Bradburn, traces the president s military career from french and indian war, through the American Revolution. Here we are again. Welcome back to mt. Vernon. My name is doug bradburn. Im the president and ceo of George Washingtons mt. Vernon. And its been my delight to have these opportunities to talk about the story of George Washington. Last wednesday we were in our museum, this is what we call our Education Center here at mt. Vernon. It focuses on the life of George Washington. Really, a grand sense of his biography and why he matters and how he impacted the age that he lived in and why his legacy Still Matters to us today. Last time we were looking at his youth, a youth that youll remember we said is oftentimes enwrapped in romance. Its wrapped in myth. Its hard to get at because its the period where its least documented. But it really is an interesting period to understand George Washington in the context of the 18th century. Of course, hes most known to americans and perhaps to folks around the world as a great military commander, war for independence, through eight long years of war. And his identity as a warrior is a crucial one when we think about who was George Washington, how did he think of himself, as, and why does it matter today. George washington as a military commander is still studied regularly in the great military disciplines in this country at west point, the naval academy, as well as the war college. Washington is a fundamental figure in the establishment of an american tradition of leadership in arms. He was the first officer of the American Army. The United States army dates its own birth to his service. And the Continental Congress appointment of him taking over the army. So that story is important for thinking about the cultures and the traditions part of American Military power and military leadership today. George washington also was a man of the 18th century. He lived in a very different world. With different assumptions about how warfare should be conducted and what was needed. And some of that, i hope, will come out as well. What was different about the way an 18th century officer might organize troops. Versus today, as well. So lets get into it. I want to start with the french and indian war. George washingtons military education was through the process of fighting in the french and indian war. He had no experience leading men into battle. He had no experience creating a camp, building a supply train, or any of that. So he learned a lot of basics in the field through long service in the french and indian war, and also by many mistakes. He had a skirmish that turned into a nasty assassination as the french consider it. He lost one of his early commands at the battle of fort necessity, where he had the virginia regiment and other troops surrounded by british, with no native american allies, and ultimately had to surrender his post in that moment. And he survived to go on to great things in the french and indian war. He went on to be known as a very respected officer and respected colonial officer. Particularly by virginians, but also by colonials throughout north america. In part this had to do with his exploits at whats off called braddocks defeat. General edward braddock, the Great British he wasnt great. He was a fairly inexperienced by longserving british commander who was sent to attack ft. Decain in 1755. And George Washington served as a volunteer on his staff. At this Point Washington resigned his commission but braddock, in asking around for informed locals, braddock has his war meeting at the John Carlisle house. John carlyle was also married to a daughter of william fairfax. So George Washington was on the radar of people in alexandria when braddock was looking for expertise and he agreed to volunteer. Braddock agreed to have him. It served braddocks army ultimately, because George Washington was able to help lead the retreat after braddocks army was caught by an ambush of well prepared native americans. Braddocks whole army is decimated and washington is able to help guide this retreat through chaos, only a few miles away from the ohio river, which was their goal. George washington comes back after that and finds virginia undefeated. One of the things they did is built a big road. They carved out a road, an army road to make it easier for braddock to bring his army out there. Once they were defeated, it became a highway for native americans to come rushing back throughout the virginia frontier and assault the settlers in the shenandoah valley. So the colony of virginia begged George Washington to come back into service to become the colonel of the virginia regiment with a new plan essentially, a t Strategic Plan to defend the frontier. And washington found himself in an incredibly challenging position for the next few years. It was a defensive one where he only had about 1,000 men, he was supposed to have about 2,000 men, but it was never that many, across multiple forts in the shenandoah valley, intended to cover 400 miles essentially of frontier. And of course native americans are not stupid, they will not just attack the forts, they would go around those and attack the settlements, carry away captives and make civilian life miserable and dangerous on that frontier and keep the whole colony on edge. Washington was in a difficult position of having to defend the fronti frontier, but one of the things he did learn is how to command and train men, how to fight in what at that time was called the indian style in the woods, using light infantry tactics, learning how to track native american groups, and learning about supply and morale and motivation. There is an episode at one of the 40s that washington is in charge of where he had been away from for a while and comes back and there had been drunken carousing by some of the officers and washington goes through the process of a courtmartial, and he has to exercise punishment. After that, he writes an address to the virginia regiment, officers of the virginia regiment, which basically says that it takes more than the title to make the officer. And that it will make it his duty to serve with the utmost respect to the rules of comportment and training, but he would expect that of the others, as well. He said that he would punish with severity, but at the same time, he looks forward to rewarding the merit of the best. The brave and the most meritorious. And that notion he was going to reward merit was the key to understanding washingtons sense of leadership means in that environment. And he puts s an emphasis on training and reading and lists books that