(Book’s title from poem ‘John Brown’s Body’ by Stephen Vincent Benét)

• Preface: Robert E. Lee: pseudonym; adjectives: witty, bourgeois, self-justifying, scientific, lusty, disappointed; 10000 manuscript pages; “The letters force us to embrace a multifaceted man. Lee the flirt, the man handicapped by passivity and indecision, the racial supremacist, the humorless sermonizer, and the merry companion must be conformed with Lee the natural leader, the sentimental lover of children and animals, the indifferent engineer, the aggressive warrior.”; mother’s advice: ability to write letters well is important;

1. Torn to Pieces: father: Henry Lee (born 1756), captain in 1776 (nickname: Light-House Harry), friend of Washington, fight the British army, at 26 he left the army after 7 years as lieutenant colonel, disappointed & disillusioned, married his cousin Matilda Lee, 15 years in politics as congressman, governor of Virginia, removed from office after quelling the Whiskey Rebellion, felt betrayed, volatile nature, devastated after death of wife & eldest son, tried to find happiness in politics, then in flirting pretty women, married to Ann Hill Carter (22 siblings, well educated) after being turned down by Maria Farley, elected to Congress in 1799, eldest son: Charles, wrote funeral oration to George Washington’s death, accumulated significant debt after entered into high-risk speculative businesses, lost trust, father insulted him in his will, left only minor property, wife & father-in-law put estate in trust for their children to protect them from Henry & his creditors, Henry had little talent for business but quite an eye for a shady deal, wife felt isolated, left to raise alone Henry’s two surviving children & 3 of their own, her father died shortly after birth of 4 child Robert Edward, Henry Lee was not home for birth, distracted by political dispute with Thomas Jefferson, tried to evade from legal actions of his creditors, got in jail when Robert was 15 month-old; started writing a book after being discharged from prison, brutally beaten & maimed by an angry mob, took a ship for the West Indies in 1813 to elude responsibilities he could not meet & avoid creditors, never returned -> ambivalent, controversial life, died in 1818, new scandal at Stratford: Henry’s eldest son seduced his young ward, the sister of his wife, infant child was discovered dead (Robert was present too)
2. Perplexity: Ann Lee’s growing discussion anxiety <-> husband’s & stepson’s continued self-indulgence; Harry Lee expected his son Carter to restore family greatness; he treated his children like a footnote in his life; by the time of her death, Ann Lee couldn’t pay their debt; “Harry would wail when he heard of his family’s increasing poverty, but it did not keep him from surreptitiously ordering sides of beef and gallons of oysters for himself.”; Ann & children moved from Stratford to Alexandria (close to relatives); Robert: shy child, often sick; morning & evening family prayers; all children received good education; attended Hallowell’s quaker school (unusually advanced), his mother sent him to dancing lessons too (despite questions from religious circles); in absence of many rule-laden games, boys came up with their own code of conduct; after Harry’s departure mother became increasingly ill & depressed; lack of material possessions compensated by quality of affability (easy to talk with others) & manners; Robert’s elder brothers away, sisters too young -> he took on responsibly, devoted to his mother, anxious for her approval; “No doubt Robert’s service was an excellent lesson in self-denial, and it seems to have brought out a genuinely nurturing side that he would later exhibit with his own family. Yet it placed him in a kind of inverted relationship in which the child becomes the caretaker and the responsible adult the dependent.”; father died in 1818, on the way home (wanted to reunite with family); Robert was 6 years old when father left family, even during that time he had seen little of him (jail, maimed after fight) -> hard to tell exact impact on his life; but later in life felt some pride for his father; became obsessive about paying back debts and avoiding to be called swindler; wrote a biography about his father (left out all the negative about him); Ann’s decision to move to Alexandria was wise -> uncles & cousins provided companionship & social connections in the absence of his father; very strong family relationships through intermarriage & blood-related business arrangements (he also married a member of his clan); Henry Lee IV: Robert’s half brother, 20 years older, very promising young man, reopened Stratford, married Anne McCarty (17 year old); daughter (Margaret) fell down from stairs, mother Anne turned to laudanum (opiate) to comfort herself -> meanwhile Henry seduced her sister Elizabeth (who was her guardian); murdered/stillborn child discovered (-> nickname: “Black-Horse Harry”); Anne became addicted to opium; family plunged into disgrace again & ruined financially (Henry tried to embezzle Elizabeth’s fortune); Henry tried to appear contrite but tried to justify his behavior (Thomas Jefferson acted similarly); exiled to Paris & wrote angry letters defending his father; _“In many ways the crisis provoked by “Black-Horse Harry” was more damaging than his father’s mistakes. The elder Lee had been a genuine hero, and the disgrace of debt was a comparatively acceptable one. Henry IV had overstepped the bounds of decency, however, taking crude advantage on all sides and coupling it with self-righteous harangues that would have been repellent under the best of circumstances. The combination of these catastrophes was devastating and had real consequences for Robert Lee as he entered young manhood. Leading families questioned the Lees’ desirability as suitors, and Robert came to believe that he would have to remain single. […] Whether conscious or not, what can be said with certainty is that Robert E. Lee chose a path quite different from that of the senior Lees. As a concerned father; as a careful investor; as an ambitious careerist; in the abnegation of his strong sexuality; as a man nearly fanatically obsessed with duty and correct behavior, he sidestepped the foibles he had been exposed to in his youth. Only in the exigency of war would he finally honor his father with emulation.”*
3. The Torchbearers: string reverence to revolutionary leaders; eg. 66-year old Marquis de Lafayette: nostalgic 13-month sojourn in US organized by president James Monroe; departed from Arlington, the home of George Washington Parke Chris (“the heir of Washington”, his grandmother was a widow with two children when married to George Washington, couple remained childless but Washington treated his stepchildren/step grandchildren as his own); Lafayette: member of French nobility, left for America in 1777 inspired by live love of liberty, used his influence to gain support for patriots, became major general at 24; his extraprofitot reception was also sign of near cult worship of George Washington; different definition of leadership: what command respect is not merely intellect, talent(European concept) but civic service & self-sacrifice without financial/political motives (even to personal detriment); Alexandria: considered George Washington’s hometown; Lafayette visited in 1824; one of ladies waving handkerchiefs was Mary Anna Custis who caught his 17-year old cousin Robert Lee’s attention (junior marshal at that time); Lafayette took time to visit Mrs Lee, the widow of his old friend Light-Horse Harry Lee (Robert Lee might have been present); Custis’ wife: Mary Lee Fitzhugh (Molly Custis): early opponent of slavery, only one of four children survived infancy: Mary; wife: quiet grace <-> husband: undisciplined, exuberant; Arlington was a real home for Robert Lee; _“On one visit Washington Custis conversed about a plan for gradual emancipation of the family’s slaves, for Lafayette believed it a barbarous institution, in decline everywhere except the United States, and had gone so far as to request that those slaveholders lining his travel routes not be accompanied by their human property.”*; no evidence of Lee idolizing Washington
4. The Long Gray Line: -> long processing line of cadets at West Point; US Military launched Robert E. Lee on two careers: military profession & letter-writing; only friendship outside of kinfolk at West Point; finished academy with highest honor; appointed assistant professor of mathematics; mother tried to talk him down but notorious actions of father/brother precluded any chance of a normal life; signed service for five years after summer camp; oath: “I do solemnly swear that I will bear true allegiance to the United States of America, and that I will serve them honestly and faithfully against all their enemies or opposers whatsoever; and observe and obey the orders of the President of the United States.”; _“Since the country’s birth there had been a national debate about the place of a professional military in a democracy. George Washington, whose experience with militia units had not always been felicitous, originally favored the creation of a trained officer corps, as did Alexander Hamilton and Lee’s father. There were equally strong voices on the other side-those who, like Jefferson, thought defense a prerogative of the states, or disliked any group that even vaguely resembled a powerful national army, so reminiscent of the oppressive military units kept by European monarchs. The compromise they reached was to create a very small regular army for peacetime that could be expanded by adding militiamen in times of crisis.”*; very ambitious program (advanced calculus, French, philosophy, history etc); Robert couldn’t best his nemesis, Charles Mason (later left army); Sylvanus Thayer: superintendent, rigorous curriculum, demerit system, committed to idea of equality, denied any support from home, system of public examinations (visitors & instructors could openly quiz the cadets); he liked Cadet Robert Lee (reflection of his own trait: punctuality, precision, self-discipline, air of command); Eggnog Riot: Christmas party against prohibition that got out of hand; Robert avoided trouble but developed close friendships with Jack Mackay, Mercer, Tilgham and Joe Johnson (other Southerners, whose fathers fought in the Revolution); academy’s austerity & rigor (only one candle to study by, cold rooms, 363 day long work calendar, respite only Christmas & Fourth of July) -> played to Lee’s natural asceticism; military analysis of American Revolution & Napoleonic Wars (including war of 1812); read Machiavelli;
