[inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] [inaudible] good evening and thank you for coming and spending your evening with us tonight. I am delighted to be here on stage with you. But these two incredible historians and biographers and allaround great people. Im i melissa, with National Public radio, annette gordonreed and peter onuf, authors of a new book and we are going to talk about Thomas Jefferson. Welcome to all of you. Again, thank you for being here on this beautiful night, you are in doors on a gorgeous washington night. I want to start with the title of the book, the most blessed of the patriarchs, you talk about in the preface is of the book that Thomas Jefferson writes that hes planning on going back to monticello in virginia, he is writing a letter to angelica skyler church, for those of us cannot hear the name with out thinking angelica, eliza. He is ready to her in london and talking about her plans to go back to monticello. Part of the writer letter reads i have my house to bill, my field to form and to watch for the happiness of those who labor for my. Ive. Ive one daughter married to the man of science, and who indeed i have nothing more to wish. They live with me. If the if the other shall be as fortunate and due process of time i shall imagine myself as blessed as the most blessed of the patriarchs. So what are you talk about a little bit about what it was in that seemingly innocuous paragraph in the letter, what was it about that language that intrigues you and made you think that was the root of this book. Personally want to say that the title was so much controversy. We have to fight to have quotes because this is a jefferson quote about himself and we did not want people to think we are calling him the most blessed of the blast of the patriarchs because. Because i am the most blessed of the blessed. Stephen might be able to get away with that but i cannot get away with get calling jefferson the most blessed of the blessed of patriarchs. But we thought it was intriguing because it is so different from the idea of being of liberty, republican, the person he saw himself as an avatar of the enlightenment calling himself something that calls to mind an agent patriarch evening, biblical of an ancient times and in another letter he refers to himself as living in monticello like it to louis and patriarch. So, he is of the new but at the same time he is seeing himself as this figure, patriarch so what we thought we would try to unpack as historians say because we have come to a point where there is a picture of jefferson and a lot of what people are doing and writing about is writing about what they wish he had done or they are mad that he didnt do, and we wanted to try to figure out what did he think he was doing which is an important thing, we think to try to uncover. You are trying really to get inside inside his head. We want to draw attention to what seems to be a paradox because the past as is well known is a foreign country and our idea is that jefferson studies have been distorted by the need to make him speak to us now and we are not going to be able to draw anything from jefferson until we can put him in his place. That was our goal. How do you think he interpreted that patriarch that he is talking about . He wasnt embarrassed to use the term and i think that is something we need to explore. That was the point of this, how could he say this and what does it signify . The point of departure for us is that the world he created for himself that monticello, it is foundational to his career in american history, his public life does not disconnect from his private life. If you want to understand jefferson you have to put those two things together. Seeing himself as a patriarch is accepting his position in the world, this is a person who is born at the top of the hierarchy of virginia, he is white, he is male, male, he is the third son, he is tall he is intelligent and welleducated and he sees himself as having a special role, an interesting thing to think of somebody who is in the middle of nowhere who decides that he is going to be a mover and shaker the world. That he is going to make his mark and he is able to do that through the force of a personality that is very selfassured, confident and you might say arrogant and away but certainly believing he had a special place. And patriarch to us is a negative thing but for most people, it is a problematic concept but it was not problematic to him because he is thinking, i am doing this the right way. That is the thing that is great. Its important to keep in mind that jeffersons career is dedicated to eradicating aristocracy. That is a challenge for us as a aristocracy, patriarchy, those are all dirty words for us, thats old regime. He regime. He saw himself inaugurating a new regime. He did not reject however this fundamental notion of the centrality of the family in the household to the future of the republic. That is is what he is celebrating, the role he is playing in his household. Does that notion of patriarch extend beyond the household, beyond monticello and his family , his enslaved workers to how he approached the presidency in politics . He didnt see himself as a patriarch. That was washington. I think he really thought he was the father of the country. Jefferson was the real father of the country but he did not see himself as a patriarch of the people, of americans, the the people were supposed to be the