Mason Locke Weems was an early American biographer who sought to instill a sense of nationalism in a new country. This he did by making the men he wrote about to be greater than they actually were. Mason Locke Weems wrote the first biography about George Washington, Francis Marion, Benjamin Franklin, and William Penn (Cunliffe xiii). He was also the first person to use the story of young Washington and the cherry-tree. Weems had many firsts, not all of them good.
Weems was the first citizen of the new American nation to become an Anglican minister. When the colonies declared their independence, the Anglican Church fell into disfavor because of its ties to the British crown. Weems did something crazy: he petitioned to become a minister in the Anglican Church. He encountered a brick wall of sorts about his citizenship. There was an oath that all ministers must take, one which involved swearing allegiance to the crown of Britain. Weems could not take the oath because he was an American citizen and swearing allegiance amounted to treason. Weems traveled to England with a friend to petition Parliament personally. In addition, Weems wrote to two fellow Americans for help: Sam Adams and Ben Franklin. Adams told him to get ordained according to Dutch custom. Franklin told him, uncharacteristically, to practice without being ordained. Weems didn't take either's advice. Weems’s persistence eventually paid off, Parliament voted that for persons preaching in another country the oath of loyalty to the crown would be waived (Kellock 24-34). Weems became parson of All-Hallows Parish, a position he would hold from 1784 to 1789 (Kellock 58).
In 1789 Weems resigned his position of rector of the parish. Weems remained a minister though he had no regular church, preaching on a "circuit". Weems had seen how successful books could be, and so became a door to door salesman (Cunliffe x). Weems had been a parson and was now a "snake-oil salesman"(qtd. in Ackerman 8) who would make money writing and selling books. "You have a lot of money lying in the bones of old George"(qtd. in Ackerman 8), he once bragged to his publisher.
He would be a book agent of sorts until his death. The first works he published were re-writes of other persons' works. He went door to door selling first the works of others and later, his own (Cunliffe x). His early works had a religious or a moralistic theme to them. For example, he wrote pamphlets on the dangers of drink, gambling, adultery, and dueling (Cunliffe xii). For the better part of his life Weems would be on the road peddling his wares. Indeed, Weems died far from home (Cunliffe xiii).
Weems' first attempt at biography was that of Washington. The original eighty page pamphlet came out in 1800, just a few short months after the death of Washington (Cunliffe xiii). 1806 brought the appearance of a fifth edition in which Weems had expanded the book to include many colorful anecdotes [the cherry-tree among them] to make a whopping 250 page novel (Kellock 83-84). An interesting point to note on the difference between this and the other biographies is this: only in Washington's biography did Weems claim the title "formerly Rector of Mount-Vernon Parish." In all of the other works he was "of Lodge No. 50, Dumfries" (Cunliffe xxxi). Weems was obviously trying to lay special personal claim to Washington. It is true that Weems occasionally preached at Pohick Church, a church frequented by Washington before the Revolutionary War [before April of 1775] (Brinkley 127) but Weems was not a minister until 1784 (Kellock 58). There is no evidence to prove that Weems actually preached in front of Washington (Wroth 42). Secondly, one must also note that there was no parish known as Mount Vernon Parish. In this claim Weems was a clearly faking his credentials (Cunliffe xxxi).
Weems wasn't all bad. The light with which he showed the men he wrote about was helping to instill a sense of nationalism in the people of the United States (Brinkley 195). Even if Washingtoncame completely from Weems' imagination, he has done a great service to the people of the United States. The books may not be a good history lesson, but they can serve as ideal models to live by (Brinkley 195).
Weems made it to the best seller list in 1806 with the help of the Washington biography. The book was there for so long that from 1800 to 1825 [first printing until Weems' death] the book went through twenty-nine different editions or rather, printings (Cunliffe xx). His other works were not so successful. Penn's first and last printing was 1822 and 1859, Marion's was 1810 and 1891, Franklin's was 1815 and 1876, and Washingtonis still being reprinted today (Cunliffe xii-xiii). "If an author's fame be measured by the public memory of his works, Weems has attained a share of the shiny bauble sufficient to lift him completely beyond the class of minor writers" (Wroth 63).
The full attack on Weems did not begin until the latter part of the nineteenth century. Two reasons for this are: one, historians were becoming more professional and two, Washington was no longer such a sacred figure. The discrediting of Weems' works caused them to go all but un-published (Cunliffe xxxi).
