14940. [2] (Thomas Jefferson) Original Draft of the Declaration of Independence [article] 14941. [7] (Thomas Jefferson, et. al.) The Declaration of Independence [article]

I have not yet seen Gary Wills’ renowned study of the Dec­la­ra­tion. But I did read Carl Becker’s work on the same sub­ject when I was a kid. I have made a small rep­u­ta­tion by try­ing to show the glob­al ori­gins of the demo­c­ra­tic idea, as opposed to the con­nect-the-dots Greece-Rome-Britain-Amer­i­ca sequence that is still a major com­po­nent of the cur­rently con­fused unde­rstand­ing of democ­racy. How­ever, that doesn’t mean that I con­sider doc­u­ments like the Dec­la­ra­tion to be unim­por­tant. Far from it. It was so impor­tant, in fact, that minor vari­a­tions in its phras­ing would have made a pro­found dif­fer­ence in the sub­se­quent his­tory, not only of the Unit­ed States, but of the world. Because the Dec­la­ra­tion was in the pock­et, so to speak, of every Amer­i­can, it could have reper­cus­sions, and util­ity, far beyond any philo­soph­i­cal essay. Fred­er­ick Dou­glas, whose char­ac­ter and intel­lect make most of the more famous thinkers of the 19th cen­tury seem puny by com­par­i­son, wrote mov­ingly of the impact its word­ing had on him. When you are a plan­ta­tion slave, as Dou­glas was, the words “We hold these truths to be self-evi­dent, that all men are cre­ated equal…” are not just a snap­py slo­gan. They are hope, enlight­en­ment, des­tiny, right­eous anger, human­ity, solace, and con­cil­i­a­tion com­pounded in a sin­gle sen­tence. That sen­tence is impor­tant to any­one who wish­es to free them­self from slav­ery, and is a pre­cious gem in humanity’s strong­box, not just for Americans.

So it’s inter­est­ing to com­pare Jefferson’s first draft with the final arti­cle. The first ver­sion fol­lows the con­ven­tions of mid-eigh­teenth-cen­tu­ry prose more close­ly. It is said that Thomas Paine had some influ­ence on the revi­sion, and it does shift to blunter, more Quak­erish phras­ing that would seem unusu­al in a cul­tured Vir­gin­ian like Jef­fer­son. But I think it more like­ly that Jef­fer­son real­ized he was think­ing in a new way, and that it had to be said in a new way. The first ver­sion is a prod­uct of a writer to be read in a book. The final ver­sion is a prod­uct of a man tap­ping a moral dimen­sion of the uni­verse. The sad thing is that Jef­fer­son him­self could not live up to his own inspi­ra­tion. The man who did more than any­one except John Wool­man to lay down the moral argu­ment against slav­ery him­self kept slaves. It is true that the Vir­ginia leg­is­la­ture, fear­ful of his exam­ple, had declared that if Jef­fer­son attempt­ed to free his slaves, they would be seized and sold to oth­er, doubt­less cru­el­er mas­ters, but Jef­fer­son, being an undoubt­ed genius, could sure­ly have devised some strat­a­gem to cir­cum­vent this. No, it was just anoth­er sad case of a bril­liant intel­lect capa­ble of imag­in­ing, but not of doing what rea­son demands. 

Leave a Comment