April 16, 2024 • 39 mins
Martha Washington to Eleanor Parke Custis, c. February 1797. In which Washington warns her granddaughter that her dress may not arrive from Philadelphia in time for a Virginia ball.
Featuring Dr. Alexandra Garrett, Assistant Professor of History, St. Michael's College.
Your Most Obedient & Humble Servant is a production of R2 Studios, part of the Roy Rosenzweig Center for History and New Media at George Mason University.
Find the official transcript here.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Kathryn Gehred (00:03):
Hello, and welcome to Your Most Obedient
and Humble Servant. This is aWomen's History podcast where we
feature 18th and early 19thcentury women's letters that
don't get as much attention aswe think they should. I'm your
host, Kathryn Gehred. Thisepisode is part of our season on
wit. And today I am so excitedto welcome Dr. Alexandra
(00:24):
Garrett. She is the AssistantProfessor of History at St.
Michael's College. Dr. Garrett'sresearch deals with elite white
women of the 18th and 19thcentury, specifically with
slaveholding white women. Soit's extremely pertinent to this
podcast. We've actually workedtogether in the past. Alexandra
did a piece on MarthaWashington.
Alexandra Garrett (00:44):
Yeah, no, I did a piece for Mount Vernon
magazine. I was a fellow therefor three months in 2019 2020
20. And it was titled "HowWidowhood Changed Martha
Washington's Life" as a shortand sweet. He's just trying to
explain how she got marriedtwice, right, experienced
(01:05):
marriage twice, experiencedwidowhood twice. And then how
her life changed legally,especially during those periods.
So from marriage to widowhood,to marriage to widowhood, and
legally, things would havechanged.
Kathryn Gehred (01:20):
I remember it was great.
So I'm so excited to have you onthe podcast. Thank you so much
for coming on the show.
Alexandra Garrett (01:26):
Of course, you're welcome. I'm so honored
to be here.
Kathryn Gehred (01:29):
Today we're doing a Martha Washington
letter. She was an eliteslaveholding. White woman. So
how has she come to play in yourresearch?
Alexandra Garrett (01:36):
When I was completing my dissertation at
the University of Virginia someyears ago, I was thinking about
how white slave owning women inVirginia, especially the
revolutionary and postrevolutionary periods, for
managing these dual roles ofbeing a woman in a patriarchal
society, men have more powerthan women in a society like
(01:58):
that. But at the same time, thisis a slave owning society, and
slave holders hold more powerover non slave owners. So what
does it mean when you're a womanwho has less power, but you're a
slave holder, which means youhave more power. So it's
supposed to be an intersectionalanalysis with gender and socio
(02:18):
economic status, thinking abouthow they are perceived in this
world, how they navigate thisworld. And then on top of that,
thinking about how they navigatemarriage. So basically, before
states enacted what are calledmarried women's property acts,
the first one was in Mississippi1839. The final one was actually
(02:38):
Virginia, which is the statethat we're thinking about today.
The last one was 1877, inVirginia, so before these
married women, property X,different colonies, and then
also states utilize BritishCommon laws, versions of kind of
legal status for women when itcomes to marriage. So if you're
married, you'd fell under what'scalled feme covert. And it looks
(03:02):
like F E M, E, and then covert.That's what it looks like, but
it's French feme covert, whichmeans you have covered your
status, it means covered womenin French and this is derived
from British common law and itsimply means that you are
married and so in the legalsystem, your majority not all
but majority of your property issubsumed under your husband's
(03:25):
control, because he is the headof household and your legal
identity basically is subsumedunder his not in its entirety,
you still have a right to dowershare, which is about 1/3 of
what the total combined propertywould be between your husband
and you. But again that dowarshare you own it, but really you
(03:45):
more control it, you control itand then upon your death, it
will go to your heirs. If youare a feme sole, that means you
are an unmarried women, meaningyou are never married or you're
waiting to get married, or youare a widow, so feme sole right
french kind of means uncoveredwomen's solo woman, it means
(04:05):
that you have the same legalrights as a man with some
caveats. So the caveats Are youcan't vote. That doesn't come
until much later. You can'tserve on a jury. But you can
sign contracts, you can dealwith your own business, you can
control your own property,control your own wages and your
earnings. You can basicallylegally do everything that a man
(04:28):
can do with a couple caveats aslong as you are unmarried. So
unmarried women are femme souls.Married women are femme
Corvairs. But over 90% of womenin early America, get married.
So you got way more femme COVIDerrs out there than femme souls
however, lots of women alsoexperience widowhood. So if
you're going to have a femmesoul, you're more likely going
(04:52):
to be a widow then you are nevermarried woman and this is a very
long tangent. No. Very basicquestion. Just to get up Martha
Washington so Martha Washington,she was a fam soul, Gosh, darn
it, but she was also a femmeCOVID. Right. So she was a
covered woman and an uncoveredwoman, meaning she was a single
(05:12):
woman. So she fell under FEMsoul. Then she got married to
Daniel Parke Custis, when shewas 18, and therefore, she was a
covered woman, she fell underfemme Corvair status. He died.
She was single, again, not forvery long, but she was so she
fell under a different legalstatus right back to pencil. She
got married to Darryl Georgie.And they were married for 40
(05:35):
years. And so she was femmekovair, again for 40 years, and
then he died before her act. Sonow she's back to femme soul.
I'm trying to think about whatthis would have meant in her
life. It's one thing to havelegal changes. And it's another
thing to like, what are youactually experiencing day to
day. So anyways, I wasinterested in that. That's how
(05:58):
she factored into my dissertation.
Kathryn Gehred (06:02):
I was one of the team of editors who published
the papers of Martha Washingtoncame out in 2022, which is a
addition of all of MarthaWashington's correspondence. And
a lot of the letters that wehave from Martha are doing of
her early life. We don't haveany from her youth. But there
are quite a few from her firstwidowhood from Daniel park.
There's these letters whereshe's you know, doing things
(06:22):
like signing contracts and, andloaning money and at like
extremely high interest. So Iremember when I was doing
research on this in the actuallike language of the Virginia
statutes about widowhood in oneof the laws about being like a
femme soul, they say, unless youhave some sort of disability,
and then it lists a husband, asa disability. always made me
(06:45):
chuckle, but no, no.
Alexandra Garrett (06:47):
No one thought, Oh, no one, no one
laughed, they
Kathryn Gehred (06:49):
show it that was as funny as I did. No,
Alexandra Garrett (06:51):
it is funny. Actually, what you're getting at
is, is actually, it's, it's easyto laugh. But also, there's
actually some truthiness to it,the idea was right, you get
married, and most of your legalidentity is subsumed. And so
your access to wealth that youwould have brought in is, you
(07:11):
know, again, not all of it, anyof it is now you know, under
this husband's control, but somehusbands are ne'er do wells, and
bombs, and might be people whoget into too much debt, there
was this concern for marriedwomen, which is why you could
think of sometimes like a kindof a, a gambling husband as
(07:35):
being a disability to a woman.Actually, what you're bringing
up is really important, becausewhen you think about the married
women's property acts, thosewere state laws that are enacted
over the 19th century. So firstone, aging 39 Last 1877. And you
might be thinking, Well, whythat time period, like why the
mid 1800s By the mid 19thcentury. And by that time
(07:57):
period, you have intensifyingincreasing capitalism. So you
have a lot more boom and bustperiods happening in the
American economy, meaning moreand more people are going into
debt or might in their totallifetime experience booms and
busts themselves. So the reasonthen why these acts are carried
(08:20):
out state by state, it'sactually to protect family
interests. It's not because Oh,women are asking for more
rights. No, actually, what'shappening is, Hey, before the
married woman's property acts,okay, so in Martha Washington's
time period, if your husbandgoes into debt, does a bad
(08:41):
business deal, whatever it mightbe, his creditors will come
after him, but he is the head ofthe whole family. And so the
creditors can take personalproperty from the whole family
to pay back that husbands debt.So suddenly, the personal
property that a wife has broughtinto this marriage, this wife's
(09:02):
property is now liable for herhusband's debt. So debtors are
coming in and taking women'sstuff that they brought to the
marriage and that deprives theentire family unit of wealth and
property. Now, with thesemarried women's property acts,
women are protected from thatmeaning if my husband goes into
(09:24):
debt, make some bad businessdecision, gamble's whatever it
might be, his creditors comecalling. They can only take my
husband stuff, they can't takeme the wife stuff. And if you
can't touch my stuff, yeah,okay. You might be still taking
away some husbands property, butthe entire family unit, husband
and wife gets away with notbeing hurt so much. If a wife
(09:48):
can keep some of that propertyis not liable for her husband's
debts anymore, that the familyunit is able to hold on to more
wealth generally. Then ifcreditors could come take wife
and husband and stats. So reallythe married women's property
acts, which were not duringMartha's lifetime. So when
(10:08):
you're, when you're livingduring Martha's lifetime, you
just hope your husband knows hisaccounting, but the mid 19th
century, this changes in orderto protect whole families going
under. So it's not in responseto women's calls for greater
autonomy.
Kathryn Gehred (10:25):
That's super interesting. And that comes up
so much in these letters,particularly, a lot of Virginia
women at this time period, theirhusbands are in a huge amount of
debt. Not for Martha Washington,George Washington seems to have
been pretty good at keepingthose finances in good shape.
