July 11, 2025 • 45 mins
In this compelling second installment of our series on Revolutionary War espionage, host Tony Sweet sits down with Dr. Lindsay Chervinsky, Executive Director of the George Washington Presidential Library, to uncover the shadowy world behind America’s fight for independence.
Dr. Chervinsky shares expert insights on George Washington as the “Spymaster-in-Chief,” revealing the sophisticated networks, coded messages, and double agents that turned the tide of the war. Beyond the battles and politics, they explore Washington’s leadership style, his mastery of deception, and the human stories behind the Culper Ring and other intelligence operations.
This episode offers a rare look at the man behind the myth—one who understood that winning hearts and minds sometimes required secrecy and subterfuge. Whether you're a history buff or simply curious about the hidden side of America’s founding, don’t miss this fascinating conversation about the secrets that built a nation.
🎙️ Hosted by Tony Sweet
🌐 Follow us:
@TheClubParanormal on Instagram | @ClubParanormal on Facebook
🔗 www.clubparanormal.com
#TruthBeTold #TonySweet #GeorgeWashington #RevolutionaryWar #Spies #Espionage #AmericanHistory #DrLindsayChervinsky #Podcast #HistoryPodcast #SecretsAndSpies
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/truth-be-told-paranormal--3589860/support.
Dr. Chervinsky shares expert insights on George Washington as the “Spymaster-in-Chief,” revealing the sophisticated networks, coded messages, and double agents that turned the tide of the war. Beyond the battles and politics, they explore Washington’s leadership style, his mastery of deception, and the human stories behind the Culper Ring and other intelligence operations.
This episode offers a rare look at the man behind the myth—one who understood that winning hearts and minds sometimes required secrecy and subterfuge. Whether you're a history buff or simply curious about the hidden side of America’s founding, don’t miss this fascinating conversation about the secrets that built a nation.
🎙️ Hosted by Tony Sweet
🌐 Follow us:
@TheClubParanormal on Instagram | @ClubParanormal on Facebook
🔗 www.clubparanormal.com
#TruthBeTold #TonySweet #GeorgeWashington #RevolutionaryWar #Spies #Espionage #AmericanHistory #DrLindsayChervinsky #Podcast #HistoryPodcast #SecretsAndSpies
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/truth-be-told-paranormal--3589860/support.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Well, this is part two of our series Secrets and
Spies of the Revolutionary War, with the emphasis on George Washington,
the father of our country. And in this episode we're
honored to be joined by doctor Lindsay Tchervinsky, executive director
of the George Washington Presidential Library, and together we'll peel
back the layers of myth and the legend to reveal
(00:23):
the complex, strategic, and often in secretive life of America's
first President, George Washington. We'll explore how George Washington not
just as a general and a statesman, but how he
dealt with espionage, deception, and psychological warfare, and what were
the secrets behind his success, How did his spy network
(00:43):
help him win the war? And what can we learn
about the man behind the legend. All, I'm Tony Sweet
with Truth be Told and please help me. Welcome to
the Truth Be Told Studios for the first time, doctor
Lindsay Trevinsky. Well, thank you so much for being here.
(01:04):
And I want to make sure in my intro that
I said your name right, doctor Lindsey chur Chirvinsky. Yes, yay,
I got it right. The blonde did not seep too
far in okay, great, well, thank you so much for
being here. I'm a big history buff. I've always loved
American history, even world history, but American history, of course,
(01:28):
because my family goes way back, you know, clear up
into the early sixteen sometimes late fifteen hundreds. My seventh
great grandfather was Richard Stockton, who was one of the
signers of the Declaration of Independence. And they all in
the Stockton family where I always called them before the Kennedys,
because almost every one of them were like senators and
(01:49):
congressmen and judges and you know, signers and all kinds
of different things. But I've always found it very fascinating
the secrets, the spies, the espionage, and some of the
secret societies that some of these leaders were part of.
And so I thought, when I read your bio and
(02:10):
saw your books, I'm like, oh, I have to have
her on and hopefully we can answer some stuff today.
Some stuff might go unanswered because we just don't know.
So let's start there. So I want to find out,
as the director executive director of the George Washington Presidential Library,
(02:35):
how did you approach this? And you see now see
your mission in preserving, interpreting Washington's legacy for the modern audience,
because you know, it's been quite a few years since
he's been president. How do you preserve and interpret his legacy?
Speaker 2 (02:57):
Such a great question. Well, you know, I think there
are a couple of things. So Vernon more broadly certainly
preserves the site of Mount Vernon, and that tells us
actually a lot about the evolution of American history, because
Washington was incredibly innovative with things like crop rotation and
using the newest scientific advancements to try and improve his
(03:19):
agricultural output. And when he adopted something, then other people
tended to as well. So he was one of the
first farmers in the area to adopt wheat instead of tobacco.
He was actually the creator of the American mule, which
was an essential part of settlement across the West. In
the United States more broadly, was a critical part of
(03:40):
average farms being able to function because horses were not
as efficient and were not as easy to maintain as mules.
So there are things like that that we can really
connect washington story in particular at Mount Vernon to the
sort of broad American story. But then at the Presidential Library,
we really focus on a lot of the precedents that
washing Hington established first as commander in chief and then
(04:03):
as president, because so much of our political system today,
and I would say even our political culture, our civic
culture rests on Norman custom. Actually very little of it
is written down, and so much of that Norman custom
comes from Washington. And so when we think about Washington's legacy,
(04:23):
we're not just talking about the things he did, or
talking about how did other presidents pick those up and
use them in their administrations, how did they discuss Washington,
how did they think about their role visa the Washington
And that brings us all the way up to today.
So this legacy is one that is not kept in
the eighteenth century, which can steps feel quite foreign and
(04:44):
distant to us, but rather explains a lot about our
current moment.
Speaker 1 (04:48):
And what is some of the primary sources or archival
materials that you use at the library that really most
illuminate the hit are less known aspects of you know,
Washington's leadership during this time and the Revolutionary War.
Speaker 2 (05:08):
Well, you know, we are, on one hand, blessed that
we continue to acquire documents and artifacts all of the time,
including a really cool letter that I will give as
an example for what you're talking to play. But unfortunately,
because Washington when he died, he left the bulk of
his papers and his books to his not his direct errors,
but his family members and over generations, they actually sold
(05:31):
off much of that material. So the bulk of it,
or i should say the largest majority of originals, is
at the Library of Congress, and then a lot of
it is scattered around the world. But that gives us
an opportunity to try and acquire the things that are
not in places like the Library of Congress, who are
very comfortable holding that. However, there is a lot of opportunity,
especially when you actually look at the document, to get
(05:54):
a better understanding of what Washington was intending. So one
of Washington's greatest contributions was ensuring the civilian control of
the military. And this is a foundational element of our republic.
We are run by a civilian government and it oversees
the military, and the military is kept separate from civilian life.
The military does not engage in domestic peace keeping. That
(06:17):
is very much a Washington, or at least partially a
Washington creation. Others obviously were committed to that too, and
one of the moments in which he ensures that that
happens is what's called the Newburg conspiracy, when a number
of officers towards the end of the war were worried
that Congress was going to basically send them home without
(06:37):
paying them the years of back pay they were owed,
and they started talking about ways that they might be
able to use military force to encourage force them to
pay that back pay, which is essentially a military coup.
Washington got wind of this. He called a meeting and
he went in and he started to read an address
(06:58):
in a way that was quite theatrical, in a way
that sometimes leaders need to be. So he pulls out
this dress. He then pulls out his spectacles, which were
not something you typically wore in polite company, and he said,
I apologize, I have gone blind and gray in service
to my nation. And the men in the room burst
(07:18):
into tears, and it totally diffused this situation. But two
weeks later he wrote a letter to a congressman that
he was quite close to, and this is the letter
that we recently acquired. It's an eleven page letter. It's
in his hand, which is quite revealing because typically he
had so much correspondence to do that. When he had
a letter that length, he would have a secretary write
(07:38):
it out, but it's in his hand, and he's talking
about his concern about safely decommissioning the army but also
ensuring that they're cared for and they're paid. So it's
directly speaking to this threat of the Newberg conspiracy. And
he underlined certain passages so you can see the emotion
in this letter and his commitment to it in a
way that if you're just reading the text it's not
(08:00):
always clear.
Speaker 1 (08:02):
I have to say that that that's pretty amazing, but
that's actually a T shirt that needs to be sold
at the gift shop Blind and Gray. I love that,
you know, the the there's so much that we don't
know about Washington, just as you said, because there's still
(08:24):
a lot of you know, documentation that has been dispersed.
Where do you get a lot of this new discoveries.
Is it directly from the people that have just you know,
went through paperwork and go, oh what is this and
they you know, bring it to you as you know,
(08:45):
to purchase, or do people come and just say I
want to donate it to the library, because I think
that's important for me I think I would want to
donate it just because it was part of American history.
But I'm you're laughing, so I'm assuming that's when, Well.
