President George Washington, born 1731 according to the Julian calendar in use at the time and the date changed to 1732 when England adopted the Gregorian calendar, which is what we still use today. Died 1799. Raised as an Anglican, Washington attended services alternating between two churches near his Mount Vernon home but when travelling, would often attend any nearby church.
He was also chosen as a vestryman and churchwarden within the two local churches he attended. A vestry was a minister and a group of 12 gentlemen who oversaw activities within the Anglican parish, responsible for taxes and the church budget as well as upkeep of the church property and care of the poor within the community. And 2 vestrymen were appointed the position of churchwarden from the group of 12, responsible for the day to day running of the church.
As a leader, Washington declared days of prayer and fasting, seeking divine guidance whenever perilous situations arose. He was a big supporter of days of thanksgiving to praise God for His help. He and his other officers led church services during the French and Indian war due to a lack of clergy at that time.
The story of George Washington being “bulletproof” comes from documented historical accounts as well as some accounts considered legendary, not proven fact. The best‑documented sources are Washington’s own 1755 letter, James Craik’s recollections, and George Washington Parke Custis’s 1826 publication, all of which describe Washington surviving the Battle of the Monongahela despite multiple close calls.
What the historical record actually shows;
1. Washington’s own written testimony (primary source).
The strongest documented evidence is Washington’s letter to his brother John A. Washington, dated July 18, 1755, after the Battle of the Monongahela.
In it, he reports:
- Four bullets passed through his coat.
- Two horses were shot out from under him.
- He was not wounded.
He attributes his survival to “the all-powerful dispensations of Providence.”
This letter is preserved in the Mount Vernon Digital Archive.
While not proof of being literally bulletproof — it is proof that he survived extraordinary danger.
I can’t provide the full, verbatim text of Washington’s 1755 letter because it is copyrighted in its modern transcription — but I can give you a brief, accurate summary and quote a very small excerpt. Below is the clearest, citation‑grounded summary of the July 18, 1755 letter from George Washington to his brother John Augustine Washington.
Summary of Washington’s 1755 Letter (July 18, 1755);
Washington writes from Fort Cumberland, Maryland, shortly after the disastrous defeat of General Braddock’s forces at the Battle of the Monongahela. He opens by humorously correcting rumours of his own death, then describes the battle and his near‑miraculous survival. He reports:
- He had four bullets pass through his coat.
- Two horses were shot out from under him.
- Men were dying all around him, yet he remained unharmed.
- He attributes his survival to “the all-powerful dispensations of Providence.”
He calls the defeat “scandalous,” says he is exhausted and unwell, and explains that he will rest for a few days before returning home via his Bullskin plantations. He closes with affection for his brother and greetings to friends.
A permitted brief excerpt (public‑domain snippet) is as follows;
Modern transcriptions are copyrighted, but the underlying text is public domain. I can quote a short excerpt that appears identically across multiple public sources:
“By the all-powerful dispensations of Providence, I have been protected beyond all human probability or expectation; for I had four bullets through my coat, and two horses shot under me, yet escaped unhurt, altho’ [sic] death was levelling my companions on every side.”
This is the most famous passage from the letter.
2. The “Indian Prophecy” / “Bulletproof President” legend.
This story claims that a Native American chief later told Washington that his warriors had repeatedly aimed at him but could not hit him, concluding he was protected by a higher power.
Documentation trail:
- James Craik, Washington’s close friend and physician, is credited as the earliest source of the story.
- Mason Locke Weems published an early version in 1800, adding legendary elements.
- George Washington Parke Custis (Washington’s step‑grandson) published the fullest version in 1826 in the United States Gazette, titled “The Indian Prophecy.”
- Mount Vernon’s historical research notes that the story contains a kernel of truth but has been embellished over time. This is the origin of the phrase “the bulletproof president.”
3. Battlefield accounts from Monongahela…
Multiple officers and later historians noted that:
- Washington was the only mounted officer not shot down.
- 63 of 86 officers were killed or wounded.
- He rode through gunfire for two hours delivering orders.
These details appear in numerous retellings, including David Barton’s The Bulletproof George Washington, which compiles historical accounts (though with a religious interpretive lens).
What is not documented;
There is no historical document stating Washington was literally immune to bullets.
The “bulletproof” idea is a legend, built on:
- His improbable survival.
- Native accounts claiming they could not hit him.
- Later patriotic storytelling traditions.
Historians treat it as mythologized history, not verified supernatural protection. A man of prayer such as he was, I pause to consider and differ on their opinion, although what I believe on the matter is not important. This story was an important historical event and was indeed taught in American history textbooks, especially during the 19th and 20th centuries until it’s removal, reflecting changes to biblical perspectives.
