Lincoln's Contested Legacy
Great Emancipator or unreconstructed racist? Defender of civil liberties or subverter of the Constitution? Each generation evokes a different Lincoln. But who was he?
- By Philip B. Kunhardt III
- Smithsonian magazine, February 2009, Subscribe
(Page 4 of 4)
And yet, as Bennett and others have rightly insisted, the Lincoln of earlier generations of blacks was also in part a mythic figure—his own racial prejudices passed over too lightly, even as African-Americans' roles in emancipation were underemphasized. In a series of 1922 editorials for the NAACP journal the Crisis, W.E.B. Du Bois stressed the importance of taking Lincoln off his pedestal in order to place attention on the need for ongoing progress. But Du Bois refused to reject Lincoln in the process. "The scars and foibles and contradictions of the Great do not diminish but enhance the worth and meaning of their upward struggle," he wrote. Of all the great figures of the 19th century, "Lincoln is to me the most human and lovable. And I love him not because he was perfect but because he was not and yet triumphed." In a 2005 essay in Time magazine, Obama said much the same thing: "I am fully aware of his limited views on race. But...[in] the midst of slavery's dark storm and the complexities of governing a house divided, he somehow kept his moral compass pointed firm and true."
Lincoln will always remain the president who helped destroy slavery and preserved the Union. With stubbornness, caution and an exquisite sense of timing, he engaged almost physically with unfolding history. Derided by some as an opportunist, he was in fact an artist, responding to events as he himself changed over time, allowing himself to grow into a true reformer. Misjudged as a mere jokester, incompetent, unserious, he was in fact the most serious actor on the political stage. He was politically shrewd, and he took a long view of history. And he knew when to strike to obtain his ends. Just for his work on behalf of the 13th Amendment, which abolished slavery in the United States, he has earned a permanent place in the history of human freedom.
In addition, he was a man of patience who refused to demonize others; a person of the middle who could build bridges across chasms. Herein may lie one of his most important legacies—his unwavering desire to reunite the American people. In Chicago's Grant Park, the night he was declared the winner of the 2008 election, Obama sought to capture that sentiment, quoting from Lincoln's first inaugural address: "We are not enemies, but friends.... Though passion may have strained, it must not break our bonds of affection."
And with the inauguration of the nation's first African-American president, we remember that, in 1864, with the Union war effort going badly, the national government might have been tempted to suspend the upcoming elections. Not only did Lincoln insist they take place, he staked his campaign on a controversial platform calling for the 13th Amendment, willing to risk everything on its behalf. When he went on to an overwhelming victory in November, he obtained a mandate to carry through his program. "[I]f the rebellion could force us to forego, or postpone a national election," he spoke to a gathered crowd from a White House window, "it might fairly claim to have already conquered and ruined us....[The election] has demonstrated that a people's government can sustain a national election, in the midst of a great civil war."
Around the world, governments routinely suspend elections, citing the justification of a "national emergency." Yet Lincoln set a precedent that would guarantee the voting rights of the American people through subsequent wars and economic depressions. Though our understanding of him is more nuanced than it once was, and we are more able to recognize his limitations as well as his strengths, Abraham Lincoln remains the great example of democratic leadership—by most criteria, truly our greatest president.
Philip B. Kunhardt III is co-author of the 2008 book Looking for Lincoln and a Bard Center Fellow.
Single Page « Previous 1 2 3 4
Subscribe now for more of Smithsonian's coverage on history, science and nature.










Comments (18)
+ View All Comments
Lincoln jailed 10,000 northerners for verbally opposing the war. Shutdown more than 300 newspapers who opposed gim. Order the Union Army to shoot into unarmed crowds of New York men, women and children protesting a draft that allowed wealthy Republicans to buy their way our of millitary service. Lincoln's war killed several hundred thousand southern civillians by hiring generals who would employ Lincoln's brutal war tactics. He also put 500,000 soldiers to death for his cause, whatever it was. Tyrant?
