You are here

Robert E. Lee statue at Gettysburg National Military Park/LRR2020

The Future Of Confederate Monuments

As the nation reckons with its racist history, legislation calling for the removal of Confederate commemorative works from national parkland is likely to be reconsidered this year. 

By Kim O'Connell

If you knew nothing about the U.S. Civil War and traveled to Gettysburg National Military Park, you might be forgiven for believing the South won, based on a reading of the monuments alone.

The statue of Southern commander Robert E. Lee on horseback, which also serves as the monument to the fighting sons of his home state of Virginia, stands at 41 feet tall, including both statue and pedestal. It’s more than double the height of the similar equestrian statue of Union Gen. George Gordon Meade that sits across the field, despite the fact that Meade was the victor at Gettysburg, helping to turn the tide of the war.

Lee’s prominence at Gettysburg, along with the estimated 1,700 Confederate commemorative works that still stand across the United States, is now under scrutiny. In recent years, the nation’s racist history has been debated and confronted in a variety of ways, with Confederate names and symbols being removed from public squares, schools, and flagpoles across the South and elsewhere. And yet, the Confederate battle flag is still hoisted aloft and visible in places like the 2017 Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, and at the U.S. Capitol insurrection last month, not to mention on countless car bumpers, t-shirts, and gift shop tables.

Last summer, Democratic lawmakers in the fiscal 2021 spending package included language that would have required the National Park Service to remove Confederate monuments from all National Park System sites within six months. Although that language didn’t make it into the final bill, it’s likely to be reintroduced this year.

The proposal is raising a debate not only between those who support Confederate symbols and those who say they prop up a legacy of hate, but between those who say the Park Service needs more time to inventory and consider these works and those who say the Confederacy has been given time enough. 

At issue, too, is the crusty legacy of the “Lost Cause,” the mythologizing of the Southern warriors that recast them as fighting not to support slavery but to maintain states’ rights (overlooking, of course, that those "rights" included enslaving other human beings). Most of the Confederate monuments erected on national parklands were placed there in the early 20th century, well after the war, during the height of Jim Crow segregation. They are not interpretive historical markers, opponents say, but symbols of white supremacy and oppression. 

The pedestal of a Confederate statue that was removed last year from a prominent intersection in Alexandria, Virginia. / Ser Amantio di Nicolao

The National Park Service was a willing participant in this effort, allowing groups like the United Daughters of the Confederacy to sponsor monuments on its battlefields that helped to elevate and equalize the losing side. Hence, the existence of the Lee monument at Gettysburg, erected in 1917, and the Robert E. Lee Memorial, as his former home in Arlington, Virginia, is designated — despite the fact that Lee was an often-brutal slaveowner who took up arms against his own government.

“This is not about erasing history or denying anyone’s heritage,” said U.S. Rep. Betty McCollum, Democrat from Minnesota and a key advocate of the removal legislation, during a Congressional subcommittee debate last July. “This is about whether we’re willing to do the hard work needed to confront the truth of our history and to work to right past wrongs. In order to do that, it means ending the use of Confederate symbols which continue to be used today to intimidate and terrorize millions of our American citizens.”

McCollum isn’t sure yet what form the removal requirement might take, but she plans to support it, and she thinks the NPS is well positioned to move quickly. “As to whether or not I’ll do formal legislation, I’ll still be making sure I continue to work on removing these symbols of discrimination and oppression on public lands,” McCollum said in an interview with the Traveler. “People at the Park Service are smart enough and well-trained enough that they probably have a good idea what they have [in terms of Confederate monuments]. The people who work on our public lands -- they are professionals. I’m sure many have been thinking about it already.”

Other park advocates argue, however, that the Park Service needs far more time to consider the monuments and their specific roles in their particular landscapes, noting that some monuments might be historically significant in their own right, perhaps because of the artist who sculpted or designed them or some other reason. The ground disturbance from monument removal could also trigger federally required archaeological assessments or other studies to discern impacts on the historic landscape.

“This is not an issue to be resolved by an act of Congress,” says former NPS Director Jon Jarvis, now the chair of the board for UC-Berkeley’s Institute for Parks, People, and Biodiversity. “There are literally thousands of monuments to the soldiers of the North and the South on the various Civil War battlefields maintained by the NPS. Many are important because they mark a particular battle, a skirmish, victory or loss, on the actual ground where people died. These monuments are used by the NPS staff in their interpretation of the events and are often important for context. That is very different from a bronze guy on a horse in the middle of a traffic circle placed there to intimidate.”

Jarvis encourages President Biden to request that Congress commission a study, led by prominent and diverse historians, to evaluate the monuments against a set of agreed-upon standards to help determine which ones get removed or put in some other context, such as a museum or warehouse.

“A better symbolic measure by Congress would be to direct the Park Service to complete an analysis of its monuments and report back in two years and then they would get to work on it,” Jarvis says. “What is needed to respond to those who were disenfranchised during the Civil War and during Reconstruction is a reinterpretation of the Civil War, and we stated that during the sesquicentennial. Rather than focus on taking down this or that monument…provide the platform for the telling of a broader story and to not respond to a quick fix.”

A statue of Confederate Gen. Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson long has stood on the battlefield at Manassas National Battlefield Park/Kurt Repanshek

A statue of Confederate Gen. Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson long has stood on the battlefield at Manassas National Battlefield Park/Kurt Repanshek

Although the National Parks Conservation Association hasn’t released an official policy on this yet, the organization generally supports giving NPS the time and resources to assess its Confederate works. “We want the Park Service to have the opportunity to inventory their commemorative works,” says NPCA’s Mid-Atlantic Senior Regional Director Joy Oakes. “We want the professionals to have a thoughtful and informed process.”