Her son, not so much. Not somuch. But yeah, yeah, that comes
up all the time. So it's legalhistory. So interesting. I'm so
(10:47):
happy to have you on here. Andpeople don't think of how women
are affected by legal history.But absolutely there.
Alexandra Garrett (10:51):
Oh, yeah. I mean, this is why the choice of
And that is a great segue intothis letter. Martha who is
husband during anytime before1839, really, when the first
working and trying to get hergranddaughter engaged. You gotta
married woman's Property Act isenacted in Mississippi, women
getting married was a hugechoice for their well being and
it goes beyond their emotionalwell being. It goes to their
financial their entirelivelihood, you better shoes,
(11:13):
right.
hand it to Martha Washington.She married well, twice.
Sure, did,
Kathryn Gehred (11:29):
To people who had a lot of money and managed
it now. I mean, again, itdepends on what you mean by
Well, she was a slave holdermarrying other slave holders. So
it's like there's also thatelement. I never want to
Girlboss a slave holder, but
Alexandra Garrett (11:40):
Oh, never know, I'm writing my book on one
of the largest female slaveowners in Essex County, Virginia
for decades. I tell my studentsabout that. And they start their
eyes start getting wide withthis Girlboss energy. And I'm
like, no intersectionalanalysis, my friends. She's
powerful because she ownsenslaved people. And then their
eyes start squinting again. Andthey're like, Oh, no. So yeah,
(12:03):
it's a good lesson. It's a goodlesson, right?
Kathryn Gehred (12:05):
Yeah, definitely. Yeah, you always
have to keep that in mind. Iguess we'll move into the actual
letter. Yeah, try to keep it tothe specific moment. So I'll set
up a little bit of thebackground. This is a letter
from Martha Washington to hergranddaughter, Eleanor, who
called Nellie Parke Custis, inwhat we're pretty sure was
January or February of 1796. Toget a little bit into the
(12:27):
documentary editing weeds, theway that we were able to date
this letter was through thecontent of the letter itself.
Imagine you're in the 18thcentury, and you're writing
letter to somebody, normally,you would put down the place,
and the date that you arewriting from, and this was
really essential for a number ofreasons, things got lost, all
(12:48):
the times things would bedelayed, you didn't know where
somebody was, maybe somebody'ssaying they're coming to your
house, and they're letting youknow where they're writing from.
There's a lot of reasons thatyou would put when and where you
are writing from. But sometimesin some of these more casual
women's letters, people eitherjust forgot or didn't really
(13:09):
think it was important to do.Martha knows that Nellie knows
she's writing from Philadelphia.And she's writing this letter
quickly. And it's this is alsosomebody that she speaks to all
the time. So it's a very casualMartha letter. In the past, I've
done some Martha Washingtonletters where she's trying to
put her best foot forward. Thisis not that this is Martha
(13:31):
writing, quick stream ofconsciousness. So she didn't
even date it. She didn't date itor say where she was writing
from. So from things like hersaying that she's going to have
been mentioning that Nellie's inAlexandria, we were able to look
into when Nellie was old enoughto be writing and receiving
letters when she was visitingfamily. And from that we were
(13:52):
able to narrow it down toprobably the winter of 1796. At
this point in January, Februaryof 1796. Martha is they didn't
call it the first lady backthen. But she's the first lady.
Her husband is president. She's65 years old. In the political
world, the Jay Treaty drama isat peak at this point. But
Martha is not writing aboutthat. Nellie is almost 17. If
(14:13):
you've listened to one of ourprevious episodes, Episode
Seven (14:17):
"Strange, Most Passing Strange." We have another letter
that was written during thistime period, and you can hear
more about what Nellie was upto. Suffice it to say that
Nellie her older sisterElizabeth has just stunned
everyone by getting marriedsuddenly without telling anyone
and her sister Patty has justhad a daughter. And so Nellie
(14:37):
was visiting her sister Patty atthis time to visit the new
family members. These are theCustis kids who Martha
Washington sort of adapted, twoof her grandchildren, George
Washington Park Gustus andEleanor Parke Custis and the
other two stayed with theirmother. It created this kind of
interesting family dynamic wherethere's like George Washington
(14:58):
Parke Custis, and Nellie are thelittle prince and princess of
America figure are definitelyspeaking, and their siblings who
are just as close to theirgrandma are sort of stuck, not
as sort of famous a situation.So Nellie, when she's writing
letters from visiting herfamily, you can just sort of
like feel that she would ratherbe in Philadelphia, she'd rather
(15:19):
be in the thick of it again, shedoesn't want to be sort of stuck
with all of her dozens of halfsiblings and siblings in
Virginia she would rather beback with with grandma and
grandpa. She's going to severalballs while she is in Alexandria
visiting her sister. And that isthe context of this letter
Martha is writing trying to helpher get ready for a ball. So
(15:41):
with that, take it away.
Alexandra Garrett (15:43):
All right, so this is Martha Washington's
letter to her Eleanor ParkeCustis parentheses later in
life, Lewis, and she's writingfrom Philadelphia in January or
February 1796. And she writes,"My dear Nellie, I Expect to get
your things every moment to putup— a servant of mr Easterns is
(16:04):
going to Alexandria the Box willbe put under her care for you— I
can not get a pair of whiteTassles in the city— I think
your chemese will look muchbetter with a handkerchief than
without— I have sent you one ofmine in case you should not have
one of your one— I have put upevery thing that I could think
you could want— ask your Cousinto assist in dressing you when
(16:25):
you go to the ball— I wish youto look as neat as possable—and
let all your things be of apeice— my love to you I wish you
may have as much pleasure as youExpect— going to these places
one always Expect more pleasurethan they realize after the
matter is over. wednesdaymorning My dear child— after
hurring Mrs Wright and gettingyour things put up and sent to
(16:48):
the place they were to gofrom—the person was not ready to
go and the stage is gon withoutit— I shall have it put under
the care of the stage master andsend it to morrow— I hope you
will get it early on monday— thefeathers are the olny tolarable
ones to be had they have beenpicked so often that thare are
none left that was handsome givemy love to your sister— the
(17:10):
President joins me in love toyou and wishing you every
happyness— I am my dear yourever affectionate m. Washington
as I told you before you mustnot depend altogather on the
dress that is going in the stagegive my love to your cousin."
Kathryn Gehred (17:27):
Excellent, a beautiful read. From reading
this letter, Alexandra, what areyour sort of takeaways? What
does that letter make you thinkabout?
Alexandra Garrett (17:37):
Sure, it makes me think about a lot of
things. First and foremost, ourlistening audience can't really
see the letter. But the pausesthe natural pauses that I took
aren't necessarily punctuated inthe letter itself. So just to
explain punctuation, grammar,spelling, you know, it exists
during this time period. Butit's not. It's not uniformly
(17:58):
taught to everyone who evenhappens to have the wealth to
receive an education. And forMartha Washington in particular.
Basically, scholars have seen wedon't have a lot on your her
young life. But scholars haveassumed that she might have been
taught basic reading andliteracy skills from an
itinerant tutor growing up. Andin Martha Washington's letters,
(18:18):
you will notice there's a lot ofspelling mistakes, or lack of
punctuation, or words, the sameword spelled differently
multiple times, I want to bereally clear with women of this
time period, it's not a sign ofintelligence at all. It is
instead a gender division ofeducation where women were
(18:39):
taught to, to write in a waythat was more about getting
information across. So writingwas more of a utilitarian task
for women. Whereas for men,they're able to be the ones
going to boarding school if youif you first of all, if you
really can't afford it. They'retruly genteel, you're going
across the pond for boardingschool. But even if not, you
(18:59):
know, even if you have anitinerant tutor, you're being
taught writing baseline isutilitarian. But on top of that,
you want to have this loquaciousflowery show off style, because
you are showing off youreducation. It's a class status
thing to write long sentenceswith lots of allusions to the
(19:20):
books you read about Greek andRoman history. So if anyone
reads early American lettersfrom really well educated men
versus you know, well educatedenough women, you're still gonna
see these differences. And Ijust really want to point out
it's not about intelligence,it's about what was seen at the
time was the point of writingand the point of writing for
(19:40):
women was to keep householdscounts, and to communicate with
loved ones.
Kathryn Gehred (19:45):
Yeah, well, and I think that's part of why I
thought of this letter under thesubject of wit. I just think
it's a little bit funny. I don'tknow if she's trying to be very
funny in this but a little bitand she does pass on a little
bit of wisdom like going tothese places, one always expects
more pleasure than they realizeAfter the matter is over, very
good.
Alexandra Garrett (20:02):
That was 100% my favorite. Haven't we all
experienced that? It whetheryou're a girl or a boy, right? A
teenager, young man or youngwoman, you get all hyped up to
go to the party, right? Becauselike, you know, there's gonna be
some single crushes there.Right? And then like you go, and
like maybe you have a fun time,maybe you have a devastating
time, because so and so'sdancing is so and so. But when
(20:23):
you come home, you're like,Wait, I got super hyped up for
that. And it was just fine. Youknow, we have experienced this.
We have been 17. Yeah, we'vegotten to prom. It's such
motherly advice. Basically,she's saying, Honey, don't get
your hopes up if things don't goso well.
Kathryn Gehred (20:40):
Yeah, I thought I thought that was great. And
that's one of the things I loveabout women's letters. Some of
these men are writing suchflowery, verbose letters that
they think you can just tellthey think they're so good. And
it's just hard to get through.It's just hard to it's hard to
get through. It's painful.
