Why July 19th, 1776 Matters

By

An Engrossed Copy

As many readers now know, CARRYING INDEPENDENCE is about the importance of gathering signatures on a single copy of the Declaration of Independence. Today’s date was a significant moment in history that indicated to me that I could indeed write such a story.

July 19th, 1776, was the day the Continental Congress agreed to have one “engrossed” copy of the Declaration made. One readable, handwritten copy, signed by all. Why?

New York Finally Approved the Declaration

Ten days earlier, on July 9th, New York representatives finally agreed to the wording of the Declaration—the last of 13 states to do so. This mattered because their approval finally made the separation from Britain unanimous. But words are hollow without a contract everyone will sign.

Would you agree to move out of your home, while only verbally agreeing the guy moving in could take over? Nope. You’d ensure he came in and signed some papers assuming the mortgage, and absolving you of responsibility. You’d want all parties in agreement.

So did the Congress.

If you really want to see how we began, put down the Constitution and pick up the Declaration.

Signing_KarenAChase.jpg

So what? Why does this decision and day in history matter now?

In a country that too often operates divisively and viciously, we need to remember that this nation began by coming together. By compromising. By being optimistic in the face of grave danger and the real possibility that we might not stand a snowball’s chance of surviving the heat. We began by laying down our lives and our fortunes and our sacred honor for the sake of each other—no matter which colony or country we were born in.

If you really want to see how we began, put down the Constitution and pick up the Declaration. When you read it—actually study it— you’ll find that our country, with this document as evidence, was founded not upon seeking what was best for us individually.

Even with all its flaws, the Declaration was an agreement to collectively be better. And not just for Americans, but for and before “a candid world.”

* * *

Reader Insider Note: I’ll admit it… not before this book had I really studied the Declaration. But with chapter 23 of CARRYING INDEPENDENCE, I wrote myself into a corner. George Wythe, the man who taught Jefferson, was to explain to Nathaniel, my protagonist, the reasoning behind the Declaration. Not the intent. The reasoning.

Of all my chapters and scenes, it took me the longest to write this one—days and days of researching the ideologies, reviewing academic interpretations, and studying the document itself. At times I wondered if I was smart enough to grasp and then convey the meaning of it all. And then I decided I would simply allow Wythe to explain it to me as if I were Nathaniel—a nonacademic, uncertain yet hopeful, resident now living in a foreign land.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

For more history nerd posts like these, subscribe to the blog. Guest posts are welcomed and encouraged. Contact me for details.

For behind-the-scenes author-related news, giveaways, and to find out where I might be speaking near you, subscribe to my e-publication, CHASING HISTORIES.

 

Posted in Blog | Comments Off on Why July 19th, 1776 Matters

Navigating Historic Maps

By

Geographic Time Travel

As a “popular historian” rather than a learned academic, I believe that part of my job is to explore some of the same sources that academics do, and then to bring them into today for the average person to explore with me. Case in point, historic maps.

David Rumsey Map Collection

Very early on an historian, Woody Holton, was gracious enough to have lunch with me to discuss my historical project. He shared numerous sources, including a gem of a website, the David Rumsey Map Historic Collection. It’s a digitized, catalogued historic collection, searchable by region, time period, mapmaker, and so much more. It was there I found late 18th century maps of Britain’s “Middle colonies”—what would become the middle United States. Some maps were so incredibly detailed and high-resolution that I could zoom into ferry landings where travelers would stop to cross on boats before bridges came into existence.

Making Historic Maps Relevant to Readers

While locating those ferry landings was like finding gold for a story in which a guy rides across the colonies in 1776, trying to write modern fiction around archaic maps—such that every day people now could recognize where my character might be—was like trying to dislodge that gold and contextually reposition it using a toothpick. It was tedious. I would pull up the historic map in one browser window, pull up Google maps in another, and flip between them. Or, that was what I had to do five years ago, before the collection added a new feature—the Georeferencer.

