It is from there great lives lecture series. Announce apleased to special miniseries of six lectures every entitled great president ial lives. This series is particularly attractive for two main reasons, the first being its timeliness. As we face a president ial Election Year and prepare for it, it will be an insight that all of us can benefit from. The second is the speaker esteemed professor of history, who has just completed 50 years on the faculty of the university of mary washington. Hasng that halfcentury, he contributed in numerous and significant ways, not least of all the creation of our renowned Historic Preservation program, and the creation of this amazing great lives series. But it is for his excellence in teaching that he is perhaps best known, and to thousands of our students that have come through our halls. He has received our institutions highest honors in teaching, both from his colleagues and from his students many of whom through , the years have voted him as the faculty member who has made the greatest impact upon their lives. Dr. Crawley has become a true icon of this community. So it is with great pleasure that i introduce Professor William crawley, who drawing upon his 50 years of teaching political history, has truly learned and shared so much of his knowledge and will be sharing it again with us today as he looks at the life of one of six highly interesting and sometimes controversial president s. Moderndayny president s, none is so straightforward as the story may recall or the history may have told us. Dr. Crawley, would you please share with us now . Crawley focusing on one of the truly iconic, if not controversial president s. Thomas jefferson. Let me begin with a disclaimer, whenever i have spoken on jefferson, im reminded of a prominent historian i once heard who said that he never fully trusted anyones views on jefferson who had attended the university of virginia. I have to plead guilty on that score, having spent four years in graduate school at mr. Jeffersons academic village. Certainly jefferson himself was quite proud of that institution. Specifically directing the words beher of the university of only three a, schmitz be one of only three accomplishments that should constitute his epitaph. The other being the father of the declaration of independence and religious freedoms. The university has historically been very proud of its founder. Treating his memory with such reverence that president howard taft once said after delivering a lecture there that people still talk about mr. Jefferson as though he was in the next room and he might overhear them. I trust that my association does not render me incompetent to assess his career. Im not much given to hero worship and professionally, ive always believed that michael should not be to indoctrinate but to enlighten, and not to deify or demonize the subjects. With that said, the truth is that Thomas Jefferson long held a place, and to many, the highest place within the pantheon of our political heroes. Among the nations founders, he possessed the widest range of talents and produced the most diverse accomplishments. He has generally been regarded as the most intellectual of them, recalling that often quoted comment from president kennedy, when offering a toast to a group of Nobel Laureates at the white house, said he said they constituted the most extraordinary collection of talent and Human Knowledge that has ever been gathered together at the white house with the possible exception of when jefferson dined alone. It was of course the eloquent voice that jefferson gave to democracy modern democracy, including most notice notably his declaration that we hold these truths to be self evident that all men are endowed by their creator and among these of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. The very core of the american creed. Accordingly, one historian has figure in ourno past has embodied so much of our heritage and our hopes, and it is for that reason near the end of the 20th century and the end of the millennium that a columnist went so far as to suggest that Thomas Jefferson was indeed the most significant person on the planet for the last 1000 years. That sounds pretty extravagant. But we will make but but he makes a plausible case. The argument for jefferson is that history is essentially the history of the human mind of ideas. Jefferson was predominantly the mind of the revolution. It resulted in the birth of the first modern nation and the 20th century saved the world from tyranny. Jefferson expressed the american ideals. With his powers, he expressed elegant phrases, but also the way he lived, as a statesman , scientist, architect and educator. Regarding his own legacy, employed himself once his friend and president ial successor James Madison to take care of me when i am dead. He did not have to worry because for the most part, after the six decades of the 20th century, the historian shared that jefferson was beyond reproach. His extraordinary career would seem to have justified that reputation. Lets take a quick look at jeffersons career. Very briefly. He was born april 13, 1743 near charlottesville. His father was a yeoman farmer who became a