Classical Traditions in Early America 0915932024, 9780915932023

Citation preview

CLASSICAL TRADITIONS IN EARLY AMERICA

Essays by Meyer Reinhold Edwin L. Wolf James McLachlan A. Owen Aldridge George Kennedy Martin D. Snyder Ira D. Gruber David S. Wiesen John E. Crowley

Commentary by J. G. A. Pocock

CLASSICAL TRADITIONS IN EARLY AMERICA

Edited by John W. Eadie

Center for Coördination of Ancient and Modem Studies The University of Michigan Ann Arbor

Copyright © 1976 by the Center for Coördination o f Ancient and Modem Studies. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. Typed by Peg Hayman. Library o f Congress Catalog Card No. 76-51864 ISBN 0-915932-02-4 Cover design by Arthur Spinney, senior graphic artist, University o f Michigan Publications.

CONTENTS

Foreword

vii

Editor’s Introduction

ix

Program o f the Interdisciplinary Conference on Classical Traditions in Early America

MEYER REINHOLD - Survey of the Scholarship on Classical Traditions in Early America

1

EDWIN L. WOLF - The Classical Languages in Colonial Philadelphia

49

JAMES McLACHLAN - Classical Names, American Iden­ tities: Some Notes on College Students and the Classical Traditions in the 1770s

81

A. OWEN ALDRIDGE - The Concept of Ancients and Modems in American Poetry of the Federal Period

99

GEORGE KENNEDY - Classical Influences on The Federalist

119

MARTIN D. SNYDER - The Hero in the Garden: Classi­ cal Contributions to the Early Image of America

139

IRA D. GRUBER • Classical Influences on British Strategy in the War for American Independence

175

DAVID S. WIESEN - The Contribution of Antiquity to American Racial Thought

191

v

vi

CONTENTS

JOHN E. CROWLEY - Classical and Other Traditions for the Understanding of Change in Post-Revolutionary America: The Idea of Decline

213

Comment J. G. A. Pocock

255

Discussion

261

FOREWORD

This book, besides carrying a serious and important message of its own, recalls to mind a good part of the history of the Cen­ ter. The Center for Co&rdination of Ancient & Modem Studies was established at the University of Michigan in 1969. It aimed from the beginning, though with very modest means, to illuminate the manifold activities going on in various fields of ancient and modem study by bringing some of them together for comparison. This process of coôrdination was carried on under two mutually complementary headings, continuity and comparability. Continuity refers to the obvious fact that antiquity has exerted and continues to exert a massive influence on the modem world; comparability to the less obvious idea that certain periods and regions of ancient civilization present especially close parallels with current developments and problems. An example, at least deserving sober consideration, is the set of parallels (along with notable differences) between Athenian and American democracy. It is clear that the classical influences on early America be­ long under the heading of continuity—a principle which may be especially useful to us just now when our own continuity with our creative past is seriously warped and threatened. America’s relation to her classical heritage has been high on the Center's list of concerns from its very first days, and John Eadie has played a leading role in this activity from the beginning. It was he who organized our earliest discussion of the theme, at a planning conference in 1970, and he who secured a planning grant from the National Endowment for the Humanities, in 1973, to maintain forward motion in the project. Without Eadie's vision and tenacity neither a conference on “Classical Traditions in Early America" nor this book would ever have come to be. The conference, as finally held (November 1975), was sup­ ported by special grants from the RELM Foundation and the office of the Vice-President for Academic Affairs, University of Michigan. Most welcome advice and encouragement was also vii

•M

Vlll

FOREWORD

received from the Institute for Early American History and Cul­ ture at Williamsburg, Virginia, Thad Tate, Director. It has given us satisfaction to see this field begin to be plowed by others, notably the American Philological Association’s Committee on Classical Humanities in the American Republic (CHITAR). Much remains to be done; there is enough work for many hands. We hope that this important but long neglected aspect of our country’s history will not be allowed to go fallow again. The present volume was preceded by three others represent­ ing the “take” from four previous interdisciplinary conferences sponsored by the Center. The three books are: JANUS: Essays in Ancient and Modem Studies, edited by Louis L. Orlin, 1975; Language and Texts: The Nature o f Linguistic Evidence, edited by Herbert H. Paper, 1975; Oral Literature and the Formula, edited by Benjamin A. Stolz and Richard S. Shannon, 1976. Peg (Mrs. Herbert) Hayman has typed “Classical Traditions in Early America” in her customary flawless manner. November 1976

