Jonathan Den Hartog: The American Revolution & Republicanism | BRI Scholar Talks

0:01 [Music] hi this is tony williams senior fellow at the bill of rights institute and we are pleased to bring you another episode of scholar talks for this episode we are honored to have scholar jonathan den hartog who is going to discuss the republican principles

0:21 of the american revolution related to his important essay in the new bri textbook life liberty and the pursuit of happiness jonathan welcome well thank you tony it’s a delight to be here especially as i know these are designed to be a service to both the general public and especially those uh teachers who are working in the

0:42 classroom all right indeed yes we hope that our teachers and and students uh will will be watching and we’ve had a lot of people sign up already so we’re very pleased well let me introduce you uh jonathan den hartog is a professor of history in the department chair at samford university in birmingham alabama he previously taught in st paul

1:02 minnesota at the university of northwestern for 13 years he received his phd in american history from the university of notre dame and he’s a specialist in american political and religious history he is the author of patriotism and piety federalist politics and religious struggle in the new american nation

1:24 and the co-editor of disestablishment and religious dissent church state relations in the new american states he’s married to jacqueline and they have four children so uh again jonathan welcome and thank you for joining us um should we dive right in let’s do it all right good good all right so my

1:46 first question is can you provide some historical context for our viewers by explaining how the french and indian war helped contribute help lead to the american revolution yes i like to start my narrative of the revolutionary period

2:07 with the french and indian war which really spans from 1754-55 down to the peace treaty in 1763. there had been many wars on the north american continent before uh often it was the british colonies versus the french colonies or the british colonies versus the spanish

2:28 colonies but the french and indian war turns out to be a different type of conflict in that it starts in the new world but uh ends up spreading to europe uh where it’s known as the seven years war and really it spans the globe because

2:48 fighting happens also in the caribbean uh on the uh coast of africa and even in india so there there are ways in which we can consider the french and indian war the first world war um and that and so it spans multiple years um it sees much colonial activity supporting the war

3:08 um many many colonists fight and then uh the british are victorious which gives great joy to the colonists because they feel like they’ve helped this uh great great endeavor by the british empire right it’s great to think of them as british patriots celebrating this

3:29 this victory and part of that victory is that by treaty france gives to great britain all of canada all of new france now becomes the british canada and once again you would say this is a great success but in all of that victory it raises new challenges

3:52 that will have to be addressed and in addressing those challenges i think actually in the failure to address those challenges we see the groundwork laid for the conflict that will lead to the american revolution so just to give some examples of that the biggest one of course is finances

4:12 right that fighting a world war for seven years has emptied uh the british treasury and so the uh the chancellors of the exchequer those holding the funds as well as even just parliamentary leaders realize we we need to do something to recoup british finances

4:32 and part of that they’re going to look to the colonies the colonies have benefited from defense and from the the spending of so much treasure maybe they should come along and give help and support financially and so this is going to raise financial questions i think there are other dynamics that work though too

4:53 um the fact that uh there’s no longer a french threat to the north gives both the colonists and the british government a little bit more of a free hand they both sides feel a little bit less constrained which will allow that conflict to percolate further and i think it’s

5:14 really significant that many of the units that had fought in the french in any war the british regular units are actually left in the colonies and so now you have a much larger force and sometimes stationed in population centers like boston new york elsewhere but especially boston

5:36 where they can also become a uh one-handed tool of british control on the other a flashpoint for colonial conflict so all of these dynamics start to feed into a challenge for how will britain handle the post-war settlement and as they uh i think as they

5:58 uh bobble it uh you’re going to see conflict that’s going to push us further and further it towards a revolution right interesting yeah and yeah yeah this the stand back the talents and acts uh the t act just a series of taxes all its attempts by parliament to tax the colonies

6:19 and the colonists of course complain that they’re being taxed without their consent right they the old cry that we all learned at a young age of no no taxation without representation and this idea of consent uh is deeply rooted in the principles of and civic virtues of republicanism and and and i really would love for you