Alexandra Garrett (20:57):
Yes, yes. Where this letter is not
painful. This letter is shortand to the point and it's like
boom, boom, baby. Yeah, it'sgreat.
Kathryn Gehred (21:04):
She repeats three times do not count on this
dress getting literally to you.
Alexandra Garrett (21:08):
Literally I hope this just gets you I hope
this handkerchief I hope thisthese feathers. But like don't
count on that because like 111thing already left and then
didn't get on it. So like I hopeand just cross your fingers.
Like that's the tone for sure.It's like when you're waiting,
you know, when you're like, Oh,crap, I didn't get my Halloween
costume. Overnight it fromAmazon. And it's just like, Oh,
(21:28):
I hope it gets here in time. I'mnot going to look fly at the
ball without. It's so similar.It's actually uncanny.
Kathryn Gehred (21:36):
Yeah, this it feels it definitely feels
relatable to me. And I hadanother example I almost picked
this letter. But I just want togive a quote from an earlier
letter from January 3 1796.Martha wrote to Nellie, "I was
very sorry, my dear child tohear that you had been sick and
had the toothache. You should bevery careful how you go out in
the cold to keep your feet dryand to take care of your teeth
(21:57):
to clean them every day." Shejust she keeps going with
nowhere punctuation andeverything that she's thinking
like, take care of yourself.Take care of yourself. Take care
of yourself. That is alsoclassic Martha
Alexandra Garrett (22:07):
Oh, yeah. And like, I think it's a really good
point. It's such a mom move. Andshe's not the mom.
Kathryn Gehred (22:13):
She took her adopted grandchildren bro her
role very seriously. And itgives a little bit of a peek
into what she was like as amother. One of the things I
really like about CassandraGood's book on the Custis's is
she gives outsider perspectiveson how Martha is with the kids
and she's a little bitsmothering. She spoils them a
(22:33):
lot. Oh,
Alexandra Garrett (22:34):
definitely a third party. I mean, her love
and like, right, this is like adoting person too. You can
imagine the 17 year old Nellie17 right now. She's 17. Right?
You can imagine 17 year oldNellie being like, I know like,
I know, kind of like God, youonly say it to me, like every
two seconds. It's this kind ofthis doting chittering type of
(22:57):
motherly advice because shesays, you know, she's all
worried that the dress won't getthere in time. But also, you
better have your cousin help youget dressed. I wish you to look
as neat as possible. Okay, leteverything be matching. Let it
be all of one piece. Oh, also, Ilove you. I love you. I hope you
have a really great time. Have agreat time. Yeah, but let your
cousin help you. Girl you needit. That's the vibe, right?
Kathryn Gehred (23:21):
When she says I think your dress or I think you
should use will look better witha handkerchief than without I've
sent you one of mine.
Alexandra Garrett (23:28):
In case you should not have one as your own.
And also you better wear itbecause it does look better. And
I know you might not wear it soyou better wear it like it's
just such a mob. Like it's socute. It's so cute. Yes.
Kathryn Gehred (23:41):
You know, I was trying to think I don't know if
it like if if Martha would be Idon't know if Nelly would be
rolling her eyes at this likeOkay, fine. A handkerchief or
like Martha did have a lot ofmoney. She cared a lot about
clothes. There's another greatletter of her just absolutely
tearing into this woman sellinglace in Philadelphia. Mm hmm.
She has strong feelings aboutthese things. So I don't know.
(24:03):
Maybe Maybe it was a veryfashionable handkerchief. And
no, it was like, Yes.
Alexandra Garrett (24:06):
You're right. She could be like, Oh, another
handkerchief, but that wouldonly mean that Nellie is very
spoiled. Grandma quote unquote,has beautiful handkerchiefs that
she gives her all the time ormaybe she's not rolling her eyes
Exactly. Like you said, whereit's like, Oh, thank god. She's
sending me one of her own. Ihope it's one of the good ones.
Kathryn Gehred (24:25):
That I don't know.
Alexandra Garrett (24:28):
I don't know either. That's That's the
mystery.
Kathryn Gehred (24:30):
Uh, again, a little bit of the documentary
editing side of this letter.This one was a bit of a struggle
A) it was not dated. So it tooka lot of research B) She
mentioned several people byname. This is a fairly well
documented time. You can lookpeople up in Philadelphia
directories you can find GeorgeWashington's 1000s of letters.
He mentioned people all thetime. We could not find Mr.
(24:50):
Eastern or a really good idea ofMrs. Wright. We know that she
paid Mrs. Wright for something,but we don't know what service
she was providing. So it was,this was just a little bit of a
struggle of a letter for for awhile, when she says a servant
of Mr. Easterns. Who's goingthat's probably a slave. But I
don't know she's inPhiladelphia, probably that we
(25:11):
don't know for sure. Yes, yes,it's good to bear in mind that
at these balls were Nellies,having fun and meeting people
and Martha sending things, thepeople who are delivering the
clothes, the people who areprobably serving them at the
ball, the inheritance thatpeople are set up to get a lot
of that includes human beings,and that this was a society
where people were human beings.And that's always something that
(25:32):
you have to keep in mind, whichthey did not necessarily have to
keep in mind like that wasabsolutely that they would sort
of rather that we didn't talkabout and that's why it doesn't
turn up in letters all the time.
Alexandra Garrett (25:41):
That's right. And or they just it's a part of
Kathryn Gehred (25:42):
And also there's a lot of you mentioned, there's
a lot of spelling issues inthis. This is one of my all time
their natural life. And theytake it for granted don't even
see. So why why mentioned thethings that are just every day.
classic Martha Washingtonspelling issues, she spells own
o n e that you would read asone. So when she says you
(26:04):
shouldn't have one of your own,she spells it o n e.
Alexandra Garrett (26:08):
But when you think about it, it makes me own
it makes sense phonetically.
Kathryn Gehred (26:12):
And then the other the other spelling mistake
in this one, which boggleseveryone's mind is she wrote for
only she spelled it oln y only,which is something that is more
of a it looks like it's a typingerror. That's an error that you
make while typing every singletime we would read this
transcription, we would alwaysgo back to the manuscript. And
(26:33):
even when we sent it on to latereditors, we would always go back
to the manuscript to make surethat wasn't a typo. And it was
not she spelled it ol and why itdoes not say anything about
intelligence. It was adifference in education. And
also I actually like it that youget these absolutely completely
not selfconscious just writingas she's thinking it letter that
she wrote super fast and sentoff. I feel like it is really
(26:55):
telling about Martha as aperson, and you get to sort of
feel for her voice even in theletter.
Alexandra Garrett (27:01):
Yes, definitely. And like I was
mentioning earlier, just to kindof give an audience uses they
can't necessarily like see thisletter as they're listening. I'm
going to read a sentence andit's going to have natural
pauses in the way that we wouldthink of it today. So I expect
to get your things every momentto put up a servant of Mr.
Easterns is going to Alexandria,the box we put under her care
(27:22):
for you. Okay, that sounds likenatural pauses. But just keep in
mind that it looks more likethis. I expect to get your
things every moment put up dash,a servant of Mr. Easterners
going to Alexandria the box, weput under her care for you,
period. You know, it takes you acouple of times to be like, oh,
oh, that's what the Okay, maybemaybe it would help modern day
(27:42):
readers put a comma there. Yeah.But it's not there. And then
with letters like this, but Iit's not just this letter, it's
this, these letters have thistime period, they would write
down things as they're happeningor whatever thoughts they
wanted, and then they would walkaway from it and then add the
next day, two days later, a weeklater, just pick right back up
(28:03):
where they left off on thatletter, and just kept going with
something new. And that's notreally how we experienced
letters today, right? The firsthalf of this letter is all about
Mr. Easterns is going toAlexandria this box. I'm trying
to get you this stuff do to doto do I want you to look nice,
and then it just stops and thenyou just see Wednesday morning,
and then it starts again. Mydear child, she's like updating
(28:25):
her but there's like at leasttwo days if not more represented
in this letter, but it's justone letter.
Kathryn Gehred (28:31):
I love letters like that the day spanning
letters and again I say it'slike she read it really quick
but she she wrote it reallyquickly over the span of several
days. And then she didn't dateit but she did right Wednesday
morning.
Alexandra Garrett (28:42):
She at least for a Wednesday morning to like
let even Nelly know Hey, this islike a new New Day New Thought.
Yeah, yeah, we have to keep inmind too. You're not You're not
writing with an easy peasyballpoint pen here, either.
Whatever you take care to evenwrite down. It must matter
enough to you.
Kathryn Gehred (28:59):
Yeah, paper is expensive. People always
apologizing for the quality oftheir quills and ink and things
like that. A lot of the lettersthat we come across almost none
of them are just perfectly blankon the back because people would
save the letters and use themfor things like adding up debts
and things on the back. There'salmost always just like family
scribbles on them because youjust didn't have that much paper
back then.
Alexandra Garrett (29:19):
No, I mean, think about what you might just
jot down quickly on a stickynote that might be on the what
you jot down on like a nicebeloved letter from grandma. You
know, it's like, oh my gosh, mydear beloved grandma, then it's
just like bread sugar. are justnumbers from someone counting
thing, right?
Kathryn Gehred (29:37):
Yeah, we would have to figure it out too.
