Aaron Burr: A Great American Villain, Or Was He?

Aaron Burr, A Great American Villain, Or Was He?

Aaron Burr is considered a great villain of American history. He killed Alexander Hamilton, one of the founding fathers, in cold blood, and attempted to create his own country in the middle of America. But is he really deserving of his cruel title?

Aaron Burr. A name that through millions of historical textbooks has been painted as bloodthirsty murderer and untrustworthy conspirator, but with the rise of the new hit musical Hamilton people are beginning to question if Burr was really as villainous as he’s been portrayed, or if he’s just a man who made a few terrible choices.

Burr certainly is far from an innocent man, but was Alexander Hamilton’s death really murder? Did Burr attempt to separate

An examine of the pistols century and a half later reveals that the pistols contained a secret hair trigger that could be used, that only required half a pound of pull instead of the usual 10-12 pound pull. These pistols were also not Hamilton’s, instead belonging to John Church, his sister-in-law’s husband. Why would Hamilton use Church’s pistols when he had his own? And why go through all that trouble of getting them if he was planning to throw away his shot? Some historians believe that he may have intended to shoot at Burr, and the use of the hair triggers (which can be quite temperamental) may have led to him shooting early, before he had a clear shot at Burr.

Most historians believe that Burr also missed, shooting Hamilton where he may have meant to miss. Burr was a very career focused man, and would have known that killing Alexander Hamilton would lead to his downfall. It was stated by Hamilton’s second that after the duel Burr “advanced towards General Hamilton, with a manner and gesture of regret, but without speaking” (Gaylord, 1804), showing that Burr almost certainly did not mean to shoot Hamilton. So it seems that maybe both men missed their mark, with Hamilton leaving the field a dying martyr, and Burr a bloodthirsty

The only piece of evidence they had was the letter from Wilkinson which he had “to admit that he doctored” (Wikipedia, 2016) which he no doubt did to remove himself from the conspiracy. Chief Justice John Marshall believed that this was not enough to charge Burr with treason.

Chief Justice Marshall ruled that Burr was innocent as according to the first amendment citizens had the right to voice opposition to the government, and therefore to suggest war or to engage in a conspiracy was not enough, as no “overt act of war had been committed” (Gale Research Inc., 1997).

So does conspiring to make his own country really make Burr a villain? Nothing explicit was committed, and the fact that people were willing to follow implies that it may have occurred with or without Burr’s involvement. While this act seems to be a very unlawful act, the fact that he never started a war means it doesn’t really qualify him for being a villain.

The