← Back to Podcast/Martha Washington's First Steps
Episode Transcript

Martha Washington's First Steps

How did Martha Washington create an office before women could hold one? Colleen Shogan talks with Karin Wulf about the first First Lady, the struggle to throw off monarchy in the new republic, and the search for Martha Washington herself. 

Karin Wulf, Ph.D., Librarian and Director, the John Carter Brown Library, and Professor of History at Brown University.

Read Dr. Wulf's essay on Martha Washington at Inpursuit.org.

INFO:

Tell us who inspires you: https://www.inpursuit.org/join.

Please leave a rating and review on Apple, Spotify, or your favorite podcast app. It helps other listeners find the show.

Watch all episodes on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@InPursuitUSA.

Hosted by Colleen Shogan, Ph.D. Written and Produced by Jim Ambuske, Ph.D. Audio mixing by Curt Dahl of CD Squared. Music from Music Bed. Production Services by Stand Together. In Pursuit is a podcast by More Perfect.

SOCIAL:

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/p/In-Pursuit-USA-61580409336588/ 

Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/inpursuitusa/

TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@inpursuitusa 

BlueSkye: https://bsky.app/profile/inpursuitusa.bsky.social 

X: https://x.com/InPursuitUSA


Karin Wulf: Even later in her life, people often remarked when

she was first lady that she dressed rather simply, and I

think that's very self conscious. She doesn't want to

look too fancy, because it's a balancing act, trying to be

first lady, but not trying to pretend that you're being the

queen or something. But the fabric of her clothing was

exquisite, always, of the finest quality.

Colleen Shogan: In early May 1789, Martha Washington

finalized the details of a long journey ahead. In a few weeks

time, she would set out from her home in Mount Vernon in Virginia

and head north to New York City. There she would join her

husband, George, the nation's first president, in the first

capital of the United States. Martha wasn't exactly looking

forward to her new life as the first first lady. She longed to

remain at Mount Vernon and live in retirement with her husband

and grandchildren, but George had answered the nation's call,

and she understood his sense of duty more than most. There was

also no precedent for her new role, and as today's guest, Dr.

Karin Wulf writes, Martha knew that the eyes of the nation were

upon her. So what can we learn then from Martha Washington's

leap into the dark. I'm Colleen Shogan, and this is In Pursuit a

podcast that explores lessons from America's past to write the

history of America's future. Episode Two: "Martha

Washington's Frst Steps."

Karin Wulf, Welcome to In Pursuit.

Karin Wulf: Thank you so much, Colleen, it's good to be with

you.

Colleen Shogan: So we're going to be talking about Martha

Washington this morning. Now, she never expected to become the

first lady of a new nation. As a very young and wealthy Virginia

woman, what path did she expect to follow earlier in her life?

Karin Wulf: I love that you started with that question in

part because I think Martha Washington's story and George

Washington's story is such a Virginia story. I'm a native of

Virginia. Virginians tend to think that Virginia is the total

of early American history, but this is really a story rooted in

Virginia and to understand Martha's early life and the path

towards marrying George Washington, and the path they

ultimately followed that led to the presidency, you have to

understand early Virginia and her expectation, not that she

would be the First Lady of the United States, which didn't

exist, but that she would probably be the mistress of a

modest Virginia plantation, or if she had ambitions that she

would run a larger plantation. She came from a family that was

relatively modest by some standards, but very wealthy by

others. She would have managed enslaved people, and she would

have managed household resources, and she would have

expected to raise children not to be the first lady of a new

nation.

Colleen Shogan: So genealogy is very important, as you

mentioned, to early Americans. And in fact, you've written a

new book entitled Lineage on the topic. So tell us about Martha

Washington. How did she view genealogy? Was this important to

her?

Karin Wulf: Genealogy was so important to Martha Washington's

life as it was to all people who lived in British America, in

part because genealogy is about the relationship between

property and family, and Martha Washington's whole life is

structured around precisely that relationship of property and

family. So whether she was thinking about the family that

she was born into, or the first family she was married into, or

the second family she was married into, because George

Washington was her second husband, she was always thinking

about and understanding that her position owed everything to the

people that she was descended from. So let me give you just

one example. Her first husband, Daniel Parke Custis, was a child

of incredible privilege of a much wealthier family than

Martha's. He was much older than she was, and his father had a

child by an enslaved woman, and also his father had probably his

own half brother in the Caribbean. This is a family

through whom property in people as well as property in land,

meant a lot to what you inherited, whether you inherited

your own personal freedom or you inherited property yourself. So

she would have been enormously attuned to and understood the

significance of her family relationships. It structured her

life.