rulers but i think his understanding of family and how people could relate to one another was central and it came from what he conceived family was supposed to be like in monticello. To remember the Nuclear Family where most americans live to in nuclear families, some of you probably still do but jefferson thought it was natural. That is the key word for him, nature. The family comes together naturally and he imagines the republic is the most natural form of government. It is selfgovernment. It. It is true to the nature of human beings. Therefore the United States will be a model. Lets talk about the structure the book a little bit because you approach it in an interesting way, youre moving chronologically but not so focused on his political life where he the you wrote chapters on music and in privacy and how vital privacy was to him. Talk little bit about how that approach and why you approach it that way. We wanted to do something different, we wanted to try to show what we thought, the things that we thought were important to shaping jeffersons life. He was born in chadwell and then one thing happened and then another and another. The ideal was to have things that were important to him that could be in the patriarchy. So we unpacked that and think about how he became a patriarch. The second section is traveler and it talks about the influence of france, what happened to him when he leaves monticello and goes out into the world. The last one is enthusiast because thats where we talk about music and visitors and things that are influences that shaped him but would not be typical biography side in that way. The idea is to get inside his head in a fashion and not just do a laundry list of details. And if we successfully integrate his private life into his public life then we can show how the performances that he orchestrates in his house then appealed to him man awaits way its a microcosm of how he imagines the world to be. Civil conversation, music in which Everybody Knows her part and they harmonize, there is a political meaning to all of this and i think it is profoundly on the basic to his political philosophy that the idea but jefferson is you can never know who he is. We think thats stupid. Its foolish is supposed to be impenetrable. Well, jefferson himself made a big deal about his privacy, and you mention that, that privacy is foundational to how he understands his public life. Take this simple idea, in a republic citizens are equal, they have to consent to the laws that the majority decides on then that consent has to be truly voluntary. It has to come from the Self Determination of the. How do you protect individuals from insidious influences . How do you take for instance the, person out of the mob, how do you avoid the usual problems or pathologies of democracy because democracy was a dirty word. Put people together and they are going to get drunk. If they had a government and they controlled the government what would you do . Well you would possible lawn you would redistribute property. So how you lift people up is a big challenge and crucial to the project of lifting people up, theres a new conception of consent itself. Jeffersons project we describe as a a cell fashion project to make himself somebody. He wants to exemplify how an enlightened republican citizen can become wellinformed and can become part of a new kind of public life based on that. He doesnt see himself as an avatar but as an example of all of this theres an arrogance to this, the idea that hes the national teacher, that he is an example to teacher and thats what it was supposed to be. You go to monticello and if you been there you go to the indian hall and the foyer there, theres all sorts of paintings, sculptures and everything in the idea is that these are things that he brought back from france to show to people. Hes going to show people how to model a civilized behavior. So its an interesting idea to say that i am an example of something that i want other people to see and this is how you model yourself. In a way to be educational 20 people. Speaking of the consenting, obviously an entire category people who are by no means. [inaudible] im curious, we have spent a lot of time looking into the family, the extended family of Thomas Jefferson through hemming. Did did you come to a different understanding of how he viewed slavery . So much as in written any of set it that the fatal state as he described it, you do so spent times that when he goes to france his you saying francis slavery became fully domesticated in his mind. What does that mean . It means that before he went to france jefferson had a reputation as being anti slavery. The first indication of this was a young man in his 20 and he copies interest, place book parts of a poem. And it talks about the evils of the slave trade and somebody yanked from his native land and was brought up cross the ocean to labor for someone else. As a young legislator he wanted to introduce legislation for emancipation plants which were nowhere in virginia. And he wrote about this in he had a reputation as being antislavery. When he goes to france and he sees the society and you leave your country and you think theres bad things about your country to go someplace else and they say well at least were not like that. We can be friends. That was his attitude. He thought he was in france during the prerevolutionary. And people were starving, there is on rest, riots and all kinds of things. And