6:41 to explore that concept uh what is republicanism uh and and how did it shape american thinking about that relationship you described with great britain going into the 1760s and 1770s right and so we see just a great

7:01 connection we have from that that financial challenge to now things like the stamp act the talent duties the the sugar act the t act all of these uh are are first of all taxes so and and then is there a legitimacy there that’s that’s that’s the question and as you mentioned the the cri of no taxation

7:22 without representation really appears as early as 1765 with with the stamp act controversy so it’s not like they had to hunt around for a a phrase that would work but it’s it’s there from very early on and then as we think of well what is what are the ideals what are the ideas

7:44 that kind of motivate the revolution i’m going to argue that the key piece really is this ideal of republicanism and now as a historian i’m always i always have to qualify that and say of course there are other pieces in the recipe we can talk about the commitment to the british common law and

8:06 constitutionalism uh the importance of a thinker like john locke who feeds into this even protestant theology feeds into this but what holds it together what puts it together is this concept of republicanism um and and so i think it’s it’s really uh

8:28 important to kind of camp out there what is it well the first thing i always like to say is um it’s not simply what we think of as the republican party so we need to distinguish or draw draw that that’s not what we’re talking about instead it’s a kind of a complex idea

8:49 of beliefs about politics that has a long history again americans didn’t invent it they look back to ancient rome right so there’s a classical impulse of the roman republic and its ideals there’s a renaissance theme renaissance florence was proud to

9:10 be a republic and then it had english advocates john milton as a republican thinker or uh harrington the author of oceania right these are these are english writers who are then carried forward into the 1700s and even in the 1700s there are british

9:31 writers advancing these ideas people who published like uh trencher and gordon published a newspaper that was then read in the colonies so what did this say well i would highlight the importance of self-government for liberty self-government for liberty as being at the heart of

9:53 republicanism there’s a great concern to preserve liberty because there are threats to self-governing liberty um this could be a concentration of unchecked political power if you give any person or any group too much political power

10:13 they will abuse it but they also believed that money could be too overwhelming that too much accumulation of money and a few hands could constrain liberty why is that when you give too much power to certain people they’re out to abuse it and the language that they use is

10:33 they will actually enslave others that the opposite of liberty is slavery and so that needs to be really guarded against so you need to guard against that you also need to develop a certain type of citizen that self-government means every citizen has a responsibility to be

10:56 engaged thoughtful and self-sacrificing that that there’s a concept that the republic the public things have a common good that everyone has a duty to contribute to this so it’s not just about the front the structure of government although that’s

11:17 really important it’s about engaged citizens actively promoting self-government for liberty it turns out that this is uh very compatible with much of the other thinking going on in the colonies especially the uh protestant christianity that’s dominant in the colonies at the time

11:38 this comports really well so americans are reading these ideas they’re talking about these ideas and it’s i think really shaping their political outlook then when things start to happen when acts start to come down from uh the british government stamp act talention duties it’s like

11:58 raising this alarm it triggers a response this looks like an abuse of power our job must be to push back and resistant excellent yeah uh so self-governing uh citizens and uh virtuous leaders uh which which brings me to my next question your

12:19 your essay really narrates and unfortunately enough time to go through all the dramatic battles of the revolutionary war and and really how the outcome of that that war was never predetermined i mean it really sort of balanced on the edge of a knife for for so long for so many years during that eight year struggle and and can you explain uh the role that

12:41 george uh general george washington played in using his virtuous character to mold this what i would call a republican army uh you know he defers to civilian authorities he shapes that continental vision within the army he he seems to be that virtuous republican almost roman statesman uh if you will roman

13:04 general uh cincinnatus right uh and so can you explain a little bit about his significance uh in in the continental army right and again in the essay that was that was a piece i was really trying to emphasize the the drama and the contingency of the war for independence that as

13:24 americans we tend to say well of course it was going to happen because we’re americans but uh through from 75 1775 1781 there was no guarantee that it would turn out as as it did so we do have to give credit to uh those who helped it succeed and here at the very top of the list we have

