A Companion to George Washington

Edward G. Lengel, Edward G. Lengel

• Publisher: Wiley-Blackwell
• Year: 2012
• ISBN:
  9781118219928
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Storia
• Subtopic: Primordi della storia americana

Utilizing new primary source material from the Papers of George Washington, a documentary editing project dedicated to the transcription and publication of original documents, A Companion to George Washington features a collection of original readings from scholars and popular historians that shed new light on all aspects of the life of George Washington.

• Provides readers with new insights into previously neglected aspects of Washington's life
• Features original essays from top scholars and popular historians
• Based on new research from thousands of previously unpublished letters to and from Washington

Chapter One

THE YOUTH OF GEORGE WASHINGTON

Jessica E. Brunelle

In 1841 the celebrated novelist Nathaniel Hawthorne wittily remarked that George Washington “was born with his clothes on and his hair ­powdered, and made a stately bow on his first appearance in the world” (Wills (1994) 194). For many Americans in the 19th and early 20th ­centuries it was difficult to imagine that the revered Father of our nation had ever been a child, romping around in the Rappahannock River, ­practicing his penmanship in copybooks, and wooing girls. The severe lack of legitimate documentation of his youth did not aid this understanding. Tremendous gaps in surviving records have allowed eager hagiographical mythmakers like Mason Weems to fill in Washington’s early life with didactic and entertaining stories that praise the great man he would become. Many of those stories – the most famous being young Washington chopping down the cherry tree – have permeated the American memory and become acknowledged as fact. This is all much to the chagrin of many 20th and 21st century Washington historians who have ignored Weems entirely and looked at a wide variety of sources and studies to cobble together a more complete and truthful picture of Washington’s youth. The resulting image is a young man with a voracious sense of ambition who yearned to be free of life at the ­family farm and rise above his middling ­status. Young George Washington desired greatness and exploited circumstances and connections to achieve it – though not even he could have dreamed the greatness he would attain.

If we do not know much about the young George Washington, we know even less about his parents. His father, Augustine Washington, was born in 1694 to Lawrence Washington and Mildred Warner. In 1715 or 1716 he married Jane Butler, who died unexpectedly on November 24, 1729 after bearing him three children: Lawrence, Augustine, Jr (or “Austin,” as he was known), and Jane. A year and a half later, in 1731, Augustine married Mary Ball, an orphan who brought middling property to the marriage. The value of Augustine’s land and investments put his growing family within the wealthiest 10% of Virginians, but they were in the second tier of the gentry, a level below the stately Lees, Byrds, and Fairfaxes. Augustine seems to have been an ambitious man, however, intent on moving up the socio-economic ladder. He served as a Justice of the Peace, sheriff, and church warden and sent Lawrence and Austin to the Appleby School in England to receive educations befitting gentlemen. He also acquired numerous properties throughout the region, including a plantation in Stafford County, 2,500 acres along the Potomac known as Little Hunting Creek, and a managing interest in an iron foundry built on his land.

Mary Ball Washington, born in the winter of 1708–1709, was 23-years old when she married Augustine. After the deaths of both of her parents she had lived under the guardianship of George Eskridge, a highly-respected lawyer, landowner, and burgess. It appears that when she gave birth to her first child she chose to honor her guardian by naming her son after him. And so, on February 22, 1732 George Washington was born.¹ At this time the Washingtons lived in Westmoreland County, Virginia at a farm known as Popes Creek. In 1735 Augustine relocated his growing family sixty miles northward to Little Hunting Creek and in 1738 they moved again, this time to a 260-acre plantation on the Rappahannock River across from the burgeoning town of Fredericksburg. By this time Mary had given birth to all six of her children: George, Elizabeth, Samuel, John Augustine, Charles, and Mildred, the latter dying soon after in 1740.

The Washingtons lived comfortably at the new property, named Ferry Farm due to its proximity to the boat that took people across the Rappahannock. An inventory of their possessions lists curtained beds, silver spoons, napkins, tablecloths, and some 50 slaves, but the home’s primary value was its nearness to Fredericksburg, a growing town that offered tremendous investment opportunities for someone as ambitious as Augustine. Fredericksburg also gave young George his first glimpse of a real town and he likely took the ferry to explore all it had to offer.

