What Sarah Josepha Hale Asked Lincoln to Do About Thanksgiving
Sarah Josepha Hale’s September 28, 1863 letter to Abraham Lincoln is a request for action, not a holiday founding certificate. Reading its argument closely reveals how an editor tried to turn an existing observance into a coordinated national occasion.
Her request was coordination, not the invention of gratitude
In the letter preserved by the Library of Congress, Hale asks for national recognition and a fixed, shared Thanksgiving observance. She writes as the editor of the Lady’s Book and describes an existing practice she wants coordinated.
That distinction changes the question. Instead of asking whether one woman invented an entire holiday, ask what institutional action this writer sought. A campaign can shape how people observe an occasion without creating every custom, belief or meal associated with it.
A useful first reading ends with a single sentence in your own words identifying the requested action. Keep that sentence narrower than the holiday’s complete history.
Notice how she establishes her standing
Hale identifies her editorial role, describes years of advocacy and refers to supporting papers and favorable responses. These details are part of her attempt to persuade the president that the proposal deserves attention.
The National Park Service biography places her work in a wider career as an editor, writer and organizer. It supplies context for the person writing; the letter supplies the argument she presented on this occasion.
When taking notes, separate biographical context from statements inside the letter. A later biography may help explain why a writer had an audience, but it should not silently become evidence that the recipient accepted every claim she made.
The route to action is part of the argument
Hale discusses state action and proposes a presidential proclamation as a more direct route. She also mentions writing to William H. Seward. The letter therefore offers a plan as well as an aspiration.
Read this as her proposal about how to proceed, not as a modern legal opinion supplied by this article. The interesting question is how she moves from a broad wish for unity to named people and specific actions.
On a second reading, mark each change in scale: the editor’s campaign, other officials, the president and the proposed observance. An argument often becomes clearer when its audiences are separated.
A letter can show intent without proving sole cause
A dated request is strong evidence of what its author asked. By itself, it does not tell us everything the recipient considered or establish that no other person influenced a later decision.
To investigate influence, look for additional records: a reply, a staff memorandum, a diary entry or another contemporary document that connects the proposal to subsequent action. Do not make that connection stronger merely because the dates are close together.
This is not a reason to minimize advocacy. It is a way to describe it accurately. A person’s sustained effort can matter even when a complex institutional outcome has more than one contributor.
Try a three-pass reading of the document
First pass: identify the request
Read without highlighting everything. Write the requested action, the intended decision-maker and the proposed timing. Leave a blank where the text does not answer your question.
Second pass: identify the support
List the kinds of support the writer offers: prior work, other people’s responses, practical advantages or an appeal to shared values. Distinguish an enclosure mentioned in a letter from an enclosure you have actually inspected.
Third pass: identify the unanswered question
Ask what record you would need next. Perhaps you want to know whether a particular official replied or how readers of the magazine responded. Write a research question instead of inventing an answer.
The result is a small document analysis with a clear boundary. It can stand beside a broader history without trying to replace it.
Keep the historical language attached to its setting
A nineteenth-century writer’s idea of national unity does not automatically represent every person living in the country. Read the language carefully without rewriting it into a present-day consensus.
If discussing the letter with children, ask who is speaking and who is not directly represented in the document. Then select another source with a different perspective. A presidential letter is not the appropriate source for every question about Indigenous history, household traditions or contemporary experiences of Thanksgiving.
When sharing a short summary, link the document and identify whether you used a transcript or an image. Transcription makes handwriting accessible, while an image preserves features of the original page. Neither format requires reproducing the whole document in your own article.
Frequently asked questions
Did Hale write to Lincoln in 1863?
Yes. The source identifies September 28 as the date.
Did she invent every Thanksgiving custom?
That is not what this letter establishes. It records a campaign for national coordination.
Does a request prove it was the only cause of a later decision?
No. Influence requires additional evidence.
Where does this fit in the larger history?
Joye’s Thanksgiving timeline separates the holiday’s historical layers. Its place-card guide concerns a modern gathering, which need not be presented as a reenactment of the past.
