Founding Fathers and Slaveholders
To what degree do the attitudes of Washington and Jefferson toward slavery diminish their achievements?
- By Stephen E. Ambrose
- Smithsonian magazine, November 2002, Subscribe
(Page 2 of 4)
In Notes on the State of Virginia, Jefferson describes the institution of slavery as forcing tyranny and depravity on master and slave alike. To be a slaveholder meant one had to believe that the worst white man was better than the best black man. If you did not believe these things, you could not justify yourself to yourself. So Jefferson could condemn slavery in words, but not in deeds.
At his magnificent estate, Monticello, Jefferson had slaves who were superb artisans, shoemakers, masons, carpenters, cooks. But like every bigot, he never said, after seeing a skilled African craftsman at work or enjoying the fruits of his labor, "Maybe I’m wrong." He ignored the words of his fellow revolutionary John Adams, who said that the Revolution would never be complete until the slaves were free.
Jefferson left another racial and moral problem for his successors, the treatment of Native Americans. He had no positive idea what to do with or about the Indians. He handed that problem over to his grandchildren, and theirs.
The author of the Declaration of Independence threw up his hands at the question of women’s rights. It is not as if the subject never came up. Abigail Adams, at one time Jefferson’s close friend, raised it. But Jefferson’s attitude toward women was at one with that of the white men of his age. He wrote about almost everything, but almost never about women, not about his wife nor his mother and certainly not about Sally Hemings.
So it is of particular irony to admit that Jefferson was as remarkable a man as America has produced. "Spent the evening with Mr. Jefferson," John Quincy Adams wrote in his diary in 1785, "whom I love to be with....You can never be an hour in the man’s company without something of the marvelous." And even Abigail Adams wrote of him, "He is one of the choice ones of the earth."
Jefferson was born rich and became well educated. He was a man of principle (except for slaves, Indians, and women). His civic duty was paramount to him. He read, deeply and widely, more than any other president of the United States except, possibly, Theodore Roosevelt. He wrote well and with more productivity and skill than any other president except, perhaps, Theodore Roosevelt. Wherever Jefferson sat was the head of the table. Those few who got to dine with him around a small table always recalled his charm, wit, insights, queries, explanations, gossip, curiosity, and above all else his laughter.
Jefferson’s range of knowledge was astonishing. Science in general. Flora and fauna specifically. Geography. Fossils. The classics and modern literature. Languages. Politicians of all types. Politics, state by state, county by county. International affairs. He was an intense partisan. He loved music and playing the violin. He wrote countless letters about his philosophy, observations of people and places. In his official correspondence, Jefferson maintained a level of eloquence not since equaled. I’ve spent much of my professional life studying presidents and generals, reading their letters, examining their orders to subordinates, making an attempt to judge them. None match Jefferson.
In spite of these rare abilities, Jefferson was not a hero. His great achievements were words. Except for the Louisiana Purchase, his actions as president fall short. But those words! He was the author of the Declaration of Independence. The second paragraph begins with a perfect sentence: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal." Those words, as the historian Samuel Eliot Morison has said, "are more revolutionary than anything written by Robespierre, Marx, or Lenin, a continual challenge to ourselves, as well as an inspiration to the oppressed of all the world." Eventually, with Lincoln, who articulated and lived these truths, and slowly afterward, the idea made its progress.
Jefferson was the author of the Virginia Statute of Religious Freedom, a doctrine that spread throughout the United States. He is the father of our religious freedom. It is, next to the words of our independence, his greatest gift, save only perhaps our commitment to universal education, which also comes to us via Jefferson.
The Northwest Ordinance of 1787 was based on Jefferson’s "Report of a Plan of Government for the Western Territory" written three years earlier. In it, he made certain that when the populations of Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin, and Michigan were large enough, these and other territories would come into the Union as fully equal states. They would have the same number of senators and representatives as the original thirteen. They would elect their own governors, and so on. He was the first who had the thought that colonies should be equal to the thirteen original members of the Union. No one before him had proposed such a thing. Empires were run by the "mother country," with the king appointing the governors. It was Jefferson who decided that we wouldn’t do it that way in the United States. The territories would be states. He applied the principles of the Northwest Ordinance to the Louisiana Purchase territories, and by later extension to the West Coast. It was Jefferson who envisioned an empire of liberty that stretched from sea to shining sea.
