Matts parents, tim and debbie because cello, who are tim and debbie costello, and his wife. Sophia and theodore are at home. Wonderful kids. I would like to also welcome are welcome the members of our board of directors who are with us tonight. We have ann stock. [applause] and bob mcgee. [applause] and two are en route, Anita Mcbride and gail west. Both will be with us tonight. Steve strong is the national cochair of our white house, National Council on white house history. He and his wife andrea are here with us tonight. This is one of our most important groups here at the White House Historical association. Their support, their encouragement, their inspiration , their wisdom really puts the wind in the sales of so much of what we do. We are grateful to have you with us here tonight, steve. The program tonight, dr. Matt castillo costello is going to share with us about his brandnew book hot off the presses. This is the first time we are making it available. We are very proud of proud of matt. He is one of her historians here at the association. He has been with us now how long has it been . Three years on november 1 and he has made quite a mark and makes a contribution to the association. Prior to coming here he contributed to the George Washington bibliography project. He is a fellow at mount vernon and is currently doing two things i am particularly proud of. He is teaching a course at American University on white house history, the first time this has been done anywhere, to our knowledge. We hope to broaden that beyond American University so classrooms across the country can join virtually and we can expand that impact. It is really a cutting edge, first mover opportunity for us that we are very proud of. He is working on his next book, which will be published by the White House Historical association instead of Kansas University press which published this one. We are proud to have the opportunity to publish his next book on the renovation of the white house undertaken by president Theodore Roosevelt in the early 20th century. Following his remarks, this podium will be moved away from the stage so everyone here can have a clear view. And he and i will have a conversation, a few probing questions i have about his book. Then we will open the floor to questions and youre all invited to join us in the courtyard for refreshments following. Thank you very much for being here. Matt, i will turn it over to you. [applause] good evening and thank you for that wonderful introduction. It is truly a privilege to be here tonight with you all. One of the most gratifying exercises about finishing the book is that you get to write acknowledgments. You get to take time and really think through the people in the places that made this project possible. And i am thrilled that many of those people are here in this room today, including my colleagues here at the association. Thank you for your support, your encouragement. We share this accomplishment together. In the spirit of sharing something collectively, tonight im going to talk about the subject of the book, about the property of the nation. I am getting at is what im getting at is who owns history . I use washington and his tomb to explore how it unfolded in the 19th century. Now, this project began as an offshoot of research i was doing around the Washington Monument. As i was exploring different efforts by congress to build statues and memorials and monuments, i was drawn to this particular incident in 1832. Members of congress were debating and then voted in favor of removing George Washingtons body for mount vernon and into tombing it ind en the then just for the crypt in the capitol rotunda. As i dug deeper, pun intended, i discovered this was one of many attempts to physically remove washingtons body during the 19th century. Actually i was curious about what was happening exactly at the gravesite. I found some fascinating stories. The tomb served as an intersection for historical tourism, race and class relations, Popular Culture, religious expression, things that were transformed by the advent of political democracy. These illuminate how the democratic impulse transcended the present. The president. More americans sought to know, touch, and even have pieces of washingtons past. Different individuals interacted with washingtons final resting place at mount vernon and it was through these visits that citizens, writers, entrepreneurs and enslaved storytellers reimagined the collective memory of washington, democratizing the first president and creating this popularly held belief that he was, indeed, the property of the nation. But in order to talk about the memory making process, unfortunately we have to start with washingtons demise. On december 14, 1799, washington came down with what appeared to be a winter cold. It accelerated quickly. Studies now believe he probably suffered from acute epiglotitis, the swelling of the larynx. Whether it was bacterial or viral in nature, we are really not sure but the medical , treatments of the time only accelerated his to decliningated his health. Washington passed away between 10 00 and 11 00 at night on december 18, he was privately interred at mount vernon. Six days later, on christmas eve, 1799, president john adams asked for marthas consent to move her husbands body in the future to the capitol. We then see the apotheosis of washington. Rning was a national mou period up until his birthday, february 22, 1800. And gerald kaylor has done a great study telling the different funeral processions. You counted instances. Over 400 different this was an outpouring of National Grief the Young Country had never seen before. At mount vernon itself, letters of condolence streamed in, in particular to martha. Not all of these were some dish were sympathetic were sympathetic. Some were very opportunistic. So, for example, a number of individuals writing martha to ask for locks of her deceased husbands hair, which sounds strange to us, but it was pretty common in the 18th century and 19th century. One man claimed he had served with George Washington and asked martha if she could write a pardon on his behalf to the governor of pennsylvania because he had been accused of stealing a horse. They had not been able to find the real thief and only the widow of washington could save him from his unfortunate fate. She did not reply. Now, with