Remembering the indispensable man, part 2
My post below on George Washington elicited more of interest from readers. Historian John Steele Gordon writes to let us know that American Heritage has posted his column providing Lord Byron's take on George Washington: "Washington's birthday." Rick Moran of Right Wing Nuthouse writes:
I was happy to see your tribute to Washington published on the actual day of his birthday rather than on the "observed" day which is commonly called Presidents Day but is actually designated as "Washington's Birthday" by the government.See also Rick's "Make Washington's birthday a national holiday again."
One other point I might make about Washington's presence at the Constitutional Convention was that during debates about how much and what kind of powers the executive branch should have, the delegates were guided by the fact that it was universally recognized that Washington would be the first President. Flexner makes the point that this factor in the delegate's deliberations probably did more to encourage expansive powers for that office more than anything else since the delegates knew how lightly power rested on Washington's shoulders.
Michael McNeil of Impearls writes:
I would like to add a bit to what you said, and that is the emphasis that should be placed on Washington's *character*. For insight on that I'll turn to that delightful collection of imaginary dinner conversations with great personages of history -- prepared for the edification and inspiration of his grandchildren -- _Van Loon's Lives_, published in 1942, by Dutch-American historian and journalist Hendrik Willem van Loon, who arrived on America's shores in 1903 at the age of 19.Permit me to repeat myself: Let us send up our thanks to the Ancient of Days for this indispensable man.In the foreword to his described dinner with William of Orange (known as the Silent), founder of the 16th-century Dutch Republic (whose declaration of independence from the Habsburg Spanish Empire -- the Act of Abjuration -- left reverberations echoing down through history into our own Declaration of Independence), and George Washington, father some two centuries later of America's Republic, van Loon ended his introduction to the latter personage with this comment:
[I]t was he who founded our republic; it was this Virginian planter who set us free from foreign domination; it was this Southern aristocrat who started us off on our noble experiment in self-government, and he was able to do this because he was far ahead of his contemporaries in that one particular respect which counts more heavily in the scales of the gods than all other qualifications for glory and success put together.You've already pointed to Washington's critical role in the drafting and ratification of the Constitution -- which was also due to the force of his character on the Convention and the country. But there is another aspect in which Washington's character had an enormous impact on the future of the fledgling nation: the manner in which he departed the office of the Presidency. It so happens that in the entire centuries-long history of the Roman Empire (so similar and analogous to America in some ways, but in this one respect so different) there was only *one emperor* -- Diocletian -- who managed to retire at the end of his reign and spend the remainder of his days gardening. (Diocletian's retirement palace is now the historic core of the Croatian city of Split.) *All* other emperors of the Empire either died in office -- or were bloodily overthrown.George Washington was the embodiment of character.
Webster defines character as follows: "Highly developed or strongly marked moral qualities; individuality, esp. as distinguished by moral excellence; moral vigor or firmness, esp. as acquired through self-discipline; inhibitory control of one's instinctive impulses...."
I think that I can let it go at that. For my final comment upon both William of Orange and George Washington need consist of but one single word: CHARACTER.
Washington retired from office after two terms; he could have run again, but chose not to do so in order to set a lasting, shining example for future Presidents, which continued until, with World War II already raging round the world, Franklin Roosevelt chose to stand for a third term. And still, even today, America continues to transfer power wholly peacefully from one President to the next -- in what is really a revolution: every election in America is a revolution -- an entirely peaceful revolution, one that this country takes totally for granted.
Me, whenever I see the next peaceful transfer of power occur, given the Roman and other precedents throughout history, I think of it as almost a miracle.