5. Long to Be Remembered: Robert E Lee married Anna Rudolph Custis in 1831; his mother died after graduating from West Point; brother Henry Lee IV appointed US consul but was forced to leave position by the Senate; Robert’s first army post in Georgia; got engaged to Mary (his cousin); father was hesitant (Mary was their only daughter & had a lot of inheritance <-> Robert could not match up for it + marrying a soldier will come with anxiety & sacrifice); Mary’s spontaneous conversion to God before meeting with Robert (-> revivalism popular at that time) changed her character (less egocentric, more responsible) -> worried about the spirituality of Robert; Mary also had doubts (loss of personal liberty, loss of virginity -> real fear of death during childbirth) -> postponed the wedding multiple times; wedding party extended over multiple days; marriage would become partnership of unusual equality; _“The popular eighteenth-century view had been that marriage was either an unapologetic economic alliance or a coupling fitted for low, snickering humor. In the early years of the nineteenth century, however, attitudes were shifting in favor of relationships grounded in friendship and mutual support. Marriage with a true companion, which eased the burdens of life and inspired introspection and self-sacrifice, was seen to be part of the happiness that Americans were entitled to pursue.”*; Mary paid little attention to fashion & timeliness & was unwilling to unquestionably follow her husband’s lead; dissimilar personalities causes real frictions but later they learned to accept their differences; requirements of military <-> Mary’s intense love for Arlington caused serious disagreements; she returned to her parents multiple times afterwards; lived years apart but learned to appreciate each other;
6. Seven Arias: 7 children (4 girls & 3 boys) within first 14 years of marriage; army responsibilities in conflict with desire to be effective parent; all children were given affectionate nicknames (eg. “Precious Life”); showed them physical affection too (lying in bed next in the morning); he taught them how to ride, skate and swim, encouraged them to spend as much time as possible getting exercise in fresh air; took boys with him to engineering works; Robert (=Pa’a) was great storyteller, taught them steadfastness and courage; lack of discipline -> Robert cautioned Mary not to visit with whole family (it would be burdensome); changing cultural attitude toward children: began to value uniqueness of each boy & girl and value rather than suppress their childishness; Lee tried to fight trend toward parental disengagement (not-always-welcome-advice to wife & letters to children) but was absent most time -> day-to-day burden fell on Mary; she was less patient than her husband, often irritated by lack of ability to pursue intellect/art; more concerned with their soul: taught them to fear God & read the Bible; pregnancies seem to have been difficult with slow recovery; Robert was absent from most childbirth (maybe due to fears for Mary’s safety or distress at his own helplessness); Mary stopped bearing children at age 35 (probably a conscious decision); raising children: central concern for Robert, obsessed with self-discipline and obedience; rarely punished his children, used humiliation instead; but did not appear to alternate himself from them; none of his daughters ever married; children were ages 15-28 when Civil War broke out -> had significant impact on their identities
7. Pioneers: at age 30 assigned to redirect channel of Mississippi river to save the port of St. Louis; important contribution from military to develop uncharted territory in the West; West Point: only school in America offering degree in engineering until 1835; Harvard/Yale selected West Pointers to head first school of engineering; military reforms: effective management system, spilled over into civilian life through engineers’ participation in public projects (eg railroad); first impatient as a leader, later; appreciation for critical observation; sceptical of doctors because of ineffective & dangerous methods, rather preferred exercise and healthy diet; project left unfinished, new city engineer made essential changes to Lee’s plan and finally secured the port in 1853; yet Lee was successful to buy time & provide foundation for those who find permanent solution
8. The Family Circle: slavery: “peculiar institution” (South) <-> “monster of darkness” (abolitionists); that time only 10% of slave owners had >20 slaves <-> Custis family had 196; 60 worked in Arlington; Mr. Custis opposed slave trade (like most of his contemporaries), considered it inefficient yet didn’t liberate any of his slaves during his lifetime; wife convinced him to end slavery in his will; didn’t directly oversee his slaves -> things often got out of control; but made efforts to keep their identities (recognized surnames, allowed marriages); slaves fought the system as they could (broke equipments, delayed, items disappearing, inefficiency, openly ridiculing masters); “Ridicule, inefficiency, and irritation were the tools slaves used to prove that the system did not work and that there was a limit to their acceptance of it.”; health of the slaves required medical attention (not just compassion but also pragmatism: protecting labor force & avoid diseases to spread); _“In the tangled web of denial about the humanity of the slaves, the communicability of disease was one human link the whites at Arlington could not afford to ignore.”*; food provided was modest but slaves were allowed to tend their own gardens, keep chicken -> took burden off of slavemasters but it made slaves dissatisfied/demanding (increased appetite for freedom & self-sufficiency to obtain it); hope of “gradual emancipation”: Mary Fitzhugh Custis (Custis’ wife) dedicated herself for 50 years to prepare black people for an independent life; education of slaves (rudimentary reading & writing) had mixed results (lessons from their masters might have been intimidating & black people knew what was relevant for their survival and what was not); main objectiv: Christian teaching (elevate morale, improve work ethic); blacks & whites worshipped together in wooden loghouse; biblical texts carefully chosen (stressing gratitude to the master, accepting one’s lot in life <-> avoiding difficult passages like Exodus or those extolling brotherhood of man); but blacks had their own (charismatic) religious services too -> dual culture: in one slaves outwardly conformed, in other they expressed their true sentiments; Robert Lee & in-laws considered bondage as a necessary way station for blacks in their way to civilization/salvation & were convinced themselves as slaveholders to be fulfilling God’s design <-> legal restrictions in Virginia become increasingly strict (no instructions on reading & writing for blacks, having their own religious assemblies led by blacks are illegal); participation in American Colonization Society: proposed settling freed slaves in Liberia (they thought to have no realistic chance of survival in America, presented as enlightened response to potential dangers of mass of freed slaves) -> reputation shattered (they wanted to remove evil black freed people from the vicinity of their slaves & most slaves didn’t want to go back to Africa); sexual (often abusive) relationship with black female slaves were common (in Arlington too); mulatto children often inherited status of their mother, but sometimes were freed; while some respect and harmony existed between slaves and master in Arlington, the reality was harsher -> slaves would begin to openly rebel
