>> guest: okay, sure. spain comes into the war early in 1779 i believe it was, but not as an ally of the united states. they came in as an ally of the, the french. there was an indication, in fact, that things were not going well in the war for france. it was part of that matter that i addressed in the first hour of the program when things were going badly enough that the french had to step up their activity and send an army over to america. but spain came into the war as what's technically called a co-belligerent, that is not as an ally, but they were fighting the common enemy of the united states. they did make some loans to the united states, loans of money, and the united states was bankrupt and needed every penny

it could get its hands on, so the spanish for important from that standpoint. but i think probably the biggest single aspect of the spanish entry into the war was that once spain came into the conflict then the combination of the french navy and spanish navy together gave the allies a numerical superiority on the seas. and it really changed the equation on the, on the seas from that point on. during the war to the best of my knowledge washington had no, no contact with the spanish. he certainly, of course, did as president of the united states, and one of the last acts of washington as president in the last full year of his presidency was he concluded a treaty that was called the pinckney treaty with spain, and it was a treaty that resolved many of the

western differences that had existed with spain. actually from the 1760s all the way down to the 1790s that spain agreed to the southern boundary of the united states, that the united states wanted which is more or less the boundary along georgia and alabama and the florida boundary today extending out to the mississippi river. and they opened navigation, gave the united states the right of navigation on the mississippi river which was absolutely crucial for opening the west because that was the only way that western farmers living in places like kentucky and ohio and indiana and illinois had for getting their goods to market. otherwise they had to bring their goods across the appalachian mountains which was just not, not feasible. so washington concluded that

treaty with spain, and it was one of the great triumphs of washington's presidency. >> host: our next question is from sean watching in phoenix. go ahead, sean. >> caller: yes, thank you so much, dr. ferling, for your time today. i've got a quick question, i think it's a rather simple one. is general nathan green, was he a moderate, and were the green mountain boys his troops, so to speak? and then to talk, to expand upon the questions about the navy, isn't it true that katherine the great of russia sent the russian navy to sit in, i believe, the ports of baltimore and possibly new york for a short period of time during our revolution? and thank you so much. >> guest: okay, sure. nathan yell green was from rhode island, the green family was very powerful politically, as a matter of fact, in rhode island in the late colonial period.

he was not related to the green mountain boys. in fact, we usually think of ethan allen as the commander of the green mountain boys. they were from out in what we think of as vermont and western new hampshire at the time. i'm unaware of the russian navy coming over at all during the revolutionary war. the british decided early on they just didn't have a large standing army, and they were in the habit when they went to war of hiring mercenaries. and at the very outset of the war lord north, the british prime minister, attempted to hire russian mercenaries and made contacts with katherine the great, and she refused. she wanted no part of it. so lord north turned then to the

german principalities and concluded treaties with several principalities which we usually mistakenly -- but nevertheless we do it -- lump them all together and call the german soldiers who served over here as british mercenaries as the hessians. >> host: this is an e-mail from richard mclean watching us in north dakota, california. first of all about your writing. i appreciate the way in which you present our early history in its full dimension, warts and all, and that in the end inspires awe and gratitude to that small band of brothers who earned our freedom today. then the question, as a stanford history major, i was amazed at the number of times the army was miraculously saved by unusual weather, event and confidence of the british. and this question, i wondered if francis scott key's line, and the heaven rescued lamb, was

inspired in the then-current belief in america that god had a hand in the improbable american victory not only in the revolutionary war, but in the war of 1812. >> guest: okay. yeah, i think the first part of that question let me say i think washington was an extremely lucky individual all through his life. i mean, he was the proverb y'all guy with the -- proverbial cloud with the silver lining hanging above his head. and certainly during the revolutionary war on a number of occasions, especially in the campaign for new york, washington found himself trapped, and he was able to wiggle out of the trap. sometimes because of weather and sometimes because of the lassitude of the british in pursuing him. in fact, at one point in 1776 a british wag writing in a london newspaper made the comment, only general howell could have failed

to defeat george washington, and only george washington could have failed to defeat general howell. i think the first part was accurate, howell, i think, should have defeated washington in 1776. so washington, i think, was an extremely fortunate individual. i've forgotten the second part -- >> host: well, if you know the pref dense of the line from the star-spangled banner? >> guest: no, i'm not familiar with that, but i do know that a great many people at the time certainly felt that providence had been on america's side. washington usually didn't use the term god in his references. he did on occasion, but he more than, more often than not used the term providence meaning, i think, god or as jefferson says in the declarationover independence, nature or nature's god intervened on his side. and, in fact, when washington

resigned his commission at the end of the revolutionary war, when he went to annapolis and resigned his commission, he says in his remarks that providence had been on, on america's side. and i think a great many people all through that period thought that that was, that was true, and perhaps the thing that convinced people even into the 19th century more than, the event more than anything else that convinced them of that was on july 4, 1826, the 50th anniversary of the revolutionary, of the declaration of independence. john adams and thomas jefferson, both of whom had served on that committee to write the declaration and jefferson was a principle author both died that day. and even john quincy adams says at the time in his writings that this appears to be the hand of providence, a recognition that america was an exceptional place, that it had god's, god's

attention. >> host: we are live on this independence day weekend from mount vernon, virginia, with revolutionary war historian john ferling, biographer of both washington and adams. our next telephone call for him is from fairfax -- i'm sorry, first up david in tulsa, oklahoma. go ahead, david. >> caller: hi, thank you for c-span. your previous e-mail kind of stole my question -- >> host: i'm sorry. >> caller: tulsa, oklahoma, and many of my colleagues do believe that the founding of the nation and george washington was prove den cial. so i'll go with a question, do you believe that -- what was, what was president washington's position on slavery, and did he believe that eventually that it would be taken care of before civil war? >> host: thank you very much. >> guest: i'm glad you asked that question.