he said we had problems in america but this place has lots of problems and just on the road to be to solve those problems because he was much in favor of the french revolution. He is excited by that. Gave him a sense that well, we have time to sell a problem as as well. The other thing that happened is in france with james and Sally Hemmings who are his wifes half siblings. He begins to to treat them in a way, he pays some wages and he starts the practice that he continues when he comes back home and that is wherever he is in the city and mix in slave labor and free labor he pays everybody because it causes a conflict. Hes hes living with these people who have an opportunity to be free because every person who petitioned for freedom and france is granted. And they couldve done, but they didnt do and while he was there he is living with these people who become the face of slavery for him and away. And he continues this when he comes home, he sees himself as a slave owner through his relationship with the people who are the closest around him. Thats unrealistic because they are not the people down the mountain. They are not the bulk of this is his wifes family. They have a completely different relationship to him that the others do. And his brothers, lots of times he didnt know where they were. They hired their own and went out of the money. He would he would call them back when he needed them for something. Thats a very different relationship than he had with over 700 people that he owned over the course of his lifetime. This is a tiny group of people who are pulled out. Sees himself as a slave owner through those relationships. We think france really heighten that for him. Because they do come back, they dont stay. Slavery becomes domesticated. He is thinking about the mess members of his household and how he treats people in his household. That is very different than the situation. A kind of reciprocity to come is not symmetrical, theyre not equal, but like family members, and i use the word natural before, he has created what he thinks is a kind of family that extends and i think thats using the right words when we use the word face. Its how he sees or wants to see slavery area but the other crucial thing to keep in mind is that jeffersons urgency and doing something about slavery varies with the geopolitical situation. To put it narrowly and neatly in the American Revolution and slave people could run the british lines to join the counterrevolution later on in the revolution and what becomes haiti, the possibility of uprising. It would spread to the continent during the war of 1812. The british coming in and its another opportunity for and slay people to take advantage of this. At moments like this jefferson says, my fellow republicans, we have to do something about this, i know slavery is an unjust institution, we need to act in his solution of course is emancipation. We have to to free these people. This is radical injustice. He never backs off from that and then we have to send them to another country. Expatriation is his solution. Liberia, wherever. He thinks may be in the Trans Pacific but he said late we might need that territory. So he thinks about but there there is a black republic, that recognized that maybe, thats expensive. He goes through the possibilities but the important thing is that when the piece comes the urgency goes, when the piece comes then he seizes himself and this is crucial, hes a kind of steward, he has a responsibility just as the father and the family has a responsibility. He has a a responsibility to look after the happiness of those who labor to borrow another phrase from that letter that we started off within our title, and then we have a kind of domestication that were talking about and that is that we are trying to create a sense within this household of good treatments of hes in ameliorate or wants to improve and rationalize things there are ways in which he can practice the enlightenment at home, make things better while we wait for his fellow virginians to see the lights, they use that to get and then come to the collective decision, we have to do something to end this unjust. He understands that he doesnt believe there is what is called the republican solution to the problem. So the white people of virginia were not going to vote to do away with slavery, the second happened during his lifetime thats likely to happen. But he knew that was not going to happen at the time and that it was going to and by the time he gets to the missouri crisis he realizes its going to end the way it did and that is with the war. That is not something he would have concentrated. Yes i think jefferson in haiti is fascinating because when he first hears about it he writes a letter to his daughter and he said the negroes have taken over the island ten he was sort of like isnt this the age of revolution and then all of a sudden he hears that lots of white people are being killed and then the tone changes. Its one thing for white people to kill for their freedom in france essentially which he supported the friends revolution far longer than people think he should have but for the black republic at first its okay but then when they start killing its not okay. And that reinforces the idea of racial national difference. One of the key terms we play with is the idea of race which doesnt have a fixed meaning. It is equivalent to nation, people, race, in the modern sense and if enslaved