this resolution to move washington in the future, this opened up a new question about hero worship in early america. How will we venerate our past through education, or public displays, statues, monuments, or something antithetical to the revolution, appear a middle appear middle pyramidal mazza liam . One of theosed to be tallest structures in the United States at the time. It would be made of granite and marble, very expensive. This issue of hero worship comes is this for a man or a pharaoh . With the United States be different from other countries . Will the United States be different from other countries . Obviously, theyre working parents there were comparisons with egypt, with rome, but they come down against a grand mazza liam for masouleum for washington. And the federalists kind of sunk their ship. Interringssue of washington in a new place never goes away. In 1816, the new owner of mount vernon, a Supreme Court justice who was the nephew of George Washington is solicited by the virginia General Assembly, and they propose moving washingtons body to richmond to lay underneath a monument that has not been built yet. Another attempt, this time by a state government. Congress gets wind of it and they inquire about moving washington again to the capito l. Has just been burned, but they are having these conversations. He declines. Freemasonry and freemasons come along in the 1820s and propose raising money to essentially build a new tomb in honor of George Washington and his masonic accomplishments. Of lodges propose putting together money and creating a National Lodge and having washington attached to it. What i argue is that in the 1820s keep in mind that freemasonry has taken a turn, theres the rise of the antimasonic party, and americans are becoming suspicious of what they see as elitist freemasons. They are still visiting washingtons grave, still attributing his memories to their own brotherhood, and saying criticism against us is criticizing washington himself. Aey are a great example of Societal Organization using washington as a shield to guard against criticism and anything like that. Really, it is where we see sort of a major transition in how washington is perceived, how he is marketed, and how people profit from it, this gentlemen. He is the last private owner of the mount vernon estate. He agrees to a contract in 1858. He formally vacates the estate he1860, but before then, labors to turn mount vernon into americas first historic tourism destination. Invested in several ventures hoping to capitalize on the public fascination with the famous relative. He negotiated the washington and alexandria steamboat companies so they could have direct access to the peer landing at mount vernon, essentially a constant flow of steamboats would come between alexandria and mount vernon. He even authorizes the building of a wooden plank walkway, which you can see in this photograph, and charged it to the company. Probably one of the funnier things i came across in my research was that this land was so valuable that there was a man named george page who arrived at mount vernon along the shoreline and was holding up a deed saying that he owned part of the shoreline of mount vernon. This through John Washington into a fit, but essentially the land he was claiming was technically underwater. It did not go too well for george page, but it does go to show you and george page also worked for the baltimore steam packet company. There were other companies operating, bringing people to mount vernon, who wanted that access as well. He took a cut of their ticket sales. You can see this is actually the advertisement for the thomas collier, the one that went down several times a week. This is where we see the making the estate more accessible and more affordable to people. It was relatively inexpensive. They started offering things like confectionery. Sometimes they had liquor, depending on what type of cruise , and they also had music. It became part of this larger experience americans enjoyed in the 19th century. He was not only investing in this particular company. He was taking a cut of their sales. He started buying stock and then he actually started selling woods on the estate. The idea behind it was to essentially package and sell pieces of washingtons world that American Consumers could be more directly connected to the man himself. This is a particular example. It was made by an english businessman named james cratchit, probably most famous for his installation of gas lighting at the capitol, but he also had this business on the side where he was manufacturing washington trinkets made from wood from the estate. Much like we are accustomed to today, when you ever whenever you get something that is supposed to be authentic, you get a certificate that goes with it so you can prove to people that it is legitimate. You get some poetry, washingtons face, but also a statement from the mayor of washington, d. C. Attesting to the character of the man in question and where the wood came from. In the certificate, he says it is from the same hill where George Washington is buried. That is particularly interesting because this was a place that was considered sacred to many americans, but when i actually went through his farm books and tried to plot out where he was taking this wood from, it was not always from the hill. I think John Augustine washington was good at sales. This is what people wanted to hear. In fact, some of the wood came from right along the shoreline. This was a place that George Washington had efficiently affectionately called hellhole because he could not get anything to grow there. That is technically part of the hill, so we will let that one slide. M,w, with the mount vernon ge this one dated november, 1856, was alsota washington selling things at mount vernon. And he wasing also collecting any type of revenue when people came in. For a time being, there was a daguerreotypist on the estate. Were amber of ways, they forerunner to the modern Association Taking over, and also that Association Taking over the strategies. Augustineh John Washington was profiting on the memory of washington, it was the enslaved community at mount vernon who were the primary storytellers and keepers of the tomb. These were the people who were onsite interpreters. They use that opportunity to right themselves and weave themselves