The Georeferencer Revolutionizes Map Exploration

The Georeferencer, now in version 4, according to the collection, “it allows you to overlay historic maps on modern maps or other historic maps. The overlaid maps reveal changes over time and enable map analysis and discovery.”  Now, my 1776 map is set precisely over the Google map, among others, and moving a simple toggle bar allows me to fade from the old map to a current day one.

I’ve taken these three screen captures of a 1776 cross section of the land in Pennsylvania featured in my novel. Nathaniel ventures into the Kittatiny Mountains to the west, his homeland is along the Saucony Creek in the middle upper Berks County, and he travels first to Philadelphia in the bottom right. The first image below is the original map, the second shows the overlay, and the bottom image is the modern Google map.

1776_1

1776_2

Screen Shot 2019-07-12 at 6.37.02 PM

You can pop open a new browser window and toggle the maps within the Georeferencer for the 1776 map shown above here.

Prepare to lose all track of time. Maps both of this whole wide world and those of the past are literally at your fingertips.

Reader Insider Note: I was so impressed by Rumsey’s map collection, and the changes that map-making has undergone since 1776, that it plays a small role in the novel for my protagonist. Nathaniel is often marking up old maps. It was during the early years of the Revolution that George Washington, among others, recognized the rebels were never going to win a war with antiquated maps made by the British. In 1777, Congress authorized a national geographic division to chart and draw the fledgling nation.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

For more history nerd posts like these, subscribe to the blog. Guest posts are welcomed and encouraged. Contact me for details.

For behind-the-scenes author-related news, giveaways, and to find out where I might be speaking near you, subscribe to my e-publication, CHASING HISTORIES.

 

Posted in Blog | Comments Off on Navigating Historic Maps

The Woman on the Declaration

By

Founding-Documents Blog Series: Part Six

On this, July 4th, my blog features the last in a brief series related to the history and signing of the Declaration of Independence… Part one began here.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

So many blogs will rightly tell you that the Declaration of Independence was not written, voted for, or even signed on July 4th. All true. Today, however, I’d rather talk about the only woman whose name graces the Declaration. A woman featured in Carrying Independence.

DeclarationGoddard960.jpg

Mary Katharine Goddard

Her brother was a drunkard. He owned his own print-shop which often fell into neglect as he stumbled around the colonies bemoaning (whining) that Benjamin Franklin had been given the title of Postmaster General over him.

When the print shop was left in Mary Katharine’s hands in Baltimore in the mid 1770s, Mary Katharine (with two As) became known not only as the printer, but the editor and the first female Postmaster of Baltimore. (As she says in novel, “It does not take a man to organize the mail… I was already writing and publishing both the Maryland Journal and the Baltimore Advertiser, so why not know the post routes, too?”)

Postmasters in the colonies were paid by Congress, making Mary Katharine the first female federal employee of the newly formed United States. But by the end of 1776, problems in that new country were afoot.

Congress Had a Failing Army

Getting all the congressmen to sign a sole copy of a Declaration—while hiding their identities—was one thing. Ensuring troops stayed to fight was quite another. By January of 1777, the enlistments of soldiers who had joined in July of ’76 were nearly up. Their morale was severely down. Would you have stuck around after 6–8 months of marching, starving, and losing, or would you go home to tend your farm and eat?

Congress decided to admit “to a candid world” who the signers were. They put out the call to printers asking them to make a copy of the Declaration with all their names typeset so all those soldiers could see exactly who and what they were fighting for.

A Woman Volunteers

Enter Mary Katharine Goddard. In February of 1777, she volunteered her print shop in Baltimore to print documents, called broadsides. She used the font Caslon, which, ironically, was created in a type foundry in England. Two hundred copies were made and circulated among the states. To date, nine copies still exist.

Only one signer’s name does not appear on the Goddard broadside. That of Thomas McKean of Delaware. It’s believed that when Goddard printed these copies, the congressmen had yet to sign the original—further proof that the congressmen were not all together on August 2nd for the formal engrossing.

