While slightly before your timeframe, I think the writings of Alexis de Tocqueville are a great, enduring example of what a well-educated European thought about Americans in terms of culture, economics, science, power, and influence in the mid-1800s. He set out to travel through the United States in 1831 to investigate its prison system, but ended up writing a study of democracy in its infancy instead. He published his first volume of Democracy in America about four years later in 1835, and the second volume in 1840. It was immediately popular in Europe and the US alike, and helped shape European opinion of the fledgling democratic republic and its people for years to come.

While Tocqueville lamented the state of the arts and science in the US, believing these fields to be limited to pedestrian applications, he visited prior to the literary renaissance which saw the emergence of great authors like Poe, Thoreau, Emerson, Melville, Whitman et al. Had his timing been different, he may have changed his opinion as to the state of literature if not the arts as a whole, but I will limit speculation and stick to the text.

Overall, Tocqueville was impressed with the spirit and character of the American people, while pointing out downsides of the great democratic experiment the US represented. Many of these concerns still ring true. For example, he was particularly concerned with tyranny of the majority over thought or more learned positions on policy (an understandable position, especially for an educated aristocrat), materialism, strained race relations, the double-edged sword of a free press, and the isolation of individuals.

To Tocqueville, the true greatness of the American experiment was found in its small townships, which were more inclusive than the sprawling urban centers where it was easier for many to feel isolated or disenfranchised, to give into corruption, or to be driven by materialism rather than personal and community needs. He also admired the relative autonomy with which townships operated, which was a stark contrast to the centralized approach that historically dominated the French, and other European nations’, style of government.

The apparent prescience with which Tocqueville was endowed through his travels is a testament to the thoroughness of his studies and ability to contextualize them on the world stage from a European perspective. I think this is best encapsulated by the following quote, which is the conclusion of Vol. I of Democracy in America and predicts the two greatest influences on the course of western/world history for the next 160+ years to come:

There are at the present time two great nations of the world, which started from different points, but seem to tend towards the same end. I allude to the Russians and the Americans. Both of them have grown up unnoticed; and while the attention of mankind was directed elsewhere, they have suddenly placed themselves in the front rank among the nations, and the world learned their existence and their greatness at almost the same time.

All other nations seem to have nearly reached their natural limits, and they have only to maintain their power; but these are still in the act of growth (fn. 101: the population of Russia increases proportionately more rapidly than that of any other country in the Old World). All others have stopped, or continue to advance with extreme difficulty; these alone are proceeding with ease and celerity along a path to which no limit can be perceived. The American struggles against the obstacles nature opposes to him; the adversaries of the Russian are men. The former combats the wilderness and savage life; the latter, civilization with all its arms. The conquests of the American are therefore gained by the plowshare; those of the Russian by the sword. The Anglo-American relies upon personal interest to accomplish his ends and gives free scope to the unhinged strength and common sense of the people; the Russian centers all the authority of society in a single arm. The principal instrument of the former is freedom; of the latter, servitude. Their starting-point is different and their courses are not the same; yet each of them seems marked out by the will of Heaven to sway the destinies of half the globe.

Full citation available upon request. I tried to satisfy the guidelines but please let me know if there’s anything else I need to change to satisfy them; I don’t often feel like I can contribute to my favorite sub so I want to make sure my maiden voyage, so to speak, is acceptable. Thanks!