Lincoln and the Problem of Race: A Decade of Interpretations

Long before Alex Haley popularized the idea of 'roots,' Americans have been concerned with the search for ancestors. The attempt to answer the question, 'Who are we?' has often been answered by another question, 'Where did we come from?' Although historians have been responsible for drafting answers to these questions, neither the questions nor the answers are exclusively within the domain of historians. Popular culture has its own answers, and we have, in fact, often witnessed a real tension between popular history and professional history in answering vital questions about who we are and where we came from.In the 1960s, when race was an overriding concern, our search for self-definition through looking at our roots led to a heated controversy over the real meaning of Abraham Lincoln.

Lincoln was one in a series of American founding fathers, and his views on slavery and race might provide a guide for those troubled days. The popular view of Lincoln as the Great Emancipator could provide a source for an American commitment to racial justice. Yet, this picture could lead to an obvious question—if Lincoln pointed the way to racial justice, why, in over one hundred years, had we neglected to follow his path?

In February, 1968, a prominent black journalist, Lerone Bennett, Jr., offered an answer to the paradox when he charged that we, in fact, had followed Lincoln's path. Bennett stated that Lincoln's path was itself deeply flawed; Lincoln was the embodiment of the American racist tradition.1According to Bennett, no American story was as 'false' as the traditional picture of Lincoln as the Great Emancipator. Lincoln, he charged, was no idealist; he was a 'cautious politician' who was never committed to abolishing slavery but only to preventing its extension.

He was motivated by a concern for the interests of his white constituents, not the needs of the oppressed blacks. During the celebrated debates with Stephen A. Douglas, Lincoln explicitly supported the doctrine of white supremacy, and he opposed granting civil and political rights to Negroes.

As President, he spent the first eighteen months of his administration 'in a desperate and rather pathetic attempt to save slavery'; he moved against it only because of circumstances and the pressure applied by a small band of dedicated radicals. The Emancipation Proclamation was not a great charter of freedom; congressional legislation had already gone further, and the Proclamation applied only in areas where Lincoln could not enforce it. Moreover, only a few months before his death Lincoln was still equivocating about immediate emancipation.

Lincoln, according to Bennett, never did accept the idea that the United States could be a genuinely bi-racial society, and to the very end the President supported a policy of colonization. Lincoln's reconstruction policies virtually ignored the needs of the blacks. Therefore, Bennett concluded, 'Lincoln must be seen as the embodiment, not the transcendence, of the American tradition, which is, as we all know, a racist tradition.'2Bennett's article struck a nerve.

His charges were broadcast on radio and television and were debated in newspapers. The issues he had raised were important. For some Americans, Bennett's attack, coinciding as it did with a period of great racial tension, was further evidence of an irreconcilable split in American society.

The fact that Bennett was a spokesman for blacks contributed to the article's impact because it had been blacks who had, in large measure, made Lincoln a symbol of liberation in the first place. Bennett's article was a literary equivalent of the Black Power movement, of the split in the civil rights coalition, and of the frightening violence of the summer of 1967. Bennett had not only called into question the reputation of a beloved hero, he had challenged the American picture of our history as the story of measured progress toward liberal goals.3Herbert Mitgang, a member of the New York Times editorial board and a Lincoln scholar, was one of the first to reply to Bennett's charges.

Mitgang's article asked, 'Was Lincoln Just a Honkie?'—and the answer was a resounding 'No!' Mitgang was quite explicit about the context of the controversy. The article begins: 'One hundred and five years after the Emancipation Proclamation—and, what is far more relevant, five months before the feared summer of 1968, when uptight frustration responding to cries of 'Black Power!' can again enflame American cities in a new civil war—Abraham Lincoln is being called a false Great Emancipator.' Mark Krug, a historian who also wrote an early reply to Bennett, pointedly noted: 'Only harm can result from this unworthy effort to convince the Negro population, especially its restless young generation, that even Abe Lincoln was just another white supremacist.' Both Mitgang and Krug gave the impression that Bennett would be indirectly to blame if racial violence broke out in the summer of 1968.4Bennett's charges against Lincoln were not so easily dismissed by other historians, however. Although they recognized that Bennett's charges were not entirely new (several of them had been anticipated by Richard Hofstadter and Kenneth Stampp), Bennett's picture of Lincoln required careful consideration and measured appraisal.5 In the historians' dialogue between past and present, the subject of race was increasingly important, and Bennett had been quite correct in his assertion that myths provide little light for present-day problems.

