The Great Contradiction: The Tragic Side of the American Founding

by Joseph J. Ellis

A major new history from our most trusted voice on the Revolutionary era, the author of the Pulitzer Prize–winning Founding Brothers and the National Book Award winner American Sphinx, and featured in THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION, a film by Ken Burns, Sarah Botstein, and David Schmidt, on PBS.

An astounding look at how America’s founders—Washington, Jefferson, Franklin, Madison, Adams—regarded the issue of slavery as they drafted the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. A daring and important work that ultimately reckons with the two great failures of America’s the failure to end slavery and the failure to avoid Indian removal.

On the eve of the American Revolution, half a million enslaved African Americans were embedded in the North American population. The slave trade was flourishing, even as the thirteen colonies armed themselves to defend against the idea of being governed without consent. This paradox gave birth to what one of our most admired historians, Joseph J. Ellis, calls the “great contradiction”: How could a government that had been justified and founded on the principles articulated in the Declaration of Independence institutionalize slavery? How could it permit a tidal wave of western migration by settlers who understood the phrase “pursuit of happiness” to mean the pursuit of Indian lands?

With narrative grace and a flair for irony and paradox, Ellis addresses the questions that lie at America’s twisted roots—questions that turned even the sharpest minds of the Revolutionary generation into mental contortionists. He discusses the first debates around slavery and the treatment of Native Americans, from the Constitutional Convention to the Treaty of New York, revealing the thinking and rationalizations behind Jay, Hamilton, and Madison’s revisions of the Articles of Confederation, and highlights the key role of figures like Quaker abolitionist Anthony Benezet and Creek chief Alexander McGillivray.

Ellis writes with candor and deftness, his clarion voice rising above presentist historians and partisans who are eager to make the founders into trophies in the ongoing culture wars. Instead, Ellis tells a story that is rooted in the coexistence of grandeur and failure, brilliance and blindness, grace and sin.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, American History, Politics, American Revolution, Social Justice, Race

287 pages, Kindle Edition

First published October 28, 2025

About the author

Joseph John-Michael Ellis III is an American historian whose work focuses on the lives and times of the Founding Fathers of the United States. His book American Sphinx: The Character of Thomas Jefferson won a National Book Award in 1997 and Founding Brothers: The Revolutionary Generation won the 2001 Pulitzer Prize for History. Both of these books were bestsellers.

Reviews

[Tracey · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a well-written, entertaining, informative non-fiction book. It explores the conflict of the founding fathers' pursuit of liberty while supporting slavery and the relocation of the Native American people from their lands in a clear and concise manner. The opinions of George Washington, Henry Knox, and Philip Schuyler on the topic of the Native American situation were fascinating. Ms. Kimberly Farr does an outstanding job narrating the audiobook.

[Erin · Rating 4 out of 5]

4.5 Stars!

"Western civilization lacked a conscience."

"We are beginning to forget that the patriots of former days were men like ourselves."

The Great Contradiction, to which this book speaks is the original sin of The United States: the failure to end slavery and the failure to avoid Indian removal. I agree on both counts. You can't talk all this shit about "Freedom" while enslaving Black people and committing genocide against Native Americans. I mean not only did the founders do nothing to abolish slavery they actually endorsed it by passing the original Fugitive Slave Act. So even the founders who were against slavery morally, were perfectly ok with slavery in practice.

"Within the Virginia political universe, the most self-evident truth of all was white supremacy."

This is a short and very easy to read book about the founding of the United States. You don't need to be a History buff to enjoy this book.

"Next to the failure to end slavery, or at least put it on the road to extinction, the inability to reach a just accommodation with Native Americans was the greatest failure of the revolutionary generation."

[Clif Hostetler · Rating 3 out of 5]

Joseph Ellis has written a number of books about the American founding fathers. For this book he has gone through his notes one more time and prepared this book's narrative focusing on the contradiction between slavery and displacement of Indians with the spirit of liberty and equality that justified their formation of a new republic.

Most people at the time identified as citizens of their State first, and identification as part of a United States came second. A majority of the population at that time were satisfied with the government operating under the Articles of Confederation, and it was a small group of elites that felt it needed to be improved. Thus getting it changed required some skilled manipulations. Ellis refers to it as a coup d'état.

Ultimately the southern states valued slavery more than unity, and they were willing to vote no on any unity plan if slavery was threatened. The northern states were not willing to do the same with their antislavery position. The solution was to avoid discussion of slavery to the extent possible.

It was interesting how the newly prepared constitution was interpreted differently between northern and southern states. Many in the north felt that it provided for a strong central government that would have sufficient power to end slavery sometime in the future. Proslavery leaders in the south felt that the Constitution protected their interests. It was good that they both felt that way they did, because otherwise the Constitution would have never been adopted.

The book includes a chapter on negotiations between the early government and native Americans. One thing the new Constitution provided for was that the Federal Government was the entity that made treaties with the Indians. It's obvious from the following language in the Northwest Ordinance of 1787 by the Confederation Congress that their early intent was to treat native Americans with respect.