i cut a response short just before the break on the question of slavery. i think before the revolutionary war washington didn't give very much thought to, to slavery at all. he was a slave owner, and a number of his slaves were growing -- the number of his slaves were growing. there's no indication in any of his writings that he ever considered the morality of slavery, but when washington came home from the revolutionary war, it was clear that he had changed his outlook. and i think the change comes about for two reasons. on the one hand, a great many african-americans soldiered during the revolutionary war. there were about 100,000 men served in the continental army, and 5,000 of them were african-americans. most of those served from 1778 on, so they constituted 5 percent of the total, but an

even larger percentage -- probably closer to 10 percent of the total in those last desperate years of the war. and i think washington saw those men soldiering, and i think maybe for the first time in his life it dawned on washington that if given an opportunity, african-americans could do everything that white americans could do. so i think that was a transformative thing for, for washington. but in addition, washington surrounded himself with some very bright, young aides during the war. and two of those aides in particular, alexander hamilton and colonel john lawrence from south carolina, were antislavery in their outlook. and i think when they were with washington in the evenings after a long workday, they must have talked about slavery on occasion. and i think they may have convinced washington of the

immorality of slavery, and hamilton in particular, i think, may have convinced washington that slavery was not a good economic system, that a free labor system was a more productive labor system. after all, a free laborer who had an opportunity to rise by working hard would do more for the person that he was working for than a slave laborer would. so when washington came home from the revolutionary war, i think his attitude towards slavery had, had changed somewhat. but he continued to own slaves, and i think he felt that he had sacrificed for eight long years during the war, he thought he didn't have very much time to live, he was up in his 50s at that point. men in the washington family had

a terrible habit of dying at a young age. washington's grandfather had been 39 when he died, his father, augustin, had been in his mid 40s, george was in his 50s, but i think he thought he probably wouldn't live to a ripe old age, and he wanted to enyou and live in comfort those years -- enjoy and live in comfort those years that remained. so he did nothing about slavery until the last year of his life, and then he changed his will at that point providing for the release of all of his slaves following his death or martha's, whichever came last. >> host: we are live here in the reynolds education center and museum at mount vernon, and by the way, if you live in the washington, d.c. area and interested in this conference, john ferling will be staying on after our program ends at 3 p.m. eastern time to sign copies of his book, so you're most welcome to come down and visit the

museum, tour the mansion and also meet our guest who's been so kind to spend three hours with us today. let me tell you about the painting over his shoulder since we've now been looking at it for about an hour and a half. it is a mid 19th century copy of a very recognizable portrait of george washington. the original one was painted by gilbert stuart, this one is a copy by james stuart -- jane stuart, daughter of, and painted in about 1850. would you talk about the depictions of george washington by his contemporaries and immediately after his death that helped evolve the image that we have of washington today? >> guest: sure. washington was painted for the first time in 1772, i think it was. he was 40 years old when he was painted. and it was interesting, he had charles wilson peel who was a painter from maryland come to

mount vernon to paint him, and washington wrote a couple of letters while he was sitting for that portrait, and he says in the letters this is the first and the last time i'm ever going to be painted. and it was interesting, he hadn't soldiered in 15 years, and he was a successful planter and businessman at that point. but he obviously wanted to be remembered as a soldier, so he went to his trunk and dug out his old virginia regiment uniform out of moth balls, and that's what he wore when he was painted that time. turns out he was wrong, it wasn't the only portrait that was made of washington. peel, in fact, developed almost a cottage industry in painting washington. and then, of course, i'm not sure how many times washington was painted during his lifetime, but obviously multiple times.

gilbert -- if peel was the most famous painter of washington during the revolutionary years, peel and john trum bl, i actually like john trum bl's works better because washington's step grandson who lived here at mount vernon for a time with him said he thought treasures rumble captured washington better than anybody else did. peel had a tendency to paint everybody with sort of a middle-aged spread, a paunch to them. and if you look at the trumble painting, and there's a copy of it in my book, washington is very lithe and very trim as the, as the commander of the continental army. but if people and trumble were the major painters of washington during the revolutionary war, gilbert stuart was the principle painting of washington during washington's presidency.

and it's really taken from -- yeah, that's the first portrait of washington, and you can see that he's got his virginia regiment uniform on though that was 15 years before -- >> host: all right, let me put this down, what other one would you like people to see? >> guest: the john trumble painting of washington. >> host: how far back is it, can you talk while i'm looking? is this it here? >> guest: yeah, that's it. you can see where peel tended to make washington look rather pawn chi, washington is slim and in good shape. and i mentioned earlier that it's around this time that washington, who's 6 feet, 3 inches tall weighed 210 pounds and he's 50 years old, so he would have been, i think, lithe and trim. >> host: may i take a call? someone's been waiting for quite

a while. >> guest: sure. >> host: jack if fairfax, virginia, thanks for hanging on the line. you're on the air. >> caller: thank you for taking my call. with the idea of the importance of free masonry has come to the forefront of america's pop culture. washington had the majority of the staff for free masons and he held lodge meetings, so i was wondering if you could just comment on the importance of free masonry in washington's life and the founding of the country. thank you. >> guest: sure. washington was a member of the masons, he was in i guess called chapter, i'm not sure, in alexandria he was active in it before the revolutionary war for certain. and several other figures in the revolution even including john paul jones were masons as well.

so at least in the early years i think it was important for washington. >> host: our next call is from monroe, california, janet, you are on the air. go ahead, janet. >> caller: hi, dr. ferling. >> guest: hi. >> caller: i was wondering if you could comment about a story that i had read. this was about a indian chief who spoke to george washington later on in life, and this concerned when george washington was a 23-year-old colonel in the french and indian war, and it concerned the battle of monongahela. >> guest: monongahela, right. >> caller: thank you. the chief had told washington that the chief had told his warriors to level his guns at him, but he saw it was all in vain and they told them to stop firing at him because he was a

particular warrior who could never die in battle. >> guest: i've never heard that story before, but i do know that in the french and indian war washington looked for indian allies. he did have allies among the senecas, he worked with an indian chieftain named -- the english called him the half king, and they were allies with washington in that first engagement that i mentioned earlier when washington ambushed the french. the indians were part of that attack on the, on the french. the english soldiers under washington sort of formed a circle around the french and the indians then formed an outer circle around the virginians in the hopes of getting any french who were able to escape through

the virginia lines. so that washington fought with them then, and then most of washington's fighting during the french and indian war was not against the french, but it was against the indians. and i think washington probably spent many a lonely hour riding down paths in the wilderness out in the western areas of virginia at that time not knowing whether he was going to be attacked by the indians. there was a case i might mention during the battle of brandywine during the revolutionary war when a british officer named patrick pegson who -- ferguson who eventually developed a rifle, invented a rifle of his