Single Page « Previous 1 2 3 4 Next »
Subscribe now for more of Smithsonian's coverage on history, science and nature.










Comments (22)
+ View All Comments
Thank you Mr. Ambrose for a very thoughtful article.
Posted by Terrence on February 6,2013 | 06:39 PM
I SEE ON THIS PAGE THERE IS A LOT OF DEFENSE FOR WASHINGTON AND JEFFERSON BOTTOM LINE OWNING SLAVES WAS MORALLY WRONG PERIOD. THAT WOULD BE LIKE BRITAIN DURING THAT TIME OWNING THEM AND MAKING THEM WORK ON PLANTATIONS IT WAS WRONG IM KNOCKING WHAT THEY ACCOMPLISHED AS POLITICAL GURUS THEY WROTE LAWS IN THIS COUNTRY TILL THIS DAY I AGREE WITH. THEY FAILED TO ADDRESS THE BIG ISSUE WHICH WAS SLAVERY DURING THAT TIME. THEY TURNED BLIND EYE TO IT NO LEGISLATION PASSED FOR ALL SLAVES TO BE FREE IT TOOK LINCOLN TO DO THAT AND HE WAS SHOT DEAD FOR BEING MORALLY RIGHT AND CONSCIOUS.
Posted by TAUREAN on February 5,2013 | 09:25 PM
You may want to do a little mor e research on Adams. He had slaves African and Indian. I know this for a fact my ancestors were those slaves.
Posted by Lita Adams on January 1,2013 | 08:13 AM
Although George Washington and Thomas Jefferson owned slaves, they were still the fathers of our country, and are the reason why we are still united today. Yes, everyone is flawed in their own ways, and we have to open our eyes to that, instead of ripping on them for what they did, and discrediting their amazing accomplishments. I view them as great men to liberty and justice.
Posted by Jake on December 18,2012 | 12:38 AM
Jefferson was one of the most educated, intelligent, and skilled writers of his and our time. He was also a slave owner. On the other hand, Washington was an inspiration to Revolutionary soldiers, a wonderful character, and a guiding first President. Washington was also a slave owner. To say that these two men “failed to rise above their place and time” is preposterous. If anyone rose to the occasion, it would be the author of the Declaration of Independence and the first President of the United States. By today’s standards, it may seem cruel to own a slave, but during Jefferson and Washington’s time, it was acceptable. Remember, when thinking on the past, one must put them selves in the past, and when living in the present, one must put them selves in the future. Washington and Jefferson were certainly thinking ahead by defying the British and creating a lasting government, but we have to do our part and put our futuristic minds in the past.
Posted by Rusty on December 18,2012 | 09:33 PM
I do not agree with Ambrose. Washington and Jefferson should be viewed by the people of their time not ours. Back then many people could have been for slavery, it could have been helping the economy, we never know. It is more cear to us today what the right decision should be but we will never kno for sure what was going on back then and in Washington and Jeffersons' minds.
Posted by John on December 18,2012 | 06:50 PM
Jefferson a racist?? That's the most pathetic attempt at an attention grab I've ever seen. He had a black mistress who who took with him to Paris!! The two had a child, which is the only 'slave' that could truly be considered his. Also, the 'slaves' mentioned in this story were never truly Jefferson's. They were inherited from his father and law and worked the land at Monticello. Due to the debt also inherited from his father and law and Jefferson's incessant collecting and travels his creditors would NEVER have allowed him to free his slaves and cut all source of income from the small plantation. His child with the 'slave' lived happily on their plantation in a separate house with his mother, with no responsibilities, traveled with him to Europe and was 'FREED' by Jefferson on his deathbead. He also guaranteed that he receive an education, something that was all but forbidden at that time. He took ridiculous amounts of care to ensure the safety and continued success of even an illegitimate child with a slave. Doesn't sound very racist to me.