Although her name doesn’t appear on the original signed version of the Declaration, I still point to her when historians ignore women’s roles in the struggle for independence. Mary Katharine not only participated, she even had the wherewithal to typeset her own name on her copies, thereby inking herself into history.

The Smithsonian has a lovely article by Erick Trickey on Mary Katharine Goddard‘s life, background, and achievements.

Reader Insider Note: In order to make copies like the Goddard broadside, printers often worked alongside the original document. In my novel, my protagonist, Nathaniel, not only delivers the document, but stays to help Mary Katharine Goddard typeset the thing. To read how it was done, and to see the sparks fly between Postmistress and Post rider, you can get the book… (ahem—it’s just 99¢ all this week).

 

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

For more history nerd posts like these, subscribe to the blog. Guest posts are welcomed and encouraged. Contact me for details.

For behind-the-scenes author-related news, giveaways, and to find out where I might be speaking near you, subscribe to my e-publication, CHASING HISTORIES.

 

Posted in Blog | Comments Off on The Woman on the Declaration

Declaration of Independence Mistakes

By

Founding-Documents Blog Series: Part Five

Between now and July 4th, my blog features an ongoing series related to the history and signing of the Declaration of Independence… Part one began here.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

While researching the Declaration for Carrying Independence, I came across a few unique things about the the document itself.

The Declaration is a Document With Mistakes

Timothy Matlack was hired to copy the text from Jefferson’s drafts onto the official document. He was responsible for the ink used for the text and the signers (see Part Four here), but in the copying, there were a couple mistakes.

As Kris Spisak wrote, when she was a guest on my blog in her article on Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of an American Language, we often discuss the use of “unalienable” versus “inalienable.” Alison VanNest also wrote an article for Grammarly.com on the spelling and grammatical errors. She illustrates how some mistakes (the spelling of “Brittish” and “shewn”) are simply because of the usage at the time.

The Declaration was Later Corrected

Personally I love the two corrections that were made—some assume by Jefferson’s hand—after it was fully crafted. The word “representatives” was missing the “en” so that was penned in. The word “only” was inserted about ten lines up from the bottom into, “…our repeated Petitions have been answered only in repeated injury.” Cropped images of those sections are below (see the whole document close up here).

Decaration_EN_KarenAChase.jpgDeclaration_Only_karenachase.jpg

A Handprint on the Declaration

There is also a handprint is embedded into the paper in the bottom corner, possibly having seeped through from the back. The size is smaller, as if from the hand of  a woman. It’s impossible to determine when it was set or to test for any traces that might result in a DNA examination without pulling up chunks of the actual document. So there it sits, an unknown shadow sealed forever in parchment.

HandprintDeclaration_KarenAChase.jpg

Reader Insider Note: What’s more fun that an unknown piece of history like an inky handprint when you’re a fiction writer? Not much, so youbetchya… I had to scoop that up and provide a scenario for how it got there! No… I can’t tell you what that scenario is right now, but you can get the book… (ahem).

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

For more history nerd posts like these, subscribe to the blog. Guest posts are welcomed and encouraged. Contact me for details.

For behind-the-scenes author-related news, giveaways, and to find out where I might be speaking near you, subscribe to my e-publication, CHASING HISTORIES.

 

Posted in Blog | Comments Off on Declaration of Independence Mistakes

Faded Ink Informs 1776 History

By

Founding-Documents Blog Series: Part Four

Between now and July 4th, my blog features an ongoing series related to the history and signing of the Declaration of Independence…

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Evidence to Support An Incomplete Declaration of Independence

My novel, Carrying Independence, as covered in Part One, is fiction supported by the fact that not all 56 congressmen were in the same room on August 2nd, 1776 to affix their signatures to the Declaration. Two factors contributed to my being assured that there were men missing from that formal signing.

Ink Fades Based on the “Recipe”

“Timothy Matlack, a revolutionary leader and one of the official scribes of the Declaration of Independence, copied the official document,” writes Kelly Dickerson for LiveScience.com. “[The delegates] signed it in iron ink, which is made with an acidic chemical compound that bleeds into parchment. The staining makes the ink last longer.”