Colleen Shogan: Her first husband, as you mentioned,

Daniel perk Custis. What happens to him actually impacts what

happens to Martha Washington later in her life. He dies in

1757, how does this affect Martha Washington? What does it

mean for her to be a widow at a fairly young age.

Karin Wulf: Her early life is so compact, I think sometimes it's

easy to miss the fact that she gets married, and within six,

seven years, she's had four children, two of whom died, and

her husband's dead. And then she meets George Washington, or she

probably knows him a little bit anyway, and in another year,

she's remarried to him. It's very compressed, I think, from

our perspective. But when her husband dies, she is appointed

the executor of his estate, which means she's in charge of

distributing to his heirs or managing for his heirs, because

they're they're two little kids, all of the property, and it's

extensive. It's like multiple households and many, many

hundreds of acres, many dozens of enslaved people. And it's not

unusual in Virginia for a young widow to actually be the

executor to manage that kind of property after the death of

someone. Not everyone does it, but it would have been a lot.

And one of the things we see in Martha Washington's papers, what

little survives actually, is how intense that management of

Daniel Parke Custis estate was. She's writing to London. She's

writing to people in Virginia. Merchants in Williamsburg are

writing to her and reminding her that her husband owes the money,

and they're really hoping that she's going to be able to settle

the estate and pay out. It's a really complex financial and

organizational undertaking for her, and she seems to do it

pretty well.

Colleen Shogan: How does that affect our conception of gender?

In the 1750s that a woman is able to be entrusted with this

responsibility? Essentially, she's running a small business.

Karin Wulf: Yeah, absolutely.There's so many ways

in which I think we misconceive what it meant for women who were

part of this particular wealthy Virginia elite, what was

expected of them, what they did on a day to day basis, even the

fact that we often don't think about women as Enslavers, that

they managed property in people, and she did, and part of that

large business was enslaving people and keeping them working

on these plantations in slavery, but it also meant managing

incredibly sophisticated financial instruments, because

this is an economy of debt and credit, in which people are

always operating on the basis of how much debt they can

accumulate and how much debt They can extend to others. It is

a very much a fluid reputation based debt and credit economy,

and she had to understand all of those different pieces of that

in order to be able to function, both when she was married and

then also after her husband died, when she was the executor

of his estate. So she had to be attuned, as I said before, to

the important relationship between family and property, but

also to the complexity of the financial situation in which

they lived.

Colleen Shogan: Martha Washington meets George

Washington. She is one of the wealthiest young widows in early

America. Why did they get together? Why did they get

married? Do we know from a history, did they marry because

of a union of wealth? Did they marry because they fell in love?

Was it both? What do we know?

Karin Wulf: We don't know for sure, but it seems like the

answer is yes, that they married for love, and they absolutely

married for money, because you wouldn't otherwise, it was very

awkward for people not to marry within people of their own

status. In fact, in her first marriage, her first husband's

father tried to resist their marriage, saying that she didn't

bring enough money, frankly, to the Union for George Washington,

she would have been a great catch because of that property.

But you know, there's a long tradition in early Virginia, of

men doing well by marrying wealthy women. And in fact, if

we look at all of the Virginia like senior politicians and

those planters who become very wealthy, they all do well, and

that includes Washington's ancestors. They do well by

marrying wealthy women. Wealthy women are a great source of

power for men. So yes, of course, they married because

this was a union of assets, as it were. But there's plenty to

suggest that George Washington was kind of dishy, quite

handsome and quite a strange

Colleen Shogan: thing, like the George Clooney of the 1750s I

don't know. I don't know. I'm not sure what to compare him to.

Karin Wulf: I know, right? Like very striking, very handsome,

and a real kind of, you know, people talk about Washington,

when he was the general, that he had such an air of command, but

he had an air about him, even as a courting suitor. He's very

tall, he's very handsome, and at that point, he still had his

teeth too. So that seems important, but she's also very

attractive. We don't have a lot of portraits of her. And, you

know, people are always describing women, right? It's so

annoying, but they do, and they tell us, and we also know this

from material evidence, like some of her surviving clothing.

She was very petite. She had dark brown hair. She was very

smiley, I guess we might say now, she was curvy. Later,

people said very kind of uncharitably that she was a

little plump. But she was curvy and lively and just by all

accounts, quite attractive, and they seemed to enjoy one another

a lot. So sure affection growing into love, or maybe even a spark

right from the start. But I think it had to meet that

threshold first. You know, was this a responsible union of

people of similar or kind of simpatico financial situation.