successful planter. He joined the upper class by marrying jane randolph. He was educated at william and mary and studied under a noted attorney and became a successful and wellknown lawyer in virginia. He was imposing an appearance, standing over six foot tall, rare for that day, and with red hair. For a public figure he was shy, and avoided public appearances whenever possible. He was elected to state legislature in 1769, by which time he owned more than 2500 acres of land and a substantial number of slaves. In 1772, he married a young widow, through whom he doubled his property, and increased his number of slaves. He was cast into deep depression by the death of his wife in 1782. He never remarried. He became known as a supporter of independence from britain and coauthor of the declaration of independence along with regimen franklin and john adams. He served in congress in the federation period in 1780s, and in 1785, he replaced the aging Benjamin Ficklin as minister to france and spent five years in europe. That was significant because during that time he became Close Friends with lafayette and wrote the notes on the state of virginia. He returned to america in 1789, and was appointed to secretary of state by George Washington. He became Vice President , having finished close behind his rival john adams in the contest for the presidency. He was elected president in 1800. The greatest accomplishment of his administration was perhaps the acquisition of louisiana from france in 1803. He was easily elected to a second term but that term proved to be troubled, particularly development in europe as napoleon rose to power. After leaving the presidency, he andred to monticello concerned himself mainly with establishing the university of virginia, which was founded in 1819. Finally, by strange quirk of fate, and i think this must be the most extraordinary coincidence, well certainly the most extraordinary coincidence i about,r recall reading both jefferson and john adams died on july 4, 1826, during the celebration of the 50th anniversary of the declaration of independence. You have probably heard of this, allegedly adamss last words were jefferson lives. But he did not. He had died earlier that day. Well, as this very brief biological sketch indicates, these were great compliments, no doubt. Great accomplishments, no doubt. But, as i alluded to earlier , they have been recently overshadowed by a different and negative interpretation that has risen in the latest generation of jefferson scholars. The reason for this decline in his reputation is not hard to find. That is, these writers have focused on that era in jeffersons life, and certainly the least attractive, and most vulnerable, and that is his views on slavery and race. Perhaps it was predictable because what happened in an america in the wake of the civil rights movement, that we became much more keenly aware of racial injustice. When that happened, it damage to jeffersons unblemished stature was inevitable. Largely ignoring his extorting her positive accomplishments they have struck at his achilles heel, which to them which was the heel of oppression that he ground into the backs of his slaves. So weve reached the point of the debate where one of his most prominent biographers have declared jefferson will not be revered and his laws his flaws are beyond redemption. Well, how about this . Thats the basic question i want to address during the remainder of my comments today. And i want to do it in the following way, first to examine briefly jeffersons theories on race and slavery. Second, to look at his actions about public and private regarding slavery. And finally, in light of recent criticism, to suggest a summary hisuation of jefferson and proper place in history with particular regard to slavery in and race. Lets look first then at jeffersons thoughts concerning race and slavery and look at what he actually had to say on those subjects. Its somewhat surprising how little jefferson actually wrote on anything given his highly intellectual nature. Much of what we know of his thoughts comes mainly from his letters, and from the longest of his publish works. The aforementioned notes on the state of virginia, which was published in france in 1785. Even the notes are far from a polish systematic statement of the views, and he didnt actually intend for it to be published at all. He literally spawns to a request from a french official when he was in paris and he did so with the intention of being of it being read by a select group. Basically french intellectuals, for who he was trying to explain the government, the economy, and social structure of his native virginia. It was pirated and became public. So eventually jefferson owned up to it, and with some embarrassment. As one of his biographers puts it, jefferson, if he had his way the only book he ever wrote and in this case hadnt been published his opinions on slavery would not have been published. For purposes of our top today, topic today, and unfortunately for his place in history, jefferson did leave a fairly quite a bit of information on African American views in general, and on slavery in particular. So, what do these reveal about his thinking . We