Rethinking Politics of Slavery, 1776-1836 Contesting Slavery: Politics of Bondage and Freedom in New Nation. Edited by John Craig Hammond and Matthew Mason. (Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 2011. Pp. ix 4- 313, notes, index. Cloth, $49.50; paper, $26.50.)The final decade of eighteenth century and earliest decades of nineteenth were once considered a neglected of scholarship on politics of slavery. But no longer. Numerous scholars have examined this period afresh from many perspectives over past two decades. But as this volume well confirms, we have much still to learn, and to rethink, about politics of slavery in early republic.Some of same historians who have made neglected passe are prominent in this volume, making up majority of fifteen authors. Firmly planted on familiar historiographical ground, essays discuss quite varied topics yet contribute to volume's overall coherence. volume's mission, as I understand it, is to demonstrate that controversies over slavery were incessant in politics of early republic (1780s through 1820s), to explain why this was case, and to suggest how understanding this phenomenon invites us to alter our views on evolution of politics from age of Founders to die decades before Civil War.In their Introduction, editors Matthew Mason and John Craig Hammond summarize precisely what I take to be their collection's salient conclusion: The issue of slavery repeatedly entered into state, regional, sectional and international conflicts, in turn feeding into and impinging on politics on national level (3). In early republic, in other words, conflicts over slavery were frequent, serious, many faceted, usually from the bottom up, and above all fundamental to systemic functioning of larger political system. Disagreements over slavery, moreover, quite often became implicated in debates over other contested issues unrelated to bondage, causing volatile language of slavery and antislavery to insinuate itself deeply and early on new nation's political culture.Mason and Hammond caution that a proper understanding of these dynamics requires stifling instincts to seek origins of Civil War causation in these earlier politics of slavery. Their advice is exactly right and pays a big dividend. By focusing on their subjects without anticipating political crises over slavery in 1840s and 1850s, essayists push their inquiries well beyond familiar investigations of elite politicians, wording of Founders' Constitution, debates restricted within walls of Congress, chronologies of individual state-making and so forth. Instead they either expand on topics about which we know too little or offer perspectives that may, to some, be new.The findings of these essays make it clear that disagreements over slavery were ubiquitous, substantial, and significant enough in early republic to require historians to assay their meaning carefully. Together, they posit an invigorating challenge to way in which antebellum political history is customarily organized. No matter what their specific interest, students of sectional politics will find real value in this collection.Mason and Hammond's Introduction outlines their collection's overall claims and offers a reliable outline of its structure and content. After that, collection divides into three headings. Part I, Slavery and Ideology, Action and Inaction, explores connections between belief systems and political choices. Part II, State and Slavery, addresses ways in which slavery issues shaped law, economy, and institutions of racial domination. Part III, Slavery, Sectionalism and Partisan Politics, offers just what its title promises. It is here that historiographical implications of this volume for political historians are most clearly delineated. …