into various washington legends. Some used these to extract tips from people who are maybe not as knowledgeable about George Washingtons life. Others were able to highlight washingtons treatment and, depending on the audience, his freeing of his sleeves in his slaves in his will, which was a very interesting conversation. Where as a situation washington gets called out by the liberator for not offering to slaves, and compare it essentially a slave account of a visit at mount vernon. Using slaves as tour guides was not a new idea. Washington left it to his sleeves to interact with strangers and interested patrons, but was shocked when he found out that his enslaved storytellers were telling him things about what was happening on telling them things about what was happening on the estate. They were not bound by the same rules of etiquette that they thought they should. Here this is postcivil war. This never goes away. Africanamericans are very much involved in telling the stories of washingtons life at mount vernon beyond the civil war. Sources,e in other because that is one of the difficult things, trying to track down the voices of the enslaved, as they is they played a prominent role in not only sharing accounts in newspapers and periodicals, but also in examples like this. There were many musical scores about washingtons tomb, but the image is very striking, because you can see there is an africanamerican man next to the tomb. He is a number of walking sticks lined up. Canesgton keynes became very popular in the 19th century. It tied people to the estate and was a symbol of affluence in the 19th century. There are many accounts of enslaved people either selling or marketing these walking sticks were making them for people sticks or making them for people. Apparently, this was much more utchetsful, because goes out of business and these enslaved storytellers keep selling them through the civil war. No matter how you look at it, whether they are cutting the wood for the keynes, there ore laying planks, selling things on site and americans es, africanamericans were involved in perpetuating these washington legends, but also challenging thoughts about how washington thought about things like emancipation. One of my particularly favorite theyes, because oftentimes would make comments about whether or not they were given some type of gratuity or tip, there was one instance where a gentleman was not able to give anything to a particularly elderly enslaved woman, and she asked for a pinch of tobacco. It just goes to show you that it was not always about money. Sometimes it was just whatever the visitor might have on them. There was an expectation that there would be in exchange for service, and africanamericans were a vital part of that. We also border on things that seem a little bit more unorthodox, a little bit strange. Really, starting from the 1830s therd, we see this trope of last servant of George Washington. That phrase gets repeated a lot. And by my count i found at least five last servants. It tells you more about why does that claim have meaning in the 19th century. From the 1830s onward, the founding generation is mostly gone and americans are looking to the next generation of political leaders and contemplating how will the country survive without that leadership. It is a claim the claim that association did carry some type of social weight. We see this time and time again. Some of my particular favorites. There was a man named john kerry who said he was 113 years old. He was seeking a pension from congress in 1843, and claimed he served washington in the french and indian war and the american revolution, so he deserves twice the pension. It does not go anywhere, but it is interesting that there are making there are people making that claim. It was moved to committee and then it got tabled, so it was believable to an extent. This continues postcivil war. Nameds a picture of a man jim mitchell in 1870. You can see, even though the civil war has ended, slavery has been abolished, that africanamericans are still taking up these roles, but they are doing it now on behalf of the Mount Vernon Association at mount vernon. You can see behind him walking sticks. They would have been the primary storytellers, but also selling items from the estate. That we haveime congress and the virginia General Assembly arguing and bickering about where washington should be buried, we have enslaved storytellers at mount vernon delivering different types of the washington experience. And then we also had this group of writers and poets and artists who are sharing different bits and pieces of washington lower, either through poetry , throughn lore poetry, biography, and visual artwork. They played a role in this process because most americans will not get to mount vernon in the 19th century. They will rely on things like visuals to fill in the gaps in what they know about washington. Grandson,s adopted George Washington custis. He became a washington publicist in spokesperson. He gave speeches, traveled the really, wrote plays that built up his adopted grandfathers legacy. Most important were his leg correct where his recollections published right before the civil war. You cannot forget mason locke weems, probably the most influential person making washington more popular in Popular Culture. His life of washington was in its 40th edition by 1825. He continued adding more material by oral histories and folklore, which was probably not true, but it was the Washington People wanted to hear about. He was relatable. He seemed more ordinary and or truly hard at improving himself and getting to the point where he needed to. We talk about how washington made his money. A big part was his marriage to martha. That is where a lot of his fortune came from, but, again, putting out this different image of washington is being much more humble, much more folksy. It resonated with more americans in the 19th century. Visuals to see these where, essentially, the old tomb and the new tomb coincide with the rise of the hudson river school. Part of what this school of artistic expression was getting at was highlighting the bounty and the discovered richness of the american discovered richness of the american landscape. You will see examples of this at the white house and the met, but mount vernon became a place that was continually captured. It