Washington and Lincoln

Paths to Greatness

Abraham Lincoln and George Washington, two of our greatest politicians and leaders, share many qualities, though were vastly different in personality, temperament, and background. What makes one great seem to have quite a number of osculations, while others aspects seem relatively unimportant. We look at only a few.

Touch Points.

• Both were surveyors in their younger days. This illustrates a considerable facility with basic math.
• Both were presidents, often ranked #1 and #2 for their impact and excellence.
• Both prosecuted long and costly wars for the higher social goals of political and social liberation.
• Both took terrific risks to achieve their goals, Washington as a battlefield commander; Lincoln as a commander in chief. Both wars are landmarks of American history.
• Both dealt successfully with conspiring subordinates seeking power, militarily and politically.
• Both understood fully the importance of the political nature of war as the sister of its acknowledged military nature.
• Both were able administrators.
• Neither were religious to any great degree.
• Both disliked slavery as an institution, though Washington held over 100 slaves prior to the American Revolution. Lincoln, however, had strong philosophical views opposed to slavery throughout his life.
• Both were of the nature to never, ever give up, but to fight on to a conclusion.
• Both suffered enormous defeats during their lives, Washington on the more military side, Lincoln more politically throughout, then militarily as president.
• Both willing participated in hard physical labor, though in Lincoln's case it was to survive.
• Both had an interesting sense of humor, more ironic  for Washington, and perhaps self-deprecating for Lincoln. Indeed, Lincoln often practiced jokes and was adept at inventing parables, after Aesop. Lincoln rarely spoke extemporaneously; he was extremely careful, often making numerous drafts of anything he said.  
• Washington was a great and clever administrator who surrounded himself and managed opposing clever, jealous, and ambitious men (Adams, Hamilton, Jefferson, Gates, and others) under his command. Lincoln functioned essentially alone though he needed to manage opposing jealous and competing generals, changing them several times. As well, Lincoln enlisted some of the most clever and capable politicians of their day. Both fully understood the rank of their office, and both used this to the maximum.
• Professionally, both were essentially impenetrable.

Divergence.

• Washington was the Cincinnatus of our early country, always preferring to return to his agrarian roots.  Lincoln, having emerged from the hardscrabble rural living; eventually he preferred urban life.
• Lincoln was a consummate, even calculating, politician planning for greatness his entire life - one of his earliest goals. Washington did not actively seek service.
• Lincoln was an avid reader and scholar of literature. Shakespeare, Bryon, and Burns were his constant companions. He was deeply influenced by Ralph Waldo Emerson.
• Lincoln was the last president to write all his own speeches and essays. He was a brilliant writer. Washington relied heavily upon Alexander Hamilton to draft speeches and write letters, while Washington added more a humanistic tone to some of Hamilton's drafts.
• Washington enjoyed wealth and leisure from an early age, while Lincoln struggled for material comfort well into middle age.
• While both married women of considerable resources, both women were very much different. Martha Dandridge Washington, by all accounts, was agreeable, available, and amiable most of the time. Mary Todd Lincoln, on the other hand, seems to have been arbitrary, argumentative, and angry much of the time.  The Washington's had frequent visitors; the Lincoln's rarely.

It is unclear if Washington would have prevailed in the time of Lincoln, nor that Lincoln would have succeeded in the time of Washington. Each had exactly the skill set required for their age - they were exactly the needed rostrum for their day.   It is reflective to note that during the time of the first there may have been the perfect person for the second, and vice-versa. We can never know.