>The QUESTION was not the succession, the QUESTION was:

>If, how many, and when did the issue of GW being made King occur during the 
>early years of the country.


  I do not believe any strong evidence exists to show the issue of "kingship" ever existed.  Robert F. Haggard wrote a great piece entitiled: "The Nicola Affair: Lewis Nicola, George Washington, and American Military Discontent during the Revolutionary War," in which he examine the origin of the subject. I can't remember, at the moment, where I read the article.

  Haggard and others believe the "myth" was born as the result of a letter written (to Washington) by Col. Lewis Nicola.  Unfortunately, Nicola's letter often becomes confused with the Newburgh Address of 1782.  Neither the first, nor second Newburgh address contained any reference to kingship for GW.  I believe the addresses and Nicola's letter may be in the Washington papers at The Library of Congress.

  It seems that the notion of Washington refusing a "kingship" has fit well into the personna America has created for the general and; therefore, has refused to die.  It may have been little more than a way for early America to deter ANY person from attempting to attain "kingship."  After all, if Washington refused, then who else would ever be worthy to hold such title!

  Wish I could offer more, but I am suffering fuzzy-brain syndrome at the moment.

  R. Burnett Jenkins

______________________________________
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html