“... the utmost good faith shall always be observed towards Indians; their land and property shall never be taken from them without their consent.”

The book describes the negotiations between the new Federal government and the Creek Nation (1790 Treaty of New York). The book says that George Washington felt his honor was besmirched by the later invasion of new settlers into the Creek territory in violation of the treaty. The Federal government was powerless to keep settlers out of Indian country.

The book ends with a chapter discussing the fate of Washington's and Jefferson's slaves. Both their estates were heavily in debt and slaves were their most valuable asset. Washington was still able to free his slave after his death through his will, but creditors forced the sale of Jefferson's slaves.

Below are some quotations from the book with my introductory comments.

Slavery which is so obviously evil to us today was not so obviously evil prior to the eighteenth century. It's interesting to note that among all the great philosophers and thinkers of the ancient Greeks and Romans, there was not a single abolitionist. The following excerpt from this book expands on that observation.

For more than four centuries the most important voices of Western civilization remained mute as a highly organized program of unspeakable barbarity with genocidal implications flourished throughout Europe. Plato, Socrates, Aristotle, Aquinas, Erasmus, Locke, and all the Catholic popes regarded slavery and the slave trade as acceptable features of European society. Western civilization lacked a conscience.

The following quote from the book is a reminder that African Americans have deeper roots in American than most whites.

Since a majority of the white population in the United States arrived in the 19th and early 20th centuries, African Americans as a group can trace their origins as Americans further back in time than a majority of whites.

The slave trade was financially the most lucrative business available to traders of that era which explains their moral blindness.

Moral blindness made eminent economic sense.

[Jessica - How Jessica Reads · Rating 4 out of 5]

Short, insightful, and pulls no punches.

p 5 "Moral blindness made eminent economic sense"

p 135 “Next to the failure to end slavery, or at least put it on the road to extinction, the inability to reach a just accommodation with the Native Americans was the greatest failure of the revolutionary generation.”

Full review coming soon for Shelf Awareness.

[Doug · Rating 5 out of 5]

Remarkably truthful. Amazing insight in relatively few pages. Ellis is an American treasure. The shadow of the Great Contradiction continues to hang over the United States. Understanding our history in its entirety is a necessary step toward healing.

[David Santistevan · Rating 5 out of 5]

I loved this book. History books that are under 200 pages are a refreshing companion to longer, denser historical records. I felt this book portrayed the founding fathers well: principled and brilliant white men who lived with contradictions as it related to African Americans and Native people. Ultimately, different decisions could have been made but they were deferred to future generations. Facing history in its atrocity and reality is a necessary step in becoming the nation we are capable of.

[Ryan · Rating 4 out of 5]

Although Ellis covers no real new ground here, he brings forward ideas from previous works that shine a harsher light on two ideas: 1, How the Founders accepted slavery to achieve and maintain a union between the end of the Revolution and the adoption of the U.S. Constitution, and 2, initial attempts to share land with Native Americans.

The book itself focuses far more on the former topic, though its chapter on the Treaty of New York is a fascinating look at how Washington et al. attempted to demonstrate the strengths of a newfound nation’s ideal as a republic and as a diplomatic force with the sovereign Creek Nation.

Regarding slavery, the book concludes with brief examinations of how Washington and Jefferson considered their legacies — or, perhaps more properly, how history would remember them. Both men, both architects and leaders of The Cause, were of the Virginia planter class — and Jefferson, at least, would live to see how Old Dominion would lose its stature due to the very reason it was able to establish itself in early America.

Washington, Jefferson and several other Virginians — including Madison and Monroe — died in debt; they were presidents who would live on in the history books, beneficiaries of an abhorrent practice they claimed to detest though didn’t always seem (if at all) to grasp the contradiction of their reluctance to end slavery.

Ellis, as always, puts the reader in the time and setting of his subject; however, in “The Great Contradiction,” the 82-year-old author adopts a looser dual standard approach. Here, he seeks understanding for the actions, within their context, while still holding them accountable for their inexplicable behavior. (Or, at least he did so more than he has in his previous books.)

The answer, as he has returned to time and again over the course of his bibliography, is we simply wouldn’t have an America to write about had it not been for the exact course our leaders have taken — and, ever-curious, he joins the reader in finding out why.

[Lindsay Giunta · Rating 4 out of 5]

I liked a lot of this book. I thought it was interesting and well written. It was easy to understand and I really did learn a lot as an APUSH teacher that I can use in future lessons. I will say that I think the author needed to talk more about Jefferson having children with an enslaved woman and the implications of that. There's a whole chapter at the end of the book dedicated to Jefferson and his contradictory views on slavery, and there is the smallest mention of him having biracial, enslaved children and no mention of Sally Hemmings. I also think that if the author was going to tackle Native American treatment in this book, he needed to make it longer and include more about it. Overall though it was an interesting read and I did learn a lot.