Gerald F. Else Director

INTRODUCTION

This volume is the final product of the Centers commitment to file investigation of classical traditions in early America. The first expression of this commitment was the conference held in Ann Arbor in October 1970 which brought together a group of classicists, early American historians, and eighteenth-century specialists to assess previous research on the subject and to identify and formulate questions that merited further investigation. At the end of two days of wide-ranging discussion there was general agreement on two points: that a comprehensive examination of classical traditions is essential to our understanding of early American society; and that a multidisciplinary approach was both feasible and desirable. It was observed that scholars had often noted the classical elements in the architecture, school curricula, literature, and political life of early America, but that few had examined in detail the process of internalization which these evo­ cations of the classical past reveal or had assessed the function of classical traditions within American society. Assisted in 1973 by a planning grant from the National En­ dowment for the Humanities, an advisory board—Gerald Else, John Shy, and myself (Michigan); Jack Greene (Johns Hopkins); Meyer Reinhold (Missouri)—was appointed to assess the recom­ mendations of the conference participants and to construct a pro­ gram of further research. Since careful scrutiny of the existing literature revealed that most scholars had based their evaluations on limited evidence, the board initially proposed a systematic sur­ vey of material in early American newspapers, magazines, and pamphlets related to classical traditions and classical ideas with some currency in early America. When it became clear, however, that foundation support for this comprehensive collection o f data could not be secured, it was decided to stimulate further research by sponsoring the publication of a multidisciplinary volume of essays which would demonstrate by example the practicability of certain lines of inquiry. To realize this goal the second Center conference on classical traditions in early America was scheduled for November 1975. ix

X

INTRODUCTION

The participants in this conference, unlike the first, were asked to assess specific methodologies that had been employed in the past and to propose alternative approaches that could be tested in subsequent research. To focus the discussion we invited ten scholars to contribute papers and arranged to distribute these in advance to all participants. During the conference itself each contributor was given the opportunity to present a summary, often with supplementary data, of his written paper. This pro­ cedure, perfected in earlier Center conferences, eliminated un­ necessary repetition and permitted us to allot most of the confer­ ence to discussion. It has not been possible to reproduce here a transcript of all the conversations and discussions, but the sample appended to this volume will indicate that the papers inspired a lively debate. This exchange, together with the nine essays and the com­ ment that preceded it, emphasize once again the need for a thorough reappraisal of the concepts and methods that have guided research on classical traditions in early America. They also demonstrate that classicists and early American historians ap­ proach the subject from very different perspectives. It is no longer necessary to prove that educated Americans were familiar with the classical books included in school and college curricula or that they continued to have access to such books through private, col­ lege, and subscription libraries. Nor is there any disagreement con­ cerning their predisposition to quote classical authors in speeches, pamphlets, and letters. The extent to which familiarity with the classics and a fondness for classical allusions and tags are reliable indices of the internalization and function of classical traditions, however, is still debated. The papers in this volume point up the differences in per­ spective and approach, but they also point to areas of agreement. None of the contributors, for example, is inclined to measure classical “influence'* simply by counting the number of citations of classical sources, and everyone rejects the agglutinative pro­ cedure of Richard Gummere. On the other hand, the word in­ fluence is employed in a variety of ways, and some would insist that the word should be eliminated altogether. The early American historians believe that the influence of classical traditions cannot be measured and consequently stress the need for an assessment of the function of these traditions. Moreover, the exclusive search for

INTRODUCTION

xi

the classical in 18th/ 19th century America, they argue, will not be productive; instead, one should attem pt to discover the ways in which classical traditions complemented or conflicted with Biblical and post-classical western traditions. Since this approach, ex­ pressed in its most extreme form, seems to restrict or even to ex­ clude the classicist, some historians have expressed surprise that classicists continue to work in this field. Most classicists, of course, have avoided the subject, but those who have not undoubtedly are attracted by the intellectual challenge it presents. For these scholars the topic affords an opportunity to test their perceptions in an independent, but related, research area. The Center conferences were designed to improve communi­ cation between these classicists and early American historians— who rarely have the opportunity to exchange ideas or to establish intellectual common ground, even within a single academic com­ munity—by providing a forum for the discussion of questions of interest to both. It was not our purpose, however, to effect a reconciliation of disciplinary differences; rather, we hoped to direct the attention of representatives of the various disciplines to the task of creating a research design for the investigation of classical traditions in early America. The papers in this volume indicate that we have made some progress toward this goal, but the methodologies proposed or employed must now be tested by further research. It is quite likely this research will follow the traditional pattern—i.e., it will be produced by individual scholars, not by an interdisciplinary consortium—but one may hope that it will be informed by the results and recommendations of the two Center conferences. Over the past six years a number of individuals and groups, within and outside the Center, have been involved in planning the conferences and assembling this volume of essays. Above all, I want to express my thanks to the Director, Gerald Else, who from the beginning has contributed his time and energy to the various projects and has offered counsel at critical moments, and to my colleagues on the Executive Committee—Robert E. Moyers, Rhoads Murphey, Louis L. Orlin, Charles Witke. I am also in­ debted to the superb Center Staff—Mrs. Dorothy Warner, who in the early days of the project gave invaluable assistance; Mrs. Evangeline Newton; Mrs. Susan McGee; Ms. Gretchen Kronk—and to Mr. Bruce Hitchner, who transcribed some of the conference