own and was regarded as one of the great sharp shooters had a chance to shoot washington. he was on the battlefield, washington and his aides came riding out across the battlefield, and ferguson had a shot at washington. he could have shot him in the back, and he thought that that would be a dishonorable thing to do, and so he did not shoot him. i don't think he knew it was washington at the time, he just knew it was a high-ranking american commander. and later that day or the next day he learned that it was washington that he could have shot, and he chose, obviously, not to. and ferguson said that he was glad he hadn't done it, he thought it was the honorable thing to do rather than not to shoot a man in the back. it was a very different standard of warfare at that time. on that same topic i should mention that in a couple of encounters during the revolutionary war including the

battle of princeton washington leads his troops into battle. he's riding at the head of his men, he's riding right into british forces who are firing muskets at him, and he is no further away from the adversary who was shooting at him than a pitcher's mound would be from home plate on a baseball diamond if you can imagine that. so it took enormous courage to do that and considerable luck to escape unscathed. >> host: john ferling joining us on in depth live from mount vernon, virginia, he's the author of about ten books of revolutionary war history and the people who helped shape the colonial and the united states. his latest book is called the ascent of jack washington, it is widely available at your favorite bookseller. next telephone call is from monorow, new jersey, this is nick.

>> caller: hello, dr. full-terming, and thank you for your insightful information here. previously you discussed the diary keeping of washington and, you know, the other founding fathers like adams and, of course, there's jefferson and hamilton. i'm just wondering, was that a behavior that was consistent through the just the early years of the founding of the country, or did that wax and wane throughout history and even today do we have contemporary politicians aside from presidents that are usually recorded from what i understand keeping diaries and that are, perhaps, the foundation for future history? thank you. >> guest: well, i think it's just an individual matter. i think president reagan kept a diary that was published here not too long ago and a couple of members of franklin roosevelt's cabinet kept diaries that were published after the 1930s.

but i think it's always been just an individual matter. in the case of john adams, he was a new englander. he was from massachusetts. and one of the things the puritans did in the 17th century was many of them kept diaries, and it was a way of kind of keeping personal track of their, their godly lives, of the transgressions that they might have committed and what they might do to improve their relationship with god and their lives and so forth. and so to a certain degree i think john adams' diary keeping came out of that tradition. a few members of the continental congress kept diaries as well and were, i think, those of us who are historians and work on the continental congress are

particularly grateful for that because it does provide some indication of the debates and what congressmen felt toward one another and what was happening at particular times and when congress learned of certain information and whatever. so historians always wish that more people would have kept diaries. and i suspect more people did keep them than, than have survived. those things got passed along into families and then somewhere along the way they were lost in house fires or floods or descendants just thought they were useless and tossed them out. if i can take ten seconds and make a personal appeal to people out there, if you have any kind of historical record that's important, any letters from relatives who were in world war ii or korea or vietnam, whatever, or even today in iraq put them in an archives some

place so that they can be preserved and futuregen rations can look at them. and if they're contemporary letters from somebody in iraq or afghanistan or somebody serving in the u.s. government today and those letters might be important, you can always stipulate these are not to be opened for 50 or 75 years if you want to preserve the privacy of that person. >> host: print out those e-mails and save them, in other words, right? >> guest: that's right. >> host: we have just 3 minutes left in our second hour with our three-hour conversation with washington biographer john ferling, and this question comes from david in cose that mesa, california. >> caller: good afternoon. thank you for taking my call. washington was elected as president first in 1789 and then in 1792 which, curiously, was only three years. but what was the political

process, and who was actually able to vote among the public to choose eventually the electoral college which then chose washington as the president? thank you very much. >> guest: well, it depended on the state. and in some states the state assembly chose the electors, and in other states the electors were chosen popularly. so finish it evolved all through the 1790s. virginia did it one way in one election and then changed and did it another way at another time. and in washington's case the fact that less than four years separated the two elections, remember there couldn't be an election of a president until the constitution was ratified, and it was finally ratified in

june of '88 and then steps had to be taken to get the electoral college elected. and there just wasn't enough time to get that done by november of 1788. so washington's first term was a little bit short of the normal length of time. >> host: as you can see, a very busy afternoon here at mount vernon, virginia. we are at the reynolds education center, and people here are able to get a more in depth look of the life and times of our fist president. during our break we're going to show you more of mount vernon mansion. >> this is what george washington referred to as the heart of the house. this is the original farmhouse

that george washington would have inherited as a young man. remember george washington at age 22 inherits mount vernon from his older brother. george washington's father died when george was only 11 years old, and he had a half brother, lawrence washington, and lawrence really becomes his role model, helps to raise george washington, has a tremendous influence on george washington and as a result of that, they become very close. and lawrence washington dies at age 34, and that's why george washington at age 22 inherits mount vernon, and it is a long hallway. two rooms on the right, two rooms on the left, and the roof that probably just went to the top of the stairs. so as his life changes, the house changes. remember, he's a bachelor. and it wasn't unusual in virginia to have this long hallway. you'd have both doors open, have a nice breeze going in in the summer time. in the winter time it would, of course, become an additional room. not exactly sure how it was

appointed when george washington was a young man. we do know what it looks like december 14, 1799, so you'd have had the parlor. george washington called that the best room in the house, and you have a music room with the original harp si cord that he purchased for his granddaughter who apparently was excited until she found out she had to practice four hours a day. .. we have a document that even wrote a letter that said if no one shows up in the next half hour, martha and i will dine alone for the first time in 20 years. oh, my gosh.

just to give you somed and -- some idea of the number of visitors. he said i would love to go to the table and see a familiar guest. he he said treat your room as you would your own apartment i must suggest to you breakfast fast at 7 main meal at 3 and lighter fare at 8. and i must suggest the meals are served upon the arrival of the hour not the guest. you had to be prompt and be on time. probably something of the most historical significance is this key on the wall. and it's a key to the french prison and you see a sketch below and oftentimes people say well, why would george washington have the key to the french prison? well, what country helped us win our independence? >> france. >> and what frenchman was probably the closest to george washington? you guys get to answer all the questions. you g p -- get to go to the next level. the marquis lafayette.