[lola]

"It dawned on me, gradually, that for the same reason that religions require divinely inspired prophets, emerging nations seem to require mythological heroes. Think Odysseus for Greece, Romulus and Remus for Rome, King Arthur for England." set me off in so many different ways that i'm just cutting my losses on this one. you're telling me that you, a historian specializing in the founding of the united states, do not even know the definition of a nation? can't even get started on the king arthur thing but please know that i'm weeping blood.

[Paul Womack · Rating 5 out of 5]

Accessible history of the thought and thinking of founding fathers over issues of enslavement and the treatment of native American persons.

[Allison · Rating 5 out of 5]

4.5 stars rounded up to a 5. Ellis's writing is engaging and accessible (as always), and this short book doesn't mince words about the founding generation's failures with respect to slavery and Native American policy. Particularly important book in 2025 and on the heels of the 250th.

[Will · Rating 4 out of 5]

“Looking forward, one could safely predict that prominent leaders in Virginia would wrap themselves in the Confederate flag, embrace the myth of the “Lost Cause,” vehemently oppose the civil rights movement, and derive their sense of significance by standing proudly on the wrong side of American history.”

[Bruce Katz · Rating 3 out of 5]

RTC

[Bookreporter.com Biography & Memoir · Rating 4 out of 5]

Joseph J. Ellis --- winner of the Pulitzer Prize for History for FOUNDING BROTHERS: The Revolutionary Generation and the National Book Award for AMERICAN SPHINX: The Character of Thomas Jefferson --- has long been regarded as one of the foremost contemporary scholars of the Revolutionary Era.

In THE GREAT CONTRADICTION: The Tragic Side of the American Founding, Ellis examines “two legacies of the founding era that must be noticed, and both qualify as enormous tragedies.” Those legacies --- the utter failure to end slavery “or, more realistically, put it on the road to extinction,” and the unsuccessful attempt to protect the territorial rights of the fledgling nation’s Native American population --- have haunted the country throughout its history.

From the outset, Ellis acknowledges the gulf that separates the Declaration of Independence’s soaring rhetoric of equality from the political realities confronting the founders as they strove first to unite to win a war against the powerful British Empire, and then to navigate the by-no-means assured transition from a loose affiliation of states jealous of their identities and prerogatives to a unified nation.

Beginning with the debates of the Continental Congress, Ellis recognizes that when it came to the slave trade and slavery, “moral considerations had no role to play in the deliberations.” He argues that in severing the colonies’ ties with the British Empire, unlike historic revolutionaries like Robespierre, Lenin and Mao, “the leaders of the American resistance were not utopian visionaries, but, rather, an assemblage of pragmatic statesmen accustomed to negotiating the space between ideals and realities in their respective colonial governments.” For them, at all times, “there was a clear consensus that slavery was a taboo topic with the explosive potential to blow up any pretense of political unity.”

In this concise but well-sourced and lucid account, Ellis explains how once the war had been won (with the aid of at least 5,000 Black soldiers, though some 10,000 to 12,000 fought on the British side), that perspective carried over into the debates surrounding the drafting and ratification of the United States Constitution. In his view, the vision of a national government advanced by men like Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and John Jay was nothing less than a “coup d’etat,” but one doomed to failure if abolitionists had pressed their arguments to their ultimate conclusion. In detailing the four sectional compromises over slavery that were part of this process, he argues that pragmatism ultimately triumphed over principle, as it became clear that any effort to abolish the slave trade, let alone emancipate the nearly 700,000 slaves living in America by 1790, doomed the federal project to failure.

Ellis devotes considerably less attention to the story of the failed attempt to put policy toward Native Americans on a more humane path. Most of his discussion concerns the efforts of George Washington and his Secretary of War, Henry Knox, to negotiate the pact formalized as the Treaty of New York in August 1790 with the colorful and controversial chief of the Creek Nation, Alexander McGillivray. “They inherited an Indian policy headed inexorably toward the extermination of Indian Country east of the Mississippi,” Ellis writes in describing the challenge facing Washington and Knox, “and they attempted to turn it around.”

The treaty, signed amid a celebratory atmosphere, was intended to protect the Creeks and allied tribes in the face of rapid settlement of their homelands. But as Ellis explains, the good intentions it embodied were swamped by the demographic realities of an expanding white American population and a shrinking Native American one. “No political effort to contain or control this explosion stood much chance of success,” he argues. And by the time of Andrew Jackson’s presidency and the passage of the Indian Removal Act of 1830, a policy antithetical to the one pursued by Washington and Knox had long held sway.

THE GREAT CONTRADICTION concludes with brief portraits of George Washington and Thomas Jefferson in their final years, contrasting Washington’s decision to free his Mount Vernon slaves in his will with Jefferson’s refusal to do so based on his judgment that emancipation without repatriation of America’s slave population was impossible. In different but related ways, the actions of both men epitomize the tragedy of this era of American history.

In a work that is both clear-eyed and sympathetic, Ellis --- who describes his efforts during the past four decades as “dedicated to rescuing the founders from the electromagnetic field we have constructed around them, asserting that “the mythology surrounding the founding generation was a fog bank that needed to be blown away” --- thoughtfully fulfills his mission. In doing so, he enables us to see, and perhaps identify with, America's founders in their full humanity. Despite all their undeniable achievements, the legacies of these leaders must be weighed against their inability to rise above their circumstances and do what they knew to be right.

