Thesis (M.S.)--University of Wisconsin--Madison, 1964. / eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 143-150).

The severely neglected subject of Antifederalism is the focal point of this project. As the framing ideology opposed to the ratification of the U.S. Constitution, Antifederalism has not been treated with the same historical care as Federalism, the successful and currently operational ideology. This is both an intellectual and ethical mistake that ignores the role that Antifederalism played in procuring the Bill of Rights, and still plays in the sphere of political dissent. The de facto successors to the Revolutionary mentality, Antifederalists took it upon themselves to conclusively secure the American conception of liberty, already wrested from British hands, from a growing threat—those whom they deemed domestic imperialists. Even Thomas Jefferson, architect of the Declaration of Independence, espoused the principles behind Antifederalism, especially when confronted with those of Hamiltonian Federalism. Moreover, Jefferson’s Revolution of 1800, which gave rise to the Democratic-Republicans, consisted of many former Antifederalists. While wholly relevant and increasingly indispensible, the few studies that do examine Antifederalism fall short of finding or acknowledging its lasting significance, owing to supposed internal dissension, socioeconomic in nature. However, Antifederalists featured ideological unanimity in at least one area: opposition to standing armies. This opposition is evident in both the theoretical (why they were against standing armies) and practical (what to do about it) areas. The imperial legacy of hostility, a historical and lived experience for Americans of the time, drove Antifederalists to make their objections to ratification obvious, of which the standing army issue played the most elemental part. Informed and inspired by this lengthy history of distrust for military forces maintained in time of peace, which included their own Revolution, Antifederalists sought to safeguard their liberties from future encroachments, for future generations. By arguing iii that Antifederalists, regardless of region or class, objected to standing armies, this thesis seeks to elevate Antifederalism to its rightful place in the contexts of political history and the encompassing American tale.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the nature and language of Anglo-American opposition to quartering from the start of the French and Indian War in 1756 to the Revolutionary War in 1776. This paper will also attempt to demonstrate the shifting focus of Anglo-American arguments against the quartering of troops over these two decades. Quartering of troops in private homes and defraying the cost of quartering were the prevalent concerns of Anglo-Americans during the French and Indian War. Then, the Quartering Act of 1765 significantly changed the perception of Anglo-Americans toward quartering of troops as a matter of illegal taxation. Lastly, the unfolding events in 1768 and onwards, in Boston, marked a turning point as the fear of a standing army in peace time redefined Anglo-American opposition to the quartering of redcoats. The significance of Anglo-American opposition to the Quartering Acts paled in comparison to other colonial grievances that stemmed from taxation issues, but it was important enough to finds its place in the Declaration of the Independence and in the Third Amendment of the federal constitution. / Master of Arts

This thesis will contend that a permanent body of military force under royal command, a ‘standing army’, arose during the first three decades of the seventeenth century in France. Such a development constituted a transformation in the nature of the monarchy’s armed forces. It was achieved by encouraging elements of the French nobility to become long-term office-holders within royal military institutions. Those members of the nobility who joined the standing army were not coerced into doing so by the crown, but joined the new body of force because it provided them with a means of achieving one of the fundamental ambitions of the French nobility: social advancement for their family. The first four chapters of this thesis thus look at how the standing army emerged via the entrenchment of a system of permanent infantry regiments within France. They look at how certain families, particularly from the lower and middling nobility, attempted to monopolise offices within the regiments due to the social benefits they conferred. Some of the consequences that arose from the army becoming an institution in which ‘careers’ could be pursued, such as promotion and venality, will be examined, as will how elements of the the nobility were vital to the expansion of the standing army beyond its initial core of units. Chapters Five and Six will investigate how the emergence of this new type of force affected the most powerful noblemen of the realm, the grands. In particular, it will focus on those grands who held the prestigious supra-regimental military offices of Constable and Colonel General of the Infantry. The thesis concludes that the emergence of the standing army helped to alter considerably the relationship between the monarchy and the nobility by the end of the period in question. A more monarchy-centred army and state had begun to emerge in France by the late 1620s; a polity which might be dubbed the early ‘absolute monarchy’. However, such a state of affairs had only arisen due to the considerable concessions that the monarchy had made to the ambitions of certain elements of the nobility.