Speaker 1: Welcome to Noble Blood, a production of I Heart Radio
Speaker 1: and Grimm and Mild from Aaron Minky listener, discretion is advised.
Speaker 1: The first three fun facts that you learn about George
Speaker 1: Washington are wrong. Before or even out of elementary school
Speaker 1: in the United States of America, we learn plenty of
Speaker 1: myths about our first president, George Washington. Take, for instance,
Speaker 1: the famous anecdote about George Washington cutting down a cherry tree.
Speaker 1: If you haven't heard it or haven't heard it in
Speaker 1: a while, the basic story goes like this. At six
Speaker 1: years old, George Washington gets a brand new hatchet, and,
Speaker 1: excited to try it out, he sets about swinging it
Speaker 1: at his father's prize cherry tree in their front yard.
Speaker 1: When George's father gets home, furious about either the hatchet
Speaker 1: marks in the tree or the fact that it had
Speaker 1: been cut down altogether, Mr Washington asks his son if
Speaker 1: he was the responsible party. Ever the paradigm of moral virtue,
Speaker 1: even as a kindergartener, George Washington admits what he did
Speaker 1: right away with the phrase, I cannot tell a lie
Speaker 1: if you didn't already know that story, endearing as it is,
Speaker 1: simply isn't true. It first appeared in a biography written
Speaker 1: by Mason Locke Weemes, who published his book Trying to
Speaker 1: Cash In immediately after Washington's death. Although the cherry Tree
Speaker 1: anecdote didn't actually appear until the book's fifth edition, published
Speaker 1: six years later, that story just detailed enough to be
Speaker 1: memorable and vague enough to apply as a life lesson
Speaker 1: for all children immediately caught on. In eighteen thirty six,
Speaker 1: a Presbyterian minister and professor named William Holmes McGuffey included
Speaker 1: it as a lesson on morality in a Chill Duran's
Speaker 1: grammar school textbook, sort of a nineteenth century equivalent of
Speaker 1: a Highlights magazine. Goofus and Gallant. Mcguffey's textbook stayed in
Speaker 1: print for almost one hundred years. The year before the
Speaker 1: textbook came out, circus ringleader and conman P. T. Barnum
Speaker 1: purchased an elderly enslaved woman named Joyce Heath and put
Speaker 1: her on display as a sideshow attraction, claiming that she
Speaker 1: was the slave who had raised George Washington. Heath, who
Speaker 1: would have been one hundred and sixty one years old
Speaker 1: if Barnum's claim was actually true, told stories to wrapped
Speaker 1: audiences about Washington, including the then already famous Cherry Tree anecdote.
Speaker 1: It's easy to understand why the Cherry Tree story had
Speaker 1: such longevity. It's an American Horatio Alger novel in anecdote form,
Speaker 1: a modern tutor morality play, and it's a perfect celebration
Speaker 1: of the law myth of America that we're a land
Speaker 1: of meritocracy. If you're a good person, like the six
Speaker 1: year old who was honest to his father, then you
Speaker 1: can and will go on to achieve great things. America's
Speaker 1: love mythologizing our founding fathers, turning them into superhero mascots
Speaker 1: of our own national self celebration. The next myth about
Speaker 1: George Washington is a little bit harder to trace. The
Speaker 1: idea that George Washington had wooden teeth. He didn't. He
Speaker 1: did suffer from issues with his teeth throughout his life,
Speaker 1: and by the time he gave his first presidential address
Speaker 1: he only had one of his original teeth left in
Speaker 1: his mouth. But his dentures were never made of wood. Really,
Speaker 1: that seems like an awful idea for dentures on any level.
Speaker 1: What is porous and absorbent, It warps and cracks. I mean,
Speaker 1: imagine the splinters. Throughout George Washington's life, he had multiple
Speaker 1: sets of dentures made for materials like ivory, gold, lead,
Speaker 1: and slave teeth, yes, probably slave teeth. In George Washington's ledger,
Speaker 1: he noted that on May eighth, seventy four, he paid
Speaker 1: six pounds and two shillings to quote Negroes for nine teeth.
