Tumgik
gracehosborn · 9 hours
Text
Heads Up, Seven Up Tag
Thanks so much to @illarian-rambling for the tag!
Rules: post seven lines you wrote and tag friends to play along.
From Ink of Destruction:
"You did what? That is nonsensical." Before I could stop myself, the words were blurted out, and I knew there was no way to take them back.
Mr. Waiter sighed, his shoulders falling as though thick history textbooks had been placed atop them. "Oh, Alex.”
Before I could decipher the impatience that sprinkled in his eyes, the man turned towards the box the sword had been originally placed in as he continued. "Recall to me what you witnessed this morning: the Constitution of the United States of America vanished from existence—of which it’s reasonable of me to suspect you believe, and to the point, you are also to believe that, that pen was doing unusal things—such that you sought me out for questioning." Adjusting his grip upon the sword, he made his way to its box, and carefully placed it back inside.
This scene has been so much fun to revise. I love it. I should really talk about this insane novel more lol.
Tagging, with no pressure: @kaylinalexanderbooks @meerawrites @thestarsfightagainstusmyfriend @sunset-a-story and leaving this open for anyone else who wants to play!
6 notes · View notes
gracehosborn · 20 hours
Text
Last Line Tag
Thank you to @sunset-a-story for the tag!
Here’s the last line I wrote in the scene I’m revising in Ink of Destruction:
Adjusting his grip upon the sword, he made his way to its box, and carefully placed it back inside.
We love some mundane description 😂 And swords. Swords are badass.
Tagging, with no pressure: @kaylinalexanderbooks @meerawrites and anyone else who wants to play.
8 notes · View notes
gracehosborn · 1 day
Text
Tumblr media
120 notes · View notes
gracehosborn · 2 days
Text
Yeah… I’ve also started to mentally make a list of people whose stuff is lost, or for whom very little survives (as of now I’m spinning in circles about the men of Hamilton’s artillery company, for whom no easily accessible information survives) but I have to figure out what to do with them anyway.
Hahahaha. I’d be strategic: go back to the days following Hamilton’s funeral, sneak into his offices before anyone noticed or started going through his papers, and take pictures of as many things as I can get my hands on that we don’t have.
Ahhh thank you!!! Makes me really happy to know people are excited over this thing. TAI is the most ambitious thing I’ll probably ever do, and am slowly losing my sanity over (the amount of research I am subjecting myself to out of spite of cases like the Alex & Eliza trilogy which just by reading the first book also ruined me) but I hope it’ll be worth it. You’re welcome to invade my inbox if you have questions!
nicholas fish is my daily reminder that letters aren't everything and we lack a whole bunch of context and interactions. he had a lifelong friendship with hamilton we don't know much about due to lack of correspondence (fish might've burned them for privacy, especially since he and morris got their hands on ham's papers after his death, i believe).
but i think it must have been a steady and deep 30 yr long friendship: they were college frat bros together (debate club actually but i bet they acted like frat bros), members of the hearts of oak in the 1770s - and he was later involved in hamfamily matters, referenced at times in letters between ham and betsey. he was even the second for a potential duel between ham and nicholson in 1795.
and of course, his son born in 1808 was named hamilton fish.
unfortunately i find the name "hamilton fish" hilarious, moreso because hamilton fish named his son hamilton fish II, who named his son hamilton fish III, who named his son hamilton fish IV. somebody named hamilton fish IV was walking around on this earth up to 1996.
i just get all emotional when i think about how family names often reflect close loved ones. even if the names end up being ridiculous. hamilton lasting in the fish family names until the literal 1990s, laurens slipping into the hamilton family names.
Tumblr media
also, for my hamilton musical enthusiasts: the cellist for the west end run of hamilton was chris fish, a direct discendant of nicholas fish!