9. Humanity and the Law: myth: Robert Lee was opposed to slavery; he seems to have detested the institution but not because of its injustice; “He thought slavery was an unfortunate historical legacy, an inherited problem for which he was not responsible, and one that could only be resolved over time and probably only by God. As for any injustice to the slaves, he defended a “Christian” logic of at least temporary black bondage. “The blacks are immeasurably better off here than in Africa, morally, socially & physically, Lee told his wife in the famous 1856 letter. “The painful discipline they are undergoing, is necessary for their instruction as a race, & I hope will prepare & lead them to better things. How long their subjugation may be necessary is known & ordered by a wise and Merciful Providence.” He went so far as to believe that the slaves should be appreciative of the situation and showed displeasure at any sign of their “ingratitude.” […] Lee might characterize slavery as “an evil in any country” and state that his feelings were “strongly enlisted” for the slaves, but he ultimately concluded that it was a “greater evil to the white than to the black race” and admitted that his own sympathies lay with the whites. […] He continued to participate in the system and distance himself from anti-slavery arguments up to and during the Civil War. […] He ignores injustice to the slaves and defends the rights of the slaveholder in both his 1841 and 1856 letters to his wife, and he continued to uphold laws that constrained blacks well after the war. […] Lee may have hated slavery, but it was not because of any ethical dilemma. What Lee disliked about slavery was its inefficiency, the messiness of its relationships, the responsibility it entailed, and the taint of it. He resented the fact that slavery had been visited on the South by unwise forefathers, whose decisions, born of expediency and greed, had saddled their progeny with an intractable problem. […] If Lee believed slavery was an evil, he thought it was a necessary one. The best guardian against any excess of the system was the law. His upbringing, founded on the class and racial prejudices of the day, paralyzed any larger vision. […] For contemporary readers, a particularly jarring note in Lee’s writings on slavery is his belief that the institution was a greater evil for whites than for blacks. Today, the seeming insensitivity of this remark leaves one questioning Lee’s moral perspective. How could those who had the authority to eradicate the “evil” of the institution be the ones most burdened by it? How in a cruelly one-sided power structure could a man of integrity ask if everything was to “be yielded to the servant & nothing to the master?” Exposed from an early age to the dilemma of slavery, Lee would have seen the situation differently. To him these statements expressed the irresolvable position of the “responsible” slave owner, who desired both to make a functional, profitable enterprise of plantation farming and to accept limitations that allowed him to live with his conscience. Slaves were difficult property to hold. They required continuous decisions that pitted efficiency against kindness and property rights against humanity. […] At a very young age Robert Lee witnessed the confusion and pain it caused for both whites, whose assets and prestige were devastated, and blacks, who suffered personal humiliation, broken families, and the trauma of an uncertain future. […] The reality was that those who were not scandalized by exposure to such sights became inured to them. Here, then, was the dilemma of slavery: if one did not openly reject the system, by definition one had to accommodate to it. Accommodation meant accepting the discomfort of moral compromise and exercising power based on oppression. It was this that constituted the insidious “evil” for white Southerners. Robert E. Lee accommodated.”; his need to supervise slaves perpetual frustration; he considered slaves to be poor workers & time-consuming emotional handicap -> tried to keep himself away from it; it is not clear if he “let go” of all his slaves before the war but he did hire them out frequently (-> double advantage of rent & less oversight) plus it was a form of punishment too; elitist attitude: Robert dismissed “the lower classes” (slaves/Indians/Mexicans -> anyone who was not white), “they are not worth it”; he professed a simple & inflexible social order; believed blacks were innately inferior to whites and that destiny favored the ascendancy of Anglo-Saxons; “[Robert Lee’s] assessment of black inferiority, of the necessity of racial stratification, the primacy of slave law, and even a divine sanction for it all, was in keeping with the prevailing views of other moderate slaveholders and a good many prominent Northerners. They had many justifications for it. Jefferson thought abolition would be like “abandoning children”; Lee thought slavery a kind of “painful discipline” that was part of God’s grand design. Defenders sought rational and religious arguments for the perpetuation of slavery, professing to see God’s hand in servitude and a divine mission in its conduct. Although they accepted that there were faults in the system, like Mason they neither saw nor created an alternative to it. James Henry Hammond, a leading proslavery writer, espoused the theory of a fundamental incompatibility of the races, which Lee later echoed. “They differ essentially, in all the leading traits which characterize the varieties of the human species, and color draws an indelible and insuperable line of separation between them,” Hammond wrote in 1845. Even Abraham Lincoln believed this to be true. He, like others of his time, had to work through the problem of slavery intellectually and emotionally. Yet he never revised his theory of an insurmountable distinction between the races: “there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality.”; biggest justification of slavery: misery of the life of freedmen in the South; Nat Turner’s rebellion: conclusion of debates: slaves were not only economically but morally unfit for freedom; “Although Lee, Hammond, and others claimed that they accepted the concept of gradual liberation, or maybe manumission followed by deportation, they clung to the notion that any immediate, universal emancipation would lead to an insupportable class of beggars and ruffians, and possibly to anarchy. […] In his philosophy of slavery, Lee declined either to defend the institution completely or to work to destroy it. Instead he chose to distance himself and to accept an elaborate middle ground that acknowledged its faults, but justified its existence. Lee seems to have thought that laws and social customs might protect both the slave and the master from any excesses. As an alternative to freedom, Lee proposed a kind of vague evolution of the institution, which “a wise and merciful Providence” would direct. It had no precise time frame and no real perimeters, but assumed that “the course of the final abolition of slavery is onward.” Here again, Lee’s views were in keeping with the political philosophy of his contemporaries. The debates of 1831-32 had also purposefully blurred a clear picture of the peculiar institution’s fate. While the delegates had rejected immediate emancipation, they also shunned the idea of perpetual slavery. Instead they approved a statement of future abolition at an undetermined date, dependent on the public will. Even Thomas Roderick Dew assumed that slavery in Virginia would disappear over time. Failing to develop a policy that could give moral and political direction to the greatest problem of their age, the pro-slavery activists, like Lee, could only describe the future with evasion, denial, and grand illusions. […] Apologists for slavery resolved the conflict between their ethical beliefs and their daily practices by defending the master’s role as a kind of enlightened despotism. Slaveholders had been wrestling with accusations of “immorality” for many decades. Those who felt they could not create a more equitable social order came to define justice not by the destruction of the institution, but by the way that slaves were treated within the system. This was precisely the philosophy that Mary Fitzhugh Custis adopted at Arlington. In their day-to-day existence, tolerant masters would somehow prepare their slaves for freedom and guarantee kind treatment. Elijah Fletcher, an acquaintance of the Lees, may have articulated it best: “Slavery is rather a misfortune than a crime. The present holders of slaves are not censurable for their fathers crimes of introducing them. They are only censurable for not treating those they possess well. We have some free negroes here, and it is a general remark that the slaves who have good masters are in a better situation. To emancipate them at once would be the height of folly and danger.” […] For “progressive” slaveholders, then, here was the way out of the moral straitjacket. Slavery was regrettable, but it was not their fault. To emancipate the slaves immediately would be the “height of folly and danger”; in any Case, with good treatment by enlightened owners, the slaves enjoyed a “better situation” than they would in Africa. The law would protect both slave and master. At some imprecise time the institution would fade away. […] The tragedy for Lee is that he never made the transformational leap that would recognize the fundamental human nature of the slaves. George Washington wrestled with it; Abraham Lincoln did as well. Neither of these men ever considered African-Americans their equal. Ultimately, however, they both grasped the fact that what was wrong with slavery was not an absence of sufficient laws, or a need for more humane treatment within an exploitative system. What was wrong with slavery was that it failed to recognize the brotherhood of the human condition. The entangled lives of the slaves and their masters, the emotional, historical, sexual, and communal connections, could mean only one thing: that these beings were equal as part of mankind; equal in their human instincts, passions, desires, and inclinations, including the desire for self-determination. Equal, as Lincoln said, in the “right to eat the bread without the leave of anybody else, which his own hand earns…” Capable, as George Washington finally realized, “of a destiny different from that in which they were born.” This was the pivotal insight of Uncle Tom’s Cabin, which riveted popular attention in 1852; it was the great truth of Huckleberry Finn, articulated by Mark Twain, a southern white, born to a slaveholding family. Robert E. Lee would never cross this threshold. He could embrace the need for justice, but it was a justice defined by unjust principles. His racism and his limited imagination meant that he never admitted the humanity of the slaves with whom he lived. In avoiding that truth, he bound himself to slavery’s inhumanity.”