Colleen Shogan: We know that Martha Washington, she

eventually burns almost all of her correspondence with George

Washington. So how do we know actually what Martha Washington

was like? I mean, how do we have a sense of what she was like as

a person, if we don't have much of her surviving evidence with

her relationship with George Washington.

Karin Wulf: You know, it's so tough for women of any kind of

status, we have so little by comparison to what we have with

men. I want to just call out with enormous admiration for the

papers of George Washington Project at the University of

Virginia, which did a "Papers of Martha Washington" volume in

2022. It's fantastic. It's a super scholarly edition, which

might sound like it's dry reading, but it's not. It's

great reading. I highly recommend it to anyone. But it's

essentially hundreds of letters written by her and to her, and

some other materials like receipts and copies of wills and

estate papers. It's a kind of a one stop shop for what we know

from the textual evidence. So that's not the material

evidence, but the textual evidence about Martha

Washington, and it's quite revealing. It shows us quite a

lot about her. It shows us how she expressed herself in

language. It shows us, for example, that she was exchanging

information with these people when she was the executor of her

first husband's estate. It shows us that she's writing about

wanting to make purchases or management of her estate. There

is very little to her husband that is true her husband George

Washington. And it's also true that by comparison to someone

like him, it's very little. This single volume of hundreds of

letters. It's dwarfed by, you know, just in the Founders

Online resource of the documentary editing projects,

this wonderful collaboration of the National Archives and the

documentary editing projects. It's fantastic, online one of

the best resources for early American history. Shows there

are more than 30,000 letters written by George Washington. So

when you say we've got a couple of 100 things written by or two

or about Martha, it seems like very little. But for many other

women, we have 5% of that. We might have one or two or five

things. So I guess what I'm saying is it's a matter of

perspective. There does seem to be quite a lot about her by

comparison to other women, and we can kind of use that

material. We can understand that in conjunction with the

material, evidence of her clothing, material she

collected, things she was interested in. People often

mention that she was a fashionable dresser, and we know

that from what survives, both of the actual material stuff, like,

there's, you know, surviving her beautiful wedding shoes, very,

very fancy she would have absolutely been wearing the

fanciest French shoes.

Colleen Shogan: They were high heels, right? I mean, pretty

unusual.

Karin Wulf: Purple silk embroidered. I mean so, so fancy

and like, can you imagine in 18th century Virginia, saying,

like, dear so and so, this is what I want for my wedding

outfit. I want these fancy heels. So some of that tells us

a little bit about her, too, that she was not the kind of

grandmotherly, you know. Let's just leave her on the margins.

Not much to say about her caricature of later years she

was a woman who knew her own mind.

Colleen Shogan: Yeah, that's interesting, because we have

this picture of Martha Washington in our head, of her

later in life, where she's portrayed very differently than,

like you said, a younger woman who's looking for fancy shoes to

wear at her wedding.

Karin Wulf: Yeah, and but you know, the other thing is that

even later in her life, people often remarked, when she was

first lady, that she dressed rather simply, and I think

that's very self conscious. She doesn't want to look too fancy,

because it's a balancing act, trying to be first lady, but not

trying to pretend that you're being the queen or something.

But the fabric of her clothing was exquisite, always of the

finest quality, and fabric is incredibly expensive at the

time. So she may look like she's simply dressed, but she's

dressed in the best.

Colleen Shogan: You know, she steps into the spotlight,

probably for the first time, when George Washington takes

command of the Continental Army in 1775 and she is now the

spouse, or the wife, of the commander in chief of that army.

What role did she think she had to play in this new foray that

George Washington undertakes that she probably was never

anticipating?

Karin Wulf: Yeah, it's so interesting because one of the

few surviving letters between them is a letter that George

wrote her as he is about to take command, and he says, "I have

been asked to basically, take on this whole big job." And it's a

longish letter, actually, but he's very self conscious about

saying, "I know that this means something, not just for me, but

for you. It's a burden, but it's a responsibility, but it's one I

think we need to shoulder." Interestingly, at the very end

of that letter, he says, PS, "I got the prettiest muslin."

That's gorgeous fabric. I got the prettiest muslin for you,

and I'm sending it. So I think both of them knew that this was

going to change things for them. He'd been a soldier. She knew

that he was an officer for the Virginia militia in the Seven

Years' War. He was fighting for the British because he was a

British colonist. You know, he was a subject of the crown early

in their marriage. But this would change things, and we can

see that she took that seriously in a couple different ways. She

famously always went to visit him at the Winter encampments,

all eight winter encampments, every winter, she tried to be

with him. Armies generally tried to kind of stay put and not

march around and do too much in the winter. So she tried to be

with him. But there are other interesting snippets. Like, for

example, she sometimes just a little bit of evidence on this,

but she would sometimes clearly act as secretary for him, take

notes for him, make copies of letters that he needed, and he

needed a lot. You know, he was managing a big operation. So it

seems to me, what she thought she should do is a version of

what she would have been doing as a plantation mistress,

running an operation. She was thinking about how to serve her

husband and his work, and how to serve the operation that they

were jointly invested in as best she could.

