Literary Synopsis - Washington Irving’s Rip Van Winkle

Published in 1819 by Washington Irving, the story of Rip Van Winkle centers around the character of a Dutch-American living in the mountains of New York prior to the War for Independence. An American short story based on Dutch myth and legends experienced in the Hudson River Valley, novelist Irving created the tale of a villager living in the Catskill Mountains who awoke to an altered reality akin to how colonial New England transformed following the establishment of the early American republic.

Initiating the tale with a description of a quaint Dutch village nestled in the fair Hudson River valley, Irving introduces the character of Rip Van Winkle - a descendant of the Van Winkles famed during the days of Peter Stuyvesant. However, Rip lacked the chivalrous nobility of his ancestors. Instead, he was rather simplistic and good-natured, though henpecked by his wife. Her shrewish temper and tirades were warranted as her husband blamed Dame Van Winkle for his mishaps and would instead play games with village children, preoccupying focus from his patriarchal role due to an "aversion to all kinds of profitable labor." He would rather while hours away flying kites, husking corn, telling tales of ghosts and Indians, assisting neighbors with their chores, and by running errands for the village ladies. He most cherished hunting in the woods with his dog, Wolf, and ignore his troubles by fishing all day. Notably, he found little use in cultivating his deteriorated farm covered in weeds. Suffering from their father's negligence, his children wore rags and seemed to be as wild as the mountains their father so loved. His son took after him and declared that he would replicate his father in speech, dress, and deed - much to his mother's chagrin.

Escaping the tirades of his wife's lashing tongue, Rip would often flee to the village inn to drown his sorrows in gossip and to hear the fanciful stories of the refined schoolmaster, Derrick Van Bummel. Meek and carefree, the lighthearted Winkle submerged himself in lengthy discussions at the inn. However Dame Winkle would often disrupt and reprimand his laziness to the point where Nicholas Vedder, the inn's landlord, refused Rip continued service. Refusing to occupy himself in a meaningful way, Van Winkle would resort to trekking in the mountains with faithful dog and gun in hand.

Upon one of his travels through the Catskills, he reached a high peak in the mountains which enabled him to survey the entire valley. The hunter lay down to admire the beauty of the Hudson river and before long, nighttime fell. Right as he roused himself upwards to return home while regretfully imagining forthcoming beratement, he happened to hear the call of his name in the twilight. Spying a figure traveling up the mountain carrying a heavy keg on his back, Winkle shimmied down to aid the burly individual dressed in antique clothing. Though apprehensive, Rip helped hoist the package up the ravine. They came to a small natural amphitheater surrounded by trees where the duo finally rested the carton of liquor the man had brought to the secluded hollow.

Gazing at the unfamiliar clearing, Rip realized he was surrounded by curious looking people dressed similarly to the strange man carrying the barrel up the mountainside. They resembled figures from old Flemish paintings though not as composed, for in spite of their wordlessness, they played a game of ninepins. Silence reigned save the clack of balls resounding like thunder. Trembling in fear as their eyes fell upon him, the man carrying the keg up the mountain, none other than the ghost of Henry Hudson - the explorer of the Hudson River after which the valley received its named – motioned for Rip to wait as he filled flagons with liquor for the crew of the Half Moon. After downing their portions, the crewmembers returned to their game while Rip, so taken with the drink, sipped more and more until his head swam and he slipped into a dream-like state.

Unable to recall when he nodded off to sleep, Rip awakened the next morning only to find that his gun has disintegrated with rot and rust. Rip assumed that the strange men he had encountered the night before played a trick by dousing him with liquor only to steal his gun. Rising with creaking joints, Rip whistled for his dog but Wolf had departed. Thinking Wolf had chased after a nearby fowl, Rip decided to return to the amphitheater. However, the pass was impaired by a trickling stream that he did not recall. No amount of effort afforded him entry to the clearing now covered by vines and thick vegetation. Exhausted, hungry, and dreading to return to his wife empty-handed, Rip grieved the loss of his dog and gun, and stumbled homeward.