Speaker 1: While it's possible that he was buying them for a
Speaker 1: family member, it's just as likely that they were meant
Speaker 1: for his own mouth. As the Mount Vernon website itself notes,
Speaker 1: selling teeth to dentists was a common way to make
Speaker 1: money for poor people since at least the end of
Speaker 1: the Middle Ages. But it is important to remember that
Speaker 1: although Washington paid for these teeth, the enslaved people in
Speaker 1: Virginia in the eighteenth century had no choice when it
Speaker 1: came to participating in the transaction. So where did the
Speaker 1: idea of wooden teeth come from? Most historian degree that
Speaker 1: Washington's ivory dent years became stained and brownish over time,
Speaker 1: which made them look wouldn't But why would that story
Speaker 1: be so enduring? It doesn't have a simple moral narrative
Speaker 1: like the cherry tree story unless you assume that Washington
Speaker 1: carved the teeth himself, and then sure it does give
Speaker 1: him a rugged, self sufficient man of the people type power.
Speaker 1: But well, wooden teeth themselves are memorable. They're oddly specific
Speaker 1: and a little gruesome in their imagery and weirdness, Especially
Speaker 1: in conjunction with a historical figure that's so often portrayed
Speaker 1: as so virtuous he may as well just be a
Speaker 1: marble sculpture. Is interesting. It makes George Washington seem human
Speaker 1: and lets us in the modern day shake our heads
Speaker 1: in superiority at how antiquated, how positively medieval things were
Speaker 1: two years ago. But it the third George Washington myth
Speaker 1: that will be talking about in depth today, a myth
Speaker 1: that has so infiltrated the popular culture that I admit
Speaker 1: I didn't know it was false myself until I started
Speaker 1: doing my research for this very podcast. You see, with
Speaker 1: all the attention on the American executive branch during a
Speaker 1: presidential election, I found myself thinking about the historical fun
Speaker 1: fact that I've heard so many times, the folk grum
Speaker 1: point in American history that could have changed the course
Speaker 1: of our nation with a single decision. The notion that
Speaker 1: they offered to make George Washington not the first president
Speaker 1: of the United States, but the first king. Of course,
Speaker 1: you know the rest of that story. George Washington, he
Speaker 1: of the moral backbone to come clean after an act
Speaker 1: of fruit tree vandalism, refused the crown, and he ushered
Speaker 1: our young country in as a representative democracy. George Washington
Speaker 1: could have been a king, they say, and he chose
Speaker 1: not to be. It's a story that makes Washington and
Speaker 1: by extension, America, look honorable and virtuous. It's the type
Speaker 1: of story we want to believe about ourselves. But the
Speaker 1: truth is always a little more complicated. I'm Danis Schwartz,
Speaker 1: and this is noble blood. In seventeen eighty, while the
Speaker 1: soldiers of the Continental Army fought against the British, the
Speaker 1: delegates of the Second Continental Congress passed a statute promising
Speaker 1: that the American soldiers would receive a pension after they retired,
Speaker 1: half of their current pay for the rest of their lives.
Speaker 1: It was a mighty promise from a government that could
Speaker 1: barely find the funds to pay the soldiers. As it
Speaker 1: was at this point in American history, the federal body
Speaker 1: had almost no actual power beyond the symbolic, especially when
Speaker 1: it came to money. Congress had no power to tax
Speaker 1: the States to pay the army. The federal government relied
Speaker 1: on requisitions from the states that the states would pay voluntarily,
Speaker 1: and as you might imagine, these voluntary payments weren't nearly enough.
