With the removal of the Robert E. Lee statue in New Orleans, the relentless drive to erase any celebratory vestiges of the rebellious Southern Confederacy rolls on. This is not an easy issue to address and is far more nuanced than the display of the Rebel Battle Flag…a symbol co-opted by the defiant forces of segregation and race hatred to the point where it has lost much of the essence of “heritage” it may sincerely represent to segments in the South. But the statues of often complex historical figures are not so easy to just erase from our collective memories. Who were these men? And what are the criteria to decide that this man, who had a very real impact on the story of America, should remain, and that fellow should be banished from the public square?
Consider Robert E. Lee, the latest target of this movement. His wife, Mary Custis, was the daughter of George Washington’s step-grandson. Lee’s own lineage boasted Revolutionary War hero Richard Henry Lee, the delegate who introduced the resolution for American independence to Congress in 1776. It is as if drawn from a Greek tragedy that R.E. Lee should one day be the very personification of the armed rebellion against the nation his forefathers had risked so much in establishing. The second highest-scoring cadet in his West Point class, and even having a stint as its superintendent, Lee served the country faithfully for over thirty years, at great personal sacrifice to his family life. By 1860 he was America’s most respected soldier. When the Southern states seceded and war seemed inevitable, Lincoln first offered command of the Union Army to Lee…an offer he refused after a painful night of deliberation and soul-searching.
.png)
.png)
