Myths and Facts: General Robert E. Lee and His Views on Slavery

There are many myths and misconceptions surrounding General Robert E. Lee, particularly regarding his stance on the institution of slavery. It is important to dispel these falsehoods and examine the historical facts to understand his true beliefs and actions.

The Truth Behind the Quote

One of the most prevalent myths is the claim that General Robert E. Lee said, "If I owned the four millions of slaves in the South I would sacrifice them all to the Union." This statement is not only incorrect but also contradictory to the historical context of the time.

Not to mention that quote doesn’t make any sense because Lee was a supporter of slavery. The true historical record shows that Lee believed in the institution of slavery and did not advocate for its abolition.

General Lee's Encounter with Francis Preston Blair

General Lee did have a significant conversation with Francis Preston Blair, a prominent journalist and friend of Abraham Lincoln, just before he resigned his commission in the U.S. Army. According to Blair, Lee stated, "Mr. Blair, I look upon secession as anarchy. If I owned the four millions of slaves in the South, I would sacrifice them all to the Union, but how can I draw my sword upon Virginia, my native state?"

Blair, who was considered a reliable source and had no reason to lie, reported this exchange. Lee himself confirmed this conversation in a 1868 letter to his son, further validating the historical record.

Lee's Complex Stance on Slavery and Secession

While Lee was not anti-slavery and engaged in the rationalization of the institution, he was not a radical pro-slavery fanatic. In 1861, he expressed his preference for ending slavery rather than engaging in a civil war:

“If I owned the four millions of slaves in the South, I would sacrifice them all to the Union, but how can I draw my sword upon Virginia, my native state?”

Lee's decision to resign and assist the Confederate cause was nuanced and based on his personal beliefs. He came from a family that had a long history of resistance to government overreach, dating back even before the American Revolution. His family's lineage included figures like Robert the Bruce, further emphasizing his stance against any perceived overreach by the federal government.

In 1861, the perception of the United States was different from today. Many considered it a confederation rather than a consolidated nation. This perspective influenced Lee's decision to support Virginia's secession, as he believed it had the right to do so under the Constitution. Lee may have preferred to see the country remain unified, but he respected the political rights of his state.

Sam Houston's Example

Sam Houston, another notable southern figure, faced a similar dilemma in 1861. He had not been active in the military for years but still refused to draw his sword on Texas. Houston's approach was public, whereas Lee's was more private. Had Lee spoken out against the Confederacy, it is unclear if he could have made a difference in the outcome of the conflict.

Despite his professional military background, Lee's decision to resign and take command of Virginia's militia reflects his commitment to his state and his view of the legal and political rights of the Southern states. This decision was not an easy one, and it is important to understand the complexities of his decision-making process.

Lee's stance on secession and slavery is deeply rooted in the historical context of the time. While his actions and words have been subject to scrutiny and reinterpretation, it is crucial to examine the facts and avoid both hagiography and modern-day revisionism in our understanding of General Robert E. Lee.