Speaker 1: After the Battle of Yorktown in the war on land
Speaker 1: between the colonists and the British was largely over. Peace
Speaker 1: talks were beginning, and even though British ships still bobbed
Speaker 1: visible in the Atlantic Ocean, cutting off trade, independence was imminent,
Speaker 1: but the Continental Army remained vigilant monitoring. British occupied New
Speaker 1: York City from their base in Newburg, sixty miles to
Speaker 1: the north, but the soldiers were well aware that they
Speaker 1: occupied a strange Noman's land. They were soldiers for a
Speaker 1: country that didn't quite exist yet. Hand with the war ending,
Speaker 1: they were about to be unemployed. In the meantime, Robert Morris,
Speaker 1: the Superintendent of Finance, who would be called the financier
Speaker 1: of the Revolution, had to stop army pay in seventeen
Speaker 1: eighty two to cut costs. He made the assurance that
Speaker 1: it would be only temporary that Congress would pay back
Speaker 1: all of its soldiers their back wages and the pensions
Speaker 1: they were promised. It was just under the Articles of
Speaker 1: the Confederation they had no way to actually do that.
Speaker 1: A group of Congressmen, including Alexander Hamilton's, recognized that discrepancy.
Speaker 1: Without a strong central federal branch of the government with
Speaker 1: actual power, this new country wouldn't be a country at all,
Speaker 1: and so Hamilton's proposed an amendment to the Articles of
Speaker 1: the Confederation, a workaround for the no federal taxes rule
Speaker 1: that would allow Congress to levy and import tariff. It
Speaker 1: was immediately shut down. Soldiers wrote to Congress demanding their
Speaker 1: pay and their promised pensions, and Alexander Hamilton's would read
Speaker 1: these letters allowed in chamber, trying to convince his fellow
Speaker 1: congressmen that they needed to do something in order to
Speaker 1: actually pay their army. But no amendments or agreements passed.
Speaker 1: Soldiers who had gone months without pay were beginning to
Speaker 1: feel forgotten. Officers covered their tattered, tearing uniforms with blankets.
Speaker 1: Lower ranking soldiers didn't even have blankets to cover themselves
Speaker 1: up with. They were all cold and hungry and frustrated
Speaker 1: while waiting for the war to officially end. They also
Speaker 1: waited to find out what sort of government they would
Speaker 1: be serving on the other side, and the government that
Speaker 1: they currently had under the articles of the Confederation didn't
Speaker 1: seem to be working out for them. It was during
Speaker 1: this period of tension that an officer named Colonel Lewis
Speaker 1: Nicola wrote a letter to George Washington to say that
Speaker 1: they were colleagues would be incredibly generous to Nicola work
Speaker 1: acquaintances maybe. Niccola was born in Ireland, and before the
Speaker 1: Revolutionary War he lived in Philadelphia with a subscription circulating library.
Speaker 1: He went on to join the Continental Army to serve
Speaker 1: as City Major Philadelphia, and it was actually he who
Speaker 1: proposed that the Continental Congress form an Invalid Corps, a
Speaker 1: group of men who wouldn't be fit for actual combat,
Speaker 1: but could serve as guards or teachers for other soldiers.
Speaker 1: The corps wasn't quite a success. Nicola, as its commander,
Speaker 1: was plagued with challenges when it came to recruiting enough men,
Speaker 1: and he struggled with order and discipline in the ranks
Speaker 1: he commanded. And things were getting even harder for Nicola
Speaker 1: as Congress continually refused to honor their promises of wages
Speaker 1: and pensions. The wages they did get, Nicola believed where
Speaker 1: in paper money whose value had been so depreciated that
Speaker 1: was worth far less than promised. As the war drew
Speaker 1: to a close, Nicola was, as one historian characterized him,
Speaker 1: quote a man harassed and brooding over the universal gloom
Speaker 1: and sense of injustice at the neglect which the army
Speaker 1: was experiencing. He began his letter to George Washington explaining
Speaker 1: those grievances. Soldiers, he wrote, have quote much reason to
Speaker 1: fear that the future provision promised two officers by Congress
Speaker 1: will be little tended to when our services are no
Speaker 1: longer wanted, and that the recompense of all of our toils, hardships,
Speaker 1: expense of private fortune during several of the best years
Speaker 1: of our lives will be forgot and neglected by such
Speaker 1: as reap the benefits of our labor without suffering any
Speaker 1: of the hardships. It's at this point in the letter
Speaker 1: that Nicola notes that he is not quote a violent
Speaker 1: admirer of the republican form of government. The republics of Europe,
Speaker 1: which Nicola names Venice, Genoa, and Holland, were short lived
Speaker 1: in their periods of power when compared to monarchies. Let
Speaker 1: us consider the principal monarchies of Europe. Nicola writes, they
Speaker 1: have suffered great internal commotions, have worried each other, have
Speaker 1: had periods of vigor and weakness, yet they still subsist
Speaker 1: and shine with luster. But Nicola is also quick to
Speaker 1: point out that he is not a fan of absolute monarchy.
