Here’s a reprint of the part of the letter talking about the duel (the first part seems to allude to a fear amongst Hamilton’s friends about a possible duel a while before the actual duel took place)

In the midst of their alarm ^ the imaginations of Hamilton’s law friends raised up the spectre of a duel between him and Burr; and to prevent a real one Hamilton’s law friends unanimously resolved on using all prudent means.  For this purpose the first step they took was to request me to wait on Hamilton to ascertain the truth of the reports, and to inform him of our fears.  I waiting on him accordingly:  he laughed at our fears & declared that Burr was not in possession of any letter to Morris: that Burr knew the nature of the testimony he expected to give in the trial of the libel suit, and was satisfied with it: and that there was not the slightest ground for apprehending a duel.
I reported to our law friends the result of my conference with Hamilton: we were all exceedingly rejoiced:  the trial of the libel suit did not take place:  And thus we were unfortunately lulled into a false security
The duel originated afterwards from a different cause
When Hamilton accepted Burr’s
– – –
17
challenge a Court in which Hamilton had a good deal of business, was on the eve of sitting; and it was agreed that the duel should be postponed till after the court had finally adjourned; to the end that Hamilton might perform his engagements to his clients.
In the latter part of the afternoon, preceding the duel ^ Hamilton finished a lengthy law opinion, and soon afterwards he paid me a visit.  I was then confined to the house, by a lingering disease, which, after his death, I discovered that he and some other friends, conceived would be mortal.  During his visit he limited his conversation to inquiries into the state of my health, and to advice concerning the best mode of re-establishing it. His manner struck me as having an air of peculiar earnestness, and solicitude, but not dreaming of any duel, I attributed the manner solely to his sincere, and long standing, friendship for me.
King has more than once told me that while
– – –
18
the duel was pending, Hamilton made him repeated visits, in each of which the duel was the only subject of conversation.  Notwithstanding Hamilton’s mind was fully capable of viewing the duel, in any possible light, yet King entered into solemn argument with him against it, under any circumstances whatsoever.  Hamilton freely acknowledged that duelling could not be defended on any principles of reason, morality or religion; but at the same time, declared that he would not avoid meeting Burr.  After King saw that Hamilton’s purpose was not to be changed, he suggested to him that Burr undoubtedly meant to kill him and consequently it was his duty to make such preparations for the contest as would place him, as nearly as could be done, on equal ground with Burr.  To these suggestions Hamilton answered he could not endure the idea of taking the life of a human creature in private rencontre; to which King replied “Then Sir you will go like a lamb to be slaughtered”.
Mr Pendleton who
– – –
19
was Hamilton’s second, also told me that the day before the duel he, with difficulty, prevailed on Hamilton to take his pistols in hand that he might, in some degree, become familiar with the use of them.  Pendleton thereupon delivered him one of the pistols.  He quickly raised it to a level, but, dropping his arm as quickly, he returned the pistol to Pendleton; and this constituted the whole of his preparation to fight an antagonist very adroit in firing with pistols.
I verily believe that Hamilton had not fired a pistol since the termination of the revolutionary war.
There cannot be any doubts, from Pendleton’s statement of what passed at the duel, that Hamilton fired in the air.
How Hamilton commenced his preparation for the army, and how he acquired his knowledge of the practice of the law – for admission to the bar, I have heretofore related in memoranda sent to J.A. Hamilton.  Altho’ I have not retained copies of those memoranda
– – –
20
yet if they should not be with you, or if they should be lost, I will endeavour to furnish you with the facts.
I have now completely exhausted my stock of recollections respecting a man whom I loved when we were boys together; and whose transcendent talents, public spirit, and private virtues, since his arrival at Manhood, I have never ceased to admire.
I rejoice that I have lived to contribute some portion of the materials for illustrating Hamilton’s name.  I rejoice still more that it has happily fallen to your lot to be the instrument of transmitting his name, in all its native [?] lustre, to impartial posterity.

So if you read my newest article, “Hamilton Revisited”, you’ll see that I’m no longer convinced Hamilton and Troup were anything other than friends. I do think they were both queer, and this may have been part of the basis of their friendship, but I’m not sure I really have evidence they were in love or slept together.

I do think it was probably incredibly painful for Troup when one man he cared deeply about killed another man he cared deeply about, regardless. That said, after Burr left town for a while to wait for things to cool down, when he returned, Troup helped him restart his legal business. So I think Troup did eventually forgive him. He knew how reckless and impulsive Hamilton was, and that Hamilton was at least a little responsible for his own death.

My thoughts exactly!

I go back and fourth on whether or not Hamilton and Troup had a romantic relationship. Lately I’ve been leaning towards no, but I’m open to hearing arguments about it; it’s hard to tell with them.

As for Troup and Burr, what a story! I think it sounds like a romantic relationship; but then for Burr to display such disinterest in Troup later, and eventually marry Theodosia, their mutual friend…? Crazy. Poor Troup.

If Troup did try to have a committed, domestic relationship with Hamilton, and then Burr, Troup could be so important to LGBT+ historical work! In all eras queer people have had more than just one night stands, but it’s usually so hard to find evidence of this kind of non-traditional homemaking.

As for what you said about Burr, I think Burr must have been complex. He did do some good things, and I think he really did endear some people to him. But he could also quickly give up people or things if they no longer served his long term goals, and didn’t seem to feel a lot of remorse about it. To be fair, Alexander Hamilton did this too.

Thank you for your comment (I get so few real ones!) and for all of your support of my work! I’m so glad I can help you on your own research journeys!

Great question! Actually, you are looking at the wrong Charles Pinckney! The Charles Pinckney who married Eliza L. Pinckney lived from 1699 to 1758. The Charles Pinckney who married Mary Eleanor Laurens lived from 1757 to 1824.

There are a lot of Charles Pinckneys in that part of US history, and I too sometimes mix them up!

Hope this helps!

I wonder which is correct? The National Park Service for the Pickney estate or your research? It seems like a big fact!