10. Adrenaline: Mexican War: first seduction of warfare, opportunity to prove himself, where he became a warrior; 1840s: period of immense social & economic change, first patented sewing machine, American optimism: their country knew no limits; great expanse of North America; 1846: US held only 50% of current territory; James Polk declared Mexican War in 1846 (few thought it was only a shameless land grab); Robert also wished he was “better satisfied as to the justice of our cause,” but told himself that the duty of a soldier was to follow policy, not make it; formidable opponent: general Antonio López de Santa Anna (killed everyone in the battle of Alamo, without taking prisoners -> many inspired to join the fight); Robert Lee employed by General Wool to do uninspiring logistical jobs; was later selected for intelligence work (”head-work”) by General Winfield Scott in 1847 who gave him his trust; first success: taking the port of Vera Cruz; then created a “Trail” to surprise Mexicans in Cerro Gordo -> as a result, they managed to capture Mexico City, the extensively fortified capital with a greatly outnumbered army which was cut off if its own line of supplies and communications; delight in Mexican chocolate but disdain for Mexicans (idle, cowardly, vicious), missionary zeal to bring Anglo-Saxon culture; loneliness, missing family (esp. Christmas) -> wrote long letters to her wife (who also suffered from separation: had to raise seven children, youngest was only a few months old); Robert received only two brevet promotions but earned sincere respect from his colleagues; disillusioned inn the political plays after the war (President Polk relieved General Scott of command out of jealousy); Scott’s military tactic: superior intelligence based on reconnaissance, striking at the political heart of the enemy, imaginative use of terrain, surprise, flexibility & agility (vs frontal assault: wasteful use of troops) -> hallmarks of new kind of warfare; also invented the idea of generous victor (goal not to triumph over a people but to win enduring peace -> keeping the population on your side is important); 1848: ratification of treaty, Lee could return home
11. Crenellations: ambivalent relationship to army: strong friendships but far from family & lack of opportunity for promotion (only way to increase salary); cynical about politicians; hesitant to use his influence to interfere on behalf of others; competent engineer but not a genius; paradox of technological revolution: freedom from preindustrial thought (unlimited opportunities) <-> seeking to standardize social principles ~ mechanics (dress, manner, speech); shift focus from aristocracy (family heritage) to meritocracy (individual achievements); engineering principles (careful planning, stability) brought him success, and the lack of them caused his fall at Gettysburg (miscalculation, unstable buttressing)
12. Black-Eyed Fancies: attached to his wife but also carried lifelong affairs with other ladies young and old despite his reserved nature; he was at extraordinary handsome man; cared about fashion; yet his older brother Smith Lee was even more handsome than him; preference for brunettes; loved to flirt; openly sexual comments; his wife was didn’t oppose it; yet Lee restrained himself & remained faithful to his wife despite permissive masculine world around him; with Martha Custis Williams (Cousin Markie) he likely overstepped his code of sexual conduct; discouraged his daughters from marrying;
13. The Headache Bag: Robert discouraged make relatives from military education; appointed to be superintendent of West Point in 1852 (didn’t like it); internal conflict: Lee was both a man of principle and compassion; main intellectual acquisition not from theory but exposure to important people; his nearly perfect physique was an unattainable ideal, alienating rather than inspiring students; “Though Lee had hoped to temper discipline by promoting soldierly honor and invoking shame, his public rebukes were resented. Consciously or not, these off-putting elements were absent from Lee’s interaction with the rank and file during the Civil War. His looks altered radically in the early years of that conflict, giving him the fatherly white-haired image his soldiers loved, and he avoided the sermonizing that appears to have been counterproductive at West Point. Instead he ignored many breaches of discipline, focused on the key element of his men’s performance-fighting—and avoided humiliation, appealing instead to bravery and pride.”; being together with family couldn’t compensate him for the stress that started to affect his health; left West Point as soon as he could -> 1855 offered a position in 2nd Cavalry
14. Mutable Shield: societal transition: move away from strict Calvinism & piety to rationality (God can be proven through scientific observation), focus on intellect and wonder, not emotional surrender; household motto: “Religion was never designed to make our pleasure less” -> focus on praise and gratitude; Ann Lee’s influence: morality = greatest expression of godliness; influence of Hugh Blair’s sermons: keep clear conscience, trust in divine mercy, improve the mind, embrace regular industry & regular test, govern passions, never expect too much; serious of religious revivals (Second Great Awakening) challenged this graceful cerebral design: focus on importance of personal relationship with God, shift focus from intellect to emotions, base nature of human soul is repugnant, continuous need for atonement, God: controlling figure, active participant in human history, not particularly merciful, misfortunes seen as sign of God’s discipline, central idea: no justification/rationalization could serve as basis of faith, only resignation to God’s will and the heart’s sincere reception of Christ; rejection of materialism: antidote to chaos and greed, strong emphasis on afterlife provided comfort against helplessness; Robert’s brothers actively mistrusted evangelicals but he was surrounded by the influence of revival movement; greatest influence: Mary Fitzhugh Custis (mother-in-law): freed her own slaves, persuaded her husband to do the same, her husband’s death led to the conversation of Mary Ann Lee (Robert’s husband): adapted strict form of evangelicalism (denial of worldly pleasures, distribution of religious literature, pursued the salvation of her husband); Robert was reluctant but slowly adopt the evangelical faith (epiphany came at death of Mary Fitzhugh Custis in 1853); focused on gratitude and love to God instead of wrestling with theological questions; became increasingly focused (obsessed) with “duty” & fatalistic (only God is responsible for the outcomes -> passive, indecisive attitude); became more and more judgmental -> lead to alienation from others; just before Civil War became less negative, began to rejoice again at creation; both sides prayed to the same God and firmly believed He would intervene on their behalf (Abraham Lincoln); Southerners especially viewed it as moral/religious crusade; Lee & others ascribed specific victories to the work of the Lord, personal & national salvation became intertwined; losses inspired revivals and conversions; Lee was open-minded about differences of worship; called for days of fasting and prayer; contradiction between personal righteousness and national defeat -> Southerners started to consider the war as divine indictment; but not for the wrongs of human slavery but for other sins (breaking Sabbath, laziness etc); ”Those who dared to approach the ethical questions of slavery couched it in terms of abuse within the system, not a condemnation of the institution itself. Slavery, they believed, had been part of God’s compact with the South, a precious burden placed there so that whites could be sanctified by their responsibility, and Africans could be civilized through Christianity. Few doubted this: it gave them a mission and a purpose, as well as a justification for their continued reliance on the institution. […] Some have called it a massive cognitive dissonance, a denial of reality that substituted trivialities for transgression. In the North, where there was a temptation to point an accusing finger at the South, the faithful were similarly shaken as they contemplated their own capacity for destruction and inhumanity.”; some Southerner churchmen even started to see suffering as a sign of vindication (God chastens his people <-> victory would only lead to pride); Lee was also considered as an agent of God; became trophy of gentlemanly sensibilities and martyrdom; his dignity in defeat seemed to epitomize the righteousness of failure; innate integrity & shunning worldly success as an end goal was contrary to the stereotypical Yankee -> South could recapture moral high ground from the North
15. Odyssey: appointment as lieutenant colonel of the 2nd Cavalry -> difficult period; responsible to restrain rancorous Indians (because white settlers broke into their grounds despite repeated reassurance from the government) & marauding Mexicans; lack of adequate resources; his wife was ill (rheumatism); too far to help them; army’s job to protect settlers & uphold native rights & keep peace among tribal fractions; unspoken agenda to “civilize” the Comanche Indians; had to attend courts-martial; often withdrew himself in nature & writing letters; renewed conflict between home obligations & army duty; experiences personal losses (sister & pet animals); feeling isolated from family (furlough didn’t help either); failed attempt to defeat Mexican gang Cortinas; worsening political situation by 1860; Texas intended to secede, Twiggs took over the command from Lee and formally relinquished the army’s assets to rebellious Texans; “Had he remained in charge of the Department of Texas a few weeks longer, and had the secessionists forced the issue, as they later did at Fort Sumter, the Civil War might have begun there. Commanding the defense of Union property against the rebels would have been Colonel Robert E. Lee.”
