Facts are Stubborn

It is completely understandable for scholars… to challenge conventional wisdom in regards to Thomas Jefferson.  Revisionist historians have won the battle to craft discourse on the Jefferson narrative.  Gone are the scholarly works of Dumas Malone and Merrill Peterson; unceremoniously replaced by the pseudo-history of Annette Gordon-Reed while the spectre of Fawn Brodie’s shabby scholarship (Garry Wills’ classic review linked here)  haunts all students of history.  The Jefferson debate is in the post DNA phase, Gordon-Reed with full support of the Jefferson Foundation at Monticello, have used the inconclusive 1998 test as the catalyst to proclaim their conjectural dribblings as fact….and America listens.   David Barton’s ridiculed book was just one of many neo-revisionists studies to hit book shelves trying to redeem Jefferson’s sullied character.  Barton had an alternative agenda, something beyond the “Sally accusations.”  While there is plenty of evidence to refute the Sally allegations, Barton stooped to the amateurish levels of Brodie to argue the Sage of Monticello was an evangelical.

What’s wrong with this picture? David Barton can’t really say…..

  • The Jefferson Bible exists-  Barton stretches quotes far beyond reasonable context to argue that the book now on display in the Smithsonian American History Museum is really a secular deception.  His source material is misquoted  from a dubious secondary source.  Check out Jefferson’s correspondence with Dr. Benjamin Rush to see his true intent in compiling the morals of Jesus.
  • Jefferson did not lead church services-  Barton makes plenty of hay out of Jefferson attending religious services held in the Senate chamber during his administration.  Conveniently, he ignores the obvious documentation proving his attendance was for the sake of his daughters (who were Christians.)  Jefferson scholar Clay Jenkinson, not a revisionist by any means, cannot understand why Barton would waste so much intellectual energy on such misguided assertions.
  • Why Jefferson?  Barton’s frustration with revisionists is understandable, but terribly misguided.  He never intended the book to be a scholarly examination, but rather an evangelical manifesto- rally the religious right to the most influential of our Founders kidnapped by secularists.  Ignore the mountains of evidence to the contrary, focus on miniscule passages or quotations taken entirely out of context, cite questionable sources- when all else fails, make stuff up.  Founders who were professed Christians such as;  Patrick Henry, Benjamin Rush, Alexander Hamilton, even George Washington, all would have been better topics for Barton’s efforts.
About these ads

2 Comments

Filed under News

2 responses to “Facts are Stubborn

  1. Dale Little

    I see much criticism of David Barton, but I see nothing in this article to prove him wrong. Your articles intent seems to be to tear down David Barton instead of teaching anything about Thomas Jefferson.

    • Looking upon the Jefferson Bible with my own eyes, seeing his hand-written notes in its margins….just because it was never published, doesn’t mean it didn’t exist.

      Thanks for visiting my blog, there are at least 7 Jefferson posts- “Picking Pockets-Breaking Legs” sums up Jefferson and religion quite well.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s