Cultural History: George Washington's Character

I just realized how long it's been since I posted something on here.  I will write something newly original at some point in the near future.  At the moment, the paper that I wrote about George Washington and the British public's perception of him during the Revolutionary War should serve as an interesting diversion.  I just read a Snapple cap about George Washington and how he was the only US president to be elected unanimously.  This unique occurrence was due to his personality and modesty.  This paper goes a long way to show how he developed that personality and how it endeared him to others.

The inspiration for this paper came from  General Howe's Dog: George Washington, the Battle for Germantown and the Dog Who Crossed Enemy Lines, which provided a prime example of Washington's chivalry and civility.  The incident described in the book prompted me to closely examine Washington's character and to attempt to gain a better understanding of one of our country's most beloved presidents and founding fathers.  This essay will be of great interest to dwellers of the Germantown/Philadelphia are because it will provide them with a better understanding of the region's role in the Revolutionary War.

George Washington, a British Cincinatus

The outbreak of the American War for Independence placed the citizens of Great Britain in a unique and uncomfortable position.  The explosion of colonial resistance to British imposed taxes and the quick escalation from peaceful protests to armed struggles, especially in the northern colonies, during the early 1770s forced the English populace to confront the possibility of war against the colonists, who were still commonly viewed as British subjects.  Though the majority of Britons supported the effort to crush the rebellion and disliked the Continental Congress, many admired and even praised George Washington for his genteel manner on and off the field of battle.  Incidents, such as his quick return of General William Howe’s dog following the Battle of Germantown, served only to increase the admiration of the British press and public for the rebellion’s general.  In essence, the British attitudes concerning George Washington’s conduct during the Battle of Germantown and the affair of Howe’s dog resulted from his gentlemanly manners and ultimately reflect the ambivalence of Britons towards Washington and the Revolutionary War itself.

Throughout the American War for Independence the British media depicted George Washington as a classic English-American gentleman and the model of civilian virtue, a sentiment largely echoed by the English public and an image carefully maintained by Washington during his life.  Born into a middling “aristocratic” Virginia family, Washington spent his entire life cultivating the manners necessary to operate in the upper class society of American gentry and British aristocracy to which he belonged.  Though his father’s premature death when he was eleven years old prevented him from receiving a gentleman’s education in England like his two elder half-brothers, Washington taught himself the basics of math, geography, history, and perhaps Latin (Zagarri as cited in Sayen 8).  His self-instruction included transcribing the 110 “Rules of Civility and Decent Behaviour In Company and Conversation,” a series of guidelines for the correct behavior of gentlemen as derived from an English courtesy book published in 1640, which itself was a translation of a French work created for the education of noble boys, at the age of twelve (Sayen 9).  These rules would continue to influence Washington’s actions both on and off the battlefield until the end of his life.

George Washington’s eagerness to master the complex rules of etiquette surrounding the proper behavior of gentlemen stemmed from his ambition to become an officer in the British army like his older half-brother Lawrence Washington, who became his stand in father.  His diligence was soon rewarded, for Washington’s careful adherence to the “Rules of Civility & Decent Behaviour In Company and Conversation,” the tips for proper dressing, speaking, and deference to those of higher rank it described, impressed Colonel William Fairfax, Washington’s family because of Lawrence’s marriage to one of his daughters, and his cousin Lord Thomas Fairfax (Tiger 20-21).  Their patronage and the prestige and power associated with the Fairfax name in Virginia and the colonies laid the foundation for Washington’s future career as a commander in the Virginia militia and confidant of the colony’s acting governor (Sayen 18-21).  Though his military career under the British during the French and Indian War was plagued by several misfortunes and Washington’s disappointment over British reluctance to recognize his roles in their successes in the Ohio Valley against the French, it, along with his high status in Virginia, earned him a seat in the Second Continental Congress, where he was named Commander of the Continental Army (Tiger 56).  Thus, Washington’s road to revolution started with his consciously cultivated gentility.