16. Theory Meets Reality: Wesley Norris’s testament (runaway slave severely beaten at the order of Lee as a punishment along with her sister) created uncomfortable negative publicity for Robert E. Lee; its veracity has been questioned but all of its facts are verifiable; 1857: death of George Washington Parke Custis; neglected his holdings; made Lee executor of the estate in his will; debt up to $10000; he freed his slaves with the stipulation that the debts were to be paid first & manumission was to take place within 5 years -> nativity about human nature (slaves wanted to be free) & his debts made it difficult to fulfill his will; instructions of the will we contradictory; Custis became more relaxed with his slaves <-> Lee expected them to work diligently (to make the estate solvent); Lee also ruptured the Washington and Custis tradition of respecting slave families -> many slaves were very unhappy; led to low cooperation, finally protests; Wesley Norris was one of the slave hired out against his will; slaves believed they were already free based on rumors which has some truth in it: will didn’t say debts have to be paid before manumission but called for selling these lands to pay debts; slaves worst fear: being sold South; Lee was very poor in cross-cultural communication (he told the slaves they have to remain slaves for another 5 years) -> openly rebelled against Lee; Wesley Norris ran away with his sister; Lees seem to have underestimated how much the Custis slaves wanted to be free (they thought they had nearly ideal life with minimum work required, were much better off than the lower classes in England - standard proslavery argument); presence of abolitionists heightened slaves’ feelings of injustice; Lee had a strong animosity to abolitionists; ”Having convinced themselves that their servants were content, slaveholders often blamed abolitionists for stirring up feelings of “disloyalty” that the slaves would not have felt on their own. They were outraged that antislavery groups felt they had a right to meddle in the affairs of the South and thought that they should be left alone to solve the problem. They did not see this as a national dilemma to be resolved jointly with the North. In fact, they believed that the abolitionists created a vicious circle by their interference, in which the slaves were worked up into an unnatural discontent, became less docile and more likely to rebel, and as a result had to be treated more harshly. If cruelty was to be found, it was because the abolitionists inspired it, not because they had uncovered it.”; Lee’s tyrannical behavior (eg. washing the bloodied blacks with brine) has often been rejected but every detail of Norris’s report can be verified; slave testimony is no more manipulative than any other historical resource (some reports says he personally whipped the girl which is doubtful though); Lee was well within his legal rights to punish the runaways; returned to Texas in 1860 (one year before eruption of the war), largely abandoned the role of executor; the court ruled against him, stating that black people were to be liberated with or without the payment of other legacies -> Lee bowed to the decision, most were freed on January 1, 1863; he used his own funds & sale of land to fulfill Custis’s requirements; carefully developed life ideals failed him when he meet the reality of being a master; ”Lee was unsuccessful as a master largely because he neglected to see the situation in human terms. He embraced the legal and economic aspects of the master-slave system without really grasping its complex underlying relationships. He never recognized the slaves’ fundamental desire to change their condition; instead he tried to superimpose his sense of “duty” upon them. Moreover, by breaking up families and proposing to ship them far away from their community, he both denied the slaves’ humanity and stepped beyond the genteel code of paternalism that even proslavery men professed. Lee could have freed the slaves immediately at the death of his father-in-law; as executor he had that ability. Virginia law made this difficult, but the law had been circumvented before at Arlington.” He could have freed them and rehired them to make the estates solvent, or worked with imported labor. Instead Lee took decisions that ultimately had to be upheld by force. The option he finally chose, of selling land to furnish money for the legacies, was what Custis had specified from the beginning. His failure to communicate on human terms and to see beyond self-interest caused him to mishandle a delicate situation. Lee never lost his legal rights over the slaves, but he did lose his moral authority. And that was because he continued to treat the African-Americans at Arlington as property, when they thought of themselves as free men.”
17. “Upon a Fearful Summons”: Virginia seceded from the United States; Robert Lee put down antislavery rebellion at Harper’s Ferry; leader John Brown was executed -> public considered him a martyr; fear grew among Southerners about possible repercussions; Robert Lee thought secession can be peacefully reversed; also knew that his destiny would follow Virginia’s decision; ”I shall never bear arms against the United States, —but it may be necessary for me to carry a musket in defence of my native State, Virginia, in which case I shall not prove recreant to my duty.”; in this most critical moment of life he chose not to use his influence to guide Virginia’s decision but fell back on his old passivity & linked his fate with volatile public will; Lincoln elected as president in 1861: said he would not interfere with slavery where it existed but also made clear that he didn’t recognize independent states and intended to protect federal property; Lincoln’s fateful decision: call for 75000 soldiers to defend US property in Fort Sumter -> Southerners believed Lincoln was preparing to invade their homes -> Virginia seceded (even though union sentiment remained widespread until then); Lee was offered command of forces to defend the Union -> declined on the spot (he saw nothing but “anarchy & ruin” in secession yet he couldn’t bring himself to raise a sword against his Virginia home and heritage); after the most severe inner struggle decided to resign from the US Army (”With all my devotion to the Union and the feeling of loyalty and duty of an American citizen, I have not been able to make up my mind to raise my hand against my relatives, my children, my home”) <-> in fact there were other options too: eg General Winfried Scott was also Virginian yet he knew his path lay with the Union, when he was approached by state officials, he dismissed as an insult any suggestion that he would renege on his solemn oath of loyalty; so did George Thomas, with whom Lee had companionably ridden over the Texas desert -> both Thomas and Scott would suffer social ostracism; others opted not to fight on either side (eg. West Point’s Dennis Hart Mahan); Lee hoped to avoid pitting himself against his family <-> couldn’t avoid it (”I feel no exalted respect for a man who takes part in a movement in which he can see nothing but ‘anarchy & ruin’ … and yet that very utterance scarce passed Robt Lees lips … when he starts off with delegates to treat with Traitors” said a family member); some family members joined the Unionists; ”Had Robert Lee taken the part of the Union, he still would have faced confrontation within his border-state family, many of whom sided with the South. But his assertion that he was acting in simple solidarity with a like-minded group of relatives would never be borne out.”; reason for his decision: honor (secession became the most “honorable” option to Southerners because it showed independence & spirit of self-protection; ”Many of those who chose to fight for the South gave this as the reason for their fierce determination, and throughout the war the reaction against “subjugation” was a strong motivating force. It had nothing to do with the inherent principles in their cause; more accurately it could be called “pride,” that second cousin of honor. In Lee’s case this likely colored not only his decision to leave the U.S. Army, but his strongly aggressive performance on the battlefield.”; honor was in the eye of the beholder in 1861 -> from the beginning Lee’s motives were criticized (skeptics believed that those who swore easy oaths in fine times & later abandoned them not only shamefully betrayed their country but had no honor); West Point: someone drew Lee’s head on the body of an insect; “Lee tried to disavow private interests in his statements, but in fact it was the intense personal quality of his struggle that made it emblematic of the nation’s torment. His decision came to represent more than a divided country, or divided regional fidelity; it went beyond a divisive vote on secession or a splintered family. It strikes a timeless chord because it evokes that lowest of all miseries: the nightmare of a divided soul. […] Lee’s dilemma was not simply a historic wrestling match between right and wrong, patriotism or treachery. It stands as a critical moment in our nation’s pageant because it forces us to consider some very basic questions. What is patriotism? Who commands our first loyalty? Can loyalty be divided and still be true? And who defines truth anyway? It is the excruciating gray area that makes these questions universal. Lee tells us that the answer to each is highly subjective. By taking a stand and never turning back, Lee also teaches us that they must be faced by every individual at the moment they are summoned, no matter how unsure or unprepared, and that the grandest theories in the world fall away at the moment of heightened instinct. And then his decision tells us something more: that following the heart’s truth may lead to censure, or agonizing defeat—and yet be honored in itself.”