Because it's like the lettersdated this one time. And then
there's something written on theback and we're like, I think
that's from like 30 years later.Nellie does write that she she
went to two balls in 1796 andher sister's wedding. She said
the balls were very agreeable,and I danced a good deal.
Dancing you know has always beenmy delight and I prefer balls to
(30:00):
any other amusement? Hmm. So itseems like
Alexandra Garrett (30:03):
Same girl, same. yeah, no, it seems, it
seems that she really lovesdancing and it seems to go,
Okay, I really liked that youbrought that up because I think
this, this transitions intosomething I was thinking about
with balls. You know, when wethink of balls, we don't host
balls really today in the sameway. But really, it's a big
(30:24):
dance party. And it's a bigmusical refreshments party.
That's what a ball is. And it'sone of the fewer moments or
there were fewer moments duringthis time period to
appropriately interact with theopposite sex. And this is a
chaperone meaning like, youknow, your mom and your aunt and
other people or kind of otherpeers are watching. So it's kind
(30:47):
of chaperone. So you want tostay in your lane. By it's your
way to physically get close topeople to flirt, especially when
so much culture before the mid19th century in general is is
relatively homosocial wherewomen hang out with women men
hang out with men, though it'snot always true. I mean, you
have men and women reading inparlors together, and you have
(31:08):
men and women dancing. So it'snot always the case. But we
don't have schools that have menand women really together as
much as comes later. Right. Sothis is like a chance to flirt,
a chance to be physically closea chance to socialize, talk in a
way where it's safe, and you'renot breaking any sort of norms
or not being coquettish by anyany means. But you can still
(31:33):
kind of get to know otherpeople. We still do that today.
Like yeah, man, even though wehave a much more mixed sex
settings in our daily life,right socially at work, we still
like to go to somewhere wherethere's music and dancing and
kind of get to know other peopleon a different level.
Kathryn Gehred (31:46):
Yeah, sometimes I think it'd be so fun to go to
old time balls like this. Andthen I think about the fact that
she talks about I danced a gooddeal. There were a set number of
dances of songs that he like,had to like know the steps to if
somebody didn't want to dancewith you, you you weren't
dancing. So it really was kindof a mark of how well you did of
whether you were dance peoplewere interested enough in you to
(32:07):
keep dancing with you all night.And of course, now he was
dancing all night. But I knowfor a fact if I was at one of
these things, I would not be.
Alexandra Garrett (32:14):
Oh my god, why would be your friend pulling
you out into the dance floor? Soyeah, no, it's so true. And in
fact, so it's funny I have Ihave this book here that I'm
using for my own research. It'sthe journal and letters of
Philip Vickers Fithian, and he'sthe plantation tutor of the Old
Dominion. So basically, this is1770s. I know it's like some
(32:35):
decades before what we'retalking about. But this is like
an itinerant tutor, journaling,jotting down his experiences in
Virginia and the 1700s. Andthere's some great stuff here
about balls. I just want to sayhe keeps commenting on how well
the girl stance or not, whichactually matters, apparently
just like you said, right. He'sat a ball in Hobbs Hall, which
(32:58):
is Tappahannock, Virginia. Andhe goes, Oh, Miss Richie danced
a minuet. She is a tall, slimgirl dances nimble and graceful.
And then there's somebody else.He goes Mr. Richie, he stalked
about the room. He was thedirector of this ball. He dance
middling though. I also want itknown that women are not going
(33:22):
to bed early. Okay, so thisguy's writing and he says Miss
McCall, Miss Ford, Miss Brockand berry to the younger Miss
Ritchie's and Miss Wade. Theydance till half after two. Oh,
then he goes on. My girlfriend'sa die he goes quote, We got to
bed by three after a day spentin constant violent exercise,
aka dancing, okay, and drinkingand unusual quantity of liquor.
(33:48):
For my part with fatique heat,liquor, noise, want of sleep,
and the exertion of my animalspirits, aka dancing my butt
off. I was almost brought tobelieve several times that I
felt a fever fixing upon me. Idanced and drank and partied so
hard. I thought I was gettingsick. The next day he goes, we
were called up to breakfast athalf after eight. We all looked
(34:09):
dull, pale and haggard. Like brois hung over and you know those
you know these women are hungover to, right are you kidding
me, can you be going to bed atlike 2:30 and waking up at like
8:30 Anyway.
Kathryn Gehred (34:21):
I love that. That's like a beautiful 18th
century language description ofa hangover is fantastic. =
Alexandra Garrett (34:27):
Pale. dull. Haggered half times changed Katy
really? How's our party changedthat much? I don't think our
bodily reaction to too muchliquor has.
Kathryn Gehred (34:39):
I do think of me dancing is animal exertion.
Alexandra Garrett (34:43):
My animal exertions by violent exercise
that's that's what somebody whowould hate me would say about my
dancing. Yeah, her violentexercise. Anyways, I know it's
not from the Martha letter, butwhen you when we were reading
about balls, I was like, I betthese balls got down like except
for partied hard into the night,this is not, let's go to bed at
(35:04):
eight ladies, this is our chanceto shine. =
Kathryn Gehred (35:06):
And you weren't barred from follows after you
got married Martha and Georgeactually had a subscription to
Alexandria balls, before he wasfamous. And they would go and
they would go and dance just tobe social butterflies in the
city. And they would writelittle critiques of who threw
good balls.
Alexandra Garrett (35:23):
That's right, who through the good ones who
did what, yeah, it's verygossipy. And like, I like that
to like, let's just put it outthere. This is a man's journal I
read from, it's not just womenwho are gossipy. Anyone who's
concerned about social status isgonna write like that. And that
includes men. You know, lots ofmen got their social standing
from the rich women theymarried. They're concerned with
(35:45):
all this stuff, too. So
Kathryn Gehred (35:47):
I have a slight theory about this letter. And I
always read too much intoletters. But I have a slight
theory about this letter, thatMartha, she cares so much about
Nellie, looking nice, looking ata piece going to this ball,
because this is a ball inVirginia. And Martha doesn't
want Nellie to marry one ofthese Philadelphia guys, because
as soon as she is done with thispresidency, Martha wants to go
back home to Mount Vernon. Soshe's really hoping I think that
(36:09):
Nellie makes a good goodimpression to the Alexandria and
Virginia social scene, becauseshe wants to stay down there.
That is just a theory that Ihave.
Alexandra Garrett (36:18):
I think your theory I buy into you know,
especially since you saidearlier tonight that Nelly
wishes she were in Philadelphiaby the tone of her letters that
would not that would not MissMartha, Martha wouldn't know
that. Right? So she's like, yougo, you go look nice. You go
have fun at this Alexandra balland you mean a nice man. And
like, everything will be fine.Right? You'll be close to me.
(36:39):
And all these Philadelphiathings. They'll just they'll
just go away. Right. But ofcourse, you know, we're not
seeing that in the literalwriting. But like, it's fun to
infer, especially when you havecontext clues.
Kathryn Gehred (36:49):
Yes, that's just just a little guess that I have.
But Nellie does. Of course, shemarries one of George
Washington's nephews and lives,basically at Mount Vernon next
door. So it works.
Alexandra Garrett (36:59):
So Martha, Martha got what she wanted. I
hope Nellie did too.
Kathryn Gehred (37:04):
And then the very last thing that I just
thought was funny where shesays, I'm so sorry for the
feathers. I'm sorry, I'm sendingyou these ugly feathers in this
box. They're the only ones thatwere there.
Alexandra Garrett (37:16):
They're the only feathers all the good ones
were taken, like just do whatyou can, man. That's like the
tone of it. Defini tely. No,it's really funny with
Kathryn Gehred (37:23):
a beautiful beautiful chemese a beautiful
handkerchief and these uglyfeathers.
Alexandra Garrett (37:29):
Martha's so concerned that, gosh, I hope
this husband won't care aboutthis feathers like this future
husband. It's like it's fine.Martha, it's like a you almost
like you almost want to justlike reading it. Now. How many
years later? It's just like, oh,Martha, you're so loving it also
like it's fine. You're gonnalook fine. Funny.
Kathryn Gehred (37:49):
This not the most intense letter. This is
very much a little slice of lifea little moment. But those are
some of the ones that I enjoydigging into. So thank you so
much for coming on the podcastand talking about this with me.
Alexandra Garrett (37:59):
Oh, you're welcome. It was absolutely my
pleasure. And it's often fromthese slice of life letters that
you get at people's realemotions, real life and real
concerns that you're just likenot necessarily going to get
from a letter that's kind ofmore high minded or political.
Right.
Kathryn Gehred (38:18):
Thank you so much for coming on the podcast.
This was wonderful. For mylisteners. I will leave more
information about the letterswe've been quoting in the show
notes. Thank you so much forlistening, and I am as ever,
your most obedient and humbleservant. Thank you very much.
Your Most Obedient and HumbleServant is a production of R2
Studios at the Roy Rosenzweigcenter for history and new media
(38:41):
at George Mason University. I'mKathyrn Gehred, the creator and
host of this podcast. JeanettePatrick and Jim Ambuske are the
executive producers. If youenjoyed this episode, be sure to
listen to past episodes andcheck out more great podcasts
from R2 Studios. We tellunexpected stories based on the
latest research to connectlisteners with the past. So head
(39:04):
to R2 studios.org to startlistening
Hello, and welcome to Your Most Obedient
and Humble Servant. This is aWomen's History podcast where we
feature 18th and early 19thcentury women's letters that
don't get as much attention aswe think they should. I'm your
host, Kathryn Gehred. Thisepisode is part of our season on
wit. And today I am so excitedto welcome Dr. Alexandra
(00:24):
Garrett. She is the AssistantProfessor of History at St.