africans and africanamericans are a distinct people nation race, then how could they possibly live with the people who had enslaved them . But there would be no peace, that that is the thing that really gives people a problem is because we congratulate herself and think that we are better, were in light now living together in peace and harmony, yeah, right . We get along. Will im happy were kind of get along. [laughter] but i mean he doesnt have the confidence, how could blacks love a country that has treated them so poorly . How could you do that because this is him saying i know what i would do and hes transferring and basically saying. And thats the downside in the sentimental conception of what nations, great big family who love each other. But how long did it take for the laws to change on interracial mayor in america . Were talking about basic stuff, what i want my daughters to marry black people . This is insane. So that idea of the on naturalness of the races mixing. Except that its interesting because we talk about this in the book that it is very, is the attitude of the conqueror, white men have access to the bodies of white women, black women, native, native american women, but not the other way around. Really for jefferson and those in the state of virginia when hes talk about mixing, hes talking about the horror of up flight a black man having access to white women. To black, black men having access to white women. He didnt have any problem the other way around because he knows that in slavery slavery is a laboratory for that kind of thing. In his own household, and his fatherinlaw, people in virginia just in general. Its clear this its clear this is something that was a big part of life during that time. Think about the implications of abolishing artificial hierarchies among white people that his aristocracy, monarchy, all people are white people, citizens are created equal. But you can do that but then youd draw attention to visions that you consider natural, not artificial. To have a king they tell us all about this for, there is nothing legitimate about a very important word in regimes. Theres nothing legitimate about it. He abolished all those and we agree on that and celebrate this its in the first grade modern republic. Yet what that draws your attention to is how a society constituted . What what is the natural relations that emerge . We would like to think that means everybody was involved in the revolution, let the loyalist go back to britain. Theyre going to love each other and it is going to be fine. There is a distinction here, a distinction that runs down through society itself. Two People Living living in one place, it is unnatural. It is vitally important have the relationship to the land of your country. This is what patriotism means, this love of country and we have people here against their will who we own unjustly, this is impossible. They cannot love it. We wont love them and they cannot love us. And we cannot form families. How can you be equal citizens if you cannot be in the same family . Yes, we are all equal in the same but you cannot be my daughterinlaw or my soninlaw. You include part of a letter that Thomas Jefferson writes to Tom John Adams this historic miracle that both john adamson Thomas Jefferson die on the same day, on july 460 years after signing the declaration of independence. He says time which outlives all things while live this people also. Clearly taking the long view, who knows what exactly he was thinking. Remember he believes in the afterlife is going to see the. Im curious in the writings in his letters, he talks of slavery on a grand scale as an institution, but does he ever refer to it within the context of his family . Does he talk about the need the paradox of the of what we see now where any of the other enslaved people on the plantation and a direct way . Does he wrestle with that ever . No, hes not wrestling with it. Talking about Sally Hemmings or anything like that, he sees himself as being a good master to these people into my family, and it is not, this is not something that is keeping him up at night. Most of the time hes talking about slavery is that the request of somebody, somebody has written to him and asked about it, he is not being proactive. If youre from new england he would feel guilty not sleep at night but he is not. I was going to say there is a lot of projection in jefferson. When i least like a jefferson, when i dislike him is when his solution to a problem, why there is a problem in someone elses fault. This idea in scenario we sketched out of how you would have emancipation of virginia, the white majority finally realizes it has to act because its a basic republican requirement. Whose whose fault is it . He says this repeatedly, i have made it clear what my position is, this is the only solution you are going to have to wake up to this. Now as you quoted from that later is not going to happen in my lifetime, but its not his fault. That is where we have the problem. Its a jefferson, go to church, get down, apologize, feel bad. Get down . [laughter] i have no idea what that means. Pray for forgiveness i have to say one of my shifting gears here little bit before this gets too controversial, you talk about exploding some of the myths around Thomas Jefferson. One of my favorites is the notion that he goes to france and he arrives in 1784 and as you describe it he promptly greeted by portis because he spoke very little