always sets that same framework. You see the rustic setting, the tomb, and a humble abode. This is where the remains of George Washington are. Heres another engraving. But again, you can see things have kind of shifted. Now we have a new tomb, which is pointed toward the river. You can see the mansion, the potomac river. Here is another example. And the other thing that is coinciding with this is that the artists are not formally trained, either. When we talk about democratizing washingtons memory, there are more and more people that are maybe not necessarily trained in the formal sense, but they are also, in the way, claiming washington for themselves. In a way, claiming washington for themselves. For those that could afford to could not afford to make the trip to mount vernon, these visuals, along with literary works, poetry, and musical scores, made washingtons asting place a popular part of american Popular Culture. Many visitors found the tomb unacceptable and they thought this was a sacred place and that the tomb needed to reflect that sacredness. What many visitors start doing around that time period is talk about going on a pilgrimage to mount vernon. They use deliberately selected religious language. Items taken from mount vernon are considered relics. They themselves are pilgrims. Whether or not they believe in it in the judeochristian since that is debatable. Hadainly for americans who to invent the country and a government to go with that Country International culture that would work with institutions, washington was the natural selection. Because of this visitor traffic to mount vernon we hear these accounts of people stripping trees of their branches or pulling all the leaves off the lemon tree, that was a big there one. Was a great example where a man came and he dug up and filled three flower barrels. He just wanted mount vernon dirt. The original coffin washington was buried in was taken out of and put into a new coffin and transported to the new sarcophagus once it was made for the new tomb. He was moved there in 1831 and put into the marble sarcophagus in 1837. That goes to show you that these bits and pieces of what we would think of today as either not something most people would save or not really sure where they came from so most people would toss them, these are the types of things 19th century americans would hold onto. This is a closeup shot of the marble sarcophagus. This was done by a mason, the masons tiein again. John struthers offered to build a sarcophagus and the leslie the last living executor of the estate took him up on the offer. William strickland designed the crest and the eagle motif. He gives an interesting account of them going to mount vernon with the newly finished sarcophagus and finding out that somebody must have mismeasured and they cannot get the sarcophagus into the tomb. That is part of the reason why, when you go to mount vernon, there is this outer enclosure. They need to build a space that would be able to fit the sarcophagus. Georges and then marthas later. By building this new tomb this insured George Washington and mount vernon would remain intertwined forever. That meant any attempt to possess washington physically would mean purchasing the property. Both the federal government and state of virginia tried to do this, but neither could ever really fully reach the terms of the washington family. This is where our story ends. We see it from a Popular Culture side, the political side, and economic side, and historical side. Ultimately what it takes is an organized group, of private organization of likeminded people, to come together and raise the money to purchase the estate which included the tomb. That was part of the agreement. The Mount Vernon Ladies Association union emerges out of the thought process of anne pamela cunningham. She puts out the call to southern women to save it and when that does not get as far, she decides maybe we need northern women. She says it might not be a bad idea to have the ears of those capitalists of the north. She was right because if youre going to raise money, you need a larger infrastructure and you need more people involved. Against the advice of the male secretary and other southern women she is operating with she decides to open it up to northern women, creating a national organization. What they do is they print the mount vernon record which keeps track of fundraising, the they sell portraits and they enlist Edward Everett to essentially go around and give speeches about washington and donate ticket sales. It is a massive Fundraising Campaign and they are able to do it in only a few years. By 1860 the ladies have taken possession of the property. In one of their triumphant statements they say mount vernon now belongs to the nation. It is the property of the nation and this process seems like you would think this is the high point, but then we have the civil war. One of the immediate concerns for the ladies was what are we going to do in the event the federal government seizes mount vernon . It had seized darlington house where theres a cache of relics. What they acquire the property . What would happen if the union troops pushed underground, would they acquire the property . Heres a picture of union troops visiting the tomb. They adopted guidelines and try to remain as neutral as possible. One of the things they said is no firearms are allowed on the grounds, soldiers are allowed to visit and see the home of washington, but this was not supposed to be a place where the war was supposed to continue. This was supposed to be an island of neutrality. If you go to mount vernon today and you look at the face of the new tomb very closely, you will see initials. A lot of those are from union soldiers. What i argue is that they may not have been able to take washingtons body, but some of them were making a mark on that tomb for a deliberate reason. I think it was because they wanted to claim washington and were essentially putting their mark on why they were fighting this war. Part of it was to uphold the memory of washington as a constitutionalist, is a president. The south had a very different interpretation of washington was. In fact, the confederate seal featured George Washington on horseback. But washington was so malleable he could be used by the freemasons, he could be used by southerners, slaveowners, abolitionists, he