Reviewed by Harvey Freedenberg

[Rich Drao · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a review of "The Great Contradiction" The tragic side of the American founding by Joseph j Ellis. I have read this book and have some things that I would like you to know about this author and this narrative. Joseph j Ellis is a proven and award winning top nationally acclaimed author and historian. He is a Known intellectual, concerning research and an accurate telling of whatever subject he might be discussing. You will find that all of his statements, all of the information you have never heard is documented in the back of the book under notes and abbreviations.
I have read all of his printed works and have the utmost respect for the honest way he delivers any subject. He is truthful, honest and his directness of the subject is enlightening and unusual. These are just a few of the gifts this author and historian brings to the written page.

This book is the most to the point complete narrative to the buildup to the revolution for independence that I have ever read. He offers you the real result of that struggle. Mr Ellis gives us the reasons with a deep insight as to what led up to war. I say the reasons will surprise you. I'm a 65-year-old American who has attended two colleges and studied as an amateur historian. Mr Ellis has offered truth between the lines ,truth of history that we were never taught. The extreme aversion to harmonious collaboration with the black race is centuries old ignorance. This book is totally enlightening in the real thoughts and results of our struggle for independence. You will be shocked to learn ,we were governed by mob rule. The individual states and the people within the states made the rules. Folks did as they pleased for years. No federal government as we know it is in sight. Not for years to come. The founding fathers generation were a mass of contradictions. Mr Ellis explains the slavery issue was always on the table, to be abolished. Our founding fathers or the founding generation, knew that it was repugnant and a violation to man; they did address it over and over again only to table it from fear. There were many reasons most were financial and some were the inability to deal with an integrated community and a white race that might become diluted with The blood of their slaves. This was almost 100 years before the civil war.

Mr Ellis explains the Native American plight ,which was basically lies, treaties that were broken mainly by the people settling in their territory. The murders that you read about were mainly committed by mob rule, again the US government is not yet set up. Note, we're dealing with the years in the 1790s. It's really a surprise to me to find out how long it took to set up a functioning federal government. You will learn what I call the truth in our historic paperwork, documents and the attitude of the founders. After reading this you can really understand why the country is set up as it is. One could predict some of the future if you were standing in 1793 and looking at the information I just read. Actually some did but it did no good.

This is a book that will enlighten you it will fill in all the gaps you've never learned that you didn't know existed. Mr Ellis tells our story as blunt and truthful as you have never heard. I truly enjoyed learning the truth of our founding some of the subjects are quite upsetting, but so is some of our history. Hopefully we can learn from these filled in voids of information.
Was equality ever really on the table? Read the" Great Contradiction"by Joseph j Ellis okay and find out.

[William Fuller · Rating 4 out of 5]

I read The Great Contradiction: The Tragic Side of the American Founding on the heels of Joseph Ellis' Revolutionary Summer and found that the two books—both slim volumes averaging just over 200 pages of text each—complement each other quite smoothly and, taken together, are equally effective in abolishing many of the national myths that we learned from childhood on up and in replacing them with much more realistic, actual history. Having now used a word that will undoubtedly turn potential readers away from both books, I must hasten to stress that this is readable—I'm tempted to say entertaining—history that is a far cry from that boring history book we had to wade through in our public school days.

In The Great Contradiction, Ellis addresses three principal topics very clearly: the machinations, deals, trade-offs and heavy politicking that produced an intentionally ambiguous document that the U.S. calls its Constitution; the abject failure of the so-called “Founders” to abolish slavery when they may have had the opportunity, as well as their valiant but equally failed attempt to safeguard the rights of the previous inhabitants of the land, the American “Indians”; and how the personalities of several primary actors--Adams, Washington, Franklin, Jefferson, Hamilton, Monroe, etc.—shaped the future of the confederation of states during their infancy.

Readers certainly emerge from a reading of The Great Contradiction with a clear (and probably new) understanding of the two-and-a-half-century old conflict between Federalists and “states righters.” Those of us who thought that was a 20th and 21st century disagreement have been mistaken. It's been a point of contention since before the States were ever United.

Now, if one absolutely insists on stark, objective facts and believes that nuances and implications have no place in a book dealing with historical matters, such a reader may well levy a string of criticisms against Ellis in his handling of the “Great Contradiction” in the nation's founding. Of all his books, this one may be the most forthright in expressing the author's beliefs and opinions as well as his approvals and disapprovals. In the case of Joseph J. Ellis, I do not find this objectionable because he is a noted expert in his field of American history, and, along with Nathaniel Philbrick, he is among the most knowledgeable authors in that field that I have read. I trust his opinions and conclusions to be based on meticulous study and am perfectly satisfied that he should express them in his analyses of events, their causes, and their effects.

