Table Of ContentTHE UNIVERSITY OP CHICAGO
CLASSICISM AND THE FRAMERS OP THE CONSTITUTION
A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO
THE FACULTY OP THE DIVISION OF THE SOCIAL SCIENCES
IN CANDIDACY FOR THE DEGREE OF
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY
BY
EPAMINONDAS P. PANAGOPOULOS
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS
AUGUST, 1952
PREFACE
The frequent references to antiquity made during the de
bates at the Philadelphia Convention of 1787, as well as at the
state conventions for the ratification of the Constitution, im
press all readers of their records. Classical expressions,
allusions to Greek mythology, lengthy references to ancient his
tory, and detailed analyses of Greek and Roman political institu
tions abound. The same practice characterized the authors of
contemporary literature on the proposed Constitution. Pamphlets,
essays, and newspaper articles often appeared under pseudonyms
borrowed from the names of distinguished Greeks and Romans.
Quotations from ancient writers were frequently made and sometimes
added to titles of pamphlets already long without them, and
substantial parts of many of the articles consisted of penetrating
discourses on ancient political practices.
One does not fail to recognize under all of this a rich
and creative current of thought, so familiar in the eighteenth
century intellectual atmosphere. It was this conscious harking
back to the nature of antiquity, the continuous endeavor to find
in it lessons of value for 1787, the effort to utilize a great
legacy of high ideals and precious experience that found expres
sion in the "classical” allusions and examples brought forth
during the constitutional debates of this period. "Classicism,"
with all the creative power which contributed so much to the
ii
birth of the modern world, was again manifested in a decisive
period of this country's history, offering its aid in the framing
of a new political structure. As with the people of the Renais
sance, "classicism" for the Americans of the eighteenth century
meant not only the culture of a certain period of antiquity or a
specific literary style or even a certain set of aesthetic val
ues; it meant the whole civilization of the Greeks and Romans,
from the rise of these great peoples to their fall.
This study endeavors to show how this current of classi
cism, with its broad eighteenth century content, found expression
during the period of the constitutional conventions, as well as
in the literature on the proposed Constitution during the years
1787-1789. Moreover, it attempts an evaluation of this contribu
tion, especially on the attitudes of those remarkable men who
became the Framers of the United States fundamental law. In the
following pages the title of "Framers" has been applied not
exclusively to the members of the Philadelphia Convention, but
also to the delegates to the State Conventions for the ratifica
tion of the Constitution, who discussed again almost all the main
topics debated in Philadelphia and made significant new contribu
tions, including the first ten Amendments to the original document.
The subject is large and fascinating. This is one reason
why the author of this paper is acutely aware of its shortcomings.
For instance, the introductory chapter on the mind of the Framers
is not a complete analysis of the philosophical method employed
by them. It endeavors merely to demonstrate how the use of
history was a natural consequence of the Framers' philosophy.
ill
Moreover, so far as the classical background, of the members of the
various Conventions is concerned, the scattered and rare material
on their early life and education, as veil as the short space de
voted to this topic here, leaves much for others to discuss. This
is true also of the chapter on the sources used by the Framers in
their references to antiquity. In these areas, future findings
may add greatly to the information presented. Finally, vhere an
analysis and evaluation of these references have been attempted,
abler scholars may offer different interpretations and drav addi
tional conclusions. In addition, students vith special interests
in scholarship vill not find in this dissertation, vith its
restricted scope, information of a more general character. Thus,
one vhose interest lies in the influence of classicism on eight
eenth century America vill find here only a part of the story.
He must complete the picture through research into the literature
and arts, education and lav, as veil as other important phases of
the American life of this period. Also, one vho vishes to study
the empirical method of the Framers and the significance of the
historical examples adduced by them, should add to those mentioned
here the references made to modern countries, such as England and
the Netherlands, Svltzerland and France, Poland, Germany and Italy.
This study has been attempted vith one purpose only: to
contribute tovard a better understanding of the constitutional
thought of the Framers and of the role of classicism, as a regener
ating and creative current in eighteenth century America. If the
author has succeeded in making such a contribution, his hopes have
been fulfilled.
iv
TABLE OP CONTENTS
Page
PREFACE............................................ ii
LIST OF PLATES..................................... vi
Chapter
I. THE MIND OF THE FRAMERS......... 1
II. CLASSICAL TRAINING IN THE EDUCATION OF THE
FRAMERS.............................. 35
III. THE SOURCES OF THE FRAMERS IN THEIR REFERENCES
TO ANTIQUITY.......................... 90
IV. THE NEED OF A STRONGER FEDERAL GOVERNMENT . . 129
V. THE DEPARTMENTS OF THE PROPOSED GOVERNMENT . . 155
VI. THE PRINCIPLE OF REPRESENTATION..........178
VII. CONCLUSIONS............................. 198
BIBLIOGRAPHY ....................................... 215
v
LIST OP PLATES
Plate Page
1. A Page of the Minutes of the Governors of King's
College, of March 1, 1763, Introducing a New Plan
of Education..................................... 76
2. The Cover Page and Title Page of an Oxford
Edition, in 1699, of the Works of Theocritus . . . 79
3. Pages 2 and 3 of a London Edition, in 1695, of
Comedies by Aristophanes, Plutus and Nephelae . . 79
vi
CHAPTER I
THE MIND OP THE FRAMERS
The picture of Antaeus, the giant of Greek mythology, who
was all-powerful and invincible as long as he was in contact with
Mother Earth, comes to our mind when we follow the development of
the thinking of the Framers of the Federal Constitution.^- As if
they knew the tragic end of Antaeus, when Hercules, discovering
the source of his strength, lifted him up and crushed him to
death, the Framers kept close to their own grounds, deriving their
power from American realities.