18. Field of Honor: Lee’s life at Arlington has ended; hope for peace was gone; Lee & his family’s life shifted from obscurity to public expectation; Arlington became tactically important (only three miles from Washington, White House even closer) -> Lee asked Mary to leave ASAP <-> she hesitated first (ignored the family’s danger); Unionists soon took it over & built fortifications; soldiers kept good care of the house first but later everything was plundered & fell to vandalism; Yankees accused of foraging & confusing random destruction with military need (same was true for Virginia troops too); Mary Lee was indignant about Arlington’s desecration; their exile radicalized them & invoked personal vengeance -> they finally became rebels, never wavering in their identification with the South; Freedman’s Village: program launched at Arlington to care for & educate former slaves; government confiscated Arlington; later built a cemetery as a field of honor (they buried the dead right around the house) -> Arlington National Cemetery
19. “A General… Is a Rare Product”: assumed command of Virginia’s forces 1861; fewer qualifications than many of his professional counterparts; Thomas Jefferson: first & only president of the Confederacy; Seven Days battles: unable to defeat the Union army but caused them to retreat (but many died); Lee’s polarized character: calm/passive private man <-> aggressive/combative soldier; moved from precarious defense of Richmond to tactical offensive at Manassas; rebels were exhausted but morale soared; plan to invade Maryland & Pennsylvania (radical change after Arlington’s loss); narrowly escaped defeat at Sharpsburg after the invasion of Maryland (bloodiest day in American history: 23000 men killed or wounded); army demoralized after retreat to Virginia (self-satisfied campaign accomplished nothing); main reason of defeat: Lee divided the army; high point of desertions; bringing the war to north did not demoralize the local population (as Lee expected) but rather galvanized their territorial instincts (was not considered a one-sided subjugation but necessary self-defense); Lincoln took away moral imperative & issued Emancipation Proclamation articulating high purpose of Union (set more than 3.5 million slaves free in Confederate states, have them permanent freedom once they crossed Union territory & allowed them to join the army); Lee’s expectation of ideal general: attentive, industrious, brave, prompt, quick, bold, cheerful under all circumstances; tried to stay away from personal frictions/jealousy among his high level officers; laissez-faire management style: Lee did not prioritize promoting talent & removing underperformers; Lee made mistakes as a general but took control of the military arena & forced the Union to respond to him, even transforming their offensive into defense
20. Apogee / Perigee: in one of the boldest feats in military history, Lee defeated General Hooker in Chancellorsville with his outnumbered army; however, the victory came with a great loss -> Lee began to have a reputation as “a Greatest Gambler in human life”; Lee’s idea of achieving victory through annihilation of the enemy (as opposed to conquering territory); crossed the Potomac river; determined to move north for reinvasion in Pennsylvania; Lee expected Union demoralization & fatigue but encountered hostility & greater determination instead (-> major miscalculation); little direct violence against civilians but plenty of chickens went missing & Confederates kidnapped blacks & sold again into slavery; Lee copied a plan that had previously failed -> ignored first principle of engineering (build on accumulated knowledge); Lee left behind his supply lines; major personnel changes (Jackson’s death -> serious blow to the Army of Northern Virginia, two commanders were inexperienced); lack of precise information about the landscape; July 2, 1862: after initial defeat at Gettysburg, Union army reinforced strongly during the night; Meade borrowed Lee’s tactic of deception (ended fire before ammunition was spent -> fooled Lee to order two divisions to march across the fields -> more than half were slaughtered); Lee ordered Stuart to ride around the enemy -> they were expecting it & managed to fight back; Lee manages to retreat his army through the swollen Potomac river to save them from destruction by the Federals; his letter of resignation was dismissed -> the next day he seen to have suffered a heart attack; letters disjointed, full of mistakes; Gettysburg was not the decisive battle of the Civil War (conflict continued for 21 months); reason for defeat: too much confidence, lack of caution, false presupposition of the collapse of northern morale rather than fierce resistance; Gettysburg Lee was “out-engineered, out-generaled, and out-fought”
21. Overwhelmed: 1862-63: impressive military feats by Robert Lee but great personal loss; series of family devastations: occupiers of Arlington strengthened their hold -> possessions started disappearing; Rooney’s two-year old son caught cold & died; White House plantation burned by the Yankees; Annie (Robert LeeI’d daughter) died of typhoid fever at age 23; Lee suffering from chest pains & chronic lung problems; Rooney (aka “Fitzhugh” son) shot & taken as prisoner; takes long to release him; his wife dies by the time he returns; difficulty for women during war: being isolated from their menfolk; huge internal migration: one of Confederacy’s most difficult social problems; ”A dinner in summer 1864 consisted of dried Indian peas, rice, and salt pork. From camp General Lee worried about how [his family] subsisted on daily rations of a quarter pound of bacon and a pint and a half of meal per person. He evidently missed the irony that this was very nearly the allotment slaves had traditionally been given.”; Mary Lee moved to Richmond to be close to family & play part in the war (knitting socks/gloves etc); ”The wartime ethic called for women to be optimistic, brave, and patriotic; to endure death notices, dashed hopes, and everyday hardship with stoic strength. Many did so…”; as if to ward off reality, many leading families partied away their sorrows <-> many starved; Lees became known for their austerity, became linchpin between diverging social worlds; ”For years Mary Lee had been praying to God for a purpose, a way to use her faith actively and to test her commitment. Her mother had been dedicated to the American Colonization Society, but it had never really been Mary’s calling. Now she had found a mission and an identity that built on the Mount Vernon-based nobility with which she had been raised. It was her moment, and she triumphed in it. In photographs from the war years she appears serenely regal, quietly commanding from her rolling chair, with a determined twinkle in her eye. She not only complemented her husband’s dignity, she lent real material aid to the Confederate cause, and became its most loyal political supporter. Rising above self-pity, she reflected instead on the larger tragedy around her. […] Nothing daunted Mary Custis Lee—not bereavement, nor crippling disease, nor her husband’s defeat. But her outlook did change during these Years. The Civil War was a personal revelation for many women, North and South. Accustomed to being told they were frail, they found they were resilient. Used to leaning on a man’s judgment, as well as his escorting arm, they found that they had a moral as well as physical backbone.”; Lee’s dual prisons: accountability & suffering -> outlet: writing letters;
22. The Political Animal: Southern political philosophy: individual & communal interests overrode national authority -> paradox: how to sustain a compact between states whose very motivation for departing the Union was their objection to federal authority; only clear connection point: objection against Unionist “hegemony”; absence of cohesive ideology -> Confederates began to develop symbols that helped define themselves (which was very similar to the ones they rejected except legitimization of slavery); for many it came down to making personal peace with their divergent loyalties; Lee never showed interest in political office; Confederate president: Jefferson Davis: propensity to get lost in minutiae irritated his generals & wasted valuable time; lacked fundamental qualities of diplomacy; but he was intelligent & willing to defend unpopular stands; different focus (national interest vs Virginia’s); as the weakness of Jefferson’s leadership became more evident with time -> expectations from Lee increased; Lee’s vision: total civic commitment (eg increased farming) <-> reality: few very willing to sacrifice; tough capable, the South couldn’t sustain itself (railroad owners didn’t cooperate, farmers hoarded grain to benefit from high prices & sold food to Yankees in occupied areas for cash); many believe lack of unity led to South’s defeat; reasons for lack of unity: 1) over-reaching self-confidence: expectation of quick & easy victory (-> disappointment eroded morale); 2) concentration of power in Richmond; 3) loss & lack of protection of male population (women more vulnerable to Yankees/neighbors & less ability to control slaves); 4) unsuccessful Confederate conscription laws; many desertions; Lee called for a vote whether to allow blacks to fight in the army in exchange to give them freedom as a reward (hit fundamental assumption of South’s rebellion <-> they needed men in order to survive) -> discussion highlighted the South’s defining motives (freedom offered as a reward contradicts slavery’s justification, namely that it is the “best” for African-Americans) -> limited form of black conscription introduced in 1865 but only few blacks ever joined; ”By opening the debate, Southerners had been forced to realign their understanding of what they were protecting and to recognize the contradictions in their carefully honed rationalization. Some would still staunchly defend it; others would adopt the ostrich’s honored posture. But many understood only too well that they had already surrendered.”