The Washington biography is largely fanciful anecdotes on a childhood that Weems knew nothing of and certainly of which there were no records. Weems wrote the story of the cherry-tree to show the virtues of honesty (Orlandi 5). Weems' moralizing tendencies often ran away with him (Cunliffe xxxviii). Weems came up with stories that could happen to any young boy and moralized them (Cunliffe xxxvii). When George was confronted by his father about the tree, George replied, "I can't tell a lie, Pa; you know I can't tell a lie. I did cut it with my hatchet" (Weems, Washington 12). George's father is so proud that his son will not hide behind a lie, and so he hugs George (Weems, Washington12).
When Weems couldn't make something up, he copied someone else (Cunliffe xxxii). For instance Weems tells the story in which George's father tries to impart the meaning of God Almighty to his son. Mr. Washington traced GEORGE WASHINGTON into some soil and planted cabbage seeds in the furrows (Weems, Washington 15). George happened by a few days later and saw his name growing in the soil. He then ran to his father and accused him of planting his name. Mr. Washington admitted doing it and then explained why. He said that even though George had not seen him plant the words, George knew that he had. Just as one does not see God, one can see the results of His work (Weems, Washington14). This anecdote is clearly plagiarism upon a work by the Scottish writer James Beattie (Cunliffe xxxi-xxxii). The characters and the setting are the only difference between the two works; the rest of the story is pure Beattie (Cunliffe xxxii).
Sometimes Weems wrote some real history, but got confused about the facts. He occasionally mixed up names and dates. For instance, Weems writes that Mr. Washington's first wife was "the lovely Miss Dandridge" (Weems, Washington7). She was in fact Jane Butler (Orlandi 5). Weems confused George with his father. George married Martha Custis, the widow of Daniel Parke Custis [not John Custis as Weems would have you believe (Weems, Washington 53)], Martha was formerly Miss Dandridge (Orlandi 16).
There is an incident in which Weems gets a little confused chronologically. When Weems recounts the death of George's older brother, Lawrence, Weems states that Lawrence dies after hearing of George's gallant fight for his country at Fort Necessity (Weems, Washington 22). This is an impossibility because Lawrence died in 1752 and Ft. Necessity didn't happen for another full two years (Cunliffe footnote Weems' Washington22).
Weems claims to have written the Marion biography in conjunction with one of Marion's closest friends, Peter Horry. There is very slight truth in that. Horry wanted people to remember Marion so he wanted to write a book. He began to gather old letters and records to write from (Kellock 143). When it came time to set it down, he found that he couldn't write it with the quality he believed Marion deserved. Who better than Washington's biographer would he get to write the book for him (Kellock 143). Horry turned over his research to Weems. He never saw his research again. Horry never even saw the book until it came out in print (Cunliffe xxvii-xxviii). Horry read the book, and to his horror, it was full of anecdotes, not at all the history that he had wanted (Kellock 143-144). Weems had gone so far as to put Horry's name first on the title page along with his own. Horry wrote to Weems to have the title page changed. Horry should have saved his paper and ink, for it was never changed, and Weems was shocked to hear that Horry didn't like the way it was written (Cunliffe xxviii). A portion of one of Horry's letters of outrage follows:
Nor have the public received the real history of General Marion. You have carved and mutilated it with so many erroneous statements, [that] you embellishments, observations and remarks must necessarily be erroneous as proceeding from false grounds. Most certainly 'tis not MY history, but YOUR romance. (qtd. in Cunliffe xxviii)
It is difficult to say which facts are true. A majority are most likely embellishments upon actual events, and not from whole cloth like the Washington biography. Weems wrote at least one such story about Marion, and there is no doubt that it happened, the only doubt is as to when.
Weems writes that when Marion was twelve, he was a bit sickly. Some friends of the family recommended that young Francis go for a cruise in the tropics to improve his health. The ship sank because it was "attacked by some monstrous fish" (Weems, Marion 21). Marion is the sole survivor and is picked up eleven days later (Weems, Marion 21). William James wrote about the shipwreck but this time Marion was a sixteen year old sailor, a member of the crew. Also, Marion was rescued in this account after only seven days (Williams 10). The James account is probably the more accurate because James actually knew Marion and had served with him for many years (Williams 10). This is a perfect example of the difficulty in the verifiability of facts in Marion.
Weems would seem very patriotic in writing novels about the lives of America's greatest man. He even tried to make a sort of connection between Washington and Marion.