xu••

INTRODUCTION

tapes. Their patience and administrative skills have greatly facili­ tated the process of coordination. A special vote of thanks goes to my wife, Joan, who has provided suggestions and support through every phase of the project. The 1975 conference would not have occurred without the support of the National Endowment for the Humanities, the RELM Foundation, and the University of Michigan; the publication of this volume would not have been possible without the continuing generosity of an anonymous donor. To these benefactors we wish to express our sincere gratitude. Finally a word of thanks to Thad Tate and Norman Fiering, who put at our disposal the re­ sources of the Institute for Early American History and Culture, to the members of the advisory board for the NEH grant, and to those who contributed to and participated in the Center confer­ ences. I hope they will share my belief that this project has been an enjoyable and rewarding intellectual experience. November 1976

John W. Eadie Editor

PROGRAM OF THE INTERDISCIPLINARY CONFERENCE

CLASSICAL TRADITIONS IN EARLY AMERICA October 29 - November 1,1975 supported by grants from the RELM Foundation and the University of Michigan

Public Lecture Paul McKendrick, University of Wisconsin: “Thomas Jefferson and His Library'*

Session One James McLachlan, Princeton University: “Classical Names, Ameri­ can Identities: Some Notes on Princeton Students and the Gassical Tradition in the 1770's" Edwin L. Wolf, The Library Company of Philadelphia: “Classical Languages in Colonial Philadelphia" Commentary: Robert Middlekauff, University of California, Berkeley Discussion Session Two A. Owen Aldridge, University of Illinois: “The Concept of An­ cients and Modems in American Poetry of the Federal Period" xiii

xiv

PROGRAM OF THE CONFERENCE

Alan Gowans, University of Louisville: “Classical Arts as Vehicles of Ideological Conviction and Persuasion in American Cul­ ture” Commentary: John Pocock, The Johns Hopkins University Discussion Session Three Ira D. Gruber, Rice University: “Classical Influences on British Strategy in the War for American Independence Martin D. Snyder, Duquesne University: “The Hero in the Garden: Classical Contributions to the Early Images of America” Commentary: John Waters, University of Rochester Discussion Session Four George Kennedy, University of North Carolina: “Classical Influ­ ences on The Federalist” David S. Wiesen, University of Southern California: “The Contri­ bution of Antiquity to American Racial Thought” John E. Crowley, Dalhousie University: “Classical and Other Tradi­ tions for the Understanding of Change in Post-Revolutionary America: The Idea of Decline” Commentary: Caroline Robbins, Bryn Mawr College Discussion Session Five Meyer Reinhold, University of Missouri: “Survey of the Scholar­ ship on the Classical Traditions in Early America” Discussion

PARTICIPANTS IN THE CONFERENCE

xv

A. Owen Aldridge

Professor of Comparative Literature, Uni­ versity of Illinois

Stephen Botein

Assistant Professor of History, Harvard University

John E. Crowley

Professor of History, Dalhousie Univer­ sity

C. Grier Davis

Assistant Professor of Gassics, North­ western University

John W. Eadie

Professor of History, University of Mich­ igan

Gerald F. Else

Professor of Greek and Latin and Direc­ tor, Center for Coordination of An­ cient and Modem Studies, University of Michigan