Speaker 2 (09:01):
No, I'm laughing because we welcome, we love that if
people have Washington letters or they want to give them
to us by all means. The challenge is that they
are also quite valuable, so often people don't want to
do that, although it is a you know, a donation
and a tax write off, so if you're thinking about that,
that is an option, you know. So a lot of
most of the letters we know about because there's the
(09:22):
Washington Papers Project, which is a multi decade project in
partnership with Mount Vernon and the University of Virginia Press,
which is putting together an edited collection of the Washington volumes.
And there are dozens and dozens and dozens of these volumes.
There are different series, so the Colonial series, the Revolutionary series,
the presidential series, et cetera. And so they went on
(09:43):
the way they start that project is they go around
the world to archives and they take scans of whatever
that archive has to use for this transcription project. So
most of the letters that are in at least somewhat
public institutions we know about, and sometimes those will come
up for auction, but occasionally letters are found. For example,
a letter was recently found at Gunston Hall, which was
(10:06):
George Mason's home, that no one knew about. It was
a unpublished, non non known letter, which is an amazing find.
The way we acquire letters is threefold. One sometimes there
are donations. Two sometimes things go up for auction, and
then we do bid on them depending on what the
letter is and its value. And then three Sometimes in
(10:29):
the case of this letter, a family owned it. A
woman owned it, and she had purchased it. It had
been in the family since I believe the nineteen thirties,
and the owner passed away and her estate was ready
to sell it, and so they got an estimate and
they said, you know, we would love to sell this
to Mount Vernon. We would love to avoid auction. Can we,
(10:51):
you know, sell it to you directly and save money
by not doing the bidding and not doing the auction
has fees. So we do also do private sales in
that particular the way, and so we always welcome people
with outreach if they have something that they believe is
Washington's We're happy to talk about it and see what
we can arrange.
Speaker 1 (11:09):
And I always encourage people. I do this myself, my grandparents,
my great my parents. Now that my father's ninety, I
just recently sold the family home. But I go through
all the paperwork. I don't just throw paperwork away because
you never know what is in there. In fact, my
(11:31):
dad had his great grandmother gave my dad. It's a picture.
I don't know if it's a postcard, I don't even know,
but it's Abraham Lincoln and it's from the late eighteen hundreds.
So yeah, and so if I would have just picked
it up and throw the trash away, I would have
(11:52):
thrown it away. But I'm just one of those people.
I look through everything. So I encourage people not to
just throw things away, but to look through in case
there is something of historical value, if it's family, personal business,
or you know, something of history, So please do that.
So let's I want to dive into like the Revolutionary
(12:15):
War era espionage, because Washington has often been described as
americus first spy master, And so I want to ask you,
what do you think people miss understand most about the
approach of espionage and this title of spymaster.
Speaker 2 (12:37):
Well, I do love the title, and I actually agree
with the title because he was very much his own
spymaster for the Continental Army. Partly that was because he
understood the more people that you have in on I'm aspiring,
the more likely it is to be growing up. He
was a little bit of a control freaks, so he
really liked to control important things, and he also wanted
(12:57):
to be aware of all of the information. So this
was not something he was going to really leave in
other people's hands, and he was instrumental in getting up
this spy ring setup. So first spy Master title I
approve of. I think there are a couple of things,
a couple of elements that I would add to perhaps
the first mythical story. The first is, anytime you have
(13:18):
a war dynamic like the one that is the Revolution, spine,
especially local spine in the local communities are essential. Because
the British Army was essentially an invading force trying to
establish control over a massive piece of territory and a
huge number of people, and we know from you know
wars that have occurred since then, you need a huge
(13:41):
amount of firepower, you need very strong supply lines, but
also you need local spies in order to make that work.
And Washington understood that, and he was keen to flip
the spy dynamic on its head and use spies to
weaken what was great Britain's military strength enable strength. They
were on paper, a much stronger opponent, and so his
(14:05):
local connections were a strength that he could use to
undermine the British position, and he did quite effectively. Washington
Times referred to this as having to win the hearts
and minds of the American people. So if you have
them on your side, they are more likely to give
you information. And he was happy to get information wherever
he got it, including you know, for example, after the
(14:27):
famous crossing the Delaware in the successful battle at Trenton,
he called what was called a council of war with
his officers and his aids, and they brought in a
couple of local farmers to talk to him about the terrain,
because he was kind of stuck in this position and
was going to be attacked by Cornwallace, and the farmers
(14:48):
knew about a secret path that would go around the
British forces that weren't on any maps, and so by
getting that local intel, he was able to basically sneak
by the British Force and march on to Princeton, where
they had an incredible victory. So that local intel, whether
it's secret or not, is essential. The other piece that
(15:10):
I would add is when we think of twenty first
century spycraft and the technology and the you know, complex codes,
that was not what was happening to be. You know,
they were using sort of experimenting with different kinds of ink.
They were experimenting, you know. The most famous was shown
in the show Turn where Anna Strong, who was probably
(15:34):
one of the culpeper Ring connections, would hang laundry in
a certain way to kind of symbolize movement. And they
did have sort of sim simple or relatively simple codes
that they would use. But you know, spies today could
break those codes like that, So we are not talking
(15:54):
about the very complex methodology that we have today.
Speaker 1 (15:59):
We didn't have the service at that time. And as
we use term now as open policy, what was his
open door policy? You said he took the information from
as much as he could. How did he know? I mean,
we weren't there, But how do we know who he
could trust and who he could not?
Speaker 2 (16:21):
This is a great question. So as President Washington had
no guards, no security. There was no gate outside the
president's house. Anyone could walk up to the street. As
commander in chief, initially he didn't have a whole lot
of security. I mean, he was surrounded by an army,
he didn't have anyone that was necessarily focused on his
personal security. And then they uncovered that there was actually
(16:42):
a plot to assassinate him, and they created what was
called the Lifeguard, and the Lifeguard was a group of
guards that were dedicated to preserving the baggage or taking
care of the baggage and headquarters and Washington security recognizing
that those were sort of points of weakness around his
personal safety, and they were officers that he personally selected
(17:05):
for their trustworthiness and they were deeply, deeply loyal to him.
And in honor of that, we actually have a group
of donors who are called the Lifeguard at Mount Vernon now,
which I think is a lovely tie in. So in
terms of who he could trust, Washington very much believed
in trust but verify. So he would get information from
(17:26):
let's say the farmers in this circumstance, but then he
would send some of his aids or his officers to
go investigate the path before they actually used it. So
he was very careful to always, you know, double check
the sources of things. He was very careful to double
check the validity of that information. Now that's not to
say that he always got this right. He didn't. You know,
(17:48):
a lot of his campaigns in seventeen seventy six were
undermined by the lack of that information, by not getting
enough information. But when he did get it, usually he
got it right.
Speaker 1 (18:00):
I love that. I love I because I always thought
as like to have you know, the protection that they
do now, and you know, to even up to Kennedy
when you know he was unfortunately assassinated, I couldn't even
imagine to live in that era of note really not
a lot of protection. So I'm glad he had some support. Though.
(18:24):
Could you talk a little bit more about a little
bit about the Culpa Ring and how it worked and
what made it so effective, you know, even despite this
little limited technol g as you know, as we do today.
Speaker 2 (18:41):
So the Culpoor Ring was largely focused around the New
York area and this was where the British forces had
most They had a stronghold for most of the war.
Once they kicked the UH. Once they kicked the American
forces out of New York City in seventeen seventy six,
they held onto the city until the end of the war,
when they vacated in seventeen eighty three. And so at
(19:04):
various points when Washington was considering either his next movement,
when he was considering a battle, when he was considering
an attack, when he was considering where to put his
winter quarters, he needed information on what the British were
up to and where they were going to go next.
And he was incredibly wise about the people that he
selected as potential spies. They were people that had a
(19:26):
lot of access to British officers but wouldn't necessarily be
suspicious because they were sort of invisible or you know,
social nobody's So the most famous is Hercules Mulligan, who
was a tailor and he would tailor the or you know,
adjust the uniforms. That's what I was looking for, uniforms
(19:47):
of the British forces. And while he was doing these sessions,
they would be talking about what they were going to
do next and not paying attention to him. And he
was then able to often put messages into clothing, like
sew them in to the seams and get them out
of the city. In that way, the culpor ring also
then included a number of people on the other side
of the harbor and the other side of the river,
(20:08):
because you have to get the information out of the
city to Washington. And this is where Anna Strong was
useful because she could send messages without actually having to
go anywhere or carry material, which is when you are
at your most vulnerable for a spy. The challenge with
the culpur ring is there's actually relatively little documentation about
(20:30):
who isn't it, what they were doing, how, who was
responsible for what, who was in charge of it, because
Washington intentionally left little written record. He understood that would
be a vulnerability and that would make it more likely
that this culpur ring would be broken up or would
be infiltrated. And so we just don't have that much information,
(20:51):
although I know we wish that we had more because
it's such a fascinating story.
Speaker 1 (20:56):
I wish that they would have thought about the time capsules,
you know, hide it, but yet leave leave leave somewhere
so we can keep a little bit more track of
our history. I'm going to jump into uh secret societies
when it comes to Freemason, because I know there are
several of the Founding fathers. In fact, my seventh grade
(21:20):
grandfather was a Freemason, and it often comes up in
discussion about the Founding Fathers. What was Washington's actual involvement
and how much influence did the Freemasons really have? I mean,
apparently a lot, because pretty much shaped Washington d C. So,
but at that period when washing George Washington's around, what's
(21:43):
your thoughts, Yeah, I mean.
