The History Book Club discussion

Question: On the anniversary of the death of George Washington's mother Mary on this date back in 1789 (thank you Twitter for that historical reminder), I'm wondering if you feel the strained relationship George Washington had with his mother may have helped shape his military style and/or personality.

Jerome wrote: "Question:How would you describe the young Washington? Would you have handled the expedition differently?"

Hi Jerome, I can really relate to the young Washington we saw at Jumonville. He was a brave, adventurous, and ambitious young man who was eager to prove himself. At the same time, his lack of experience left him a bit naive. He probably should have been more skeptical of the Half King's motives but instead he was caught off guard by the massacre.

I can just see him standing there, thinking he was in control after having won the battle, only to have the situation unravel right before his eyes. Being just as naive at that age, I probably would have done the same thing!

Washington is so impressive in the way he was able to learn from his youth and channel that wisdom into forging a new nation. I have tremendous respect for him.

Thank you, I enjoy your comments in the threads!

Craig wrote: "Question: On the anniversary of the death of George Washington's mother Mary on this date back in 1789 (thank you Twitter for that historical reminder), I'm wondering if you feel the strained relat..."

Wow Craig, I love that idea. Please bear with me as my inner psychologist shows, but I would venture to say that relationship was fundamental to the man he became.

In many ways, Washington's military campaigns were in direct rebellion to his mother's wishes. She wanted him to stay at home to take care of her and his family, but it seems the more she protested, the more Washington sought adventure during his youth.

In fact, Mary Ball Washington also never praised Washington for his amazing victories. In fact, she was rumored to be a Tory! This lack of maternal approval was likely a factor in Washington's almost obsessive drive to lead in a manner that met with widespread public respect - and adulation.

Finally, growing up also taught Washington his stoicism. He knew hard work and suffering as he struggled to be that man of the house at such an early age. This led to a Commander in Chief who camped and fought alongside his men during an era while his more aloof counterparts on the British led from afar.

Hi Logan ~

I am thoroughly enjoying your book and the way your writing brings everything to life. As a genealogist, I enjoy uncovering interesting stories/connections in a person’s ancestry that was not expected. Sometimes we find that the idea of a person in our ancestry is different when we dig into the details about them. I think as a group we are seeing this with Washington.

Question: Were there any surprising moments during your research where you uncovered information that you were not expecting? Were there any founding fathers that ended up being different that you expected them to be?

Teri wrote: "Hi Logan ~

I am thoroughly enjoying your book and the way your writing brings everything to life. As a genealogist, I enjoy uncovering interesting stories/connections in a person’s ancestry that ..."

Hi Teri, I am very much interested in genealogy - every family has such a fascinating story to tell. I view this book as a sort of look at our national heritage.

I was surprised by Washington the most. Before writing this, he was a bit of a sphinx to me - that is the way many books portray him. It is not entirely their fault since he was masterful in his ability to hide his emotions.

But as I dug, I found the real man. I find that real person overcoming impossible situations to be even more impressive than the statue of a man he is commonly portrayed as. I was surprised to learn about his quirks (e.g. how he was a great dancer), his relationships (e.g. how close he was with Martha despite the physical distance), and his beliefs (e.g. his sense that he was destined for greatness and how that made him feel invincible during battle).

You will pick up in my writing that I really like some people like Ethan Allen, Nathaneal Greene, and even John Andre - while I grew to dislike some others, like Horatio Gates. I am eager to hear who you like!

Ethan Allen
Nathanael Greene
Horatio Gates

Question:What are your thoughts on Washington’s initial reports following the battle? Do you think he was trying to cover up his mistake?

Jerome wrote: "Question:What are your thoughts on Washington’s initial reports following the battle? Do you think he was trying to cover up his mistake?"

I think he was putting a positive spin on it - I do not think it was a nefarious plot.

It is sort of like a college-aged kid crashing a parent's car and then leaving out some of the important details when calling home. People dieing and starting a war is obviously much more serious but the analogy holds to a degree.

Washington did not outright lie about it but instead hoped it might blow over. I think it was more of an immature reaction rather than something dark.

What is your take on the situation?

