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
From the time of his death in 1865 to the 200th anniversary of his birth, February 12, 2009, there has never been a decade in which Abraham Lincoln's influence has not been felt. Yet it has not been a smooth, unfolding history, but a jagged narrative filled with contention and revisionism. Lincoln's legacy has shifted again and again as different groups have interpreted him. Northerners and Southerners, blacks and whites, East Coast elites and prairie Westerners, liberals and conservatives, the religious and secular, scholars and popularizers—all have recalled a sometimes startlingly different Lincoln. He has been lifted up by both sides of the Temperance Movement; invoked for and against federal intervention in the economy; heralded by anti-communists, such as Senator Joseph McCarthy, and by American communists, such as those who joined the Abraham Lincoln Brigade in the fight against the fascist Spanish government in the 1930s. Lincoln has been used to justify support for and against incursions on civil liberties, and has been proclaimed both a true and a false friend to African-Americans. Was he at heart a "progressive man" whose death was an "unspeakable calamity" for African-Americans, as Frederick Douglass insisted in 1865? Or was he "the embodiment...of the American Tradition of racism," as African-American writer Lerone Bennett Jr. sought to document in a 2000 book?
It is often argued that Lincoln's abiding reputation is the result of his martyrdom. And certainly the assassination, occurring as it did on Good Friday, propelled him into reverential heights. Speaking at a commemoration at the Athenaeum Club in New York City on April 18, 1865, three days after Lincoln died, Parke Godwin, editor of the Evening Post, summed up the prevailing mood. "No loss has been comparable to his," Godwin said. "Never in human history has there been so universal, so spontaneous, so profound an expression of a nation's bereavement." He was the first American president to be assassinated, and waves of grief touched every type of neighborhood and every class—at least in the North. But the shock at the murder explains only part of the tidal wave of mourning. It is hard to imagine that the assassination of James Buchanan or Franklin Pierce would have had the same impact on the national psyche. The level of grief reflected who Lincoln was and what he had come to represent. "Through all his public function," Godwin said, "there shone the fact that he was a wise and good man.... [He was] our supremest leader—our safest counsellor—our wisest friend—our dear father."
Not everyone agreed. Northern Democrats had been deeply opposed to Lincoln's wartime suspension of habeas corpus, which led to the imprisonment without trial of thousands of suspected traitors and war protesters. Though Lincoln had taken care to proceed constitutionally and with restraint, his opponents decried his "tyrannical" rule. But in the wake of the assassination even his critics were silent.
Across much of the South, of course, Lincoln was hated, even in death. Though Robert E. Lee and many Southerners expressed regret over the murder, others saw it as an act of Providence, and cast John Wilkes Booth as the bold slayer of an American tyrant. "All honor to J. Wilkes Booth," wrote Southern diarist Kate Stone (referring as well to the simultaneous, though not fatal, attack on Secretary of State William Seward): "What torrents of blood Lincoln has caused to flow, and how Seward has aided him in his bloody work. I cannot be sorry for their fate. They deserve it. They have reaped their just reward."
Four years after Lincoln's death, Massachusetts journalist Russell Conwell found widespread, lingering bitterness toward Lincoln in the ten former Confederate states that Conwell visited. "Portraits of Jeff Davis and Lee hang in all their parlors, decorated with Confederate flags," he wrote. "Photographs of Wilkes Booth, with the last words of great martyrs printed upon its borders; effigies of Abraham Lincoln hanging by the neck...adorn their drawing rooms." The Rebellion here "seems not to be dead yet," Conwell concluded.
For their part, African-Americans' pangs of loss were tinged with fear for their future. Few promoted Lincoln's legacy more passionately than critic-turned-admirer Frederick Douglass, whose frustration at the presidency of Andrew Johnson kept growing. Lincoln was "a progressive man, a human man, an honorable man, and at heart an antislavery man," Douglass wrote in December 1865. "I assume...had Abraham Lincoln been spared to see this day, the negro of the South would have had more hope of enfranchisement." Ten years later, at the dedication of the Freedmen's Memorial in Washington, D.C., Douglass seemed to recant these words, calling Lincoln "preeminently the white man's President" and American blacks "at best only his step-children." But Douglass' purpose that day was to puncture the sentimentality of the occasion and to criticize the government's abandonment of Reconstruction. And in the final decades of his long life Douglass repeatedly invoked Lincoln as having embodied the spirit of racial progress.
Douglass' worries about America proved prophetic. By the 1890s, with the failure of Reconstruction and the advent of Jim Crow, Lincoln's legacy of emancipation lay in ruins. Regional reconciliation—the healing of the rift between North and South—had supplanted the nation's commitment to civil rights. In 1895, at a gathering of Union and Confederate soldiers in Chicago, the topics of slavery and race were set aside in favor of a focus on North-South reconciliation. As the 1909 centennial of Lincoln's birth approached, race relations in the country were reaching a nadir.
