Talk:George Washington

plan to free slaves

I read a pretty good book a while back about a plan Washington had to free at least some of his slaves long before he died..it was resisted by local politicians and his wife..I can`t remember the name of the book or the writer but when I find it I`ll be back..I`m sure there are many references to him and slavery in the archives but as to whether this is included I don`t know..I`ll give it a look..the book was well written and referenced history and fairly recent..it probably should be mentioned in the article--Lonepilgrim007 (talk) 03:04, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

I think you are referring to Henry Weincek's book, An Imperfect God: George Washington, His Slaves, and the Creation of America:http://www.amazon.com/An-Imperfect-God-Washington-Creation/dp/0374529515

In correspondence with Dr. David Stuart (who married the widow of Martha's son Jacky, and was stepfather to Martha's grandchildren), Washington discussed a scheme to free the "dower" slaves. The "dowers" were owned by the Estate of Daniel Parke Custis (Martha's first husband), and held in trust for their son Jacky — and, following Jacky's 1781 death, for Jacky's 4 children. Martha had control of the "dowers" during her lifetime, after which they were to be divided among her grandchildren.

Washington's scheme seems to have been to rent out the "dower" slaves as laborers to other plantations, with the income going toward buying the "dowers" from the Custis Estate. This scheme would have needed the cooperation of all the parties involved – Martha, granddaughters Eliza (and her husband), Martha (and her husband), Eleanor (still a minor), and grandson G.W.P. Custis (also still a minor).

We don't know why the scheme never panned out. Maybe there was not enough of a market to rent out the slaves, or maybe one of the parties objected and squashed the whole idea. Wiencek speculates that one or both of the married granddaughters' husbands may have been responsible. Upon marriage, the granddaughters inherited other Custis slaves, and the husbands speedily set about selling off those slaves.

-- BoringHistoryGuy (talk) 13:41, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

I really think the whole issue raises a lot of questions as to how he really felt about slavery..while he obviously accepted it in his youth he seemed to have eventually have some serious misgivings about it long before he died possible as a result of black soldiers serving with him in the war..from what I understand Martha was totally opposed to him on this but actually freed some of her own slaves eventually out of fear that they might turn against her..I really don`t know much about it as I`m not an historian..I do believe he was ahead of his time in a lot of ways and pretty much was only able to get away with it because of his wealth and influence at the time. Lonepilgrim007 (talk) 03:23, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Edit request 14 May 2013

Category:Ninth President President George Washing was elected in 1789, after the United States had been a sovereign, independent nation for 13 years. Before him, 8 previous US presidents were elected, Each presiding for a 1-yer term, from 1782 - 1789. President John Hansen (elected 1782) was the first US president. More specifically, his legal title was "The President of United States in Congress Assembled" under the ratified articles of Confederation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 15.203.233.78 (talk) 18:10, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Fat&Happy (talk) 18:31, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Final illness

There was some disagreement among Washington's physicians as to the diagnosis. Dr. Craik's original impression was "inflammatory quinsy." Dr. Dick disagreed with that diagnosis when he examined Washington sometime later. When Craik and Brown subsequently wrote their account that was published in the news report, they called the diagnosis "cynanche trachealis."

We should be careful not to make the mistake of assuming that our modern-day meanings for these terms are the same as what the terms meant when used two centuries ago. The Wikipedia article on "quinsy," for example, defines that term as meaning a peritonsillar abscess. However, in the late 18th century, a number of different forms of quinsy were recognized, such as scirrhous quinsy vs inflammatory quinsy, the latter of which was further divided into various subcategories. The current Wikipedia article does not explore this history or explain how the current meaning of the term quinsy compares to what it meant historically. Cynanche trachealis and inflammatory quinsy were probably just very general descriptive terms for illness due to upper airway inflammatory disease, from our contemporary perspective, given the still fairly limited knowledge of human pathophysiology in Washington's day (and given his physicians' inability to perform any sophisticated diagnostic studies or a post-mortem examination in his case). Dezastru (talk) 19:43, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I know that medical terms yesterday and today do not mean the same thing.

Washington's primary cause of death was probably actually suffocation. His throat was so swollen by a severe sore throat infection (whatever type of sore throat his physicians characterized it as or whatever other commentators might theorize it was) with the additional complication of Hypovolemia Shock due to the loss of half his blood-volume from intentional bloodletting.

Now, that being said, all that the article can rely on is verifiable references from recognized medical experts or from those who were present during Washington's terminal illness and who left written records (Tobias Lear, Doctor Craik, Doctor Dick, Doctor Brown and his stepgrandson George Washington Parke Custis).

Craik & Dick published their account 5 days afterward in The Times of Alexandria, at that time calling the sore throat "cynanche trachealis". Dr. Brown wrote a letter to Dr. Craik dated January 2 1800 (found in The Writings of George Washington(Volume 14) on Page 257) which quotes Dick as saying "he assured us it was not really quinsey, which we had supposed it to be, but rather a violent inflammation of the membranes of the throat, which it had almost closed, and which, if not immediately arrested, would result in death." Lear's December 15 1799 letter to William Augustine Washington described the General's condition as being "quincy" (which he called "an inflammatory sore throat").

I have adjusted the text a bit and added some references. Shearonink (talk) 01:37, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Deist or Christian

I have seen in documentaries that and books that George Washington was a Christian. — Preceding unsigned comment added by The Maigne Event (talk • contribs) 19:43, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

You would need to provide referencing from reliable sources that would verify such a change to the Infobox, merely posting a claim without providing specific sources does not prove your case. The present editorial consensus is that Washington most probably should be considered as a Deist, this doesn't mean that he was not a Christian, just that his flavor of Christianity/religion can be characterized as being on the "Deist" model. Please refer to the several previous discussions about this issue as found in this talk page's Archives here. Besides, infoboxes are intended to be summaries of article content, Washington's religion is covered within the Religion section and has a stand-alone article at George Washington and religion. Thank you. Shearonink (talk) 01:37, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Terrorist?

Given that Washington used violence to achieve a political aim against the legitimate government of the day, surely every rational American can admit that he was what would nowadays be termed by Americans (Noam Chomsky excepted) a "terrorist"? 89.101.41.216 (talk) 10:48, 24 June 2013 (UTC)