Managing to find his way into town, Van Winkle soon became perplexed by all the unfamiliar faces he spotted along the country road, as he thought we was well-acquainted with most residents. Their strange method of fashion and gaping stares caused him to mimic their expressions and the scratching of their chins. Upon scratching his own, he realized his beard had grown over a foot long.

When he reached the outskirts of the village he found, to his dismay, not the small yellow brick houses that were once constructed after the architectural traditions of Holland, but that the town had grown more populous as there were rows of new houses and storefronts. Many of his favorite locations had disappeared or were replaced by foreign signs and family names. Children laughed at him and dogs bristled. Soon Rip began to wonder if he were in a dream or cast under a spell that had disoriented the native life of the village he knew to be quite different only the day before. Seeing that the landscape remained the same, Rip knew that this village was his own. Acknowledging that his hallucinations were real, Van Winkle, now an old man, realized that these effects must be due to the peculiar flagon from which he had sipped.

Coming upon his home, he found it decayed with the windows shattered and abandoned save the emaciated dog that resembled his faithful Wolf. When Rip called out to the starved animal it growled and moved along, causing Rip to mourn that his own dog had forgotten him. Entering the house, he loudly called for his family yet was met by silence. He raced out towards the inn, expecting to find a semblance of normalcy yet once he arrived, it too no longer existed in its original form.

The village inn had been renovated into a hotel. The sign no longer bared the image of King George but a new portrait of a man in blue bedecked by a cocked hat. This man, identified as “George Washington” by the fresh engraving within the wooden emblem, held a "sword instead of a scepter." Amazement and concern plagued the disoriented man in the bustling center fraught with talk of liberty, elections, war heroes, and the rights of citizens. The bewildered man soon gained the attention of the politically-minded who crowded around him as though he were a curious spectacle. He was asked which partisan affiliation he adhered to, Federal or Democrat, and was jostled about as an old gentleman demanded to know whether he intended to bring a riot into the tavern by wielding his gun. 

In dismay, he attempted to clarify that he was a peaceful subject of the king to which the crowd accused him of being a tory until the elderly man restored order. After inquiring the location of his friends, he was informed that Nicholas Vedder and Brom Dutcher had been long deceased after fighting in the American Revolution while Van Bummel, the school master, was now a member of Congress. Perplexed by news of warfare and these new political terms, Van Winkle cried out if anyone knew a person by his name. Someone indicated to the young, lazy fellow leaning against a tree. Seeing the vision of his aged son, he began to doubt his identity and desperately explained how he fell asleep in the mountains and that everything has changed upon his return. The crowd began to chuckle, thinking that the old man was simply senile, however, an old woman with a child in her arms approached.

He recognized her as his daughter though he saw how considerably aged she had become. He learned through Judith Gardenier, his daughter, how she was now married and accompanied by a child, his grandson, Rip Van Winkle III. She told of how Van Winkle was thought to have gone off into the mountains only to never be heard from again. Most of the villagers assumed he had either shot himself or had been accosted by Indians. Van Winkle confessed that he was her father. Believing him, she related news of her mother’s death and, though Rip was relieved to hear of his nagging wife’s demise, Rip began to comprehend that he had truly been asleep for twenty years though he thought he had only spent one night in the Catskills.

Another old neighbor welcomed him home while Peter Vanderdonk, a historian of Dutch lore and the oldest remaining villager alive, confirmed the identity of Rip Van Winkle and asserted that his tale was credible. The pairs’ aligning details regarding the myth of the ghost of Henry Hudson and his crew pacified the crowd and they soon dispersed. Judith invited Rip to live at her family home and while there, he quickly resumed his old habits. As before, he ignored labor and enjoyed the company of children of whom he gained favor. Irresponsible tendencies continued to plague the elderly man as he had slept through vital years that may have prompted maturity. Despite his lethargic tendencies, his natural charm and inherent kindness had not dissipated, for yet again, the eccentric orator came to be beloved by the villagers whom he entertained with stories of old Dutch colonial life and of his wanderings in the wild.

Image (c) Geoffrey Crayon, 1921.