Speaker 1: The answer he's suggests isn't a government not dissimilar to
Speaker 1: the one that existed in Britain at the time, a
Speaker 1: constitutional monarchy. From there, Nicola proceeds to what he calls
Speaker 1: his scheme. What if Congress made good on all of
Speaker 1: their promises by giving soldiers tracts of land west of
Speaker 1: the existing colonies, where each individual soldier could quote have
Speaker 1: his due land with swamps, mountains, lakes, and rivers, and
Speaker 1: all of the soldiers could put their land together, quote
Speaker 1: into a distinct state under such mode of government as
Speaker 1: those military who choose to remove to it may agree upon.
Speaker 1: Congress could also put some of that pension in cash upfront,
Speaker 1: so that the soldiers in the new state could buy
Speaker 1: farm equipment. For his part, Nicola believes that that agreed
Speaker 1: upon government should be a constitutional monarchy. I quote. This
Speaker 1: war must have shown to all but to military men,
Speaker 1: in particular the weakness of republics and the exertion of
Speaker 1: the army that we've been able to make by being
Speaker 1: under a proper head. Therefore a little doubt when the
Speaker 1: benefits of a mixed government are pointed out and duly considered,
Speaker 1: But such will be readily adopted. In this case, it will,
Speaker 1: I believe, be uncontroverted that the same abilities which have
Speaker 1: led us through difficulties apparently insurmountable by human power, to
Speaker 1: victory and glory, those qualities that have merited and obtained
Speaker 1: the universal esteem and veneration of an army, would be
Speaker 1: most likely to conduct and direct us in these smoother
Speaker 1: paths of peace. In other words, soldiers understand how nice
Speaker 1: it is when it's clear who's in charge, and when
Speaker 1: that person in charge is as good at leading as
Speaker 1: you are, George dot dot dot, if you catch my
Speaker 1: drift quote. Some people have so connected the ideas of
Speaker 1: tyranny and monarchy as to find it very difficult to
Speaker 1: separate them. It may therefore be a requisite to give
Speaker 1: the head of such a constitution as I propose some
Speaker 1: title apparently more moderate, but if all other things were
Speaker 1: once adjusted, I believe strong argument might be produced for
Speaker 1: admitting the title of king, which I conceive would be
Speaker 1: attended with some material advantages. The letter is seven pages long,
Speaker 1: filled with adorable justifications and ideas. This new state is
Speaker 1: especially smart, Nicola writes, because won't Congress, and the existing
Speaker 1: colonies want soldiers on their western flank protecting them from
Speaker 1: Native Americans, and we can also protect them from Canada.
