“I can only say
that there is not a man living who wishes more sincerely than I do to see a
plan adopted for the abolition of slavery.”
~ George Washington
“21 Aug. 1805…bought
a negro woman Lucretia Jame’s wife, her 2. sons John & Randall and the
child of which she is pregnant, when born, for £180.” ~ Thomas Jefferson’s Memorandum Book
We traveled the Old Dominion from the northeast corner
at Arlington over the state line from DC to the southwest corner at Abingdon, just
a tobacco spit away from the Tennessee border.
Along our route we made house calls on some former presidents. The presidents are long since gone but their
homes, from Washington’s Mount Vernon just south of DC to Jefferson’s Monticello
on the eastern edge of the Blue Ridge, all remain in magnificent
restoration. Four of our nation’s first
five presidents hailed from Virginia, George Washington (1) Thomas Jefferson
(3) James Madison (4) and James Monroe (5) and we visited the homes of all four.
Jefferson’s Monticello is easily the most famous, evidenced
by the crowds at the hilltop plantation.
It’s a fascinating place; for the architecture, the views, the furnishings
and inventions and the beautiful grounds.
You enter the mansion into an entry hall that features an ingenious
clock designed by Jefferson that marks the time and the days of the week. The walls of the entry hall covered with
artifacts that Lewis and Clark brought back from their expeditions. Most are reproductions but it can be jaw
dropping when a docent points out the originals. You enter the library where most of the
volumes are reproductions but behind panes of glass you see volumes that the
third president held in his hands. Tour
the home and walk the grounds and you realize that Jefferson was the
quintessential renaissance man; fluent in five languages and able to read two
others, acquainted with nearly every influential person in America, and a great
many in Europe as well; a lawyer, agronomist, musician, scientist, philosopher,
author, architect, inventor, and statesman.
And yet throughout the tour you can’t step out of that long shadow of
controversy that’s darkened Jefferson’s legacy.
The Kitchen at Monticello |
I was standing in front of the wine cellar at Monticello
when I heard a woman’s disdainful voice, “This was not a happy place.” I glanced to see an elderly black woman
reading the display describing the duties of slaves in the dependencies located
under the mansion in the cellar passageway.
You don’t go very far at Monticello without seeing references to slaves
and their duties.
Jefferson's Monticello |
During his lifetime Jefferson owned more than 600 human
beings; a fact that might not be notable at an 18th century southern
plantation except that this one happened to belong to the man who penned the
words, “We hold these truths to be
self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their
Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and
the pursuit of Happiness.” For
Jefferson, those truths were only self-evident for white men. Jefferson decried slavery as a “moral blot”
and a “hideous depravity,” while spending a lifetime being a slaver in
abolitionists’ clothing; proposing anti-slavery legislation that he certainly realized
would never fly. Jefferson held on to the
notion that emancipation should be dependent on the democratic process making
the final arbiters free white males.
During his lifetime he freed only two of his slaves; James Hemings and
Robert Hemings. Being the original
American shopaholic who never met a gadget, book, or bottle of French wine he didn't like nearly all
of his slaves were sold in order to pay off his debts after he had died. Only five were freed in his will.
In fact all four of the Virginian presidents whose homes
we visited denounced slavery in the strongest terms yet all four owned
slaves. They all advocated a gradual
abolition and predicted that over time slavery would experience an obsolescence
that would lead to its eventual demise – a convenient arrangement for men with
livelihoods and lifestyles that were dependent on the “peculiar institution.”
In retirement during the debate over the Missouri
Compromise, Madison advocated that the importation of slaves into new states
would “diffuse” or dilute the number of slaves in slave holding states leading
to a sort of natural abolition, “the
States holding fewest slaves are those which most readily abolished slavery
altogether.”
Madison never predicted a timeline for the diffusion and subsequent disappearance of slavery. It would be some 40 years later that the American Civil War would finally answer a slavery question which despite Madison's prophesy showed little evidence of otherwise going away. It's a sad irony that these great men who had advocated revolution in order to shed the tyranny of King George counseled patience to blacks suffering the tyranny of slavery.
The argument is made that they were products of their
times but that just doesn't jibe with the fact that in so many ways they were
men who were forward thinking beyond their times. Jefferson’s humanism shrivels in his very
words; "I consider a woman who
brings a child every two years as more profitable than the best man of the
farm," he remarked in 1820.
"What she produces is an
addition to the capital, while his labors disappear in mere consumption." The man who advanced the concept of all men
being created equal never could bring himself to go all in when it came to
black men and women. This renaissance
man of extraordinary intellect and breadth of knowledge sadly and surprisingly held
blacks to be “as incapable as children” and
claimed, "in imagination they are dull,
tasteless, and anomalous.” Jefferson fathered six children by Sally
Hemings, one of his domestic slaves. She was never
freed, and in a sort of tragic robbery of her humanity there were no images ever made of her and only four descriptions of her
have ever been found. Regrettably she wasn't
found worthy enough to be buried in the Jefferson family grave site.