In 1738, Lawrence Washington returned from England and George met his half-brother for the first time. He was 20 or 21 (his exact date of birth is unknown), graceful and refined after years of thorough schooling. George was quite taken with his brother and admired and revered his polish and worldliness. That reverence expanded in late 1740 when Lawrence was commissioned captain of a Virginia company being raised for the British army’s campaign in Cartagena. Britain was embroiled in a conflict with Spain – known as the War of Jenkins’ Ear – over trade in the Caribbean and launched this operation to obtain one of Spain’s principal ports. Though he did not actually participate in the battle, Lawrence sent home a detailed account of the fighting and made sure to emphasize that he had quickly learned to disregard the roar of the cannons. It is unclear whether Lawrence’s adventure awakened a military spirit in the then nine-year old George, but it seems likely that his deep admiration for his brother would have inspired him to follow in his footsteps, wherever they led.

In the spring of 1743 George was visiting his cousins in the Chotank district of the Potomac when he received word that his father was very ill. He returned home immediately, in time to see his father pass away on April 12. Augustine’s death had a profound impact on George, though likely not due to any particular emotional closeness between the two. In the few years before his death, Augustine had been overseas, spending much time in England consulting with partners on his financial interests. Rather, Augustine’s death directly affected George’s education and created circumstances that forced his childhood to come to a rapid end.

Augustine’s hard work and investments allowed him to bequeath land to each of his six sons, but the bulk of the property went to the eldest. Lawrence received Little Hunting Creek, his father’s interest in the foundry, town lots in Fredericksburg, and the largest share of slaves. By comparison, George received Ferry Farm – a property 1/5 the size of Little Hunting Creek and much less fertile – three lots in Fredericksburg, a half interest in an undeveloped tract in Stafford County (land so bad and unfertile that he never tried to develop it) and ten slaves. On its own, Ferry Farm would allow George to be a second-class planter, but not until he turned 21 and could inherit the property outright. For the time being all of George’s inheritance would remain under the control of his mother. And so would George. Even though Mary Washington’s youth and property made her attractive to potential suitors, she never remarried. It is unclear why she did this, though one possibility is that she did not want to run the risk of a new husband ­distributing her family’s property among his children and leaving hers without. Whatever her reasons, Mary’s decision forced the 11-year old George, as the oldest male at Ferry Farm, to absorb the family burdens and assist his mother with the maintenance of the plantation. This new day-to-day duty, plus the family’s newly diluted income, made it impossible for George to go overseas to receive a formal education like his eldest brothers had. Whatever education he would receive would be basic, disjointed, and sporadic.

Historians and biographers have posited many different theories about the alternative and informal education young George received during this period. Some have stated that he was taught by one of Augustine’s tenants, a man by the name of Mr. Hobby. Others have suggested that he attended Reverend James Marye’s school in Fredericksburg, but there is very little direct evidence to validate either of these statements. David Humphreys’ Life of General Washington states that George was educated by a domestic tutor, but no further information is given (Zagarri (1991) 6). What is known for sure is that from the ages of 10 to 13 George completed ­exercises in geometry and trigonometry, calculated money conversions and interest, and copied poems and legal forms. Over 200 pages of these exercises and documents have survived and they very clearly indicate that young Washington’s education was focused on learning the basic financial and agricultural understandings of a planter (see PGW, Colonial, 1: 1–4).