may do well to begin with what they call his central dilemma. That was that he hated slavery, but thought negroes inferior to whites. This was a serious dichotomy in jeffersons thought. And its caused him a lot of intellectual suffering, his essential dilemma. He hated slavery but thought blacks inferior to whites. Now, this is a difficult intellectual position. On one hand, he conservatively said there is no indication in any of his works that jefferson felt slavery to be right. And yet at the same time, on the other hand, theres every reason to believe that jefferson did not indeed believe that blacks were equal to whites, and that goes against his words of all men were created equal. What is the effort in evidence in his writing that says he didnt agree with slavery . Well, its evident that he took no pride in owning slaves. In fact, he intended he tended to regard them as a burden rather than a blessing. It seems that he didnt like the word slave itself and often used the word servants, in lieu of slaves. And he acknowledged, on various occasions, that he felt that the slaves must have been, in his words, miserable, and he referred to slavery as a hideous evil. Yet, even though its clear that jefferson didnt believe the condition of the slave was desirable, it wasnt the primary reason why he didnt like slavery. In fact, the main reason which he expressed to opposing slavery, was the harmful effect that it had on white society. In other words, his main attack was not against the cruelty of the system to blacks, but against what he believed to be the injustice of the system to whites. Now how can that be . This is the way he explained it, in his notes on this. This is a quote now. There was doubtless and influence on our people, produced by the existence of slavery. The whole commerce between master and slave is a perpetual exercise and the most and rim missing despotism, that children see this, and learn to imitate. And man is an imitative animal. With the morals of the people, their industry also destroyed, or in a warm climate, no man will labor for himself when he could make another labor for him. End quote. In other words, slavery was bad training for democracy. Now opponents of slavery had traditionally been concerned the fact that the institution upon slave owners. Jefferson wasnt the first or the last to express such a view. But with jefferson, it seemed to be almost his only concern. As one expert puts it, he said jefferson went to his grave thinking that slavery was detrimental to white people. So, jefferson was concerned with what we might call the corrosive internal effect on society. At the same time, however, as i noted earlier, jefferson believed that the black race was inferior. Theres nothing on this and there could be little doubt on this point. Its precisely on this point that most colors today criticize him. In his notes, jefferson addresses himself to what he calls a real distinction that nature has made. End quote. Between the races. In doing so, he considers not only physical but, the mental and moral differences. As to the physical, jefferson was predisposed against blacks. Even their color seem to offend him. He wrote at one point for example, disparaging quote that eternal, not need the immovable veil of black which covers all their emotions. As to the mental abilities of africanamericans, hes quite clear. He unquestionably believe that believed them to be inferior to whites. He said, comparing them by their faculties of memory reason and intonation, appears to me that in memory they are equal to in mental, but capacity, inferior. Whenever he was confronted with claims by black authors and poets, he said that the works weather can be and jefferson remained skeptical of this. Remain highly skeptical, to put it mildly. Might be assumed that he attributed some of these perceived lack of opportunity, that is to the environment in which africanamericans were forced to live. But that was not apparently the case. Said he, quote, its not the recognition, but nature which has produced this distinction between the two races. In short, jeffersons fundamental attitude in the issue of rate seems to be summed up, as he quoted passage in which he said quote, i advance it as a suspicion only, but the blacks, whether originally a distinct race, made its distinct by time and circumstance are inferior to whites in body and mind. As i noted earlier, jefferson also addressed himself to the physical and mental attributes, but also to what he called moral sense of the African Americans. And in this respect, he argued that blacks were equal to whites. Moreover, he argued that if there were any shortcomings on the part of blacks in this regard, such a deficiency should be attributed to the environment. He said if a slave stole chickens from the barnyard, such an act he said, quote, must be ascribed to the situation. If such theory occurred, he claimed it was fully understandable. Quote, the man, in whose favor no loss of property exist. Hardly feels himself less bound to respect those laws made in favor of others. And therefore he asked, rhetorically, might not the quote, justifiably take little from one who has taken everything from him . So much