Tumblr media
39 notes · View notes
gracehosborn · 2 days
Text
This!!! But also their lack of correspondence has me spinning in circles over what to do with Fish within The American Icarus (Though fictional, TAI is heavily based off of Hamilton’s historical record). Revisions will occur, of course, but it does suck to have lost that information. But it is completely understandable as to why we don’t have it. I can’t imagine having my personal conversations read by historians or interested nerds a century from now.
The fact that the Hamilton name stayed in the Fish family through the 20th century is actually insane and I love it. 😂
nicholas fish is my daily reminder that letters aren't everything and we lack a whole bunch of context and interactions. he had a lifelong friendship with hamilton we don't know much about due to lack of correspondence (fish might've burned them for privacy, especially since he and morris got their hands on ham's papers after his death, i believe).
but i think it must have been a steady and deep 30 yr long friendship: they were college frat bros together (debate club actually but i bet they acted like frat bros), members of the hearts of oak in the 1770s - and he was later involved in hamfamily matters, referenced at times in letters between ham and betsey. he was even the second for a potential duel between ham and nicholson in 1795.
and of course, his son born in 1808 was named hamilton fish.
unfortunately i find the name "hamilton fish" hilarious, moreso because hamilton fish named his son hamilton fish II, who named his son hamilton fish III, who named his son hamilton fish IV. somebody named hamilton fish IV was walking around on this earth up to 1996.
i just get all emotional when i think about how family names often reflect close loved ones. even if the names end up being ridiculous. hamilton lasting in the fish family names until the literal 1990s, laurens slipping into the hamilton family names.
Tumblr media
also, for my hamilton musical enthusiasts: the cellist for the west end run of hamilton was chris fish, a direct discendant of nicholas fish!
Tumblr media
39 notes · View notes
gracehosborn · 4 days
Text
Historical fiction writers of Tumblr: if you could choose one modern thing to send back in time to gift to each of your characters, what would it be?
24 notes · View notes
gracehosborn · 5 days
Text
Out of Context Line Tag
Wanted to jump on the train because firstly this looks super fun, and secondly because this wonderful couple of lines popped in my head and now I must include them in my revision.
Rules: Post an out of context line(s) from your story/work-in-progress, then tag friends to play along.
From Ink of Destruction:
“Damnit!” he cursed. His voice echoed through the quiet sanctuary as he held his hand still in the air. Instead of the cream-filled doughnut Lenna had given him, [Redacted] now held what looked like an English muffin. “The food wishes to spite me? I did not invent doughnuts?!”
Yeah this is more than one line but I had to include the context because it makes me laugh out loud, and I’d like to make you laugh, too.
Softly tagging: @kaylinalexanderbooks @sunset-a-story @papers-pamphlet @meerawrites and anyone else who wants to play along.
9 notes · View notes
gracehosborn · 5 days
Text
Yeah. It’s so weird to think about with having the benefit of hindsight, but there were so many moments where things could have very easily gone horribly wrong and changed everything. But to that end, it’s also super interesting to think about.
lol imagine the british won the battle of princeton and wiped out not only washington but also hamilton and monroe. 2 presidents and 1 very important secretary down.
58 notes · View notes
gracehosborn · 6 days
Note
List 5 things that make you happy, then put this in the askbox for the last 10 people who liked or reblogged something from you! Get to know your mutuals and followers!
This is like two months late I am so sorry but I’m slowly working through my asks and tags 😂
Alright, five things that make me happy are:
@kaylinalexanderbooks
My new platform Converse and lace-up riding boots I got for my birthday.
Getting to revise Ink of Destruction and give more page time to one of my favorite character dynamics hehehe.
Interacting with the history and writing communities here—y’all are awesome, keep doing what you’re doing.
Finally getting the chance to step into the history field via taking on a student digitization position with my university. Digital collections are invaluable (and the only reason The American Icarus is even a project I can work on) so getting to see the back end of the process and help scan some books is neat.
Thank you for the ask!!