Noticeably absent from those surviving documents are lessons in ­philosophy, languages like Latin and French, and books of classical and English literature, all of which were the hallmarks of an 18th-century ­gentleman’s liberal education. We do not know how the 10–13-year old George felt about not receiving instruction in these areas. We do know how he felt later, however. In 1785 he referred to his education as “defective” and refused to write his memoirs because he believed he did not have the talent (PGW, Confederation, 3:148–151). Later, he turned down all invitations to France because he did not want to speak through an interpreter. He felt intellectually inferior when in the company of Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, James Madison, and many of the other founders. Whereas his peers had studied the arts and humanities and gone to college, he had scratched out texts and solved practical geometry problems. He had to work exceptionally hard to master his native language, let alone a second one. But his own sense of academic inadequacy inspired him to desire the best for his family. In a letter to Jonathan Boucher about the education of his step-son, John Parke Custis, Washington lamented the fact that Custis was “unacquainted with several of their classical authors … ignorant of Greek … knows nothing of French…little or nothing acquainted with arithmetic and totally ignorant of the mathematics,” of which, “nothing can be more essentially necessary to any person possessed of a large landed estate” (PGW, Colonial, 8: 495).

Whatever the type and amount of schooling Washington experienced, he received it at a time when he was living at home with his mother. Much has been written about Mary Ball Washington, ranging from adoring ­presentations of her as the ideal republican mother to ruthless critiques of her as an unrelenting shrew. 19th-century hagiographers intent on idolizing the woman who raised the father of the nation, created the former interpretation, one that 20th-century historians took great pains to destroy. They, in contrast, promoted the latter image, one based on Washington’s frustrated letters and references to Mary from the 1780 s. Historians have recently refuted that interpretation as well, declaring that while George and his mother’s relationship may have been strained in the later years of her life, it is unfair to also assume that it had always been like that (see Warren (1999) 5795–5796).

This is not to suggest, however, that Mary Washington in the 1740 s was a passive and subdued woman who did what she was told. Instead, she was a 34-year old widow with five children, in charge of a plantation and a few dozen slaves. To ensure that Ferry Farm ran in working order she had to be stern, determined, and exacting; and under her guidance, young George learned firsthand what it was like to give orders and see to it that they were followed. The farm reports that the Washingtons demanded from their overseers are incredibly detailed and suggest that the farm was run with great precision and discipline. But the similar management styles and personalities that allowed Ferry Farm to succeed likely created tension between Mary and her son. George was, after all, entering his adolescence and undoubtedly preferred to explore the countryside and visit his brothers than to stay home with his mother and younger siblings.

Upon inheriting the Little Hunting Creek property Lawrence renamed it Mount Vernon in honor of his admiral from the Cartagena campaign. The house was exciting, fancy, and bustling and not stifling, rough, and overly disciplined like Ferry Farm. George became a frequent visitor at Mount Vernon and Lawrence regaled him with stories from his brief stint as a soldier, making him an infinitely more welcome housemate than Mary (of whom, one of his cousins claimed, he was more afraid than his own parents) (Conkling (1858) 22). George still harbored a tremendous amount of respect and admiration for his brother who reciprocated through taking an active interest in seeing George succeed.

In September 1746 Lawrence informed George that he wanted him to apply for an open position of midshipman aboard a royal ship currently anchored at Alexandria. Much later in his life Washington acknowledged that he had had little desire to go to sea, but that at the time he recognized his brother’s authority and influence and resolved to fulfill his wish (Zagarri (1991) 7). As he was only 14, however, the final decision rested with Mary. Initially, she did not veto the proposal, but Robert Jackson, a Fredericksburg friend and neighbor of the Washingtons, believed that she was just waiting for someone to give her a good reason to reject it. “I find that one word against [George’s] going has more weight than ten for it,” he wrote to Lawrence (PGW, Colonial, 1:54). Mary finally appealed to her older brother Joseph, a successful merchant and lawyer living in London, and got exactly what she wanted to hear. In his response dated May 19, 1747, Joseph quipped that if George were to join the navy he might as well be ­apprenticed to a common tinsmith. As a colonial and not a Briton, Joseph continued, George would be used “like a negro, or rather, like a dog” and he very bluntly added that “as for any considerable preferment … there are always too many grasping for it here, and he has none” (Warren (1999) 5808). Joseph’s response was exactly what Mary was looking for. She decided against George becoming a sailor and the subject was never ­mentioned again.