Michael's College. Dr. Garrett'sresearch deals with elite white
women of the 18th and 19thcentury, specifically with
slaveholding white women. Soit's extremely pertinent to this
podcast. We've actually workedtogether in the past. Alexandra
did a piece on MarthaWashington.
Alexandra Garrett (00:44):
Yeah, no, I did a piece for Mount Vernon
magazine. I was a fellow therefor three months in 2019 2020
20. And it was titled "HowWidowhood Changed Martha
Washington's Life" as a shortand sweet. He's just trying to
explain how she got marriedtwice, right, experienced
(01:05):
marriage twice, experiencedwidowhood twice. And then how
her life changed legally,especially during those periods.
So from marriage to widowhood,to marriage to widowhood, and
legally, things would havechanged.
Kathryn Gehred (01:20):
I remember it was great.
So I'm so excited to have you onthe podcast. Thank you so much
for coming on the show.
Alexandra Garrett (01:26):
Of course, you're welcome. I'm so honored
to be here.
Kathryn Gehred (01:29):
Today we're doing a Martha Washington
letter. She was an eliteslaveholding. White woman. So
how has she come to play in yourresearch?
Alexandra Garrett (01:36):
When I was completing my dissertation at
the University of Virginia someyears ago, I was thinking about
how white slave owning women inVirginia, especially the
revolutionary and postrevolutionary periods, for
managing these dual roles ofbeing a woman in a patriarchal
society, men have more powerthan women in a society like
(01:58):
that. But at the same time, thisis a slave owning society, and
slave holders hold more powerover non slave owners. So what
does it mean when you're a womanwho has less power, but you're a
slave holder, which means youhave more power. So it's
supposed to be an intersectionalanalysis with gender and socio
(02:18):
economic status, thinking abouthow they are perceived in this
world, how they navigate thisworld. And then on top of that,
thinking about how they navigatemarriage. So basically, before
states enacted what are calledmarried women's property acts,
the first one was in Mississippi1839. The final one was actually
(02:38):
Virginia, which is the statethat we're thinking about today.
The last one was 1877, inVirginia, so before these
married women, property X,different colonies, and then
also states utilize BritishCommon laws, versions of kind of
legal status for women when itcomes to marriage. So if you're
married, you'd fell under what'scalled feme covert. And it looks
(03:02):
like F E M, E, and then covert.That's what it looks like, but
it's French feme covert, whichmeans you have covered your
status, it means covered womenin French and this is derived
from British common law and itsimply means that you are
married and so in the legalsystem, your majority not all
but majority of your property issubsumed under your husband's
(03:25):
control, because he is the headof household and your legal
identity basically is subsumedunder his not in its entirety,
you still have a right to dowershare, which is about 1/3 of
what the total combined propertywould be between your husband
and you. But again that dowarshare you own it, but really you
(03:45):
more control it, you control itand then upon your death, it
will go to your heirs. If youare a feme sole, that means you
are an unmarried women, meaningyou are never married or you're
waiting to get married, or youare a widow, so feme sole right
french kind of means uncoveredwomen's solo woman, it means
(04:05):
that you have the same legalrights as a man with some
caveats. So the caveats Are youcan't vote. That doesn't come
until much later. You can'tserve on a jury. But you can
sign contracts, you can dealwith your own business, you can
control your own property,control your own wages and your
earnings. You can basicallylegally do everything that a man
(04:28):
can do with a couple caveats aslong as you are unmarried. So
unmarried women are femme souls.Married women are femme
Corvairs. But over 90% of womenin early America, get married.
So you got way more femme COVIDerrs out there than femme souls
however, lots of women alsoexperience widowhood. So if
you're going to have a femmesoul, you're more likely going
(04:52):
to be a widow then you are nevermarried woman and this is a very
long tangent. No. Very basicquestion. Just to get up Martha
Washington so Martha Washington,she was a fam soul, Gosh, darn
it, but she was also a femmeCOVID. Right. So she was a
covered woman and an uncoveredwoman, meaning she was a single
(05:12):
woman. So she fell under FEMsoul. Then she got married to
Daniel Parke Custis, when shewas 18, and therefore, she was a
covered woman, she fell underfemme Corvair status. He died.
She was single, again, not forvery long, but she was so she
fell under a different legalstatus right back to pencil. She
got married to Darryl Georgie.And they were married for 40
(05:35):
years. And so she was femmekovair, again for 40 years, and
then he died before her act. Sonow she's back to femme soul.
I'm trying to think about whatthis would have meant in her
life. It's one thing to havelegal changes. And it's another
thing to like, what are youactually experiencing day to
day. So anyways, I wasinterested in that. That's how
(05:58):
she factored into my dissertation.
Kathryn Gehred (06:02):
I was one of the team of editors who published
the papers of Martha Washingtoncame out in 2022, which is a
addition of all of MarthaWashington's correspondence. And
a lot of the letters that wehave from Martha are doing of
her early life. We don't haveany from her youth. But there
are quite a few from her firstwidowhood from Daniel park.
There's these letters whereshe's you know, doing things
(06:22):
like signing contracts and, andloaning money and at like
extremely high interest. So Iremember when I was doing
research on this in the actuallike language of the Virginia
statutes about widowhood in oneof the laws about being like a
femme soul, they say, unless youhave some sort of disability,
and then it lists a husband, asa disability. always made me
(06:45):
chuckle, but no, no.
Alexandra Garrett (06:47):
No one thought, Oh, no one, no one
laughed, they
Kathryn Gehred (06:49):
show it that was as funny as I did. No,
Alexandra Garrett (06:51):
it is funny. Actually, what you're getting at
is, is actually, it's, it's easyto laugh. But also, there's
actually some truthiness to it,the idea was right, you get
married, and most of your legalidentity is subsumed. And so
your access to wealth that youwould have brought in is, you
(07:11):
know, again, not all of it, anyof it is now you know, under
this husband's control, but somehusbands are ne'er do wells, and
bombs, and might be people whoget into too much debt, there
was this concern for marriedwomen, which is why you could
think of sometimes like a kindof a, a gambling husband as
(07:35):
being a disability to a woman.Actually, what you're bringing
up is really important, becausewhen you think about the married
women's property acts, thosewere state laws that are enacted
over the 19th century. So firstone, aging 39 Last 1877. And you
might be thinking, Well, whythat time period, like why the
mid 1800s By the mid 19thcentury. And by that time
(07:57):
period, you have intensifyingincreasing capitalism. So you
have a lot more boom and bustperiods happening in the
American economy, meaning moreand more people are going into
debt or might in their totallifetime experience booms and
busts themselves. So the reasonthen why these acts are carried
(08:20):
out state by state, it'sactually to protect family
interests. It's not because Oh,women are asking for more
rights. No, actually, what'shappening is, Hey, before the
married woman's property acts,okay, so in Martha Washington's
time period, if your husbandgoes into debt, does a bad
(08:41):
business deal, whatever it mightbe, his creditors will come
after him, but he is the head ofthe whole family. And so the
creditors can take personalproperty from the whole family
to pay back that husbands debt.So suddenly, the personal
property that a wife has broughtinto this marriage, this wife's
(09:02):
property is now liable for herhusband's debt. So debtors are
coming in and taking women'sstuff that they brought to the
marriage and that deprives theentire family unit of wealth and
property. Now, with thesemarried women's property acts,
women are protected from thatmeaning if my husband goes into
(09:24):
debt, make some bad businessdecision, gamble's whatever it
might be, his creditors comecalling. They can only take my
husband stuff, they can't takeme the wife stuff. And if you
can't touch my stuff, yeah,okay. You might be still taking
away some husbands property, butthe entire family unit, husband
and wife gets away with notbeing hurt so much. If a wife
(09:48):
can keep some of that propertyis not liable for her husband's
debts anymore, that the familyunit is able to hold on to more
wealth generally. Then ifcreditors could come take wife
and husband and stats. So reallythe married women's property
acts, which were not duringMartha's lifetime. So when
(10:08):
you're, when you're livingduring Martha's lifetime, you
just hope your husband knows hisaccounting, but the mid 19th
century, this changes in orderto protect whole families going
under. So it's not in responseto women's calls for greater
autonomy.
Kathryn Gehred (10:25):
That's super interesting. And that comes up
so much in these letters,particularly, a lot of Virginia
women at this time period, theirhusbands are in a huge amount of
debt. Not for Martha Washington,George Washington seems to have
been pretty good at keepingthose finances in good shape.
Her son, not so much. Not somuch. But yeah, yeah, that comes
up all the time. So it's legalhistory. So interesting. I'm so
(10:47):
happy to have you on here. Andpeople don't think of how women
are affected by legal history.But absolutely there.
Alexandra Garrett (10:51):
Oh, yeah. I mean, this is why the choice of
And that is a great segue intothis letter. Martha who is
husband during anytime before1839, really, when the first
working and trying to get hergranddaughter engaged. You gotta
married woman's Property Act isenacted in Mississippi, women
getting married was a hugechoice for their well being and
it goes beyond their emotionalwell being. It goes to their
financial their entirelivelihood, you better shoes,
(11:13):
right.
hand it to Martha Washington.She married well, twice.