3 notes · View notes
gracehosborn · 7 days
Text
Elizabeth S. Hamilton at the Constitutional Convention, June 1797
Elizabeth Schuyler attended a diplomatic meeting at the age of 6; as a teenager, she hosted politicians solo; her relationship with George Washington predates Alexander Hamilton's. As a married adult, she stood in for Martha Washington, she led the Republican Court in NYC, she led charitable endeavors, and she hosted any number of national and international figures, from bankers to politicians, etc. U.S. presidents through the 1840s paid homage to her. But as so many women of the early Republic were, she was pretty deliberately erased. Particularly excised were the contributions and political activism of the Federalist wives - the amount of influence these women had could not be discussed.
And so by the late 20th century, we have historians writing that ESH didn't like politics and was sickly, usually pregnant, and often absent from her husband, but at least she tried to make a nice cozy environment for the Great Alexander Hamilton to go home and snuggle in, or something like that, as though it didn't occur to these historians that Elizabeth Schuyler likely could have married any number of wealthy, accomplished (and distant relative) men and lived a very comfortable life of luxury in Albany. And yet she looked at the super-charismatic guy who everyone said was brilliant, but with no steady income, not even a lawyer yet and with no ties to Albany, but noted as highly ambitious and said, "yep, he's the one!" Spoiler: she did it because she was ambitious herself and recognized that theirs could be a strong strategic/political partnership, in addition to a strong marriage. (I'm sure it was also good for her ego that he declared himself her best friend after only a few weeks and was so far gone he couldn't remember a military password after an evening with her.)
This erasure led to the common assumption that Elizabeth was not in Philadelphia at the Constitutional Convention in summer 1787. However, statutesandstories.com has posted about new evidence - really, a more careful examination and reading of old documents - that ESH was in Philadelphia in June 1797, and was likely in the city at the time of AH's June 18th speech to the convention. The theory is that she traveled with the Knoxes from NYC to Philadelphia, as she's mentioned in a letter from Knox that she is traveling with them, and she's definitely with AH on June 19th, as they are recorded in a journal/diary at a social engagement also attended by George Washington. Additional conjecture that this letter from AH can be more tightly dated to this period, considering these lines:
I cannot yet determine what will be our stay here and consequently I can make no determinations about my love; but I feel that it will be impossible for me to submit to a long separation however inconvenient it may be to incur the expence which will attend her coming here. 
Which may align with EH borrowing money for this travel from her brother-in-law, Stephen van Rensselaer, also possibly more tightly dated to this period.
Please check out the well-cited posts (3 parts): 1, 2, and 3
Although no Hamilton biographers have discussed Eliza’s trip to the Convention in June, historians from Independence National Historic Park (INHP) concluded in the 1980s that Eliza was one of as many as nine wives who likely “attended” the Convention.  Part 4 (pending) will discuss Eliza Hamilton’s relationship with the other eight wives who likely were in Philadelphia during the Convention, including Rufus King’s wife, Mary Alsop King, who was a native New Yorker. 
This makes total sense to me - not just the documentation presented, but that she would have shown up to perform soft politicking/diplomacy around her husband's activities, in addition to a possible role assisting him in the drafting and editing of his speech. The daughter of Philip Schuyler and Catharine Van Rensselaer wasn't going to sit in NYC on the sidelines for this - she bolstered Hamilton not only in the ways she was personally helpful to him (emotionally, but also going over his writings and speeches with him), but through her representation of the wealthy Dutch-American interests, showing that Hamilton was a junior delegate from NY with a lot of political and financial power backing him.
As the blog states:
Yet it remains possible that Eliza may have helped her husband prepare for his one-of-a-kind speech on June 18. Moreover, it is felt that the possibility of informal, behind-the-scenes contributions by Eliza cries out for further examination.
Cause ya know, she's not discussing new threads for her needlework and thoughts on child-weaning at all these social gatherings or standing in for Martha Washington and chatting with Martha's husband about the best ways to make pastry.