Speaker 2 (21:45):
I think, you know, I think the influence of the
Freemasons in terms of shaping society is perhaps a little
bit overstated because it makes for a really good story
and you know movies like National Treasure, which of course
everyone loves it, and so you know, it does make
for a great a great film. But you know, it
was a critical element of civic society at the time,
(22:08):
and religion played an important part of that. But at
the era that Washington was living in, this was sort
of the age of Enlightenment, when most of the leaders
in society were incredibly well educated. They were reading, you know,
all of the Enlightenment thinkers from Europe. They were importing
books and discussing these things both publicly and then in private,
and so the Freemasons I think served as an important
(22:31):
part of the civic fabric because they gave a space
for people to think a little bit outside the box
of traditional religion or even traditional political culture. And also
tended to be a fairly I mean, it has its
own hierarchy, but it tends to be a fairly egalitarian gathering.
And as they were discussing creating a new new nation,
(22:52):
which inherently requires a new culture and a new political system,
that was a space to put forward some of these ideas.
So Washington was a member of a lodge. There continue
to be many lodges named after him, and they regularly
actually come to Vernon and you know, pay respects. There's
a day usually that they come and they lay a
wreath at his tomb. But I think that certainly there
(23:15):
are elements of Masonic thinking that were quite important to
the creation of Washington, d c. And how it was
laid out, and some of the elements in the architecture
and the design that they were trying to incorporate. But
these were also ideas that had been circulating in sort
of city planning and what an ideal city would look
like as well. As a very intentional nod to Roman
(23:38):
and Greek history of trying to bring forth the most
important values of what it means to be a republic,
to have virtuous citizenry, and a lot of the buildings
and the design of the city were meant to invoke
those principles.
Speaker 1 (23:53):
Yeah. Like I said, I've had the opportunity to join
the Freemasons, I didn't as of yet, just but I've
always found them fascinating because I've heard, you know a
lot of the answers that we do seek. They do
have some information, but you know, the TV shows do
enhance a lot of what movies and TV shows that
(24:17):
make us I think intrigue us even more. But do
you think these type of societies and networks that contributed
to a broader cultural of conspiracy thinking among revolutionaries and
their opponents.
Speaker 2 (24:32):
Or well, you know, Americans to a certain extent have
always been fans of conspiracies. And I think that that
is to a certain extent, when you have a democratic
society that is is calling for transparency and a lot
of its decision making process. When there isn't transparency, then
that can lead to conspiratoral thinking. And when you have
(24:55):
a society that does value freedom of speech and the
freedom of the press, although that has of course shifted
over time. Sometimes you are going to have space for
that type of thinking and it can proliferate. During the Revolution,
there was a sense that there wasn't necessarily a conspiracy,
but they blamed the British Cabinet, which met in secret.
(25:17):
There were no notes, there was no record of who
said what. They blamed the British cabinet for controlling the
king and turning the king against the American people, and
they believed that this was really the center for cronyism
and corruption at the highest levels. Now, I don't think
that many would go so far as to say that
there was a conspiracy to destroy the colonies or to
crush them, but that's often how it felt to them
(25:39):
because they couldn't penetrate what was happening behind those closed doors,
and so much of the design of the first federal
system and the Constitution passed in seventeen eighty nine is
crafted with that sort of transparency in mind. So they
actually rejected proposals for a cabinet for the president, they
rejected rosalsarious executive councils. They put that the executive department
(26:04):
secretaries should be giving their advice in writings. There was
a record of who said what and who did what.
And initially the Senate proceedings were not open to the press,
and there was a lot of pushback to that, and
that shifted in the first sort of in the first
decade to two decades of American history. So we can
see a lot of the concerns about secrecy playing out
(26:25):
in the early Republic.
Speaker 1 (26:28):
Yeah, and you mentioned Britain, but what role did other
European powers such as France and Spain and even secret
missionaries play behind the scenes and supporting the Revolutionary war.
Speaker 2 (26:46):
Well, there was a lot of initial clandestine support. So
some of it came through very wealthy individuals that were
sending shipments of arms and goods and money and food
to the American cause. The Marquis de Lafayette, of course,
is the most famous kind of you know, renting a
ship and going off himself to join the American army.
(27:06):
There were a lot of European soldiers who came over
to fight, sometimes for altruistic purposes and genuinely believing in
the cause, and sometimes because they didn't have a whole
lot of promotion in their army, and they thought that
they could get a general ship pretty easily in the
new Continental Army. But you know what's interesting is that
France was pretty supportive of the United States starting almost
(27:28):
immediately in the war, but didn't actually declare alliance with
the United States and didn't actually recognize independence until seventeen
seventy eight, which was two years, of course after the declaration.
So all of the sport that was taking place up
until that point was in theory clandestine. Now, of course
the British understood, all of a sudden, when you have arms,
(27:48):
you know, when you have muskets coming and guns coming
onto the field of battle that are from France. Doesn't
take a genius to put those two pieces together. So
they understood where the support was coming from. But in
theory they could maintain plausible deniability for diplomacy. Spain actually
never declared itself openly a lot allied with the United
(28:10):
States during the war. That came later, but they did
provide support, especially sort of through France, and so a
lot of that support came secretly, and the Netherlands were
a very important economic partner, but that partnership as well
didn't come until towards the end of the war, so
a lot of the support early on was secret.
Speaker 1 (28:29):
I don't know if if you saw the I think
it was Apple TV and it was I think it
was Franklin. It was the name of it. Did you
see that.
Speaker 2 (28:38):
I saw some of it. I didn't watch the entire series,
but I did watch some of it.
Speaker 1 (28:42):
I mean, I actually loved it, but it gave a
whole different side that we don't normally get to see.
And like, again, Hollywood adds it's flair, but I found
it very fascinating too.
Speaker 2 (28:54):
My main complaint with it was just the depiction of
John Adams is utterly ridiculous. And you know what's interesting, though,
is I was listening to an interview with the screen
playwriter and he actually also wrote the screenplay for John Adams,
the HBO mini series, and so what he said is
that series is through John Adams eyes, and this one
(29:15):
is through Franklin's size. But I actually think the depiction
of Franklin is a little bit fairer in the HBO
series than this one of John Adams, who just makes
it out to be this preposterous figure. And there were
certainly things that John Adams did wrong, but not in
that degree. But I think you're right that it does
get at the point where you know, France and its
(29:37):
support was essential for the United States to have success.
And we as Americans now tend not to think in
a global fashion because we're such a powerful nation we
don't have to. But in the Revolution and even you know,
for the first half of the nineteenth century, the United
States was a baby nation that had relatively little power,
and so the American people actually cared deeply and paid
(29:59):
very close attention to what happened to be on our
shores because it would have such a huge impact on
our nation, our economy, our ability to function. And so
Americans at the time did care deeply about what was
happening in.
Speaker 1 (30:13):
France, and Louisianna purchased. But the also the I've heard
many times, you know we America saved France. Well, yeah,
we helped save France, but we also they helped save
us to even get started. So that's what we're supposed
to be, you know, help each other out. But I
(30:35):
do want to talk about you mentioned it was.
Speaker 2 (30:36):
Actually a great story about that when General Pershing arrived
in Paris, towards the end of World War One, he
went to the tomb of Lafayette and he said, we
have arrived. So he was basically intentionally repaying that promise.
Speaker 1 (30:51):
See, there we go. I love it. And you mentioned
John Adams, and I do want to talk about just
real quick about your book Making the Presentency and what
surprised you most about Adam's influence on the office.
Speaker 2 (31:07):
Well, you know, my first book was on Washington and
the creation of the President's Cabinet, but it really focuses
how he basically creates the presidency because Article two is
so incredibly short and says so little about what the
day to day life or even the use of a
power would look like. But then I started to think about,
you know, what happens when Washington left office, because he
was such an unusual figure in our story. He's so
(31:31):
unparalleled in his stature and the respect that even people
who disagreed with him had for who he was in
his service, So so much of his power and so
much of his precedence were unchallenged or with very little pushback.
That was not going to be the case for any
of his successors. And so John Adams had the very
(31:52):
unenviable but essential task of following that and what that
would look like was going to be incredibly difficult, and
he knew it, and he did it anyway, recognizing that
in order for the presidency and the republic to survive,
someone had to be number two and had to ensure
that those precedents that Washington established continued in order to
(32:14):
actually be presidents, because if they're not repeated, then they're
just interesting historical anomalies. And so I was I think
I was impressed by his awareness of what he was doing,
of the point of his administration, and his commitment to
ensuring that both his transition into office and then his
transition out were done peacefully and in a way that
(32:36):
would lay the foundation for what it means to be
a republic, which is that you do have a peaceful
transfer of power.
