Society hosted this event. Its about half an hour. Now i have the pleasure of introducing Joann Freeman. She is a long history with the museum and long we are Alexander Hamilton. Now 25 years ago, john herzog approached a young Woman Working at the library of congress where the hamilton papers are lodged, and this woman not even a grad student had already cure rated an exhibit on hamilton. It became one of the earliest exhibits and of course, that was Joann Freeman. Her history with hamilton from early age, it was very extensive. We have many hamilton residents in the audience, but how many have rather them and several times . Joann has. Her research took her to the grange in scotland as well as the others. And while she was at st. Croix, she emersed herself in the culture by living there for several weeks. She is so much experience that she went and fired a black powder dualing pistol, and she did this at a gun range mind you, calling this quote unquote oddly satisfying, not much of a kick, but a nice full pop and a dramatic puff of spoke soon after. So when joann, we have a historian thats capturing the mood and the moment of what it was like several hundred years ago, and this actually extends to her phd work which was done at the university of virginia of all places. So in jefferson country. Thats e mercying yourself in a different culture. Joann pulled that trigger in research for her book affairs of honor, National Politics in the new republic which won the best book award from the society of his or it yans to the early american republic. It also receives high praise from her peers. Joseph ellis called that book quote unquote a landmark work. And when her editor volume, writings appeared, Atlantic Monthly published it in, was published Atlantic Monthly ranked it as one of the best books of the year. Thats just a sampling of her work. She has numerous articles in peer review journals. Appeared in a host of documentaries on pbs and the history channel. A number of radio programs including the bbc and npr. Library of congress, the treasury department, and colonial williamsburg. And recently she assisted the hamilton grange when had it reopened here in new york. So its no wonder that joann was ranked as one of the nations top young historians. In conclusion, i quote words from 212 years ago, quote unquote, it is my duty to exhibit things as they are, not as they ought to be. Well thats very good advice for a historian, and Joann Freeman explains not as it ought to be, but as it was. Who said those words . Of course Alexander Hamilton. Its my pleasure to introduce our keynote speaker, Joann Freeman. [ applause ] thank you. Thank you, very much for that very gracious introduction. I have to say im really pleased and honored to be here speaking to you today. Particularly at the end of what was an event filled weekend, celebrating and commemorating Alexander Hamiltons life and accomplishments and particularly to be speaking here at Trinity Church where hamilton was laid to rest 210 years ago today. Now my subject today is Alexander Hamilton as a man of honor. And i suppose rather perversely im going to start by telling you what im not going to be talking about today before i launch off on what i am going to be talking about. Im not going to be talking about what an honorable man hamilton was, although he certainly was an honorable man, but instead what i want to talk about is what honor as it was understood in the 18th century meant to hamilton in a concrete way and how it shaped his thoughts and actions over the course of his life. And i want to do that in three parts. First, ill talk about how the concept of honor shaped hamiltons sense of himself, particularly as a young man. Then ill talk about how the concept of honor shaped his politics and policies. And finally ill talk about how the con set of honor led him to the dualing ground and the dual that ultimately ended his life. Now at this point, im very tempted to say that in todays world, we really dont understand or appreciate honor all that much. Now, i see a lot of people nodding yes, its not quite true, somewhat true, but it is true that we dont understand honor today as someone like hamilton did in the 18th century. To an 18th century gentleman, his honor, his reputation, his character was like a concrete possession. His most valued possession worth fighting for, worth dying for. It really represented the essence of who a man felt himself to be. For politicians, honor was even more important. In the 18th century before being a politician was seen as a job with job skills, men gained Political Office based on their reputation. On what people thought of their character, not based on job skims. So clearly, a mans personal honor was even more important to someone who held or was hoping to hold Political Office. Men who were viewed as honorable were trusted with power. Now hamilton clearly invibed this concept already as a very young man, even as a boy. As an early letter that he wrote shows very well. And i have to say, as a historian, i sometimes think the history bugs when i find a particularly wonderful piece of ed. Im going to mention a few today in the course of my talk. And this letter that im going to quote from is one of the pieces of ed that you sort of thank the heavens for because its kind of evidence that brings a person or an idea to left in literally a sentence. And the letter that im about to quote to you is actually the first letter that we know of that hamilton wrote. It was written when he was a teenager, ill legitimate child living on st. Croix in the west indies. Working as a