“The Worlds of William Short” at U.Va.

by Laura Voisin George

My Spring 2012 history seminar, “The Worlds of William Short,” confronted U.Va. students with the words of Thomas Jefferson and William Short, his private secretary and close friend, and challenged them to learn what these words do – and do not – mean.  The students worked with microfilms of Short’s correspondence, the originals of which are in the Library of Congress (alas, still not formally published), and each student was required to transcribe at least one letter pertaining to their research topic.  They soon learned about epistolary conventions of the era – with letters dated as ultimo and instant, courteous self-references as being a humble and obedient servant, and a myriad of abbreviations and superscripts that stand in for titles, measures, and frequently-used words (such as “would” being written wld, and “which” as wch).  At a time halfway between Shakespeare’s day and our own, these expositions from the Republic of Letters show how the language itself was transitioning, through Jefferson’s and Short’s masterful use of it.

Beyond these technicalities, through studying William Short’s long life (1759-1849) and his experiences in Europe as well as in the burgeoning United States, the students were able to bring into focus the changes not only in Short’s relationship with Jefferson, but also in the world around them.  Their research enabled the students to explore motivations and influences that affected Short’s choices and strategies, and in his voluminous correspondence they explored  imprints showing the common (and sometimes contrasting) ideas he shared with Thomas Jefferson.  These reflections and sidelights show Jefferson from the perspective of his “adoptive son.”

The students also learned what Jefferson’s and Short’s written words do not say.  In cases of sensitive diplomatic matters, the perils of a letter’s long passage between them sometimes caused Jefferson and Short to either write in cypher or in euphemisms, promising to relate the matter fully when next they saw one another or a trusted representative face-to-face.  And in some matters – those held close to the bosom, er, heart – one can feel how carefully each word was chosen, and how far each boundary could be pushed and stretched, without going too far.

In this game of diplomatic and Jeffersonian words, William Short was remarkably successful.  To him, late in life Jefferson shared his early ideas about the morals and teachings of Jesus.  Given the atheist brush with which Jefferson was painted in advance of the election of 1800 and his life-long public insistence that his religion was a matter between God and himself, he had considerable trust in William Short to open this door to him.

The third- and fourth-year U.Va. students’ insights about Short’s role in diplomacy abroad, his convictions about abolition and support for the colonization of freed slaves, his interests in land development and successful investments in the canals and railroads that connected the rapidly-expanding new nation – showing the balance between the ideals he shared with Jefferson and the pragmatic concerns of their age – will contribute to the holdings of the Jefferson Library at Monticello and to future research about Thomas Jefferson and the world and relationships of which he was a part.

We can look forward to exploring the careful use of words in Jefferson’s correspondence with Short in June at the Summer Jefferson Symposium.

Laura Voisin George