officers should read. So the other thing i want to bring up before we get into the American Revolutionary war more generally is that George Washington really become s alienated from the british world for the first time during his experience in the french and indian war. He trained the virginia regiment over these three long years of bloody campaigns, as he called them. They are an established military unit at the province wide level, but they arent whats called the regular british establishment. So theyre not part of the british army per se. Theyre provincial regiment. So George Washingtons commission as a colonel is not effective when hes around an officer who has a Kings Commission. A Kings Commission at the level of captain is supposed to be able to have authority over provincial colonels, which to George Washington is seen as an insult to his rank and honor. So this there is constant concern that the provincials are going to serve alongside regular troops and all of their officers will be graded in the eyes of the troops. So washington was trying to get his own commission and his whole regimen put on a british establishment that equalizes his own status within the british army more generally, but also would do the same for his fellow officers. He had 60 or 70 officers in the virginia regiment. This comes to a head a couple times throughout the course of the french and indian war and he fails to get this recognition. He thinks the great opportunity has emerged with the appointment of a new british commander in chief in about 1756 or 7, which is the earl of loudoun, john campbell, the earl of loudoun. John campbell is a scottsman. He is also a nobleman, the earl of loudoun. And he is appointed the commander and chief. Hes also appointed the royal governor of virginia, which is really point, because the royal governor of virginia obviously represents the throne, the crown in the virginia colony. Virginia is mostly run by what are called lieutenant dwofr ngo. So we have a royal governor, he appoints a Lieutenant Governor who goes and runs the colony on behalf of the actual governor. Most of the time he stays in scotland or in england collecting his salary, but not actually doing anything. In this case, all of a sudden, the royal governor of virginia, the real royal governor, the big cheese, is coming to the colonies. Hes also the commander in chief of all the forces. So heres George Washington think thing is perfect for me, because im the colonel of the virginia regiment, so i have that connection to this royal governor. Plus, im obviously serving in this war, so has that connection to the commander in chief. Plus ive got all this experience in fighting in this war. He has a strategic idea that he wants to bring to his superiors. He wants to go on the offensive. He knows that they can take the forks of the ohio, where the french where built ft. Duchesne, thats the launches point of native american raids southward into pennsylvania from the forks of the ohio. Its a place where the americans are coming from canada and other places coming down and launching raids into the frontier of pennsylvania, virginia, North Carolina and even further south. So if you could take ft. Duchesne, you could cut off that whole regions ability to sustain native warfare on the frontier. Washington knows this. It is the hive that they have to destroy. He wants to go on a mission, he wants to convince the new commander in chief, lord loudoun, to make this assault on the ohio. So what does he do . He takes his he writes a very flattering letter to lord loudoun. He names his new fort after loudoun. He writes a flattering letter that were so delighted that youre now in charge. He goes to give where he is. And loudoun, of course, hes the commander in chief of the british army. This is an idea about what they should be doing. That is typically not the way that these sorts of decisions are made. So washington is put on ice. Here he is cooling his jets for two weeks in philadelphia trying to get the attention of lord loudoun. He is finally allowed to see him whanld does loudoun do . He says i have no interest in hearing your ideas, young man. Washington is only 24 at the time. From loudouns point of view, from little experience. And he is a provincial to begin with, so he doesnt know about warfare from the perspective of a european. So not only do they go on the offensive, but washingtons virginia blues, this regiment that hes trained over these years, hes going to have to lose some of his men who will be sent to south carolina. So washington emerges from this meeting completely humiliated and angry. And writes what i called the smoking gun letter that he writes to the Lieutenant Governor of washington, who he has been working, and he says, i cannot conceive that americans, only because theyre not british, will be denied the rights of british subjects. Hes essentially saying how come we arent treated equally with the british . He goes on to point out there is no other regimen that served three bloody campaigns without recognition. And that idea that americans are lesser than the british comes through very powerfully in an angry way. I think that this is the crucial moment if anyone was to ask why does George Washington ultimately become a rebel against the king . Who he served in the french and indian war. This experience is one of those moments you can point to sea say there is poor George Washington being treated like a dog, and he is never going to forget it. So ultimately, the french and indian war, washington does participate one other thing about loudoun ill say. To give you a sense of the character of john campbell, Benjamin Franklin said of lord loudoun, hes like st. George on the tavern side. Always on horseback but never going anywhere. You get the sense of the man who played a great soldier but never did much. Ultimately, George Washington does participate in a successful march on ft. Duchesne. He goes a forbes campaign. That was in 1758. In that campaign, he believes he has a major impact on helping to lay out the plan of the line of march, because he has experience with this sort of wood fighting. He also even though he doesnt get what he wanted, he wanted fors to take the same route that braddock did, but forbes took a longer but flatter route through pennsylvania. Ultimately had the same success the french left the fort before the british arrived. So that basically ended the french and indian war in the south. The french had no way to project power south of the great lakes. So when that was over, George Washington resigned his commission. It was clear