Norman Fiering

Editor, William and Mary Quarterly

Alan Gowans

Morgan Professor of Architectural His­ tory, University of Louisville

Jack P. Greene

Professor of History, The Johns Hopkins University

Ira D. Gruber

Professor of History, Rice University

E. M. Halliday

Editor, American Heritage

Marianne Hartfield

Department of History, University of California, Berkeley

George Kennedy

Paddison Professor of Gassics, University of North Carolina

James McLachlan

Editor-in-Chief, Princetonians

xvi

PARTICIPANTS IN THE CONFERENCE

Paul McKendrick

Lily Ross Taylor Professor of Classics, University of Wisconsin

Robert Middlekauff

Professor of History, University of Cali­ fornia, Berkeley

J. G. A. Pocock

Harry C. Black Professor of History, The Johns Hopkins University

Meyer Reinhold

Byler Distinguished Professor of Classical Studies, University of Missouri

Caroline Robbins

Emeritus Professor of History, Bryn Mawr College

Galen O. Rowe

Professor of Foreign Languages and Lit­ eratures, University of Idaho

Richard P. Snow

Associate Editor, American Heritage \

Martin D. Snyder

Associate Professor of Oassics, Duquesne University

Thad W. Tate

Director, Institute for Early American History and Culture

Rex Wallace

Department of Classics, University of Nebraska—Lincoln

John Waters

Associate Professor of History, Univer­ sity of Rochester

David S. Wiesen

Professor of Classics, University of South­ ern California

Thomas Winter

Associate Professor of Classics, Univer­ sity of Nebraska—Lincoln

Edwin L. Wolf

Librarian, The Library Company of Phila­ delphia

Gordon Wood

Professor of History, Brown University

SURVEY OF THE SCHOLARSHIP ON CLASSICAL TRADITIONS IN EARLY AMERICA Meyer Reinhold On January 1, 1801, David Ramsay, distinguished physician, political leader, historian, speaking before a glittering audience in Charleston, offered an invocation for our present labors. “ Let those who follow us in the 20th [century] ,** he said, “have as much rea­ son to respect our memories, as we have to venerate those who have gone before us.“ Lest I mislead you about Ramsay*s fellow-feeling for classical learning, I ask you to reserve judgment on what he in­ tended until later.12 But I will give you a hint that Ramsay was strongly under the influence of his beloved teacher Dr. Benjamin Rush of Philadelphia, who for a generation was an untiring and vo­ ciferous opponent of classical education in the new republic. Jef­ ferson, however, in 1782 noted that “The learning of Greek and Latin, I am told, is going into disuse in Europe. I know not what their manners and occupations may call for; but it would be very ill-judged in us to follow their exam ple.. . .** John Adams, too, re­ mained loyal to the Gassics in the midst of the national debate in the early national period on the future of the Gassics in America. In 1814, after Rush died, unrepentant, Adams wrote Jefferson: “Gassics, in spite of our friend Rush, 1 must think indispensable.** NINETEENTH-CENTURY JUDGMENTS At the very beginning of the nineteenth century an attempt was made to appraise the state of classical learning by Samuel Miller in his extraordinary book A Brief Retrospect o f the Eigh­ teenth Century,a a work which was called by a contemporary a 1See below under “The Discipline of Intellectual History.” 2New York, 1803 (2 Vols.). B rief Retrospect was written before Miller was 3S. For the Rev. Samuel Miller’s career (1769-1850) see D iet. Amer. Biog. XII, 636-637. Worth reading is his later comprehensive and spirited case for the study of the Classics, w ritten in 1843 for his sons, in Samuel Miller, L etten from a Father to H ü Sont in Col­ lege (Philadelphia, 1852), 131-139.

2

MEYER REINHOLD

“funeral sermon of the 18th century,'*3 and recently by an Ameri­ can historian “the first systematic study of intellectual history by an American.*'4* Surveying the evolution of education in the colonies and in the early national decades, Miller concluded that classical learning suffered a steady decline during the century. The reasons he assigned to this were complex: exclusiveness of the classical curriculum; emphasis on language and grammar to the neglect of the content of the Gassics; the peivasive utilitarian spirit of the country; competition by other branches of learning, including the living languages; the democratization and general diffusion of knowledge. At the end of the century these develop­ ments culminated in widespread loss of confidence in the useful­ ness of the Gassics, especially in America, where its study was pitifully superficial. Miller also concluded that the decline in the study of Latin and Greek was in part the result of ready availability of many translations of the Gassics in the eighteenth century, which he called the “Age of Translations.** The national character, above all, was the determinative force, for it was disposed to favor more immediately practical and useful knowledge. “The spirit of our people,** said Miller, “is commercial. It has been said, and per­ haps with some justice, that the love o f gain peculiarly character­ ises the inhabitants of the United States.*' Thus, by the end o f the century the Gassics “ . . . came to be regarded by a large portion o f the literary world as among the most useless objects of pursuit.'' As for himself, Miller deplored the strong popular prejudice against the Gassics and the decline in their study as “among the fashion­ able follies of the age___ *'s Despite his closeness to the times, we would be ill-advised to accept Miller’s summary of the role of the Gassics in the eigh­ teenth century. Not only were his conclusions not based on a 3Charle» Nisbet, first president of Dickinson College. See James H. Smylie, “Charles Nisbet: Second Thoughts on a Revolutionary Generation,” Pa. Mag. H ist.