There was one batch of ink made for one hand-made silver inkwell holding the one pen used by 49 congressmen assembling in the one room at the State House on August 2nd, 1776. The subsequent signers used whatever ink was on hand—some of which are different recipes than Timothy Matlack’s. Those signatures have faded differently.

A Woman Proves the Last Signer of the Declaration

In Part Three of this series, I noted that Thomas McKean was the last man to sign the document. For proof, enter Mary Katharine Goddard (more on her in the next post).

In 1777, Congress decided to typeset a copy of the Declaration that included all the names of the signers. ALL their names. But it doesn’t.

Goddard_broadside

Goddard volunteered to make the copies (shown above) in her print shop. Just like other printers, when she reproduced large documents it was customary to build the printing plates (text inserted, one letter at a time, into metal frames) with the original document before her for comparison.

She would read, and then she or an employee (a composer) would type-set that line. “When in the course of human events…” Type-set. “…it becomes necessary for one people…” Type-set. All the way down to the signatures. “John Hancock…” Type-set. “Thomas Jefferson…” Type-set.

In January of 1777, she completed 200 copies. One name, based on one signature, is missing. Thomas McKean.

Thomas_McKean_signature copy

Reader Insider Notes: The Goddard Broadside (of which, to date, 9 still exist) helped fix my time frame for inserting McKean into the novel. Also, when you discover a fact in history that suggests the very document your fictional protagonist, Nathaniel, is carrying ended up in the print shop of an historical figure… well, what would you do? Put him there working alongside her, of course! Here, an excerpt from the chapter informed by the research:

“So long as the document stays, so do you. I have to follow the original to replicate it exactly, and I was told your being here should be hush-hush.” Mary Katharine waggled the apron at Nathaniel, and he [reluctantly] took it from her. “Also, my pressman is ill, and my best type composer joined the Cause last week. It must be you.”

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

For more history nerd posts like these, subscribe to the blog. Guest posts are welcomed and encouraged. Contact me for details.

For behind-the-scenes author-related news, giveaways, and to find out where I might be speaking near you, subscribe to my e-publication, CHASING HISTORIES.

 

Posted in Blog | Comments Off on Faded Ink Informs 1776 History

The Last Signers of the Declaration

By

Founding-Documents Blog Series: Part Three

Between now and July 4th, my blog features an ongoing series related to the history and signing of the Declaration of Independence…

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Who Was Really the Last Congressman?

Since I began writing Carrying Independence—a story that hinges on the fact that not all Congressmen signed the ONE document were in the same room on the same day to affix their signatures (covered in Part One)—I’ve often been asked, “Who was the last one Delegate to sign it?” I look at two men in particular:

Matthew Thornton was the 56th DelegateMatthew_Thornton_KarenAChase

As I mentioned in Part two of this series, the first 49 Congressmen to sign the Declaration of Independence gathered August 2nd, 1776. At that time there were a total of 55 delegates in the Continental Congress. When I asked Joseph D’Agnese, co-author on the book, Signing Their Lives Away, why Thornton was added late, he said, “it was up to each state to determine how many delegates to send to Congress.”

In September, 1776, New Hampshire decided to enlist Matthew Thornton. A rather handsome, Irish-born man, with a reportedly sharp sense of humor and weakened eyes from a smallpox inoculation, Thornton finally joined Congress in Philadelphia in November, 1776, where it is assumed he signed the document.

MatthewThorntonSignature

Thomas McKean Was the Last Man to Sign It

The last man to affix his signature, date-wise, later helped the newly formed states develop a Constitution. Thomas McKean had homes in both Philadelphia and Dover, Delaware, and for the better part of 1776 and into 1777, he was literally on the run from the British.

ThomasMcKean_KarenAChase2McKean wrote to John Adams about being, “hunted like a fox by the enemy, compelled to remove my family five times in three months, and at last fixed them in a little log-house on the banks of the Susquehanna.” No small feet with five children and his second wife pregnant with number six.