that his ambition in the military was not going to be in the british army. He resigns his commission, marries marsha washington and embarks on his next year as a virginia planter. It is really interesting to see that as connected. That he is turning his back on a military career that has been denied him. And now hes really going to become that virginia planter that he had never had been. And to do that he brings martha to mt. Vernon and the next faze of his life begins. Okay, lets go fast forward then to the American Revolutionary war and why dont i take a question as a way to get into it. As a way to think about George Washington as a soldier. Sure, so washington was one of historys greatest generals, who who were his mentors and how did he learn strategies during wartime . The question is about washington considering that he is one of the greatest generals, and i will submit that he is and we can argue that and why we have to think about him that way. So who were his mentors in arms . How did he learn . A couple interesting things, he learned by doing here. One of the incredible things you see about him is that he will fail or blunder and make mistakes. But he clearly learns from his experiences in the french and indian war. And also in the American Revolution as we will talk about as well. But he was also a great reader of all the military books of the age. He clearly learned a lot from braddock and the officers who surrounded him. People like thomas gage that he will later faus off against in the boston theater. But also you know you ran all of the latest, he started to focus particularly on what was sort of tracks, light infantry, a guerrilla war that we might call it today. But in the 18th century, the european mind of war far was fairly stuck in a tendency that had basically existed for almost 100 years. The technology had not changed that much. The british were using a musket. It was like the musket that they were using in 1705. They were using it in the wars around the 1710s. The brown bess musket, which the british used. And these were, you would mask fire power, and the goal was to outmaneuver, you know, outnumber the other teams infantry on the other side. It was very static in the way they were thinking about tactics and the approach to war fighting at the time. So washington is learning from this european tradition through their manuals that emphasize drill, lines of men with muskets that would march close together and shoot at pointblank range. Until the other side was weakened. Then they would charge by the bayonet. This is how european battles had been fought for hundreds of years. After the evolution of the bayonet on to the musket. And calvary was used in minimal ways as well in these major 18th century european battles. So washington could learn about this tendency of warfare. He also learned from the ancients as well. Interestingly, he read julius ceasar. And caesar, the commentaries on gall that washington was reading while he was defending the british frontier. Caesar is talking about the challenges of defeating an enemy, in this case the german tribes, that fought in a different way than the romans had been fighting. In a sense washington is learning from these tracks. You know the great military figures in the 18th century were you know you have the ancients like phabias. He was able to defeat hannibal. Youve got ceasar. Youve got the moderns. You have the 30 years war. You have maurice of nassau. You have william of orange. You have prince eugene. Youve got frederick the great. In washingtons time frederick the great is the living greatest general. He is the pinnacle of the highest level of what tactics had approached. Bringing fire power to bear. Emphasis on highly trained expensive permanent armies that you would not use very often and hopefully you would not not many of them would die because they were so expensive to train and maintain over the period a and so the warfare tended to be focused on siege craft. When you think about battles and fighting in europe, youre thinking about seizing rivers and fortresses. These armies move extremely slowly. Their supply lines can only be a couple days away at most. They require fodder and food. And horses. One military story described 18th century armies as sort of theyre shackled by their supply line. So imagine a giant man walking with shackles on. These armies move very slowly. Most battles that we think about are great sieges. Youre going to see a major change in this with napoleon. But the American Revolution is fought at a time of these older sensibilities about what warfare looked like in the 18th century. So he is schooled up there through reading, through the generals. And also as you see he evolves in his own thinking and understands how to command at a high level. The real challenge that he will face is that he never has commanded anything more than 2,000 men. Thats tiny. Even though he often doesnt have that many men directly under him, well see like in the new york theater you know the fight over new york at the very beginning of the war when washington commands about 25,000 men, he makes some fundamental mistakes how to arrange that army. So how about another question. Sure, mj wants to know what kind of reputation did washington have among the soldiers versus at home . The question is the reputation of washington amongst the soldiers. There is also an implicit question there. What was his reputation like to the enemy and to the other side . And this is important to recognize. He was ultimately beloved by the soldiers. In fact, a lot of his political power within the army, the fact that he never lost his command, had to do with the fact that there was a huge score of i dont think evidence soldiers but the officer corps that loved washington and believed he could do no wrong. This came through experience of working with him. He was, as as leader, a great listener. Welcoming other points of view. Promoting men of great talent. When it came to the regular soldiers, he was there. He stayed with the army in a way that generals did not do. So he is at valley forge in the winter. Hes at morristown through two brutal winters. He is there with the trips and never takes a furlough. They say that 90 of doing a job is showing up. Washington showed up. And the other thing he did when he was there, he wasnt like the kind of general he wasnt an omar bradley. He wasnt a soldiers general. He is not trying to go into peoples tents and be one of the guys in the middle of their adversity. He is trying to find them food and clothing. Hes writing letters. Hes getting the