shipping Company Clerk to support himself, and absolutely yearning to get out into the world to make something of himself. Writing to his best friend edward stephens, hamilton wrote, to confess my weakness, ned, my ambition is prevalent that i condemn the condition of a clerk or the like to which my fortune condemns me and would willingly risk my life, though not my character to exalt my station. Now think about that last phrase for a minute. Hamilton season saying he would willingly risk his life, but not his character to exalt his station. What hes talking about there is essentially honor. He would risk his life, but the not his honor to better himself. Now thats first of all something remarkable for a teenager to say. And it pretty much sums up a basic attribute of his life and personality. He was eager to make something of himself, he was willing to work hard even to risk his life to do it, but he would quite literally guard his honor, his character, his reputation with his life. Now that remarkable letter ends with yet another really interesting sentence. At the end of the letter, hamilton writes, i shall conclude saying i wish there was a war. And as odd as that sentence may seem, it actually makes perfect sense in the context of hamiltons letter because for someone without connections or money, fighting as an officer in a war was a fine way to earn reputation and honor. And it was hamiltons good fortune to come to north america just as the American Revolution was getting off the ground and became engaged with a struggle at a very early point. Believer in the cause of the colonies that was well aware of the fact that he might very well be walking into the war that would enable him to make his name. And he assumed that the best way to make that name for himself was through an act of glory on the battlefield. Now in the end of course, the most valuable boost to his reputation during his wartime battlefield, but at general George Washingtons headquarters because working besides washington who even at the time was known as the nations leading man or as some people called him, the first man, working by the his side was invaluable and countless ways as hamiltons later career would show. Even so, hamilton was bound and determined for his moment of battle field glory to really prove his reputation and in a sense to come away from the war with a concrete something in hand. So throughout the war whenever an opportunity for a field command came into view. Hamilton in true style put himself forward as the man for the job. But not until the battle of york town at the end of the war did he finally get his moment of battlefield glory persuading to capture a redoubt and supposedly, when washington told hamilton he was going to have this opportunity, one anecdote has it that he rushed back to his friend Nicholas Fish yelling, we have it, we have it. Which, i love because its just one of those wonderfully human moments that shows you people being people even in the middle of history unfolding. Hamilton was on his way, but with the launching, honor took on an entirely new meaning for him. For the rest of his life, in addition to concerning himself with the preservation of his personal honor, hamilton would be focussed on the new nations honor, on National Honor. The reputation of the young United States in the eyes of the world. Now as a brand new nation, the United States didnt have centuries of history and achievements and stability behind it. It had to prove its worth and status on the world stage. And in the context of the late 18th century, this was no easy task. Think for a minute about the world that the United States was trying to impress, the american constitution created a republic in a world of empires, monarchies, and monarchs. The United States was something new on the world stage. Although the founders look back to republics of the ancient world for guidance in essence, they were creating something new in the modern world. Something untried, untested, and fragile. And i think its really easy to forget how new and experimental the young nation was during its founding years. You can certainly hear it in the comments of a lot of people at the time. So for example, heres James Madison at the launching of the new government in 1789. He said quote, we are in a wilderness without a single footstep to guide us. Heres George Washington that same year, i walk on untrodened ground. And heres a senator, William Mcclay of pennsylvania who had the same exact feeling in 1889. He wrote the whole world sl a shell, and we tread on hollow ground every step. Now, those, if you think about it, those are three remarkably similar statements. Its almost like these three people woke up and conferred and said the shaky ground metaphor really, thats what it feels like to be founding a country. All three men are describing the exact same feeling. A feeling of not knowing where youre going. A fear that the ground is going to break beneath your feet at any moment. The new nation had a constitutional framework, but no one knew just what kind of nation was going to emerge from it. The stakes seemed extremely high to the people involved in it. Because they truly assumed that they were deciding for all time whether a republic was feasible in the modern world. And i think that Alexander Hamilton puts it best in the first paragraph of his first essay in 1787. I read this in some way in almost every class that i teach at yale because i think it captures the mood and the spirit so well. These are hamiltons words. It seems to have been reserved to the people of this country by their conduct