Speaker 1 (32:44):
Couldn't you imagine, I just think about if Whitney Houston
was still alive and you or me had to go
on stage and sing after her exactly. I couldn't imagine
you know, being you know, Washington being so loved, you know,
people wanted him to continue as president or I don't
even remember. I think maybe even a king type of
(33:05):
figure and and then him saying no and then having
somebody come in after him. But that leads me actually
to before we get out of here, because I don't
want to keep you up, keep you too much. But
what what he had so much power, he could have
stayed and had become almost king, like I mean, we're
(33:27):
seeing it. You know from a lot of his successors
wanted power. They just wanted power, and he walked away
from that. What what contributed to that where he did
not want to continue that power?
Speaker 2 (33:41):
Well, you know, I think so he walked away from
it twice, which was we can't you know, today we
expect we expect presidents to do that. That is, that
is how our political system works. And we live in
a world in which there are regular elections and there
is a peaceful transfer power sort of around the globe.
Not every wear around the globe, but they exist around
(34:01):
the globe. When Washington did it, it wasn't done. This
was the age of kings and military dictators. And you know,
not that many years later Napoleon comes on to the
scene and will fight back from an island to regain power.
So that is the context in which he is operating,
and so initially you know, I think it is worth
(34:21):
noting that as a young man, Washington was quite ambitious.
He wanted to be commander in chief of the Continental Army,
and he showed up at the Continental Congress in military
uniform just to remind them that he had that experience.
But by the end of the war he understood and
I should actually say for the duration of the war,
even though he wanted that power, he was very mindful
never to try and abuse it because again the hearts
(34:44):
and minds thing of the American people. But also he
had to remain deferential to Congress or the entire experiment
didn't count, because if he became a military dictator, then
he was no different than a king. It was just
a military figure. So he understood that his death reference
to Congress, his willingness to submit and to return his commission,
(35:05):
was essential to the character of this movement for independence.
And that was really difficult because Congress was often very
annoying and didn't know what they were doing, and they
were inefficient, and they didn't give him what he needed.
And he remained respectful and deferential, which is incredibly impressive
because you know, anyone else would have I think lost it.
(35:26):
With them. So he returned his commission at the end
of the war when I think he could have easily
become a military dictator, and in fact some people were
asking him to and he said, no, no, that is
not what we're doing. Then as president, you know, he
did not want to be president. He understood that he
was the only person that could do it. He was
the only person that had the national profile what we
(35:46):
would think of as the name recognition, but also the
trust in the American people that he could be trusted
with this incredible authority, could be trusted with this incredible power,
and was the only person that could bring the States together.
So he did it sort of begrudgingly, knowing that it
was essential. And so by the time he was ready
(36:07):
to leave the presidency, he wanted to leave after the
first term, and he was convinced by a number of
aids and friends that he had to stay. He wanted
to go home for personal reasons. He was tired of politics,
he was tired of criticism, which he did receive. He
was ready to be home in Mount Vernon. But also
he understood that if he stayed in office until he died,
(36:29):
then it would set the president that presidents are essentially
elected kings and or I should say elected presidents, but
elected presidents for life, and that was a dangerous president
to establish. He also understood that that first transition, whenever
it happened, was going to be incredibly scary for the
American people because they only knew what it was to
(36:51):
have him as president, and so he wanted to ensure
it happened in orderly fashion, not suddenly when he died.
He wanted to ensure that he was there to lend
his legitimacy to the new administration and to kind of
help smooth that process. And he understood that the American
people had to be taught how to do this. This
is not something they did on a national level. And again,
(37:13):
when they looked around, they were not seeing it in
the world, and so he wanted to help them do that.
And that was an incredible, an incredible thing to do.
We just don't see it all that often in the
scope of human history.
Speaker 1 (37:25):
No, not at all, and that's I think why we
appreciate who he was. And he was the best president,
not only the first, but the best president. I think
that set the tone for America. We can't get out
of here. Without mentioning because we've talked about spies and
you know, espionage, but we can you name a few
(37:47):
that we did not talk about. I know one Benedic Arnold,
but can you give us a couple that should get
honorable mention of who do you think were one of
the best spies for America and against America.
Speaker 2 (38:05):
Well, so the Culpa Ring is named after a man,
Robert Townsend, who went by Samuel Cole the singer, So
he sort of ran he ran that that ring, so
that's an important one. It's possible that his messages were
sort of picked up by Caleb Brewster, who was another
name that was in that ring. Those are names people
should know. There are also a number of spies that
(38:28):
you know. Nathan Hale is the one that is best
known for saying, you know, I wish that I had
more than one life to give for my nation, or
something like that. He was a terrible spy. He was
very earnest, but did all things wrong. And speaking of
spies that did all things wrong. John Andre was Benedict
(38:48):
Arnold's British handler, and he was probably a British officer
and not you know, not just a spymaster, but because
he carried papers in his boots. Spycraft one on one,
do not carry papers on you explaining what your plans are.
When he was captured, he was hung as a spy
because he wasn't in uniform. And so certainly he was
(39:10):
helpful to the United States because it revealed Benedict Arnold's
treason and the plot to hand over West Point, which
would have been devastating to the American cause. But from
the British perspective, he was a pretty veiled spot.
Speaker 1 (39:24):
All right, Well, fun question. I think this was something
that I probably would answer myself, but I'll let you
answer it. If you could sit in on one of
these secret meetings from the Revolutionary era Freemasons, the culpa
ring Constitutional Congress or Continental Continental Congress in the back room,
(39:49):
where would you go? And why?
Speaker 2 (39:53):
Man, that's such a good question.
Speaker 1 (39:57):
There's so I know, yeah, because each one has its
own so many there are.
Speaker 2 (40:00):
So many questions I have that you know, I wish,
I wish we had better information on I guess I
would love to see I would have, you know, if
Washington had like a spy book, if he'd which I
don't think he actually kept that many materials because I
think he's not as dangerous, but I would love to
know the spycraft. That would be really fun.
Speaker 1 (40:21):
I love it. I love it all right. Well, tell
everybody about you where they can find you, and then
how can they also contribute and help out with George
Washington's Presidential Library.
Speaker 2 (40:34):
Well, thank you so much. I can be found online
on most of social media channels. I'm the only one
with my name, so it's easy. It's relatively easy to
find me. I do write a monthly newsletter which is
called Imperfect Union at imperfect Union dot substack dot com,
and I send out a monthly essay sort of explaining
the historical origins or how something has evolved, especially if
(40:56):
it's important to our current moment, as well as links
to all podcasts and press and media. I do like
this one and other things that I have written. In
terms of the Presidential Library, you can of course go
to Mount Vernon dot org slash library, which is the
library website. You can also find them on find us
on YouTube and social media. We are open to anyone
(41:19):
who makes a research appointment, so it is by appointment only,
but you don't have to be a professional historian. We
do have open house days on Washington's birthday, and of
course Mount Vernon is open three hundred and sixty five
days a year, so you are welcome to visit us
whenever you are in the area, and we would love
to see you.
Speaker 1 (41:36):
Perfect and just a ps. Do you think how would
Americans perceive George Washington if he was president today?
Speaker 2 (41:49):
He would not do well in our current system. It
was he was very He was very reserved. He did
not like to talk a whole lot in public. That
was partly because he was a little bit self conscious
of his lack of formal education. But he also wore
very uncomfortable dentures that were hard to speak in and
especially speak and eat, so he tended to be fairly quiet.
(42:10):
He was not necessarily one for a lot of you know,
public speaking. He certainly would not be a fan of
social media, and so a lot of the things that
we have come to expect of our presidents, he would
not do well with those expectations. But I think that
if we could set that part of it aside, he
had excellent judgment. He had the ability to bring people
(42:34):
around him that had a lot of different diverse viewpoints
and gather information from them. That he needed to make
good decisions, and so certainly his decision making would be excellent.
Speaker 1 (42:45):
Awesome and pss, I keep remembering these things because I
have you here. But is it true? I saw it
on a TV show, So is it true? Was he
visited or did he have visions of what America was
going to look like?
Speaker 2 (43:07):
Well, he had a vision for what he wanted it
to look like. I don't know, you know, no one.
I don't think most people can predict the future. So
he he certainly believed that the United States would expand westward.
He believed westward expansion was an important part of actually
bringing the existing parts of the nation together.
Speaker 1 (43:24):
Uh.
Speaker 2 (43:24):
He believed in the American experiment and its ability to
survive long term. I think that he believed in the
importance of the United States engaging on the world stage,
and what that looked like would of course evolve over time.
But he was he was not an isolationist, and so
he believed that the United States could grow to become
you know, the word superpower was not one that they
(43:46):
used in the eighteenth century, but he believed that the
nation could grow to become a power broker on the
world stage. And yet he also saw the divisions that
would potentially, you know, throw a rent in the works.
So he warned in his farewell address against allowing partisan
alliances or partisan identity to overtake your American identity. He
(44:09):
warned against foreign interference, and he warned against permanent alliances,
which is often misinterpreted to mean not having alliances. What
he was saying is we can't allow ourselves to be
dragged into wars that have nothing to do with our
self interest. And so in his case, he was thinking
about an alliance with France that had been signed in
(44:30):
seventeen seventy eight, and so he would warn against that.