Speaker 1: It's a win win. The letter has the self delighted
Speaker 1: and slightly delusional energy of a friend who thinks he's
Speaker 1: figured out how to beat the house in a Vegas
Speaker 1: casino once and for all. It's somehow at the same
Speaker 1: time both naive and also the results of way too
Speaker 1: much thought and research. George Washington was wildly freaked out
Speaker 1: by this delusional pitch from a guy who was a
Speaker 1: polite work friend at best. Washington wrote his response the
Speaker 1: very day you received the letter, and just to make
Speaker 1: sure that he was on the record loud and clear,
Speaker 1: Washington had his secretary write an exact copy of his
Speaker 1: response to keep in his own files. I will read
Speaker 1: the entire second paragraph of his response here, just because
Speaker 1: I can't imagine a more brutal shutdown quote. I am
Speaker 1: much at a loss to conceive what part of my
Speaker 1: conduct could have given encouragement to an address which to
Speaker 1: me seems big with the greatest mischiefs that can befall
Speaker 1: my country. If I am not deceived in the knowledge
Speaker 1: of myself, you could not have found a person to
Speaker 1: whom your schemes are more disagreeable. At the same time,
Speaker 1: in justice to my own feeling, I must add that
Speaker 1: no man possesses a more sincere wish to see ample
Speaker 1: justice done to the army than I do. And as
Speaker 1: far as my powers and influence in a constitutional way extent,
Speaker 1: they shall be employed to the utmost of my abilities
Speaker 1: to affect it, should there be any occasion. Let me
Speaker 1: just conjure you, then, if you have any regard for
Speaker 1: your country, concern for yourself, or posterity, or respect to me,
Speaker 1: to banish these things from your mind, and never communicate
Speaker 1: as from yourself or anyone else, a sentiment of the
Speaker 1: like nature. With esteem, I am your most obedient servant.
Speaker 1: George Washington and Nicola received the message. Upon getting such
Speaker 1: an icy response from the man, he admired so much
Speaker 1: George Washington himself for what he thought was his brilliant,
Speaker 1: little intellectual idea. Nicola absolutely panicked. He wrote back not
Speaker 1: just once, but three times in a single week, backtracking
Speaker 1: and begging for George Washington's forgiveness, saying he must have
Speaker 1: been misunderstood, but he realizes he was way out of line.
Speaker 1: We don't have Washington's response to these frantic triple messages,
Speaker 1: but we assume that Nicola was forgiven and his little
Speaker 1: indiscretion forgotten, because the relationship between him and Washington returned
Speaker 1: soon enough to the way it had been before the letter,
Speaker 1: the eighteenth century equivalent of saying hi at the Christmas party. Washington,
Speaker 1: for his part, never told another person about Nicola's letter,
Speaker 1: lest the idea get any legs. This is the sole
Speaker 1: source and origin of the rumor that George Washington was
Speaker 1: offered the position of king. This is the closest that
Speaker 1: anyone got. One guy, not even a congressman, just a
Speaker 1: colonel writing a letter, floating a weather balloon for a
Speaker 1: new idea for what the soldiers could do after the war.
Speaker 1: Just a blue sky pitch from one guy who thinks
Speaker 1: monarchies are more efficient than republics and wanted to run
Speaker 1: his idea past the big guy. That's the historical basis
Speaker 1: for the story that some faceless capital t they offered
Speaker 1: George Washington a crown. I read so many direct excerpts
Speaker 1: above from Nicola and from Washington because I want to
Speaker 1: be fully transparent about how I get my information. To
Speaker 1: this day, historians completely mischaracterized that exchange. In two thousand four,
Speaker 1: a New York Times best settling biography of George Washington
Speaker 1: called His Excellency, covered the letter from Lewis Nicola by
Speaker 1: saying that the young officer wrote in his letter that
Speaker 1: certain disaster would befall postwar America unless Washington declared himself king.
Speaker 1: That's not what the letter says. The book also claims
Speaker 1: that Nicola put into writing an idea that several officers
Speaker 1: were whispering about. That's a wild stretch on multiple levels.
Speaker 1: Lewis knew his idea was outlandish and was going to
Speaker 1: be unpopular. He himself, in his letter calls it heterodox
Speaker 1: and jokes that some would hear his idea and think
Speaker 1: he should be burnt at the state. And again, Lewis
Speaker 1: was proposing a new state not suggesting an overthrow of
Speaker 1: the existing government. And again, to be clear, he doesn't
Speaker 1: really offer Washington the crown explicitly, it's just implied that book.