Posted by Nick Griffin on November 27,2012 | 02:30 AM
Abraham Lincoln in Perspective
https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=explorer&chrome=true&srcid=0B7lAWzevz5aKM2YwZWM3ZGUtMWQ3NC00ZWNkLWE4ZTktMTlkZjNiMmVjMWI0&hl=en_US
Posted by Patrick on October 13,2011 | 10:50 PM
Re: Maura Weise
"After his death, the Constitution of the United States was left to be interpreted by generations, interpreted poorly and interpreted justly. That Constitution is a document and also a dream in itself that we may all aspire to attain and live under. I am tired of the bigotry, ignorance and depressing nature of racism want to live by that Constitution."
Maura, you should do a little research on your own rather than rely on biased ideological revisionist history writers to shape you mind about what President Abraham Lincoln did to our U.S. Constitution. Aren't you concerned about the "POWERS" delegated by the "PEOPLE" to the STATES and Central Government, i.e. President, Congress and Judiciary?
Would it surprise you that most of the transfer of Constitutional POWERS from the PEOPLE and STATES occurred during the Presidential term of Abraham Lincoln. He miss-used the Constitution and Declaration of Independence and Articles of Confederation to give him cover to execute whatever he thought was best for the Nation. In so doing he nullified the Constitution and set our Republic on the course of big central government, corrupt government and politicians and ushered in a despotic form of government, clearly opposed the the Constitutionally guaranteed republican form of government... You have a lot to learn about truthful history...
Posted by Alfonso Barrs on August 26,2010 | 05:03 PM
I was born and raised in Spfld Il, and someone ask me if there is a sign at Oak Ridge regarding segreagation> Does anyone know?
Posted by linda bennett on July 23,2010 | 01:14 PM
If we have learned anything from the course of history, it is the fact that all history is subjective to the memories of the individual. Even those who are physically present during specific events cannot accurately describe what happened and have no idea what was even going on at the time. Today, we have the benefit of the internet which allows all of us to research any subject that we care to. In addition, we have the perspective of history (hindsight is always 20/20) to rely upon. Lincoln may have been the greatest President of all and he certainly had his flaws, but the truth of the matter is that he was the right President for the times that he lived in. All we can ever ask of an individual is that they "do their best" in their approach to life. In my opinion, Abraham Lincoln accomplished that goal.
Posted by Ron Harris on March 8,2009 | 04:40 PM
There is no doubt Lincoln was a great man.However we should adjust some of the ideals and the facts behind the man.My family was a southern serving family in the war and we didn't even marry any Yankees till after WWI.But that is neither here nor there. As far as Mr. Lincoln was concerned didn't he say the if he could win the war and end slavery he would do that. But if he could win the war and not end slavery he would be glad to do that too. Mr Lincoln also was a shrewd propagandist who saw that the emancipation proclamation was also a powerful tool in the war against the south.Perhaps that the political maneuver had more to do with it than a personal belief.We may never know.Well that is just an opinion as I am neither a racist or a Lincoln hater I think he did as he saw right and some of the rules be damned.You have to respect that because that is just being an American
Posted by Rick Witt on February 28,2009 | 04:15 PM
Is General Wagoner...... President of the DAR as the comments have said, a woman? It is the DAUGHTERS of the American Revolution....Just wondering
Posted by Betsy Gravatt on February 20,2009 | 02:35 AM
Leslie, I'm not sure where you are getting your information, but I don't see how "the ladies of the DAR are sick and tired of this erroneous statement", since it is verified on the DAR website. In fact, the website contains the text of a speech given by the President General of the DAR to commemorate the Marian Anderson stamp issued by the USPS in 2005, which acknowledges the event:
http://www.dar.org/natsociety/content.cfm?ID=613&hd=n
Perhaps you should check YOUR facts before attacking the journalistic integrity of the Smithsonian and the article's author.
