Both of you who have read any of my other reviews about college and university history books know that I like to gripe about the lack of academic quality in this genre, particularly regarding the histories of individual institutions. This book is different. It passes the test.
For the story of how American higher education evolved from tiny rustic roots into the world-leading, mega-institution it became by the late 19th century, this book is a joy, and the justified leader. Its rendering of the critically important evolution of institutions from local sectarian academies to colleges (after the Revolution) and from colleges to research universities (after the Civil War) is both essential and superb reading. American history told without this important social component is incomplete. We ARE our colleges. That's why we love them so much.
Rudolph's "struggling hilltop college" thesis has long been superseded by more sophisticated scholarship, as we know that our earliest colleges were far from the tiny, decrepit, under-supported institutions we quaintly recall. A reader can easily misunderstand the importance of a small college by simply assuming that enrollment figures tell the whole story. Rudolph makes that mistake. William & Mary was always a tiny institution by modern (and contemporary) standards. Does that, in any way, diminish its profound impact on American (and world) history? When Webster argued for Dartmouth before the Supreme Count in 1817, how many students did the College enroll? You get the idea. Before 1900, size really didn't matter.
Rudolph's conclusion that the rise of Jacksonian Democracy, in place of Hamiltonian Federalism, created a "crisis" in American higher education is just plain wrong, and a typical New England perspective. Institutions simply evolved to represent the changes in the society. Before 1860, Yale, North Carolina and Virginia displayed prosperity and excellence. Rudolph's book is a product of his time and place. Henry Adams would have loved this book.
The book lets me down in two areas: First, there are no illustrations of any kind. Second, the author ignores the rapid advancement of serious higher education away from the East during the 20th century. This is very much a Massachusetts-centric view of things, which was eroding rapidly by the time the first edition appeared in 1962. As people migrate, so go their attendant institutions.