In Chapter One of Founding Fathers, author and historian Stephen E. Ambrose discusses the character, achievements, and short-comings of several of the founding fathers, with an emphasis on George Washington and Thomas Jefferson. The first and third Presidents, respectively, these men are singled out not only for their prominence, but for the fact that such icons and champions of liberty were in fact men who profited from an institution that was the antithesis of freedom: slavery.
Through anecdotes he relates how both men, in light of this fact, have fallen out of favor with many American educators citing a case where one teacher dropped Thomas Jefferson from required reading and another where the name of a middle school originally named for George Washington has it changed to something more politically correct.
Jefferson receives especially harsh treatment. Not just because he owned slaves, but because in his writing he is intellectually honest enough to admit that slavery to the reasoned mind does appear to be immoral. Regardless of his academic honesty, he maintains a belief that African Americans are inferior to justify not only inaction towards the cause of emancipation, but to justify his ownership of slaves, which economically-speaking, was quite convenient for him to do.
Still, Ambrose does strike a balance by pointing out Jefferson’s significant achievements, such as establishing freedom of religion with the Virginia Statutes of Religious Freedom, and promoting the idea of universal education. And it was the Northwest Ordinance of 1787 which was based on plan he had written outlining how the country would be settled west of the Appalachian Mountains that set the precedent still in effect today by which U.S. territories would be come states.
Still, Ambrose leaves no doubt that in his estimation Jefferson’s racism and ownership of slaves taints these accomplishments.
His treatment of Washington is not nearly as harsh, though Washington, a Virginia farmer like Jefferson, also owned slaves. While he does not consider Washington to be Jefferson’s intellectual equal, he views Washington more favorably for the simple reason that Washington took courageous and decisive steps for the cause of freedom, and cites the fact that upon his death Washington did free his slaves. Ambrose maintains of Washington that he “never lied, fudged, or cheated.”
He notes that Washington led the nation to victory despite long odds, and did so at great personal risk. He notes that had Washington lost the war and been captured by the British he would have been tried for treason and executed. “Washington personifies the word ‘great,” he concludes.
Ambrose’s main point would seem to be that despite the irony of the fact that these founding fathers owned slaves, their intellectual and political efforts helped plant the seed that would change the world, and for that they should be honored and remembered. He defends them with statements such as “few of us ever completely escape our time and place.” For Ambrose, the fact that Washington risked his very life for the cause of the freedom coupled with the fact that he freed his slaves upon his death earns him a pass, and cements him as the greatest of the founding fathers in this historian’s eyes.
Jefferson need be remembered primarily for his brilliant way with words, but notably as well for advancing the causes of universal education and religious freedom. His eloquence on such matters helped justify the brave efforts of later generations and offers an ounce of redemption; even though Ambrose makes it clear he regards Jefferson’s character as flawed. He notes an apparent death bed conversion of sorts wherein Jefferson declines to be at the 50th anniversary celebration of his Declaration of Independence, and quotes Jefferson as having discerned “All eyes are opened, or opening to the rights of man …the palpable truth that mass of mankind has not been born, with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred and ready to ride them.”
He allows that the fact that these men were far from perfect but concludes “that doesn’t mean we should judge the whole of them only by this part.”
In judging past leaders by today’s standards it’s important to remember that all humans are imperfect. If we are to judge those white Americans who were slave owners, what are we to make of the Africans complicit in the slave trade that turned in their fellow men? History is full of ironies such as this: some Cherokee Indians were also slave holders who were forced to adopt their slaves as their own after the end of the Civil War. The man that is oppressed today may be tomorrow’s given the chance. That is not to excuse the behavior outright but to put their behavior in proper context.
Christianity, which plays such a prominent role in American history, emphasizes the imperfection of all men, and in recognizing that we’re all imperfect, there is imperative to forgive your fellow man, for “all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.” Or in other words, people who live in glass houses should not throw stones. It’s easy with hindsight to look back upon the actions of historical figures and pass judgment, but in doing so we invite future generations to cast aspersions upon our generation as well. In short, nobody is perfect, including the founding fathers, but their contributions and the things made possible through their courage and effort, deserve to be acknowledged, and as mitigating the more unsavory aspects of their character.
