The claim that Confederate General Robert E. Lee never surrendered his sword or never became a prisoner of war despite his surrender is often brought up in discussions about the end of the American Civil War. However, the details surrounding Lee’s surrender at Appomattox Court House on April 9, 1865, provide a nuanced perspective on these assertions.
Did Robert E. Lee Surrender His Sword?
The popular notion that Lee "never surrendered his sword" is technically true but often misinterpreted:
Ceremonial Sword: At the time of surrender, it was customary for defeated commanders to offer their sword as a symbolic gesture of submission. However, during the meeting between Lee and Union General Ulysses S. Grant at Appomattox, no such exchange took place. Grant, demonstrating magnanimity, did not demand Lee’s sword or require any ceremonial gestures of surrender.
Grant’s Humanity: Grant explicitly avoided humiliating Lee or the Confederate officers, focusing instead on reconciliation. Officers, including Lee, were allowed to keep their sidearms, horses, and personal belongings. This act of respect contributed to the mythos surrounding Lee’s dignity during surrender.
Was Robert E. Lee Ever a Prisoner of War?
While Lee formally surrendered the Army of Northern Virginia, he was not treated as a prisoner of war:
Grant’s Terms: The terms of surrender at Appomattox were exceptionally generous. Confederate soldiers were paroled and allowed to return home rather than being taken into custody as prisoners. Lee himself was granted parole, meaning he was not arrested or detained after the surrender.
After the War: Lee was never imprisoned or tried for his role in the Confederacy. While some Union leaders initially called for harsher treatment, including potential prosecution for treason, Grant and other moderates opposed such measures. Lee lived the remainder of his life in peace, even becoming president of Washington College (now Washington and Lee University) in Lexington, Virginia.
Why Is This Misunderstood?
The misunderstanding about Lee’s sword and status stems from:
Mythology of the Lost Cause: Post-war narratives glorifying Lee and the Confederacy often emphasized his supposed nobility and dignity, omitting or romanticizing aspects of his surrender.
Symbolism: The absence of a sword surrender is sometimes misconstrued as a defiant act, but in reality, it was a product of Grant’s leniency.