It seems plausible to me. After all, Washington was always trying to add some sort of "gentlemanly" element to his conduct as an officer; especially during the early stages of the French & Indian war, when most of his experience and expertise amounted to technical and practical issues, and his record wasn't exactly exemplary. I think he was a man aware of his limitations.

Question: In law school, how much did your coursework cover material related to the book such as military tribunals, constitutional powers of the presidency/war, POW treatment, etc.

Great question Bryan. That is an interesting one for you Logan too because you have to wonder with today's legal quagmires regarding Quantanamo, fundamentalists taken into custody and how they are tried or held - that must be a sticky wicket and who is trained to really judge these kinds of situations and the legality of all of the above.

Bryan wrote: "Question: In law school, how much did your coursework cover material related to the book such as military tribunals, constitutional powers of the presidency/war, POW treatment, etc."

Bryan - as much as possible! I love this area but it is not extensively covered in law schools. The idea for the book started in my Constitutional Law class, which all law students take, but after that, I had to get a bit creative to continue to study these topics.

Yale Law is a particularly small school (only about 200 students per class) but they are surprisingly flexible in allowing you to pursue your individual interests. I found some amazing professors who were experts in these areas and although they did not always offer a standard class, I worked with them on an independent study basis.

Other times, I took a related class and write a paper connected to this topic. For example, when I took Criminal Procedure, I wrote on the John Andre case (Part III of the book).

Very interesting Logan and as I suspected.

Question:When you learned about George Washington in school, did he seem like a real man to you? Do you think this depiction of him as a real person who overcame seemingly insurmountable obstacles makes him more or less impressive?

QUESTION: After reading about Ethan Allen and his problems with his wife, I wondered why he married her in the first place! What else do we know about Allen and his family life?

Thanks Tomi. Bold the word question before you put type your question

Hi Jodi - I have a mac and it bolds just fine - you have to use html.

So if you are bolding the word Questions: then do this < b > Question: < / b > without the spaces.

Take out all of the spaces and it should work for you. - you then type normally after the html and you can then use the preview button to see if things look OK

Hey look at all of the bolding. (smile)

Bentley wrote: "Great question Bryan. That is an interesting one for you Logan too because you have to wonder with today's legal quagmires regarding Quantanamo, fundamentalists taken into custody and how they are..."

Bentley, "sticky wicket" is a great way to put it! Judges, politicians, and academics are still grappling with these tough questions, which is why I think we especially need history's guidance.

Jerome wrote: "Question:When you learned about George Washington in school, did he seem like a real man to you? Do you think this depiction of him as a real person who overcame seemingly insurmountable obstacles ..."

Hi Jerome, frankly, I thought he was a boring stiff when I learned about Washington in grammar school and high school. It was like learning about Zeus - sure he has some amazing stories associated with him, but in the end he is just a statue. Washington was so inhuman that I could not relate to him.

The more I learned about Washington as a man, the more fascinating he became. I find him so much more impressive as a person who struggled with seemingly insurmountable obstacles but ultimately overcame them while holding true to his principles. Now THAT is someone we can relate to - and learn from. I have tremendous respect for Washington the man and think the common portrayal of Washington as a statue does his legacy a great disservice.

Tomi wrote: "QUESTION: After reading about Ethan Allen and his problems with his wife, I wondered why he married her in the first place! What else do we know about Allen and his family life?"

I wondered the same thing, Tomi! I checked the dates on their first born but it was apparently not a shotgun wedding. haha

It seems that the pickings were slim - he arrived at marriageable age and did not have any better options. She was about 5 years older than him so she likely faced great societal pressure to wed and he obliged. And it is important to note that although she did not make him happy, he did seem to still love her. He expressed great heartache upon her death (but he soon found another wife, with whom he had a happier marriage and 3 more kids).

Jodi wrote: "Hi, Logan,

First, thank you for such an enjoyable read. :) I wanted to be a part of this group because I am trying to improve my knowledge of (and my attitude toward) American history. I have taug..."

Tomi, good question - in hindsight, they might have killed him faster had they known how things would turn out. The history is not exactly upfront on the reasoning of the various parties but they had a couple of reasons to keep him alive for a while: 1. they could make an example out of him, parading him around in chains as the doomed captured rebel before having a grand public execution, 2. he could potentially become valuable as a trade (which he did).