french. He studied french, he knew all sorts of things but his Language Skills were not up to snuff. He knew how to read french speaking a language is very difficult. Its one thing to study something and then actually go to france and having people speak about a mile a minute, but but their normal way of speaking and to put it together, he read french well and he could understand people but he had difficulty speaking the language. His daughter and sally and James Hemingway eventually learned how to speak it pretty well. He was older when he goes to france. Hes in his 40s in language is not easily acquired at that time. , my favorite story of that time. Isnt going to a chess club in paris and then getting beaten easily, handedly by people. He doesnt go back and we think thats interesting because my husband to play chess competitive civilly says the only way to get better is to play with people who are better than your. And its an interesting thing that he did not, he loved to play chess but he did not want to do it. He didnt love it enough to get beat repeatedly. Hes a very thinskinned person. Is very anxious. You identify with that. [laughter] im a white guy at heart. [laughter] when he is in france, look at its most remarkable to us i think beyond the initial Culture Shock and his need to create a little virginia at home. He needs the comfort zone. It is the danger he feels that works in French Society to impressionable young people that he can barely resist the temp tatian some cell. So young people dont go to paris because you have women in the streets messing in politics. And thats why he celebrates the properly constituted republican family where women have their place, they played played a role but they are not doing politics, they are not influencing society. They are in their place hes upset with this, it has a lot to do with sexuality and ten tatians that he sees there. In one letter he suggests that if you come to france at an impressionable age to things will happen to you, you will develop a taste for for horse and you will never learn to speak your own language well because during this crucial. You will be speaking another language and having too much of a good time. What is really important is that youre going to have to go back in the republic. The key key art in the republic is persuasion of speaking my well. So if you cannot speak the language well and if sexually you are developing in an abnormal way than the very foundation of the publics being subverted. I do want to ask you one thing, as coauthors of the book and im enjoying listening to your slight disagreements here, where there times when you really could integrate . Did you have to come to consensus . Which one . Shes going to talk about religion now. I pray you do. All i suppose the biggest dispute between us was jeffersons christianity. Peter calls himself a unitarian. And on my thing is always how can you tell and i grew up in a United Methodist tradition and jefferson calling himself a christian i was not convinced about that. I was reduced to prayer at that point. And he convinced me that i was perhaps being too judgmental and that idea because it suggests that jefferson did not believe in the divinity of christ, he believed jesus was a great oil teacher and that you should live according to the precepts of jesus but not jesus the christ. That is why why he writes the life and morals of jesus of nazareth, not jesus christ. So he raises out parts of the bible that are that he considers to either mysticism and magical thinking. But he convinced me that i had to narrow a view of all of this. So that was an area that he persuaded me about. We have other small disputes and sometimes you just, but it go. Was at the movie of medical, frozen or whatever. Im not going to sing that. But we basically agree its not that different. What was wonderful about this collaboration for me and i think for both of us was that we brought complementary knowledge and skills together and i think the fit has been wonderful. We enjoyed working together. The only downside for me is that i am now known as the biographer. [laughter] i dont do biographies. We have microphone set up for people who want to have questions. You can come forward. And so will go to the site for. Im so excited to be first. And that i loved your book. It has been a huge inspiration to me. Thank you. I am writing a book and i and interesting interested in a craft. What kinds of, what are the biggest obstacles you had in trying to put together the forces that you are using to create a narrative . Will the biggest obstacle is pulling it all together and trying to find the right way to craft the narrative. I mean to have lots of information but you know what to go and what to leave in and what to take out, thats the biggest thing. There was a lot there i think but we dont have a lot of direct evidence or any evidence from sally herself but you have to research around the situation. Its funny because i didnt perceive it as a problem, it was fun. A a minute think im a natural detective. Id love to write but i also like to research if not more, but certainly as much. But i would say if i would to say what her problem would be a was learning how to take the material and turn it into a narrative and to know you have a file or you have the old thing, kill your darlings. I never killed them, i exiled them. I exile is called outtake in you take stuff and put it away and say you may be able