and example tom decide the important question whether societys of men are really capable or not of establishing Good Government from reflection and choice or forever destined to depend on political constitutions on accident and force. The crisis from which we are are regarded as the era in which that decision is to be made and a wrong election of the part we shall act may deserve to be considered as the general misfortune of mankind. Think about the sense of responsibility that goes along with the statement. They believe theyre deciding for all time if you can put a bunch of men in a room, have them calmly complete a just form of government, and then put it in motion through a calm and slib rat process of ratification. Could this new experimental nation hold its own . And if so, how . Who were its friends . Who were its enemies . And what were the implications of making friends and enemies of Different Countries . Americans at the time really assumed that world empires, nations were hovering over the new republic sneering at its littleness and licking their chops. And i think the best example of American Fear is about what the world thought of them in these early years. Its summed up in hamilton document that is little known, but i think its a fascinating one. And its a draft, and it never left his desk and thats probably a good thing in the end. In 1796 with the french revolution raging, hamilton decided he would try to design a National Seal for the United States. And as i said, i think its a memo, he drew it up for himself and did nothing with it, but its fascinating, its a glimpse into the mind of hamilton, and i thinkening a lot of other people. This is the image he suggests for the National Seal of the new United States. He wanted a globe with europe on one side, and america on the other. And he wanted a giant with one foot standing in europe, and the other hovering over north america, and in north america, he wanted to figure in armor with a shield and a spear basically doing this. So for a National Seal, hes basically creating this image of america fending off this frightening threatening europe thats looming over it. Its a remarkable image. Not the most graphically wonderful image,ly also say that maybe graphic arts was not his forpay it and particularly when i looked at this again, i found something i hadnt noticed before, its a complicated image, and he talks about armors and shields and everything else. Then he says at the end, essentially to himself, you know if its not too complicated, we should add neptune in the ocean. Maybe a drink dent, he really was enthusiastic about the seal. But clearly what thats bringing to life is the idea that the United States was well aware of the watchful and even threatening attention of the world. So given that context, you can see how the new nations reputation, its National Honor in the eyes of the world would have mattered, not only to hamilton, but to the founding generation generally. And you can see hamilton worrying about National Honor right after the war. In a letter that he wrote in 1783, he urged him to treat them fairly as the war came to a close. Not to penalize them of their property because, as hamilton explained in this letter, it was a matter of National Honor. American treatment of loyalists after the war would say a lot about the character of the new nation and hamilton wanted the nation to start off on the right foot. So hamilton was thinking about National Honor almost from the launching of the new nation, but he really concerned himself with the preservation of National Honor when he became the nations first secretary of the treasury in 1789. Hamilton dealt with the new nations enormous war debts, so essentially, he was responsible for establishing national credit. Now hamiltons concern with National Honor makes sense if you think about the credit. Credit is essentially honor in another form. Credit, a person with credit is trust worthy, a person with credit has a reliable and upstanding character. A nations credit represents all of those things as well as its standing in the eyes of the world. And nations reputation. So credit and National Honor are very much bound together. And thats precisely how hamilton understood the idea of national credit. He assumed that hfs fundamentally bound up with National Honor. To hamilton, a nation with bad credit was a nation without honor. As he put it in an unfinished report that he wrote, defending his Financial System after he stepped down, bad credit, quote, prostraited the National Honor. Now given hamiltons utter conviction that bad credit meant national dishonor, and given how firmly he believed that his policies were best for the nation, and given how much he tied his own reputation to the founding of the nation, imagine how he felt when his policies were tampered with. So for example, in 1795 when congress didnt precisely follow his suggestions concerning the nations unsubscribed debt. Hamilton went wild as he put it in a letter to his friend rufus king. The unnecessary capricious and abombable assassination of the National Honor by the rejection of the propositions respecting the unsubscribed debt haunts me every step i take and affects me more than i can express. To see the character of the government and the country so sported with exposed to so indelible ablot puts my heart to the torture. Now listen to where he goes from there which is more interesting. He goes on to say am i then more of an american than those on american ground . Or what is it that thus torments me at a circumstance viewed by everybody else . Am afool or is there