fit the bill at different moments of his life. The ladies actually appoint a new york woman named sarah tracy. And a virginia man named Upton Herbert as superintendent of the property, so the pairing of a southerner and a northerner, this was supposed to put out the idea that this is neutral property, this is balanced. There was no reason for either side to bring the war to our doorstep. So the history of how americans remember George Washington tells us more about how we have continuously struggled to define and connect the significant figures in our national history. By constantly recasting washington, americans attempted to keep him relevant to inspire future citizens to use his wisdom for political purposes and promote shared religious beliefs. The competing efforts of these groups illuminate washingtons importance in how we define who we are as americans. The malleability of his memory speaks to the many paradoxes of the american character. The memory studies emphasize how social groups remember the past. But an integral part of this process is how groups determine what is remembered and what is forgotten. The memory of the republican washington served its purpose during the early republic, but as the country democratized, americans reimaged the symbol. The democratic washington came from humble origins. He lacked a formal education and tirelessly labored to achieve greatness in politics and personal wealth. This washington appealed to 19th century americans, many of whom faced the same conditions and obstacles in their own lives. It did not take much for americans to be convinced that washington had always supported political democracy. While sources remain mostly intact, how we conceptualize the past speaks to the challenges we face at the present. This evolution in memory continues today. As americans often cite, the founders justify political positions, beliefs, or to those or to criticize those of their opponents, washingtons words have been used to condemn the national debt, also youth to promote religious freedom, the second amendment, and the legalization of marijuana. These attempts are often filled with errors and sometimes historical ignorance. However distorted, the memory of washington brings gravitas to the issue at hand. The battle to reclaim George Washington endures. Americans deliberately chose to remember a washington that comforts their anxieties, confirms their beliefs, and adheres to their worldviews. Thank you. [applause] well, im going to pose just a few questions and hopefully you all will have some that you would like to ask as well. You did mention the property of the nation. And clearly, thats title of the book. Did that phrase have an origin elsewhere . And what is the meaning behind that . Dr. Costello this was a phrase that kept coming up in my research. I believe it originated with a man named Alexander Conte hanson. He was a federalist senator from maryland but also ran a prolific profederalist newspaper. Around the war of 1812, when they are talking about the destruction of the capital city, this idea of moving washington to richmond, theres the first instance where i saw of his newspaper talking about well, washington shouldnt belong to any one state. He belongs to the nation. He is the property of the nation. And i see that phrase pop up again and again and again. One of the things that i argued was that this was a part of a wider ethos, that all americans also felt that they had some rightful claim to washington. Thats where the property of the nation, that idea it picks up then, moving into the 1930s. You talked about his death and a few days later, his burial, but what was the funeral process between in those few days . How was he grieved by his family . How did the people come to mount vernon . Was there a service at mount vernon . And did faith play a role in that ceremony . Dr. Costello absolutely. Per washingtons instructions, he wanted it to be laid out three days to ensure that he was three dead, which was common at time. A lot of americans had this fear that they would be buried alive. So one of the things they would tell people make sure ive been expired for some time. Washington was laid out in the new room at mount vernon. He was dressed in grave clothes, put out on the portico overlooking the river. And thats where the funeral would have taken place. It was a private funeral. But they also sort of expected that it wouldnt be that private, that people would catch wind of it, citizens from the national government, alexandria, and his neighbors, and pretty soon, from the accounts that i have seen we are talking about hundreds of people as oppsed to, i think washington even said in private, in a private manner. So not all of his wishes where closely adhered to. Some of the pallbearers were freemasons, but there were they were rectors at some of the local churches. Again, we see that connection between freemasonry, the different schools and churches washington supported in his citizenry and private life, and those individuals being responsible for the funeral procession, down to the tomb, giving a series of last words, there is a volley fired, and washington is entombed. We saw images of the old tomb and the new tomb. Why were there two tombs . Why was it necessary at some point to have a new tomb . Dr. Costello so the old tomb probably was built by lawrence washington. By the time of washingtons death, it was a bit old. It is not a big tomb. So for washington family members that were buried there, space is limited. Washington, in his will, put aside money, wanted the family to build a new tomb, so that him and the remains of his family members could be moved there and then anyone else who came after them could also be buried there. But they waited 30 years to build the new tomb. So i dont know if part of it was just they didnt feel like it was a priority at that time. But thats the reason why there are two tombs. The old tomb that dates to the 17th and 18th centuries and the new tomb was built in 1831. And the old tomb is still there. It can still be seen. It has sort of a feeling like the stone has rolled away feeling when you see it. It is an interesting feel. Dr. Costello some americans certainly when they are visiting, they talk about they are in the presence of what seems to be a saint of sorts. At other times, some people saying, i wouldnt throw