kmond commander in chief of the french national guard 1789 july 14th. when that is torn down he sends the key to george washington by way of thomas paine and in a letter indicates that he considered george washington his adopted father. his spiritual father. his american general but most importantly he considered george washington the father of american liberty and george washington parently is extremely proud of it. puts it on the wall. been there since 1790. it did take a trip to the to france on the 200th anniversary of the fall of be a still and nice gentleman named george bush senior took it over and brought it back.

this summer "booktv" is asking what are you reading? >> susan weinberg publisher of publish affairs books. what's on your summer

reading list? >> well, the first book on my list is real change of pace for me because we publish nonfiction and i read a lot of nonfiction but i hope this summer i get to read the master. it's a book that i know the publisher and she gave me a copy and she gives me a copy of a book very often. we trade books and talk about each other's books but when she found out i hadn't gotten around to reading that one. she was quite vexed i thought boy, publisher believes in the book that much i do have to read it. i also just read and am going to read another one of our books this summer that we happen to have two books coming out that are wonderful looks at the islamic world one is called destiny disrupted history of the world through islamic eyes and it is a wonderful narrative history of the -- we all know the western narrative the ancient greeks the romance this is the islamic's world narrative how in the 19th century they claim to clash so tragedy.

i -- tragically. i loved every word and read the book and recommended to my reading book which i also rarely do as a pubbish her they are reading it too we'll be discussion it next month. another book is by neil "the new york times" united nations bureau chief now he's had other jobs i had to think fb the ar minute. for 20 years reported in the mideast. cairo bureau chief. reported on islam in the u.s. and neil actually grew up as an oil brat and he, after he came back to this country for college and decided he wanted to go back and learn arabic and really understand this area this land where he had grown up and he's written a wonderful book. the media relations department of hezbollah wishes you a happy birthday. and i've read some of that book as neil was developing it but wasn't the editor and didn't have time to read the whole thing yet, but i loved so much what i read that i decided i really want to give the whole thing a great read and i love hearing what people are saying and talk about that book. and the third book that i

have to admit has been next to my bedside many a summer but maybe this is the summer when i'll finally read the power broker by robert. his book on robert moses. it is something i wanted to read for a long time and it is the kind of book where you need a nice summer month to find the time to read it. >> on this sunday the 5th of july you're looking at some of the crowds at mount vernon mansion. the home of george and martha washington. we are at mount vernon today with author and biographer john ferling to learn more about his writings on revolutionary war history and some of the famous people who helped shape it. we are inside the reynolds education center. we're in our third hour as

we begin our third hour of questions with your phone calls. we'll put the phone numbers on the screen. some of the biographies important to note from this period of time are two on adams this john adams a life by john ferling and also adams and jefferson and his latest book is this biography of george washington which we have been talk about throughout our program. "the ascent of george washington" the hidden political genius of an american icon. john ferling as we begin this third hour, let me ask you, we've been talking a lot of details and specifics with people's questions but over the course of your 30 plus years of research, what is your overarching view of the moeted vagss of most of our founding fathers? -- motivations of most of our founding fathers? were they driven by political ideology, did they have grander view of a new nation or were commercial interests and private interests a big part of the process? >> well, actually i think it is probably a combination of all those things. i think it depends on the

individual. i tend as a historian to be what historians call an economic determinist. that is i think economic factors are probably the biggest single motivating factor. in driving someone. and i think you can make a case for example that washington eventually came to the conclusion that the relationship with great britain was harmful to him personally from an economic standpoint because it inhibited the settlement of the west and his lands that he only owned about 60,000 acres out west weren't selling. i think jefferson had some of those same feelings as well. but i mean, i would never for a moment suggest that those were the only things that drove those people. i think probably washington was inbittered by the way he

was treated by the british during the french and indian war. he's a very proud man. he had been treated as a second class person by the british. i think he was an american nationalist. his great grandfather had come to america so several generations of washingtons lived here. he thought of himself increasingly as an american, not as an englishman and he wanted americans to be able to control their own destiny. and i think all of these people, washington, adams, jefferson all of the others who were major players among the founders really believed that the british were victim americans. that their taxes were wrong that they were trying to establish unwarrant control over america.

they wanted greater autonomy for america. they genuinely believe the prisht were acting -- british were acting in a manner. i think all of those people probably led people to become active in the revolutionary movement. >> host: we're going to try to take as many calls as we can during this final hour. have to get a couple quick facts on the table. george washington was what age when he served as president of the united states? >> well, let's see he was born in 1732 and he became president in 1789. so what 57 i think maybe is that right? >> host: 57 depending upon the month. and when he at the conclusion of his second term, was there debate over whether or not he would leave the presidency? >> guest: well, not debate. i think more speculation whether he would leave or not. but he made clear about a

year before he was leaving that he intended to step down. i don't think he made that clear pub will bely u -- publicly, but he approached hamilton about writing a farewell address for him in the spring of 1799 which was -- 1796 which was the year before he leave the presidency. and it's difficult to keep that kind of thing secret. especially since hamilton was highly involved in politics and would be interested in naming washington successor and so forth. so i don't think there was debate but there was speculation over whether washington would stay on for a third term. but i think he wanted to get away. he wanted to come back to mount vernon. he really knew by that time he probably didn't have very much time remaining. he had suffered two very serious illnesses while he was president. probably had pneumonia

during his second year as president. and he himself said that he never had as much physical vigor in the aftermath of that illness as he had previously. and so i think he saw the sand was running out and he wanted to come back and live out whatever time he had remaining in as much comfort as possible. he was coming under increasing public attacks as president too. that was an unusual thing for washington. but the republican party the fauxes of the federalists were attacking him openly at this point. and he was a thin skinned individual. i think he wanted to get away from that. but he knew his historical reputation was solid and this was a time to go out and unlike a good ma athletes -- many athletes who linger on too long, he got out at the right time.