Sure, did,
Kathryn Gehred (11:29):
To people who had a lot of money and managed
it now. I mean, again, itdepends on what you mean by
Well, she was a slave holdermarrying other slave holders. So
it's like there's also thatelement. I never want to
Girlboss a slave holder, but
Alexandra Garrett (11:40):
Oh, never know, I'm writing my book on one
of the largest female slaveowners in Essex County, Virginia
for decades. I tell my studentsabout that. And they start their
eyes start getting wide withthis Girlboss energy. And I'm
like, no intersectionalanalysis, my friends. She's
powerful because she ownsenslaved people. And then their
eyes start squinting again. Andthey're like, Oh, no. So yeah,
(12:03):
it's a good lesson. It's a goodlesson, right?
Kathryn Gehred (12:05):
Yeah, definitely. Yeah, you always
have to keep that in mind. Iguess we'll move into the actual
letter. Yeah, try to keep it tothe specific moment. So I'll set
up a little bit of thebackground. This is a letter
from Martha Washington to hergranddaughter, Eleanor, who
called Nellie Parke Custis, inwhat we're pretty sure was
January or February of 1796. Toget a little bit into the
(12:27):
documentary editing weeds, theway that we were able to date
this letter was through thecontent of the letter itself.
Imagine you're in the 18thcentury, and you're writing
letter to somebody, normally,you would put down the place,
and the date that you arewriting from, and this was
really essential for a number ofreasons, things got lost, all
(12:48):
the times things would bedelayed, you didn't know where
somebody was, maybe somebody'ssaying they're coming to your
house, and they're letting youknow where they're writing from.
There's a lot of reasons thatyou would put when and where you
are writing from. But sometimesin some of these more casual
women's letters, people eitherjust forgot or didn't really
(13:09):
think it was important to do.Martha knows that Nellie knows
she's writing from Philadelphia.And she's writing this letter
quickly. And it's this is alsosomebody that she speaks to all
the time. So it's a very casualMartha letter. In the past, I've
done some Martha Washingtonletters where she's trying to
put her best foot forward. Thisis not that this is Martha
(13:31):
writing, quick stream ofconsciousness. So she didn't
even date it. She didn't date itor say where she was writing
from. So from things like hersaying that she's going to have
been mentioning that Nellie's inAlexandria, we were able to look
into when Nellie was old enoughto be writing and receiving
letters when she was visitingfamily. And from that we were
(13:52):
able to narrow it down toprobably the winter of 1796. At
this point in January, Februaryof 1796. Martha is they didn't
call it the first lady backthen. But she's the first lady.
Her husband is president. She's65 years old. In the political
world, the Jay Treaty drama isat peak at this point. But
Martha is not writing aboutthat. Nellie is almost 17. If
(14:13):
you've listened to one of ourprevious episodes, Episode
Seven (14:17):
"Strange, Most Passing Strange." We have another letter
that was written during thistime period, and you can hear
more about what Nellie was upto. Suffice it to say that
Nellie her older sisterElizabeth has just stunned
everyone by getting marriedsuddenly without telling anyone
and her sister Patty has justhad a daughter. And so Nellie
(14:37):
was visiting her sister Patty atthis time to visit the new
family members. These are theCustis kids who Martha
Washington sort of adapted, twoof her grandchildren, George
Washington Park Gustus andEleanor Parke Custis and the
other two stayed with theirmother. It created this kind of
interesting family dynamic wherethere's like George Washington
(14:58):
Parke Custis, and Nellie are thelittle prince and princess of
America figure are definitelyspeaking, and their siblings who
are just as close to theirgrandma are sort of stuck, not
as sort of famous a situation.So Nellie, when she's writing
letters from visiting herfamily, you can just sort of
like feel that she would ratherbe in Philadelphia, she'd rather
(15:19):
be in the thick of it again, shedoesn't want to be sort of stuck
with all of her dozens of halfsiblings and siblings in
Virginia she would rather beback with with grandma and
grandpa. She's going to severalballs while she is in Alexandria
visiting her sister. And that isthe context of this letter
Martha is writing trying to helpher get ready for a ball. So
(15:41):
with that, take it away.
Alexandra Garrett (15:43):
All right, so this is Martha Washington's
letter to her Eleanor ParkeCustis parentheses later in
life, Lewis, and she's writingfrom Philadelphia in January or
February 1796. And she writes,"My dear Nellie, I Expect to get
your things every moment to putup— a servant of mr Easterns is
(16:04):
going to Alexandria the Box willbe put under her care for you— I
can not get a pair of whiteTassles in the city— I think
your chemese will look muchbetter with a handkerchief than
without— I have sent you one ofmine in case you should not have
one of your one— I have put upevery thing that I could think
you could want— ask your Cousinto assist in dressing you when
(16:25):
you go to the ball— I wish youto look as neat as possable—and
let all your things be of apeice— my love to you I wish you
may have as much pleasure as youExpect— going to these places
one always Expect more pleasurethan they realize after the
matter is over. wednesdaymorning My dear child— after
hurring Mrs Wright and gettingyour things put up and sent to
(16:48):
the place they were to gofrom—the person was not ready to
go and the stage is gon withoutit— I shall have it put under
the care of the stage master andsend it to morrow— I hope you
will get it early on monday— thefeathers are the olny tolarable
ones to be had they have beenpicked so often that thare are
none left that was handsome givemy love to your sister— the
(17:10):
President joins me in love toyou and wishing you every
happyness— I am my dear yourever affectionate m. Washington
as I told you before you mustnot depend altogather on the
dress that is going in the stagegive my love to your cousin."
Kathryn Gehred (17:27):
Excellent, a beautiful read. From reading
this letter, Alexandra, what areyour sort of takeaways? What
does that letter make you thinkabout?
Alexandra Garrett (17:37):
Sure, it makes me think about a lot of
things. First and foremost, ourlistening audience can't really
see the letter. But the pausesthe natural pauses that I took
aren't necessarily punctuated inthe letter itself. So just to
explain punctuation, grammar,spelling, you know, it exists
during this time period. Butit's not. It's not uniformly
(17:58):
taught to everyone who evenhappens to have the wealth to
receive an education. And forMartha Washington in particular.
Basically, scholars have seen wedon't have a lot on your her
young life. But scholars haveassumed that she might have been
taught basic reading andliteracy skills from an
itinerant tutor growing up. Andin Martha Washington's letters,
(18:18):
you will notice there's a lot ofspelling mistakes, or lack of
punctuation, or words, the sameword spelled differently
multiple times, I want to bereally clear with women of this
time period, it's not a sign ofintelligence at all. It is
instead a gender division ofeducation where women were
(18:39):
taught to, to write in a waythat was more about getting
information across. So writingwas more of a utilitarian task
for women. Whereas for men,they're able to be the ones
going to boarding school if youif you first of all, if you
really can't afford it. They'retruly genteel, you're going
across the pond for boardingschool. But even if not, you
(18:59):
know, even if you have anitinerant tutor, you're being
taught writing baseline isutilitarian. But on top of that,
you want to have this loquaciousflowery show off style, because
you are showing off youreducation. It's a class status
thing to write long sentenceswith lots of allusions to the
(19:20):
books you read about Greek andRoman history. So if anyone
reads early American lettersfrom really well educated men
versus you know, well educatedenough women, you're still gonna
see these differences. And Ijust really want to point out
it's not about intelligence,it's about what was seen at the
time was the point of writingand the point of writing for
(19:40):
women was to keep householdscounts, and to communicate with
loved ones.
Kathryn Gehred (19:45):
Yeah, well, and I think that's part of why I
thought of this letter under thesubject of wit. I just think
it's a little bit funny. I don'tknow if she's trying to be very
funny in this but a little bitand she does pass on a little
bit of wisdom like going tothese places, one always expects
more pleasure than they realizeAfter the matter is over, very
good.
Alexandra Garrett (20:02):
That was 100% my favorite. Haven't we all
experienced that? It whetheryou're a girl or a boy, right? A
teenager, young man or youngwoman, you get all hyped up to
go to the party, right? Becauselike, you know, there's gonna be
some single crushes there.Right? And then like you go, and
like maybe you have a fun time,maybe you have a devastating
time, because so and so'sdancing is so and so. But when
(20:23):
you come home, you're like,Wait, I got super hyped up for
that. And it was just fine. Youknow, we have experienced this.
We have been 17. Yeah, we'vegotten to prom. It's such
motherly advice. Basically,she's saying, Honey, don't get
your hopes up if things don't goso well.
Kathryn Gehred (20:40):
Yeah, I thought I thought that was great. And
that's one of the things I loveabout women's letters. Some of
these men are writing suchflowery, verbose letters that
they think you can just tellthey think they're so good. And
it's just hard to get through.It's just hard to it's hard to
get through. It's painful.
Alexandra Garrett (20:57):
Yes, yes. Where this letter is not
painful. This letter is shortand to the point and it's like
boom, boom, baby. Yeah, it'sgreat.
Kathryn Gehred (21:04):
She repeats three times do not count on this
dress getting literally to you.