In August 1908, riots broke out in Lincoln's hometown of Springfield, Illinois, after a white woman, Mabel Hallam, claimed she had been raped by a local black man, George Richardson. (She later admitted to making up the story.) On Friday, August 14, two thousand white men and boys began to attack African-Americans and set fire to black businesses. "Lincoln freed you," rioters were heard to yell. "We'll show you where you belong." The next night, the mob approached the shop of William Donnegan, a 79-year-old African-American shoemaker who had made boots for Lincoln and at whose brother's barbershop Lincoln used to mingle with African-Americans. Setting fire to Donnegan's shop, the mob dragged the old man outside and pelted him with bricks, then slashed his throat. Still alive, he was dragged across the street into a school courtyard. There, not far from a statue of Abraham Lincoln, he was hoisted up a tree and left to die.
Subscribe now for more of Smithsonian's coverage on history, science and nature.










Comments (18)
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
RE: Lincoln article A piece of trivia - how many caught this one? At the beginning of the article, there is a photo of Lincoln's pocket watch. Take a close look at the numerals on the second hand indicator. Notice how they run 10 - 20 -50 - 40 - 50. That's right - where there should be a 30 there is a 50. I'm not the first to notice, am I?
Posted by Robert on January 30,2009 | 02:08 PM
On page 34 of the magazine is a picture of Lincoln's death bed. We are trying to identify the men surrounding Lincoln. Can anyone help with this?
Posted by Susanna Jonson on January 28,2009 | 01:04 PM
Dear Josephine and Charles. Yes - Abraham Lincoln was great. He was also human. Yes, he worked to create "the rise of the all-powerful banking elite and the creation of an American empire that would do a Caesar proud", but it was a unified empire with a Constitution based on freedom for all. 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. I hope this country can make the journey even if you two want to stay behind (okay with me). I do not want children of the future to inherit the ugliness that was and may still become this nation. I see light; I see good things. I hope in the next one hundred years in this country when we are all a nice creamy brown living under one flag and one Constitution. I hope children still go to the Lincoln Memorial to read, "In this temple, as in the hearts of the people for whom he saved the Union, the memory of Abraham Lincoln is enshrined forever.” I hope it takes their breath away as it did mine when I was small! Thank you Abraham Lincoln.
Posted by Maura Weise on January 27,2009 | 08:27 PM
As a graduate of Temple University I was disappointed that the article did not identify Russell Conwell as the founder of my alma mater. In addition to being a writer, Conwell was a distinguished orator who gave his "Acres of Diamonds" speech more than 6,000 times to fund the Baptist Temple and, eventually, the Baptist College that has grew to be one of the largest public universities on th east coast.
Posted by Bill Young on January 26,2009 | 01:34 AM
Concerning anti- slavery,was Abraham Lincoln also opposed to the keeping of slaves that were attached to some Native Amaercan Nations ? I know that some of these people were eventually "adopted" into the tribe.eg.some Cherokee people.comments welcome,author of WHITE BUFFALO SPIRIT -an historical novel set in the Eastern woodland in the early 1700's-check it out !!!!
Posted by michael muchnock on January 26,2009 | 04:59 PM
Thank you for providing to those of us who do not know both sides of the coin, a balanced and balancing treatment of Abe's impact and contribution. It's too easy for us to credit ourselves with such superior knowledge to "the masses", when what we're sharing is naught but our limited view and biases. Congratulations on your scholarship and thoroughness. -- Carey
Posted by Carey Conway on January 24,2009 | 02:23 AM
Odd, isn't it that you never mention Lincoln's immense contribution to the demise of the American Republic, the rise of the all-powerful banking elite and the creation of an American empire that would do a Caesar proud. Instead, you prefer to wrap your Father Abraham in a robe of pseudo-emancipation; that is, what the defeated South calls the treasury of Yankee virtue. But, then again, winning a war, unjust or not, means never having to say you're sorry. Charles E. Foiles Chesapeake, Virginia
Posted by Charles Edward Foiles, III on January 24,2009 | 03:36 PM
Lincoln's War was evil. A war on civilians that destroyed all their founding fathers had built. Freeing the slaves was not his aim, POWER and EMPIRE is his fame! A Tyrant, A War-Monger. Did you ever consider what was done to the black africans in the South, because of Lincoln's War? They lost their homes, their livlihood, and during the hideous reconstruction their honor and good name. Booker T. Washington was the only black in the South who tried to guide his people in a correct and Christian manner and teach them to assimilate. This article is another example of thw mentality and mind-set of PRESENTISM! Presentism is the empty, false assumption that all former people thought as some present people feel. It’s fundamental to the worldview of Liberal Human Secularists who worship the trinity of race, class, and gender(s). It’s necessary for their hierarchy of evil that demonizes political and cultural enemies. It makes nothing Conservatives say count, because Conservative speech is permanently tainted by some hatred, intolerance, historical crime or politically incorrect no-no.
Posted by JosephineSouthern on January 23,2009 | 01:34 PM