ing to Hahn. Similar conclusions can be drawn from Worth Robert Miller, Oklaboma Populism (1987). But it is Lawrence Goodwyn's work that most decisively repudiates the usual misunderstandings about Populism. Democratic Promise (1976) is a historiographical landmark for that reason; see also Goodwyn's abridged version of that book, The Populist Moment (1978), and his essay "The Cooperative Commonwealth and Other Abstractions," Marxist Perspectives 3 (summer 1980): 8-42.

CARLYLE. It is the early Carlyle—the author of "Signs of the Times" (1829), "Characteristics" (1831), and Sartor Resartus (1833-34), not the author of Latter-Day Pamphlets (1850) or "Shooting Niagara" (1867)—who tells us what it is like to live in a world without wonder. On Heroes and Hero-Worship (1841) should be read as a further exploration of this theme—an argument to the effect that there is "no knowledge without worship"—and not primarily as a plea for strong political leadership. Only two statesmen, Cromwell and Napoleon, appear in Carlyle's cast of characters. The first commended himself to Carlyle more as a "prophet" than as a statesman, and the second, with his "charlatanism" and his "blamable ambition" to bring all of Europe under his will ("the heavier this Napoleon trampled on the world, holding it tyrannously down, the fiercer would the world's recoil against him be, one day"), was no hero at all, in Carlyle's eyes, but a "great implement too soon wasted." The French Revolution (1837) is important, for my purposes, chiefly because it strengthens the case against interpretations that place Carlyle in the tradition of Burkean conservatism. Carlyle did not share Burke's horror of the revolution or his respect for established regimes. His account emphasized the promise as well as the horror of the revolution and repeatedly invoked the "sacred right of Insurrection." Past and Present (1843) is easier than Carlyle's other works to reconcile with the tradition of organic conservatism, since it used the Middle Ages as a standard by which to condemn modern capitalism ; but even here, Carlyle was interested not so much in medieval organicism as in the heroism he found in Abbot Samson, whose courage, hope, and cheerful industry embodied the moral qualities Carlyle most admired.

Ian Campbell, Thomas Carlyle (1974), is the best short life, valuable also for its concluding discussion of Carlyle's reputation over the years. The most authoritative modern biography, Fred Kaplan's Thomas Carlyle (1983), shows unfailingly good judgment. A convenient collection of Carlyle's writings, G. B. Tennyson's Carlyle Reader (1983), contains the whole of Sartor Resartus, most of the important essays, and excerpts from other works. Tennyson's exhaustive study Sartor Called Resartus: The Genesis, Structure, and Style of Thomas Carlyle's First Major Work (1965) contains a great deal of useful information, though I am not persuaded by Tennyson's claim that Sartor Resartus is best read as a "novel." In general, earlier studies of Carlyle tend to see him chiefly as a man of ideas; later studies, as a literary

-544-