George Washington: The Reluctant President
It seemed as if everyone rejoiced at the election of our first chief executive except the man himself
- By Ron Chernow
- Illustration by Joe Ciardiello
- Smithsonian magazine, February 2011, Subscribe
(Page 4 of 4)
In the first line of his inaugural address, Washington expressed anxiety about his fitness for the presidency, saying that “no event could have filled me with greater anxieties” than the news brought to him by Charles Thomson. He had grown despondent, he said candidly, as he considered his own “inferior endowments from nature” and his lack of practice in civil government. He drew comfort, however, from the fact that the “Almighty Being” had overseen America’s birth. “No people can be bound to acknowledge and adore the invisible hand, which conducts the affairs of men, more than the people of the United States.” Perhaps referring obliquely to the fact that he suddenly seemed older, he called Mount Vernon “a retreat which was rendered every day more necessary, as well as more dear to me, by the addition of habit to inclination and of frequent interruptions in my health to the gradual waste committed on it by time.” In the earlier inaugural address drafted with David Humphreys, Washington had included a disclaimer about his health, telling how he had “prematurely grown old in the service of my country.”
Setting the pattern for future inaugural speeches, Washington didn’t delve into policy matters, but trumpeted the big themes that would govern his administration, the foremost being the triumph of national unity over “local prejudices or attachments” that might subvert the country or even tear it apart. National policy needed to be rooted in private morality, which relied on the “eternal rules of order and right” ordained by heaven itself. On the other hand, Washington refrained from endorsing any particular form of religion. Knowing how much was riding on this attempt at republican government, he said that “the sacred fire of liberty, and the destiny of the republican model of government, are justly considered as deeply, perhaps as finally staked, on the experiment entrusted to the hands of the American people.“
After this speech, Washington led a broad procession of delegates up Broadway, along streets lined by armed militia, to an Episcopal prayer service at St. Paul’s Chapel, where he was given his own canopied pew. After these devotions ended, Washington had his first chance to relax until the evening festivities. That night Lower Manhattan was converted into a shimmering fairyland of lights. From the residences of Chancellor Livingston and General Knox, Washington observed the fireworks at Bowling Green, a pyrotechnic display that flashed lights in the sky for two hours. Washington’s image was displayed in transparencies hung in many windows, throwing glowing images into the night. This sort of celebration, ironically, would have been familiar to Washington from the days when new royal governors arrived in Williamsburg and were greeted by bonfires, fireworks and illuminations in every window.
Excerpted from Washington: A Life. Copyright © Ron Chernow. With the permission of the publisher, The Penguin Press, a member of Penguin Group (USA) Inc.
Single Page « Previous 1 2 3 4
Subscribe now for more of Smithsonian's coverage on history, science and nature.
Related topics: George Washington American Revolution
Additional Sources
George Washington: A Biography, Volume Six: Patriot and President by Douglas Southall Freeman, Scribner & Sons, 1954









Comments (9)
I THINK IS INTERESTING, BUT THERE ARE SOME WORDS THAN I DON`T UNDERSTAND =(
Posted by manuel on February 11,2011 | 09:32 AM
This was a very interesting article to me. Presently I am reading "George Washington - the Christian" by William J. Johnson (The Abingdon Press, New York/Cincinnati, 1919). As it treats the time leading up to this inauguration, the content of Washington's correspondence corroborates Chernow's premise of reluctance. Washington seems to have had a very limited view of his own capabilities. He attributed his success as a general and his hope of success as president to Almighty God. This is attested in his public and private worship as well as his diary and correspondence. There can be no doubt of his deep, abiding faith. He was a communicant in good standing with the Protestant Episcopal Church (successor to the Church of England after the revolution), but he attended other services, including Presbyterian and Roman Catholic. He confessed no prejudice toward any man's faith, but this seemed to be confined to the Christian religions since Washington qualified his statement by saying that a man's faith should lead him to God. As a Christian himself, he would have subscribed to Jesus' statement, "No man comes to the Father except through me." (Gospel of John 14:6b)
Posted by Rev. Charles Hofmeister on February 9,2011 | 02:35 PM
George Washington, on his journey to his inauguration, did not arrive in Elizabethtown at the docks, and immediately climb aboard a barge to N.Y. He arrived at Boxwood Hall on Water Street (now East Jersey St.) the home of Elias Boudinot, the President of the Continental Congress. There he had lunch with Boudinot and his guests, William Livingston, John Jay, Richard Henry Lee, and Charles Carol. Washington's wife Martha was, at that time , a guest at William Livingston's home, Liberty Hall, on Morris Ave. in Elizabethtown.
Dan Pagdon
Posted by Dan Pagdon on February 7,2011 | 05:15 PM
Chernow’s a superb writer and a great story teller.