And I just love if she helped advise him on a speech that only the "rich and well-born" can make a strong government. I'm sure they felt quite haughty and proud and said, "let's make another baby!" (James Alexander Hamilton was born around 9 months later.)
13 notes · View notes
gracehosborn · 7 days
Text
"Continentalist" – a linguistic puzzle
nothing but the approaching critical junction of southern affairs and the expectation of my countrymen could induce me to sollicit a farther leave of absence in case of my exchange_ I profess myself too much a continentalist to be affected by local interests_ but I indulge a hope that my acquaintance with the country [South Carolina] and connexions as a southern man may enable me to be of some ability in the new theatre of the war_
John Laurens to George Washington, 6 November 1780
In this letter, Laurens – currently on parole in Philadelphia as a prisoner of war – is asking Washington preemptively for permission to join the military campaign in the south.
What's interesting to me is the word "continentalist", which he is using to distinguish himself from someone whose interests are focused on their native state. Laurens is making the point that his allegiance is to the new union of states as a whole, and not just his 'country'. It's like someone today calling themselves pan-European instead of German or French.
The way Laurens uses it suggests that it's a familiar enough word, but the only other related instance that I have found is from the title of Alexander Hamilton's essay series, The Continentalist (published from July 1781). And indeed, the Oxford English Dictionary states, "OED's earliest evidence for continentalist is from 1781, in the writing of Alexander Hamilton".
Searching for this term on Founders gives Laurens's usage as the first instance, and Library of Congress doesn't bring up anything earlier either. It's not included in Samuel Johnson's dictionary, or several other sources I've skimmed.
So now I'm interested to find out where "continentalist" came from. Was this a word coined among Washington's staff to describe their broader perspective on the revolution? If anyone has any other leads or sources, please do share.
28 notes · View notes
gracehosborn · 8 days
Text
Was scrolling around Founders Online, as you do, and stumbled across a letter I had forgotten about (how, considering its dramatic air, I have no idea) from Hamilton to his friend, Edward Carrington [link here]. This popped out at me:
This conviction in my mind is the result of a long train of circumstances; many of them minute. To attempt to detail them all would fill a volume.
*Glances at The American Icarus series* Well. About that…. 🤣
Part of me feels validated in pursuing this insane project, while the rest of me is dying of laughter at this paragraph and the letter it is apart of as a whole.
Hamilton here is referring to Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, as he’s explaining to Carrington the tale of how he came to believe this duo was “at the head of a faction decidedly hostile to me and my administration,” [emphasis Hamilton’s] and some other related topics that extend out of this. Overall this letter is a fun and wild read I highly recommend.
6 notes · View notes
gracehosborn · 8 days
Text
absolutely useless discourse: comparison of washington's thank you letters to jefferson & hamilton
today in the group chat i shared the letters that washington sent both jefferson and hamilton after their respective resignations, noting that they were really similar in their message. for some reason this sparked debate on which letter felt "warmer", with a surprisingly split vote?
washington particularly paid close attention to the words he used - Sir, Dear Sir, My Dear Sir all show different degrees of affection and he could use that subtlety to convey tone. i thought this debate might be interesting to throw out to people who know washington's letter-writing habits, or general 18th century letter standards. the real answer is that both letters are basically the same and this is a stupid question but hush. we're continuing the age-old tradition of pitting jefferson and hamilton against each other.
Tumblr media Tumblr media
the pro-jefferson side of the chat was noting how he sounds much more obliging and deferent to jefferson, like "i cannot suffer you to leave your station without assuring you", or "I beg you to believe that I always am Dear Sir Your Sincere friend". obviously they break later on but at this point, he must've had great respect for him.
the pro-hamilton side said that that's proof he was closer to hamilton, and felt more comfortable being straightforward: "you may assure yourself of the sincere esteem" instead of "i beg you to believe". also, they pointed out how although he says that both of them fulfilled all their duties to his expectations, he says in only hamilton's that he can render it due to opportunities that "cannot deceive me".
any thoughts?