for jeffersons theories, but what were his actions regarding slavery . Lets look first his public actions and then well get to his private behavior. Such as we know of it. At the risk of oversimplification, it might be said that jefferson publicly involved, and had spoken opposition and acquired opposition, to that of despair , acquiescence, resignation to the end of his life. Earlier in his career, for example, there were indications, that he certainly had qualms about slavery, and in particular, slave trade. Blamedy as 1774, he had the British Government for slave trade. Two years later, in 1776 he drafted the virginia constitution, which stated flatly that no persons after come to virginia will be hailed will be held in slavery. Though unfortunately, that draft was not adopted. With regard to outright abolition, in 1784, he moved to what was his most important antislavery action of his career. It was in that year that he sponsored a bill, before the virginia legislature, which would have granted freedom to all slaves. Obviously, could have made a dramatic difference. But when the bill went before the legislature the following year, jefferson withdrew his support for it because he that thee had found public mind would not yet there the proposition. He found out it was unpopular with the voters. Highlytion shows us two attitudes towards emancipation. First, it was if he withdrew his proposal for the reason he did. Thats because the public would not yet barrett. He was a politician and he had to be concerned with Public Opinion. The second revelation for this episode is that jeffersons proposal for gradual emancipation which would have emancipation included a provision, which would have acquired the removal of all freed slaves. That in his words, is that they should be colonized to such places where circumstances at the time. And this demand for deportation, of colonization was one of the real constance in jeffersons actions in regards to slavery. He simply wanted all freed blacks to be sent to the west indies, africa, or anywhere outside the United States. Why was this . The answer is that he simply seemed not to believe that the races could live together side by side in harmonious equality. And in his notes in virginia, he explained why he felt this way , as follows. Deeprooted prejudices by the whites, 10,000 recollections by the blacks about the injuries that they have sustained. Real distinction, as nature has made, and in many other circumstances, they produced convulsions that would never end but in the extermination of the one race or the other. Pretty strong words. Again, at the end of his life, in 1777, in his unfinished autobiography, he reiterated this. He concluded that it was in his words, that was certain the two races, equally free, could not live under the same government. In view of such statements, he stated flatly, that the entire body of jefferson writings, he never even seriously considered the coexistence of the quality death. Quality until his or as another more critical historian put it, nothing is more certain than the Thomas Jefferson didnt attend intend that black people would be free in america. And that free blacks were to be banished. Well, most of what i have talked about so far deals with his attempts regarding slavery at state level. But of course, jefferson was a national figure, as well, and as such, he was involved with the slavery issue at that level, as well. Most important, of his national act and as it came during the period of confederation, thats before the current constitution went into effect, that during that time, jefferson devised a bill known as the ordinance of 1784. This piece of legislature, if passed, wouldve had a potentially great impact because it would have prohibited the extension of slavery into any of the western territories of the United States after 1800. Again, this would made a serious difference. But the ordinance of 1784 failed to pass by a margin of one vote. But any case, that proposal was significant for two reasons. First, in the long run, it raised a principle of which many future attacks on slavery would rest. And that is that the spread of slavery could and should be limited by the federal government, which was the basis of the free soil doctrine of the antebellum years. And secondly, in the short run, it certainly inspired an act three years later, the northwest ordinance of 1787, which banned slavery in the northwest. And were not talking about oregon and washington. This is the old northwest. So, the enactment prevented slavery from ever being established in the northwest. Thats ohio and indiana and jefferson must be given credit for that legislation. On the other hand, jefferson folks, would listen there is always an on the other hand with jefferson people. On this case, on the other hand, if he is to be credited with limited proliferation of slavery, then maybe he could be blamed for its expansion in other areas. Like where louisiana, because the purchase of louisiana from france in 1803 did permit the spread of slavery, or at least it was not forbidden in that huge area. How valid is that criticism . Well, the actual sister waist is that slavery already existed in louisiana