Interestingly enough, there seem to have been a few of his closest military aides/Generals that were all considered his “favorite”, at least by historians.
Terry Golway’s 2004 book on the life of General Nathanael Greene is actually called “Washington’s General: Nathanael Greene and the Triumph of the American Revolution”. Washington showed tremendous confidence in Greene’s ability to lead, especially later in the war when Washington entrusted him with the entire Southern army, which at the time was pretty close to folding altogether after the slaughter at Camden. To quote from Publisher’s Weekly, “Golway shows him as one of Washington’s most trusted subordinates, with a mixed record as a field commander and a good one as a very reluctant quartermaster-general (a job that made making bricks without straw look simple). In the war’s darkest days, in late 1780, Greene was appointed commander in the Southern theater, where the British had nearly swept all before them. Without ever winning a major battle, Greene, Golway shows, kept his army in the field, supported Patriot militias and suppressed Tory ones, undercut British logistics, eventually forced Cornwallis north to Yorktown and besieged Charleston.” Quoting the wiki on the Battle of Camden. “Gates lost control of the southern army due to his cowardice. General Nathanael Greene, standing next to George Washington as the most able and trusted Colonial officer of the Revolution, was given Gates’s command of the southern army and started recruiting additional troops.”
The Marquis de Lafayette is another person that had an extremely close bond to the Commander-in-Chief. After paying for his own journey from France to America at the age of twenty, he impressed everybody right away with his looks and easy manner, and also offered to serve as Major General without pay. In early 2008, a book was released by David A. Clary, entitled “Adopted Son: Washington, Lafayette, and the Friendship that Saved the Revolution”. To quote from Publisher’s Weekly’s review, “…Clary…argues that although each man was a hero of the American Revolution, it was their partnership that secured American victory. Both men were orphans, and their devotion to each other was motivated by a deep psychological bond. As the title suggests, Washington was something of a father figure to the younger Frenchman, and Lafayette gave the general “unwavering loyalty, truly filial devotion.” But the mentoring was not wholly one-sided: Lafayette was committed to the abolition of slavery, and Clary suggests that it was because of Lafayette’s influence that Washington chose to free his slaves on his wife’s death. The chapters on Lafayette’s role in the French Revolution and Washington’s anguish over Lafayette’s imprisonment make this book far broader than the usual 1776 account…”
I just finished Mark Puls’s February 2008 “Henry Knox: Visionary General of the American Revolution”. It’s really astounding the number of times Washington wrote glowingly of Knox to Congress and its delegates espousing his gifts for military command. Numerous times during the war Washington took Knox’s advice even if a majority of his Generals disagreed. After Gates abandoned the Southern army, General Greene, speaking to Washington about who his replacement should be, fully advocated Knox as the best person for the position. Washington agreed, and said that because of how great of a military man he was, he couldn’t afford to not have Knox by his side. At the beginning of the war, when Knox was merely 25 or 26, Washington had such confidence in him that he appointed Knox to build and lead the army’s artillery corps, which he did with astounding success until the war’s end.
Another person who was remarkably close to Washington was Alexander Hamilton. Reading Alexander Hamilton by Ron Chernow, released in 2004, you would think that everybody else on the Patriot side took a backseat to the relationship between between these two men. Despite Hamilton’s unrelenting desire for military glory, Washington kept him close by as an aide for years, unable to spare Alexander’s oratory and writing gifts. Numerous sources have stated that they two of them worked so well together that Hamilton was able to write what Washington wanted to say without even consulting the General.
In His Excellency: George Washington, Joseph J. Ellis shows that earlier in the war Washington writes personal notes to and confides in Joseph Reed, while later in the war he often writes extremely warmly to John Laurens, as though he’s adopted both of these younger men as adopted sons.
Perhaps people wanted to as close to him as possible because of who he was:
First in war, first in peace, and first in the hearts of his countrymen, he was second to none in humble and enduring scenes of private life. Pious, just, humane, temperate, and sincere; uniform, dignified, and commanding; his example was as edifying to all around him as were the effects of that example lasting…Correct throughout, vice shuddered in his presence and virtue always felt his fostering hand. The purity of his private character gave effulgence to his public virtues…Such was the man for whom our nation mourns.
-Eulogy by Congressman Henry Lee, a Revolutionary War comrade
An excerpt from the Introduction to His Excellency: George Washington, Ellis makes a very telling statement: “It seems to me that Benjamin Franklin was wiser than Washington; Alexander Hamilton was more brilliant; John Adams was better read; James Madison was more politically astute. Yet each and all of these prominent figures acknowledged that Washington was their unquestioned superior.”
One can also point out things done to honor him, including the name of our Capital, another state, the quarter and one-dollar bill, a monument in his name, his face on Mount Rushmore, along with countless counties, streets, bridges, etc. scattered across the country. One can find few Americans to be more proudly, or more closely associated with, than George Washington.