23. Ragged Individualists: Army of Northern Virginia (ANVa): 35-85 thousand men, average age: 22 years old, half married, uniforms stolen from the enemy or dead, motivated not by money but by fear of bondage by the North (often referred to as “the Abolitionists”); army became associated with success after the Seven Days battles; weakness: system allowed each company to elect military officers -> often led to confusion at crucial times; Lee managed the huge army with small staff & mobile headquarters (-> didn’t prioritize developing his staff which lead to poor communication -> many of his intentions were not fully carried out); staff was overworked, conditions were austere (Lee didn’t allow them to stay in comfortable quarters); they suffered from Lee’s difficult temperament (quick to censure, slow to praise, indifference to staff recognition -> many felt undervalued; difficult to accept personal blame, sometimes rebuked aides for him own shortcomings); everyone around the general was afraid of him (constantly tested the men against his impossible standards, ridiculed them on sensitive points, joking not with them but at their expense); insufficient clothing & forage hindered military success (ration of soap: one teaspoon every two weeks); didn’t allow officers to have bigger rations than enlisted soldiers; Lee was sincerely concerned about his men but his exertions also causes desertions, plunder, lax discipline & looting (conspiracy of silence about it after the war despite abundant evidence); Lee wanted to stop this because it undermined the morale; tried many things but without real success; didn’t want to be too tough on the common soldier since he was sacrificing a lot; Lee was believed to be fair & caring, soldiers could safely idolize him (they didn’t he him too often); Lee recognized the dignity of each individual, innately understood that gentlemanly gestures instilled respect; Lee considered as a caring father (appearance was less formidable, eroded by care); Lee’s leadership of the army was a mix of intuition & experience; most impactful quality was his majestic existence (he looked like a great man); such charisma is innate & cannot really be learned; Lee always wore his sword (-> symbol of authority); his reverence increased after the death of Jackson (soldiers often compared him and Lee); 1864: Overland Campaign: seven weeks of relentless & brutal fight between Lee and Union forces led by Ulysses Grant: 44000 Federals & 25000 Confederates lost; both sides undervalued the other; high Confederate morale: partly due to brief that they were winning; Lee was more present than any other time before -> his presence was reassuring & led to nationwide hero worship afterwards; ”To the end the Army of Northern Virginia was fueled by the power of Lee’s example. The men believed he would never let them down; they could not imagine leaving his side. “You are the country to these men,” Henry Wise is said to have remarked the morning of Lee’s surrender. “They have fought for you.” Though the incident has never been corroborated, the sentiment rings unmistakably true.”; -> when they heard about the surrender they couldn’t believe it; president was wholly unprepared for Lee’s capitulation; ”Lee had placed his trust in God’s ability to order events to his advantage; but the southern people had put their faith in General Lee, and they believed in him as if in a miracle worker.” […] Everyone in the South had a theory about why the war had been lost: foolish politicians, bad distribution of supplies, lack of enterprise among the populace, or the favorite, the inevitable dominance of northern resources. […] But in the parlay no one ever denigrated the Army of Northern Virginia’s battlefield mettle, or the leader who aroused it. “I fought the enemy at every step,” Lee would tell a confidant. “I faced him and … I believe I got out of [my army] all they could do or all any men could do.” It is an assessment that stands today. What he gave them in return was peace with honor. The idea of submission was debasing to men who believed so proudly in their superior manhood and their fighting ability. Lee was determined not to subject his army to conditions that would belittle them or endanger their future. As he and Grant began to correspond on the possibility of an end to hostilities, Lee gingerly probed Union intentions. It was a final last maneuver between the two military giants, with Lee hoping that a dignified ceasefire could be established and Grant, in skillful diplomatic language, stating that he had no authority to treat on anything but surrender. But Grant, mirroring Lincoln’s plea to “let ‘em up easy,” also made clear that the terms would be generous: there would be no unconditional terms, no retribution or imprisonment, the Southerners could simply go home. And Lee, knowing he could ask no more, surrendered as much to Lincoln’s goodness as he did to Grant’s armies.”
24. A Leap in the Dark: Appomattox campaign: series of battles that concluded Robert Lee’s surrender at the courthouse on April 9, 1865; for the South it was more than just an end of the conflict - it was the end of their dreams; Robert Lee was most traumatized: for weeks remained in semi-isolating in his house, slept long hours, tried to avoid attention; gave an interview 3 days after the war (didn’t feel the mood of the North, showed no signs of contrition, no regret for slaughter, no discordon on South’s responsibility, instead list of demands to the victors); mood of South: despair (they committed treason); Lee was offered the chance to hide but refused to leave; wanted to retake oath of allegiance but failed to do so; encouraged former soldiers to lay down their arms, reject hostility & return to their communities (not to escape); ”It should be the object of all to avoid controversy, to allay passion, give full scope to reason and every kindly feeling. By doing this and encouraging our citizens to engage in the duties of life with all their heart & mind, with a determination not to be turned aside by thoughts of the past & fears of the future, our country will not only be restored in material prosperity, but will be advanced in science, in virtue, and in religion.”; his philosophy was a great balm on the bruised South sensibility & had practical effects on countless individuals who felt humiliated & wanted to express their feelings violently; ”He had led them in war, and now he would show the way through an unendurable peace. Three-quarters of eligible white men had fought for a least a time with the Confederacy. They thought they knew what manhood was, and what liberty and loyalty meant. Now they had to redefine these terms, and General Lee helped them to do it. He showed them a way to carry on with self-respect, to find hope against deprivation and domination. If this man could rise above defeat, they could follow him, just as they had intuitively followed him against the deadly odds of combat. It was an act of spiritual fortitude, as audacious in its way as anything he had ever performed on the battlefield. Through it he held up courage and dignity as the only path through a frightening and unfathomable wilderness. In this moment of personal bravery, Lee transcended his own violent emotions and showed himself superior to misfortune.”; earning a living was one of Lee’s dilemmas; family friend lent them a house called Derwent; received very few offers to work; finally Washington College asked him to serve as president; public saw his new role as a splendid gesture which inspired them; it gave him purpose too; he was expected to only lend his prestige to the college <-> to everyone’s surprise, he immediately immersed into the administration of the institution (proposed new curriculum, personally oversaw building reparations, participated in biannual exams); he had variety of impressions on students (some found him genial & kind <-> others viewed him with fear & distance because of his explosive temper; family moved to Lexington; Lee helped design their second house to accommodate his wife’s wheelchair; rare romantic encounters for his girls, felt isolated; it was a blessing but not a home
25. Blurred Vision: Lee’s view on education & encouraging Southerners to stay is forward-looking but his political views & effort to accept tragic events of war (including his part) is nearsighted; Lee’s wife was bound to wheelchair, suffered from being cut off from Arlington (too old to take root in a new soil); post-war destruction created stronger unity in the South than before that ($2 billion in slave property had been lost, political instability); Mary Lee was aggrieved by the favoritism shown to freed people (Congress spent millions of dollars to educate blacks instead of helping destitute White Southerners); Lee was more cautious to voice his opinion, wanted to avoid publicity; ”Lee had consistently stated that he did not approve of slavery, that he “had always been in favor of emancipation-gradual emancipation.” Since he believed the system unworkable, and detrimental to the interests of whites, there is no reason to question his sincerity on this point. This, however, did not mean that he could accept anything that approached egalitarianism. Like others of his region, he persisted in truly believing that blacks were incapable of functioning on their own, that they had no inclination to work, and aspired to nothing beyond daily comfort and amusement. Such attitudes not only justified the adherence to slavery in the first place, they calmed the unspeakable worry that the freed blacks might succeed, thereby becoming a threat to status, economy, and pride.”; he thought freedmen would work against their former owners; ”I have always observed that wherever you find the negro, everything is going down around him,” he told one cousin, “and wherever you find the white man, you see everything