A few years earlier, in July 1743, Lawrence married Ann Fairfax, the daughter of Colonel William Fairfax and niece of Thomas, Lord Fairfax. The union made Mount Vernon all the more attractive to young George as it made him a welcome guest at the Fairfaxes’ nearby estate, Belvoir. Located four miles downstream from Mount Vernon, Belvoir, with its stately brick facade, two floors, nine rooms, and outbuildings, was the ­pinnacle of life among the Virginia gentry. George spent a great deal of time at the estate over the next few years and witnessed firsthand the ­prestige and privilege of elite landowners. He was by no means poor, but he did not live on the same level as the Fairfaxes. With his second-tier upbringing and informal education, George did not quite fit into Belvoir’s elite image – but that did not deter or embarrass him. He was very much his father’s son and as he entered his adolescence began to demonstrate a prominent streak of ambition and drive that inspired him to hone his ­rugged and informally educated self into a refined and polished gentleman.

One of the easiest changes George could make was to upgrade his ­appearance. In 1748 he drafted a diary entry entitled “Memorandum of What Clothes I Carry into Fairfax” and listed the necessary items for his ­upcoming visit to Belvoir. Shortly afterward he drafted another memo, this one giving very specific instructions about a new frock coat he wanted made. It was “not to have more than one fold in the Skirt and the top to be made just to turn in and three Button Holes” (PGW, Colonial, 1:46). George took steps to look the part, but he also needed to act it. At least five years earlier he had, as part of a writing exercise, copied out the “Rules … of Civility & Decent Behaviour in Company and Conversation,” a book of etiquette that originated with French Jesuits in the sixteenth century. While it does not seem that he consciously sought to heed the rules when he first wrote them out, it is possible that he referred to them at this time. The rules outlined such crucial aspects to gentility as dress, posture, manner, and attitude. They spoke to a level of refinement that George had not ­experienced as a boy running around Ferry Farm, but that he would need if he wanted to continue visiting Belvoir.

Polishing his manners and presenting a respectable figure was also ­significant to George as he began to take an interest in women. Sometime in 1749 or 1750 he wrote to his cousin Robin that while there was a “very agreeable Young Lady” at Belvoir, her presence “revives my former Passion for your Low Land Beauty.” It is unclear who this girl or what the nature of her relationship with George was, but it is certain is that she left a ­profound impact on him. In the same letter he wrote that the only way to end his heartache was “by burying that chast and troublesome Passion in the grave of oblivion or etarnall forgetfuless” (PGW, Colonial, 1: 41). Despite his heartache over the “Low Land Beauty,” (PGW, Colonial, 1:41) however, the “agreable” lady at Belvoir certainly intrigued George and he mentioned her in two further letters. It is likely that this young woman was Mary Cary, the sister of Sarah “Sally” Cary Fairfax (PGW, Colonial, 1:43). George probably first met the sisters in December 1748 before Sally’s marriage to George William Fairfax, son of Colonel William Fairfax. Sally was a beautiful and vivacious 18-year old, just two years older than George. They exchanged a number of letters throughout the 1750 s that reveal that George was quite taken with her – much more so than her sister – but historians agree that despite Sally’s playful return of the flirtation, George probably never acted upon his feelings.

The Fairfaxes offered George much more than the dream of wealth, prestige, and gentility, however. They offered patronage and connections and the means through which that dream could be achieved. Lawrence reaped the benefits of marrying into the family, gaining a seat in the House of Burgesses, accumulating much land, and becoming Adjutant General of the Virginia militia. He encouraged George to take advantage of the ­marriage as well. Colonel Fairfax saw great potential in him and even ­participated in Lawrence’s plan to have George join the navy. William had served in the navy and with the infantry in Spain and like Lawrence, it is possible that he later inspired George to pursue a career in the military. At this time, though, the Colonel inspired George to become a prominent landowner. All he had to do was look at the Colonel, the five million acres he managed for his cousin, Thomas, Lord Fairfax, and the opulence of Belvoir to know that land was the means to great wealth and esteem.

George took his first step on the road to distinction by becoming a ­surveyor. It was the most logical choice. Socially, surveying was a respectable profession for young potential landowners. Practically, it would allow him to make a good deal of money in a short amount of time and enable him to scout the best lands ahead of everyone else. In addition, his father’s old tools were locked in a...