>> our next question comes from romeo, michigan our viewer's name is ed. >> caller: hello. >> host: i'm pretty well up in age so i don't speak quickly. excuse me. so there's a lot of news about detroit you know cadillac founded detroit 1701. and pontiac indian chief. in case i forget i want you to recommend some reading. i come from an old french pioneer family. came here with cadillac. he died in detroit 1733. and then our genealogy one of his grandsons just had an indian woman and we think that would be the mother of george gerard. some people mispronounce it. he was head scholar luis. a husband, that's a french

name. so and i also -- the story of detroit describes the founding. so i was wondering if you could recommend a reading of anything that was said about these people who were living here for 100 years in the context, everything seems to be going on the east of us. >> host: okay sir let me jump in at that point and have dr. ferling respond to your question. thanks. he's interested in some of the earlyest history of what's now detroit including the indian histories and the like and some of the characters that you write about who helped shape that. >> guest: that's really a little bit outside of my area but what i would recommend i think is to look into the writings of a historian named fred anderson who has written extension ufly on --

extensively on the french and indian war and look at the bibliography and the footnotes in anderson's books and i think that would probably be a good starting place for moving in the direction that you wish to go in. >> host: our next question is from woodbury, pennsylvania. our viewer's name is eduardo. hello eduardo. are you there? >> caller: yes, thank you professor ferling for receiving my call. i like the share true fact story that's never been heard erased from history and that is -- the true father of the american liberty. he not only defeated the british invincible, mobile, alabama battle in 1781 but he planned with francisco the defeat in yorktown. he was well recognized in europe. his name is enshrined in the arch of triumph in paris not george.

george was also considered a bastard child with indian woman. please comment on those two facts never heard story sorely erased from history. >> host: thank you very much. >> guest: well, i'm certainly familiar with miranda and particularly with alexander hamilton's interest in miranda. there is some evidence that in the 1790s that hamilton thought that, or hoped that the united states might be in contact with miranda and try to acquire some of the property in the southwest that the spanish had control. the second part of your question i don't recall. >> host: it really was about george, he has a different view of george washington. i heard him say that he's viewed by these proponents

of the general miranda as actually being an illegitimate child. >> guest: okay. i thought that's what he said. that i've never heard of and certainly it's not true. we know that august tin washington was married twice. his first wife died and then he married mary ball washington and she was washington's mother and he was clearly a product of that marriage. >> host: our next question is from san diego. our viewer is clay. >> caller: yes, thank you. i wanted to ask a question. do you consider washington to have been more of a classical christian or did he have ds leanings like jefferson and some of the other founding fathers? thank you very much. >> sure. i think washington was a a deeist. he believed in a supreme being.

but by and large like most i think he did not believe in a god that directly intervened in human affairs. having said that as i mentioned earlier, washington did from time-to-time refer to the hand of providence and so there's certainly some contradiction in washington's thinking in that regard. he general 4r -- generally did not take communion. he and martha would attend the ang gane chur. he was raised as anglican which would be the episcopal yan church today. he was a church officer. but he generally would not take communion. >> host: we are spending three hours with john ferling at mount vernon. this is our monthly in-depth program. every month a noted american

nonfiction author with the breadth of their writings and we're very pleased to be on this 4th of july weekend talking about revolutionary and colonial america. nextel phone call is from lee in greensboro, north carolina. hello lee. >> caller: hello. thank you for taking my call. i am interested in the concept of shall we say fall from grace. there have been several books written lately about thomas jefferson that have portrayed him as really not so wonderful person. i wonder if you could comment on what you first of all opinion and then maybe what you know about this man and referring back to the kmishl question in this -- initial question in this hour. what was his motivation? thank you. i'll listen on the television. bye. >> guest: i'm a little

uncertain -- was it about jefferson? >> host: it was about thomas jefferson and the concepts of falling from grace as we know more about these figures. >> guest: okay. i think what the caller probably is referring to is that it's now widely believed. i certainly believe it that jefferson had a long-term relationship, intimate relationship with one of his female slaves. sally. the story was around in the 19th century but historians just looked the other way and didn't give it credence and then in a biography a -- that appeared about 30-35 years ago by fawn brody called thomas jefferson an intimate history. she made a very persuasive case for that relationship and annette gordon read in a couple of books recently on jefferson and helpings and

on the helpings family has i think along with dna test pretty conclusively established that that relationship and it certainly races -- raises questions about jefferson. we don't know much about the relationship. we don't know whether jefferson compelled her to have the relationship or whether it was a loving relationship between the two. but it has introduced some new features into what we know and think about. thomas jefferson today. there's no indication i should say of any kind of intimate relationship on washington's part with any of his slaves. that's been studied but there certainly is no evidence for that and i don't know any serious

historian who would take that position regarding washington. >> host: i'd like to take her question to a different level. she was talking about the concept chul -- concept chul idea of historical figures falling from grace and here is an early depiction of george bah -- george washington that you feature in your book and you can see there's a great deal of glorification of him as a historical subject with the angel and the light from above. i'm also remembering washington in the capitol. the same has been done with abraham lincoln in the early depiction of him after his assassination. it's a question about the study of history in america. who are the figures that are treated in this larger than life way somewhat mythical way and it is our changing ability to study history that adds more dimension and more reality to these figures?

>> i don't think it's that so much as just changing attitudes by generations so that reputations come and go or they grow and they decline over time. benjamin franklin for example was extraordinarily famous and beloved at the time he died and then his reputation was eclipsed somewhat and then grew as america industrialized in the late 19th century. franklin's reputation began to grow. here was a guy an inventor like thomas edison and whatever. so his reputation increased. john adams' reputation sank not so much because of anything that he did i don't think. but just that others grew more important. at the end of the revolution the great american triumphant at least in the

minds of the french were washington and adams and franklin. and then adams became eclipsed in the early 19th century by jefferson. and i think it probably wasn't until david mccullough came along and wrote the biography of adams 10 years or whenever ago it was and the recent series on adams on hbo i think it was that has helped to revive adams' reputation. so i think as people change. in our case we've gone through the civil rights revolution of the 1960s. and since then and all historians who have come along since then have been much more aware of slavery and of the founding fathers as slave owners and what they did and didn't do and said and didn't say about

slavery than were historians before that time. and as we go on through the 21st century new problems are going to arise and new challenges and those things will cause people to look back at all of the founders in a somewhat different way. we just can't anticipate what it is going to be. >> host: for john ferling next is chelsea, michigan this is a caller named harold. go ahead please. >> caller: thank you. professor, washington had some problem with his officers. so-called conway and i'd be interested to know how he handled it and particularly with regard to horatio gates who i read was one of the conspirators behind it. how did washington handle it if he did handle it? and i'll listen on my television. thank you.