local authorities mobilized to support the foraging of this army. He is actively seen as trying to make life better for the army. He is not the one they blame when they dont have shoes, clothes, gun powder. They blame the Continental Congress, they blame their states, they blame the politicians. So washington is very popular among the soldiers. Much of that spreads into the american people, as well. There is a reason he is the most trusted man in america by the end of the war. Its not just the soldiers but the stories they tell him about. These soldiers dont serve for most of the war. They served for short periods, then go back to being a farmer. Its likely that everybody knew somebody who could claim to have served with George Washington or whose father or brother or uncle or cousin had served or seen him or talked about seeing him. Its really a remarkable thing. I want to talk about his reputation amongst his opponents. The british made some critical mistakes at the very beginning of the American Revolutionary war by underestimating the americans. The idea that colonials could fight. In 1775, even thomas gauge, who is married to an american, will basically say of new englanders, theyll be bold in council but wont show any stomach in the battle. They dont have the guts to do it there they like to talk a lot but they dont know how to fight or stick this out. They extend that for too long thinking about the americans in that way and they have no respect at all for their ability as soldiers. And part of that theres good reason for that. The European Army has to train infantry for two to five years before they can be expected to stand in a line taking fire, changing fire, and then winning a set piece battle. The colonials have never been able to do that and they dont have bayonets, they might snipe at officers from trees, but that is no way to win a battle so the british have good reason to think they have the advantage. What they didnt bargain for is the fact that they have tremendous leadership and they were flexible to train up troops. And ultimately washington is seen in europe as one of the greatest captains of the age, one of the great generals in worldis try. So particularly after he turns the tide of battle at the end of 1776 by crossing the delaware and those ten days, where he crosses the delaware, he maneuvers around a larger army, wins the battle of princeton, and forces, because of the way he sets up his troops afterwards, he forces them to lose all of jersey. He is the greatest military figure in europe as some of the finest ten day thats he has ever seen in history. So in all of the courts in europe, the name George Washington becomes this reputation of great generalship to be studied and admired. That attitude spreads also amongst the british generalship over time. That washington is not just some american bungler. Hi a very challenging foe to defeat. How often did washington get home during the war years . He didnt really get home at all during the war years. Home often came to him. He had a very close enslaved man, william lee, who served with him throughout the war. This is someone that washington knew. They had been in the hunt together, and now they were together in war, so that was part of washingtons day to day life, but also Martha Washington came to him he is put herself in danger, she also potential sides she also mobilized women support for the war, making cartridges, raising money, and was part of washingtons experience in the wintertime. When all he had was cares and stress, could he make the army survive another winter. Could he make sure they were alert and active until the winter was over . And martha was there to calm his mood and make him into a really a better man and a better leader. In fact, the officers in washingtons experience, would often celebrate with martha arrived at camp, because it would make him a little easier to deal with. A little less angry and wound up. He tended to be a control feek, and df norman would like to know, i heard that it was hugh mercer that crossed the delaware. Theres a lot of different people that can claim it to be their idea, including George Washington himself. The british are sending an Expeditionary Force to destroy this rebellion. George washington is set up under the guidance of charles lee, one of the commanders he puts in the defense of new york. George washington is in command of about 25,000 troops, in manhattan and along long island. What he does, and its incredibly strategically important for a lot of reasons. The hudson river is crucial because you cant let the british control the hudson. New york is a very important port. It is dominated by a lot of loyalists so its important to sort of keep control of that area. The Continental Congress wants George Washington to defend new york. So washington is there. Now, its also untenable, as we know from hindsight, new york is an island and its surrounded by navigable waterways for hundreds of miles, and George Washington has no navy. So an Amphibious Assault can outflank new york at any time, particularly given the ability of the American Army at that time to move rapidly and effectively. So George Washington stations all his troops on either manhattan or long island. Its a huge strategic blunder, because general howe, who commands the invasion, could simply have landed on Manhattan Island and outflanked George Washington and destroyed the whole army. Its hard to see how washington could have escaped, if at all. Fortunately, howe was not that enterprising of a commander, so he fought him first in long island and then fought him on Manhattan Island and allowed washington to ultimately escape destruction. In fact, its a series of losses, obviously, in long island. Washington loses, but he does have a successful retreat and they dont ultimately lose the core of their army. He loses a flurry of battles and skirmishes, and washington is going to lose a lot in these losses. Hes going to learn the value of maneuver. He sets up in manhattan numerous strong positions and howe outflanks every time, so the value of maneuver. He also understands the value of training. His troops cannot move effectively on the battlefield. He needs to train them to function as a proper infantry unit that can move without becoming chaotic, that can move and fight, that can not only hold ground and entrench but can fight effectively on a battlefield without losing sense of order and panicking. He also learns the value of naval power in the battle of manhattan. So these are three crucial things that hes going to need to ultimately triumph in the