Alexandra Garrett (21:08):
Literally I hope this just gets you I hope
this handkerchief I hope thisthese feathers. But like don't
count on that because like 111thing already left and then
didn't get on it. So like I hopeand just cross your fingers.
Like that's the tone for sure.It's like when you're waiting,
you know, when you're like, Oh,crap, I didn't get my Halloween
costume. Overnight it fromAmazon. And it's just like, Oh,
(21:28):
I hope it gets here in time. I'mnot going to look fly at the
ball without. It's so similar.It's actually uncanny.
Kathryn Gehred (21:36):
Yeah, this it feels it definitely feels
relatable to me. And I hadanother example I almost picked
this letter. But I just want togive a quote from an earlier
letter from January 3 1796.Martha wrote to Nellie, "I was
very sorry, my dear child tohear that you had been sick and
had the toothache. You should bevery careful how you go out in
the cold to keep your feet dryand to take care of your teeth
(21:57):
to clean them every day." Shejust she keeps going with
nowhere punctuation andeverything that she's thinking
like, take care of yourself.Take care of yourself. Take care
of yourself. That is alsoclassic Martha
Alexandra Garrett (22:07):
Oh, yeah. And like, I think it's a really good
point. It's such a mom move. Andshe's not the mom.
Kathryn Gehred (22:13):
She took her adopted grandchildren bro her
role very seriously. And itgives a little bit of a peek
into what she was like as amother. One of the things I
really like about CassandraGood's book on the Custis's is
she gives outsider perspectiveson how Martha is with the kids
and she's a little bitsmothering. She spoils them a
(22:33):
lot. Oh,
Alexandra Garrett (22:34):
definitely a third party. I mean, her love
and like, right, this is like adoting person too. You can
imagine the 17 year old Nellie17 right now. She's 17. Right?
You can imagine 17 year oldNellie being like, I know like,
I know, kind of like God, youonly say it to me, like every
two seconds. It's this kind ofthis doting chittering type of
(22:57):
motherly advice because shesays, you know, she's all
worried that the dress won't getthere in time. But also, you
better have your cousin help youget dressed. I wish you to look
as neat as possible. Okay, leteverything be matching. Let it
be all of one piece. Oh, also, Ilove you. I love you. I hope you
have a really great time. Have agreat time. Yeah, but let your
cousin help you. Girl you needit. That's the vibe, right?
Kathryn Gehred (23:21):
When she says I think your dress or I think you
should use will look better witha handkerchief than without I've
sent you one of mine.
Alexandra Garrett (23:28):
In case you should not have one as your own.
And also you better wear itbecause it does look better. And
I know you might not wear it soyou better wear it like it's
just such a mob. Like it's socute. It's so cute. Yes.
Kathryn Gehred (23:41):
You know, I was trying to think I don't know if
it like if if Martha would be Idon't know if Nelly would be
rolling her eyes at this likeOkay, fine. A handkerchief or
like Martha did have a lot ofmoney. She cared a lot about
clothes. There's another greatletter of her just absolutely
tearing into this woman sellinglace in Philadelphia. Mm hmm.
She has strong feelings aboutthese things. So I don't know.
(24:03):
Maybe Maybe it was a veryfashionable handkerchief. And
no, it was like, Yes.
Alexandra Garrett (24:06):
You're right. She could be like, Oh, another
handkerchief, but that wouldonly mean that Nellie is very
spoiled. Grandma quote unquote,has beautiful handkerchiefs that
she gives her all the time ormaybe she's not rolling her eyes
Exactly. Like you said, whereit's like, Oh, thank god. She's
sending me one of her own. Ihope it's one of the good ones.
Kathryn Gehred (24:25):
That I don't know.
Alexandra Garrett (24:28):
I don't know either. That's That's the
mystery.
Kathryn Gehred (24:30):
Uh, again, a little bit of the documentary
editing side of this letter.This one was a bit of a struggle
A) it was not dated. So it tooka lot of research B) She
mentioned several people byname. This is a fairly well
documented time. You can lookpeople up in Philadelphia
directories you can find GeorgeWashington's 1000s of letters.
He mentioned people all thetime. We could not find Mr.
(24:50):
Eastern or a really good idea ofMrs. Wright. We know that she
paid Mrs. Wright for something,but we don't know what service
she was providing. So it was,this was just a little bit of a
struggle of a letter for for awhile, when she says a servant
of Mr. Easterns. Who's goingthat's probably a slave. But I
don't know she's inPhiladelphia, probably that we
(25:11):
don't know for sure. Yes, yes,it's good to bear in mind that
at these balls were Nellies,having fun and meeting people
and Martha sending things, thepeople who are delivering the
clothes, the people who areprobably serving them at the
ball, the inheritance thatpeople are set up to get a lot
of that includes human beings,and that this was a society
where people were human beings.And that's always something that
(25:32):
you have to keep in mind, whichthey did not necessarily have to
keep in mind like that wasabsolutely that they would sort
of rather that we didn't talkabout and that's why it doesn't
turn up in letters all the time.
Alexandra Garrett (25:41):
That's right. And or they just it's a part of
Kathryn Gehred (25:42):
And also there's a lot of you mentioned, there's
a lot of spelling issues inthis. This is one of my all time
their natural life. And theytake it for granted don't even
see. So why why mentioned thethings that are just every day.
classic Martha Washingtonspelling issues, she spells own
o n e that you would read asone. So when she says you
(26:04):
shouldn't have one of your own,she spells it o n e.
Alexandra Garrett (26:08):
But when you think about it, it makes me own
it makes sense phonetically.
Kathryn Gehred (26:12):
And then the other the other spelling mistake
in this one, which boggleseveryone's mind is she wrote for
only she spelled it oln y only,which is something that is more
of a it looks like it's a typingerror. That's an error that you
make while typing every singletime we would read this
transcription, we would alwaysgo back to the manuscript. And
(26:33):
even when we sent it on to latereditors, we would always go back
to the manuscript to make surethat wasn't a typo. And it was
not she spelled it ol and why itdoes not say anything about
intelligence. It was adifference in education. And
also I actually like it that youget these absolutely completely
not selfconscious just writingas she's thinking it letter that
she wrote super fast and sentoff. I feel like it is really
(26:55):
telling about Martha as aperson, and you get to sort of
feel for her voice even in theletter.
Alexandra Garrett (27:01):
Yes, definitely. And like I was
mentioning earlier, just to kindof give an audience uses they
can't necessarily like see thisletter as they're listening. I'm
going to read a sentence andit's going to have natural
pauses in the way that we wouldthink of it today. So I expect
to get your things every momentto put up a servant of Mr.
Easterns is going to Alexandria,the box we put under her care
(27:22):
for you. Okay, that sounds likenatural pauses. But just keep in
mind that it looks more likethis. I expect to get your
things every moment put up dash,a servant of Mr. Easterners
going to Alexandria the box, weput under her care for you,
period. You know, it takes you acouple of times to be like, oh,
oh, that's what the Okay, maybemaybe it would help modern day
(27:42):
readers put a comma there. Yeah.But it's not there. And then
with letters like this, but Iit's not just this letter, it's
this, these letters have thistime period, they would write
down things as they're happeningor whatever thoughts they
wanted, and then they would walkaway from it and then add the
next day, two days later, a weeklater, just pick right back up
(28:03):
where they left off on thatletter, and just kept going with
something new. And that's notreally how we experienced
letters today, right? The firsthalf of this letter is all about
Mr. Easterns is going toAlexandria this box. I'm trying
to get you this stuff do to doto do I want you to look nice,
and then it just stops and thenyou just see Wednesday morning,
and then it starts again. Mydear child, she's like updating
(28:25):
her but there's like at leasttwo days if not more represented
in this letter, but it's justone letter.
Kathryn Gehred (28:31):
I love letters like that the day spanning
letters and again I say it'slike she read it really quick
but she she wrote it reallyquickly over the span of several
days. And then she didn't dateit but she did right Wednesday
morning.
Alexandra Garrett (28:42):
She at least for a Wednesday morning to like
let even Nelly know Hey, this islike a new New Day New Thought.
Yeah, yeah, we have to keep inmind too. You're not You're not
writing with an easy peasyballpoint pen here, either.
Whatever you take care to evenwrite down. It must matter
enough to you.
Kathryn Gehred (28:59):
Yeah, paper is expensive. People always
apologizing for the quality oftheir quills and ink and things
like that. A lot of the lettersthat we come across almost none
of them are just perfectly blankon the back because people would
save the letters and use themfor things like adding up debts
and things on the back. There'salmost always just like family
scribbles on them because youjust didn't have that much paper
back then.
Alexandra Garrett (29:19):
No, I mean, think about what you might just
jot down quickly on a stickynote that might be on the what
you jot down on like a nicebeloved letter from grandma. You
know, it's like, oh my gosh, mydear beloved grandma, then it's
just like bread sugar. are justnumbers from someone counting
thing, right?
Kathryn Gehred (29:37):
Yeah, we would have to figure it out too.
Because it's like the lettersdated this one time. And then
there's something written on theback and we're like, I think
that's from like 30 years later.Nellie does write that she she
went to two balls in 1796 andher sister's wedding. She said
the balls were very agreeable,and I danced a good deal.