13:46 to put washington washington was the indispensable man uh for independence people at the time called him the father of his country and uh i think that’s great that’s greatly val greatly you know true that he was his his value his worth was recognized at the time and

14:07 i think we do well to continue to acknowledge uh that virtue and i think you’re right to say that it grew out of him having internalized those ideals first that uh even though he’s not a great sas like john adams or thomas jefferson

14:27 yet he thought about political matters he was a reader the library of mount vernon attests to this and uh he really did prize that self-government for liberty as well as as you say the the classical ideals that that undergirded some of his favorite

14:47 literature was was classical literature and uh other plays that memorialized classical virtues so he had to confront how do you build a republican army that is going to function while fighting right i mean he didn’t

15:08 have a year five years to to plan he had to construct this while they were while they were trying to fight the war so uh assemble the airplane while it’s flying would be a modern analogy and the fact that he he does this i think really again attests to skill and wisdom as a leader

15:32 where to where to put that value um let’s just kind of highlight the the kind of three components you you mentioned first of all he developed a republican army okay so how do you lead an army of free citizens and what he realized is that the american army has to function

15:54 differently than a european army where people are just trying to obey your commanding officer tells you do this and you do it and what american commanders found was you couldn’t do that one you you had to if there were decisions to be made you did have to have consultation

16:14 either with officers or sometimes even with your men also you had to explain what you were doing washington really realizes that a republican army needs to be led not ordered so creating a republican army second he realized that he had to develop a

16:36 republican response to civil leadership how how what are the civil military relations going to be and he consistently deferred to congress on political decisions that there has to be civil control of the military however on the actual operational side

16:58 of things the military should give good feedback to congress and should be should have the leeway to operate as it sees fit so different realms of responsibility political decisions for political decision makers military decisions for the for the

17:18 military now the place where this was challenged the most actually comes at the end of the war after yorktown when the army is in barracks in newburgh new york and it turns out that congress has been really slow to support the army so to send the finances it needs and there are

17:40 some officers who are grumbling and there’s the the threat it’s called the newberg conspiracy some question how much of a conspiracy was but the newberg conspiracy to threaten congress and what does washington do washington totally uh puts it stops it by appealing to their republican virtue

18:03 he says if i’ve sacrificed for the country you can too basically he says i’ve grown old in the service of my country so i i hope you’ll uh you’ll listen to me so civil military relations that endure in america and then third that point about a continental vision

18:23 i think for the country going forward it becomes so important that it has officers an officer group from all of the states it’s not just one region it’s all of the states they all serve together with washington they develop ties with people from other states and

18:44 they realize that we have more in common than differences and that the country is going to work better if we’re all collaborating rather than if we all do our own thing so the continental vision that happens through working together i think will then pay off in the coming

19:06 decade as there’s a move for a stronger stronger national government so and again who’s at the heart of all this it’s washington and that’s why he deserves the credit the indispensable man and uh and your last comment led me right to my next question uh and so the americans win the war they secure their their independence

19:28 their nationhood and yet this new republic its first constitution the articles of confederation really seemed inadequate to the task of actually governing a nation uh and so what were the some of the challenges what were some of the problems of the 1780s that americans face

19:49 there’s drama in the 1780s as well because uh we’ve won the war we’re we’re independent terrific what do we do with it [Music] and that’s the challenge that people aren’t sure again there’s no blueprint for how to do this and so there’s there’s this question are we starting from scratch right are we

20:11 kind of throw out everything that we had as colonies but that doesn’t seem right because there was a lot in the late colonial period that we liked that we were actually trying to preserve so you have to sift through what do we keep what do we disregard there’s a question how do we rebuild our economy 1780s

20:34 hasn’t it has an economic depression because the trade ties uh both between the states and with england in the in the british trading empire are gone so they trade has to be reestablished and then uh simply population and society has to

20:55 settle back down there have been a lot of uh just people who have been refugees during the war and many who had supported britain had left the country so there’s just a lot of instability there on top of that uh the the articles of confederation congress is not doing a very good job i mean to

