Discussion: Affairs of Honor

I just have a few thoughts.. I enjoyed Affairs of Honor much more than Forced Founders.

I loved reading about Maclay. As a marginal actor in the politics of the 1790s, I had never heard of him. His diary is an invaluable source to the inner workings of his time spent in the Senate, and Freeman spends a good deal of time making this clear. Freeman uses Maclay's diary as the opening to her thesis on honor in the lives of eighteenth century politicians. I think those men used honor as a rule book in their politics. In the early years of the new nation, men like George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and John Adams (my favorite) carried more weight than the actual government. By being an 'honorable' man early American politicans could gain support and followers. Freeman indicates everything about a man's life could be subject to the honor test: dress, food, comportment, writings, etc.

I loved the paragraphs on caning and nose tweaking. It's funny to think of old men pinching each other's noses, but we have to remember the extreme insult nose tweaking would have been to a man of honor.

Lastly, Freemen uses the duel as a final study of honor. For me, the most interesting claim is how a man could engage in a duel for the sake of honor, win the duel, but come out of the duel less honorable, like Aaron Burr.