National Book Festival

Scholar of American History from Colonial Times Through the Early Decades of the Republic

Joseph J. Ellis , a professor of history at Mount Holyoke College, is a nationally recognized scholar of American history from colonial times through the early decades of the Republic. The author of seven books, he is recipient of the National Book Award in Nonfiction for "American Sphinx: The Character of Thomas Jefferson" (1997) and the Pulitzer Prize for "Founding Brothers" (2000).

Ellis will be online Monday, Sept. 19, at 1 p.m. ET to discuss his writing and his appearance at the National Book Festival .

Read the transcript .

His most recent book is "His Excellency: George Washington" (Knopf, 2004). He lives in Massachusetts.

____________________

Annapolis, Md: Hi.

One of the controversies of the constitutional period is the idea that the constitutional convention bypassed the articles of confederations' call for unanimity in passing laws, and decided that only 9 states were required to pass the constitution. Critics of this period cry foul.

I'm interested to know what you think?

Joseph J. Ellis: There are reasons to think of the convention as extra legal. It was not supposed to replace the articles but revise them. The convention went beyond it's original intention and those critics have some justification.

My personal view, of course, is that I am pleased they succeeded.

_______________________

Long Beach: Greetings,

How do you feel about Thomas Jefferson, Madison and Monroe being labeled as "Republicans" by our senate.gov web site?

(Andrew Jackson as well!) I know the Democratic-Republican Party moniker is confusing, but should the GOP be allowed to

commandeer Jefferson, the founder of the Democratic Party?

Joseph J. Ellis: You are correct that Jefferson's party morphed into what became the Democratic party. The modern Republican party arose from the 1850's and the party of Abraham Lincoln. Jefferson was apprehensive of federal power, afraid of taxes, a bit of a libertarian. But the Democrats are perfectly correct in having an annual Jefferson Jackson dinner. He is the founder of the modern Democratic party. There is a reason why Bill Clinton started his inauguration from Monticello -- It was intended as a spiritual pilgrimage. Also, the location of the Jefferson Memorial was originally intended as the spot for the Theodore Roosevelt Memorial.  Franklin Delano Roosevelt believed that the Democrats should have a prominent memorial like the Republicans did with the Lincoln Memorial, so the spot became home to the Jefferson Memorial.

_______________________

Lansing, Mich: I recently read both your Jefferson and Washington biographies. I enjoyed them very much. I was left with a rather low opinion of Jefferson's character. The irony is that this great revolutionary leader never faced fire in defense of his cause. Had he been in the country at the time of the Constitutional convention and ratification, he would have surely worked against it. And he was a supremely equivocal and self-delusional about slavery. Jefferson is the president for those guys with the "I love my country but I fear my government" bumper stickers on their pickup trucks. On the other hand, I came to admire Washington very much. He was the embodiment of the Aristotle's great man -- a great souled man. Clearly the American revolution could not have succeeded without him. And he appeared to be much more clear-eyed about the issue of slavery. I believe I have read that Washington once said that if the nation split on the issue of slavery, he would cast his lot with the free states. Is this an accurate quote? If so, what was the context?

Joseph J. Ellis: You have read my books and captured my convictions about Jefferson and Washington. It is an accurate quotation that comes from late in his life.  Washington was deciding where to send one of his young relatives to college. He wanted to send them to school in the north, not to William and Mary and made the statement you reference above.  

Jefferson never made a specific quote about what side he would take although he did speak about the possibility of a civil war. I believe his deepest convictions, should he have lived until 1860, would have been with states' rights and the right to slavery.

_______________________

Long Beach: Greetings, If all Americans knew our early history nearly as well as you do, would we have different views on the worth of declaring ourselves above the Geneva Conventions, and having the right to torture? Certainly the British seemed to take the same position, that the American Revolution was not legitimate, and their use of torture and gross mistreatment of prisoners only led to their ultimate defeat, don't you think? Your opinion, sir?

Joseph J. Ellis: It's true the British imposed severe conditions on many of their American prisoners. There were high death rates as many prisoners were kept on ships. However, I don't know if those conditions had any effect on why they lost the war.

As far as the founders go, you would have a lively debate over the treatment of prisoners. Both Washington and Adams supported the Alien Sedition Act. Jefferson and Madison did not agree. You would not find consensus among them over treatment of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay. It is very likely they would be divided.