territory. I suppose its doubtful that the purchase wouldve been carried out if slavery hadnt been allowed to continue. I dont think it wouldve been banned in any case, but it came with the package, unfortunately. Well, the fact is, friends, that after the 1800s, jefferson was able to do very little to increase slavery. For a while, he remained reasonably optimistic however, saying to one of his friends in 1814, the hour of emancipation is advancing. In the march of time, it will come. And yet, as jeffersons life progressed, the likelihood appeared to decrease rather than to increase, as well see, and the court of jefferson appeared to become more pessimistic. Now, what ive been talking about so far dealt with his public actions. But well also take some look at his personal interactions with slavery. It is something that he was intimately acquainted with. He recalled that his first memories was that he was, and my point is he knew slavery literally from the crib to the grave. The first one was remembered being carried on a pillow by a slave and there was a slave carpenter who made the coffin in which he was buried in. And in between, throughout his adult life, he was the owner of between 100 and 200 slaves, a making him a very substantial slave owner. Now, we dont know much about his daytoday behavior as a slave owner. The assumption in the past was generally that he has been benevolent and enlightened master, but that has been challenged by more recent historians, one of whom point out that 1 7 of his slaves apparently ran away, which is a fairly high percentage, and jefferson himself records that he sometimes had his slaves whipped. In short, it now appears the jefferson was for lack of a better term, an average slave owner, difficult as, impossible as that term is, i suppose, to define. As one reason historian put it, he was a typical southern slave owner. He may have been a benign despot, but he was a desperate desperate despot nonetheless. The fact is that in the historical record, well there is nothing getting us to believe that he was anymore ruthless or any more benevolent than other slaveowners of his time. Now, jeffersons personal involvement slavery always of course brings up the issue of Sally Hemmings, his alleged slave mistress. This is a subject about which an enormous amount has been written and not surprisingly because after all, it has all the ingredients to fascinate the public. A historical figure, a preeminent importance, interracial, white exploitation of blacks, the kind of thing that if it had existed couldve kept Oprah Winfrey in the tabloids and social media for months. The charge, as im sure you all know, is that jefferson was the father of four, maybe even five or six children by his slave. That story is well known, have been the subject of at least one novel, one movie of the week special, and a couple of Television Mini series and has been the focal point of several biographies in recent years. Now, this is a subject which by itself could take up more time then we a lot it today. Let me just add generally agreed upon facts. First, jeffersons wife martha died in 1872, after which jefferson never remarried, remaining a widower for the remaining 44 years of his life. During that time, his slave Sally Hemmings, who was in no they have to start his late wife or four children who survived to adulthood although jackson was often absent from monticello, record shows present at the time that those conceptions wouldve occurred many accounts of a hemmings offspring say they were so lightskinned that they often passed for white. And perhaps the most noteworthy piece of evidence in the view of having was at the hemmings token were essentially the only slaves that jefferson ever freed, or allowed to go free. The question is, does this all add up to his paternity . Old scholars say up through the 1960s and 1970s, to them, it surely did not add up. They essentially scoffed at the notion, on the reverential theory that if i make put it this way, that jefferson just wasnt that sort of man. Was he . They also put heavy emphasis on the fact that this story of the affair with Sally Hemmings was first disseminated in 1802 during jeffersons first term as one james calendar, who was an embittered political opponent of jefferson and a notorious scandal monger. Now unquestionably, by all accounts, calendar was a disreputable person. In the words of one historian quoting, despicable individual ruled by venom and racism. And yet, even as this writer points out, a vile and vicious person isnt always an untruthful one. It would be perhaps unwise to reject the story purely on a kind of the dubious character of its provisional purveyor. Recent scholars have tended to give credence to the story beginning most notably with in 1974 study called Thomas Jefferson, an intimate biography 1997 book, Thomas Jefferson, tally hemmings and controversy. And in lieu of going into further detail myself today, i commend both of these books to you if you wish to pursue this. A significant step in the controversy if you occurred a few days ago based on dna test, apparently they do not prove that jefferson fathered sallys do give significant support to that possibility. One thing they conclusively do rule out, the fraternity of jeffersons nephews who have usually been regarded as the as one of the prime suspects other than jefferson himself. As it now stands, it seemed safe to say the story is fairly generally believed, and is interpreted in that fashion by historians of martha cello who essentially conceded its validity. Now, having a look at jeffersons thought on the matter of slavery, as well as his public and private acts regarding this turn final into an overall evaluation of the men. As well as within the context of his own times and is certainly true that assessments of jefferson have been highly divergent over the years, as you would expect given his complex nature and has long and highly visible public career. In his own times, his admirers on him with such titles as the sage of monticello and hailed him as the most learned man in the world. His opponents were not so charitable, including one who referred to him as, quote, that red headed son of a bitch. After days of almost uniform veneration by his stories, as i, as i mentioned earlier, in some cases, with just as much hostility. This the explanation for this , i suppose, lies partly through the apparent inevitability of this talk of revisionism. Its one of jeffersons own biographer as you noted, quote, american political heroes of both past and present are in trouble, assaulted openly and from ambush, from the right and from the left, and even from seemingly innocuous professors of history. And so it is that we have witnessed in recent years series aspersions upon notify figures from Christopher Columbus to Abraham Lincoln to john f. Kennedy. But nowhere has been more stark than in the case of jefferson so it becomes that the concluding part of our election today to examine some of the chief criticism and to offer, if not exactly a rebuttal, at least a measure of explanation. Fundamental to the revisionist thrust is the conflict present throughout jeffersons life between word and deed. The contradiction inherent in the expression of human equality with unmatched elements of other human beings. That, incredulity, was noted in his own times by no less figure than dr. Samuel johnson, who once asked, how is it that we hear the loudest yelps for liberty from the owners of slaves . Picking up that theme in modern times, one prominent historian pointed out the irony of that quote, the laser that made possible jefferson great legs on human liberty, supported by the laborers of three generations of slaves. Could go on, the basic point being, far from being an icon of democracy, jefferson was in fact a racist hypocrite. Now, within that overall critique by several charges, either explicit or implicit, the first is jefferson, in reality accomplished very little with. Egard to slavery and in some ways, his efforts active assaulted it spread. Several points seem to be made, and the first, i think the most fundamental one is that any effort the jefferson may have undertaken to end slavery plays an enormous and increasing economic obstacle. And here is why. Earlier in jeffersons career, and up through the writing of the constitution, slavery was widely believed to be a dying institution. In fact, it was this belief in the eventual economic device of slavery that allowed for the creation of the constitution. It was almost universally believed it was going to die out. Unfortunately, just the opposite happened. Instead of dying out, slavery took on new life in the 1790s, specifically after 1793, when eli whitney invented the cotton gin. What this meant, to make a long story very short, is that cotton could then become profitably grown not just along the south atlantic seaboard, but throughout the south, all the way to texas. And the resulting spread of cotton was dramatic and the need for extensive imagine manual labor tremendous hamilton yes spread of slavery, and to the institution that seem destined for demise was now increasingly entrenched with the production of cotton and the ownership of slaves constituted a very pinnacle of southern society, sure certification of status and prestige. But that wasnt all. It vastly increased number of slaves, almost 4 million by the time of the civil war, raised in the minds of many whites the problems of social control that had failure to arise with emancipation. Jefferson himself spoke directly to this point when he wrote on one occasion regarding the possibility, and i think this is one of his most telling observations, signing up as he did the essence of jeffersons concerns when he wrote, quote, talking about whether or not to abolish slavery. He said, we have the wolf by the ears. We can either safely hold him or safely let him go. Justice, one emancipation, is in the one scale, self preservation in the other. Listen, solution as we have seen is colonization. All of this is just to illustrate any impulses he may have had with emancipation ran headlong into the hard economic realities of the times and the pervasive social fears. Which of course created a Formidable Political problem that we think of jefferson as a statesman, which he was. But before you become a statesman, he had to be a politician, a practical politician, one