Readers will, I believe, find The Great Contradiction to be a quick yet intriguing read that will not only hold their interest throughout but will also imbue them with a greater and more accurate understanding of the fraught and ambiguous environment in which the States would become more or less united as an actual nation rather than the loose confederation in which they found themselves once the treaty of 1783 formally ended the Revolution. The book is assuredly worth the reader's time, attention, and enjoyment.

[Kyle Beacom · Rating 5 out of 5]

This was a gift from my wife for Christmas, and I greatly appreciate it because I consider Joseph Ellis to be the best modern voice on the Founding Era / Founding Fathers and because I learned several new specific facts about that time period.

In this brief book Ellis argues that the Founders made two grievous errors and both were contradictory to the ideas that the drove the Revolution: (1) They did not create a path, gradual or immediate, for the abolition of slavery. (2) They failed to create a workable plan for protecting tribal lands of American Indians and likewise a workable plan for incorporating Indians into the United States as residents and/or citizens. More particularly, Ellis looks at how both Thomas Jefferson and George Washington wrestle with these two issues both mentally and politically.

Some interesting tidbits:

Between 1550 and 1860, European vessels embarked with 12.5 million African captives and landed 10.7 million in the New World. This means, 1.8 million died during the Middle Passage, a staggering number! Of the survivors, only 400,000 (4%) went to North America. Most went to South America and the Caribbean.

George Whitefield and other Great Awakening preachers typically promoted abolition and/or equality. Whitefield wrote, "Do you think you are any better by Nature than the poor Negroes? No, in no wise. Blacks are just as much, and no more, conceived and born in sin, as White men are."

Abraham Lincoln wrote this about Jefferson and his Declaration of Independence: "All honor to Jefferson, to the man who, in the concrete pressure of a struggle for national independence by a single people, had the coolness, forecast, and capacity to introduce into a merely revolutionary document, an abstract truth, applicable to all men and all times, and so to embalm it there, that today, and in all coming days, it shall be a rebuke and a stumbling block to the very harbingers of re-applying tyranny and oppression."

At the end of the Revolutionary War, it is estimated that 10% of the Continental Army was Black soldiers.

34 of the 55 Constitutional Convention delegates were slave owners. George Washington was aided by his man servant, Billy Lee, throughout the entirety of the proceedings.

Due to the Three-Fifths Compromise in the Constitution, Jefferson was referred to as "the Negro President" after his narrow victory in the election of 1800.

Calvin Coolidge was distantly related to Jefferson. Jefferson had a granddaughter who married and moved to Boston. Her name was Ellen Randolph Coolidge.

Jefferson, Madison, and Monroe all died bankrupt even though they owned substantial plantations and large numbers of slaves.

Lastly, during his first term as POTUS, Washington told his Cabinet that, if there was a civil war during his lifetime, he would side with the North. Jefferson leaked this info to his friends in Virginia and they then regarded Mt. Vernon as an "enemy outpost."

[Cassie · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5/5

Succinct and concise "The Great Contradiction" focuses on the hypocrisy not just within individual leaders of "The Cause" but to the social structure and justifications of the time concerning who was deemed as 'all men'. Starting with a look prior to the lead up of the Revolution, it extends far beyond the usual points of slavery's role in determining state inclusion into the union and it's representational power. It doesn't give a pass to many who have gone down in history as not being in favor of slavery or were 'friends' to indigenous populations. Those who did not denounce or fight against this dehumanization still saw how other humans were treated as a matter of 'regrettable' tool for negotiation.

I have read collections of articles concerning black soldiers and contributors to the cause. But this work did a good job of putting those accounts into perspective in terms of scale. Some may argue that this author might not be the most appropriate voice to be speaking this story, but something about this approach leads me to believe they're using their established publishing history to open a door. He demonstrates the injustice mostly from the statements and records of leaders and their households and correspondents. He doesn't need to dive into assumptions about the lives of the enslaved and indigenous populations more than the simple truth of the matter to make his point about the people controlling their lives.

The one exception to this happens to also be one area I had no previous knowledge of. No where in all my readings concerning the founding had I ever heard the story of Alexander McGillivray. I appreciated that how native populations factored into early expansionism and formation of the union. It brought 'real' individuals onto the stage where other works have glassed over the nations and the resolution rather than the process.

I also found the depiction of Washington to be surprisingly well rounded. Ellis didn't shy away from his rougher edges that he'd like glossed over in his monuments. More works these days are shattering the infallible moral hero myth. But I admit I didn't know of his vow not to break up families and never gave him at least a touch of credit that the integration of his slaves and Martha's might have been a factor in his decisions on that account.

A good introduction to the topic that I hope will make way for more elements of forgotten lives taken up by more authors.

[Terry Tucker · Rating 2 out of 5]

This review is for the Kindle edition

The book is divided into two major sections: Part One contains seven chapters, and Part Two includes two chapters and a notes section, for a total of 285 pages. The author relies almost exclusively on secondary sources. It is unclear why primary archival materials—readily available through the National Archives and numerous academic institutions—were not incorporated.

I have assigned this book a two‑star rating for the following reasons:
1. Overreliance on Secondary Sources
The author’s exclusive use of secondary sources results in a work that functions largely as a survey of material already published rather than an original contribution to the historical record.