Although McKean’s letters confirm he did not attend the August 2nd signing, unfortunately his letters do not indicate where or when he affixed his name. Historians speculate it was some time after March of 1777, or as late as 1781 when he was back in Philly working on the Articles of Confederation. Regardless it was his signature that united the colonies, making them unanimous states at last.

Thomas_McKean_signature copy

Reader Insider Notes: The “little log cabin on the Susquahanna” Thomas McKean mentions in his letter to Adams, is where I chose to have my protagonist find Thomas McKean. Confusion over where that little house actually was/is, became a plot device.

Also, there’s a joke, attributed to no one in particular that begins, “Where did the delegates sign the Declaration of Independence?” When I discovered that Matthew Thornton, due to his late addition, was forced to squish his signature into the very bottom right corner of the document, I claimed the original punchline of that joke for the jolly fellow to share:

“Now, when people ask me where the Declaration was signed, I can honestly answer,” Thornton chuckled through his punchline, “at the bottom.” – An excerpt from Carrying Independence

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

For more history nerd posts like these, subscribe to the blog. Guest posts are welcomed and encouraged. Contact me for details.

For behind-the-scenes author-related news, giveaways, and to find out where I might be speaking near you, subscribe to my e-publication, CHASING HISTORIES.

 

Posted in Blog | Comments Off on The Last Signers of the Declaration

The First Signers of the Declaration

By

Founding-Documents Blog Series: Part Two

Between now and July 4th, my blog features an ongoing series related to the history and signing of the Declaration of Independence…

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

When Did Congress Sign the Declaration?

In Part One of this series, I described the Declaration as a contract. Just as we would when signing a contract today, in 1776 Congress tried to get all the parties (congressmen) into the same room on the same day to sign it—witnesses to one another. The date they chose for everyone to reassemble in Philadelphia was August 2nd, 1776.

The Issues of Assembling in 1776

When mail takes between 2–4 weeks to deliver, and you’re fighting a war with an army already on your soil, getting everyone to return to Philadelphia is a chore. Additionally, the distance imposed limits. Today I can drive from Richmond to Williamsburg in about 45 minutes, but in 1776 it could take up to 3 days–dependent on horse, carriage, and/or weather. If I’m not feeling well, I’d send my regrets, just as Richard Henry Lee did.

Today I can drive from Richmond to Williamsburg in about 45 minutes, but in 1776 it could take up to 3 days–dependent on horse, carriage, and/or weather.

How many Congressmen were in Philadelphia on August 2nd, 1776?

Let’s look at numbers. In the end, 56 men signed the Declaration. There were just 55 until November of 1776, when New Hampshire elected Matthew Thornton (topic for the next post…). Of those original 55, evidence suggests there were between 49 or 50 at the formal event. All of Congress except Richard Henry Lee, George Wythe, Lewis Morris, Oliver Wolcott, Thomas McKean, Matthew Thornton, and Elbridge Gerry.

While the latter, Gerry, is generally thought to have signed it later in the fall, in a post about the signing by J.M. Bell in his blog Boston 1775, he recounts a wild story told about the signing in which Benjamin Harrison IV saying to Gerry that, “I shall have a great advantage over you Mr. Gerry when we are all hung for what we are now doing. From the size and weight of my body I shall die in a few minutes, but from the lightness of your body you will dance in the air an hour or two before you are dead.” Fictions aside…

Did Congress Record who signed the Declaration?

Well, that would have made writing my book all the easier! Alas, while Congress often listed individual names for voting records in their meeting minutes, the August 2nd entry in their journal showed only this.

SecretJournal_August2_KarenAChase

Reader Insider Note: This same historical entry from Congress’ “Secret Journals,” page 53, helped me craft bits of fiction for Carrying Independence. The passage is included on page 80 of the novel, and when I first discovered the entry, I used it to determine:

• The name, “Mirtle,” as a surname pseudonym for my protagonist, Nathaniel.
• How much Nathaniel would be paid for his task—30,000 pounds.
• A sailing vessel, the Frontier captained by Hugo Blythe featured in this excerpt, would take Nathaniel north to Manhattan.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

For more history nerd posts like these, subscribe to the blog. Guest posts are welcomed and encouraged. Contact me for details.