So those are all things that we have grappled with
over the many centuries, and I think he was quite
wise to warn us against those, recognizing that they were
central aspects of what it meant to be an American
and they were going to emerge again and again.
Speaker 1 (44:48):
Just listen to Papa. So all right, thank you, doctor Lindsay.
I appreciate it.
Speaker 2 (44:54):
Yes, absolutely, this is fun.
Speaker 1 (44:56):
And so everybody please go support uh this wonderful guest,
doctor Lindsay. Uh Kervinsky Chervinsky. I knew it. I was
gonna miss It's like church but churn. What is that background? Uh?
Speaker 2 (45:13):
It is uh, you know, Eastern European sort of Russian Ukrainian.
Speaker 1 (45:16):
Yeah, it sounds like My grandfather was a Litrujiksko, so
it was Czech Republican. So anyway, all right, we're gonna
get out here because she wants to go eat and
have a nice evening. So thank you everybody for tuning in.
I'm Tony Sweet with truth be told. Until next time,
take care of yourself and each other, and until then, audios,
Bye bye,
Well, this is part two of our series Secrets and
Spies of the Revolutionary War, with the emphasis on George Washington,
the father of our country. And in this episode we're
honored to be joined by doctor Lindsay Tchervinsky, executive director
of the George Washington Presidential Library, and together we'll peel
back the layers of myth and the legend to reveal
(00:23):
the complex, strategic, and often in secretive life of America's
first President, George Washington. We'll explore how George Washington not
just as a general and a statesman, but how he
dealt with espionage, deception, and psychological warfare, and what were
the secrets behind his success, How did his spy network
(00:43):
help him win the war? And what can we learn
about the man behind the legend. All, I'm Tony Sweet
with Truth be Told and please help me. Welcome to
the Truth Be Told Studios for the first time, doctor
Lindsay Trevinsky. Well, thank you so much for being here.
(01:04):
And I want to make sure in my intro that
I said your name right, doctor Lindsey chur Chirvinsky. Yes, yay,
I got it right. The blonde did not seep too
far in okay, great, well, thank you so much for
being here. I'm a big history buff. I've always loved
American history, even world history, but American history, of course,
(01:28):
because my family goes way back, you know, clear up
into the early sixteen sometimes late fifteen hundreds. My seventh
great grandfather was Richard Stockton, who was one of the
signers of the Declaration of Independence. And they all in
the Stockton family where I always called them before the Kennedys,
because almost every one of them were like senators and
(01:49):
congressmen and judges and you know, signers and all kinds
of different things. But I've always found it very fascinating
the secrets, the spies, the espionage, and some of the
secret societies that some of these leaders were part of.
And so I thought, when I read your bio and
(02:10):
saw your books, I'm like, oh, I have to have
her on and hopefully we can answer some stuff today.
Some stuff might go unanswered because we just don't know.
So let's start there. So I want to find out,
as the director executive director of the George Washington Presidential Library,
(02:35):
how did you approach this? And you see now see
your mission in preserving, interpreting Washington's legacy for the modern audience,
because you know, it's been quite a few years since
he's been president. How do you preserve and interpret his legacy?
Speaker 2 (02:57):
Such a great question. Well, you know, I think there
are a couple of things. So Vernon more broadly certainly
preserves the site of Mount Vernon, and that tells us
actually a lot about the evolution of American history, because
Washington was incredibly innovative with things like crop rotation and
using the newest scientific advancements to try and improve his
(03:19):
agricultural output. And when he adopted something, then other people
tended to as well. So he was one of the
first farmers in the area to adopt wheat instead of tobacco.
He was actually the creator of the American mule, which
was an essential part of settlement across the West. In
the United States more broadly, was a critical part of
(03:40):
average farms being able to function because horses were not
as efficient and were not as easy to maintain as mules.
So there are things like that that we can really
connect washington story in particular at Mount Vernon to the
sort of broad American story. But then at the Presidential Library,
we really focus on a lot of the precedents that
washing Hington established first as commander in chief and then
(04:03):
as president, because so much of our political system today,
and I would say even our political culture, our civic
culture rests on Norman custom. Actually very little of it
is written down, and so much of that Norman custom
comes from Washington. And so when we think about Washington's legacy,
(04:23):
we're not just talking about the things he did, or
talking about how did other presidents pick those up and
use them in their administrations, how did they discuss Washington,
how did they think about their role visa the Washington
And that brings us all the way up to today.
So this legacy is one that is not kept in
the eighteenth century, which can steps feel quite foreign and
(04:44):
distant to us, but rather explains a lot about our
current moment.
Speaker 1 (04:48):
And what is some of the primary sources or archival
materials that you use at the library that really most
illuminate the hit are less known aspects of you know,
Washington's leadership during this time and the Revolutionary War.
Speaker 2 (05:08):
Well, you know, we are, on one hand, blessed that
we continue to acquire documents and artifacts all of the time,
including a really cool letter that I will give as
an example for what you're talking to play. But unfortunately,
because Washington when he died, he left the bulk of
his papers and his books to his not his direct errors,
but his family members and over generations, they actually sold
(05:31):
off much of that material. So the bulk of it,
or i should say the largest majority of originals, is
at the Library of Congress, and then a lot of
it is scattered around the world. But that gives us
an opportunity to try and acquire the things that are
not in places like the Library of Congress, who are
very comfortable holding that. However, there is a lot of opportunity,
especially when you actually look at the document, to get
(05:54):
a better understanding of what Washington was intending. So one
of Washington's greatest contributions was ensuring the civilian control of
the military. And this is a foundational element of our republic.
We are run by a civilian government and it oversees
the military, and the military is kept separate from civilian life.
The military does not engage in domestic peace keeping. That
(06:17):
is very much a Washington, or at least partially a
Washington creation. Others obviously were committed to that too, and
one of the moments in which he ensures that that
happens is what's called the Newburg conspiracy, when a number
of officers towards the end of the war were worried
that Congress was going to basically send them home without
(06:37):
paying them the years of back pay they were owed,
and they started talking about ways that they might be
able to use military force to encourage force them to
pay that back pay, which is essentially a military coup.
Washington got wind of this. He called a meeting and
he went in and he started to read an address
(06:58):
in a way that was quite theatrical, in a way
that sometimes leaders need to be. So he pulls out
this dress. He then pulls out his spectacles, which were
not something you typically wore in polite company, and he said,
I apologize, I have gone blind and gray in service
to my nation. And the men in the room burst
(07:18):
into tears, and it totally diffused this situation. But two
weeks later he wrote a letter to a congressman that
he was quite close to, and this is the letter
that we recently acquired. It's an eleven page letter. It's
in his hand, which is quite revealing because typically he
had so much correspondence to do that. When he had
a letter that length, he would have a secretary write
(07:38):
it out, but it's in his hand, and he's talking
about his concern about safely decommissioning the army but also
ensuring that they're cared for and they're paid. So it's
directly speaking to this threat of the Newberg conspiracy. And
he underlined certain passages so you can see the emotion
in this letter and his commitment to it in a
way that if you're just reading the text it's not
(08:00):
always clear.
Speaker 1 (08:02):
I have to say that that that's pretty amazing, but
that's actually a T shirt that needs to be sold
at the gift shop Blind and Gray. I love that,
you know, the the there's so much that we don't
know about Washington, just as you said, because there's still
(08:24):
a lot of you know, documentation that has been dispersed.
Where do you get a lot of this new discoveries.
Is it directly from the people that have just you know,
went through paperwork and go, oh what is this and
they you know, bring it to you as you know,
(08:45):
to purchase, or do people come and just say I
want to donate it to the library, because I think
that's important for me I think I would want to
donate it just because it was part of American history.
But I'm you're laughing, so I'm assuming that's when, Well.
Speaker 2 (09:01):
No, I'm laughing because we welcome, we love that if
people have Washington letters or they want to give them
to us by all means. The challenge is that they
are also quite valuable, so often people don't want to
do that, although it is a you know, a donation
and a tax write off, so if you're thinking about that,
that is an option, you know. So a lot of
most of the letters we know about because there's the
(09:22):
Washington Papers Project, which is a multi decade project in
partnership with Mount Vernon and the University of Virginia Press,
which is putting together an edited collection of the Washington volumes.
And there are dozens and dozens and dozens of these volumes.
There are different series, so the Colonial series, the Revolutionary series,
the presidential series, et cetera. And so they went on
(09:43):
the way they start that project is they go around
the world to archives and they take scans of whatever
that archive has to use for this transcription project. So
most of the letters that are in at least somewhat
public institutions we know about, and sometimes those will come
up for auction, but occasionally letters are found. For example,
a letter was recently found at Gunston Hall, which was
(10:06):
George Mason's home, that no one knew about. It was
a unpublished, non non known letter, which is an amazing find.