Colleen Shogan: What's interesting to me, she doesn't

remain at Mount Vernon, where she would have been certainly

more comfortable and probably safer, but she does make these

trips, which has to show some sort of attachment to George

Washington.

Karin Wulf: Yes, although it wasn't completely unusual. You

know, many women did do this, and their husbands did want them

to be with them. I'm reminded that Nathaniel Greene, the great

Rhode Island general, probably George Washington's best

general. I might be biased as a Rhode Island resident now, but

Nathaniel Greene was so desperate for his young wife to

join him on campaign, he wrote her these very sexy letters,

like saying, you know, like, I I'm desperate without you, you

need to join me. And she was like, Well, I just had a baby.

I'm kind of tired. Actually, she named that baby Martha

Washington. Oh, how about but so it's not completely unusual for

women to join their husbands. And of course, as we know that

many armies marched with lots of women in train, lots of women

working for the army. So it's not completely unusual, but it's

true that no one would have thought otherwise. If she had

said, I'm just going to stay at Mount Vernon and manage things

there, it would have been a lot less stressful for her. It would

probably have been a lot easier in a lot of ways, but she wanted

to be there with him now,

Colleen Shogan: After the Revolutionary War is over and

the Constitution is ratified, of course, George Washington

becomes the President of the United States, and then Martha

Washington becomes the first First Lady of the United States,

even though that title wasn't in existence at that time. But how

does she approach this job? I mean, this is actually really

hard. There's not precedent for what this will look like in a

republic in the United States. How does she approach this new

role and position?

Karin Wulf: I think there are two things. One is just to go

back to the world of Virginia that they came from. They lived

in an extremely hierarchical world. They lived in a world

where, literally, some people were free and some people were

enslaved, where there was a hierarchy of Gender, Women

typically expected to be subordinated to men, where

wealthy people expected to be in power, and political power, like

the world of hierarchy, was not unusual to them. She would have

understood being in an important position, and she would have

understood very plainly her husband being in this kind of

prime, elevated position. So hierarchy was not new. Hierarchy

was entirely obvious to them, and that, I think, probably

helped with this transition. What's different is the idea

that it's not the ultimate hierarchy that they were used

to, political hierarchy that they were used to, which was the

monarchy, and the monarchy with all of the symbols and the

trappings of luxury and wealth and status that comes with it

that it helped to culturally convey political and

governmental authority. So the question is, how do you have

enough authority to do what you need to do and to convey the

power of the government, but also not so much that you're

tripping over or falling into monarchical habits and cultural

trappings. How do you do hierarchy, but within a

democracy? Very, very challenging. So I think both

George and Martha Washington, they had a little time to think

about this. He was the commander of the army, and that's a very

hierarchical institution, and people had made her into not

quite a celebrity. Like we think of now, but people knew her.

People, as I just mentioned, with Nathaniel Greene and his

wife, people were naming their babies after George and Martha

Washington. They were celebrated. So it wasn't like

they went from nothing to all of a sudden, catapulted into the

spotlight, but they had to really navigate this new

position quite carefully. And you can see how she wants to

think through how she would entertain for example, because

at Mount Vernon, you are bringing people into your home.

But when you're in the president's house, the

President's mansion, you're bringing people into this place

that is the president's residence of the United States

of America. That's very different. You're not welcoming

people into your home, you're welcoming people into the

President's home. And she's a little self conscious about

that, and she sets up some kind of structures for how to do

that. She has parties, but she structures them in terms of who

she invites when they come in, how she greets them, as I

mentioned before, she's pretty self conscious about dressing in

this kind of simple but very elegant style. She outfits their

houses, the president's house this way, orders China and other

kinds of things that will be kind of emblems of the

presidential residence. So I think she's quite self

conscious, and I think it is a major transition that takes a

lot of thought and care, but it's not a wholesale revolution

in how to be.

Colleen Shogan: How does the American public view these

choices that she makes as the first woman to be married to the

American President, which would eventually be the first hostess

of the United States? How do people react?

