too numerous to attempt to list here—they include faculty, graduate students, and undergraduates—we received generous and thoughtful suggestions and insights, essential to the growth of this project, and all through a time of widespread institutional austerity. We thank student assistants Emily Anderson, Deanna Koretsky, and Stephanie Scherer for their hard work. We owe our thanks, as well, to University of Florida students in ENG 3011 and AML 6017 and Bucknell University students in ENG 306. A version of chapter 2 appeared as “Secret Witness, or the Fantasy Structure of US Republicanism,” in Early American Literature 44.2 (2009): 333–63. We thank the anonymous reviewers, David Shields, departing from the journal’s editorship, and Sandra Gustafson, entering, for their help. A portion of chapter 4 appeared as “The Constitution of Toussaint: Another Origin of African American Literature,” in A Companion to African American Literature, ed. Gene Jarrett, 59–74 (New York: Wiley-Blackwell, 2010). We are grateful to Gene for his suggestions and encouragement. We are grateful, too, at NYU Press, to the series editors, Priscilla Wald, David Kazanjian, and Elizabeth McHenry, as well as to Eric Zinner and Alicia Nadkarni.
The Traumatic Colonel began with a conversation in October of 2005. Since then, we have worked in fits and starts, time permitting, with hours on the phone, hundreds of emails, conversations with friends, and above all the tremendous patience and support of loved ones. We acknowledge a few personal ties, those who understand that there are a lot of facets to this, a lot of interested parties: Jim Lavine, Kevin Daly, Daniel Juan Gil, Ed Cahill, Duncan Faherty, and Molly Rothenberg. Ed is especially grateful to Amisha Sharma, who appreciated this very complicated case—a lotta ins, lotta outs, lotta what-have-yous. He cannot adequately thank her for making this come together. Michael wishes to thank his children, Hannah, Mariah, and Caleb for a few quiet hours, and most especially Kimberley—getting there is half the fun; being there is all of it.
Burrology—Extracts
In the case of Mr. Jefferson, there is nothing wonderful; but Mr. Burr’s good fortune surpasses all ordinary rules, and exceeds that of Bonaparte. All the old patriots, all the splendid talents, the long experience, both of federalists and antifederalists, must be subjected to the humiliation of seeing this dexterous gentleman rise, like a balloon, filled with inflammable air, over their heads. And this is not the worst. What a discouragement to all virtuous exertion, and what an encouragement to party intrigue, and corruption!
—John Adams to Elbridge Gerry, 1800
Few men, if any, in the United States have done more to produce the late change in the representation of the people, than colonel burr. His Eagle eye penetrated thro’ every scheme, of the adverse party, and he has combated with success the “evil genius of America.” While some were distracting their brains, with jarring elements and component parts, the capacious soul of Burr, conceived the harmony of the great whole. While others were collecting their materials, he erected his fabric. A man whose active genius is every where & whose goodness of heart and purity of morals have never been impeached, is an admirable second and may be a suitable successor to the sagacious Jefferson.
—Morgan J. Rhees, Esq., Inauguration Day Oration, 1801
What is the language the people of America express in this vote? Why certainly that in their opinion Mr. Jefferson is equal to Colonel Burr, and Colonel Burr equal to Mr. Jefferson!
—Washington Federalist, 1801
It is in the camp of the Enemy that we must look for a Deliverer. In the choice of Mr. Burr, there is yet a remedy for the evils I have enumerated. . . . It is often difficult to trace with precision, the proportion of each, in that compound of motives, by which the conduct of statesmen is usually governed. To borrow a familiar illustration—we can see, as in a changeable silk, that there is a variety of colors; but it is difficult to say where one ends or the other begins.
—Epaminondas, New-York Gazette, 1801
It is time to tear away the veil that hides this monster, and lay open a scene of misery, at which every heart must shudder. Fellow Citizens, read a tale of truth, which must harrow up your sensibility, and excite your keenest resentment. It is, indeed, a tale of truth! And, but for wounding, too deeply, the already lacerated feelings of a parental heart, it could be authenticated by all the formalities of an oath.
—Aaron Burr!, handbill, 1801
Something “is rotten in Denmark”; that under an exterior, which, though not altogether pleasing, is calculated to make false impressions on unsuspicious minds, something exceedingly unpropitious to the freedom of the union, is at this moment contemplated by the vice-president.
—James Cheetham, Narrative of the Suppression, 1802
It cannot escape notice, that in the toasts given by the Anti-Constitutionalists on the anniversary of independence, the vice-president is either omitted, or mentioned with pointed disrespect. In one he is called the “Burr of democracy.”
—New-York Gazette and General Advertiser, July 20, 1802
The lovers of secret history, and those who listen with pleasure to the tales of party intrigues, or smile at the arts of authorship, may find some amusement in the perusal of this pamphlet. As a considerable portion of it is occupied in detailing the contents of the suppressed history, it is unnecessary for us to be particular in our account of it; since, in the next article, the reader will perceive that this same history has, after all, come forth into open day. The author of this narrative makes some very severe strictures on the character and conduct of Mr. burr, and it appears to be the main design of his performance to hold him up to the contempt and detestation of the world. . . . That such accusations should be made by one of the same political party against so distinguished a character as the accused, may, at first sight, be thought unaccountable; and the mystery will disappear to those only who are acquainted with all the subdivisions of party and the springs which influence their political movements.
—American Review, and Literary Journal, 1802
The character faithfully drawn of Mr. Burr in the following pages is so complex, so stript of precise and indelible marks; so mutable, capricious, versatile, unsteady and unfixt, one to which no determinate name can be given, and on which no reliance can be placed, that serious questions may arise from it.
—James Cheetham, A View of the Political Conduct of Aaron Burr, Esq.,1802
To a genius of singular perspicacity, Mr. Burr joins the most bland and conciliating manners. With a versatility of powers, of which, perhaps, America furnishes no other example, he is capable of yielding an undivided attention to a single object of pursuit.
—John Davis, Travels of Four Years and a Half, 1803
Perhaps no man’s language was ever so apparently explicit, and, at the same time, so covert and indefinite.
—William Plumer, Memorandum, 1804
I trust . . . that the world will do me the justice to believe that I have not censured him on light grounds nor from unworthy inducements. I certainly have had strong reasons for what I have said, though it is possible that in some particulars I may have been influenced by misconstruction or misinformation.
—Alexander Hamilton, statement before the duel, 1804
O thou agent of our sorrows! who by the people’s voice wast raised so near the highest honors thy nation could bestow, couldst thou not forgive? . . . Where is that honor now thou heldest so dear? Gone; for ever gone. . . . Honor, at best, is but a noisy breath.—Methinks if ever re-applied
