8/6/2019 Journal of American Studies (2008), 42, Page 165

1/1http://journals.cambridge.org Downloaded: 19 Aug 2009 IP address: 132.66.7.212

Journal of American Studies, 42 (2008), 1. doi:10.1017/S0021875807004616

Christopher Waldrep and Michael Bellesiles (eds.), Documenting AmericanViolence: A Sourcebook (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006, 17.99).Pp. xiv+399. ISBN 0 19 515004 X.

Touching as it does on so many of the vibrant themes in American history, this bookis a wonderful classroom resource. Eleven chapters deal with themes ranging fromslavery to crime control. Each chapter consists of an introduction by the editors, acollection of between five and ten documents, and a guide to further reading.

However, as one would expect from such distinguished editors, the volume offersmore than that. It yields ideas and guidance for more advanced scholars. A learnedgeneral introduction supplies an overarching view. Waldrep and Bellesiles do not godown the statistical road, and refrain from offering simple solutions to the complexpuzzles of American violence. They choose as their analytical starting point the

scholarly enquiry run by Hugh Davis Graham and Ted Graham Gurr on behalf ofPresident Lyndon Baines Johnsons National Commission on the Causes andPrevention of Violence. In the general introduction and subsequent chapter in-troductions, they build on that multi-authored source to supply what amounts to ahistoriographical primer. They review, in turn, Charles Tillys cautions on ex-ceptionalism, and Richard Hofstadters contention that Americas one exceptionaltrait is its capacity for denial. Richard M. Browns distinction between negativeand positive violence is explained, as is the difference between Browns views andthose of Joel Williamson, who placed a heavier emphasis on race. The introductionto the last chapter, on rape and other domestic abuses of women, is a little his-

toriographical gem in its own right.As its editors observe, the compact nature of the volume means there are sig-

nificant exclusions. Given Bellesiless expertise, it is a pity that there is no materialon the contribution of gun cultures to American violence. Another omission stemsfrom what Graham and Gurr called Americas historical amnesia about violence.Hofstadter backed their claim that there had hitherto been no serious research intoAmerican violence, let alone its comparative dimensions. But this was an oversight.In the Progressive era, the Research Division of the United States Commission onIndustrial Relations issued several reports on industrial violence, some of whichoffered international comparisons of policing methods, and several of which influ-

enced New Deal legislation in the 1930s. An extract from the reports on violence byEdwin E. Witte or one of his colleagues would have been a welcome corrective to1960s oversights, as well as a harmonious accompaniment to a glittering array ofdocuments.

R H O D R I J E F F R E Y S- J O N E SUniversity of Edinburgh

Reviews 165

http://journals.cambridge.org/http://journals.cambridge.org/