CHAPTER ONE Jefferson and Biography ANNETTE GORDON-REED It was the fate of Thomas Jefferson to be at once more loved and praised by his friends, and more hated and reviled by his adversaries than any of his compatriots. Time has pro- duced less abatement of these feelings towards him than is usual; and, contrary to the maxim which invokes charity for the dead, the maledictions of his enemies have of late years been more frequent and loud than the commendations of his friends. George Tucker, 1837 The argument never ceases. Just who was Thomas Jefferson and what is he – what should he be – to us? Attempts to answer that question began soon after Jefferson drew his last breath on July 4, 1826. His family made the first move with the publica- tion in 1829 of four volumes’ worth of Jefferson’s writings and correspondence. The biographers soon followed, creating narratives that put their own cast on his legacy, hoping to shape posterity’s opinion on where the Virginian should fit in the American pantheon or, sometimes, whether he should be in it at all. From the 1830s until today, the full-length biographies, single- and multi-volume, have poured forth. It is safe to say that no president besides Lincoln has been the subject of more intense, and varied, investigation. People who love Jefferson have written about him, as have those who loathed him, along with those who are simply deeply conflicted. Like all biographies and written histories, these works are the products of the times in which they were crafted. Some have been more influential and important than others. Because of their talent,COPYRIGHTED or exquisite timing, the authors MATERIAL of those particular volumes managed to use their cultural moment to create a picture of Jefferson that captured the imagination of contemporary readers and, perhaps more importantly, of the his- torians and biographers who would follow them. Their work covers the field until another strong effort comes to take its place. The field of Jefferson studies can usefully be divided into three eras, dominated by biographies that were judged the leading word, the “definitive” treatment of Jefferson A Companion to Thomas Jefferson, First Edition. Edited by Francis D. Cogliano. © 2012 Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Published 2012 by Blackwell Publishing Ltd. CCogliano_c01.inddogliano_c01.indd 3 77/19/2011/19/2011 111:44:271:44:27 PPMM 4 JEFFERSON’S LIFE AND TIMES for that particular age, with the expectation that the book’s influence would continue far into the future. This is not to say that there were not many fine biographies or books about Jefferson written during these same periods, it is to suggest that the research, insights, and conclusions of the defining books had a greater impact on the field than others. Even though it was not the first biography of Jefferson, the nineteenth century, well into the mid-twentieth century, was the era of Henry S. Randall’s Life of Thomas Jefferson, published in 1858. Randall’s work set the tone for writing about Jefferson for his time and influenced generations of biographers who succeeded him up to the present. After Randall came Dumas Malone, who began his majestic six-volume study, Jefferson and His Time, in the 1940s and ended it in the early 1980s. Though not totally eclipsed, the Malone era has been in decline with the rise of more specialized and focused considerations of aspects of Jefferson’s life. Jefferson biography has splintered into a seemingly endless number of fragments. From the 1960s until today we have lived in the era of “Jefferson and” – Jefferson and slavery, Jefferson and women, Jefferson and the character question. Even as these specialized studies have enriched our understanding of Jefferson, they remind us of the need for a comprehensive treatment that puts the man whole again after all that we have learned from the many sophisticated studies of individuals aspects of his life and attitudes. What follows is a description and analysis of the progression of Jefferson biography from the earliest time until today, with a particular emphasis on the most influential works. But before Jefferson biographies there was, of course, Jefferson himself. He is at the heart of every attempt to fashion a narrative of his life, not merely because he is the biographical subject at hand, but because he tried to so hard to make historians the object of his influence. Any consideration of the history of Jefferson biographies must begin with him. The Pitch It would be hard to imagine any figure in history more self-conscious about his legacy than Thomas Jefferson. From the time he burst onto the scene as a young revolution- ary, he had good reason to believe that he would live on in history. He had played an integral role in a movement that had successfully defeated what was at the time the most powerful nation on the earth: Great Britain. As his star in the leadership cadre of the new nation continued to rise, he had even more reason to feel certain that later generations would know his name. This was not only what Jefferson expected, it was what he very much wanted, and in this he was little different from the other well-known members of his revolutionary cohort. In his influential work, Fame and the Founding Fathers, the historian Douglass Adair cited fame as a key motivator for many members of the founding generation (see Colbourn 1974). It helped shaped their sense of themselves and guided their actions during their lifetimes as they, anachronistically, reached across the centuries and tried to model themselves after the famous men of ancient western civilizations, the Greeks and Romans, and, when the situation warranted, resorted to a mythical Anglo-Saxon past. That made sense, given that they were also scouring history look- ing for templates for the new republic they wanted to create: one that would stake its CCogliano_c01.inddogliano_c01.indd 4 77/19/2011/19/2011 111:44:271:44:27 PPMM JEFFERSON AND BIOGRAPHY 5 own claim on the future. Just as in ancient times, the men who made the American republic would have to have the character to pull it off – or at least be seen as having the character to do so. But it was not celebrity during their lifetimes that mattered; the much longed-for goal was fame in posterity. Jefferson biographer Fawn Brodie observed that “Jefferson had a superb sense of history and an exact understanding of his own role in it” (Brodie 1974, 22). As one who read history and appreciated its pivotal role in determining what later genera- tions felt about events and people of the past, Jefferson realized that his legacy would ultimately be in the hands of historians. How would they go about making their judgments? What material would they use to assess the meaning of his life’s work and those of the other American Revolutionaries? “Who will write the history of the American Revolution?” John Adams asked Jefferson during one exchange in their famous late-in-life correspondence. “Nobody; except it’s (sic) external facts,” Jefferson responded. Then he explained. The men who made the Revolution – including himself – kept sparse, if any notes, about what was going on. Therefore, their thoughts, feelings, and motivations at the time, which was “the life and soul of history must forever be unknown” (John Adams to TJ and Thomas McKean, July 30, 1815; TJ to John Adams, August 10[11], 1815, in Cappon 1959, 2: 451, 452). Jefferson’s answer to Adams about the American Revolution presents a telling window into his thoughts on the nature and substance of history overall. As the historian Francis Cogliano has noted, Jefferson believed that in order for history to “retain its power and significance,” it had to be based upon primary sources (Cogliano 2006). Documentary evidence, written by the people who were involved in the events, or were the subjects of historical inquiry, provided the chief, if not only, means for getting at the real truth of what had gone on in the past. This conception of history as necessarily coming from the actual participants describing what actions they took and, perhaps, expressing their thoughts and feelings about events as they were unfolding formed the basis for Jefferson’s understanding of how to present himself to posterity. If historians were to be his judges, he wanted to address them and influence their project as much as possible. With this philosophy in mind, he set out to establish what he wanted to be the historical truth of his life, even as he drew sharp limits around what parts of his life were to be included in the historical record. Of course, many histories of the Revolution have been written – and good ones too. The documentary record is more extensive than Jefferson knew of or imagined. In addition, the understanding of the kinds of things that could be a part of the record has greatly expanded. Perhaps it is here that models from ancient history most poorly served Jefferson’s understanding of what was likely to happen when future historians wrote about him and his times. The words of non-elite men, women, and slaves have been added to the mixture of the attempt to tell the story of America’s origins. History is no longer simply what great men did, said they did, and their explanation for why they did it. As a result the ground has shifted decisively underneath Jefferson’s historical feet. Even without that shift, Jefferson’s statement about the primacy of documentary records does not get at the true heart of the historical enterprise, or how responsible historians go about shaping the legacies of historical figures.