a constitutional defect in the American Mind . Now thats a remarkable statement, and it really shows you how National Honor was an intensely personal issue for hamilton, deeply felt personal that shall they bound up his identity with. In fact, hamilton took the defense of National Honor so seriously that he chose a really interesting word to describe the sacrifice of National Honor. He called it suicide. At least twice, hamilton incesteded that not defending National Honor was suicidal. As he put it in the defense of his funding system, not attending properly to the National Debt would have humiliated the United States before the eyes of the world or as he put it, quote, it would have been an act of suicide in the government at the very commencement of its existence. Not defending National Honor was an act of political suicide. Its an idea that he used more than once when discussing national policy. Now that idea that sacrificing honor is suicidal, brings us to the topic of the third part of my talk this afternoon. Hamiltons defense and the dual that led to his death in 1804 and the logic behind it. Now over time, some people have suggested that hamilton was suicidal in fighting that dual. But i think if you understand his idea, that not defending honor is suicidal, and if you combine that idea with an understanding of how the code of honor and dualing worked in the period, you find that his dual with bur was not that simple. But before we turn to hamiltons dual, i want to turn to the moment the code of honor. Ive said that for a politician, honor was a vague sense of selfworth. It represented his ability to prove himself as leader. If you think about it, among men who were touchy about their reputation and had to be, rules of behavior became very important. And this makes sense. Insults carry such grave consequences. Where the wrong word might lead you to the dualing ground. There may be clearly defined rules and standards so that accidental insults and violence can be avoided. The code of honor set out clear standards of conduct. Words that you were supposed to avoid, actions that you were supposed to avoid, and when a line was crossed and honor was offended, the koefd honor settled the dispute hopefully with negotiations, but sometimes gun play on a dualing ground. For example, there were a number of what i suppose i call alarm bell words that you could never use in reference to another gentleman. Words like liar, coward, rascal, which is kind of lost a little bit of its zing, scoundrel, and puppy. Which is really lost all of its zing in the 21st century. Everyone knew that insulting a man with one of those words was as good as challenging him to a dual. In a sense, it was a dare that demanded a response. To ignore it would be to dishonor yourself to commit political suicide. Once a man felt that he had been dishonored, matters followed steps according to the code of honor. Man who felt offended would write a form letter and it would include five basic statements. First it would say ive been told you insulted me. Second, it would repeat the insult very precisely. Third, it would ask is this a count true or false. Fourth, it would ask do you have an explanation . And fifth, it would demand an immediate response, typically by demanding quote the respect due to a man of honor. The person was willing to fight, and from that point on, as soon as you receive that kind of a letter, you were engaged in an affair of honor, and your every word and action could result in a dual. This is typically the point where each man would appoint a second to represent him, a person who acted as a kind of lawyer, negotiating terms for his client, hopefully, finding a way to forge an apology without humiliatingcicici k either part. Ideally, these negotiations allowed honor to be satisfied without any violence. The point of an affair of honor was to demonstrate your willingness to die for your honor. Not necessarily to engage in gun play, and not necessarily to kill your opponent. And its not sort of counterintuitive, but true. The point of a dual is to prove that youre willing to die for your honor, you dont need to have a gun in your hand to prove that. You need to prove that youre willing to dual. Even on a dualing ground. Youre not trying to kill your opponent, particularly in political duals, youre trying to prove that youre brave enough to be there and willing to die for your honor. Now, once you understand political dualing in this way, and you recognize all of the letters sending and the negotiations as an affair of honor, you discover that there were many more affairs of honor in early america that most people think. For example, hamilton was involved in at least ten of these affairs of honor which are in a sense duals without gunfire before his dual with bur. In new york city alone, in the 12 years surrounding the bur hamilton dual, there were at least 17 other political duals. Many of them interrelated. So in other words, the burhamilton dual wasnt a lone dual in and of itself, but part of a larger trenld. And when you look at all these political duals together, you notice some really interesting patterns. Most of them took place shortly after an election, and they were deliberately provoked. And a common ploy was one man would call a selfinterested politician, and theres only one spoens to that sort of an insult, which is youre a liar. And poof, off cool. It was very effective way of provoking a dual. And in most cases, the loser of an election or one of his friends would provoke the winner or one of his friends into a dual. So, what were talking about here, and