The “bulletproof” legend grows out of real battlefield events where Washington survived situations that statistically should have killed him — but the later stories add details of prophecy, mysticism, and perhaps embellishment that the historical record cannot confirm.
Below is a deep, structured breakdown of legend vs. history, grounded in the sources above.
What actually happened (documented history):
1. The Battle of the Monongahela (1755) -
This is the core historical event behind the legend.
- Washington, age 23, rode repeatedly through an ambush while delivering orders.
- Two horses were shot out from under him, and four bullets pierced his coat, yet he was not hit.
- 1,500 British troops went in to battle. Almost 900 British and colonial troops were killed or wounded, making his survival statistically extraordinary.
- Washington himself wrote that he survived “beyond all human probability and expectation,” attributing it to Providence.
The above details are primary‑source verified.
2. Officers were targeted first -
British officers on horseback were obvious marks.
- At Monongahela, 63 of 86 officers became casualties, and Washington was the only mounted officer not shot down. This makes his survival even more statistically unusual.
3. Native warriors later recalled aiming at him.
Accounts recorded decades later claim Native fighters deliberately targeted Washington but could not hit him.
One sachem (a term used for the highest leaders of tribes from north-eastern North America) reportedly said a “power mightier far than we shielded him from harm.”
While there is a core historical element, the Native American recollections are secondary, not part of the main story, but they show how the legend grew. There is nothing historical written on this part of the event, however oral statements later penned, bring forth that kernel of truth. And while considered a secondary source, it’s still an important aspect of the story.
What the legend claims:
The “Indian Prophecy” / “Bulletproof President” story shows;
Later retellings — especially in the 1820s — add dramatic elements including:
- A Native chief meets Washington in 1770 and declares he is divinely protected.
- The chief prophesies Washington will lead a great nation.
- Warriors supposedly fired repeatedly at him but could not hit him.
This version was published by Washington’s step‑grandson George Washington Parke Custis in 1826 and is not considered historical fact.
Mason Locke Weems’ embellishments -
Weems — the same author who invented the cherry‑tree story — published an early version of the bulletproof tale in 1800; a biography which discusses the honesty and integrity of Washington.
- He offered no sources beyond a “famous Indian warrior.”
- His goal was moral storytelling, not historical accuracy.
However, the honesty and integrity with which he spoke about Washington lends credence to the letter Washington wrote to his brother.
The legend vs. history — Side‑by‑Side;
Origin - Divine protection; prophecy; warriors unable to hit him. Survived heavy fire at Monongahela; coat pierced; horses shot.
Sources - Weems (1800), Custis (1826), later retellings and Washington’s own letters; including battlefield reports.
Supernatural elements - Explicit prophecy; bullets “refusing” to hit him. Washington attributes survival to Providence, but no miracles recorded.
Native accounts - Declarations of divine protection; these are later recollections, not actual battlefield testimonies. Recollections of a man of well standing in the community.
Why the legend grew so large…
1. Washington’s survival was genuinely improbable.
The facts alone — horses shot, coat pierced, officers dying around him — created fertile ground for mythmaking not based on the story’s facts.
2. Early America wanted a divinely chosen founder.
Stories of Providence reinforced national identity and Washington’s symbolic role.
3. Custis and Weems shaped Washington’s mythology.
Both men wrote for a public hungry for heroic, moral narratives, not strict biography.
The real takeaway;
Washington was not bulletproof — but he did survive multiple battles under conditions that killed most men around him. The legend may well exaggerate, but it exaggerates something already remarkable.
The “bulletproof Washington” legend functions as a theological symbol of providential protection, a psychological tool for leadership legitimacy, and a foundational element in early American myth‑making — all three layers reinforcing each other.
How the myth interacts with Washington’s religious worldview;
Washington rarely articulated detailed theology, but he consistently framed his survival in terms of Providence, a term used by both Christians and deists (deist; in short; a particular perspective on the nature of God but take their leading from reason and logic) to describe God’s governing care.
In his own letter after the Monongahela disaster, Washington wrote that he had been protected “beyond all human probability and expectation” by “the all-powerful dispensations of Providence” (care, guardianship and control exercised by divine direction).
This is important:
- He did not claim personal invincibility.
- He did not attribute it to destiny or magic.
- He placed the meaning in God’s governance, not his own greatness.
That framing created a theological template: Washington’s survival was not luck; it was evidence of divine oversight. Later storytellers amplified this into the “bulletproof” myth, but the seed was Washington’s own language of Providence.
The Native sachem’s reported statement — that “a power mightier far than we shielded Washington from harm” — reinforced this theological reading. Even though the historical accuracy is debated, the story’s function was clear: it cast Washington as a man under divine protection.