Further, it was proper procedure to have a trial before execution - this did not stop many Brits from brutally executing Americans summarily, but it likely influenced Allen's captors.

Ethan Allen

Logan wrote: "Bentley wrote: "Great question Bryan. That is an interesting one for you Logan too because you have to wonder with today's legal quagmires regarding Quantanamo, fundamentalists taken into custody ..."

Could not agree more.

Logan wrote: "Jerome wrote: "Question:When you learned about George Washington in school, did he seem like a real man to you? Do you think this depiction of him as a real person who overcame seemingly insurmount..."

Love your analogy to Zeus - it made me laugh - but apropos.

Logan I am very interested in the amount of time you spent covering the prisoner abuse issue. I have never read anything in any previous books that covered this issue to this depth.

I am a Navy officer and I served in Iraq so this issue is very interesting to me. Why did you decide to put so much discussion about this issue in this book? Also, where did you discover the correspondence?

So far a very good book. Well written and I enjoy the new areas you have researched. Thank you.

Thank you, Jack, I am very happy you are enjoying it. Thank you very much for your service to our country

I focused on that issue because it was a very hot topic while I was in law school (and still makes its way back into the news today). I was curious how the founders approached the issue since so little has been written on it.

I was able to find it through lots of digging. One source that was particularly helpful was the Papers of George Washington Project at the University of Virginia. They collecting papers from all over and digitizing them - which is a tremendous undertaking and invaluable. They have been at it for years and are still finding new documents.

This book has all of these new facts and details largely because I was one of the first to search through some of these largely forgotten primary sources.

I appreciate your thoughts and look forward to speaking more as you continues through the book.

Logan-

First off I am really enjoying this book and look forward to continued reading. As someone currently writing a law related thesis for an undergraduate honors program I am impressed by the varied source material that you use and how you interwove these sources together. I constantly flip between the writing and the end notes and find it all very fascinating. I know to some degree how painstaking that work is and the thoroughness shows in the works's quality. Great work!

My question is about Washington as a visionary. Do you think he saw himself as the potential leader of a great nation from an early point in his career (or early in the Revolution), or do you think over time he developed an understanding of where his service was taking him? In any case do you think it was a singular event that lead him to this understanding or did it occur gradually over time?

Thanks!

Jason

Logan wrote: "Jerome wrote: "Question:When you learned about George Washington in school, did he seem like a real man to you? Do you think this depiction of him as a real person who overcame seemingly insurmount..."

Agree, Logan, it's the same for me in school right now.

Jason wrote: "Logan-

First off I am really enjoying this book and look forward to continued reading. As someone currently writing a law related thesis for an undergraduate honors program I am impressed by the ..."

Jason - great question - but always separate your question out so that Logan does not have to waste a lot of time reading.

So place Question: in bold before you question to make it easier

Thanks much.

Great questions, everyone, and thanks Logan for the great answers.

Jason wrote: "Logan-

First off I am really enjoying this book and look forward to continued reading. As someone currently writing a law related thesis for an undergraduate honors program I am impressed by the ..."

Good luck on your thesis, Jason! This book started as a thesis for law school and I kept on writing after I graduated - I encourage you to do that same.

Yes, I think Washington always saw himself as destined for greatness. It is interesting to see his writings about "Divine Providence" in which he conveys the distinct sense that a high power was on his side. I do not think it was any one event - it was more a way of thinking that he possessed throughout his life.

This belief manifested itself in several ways, including the many time he acted as if he was bulletproof. Unlike other leaders, he was consistently right on the front lines charging - he was almost insanely brave! Even look at Jumonville, for example, did he really need to jump up from his hiding place to announce the attack?

As the Revolution began, Washington continued to display this belief that he (and the United States) were destined for greatness. He was so careful to conduct himself in such a proper manner and document his every move precisely because he believed he was in the middle of a historically momentous struggle that would be studied for generations. It is downright eerie how foresighted he was.

It is so easy for us to look back on history and recognize how important certain periods were. However, from Washington's perspective, he was a wealthy, landowning British subject taking a huge risk by inciting a rebellion against the mightiest empire on earth. It is a wonder they were not quickly defeated and hanged.