my livestock in Something Like this. There is a wide range of perceptions and what people put out there in terms of the press and there observations of the two tombs. You mentioned the will. There were a couple of wills, werent they . How was that resolved . Dr. Costello washington had two wills, and when he realized the end was probably near, he instructed his private secretary and martha to bring the wills. Washington kept one. And he burned the other. So what exactly was in that other will . Well never know. Its sort of one of those great, you know, mysteries in history. But the one that he did keep was very specific about how Different Things were going to be divided, including he freed about 123 people from the mount vernon estates. Washington freed the slaves that he owned in his own right. He couldnt free the slaves that belonged to the custis estate, which was about 150 or so. There were another 40 enslaved people working from neighboring plantations. So, for washington, who i think generally was very conservative, he didnt like to color outside of the lines a whole lot when it came to making a radical decision. That was one thing i think most people overlook, because, you know, his peers, thomas jefferson, James Madison, they did not take that course. I was interested, in your talk about those being enslaved to him and they became storytellers there at the estate. As they worked, did they continue talking about washington . Are there stories, is there evidence that they became biographers of the stories they told . Dr. Costello some of them did. The best example in the book is samuel anderson, who he popped up in the obituary in the 1840s. He essentially lives to be about 100 years old and he is in the process of being freed by the terms of the will, but he never goes very far, because a lot of these enslaved people intermarried with the slaves from the custis estate and had families, and one of the side effects of how the will was devised is that some people are going to be free and some werent. For a lot of them that had family that would still be enslaved, they either tried to stay as close as they could or they tried to follow along to the custis estate, with their grandchildren. That was going to be their best bet of keeping their family together. His body never left the estate from the time he died until the time he was buried. He never left the estate. There were all these attempts to move him to the capital, move him to richmond. Who stood in the way . Who prevented that from happening . Dr. Costello the washington family. They were the ones that really had the authority. I only mention Bushrod Washington. But, you know, martha had technically given her consent. She actually agreed to it. But the rotunda wasnt built. So it was a pipe dream of sorts, and then the rotunda wouldnt be finished until the late 1810s, so it was a foregone issue, and then when it came up again, then obviously things had changed a lot politically. And in terms of sectionalism. Even though they said martha approved it, you know, different representatives had different perspectives on how the will should be interpreted. Or how marthas letters should be interpreted. It sort of boiled down to, you know, virginians tended to say washington is in his native state. He was a virginian. So they were really putting their stamp on who washington was. He was a virginian. And members of the national government, whig representatives, they liked to argue dont you think delaware has much claim to George Washington as virginia . Or new york, or pennsylvania . So, really this issue of entombment speaks to some of the fissures that are happening between Political Parties at different moment in time. How did word get out . How did the word spread across the country that the great George Washington had died . What was the reaction nationally and how did people mourn and grieve him . Not just at mount vernon, but across the country . Dr. Costello it was a story that got picked up pretty quickly in the papers starting with the alexandria gazette, but then working its way northward to massachusetts and southward down to georgia. Pretty soon, within a week, americans knew George Washington was gone. It fell really to the local communities, the state legislatures, to decide what types of mourning that they were going to do. One that sticks out to me was that there was a mock funeral where there was an empty coffin that was paraded through the streets. It was supposed to represent that washington, even though his physical remains arent there, we are still going to have a state funeral of sorts. Even though he had left the presidency by the time he passed, it is amazing to me, of our 45 president s, eight of them have died in office. And we even have great mourning of our former president s and first ladies most recently, president bush and barbara bush. Did the washington funeral and the way he was mourned set a precedent for president ial mourning . Dr. Costello absolutely. Washington is looked toward for a lot of president ial precedents. So not only during his time in office, but how does a former president interact in our new political culture . What type of role are they supposed to have . Are they supposed to be active . Are they supposed to be vocal . Aside from the quasiwar, he was going to be called into military service again, he tried his best to stay out of those types of national affairs. But this idea of creating a state funeral wasnt really around until our first sitting president died in office, William Henry harrison. When they were planning harrisons funeral, where did they look . They looked at how the president had been mourned afterwards it was from the models of washington and jefferson and adams that they were able to sort of concoct what the new american state funeral would look like. And with harrison moving forward for sitting president s, it usually involved a Funeral Service in the east room. The remains would be taken to the capital rotunda. They lie in state. Theres a period of mourning and the transportation of the entombed in the capital. So, you know, if he was buried in the capitol . But from washington forward, you know, our leaders retire from politics, they go back to private life, and for the most part, they are privately interred. Lets wrap up our part of the conversation by talking about this place. We