Posted by Scott on February 10,2009 | 11:39 PM
I have searched the web for some refutation by the DAR of the Marian Anderson incident denied by "Leslie". It does not exist. On the contrary, I found an admission and an apology in the text of a 1/27/05 speech given by DAR President General Presley Merritt Wagoner, at the Marian Anderson Commemorative Stamp Dedication Ceremony in Washington, DC. to wit:
"It is most fitting that we gather in Memorial Continental Hall at Constitution Hall, the place which historically represents a sad chapter in our country's history and in the history of DAR. We deeply regret that Marian Anderson was not given the opportunity to perform her 1939 Easter concert in Constitution Hall but recognize that in the positive sense the event was a pivotal point in the struggle for racial equality."
http://www.dar.org/natsociety/content.cfm?ID=613&hd=n
Leslie: Shame on you for not checking the DAR's own archives before attacking Mr. Kunhardt's scholarship.
Posted by Steve on February 10,2009 | 03:57 PM
Thank you, Smithsonian for bringing more light and knowledge to the man who tried to save the United States in it's greatest hour of need.I have always known that Lincoln was a person who cared deeply for the cause of the african american. I have also known that Lincoln also cared for the health of the union and hated to see the southern states secede because of what they saw in Lincoln. However, I didn't know that Lincoln was not highly thought of by Frederick Douglass after his death. I also didn't know that Lincoln had been highly influenced by pressure from his wife's southern beliefs.I respect Lincoln's attempts to bring peace to a turbulent situation. After seeing Obama's swearing in, I imagine that Lincoln must be proud to see that his work was not all for nothing.
Posted by Theodore on February 10,2009 | 02:58 PM
The writer of this article captured my attention and interest until the line about Marion Anderson and the DAR. One MUST do his/her homework and research to be accurate. The ladies of the DAR are sick and tired of this erroneous statement. Get your facts straight THEN write an article to be published in a prestigious magazine. How much of the article has been quoted from heresay? Maybe more than one would think...if one statement was made incorrectly, how many other "facts" are also incorrect? Shame on you and shame on Smithsonian for not having an editor to review this before publication.
Posted by Leslie on February 7,2009 | 05:49 PM
Susanna, Re page 34 picture of the Deathbed grouping. I am also trying to identify the individuals in this picture because I believe one of them is a reliative of mine, Gen Montgomery Meigs, the Quatermaster General during the war. He stands 5th from the left. It's the "spitting image" of others I have of him. Jule's identification sequence didn't track for me. I would like to get a better ID of the picture in question. So unlike the Smithsonian Mag not to have the image identified somewhere in their text?
Posted by Bruce Meigs on February 4,2009 | 04:53 PM
Robert, I think the Roman numeral script is throwing you off a bit. With a glance of the magazine photo it might look the way you described, but upon close examination you will see that parts of the first numeral in both places are boldly shaded that accent their differences. It might be easier to see this difference if you could look at the actual watchface in person. What interests me is, can anyone shed any info about the watchmaker, Geo. W. Chatterton of Springfield, IL?
Posted by Bill on February 2,2009 | 08:31 PM
Dear Susanna: This Currier & Ives lithograph has the following names in script under the lithograph. It includes people who historians say were not at Lincoln's deathbed. From Right to Left, Miss Harris (Clara Harris, friend who went to theatre with the Lincolns), Mrs Lincoln & Tad (child Tad was not there), Pres Lincoln, Surgeon General (Joseph Barnes), Robert Lincoln (standing with handkerchief), Sec Wells (Gideon Wells - Sec Navy), Sec Stanton (Edwin Stanton Sec War), Chas Sumner (Senator from Massachusetts), Vice Pres Johnson (Andrew Johnson - only there for a minute because Mary hated him), Sec McCullough Attorney General, Mr Chase CJ (was not actually there). A history book claims that 47 people went into the room that night and they are depicted in a painting by Alonzo Chappel called the Death of Lincoln.
Posted by jule on February 1,2009 | 05:57 PM
+ View All Comments