Speaker 1: His Excellency continued by saying that George Washington's stern response
Speaker 1: to Nicola made its way to King George the Third
Speaker 1: in England, who equipped that if George Washington actually did
Speaker 1: turn down the crown, he would be the greatest man
Speaker 1: in the world. The seed of the story is true,
Speaker 1: but it was what George the Third actually said fifteen
Speaker 1: years later when he heard that Washington was planning on
Speaker 1: retiring after two terms as president. I'm not a professional historian,
Speaker 1: and in the course of this podcast, I have absolutely
Speaker 1: made a number of errors, usually years I accidentally read
Speaker 1: wrong from my script and correct as soon as I can,
Speaker 1: and more often errors of pronunciation. And I don't mean
Speaker 1: to call out that biographer in some sort of gotcha.
Speaker 1: I just think it's important to reflect on how appealing
Speaker 1: mythologies can be so pervasive in our culture that they
Speaker 1: just become wrote things we assume are true because we've
Speaker 1: heard them repeated so many times that then we ourselves
Speaker 1: repeat the narrative of George Washington turning down the crown
Speaker 1: is such a fundamentally appealing one in the myth of
Speaker 1: how America came to be. And if you only read
Speaker 1: George Washington's reply, not the letter to which he was replying,
Speaker 1: it's easy to fill in the gaps of the story
Speaker 1: in your head and make it the story that you
Speaker 1: want to hear. Washington actually would drastically influence the shape
Speaker 1: of the American democracy before the end of the Revolutionary
Speaker 1: War and prevent mutiny against Congress, but he didn't do
Speaker 1: so with a response to a letter that no one
Speaker 1: else actually read. He did it with a pair of
Speaker 1: reading glasses. As things were growing more tense within the
Speaker 1: Continental Army, a delegation of officers arrived in Philadelphia to
Speaker 1: deliver a memo to Congress by hand. There would be
Speaker 1: quote fatal effects, they wrote, if Congress didn't supply what
Speaker 1: they had promised. The threat was almost too blatant to
Speaker 1: be considered implicit nationalists, by which I mean the congressman
Speaker 1: who supported a strong national govern ment like Morris and Hamilton's,
Speaker 1: were able to convince the soldiers to hold type while
Speaker 1: they fought to push their policies through in Congress. On
Speaker 1: one hand, the threat of military coup was terrifying. On
Speaker 1: the other hand, nationalists like Hamilton's We're well aware that
Speaker 1: from a political standpoint, the discontented military was a pretty
Speaker 1: good driving force for convincing his fellow congressman that they
Speaker 1: needed to give the federal government some actual power. To
Speaker 1: this day, historians argue whether the coup was a legitimate,
Speaker 1: impending course of action, or whether the threat was exaggerated
Speaker 1: for political benefit, but whether they were political ponds or not,
Speaker 1: the officers at Newburgh were getting restless. Early on the
Speaker 1: morning of March tene an unsigned letter circular related amongst
Speaker 1: the officers at Newburgh, calling for a meeting at eleven
Speaker 1: a m. The letter, later attributed to Major John Armstrong
Speaker 1: into camp to Washington's rival, General Ratio Gates, said that
Speaker 1: it was time for the army to take a bolder tone.
Speaker 1: You have fought for a country. The letter said that
Speaker 1: now tramples upon your rights, disdains your cries, and insults
Speaker 1: your distresses. And now, the letter said, Congress has left
Speaker 1: you to grow old in poverty, wretchedness, and contempt. Would
Speaker 1: they consent to quote wide through the vile miyer of
Speaker 1: dependency and owe the miserable remnant of that life to
Speaker 1: charity which has hithero been spent in honor. As Professor
Speaker 1: Richard Cohen phrases, that if so, they would be pitied
Speaker 1: ridiculed for suffering this last indignity. They had bled too much.