were looking at the political duals are not impulsive, irrational events, not guided by suicidal impulses or murderous rage. They were deliberately provoked and strategically primed. Early american political duals were kind of like counterelections. Someone who was dishonored by an election by losing an election tried to redeem his repetition with an aristocratic contest of honor. A dual. So in essence, american political duals were deliberate attempts to prove ones self el available for future leadership to protect ones honor and prove ones self a deserving political leader. Now remember that idea as we turn now to the burhamilton dual. The year was 1804. Bur was Vice President of the United States, but his National Political career was looking grim, president Thomas Jefferson didnt trust him and basically cut him out of his administration, aware that he wouldnt have a Second Chance at the vice presidency and still ambitious for a position of leadership, bur turned to state politics and decided to run for governor of new york. Now, hamilton at this point was a practicing lawyer in new york city, he was not particularly political, politically active, but he became more active when he learned that the man he most distrusted in the world, aaron bur was running for governor of his own state. By 7804, bur and hamilton were rivals for 15 years. Both men were intense individuals, they were ambitious, they moved in the same social circles, they went to many cameras, many of the same friends. Sometimes they argued legal cases together as joint council. According to hamilton, there was one central way in which the two men were extremely different. Hamilton was exceedingly ambitious, so there was no denying that, and i dont think hamilton himself would have denied that. Hamilton felt he was guided by his thirst for honor and fame as it was understood in the 18th century. A desire to win glory in the eyes of posterity by serving the public good. So in a sense that many man hamilton was selfinterested because he wanted fame and glory. He felt that the best way to earn those things was through great acts of public service. Bur made no such claims. To many people at the time, he didnt seem to be bound by any grand political principles. He seemed to cease on the politics of the moment to get things done. And many politicians of the time were impressed and sometimes a little shocked at this. He didnt seem to have as one politician put it, pesky political principles tieing him down. He seemed to be an incredibly useful person to have around during battles or elections. Now this was terrifying to hamilton, bur was talented, charming, just as ambitious as hamilton, but in hamiltons view with seemingly no political restraints, no guiding star holding him back. To hamilton, that made bur a dangerous man. Someone who had to be stopped. So hamilton focussed on destroying the campaign. The roots of the door were at a dinner party in albany, new york. Cooper described the party in a letter, and im going give you a bad paraphrase of the letter here. Cooper said, you should have heard hamilton talk about bur over dinner. He said that bur was a dangerous man who ought not hold the reigns of government, and i could detail a more despicable opinion which general hamilton expressed of mr. Bur, but i wont, because letters these days tend to get stolen from the mail and printed in newspapers by political enemies. And of course, what happens to coopers letter . Its stolen by political enemies and published in a newspaper. So that happens, its public, bur loses the Gubernatorial Election not necessarily due to the opposition, but he was humiliated. He had essentially first been ousted from the vice presidency and publicly voted not good enough to be voted for governor. He began to feel desperate to prove he was a political leader especially to supporters who were beginning to doubt him. Why cling to bur as a leader if he couldnt offer you anything . No patronage, no influence . Some said this quite literally as one put it, bur had to fight back, quote, if he tamely sat down in silence, what must have been the feelings of his friends . They must have considered him a man not possessing sufficient firmness to defend his own character and consequently unworthy of their support. So to prove himself a political leader, bur felt that he had to redeem his reputation, and that was a frame of mind when someone put coopers letter in his hand. Bur sent hammilton a letter on june 18th, it included the five key phrases, youre insulted me, said something still more despicable about me, is this true or false . Do you have an explanation, and reply promptly as i deserve as a man of honor. So this was a threat. And immediately upon receiving this letter, hamilton would have known that he was now involved in an affair of honor. And that there was the possibility that a dual might result. But hamilton was puzzled because bur accused hamilton of saying something despicable, but there was no specific insult for him to deny or explain. To hamilton, his supposed insult seemed too vague to merit a dual and how do you apologize for something that vague . Hamiltons response to burs letter shows how torn hamilton was between his need to face burs challenge and to fend his honor as a gentleman an natural desire to avoid a dual. Trying to find his way out of his predicament, he began his letter by debating the meaning of the word despicable. And he then concluded his letter quite logically by showing that he wasnt afraid to dual if he had to. He wrote that he would not be held responsible for hearsay, and that