revolutionary war that hes allowed to learn in the series of losses in this blunder. So lets get to the main point, though. So his army ultimately, you know, does escape from manhattan, although he loses 3,000 men at fort washington. That loss is really the big loss, because now howe actually has something to claim victory about. Seizing new york, which is a town of 20,000 people, we think of new york city as this incredible metropolis. New york city is a port in north america. Its not in charge of anything outside its immediate interland. Its an important place and a valuable place. But for europeans to say i fought many battles and won the port of new york, its not actually a great victory without capturing a chunk of George Washingtons army, which he was able to do in fort washington. Its a huge blow to morale, to the cause, and a great celebration for british arms in that campaign. So washington is escaping from howe through new jersey, tracing back to philadelphia and being chased by the british across new jersey, and his army is disappearing. Men are leaving. Their enlistments are coming up at the end of the year, anyway. Theyve been beaten, theyre tired, they dont have any food. The army ultimately dwindles down to 3,000. Think about that, from 24,000 to 3,000, this army just sort of melts away like the snow. And washington, as early as november, late november of 1775, is trying to im sorry, late november 1776 dates matter in 1775, he was still in boston. In 1776, he starts thinking about the need to counteract the news of the loss of fort washington. That fell at the end of november, so with that loss, washington knew he needed something to change the narrative of this fight in a counterattack of some kind. He starts looking for opportunities. And thats ultimately what is presented to him with trenton. The british have chased him across the Delaware River, to new jersey almost. Theyre going into Winter Quarters with extensive posts throughout the state. Their behavior was terrible in new jersey, there was plunder, grapevine, destruction of property. You have one of the signers of the declaration of independence is a signature and declared loyalty to the crown. Its a huge propaganda challenge, but the militia starts rising in new jersey. Washington is being fed intelligence about the possibility of an attack, and that leads to the incredible decision to cross the delaware and turn the tide of the war, which washington did. In ten days he turns the tide of the war and transforms the narrative. Of course, general mercer dies at the battle of princeton. And mercer is bayoneted to death by troops we might believe, and there is good sense to believe that he is general washington at the time. Mercer is well dressed in a colonial uniform. He is fighting. He refuses to surrender, and hes bayoneted. Of course, most of the other american troops are fairly poorly dressed, pretty bedraggled, ragtag army, so mercer would have stood out in a really grand way, and that made people think this was possibly washington that they had. So thats a good question about whether mercer could get credit. I dont think you could say it was mercers idea alone. There were others, general cad wallinger in pennsylvania, general washington and his staff. There were a lot of opportunities. Mike would like to know what type of watercraft did washington and others use to cross the delaware . The crossing of the delaware, we think of it oftentimes with this beautiful painting by emanuel ludza from the 1850s. It was a german immigrant who painted this extraordinary painting at the metropolitan museum of art. You can see it online at our web page, you can see it at the mets web page. Its Washington Crossing the delaware where hes standing i dont remember where hes standing exactly, but hes standing looking forward at this massive river clogged with ice, which is much larger than the actual delaware. Then hes in this boat which is being rode by lots of different people, some of whom seem to represent real people like james monroe who was in the crossing and got wounded, actually. But also others who are meant to be indicative of the diversity of america. There is a woman in there, there is an africanamerican member of the marblehead regimen. There is a scotsman by his dress, you can tell. So he paints an interesting story about americas greatness in the 1850s, emphasizing diversity and washingtons leadership and really creating a great historical memory and interpretation, but its not really what actually happened. So the questions about how did washington actually cross the delaware, it would have been in very different style boats. Flat boats and what are called durham boats are shallow draft boats that were used for carting things along the river, but it actually was a mishmash of a lot of different crafts. The mexicans had been collecting all the different crafts on the Delaware River and making sure the british couldnt get them. Mostly these flat cargo boats, essentially, that were used. Washington likely would have been seated in a different fashion. There is a good painting by a cusslers painting is it cussler, matt . Anyway, you can see the cussler painting of Washington Crossing the delaware. In our winter patriots movie, you can see a representation of that in the snow. But it was a remarkable crossing nonetheless. It took many hours longer than washington had hoped, it almost led to disaster, but he had his luck with him that night. Question . There is a question, was there ever a time during the war that washingtons life was in great danger or that he faced maybe being captured . Was there ever a time during the war where washingtons life was in great danger . The answer is yes. There are at least three really documented moments in which people were afraid that washington was taking risks with his body in the face of enemy gunfire that was not considered to be smart, given that he was the indispensable man. One was in the battles in manhattan where he was so upset at the retreat of the americans that he started basically wanting to assault the lines himself, throw himself into bodily danger there and was held back and cried, are these the men with which i am going to defend america . Thats the line thats quoted in the hamilton musical and the great song in fact, its one of the great artistic renderings of the chaos and the intensity of those series of losses, you know, where theyre moving rapidly and theyre fighting and theyre dying and theyre actively engaged. The other one is the battle of princeton, famously, where washington gets within 30 yards. British