concerned with what the republic mind would bear. And this is the way one historian describes jeffersons lack of assertiveness on this issue. Said, vital as the abolition of he said, vital as the abolition of slavery was to him, when he had proposed plans for freeing the slaves had demonstrated him that the press too hard on this issue was to risk a premature end to his political career and preclude him from accomplishing any constructive purpose whatever. In other words, he was unwilling to sacrifice his whole career on the altar of evolution abolition or, as John Quincy Adams put it most simply and most aptly, mr. Jefferson didnt mr. Jefferson did not have the spirit of martyrdom. Interestingly, jefferson himself address this matter of his apparent reticence on the issue, sensing that subsequent critics will lay charges of hypocrisy. The reason for his restraint was and he explained in so many words was, to paraphrase, the time wasnt right. On one occasion that, listen to this, the moment of doing it with success has not yet arrived and the unsuccessful effort as too often happens would only rivets ever closer the chains of bondage. Much later his life, in fact, only two weeks before his death, he returned to that subject, explaining his position this way. Again, a good quote. A good school often causes often injured more by ill times efforts of its friends them by the argument of his enemies. Persuasion, perseverance, and patience are the best advocates in questions depending on the will of others. The revolution of Public Opinion which this cause inquires is not to be expected in a day or perhaps in an age, or time which outlived all things will outlive this people also. Concerning another modern criticism of jefferson, some say some have conceded it might have been too much for him to have engineered the abolition of the institution slavery, but he why hadnt he was freed his why hadnt he freed his own slaves . Two explanations are offered. One is that he kept them because he thought they would be better off as his slaves then if they were freed and had to fend for themselves. Ive always thought this would be a flimsy reason because i expect, given a choice, the great majority of devoted slaves wouldve opted for freedom. On the other hand, theres a slight of plausibility in it, in the theory, because the plight of most freed blacks in the antebellum south was difficult and extreme. There is a more fundamental reason, or likely reason for his position, thats that the economic said he couldnt afford to free them because they were essential to his livelihood. We tend to think of jefferson as a wealthy man, as by his grandeur of monticello. But to put it bluntly, he lived beyond his means. Such as effect that he nearly lost monticello. In such financial straits, he could hardly divest himself of such a major collection of his assets even if he wanted to. In this way, hes different than George Washington, who is a better businessman and did provide for feeding freedom of his slaves after his death. Now it should be noted that this explanation of jeffersons actions does not nullify his most ardent critics. To judge from his lifelong behavior, jeffersons grand style was more important to him than the natural rights of the slaves. Now, the last point of criticism namely that jefferson was a racist, there can be no real exculpation of this. Nothing could disguise the fact, that by modernday standards, he was a racist. As is made abundantly clear, but not all of which i quoted to you. I told my students over the years, it would be good to read the notes of virginia to see jeffersons views in some detail. But dont do it if you have a weak stomach or a weak constitution. Or if youre a jefferson idled jefferson idolater because its gross. But the notes, its pretty graphic. But not appealing to us today to read those words. But in any case, thats what he wrote. And thats where were left with his views on race. What we can do, though, and i think should do is consider two things. The first that there simply is such racial views, should be considered within the context of his own times. And this is a period, ladies and gentlemen, where virtually no no one no one thought differently. And indeed, in jeffersons own times, the odd concept wasnt that he owned slaves, which is widespread and had been in existence for a long time. The strange concept was human equality. That struck people as an odd idea, many people. Belief black inferiority was his universal belief among whites in that time. And not in jeffersons own time, but even into the 20th century, so perhaps it is, unfortunate as it is, its unreasonable to expect that he would have believed something drastically different from that. Would that he had. Me the larger point seems to involves another person in question, and that is to use did he put those views to what we consider racist and he might well have proceeded from those views to have a strong argument in favor of slavery, as some of his contemporaries and southern leaders did based on the presumption of black inferiority. For example, john c calhoun, argued late the most important southern politician following jeffersons death once advocated slavery this