What is the topic of your thesis? Good luck on it!

Libby wrote: "Pg. 6, Long-term effects of the "Jumonville Affair." The European military protocol seemed to be the Geneva Convention rules of Washington's era; and, this affair/experience made him realize how q..."

Hi Libby, yes, Washington did fear his soldiers might rebel in light of the poor conditions and lack of pay. Around Jumonville, they were more likely to dessert rather than attack him, but as we read on, you will see far more frightening episodes during the Revolutionary War!

Libby wrote: "George Washington's unusual stature for his generation was stated as "A muscular six feet and 175 pounds" (pg. 2). When people visit The Star Spangled Banner and Flag House Museum in Baltimore, Md..."

Libby, I was wondering the same thing as I walked around Mount Vernon. I could not get over how much he must have stooped to get down those small stairs next to his bedroom.

However, his writings not indicate it being of particular annoyance to him. It was just a fact of life that houses were of small proportions so he was completely used to it.

Regarding others' perceptions, yes, his build definitely influenced their impressions of him. Many noted that Washington exuded "martial dignity" and looked like a soldier. His large build spoke louder than his (few) words in 1775 to help convince Congress to appoint him as Commander in Chief.

Washington had a strong physical presence and was adept at using it!

Question: Why do you start the book after the Revolution?

Jerome wrote: "Question: Why do you start the book after the Revolution?"

Hi Jerome, I started the book after the Revolution to answer the "why do we care?" question off the bat. I wanted to show how essential Washington and his actions during the Revolution were to the creation of the Constitution and the Presidency. As we continue through the war, you should care quite a bit about Washington's actions!

My goal is to encourage readers to view this history in a new light - the precedents of the Revolutionary War had a direct impact on the meaning of the Constitution. This is precisely what judges look at in determining what the Constitution means today (we can of course debate the worthiness of this approach, but like it or not, the majority of judges/justices use such history in their interpretation).

I start at the Constitutional Convention to guide readers in seeing the relevance of the history to today. Is it working?

Question: Okay, so I noticed that a couple of times in the book, you write about James Madison and his height and write that he was 5'0". I know he was our shortest president, but I always thought he was a little taller - say 5'3" or so, maybe even 5'4". And I know it's tough to know actual heights of some of our earlier presidents and there's a little discrepancy over how tall Washington was. But I'm just wondering what your source was for writing that Madison was actually an even five-foot tall.

Interesting, Craig, I see Edward Coles wrote he was 5'6":

http://www.montpelier.org/james-and-d...

Logan wrote: "I start at the Constitutional Convention to guide readers in seeing the relevance of the history to today. Is it working?..."

I thought it was a good technique, Logan. I enjoy reading about what the Founders thought about creating the presidency and you touch on that as well.

Logan, I don't have a question (at this point) but I did want to say your interactions with us have been a uniquely positive experience for me. To be able to hear directly from the author about questions I may have about a thematic or specific point from the book is just fabulous. Thank you.

I asked a question on the discussion thread for Chapters 10-12 and didn't get the opportunity to post it over here until this morning (mobile app doesn't copy and paste very well). So, here's my question and Logan's answer:

Logan - you quoted Washington's remarks about telling the British that prisoners would be treated the same as the Americans were hearing their prisoners were treated, but didn't really say what the Americans actually did. With the communication available at the time, how did Washington get "timely" (according to current technology) updates and how did he know he could believe what he heard? I don't think this communication dilemma has gone away today, even with all of our technology.

message 62: by Logan (last edited 8 hours, 25 min ago) (new) - rated it 5 stars
8 hours, 25 min ago


Robyn wrote: "I've read all of the debate about which society was more moral - Washington's or ours - in this thread. I think that we like to think we've advanced ethically and morally, but I'm not so sure we ar..."

Hi Robyn, you are very right - false information was rampant. Washington received intelligence from a variety of sources - from released/escaped prisoners, defectors, and his extensive spy network. However, his intelligence was not 100% accurate (just like today's!).

Washington was appropriately skeptical of the reports and often sent for confirmation. In fact, he often asks the British officers, who sometimes confirmed (if only by inference) his fears.