line where colonel mahoud, who is a very experienced british officer, goes into battle on horseback with his spaniels leaping around him, very much in the spirit of gentlemanlike showing their agents of fire. And theyre much more disciplined and theyre defeating this pennsylvania militia and they come and rally the troops. We will have them pleasantly, Something Like that, and there is a story told how one officer closes his eyes because he cant bear to see washington being shot dead, which he seems has to happen because washington is basically right out there in the lines, firing back and forth. Another time in the revolutionary war that i think about, there is one in monmouth but i dont think he is in danger of battle at close arms at that point, but in yorktown, he is also known for getting up on the trenches surrounding yorktown with his spyglass observing the battle while there are shells rattling around him and bullets whizzing through the air, and often officers are saying, general, come away, and hell say, you can retire to the back if you like, i feel perfectly fine. So washington led from the front when it was necessary and put himself out there. The terrible defeat of braddock in the frenchindian war, he had multiple blows through his coat and his hat and interestingly unscratched. So washington was never wounded throughout his many wars and conflict. We have a multipart question from william. He would like to know what happened to general lee. Was he captured or did he i have in to the british. All right, so these are three questions. I dont know if i can do them all justice, but lets start with the first one which is a question about charles lee, was he captured, did he desert is to the british . Charles lee is a really interesting figure in American History and not well known today, certainly outside of people who study the American Revolution in europe. He was british but also an adopted virginian. He was not related to the virginia lee family that we think of. Hes an englishborn man. He serves in the french and indian war. He also serves in europe at the court of european princes as a military expert. He probably has a lot more military experience than George Washington and he has a huge grudge towards the british. He thought he was treated poorly by them, he thought he wasnt promoted properly, and he also is a very eccentric guy. Hes known to also not have any friends except for his dogs. He has like 20 dogs. His personality was like boiling water, quick to rage. But also quite a genius when it came to military affairs, and washington depends on him and the Congress Love him. John adams in particular think that hes very important to the americans, and they really want him to help washington because he knows a lot about siege warfare, he knows the european style of fighting and hes given a high command very early on. He is essential in the defense of charleston in the early times of the war when they defeat them, however, later, they would be conquered. He puts himself in charge of new york and does what everybody considers to be a pretty capable job with very little resources in short order. But charles lee also has a very different, and i would say, revolutionary notion of what the american strategy should be in the war. He thinks its a waste of time to try and fight the british in a traditional european manner. Washington always argues that the americans need to have a proper army thats trained and able to fight in the european way. Also kind of a revolutionary idea about how this should be the republican way of fighting in a republic. So charles lee is an interesting character. There is a great essay by john shy, one of the great military historians and a historian in the war which strategizes them for warfare. Charles lee does things that are highly questionable. Its clear he is writing that washington is not capable of managing this war. Washington has lost new york. Lee is not responding to George Washingtons inquiries very aggressively, and ultimately, when lee finally does start to bring his troops and meet up with washingtons troops in new jersey, hes very careless. He ends up getting himself captured at a crossroads by the british. He tries to sneak out of the house and ultimately ends up, you know, as a prisoner of war. There are many historians about this and confusion. Lee is said to have been captured, what we might consider traitorous behavior. This is something that comes to light much later, but lee is ultimately exchanged, and hes exchanged and comes back into the American Office in an Important Role in 1778 when George Washington is trying to figure out a way to take advantage of the british abandonment of philadelphia. The british, remember, they took philadelphia in 1777 and they abandoned on the side of the french, and now the theater of war is changed. It isnt just these 1 colonies. The british have to think about them, they have to think about the world because the french are going to fight on a much bigger scale, so it was seen as foolish to hold onto the town of philadelphia which really doesnt do much for them, so that army is going to march from philadelphia to new york in 1778. George washington wants to take advantage of this by, at the very least, harassing that army, at best finding the perfect location to attack with this better trained army. Now he has an army thats been training at valley forge with general von steuben, et cetera, so what happens . The british are marching back to new york. Charles lee is put in charge of a big section of the army. Washington wanted to put lafayette in charge of that wing, but he had pressure to put lee in that position, and lee, you know, claimed he could not serve if he was put in a position where he wasnt in command of this. Timid and not aggressive enough, that lee is not pressing an advantage and lee is retiring in the face of enemy when washington believes he should be holding his ground and assaulting. So washington dismisses him on the battlefield and there is later a very public court martial. In that court martial, lees reputation is destroyed, although hes not ultimately convicted. And thats end of charles lee as a significant figure in the American Revolutionary story. So i dont think there is any evidence to say that he goes over to the british. He is captured. But while hes in british hands, i think it is highly questionable what his behavior is. I think he thinks at that moment, which most people did, that the american cause was lost. Its right before the crossing of the delaware. Lee is likely looking for an escape hatch at that point