She’s a handler of history. A preserver of presidents. An executive branch expert. And since July, GW alumna and renowned historian, scholar and researcher Lindsay Chervinsky, B.A. ’10, has been the executive director of the George Washington Presidential Library at Mount Vernon. She is responsible for Washington's papers and manuscripts, research, fellowships, lecture series and leadership programming.
A highly respected presidential historian, Chervinsky is the author of the award-winning book “The Cabinet: George Washington and the Creation of an American Institution,” co-editor of “Mourning the Presidents: Loss and Legacy in American Culture” and most recently released a book called “Making the Presidency: John Adams and the Precedents That Forged the Republic.” She is a regular commentator for national TV and radio and regularly writes for The Wall Street Journal, Time Magazine, USA Today, CNN.com, Washington Monthly and The Washington Post.
Ahead of Washington’s birthday on Feb. 22, Chervinsky discussed with GW Today the duties of a presidential historian, why the story of the nation’s first president still resonates today, how presidential legacies are defined and redefined, contextualizing the current administration through a historical lens and the full-circle arc of her going from George Washington—the university—to George Washington—the presidential library.
Q: As broadly as you can, explain what the primary duty of a presidential historian is. How does preserving the past play a role in setting the present and shaping the future?
LC: The way I see it, studying the presidency involves examining both the institution itself and the people who have shaped it over time. It’s important to understand its evolution and what that history reveals about our current moment. You can't understand what is happening right now and how it might differ from something we've experienced before or how it might be the same if you don't know what has come in the past.
Q: Given your role as executive director of George Washington’s Presidential Library at Mount Vernon, let’s talk specifically about President Washington. What do you think fascinates researchers, historians and people in general about him to this day? Outside of being the first president, why has his story withstood the test of time?
LC: I think Washington remains fascinating for several reasons. He intentionally wanted to remain a little bit of an enigma. He styled himself almost like a marble bust and did so by rarely revealing his emotions to people in his own professional and personal writings, rarely talking about his feelings, or indicating his inner thought process. He even had his wife Martha burn their correspondence, which would have revealed a lot of that part of his personality. So, there's a lot about him you just can't fully get at, and that always is kind of a fun challenge for people to try and wrap their minds around.
His contributions also stand the test of time. He was seen as the "father of the country" at the end of the war, even before becoming president. His stature was so unparalleled when he retired from the presidency that he was just seen as something else; he almost wasn't human, and that's really hard for us to understand in this current moment because we don't have figures like that. His presence and his contributions were so enormous, and his existence was so indispensable to the founding of the nation. That impact, for people who like to study power, makes him endlessly interesting.
Q: You've only been in your current role since July 22. But between the papers and manuscripts and research that you handle at the George Washington Presidential Library, has there been any item or items that’s left you starstruck?
LC: Oh, all the time. We have a phenomenal collection filled with beautiful items. One recent acquisition that stands out is a letter Washington wrote shortly after the Newburgh Conspiracy. This letter itself is meaningful because he does actually talk about his feelings—which is not something he usually does. He talks about the threat of an army that is unpaid. He talks about his concerns with making sure the army is decommissioned in a safe way. His command of the army ensured civilian oversight remained essential and his leadership managing the military’s transition after the war was crucial to the survival of the young republic. It would have been very easy for the military to take over the government, but it didn’t. And so that letter means a great deal to me and a great deal to us.
Q: Someone like Jimmy Carter was not a popular president but was largely revered as an ex-president, especially given his humanitarian efforts. As you pointed out in a recent article on your Substack, he did something no president has done since John Quincy Adams and redefined his legacy. How do legacies of a president get shaped and reshaped over time?
LC: That’s a great question because legacy is different from history. History is what actually happened, while legacy is how we remember it—and it’s inherently evolving over time.
When a president first leaves office or passes away, the initial reaction is often colored by the partisan feeling at the time. Over time, a few things happen. One, we tend to get access to information that had been previously classified, so we get a much better sense of what happened and how the president was making decisions behind the scenes. Second, the intense partisan feelings of the moment recede, allowing for a more objective assessment. And third, we are able to see with hindsight what worked, what didn’t and what was the impact of their policies. Presidential legacies are very much shaped by who comes after them, and that is an important part of the process.
Q: Is there any historical comparison to what we are currently seeing from the executive branch? If so, what can we learn from that time period?
LC: I don’t think there are any perfect parallels. To be sure, it’s common for new presidents to push a flurry of executive orders and appointments early on. However, what stands out right now is the lack of interest in coalition-building. Traditionally, after winning an election, presidents attempt to shift toward the center and govern for all Americans. Obviously, that is an imperfect process, but that usually is the general direction they are going in, and that is very much not the case with this administration. I would even go so far as to say that there's an interest in pushing the limits of the law that we rarely see.
Q: Was there a class or experience at GW that stands out as particularly influential for placing you on this path to become a leading voice on presidential history, political culture and government? And what does it mean for you to be the director of the presidential library of not only our first president, but the one that also bears the name of your alma mater?
LC: Definitely. The class that had the biggest impact on me was Civil War History with Tyler Anbinder. It was legendary—partly because getting a good grade on his exams was incredibly difficult. He was an amazing lecturer but also a tough editor. That rigorous feedback made me a better writer and historian, and I’ll always be grateful for his time and efforts.
As for leading the Washington Library, it feels like a full-circle moment. I originally went to GW intending to go to law school and work in politics. That interest in the legal and political world took an unexpected turn—I now study and share the historic origins of law and politics instead of working as a practitioner—but it does feel full circle and like I’m meant to be exactly where I am.