Speaker 1: They still had their swords. There were two courses of action,
Speaker 1: the anonymous letter posited if Congress didn't provide the money
Speaker 1: they promised, either the army should disband and leave the
Speaker 1: brand new nation defenseless, or once the war ended, they
Speaker 1: should refuse to disband. After all, who was Congress to
Speaker 1: deny them when they were the ones with weapons. Upon
Speaker 1: hearing about the unofficial meeting, George Washington formally objected. He
Speaker 1: scheduled an official meeting four days later, and implying that
Speaker 1: he wouldn't attend himself, he asked for a full report
Speaker 1: to be sent to him after it was over. Four
Speaker 1: days later, on March fifteenth, Gates gabbled in the meeting,
Speaker 1: which took place at Camp in a building known as
Speaker 1: the Temple. But before Gates could begin with the speech
Speaker 1: he had prepared, the door opened. To everyone's surprise, General
Speaker 1: George Washington strode into the building and quietly asked John
Speaker 1: Gates if he might be permitted to speak. Absolutely stunned,
Speaker 1: Gates relinquished the floor to his superior. Washington looked at
Speaker 1: the faces of his officers in the audience. The men,
Speaker 1: usually so reverential, urging on worshipful when it came to Washington,
Speaker 1: were visibly frustrated. Even Washington's presence didn't dispel the air
Speaker 1: of discontent, of unhappiness, of impatience in the room. Still,
Speaker 1: George Washington spoke calmly and gave what would come to
Speaker 1: be known as the New Burgh Address. In it, he
Speaker 1: denounced the veiled threats of mutiny against Congress. What can
Speaker 1: this writer of this anonymous letter have in view by
Speaker 1: recommending such measures? Can he be a friend to the army?
Speaker 1: Can he be a friend to this country? Rather? Is
Speaker 1: he not an insidious foe? Washington asked his officers to
Speaker 1: give once more distinguished proof of their unexampled patriotism and
Speaker 1: patient virtue, and place full confidence in the purity of
Speaker 1: the intentions of Congress. At this point, Washington took out
Speaker 1: a letter from a congressman that he wanted to read
Speaker 1: to his men. He stared at the paper for a moment,
Speaker 1: and then as the room fell quiet, he took out
Speaker 1: a pair of reading glasses. None of the men had
Speaker 1: ever seen Washington in reading glasses before. Gentleman George Washington said,
Speaker 1: you will permit me to put on my spectacles where
Speaker 1: I have not only grown gray but almost blind in
Speaker 1: the service of my country. Officers in the crowd felt
Speaker 1: tears come to their eyes. After Washington finished reading the letter,
Speaker 1: he folded it neatly, placed it into his pocket, and
Speaker 1: left the meeting hall. All of their anger, their talk
Speaker 1: of mutiny, it dissolved like morning fog. Washington sent a
Speaker 1: copy of the anonymous letter that had circulated to Congress,
Speaker 1: who found it distressing. As you might imagine, Alexander Hamilton's
Speaker 1: sprung into action, and he helped form a committee which
Speaker 1: ultimately finalized an agreement that would provide soldiers five full
Speaker 1: years of pay after they retired instead of the lifetime
Speaker 1: half pay. The crisis was averted. Many challenges still threatened
Speaker 1: the new nation, but for the time being, its own
Speaker 1: army wasn't one of them. Washington's charisma and the loyalty
Speaker 1: that he inspired in his troops was a formidable force,
Speaker 1: the type of force that should he have wanted to
Speaker 1: become king, maybe would have allowed him to do so,
Speaker 1: But that's a hypothetical. What George Washington actually did when
Speaker 1: faced with soldiers discontent at the end of the Revolutionary War,
Speaker 1: how he secured the nation against military control in favor
Speaker 1: of loyalty to Congress is more than interesting and dramatic
Speaker 1: enough to hold our attention. But still the man who
Speaker 1: would be King story endures. After all, We do all
Speaker 1: love the allure and implied glamor of any story with
Speaker 1: a connection, however tangential to a monarchy, Don't I know it?
