1 THE NETWORKS OF JOHN JAY, 1745-1801: A HISTORICAL NETWORK ANALYSIS EXPERIMENT A dissertation presented by Matthew H. Williamson to The Department of History In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy In the field of History Northeastern University Boston, Massachusetts April 2017 2 THE NETWORKS OF JOHN JAY, 1745-1801 by Matthew H. Williamson ABSTRACT OF DISSERTATION Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in History in the College of Social Sciences and Humanities Northeastern University April 2017 3 ABSTRACT Studies of American revolutionaries often focus on their ideologies and politics, and while this approach is quite useful, the actions of this cohort can also be understood in terms of social networks. Recent works on the founding fathers, while employing the literature of social history, are still biographies that make men the center of the narrative and often ignore larger social trends. An important figure among revolutions, John Jay, provides an opportunity to look beyond biography and instead focus on the networks in which he was engaged. This approach allows for a more expansive view of how individuals and events together shape history. This project also examines the transatlantic realities of the American Revolution, and the founding of the United States. I argue that Jay understood the value of these networks, and used them to his advantage. This dissertation reconstructs the social networks of John Jay from his graduation from King’s College in 1764 to his retirement from politics in 1801. I use formal network analysis and visualization tools to create network models, specifically egocentric networks, in order to understand the web of relationships that defined Jay’s world and influenced history. The formal investigation of Jay’s networks offers an opportunity to examine his manipulation of those networks. Many of the benefits of applying social network analysis were not unexpected. People and groups that had previously been marginalized or trivialized were highlighted as integral to Jay. This work sheds light on the significance of these individuals who influenced Jay throughout his career. Another important result of this approach revealed that no singular individual was responsible for writings, ideas, and events. Using network theory, it became clear 4 that the instructions that Alexander Hamilton gave to Jay for this peace mission were, in fact, created by a number of Federalists in private discussions before the meeting. Network theory also helped to clarify Jay’s agency in the negotiations themselves. Several limitations of applying network analysis to historical study were revealed in this research. The datasets are large and require an extensive amount of investigation. Applying network data analysis to historical research challenges the writer to integrate both into a coherent understanding of the impact of relationships and events. This approach is fairly non-traditional among academics, but the practice of integrating social network analysis into historical study is a worthy pursuit. 5 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to begin by thanking my advisor, William Fowler, who helped guide me through this process. The idea for this dissertation developed from the many engaging conversations I enjoyed in his office. I am grateful for his guidance and support. I would also like to thank the other members of my dissertation committee: Heather Streets-Salter, for guiding me into the world of British History, and Elizabeth Maddock Dillon, for helping me wrap my head around the Atlantic World. I would also like to thank the Gillis Family Fund for World History Research for helping to support my research. Also thank you to the World History Summer Dissertation Workshop for introducing me to Social Network Analysis. I would also like to thank my parents, Elizabeth and Edwin Williamson, for all their support and love in not only this endeavor but throughout my entire life. I would especially like to recognize my mother for helping me edit and proofread this dissertation. I also want to thank my parents-in-law, Robert and Mary Kessler for their support. Most importantly I would like to thank my wife, Rebecca Williamson, for everything. There is absolutely no way I would have been able to complete this dissertation without her countless hours reading, discussing, and editing. She has supported me emotionally and monetarily, and my love for her knows no limits. Finally, I want to thank my two children, Jonathan and Neil, for being the most beautiful and lovely distractions. 6 TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract …………………………………………………………………………………………. 2 Acknowledgments ………………………………………………………………………………. 5 Table of Contents ………………………………………………………………………………... 