and probably later regrets it. It was a threeparter, this question. The second one was about who was it about, gates . It says why did washington allow arnold to live . Why did washington allow Benedict Arnold to live . First off, he didnt capture Benedict Arnold. He would have executed Benedict Arnold if he could have gotten his hands on him. That is probably something that kept him up at night and enraged, because arnold had not only been a trusted commander and one of the great operational battlefield generals in the revolution and a hero to boot. A hero in the canada campaign, the loss at velkor island, essential at the battle of saratoga and trusted by George Washington. Somebody, in fact, George Washington wrote to him one of his famous quotes from cado after one of arnolds successes where he says, it is not to mortals to command success, but you have done it, arnold. You deserve it. Arnold was one of the great generals. Arnold was impatient and arnold just really disliked the french, and army betrays in a hideous way the american cause. Its one thing to go over to the british, but he did it in such a way as to try to get George Washington captured. It was a very important force controlling the hudson. Then not only does he go over to the british but he becomes a british general and attacks virginia, attacks it in a devastating manner with these raids. So arnold is notorious and washington would have liked Nothing Better than to string him up by the neck as a traitor to america if he could have gotten his hands on him. Thats why he let arnold live, because he never got him. Of course, arnold ultimately goes on to live a very despised life in britain as well. The last question of that is why was general gates even allowed a command . Why was general gates allowed a command. Granny gates, as he was known by the troops, had his support. He had a lot of support. He was an eminent figure and had support of many in congress, ultimately has the Great Success at the battle of saratoga, and there were many who thought that gates would be a better commander in chief. It was a small number who made these sort of rumblings because people were upset that washington couldnt win the battle of germantown, but troops thought it was a success because they actually scared the british into staying in philadelphia. This was after the battle of saratoga, so washingtons achievements by the untrained eye looked diminished in the face of gates. And gates you know, washington was in pressure to put gates in command and he ultimately puts him in charge of the Southern Army and gates makes complete hash of it. I think there was some statement about gates after the loss of the battle of calkens. Calkens . Anyway, gates loses and basically doesnt stop for 100 miles in his retreat. So someone mentioned that the only thing gates has won in the south is a horse race, or Something Like that. Nathaniel green is put in place. We know how that goes. We get lost and regroup and we fight again. He understood that the british army was disintegrating and they couldnt replace their army, so any costly victory was as good as a defeat to wallace in that campaign. He put gates in charge because there was political pressure for gates to be in charge, but once he showed he was competent, he wouldnt again have an important command. So those are three very good questions. Yeah, so lets fete another. So you would like to know were washington and hamilton as close as they were in the musical. I love hamilton, its a beautiful piece of art, but its shakespeare history, right . Its like shakespeares plays. Henry the v. It captures a lot of the spirit of the story, but it does it in a way that has to take all kinds of liberties with the actual truth. Now, George Washingtons relationship with Alexander Hamilton was the subject of biographies, as well as forest mcdonalds. I think his biography is as good on the financial work of hamilton as anything written about hamilton. There is a lot of romance placed upon hamilton in the revolutionary war. He was an aide to George Washington and George Washington had 25 aides through the course of the war. He was a very important aide, and washington recognized his , and washington recognizes his mind, and his genius, and hamilton of course his close group of friends. But he wasnt indispensable to George Washington, by any stretch of the imagination. He is responsible for winning the American Revolution, which is what you might think, watching the hamilton play. So George Washingtons relationship with hamilton was interesting and it was testing clearly as well. Because washington lost his time temper with hamilton, and hamilton being a pride four man basically resigned, washington try to apologize, hamilton refused the apology and went back in a huff and left the army. Hamilton really had to beg washington to let him back, to be a part of the york town campaign, there was no sense of like, i have to have my right hand man back, thats ridiculous. George washington was going to win your county whether hamilton state in new york where there hamilton was on the dark side of the moon. So that said, hamilton clearly has to be recognized as a man of great valor and as a hero of the war, and the fact that he did lead that assault in the york town campaign. He was given that command by law faith, not by George Washington, lafayette commanded the American Army of that way. The thing to remember about lafayette, people forget maybe well talk about it later, lafayette was an American Officer who happened to be french. He was not a french officer in the employ of king will be the 16th, the french army was led by and its own officer corps, lafayette was an American Officer and thats what makes it really unique in the story. A german procession, but hes an American Officer. And then theres the french army which is over here, so lafayette is in charge of the american wing at the battle of york town, and then theres a whole french wing at the bottom of your town as well. And its lafayette that gives hamilton a command, to attack. In the battle of york town. But clearly, washingtons relationship with hamilton is very close, and he trusts him, and it correspond with him in the 17 eighties, but it ultimately becomes his first secretary of the treasury, and i think its in that period where you really would say, hamilton and washington become crucially inseparable in the way that they are working together to assure the success of the american experiment. Its through that cabinet period i think, and historians tend to project that back on to the American Revolutionary