Presenting George Washington as ‘His Excellency’

BOOK NOTES by Dr. Joan Ruddiman

   Happy Presidents Day!
   In appeasing the public’s demand for a long weekend, we now jointly celebrate the birthdays of George Washington and Abraham Lincoln on the third Monday of February. What a surprise to learn that Washington’s birthday was made a national holiday in 1790 — almost a decade before his death.
   This bit of trivia is evidence of the powerful influence George Washington had in his own time and ever since.
   Several strong biographies of Washington have recently been published. Each stands alone in considering the importance of Washington, but taken together they offer an enhanced understanding of "The Father of Our Country."
   In an age where historical biography brings revelations — often unpleasant — about the icons we studied in American history, biographers over time agree that Washington was The Man. Where Jefferson, Adams and others were carefully pruning and tending the official and personal records in their lifetimes so they would be posthumously remembered favorably, Washington was already America’s saint even before he became president.
   Joseph Ellis ("Founding Brothers," "American Sphinx: The Character of Thomas Jefferson," — both Pulitzer Prize winners — "Passionate Sage: The Character and Legacy of John Adams," among others) is an esteemed historian. He is a best-selling author because he is an outstanding writer. In "His Excellency: George Washington" Ellis explores the nature of the man and how the Revolution and then the new republic embody the character of America’s anointed secular saint.
   Ellis’ title captures the iconic and ironic of Washington’s relationship with his country. He was, from early on, a military icon — heroic and the one true leader. Ironically, in Washington’s final role, he adamantly refused to be elevated to a royal status. He realized and took very seriously the role he played in establishing the protocols and persona of "president."
   Washington was actually called "His Excellency" throughout the Revolutionary War, a title he easily accepted. He was the commander of all forces. He was totally in control of the success or failure of the revolution against Mother England. Even when he was beleaguered by failures, he was comfortable being the guy in charge.
   Yet Washington, even in his own times, was quite circumspect. He didn’t say much, did not respond to public criticism, did not promote his own point of view in public forums. Historians have long lamented the little his daily journals reveal. For example, on his Inauguration Day, he notes the temperature and the comment, "Today much like yesterday."
   The one possible written record of the man’s passions and deepest thoughts was destroyed. Upon his death, his wife Martha burned all his letters to her.
   Yet, historians like Ellis, Henry Wiencek and David Hackett Fischer manage to scour primary sources and past biographies in order to convey an image of the man behind the familiar and revered image.
   Wiencek tackled the ticklish issue of Washington as slave owner. In "An Imperfect God: George Washington, His Slaves and the Creation of America," Wiencek leads the reader on a search — all good research is a search — to resolve how our sainted George could buy and sell human lives. The psychology of the man is explored as Wiencek traces how Washington’s thoughts on slavery changed, and why. Indeed, of all the founding fathers who owned slaves, Washington is the only one who emancipated his slaves — at his death with an ironclad will.
   Hackett Fischer in "Washington’s Crossing" (from the "Pivotal Moments in American History" series) is primarily concerned with writing a military history — General George’s role in winning the Revolution. Fischer, a Brandeis historian, analyzes the Christmas 1776 destruction of the Hessian garrison in Trenton and the defeat of the British Brigade at Princeton from a strategic, operational and tactical perspective. His thesis is that Washington forged a "distinctly American way of war," and thus these battles were representative of more than just turning points in the fight for independence.
   Jake, my consultant on all things early American, considers the Hackett Fischer work on Washington and the colonial army to be very significant. He writes: "The main thing with Fischer’s book is that he brings to light information and analysis that I have found nowhere else. Fischer pieces together bits of information that reveal the clashing mindsets of the Americans, British, and Hessian soldiers and generals, the complimentary role of Continental soldiers and rogue Jersey militia units. His is an amazingly fresh look at a very well known event, to the extent that after I read Hackett Fischer’s account of Washington’s crossing, I questioned whether I had ever fully understood it before."
   Ellis, in "His Excellency," takes on the whole of the man. In the elegantly organized seven chapters, Ellis addresses what we know and what is pure legend (think cherry trees, lies and skipping stones) beginning with the young Washington and his Virginia world. This historical and biographical context serves the reader well in understanding the nature of the mature Washington.
   For example, Washington was not educated, as were many of his contemporaries. Though he was third generation thus pureblood Virginian, he did not come from the money that defined Virginia’s gentry. Early on, he found his calling — if not initial success — as a military man.
   Ellis also analyzes how Washington’s intense self-discipline and need to be in charge develop, which are the foundation that make the iconic general and president — "Destiny’s Child" in Ellis’ words. Though Washington, nor anyone of his times, had any idea that they were moving toward what would be a stunningly successful new nation, he did realize the impact he had on people and the influence he could wield. Washington was "the man who unites all hearts," and he played the role that he realized was so needed.
   It is the measure of the man, however, that Washington not only recognized his own shortcomings, but established a pattern in his life to compensate for those weaknesses. Ironically, in filling his gaps, Washington’s greatest gifts emerged.
   Ellis makes the case, as does Hackett Fischer, that Washington established the concept of a civil army. He was a commander of volunteers — militiamen — who were loyal to their local commanders and who fought for what they saw as their own interests. Washington worked with the commanders and created a military culture quite unlike anything ever seen before. Ellis explains Washington’s strategy of building an inner circle of leaders in part as his need to work with men who had the formal education, the literacy skills, which he lacked. Recall that he was from gentry, but not wealth, which limited his education as a child and young man — a deficit of which he was acutely aware.
   During the Revolution, Washington virtually adopted a group of young men — the "pen-men" — who became his closest confidants. They were Joseph Reed, Alexander Hamilton, and later, John Laurens. He also had a cadre of capable military minds in Charles Lee, Horatio Gates, Nathaniel Greene and Henry Knox. As president, Washington repeated this pattern as he brought together the young, bright, articulate Hamilton, Jefferson and Madison in what is the beginnings of the presidential cabinet.
   For those who love politics in all its partisan glory, the concept of political parties was born from the strife in Washington’s inner circle. Much like today, like in any political arena, perspectives differ. Washington and Hamilton deeply believed that the young nation must be solidified under one strong, central, federal government. Jefferson and Madison among other, primarily southern, voices strongly advocated for state’s rights that spoke to their love of liberty. Exasperating this debate was the revolution brewing in France in the 1790s. Washington feared it. Jefferson embraced it.
   Though they did not realize that they were splitting along party lines, (Ellis calls this "hindsight history"), what we teach kids to call Washington and Jefferson are "Federalist" and "Republican." At the time, these dynamic thinkers only knew they were divided philosophically. In the case of Hamilton and Jefferson, they were also bitterly divided personally. Ellis, in his final chapter, conveys this sad story of the old general being caught in the crossfire of his own guard.
   Ellis, however, does not leave the reader with anything but a sense of delight in the man and a real respect for the country Washington fathered. As we continue to live with the contentiousness of battling political philosophies, consider his thoughtful take on what he calls a "healthy institution."
   "By forcing the wide spectrum of political opinion into two camps, (the party system) institutionalized the ongoing dialogue into an organized format that routinized dissent. In retrospect, the two-part system has come to be regarded as one of the most significant and enduring legacies of the founding generation."
   Even Washington’s darkest moments proved to have silver linings. Ellis’ contention that Washington was "Destiny’s Child" played out in his long lifetime and continues to resonant the goodness of "His Excellency" into the 21st century.
   Joan Ruddiman, Ed.D., is a teacher and friend of the Allentown Public Library.