Dancing you know has always beenmy delight and I prefer balls to
(30:00):
any other amusement? Hmm. So itseems like
Alexandra Garrett (30:03):
Same girl, same. yeah, no, it seems, it
seems that she really lovesdancing and it seems to go,
Okay, I really liked that youbrought that up because I think
this, this transitions intosomething I was thinking about
with balls. You know, when wethink of balls, we don't host
balls really today in the sameway. But really, it's a big
(30:24):
dance party. And it's a bigmusical refreshments party.
That's what a ball is. And it'sone of the fewer moments or
there were fewer moments duringthis time period to
appropriately interact with theopposite sex. And this is a
chaperone meaning like, youknow, your mom and your aunt and
other people or kind of otherpeers are watching. So it's kind
(30:47):
of chaperone. So you want tostay in your lane. By it's your
way to physically get close topeople to flirt, especially when
so much culture before the mid19th century in general is is
relatively homosocial wherewomen hang out with women men
hang out with men, though it'snot always true. I mean, you
have men and women reading inparlors together, and you have
(31:08):
men and women dancing. So it'snot always the case. But we
don't have schools that have menand women really together as
much as comes later. Right. Sothis is like a chance to flirt,
a chance to be physically closea chance to socialize, talk in a
way where it's safe, and you'renot breaking any sort of norms
or not being coquettish by anyany means. But you can still
(31:33):
kind of get to know otherpeople. We still do that today.
Like yeah, man, even though wehave a much more mixed sex
settings in our daily life,right socially at work, we still
like to go to somewhere wherethere's music and dancing and
kind of get to know other peopleon a different level.
Kathryn Gehred (31:46):
Yeah, sometimes I think it'd be so fun to go to
old time balls like this. Andthen I think about the fact that
she talks about I danced a gooddeal. There were a set number of
dances of songs that he like,had to like know the steps to if
somebody didn't want to dancewith you, you you weren't
dancing. So it really was kindof a mark of how well you did of
whether you were dance peoplewere interested enough in you to
(32:07):
keep dancing with you all night.And of course, now he was
dancing all night. But I knowfor a fact if I was at one of
these things, I would not be.
Alexandra Garrett (32:14):
Oh my god, why would be your friend pulling
you out into the dance floor? Soyeah, no, it's so true. And in
fact, so it's funny I have Ihave this book here that I'm
using for my own research. It'sthe journal and letters of
Philip Vickers Fithian, and he'sthe plantation tutor of the Old
Dominion. So basically, this is1770s. I know it's like some
(32:35):
decades before what we'retalking about. But this is like
an itinerant tutor, journaling,jotting down his experiences in
Virginia and the 1700s. Andthere's some great stuff here
about balls. I just want to sayhe keeps commenting on how well
the girl stance or not, whichactually matters, apparently
just like you said, right. He'sat a ball in Hobbs Hall, which
(32:58):
is Tappahannock, Virginia. Andhe goes, Oh, Miss Richie danced
a minuet. She is a tall, slimgirl dances nimble and graceful.
And then there's somebody else.He goes Mr. Richie, he stalked
about the room. He was thedirector of this ball. He dance
middling though. I also want itknown that women are not going
(33:22):
to bed early. Okay, so thisguy's writing and he says Miss
McCall, Miss Ford, Miss Brockand berry to the younger Miss
Ritchie's and Miss Wade. Theydance till half after two. Oh,
then he goes on. My girlfriend'sa die he goes quote, We got to
bed by three after a day spentin constant violent exercise,
aka dancing, okay, and drinkingand unusual quantity of liquor.
(33:48):
For my part with fatique heat,liquor, noise, want of sleep,
and the exertion of my animalspirits, aka dancing my butt
off. I was almost brought tobelieve several times that I
felt a fever fixing upon me. Idanced and drank and partied so
hard. I thought I was gettingsick. The next day he goes, we
were called up to breakfast athalf after eight. We all looked
(34:09):
dull, pale and haggard. Like brois hung over and you know those
you know these women are hungover to, right are you kidding
me, can you be going to bed atlike 2:30 and waking up at like
8:30 Anyway.
Kathryn Gehred (34:21):
I love that. That's like a beautiful 18th
century language description ofa hangover is fantastic. =
Alexandra Garrett (34:27):
Pale. dull. Haggered half times changed Katy
really? How's our party changedthat much? I don't think our
bodily reaction to too muchliquor has.
Kathryn Gehred (34:39):
I do think of me dancing is animal exertion.
Alexandra Garrett (34:43):
My animal exertions by violent exercise
that's that's what somebody whowould hate me would say about my
dancing. Yeah, her violentexercise. Anyways, I know it's
not from the Martha letter, butwhen you when we were reading
about balls, I was like, I betthese balls got down like except
for partied hard into the night,this is not, let's go to bed at
(35:04):
eight ladies, this is our chanceto shine. =
Kathryn Gehred (35:06):
And you weren't barred from follows after you
got married Martha and Georgeactually had a subscription to
Alexandria balls, before he wasfamous. And they would go and
they would go and dance just tobe social butterflies in the
city. And they would writelittle critiques of who threw
good balls.
Alexandra Garrett (35:23):
That's right, who through the good ones who
did what, yeah, it's verygossipy. And like, I like that
to like, let's just put it outthere. This is a man's journal I
read from, it's not just womenwho are gossipy. Anyone who's
concerned about social status isgonna write like that. And that
includes men. You know, lots ofmen got their social standing
from the rich women theymarried. They're concerned with
(35:45):
all this stuff, too. So
Kathryn Gehred (35:47):
I have a slight theory about this letter. And I
always read too much intoletters. But I have a slight
theory about this letter, thatMartha, she cares so much about
Nellie, looking nice, looking ata piece going to this ball,
because this is a ball inVirginia. And Martha doesn't
want Nellie to marry one ofthese Philadelphia guys, because
as soon as she is done with thispresidency, Martha wants to go
back home to Mount Vernon. Soshe's really hoping I think that
(36:09):
Nellie makes a good goodimpression to the Alexandria and
Virginia social scene, becauseshe wants to stay down there.
That is just a theory that Ihave.
Alexandra Garrett (36:18):
I think your theory I buy into you know,
especially since you saidearlier tonight that Nelly
wishes she were in Philadelphiaby the tone of her letters that
would not that would not MissMartha, Martha wouldn't know
that. Right? So she's like, yougo, you go look nice. You go
have fun at this Alexandra balland you mean a nice man. And
like, everything will be fine.Right? You'll be close to me.
(36:39):
And all these Philadelphiathings. They'll just they'll
just go away. Right. But ofcourse, you know, we're not
seeing that in the literalwriting. But like, it's fun to
infer, especially when you havecontext clues.
Kathryn Gehred (36:49):
Yes, that's just just a little guess that I have.
But Nellie does. Of course, shemarries one of George
Washington's nephews and lives,basically at Mount Vernon next
door. So it works.
Alexandra Garrett (36:59):
So Martha, Martha got what she wanted. I
hope Nellie did too.
Kathryn Gehred (37:04):
And then the very last thing that I just
thought was funny where shesays, I'm so sorry for the
feathers. I'm sorry, I'm sendingyou these ugly feathers in this
box. They're the only ones thatwere there.
Alexandra Garrett (37:16):
They're the only feathers all the good ones
were taken, like just do whatyou can, man. That's like the
tone of it. Defini tely. No,it's really funny with
Kathryn Gehred (37:23):
a beautiful beautiful chemese a beautiful
handkerchief and these uglyfeathers.
Alexandra Garrett (37:29):
Martha's so concerned that, gosh, I hope
this husband won't care aboutthis feathers like this future
husband. It's like it's fine.Martha, it's like a you almost
like you almost want to justlike reading it. Now. How many
years later? It's just like, oh,Martha, you're so loving it also
like it's fine. You're gonnalook fine. Funny.
Kathryn Gehred (37:49):
This not the most intense letter. This is
very much a little slice of lifea little moment. But those are
some of the ones that I enjoydigging into. So thank you so
much for coming on the podcastand talking about this with me.
Alexandra Garrett (37:59):
Oh, you're welcome. It was absolutely my
pleasure. And it's often fromthese slice of life letters that
you get at people's realemotions, real life and real
concerns that you're just likenot necessarily going to get
from a letter that's kind ofmore high minded or political.
Right.
Kathryn Gehred (38:18):
Thank you so much for coming on the podcast.
This was wonderful. For mylisteners. I will leave more
information about the letterswe've been quoting in the show
notes. Thank you so much forlistening, and I am as ever,
your most obedient and humbleservant. Thank you very much.
Your Most Obedient and HumbleServant is a production of R2
Studios at the Roy Rosenzweigcenter for history and new media
(38:41):
at George Mason University. I'mKathyrn Gehred, the creator and
host of this podcast. JeanettePatrick and Jim Ambuske are the
executive producers. If youenjoyed this episode, be sure to
listen to past episodes andcheck out more great podcasts
from R2 Studios. We tellunexpected stories based on the
latest research to connectlisteners with the past. So head
(39:04):
to R2 studios.org to startlistening
Popular Podcasts
Cold Case Files: Miami
Joyce Sapp, 76; Bryan Herrera, 16; and Laurance Webb, 32—three Miami residents whose lives were stolen in brutal, unsolved homicides. Cold Case Files: Miami follows award‑winning radio host and City of Miami Police reserve officer Enrique Santos as he partners with the department’s Cold Case Homicide Unit, determined family members, and the advocates who spend their lives fighting for justice for the victims who can no longer fight for themselves.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.