he was willing to face the consequences for his actions. Well in a sense, not surprisingly, bur did not respond well to hamiltons letter. He said it revealed quote nothing of of that sincerity and delicacy which you profess to value. Or in other words, hamilton was not acting like a gentleman which was a highly offensive insult that hamilton could not ignore. So now hamilton felt insulted and couldnt back down. Bur felt insulted and more insistent on fighting and you can see how things spiralled to their ultimate conclusion. Before the dual, hamilton had one final decision to make. He wasnt sure if he would shoot at bur. To hamilton, shooting at a man didnt seem to be the christian thing to do. And for days he agonized about this decision and finally the night before the dual, he made his choice. He would not fire at bur. As he explained to his second nathani nathaniel, his decision resulted from religious scruples. And could not be altered. Now he was aware this was a difficult decision. It would be a difficult decision for people to understand. They might think he was being suicidal. So he decided to explain himself and defend his reputation one last time in a statement addressed to be made public only in the event of his death. And this is another one of the documents that as a historian, you thank the heavens for, its a remarkable explanation of his feelings at this moment of climax of such a decision in his life. And in his final statement, hamilton acknowledged all of the reason why is he didnt want to dual. His family, his debts, his religious and moral screw uples and his scruples, and he desire to live. He had seriously insulted bur and he believed what he had said, so he couldnt apologize, particularly since bur insulted him during their negotiations. But most fundamental of all, hamilton felt that as he put it, quote, all the of the world denominate honor impressed upon me as i thought a peculiar necessity not to decline the call. The ability to be useful in Public Affairs which seem likely to happen will probably be inseparable for a conformity with prejudice in this particular, which is a long way of saying hamilton expected a political crisis of some time, and in his mind, if he did not satisfy public expectations of leadertium, if he did not defend his honor, he would be cast off and useless at the moment of crisis. Not defending his honor would be selfdestructive. You could say in a sense suicidal. To be in future useful, to use hamiltons words, he had to defend his honor. On july 11ith, 1804, they met o a battle ground. Hamilton was fatally wounded and died the next day, and 210 years ago today, he was laid to rest just outside these doors. It was a tragic end to a remarkable life. A product of choices that made sense to him although they might not make sense to us. And that point, the fact that hamilton and actually every other founder made some choices that might seem flawed to us, is where i want to close my comments today. Because to really understand the founders and actually the american founding generally, we need to understand and remember that they were people. Sometimes flawed, sometimes selfish, sometimes selfless, and far seeing. To deny that is to deny the meaning, and i suppose you could even say the majesty, of americas founding moment. They werentgods. They were real people. Sometimes on their best behavior, sometimes not. This human story of trial and error is the real story of our nations founding. Its these very human people could accomplish great things, perhaps future generations could do so as well. Its the logic that inspired their greatest hopes for the future, the ultimate message they hoped to impart. Thank you very much. [ applause ] with live coverage of the u. S. House on cspan and the senate on cspan2, here on cspan3 we complement that coverage by showing you the most relitant coninvestigational hearings and Public Affairs events, and then on the weekends, its home to American History tv with programs that tell our nations story including six unique stories, the civil wars anniversary, american artifacts, touring museums and Historic Sites to discover what artifacts reveal about americas past. History bookshelf with the best known American History writers, the presidency, looking at the policies and legacies of the nations commanders in chief. Top College Professors delving into our past, and real america, featuring archival government and educational films from the 30s to the 70s. Cspan3, created by the cable tv industry and fund bide your local cable or satellite provider. Watch onust on hd, like us on facebook, and follow us on twitter. Today, on this cspan networks, on cspan at 5 30 eastern, an Education Department summit on bullying in schools. At 8 00, bill nye the science guy and Creation Museum founder ken hamm debate evolution. On cspan2s book tv at 7 00 eastern, James Clyburn talked about his life from his youth in the jim crow south to his lea r leadership position in the house of representatives. At 8 30, an author on her book, price of fame, about clare boothe luce. And at 10 00 poom, Michael Lewis discusses the hidden world of High Frequency stock trading. On cspan3, 7 15, american artifacts looks at declassified documents from 1964 that led to the escalation of the vietnam war. At 8 00 p. M. , warren hardinghar newly released love letters. And later, milton friedman. Let us know what you think about the programs youre watching. He would create a colossus that would stin the world. This event is from the national archives. Its a little under an hour. Good afternoon. Im david ferriero. Its a