>> host: thank you. >> guest: yeah, sure. i don't think gates was a part of the conspiracy. some historians would disagree with that. i think gates was the object of the conspiracy but i don't think he was part of an act of con pearcy -- conspiracy against washington. washington's reaction and the way he handled it was interesting and a drid and one of the things i did go into in the book. the book is subtitled "the hidden political genius of george washington" and i think his political genius shows up in his response to the challenges. washington for example made it very clear to congress that he regarded gates as his enemy. he was in effect telling congress choose gates or choose me. one of the two. he also i think turned to

his aids to -- his aides to people like alexander hamilton for example. most importantly hamilton. and they turned their pens and hamilton had a poisonous pen. he turned it loose on gates and tried to disparage gates, tried to belittle gates' victory at saratoga and say any american general could have won that victory. what i find interesting and one of the things i go into this -- in this book is a number of people who were close to washington called on people who were thought perhaps to be part of a cabal against washington and challenge them. henry knox went to john adams' house and here's big henry knox about 300 pounds. a big imposing man and he says categorically to adams, what do you think of george washington? do you support washington?

i'm not sure what adams' thought at the time but adams never forgot that and 25 years later when he wrote his memoirs he mentioned that visit in his memoirs. there was a man who was a member of what was called the board of war which is kind of congress' oversight committee that looked at the continental army and general daniel morgan a big imposing frontiers man rough heartty tough guy went to peters and called on peters and berated him for supposedly being part of the cabal and peters was absolutely terrified. and when morgan left peters wrote everything that -- everybody he could possibly think to write saying i support george washington. i was never against george washington. i love george washington. and so i think washington fought it in a number of

sult ways and overt ways and he did it the way he usually did things with political fighters he let other people do a lot of the fighting for him. >> host: we have 30 minutes left in our three hour conversation with john ferling. our next question comes from air ral watching us in tacoma, washington. hello. >> caller: hello and first of all thank you very much. i attended and spoke at a dinner in scotland. and the dinner was about with the lord buchanan that received a wooden box from wallace. they claimed that george washington had sent it back and he was supposed to give it to his, whoever is going to be next in commands. but he sent it back. and the funny part of this is they gave a -- little ceramic statues that they have purchased in the united states to speakers.

do you know about these dinners and the connection of this wooden box? >> no. no. this is news to me. >> and great deal of detail interesting to see how george washington is memorialized in other places than the united states. i was wondering if you have a favorite among the second or third tier characters in this period of history? >> host: well, actually -- >>g well, i'm not sure i'd call them second or third. >> host: the folks of whom biographyes are not often written in their entirety. >> guest: well, my students used to always ask me a long with do we have to know this for a test. which one of these people would you like to have spent an evening with. and i usually said i think if i could go to dinner with any of them it would either be franklin or john adams. >> host: see, i am actually looking beyond the great lights. that's really why i was trying

to find a word to describe them. but the people who are the secondary characters in the story of the revolution and the founding of america that not whole books are written about. do you have a favorite among them? >> guest: well, i know it sounds kind of corny to say this but i really do have a great deal of admiration for the people who served in the continental army at the time. i think you mentioned the term band of brothers. >> host: that was a viewer's question. >> guest: oh, okay. earlier i remember it being mentioned and there's actually a memoir written by a continental soldier named joseph plum martin from milford, connecticut that was published around 1830 or so and he uses the term band of brothers in that book to describe his fellow soldiers. they really endured a lot. they weren't paid very much.

they suffered e nor pri vags. not to mention the dangers they suffered about 25% of them died in the course of the war. the mortality rate was absolutely incredible compared to the mortality rate suffered by u.s. servicemen in world war i, world war ii. korea, vietnam or iraq or afghanistan. and so i do have a great deal of admiration for them. beyond that. among the figures and you might think of him as a first rate figure. i would probably is thomas paine. i have payne's writings in the library -- library of america series at home and every once in a while i'll pull it off the shelf and reread some of the paine and i think he was just a

colossal figure. not just in common sense in an american crisis but in some of the other writings of his as well. >> host: on this independence day weekend we're live from mount vernon, virginia. we'reen side the reynolds education center and museum which is a new exhibit area opened in 2006 on the grounds of mount vernon. mount vernon, virginia is overseen by the mount vernon ladies association as it has been for almost 150 years. almost a million visitors every year to this spot that is 16 miles away from washington, d.c. along the potomac river. we're talking to john ferling who is a revolutionary war history yab and -- historian and buy -- biographer of george washington. next call is david in mississippi. >> caller: hello. thank you it's an honor the talk with you. >> thank you. >> caller: i'm more of a civil war historian but i'm interested in the typical handling of prisoner of war

and it extrapolates down to or up to the revolution. i wondered what the disposition was for corn wallace army and the army surrendered at saratoga. whether they were paroled or whether there were places they were sent such as happened to the americans gareth and charleston. thank you. >> guest: sure. when they surrendered at saratoga the convention that handed -- handled the surrender called for the army to be released and sent back to england and both washington and congress objected to that. those soldiers couldn't serve in america again under the terms of the surrender but they could serve somewhere else and the people they replace could be sent to america. so congress refused to release that army and they

were kept outside of boston for a while and then they were brought down to virginia and they actually spent most of the revolutionary war following their captivity in late 1777 in virginia. until the british army came in to virginia in late 1780 and then they were moved outside of virginia. but they weren't released until the end of the conflict. and the same was true with corn wallace's army which was taken at yorktown. after yorktown there were considerable discussions that went on between the americans and the british over the exchange of prisoners and finally an agreement was worked out in the summer of 1783. so this would have been about 20 months or so after yorktown and at that point

the prisoners were released on both sides and so it was very slow and coming. >> john for listening's book -- ferling's book about the revolutionary war "almost a miracle" in 2007 was recognized by the american revolution roundtable in new york as its best book on the american revolution. he also received a lifetime achievement award for his history cal studies and -- historical studies and writings from that organization. next call from atlanta this is her shell. hello. >> caller: dr. officialling i wanted to tell -- dr. ferling i wanted to tell you it's an honor to speak with you also wanted to let you know i have a masters degree in education from west georgia. proud of that and my question is did martha and george have any children. if so, what happened to them? i'll hang up and listen. >> guest: no, they had no children. martha had two children from