But his portrait suffers from laudatory boredom. This is the same old story told and retold since Mason Weems authored the first “history” of Washington in 1800 with the express purpose of making money, something he candidly admitted to his publisher.
There are contrary views, from Paul Longmore’s famous, The Invention of George Washington, to more present accounts, such as John Ferling’s, The Ascent of George Washington: The Hidden Political Genius of an American Icon.
In my view, both views lack context. To see Washington as something more than a reluctant president, or one secretly harboring a desire to be president, as is suggested in these books, a comparison that takes us beyond the confines of the United States is needed. This is really an elementary step given that the United States at that time was a product of an Atlantic World.
Of course, such a telling would gravitate to a figure most un-Washington at the surface level, Napoleon Bonaparte. But their similarities are astounding. These contemporaries both presided over an age of revolution, and this important context binds them together.
Alas, no such comparison exists, one that refocuses the debate of Washington by placing it in the international—Atlantic World—context it deserves.
That is, none exists until later this year, when a book I am co-authoring is to be released. Titled, Washington and Napoleon: Leadership in the Age of Revolution.
Longmore had suggested long ago that Washington was playing the part of general to secure a place in colonial society. Did he take that ambition to the presidency, a desire to cement his place as the greatest American? And how best to accomplish this? Would it be by feigning a reluctance to accept power?
Answers to these and other questions are what is “new” when studying Washington.
Matthew Flynn
Hisotry Professor, USMA, West Point
Posted by Matthew J. Flynn on February 5,2011 | 03:48 PM
Wow, what a great idea, I like it.
Posted by GemiHemi on February 4,2011 | 09:34 AM
After reading this article, I am sure it was daunting for George Washington to be faced with the task of being the leader of this new country. It was almost as if that people expected him to wave magic wand and fix everything. The same could be said for the men that occupied this office since Washington. Washington certainly realized that all of those celebrations were easiest thing he would attend to.
Posted by Rose Ann Jones on January 30,2011 | 03:41 PM
While reading of Washington's fear that he would disappoint the extravagant expectations of his countrymen, I could only rejoice that we now have presidential candidates who are unencumbered by such crippling doubts. Indeed, rather than wait for extravagant praise from others, they take the more dependable course and manufacture it themselves. Some even muse that their mere nomination for the office has signaled a moment when oceans have ceased to rise and the earth itself has begun to heal. I don't know about you, but I certainly prefer a politician of the modern kind rather than an old fuddy-duddy like George Washington. I want someone who will do something, and stopping the rise of oceans sounds pretty impressive to me.
Posted by Robert Pujat on January 26,2011 | 03:33 PM
Ron Chernow is not only a sophisticated historical biographer, but, at heart, he is also a very imaginative storyteller.
It's simple to see how Chernow's imagination allows his inaugural narrative to wander away from the facts at several critical points.
As an example, Chernow explains the presence of a Bible at the inauguration by saying, "That morning, a Congressional committee decided to add solemnity by having Washington place his hand on a Bible during the oath." There's a problem here, because there's no historical record of any congressional representative recommending the use of a Bible during the administration of the oath. In reality, the distinction of having Washington swear his oath on a Bible most likely belongs to NY Chancellor Robert Livingston.
Another example occurs where Chernow writes "the president finished the oath, he bent forward, seized the Bible and brought it to his lips." Unfortunately, if anyone saw Washington seize the Bible of British manufacture, no one other than Chernow has ever said so.
Next up, Chernow tells the reader: "very few people would have heard him [add 'So help me God'] anyway, since his voice was soft and breathy." It's a puzzle why Chernow chose to rev up the notion that "few people would have heard him anyway," because even if Washington spoke with a quiet voice, the French ministerial report filed by Count de Moustier included a complete transcription of the oath as it was heard by the Count while standing nearby on the balcony. In addition, William Duer, who witnessed the event from a position across the street from Federal Hall (say, forty feet away) wrote: "The words of the oath were audibly, distinctly repeated by Washington after the Chancellor, in a solemn and impressive manner, and after he had reverently kissed the book ... ."
Posted by Ray Soller on January 22,2011 | 10:03 AM
Thank you for a very interesting and informative book excerpt, which expands on a comprehensive biography, "Washington: The Indispensible Man," that I own. I had not realized he was that reluctant, though I knew from the bio that he had not wanted to serve. He also must have known about the unstated assumption of the 1787 Constitutional Convention that he would be the first to fill the presidency. Does the book treat that period?
This is also the first time the role of Madison has been detailed. At the same time he was Washington's confidante, a point not at all mentioned in the bio above, he was also the key legislator in the 1st Congress, pushing through the Bill of Rights, the first tariff legislation, the patent legislation and Hamilton's economic measures, among other things.
Posted by mark gruenberg on January 20,2011 | 12:41 AM