An Appeal to Heaven – Baptist Isaac Backus' Struggle for Religious Liberty in the Revolutionary Era

Converting to Christianity in 1741 as an effect of the Great Awakening, Isaac Backus became a separatist Baptist Congregationalist and head of the Warren Association of Baptists who championed religious freedom in America. Through the work of his piestic writings and petitions to Congress and State legislatures, the Massachusetts Baptist pastor vied for the separation of church and state in order to ensure and protect individual liberty of consciousness.

An Appeal to the Public for Religious Liberty (1773) poses as one of Backus’ most renowned works that details legal, Biblical, and Enlightenment rationale to support his position which stresses the importance of true liberty, the role of the government, and the differences between civil and ecclesial structures. Backus clearly defines the distinction between each government type, stating that "all acts of executive power in the civil state, are to be performed in the name of the king or state they belong to; while all our religious acts are to be done in the name of the Lord Jesus." He goes onto say that due to the nature of civically elected systems, “putting any men into civil office is of men, of the people of the world; so officers have truly no more authority than the people give them."[1] Justification for the Patriots’ separation from the mother-country fell along these lines, with Colonies abject to Britain’s refusal to acknowledge their rights as Englishmen or fairly represent the interests and concerns of citizens.

Similarly, having endured decades of religious persecution due to the arrangement of state-sponsored churches, Backus and other religious dissenters saw hypocrisy in how Revolutionaries decried civil subjugation while spiritually subjugating their fellow compatriots who theologically differed from the traditional Congregational and Anglican Church structure which dominated Colonial religious life.

Backus’ Appeal to the Public illustrates that “while his thoughts were similar to John Locke, he maintained a distinctly pietistic interpretation of man's natural obedience to God. [The two ordained systems of government held] purposes and natures [which] were distinctly different and should never be linked together.”[2] He relied upon Biblical narratives and the sovereign examples of David and Solomon to reveal that God erected covenants with nations and that the creation of laws ensured the protection of liberty. However, Backus appealed to notions of God’s ordained order, the distinctive nature of man’s depravity, and how though the Revolutionary Era’s mindset adhered to the idea that civil liberty ought not to be denied, he proposed that religious liberty shared the same fundamental importance.

Patriotic cries against a neglectful sovereign were validated however, when the “same cry was raised by Backus and the Baptists in protest against religious taxes imposed by civil government, it was perceived as an unnecessarily divisive ploy by fanatical rabble-rousers.”[3] Due to their association with other groups desiring religious freedom, such as pacifistic Quakers, Baptists were viewed as non-patriotic and their petitions, letters, and public addressment of religious concerns were largely ignored. However, Backus managed to utilize the “rhetorical strategies of the more elite New England revolutionaries in support of the minority opinion that their right of conscience, like the patriots' rights with Great Britain, had been unjustly denied.”[4] Through the War for Independence, Backus preached to the Continental Army, met with Congressional members, and traveled about the colonies sermonizing the importance of religious autonomy. He consistently readdressed the Baptist “position in relation to the colonial bid for freedom emphasizing that religious taxation without representation was just as unjust as civil taxation without representation.”[5]

Historian Thomas Kidd eloquently specifies how the “evangelical tradition supplied spiritual propulsion to the Patriot cause that was unsurpassed by any other element of Patriot ideology"[6] Though differing doctrinally, these “individuals of such varied theological strands [agreed] that religion had political implications.” Communal convictions and adherence to republicanism strengthened both the religious and irreligious alike as a core principle acknowledged was that the “disestablishment of state churches was the best means to promote religious tolerance and freedom of conscience. Following the war, evangelicals and rationalists often joined politically in agreement on the public role of religion and that the government had no business legislating religion.”[7] Dissenters amicably account that the “war in Virginia was not only a war against British rule but also a war against religious establishment. Religious liberty was not the result of republicanization, but republicanization was the result of the concerted efforts by dissenters to gain religious freedom from the establishment in exchange for mobilization against the British.”[8] Furthermore, the advance of religious liberty in America is revealed to be “not inevitable, nor was it the natural outcome of the American victory in the Revolution. It had to be won, not from Britain per se, but from the established church which was at war with the British. Thus, religious liberty was won through petitions and negotiations more than on the battlefields of the Revolution.”[9] Despite theological disputes, Backus supported the Revolution, and by relying on Biblical and civil arguments vindicating the rights of man, he became known as the “most forceful and effective writer America produced on behalf of the pietistic or evangelical theory of separation of church and state."[10]