Neither the Philadelphia Convention of 1787, nor the State
Conventions that followed it, were meetings of scholars and philos
ophers indulging in academic discussions of governmental systems.
They were, on the contrary, assemblies of very practical men, who
gathered together, under the pressure of circumstances, the major
ity of them determined to meet what they thought was an alarming
situation, the others, to face what they considered a threat to
their democratic and free way of life coming from the designs of
their colleagues.
This minority, and occasionally a majority, in the various
conventions professed satisfaction with the decentralized system
■*"See reference to the myth of Antaeus in Apollodorus The
Library ii. 11; also, in Pindar Isthmia iv. 50ff; also, in Plato
Theaetetus 169b.
1
of the country, with their local self-government, and the unim
paired sovereignty of their states. Centralization of the govern
ment seemed to them a replacement of the British administration,
against which they fought only a few years ago, with a similar
local one. A cession of part of their state's sovereignty meant
a weakening of their agrarian democracy, which was so dear to them;
and it was their belief that a consolidation of a national govern
ment could only bring into power a plutocratic oligarchy, under
which the well-born and rich would reign at the expense of the
freedoms of the people. However, no matter how many there were all
over the country who had the same ideas, in the Philadelphia Con
vention they had but very few representatives. The others, to whom
the title of the "Framers11 of the new system mainly belongs, felt
differently.
For them, the desperate economic situation, the bitter
political experience under the Articles of Confederation, the sen
sitive position of a newly born nation in the middle of a chaotic
world created such grave problems that, as Madison said, "every
reflecting man" was becoming "daily more alarmed at our situation."2
For about ten years, these "reflecting men" were dissatis
fied with the Articles of Confederation and, in this case, it seems
they were reflecting a more general sentiment in the country. It
was only too clear to them that the inability of the government to
face the increasing financial and currency problems, to conclude
o
James Madison to his father, May 27, 1787, in Documentary
History of the Constitution. Bulletin of the Bureau of Rolls and
Library of the Department of State (Washington: Department of
State, 1905), IV, 168.
-3-
commercial treaties with foreign powers, and, in general, to meet
the pressing needs of those critical years, was far from contrib
uting to harmonious relations among the states and to the happiness
of a weary people.
From time to time, various incidents occurred to emphasize
the significance of this situation. Thus, when the old disputes
over the navigation of the Potomac river reached a crisis In 1785,
it became evident to many that a drastic solution should be found
for problems related to the trade and commerce of the United States.
As a result, the Annapolis Convention met in September of 1786,
but only to declare that "other important matters" ought also to
be considered, and that the Commissioners should be authorized "to
devise such further provisions as shall appear to them necessary
to render the constitution of the Foederal Government adequate to
the exigencies of the Union."3 The problem was thus placed on a
different basis, and the call went out for the Philadelphia Conven
tion.
When May came to Philadelphia the following year, it
brought with it a unique experience for Philadelphians. Once again
they saw many celebrities from all over the country. The delegates
were arriving, one by one, to participate in what came to be the
most important meeting in their times. Heroes of the Revolution,
signers of the Declaration of Independence, framers of the Articles
of Confederation, distinguished members of Congress, governors and
3"Proceedings of the Commissioners to Remedy Defects of the
Federal Government, Annapolis in the State of Maryland, Sept. 14,
1786" in Henry S. Commager. Documents of American History (New York:
Crofts, 1942), I, 132ff.
-4-
statesmen of national fame from the various states were all there.
Their gathering was, as Franklin said, "une assemble des notables,
and Madison thought that the delegates were "the best contribution
of talents the States could make for the occasion."5
It is true that some of the resounding names of those days
were not there. Thomas Jefferson and John Adams were abroad on
official missions. Samuel Adams was absent. And Patrick Henry,
though he was invited, was unwilling to participate.
However, the others who were in Philadelphia, mostly young
men in their thirties, were definitely among the most able men in
America.^ Well educated and trained in the politics of their var
ious states, they represented the most important of the dominant
interests in the country. Prominent men of commerce, planters,
representatives of moneyed interests, land speculators, manufac
turers, bondholders, professional men, all were people of substance
and standing. One would have tried but in vain to find among them
4
Benjamin Franklin to Thomas Jordan, from Philadelphia,
May 18, 1787, in Albert Henry Smyth, ed., The Writings of Benjamin
Franklin (New York: The MacMillan Co., 1906), IX/ '5'82. See also,
Benjamin Franklin to Richard Price, ibid., pp. 585ff. Also, the
Charge d'Affaires of France notes, on April 10, 1787, In his re
port to Comte de Montmorln^ French Secretary of Foreign Affairs:
"Membres les plus distingues qui doivent composer cette assembles
a Philadelphia pour regler la nouvelle Convention generale, qui
est devenue d'une necessite indispensable," in Max Farrand, ed.,
The Records of the Federal Convention of 1787 (New Haven: Yale
University Press, 1937), HI, Appendix A, 15-16. This work will
be hereafter designated as Records.
^James Madison to William Short, from Philadelphia, June 6,
1787, Ibid., Appendix A, XXXVIIIa, 37.
^William S. Johnson to his son, from Philadelphia, June 27,
1787, in George Bancroft, History of the Formation of the Consti
tution of the United States of America (New York: Appleton and Co. .
1889), II/TT-TO.