The way we acquire letters is threefold. One sometimes there
are donations. Two sometimes things go up for auction, and
then we do bid on them depending on what the
letter is and its value. And then three Sometimes in
(10:29):
the case of this letter, a family owned it. A
woman owned it, and she had purchased it. It had
been in the family since I believe the nineteen thirties,
and the owner passed away and her estate was ready
to sell it, and so they got an estimate and
they said, you know, we would love to sell this
to Mount Vernon. We would love to avoid auction. Can we,
(10:51):
you know, sell it to you directly and save money
by not doing the bidding and not doing the auction
has fees. So we do also do private sales in
that particular the way, and so we always welcome people
with outreach if they have something that they believe is
Washington's We're happy to talk about it and see what
we can arrange.
Speaker 1 (11:09):
And I always encourage people. I do this myself, my grandparents,
my great my parents. Now that my father's ninety, I
just recently sold the family home. But I go through
all the paperwork. I don't just throw paperwork away because
you never know what is in there. In fact, my
(11:31):
dad had his great grandmother gave my dad. It's a picture.
I don't know if it's a postcard, I don't even know,
but it's Abraham Lincoln and it's from the late eighteen hundreds.
So yeah, and so if I would have just picked
it up and throw the trash away, I would have
(11:52):
thrown it away. But I'm just one of those people.
I look through everything. So I encourage people not to
just throw things away, but to look through in case
there is something of historical value, if it's family, personal business,
or you know, something of history, So please do that.
So let's I want to dive into like the Revolutionary
(12:15):
War era espionage, because Washington has often been described as
americus first spy master, And so I want to ask you,
what do you think people miss understand most about the
approach of espionage and this title of spymaster.
Speaker 2 (12:37):
Well, I do love the title, and I actually agree
with the title because he was very much his own
spymaster for the Continental Army. Partly that was because he
understood the more people that you have in on I'm aspiring,
the more likely it is to be growing up. He
was a little bit of a control freaks, so he
really liked to control important things, and he also wanted
(12:57):
to be aware of all of the information. So this
was not something he was going to really leave in
other people's hands, and he was instrumental in getting up
this spy ring setup. So first spy Master title I
approve of. I think there are a couple of things,
a couple of elements that I would add to perhaps
the first mythical story. The first is, anytime you have
(13:18):
a war dynamic like the one that is the Revolution, spine,
especially local spine in the local communities are essential. Because
the British Army was essentially an invading force trying to
establish control over a massive piece of territory and a
huge number of people, and we know from you know
wars that have occurred since then, you need a huge
(13:41):
amount of firepower, you need very strong supply lines, but
also you need local spies in order to make that work.
And Washington understood that, and he was keen to flip
the spy dynamic on its head and use spies to
weaken what was great Britain's military strength enable strength. They
were on paper, a much stronger opponent, and so his
(14:05):
local connections were a strength that he could use to
undermine the British position, and he did quite effectively. Washington
Times referred to this as having to win the hearts
and minds of the American people. So if you have
them on your side, they are more likely to give
you information. And he was happy to get information wherever
he got it, including you know, for example, after the
(14:27):
famous crossing the Delaware in the successful battle at Trenton,
he called what was called a council of war with
his officers and his aids, and they brought in a
couple of local farmers to talk to him about the terrain,
because he was kind of stuck in this position and
was going to be attacked by Cornwallace, and the farmers
(14:48):
knew about a secret path that would go around the
British forces that weren't on any maps, and so by
getting that local intel, he was able to basically sneak
by the British Force and march on to Princeton, where
they had an incredible victory. So that local intel, whether
it's secret or not, is essential. The other piece that
(15:10):
I would add is when we think of twenty first
century spycraft and the technology and the you know, complex codes,
that was not what was happening to be. You know,
they were using sort of experimenting with different kinds of ink.
They were experimenting, you know. The most famous was shown
in the show Turn where Anna Strong, who was probably
(15:34):
one of the culpeper Ring connections, would hang laundry in
a certain way to kind of symbolize movement. And they
did have sort of sim simple or relatively simple codes
that they would use. But you know, spies today could
break those codes like that, So we are not talking
(15:54):
about the very complex methodology that we have today.
Speaker 1 (15:59):
We didn't have the service at that time. And as
we use term now as open policy, what was his
open door policy? You said he took the information from
as much as he could. How did he know? I mean,
we weren't there, But how do we know who he
could trust and who he could not?
Speaker 2 (16:21):
This is a great question. So as President Washington had
no guards, no security. There was no gate outside the
president's house. Anyone could walk up to the street. As
commander in chief, initially he didn't have a whole lot
of security. I mean, he was surrounded by an army,
he didn't have anyone that was necessarily focused on his
personal security. And then they uncovered that there was actually
(16:42):
a plot to assassinate him, and they created what was
called the Lifeguard, and the Lifeguard was a group of
guards that were dedicated to preserving the baggage or taking
care of the baggage and headquarters and Washington security recognizing
that those were sort of points of weakness around his
personal safety, and they were officers that he personally selected
(17:05):
for their trustworthiness and they were deeply, deeply loyal to him.
And in honor of that, we actually have a group
of donors who are called the Lifeguard at Mount Vernon now,
which I think is a lovely tie in. So in
terms of who he could trust, Washington very much believed
in trust but verify. So he would get information from
(17:26):
let's say the farmers in this circumstance, but then he
would send some of his aids or his officers to
go investigate the path before they actually used it. So
he was very careful to always, you know, double check
the sources of things. He was very careful to double
check the validity of that information. Now that's not to
say that he always got this right. He didn't. You know,
(17:48):
a lot of his campaigns in seventeen seventy six were
undermined by the lack of that information, by not getting
enough information. But when he did get it, usually he
got it right.
Speaker 1 (18:00):
I love that. I love I because I always thought
as like to have you know, the protection that they
do now, and you know, to even up to Kennedy
when you know he was unfortunately assassinated, I couldn't even
imagine to live in that era of note really not
a lot of protection. So I'm glad he had some support. Though.
(18:24):
Could you talk a little bit more about a little
bit about the Culpa Ring and how it worked and
what made it so effective, you know, even despite this
little limited technol g as you know, as we do today.
Speaker 2 (18:41):
So the Culpoor Ring was largely focused around the New
York area and this was where the British forces had
most They had a stronghold for most of the war.
Once they kicked the UH. Once they kicked the American
forces out of New York City in seventeen seventy six,
they held onto the city until the end of the war,
when they vacated in seventeen eighty three. And so at
(19:04):
various points when Washington was considering either his next movement,
when he was considering a battle, when he was considering
an attack, when he was considering where to put his
winter quarters, he needed information on what the British were
up to and where they were going to go next.
And he was incredibly wise about the people that he
selected as potential spies. They were people that had a
(19:26):
lot of access to British officers but wouldn't necessarily be
suspicious because they were sort of invisible or you know,
social nobody's So the most famous is Hercules Mulligan, who
was a tailor and he would tailor the or you know,
adjust the uniforms. That's what I was looking for, uniforms
(19:47):
of the British forces. And while he was doing these sessions,
they would be talking about what they were going to
do next and not paying attention to him. And he
was then able to often put messages into clothing, like
sew them in to the seams and get them out
of the city. In that way, the culpor ring also
then included a number of people on the other side
of the harbor and the other side of the river,
(20:08):
because you have to get the information out of the
city to Washington. And this is where Anna Strong was
useful because she could send messages without actually having to
go anywhere or carry material, which is when you are
at your most vulnerable for a spy. The challenge with
the culpur ring is there's actually relatively little documentation about
(20:30):
who isn't it, what they were doing, how, who was
responsible for what, who was in charge of it, because
Washington intentionally left little written record. He understood that would
be a vulnerability and that would make it more likely
that this culpur ring would be broken up or would
be infiltrated. And so we just don't have that much information,
(20:51):
although I know we wish that we had more because
it's such a fascinating story.
Speaker 1 (20:56):
I wish that they would have thought about the time capsules,
you know, hide it, but yet leave leave leave somewhere
so we can keep a little bit more track of
our history. I'm going to jump into uh secret societies
when it comes to Freemason, because I know there are
several of the Founding fathers. In fact, my seventh grade
(21:20):
grandfather was a Freemason, and it often comes up in
discussion about the Founding Fathers. What was Washington's actual involvement
and how much influence did the Freemasons really have? I mean,
apparently a lot, because pretty much shaped Washington d C. So,
but at that period when washing George Washington's around, what's
(21:43):
your thoughts, Yeah, I mean.
Speaker 2 (21:45):
I think, you know, I think the influence of the
Freemasons in terms of shaping society is perhaps a little
bit overstated because it makes for a really good story
and you know movies like National Treasure, which of course
everyone loves it, and so you know, it does make
for a great a great film. But you know, it
was a critical element of civic society at the time,
(22:08):
and religion played an important part of that. But at
the era that Washington was living in, this was sort
of the age of Enlightenment, when most of the leaders
in society were incredibly well educated. They were reading, you know,
all of the Enlightenment thinkers from Europe. They were importing
books and discussing these things both publicly and then in private,
and so the Freemasons I think served as an important
(22:31):
part of the civic fabric because they gave a space
for people to think a little bit outside the box
of traditional religion or even traditional political culture. And also
tended to be a fairly I mean, it has its
own hierarchy, but it tends to be a fairly egalitarian gathering.
And as they were discussing creating a new new nation,
(22:52):
which inherently requires a new culture and a new political system,
that was a space to put forward some of these ideas.