Ultimately, political change ushered in a reconfiguration of state and church structure in America. As new state constitutions were designed and adopted, a more inclusive awareness emerged towards dissenters as sects, such as the Baptists, were gradually accepted into the fold of mainstream Protestantism. The voluntary service of dissenters during the Revolution additionally aided their plight, as the conscientious objectors to imposed theocracy had proven themselves loyal to the new republic through blood and Christian fervor. The hold of Anglican and Congregational churches slowly began to weaken, yet it was not until the mid-19^th century that the final ties between church and state were officially severed.[11]

---

[1] Isaac Backus, “An Appeal to the Public for Religious Liberty,” 1973.

[2] Sewell Jr. and Edward H. “Isaac Backus’ Plea for Religious Freedom, 1770-1776.” Today's Speech 23, no. 2 (1975): 39-47.

[3] Ibid., 45-6.

[4] Ibid,.

[5] Sewell Jr. and Edward H. “Isaac Backus’ Plea for Religious Freedom,” 44.

[6] Thomas S. Kidd, God of Liberty: A Religious History of the American Revolution (2010): 94.

[7] Matthew Hill, “God of Liberty: A Religious History of the American Revolution.” Fides Et Historia 43, no. 1 (2011): 93-4.

[8] John A. Ragosta, Wellspring of Liberty: How Virginia’s Religious Dissenters Helped Win the American Revolution and Secured Religious Liberty, 2010.

[9] John D. Wilsey, “Wellspring of Liberty: How Virginia’s Religious Dissenters Helped Win the American Revolution and Secured Religious Liberty.” Fides Et Historia 45, no. 1 (2013): 156-7.

[10] William G. McLoughlin, “Isaac Backus on Church, State, and Calvinism: Pamphlets, 1754-1789,” (1968): 1.

[11] Sewell Jr. and Edward H. “Isaac Backus’ Plea for Religious Freedom,” 45.

Image - Isaac Backus, Government and Liberty Described and Ecclesiastical Tyranny Exposed, 1788.

Visiting Monticello

Monticello, Jefferson’s “little mount” is a national historic landmark upheld by the Thomas Jefferson Foundation which runs the house as a museum and interactive estate. Inheriting land from his father, Jefferson began construction at twenty six and eventually accomplished the plantation in 1772 upon which he cultivated tobacco and wheat. After acquiring modern architectural ideals from his time spent in Europe after the death of his wife, Martha Skelton, Jefferson decided to renovate his homestead into a neoclassical structure. Throughout his presidency, from 1809 until his death in 1826, he continued to remodel-a process which was adapted by the Thomas Jefferson Foundation. The private non-profit organization purchased the property in 1923 and currently operates Monticello as a museum and educational institution.

I drove through thick Virginian wood until I reached the site prized atop a secluded buff in Charlottesville, Virginia. The villa overlooks the surrounding landscape and a grand visitors’ center that rests at the base of Monticello. Decorated by a naturalistic layout, the epicenter contains a ticket office, fountain, picnic tables, and a store that guests can browse while waiting to load onto a bus which carries tourists to the guided tour area. Once divided into a group, I was escorted about the premises by a tour guide. We approached the house along a gravely road and eventually I vaulted the steps of Monticello herself. Beginning at the Entrance Hall, the tour then proceeded to the study, library, private bedrooms, and parlor. Once the tour concluded on the balcony, visitors were allowed to roam freely.

Highly interested in horticulture, botany and agriculture, Jefferson entertained a lifelong pursuit of beautifying his grounds, establishing and nurturing an impressive flower and vegetable garden and vineyard. Fortunately the Garden Club of Virginia managed to reconstruct Jefferson’s garden to its current state, providing the public with a greenhouse blooming with over one hundred and five different species. I took advantage of this opportunity to explore the gardens, Jefferson’s prized orchard, and slave quarters along Mulberry Road before paying my respects at the family graveyard.