2. Absence of a Bibliography
Despite extensive references to previously published scholarship, the book does not include a formal bibliography. This omission limits transparency and makes it difficult for readers to verify sources or pursue further study.

3. Narrative Weakened by Excessive Moral Commentary
Even assuming the secondary materials are accurate and reliable, the book contains detailed historical information. However, the narrative impact is diminished by an overemphasis on moral commentary that appears unnecessarily accusatory.

While the atrocities of slavery must be confronted and clearly articulated, such discussions are most effective when presented objectively rather than through rhetoric that mirrors the condemnatory tone it criticizes. A historical example—Thomas Paine’s 1764 exchange with a local minister who challenged his own inconsistency—illustrates how moral arguments lose effectiveness when they appear hypocritical.

4. Lack of Accountability for Academic Narratives
The author frequently infers - in general - that the reader may be perpetuating myths and misconceptions about the Founding Fathers and slavery. Yet the book does not acknowledge the responsibility held by scholars, including those in the author’s own profession, who shaped the very educational frameworks being critiqued. This lack of self‑reflection weakens the argument.

5. Distracting Use of Virtue Signaling
The book has the potential to be a valuable resource. However, its effectiveness is undermined by recurring expressions of virtue signaling that detract from the otherwise informative historical material.

[Cameron Davis · Rating 5 out of 5]

* I never regurgitate long summaries about what books are about because so many other reviews already do it. I appreciate when reviews get right to the point.

If you love American history and insightful writing vivid with imagery, Ellis is your guy.

If you're already an Ellis fan (raising my hand, too), you know that he's unlike 99% of other historians in that he doesn't just repeat what happened, when, and by whom. He cleves into the inner soul of the Revolutionary era to psycho-profile its founders, their virtues, and their flaws.

The Great Contradiction is the same, but this time, he dredges up two long (but not deeply) buried hideous traits of America's founding: slavery and mis-/mal- treatment of Native Americans.

I could quibble with a few of Ellis's finer points but...

OK, I will.

Most glaringly, he contends that abolition was dead by the time the 1820s rolled into view. It might have been hibernating, but it was far from dead, as its revitalization showed in the mid-1800s. And even if abolition didn't end slavery directly, it was one link in a chain reaction leading to the Civil War and ultimately led to abolition.

A second finer point is that Ellis's work tends to be bounded in time and space, meaning, the analysis tends to be confined to the Revolutionary era and to the Revolutionary region. With the international ban on slavery Canada, Mexico, and Haiti banning slavery in the early 1800s, the domestic abolition movement piled on, thereby putting slavery's future on the road itself to abolition.

But, like I said, this is quibbling. Even if some finer points of an author's analysis are imbalanced, they're still thought provoking. And in the end, it shows as Lincoln intimated, there's no such thing as a perfect union. Only a more perfect one that every generation, ourselves included, must craft.

PS: One of these days, I'd love to see Ellis 's views on a 3rd Contradiction: How the founding's nod to capitalism (including Hamilton's treatment of debt) set American on the path to fiscal bondage (wheter it be to foreign debt servicers, the marginalization of certain communities within the country, or elected officials to their donors).

[Terry Ballard · Rating 5 out of 5]

A country born with the words "All men are created equal," wins its independence and then must deal with an enormous irony. Two kinds of people are not being treated equally at all. Hundreds of thousands of humans, kidnapped at gunpoint, are given life sentences to do the bidding of their masters or suffer unthinkable punishments. Native Americans who had lived here for centuries found themselves to be inconvenient in the face of the booming and boisterous culture that had arisen with the European invasion. In both cases, men of good will wanted to do the right thing but did not have the power to do so. Half of the country had banned slavery or set the wheels in motion to do so in their states. The southern states were adamant that they be free to keep up the system. Virginia charted what seemed like a more moderate course, being in favor of ending the slave trade. Ellis points out that this was actually a ploy to use the law of supply and demand to make their slave property more valuable. The leaders could only provide a fig leaf of banning the import after 20 years, and hoping that a federal government would then be strong enough to end slavery. It sort of happened in 1861, but much blood was shed getting it done. With the Indians, Washington tried to work out an equitable solution. With great fanfare he invited Creek Indian chiefs to New York to be wined, dined and given an iron clad treaty that they could have their lands and soldiers would be posted to secure the borders. It turned out that there were not enough soldiers to do the job. The can was again kicked down the road to be settled in future blood baths. Ellis, a major historical writer keeps the story in human terms, making occasional jibes at Jefferson, whose inspiring words did not reflect his actual life. A very timely book to say the least.