For behind-the-scenes author-related news, giveaways, and to find out where I might be speaking near you, subscribe to my e-publication, CHASING HISTORIES.

Posted in Blog | Comments Off on The First Signers of the Declaration

There is only One Declaration of Independence

By

Founding-Documents Blog Series: Part One

Between now and July 4th, my blog will be an ongoing series related to the history and signing of the Declaration of Independence. While our country and the media is lately consumed with the US Constitution, understanding our founding better begins with an examination of the documents in order of creation.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

How many copies exist of the Declaration of Independence?

Hundreds. You’ll find a tabloid size copy in historic homes like Berkley Plantation, home of Benjamin Harrison IV, signer of the original document. There’s a massive copy hanging on the wall in the Virginia State capitol building. The American Revolution Museum at Yorktown has a broadside. We see so many versions of the Declaration of Independence, and you can buy a replica for about $4 at historic museums. However, in 1776 there was only ONE piece of parchment—with hand-written calligraphy—drafted to contain all the signatures.

00300_2003_001 .Declaration of Independence.engrossed copyThe Sole Declaration of Independence

Yes, it’s this document (approx. 24″x30″) at the National Archives that thousands of people (over 275,000 during June and July alone) visit when they come to the museum each year. It’s the one encased in bullet-proof glass stolen by Nicholas Cage. I wouldn’t call it a copy. A copy implies that it’s a duplicate. That ONE original document (shown above), is the only one that contains all 56 original signatures of the Congress. (Until November of 1776 there were only 55 signatures, but that’s a whole other story.)

Why was there one Declaration of Independence?

It was a contract. It was a unanimous agreement between the men and between the thirteen colonies—an agreement for the colonies to separate from the Crown AND come together as these united states (yes, lower case) of America.

The copies you see—often called Broadsides and with typeset text and names—were made before the original contract was signed and afterward. Broadsides were notices, distributed and posted, detailing what Congress had agreed to do.

What they had agreed to was not war. I find it easiest to remember the purpose of the Declaration by describing it one of two ways… It was both a divorce decree and a marriage agreement. It was one of the biggest “Dear John” letters in history.

“The #DeclarationofIndependence was not a declaration of war. It was both a divorce decree and a marriage agreement. Basically, it was the biggest ‘Dear John’ letter in history.” Huzzah to #carryingindependence and sharing #ChasingHistories with author @karenachase – Tweet This…

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

For more history nerd posts like these, subscribe to the blog. Guest posts are welcomed and encouraged. Contact me for details.

For behind-the-scenes author-related news, giveaways, and to find out where I might be speaking near you, subscribe to my e-publication, CHASING HISTORIES.

Posted in Blog | Comments Off on There is only One Declaration of Independence

Cocktails in 1776

By

I’m throwing a party for my Carrying Independence, “Experience the Revolution” book launch, and what better way to imbibe on the era than to offer attendees a 1776-ish cocktail. The trouble is, there weren’t that many cocktails back then, and my book features just the classic spirits of Whisky, Madeira, and Port. I needed some advice.

Drink Historians

While there are several books about drinking in America, like the aptly named Drinking in America by Mark Lender and James Kirby Martin, there are also drink historians. First, who knew that was a thing? Second, why no person I met in college ever majored in it is beyond me—some of them seemed like they were. But I digress…

I reached out to one such historian, Philip Greene, author of a delightful book called To Have and Have Another (about the drinks featured within Hemingway’s stories). He suggested that if I wanted to “make what is considered the original cocktail,” which is like an Old Fashioned, it was defined in a newspaper from May 13, 1806 (Balance and Colombian Repository) as “spirits of any kind, sugar, water, and bitters.”