war, which hamilton is obviously not in that position of authority and leadership. But he is rather trusted aide George Washington. How old was general washington when he resigned from this position . How old was George Washington when he resigned, his commission, thank you lucas for asking this question. This is one of the really important things to know about George Washington, the soldier. Is that George Washington at the end of the American Revolutionary war resigned his commission and went back into civilian life. Throughout the war, he had deferred to civilian authority, although he was given more and more power by the Continental Congress, almost unlimited dictatorial power, where the army was. Ultimately through the war, and there were even some that wanted him to become the king. Or imagine there is a possibility that he might become the permanent lord protector of the United States, like oliver crumble did at the end of the english civil war. But George Washington promised to give back his commission at the beginning of the war, and you follow through. The british after the successful treaty in 1783, finally leave you new york in november of 1783, and by december 23rd, 22nd. George washington has resigned his commission into the hands of the Continental Congress, for which all his authority flowed. Completing this incredible act to assure that america would be a government of laws, and not a government of men. A republic, not a monarchy, a place that believed in liberty, not a place that would be dictated by a benevolent dictator, or a tyranny. Washington is crucial, and this made his worldwide weaponization, so the question was, how old was he when he did that . And so, its 1783, hes born in 1732, so who can do the math . Hes 51 years old when he does that, so hes a little over 50. He became the prime the commander in chief of the Continental Army when hes 42 years old, so hes a 42yearold man, he ends up resigning when hes 51, thats really quite extraordinary. Theres a lot to know about George Washington the military leader, its a crucial part of the story of his evolution, as a great leader. Its a crucial part of the story about our American Military history as well. And washington is not infallible, but he is a tremendous political general, hes a great strategic general, ultimately. And i would argue hes not as bad as a tactician as many historians like to say, they say things like while he was in a very good tactician, and they will point to some blunders out along john long island and germantown. Some issues that can be certainly identified, but in the context of 18th century and the options that he had with his troops, as the moment, hes as good as any out there, in that mode of fighting. And he beats everybody that the british sent item, he ultimately win the war, which by the way its how you measure a great general ship, its who wins the last battle, not who wins the first battle. It will tell you the nature of combat, because theres a lot of look and a lot of things that people cant control. Once people start pulling guns out and shooting at each other. And on the strategic level, George Washington understood fundamentally the difference faces of that war, that they went through. Theres Different Things that the americans were striving to do before they declared independence. Theres Different Things that they were doing, in between declaring independence and when the french came in. Once the french came in, theres a different way to think about what is going to happen in the war, and what americans need to do. And after york town, theres a whole different way of thinking about what is his Important Role. And washington showed a tremendous flexibility in Strategic Thinking and the way that it was executed, that needs to be emphasized. Flexibility and military leadership is us important as any other quality, and washington had it in spades. So theres probably no other American General that was as good a political generalize him, eisenhower is probably the closest match, given the theater of war that he had to manage, on a much grander scale, but also political challenges, different nations, and alliances, Different Levels of government from a local to the state, to the ad hoc ad hoc to the national, to the international. George washington eisenhower share that grand strategy challenge that certainly washington mastered effectively and would use that to go on to become the first president of the United States. Certainly the model for president s for years and years to come. So thank you so much for the time we have spent together today, i look forward to answering more of your questions off line, keep sending them in. And remember, theres lots of resources on amount vernon. Org that you can enjoy if you are a student at home starting this, you can really go into the radical from articles encyclopedias, maps, interactive maps, to movies, to the actual primary documents. And also interviews with some of the great historians of this period, much better than i am, who have actually written indepth about it. I think of Stephen Brown was great gentleman warrior, i think of the great now deceased general palmer, who you can find some of his work on our website as well. Its a fascinating place to look, i would also recommend, if you like these videos subscribe to our news feeds, let everybody else know together, we can be inspired by our past and think about the country we want to be as we get through a Current Crisis we are in today. We can do great things when we Work Together as americans, and certainly, as americans being a good in the world, and i think this is a crisis which we will ultimately tell Great Stories about, the way americans came together, we valued heroes came in and fraud this disease on the front lines, i were credible doctors and nurses, and medical people and the folks who are at the Grocery Stores were out there working, thank you all so much for your work. I look forward to welcome you back to mount vernon on a better side of this. Thanks again, byebye. Weeknights this month, were featuring American History tv programs as a preview of whats available every weekend on cspan 3. Tonight we begin with womens history, the National World War One Museum and memorial hosted mona seagull to talk about her book piece on our terms. The global battle for womens rights after the First World War this Sacramento State history professor argues that a Diverse Group of women from around the world pushed for more rights and in the wake of world war i. And at some of these women who are attending the 1919 to 1920 paris peace