Historical interpretations of Thomas Jefferson's presidency, including progressive, counter-progressive, and republican views.

Historian Gordon Wood writes in 1993, "Jefferson scarcely seems to exist as a real historical person. Almost from the beginning he has been a symbol, a touchstone, of we as a people are, some invented, manipulated, turned into something we Americans like or dislike, fear or yearn for, within ourselves - whether it is populism or elitism, agrarianism or racism, atheism or liberalism." In saying this, Wood strikes on one of the main problems in historical …

…conflicts and concentrate their writing on the conflicts in Jefferson's time, whereas counter-progressive historians like Hofstadter tend to view American history as driven more by compromise than conflict. Only by looking at all of these narratives of Jefferson's presidency is one able to get a balanced, objective picture of Jefferson. Historians, like all writers, are too likely to imbed their own political views into the politics of the past, as evidenced by the above accounts.