are the White House Historical association after all. Washington is only one of the 45 president s who did not live in the white house. He selected the young architect, james hoben, who built the white house. Did he ever see the white house . Did he see it under construction . Did he see it once it was finished . Dr. Costello he saw it once on his way back, after he was leaving the presidency, he had left the presidency. He was heading back to mount vernon from philadelphia. We know he stopped and saw it on his way. I dont believe he ever stepped foot inside, but he did see it. What i tell people today, even though washington didnt live in the white house, i mean, he had his hands in just about every facet of the buildings design, the planning, the execution, the selection of the architect, the plan. And washington was a pretty intense micromanager. So he was very involved every step of the way, so even though he didnt live there, it is a representation of what washington envisioned the home of the american head of state should be. Of course, theres the portrait in the east room but other images and references to washington in the white house today. Dr. Costello yeah, and theres a number of busts that are in the white house. We have the famous Gilbert Stuart reproduction. One of the ones i recently noticed is washington always seems to have a presence in the oval office. It does not matter if we are talking about republicans or democrats, because they do usually pick sides. As you can imagine. Republicans like republican president s and democrats like democratic president s. But it seems like George Washington is always above the fireplace in one form or another. I think, again, that also speaks to the importance of his legacy in terms of president ial leadership. In that it doesnt really matter who is sitting behind the desk in that office. Theyre still looking up. Washington is still watching them on the job, so to speak. President s and first ladies can walk out on this balcony, this truman balcony, look south, and see the Washington Monument. To me, the Washington Monument is different than the lincoln memorial, that has the statue of lincoln sitting there, the Jefferson Memorial of jefferson standing there. Why does washington get an obelisk and why is there not a great statue of George Washington there . Dr. Costello you know, they had tried to do a washington statue, and it had flopped pretty horrendously. So that might have been part of it. Horatio greeno was commissioned by congress to do a massive sculpture of George Washington. The original intent was to put it in the capitol rotunda, that it was going to be in the main level of the floor. What he created, it looked like a half naked George Washington. He was wearing a toga. He looks more like zeus. And by the time he finished it and it got to the United States in 1841, sensibilities about exposing your heroes. Most americans thought it was very distasteful. It was ugly. They essentially put it it was in the capital, but moved it outside of the capitol. I think it is now in one of the smithsonian museums, so they try tried to do a washington statue. It didnt really work well. The monument was started in 1848, finished in 1849, i 1884, i believe. And if we are connecting the president ial mourning, it is interesting. Zachary taylor was there for a fourth of july celebration. That is where he got sick and ended up expiring, but the idea was that it really supposed to it was not supposed to capture any one facet of his life. Oblisks were just supposed to be essentially giant memorials and people make their own memories of that person. They remember what they want to about that person. So i think with the monument, the idea behind it is that its a grand structure, its imposing. Its the center of the national mall. The center of the city that bears his name. Its not descriptive one way or the other. People can take from it what they want. They can see that washington is important to all of us. That washington was important to all of it. Would he recognize washington today . Not the happenings of the city, but the physical city itself . Dr. Costello i think he would recognize parts of it. A lot has changed. Certainly, he would recognize the president s house in the capital. He might recognize some of the streets because he was part of that surveying mission. He would probably know where they did and did not follow his plan because he was that meticulous. But i think from washingtons perspective, you know, he had always envisioned this city to be the seat of the capital of an empire, of a great, international power. The United States was not really there during washingtons presidency or really you know, for the first i dont know, 10 president s or so. The United States had a lot of other things on its plate, including western expansion. I think his vision of this place being a seat of power, one that would impress visiting foreign dignitaries and heads of state, but also be a place to educate citizens. I think he would see those things here. Questions in our audience . I know luke and mitch are out here with microphones. If you have a question, just raise your hand, please . Anybody . I promised you a question. Dr. Costello great. So beginning with f. D. R. , i believe at least some president s were entombed with their libraries, which kind of blurs the line between public patrimony, the ownership of a body. Though, i believe the tombs at least, like the museums, arent part of the National Archive system. But theyre attached to papers. My question is, was any effort made after washingtons death to link his legacy to his papers that the nation could buy or that the nation could own . I know dolly tried to sell her husbands papers. Did the washington family try to sell his papers to the country . Dr. Costello so there were some instances with washingtons papers. So the first one that comes to mind is john marshall. He essentially volunteers to the family that hes going to write the first major biography about George Washington. They are willing Bushrod Washington is willing to hand over the papers. And, every time that happens, when a new biographer gets involved and the family essentially says, here, have at it, depending on who youre dealing with, some of them will just take papers. Some of them will cut them up, like jared sparks. Its part of the reason