So Washington was a member of a lodge. There continue
to be many lodges named after him, and they regularly
actually come to Vernon and you know, pay respects. There's
a day usually that they come and they lay a
wreath at his tomb. But I think that certainly there
(23:15):
are elements of Masonic thinking that were quite important to
the creation of Washington, d c. And how it was
laid out, and some of the elements in the architecture
and the design that they were trying to incorporate. But
these were also ideas that had been circulating in sort
of city planning and what an ideal city would look
like as well. As a very intentional nod to Roman
(23:38):
and Greek history of trying to bring forth the most
important values of what it means to be a republic,
to have virtuous citizenry, and a lot of the buildings
and the design of the city were meant to invoke
those principles.
Speaker 1 (23:53):
Yeah. Like I said, I've had the opportunity to join
the Freemasons, I didn't as of yet, just but I've
always found them fascinating because I've heard, you know a
lot of the answers that we do seek. They do
have some information, but you know, the TV shows do
enhance a lot of what movies and TV shows that
(24:17):
make us I think intrigue us even more. But do
you think these type of societies and networks that contributed
to a broader cultural of conspiracy thinking among revolutionaries and
their opponents.
Speaker 2 (24:32):
Or well, you know, Americans to a certain extent have
always been fans of conspiracies. And I think that that
is to a certain extent, when you have a democratic
society that is is calling for transparency and a lot
of its decision making process. When there isn't transparency, then
that can lead to conspiratoral thinking. And when you have
(24:55):
a society that does value freedom of speech and the
freedom of the press, although that has of course shifted
over time. Sometimes you are going to have space for
that type of thinking and it can proliferate. During the Revolution,
there was a sense that there wasn't necessarily a conspiracy,
but they blamed the British Cabinet, which met in secret.
(25:17):
There were no notes, there was no record of who
said what. They blamed the British cabinet for controlling the
king and turning the king against the American people, and
they believed that this was really the center for cronyism
and corruption at the highest levels. Now, I don't think
that many would go so far as to say that
there was a conspiracy to destroy the colonies or to
crush them, but that's often how it felt to them
(25:39):
because they couldn't penetrate what was happening behind those closed doors,
and so much of the design of the first federal
system and the Constitution passed in seventeen eighty nine is
crafted with that sort of transparency in mind. So they
actually rejected proposals for a cabinet for the president, they
rejected rosalsarious executive councils. They put that the executive department
(26:04):
secretaries should be giving their advice in writings. There was
a record of who said what and who did what.
And initially the Senate proceedings were not open to the press,
and there was a lot of pushback to that, and
that shifted in the first sort of in the first
decade to two decades of American history. So we can
see a lot of the concerns about secrecy playing out
(26:25):
in the early Republic.
Speaker 1 (26:28):
Yeah, and you mentioned Britain, but what role did other
European powers such as France and Spain and even secret
missionaries play behind the scenes and supporting the Revolutionary war.
Speaker 2 (26:46):
Well, there was a lot of initial clandestine support. So
some of it came through very wealthy individuals that were
sending shipments of arms and goods and money and food
to the American cause. The Marquis de Lafayette, of course,
is the most famous kind of you know, renting a
ship and going off himself to join the American army.
(27:06):
There were a lot of European soldiers who came over
to fight, sometimes for altruistic purposes and genuinely believing in
the cause, and sometimes because they didn't have a whole
lot of promotion in their army, and they thought that
they could get a general ship pretty easily in the
new Continental Army. But you know what's interesting is that
France was pretty supportive of the United States starting almost
(27:28):
immediately in the war, but didn't actually declare alliance with
the United States and didn't actually recognize independence until seventeen
seventy eight, which was two years, of course after the declaration.
So all of the sport that was taking place up
until that point was in theory clandestine. Now, of course
the British understood, all of a sudden, when you have arms,
(27:48):
you know, when you have muskets coming and guns coming
onto the field of battle that are from France. Doesn't
take a genius to put those two pieces together. So
they understood where the support was coming from. But in
theory they could maintain plausible deniability for diplomacy. Spain actually
never declared itself openly a lot allied with the United
(28:10):
States during the war. That came later, but they did
provide support, especially sort of through France, and so a
lot of that support came secretly, and the Netherlands were
a very important economic partner, but that partnership as well
didn't come until towards the end of the war, so
a lot of the support early on was secret.
Speaker 1 (28:29):
I don't know if if you saw the I think
it was Apple TV and it was I think it
was Franklin. It was the name of it. Did you
see that.
Speaker 2 (28:38):
I saw some of it. I didn't watch the entire series,
but I did watch some of it.
Speaker 1 (28:42):
I mean, I actually loved it, but it gave a
whole different side that we don't normally get to see.
And like, again, Hollywood adds it's flair, but I found
it very fascinating too.
Speaker 2 (28:54):
My main complaint with it was just the depiction of
John Adams is utterly ridiculous. And you know what's interesting, though,
is I was listening to an interview with the screen
playwriter and he actually also wrote the screenplay for John Adams,
the HBO mini series, and so what he said is
that series is through John Adams eyes, and this one
(29:15):
is through Franklin's size. But I actually think the depiction
of Franklin is a little bit fairer in the HBO
series than this one of John Adams, who just makes
it out to be this preposterous figure. And there were
certainly things that John Adams did wrong, but not in
that degree. But I think you're right that it does
get at the point where you know, France and its
(29:37):
support was essential for the United States to have success.
And we as Americans now tend not to think in
a global fashion because we're such a powerful nation we
don't have to. But in the Revolution and even you know,
for the first half of the nineteenth century, the United
States was a baby nation that had relatively little power,
and so the American people actually cared deeply and paid
(29:59):
very close attention to what happened to be on our
shores because it would have such a huge impact on
our nation, our economy, our ability to function. And so
Americans at the time did care deeply about what was
happening in.
Speaker 1 (30:13):
France, and Louisianna purchased. But the also the I've heard
many times, you know we America saved France. Well, yeah,
we helped save France, but we also they helped save
us to even get started. So that's what we're supposed
to be, you know, help each other out. But I
(30:35):
do want to talk about you mentioned it was.
Speaker 2 (30:36):
Actually a great story about that when General Pershing arrived
in Paris, towards the end of World War One, he
went to the tomb of Lafayette and he said, we
have arrived. So he was basically intentionally repaying that promise.
Speaker 1 (30:51):
See, there we go. I love it. And you mentioned
John Adams, and I do want to talk about just
real quick about your book Making the Presentency and what
surprised you most about Adam's influence on the office.
Speaker 2 (31:07):
Well, you know, my first book was on Washington and
the creation of the President's Cabinet, but it really focuses
how he basically creates the presidency because Article two is
so incredibly short and says so little about what the
day to day life or even the use of a
power would look like. But then I started to think about,
you know, what happens when Washington left office, because he
was such an unusual figure in our story. He's so
(31:31):
unparalleled in his stature and the respect that even people
who disagreed with him had for who he was in
his service, So so much of his power and so
much of his precedence were unchallenged or with very little pushback.
That was not going to be the case for any
of his successors. And so John Adams had the very
(31:52):
unenviable but essential task of following that and what that
would look like was going to be incredibly difficult, and
he knew it, and he did it anyway, recognizing that
in order for the presidency and the republic to survive,
someone had to be number two and had to ensure
that those precedents that Washington established continued in order to
(32:14):
actually be presidents, because if they're not repeated, then they're
just interesting historical anomalies. And so I was I think
I was impressed by his awareness of what he was doing,
of the point of his administration, and his commitment to
ensuring that both his transition into office and then his
transition out were done peacefully and in a way that
(32:36):
would lay the foundation for what it means to be
a republic, which is that you do have a peaceful
transfer of power.
Speaker 1 (32:44):
Couldn't you imagine, I just think about if Whitney Houston
was still alive and you or me had to go
on stage and sing after her exactly. I couldn't imagine
you know, being you know, Washington being so loved, you know,
people wanted him to continue as president or I don't
even remember. I think maybe even a king type of
(33:05):
figure and and then him saying no and then having
somebody come in after him. But that leads me actually
to before we get out of here, because I don't
want to keep you up, keep you too much. But
what what he had so much power, he could have
stayed and had become almost king, like I mean, we're
(33:27):
seeing it. You know from a lot of his successors
wanted power. They just wanted power, and he walked away
from that. What what contributed to that where he did
not want to continue that power?
Speaker 2 (33:41):
Well, you know, I think so he walked away from
it twice, which was we can't you know, today we
expect we expect presidents to do that. That is, that
is how our political system works. And we live in
a world in which there are regular elections and there
is a peaceful transfer power sort of around the globe.
Not every wear around the globe, but they exist around
(34:01):
the globe. When Washington did it, it wasn't done. This
was the age of kings and military dictators. And you know,
not that many years later Napoleon comes on to the
scene and will fight back from an island to regain power.
So that is the context in which he is operating,
and so initially you know, I think it is worth
(34:21):
noting that as a young man, Washington was quite ambitious.
He wanted to be commander in chief of the Continental Army,
and he showed up at the Continental Congress in military
uniform just to remind them that he had that experience.