Perhaps a reappraisal of Lincoln's view on slavery and race could help us in avoiding the exacerbation of the racial tensions that beset us. In the dozen years since Bennett's article, a number of historians have participated in this reexamination. Where has this reexamination led us?

What is our understanding today of Lincoln? Was he the Great Emancipator or merely another white supremacist?Historians who undertook a reexamination of Lincoln's reputation discussed a large number of issues, but for the purposes of this analysis I shall deal with four major issues raised by Bennett. First, how can we reconcile Lincoln's popular image with his endorsement of white supremacy during the debates with Douglas?

Second, was Lincoln a moral leader in the struggle for emancipation? Third, did Lincoln ever surrender his belief in colonization as the solution to the problem of what to do with the freedmen? And, finally, would he have supported the radicals of his own party in providing for black civil rights and suffrage in a genuinely reconstructed South?

The answers to these questions are not, of course, definitive, but a study of recent scholarship will give us a clearer picture of 'where we are, and whither we are tending.'6Lincoln's speeches in defense of white supremacy during the Lincoln-Douglas debates were an important part of Bennett's charges and in recent years have become among the most frequently quoted words of Lincoln. In the following remarks made at the fourth debate, at Charleston, he responded to Douglas's charges that he favored racial equality and amalgamation: I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races, [applause] ... I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will for ever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality.

And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be a position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.7Those who defended Lincoln attempted to dismiss these remarks as unimportant. Mitgang, for example, argued that Douglas 'had backed Lincoln to the wall and forced him to temporize,' and that late in his presidential career, Lincoln did, in fact, come out for full Negro citizenship.8A more fruitful approach is to reexamine Lincoln's words carefully. George M.

Fredrickson points out that although Lincoln argued in the debate at Ottawa that he agreed with Douglas that the Negro 'is not my equal in many respects,' the only respect that he was certain about was the physical trait of 'color.' Lincoln was tentative in identifying ways in which Negroes were 'perhaps' not the equal of whites. Moreover, he avoided using words like 'innate' in describing the inequalities between the races, leaving open the question of whether those differences were the result of circumstance.9 Historian E. B.

Smith makes a similar point when he observes that the qualifying words in the Ottawa speech reveal that 'Lincoln was obviously playing to his audience, but ... was also hedging for the benefit of his conscience.'10Don E. Fehrenbacher, an eminent Lincoln historian, sees Lincoln's statements on race as 'essentially disclaimers rather than affirmations.' According to Fehrenbacher, those statements 'indicated, for political reasons, the maximum that he was willing to deny the Negro and the minimum that he claimed for the Negro. They were concessions on points not at issue, designed to fortify him on the point that was at issue—namely the extension of slavery.' Fehrenbacher adds that if Lincoln had responded differently to Douglas at Charleston, 'the Lincoln of history simply would not exist.'11 Lincoln adopted the least racist position that would not disqualify him from consideration in the context of a racist society.12Professor Fredrickson also points out that we should devote careful attention to what Lincoln claimed for the Negro in the Ottawa address.

Despite the differences he saw between the races, Lincoln did hold that there was 'no reason in the world why the negro is not entitled to all the natural rights enumerated in the Declaration of Independence, the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.' Judged within the context of his own times, Lincoln, as Fredrickson notes, occupied a middle position between those who, like Douglas, would deny the Negro every human right and the small group of abolitionists who supported the radical doctrine of racial equality.13Although Bennett's claim that Lincoln was a white supremacist jolted the conventional picture of him, the charge that he was not really antislavery and was, at best, a reluctant emancipator, struck at the very heart of the popular understanding of Lincoln's historic role. If the Emancipation Proclamation was not a charter for black freedom, why were we celebrating Negro History in February? What was the basis for our almost worshipful attitude towards Lincoln?Stephen B.