Karin Wulf: Well, I think there are different kinds of

reactions. There is some controversy around the kind of

style that both George and Martha Washington employ in the

presidential residence. Some people complain about the

parties that they have, finding that, in fact, they look a

little too monarchical, they look a little too aristocratic,

whereas other people find that actually, they're navigating

this quite well. It's interesting that Abigail Adams,

who becomes the second First Lady, says, Look, you are such a

model. I'm never going to be able to do it as well as you

did. Thank goodness you went first, basically. And Abigail

Adams, as we know, was a pretty sharp assessor of people and

their behavior, and probably wouldn't have pulled her

punches.

Colleen Shogan: Karin in the final years of their lives, both

Martha and George Washington worried about a lot of things.

They worried about their families, their legacies, about

the future of Mount Vernon, their home, and, of course, the

future of the United States. What choices did Martha

Washington face in these years near the end of her life, and

how did she confront them?

Karin Wulf: I think there are so many different things that

they're concerned about. Her husband is very concerned about

the future of the United States and the political situation,

particularly the friction between the political parties,

is a subject of great concern. She's very concerned about her

children and grandchildren and her very dear niece, how her

close family will be. Is of enormous concern for her and

tending to those family relationships and those family

situations. I think it takes up an extraordinary amount of her

time. She does think that she will get her husband back to

Mount Vernon, and they will have time together. And of course,

they don't. He dies too soon after the presidency for them to

really have a lot of time together, which is like just

deeply, deeply sad. But I think one thing that's quite telling

to me is that her dear niece, her sister's daughter, Fanny

Bassett, marries twice, once to one of George Washington's dear

nephews, but then the second time she marries, and this is

very close to the end of George Washington's life. So it's in

the mid 1790s she marries George Washington's longtime secretary,

Tobias Lear. And I think for me, that kind of symbolizes how they

think about tending to their family, both the people that

they're related to, but also the people who have become part of

their inner circle, how they want to see them as kind of part

of a coherent whole. I think those are really important to

her. There are also important choices that she makes in terms

of as we know, George Washington decides to free the people that

he has enslaved she does not, in part, she doesn't have a lot of

choice, because the enslaved people who are her property are

actually the property of her children. That is, she just has

the care of that property. But she does have a choice about a

couple of things, including one person who she owns outright,

and she doesn't free that person. So we know that she

doesn't make the same choices that her husband does in regards

to enslaved people. And that's, I think, telling

Colleen Shogan: She does free some of the enslaved people from

George Washington earlier because they were supposed to be

freed upon her death, she frees them early. Earlier. But there's

a reason for that. Correct?

Karin Wulf: That's true. You know, that's a really tricky

one, because some people say and comments that she made

contributed to this, that she worries that when people will

gain their freedom only when she's dead, does her death

become the barrier, essentially, to freedom. So she thinks maybe

I should just go ahead and do this sooner. A more charitable

reading of it is that she wants to enact her husband's wishes

and reflect some of his changing views about slavery.

Colleen Shogan: As we look back into our nation's past, four

relevant lessons today, what can In Pursuit listeners learn from

Martha Washington's life?

Karin Wulf: I think there is no single individual who is purely

heroic and good and positive or who is purely evil? Well,

actually, maybe there are a few people who are but people are

complex, you know, and she had really important things to

contribute to the young nation. And also she's a complicated

figure because she is so implicated in some of the

greatest wrongs of our nation's past, like slavery, but she

really contributed, really importantly, in part because she

was so dedicated to her family. When we think about all the

kinds of commitments that we make to our families, we don't

know what paths that will take us down. She did not know when

she married George Washington that she wasn't just marrying

another guy who would be a planter and pretty wealthy, and

wealthier by virtue of the property he brought to her and a

guy who would be, you know, a politician in the Virginia House

of purchases. She had no idea this guy was going to go on to

be the first president of this unimaginable new thing the

United States of America. She said to someone like, situation

has outrun our imagination. But she went with that. She stayed

committed, not just to her husband, to her family, but to

their mutual commitment to the young United States of America.

Colleen Shogan: Karen Wulf, author of the new book

"Lineage," thank you so much for joining us on In Pursuit.

Karin Wulf: Thank you, Colleen.

Colleen Shogan: Thank you

To read Karen Wolf's essay on Martha Washington and to enjoy

other great in pursuit essays and podcasts. Visit

inpursuit.org. In Pursuit with Colleen Shogan is a podcast by

More Perfect. The series is written and produced by Jim

Ambuske. Our theme music is "Kleos" by Charlie Ryan, audio

mixing by Curt Dahl of CD Squared, please rate and review

the show on your favorite podcast app and tell us which

Americans inspire you.

This transcript was automatically generated by the podcast creator and may contain errors. Aggregated via the PodcastIndex API.