Posted by Erikch Weiss on December 6,2012 | 04:35 PM
In their times they may have been on par with other men, but through the lens of history they were elevated to higher status for the framework they helped lay that transcends their times. It does not make them any better or less than their contemporaries, but viewed through history and through specifics of their nature, the flaws can be seen as things to not admire, that affect them personally, not so much the frameworks left. Much of what the country celebrates in holidays are the affects of the person, not really the person since so few know the whole person.
Posted by xaviersx on November 23,2012 | 02:20 PM
Can I just point out that being hanged, drawn and quartered is not at all what the author describes here. It is being hanged or strangled to death or near death, followed by evisceration and dismemberment.
Posted by Kay on November 11,2012 | 07:45 PM
Absolutely unfounded and biased information. But just look at one of a multitude of actual historical writings: John Quincy Adams, called the "Hell Hound of Abolition" for his extensive endeavors against that institution, regularly invoked the efforts of the Virginia patriots, particularly Jefferson, to justify his own crusade against slavery. In fact, in a speech in 1837, John Quincy Adams declared: The inconsistency of the institution of domestic slavery with the principles of the Declaration of Independence was seen and lamented by all the southern patriots of the Revolution; by no one with deeper and more unalterable conviction than by the author of the Declaration himself [Jefferson]. No charge of insincerity or hypocrisy can be fairly laid to their charge. Never from their lips was heard one syllable of attempt to justify the institution of slavery. They universally considered it as a reproach fastened upon them by the unnatural step-mother country [Great Britain] and they saw that before the principles of the Declaration of Independence, slavery, in common with every other mode of oppression, was destined sooner or later to be banished from the earth. Such was the undoubting conviction of Jefferson to his dying day. In the Memoir of His Life, written at the age of seventy-seven, he gave to his countrymen the solemn and emphatic warning that the day was not distant when they must hear and adopt the general emancipation of their slaves. 52
Posted by Judy on November 10,2012 | 12:40 AM
Since when is curriculum based on the subjects actions? I'm not excusing Jefferson one bit, but why not teach the reality?
Posted by Ryan on August 29,2012 | 06:27 PM
"Yes," she replied. "He was a slave holder." And that, class, is how ignorance is born. Thomas Jefferson had a flawed character in many ways, yes, but he was one of the greatest minds to ever live. If you do not teach his writings like they are the very word of truth, you are an imbecile. Criticize his actions and preach his writings.
Posted by max on August 6,2012 | 04:12 PM
What PC garbage. The Libertarian leader M. Gilson wrote an amazing article in 2001 "Jefferson's Slaves" based on his personal research. It seems Jefferson COULDN'T free his slaves because they weren't his--he was in massive debt (the article here points it out but doesn't make the connection)--just as you can't give away your house if ther is a mortgage on it. Also, there were many legal problems to mass emancipation as in where would these people go? etc. Gilson also points out that the whole matter diverts attention from today's neo-slavery of putting people in prison for lifestyle offenses. Why don' we free those slaves and the academics talk about that? Cultural blindness lives on...
Posted by Rich on July 20,2012 | 10:03 AM
I see that 200 years from now we will ridcule and castigate those who set the foundation for bringing awareness to reducing carbon emissions, just because they owned automobiles in their lifetime. Even if it was a hybrid, that wasn't good enough.
I've read in several sources that Thomas Jefferson actually freed the slaves who were children of Sally Hemings (the slave women who he is said to have fathered the children with). He kept Ms. Hemings from being traded or sold until his death when Thomas Jefferson's daughter freed her.
Jefferson was the leading proponet to ban international slave trade during his presidency in 1807, denouncing this action as,
"violations of human rights which have been so long continued on the unoffending inhabitants of Africa, in which the morality, the reputation, and the best interests of our country have long been eager to proscribe".
Now it may seem contradictory since domestic slave trade continued, but I believe it refutes the claim of him being a racist and "incapable of rising above his time and place".
Posted by Ry on March 12,2012 | 02:35 PM
+ View All Comments