her first marriage. john park or jackie as he was called and patsy and patsy developed 'leprosy and -- epilepsy and died just before the revolutionary war. john park or jackie lived. he married and had children of his own and unfortunately when the siege of yorktown was being set up jackie asked his step grandfather george washington if he could come and serve as an aide to him during the siege and george consented. so jackie came over to yorktown and unfortunately he contracted a camp disease and died just after corn wallace's surrender. but he had children of his own and those children were

very close to washington and two of the children in particular lived with george and martha during much of the time and one of those children was washington's step grandson named george washington park constance who had a daughter and his daughter eventually married robert e. lee. and in fact he build an estate. a mansion of his own that now sits above the arlington cemetery and in fact if you look sometimes at the eternal flame of john kennedy up behind that you can see a mansion and it's called the cuss us the lee mansion named for george washington park custis and

then robert e. lee. >> host: while we're at biographical discussion let me ask you, you mentioned earlier that george washington came back after the presidency having a sense that he had not many years left. how long did he live and how did he die? >> guest: well, he came back. he got back in march of 1797 and he died in december of 1799. so 30 months or something like that. he actually remained in good health during all of that time. he had some problems with rheumatism or arthritis but nothing serious. nothing major that was debilitating and he was actually contemplating another trip out west which was an extremely arduous trip that somebody in bad health could not have undertaken and he fell ill very suddenly in december of 1799.

i think a historian named peter who taught at george mason university and has written extensively on washington nailed down probably the cause and it was i guess a bacterial infection that caused a swelling which essentially led to just a very slow suffocation of washington. he developed a sore throat i think at first he thought it was nothing more than a sore throat that would last for two or three days. went to bed that night woke up about 2:00 in the morning and realized that he was desperately ill and died probably 17-18 hours later. >> jay-z watching in st. petersburg, florida e-mailed this question did you come across any info that could

be construed as medical doctors facilitating the advancement of washington's death? >> no. physicians were called in and they engaged in bleeding early that morning. certainly didn't do him any good but i doubt that it caused his death. there was some debate in the afternoon about doing what would essentially 3w a tracheotomy -- be a track yotmy and remember -- tracheotomy and remember they didn't have anesthesia at the time. it was an operation that people that physicians didn't routinely perform and the physicians refused to do it. whether they could have done it successfully or not is a question whether they could have prevented an infection from setting up would certainly be a question. but i think the general feeling is that no doctor

wanted to do that to washington for fear that the physician would be then branded as having been the culprit who killed george washington. >> host: next question is from marthawatching us in belgrade lakes maine. hello martha. >> caller: hi susan and thank you for c-span's top-notch work as usual. i have a question about one of the books that influenced your writing. it was listed that david herbert donald lincoln reconsidered influenced your work and since this is the by centennial -- bicentennial year i'm especially interested how it influenced your scholarship. thank you for your scholarship. >> guest: sure. i think when i prepared the list i was just trying to think of books that influenced me at different stages of my career and i actually read that book

before i began graduate school. i was enthralled with the civil war at the time. i read a lot of bruce's books on the civil war but donald's book was a collection of essays on lincoln and i think he took different topics related to lincoln and then boroughed into every aspect of those topics. some of them wound up being critical of lincoln. some of them took new view points. different view points about lincoln. and i think i was probably 21 or 22 years old when i read the book and i think it was one of those things that was informative for me about what historians do and made me want to be a historian and do something like david donald did.

he went on to eventually not too long ago. i mean, he's deceased now but i think about 10 years ago he wrote an extraordinarily good biography. of washington and he was one of the major historians of the civil war period. >> he wrote a biography of washington or of lincoln? >> guest: i'm sorry of lincoln. >> host: we have 15 nurts left in our discussion with john ferling live from mount vernon. next call is from joan and she's watching us in flagstaff. >> caller: yes, mr. ferling thank you for taking all this time for research and writing this book. i can't wait to get there's a story i've heard about george washington for many years. ten-year-old kid. he had a ten-foot putt for victory. he's got that chance today. >> lance armstrong admitted following saturday's stage one of the tour de france, "i was a bittner vows."

stage two, a 121-mile ride, another good opportunity for the sprinters in this one. frank schlek of team saxo bank nearly hit by the team car. lance armstrong chooseing to stay with the pack, staying with his teammates. he would finish the day at 10th place overall, 40 seconds behind the leader. down the homestretch, it was a scary moment for one of the riders, taking a hard fall. no serious injuries reported. approaching the finish line, down the stretch they come. it's mark cavendish crossing the line first ahead of the pack, winning stage two of the tour de france. cavendish on the podium. it's his fifth tour stage win overall. fabian cancellara retains the yellow jersey. a lead over tyler farrar with lance armstrong 40 seconds off the lead in tenth place overall. stage three is monday, a 121.8 mile ride from marseille to he

grand mott, another good opportunity for the sprinters. >> let's get you caught up on some of the national league disors around makes today. the phillies up 1-0 right now on the mets. jimmy rollins seeming to be slowly coming out of his slump, solo shot, his seventh home run on the season. that took place in the first. the marlins right now holding a 5-0 lead over the pirates. jeremy hermida r.b.i. single. chris cog lynn r.b.i. single and dan uggla r.b.i. single for cog lynn and uggla, that took place in the third. the braves and national, nationals holding a 3-1 advantage right now. ronnie belliard with an r.b.i. double and scott olson with an r.b.i. single in the second. you take a look. the cubs leading the brewers right now. the cardinals holding an 8-0 advantage over the reds. colby rasmus with a two-run shot. in the fifth, four runs were scored, two runs on an error and

two sacrifice flies in the fifth. that's in favor of st. louis. well, we know that albert pujols is in. manning first base at busch stadium tuesday july 14th. he's been a monster with 31 home runs and 82 will fbi. keep in mind he's got eight games left including today before the mid-summer classic. it is pujols' eighth all-star selection. as for the rest of the national league all-star starters, chase utley, the fourth straight time he's been elected to start, the last national league second baseman elected to start four straight years was craig begio in '95 through '98. david wright a third-time election to start in a four-year span. hanley ramirez elected to start for the second straight year. jose molina will catch. he's first cardinals catch eelected to start since ted simmons in 1979. raul ibanez in the outfield along with ryan braun.