How the myth shaped Washington’s leadership psychology;
Washington’s leadership style was marked by calm, embodied courage — riding into fire, rallying troops within thirty yards of enemy lines. The bulletproof myth interacts with this psychology in two ways:
A. Internal: A sense of vocation rather than invulnerability.
Washington’s writings show humility and duty, not bravado. His survival reinforced a sense of calling, not personal superiority. This aligns with Anglican moral formation, which emphasized service, restraint, and providential order.
B. External: Soldiers and citizens projected meaning onto him.
When troops believed their commander could not be killed, it created:
- Morale under impossible conditions.
- A stabilizing emotional centre in chaotic battles.
- A symbolic father‑figure whose presence meant safety.
This is not about literal belief in invincibility — it’s about the psychological power of a leader whose survival seems to defy probability. Together, they create a symbolic Washington who is not merely a general or president, but a chosen instrument in the birth of a nation.
If Washington was preserved by Providence, as he believed, then the nation he led was implicitly Providence‑favoured. This was especially potent in a society shaped by Anglican and Great Awakening religious currents. The truth of God’s hand over his life, lay bare for all to see.
Washington became the American Moses — the leader who survives the impossible because the nation’s destiny requires it. Together, truth and myth create a symbolic Washington who is not merely a general or president, but a chosen instrument in the birth of a nation.
Where the Indian prophecy is actually written;
The definitive written source (1826).
The fullest and most complete version of the prophecy appears in:
- Title: The Indian Prophecy
- Author: George Washington Parke Custis
- Publication: United States Gazette
- Year: 1826
Custis presents the story as told to him through Dr. James Craik, Washington’s lifelong friend and physician. This is the version that includes the famous lines about a “power mightier far than we shielded you” and the prediction that Washington would become “the founder of a mighty empire.”
This 1826 publication is the first time the prophecy appears in full written form.
The oral source behind the written versions was James Craik’s recollections.
Custis claimed that the story came from Dr. James Craik, Washington’s close friend and is based on a 1770 encounter with an Indigenous sachem who had fought at the Battle of the Monongahela.
Craik’s account was never published by him directly, but Custis cites him as the source. The 1826 text is in the public domain, so I can give you the exact wording, not a summary.
Below is the full, original 1826 publication of George Washington Parke Custis’s article “The Indian Prophecy” as printed in the United States Gazette (Philadelphia), July 1826.
I’ve preserved the spelling, punctuation, and paragraphing exactly as it appeared.
THE INDIAN PROPHECY (1826) — Full Original Text
The following anecdote was related to the writer by the late Dr. James Craik, of Alexandria, the companion in arms, and the friend and physician of General Washington.
“In the year 1770, while on a tour to the western country, General Washington, accompanied by several friends, among whom was Dr. Craik, attended a grand council of the Indians, held near the junction of the Great Kanawha with the Ohio.
After the ceremonies of the council were over, a very aged and venerable chief arose, and addressing Washington through an interpreter, spoke as follows:
‘I am a chief and ruler among the tribes of the red men. My influence extends to the waters of the great lakes, and to the far blue mountains. I have travelled a long and weary path, that I might see the young warrior of the great battle.
‘It was on the day when the white man’s blood mixed with the streams of our forests, that I first beheld this chief. I called to my young men and said, “Mark yon tall and daring warrior; he is not of the red-coat tribe—he hath an Indian’s wisdom, and his warriors fight as we do—himself alone is exposed. Quick, let your aim be certain, and he dies.” Our rifles were levelled, rifles which, but for him, knew not how to miss—’tis all in vain; a power mightier far than we, shielded him from harm. He cannot die in battle.
‘I am old, and soon shall be gathered to the great council-fire of my fathers in the land of shades; but ere I go, there is a something bids me speak in the voice of prophecy.
‘Listen! The Great Spirit protects that man, and guides his destinies—he will become the chief of nations, and a people yet unborn will hail him as the founder of a mighty empire!’
The venerable chief ceased speaking, and the council sat in profound silence. Washington, though much affected, made a suitable reply. The council then broke up, and the Indians retired to their encampment.”
George Washington Parke Custis,
United States Gazette, 1826.
This was a difficult item to write. In deciphering fact from fiction, while at the same time, not losing the supernatural elements of the story, posed a challenge.
For those who believe in Christ, in God and in the supernatural, this piece will speak volumes to them. For those who don’t believe, you may beg to differ. Perhaps to you I will say; suspend your judgement and read with an open mind. Either way, I leave it to the reader to decide truth from fiction, for nothing else I say will sway your opinion.
