In 1775 and today, an elusive American unity

Boston Globe

2 days ago

'It is hoped,' Washington continued, 'that all distinctions of colonies will be laid aside, so that one and the same spirit may animate the whole, and the only contest be who shall render, on this great and trying occasion, the most essential service to the great and common cause in which we are all engaged.'
Those orders — a plea, really — still resonate 250 years later as American politics have become fractured and polarized. The country is split along regional, racial, and cultural lines; divided by President Trump's aggressive policies; and at odds over what the nation is, was, and should be.
Advertisement
'I find it horrifying to hear people talk about having blue states secede, red states secede,' said Robert Allison, a Suffolk University history professor and chair of Revolution 250, a Massachusetts nonprofit group.
Advertisement
'This is something that Washington understood, that Lincoln understood, that the liberties we have are something that we need to be unified for. Otherwise, the states will be at war with each other.'
In July 1775, many soldiers and their families hoped that peace would prevail, and that Britain would once again permit the extraordinary level of self-government that many American Colonists, particularly in New England, had enjoyed for well over a century.
Major General Artemas Ward's orderly book for July 2 to 4, 1775, which contains General George Washington's call for Colonial unity.
Massachusetts Historical Society
In camp, regional tensions would flare among the troops, few of whom had ever traveled far from their homes. And as the war progressed, they would encounter different religious beliefs, differing tastes, and different ideas about class and society.
Still, with his orders,
'It's getting the important thing right from the beginning: This effort won't survive without everyone pulling in the same direction,' said Peter Drummey, chief historian at the Massachusetts Historical Society, founded in 1791.
'Washington understood that, at least in part, his appointment is the representation of that.'
As the war progressed, the notion of a common 'American' purpose began to take hold: a revolutionary democracy built on the rule of law; a great nation bound by principles of fairness and equality, although not for the enslaved; and a government of public service elected by and accountable to its citizens.
That Washington was a Virginian was a demonstration by the Continental Congress that beleaguered Boston was not alone, and that fighting for self-determination resonated beyond New England.
Advertisement
The George Washington statue in the Boston Public Garden in April.
David L. Ryan/Globe Staff
'The separateness of the different Colonies is what they're trying to overcome' with Washington's appointment, Drummey said. 'I think almost everyone in the army thought of themselves as a Virginian or Bay Stater or wherever else they were from.'
'It's almost like they were fighting a war as if they were NATO countries under a NATO commander,' he added.
And what the new commander saw in Cambridge 'horrified' him, Allison said.
To his genteel Virginian eyes, New England troops were dirty, undisciplined, and averse to taking orders from someone they didn't know. There also were far fewer of them than he had expected.
'Saying Washington was not particularly impressed is putting it mildly,' Allison said.
But for the rank-and-file
troops, the arrival of an upper-class, well-dressed, slave-holding Southerner to lead them must have been startling.
'They've had other generals, other officers, and who's this new guy?'
Allison said of Washington. 'But this call for unity, it's almost the first thing he says.'
The war dragged on for eight more years, shifting to New York after the British evacuated Boston in March 1776, to New Jersey and Pennsylvania, and finally to the Carolinas and Virginia before a peace treaty was signed in 1783.
But what Washington understood at the very beginning, Allison said, was a far-sighted foreshadowing of the need for national cohesion.
What Washington managed to do in 'an extraordinary couple of sentences' in his orders, Allison added, was lay the framework for an epic fight that would prove longer and larger than most of his soldiers must have imagined.
Mark DiSalvo, the North Andover town moderator and president of the Massachusetts Moderators Association, said that broadening one's allegiances beyond community or county boundaries would have been remarkable in Revolutionary times.
Advertisement
'It was really hard to communicate, and you were narrow in your view,' DiSalvo said. 'You knew your neighbors, and you came to church, which became the town meetinghouse.'
Town Meeting helped provide the spark for Revolution, DiSalvo said, as the defense of a free, local government became part of the provincial response, which also became absorbed in the broader Colonial debate.
'At first, it was what many people are fighting for today — in effect, due process,' added DiSalvo, who has encouraged moderators across the state this year to note the role of Town Meeting in the rebellion.
But unity could be fleeting, even in the newly victorious nation. Massachusetts, the birthplace of the Revolution, summoned barely enough votes to ratify the Constitution.
Local and state governments were deemed by many to be the best, most relevant means of legislating for one's neighbors. Federal law that benefited Georgia, say, might not necessarily be good for Massachusetts.
And the contentious question of slavery, a subject of fierce debate at the Constitutional Convention, threatened ratification in an ominous taste of the great conflict that lay ahead.
'Even patriotic people who fought in the Revolution were not convinced that a federal government at a distance was the way forward,' Drummey said.
For Washington, the concept of national unity remained important long after he issued his general orders in Cambridge, Allison said. Before his two terms were completed, bitter partisan battles over the scope and power of the federal government had crept into American politics.
'Washington will continue talking about this. It's a constant theme through his life and US history,' he added.
Advertisement
After 250 years, its relevance persists, and today's notion of what 'American' means has continued to evolve, just as it did at the dawn of the Revolution.
'How we define that is not as clear-cut as it seemed to be a relatively short time ago,' Drummey said. 'To some extent, the idea of what it means to be American is still being contested.'
Brian MacQuarrie can be reached at