the brewers have only had two players elected to start, brawn twice and prince fielder and carlos beltran elected for fourths time as a met tied for the third most elections in team history. >> derek jeter was voted to his 10th all-star game. he has nine home runs and 17 stolen bases, good for fifth in the a.l. jeter became first yankee to win all-star m.v.p. honors back in 2000. he'ses a the leading vote getter for the american league. mark teixeira joins derek jeter in the a.l. all-star infield from the yankees. second time he's selected to start in the all-star game. dustin pedroia, jason bay representing the boston red sox. ichiro headed to the all-star game for the eighth time as a starter. josh hamilton getting his second start. third player in rangers' history elected to start multiple

all-star games. and evan longoria getting the call for the tampa bay rays. action around the american league this afternoon. yankees and jays tied 4-4. jorge posada a two-run single. the jays have just tied it up in the fourth inning. mariners have come back to grab the lead on the red sox 3-2, top five. ronnie cedeno, a bases-clearlying triple in the fourth inning. big papi has homered for the red sox and the as going in front of the indian 2-s-1, top 6, matt holliday the r.b.i. single. all right. sprint cup action from last night. the king richard petty on hand for the coke zero 400. kyle busch starting in eighth. joey logano in the field, as well. 4th of july in daytona. the big american flag. lap 77, david stremme making contact with kasey kahne. into the wall he goes. a bunch of drivers caught up in that one. smoke everywhere.

what did dale earnhardt see? >> a couple guys got together. i tried to say hi and 00 was crossed up and i got together with him pretty hard and tore the upper a frame off the chassis. it's a tough race for us. >> 13 cars involved in that one. earnhardt, jr., finishing 39th. five laps later, tony stewart gets out of pit road off the caution, beating denny hamlin out. 32 laps to go, jeff burton now in front. stewart comes back to grab the lead from him. multiple lead changes down the stretch. two laps to go. stewart still in front. watch kyle busch go up top to take the lead back. so bush the leader heading into the final lap. it was thrilling. it was dangerous. bush in the lead. stewart trying the pass him. bush trying to block stewart, into the wall he goes. a wreck would ensue from there. several cars spun off the track. stewart said afterwards, "you

work hard to get to this level. you don't want to see races decided by guys wrecking coming to the finish line," however, that is what happened. stewart crosses the finish line first. another look. busch would need to be pulled off the track by the officials. he was obviously disappointed after leading with just one lap to go. bush finished in 14th place. stewart is the winner of the coke 0400. he led a race high 86 lap, the victory his second of the season. jeff gordon remains second in the points to standings despite a 28th place finished. jimmie johnson in second followed by denny hamlin, carl edwards and kurt busch. so stewart adds to his lead now, a 180-point cushion over jeff gordon in the overall sprint cup standings. jimmie johnson remains within shouting distance. the series heads to chicagoland speedway next saturday night.heh

>> taking a look back to saturday action, manny ramirez in his second game back with the dodgers taking on the san diego padres. top one and ramirez going yard for the first time since he's gotten back from suspension. he gave the dodgers a 1-0. advantage. but in the bottom of thed a sho seventh, edwards, cabrera, hit a career high 3 r.b.i. scoring three. the pads win b y a final of 7-4, colleen dominguez was on hand for the action. >> manny ramirez took the fourth pitch he saw over the left field wall, ending speculation on when he was going to get that first home run.

>> i think it took some pressure off. just the fact that he certainly knows how to hit. >> same old guy, you know. he's baaaaack, all those things. he put a good swing on a pitch and got it going for us. >> i think this is the best medicine for him after having to go through what he went through. it's not that you're feeling sorry for him because he obviously was suspended for a reason and we're past that. >> ramirez has yet to play more than six innings since returning to the field. but the dodgers are patient. >> i think it's going to take a little time, but i just... it's just getting used to what he's doing and getting the rust off. >> on saturday ramirez ducked out on the media, opting not to speak. torre says he plans to have him in the lineup every day unless manny tells him he's feeling a little beaten up. in san diego, colleen dominguez, espn. >> coming up on espnews, we're awaiting a news conference out of nashville. we're hoping to shed much more on the tragic passing of steve mcnair.

>> back here on espn, we send

you to nashville where police are giving a briefing on the steve mcnair shooting. >> as a result of the autopsies, we know that steve mcnair was shot four times, twice in the head and twice in the chest. ms kazemi was shot one time in the head. at the scene, a semiautomatic pistol was recovered recovered m underneath ms. kazemi's body. questions? >> [inaudible] >> we at this juncture believe that they died some time in the early morning hours of saturday long before they were discovered. >> who owned the gun? >> the a.t.f. is assisting us in tracing the gun, the initial purchase and the ownership of the pistol. we're will working to interview that individual. >> [inaudible]

>> from what we know at this point, no. we think that the gun was underneath ms. kazemi's body when officers entered the residence. it was not initially visible and was only discovered late in the processing of the crime scene. >> what do you know about the relationship? >> from what we've learned from friends, they apparently were involved in a dating relationship over the past several months. >> don, are you able to make a determination whether this is a murder-suicide or what you guys are looking at? >> while it is clear that steve mcnair's death is a homicide as a result of being shot four times, the police department is not yet classifying ms. kazemi's death. she does have a single gunshot wound to the side of the head, but there is more investigation required. we're going to be interviewing persons throughout the day today and probably for next several days.

there's also quite a bit of laboratory testing that is necessary, ba ballistics testin, tissue sample testing from the medical examiner's office, a variety of things that have yet to be done. i would expect that it will be a number of days before the classification is placed on ms kazemi's death. >> it says here that she was at other bars in the area. can you tell us about that? 36 we know from talking to witnesses that mcnair was at the blue moon lagoon bar as well as loser's bar friday night into the early morning hours of saturday. we'll be talking to staff and management of those establishments about what he did there, what conversations they may have overheard, who he talked to, that type of thing. >> are you still not looking at other suspects? is there any reason to believe somebody else may have... >> well, there were no signs of forced entry. the person who discovered the

bodies actually had to use a key to get in. as far as