why the letters of washington and at this point the papers product is up to about 150,000 different bits and pieces of letters. These letters become scattered. So the family holds onto the core collection, but george who would that does get confiscated. After the war theres a family orth lead backandforth between the lead family to get them back which they do eventually get some of the items back. But in terms of where theyre buried, and how does it relate to sort of the modern its interesting because those properties were essentially i mean, they were family properties, right . So Franklin Roosevelt being buried at hyde park is very similar to George Washington being buried at mount vernon. We have the new addition, the creation of the National Archives in the 1930s and then hinging president ial papers, attaching it to a site of mourning. I think pretty much every president has followed suit, at the exception of johnson who is very buried at the ranch in texas at stonewall, kennedy at arlington cemetery, but i think the rest of them are pretty much all at their president ial libraries. But the president ial libraries are all either boyhood homes or family homes. There is no cut and dry rule. It does seem that most modern president s see these two things go hand in hand. Whether it is paying respects but also, i think it is telling that our leaders want to be buried in the place where people are going to learn more about them, and they want to make their presidency more accessible, so people can study the good and the bad that comes with both. So i think its pretty interesting that roosevelt does that, but then a lot of anybody else . Suit. Question . I always thought George Washington had laid the cornerstone of the white house. Is that myth . Dr. Costello he did not. His name was on the plate, but he actually wasnt present at the ceremony. He was there for the laying of the cornerstone of the capitol. Ok, of the capital, but not of the white house. Dr. Costello mmhm. This is gail west on our board of directors, but we have the benefit of her serving on the Mount Vernon Ladies Association. So she is here with strong representation from both sides, and other good friends here, Melissa Mullens from the curator office, and other great friends of ours, we appreciate your friendship and all you do for our organization into night. [inaudible] and you cant miss it. Its massive. It is terrible. [laughter] any other questions . It hasnt aged well. [laughter] any other questions . I have one we can close with, and i know everyone is interested in mingling with you at the reception and buying a book and getting you to sign it, but you closed remarks by talking about how his reputation has morphed over the years, how different politicians of all stripes would interpret or reinterpret or quote or misquote him throughout time. Hes been the first president and all things to all americans, so to speak. Why and how how can George Washington be relevant today . You heard me tell a story at lunch today about someone, a young person who saw the portrait of washington and said, who is that . And the answer is, its George Washington, the father of our country. She said, this is an adult. She said, well, i have heard the name but i dont think i have ever seen a picture of him. So the tragedy of historical illiteracy and ignorance in our country that you referenced as well, how can we make George Washington more relevant and powerful today . Dr. Costello to your point, i think that historical illiteracy is a big problem. I know this is one of the things we talked about in terms of our organization and education and our role helping to educate the general public about the history of the white house. But this also speaks to educating the public about american history. One of the things that i think most benefits anybody who wants to learn more about those things is that washington, i mean, he is pretty much involved in all of the major historical moments for the founding of the country. So, if you want to talk about the revolution, the articles of confederation, constitution, the presidency, washington is the key player for all of these. Its not just that. If you want to learn more about how the country, on one hand, can talk about life, liberty, pursuit of happiness and freedom and equality, but at the same time have slavery still exist beyond the founding. Washington encountered that himself. It was something, later in life, being held up as a symbol of freedom, it struck him quite often, and it was something he never forgot about. I think it is one of the reasons why he decided to free his slaves. He was very cognizant of legacy and how important it was that he would be remembered for these types of decisions that he made. Because everybody looked at him for precedent. I think any time we talk about these types of historical topics, washington is a great lens for understanding, yes, these are different times, but also there are certain values and ideas that still resonate today. Thank you. Thank you all for being with us. This is a great book, available outside. You can get all of your Christmas Shopping done here tonight by buying them all and having matt inscribe it for you. Thank you for being with us and we invite you to the courtyard to enjoy the reception with us. Thank you very much. [applause] [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2020] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] prepared to cast off. You are watching american covering his street cspan style with event coverage, archival films, lectures and college classrooms, and visits to museums and historic places. All weekend, every weekend on cspan3. Next on lectures in history, Stanford University professor rakove teaches a class about some of the issues debated during the Constitutional Convention of 1787, such as the number of representatives for each state and the method of president ial elections. He described the arguments put forth by James Madison and how delegates tried to reach compromise, despite competing state interests. Prof. Rakove the general title for the lecture is three myths about the convention, and i will explain as we go along exactly what those myths are. Let me start just by picking up where we left off on wednesday. The main argument i was trying
vimarsana.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.