21:16 be blunt um in large part that’s because the the way the articles are structured have created a very very weak confederacy so they really don’t have the power to do very much or really to reform themselves and i think that’s going to prove to be a real governmental problem

21:38 great example of that has to do again with money isn’t it interesting money for the lack of money for britain leads us to the revolution the lack of finances for the articles of confederation congress pushes a sense for a new government the articles of confederation congress doesn’t have the power to tax

21:59 what can they do they can request money from the states and i always like to say well if the states say no sorry we can’t do that what happens and the answer is nothing right there there’s no teeth there so congress had borrowed a lot of money to fight the war uh but now they’re not in a position to

22:20 repay it so that’s a problem and just at this time when people are realizing these real weaknesses greater uh unrest happens and one of one of the key examples of that unrest happens in massachusetts when there’s a western massachusetts farmers revolt under daniel shades right we

22:41 think of it as as chase’s revolt it’s just it’s just an internal massachusetts problem actually massachusetts tried to increase taxes and foreclose on some farmers but for many leaders who are observing things they say well if you have unrest in massachusetts maybe it

23:01 spreads so we need now a stronger government to bring domestic tranquility right to keep the peace because clearly the structures that we have aren’t working right now and so then it it it falls to leaders from various states

23:22 to think and act about what they might do instead of the articles of confederation right okay and uh what they decide to do is attend the constitutional convention right uh and so this constitutional convention and the ratifying conventions

23:43 you know i think they’re just such a great deliberative moment um by the people and the representatives about you know the kind of government they want uh and it’s really like nothing before seen in the history of the world where for people as alexander hamilton says in federal’s paper number one it’s by reflection and choice right

24:04 rather than accident or force uh and so what what republican principles continue to animate you know the framers of this new constitution and and even the ratification debate on both sides i think uh federalist number one is a

24:25 great place to start because hamilton is asking that question right is self-government possible do we have the capacity as rational engaged citizens to see our way through to a government that will last for the long term

24:46 right so i mean it’s posing the question can uh can republican self-government for liberty work uh for our independent country so that i think by itself is is the question and so if that’s the

25:07 question then how do you do it well there’s a recognition that you need some power in your government it needs to have energy to do certain things provide for the common defense promote the general welfare as a means to providing the

25:29 blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity to to riff on the constitution’s preamble so you need some energy some power to to do that but remember everyone is also suspicious of giving too much power to someone else that’s part of the

25:49 revolutionary legacy we’re wary of entrusting other groups with too much power so how how do you do this how do you construct a government that has power to do certain things probably involving taxes which no one will like but yet limit it so it doesn’t

26:11 uh it doesn’t go astray and so these are the questions i think that are active at the constitutional convention and then in the ratification debates which i i agree are are really just uh amazing moments when citizens across the country debate uh central basic governmental points

26:32 now i think here are some of some of the things that that we always talk about the constitution fit into this right so you separate powers for instance um that if you’re concerned about power being abused you don’t give it all to one person you separate it into several branches right which is an innovation under the

26:54 articles you only had congress now you’re going to have two houses of congress a bicameral congress you’re going to have a presidency and you’re going to have a supreme court that will be independent as well so you’re you’re bringing together uh you’re separating powers just right there further you’re going to build in

27:16 mechanisms so that each of those branches can check the other so checks and balances are also a republican mechanism to make sure that power doesn’t get abused which is you know anyone can draw the draw the lines where

27:36 uh congress can check the presidency the president can veto a lock the courts can step in and address it these are designed to equip and empower citizens for self-government to produce to produce liberty as i’m thinking about this well are

27:56 these commented on any places well turns out the federalist papers are one of the best examples of reflecting on these republican dilemmas and some of these ideas i was talking about really root in places like federalist number 10 and federalist number 51 that these are great touchstones for for these theories and

28:17 what hamilton and madison and john jay are saying is that the constitution provides a republican remedy for these problems now their opponents right are the anti-federalists and they’re opposed to the constitution

