Skip to comments.Thomas Jefferson Used ‘Subjects’ Instead of ‘Citizens’ in Early Declaration of Independence
Posted on 07/02/2010 10:08:50 AM PDT by Daffynition
WASHINGTON - Library of Congress officials say Thomas Jefferson made a Freudian slip while penning a rough draft of the Declaration of Independence.
In an early draft of the document, which is kept under lock and key in one of the Library's vaults, Jefferson referred to the American population as "subjects," then replaced it with the word "citizens," a term he used frequently throughout the final draft.
(Excerpt) Read more at myfoxdc.com ...
A series of images showing the word "citizens" analyzed under various wavelengths, with certain images enhanced by computer to make the underlying word "subjects" more apparent. (Image Credit: loc.gov)
Citizen appears ONE time in the final version.
“He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.”
Further, at the time of the drafting of the declaration, we WERE subjects of the King of England - so no freudian slip at all!
Typical New Age baloney to lessen a PERFECT document!
Interesting. I once heard that there was a little-known copy of the Constitution with the word “suckers” in it. Never could pin that one down, though.
I wonder if you could make a Freudian slip before there was a Freud.
I don’t think that meets the definition anyway. Whenever I write something I always find myself coming up with words that don’t quite mean what I wanted to say and then think of the right word in a later draft.
The word “suckers” appears in the penumbra of the Constitution. It’s right there next to the abortion section.
It’s in C. Montgomery Burns’ basement.
The Declaration ushered in a new era... even for Jefferson. As he penned it, they were subject to the Crown. The point of the document what to sever that connection. It wasn’t freudian... it was reality until he realized that their new reality of equality of all men also meant they were subject to no one. Simple edit... profound change.
You nailed it ;-)
And so we will again.
Apparently, it was written in disappearing ink. You need lemon juice and a hair dryer to read it.
At the time that Jefferson wrote it they were all still “subjects” of Great Britain on the verge of becoming “citizens” of a new nation....
No no no, that won't do now at all! How can we possibly imply that Jefferson regarded his fellow citizens as subjects if we allow such claims to stand? His "original intent" was that we are subjects and he disingenuously changed that to citizen to hid his real intent! Darn Old Dead White Man Slave Holder .....
As an old man Jefferson wrote to Adams that one of the few pleasures he had in growing old was seeing scientific progress. As a scientist Jefferson would have been extremely impressed to see his mistake discovered hundreds of years later.
Don't let Obama and Pelosi find out.
So what.... they were subjects, they then became citizens.
Sadly, today we are citizens, and if Obama and the democrats have their way, we will become subjects.
Just as surely as God made little green apples.
I take a completely different perspective on this. As this probably was the 1st draft, the subjects were writing their grievances to the King. But how can subjects who derived their rights from the King, not from God as inherent rights, justify such a course of action? With the smudging, which no doubt took place immediately because of the lightness of the wording underneath & the croosing off in all other places, it would be a more reasonable conclusion that Jefferson realized this grave error rather quickly & corrected it. We have to keep in mind that although the Brit Parliament came in & forced themselves on the colonist, from the beginning, the colonies were always considered separate from that of the Brit Parliament as they were afforded no representation in it. The owed loyalty to the crown, but not Parliaments laws. Each colony had its separate constitution well before the revolution & the laws differed in each state as did the whole of the citizenry of each colony (the ancestry of each colony established, i.e. Holland, Sweden, France, England etc). IOW, not all the colonies(less than half) were of British origin and thus their laws were derived from a completely different ancestry. To get a real grasp of the make up of the colonies, prior to and after the very short rule of the English Parliament (separate from the crown), you need to read ALL the appendixes to St George Tucker's Blackstone. Balckstone's Commentaries are NOT a place to look for original intent of the framers says St George Tucker.
That neither the common law of England, nor the statutes of that kingdom, were, at any period antecedent to the revolution, the general and uniform law of the land in the British colonies, now constituting the United States.
“John Jay & Washington both were taught in French in grammar school as well as most of the framers that grew up in America. But especially Jay whos heritage is Dutch and whos ancestry can be traced back to those 1st Dutch settlements (New Netherlands). It is no coincidence that so much attention was given to the United Netherlands in the Federalist Papers because it was from that heritage that many of the framers had their ancestry in.”
It was on this date in 1776 that Congress voted for independence, and John Adams thought that the second day of July would be celebrated as a holiday with bonfires, fireworks, etc. Instead, of course, the date that the declaration was adopted became Independence Day.
there is a reason it’s called a DRAFT.
Wow...that’s deep...I was just speculating.
So, he changed the subjects?
People in Europe, even in those countries which have no royal heads of state, still behave like "subjects" instead of "citizens". Our revolution was based on a profound reordering of some very ancient ideas. God - the People - the Government versus God (although He has been largely removed from the equation in modern Europe) - the Government - the People.
Obama, Reid, Nancy Pelosi and their ilk may act like our overlords but only in violation of this fundamental concept and only so long as we permit the charade.
This is not news. How can LOC get this wrong? Taking credit for someone else’s work. What?
Check out footnote #10
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.