around him improving.”; instead he promoted European immigration; Washington College students (”General Lee’s boys”) also provoked racial conflict (some almost ended in lynching) which brought bad publicity to Lee and the school; Lee seems too have dealt with these very laxly or turned a blind eye to it; ”It is difficult to imagine the total readjustment of assumptions and status that white Southerners faced after the Civil War. Even a man like Lee, who had fought family misfortune and earned much of his success by diligent application, had been given a jump start in life by his race and his sex. The change away from a social structure that had associated white males with prerogative and prestige might be ethically commendable-it might even be recognized by some as beneficial-but it was nonetheless cataclysmic.”; began writing political essays but these remained in draft; ”Just how Lee viewed defeat in his heart is another sobering question. It was one thing to have lost the political objective, but to confront the staggering cost of his various decisions was nearly unbearable. If, as he had proclaimed throughout the years of battle, God would determine the outcome, had he been wrong to believe that God favored the South? If God’s favor lay elsewhere, as Union victory seemed to indicate, had he defied God’s will by defending the Confederacy and all it stood for? Lee staunchly maintained that his men had never let him down—and if this was true, and God had cheered their cause, it must have been he, as he said at the close of the battle of Gettysburg, who had let down both God and man. Evangelical theology had given Southerners a convenient way out of the corner by claiming that God loved best those whom he chastised. Self-blame was limited to small failings of pride and ingratitude rather than a breach of the most sacred commandments.”; his writings show no ability to accept fault or acknowledge personal error, rather focus on self-vindication; publicly he announced after Gettysburg that it was “all my fault” but privately he pointed fingers to others; maintained cheerful attitude on the outside but inside he had an inner turmoil & felt depressed
26. “If Vanquished, I Am Still Victorious”: illness since spring of 1863; probably angina pectoris (painful spasms caused by insufficient oxygen to the heart), the result of atherosclerosis; suffered a stroke on September 28, 1870; died two weeks later on October 12; his biggest fear seems to have been failing strength -> didn’t experience for long; his wife accepted her loss from God but couldn’t attend the funeral; funeral: simple reading from the beautiful Episcopal Order for the Burial of the Dead; favorite hymn: “How Firm a Foundation Ye Saints of the Lord”; biblical passages lavished praise on him (”Mark the perfect man and behold the upright”, “The law of God was in his heart” therefore did “none of his steps slide”); weeks after the burial Mary Lee called him “the Hero of a lost cause” whose “Martyr” blood was shed for his country; religious imagery echoed for more than a century; words became even more superlative; office kept untouched as a sacred memorial; Lee was compared to Washington, Napoleon, Caesar, even to Ulysses Grant; some came very close to blasphemy (”divine example” adorned with Christ-like qualities), popular painting placed Lee on the right hand of God next to Elvis Presley; pinnacle in 1930s by Douglas Southall Freeman who proposed that Lee’s greatness was a culmination of centuries of good breeding among the Virginia gentry (-> triumph of eugenics); ”This was more than simple scholarly adulation. Lee’s example continued to have important political resonance, and admiration for him was a powerful healing agent for the wounded southern psyche. There was still a huge gulf between the teaching that God intervened in human affairs, with results dictated by his pleasure, and the fact that the South had not only lost the war but seen their proud civilization shredded, physically and philosophically. Evangelical ministers had done their best to bridge the chasm by proclaiming that God punished those he best loved, and that postwar suffering was but a honing of the South’s spiritual mettle. Doubts lingered, however, and the community spirit seemed still to need a rationale and a route back to recovery. In the years following Lee’s death there was a revival of southern literature, much of which emphasized an idyllic world of splendid plantations and patriarchal benevolence. […] Reverence for Lee was part of this effort to idealize the past and resist reality. His presence, courage, and fealty to his state were not simply portrayed as patriotic moral qualities, but as an example of white supremacy, a validation of secession, and a rejection of the need for postwar societal change. Such notions persisted not only because they justified the old culture, but because the actual truth was so painful. Southerners were not the only ones, of course, to shield themselves from full acceptance of the callous bloodbath that was the Civil War, nor the way that it had left rifts and uncertainties in the society. Northerners also chose to emphasize pathos and heroism, or linger sentimentally in an unreal past, creating a mystical mood that still evokes a popular response. Many in the North also romanticized Lee and his men, painting them as underdogs or epic warriors […] The South, however, took care to hold on to Lee, as its own savior and symbol. This fine man, with superb personal qualities —not to mention a charm that could never be achieved by a Yankee—this man, who chose integrity against his own self-interest, fighting magnificently, even miraculously, without the resources to do it; this kindly, noble warrior, as fabulous in defeat as in victory; this was what the South was about, and this is what the barbarous Grants and Shermans had destroyed. […] The disturbing point about this is not that Lee was portrayed in such an idealized light, but that so much was lost as man was turned into monument. […] Lee the underdog might quicken our empathy, but it is important to recognize that he was never a victim of fate. His story, in fact, forces us to confront the weight of one person’s decisions in a free society. Like all tragic figures, Lee’s life was a product of his own will. […] The crystal ball is as clouded in hindsight as it is in premonition, but it is hard not to conclude that Lee’s inclinations and actions had powerful consequences. The point here is not whether they were right or wrong. Rather, it is to remind us how strong is the potential power of one individual in a truly democratic society, and therefore how great the burden of responsibility. // The persistent adulation of Lee is also important for what it says about our thirst for idols. Heroism is a slippery, subjective term. Heroes are created out of needs, reflecting standards a society reveres, rather than an absolute and eternal set of qualities. […] Lee produced some undoubtedly spectacular movements in battle. But if we take care to avoid ennobling or sentimentalizing aggression, granting it validity only when it leads to societal progress, his military legacy becomes unclear. Although he led a series of thrilling feats, any timeless achievement seems elusive, for he could neither make his cause last, nor give it enduring meaning. Lee helps us understand that heroism can be local and transitory; something quite strong, yet limited in audience and meaning; indeed, something that for all its power stops short of universal significance. […] We want him to be great because he had elements of greatness in him. To be timeless and true, however, greatness must rest on two pillars. It must create something that not only benefits the world each day but endures, and can continue to be positively interpreted or expanded. The Bill of Rights is a classic example; so is the discovery of a polio vaccine. Then greatness must embody a farsightedness that reaches beyond the complacency of one’s narrow experience. It must rise above convention, and clearly advance a larger set of truths than those commonly held. It is hard to see such transcendent importance in Lee because his actions were tied to questionable mores, which were already largely rejected in his day, and were neither morally defensible nor sustainable over time. The tragedy is that he allowed his essentially noble spirit to founder in the ignobility of his era’s easy assumptions. Even had he won the war, and helped to carve out a new nation with a unique political structure, its foundation inevitably would have collapsed under the global condemnation of human slavery—which Lee himself admitted. // He came closest to real greatness in the enlightened decisions he took to foster peace and rebuild the South in the early aftermath of war. This was his grand visionary moment. After this he anchored himself firmly to old prejudices, resisting the currents of change and expanded freedom as they flowed swiftly beyond him. […] To some, Lee demonstrates the pain of unrewarded gallantry, while another beholder sees only a good man can make bad decisions. Both of these views are particularly provocative, because they fly in the face of fundamental American beliefs. Duty and diligence—Lee’s personal credo, but also the cornerstone of nineteenth-century aspiration-brought him neither success nor happiness. His own American dream devolved into a retreat from the world, where he could live on cornbread and bacon and watch his daughters weave homespun—the antithesis of the spirit of progress that characterized his age, as it does ours. That he remained a revered figure despite defeat is an astounding exception to American tradition. And this may be what fundamentally inspires us about Lee: the reassurance that the worst will not destroy us, that there is a possibility of redemption.”