58 notes · View notes
gracehosborn · 9 days
Text
In the midst of his feverish diplomacy [at the court of Versailles], Laurens found time for personal matters. During his year in London, he had married "Patty" Manning, the daughter of his father's English partner, and she had delivered their daughter after he sailed to join Washington's army; although Mrs. Laurens had made plans to join her husband in America, her delicate health made the journey impossible. Hearing that Laurens was coming to France, she and her daughter smuggled themselves across the English Channel and joined the young colonel in Paris. It was a long, difficult journey, made at considerable risk. [...] Young Laurens himself was engaged in fundamental sabotage of His Majesty's hopes of victory; yet in the finest traditions of romance, Patty Laurens ignored the English spies and informers swarming in Paris and in the channel ports and rushed to her soldier.
Thomas Fleming, Beat the Last Drum (2016)
Truly amazing how you can just Say Things in a published history book. 🥲
There's a lot that's factually wrong here, but perhaps the most frustrating is the fanciful narrative that Martha Manning Laurens went off on a daring, romantic jaunt to see her husband. The reality was far from that, even from what little remains of her historic footprint, so it's a weird angle to spin.
Martha had spent over four years in London caring for their daughter on her own and making repeated pleas to travel to America. John found a reason to rebuff all of these, not because of her "delicate health" but rather on account of the risk of the voyage (which, admittedly, was not trivial). Most likely, his underlying reasoning was more selfish – having his family close by would require him to divide his time and attention, an inconvenince he was not willing to take on when there were more glorious things to do.
Left behind, ignored and dismissed, it is reasonable to conclude that Martha dared the journey to France in a last-ditch attempt to meet up with John and to travel back to America in his company (a plan he could hardly refuse). However, according to Massey, the reunion probably never happened, in part because Martha only learned of John's presence in Paris when he was already wrapping up his mission. He doesn't seem to have bothered to inform her ahead of time, and it certainly didn't occur to him that this would have been a convenient and expedient way to bring his wife and daughter home with him. (This man spent a month on a boat. It's not like he didn't have time to think about this.)
We don't need to – and shouldn't – exonerate John's poor treatment of Martha and Frances by plastering over it with this kind of romantic revisionism.
61 notes · View notes
gracehosborn · 9 days
Text
Definitely praying for you. I will say, though Alex & Eliza was… quite insane, my frustration did lead to more productivity on my own Hamilton novel, as silly as that is.
Looking forward to those future posts!
after a lot of hemming and hawing i decided to give alex and eliza: a love story a chance. but holy shit. at first i thought it was taking a few historical liberties to give hamliza this enemies to lovers arc (which still doesn't make sense) but then it escalated into utter mayhem. i am confused at what beef this author had with henry livingston.
Tumblr media
40 notes · View notes
gracehosborn · 9 days
Text
I read this about two months ago just because I was curious how Melissa de la Cruz would take things. I lost my absolute mind and I could go on a four hour rant about my thoughts on this novel 😂. In short, I will not be picking up the rest of the trilogy. Even if I am morbidly curious to see what occurred in the later installments.
after a lot of hemming and hawing i decided to give alex and eliza: a love story a chance. but holy shit. at first i thought it was taking a few historical liberties to give hamliza this enemies to lovers arc (which still doesn't make sense) but then it escalated into utter mayhem. i am confused at what beef this author had with henry livingston.
Tumblr media
40 notes · View notes
gracehosborn · 9 days
Text
my favorite part of the young hamilton by flexner wasn't the actual biography but the note where he explains why he researched hamilton and not franklin, jefferson, or adams. franklin? already covered in the past. jefferson? being covered by a contemporary and friend.
but then he gets to adams:
Tumblr media
crying. the man's so unlikable this historian went nahh forget it.
63 notes · View notes