The 1619 Project (in the New York Times Magazine)

[David Lockmiller]

“I Helped Fact-Check the 1619 Project. The Times Ignored Me.”

Politico, by Leslie M. Harris, March 6, 2020

Leslie M. Harris is professor of history at Northwestern University, and author of In the Shadow of Slavery: African Americans in New York City, 1626-1863 and Slavery and the University: Histories and Legacies.

On August 19 of last year I listened in stunned silence as Nikole Hannah-Jones, a reporter for the New York Times, repeated an idea that I had vigorously argued against with her fact-checker: that the patriots fought the American Revolution in large part to preserve slavery in North America.

Hannah-Jones and I were on Georgia Public Radio to discuss the path-breaking New York Times 1619 Project, a major feature about the impact of slavery on American history, which she had spearheaded. The Times had just published the special 1619 edition of its magazine, which took its name from the year 20 Africans arrived in the colony of Virginia—a group believed to be the first enslaved Africans to arrive in British North America.

Weeks before, I had received an email from a New York Times research editor. Because I’m an historian of African American life and slavery, in New York, specifically, and the pre-Civil War era more generally, she wanted me to verify some statements for the project. At one point, she sent me this assertion: “One critical reason that the colonists declared their independence from Britain was because they wanted to protect the institution of slavery in the colonies, which had produced tremendous wealth. At the time there were growing calls to abolish slavery throughout the British Empire, which would have badly damaged the economies of colonies in both North and South.”

I vigorously disputed the claim. Although slavery was certainly an issue in the American Revolution, the protection of slavery was not one of the main reasons the 13 Colonies went to war.

Despite my advice, the Times published the incorrect statement about the American Revolution anyway, in Hannah-Jones’ introductory essay.

Email sent today to Professor Harris:

Professor Harris,

You wrote in your March, 2020 Politico opinion piece (titled “I Helped Fact-Check the 1619 Project. The Times Ignored Me.”) the following narrative regarding President Abraham Lincoln:

“Abraham Lincoln was unable to use the Constitution as written to end slavery, either during his time in Congress or after his election to the presidency. The argument was settled through the Civil War, and by rewriting the Constitution with the 13th . . . Amendments.”

In my opinion, Professor Harris, that narrative is a bit of underestimation of the role of President Abraham Lincoln in the emancipation of American slaves and the passage of the Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. I do not see any mention of the Emancipation Proclamation in this short passage regarding President Abraham Lincoln.

Hopefully, as a historian, you are aware of the Emancipation Proclamation. Or, perhaps you consider Mr. Lincoln’s role in the American Civil War to be one of those “blindly celebratory histories” that you mention in your text. If so, I disagree.

Yours truly,
David Lockmiller