Naturally Washington was viewed to be, “ . . . A compleat gentleman.  He is sinsible, amiable, virtuous, modest, and brave,” by his peers among the delegates to the Continental Congress (Cushing as cited in Sayen 36).  However, in a unique show of consensus, an overwhelming majority of Britons, regardless of their personal and/or political feelings about the American War for Independence, believed George Washington to be the paragon of military leadership as well.  To the British press and public he was, “The American Cincinnatus” (Bickham 101).  This veneration arose, in part, because he symbolized the conflict that was raging in many British citizens during the Revolutionary war.  Despite his status as Commander of the Continental Army in a conflict that most Britons believed would destroy the empire, Washington, as a successful member of Virginia’s aristocracy, was more similar to the gentry farmers who dominated the House of Commons than his British peers.  His letters, which were widely circulated by British newspapers, and the careful politeness and public virtue they displayed increased his favorable perception in England (Bickham 101-102).

While a large number of Britons may have sympathized with the Americans because they, shared, “ . . . A common political heritage,” only a small minority openly championed the caused of the American patriots.  However, “ . . . Even most London radicals - among the most vocal sympathizers with the American cause,” only lent their support to the patriots because they believed it would aid them in their political aims to oust the North administration (Bickham 103 and Langford as cited in Bickham 103).  Despite the political wrangling that surrounded the war and the issues it raised, Washington’s character remained untarnished.  As public interest in George Washington and his life, which had been sparked by news of his appointment as the American military commander, grew, his portrayal by the British press remained generally favorable.  A perfect example is an article, published in October 1775 in Scots Magazine, that, while openly critical of the patriots, stated of Washington: “He is a man of sense and great integrity; he is polite, though rather reserved; he is now in the prime of his life, an exceeding fine figure, (at least six feet hight), and a very good countenance.  There is much dignity and modesty in manner” (Scots Magazine as cited in Bickham 108).  Washington’s high standing in England was furthered by positive coverage of his speeches in the British newspapers, which emphasized his modesty, willingness to follow orders from the Continental Congress, and obvious lack of ambition (Bickham 108).

Though his genteel manners and apparent lack of political ambition were enough to gain Washington the favor of the British press and public, he won further praise for his generosity towards his enemies.  While more famous examples of Washington’s mercy towards his opponents exist, the little known incident of General Howe’s dog grants the best glimpse into his continued courtesy towards his adversaries despite the civil war context in which he was fighting (Bickham 113).  It was during the confusion of the Battle of Germantown that General Howe’s personal dog, “ . . . A little fox terrier, as the lore goes,” escaped (Tiger 94).  He was discovered by American soldiers following their twenty-five mile march to Pennypacker’s Mill in Schwenksville after their defeat at Germantown.  The soldiers, having discovered via an inscription on his collar that the dog belonged to General William Howe, carried him to George Washington’s headquarters.  Despite an officer’s suggestion that the dog serve as a mascot for the army, Washington, as required by the rules of war, which, “. . . Stated that soldiers could be taken prisoner but that a man’s personal property should be returned,” sent one of his men as an envoy with the dog to Howe’s headquarters at Stenton (Tiger 94-95).  Howe, impressed  and pleased by the safe restoration of his dog and Washington’s polite note, which read, “General Washington’s compliments to General Howe, does himself the pleasure to return him a Dog, which accidentally fell into his hands, and by the inscription on the collar, appears to belong to General Howe” (Washington as cited in Tiger 95), declared Washington’s action to be, “ . . . an honorable act of a gentleman” (Howe as cited in Tiger 97).  Washington’s full intentions in restoring Howe’s dog remain unsure, however, it was certainly a manifestation of his enduring adherence to the gentleman’s code and the “Rules of Civility & Decent Behaviour in Company and Conversation” number 110 of which admonished, “Labour to keep alive in your Breast that Little Spark of Ce[les]tial fire Called Conscience” (Tiger 98).  