28:39 for but they share some of the same values of protecting individuals protecting self-government protecting liberty and awareness of too much power and so the debate i think between them is what is what is a safe grant of power how much is too much does the

29:01 proposed constitution go too far do we trust that the national government will uh will stay within its its bounds do we how much trust do we have in these institutions and i think it’s fair to say that uh the federalists believe yes there’s enough checks in place the

29:21 anti-federalists are are more skeptical right even someone like patrick henry in virginia he points out that that these powers once given would have a tendency to expand so you need to be very wary of them so on this republican ground the two sides are still disagreeing

29:42 in the end the citizens make a what i think is a prudential and principled decision that no adopting this constitution is better for our country going forward what happens to the anti-federalists most of them agree most of them will come around they will support the new government but

30:04 they’ll do so out of that weariness we we had better be involved just to make sure that it follows through on its promises and of course some of those debates about how it’s going to function flare up immediately in the 1790s which is beyond our discussion today but will be exactly where those

30:25 uh questions uh come come to bear uh what the federal government should do and what it’s empowered to do under the constitution right and i think that’s a really great lesson for today right that they needed to see that even when they differed on the actual application of power or

30:46 uh you know policies in the 1790s that they were still all americans and they still all believed in republican principles they just disagreed a little bit over policy or maybe just the the right amount of power should be applied in certain situations but but they had a common cause right and and they were all in it together and

31:07 they all believed in the same ideals they were really aiming to uh get get i think to the same place right self-government for liberty it was a question of means not so much ends right right good and and the republican print these principles we’ve been talking about liberty and equality

31:29 justice consent they are they’re not always equally applied to to all people in in america and so can you explain some of those those difficult failures to secure those rights for all americans and i think some some people watching

31:50 this might say well you’ve been talking a lot about uh this the the white male citizen right um the soldiers the the voters um what about what about the rest of americans and i i think on one hand that’s that’s a it’s a good question to ask i do think at the time

32:10 it was these questions about republican liberty that were most central to to the public discourse but once you articulate those principles then you do have to ask how are they carried out how do they apply so i’m going to agree with that and of course i’m thinking as we’re recording this in 2020 there are a lot of people probably in classrooms and elsewhere asking this

32:31 very these very questions were were these uh republican ideals simply uh covers for power were they not not really believed was their hypocrisy uh being being applied and um i think we need to confront that and and ask those questions in in this in a

32:51 serious way so i think two groups uh two two groups of whose stories really matter growing out of this period uh one would be uh white women how how do how do women uh deal deal and wrestle with these themes and then also how do african-americans

33:12 in america uh relate to these themes so if i can take up both of those uh first of all thinking of thinking about women um we can ask you know what way when the declaration talks about all men being created equal are are women included in that and i think

33:32 in the language of the day they they were uh that there was an assertion of uh equal humanity and if if equal humanity then equal uh equal basic natural rights but maybe their their role would be different

33:52 um i would and there is political thinking among women at the time that revolutionary conflicts does uh sensitize uh women to to political matters they are politicized if they are going to uh participate maybe they’ll uh send

34:14 supplies to boston or maybe they will serve to support a local revolutionary war regiment so these are things that have them talking about politics engaged in politics most of the political standing though is set at the state level not the federal level

34:36 so uh you know many many people like to look to abigail adams uh in her letter to her husband john in 1776 she says you know remember the ladies um protect our interests you know because men would be tyrants if if you let them um but on some level that doesn’t fall

34:57 to congress it doesn’t even fall to the constitutional convention to determine uh those rights of voting it falls to the states and if and of course uh so there you might say oh there’s there’s a problem there one great example of uh women being involved even from the

35:18 revolutionary period is in the state of new jersey in new jersey from the revolution for several decades unmarried women are allowed to vote and we should we should remember that and that that for new jersey that was an application of these principles of liberty now during this time what happens for women

35:39 is is their kind of social cultural political role is defined not so much as voting but as supporting the revolution through an ideal often called republican motherhood and that a republican mother would raise children and would use them to