...it is difficult to determine whether Marion or Washington deserve our admiration. And even in the lesser incidents of their lives, the resemblance between these two great men is closer than common. They both were born in the same year; both lost their fathers early in life; both married excellent and wealthy ladies; both left widows; and both died childless. (Weems, Marion 251-252)
Many admirers of Marion like to draw connections between these two great men. The truth of the matter is, Marion might have been born in 1733, not 1732 like Washington was (Williams 15). The only clue to the birth year of Marion is his tombstone. It states that he died in February 1795, "In the sixty-third year of his age" (qtd. in Williams 15).
Weems wrote four biographies, but only two have truly seen the twentieth century. The biographies of Penn and Franklin are so obscure that one would be lucky to find a copy. Most that is written about them will have to be based on what other books say about them.
Weems' third biography, The Life of Franklin, wasn't typical Weemsian style. Most of the book was the frequently quoted Autobiography. This book lacks the anecdotes for which Weems has become known. One interesting point to note is that in all of the other works Weems claimed a personal connection with his subject. In this biography he made no such claim. But unlike the rest, he really had a claim to know Franklin for he had corresponded with him when trying to get into the Anglican clergy (Wroth 86).
Weems' Life of Penn was the least successful of his four books. It only went through seven editions total; it reached its second only after Weems' death in 1825. Penn was even scarcer on history and biography than the three prior works had been. The book is basically considered to be a treatise on morals. If the conversation between Washington and his mother isn't appealing, don't read Penn, for one-third of the book is more of the same between Penn and his mother (Wroth 87-88).
Weems contributed more to the sense of nationalism and morals than he did to the history of this nation. "It would be a mistake for anyone to take up the works of Weems thinking to find well considered historical writing and careful biography" (Wroth 57). William Gilmore Simms, a Weemsian champion, said that little or no distortion happened to the facts in the Marion biography. Keep in mind that Simms largely wrote fiction and would look favorable on history dressed as romance (Cunliffe xxxiv). Winterson puts it best in a work of fiction she wrote when she states that everyone that tells the same story, tells it differently, with a little of themselves thrown in (22).
Many historians consider Washingtonto be baseless (Williams 9). These same historians attribute much of American folk-lore to Weems. Weems was a distinct character of his times (Kellock 191). Not only did he write folk-lore, but he also became the object of folk-lore.
There are two memorable tales about Weems, which differ only in setting and characters therefore many historians have come to the conclusion that "the incorrigible creator of folk-lore" (Kellock 36), made them up himself. It is also believed that these two stories were Weems' first attempt at weaving moralistic stories (Kellock 37). Weems' life presents problems that are just as, if not more, interesting than the men that he praised.
Whether he sought to immortalize these four men or not, Weems did just that. In the setting down of his tales, for that was exactly what they were, he set examples of honesty and other virtues for many generations of Americans. He has shown these men to be great and patriotic, leading people to be nationalistic. Weems' tendency to resort to historical reconstruction has brought many reactions. The reactions to his anecdotes range from delight all the way to exasperation (Cunliffe ix).
For nearly two hundred years Weems' work has been published, and though some of his works didn't make it, at least one did, for many children in the United States know the story of George and the cherry-tree. Weems has certainly left behind the class of minor writers and gone into a class by himself, one of historical rewriting (Wroth 63). He has outraged historians for well over a century, and yet his works are still published. Mason Locke Weems was no historian, but a man praising and glorifying four of America's greatest men. These men weren't the only ones immortalized, Weems and his cherry-tree were immortalized also.
Ackerman, Diane. "The Real George Washington." Parade Magazine(Feb. 21,1988): 8 and 10.
Brinkley, Alan, eds., et al. American History: A Survey. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc.,1991.
Cunliffe, Marcus. Introduction to Weems' Life of Washington. Cambridge: Belknap Press, 1962.
Kellock, Harold. Parson Weems of the Cherry-Tree. New York: The Century Co., 1928.
Orlandi, Enzo, ed. The Life & [sic] Times of Washington. Curtis Publishing Co., 1967.
Varsidi, J. Allen. MythInformation. New York: Ballantine Books, 1989.
Weems, Mason L. The Life of Gen. [sic] Francis Marion. Philadelphia: Joseph Allen, 1841.
Weems, Mason L. The Life of Gen. [sic] Washington. ed. Marcus Cunliffe. Cambridge: Belknap Press, 1962.
Williams, Beryl, and Samuel Epstein. Francis Marion Swamp Fox of the American Revolution. New York: Julian Messner, Inc., 1958.
Winterson, Jeanette. "Stories and Histories." Harpers. 275 (Sep. 1987): 22-23.
Wroth, Lawrence C. Parson Weems of the Cherry-Tree. Baltimore: Eichelberger Book Co., 1911.