Oates, recent Lincoln biographer, meets Bennett's charges head on. According to Oates, Lincoln had been consistently antislavery since his earliest days.14 Yet Lincoln recognized that the Constitution protected slavery in the South, and in the early days of the war both his constitutional scruples and the need for the support of the border slave states prevented action against slavery. Moreover, Lincoln perceived that emancipation would be unpopular in the North.

According to Oates, Lincoln feared that an emancipation policy 'would alienate Northern Democrats, ignite a racial powder keg in the Northern states, and possibly cause a civil war in the rear.'15 By emphasizing Northern opposition to emancipation, Oates is able to depict Lincoln as being of his in he moved towards historian with Oates that the Proclamation was the of a commitment to The needs of the by Lincoln in the were merely that 'the real reason for in was to slavery on commitment to and the of equality on which Lincoln the to the Northern pressure nor the of making led him to emancipation. Lincoln's to is seen by Oates not as of or of commitment to emancipation but as part of a of making emancipation as a war In that Lincoln had that if he could the any he would do but he on to say that if he could it by all the he would do I do about and the I do because I believe it to save the he wrote the to Lincoln had already to the Emancipation Proclamation he was only for a before and there is no evidence that Lincoln did not to follow through on his What the was to do was to that any action to the should be as a to save the who opposed emancipation were being in that they would be not to the but to the with the help of an emancipation Oates, sees the to as an of how Lincoln, a political was the way for the of a radical new with Bennett and other historians, Oates that the Emancipation Proclamation further than had The had not only required but had also on the other was a against as an in the states, a that would all the of and Lincoln was not a reluctant emancipator, and the Proclamation the most ever to come from an American to that view of Lincoln as a reluctant was by an important article by the as that as late as February, Lincoln was still equivocating about immediate and emancipation. According to Lincoln that emancipation might be as much as five years and that might still for the of Lincoln was willing to because he saw the need for a end to the war the into and that would into the of the radical of Lincoln's end to the war would a radical reconstruction of the of Lincoln's position at the a recent article by the of Lincoln Mark E.

Jr., who points out that the only of what was there is the five years after the by if was he was by no an By the that a great deal had and there were many why might the of a Lincoln who would have been to the than the who charge of to Oates, Lincoln only the days of he terms that did not emancipation. the Lincoln his he to the war through to surrender and to with emancipation come what As Lincoln the Emancipation Proclamation had been it could not be more than the can be to even if Lincoln not the Great Emancipator for his he is entitled to it for his and effort in congressional of the constitutional that and slavery in the United attitude towards the of the blacks has been a For many years the of that was a and the of that was that Lincoln would have been and much more of white rights and than was that by the By the of Bennett's article, the traditional had been all but by the view that had been in to the of the war and to provide some for the rights of blacks and white these the that would have been Lincoln the President as to the to the of the Lincoln was not on the of those who to further the cause of black issues of what to do with the had early in the of the by Lincoln was the idea of a in which blacks would be to the United States and to own Bennett and other have charged that Lincoln's support for colonization is further evidence of his to full equality for blacks in this important question for those who study Lincoln's views on race has did Lincoln support and did he ever this of those who defended Lincoln from the charges of that although he had been a dedicated he that position as he to the other Oates, who is of the Lincoln's support of colonization as in large merely a for Northern of the of emancipation. those who feared that the would to the would be by a to blacks before the Emancipation Lincoln a great about he through every he some new antislavery he another answer to Northern of black in the his support of who has a study of Lincoln's also sees the colonization as motivated in part by Yet, points Lincoln's support for colonization was with his in and understanding of was to who the question in any that the required to any of the black of the United States was simply did Lincoln support this on the defense of as an of Lincoln's that the President avoided the question because he saw no at the 'One cannot the that by even as the colonization was Lincoln to a of the fact that the idea of large was not ... For Lincoln, the idea a it to his own and more the of the of emancipation, when it was no to believe in Lincoln Lincoln no colonization in after of there is still the question of whether he ever for blacks. of Lincoln's racial views is that Lincoln his support of colonization to the very Fredrickson that in Lincoln that he still saw colonization as an important for avoiding race war in the is as it to one can only that Lincoln to his to deny the of racial and equality in the United is challenged by who, after a of the that the with could not have when it did and that there is no reason to believe that story is but a In the of any other we must that was correct in his assertion that the President had colonization by Lincoln colonization he was still with the question of that would between the and blacks have civil and political blacks be In to Lincoln's views on these issues, historians have been forced to a small number of for to what Lincoln would have had the not struck him after the war has Lincoln's policy in a new light by out that the traditional picture of Lincoln as a to a group of radicals from his own is simply that Lincoln's differences with the radicals were often merely of and that Lincoln was able to of the radicals when an in which his on slavery would be If we accept an of Lincoln's with the it is to believe that he would have to only a little even the most of the party as they suffrage and other designed to the rights of the the most part Oates views on the between the President and congressional so far as to using the Oates sees a between a and both and Abraham in describing Oates to the view of the between Lincoln and the radicals. Oates charges that Lincoln's reconstruction of was by virtually all congressional but that to it for political Oates there was no real split between Lincoln and his on the Oates that most have the Although the President did for he did not that he to be with the with the war as a which would and his Lincoln a policy toward the important by of those who Lincoln from the charges of is a to to have been by Lincoln early in The not only reconstruction but also much further than the remarks to that In the Lincoln Negro cannot if is the I can in at suffrage on the basis of and Lincoln's on the basis of that that Lincoln had moved far the statements he had made in the debates with Douglas when he that he favored black political Yet this to be a very Although the of the has never been the of Lincoln's it by it in As the makes the source of the is was in the New York in to have it from a called the The that 'no other has been to the to who a careful study of the and the circumstances of its that of that are not I would I can no reason why we should that any part of the is like Lincoln, and the in it are not with what we about Lincoln's at the he wrote the the of most of the those who defended Lincoln's on race have been able to that other evidence the views on Negro As the eminent constitutional historian has has his to the that Lincoln to the of a the still his on Lincoln's with the reconstruction of Lincoln not only a to that some Negroes be the he the in his and he further that blacks be with In that Lincoln that were not to and that Lincoln was further the of full rights to the Although that it is to say how far Lincoln would have the of black rights that Lincoln would in the he had already that Lincoln's policies for that he was to a policy of the on the basis of black suffrage is the of an new study by a defense of Lincoln from the of to a new Lincoln was the leader of a in the with the that virtually all historians Lincoln was a on to that radical approach to reconstruction was more than policy ... because the was in the of a civil and in only the of by the can a Lincoln, as a would have to towards the policies by the evidence that are Lincoln's of the legislation and his which that he might a new Lincoln's to the radicals in by for before a constitutional was not, evidence of Lincoln's but rather it was evidence that he had been by Lincoln recognized that was in the he to the of the support and more with the of Negro As a if not as a man with a commitment to social for the Lincoln could have the that at the end of the war there was to but to the Bennett's article of was the of the American blacks and of the New were that American was deeply and that it was the of a Moreover, the radicals of the were with they saw the past as a that could only action in the action was what they in the not the if the radicals of the were with they a in the reexamination of our past from new our understanding of our Although most historians have not Bennett's views on Lincoln, we have not merely come to where we have a great have out that a number of did not to the about emancipation at and the with picture of Lincoln's to the radical of his party has also been no Lincoln as of the Constitution against the of Lincoln has been into the also have a new of the Emancipation The its was a that what had and that the of the also have a new of Lincoln's reconstruction no a Lincoln who was to the Proclamation of but one who was with the and had to as the radicals had, the need for social in the we to study Lincoln we to historians have the of the Great but they have also the of Lincoln as a are Lincoln by from those we a of presidential has are no that can our and in the the idea of a President who far the in his our are far more to the that the of for or for the of which are clearer to us than they were a Lincoln is still a He us in the a great President can his to support His image is still as to those who can a American in