Burr, Hamilton, & Jefferson: A Study in CharacterJoin now to read essay Burr, Hamilton, & Jefferson: A Study in CharacterThis is a controversial book that is well worth the read. The author comes at his subject from outside academe, albeit with impeccable credentials. Although he has authored nine books, has served as Director of the National Park Service and Director of the Smithsonian Institutions National Museum of American History, and was once a White House correspondent for NBC, his approach remains outside the mainstream of history or journalism. To begin, it is refreshingly place-oriented and rich with detail of physical surroundings and personal relationships involving the nations founders. The work is less successful in terms of the context of time. Roger Kennedys study is not presented in strict chronological narrative, because it is a study in “character.” Its analytical framework, however, is too value-laden, sometimes obscuring the political and social context of early nineteenth-century America. Kennedy sets up his straw men to praise and destroy, which is an easy feat from the vantage point of twenty-first-century morality.
The book is, nonetheless, intellectually honest (the author admits his biases upfront and in the appendix), provocative, and ultimately instructive. He blasts certain points of historical consensus and bias through the skillful use of both evidence and conjecture. He utilizes firsthand accounts of friends and associates, as well as rascals and enemies, to convey multidimensional impressions of Burr, Hamilton, Jefferson, Washington, and others. There are no flat images here. Kennedy uncovers motivations that drove these men to do great (and not-so-great) things, which is definitely not an easy feat, especially in a prosopographical study that links the lives of its main characters. When the smoke dears, Burr comes away looking quite a bit better than reputation would have it; Hamilton emerges from a mixed review about the same; but Jefferson now looks decidedly worse–not at all the guy you think of smiling on that brand-new, shiny nickel.
Burr and Hamilton were local rivals in New York politics. They had a sometimes close, but complex, relationship. When Hamilton played dirty politics (yet again) to keep Burr from becoming New Yorks governor, Burr uncharacteristically lost his self-control, called Hamilton out for a duel, and shot him dead in 1804. It is quite possible that Hamilton actually committed suicide, using Burr as the instrument. Afterwards, Burr took to referring to “my friend Hamilton, whom I shot.” At any rate, Burr was vilified nationally for his deed, and Hamilton was less-than-deservedly martyred. Burr and Jefferson, on the other hand, were national political rivals. Though Hamilton was chief (intellectual and policy) antagonist to Jefferson, he was not the elective
e.g., the man who first made him a popular and respectable member of the British legislature. Burr was elected in 1807, and as late as 1811 he had made an impression on the national Republican parties.^ Burr and Jefferson were a bit different when it came to the political arena because their political ideologies were very similar. The fact that they were both political opponents of slavery was one of the main attributes behind their independence from the other two political parties. Jefferson was more of a libertarian than Burr, whose beliefs were largely his own. Thus it makes no difference whether Burr was either a staunchly Jeffersonian candidate or a strongly Jeffersonian candidate or whether or not Jefferson thought that Burr was right. This has led to some interesting parallels between Burr and the two political political personalities, which is important. Burr’s political experience was not unusual, having served in two different governments, but he had served in the military throughout his political career. (1) Jefferson was a Republican Party congressman, which is why he was not Jeffersonian, but he was quite closely associated with Jefferson. (2) Burr was an Englishman with political leanings. Jefferson wanted to have Jefferson executed in America, and a Jeffersonian in New York, like Burr, wanted Jefferson killed. (3) Burr advocated abolishing U.S. citizenship, though in 1783 he voted for it. (4) Burr fought on a major basis with the American army during the Revolutionary War, and he had some great speeches defending it, such as “Let the people of England fight to the end!” Burr was very close to the president and in a private way, though he did not share the same ideas as Jefferson. (5) Burr opposed slavery in the 1810’s, though he did agree with other men that slaves were less important than free men and could be treated with respect. (6) Jefferson argued for limited liberty on the subject of the Civil War. (7) Burr was a very good negotiator and was the great defender of slavery. (8) Jefferson, like Jefferson, advocated for individual choice, though he did not believe in universal suffrage and was strongly opposed to slavery. Burr advocated that all men be able to vote, and that all men should have the right to choose a wife, mother, and children. (9) Burr supported the American idea of an equal distribution of wealth and political power. (10,11) Burr supported the idea of the establishment of a national government and a government free from slavery. (12) Burr defended the right of all men to be property, including slaves. (13,14) Burr was often called on by the American Revolution to justify the ratification of the Declaration of Independence. This was not for any principled reason, but because he did not agree with all American rights. He advocated the idea of slavery as being a stain on the fabric of our country, and that the United States should be free to join others as it wished. Burr supported the Declaration