Speaker 1: That's the story of George Washington's offer to become king.
Speaker 1: But keep listening after a brief sponsor break to hear
Speaker 1: about his extremely interesting family legacy and a quick personal note.
Speaker 1: Noble Blood is on Patreon. If you want to support
Speaker 1: me and the show, go to patreon dot com that
Speaker 1: slash Noble Blood Tales, where you can subscribe to get
Speaker 1: behind the scenes access to bibliographies, episode scripts, first access
Speaker 1: to merch and eventually bonus podcast episodes. But support for
Speaker 1: the Patreon is completely voluntary, just like states requisitions of
Speaker 1: funds under the articles of the Confederation. Really the best
Speaker 1: way to support the show is just to keep listening.
Speaker 1: It will always be free to listen to and I
Speaker 1: truly cannot thank you enough for listening and supporting the
Speaker 1: show that way. If at this point you the listener,
Speaker 1: are frustrated that I did an entire episode about someone
Speaker 1: not becoming nobility, well I have a bit of good news.
Speaker 1: It's going to take a discussion of a family tree,
Speaker 1: so bear with me. George Washington's great grandfather was a
Speaker 1: man named Augustine Warner Jr. Among his children, he had
Speaker 1: two daughters, Mary and Mildred. Mildred was George Washington's grandmother.
Speaker 1: Mary's descendants would have a slightly different path. Mary had
Speaker 1: a daughter, also named Mary. She married named Mary Porteus,
Speaker 1: would move with her husband from Virginia to Rippon in
Speaker 1: North Yorkshire in England. Her son, Reverend Robert Cortius, had
Speaker 1: a daughter who got married and became Mildred Hodgson. Mildred
Speaker 1: Hodgson had a son, Robert Hodgson Jr. Who became the
Speaker 1: Dean of Carlile. His daughter, Henrietta, married the daughter of
Speaker 1: the director of the East India Trading Company. And now
Speaker 1: that the family had married into money, that freed up
Speaker 1: Henrietta's daughter to marry into nobility. Henrietta's daughter, Francis Doris Smith,
Speaker 1: married Claude Bowes lyont Earl of Strathmore and Kinghorn. Their son,
Speaker 1: the four Earl of Strathmore and Kinghorn, had a daughter
Speaker 1: who married the Duke of York, who, upon the unexpected
Speaker 1: resignation of his older brother, became King George the sixth.
Speaker 1: That means that their daughter would eventually go on to
Speaker 1: become Queen Elizabeth the Second, the current reigning monarch of
Speaker 1: the United Kingdom. All of that is to say that
Speaker 1: George Washington and Queen Elizabeth the Second our second cousins
Speaker 1: seven times removed. I'm correct on that, I promise you.
Speaker 1: I checked it up and drew up a very messy
Speaker 1: family tree in my notebook just to make sure I
Speaker 1: was right. It's interesting, I mean, sort of everyone is
Speaker 1: related somehow if you can go back far enough. But
Speaker 1: with influential and dynastically people, those records are kept and
Speaker 1: are pretty easy to find if you know where to
Speaker 1: look for them. So there you have it for the
Speaker 1: noble blood purists. George Washington was never going to be king,
Speaker 1: but he would be the very distant second cousin to
Speaker 1: a Queen. Noble Blood is a production of I Heart
Speaker 1: Radio and Grimm and Mild from Aaron Minkey. The show
Speaker 1: is written and hosted by Dani Schwartz and produced by
Speaker 1: Aaron Mankey, Matt Frederick, Alex Williams, and Trevor Young. Noble
Speaker 1: Blood is on social media at Noble Blood Tales, and
Speaker 1: you can learn more about the show over at Noble
Speaker 1: blood Tales dot com. For more podcasts from I heart Radio,
Speaker 1: visit the I heart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever
Speaker 1: you listen to your favorite shows.