Phil also referred me to his friend, Mark Will-Weber—journalist and author of Mint Juleps with Teddy Roosevelt—who chimed in about three revolutionary-era cocktails. “The ‘Stone Fence,’ which is rum & hard cider mixed together—an Ethan Allen favorite… Philadelphia Fish House Punch and ‘Flip,'” which is beer, rum, and sugar, heated with a red-hot iron, and over the years eggs were added. Mark admitted that when he recently served “Flip” at an event, the general consensus wasn’t “Wow!” Most just said, “Interesting…” Uhm… maybe not that one.

The Winning Revolutionary-era Cocktails

As a result of their input, my book launch will now be replete with two aptly renamed cocktails available at the cash bar:
Patriot’s Punch. Based on the “Stone Fence” recipe.
Signer’s Cocktail. Based on the “Old Fashioned,” and using (of course) 1776 Rye by James E. Pepper.

Come hoist a glass, drown your revolutionary sorrows, and while you’re at it, visit with a few founding fathers who will be there to celebrate with us at the Patrick Henry Pub & Grill.  Event co-hosted with Fountain Bookstore. JUNE 11, 6–8PM. All are welcome.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

For more history nerd posts like these, subscribe to the blog. Guest posts are welcomed and encouraged. Contact me for details.

For behind-the-scenes author-related news, giveaways, and to find out where I might be speaking near you, subscribe to my e-publication, CHASING HISTORIES.

Posted in Blog | Comments Off on Cocktails in 1776

General Pulaski Was More Likely a Woman or Intersex

By

April was a crazy month in Revolutionary news with a new Smithsonian Channel documentary discussing the achievements and staggering DNA results of war hero, General Pulaski, a Polish Count who died of battle wounds supporting the American Cause at Savannah in 1779. Last month, it was revealed that he was not really a “he” after all.

What Pulaski’s DNA Reveals About Us

The historian in me loves it when new information helps us piece together a truer version of the past’s facts. DNA was the proof to substantiate a speculation that General Pulaski was born intersex or with reproductive organs that aren’t either typically female or male.

The writer in me loves how we insert solutions based on only what we know or believe at the time. It used to be said, for instance, that Pulaski’s hips were shaped more like a woman’s because he rode horses so much. (Immediately, I have questions about generals Washington and Lee now.)

The comedian in me loves how new information can reveal human folly. Case in point is the insight my friend and fellow Revolutionary historian, John Millar, shared with me about Pulaski’s long-time followers:

“Right after [Pulaski’s] death, some of his friends in Williamsburg founded the Pulaski Club in his honor, which is still going strong. Members of the Club sometimes meet at some nice sidewalk wooden seats on Duke of Gloucester Street near the corner of Nassau Street, where a plaque recognizes the club. In spite of Pulaski’s legendary moustache, the forensic specialists found that Pulaski’s pelvis was that of a woman, so Pulaski was actually a woman in disguise (and yes, the DNA was matched to a member of Pulaski’s family). The Pulaski Club, which permits itself to have as many members as the number of years elapsed since Pulaski’s birth in 1745, limits its membership exclusively to men: no women … Ooops!”

Ooops, indeed. Reexamining our past is important so we can be better going forward. Perhaps the truth of Pulaski might help us recognize that being a great military leader or a contributing citizen in our country has nothing whatsoever to do with gender.

General_Casimir_Pulaski_by_Kasimir_Chodzinski_-_Washington,_D.C._-_Stierch.jpg
A statue of General Pulaski in Washington, DC. The photo is, appropriately, a bit blurred.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

For more history nerd  like these, subscribe to the blog. Guest posts are welcomed and encouraged. Contact me for details.

For behind-the-scenes author-related news, giveaways, and to find out where I might be speaking near you, subscribe to my e-publication, CHASING HISTORIES.

Posted in Blog | Comments Off on General Pulaski Was More Likely a Woman or Intersex

© 2024 Karen A. Chase. Collection of data from this website is GDPR compliant, and any information you may have about data collection can be found in our privacy policy.