6 List of Figures …………………………………………………………………………………… 7 Introduction ……………………………………………………………………………………… 8 Methodology ……………………………………………………………………………………. 18 Chapter 1: Family Networks: The Jays, A New York Huguenot-Merchant Family …………….26 Chapter 2: Elite Networks: King’s College, Social Clubs, and the New York Lawyers ………. 48 Chapter 3: Loyalty Networks: The Case of John Jay and Peter Van Schaack, 1774-1777 ……. 86 Chapter 4: Intelligence Networks: John Jay the First Counter-Intelligence ……………………105 Officer, 1775-1784 Chapter 5: Diplomatic Networks: The Jay-Grenville Treaty Negotiations, 1794-1795 ………. 141 Epilogue: Retirement ………………………………………………………………………….. 184 Conclusions…………………………………………………………………………………….. 188 Appendix: Network Graphs…………………………………………………………………… 192 Bibliography ………...………………………………………………………………………... 207 7 List of Figures Figure 1: ………………………………………………………………………………………..192 Figure 2:…………………………………………………………………………………………193 Figure 3:…………………………………………………………………………………………194 Figure 4: ……………………………………………………………………………………….. 195 Figure 5: ……………………………………………………………………………………….. 196 Figure 6:…………………………………………………………………………………………197 Figure 7:……………………………………………………………………………………….. 198 Figure 8:……………………………………………………………………………………….. 199 Figure 9:……………………………………………………………………………………….. 200 Figure 10:……………………………………………………………………………………… 201 Figure 11:……………………………………………………………………………………… 202 Figure 12:……………………………………………………………………………………… 203 Figure 13: ……………………………………………………………………………………… 204 Figure 14: ……………………………………………………………………………………… 205 Figure 15: ……………………………………………………………………………………… 206 8 INTRODUCTION In the twilight of his life, John Jay addressed a letter to his son, William, who was writing a biography of his father. Jay recounted the family’s history from his Huguenot ancestors’ escape from Catholic France to his father’s success as a New York merchant.1 Before beginning the dramatic and glorifying tale, he took a moment to reflect: It becomes us to be mindful that the great Creator has been pleased to make men social beings; that he established between them various relations, and among others, those which arise from consanguinity; and that to all of these relations he has attached particular corresponding duties. These relations and duties promote the happiness of individuals and families; they pervade and harmonize society, and are subservient both to the public and personal welfare.2 In his reflection, Jay described the eighteenth century ideal of community: a utopian vision of the world where “every person has his proper sphere and is of importance to the whole.”3 It was a potent concept that for centuries had justified the hierarchical structures of monarchical government that the American Revolution ultimately challenged.4 While historians and sociologists have attempted to describe this complex community, or social network,5 few have attempted to understand the way historical actors understood, perceived, and utilized their social 1 William Pencak, ““Faithful Portraits of Our Hearts” Images of the Jay Family, 1725-1814,” Early American Studies (Spring 2009): 87. 2 William Jay, The Life of John Jay with Selections from his Correspondence and Miscellaneous Papers (New York: J&J Harper, 1833), 1: 2. (henceforth cited as LJJ) 3 Abraham Williams, A Sermon Preach’d at Boston… May 26, 1762, in Edmund S. Morgan, ed., Puritan Political Ideas, 1558-1794 (Indianapolis: MacMillan, 1965), 332. 4 Gordon S. Wood, The Radicalism of the American Revolution (New York: Vintage Books, 1991). 5 Social networks are defined as “the amalgamation of ties among actors.” Charles Wetherell, “Historical Social Network Analysis,” International Review of Social History 43 (1998), Supplement: 125-144. 9 networks.6 Today, with the current emphasis on social connectivity and globalization, we see ourselves as having a unique awareness of our social networks and understanding of the interconnectivity of society. But as Jay’s reflections remind us, the people of the eighteenth century also thought in terms of community and felt angst over belonging to a “Social Set.”7 Often lost in discussions probing the motivations and ideologies of the revolutionaries is the influence of family, friends, and acquaintances, the self-awareness of these influences, and the significance of these interactions. It is not enough to understand the actions of the American revolutionaries in terms of ideology and politics; their actions must also be understood in terms of their relationships. To recognize the full impact of the revolution on John Jay and his influence on the revolution, we must ask: What did John Jay’s social network look like? How did John Jay understand and interpret his networks? And, how did these networks influence John Jay? To truly understand the extent to