America has a historical dilemma in reconciling the
greatness of these four presidents (Jefferson authored the Declaration of
Independence; Washington had the unenviable task of being the first president;
Madison birthed the Bill of Rights; Monroe gave the country its identity) with
their history as slaveholders. These
were great men; men of talent and intelligence with extraordinary breadth of
knowledge with beliefs that were ironically and tragically limited in the true
meaning of the equality of all men.
There’s an odd sort of coming together at Monticello, that
carries a certain degree of awkwardness.
White tourists and black tourists take the house tour, walk the grounds,
take pictures, buy souvenirs and do all that tourist stuff. And while they’re touring the same home
and grounds, looking at the same Jeffersonian inventions and gadgets and reading the same historical descriptions, they’re seeing
something completely different. How
could it be otherwise? While I marveled at the
genius of the architect who designed that magnificent home, the
black woman next to me in the wine cellar saw a place that dehumanized her
ancestors. Sure, standing in that cellar
I could be aware of her feelings but I could in no way fathom them.
Just before we left Monticello we watched a small debate between a black woman and a white woman. The docents at Monticello universally use the term, “enslaved people.” The term is also used on the Monticello website. The black woman objected, saying that she would have preferred the term, “people from Africa.” It was, she seemed to be saying, as if those slaves had no past before they were made slaves. The white woman countered that “enslaved people” describes the situation that they found themselves in. “It’s history,” she said. “It’s the way things were and you can’t avoid it and you can't change it” They sat on benches, facing each other, exchanging opinions with not a hint of acrimony. Two women who’d never met before, who probably hailed from different states, undoubtedly had different life experiences found themselves at the home of the third president of their nation having a civil discussion on one of the most polarizing topics in American history – race.
Just before we left Monticello we watched a small debate between a black woman and a white woman. The docents at Monticello universally use the term, “enslaved people.” The term is also used on the Monticello website. The black woman objected, saying that she would have preferred the term, “people from Africa.” It was, she seemed to be saying, as if those slaves had no past before they were made slaves. The white woman countered that “enslaved people” describes the situation that they found themselves in. “It’s history,” she said. “It’s the way things were and you can’t avoid it and you can't change it” They sat on benches, facing each other, exchanging opinions with not a hint of acrimony. Two women who’d never met before, who probably hailed from different states, undoubtedly had different life experiences found themselves at the home of the third president of their nation having a civil discussion on one of the most polarizing topics in American history – race.
Your comment on the often heard statement about the four Virginian presidents as being products of their times reminds me of the similar statement regarding the internment camps for Japanese Americans during WWII, that to understand it one has to have lived in the 1940s. From our vantage point many decades later, we have trouble reconciling that statement of attitude. There is a degree of truth about it, though.
ReplyDeleteInstead of seeing those four men as products of their times, it makes more sense to me to try to understand why things were during the 18th and 19th centuries. Jefferson being the prototypical shopaholic was a huge part of his slave ownership. For all his intellectual greatness, he was also a dreamy optimist who spent far more than he could afford because he believed that next year's crops would be abundant and help pay his mounting debts. His chosen lifestyle of reckless spending caused him to be unable to afford to pay laborers. It doesn't excuse his owning slaves but does in some part explain it.
The other factor which you mentioned was the belief held by "enlightened" thinkers that slavery had a built-in obsolescence. That may have eventually come to pass but the Civil War forced the issue. You ended this post by stating that race was one of the most polarizing topics in American history. That is almost an understatement, considering that the Civil Rights Act wasn't enacted until the 1960s and major league baseball didn't begin to integrate until 1947.
My opinion of Washington, Jefferson, Madison, and Monroe is that they were great men who, like all men and women, were flawed. Because of their greatness and their place in history, those flaws were magnified and discussed/argued for centuries after their lifetimes.
I don't know that these mens' ownership of slaves was so much a product of their times as their place. What might have been different had these men been New England merchants with livelihoods unattached to slave labor? Would they have put more energy into the abolition of slavery? Would their interaction with freedmen given them a more enlightened attitude towards blacks?
DeleteMy problem with the assertion that slavery would die of obsolescence is in your very statement that the Civil War forced the issue. The Civil War began in 1861; 41 years after the Missouri Compromise and Madison's prediction of the eventual demise of slavery. That the war was essentially fought over the slavery issue tells us that the institution was still going strong. Obsolescence wasn't going to come as a result of a dilution of the slave population as Madison suggested (the propagation of slaves was an economic boon). If anything it would have come as a result of manual labor being replaced by the invention of mechanized agriculture. And even then, there were plenty of opportunities for the use of unpaid manual labor (domestics come readily to mind). The advocacy of patience in the eradication of injustice is ages old, still with us and is an injustice in itself. Most recently we've seen it in the arguments over gay marriage. "Be patient," they say. "Over time the old conservatives will die off, attitudes will change and acceptance will come." Small comfort for the current generation.