_______________________

Tuba City, Arizona: I am wondering whether George Washington and the early Americans are turning over in their graves regarding the beginning of your book title, "His Excellency", a gesture of honoring kings. The major accomplishment of these Americans was that they banned anyone with such pretentious titles and eradicated the delusions of aristocracy from American soil.

Joseph J. Ellis: That is indeed what they called him. "His Excellency" was used for those with exalted status -- status that was earned, not inherited. He was called "His Excellency" beginning 1775 when he took over the Continental Army. One of the reasons the young government succeeds is because there was an individual such as Washington who embodied the ideals of the nation and symbolized the new American republic.

_______________________

Harrisburg, Pa.: There have been so many books written about George Washington, and I have read several of them. What new ground does your book cover or explore?

Joseph J. Ellis: My access to the modern edition of the Washington papers added much to my scholarship, particularly a fresh interpretation of the formative years of Washington's life and the French and Indian War. The book also offers a different explanation for why Washington is so committed to American Independence and examines his strategic insights, why he loses so many battles but wins the war.

In addition, the book offers the fullest explanation of his position on two important issues -- slavery and the issues surrounding Native Americans.

_______________________

Washington D.C.: I have enjoyed all of your scholarship. But your study of John Adams in the twilight of his remarkable life remains, at least to me, one of your best. Adams' recognition of the flawed character of men and the fallibility of their grand designs has great contemporary resonance. Yet John Adams despite your work, other studies and of course the biography by David McCullough remains stuck, unable to break into the pantheon of the top revolutionary founders. This is perhaps understandable given his contrarian nature and difficult temperament. But it is unfortunate that the heavy lifting that he did during the critical years of the Continental Congress is not more widely appreciated. Without John Adams relentless leadership Jefferson would never have had the opportunity to write the words that we all celebrate.

Joseph J. Ellis: I tend to agree in terms of Adams' place in the American pantheon, but I believe his place has improved in recent years. Currently, there is legislation pending for an Adams Memorial in Washington. I testified with David McCullough before Congress in support of the memorial.

Slowly but surely, Adams is making a comeback. There will be a 3 hour documentary on the Adams family airing on PBS this fall. Don't give up on Adams!

Of all the founders, he is the one I would most want to have beer with.

_______________________

Alexandria, Va: Professor Ellis

It's a pleasure to write to you today.

I am an admitted George Washington junkie. I've read many biographies including 'His Excellency' and the four volume work by James Flexner, and am a long-time member of the Friends Of Mount Vernon.

Were the 'Founding Brothers' of the revolutionary generation conscious of the fact that their actions and decisions would effect generations far into the future? With a few rare exceptions, I feel the politicians of today find it impossible to look beyond the coming election cycle.

Joseph J. Ellis: Interesting thought, although I believe it does make a difference if you are president at the nation's creation. The founders realized that they would be remembered in the history books, have memorials and towns named after them. They knew it was a special kind of posterity.

Emerson once said "We could never be like them. They saw God face to face."

In the end, the term for the founders was less the people, than the public, that is the long term interest of the people. Modern American makes it difficult for politicians to think beyond the next election. Contemporary politicians seem to be driven by polls and it discourages them from thinking long term.  The exception to that might be Supreme Court justices.

_______________________

Washington, DC: Dr. Ellis,

I just saw your endorsement on the back of Charles Mann's new "1491". Sorry to ask about that book and not one of yours.

It seems like there's enough material out there now, that's been collecting over the last 30+ years, for someone to take a stab at writing an epic "American" history. I can picture a book that describes the United States as just one in a long series of nations/peoples that have occupied North America and draws connections between all of these nations.

What do you think? Has that time come, or is it still far away? And, what sorts of angles could you see that book taking? I imagine someone like Bill Cronon would take it from a "history of the land itself" sort of view, which seems the most obvious to me.

Thanks for doing the chat!

Joseph J. Ellis: "1491" is a synthesis of work done over the past 30 years by anthropological, geological and ecological scholars.

Something even grander -- beginning at 12,000 B.C. - is possible, but you are right it might be seen in ecological and geological terms. The material has been gathering for some time. I would expect to see something like you mention in the next decade.

_______________________

Joseph J. Ellis: Thank you everyone for joining me today.

Many of the questions reflect such a thorough reading of my works and it's very heartening. An author loves to know he has serious readers and I appreciate your enthusiasm.

In the end history is an argument without end and I am pleased we could engage in this dialogue.

_______________________

Editor's Note: Washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions.