Intro (00:02):

Welcome to The Future of Liberty, a project of Liberty Fund, hosted by Mitch Daniels.

Mitch Daniels (00:12):

Welcome, everyone, to the latest installment of The Future of Liberty. Today, our guest, I have to confess, is someone I can’t be objective about. He’s a good friend and has been a colleague in the past. More importantly, he’s one of today’s brightest young historians of the Revolutionary period, the very period we’re getting ready to celebrate with a big birthday this year. Ryan Cole has written two important books, and I hope there are more to come. One is about Light Horse Harry Lee, an ambiguous figure of that era. But the one we’re going to talk about today is his fascinating book, The Last Adieu, about the Marquis de Lafayette‘s return tour four decades after the Revolution. As Ryan describes it, it was the first celebrity tour in American history, and we’ll talk about what it meant to Americans then and what it means to us today. Ryan, thank you for this great new book, and welcome.

Ryan Cole (01:18):

Governor, thanks for having me. I know a lot of important thinkers and leaders have sat in this chair, so I’m flattered to be sitting here myself.

Mitch Daniels (01:27):

I never take for granted anymore that even an audience as informed, erudite as the people I’m sure are watching right now, knows all they should or would like to, about figures like the Marquis de Lafayette. Give us a quick summary of his fascinating, unique life and its intersection with American history.

Ryan Cole (01:48):

He’s a romantic figure, almost a fairytale figure, who came at the age of 19. A French nobleman spent his own money, to make his own way to the United States, to fight for the freedom of a people he had not met, in a country he had never seen before. And very quickly grew from a backbench soldier in the French army, to a major general in the Continental Army, became a close friend of George Washington and adopted son even. Washington had no children. Lafayette’s father had been killed at the Battle of Minden when, I think he was two. So, there was a bond there.

Mitch Daniels (02:24):

Lafayette’s father.

Ryan Cole (02:25):

Lafayette’s father. There’s a bond there. And then on top of that, very early on, Lafayette is able to ingratiate himself with the American people and the American army because of a love of liberty. Now, there’s some scholarly debate about whether he came here in pursuit of military glory, something he confessed to in his memoir. That was his objective as a young man. Either way, when he got here, he very quickly embraced American values and the cause of the rights of men as you would describe it. And now, that’s not unique, there were thousands of Frenchmen who fought in a revolution, right?

Mitch Daniels (02:59):

In business, I used to sometimes joke about the distant expert syndrome. The further away somebody came from, the smarter people assumed them to be. There was a little of that in the revolution, we had a number of Europeans show up and they quickly were given command positions. Some of them justified that and some didn’t.

Ryan Cole (03:22):

Right. The luster of having European soldiers fight for the rebel cause was important. Lafayette was a master of what we would call optics. And he even at a young age understood the gesture of this French nobleman coming and fighting for the American cause, how important it was, whether or not he could contribute. In fact, there’s some correspondence, I think, between Henry Lawrence and Continental Congress writing to Washington saying more or less, “This young boy will come here, he’ll play soldier, and then he will go home.” But the reality is, he can make very significant contributions both on the battlefield and in terms of securing French support for the American cause.

Mitch Daniels (03:55):

And now we’ve named colleges after him. We’ve named cities after him. I work in one.

Ryan Cole (04:02):

That’s right.

Mitch Daniels (04:03):

Part of the time. But many Americans don’t appreciate the large figure that he was symbolically and very practically.

Ryan Cole (04:12):

Very practically, yeah. I always like to bookend it. In September 1777, he took a bullet through the leg at the Battle of Brandywine. That’s his first action in the revolution. His last action is The Cedars Yorktown, when he and Washington and Rochambeau trap Cornwallis at the Chesapeake, which leads eventually to American independence. So, that’s huge battlefield contributions, but also very important in securing French support for the American cause, which is the critical difference maker in our victory over Britain.

Mitch Daniels (04:42):

Do we become an independent nation without France?

Ryan Cole (04:44):

No, we don’t. The French contribute. Originally contributed soldiers like Lafayette, but then formally contributed arms and expertise. We had no Navy.

Mitch Daniels (04:54):

And blockades.

Ryan Cole (04:55):

Yeah, we had no Navy. And in the fall of 1775, John Adams and others were charged with creating a Navy out of basically nothing. We had commercial ships and privateers, but the French pirates.

Mitch Daniels (05:07):

Pirates Like John Paul Jones.

Ryan Cole (05:09):

That’s right. Outfitting commercial ships. But we had no Navy. The French Naval force was decisive in the American victory, the arms, the men, the expertise, and also making the revolution a global conflict, forcing Great Britain to fight elsewhere besides the colonies, is hugely important.

Mitch Daniels (05:28):

So the tour, he comes back 40 years later. At this point, do I remember correctly? He’s the longest lived and last surviving general of the Revolutionary Army.

Ryan Cole (05:43):

There’s all sorts of debate in the newspapers about this. I think we’re safe saying he was the last major general of the Revolutionary Army at 66, when he left in the summer of 1824. Remember, he came here at 19, he returned for the last time at 66.

Mitch Daniels (05:59):

Yeah. You describe it as, “One of time’s most beautiful reunions,” a nice line. And I think someone else you quote as having said, “There was never such a guest and never such a host.” The States now, of course, many more than the 13 he had left behind, rolled out what, the reddest of carpets for him.

Ryan Cole (06:24):

Oh, my. I try to make it a contemporary comparison, so that people will understand, and sometimes they say Taylor Swift. This is probably the first time Taylor Swift has been mentioned on this show, right?

Mitch Daniels (06:35):

Safe to say.

Ryan Cole (06:36):

Okay.

Mitch Daniels (06:37):

Hopefully the last.

Ryan Cole (06:39):

I won’t mention that again. Only in the sense of spectacle and the sense of excitement. But I think this surpasses that. Because, I think it’s fair to say there’s some people who weren’t excited about Taylor Swift’s tour. Hard to find people who weren’t excited about Lafayette’s tour. And also, I think we’ll get to it, there’s a huge civic component. But the spectacle is fun to talk about. He returned to New York in August of 1824 because he got there on a Sunday and at that point, a lot of states and localities had laws informally prohibiting travel on the Sabbath. So the next Monday, which is the 16th, he gets to Manhattan and he takes a steamboat to get from Staten Island to Manhattan, disembarks at the battery, and then takes a carriage to City Hall. Now along the way, men are screaming, women are waving handkerchiefs.

(07:31):

I read some contemporary reports saying that the Marines who were accompanying him actually had to use the butts of their muskets to push back the crowds. They were so worried about him, Lafayette being suffocated. So, let me give you a little bit of how over the top this becomes. A group of men rush towards Lafayette’s carriage and try to unhook the horses, so they can carry it to City Hall themselves. So, this is the beginning of 13 months of this. On top of the hysteria, there’s pageantry. He’s pulled into towns in elaborate parades and processions. There’s banquets. As you alluded to, there are things named for him, cities, mountains, professorships, babies, a 500 pound chunk of cheese in a Kentucky town. So, there’s a lot of things about this tour that are fun. And on July 4th 1825 in New York, there’s a pie that’s cut into and a pigeon flies out of it with, in its claws, a scroll that says, of course, Lafayette.

(08:25):

So, these things are really, we read them and they’re amazing. I had a translator who was helping me with some of the letters that are in French, Lafayette and a secretary. He brought a secretary Auguste Levasseur with him and his son named, of course, George Washington Lafayette. The translator would come to me in our meetings and say, “Do you think this really happened?” Because some of it was so over the top. And that’s fun, that was a really fun part of the book to research and tell. But I think, as we’ll get to it, there’s also a much, much more weighty part of this tour that relates to who we are and the meaning of the revolution.

Mitch Daniels (09:00):

Before we leave the pageantry, you eventually, I don’t think it was originally planned, but the tour really took on a life of its own. You eventually made at least one stop in every state, including Indiana. At least you checked the box.

Ryan Cole (09:17):

Checked the box.

Mitch Daniels (09:18):

Didn’t get very far. I think you report that, the then governor and the state was, what, eight years old or nine or something at the time, wanted him to come to the new capitol of Indianapolis, but terrible roads precluded that. Yeah, we had to fix a problem like that a couple hundred years later.

Ryan Cole (09:46):

He originally had planned to tour the East Coast and then make his way to the capital city, which of course had been swamp land the last time he’d been in the country in 1784. As he’s doing this, it’s a national hysteria. I should note that there’s 600 newspapers in the country at this time and the flow of information has hastened by the advent of steam engine, steamboats. So, the whole country, you may be in Missouri, but you’re likely following what Lafayette is doing in New York and Philadelphia. So, there’s a demand obviously for Lafayette to visit the states in the South and Indiana would’ve been a Western state at the time and he’s determined he’s going to visit all of them. So, he prolongs his tour in order to take this incredible journey into the South, over to New Orleans, up the Mississippi. It’s crazy.

(10:39):

When you think of steamboat travel along the Mississippi, you don’t think of an aged French veteran of the American Revolution. And then of course he has to get back east to Boston for the anniversary of Bunker Hill. And that along the way, he stops in Indiana. Now it’s like six hours he’s in Jeffersonville. He comes across the river from Louisville. But I always say, and I’m biased, you’d be biased too, that it’s important, those six hours are important. At the table where there’s a banquet for Lafayette in Jeffersonville, there’s a transparency that reads, “Indiana, in 76, wilderness. In 1825, a civilized community.” He comes to Indiana and he sees freedom as spreading and he can take some credit for that. The seeds of the revolution, I see this in speeches that a lot of his hosts give, the seed of the revolution was planted in places like Indiana and now it is blooming and bearing fruit and Lafayette gets to see it.

Mitch Daniels (11:34):

We’re in a time when people are rightly troubled about division in the country, factions that are at each other’s throats, sometimes more than figuratively. People will occasionally point out now, be calm, we’ve been there before. This was one of those times. There was a lot of factionalism when he arrived. And yet at least briefly, this magical mystery tour that he takes, transcends that, as far as I can tell from the book. People, if he didn’t bring them together on an enduring basis, at least they laid down their cudgels for a while and celebrated.

Ryan Cole (12:19):

I interpret it that way and I think that Lafayette’s own correspondence backs that up. And Thomas Jefferson as well, not a necessarily bipartisan figure. When he gets here, we’re in the middle of a transitional period in American politics, prelude to the Jacksonian era where democracy gets closer to the people. It’s usually referred to as the era of good feelings, but that was just meant to describe James Monroe’s tour of New England after he became president. And we tend to use it as a statement to cover the whole era of his presidency. When Missouri’s entrance into the Union creates a sectional crisis, there’s an economic downturn, a panic. I mean, some economic stories were about the first real recession in the country’s history in 1819. So, it’s a difficult period and it manifests in a difficult presidential election, a divisive presidential election, which is one party, which is Democrat Republicans, Jefferson’s Party, broken into factions.

(13:17):

John Quincy Adams, William Crawford, who’s a secretary of treasury at the time, Henry Clay, Speaker of the House, and of course, Andrew Jackson. And it’s fought along sectional lines, economic lines, North versus South, slavery versus free. And that was something new for the country, that division along sectional lines and sectional interests. And a lot of commentators wonder if the Union can withstand such a contest. You see that over and over again, and it’s bitter and I mentioned 600 newspapers have fought in the partisan press. It’s new means, creative means of campaigning, increasing states. As the country moved west, one way to attract population was to offer direct election to presidential elections, rather than through state legislature. So, you have a more dynamic democracy unfolding in this election, is really, I think the first example of that. And then what comes along with that is bitter, venomous, as you alluded to. If you think you feel bad about it right now, go read some of the newspaper editorials in 1824, and you’ll feel comforted by that.

Mitch Daniels (14:23):

It was already, as you just pointed out, maybe the biggest appointed division in the country, certainly it will become that 30 some years later, when we fight with each other over it. Lafayette had been an outspoken opponent of slavery when he first came to the country. You tell in the book how he proposed the idea of acquiring land where freed slaves could go and make a free life for themselves. He comes back and Americans are debating that, but he wasn’t bashful about speaking to it.

Ryan Cole (15:01):

Absolutely. So, on one hand, we were just talking about the presidential election. Lafayette comes back and the sight of the old hero and all the other veterans of the revolution that appear has a unifying effect. Lafayette himself says, “Memories of the revolution have come back to life, bringing the people together.” I will say, I don’t think they put politics away, but they prioritize common memory and citizenship. Lafayette travels the country. He’s thrilled by this. He’s thrilled by the progress of the creation of the westward spread of population. Things like visiting hospitals and hotels or taking the theater, is evidence of the growth that liberty is working, America is succeeding, but there are areas where he obviously sees that the work of the revolution is incomplete, and that is, slavery continues to exist. Something, as you mentioned, he had been opposed to, in search of solutions for years.

(15:53):

But what Lafayette does is celebrate the progress. There’s a wonderful quote from September 1824 as he’s coming down the Hudson. He writes to another French veteran of the American Revolution, “You can’t imagine the progress made possible here by liberty. It surpasses my imagination.” At the same time, he’s able to point out, not necessarily through words but through his actions, where America still had work to do. For example, he visits a free school for Black children in Manhattan. He meets publicly with Black men who had participated in the Revolution. One of my favorite examples is that he specifically asks to meet with a battalion of free Black men who had fought in the defense of New Orleans under Andrew Jackson. Within earshot of newspaper reporters, he tells them, “I saw the contributions that Black men made to American freedom.”

(16:45):

And then my favorite is that, when he’s in the Ohio town of Gallipolis, he tells the citizens there who are French expatriates, “You’re so lucky to live on the northern banks of the Ohio River where slavery cannot breathe.” So, he was, I think through gestures saying that, articulating his opposition to slavery, and I always say, encouraging Americans to continue the great work of the revolution, which was left unfinished. And I always like to say, I think he also would’ve added to that, that the revolution and the founders have left us the tools to continue the work. And that’s part of our history beyond just this event.

Mitch Daniels (17:21):

I’m prompted to ponder the fact that, 40 years after that defining conflict, there were still lots of people alive who had lived through it. The children of those people had known all about it. I’m just watching these days, the last of our World War II veterans are just now leaving us. And those of us who grew up understanding that conflict and having learned about it secondhand, are moving past the scene too. And you worry, I worry, as John Adams and other founders did, that historical memory will not sustain either the pride in the accomplishments of this country or the understanding of how freedom gives birth to those accomplishments.

Ryan Cole (18:19):

The Greatest Generation analogy is perfect. There’s a wonderful vignette from Lafayette’s tour. His secretary, Auguste Levasseur, published a journal of his observations, and after the dedication of the Bunker Hill Monument on the 50th anniversary, he writes that he was stunned. As they were leaving the site, he was amazed to hear Americans, including young Americans, speaking with incredible knowledge about the Revolution, which, unfortunately, would be difficult to imagine today. I always find that interesting. I drove up here from Bloomington. I started in Monroe County, passed through Morgan County, and ended up here in Marion County and Hamilton County. Those counties were named in the late 1810s, so Americans at the time were still thinking about the Revolution. They were revering that generation. Before Lafayette even arrived, there was already a sense of nostalgia. Obviously, I think there’s still interest today, but there isn’t always a great deal of informed understanding. My dad used to use the phrase “informed patriotism” to describe a real knowledge of history.

(19:22):

History helps us become better citizens. And one of the great lessons of this story is that the American people were giving a lie to an adage that republics like ours are ungrateful to their benefactors. The Republican nature of our type of society says we’re responsible for our freedom, but we actually owe our benefactors. And I wonder if we’ve lost that, and we just passed Memorial Day. I saw some stats recently that the majority of the country doesn’t even know what we celebrate on Memorial Day, it’s seen as the beginning of summer. And that to me is at the top level, we don’t know, we’re not grateful to those who won us our rights, then how do we understand what they mean or how to actually use them?

Mitch Daniels (20:09):

Can you think of a figure or an event like Lafayette’s tour that could even temporarily unify the country in this day and age?

Ryan Cole (20:22):

The Baltimore journalist, Hezekiah Niles, who’s one of the first newspaper or magazine publishers in the country’s history, wrote that, “No man like Lafayette has ever reappeared anywhere in history.” And I think that’s probably the case, but I don’t know necessarily that we need Lafayette. I mean, we’re in the middle of this 250th celebration. You would think that that would be an inspiration for us to try and remember our past, remember our values, celebrate them, protect them.

Mitch Daniels (20:53):

Well, we’re taping this just a month before that, at least the date itself arrives. And right now I’m not seeing enough evidence to convince me that we have an appreciation for what that day means and should mean to our collective future.

Ryan Cole (21:11):

Do you have any memories of the Bicentennial? Was it different? Did it provide an opportunity for unity and for people to reflect on our shared history?

Mitch Daniels (21:21):

I think absolutely. And it was festive, it was positive. It was what an anniversary should be, not to ignore shortcomings and incomplete work and all of that, but a time to set them aside and celebrate what has been achieved. And I hope that’s the way we’re about to experience the 250th. But there are plenty of people who think it should be an opportunity for something else to wallow in, maybe those things that aren’t yet right. Revolutions, and ours was the most important one in human history to date, can lead to further progress or to being misunderstood and misinterpreted. So Lafayette, it almost cost him his life, certainly cost him a large portion of his life, how ironic he goes back to France and things don’t go well.

Ryan Cole (22:26):

He goes back to France. A lot of other soldiers and sailors go back to France, with the ideas of the American Revolution and at the time coinciding with an incredible fiscal crisis, dissatisfaction with King Louis XVI, right?

Mitch Daniels (22:44):

Much of that debt incurred in order to help us win.

Ryan Cole (22:47):

To finance our revolution. Yes.

Mitch Daniels (22:50):

I guess it’s fair to say, they admired what was going on here, but they were really trying to get at their nemesis, the Brits, by doing that.

Ryan Cole (22:59):

That’s absolutely right. But Lafayette and others returned to France inspired by the ideas of the American Revolution and determined to apply them there. They weren’t starting from scratch, but they were trying, in a sense, to reinvent the political order. Of course, that’s a much more difficult process when you’re dealing with a centuries old monarchy. In the early years of the French Revolution, Lafayette was one of its stars. For a brief moment, he was the hero of the Revolution. He led the National Guard, was responsible for maintaining public safety, and reached what was probably his political high point at the Fête de la Fédération, where he led the nation in pledging allegiance to the new constitution that was being written. Here’s the funny part. While I was writing this book, I had several conversations with friends in France, and they would always begin by saying, “You do understand that we view him quite differently than you do.”

(23:54):

He’s a very flawed and imperfect figure in France because of his role in the French Revolution. The real highlight of his life, at least from an American perspective, was his involvement in our Revolution. But there’s actually a great deal to admire about what he tried to accomplish. I’ll mention someone who has probably come up before on this podcast: Calvin Coolidge. Interestingly, on the hundredth anniversary of Lafayette’s tour, Coolidge gave a speech in Baltimore in front of a statue of Lafayette. He talked about the tour, but he kept returning to Lafayette’s role in the French Revolution, using the phrase “ordered liberty.” Coolidge’s point was that Lafayette understood France could not simply create an American style republic. But it could create a constitutional monarchy. Lafayette tried to occupy that middle ground, and I think that was ultimately his undoing. He couldn’t satisfy anyone. He couldn’t please the radicals, who became increasingly violent, and he couldn’t please the royalists, who never fully trusted him. The Revolution eventually consumed itself, and Lafayette was nearly consumed with it, forced to flee the country and, as you mentioned, spending five years in prison.

Mitch Daniels (25:03):

A lot of people, I’m one, worry about America losing its historical memory. A recent president, Ronald Reagan, was not the first to observe that if we forget where we came from, we will eventually lose sight of those traits that have made us great. You’re a lot closer to young Americans today than I am, or maybe some of our viewers are. Am I too worried?

Ryan Cole (25:38):

You should worry. I think there’s interest. I mean, the musical about Alexander Hamilton is one of the most popular forms of entertainment over the last decade or so, right?

Mitch Daniels (25:52):

And yet many of the young people, and I’m related to some of them and others, had no clue who these people were. I mean, I’m glad that captivated their interest, but was it the history or the rap?

Ryan Cole (26:08):

I think it was the rap. But that’s okay. It’s interesting, I’ve met people while promoting this book who only knew about Lafayette because of Hamilton. They come to the talks, they listen, they ask questions, and they’re genuinely interested in the history. Maybe we have to think differently about how we share it. I’m very like minded with you on this. I enjoy reading books, but there are other ways to inspire a love of history, whether it’s visiting historic sites or using forms of entertainment that may not have cultivated our own love of history but can cultivate it in younger generations. The stakes are pretty high because our liberty depends on an appreciation of values like popular sovereignty, representative government, and equality. History helps make us better citizens. It gives us a deeper appreciation for those principles, for the sacrifices that were made to secure them, and for the role we have in preserving the Republic.

(27:09):

So, it’s important. It’s a difficult question. Like I said, I don’t know, people don’t read books as much as they used to, obviously. And then, how do we even interpret history? We can’t even necessarily agree on who the heroes are, who the villains are. It’s an ongoing fight. We see some interpretation at federal historic sites, obviously, right?

Mitch Daniels (27:31):

No, a person who knows no history, can’t be blamed if they think somehow slavery was an American invention. In fact, it has been a fact of life in every culture, everywhere, for all of human history. We were just breaking loose of it. And it lasted much longer in other places. But if you don’t know that, you might believe that somehow this nation was born not as a leap forward in human freedom, but as a way of preserving the lack of freedom.

Ryan Cole (28:06):

History has become one of the casualties of our times, both in the way it’s interpreted and the way it’s taught. We mentioned earlier that the division and partisanship we’re experiencing today aren’t new, but I do think both sides of the political debate are often drawn to overly simplistic interpretations of American history. On one side is the view you just mentioned, that the country was born only in sin and defined by that history. On the other is the view that prefers not to acknowledge America’s imperfections at all. But part of America’s greatness is its ability to confront and correct its mistakes. As Tocqueville observed, one of the remarkable qualities of Americans was their ability to correct their errors. I think one of the best ways to cultivate a love of history, and to help citizens use it well, is to teach history in a way that isn’t vulnerable to these overly simplistic narratives, narratives that ultimately serve political purposes rather than historical understanding.

Mitch Daniels (29:02):

I think maybe the greatest casualty of historical ignorance can be in gratitude. And you mentioned gratitude earlier. William F. Buckley said he thought it was the greatest virtue. And I think that it is more than arguable, that Americans, given the remarkable times in which we’re living, safest, richest, best educated, times imaginable, even unimaginable 20, 30 years ago, we’re not very grateful for it.

Ryan Cole (29:44):

Not at all. Gratitude is a major theme of the book. Everywhere Lafayette went, the word gratitude appeared in speeches, on banners, and in private correspondence. His visit became an opportunity for Americans to express their appreciation for his service. Congress even awarded him $200,000. I always find it interesting that some members of Congress opposed the measure. They argued not that Lafayette was undeserving, but that such a large appropriation deserved more deliberation. The bill was introduced and passed within a week. Others objected because so many veterans of the Revolution were still living in poverty and receiving little or no pension. They asked, “What about all these other veterans who are begging me for a crust of bread?” They argued that true gratitude should extend to all who had served. I always thought that was an impressive debate. Lafayette himself even said, “If I had been in Congress, I would have voted against the $200,000.” Of course, he was already spending the money, buying a piano and sending funds to Italian revolutionaries. But gratitude remained the central theme. As I mentioned earlier, Americans were very conscious of the old saying that republics are ungrateful, and they wanted Lafayette’s visit to prove otherwise.

(30:49):

Washington talked about this after the Revolution, and Lafayette’s visit became a chance to answer that concern. The American ambassador to France, James Brown, wrote to President James Monroe in the summer of 1824, as Lafayette was preparing to come to America, saying, “I hope this is an opportunity for us to show that republics are not ungrateful.” It was a remarkable moment when the American people came together to express that gratitude. And I always emphasize that it wasn’t just about Lafayette. It was about all of the veterans of the Revolution, both living and dead. In fact, his visit coincided with a flourishing of monument building to honor those who had fought in the Revolution.

Mitch Daniels (31:22):

I was just about to ask you about that. I think you point this out, maybe in this book or in your book on Lee, that for a good stretch after the Revolution, Americans weren’t especially interested in honoring individuals. Maybe it was because we were trying to get away from kings and the tendency to glorify great men. We weren’t naming things after people or building many monuments. But it seems that Lafayette’s tour may have had a great deal to do with changing that.

Ryan Cole (31:49):

I think absolutely. Light-Horse Harry Lee was engaged in a wild debate in Congress with Nathaniel Macon, who was like the Ron Paul of the time, voted no on everything, including the $200,000 gift to Lafayette. And part of that was political, because the Jeffersonians didn’t want to give the Federalists a monument to Georgia Washington. But part of the argument was, if we build a monument to this man, then every single leader in the future will demand a monument. It’s inconsistent with the values of our country. But when Lafayette comes, there’s Veterans of the Revolution who had died, to Kalb in Camden, South Carolina, Pulaski, and near Savannah, Nathanael Greene who didn’t die during the revolution, but after it. There were no monuments, no actual tombs. And this is a moment where the country says, we can raise the money because there’s excitement about the revolution and this ongoing effort while Lafayette’s here, to show that Republics are indeed grateful. So, it coincides with this little boom of monument building.

(32:56):

I just want to say one thing really quickly. One of the things I found most interesting while researching this book was reading the personal correspondence of ordinary Americans, people we’ve never heard of, the proverbial man and woman on the street. They wrote about what they were seeing and what they were feeling. Of course, what they saw was fascinating. They gave these wonderfully vivid descriptions of meeting Lafayette, shaking his hand, what he was eating, what he was wearing. But even more important, and I think more relevant to this program, was the way they wrestled with what it all meant. Ultimately, they were watching their fellow Americans. I mentioned the men running to unhook the horses from Lafayette’s carriage. There were people holding their babies up for Lafayette to bless, people getting down on their knees. And they asked themselves, “Is this consistent with our identity as a republican people? Isn’t this a form of idolatry?” It’s fascinating to watch them wrestle with those questions. Most of them ultimately concluded that it was appropriate, though not everyone agreed. The governor of Missouri, for example, said, “I’m not going to kiss the hem of his garment.”

(33:55):

But most American citizens that in the correspondence I read were saying, “This is crazy, this is over the top, but if there was ever a moment for this, it’s now, because it’s our opportunity to show our gratitude to Lafayette.” And as there’s a woman who writes a beautiful letter in Boston saying, “How could you not look at Lafayette and also the old veterans tottering on their crutches, the widows of those who’d gone to their graves, and not feel an incredible pull of gratitude in your heart?” And I found that one of the most powerful parts of the story and something that we should still appreciate.

Mitch Daniels (34:29):

That’s what celebrations ought to be for.

Ryan Cole (34:31):

Yep, absolutely.

Mitch Daniels (34:35):

One coda to this conversation, in this week that we’re taping this, America lost, some of us think, our greatest, at least contemporary historian, Gordon Wood, the age of 92. Gordon Wood was the first recipient of Liberty Fund’s George Will Award and to honor those who bring genuine scholarship to large numbers of people and help them think more deeply about the principles of freedom. Do you have any reflections on Gordon Wood, one of your fellow historians?

Ryan Cole (35:13):

Well, that’s a stretch, but I’ll take it. It’s interesting to me in our fragmented time, across our fragmented media, when someone’s passing generates sadness and tributes across the divide. I think that’s a testament to their work and influence. I mean, obviously no one better captured the radicalism, the political ideology of the revolution and the framers of the Constitution. I think that, what is powerful to me as a citizen and also related to the story in this book was that, Wood articulated that what binds us as people, the revolution came to an end, militarily and politically. But the spirit of the revolution and those values, popular sovereignty, equality, representative government, bind us together as a people, not where we were born. I mean, I say this as a grandchild of an immigrant, I think you’re a grandchild of an immigrant as well, that I’ve, as I’ve promoted this book, occasionally are in the company of people, sons and daughters of the revolution and colonial times, who can point to their lineage to this era.

(36:18):

And I can’t do that, but I’m just as American as they are, because I believe in those things. And that binds us together and that touches very much on when we were referencing decline and rates of historical knowledge. That is the crucial thing that unites this country and I think that’s a wonderful legacy. And I never met him, but I see online, he obviously gave off his time very freely with students and other historians. And so he’ll be missed, but that’ll be a legacy that’ll live on.

Mitch Daniels (36:47):

Well, one can hope, even in a world in which too few people read books that maybe losing him, will prompt more people to go look at his work. And you’ve just described exactly what they’ll find there, the notion that with all its undone work, with all its flaws, our revolution was a huge leap forward for human freedom, just not the last one.

Ryan Cole (37:14):

Yeah. One thing I’d add is that, Gordon Wood was a type of historian that avoided simple narratives about our history, avoided the, all evil, all good, which is hugely important if we’re to understand this country and continue the work of our revolution.

Mitch Daniels (37:30):

We like to close these conversations with the same question, Ryan. And if you’ve seen one or two, you know what it is. I’m curious to know. In 2050, you’ll be there to either confirm your judgment or not. Some of us won’t. Will America be more or less free?

Ryan Cole (37:49):

I couldn’t say less, because it would be inconsistent with the subject of this conversation. Lafayette, who was a great enthusiast for American liberty, but that comes with caveats. I think one would be that we are able to use emerging technologies to our benefit, not become slaves to them, that we are leaders and American people are able to come together to find some solution to stave off a debt-induced economic collapse, which you have warned about with great urgency for some time. And then to touch on something we discussed through this conversation, important, a revival of the values of the American Revolution and understanding of what’s special and singular about our rights and our representative government. If we do not have that, I fear for the future of our liberty. But, I’m optimistic, I couldn’t help but be optimistic we will be more free. And I think that the history of this country, and it’s borne out by my study of the last 250 years, is towards a more perfect understanding of the values and ideas in our declaration and that means greater liberty.

Mitch Daniels (39:04):

Thank you for being with us, Ryan. We’ve talked a lot about gratitude. Here’s hoping that our fellow Americans, during the course of this 250th celebration year, do reflect a little more, become a little more grateful. Whether that happens or not, we are grateful to you for your scholarship and this great work, which I recommend to the audience, as I thank you for joining us once again on this most recent edition of Future of Liberty.

Outro (39:36):

The Future of Liberty has been brought to you by Liberty Fund, a private educational foundation dedicated to encouraging discussions of the ideal of a society of free and responsible individuals.