As the war continued following the Battle of Germantown, British dissatisfaction with its military leaders, “ . . . Who were thought to be wholly lacking in the celebrated civic virtues of the heroes of the Roman and Greek republics,” grew (Bickham 113).  Washington’s favorable image was due, in part, to this disaffection, which spanned the entire Revolutionary War and affected each of the British commanders in chief.  Though General Thomas Gage, Washington’s first counterpart, was much criticized as incompetent, Howe was met with greater ridicule by the British media.  In spite of his numerous military victories over Washington, he gained little favor with the public.  Instead, the British scorned Howe following his capture of New York for allowing Washington to escape and held him responsible for the American victory at Saratoga, news of which overshadowed his triumph in Philadelphia (Bickham 115).  In short, disparagement of British commanders by a public already disenchanted by the incompetency of Gage grew to unprecedented levels under Howe, and statements such as, “The loss of America, the ruin of your country’s greatness, an indelible disgrace fixed upon the honour of its arms, the lives of many brave men sacrificed to no purpose . . . these, Sir, form the melancholy catalogue of your achievements,” became common (Caledonian Mercury as cited in Bickham 115).  Thus, British citizens, “Unable to find a Cincinnatus among their own generals . . . increasingly turned to Washington for the exemplary hero who served his country rather than himself” (Bickham 116).

While Washington was surely unaware or only had limited knowledge of his positive standing in Britain and the reasons behind it, he certainly knew the affects his actions had upon the opinions of the American colonists.  To gain the favor of colonists and the members of the Continental Congress in addition to, “ . . . Fulfill his own sense of how a commander should behave,” Washington, “ . . . Fashioned himself as a citizen-soldier, ever ready to fight for his country without any expectation of material reward” (Bickham 121).  Thus, the two integral features of Washington’s character that most impressed the British public, his concern for courtesy and reputation, which, “ . . . Tamed and smoothed his natural endowments and brought his ideas into daily life,” were developed to gain American goodwill (Brookhiser 156 as cited in Sayen 826).  It was Washington’s final action as commander of the Continental Army, his disbanding of the army at the end of the American War for Independence and departure to Mount Vernon, however, that secured his status as a hero and the symbol of the Anglo-American understanding of civic virtue (Bickham 121).  Because, “ . . . He really put himself on the line, his time, potentially his life, his reputation, over and over again, because he really believed in this experiment, and he was determined to make it work,” Washington gained a reputation as a selfless man willing to place his country’s well-being above his own in the colonies (Gergen).  Knowledge of Washington’s lack of ambition spread to England, where it increased British admiration for him.

On the whole, the favorable portrayal of George Washington by the British press and the hero-worship he received from the British public were due to his careful cultivation of his genteel manners and his unswerving adherence to the “Rules of Civility & Decent Behaviour in Company and Conversation.”  While the British military commanders were making fundamental mistakes that allowed Washington to escape their grasp on multiple occasions and permitting their politics to interfere with tactical decisions - Howe’s reluctance to pursue Washington after defeating him in battle may have sprung from his Whig leanings - Washington earned British favor for his submission to the Continental Congress, his lack of ambition, and his generosity towards his enemies (Tiger 26).  The easy admiration of Britons for Washington and their development of him into their “Cincinnatus” when lacking in a suitable British candidate ultimately betrays the conflict of interest waging in British hearts during the American War for Independence.  In the end, the English idolized Washington because he was a combination of British gentility and American civic virtue.

W

Works Cited

Bickham, Troy O. “Sympathizing with Sedition? George Washington, the British Press, and British Attitudes during the American War of Independence.” The William and Mary Quarterly 59.1 (2002): 101-122. JSTOR. 6 Nov. 2008 .

Brookhiser, Richard. Interview with David Gergen. NewsHour. PBS. 28 Mar. 1996. Transcript. 17 Dec. 2008 .

Sayen, W Guthrie. Rev. of Founding Father: Rediscovering George Washington, by Richard Brookhiser. The William and Mary Quarterly 3rd ser. 53.4 (1996): 826-827. JSTOR. 17 Dec. 2008 .

Sayen, William Guthrie. “George Washington’s ‘Unmannerly’ Behavior: The Clash Between Civility and Honor.” The Virginia Magazine of History and Biography 107.1 (1999): 2+5-36. JSTOR. 10 Nov. 2008 .

Tiger, Caroline. General Howe’s Dog: George Washington, the Battle of Germantown and the Dog Who Crossed Enemy Lines. New York: Penguin Group, 2005.