It is not always clear precisely how the Americans responded since they did not necessarily advertise some of the things they did. I relied on accounts from both the British and American sides to provide insight into the actions. If a particular episode lacked credible evidence, I deliberately left out the specifics since I did not want to speculate.

It took a lot of digging to gather the evidence needed to write these pages! I am getting tired again just remembering it.


Thanks Logan for the quick answer and for all of the research that doubtless went into this book. I'm enjoying it very much!

Logan wrote: "Jerome wrote: "Question: Why do you start the book after the Revolution?"

Hi Jerome, I started the book after the Revolution to answer the "why do we care?" question off the bat. I wanted to show ..."

Agree, Logan, much of your book deals with the concept of precedent, so I think your style was appropriate.

This isn't a question that pertains to the book; I am just wondering (and hoping) if you are going to write another book? I am enjoying this one so much!

Craig wrote: "Question: Okay, so I noticed that a couple of times in the book, you write about James Madison and his height and write that he was 5'0". I know he was our shortest president, but I always though..."

Haha, good eye Craig! I just checked that out - in the manuscript, I had "merely a few inches over five feet tall". The line editor must have found that phrasing awkward because she cut it down to "a mere five feet tall" - a phrase that the designer then reused in the caption under his picture. I did not even notice during my frantic final check (I can tell you that whole crazy story if you are interested).

Those few inches are obviously not something that impacts the story or insights of the book but I should have caught it, particularly since he is my relative!

Bryan wrote: "Interesting, Craig, I see Edward Coles wrote he was 5'6":

http://www.montpelier.org/james-and-d..."

yeah yeah Bryan, you caught me! haha

G wrote: "Logan, I don't have a question (at this point) but I did want to say your interactions with us have been a uniquely positive experience for me. To be able to hear directly from the author about que..."

Thank you, G, I am very happy to hear it. I greatly enjoy your comments in particular - in addition to those from the rest of the group!

Tomi wrote: "This isn't a question that pertains to the book; I am just wondering (and hoping) if you are going to write another book? I am enjoying this one so much!"

You just made my day, Tomi - thank you. I am working on selecting a topic now. Do you have any suggestions? Are there any Founders or events that you think have yet to receive adequate attention?

Question:How do the relationships between the states today compare to back then?

Libby wrote: "Tomi wrote: "This isn't a question that pertains to the book; I am just wondering (and hoping) if you are going to write another book? I am enjoying this one so much!"

I agree, Tomi; the author h..."

Perfect! That is exactly what I hoped for. Too often, authors think that history needs to be dry and boring. I think history is quite the opposite - it is filled with such juicy stories just waiting to be told! My goal is to tackle some very serious subject, but do so in such way that it engages the reader. For example, my goal in Part II was to address torture without torturing the reader.

Just wait until we get to Part IV, which is my personal favorite.

Jerome wrote: "Question:How do the relationships between the states today compare to back then?"

This is exactly the kind of thinking I hope to encourage. I think the states are much more united today than they were back then. During the Revolution, the states viewed themselves as independent little nations who were allied against a common threat. They fought with one another over land (e.g. NY vs. NH), were deeply divided over slavery (north vs. south), and even had trade wars (e.g. VA vs. MD).

In a way, they were more like today's EU than the US (except at least the EU could agree upon a common currency - the states could not even agree on that).

Today, states still fight with one another and jockey for power in Washington, but time has made Americans far more comfortable with the United States being united. I think transportation and communication advances have a lot to do with that - no longer is a Virginian some exotic creature to a Rhode Islander. Back then, they had little interaction with one another, a situation which fosters an "us vs. them" mentality. Today, the states are comprised of a continuously mixing citizenry that watches many of the same TV shows, listens to the same songs, etc.

Question: Why do you think the states quarreled so much?

Logan, another few questions for you. Regarding your decision to right on Washington's choices regarding trying military and civilian traitors, what compelled you to cover that material? Also, the attacks against the Seneca, why did you decide to cover that aspect of the Revolution. I am very happy you did both since most accounts I have read do not cover these portions of the Revolution.

If you have already answered these questions, please let me know and my apologies. Thanks.

Jack