[Andy Miller · Rating 4 out of 5]

Joseph Ellis has a well deserved reputation as a leading historian in American history. So when I learned that he had written a book largely outside the scope of his earlier books, about the contradiction of America's founding ideals of liberty and equality with its refusal to outlaw slavery and its treatment of Native Americans, I was intrigued.
It is an impressive, thoughtful book. It rejects justifying the actions of our founders as products of our times as it also rejects simply demonizing them. There is an excellent discussion of the writing of Declaration of Independence by a slave holder who acknowledged that slavery was horrible but reluctant to abolish it. It discusses George Washington's initial attempts to recover slaves who escaped during the Revolutionary War but in the end refusing to push the issue for him or the other slave holders. And uses Benjamin Franklin's words to help sum up the issue. Franklin, a staunch abolitionist, endorsed ratification of the Constitution even as he was disappointed that it did not adequately address slavery. That was because of the priority of having the Constitution for all the United States that he and others believed (sadly, wrongly) would provide the structure to later outlaw slavery.
Ellis lies the fault of the contradiction between the promises of the Declaration of Independence and the later removal of Native Americans not at its leaders but at the greed of its citizens. Washington, Henry Knox and even Jefferson come off as trying to do the right thing but having the efforts overwhelmed by settlers ignoring the law and treaties. Ellis also speculates of what might have happened if there had been an effective Supreme Court and viable National Guards at the time.
In short, a great book with fresh perspective that makes you think, albeit with sorrow

[Mark Peacock · Rating 4 out of 5]

Ellis does an excellent job discussing the challenges the American founders had with the foundational problem of slavery. That he does this by examining their choices in the context of their options in colonial America in the mid/late-18th Century rather than according to "our modern-day standard of social justice" what makes for an objective discussion that trusts the reader to come to their own conclusions. “The leaders of the American resistance were not utopian visionaries but, rather, an assemblage of pragmatic statesmen accustomed to negotiating the space between ideals and realities,” he writes. However, he doesn't give any of the slave-holding founders a pass but rather, again, judges them in context of their time.

Ellis' discussion of Native Americans is just as objective, even if it receives much less focus/real estate. His detailed analysis of the Creek Indians in Georgia illustrates the conflicts between the fledgling Federal government and the local settlers looking for cheaper and better land. It's a good analysis, but I found Bob Drury's Blood and Treasure: Daniel Boone and the Fight for America's First Frontier had better and broader coverage on the Indian-settler conflicts.

I enjoyed Ellis' Founding Brothers: The Revolutionary Generation and found this, his latest book, even better.

[William Harris · Rating 5 out of 5]

I’m an admitted devotee of Ellis’s work—i’ve read all but two of his books, and have been amazed by all but one. This newest book, like its predecessor THE CAUSE, proves that Ellis’s skill, knowledge, and rhetorical and stylistic flair are as strong as ever, if not stronger as time goes on. THE GREAT CONTRADICTION is perhaps Ellis’s best work: slim, focused, but packed with important, penetrating insights. There’s not an unnecessary word or page in this laser focused overview of key moments of possibility, idealism, and abject failure of the new and then young United States (1770s-1800) to address, much less resolve, the issues of slavery and the status of Indian nations—both clear contradictions to the founding values of liberty and equality. Although Ellis has written several books related to the Constitutional Convention, the Declaration of Independence, and the Articles of Confederation, here he manages to unearth new insights or focus or illuminate old questions in new ways. Most of the book is focused on debates and action (or inaction) related to enslaved Black Americans and Indians at illustrative key moments—turning points with failed potential—before, during, and after the Revolution, the Constitutional Convention and ratification, and the early Congress. He also integrates pinpointed portraits of Washington and Jefferson’s public and personal responses to these issues. The sections on early antislavery efforts of the Quakers and Benjamin Franklin, as well as southern Congressmen’s early spiking of serious debate on abolition and emancipation, struck me as especially well conceived, written, and moving. Ellis is simply remarkable.

[Jonathan Brown · Rating 4 out of 5]

Joseph Ellis, one of America’s most distinguished historians, confronts head-on one of the most glaring contradictions at the heart of the American founding: the proclamation that “all men are created equal” did not, in practice, extend to all men—or any women. In this concise yet deeply researched work, Ellis examines with admirable clarity how enslaved people and Indigenous nations were largely omitted from the revolutionary rhetoric and the constitutional compromises that followed.

Rather than offering a simplistic indictment or a romanticized defense, Ellis presents a measured, objective exploration of the founders’ choices. He traces the political, cultural, and existential pressures facing the revolutionary generation—leaders who believed, rightly or wrongly, that preserving unity among the thirteen colonies, and later the fledgling states, required postponing the reckoning over slavery and Native sovereignty. Ellis neither excuses nor sensationalizes these decisions; instead, he situates them squarely within their historical context, illuminating how the founders understood the moral stakes even as they knowingly deferred them.

Some readers may interpret this as an apologetic stance, but I did not. Instead, I found Ellis’s narrative to be a sober and balanced account—clear, accessible, and unflinching. In highlighting the “fire bell in the night” the founders knowingly left for future generations, Ellis offers a compact but powerful contribution to our ongoing national conversation about the promises and failures embedded in our origin story.

[Chris · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good read from a good historian

This was a good book which took on the founders from a different perspective. it focused on the subjects of slavery and indigenous peoples (mostly slavery).