One of the most intriguing aspects of the statesman’s home was the welcome in which Thomas greeted his many visitors. Stunning his guests with revolutionary architecture and a personal reception, Jefferson also desired to impart his guests with a sliver of knowledge, an appreciation for culture and a portion of America’s rich history. He impressively furnished the Entrance Hall with maps, fossils, antlers, hides and various artifacts which Lewis and Clark had collected along their expedition, a mission personally sponsored by the Third President.

Serving as a museum and conversation piece, the Entrance Hall is filled with natural relics, Native American finery and artistic pieces that were meant to entertain and educate Jefferson's house guests. A humorous finding within this scene is that of a bust of Alexander Hamilton, his political opponent, fixed to eternally gaze across at the stony replica of Jefferson. A rather amusing detail is that Jefferson crafted his own likeness slightly larger than the Federalist. My tour guide explained that the two adversaries were intended to be “opposed in death” as they were in life; serving as a motivational challenge for Jefferson whenever he passed his threshold.

However, my favorite portions of Jefferson’s house were the parlor and the “Madison” room. Honorably, the Jefferson family referred to the west wing of the house as the Madison room for James and Dolly frequently visited and would often enjoy months of their dear friend’s company. On the other hand, the parlor featured as a living room specifically intended for discussion and entertainment. Jefferson is famously known as a violinist while many of his family members were also talented musicians who enjoyed hours of conversation, dancing and chess. The family would typically gather in the evenings to read. Virginia Randolph, Jefferson’s granddaughter, later recalled that sometimes while she was reading she would see him “raise his eyes from his own book, and look round on the little circle of readers and smile.” Reading would prove to be one of Jefferson’s greatest joys and in order to accommodate his company; Thomas installed a variety of chairs and sofas about Monticello, such as the campeachy chair.

Known as “siesta” chairs, Jefferson was often seen reclining in one with a book. Encouraged to try out the comfortable chair, I kindly took up the offer. I highly recommend its luxurious charm but inwardly cringed at the price of another campeachy I found in the store. I moved on from the chair and soon became fascinated by the numerous innovations Jefferson crafted which were showcased about the parlor. Jefferson is credited for designing a revolving closet, a dumbwaiter system based on the French dinning style, a weighted clock and even a dual pen which aided his many annotations.

Besides hosting notable figures that inspired Jefferson’s personal ideology, Jefferson also decorated the parlor and many of his private studies with busts of his close companions including Benjamin Franklin, James Madison, George Washington and even the distant Marquis de Lafayette. As I highly regard the French general, I was delighted to discover that his likeness was scattered about Monticello. Perhaps inspired during his tenure as Minister to France, Jefferson borrowed heavily from the French. Utilizing their sliding doors, modernized color schemes and artistic patterns, Jefferson designed his beloved home in an unconventional method unfamiliar to Colonial America.

Monticello remains an internationally acclaimed portion of world heritage, the only American house to be protected by the United Nation’s as an invaluable treasure and resource. Fun and interactive, the Monticello website is well organized with professional and engaging graphics and a surplus of links that are categorized according to Jefferson’s personal life, the architecture and the overall layout of his home. The website is user friendly and makes observing different portions of the site accessible while offering educational field trips, behind the scenes tours and holiday packages.

Additionally, the site features an elaborate greeting center and shop which contains authentic recipes, cheeses, wines, candles and books relating to the 18^th century as well as tourist merchandise. The tour was an appropriate length and set at an affordable price although I wish one was allowed to study the rooms to a greater extent during or after the tour. In addition to receiving funding from private sponsors, the horde of annual tourists provides an ample income to regulate and improve the grounds for public history. Overall, this historic site is properly managed and maintained by the Thomas Jefferson Foundation which has successfully operated Monticello and intends to preserve the legacy of Thomas Jefferson for generations.

Suggested Reading:

Hatch, Peter J. “A Rich Spot of Earth”, Thomas Jefferson’s Revolutionary Garden at Monticello. Monticello.org.

Fleming, Thomas. "The Jew Who Helped Save Monticello", The Jewish Digest, February 1974: 43–49.

"Monticello (Thomas Jefferson House)". National Historic Landmark summary listing. National Park Service. Retrieved 2014.

A Day in the Life of Thomas Jefferson: “Entrance Hall - Design and Decor". Monticello.org.