Regionalism arises when a provincialism like the cowboy culturernbecomes conservatively self-conscious, when a regionallyrnbased “way of life” (or the remnants thereof) is threatened byrnthe forces of modcrnitv and efforts are made to preserve it orrnadapt it to such changes. Regionalism has especially attractedrnthe interest of artists and intellectuals, who idealize andrnmthologi/.e a regional culture that has passed away into historrnand who seek to conserve if not restore these older folkwaysrnand values in the all too modern present. Regional novels,rnpaintings, histories, and social criticism attempt to reconnectrnthe public with the importance of values of traditionalism,rncommunalism, expressive individualism, and symbiosis withrnnature. To continue our Western example, the obsolescence ofrnthe open-range Cattle Kingdom by the early 20th century endedrnthe heroic age of the giant cattle drives—the cowboys’ heydarn—but that age and culture were subsequently enshrined byrnthe paintings of Russell and Remington, bv the fiction of LouisrnL’Amour, and bv institutions such as the National CowbovrnHall of Fame and Western Heritage Center. Bevond thesernlargely “local color” efforts, regionalism in the 19th and 20thrncenturies could also become a species of cultural radicalism, directingrnhallowed folk-regional values as an explicit critique of arndecadent, materialistic regional present (the writings ofrnBernard De Voto and Edward Abbey, for example).rnSectionalism, in contrast, is a provincialism that is self-awarernand uncritical of itself, in fact, truculently celebratory and combati’rne. Regionalism is defined bv a demand for toleration andrninclusiencss of all regions within a greater national unity. Sectionalismrnseeks to protect the interests of a self-defined regionalrncommunity against the encroachments of other regions, thernpower of national corporations and organizations, or the excessesrnof the central government. Sectional defenders lambaste therncils and vices of outsiders in an effort to rally public opinionrnand secure unit at home; and for these same reasons, they singrnthe praises of the home region unapologetically. Sectionalismrnmight not only resist cultural change—portrayed as threatsrnfrom outside the region—but also any regionally unfa’orablernmaldistribution of wealth, resources, or political power. Againrnthe West provides a telling illustration, from recent history:rnaggricxed ranchers battling the federal government andrnnational environmental groups in a campaign to preserve theirrnliclihood and “way of life” (the remnants of cowboy culture)rnfrom access restrictions and high range-fees.rnIn general, both rcgionalist and sectional spokesmen ha’C assertedrnthe importance of local, indigenous cultural autonomyrnover and against the domination of cultural expression and productionrnb’ a “cultural capital.” Early in the nation’s history,rnartists and intellectuals sought to declare cultural independencernfrom Britain and Europe; cultural regionalism was onernwith cultural nationalism. But as the country matured duringrnthe 19th century, great cities such as Boston and New York becamernpreeminent in artistic and publishing circles. Regionalrnand sectional resentments thereafter focused on the “North” orrnthe “East” for failing to reflect the tastes and values of thernSouth, Midwest, Southwest, and Rir West. Particularly by thernlate 19th and eariy 20th centuries, these issues of cultural dominationrncame to be entangled with the issues of domestic economicrnand political “colonialism,” the subservience of the underde’rneloped South and West (the periphery) to the advancedrnindustrial economy of the Northeast (the core). Thus was thernnational fabric fissured along regional lines. America, it appeared,rnwas a “union of potential nations,” in the words of ErederiekrnJackson Turner, and like any nation each sought advantagernover the others in their economic and political relations.rnThis regional differentiation of America long antedated Europeanrnsettlement. Over many thousands of years NativernAmerican tribes became indigenous to regional homelands andrndeveloped into a wide variety of distinctive provincial culturesrnwith an array of languages and customs. Consider, for example,rnthe log longhouses of the Iroquois, the adobe structures of thernPueblos, and the hide tipis of the Plains tribes. After first contactrnwith Europeans and Africans in the 1600’s and I700’s,rnmany of these tribal cultures were decimated by disease or displacedrnby settlers, yet their descendants remained to preservernessential aboriginal regional traditions despite the transformationrnin ways of life caused bv frontier cultural exchange. Thisrncultural exchange not only insured the survival of those tribesrnand peoples who could adapt some European ways, but also thernsurvival of various elements of aboriginal regional cultures thatrnwere appropriated bv yyhite settlers and their descendants, ineludingrnfarm crops, trails (later highways), placenamcs, and folkrnheroes (Sequoyah, Geronimo). These residues represent thernregional cultural persistence of the native “vanishing American”rnwho never quite vanished.rnThe American rcgionalist tradition proper may be said tornhave begun with the Puritan leader John Winthrop in 1630,rnwhen he sat on the ship Arbella off the coast of MassachusettsrnBay and defined the New England “plantation” as a specialrn”City upon a Hill.” Again, regionalism requires a distinctive localrnculture and geographical space as well as a self-awareness ofrndistinctiveness. These famous words from “A Model of ChristianrnCharity” arc often credited with introducing the theme ofrnexeeptionalism into American thought, the idea that Americarnwas a place of world-historical significance, a Promised Landrnwhere piety, liberty, and opportunity might be enjoyed asrnnowhere else on earth. In the cady Protestant terms that definedrnexeeptionalism, America was an “exception” from and arnblessed contrast to decadent Europe, the heathen multitudesrnof Africa and Asia, and the evil tyranny of the Papacy. Yet wernshould observe that Winthrop here identified exeeptionalismrnwith “New England” rather than “America” or the “NewrnWorld.” He anticipated the founding of other colonics, and hisrnhope was that they might follow the model of godly society thatrnhe envisioned for the Puritans. God, he prayed, would “makernus a |:)raise and glorv, that men shall say of succeeding plantations:rnthe Lord make it like that of New England.”rnSo began a refrain that was to recur in the rcgionalist tradition,rnarising out of far different cultural contexts and historicalrneras: the definition of one’s regional culture as unique becausernit was exceptional, embodying the values of the “real America”rnin opposition to the Old Worid and even other regional culturesrnwithin America. For Winthrop as for later regional proselytizers,rnthis recourse to exeeptionalism was an attempt to rally communityrnconsensus and preserve traditional ways and valuesrnthreatened by the forces of change, both internal and externalrnto the region. In the case of cady New England, “commerce”rnwas the devil stalking the Puritan community, as Winthrop alreadyrnrealized, portending envy and division rather than arnclosely knit pious life as “members of the same body.”rnThis refrain of a regionally seated exeeptionalism was especiallyrnprominent in the writings of an important colonial observerrnof America’s regional diversity, J. Hector St. John dcrnCrevecoeur. In his pre-Revolutionarv work Letters from anrnAUGUST 1995/15rnrnrn