to go back to that later on. It really is a parenting down. Thank you for your question. A net and peter, the big thing today in new york is hamilton. If you look at turnouts a book, i read your book theres a big emphasis on the fighting that went on between jefferson, hamilton, adams, and the madison joining with jefferson and others. And then the secretary of state and leaving. I dont know whether it was a temporary perspective that jefferson had during the administration, washington is from virginia and i was very surprised to see after reading your books how jefferson turned out to be evil. Am i crazy. Did you just say evil . Evil, because he was against the washingtons approach. , he times have you seen hamilton . I have the cd. Know and also miranda spoken know, but the fact is looking at the book he takes a certain perspective. Can i start on an answer . And annette will set me. First of all, the idea political opposition is absolutely illegitimate. Party, factions, no good. Weve been talking about love at nausea. Its that people do recognize, values and commitments, and they dont. Of course love always makes, failed love makes things worse as freud would tell you about love, hate, and the second thing is to get back to the real world there is no guarantee that the American Union will survive. There is no guarantee that the United States should ever cut a figure in world affairs, it is from a world Historical Perspective the odds against it are tremendous. In other words there so much at stake and of course with the image of planting the seed and the tree starts to grow in one direction that could be forever, they know theyre starting something. If they started wrong it will fail. So everything has a stake. I personally and i do get in trouble on this, im a little hard little hard on jefferson when we read about politics, i dont know i think, i understand what theyre both doing. They make a lot of sense to me. The fiscal military state, hamilton has it, jefferson has the notion of how to create a legitimate regime that will connect people and forge a new kind of attachment that will sustain the government. All of that makes sense. They made their contribution but you can see what the stakes are in why would they be at each others throats. All because washington is washington to untrans listening to hamilton too much. Lets go to another question. I have two if you will allow it. First of all, when i went to monticello, one thing that occurred to me was that what jefferson was doing relied a lot on his ledger, his ability to spend time of the things he wants to spend time on. So clearly he relied heavily on slave ownership to do so and yet you are also saying that he saw his lifestyle as a model for people to live by. So in a sense he thought that model of the republic one of had to rely on the institution of slavery for people to continue to try to model that. So is he conscious of that and how it deal with that in terms of his idea of the ideal republic . Okay lets leslie but one question to try to leave it at someone else. He felt that eventually its back to this point of what would change later on, he did not think the model would be slaveowning. Because eventually slavery would go away and what he wanted was to have family farms, that they would take over. But what he wanted people to model was this ideas about science, his idea about art. Those kind of things. I dont think he saw plantation like as that aspect of his life. It was the exalted not just the institution he thought was going to leave. In one way of thinking about it is that his educational system cap by the university is the very narrow apex of a Great Pyramid that begins with primary education. He doesnt think everybody will reach the top. So its not modeling in that sense. Might say what is characterize the middleclass society is its aspirational quality, blu can be. Learn, bmi tends, and every man can participate in enlightenment. And i think and i think that is the idea. So that anybody would be educated and in light by visiting monticello and pearls of wisdom from the great man. One more question before we have to break. I like to go back to the issue of writing a joint historical study like this. Perhaps he could tell us about how you got the idea of working together on this book and then how you coordinated different sections or different aspects of the book. Will peter said he was going to retire. I did . And he did retire and i got the idea that he should, i do want him to write off into the sunset yet. I asked him to write a book with me. [inaudible] [laughter] be a nearly deathlike i am in trying to keep me going. So that is how we got the idea of doing it. We have been talking with each other since 1995. I thought we should do something together so our editor wanted to have one voice but it would not be good to write a chapter me to write a chapter in to have someone responsible for different sections of it so we tried to write sections and send them to each other each week. For a period of time where being very efficient, we went out on the road and talked about it quite a bit even before we began to write. We wanted to try to craft as much as we could. There some sections that but everything got moved around. There are some quirks that i could recognize that were mine and some i her him, but a lot of time i dont know who wrote what. And theyre still talking. [laughter] thank you so much for being here. [applause]