But by the end of the war he understood and
I should actually say for the duration of the war,
even though he wanted that power, he was very mindful
never to try and abuse it because again the hearts
(34:44):
and minds thing of the American people. But also he
had to remain deferential to Congress or the entire experiment
didn't count, because if he became a military dictator, then
he was no different than a king. It was just
a military figure. So he understood that his death reference
to Congress, his willingness to submit and to return his commission,
(35:05):
was essential to the character of this movement for independence.
And that was really difficult because Congress was often very
annoying and didn't know what they were doing, and they
were inefficient, and they didn't give him what he needed.
And he remained respectful and deferential, which is incredibly impressive
because you know, anyone else would have I think lost it.
(35:26):
With them. So he returned his commission at the end
of the war when I think he could have easily
become a military dictator, and in fact some people were
asking him to and he said, no, no, that is
not what we're doing. Then as president, you know, he
did not want to be president. He understood that he
was the only person that could do it. He was
the only person that had the national profile what we
(35:46):
would think of as the name recognition, but also the
trust in the American people that he could be trusted
with this incredible authority, could be trusted with this incredible power,
and was the only person that could bring the States together.
So he did it sort of begrudgingly, knowing that it
was essential. And so by the time he was ready
(36:07):
to leave the presidency, he wanted to leave after the
first term, and he was convinced by a number of
aids and friends that he had to stay. He wanted
to go home for personal reasons. He was tired of politics,
he was tired of criticism, which he did receive. He
was ready to be home in Mount Vernon. But also
he understood that if he stayed in office until he died,
(36:29):
then it would set the president that presidents are essentially
elected kings and or I should say elected presidents, but
elected presidents for life, and that was a dangerous president
to establish. He also understood that that first transition, whenever
it happened, was going to be incredibly scary for the
American people because they only knew what it was to
(36:51):
have him as president, and so he wanted to ensure
it happened in orderly fashion, not suddenly when he died.
He wanted to ensure that he was there to lend
his legitimacy to the new administration and to kind of
help smooth that process. And he understood that the American
people had to be taught how to do this. This
is not something they did on a national level. And again,
(37:13):
when they looked around, they were not seeing it in
the world, and so he wanted to help them do that.
And that was an incredible, an incredible thing to do.
We just don't see it all that often in the
scope of human history.
Speaker 1 (37:25):
No, not at all, and that's I think why we
appreciate who he was. And he was the best president,
not only the first, but the best president. I think
that set the tone for America. We can't get out
of here. Without mentioning because we've talked about spies and
you know, espionage, but we can you name a few
(37:47):
that we did not talk about. I know one Benedic Arnold,
but can you give us a couple that should get
honorable mention of who do you think were one of
the best spies for America and against America.
Speaker 2 (38:05):
Well, so the Culpa Ring is named after a man,
Robert Townsend, who went by Samuel Cole the singer, So
he sort of ran he ran that that ring, so
that's an important one. It's possible that his messages were
sort of picked up by Caleb Brewster, who was another
name that was in that ring. Those are names people
should know. There are also a number of spies that
(38:28):
you know. Nathan Hale is the one that is best
known for saying, you know, I wish that I had
more than one life to give for my nation, or
something like that. He was a terrible spy. He was
very earnest, but did all things wrong. And speaking of
spies that did all things wrong. John Andre was Benedict
(38:48):
Arnold's British handler, and he was probably a British officer
and not you know, not just a spymaster, but because
he carried papers in his boots. Spycraft one on one,
do not carry papers on you explaining what your plans are.
When he was captured, he was hung as a spy
because he wasn't in uniform. And so certainly he was
(39:10):
helpful to the United States because it revealed Benedict Arnold's
treason and the plot to hand over West Point, which
would have been devastating to the American cause. But from
the British perspective, he was a pretty veiled spot.
Speaker 1 (39:24):
All right, Well, fun question. I think this was something
that I probably would answer myself, but I'll let you
answer it. If you could sit in on one of
these secret meetings from the Revolutionary era Freemasons, the culpa
ring Constitutional Congress or Continental Continental Congress in the back room,
(39:49):
where would you go? And why?
Speaker 2 (39:53):
Man, that's such a good question.
Speaker 1 (39:57):
There's so I know, yeah, because each one has its
own so many there are.
Speaker 2 (40:00):
So many questions I have that you know, I wish,
I wish we had better information on I guess I
would love to see I would have, you know, if
Washington had like a spy book, if he'd which I
don't think he actually kept that many materials because I
think he's not as dangerous, but I would love to
know the spycraft. That would be really fun.
Speaker 1 (40:21):
I love it. I love it all right. Well, tell
everybody about you where they can find you, and then
how can they also contribute and help out with George
Washington's Presidential Library.
Speaker 2 (40:34):
Well, thank you so much. I can be found online
on most of social media channels. I'm the only one
with my name, so it's easy. It's relatively easy to
find me. I do write a monthly newsletter which is
called Imperfect Union at imperfect Union dot substack dot com,
and I send out a monthly essay sort of explaining
the historical origins or how something has evolved, especially if
(40:56):
it's important to our current moment, as well as links
to all podcasts and press and media. I do like
this one and other things that I have written. In
terms of the Presidential Library, you can of course go
to Mount Vernon dot org slash library, which is the
library website. You can also find them on find us
on YouTube and social media. We are open to anyone
(41:19):
who makes a research appointment, so it is by appointment only,
but you don't have to be a professional historian. We
do have open house days on Washington's birthday, and of
course Mount Vernon is open three hundred and sixty five
days a year, so you are welcome to visit us
whenever you are in the area, and we would love
to see you.
Speaker 1 (41:36):
Perfect and just a ps. Do you think how would
Americans perceive George Washington if he was president today?
Speaker 2 (41:49):
He would not do well in our current system. It
was he was very He was very reserved. He did
not like to talk a whole lot in public. That
was partly because he was a little bit self conscious
of his lack of formal education. But he also wore
very uncomfortable dentures that were hard to speak in and
especially speak and eat, so he tended to be fairly quiet.
(42:10):
He was not necessarily one for a lot of you know,
public speaking. He certainly would not be a fan of
social media, and so a lot of the things that
we have come to expect of our presidents, he would
not do well with those expectations. But I think that
if we could set that part of it aside, he
had excellent judgment. He had the ability to bring people
(42:34):
around him that had a lot of different diverse viewpoints
and gather information from them. That he needed to make
good decisions, and so certainly his decision making would be excellent.
Speaker 1 (42:45):
Awesome and pss, I keep remembering these things because I
have you here. But is it true? I saw it
on a TV show, So is it true? Was he
visited or did he have visions of what America was
going to look like?
Speaker 2 (43:07):
Well, he had a vision for what he wanted it
to look like. I don't know, you know, no one.
I don't think most people can predict the future. So
he he certainly believed that the United States would expand westward.
He believed westward expansion was an important part of actually
bringing the existing parts of the nation together.
Speaker 1 (43:24):
Uh.
Speaker 2 (43:24):
He believed in the American experiment and its ability to
survive long term. I think that he believed in the
importance of the United States engaging on the world stage,
and what that looked like would of course evolve over time.
But he was he was not an isolationist, and so
he believed that the United States could grow to become
you know, the word superpower was not one that they
(43:46):
used in the eighteenth century, but he believed that the
nation could grow to become a power broker on the
world stage. And yet he also saw the divisions that
would potentially, you know, throw a rent in the works.
So he warned in his farewell address against allowing partisan
alliances or partisan identity to overtake your American identity. He
(44:09):
warned against foreign interference, and he warned against permanent alliances,
which is often misinterpreted to mean not having alliances. What
he was saying is we can't allow ourselves to be
dragged into wars that have nothing to do with our
self interest. And so in his case, he was thinking
about an alliance with France that had been signed in
(44:30):
seventeen seventy eight, and so he would warn against that.
So those are all things that we have grappled with
over the many centuries, and I think he was quite
wise to warn us against those, recognizing that they were
central aspects of what it meant to be an American
and they were going to emerge again and again.
Speaker 1 (44:48):
Just listen to Papa. So all right, thank you, doctor Lindsay.
I appreciate it.
Speaker 2 (44:54):
Yes, absolutely, this is fun.
Speaker 1 (44:56):
And so everybody please go support uh this wonderful guest,
doctor Lindsay. Uh Kervinsky Chervinsky. I knew it. I was
gonna miss It's like church but churn. What is that background? Uh?
Speaker 2 (45:13):
It is uh, you know, Eastern European sort of Russian Ukrainian.
Speaker 1 (45:16):
Yeah, it sounds like My grandfather was a Litrujiksko, so
it was Czech Republican. So anyway, all right, we're gonna
get out here because she wants to go eat and
have a nice evening. So thank you everybody for tuning in.
I'm Tony Sweet with truth be told. Until next time,
take care of yourself and each other, and until then, audios,
Bye bye,
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Special Summer Offer: Exclusively on Apple Podcasts, try our Dateline Premium subscription completely free for one month! With Dateline Premium, you get every episode ad-free plus exclusive bonus content.
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!