36:00 bring them up to continue these republican ideals so it has to do with teaching with character formation right how do you instill virtue in young people and the answers it starts in the home and it starts with mothers and so they had a very important role even though it wasn’t a voting role so uh

36:21 there there is some discussion about about the place of women and some and some debate and so we should acknowledge that in considering african americans um here rather than telling a singular story i think it’s important to note that there are several responses to to this i would like to remind my students first

36:42 of all that uh when the revolution begins in 1776 slavery is legal in all of the colonies uh even the places that you want to think of today massachusetts has limited but has slaves new york has slaves pennsylvania has slaves and so is there what kind of response to

37:05 this call for liberty self-government for liberty do you get and i think it’s important to say that in the northern states there is a recognition that slavery goes against republican ideals and so there are moves to oppose slavery and and to end it and in new

37:28 england is i i see it as very much growing out of these republican ideals it happens the fastest in new england um the middle states are slightly slower but even they’re right at the close of the revolution you see manu mission societies people saying we need to end slavery and alexander hamilton’s a part of that john

37:48 jay is a part of that that there are there are real pushes to end slavery and so uh even in middle atlantic states like new york new jersey that’s gonna happen by uh the end of the 1700s so one story to realize is that yes in the north people recognized that

38:09 slavery was inconsistent with republican ideals and it’s even worth mentioning that even virginia debated ended slavery ending slavery was not approved but they did they did debate it so that’s one point to say another touchstone that people often look to is

38:32 the constitution right and uh the constitution could have addressed slavery but it really was not in a position to end slavery throughout the nation as a national policy several several pieces here to talk about uh first of all there is the three-fifths clause that for purposes of

38:53 apportionment and taxation uh sla enslaved persons would be counted at for as at a three-fifths rate now i always like to emphasize that doesn’t mean they were deemed three-fifths of a person but rather that for counting purposes they would have that weight

39:13 and that was a compromise because again northerners said well they should either be full citizens and taxed or or if they’re not citizens they should not count for your apportionment whereas the south said no we want them to count for our seats in congress but not be taxed

39:35 so so this was a difficult compromise um that did not preclude further actions so that would be once one point a second point to note is that the foreign slave trade is addressed in the constitution there is a moratorium on touching it for 20 years

39:55 but written into the constitution is the opportunity to end the foreign slave trade 20 years hence i always like to point out immediately once the opportunity occurs to end the foreign slave trade congress doesn’t so that by 1808 the foreign slave trade is ended that’s important now what

40:18 i think the framers didn’t realize is how big the internal slave trade would become that’s that’s a separate story but but for framing this they saw the fact the ability to end the foreign slave trade as a big deal the final piece is what it to ask is what’s the constitution’s kind of approach uh to slavery altogether

40:40 and and here i’ve actually been reading a lot about this on this topic this summer and i have to say that i’m i’m convinced by the arguments that were advanced ultimately by abraham lincoln by frederick douglass and by several recent historians to say the constitution although it seems to tolerate slavery

41:03 does not give it its endorsement that there’s even nothing in the document itself that really approves of slavery it might tolerate it which is a problem but it does not approve of it and what that allows is that down the road again these are these are subsequent

41:24 decades and subsequent stories to think about that it is not getting in the way of dealing with slavery and of course that’s those are debates for the 1830s 40s 50s in into the 1860s but the the constitution i would emphasize tolerates slavery makes some uh provisions for it but does not endorse it and that that by

41:46 itself is is an important piece for american history going forward jonathan den hertog um i really appreciate your coming on any of these questions by themselves have entire books written about them or maybe even entire shelves and libraries uh written on them and so you’ve taken

42:08 us on a journey in about 30 minutes from the french and indian war all the way up to the new nation uh and so that was quite a lift and we really appreciate that your essay and life liberty and the pursuit of happiness is excellent and and i really want to thank you for coming on today well thank you and i would definitely

42:29 just uh commend the entire textbook to all of our viewers get it get a copy of that use it make make good use of it and and really thanks for the opportunity to write for it and to to talk with you this morning thank you very much