way. Get this. Some are born with saddles on their backs, and others booted and spurred to ride them. And the riding does them good. But jefferson never took this, took this approach. As far as i know, he never once suggested that the inferiority of blacks, which he presumed was a legitimate justification for their enslavement. But its Crystal Clear in a letter that he wrote\ in 1809 he said speaking of blacks, he wrote that quote, whatever their talent, it is no measure of their rights. Just because sir isaac newsom and newtons was in was superior, that basically even the blacks were inferior that didnt constitute grounds for enslavement. Finally, what can we say by way of a summary about jefferson today . In light of the vicissitudes of his historical appraisal, perhaps it is best to view jefferson as he was viewed in his own times, and viewed by people who actually knew him. Even that effort produces contradictions. One historian put it this way, he said, and listen closely. In the 19th century, abolitionists used jeffersons words as swords. Slaveholders used his example as a shield. Pretty good, isnt it . On the whole, however, it seems that in the minds of most of his contemporaries, jefferson was highly regarded, and i think rightly so, as a man of many ideals, although he could not find a solution to the problem of slavery, who could who did, he still never advocated that institution. And to appreciate the significance, jefferson must be placed in contrast to many of his contemporaries and almost all of his successors in positions of southern leadership, men like calhoun for example. My point is so long as jeffersons ideals flourish, there was always a skepticism to slavery, and a hope that a solution to it might be found. In short, the existence of jeffersonian ideals, that so obviously in conflict with the american creed, a creed which jefferson, more than anyone else, helped to establish. Thatt was not long before liberalism began to fade, and soon to be replaced by an oppressive conservatism and conformity that characterized the antebellum years after jeffersons death. All of this had its effect on jefferson, admitting the opposite optimism he once exhibited. Jefferson wrote in 1826, on the subject of emancipation, i have ceased to think because its not to be a work of my day. And he was right. Within a year, he was dead. And with him, the brightest light of liberalism in the old south was extinguished. To understand finally whats what jefferson meant in his own times, we should look not to recent historians, but to his contemporaries. And i will conclude by quoting three of those contemporaries. The first was a white abolitionist congressman who asked, who taught me to hate slavery and every other form of oppression . It was jefferson, the great jefferson. The second contemporary, also a congressman, said similarly, if i were to write a history of american slavery, i would say that mr. Jefferson was entitled to credit the first antislavery of this country and he was the force of the anti slavery movement. Lastly, the third contemporary, was quite different. Hes not a congressman, and hes not white. And his feelings were expressed not for public consumption, but on a personal level or lecture to jefferson himself. He records this and the letter was written, with a painful care of a hand unaccustomed to the pen. That hand belong to a black man, a former slave. And he wrote personally to jefferson. To tell jefferson about a very important event in his life, namely his wife, now quoting from the letter just presented me with a pair of twin boys pair of black twin boys. , a and sir, as a testimony of my gratitude, for those principles of justice and humanity by you so boldly advocated an advanced come out of respect to which i hold you, to grant freedom in equal rights, the benefactor of mankind, and the people of color in particular, i have named one of my twins thomas. And the other jefferson. Thank you. [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2020] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] from George Washington to george w. Bush, every sunday at 8 00 p. M. Eastern, we feature the presidency, our weekly series exploring the president s, their politics, policies, and legacies. Youre watching American History tv all weekend, every weekend on cspan3. Every saturday at 8 00 p. M. Eastern, go inside College Classrooms and hear about topics ranging from the american revolution, civil rights, and american president s to 9 11. Thanks for your patience and logging into class. With most colleges closed, watch professors transfer teaching to a virtual setting to engage with their students. Gorbachev did most of the work. But reagan met him halfway. Reagan encouraged him. Reagan supported him. Freedom of the press, medicine originally called it freedom of the use of the press, and it is indeed freedom to publish things. It is not a freedom for what we now refer to institutionally as the press. Lectures in history on American History tv on cspan3, every saturday at 8 00 p. M. Eastern. Lectures in history is also available as a podcast. Find it where you listen to podcasts
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.