Good info and a lot of subjects as far as slavery is concerned. Ellis shows well how slavery was mostly glossed over during the run up to the revolution, explaining how off that question had been raised, the southern colonies may well have never supported it (indeed, the British offer to free slaves who came over to their side pushed many southerners to the rebel side). It also did a good job showing how they tried to avoid it at the Constitutional Convention. Many states would never have voted for ratification if anti-slavery verbiage had been included. He goes on to point out that added c!aides lime the three-dimensional rule actually helped push ratification over the top. Studies of Washington from and Jefferson's struggles with slaves are good. Jefferson concluded the races could never live together and so slavery couldn't be abolished as it would be too costly to transport slaves out of America.

The part about indigenous people and the relationships (doomed) Washington from and Jefferson wanted to create was so limited, I almost think that it could have been left out. Maybe it would be better covered in another book. More space could have been used to develop the slavery part.

All in all, worth the read.

[Linda Sander · Rating 5 out of 5]

Perhaps the best history book I have ever read. It makes clear the fact that the American Revolution was fought to rid the continent of British rule, not to found a new nation. In so doing, it addresses the Great Contradiction: how can people, citizens and particularly the founding fathers espouse the idea of equality for "all men" while at the same time denying equality to black men, native American men and essentially all women?

The author brings George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and others to life such that you see and really feel their conflicted emotions. Slavery is bad, but lack of a country and Constitution is worse. Slavery is bad but shipping all Blacks back to Africa is too costly. Stealing Native American land is bad but trying to prevent White settlement is too costly in terms of dollars and lost lives of soldiers.

Along the way, Ellis puts to rest the notion of Native Americans as uneducated savages incapable of governing themselves.

The book devotes most of its time to the issue of slavery and the removal of Blacks from American soil. The treatment of Native Americans is followed to the point of developing the new government's foreign policy and signing the first treaty with the Creek nation but would benefit by a fuller explanation of how such policy was ignored. The lack of women's rights is mentioned but not addressed.

If you are looking for an explanation of how the United States came to be as it is, this is it.

[Phil · Rating 5 out of 5]

The author has written some very good and very important history books, but this one is in a completely different category of expertise.

From the very beginning of the book, Ellis lays out the simple argument he will be making:

"The point merits mention as we prepare to engage the tragic side of the American Founding, since the dominant assumption within the American political universe is that democracy is always an asset for the side committed to worthy causes. The exact opposite was true when it came to avoiding Indian removal or ending slavery." (17-18)

"If the founders had done what some of my colleagues have denounced them for not doing, the American republic we currently and proudly inhabit would never have come into existence." (20)

What follows is his statement of the story and the people responsible for this particluar tragic failure of our form of government.

His conclusion seals the argument and enhances the shame: "Finally, I should acknowledge that the entire book was written during a deeply divided political climate in which it was impossible to ignore the persistent potency of the thinly disguised racial prejudices inherent in the slogan 'Make American Great Again.' We are currently living through a backlash pattern that, at least as I see it, had its origins during the American founding." (194)

[Tim Schillinger · Rating 4 out of 5]

Pros
- Offers a balanced view of the Founders and their ideas about liberty, clearly examining who that liberty applied to and who was excluded. The book avoids both glorifying and demonizing them, instead acknowledging their contradictions, limitations, and the political realities of the era.
- Features a strong introduction that clearly lays out the book’s themes, arguments, and historical material in an accessible way.
- Feels firmly grounded in historical documents and does an excellent job portraying the tensions of the founding period, especially around slavery, Native Americans, and the Constitutional Convention.

Cons
- Lacks a concluding synthesis to draw the themes and arguments together. This is especially disappointing given the strength of the introduction, and the book ends somewhat abruptly without a final, unifying reflection.

Summary
This book provides a thoughtful, historically grounded examination of the Founders’ ideas about liberty, highlighting both their ideals and their exclusions. It excels at portraying the complexity and tension of the founding era without resorting to praise or condemnation. While the introduction clearly frames the key themes, the absence of a strong concluding chapter leaves the work feeling unfinished.

[Joel Wentz · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was so close to 5 stars. If I were rating solely on clarity, nuance, and mastery of historical sources, it would be a raving 5 stars.

Ellis' treatment of slavery, in particular, is simply one of the best I've read. He speaks with moral confidence, but also historical sensitivity, and he is fluent in the primary sources in a way that allows him to put together a compelling portrait of the moral complexity in its own time. On top of this, he is economical in his writing. The whole project is less than 200 pages, and he covers an astounding amount of material.

The reason the book isn't quite a full 5 stars is because his treatment of Native American removal is paltry in comparison to his treatment of slavery. Admittedly, he confesses this in the first chapter as a shortcoming of the project, but I almost wish he would have focused the whole thing on slavery, rather than even attempting to cover both topics. The single chapter he devotes to the treatment of Native Americans is interesting and enlightening, but is so limited in scope that it would have been better as an appendix, or maybe the start of a second book.

I haven't read anything else by Ellis, but based on the strength of this one, I'm immediately interested in going through his corpus.