NPCA Advisory Board member Edwin Fountain, a historic preservation expert, adds that some monuments, such as the Lee statue at Gettysburg, are more than 100 years old and are therefore considered “contributing features” on the historic landscape, to use preservation parlance. “So on what grounds do you just start saying, ‘Oh, we're going to start removing contributing features from national parks.’ I'm not saying that ends all debate, but it's got to be part of the debate.”

Others believe, however, that these symbols are keeping a significant segment of people away from these parks. It's worth noting that only an estimated 7 percent of national park visitors are Black.

“The Park Service needs to ask, ‘Who’s coming to your site and who’s not coming to your site?’” says Denise Meringolo, a professor of public history at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County, and author of Museums, Monuments, and National Parks: Toward a New Genealogy of Public History“Those monuments are a barrier to significant portions of the audience, for whom they are not simply inaccurate or annoying. They are traumatizing.”

Meringolo says that people should reconsider the prevalent assumption that monuments are permanent. “If a goal of a monument is to represent some kind of civic culture that we believe is worth discussing, and if we want to put up these things to represent common values, when someone says, ‘This doesn’t represent the values we hold dear,’ maybe it’s time to take them down. They’re not doing the work that we think they are doing. A monument is always an assertion of power and authority. It’s staking a claim.”  

Historian and educator Kevin Levin, author of Searching for Black Confederates: The Civil War’s Most Persistent Myth, says it’s worth listening to those whose voices have long been silenced and to use this moment as an opportunity for more context and interpretation.

“Many of these monuments went up at a time when African Americans were simply disfranchised,” Levin says. “They were, for legal reasons, for political reasons, just unable to voice their own view about how the war should be commemorated in public spaces. And so I think for that reason alone, this has to be taken seriously. But at the same time, I draw a distinction between Park Service sites like Gettysburg and, say, Richmond's Monument Avenue.”

Whether all or just some of the monuments stay or go, Levin believes there is enough NPS battlefield land to provide additional context about the Confederate monuments so that visitors can get a more complete picture of how and why they got there, and what their existence says about who we are. 

“I do think there's an opportunity at places like Gettysburg, acknowledging that the Confederate monuments are problematic to many people,” Levin continues. “The Park Service has a responsibility to face that."

An NPS worker prepares to remove a statue of Albert Pike, once the only Confederate statue in a public square in Washington, D.C., after protesters toppled and burned it in 2020. / Victoria Pickering

Support National Parks Traveler

National Parks Traveler is a small, editorially independent 501(c)(3) nonprofit media organization. The Traveler is not part of the federal government nor a corporate subsidiary. Your support helps ensure the Traveler's news and feature coverage of national parks and protected areas endures. 

EIN: 26-2378789

A copy of National Parks Traveler's financial statements may be obtained by sending a stamped, self-addressed envelope to: National Parks Traveler, P.O. Box 980452, Park City, Utah 84098. National Parks Traveler was formed in the state of Utah for the purpose of informing and educating about national parks and protected areas.

Residents of the following states may obtain a copy of our financial and additional information as stated below:

  • Florida: A COPY OF THE OFFICIAL REGISTRATION AND FINANCIAL INFORMATION FOR NATIONAL PARKS TRAVELER, (REGISTRATION NO. CH 51659), MAY BE OBTAINED FROM THE DIVISION OF CONSUMER SERVICES BY CALLING 800-435-7352 OR VISITING THEIR WEBSITE WWW.FRESHFROMFLORIDA.COM. REGISTRATION DOES NOT IMPLY ENDORSEMENT, APPROVAL, OR RECOMMENDATION BY THE STATE.
  • Georgia: A full and fair description of the programs and financial statement summary of National Parks Traveler is available upon request at the office and phone number indicated above.
  • Maryland: Documents and information submitted under the Maryland Solicitations Act are also available, for the cost of postage and copies, from the Secretary of State, State House, Annapolis, MD 21401 (410-974-5534).
  • North Carolina: Financial information about this organization and a copy of its license are available from the State Solicitation Licensing Branch at 888-830-4989 or 919-807-2214. The license is not an endorsement by the State.
  • Pennsylvania: The official registration and financial information of National Parks Traveler may be obtained from the Pennsylvania Department of State by calling 800-732-0999. Registration does not imply endorsement.
  • Virginia: Financial statements are available from the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, 102 Governor Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219.
  • Washington: National Parks Traveler is registered with Washington State’s Charities Program as required by law and additional information is available by calling 800-332-4483 or visiting www.sos.wa.gov/charities, or on file at Charities Division, Office of the Secretary of State, State of Washington, Olympia, WA 98504.
Share

Comments

What completely incorrect and false description of REL. This article is so full of lies I can not even begin to start on where it is false. Lee freed the slaves that his wife inherited. Lee never owned any property besides his horses and saddles.  And Lee has never been described as brutal. A man of honor.


Your comments show a complete lack of understanding of history in general and the civil war in particular, please read a variety of books by different authors and stop judging historical figures by whatever recent indoctrination you received in school, Robert E. Lee and Nathan Bedford Forrest were great men who were complex characters in a difficult period.


The article is misinformed or purposely misleading in multiple areas. Robert E. Lee was second only to Washington himself in character and humanity.  He reluctantly opposed his own government when they marched on his home state.  


The Confederacy represented millions of Americans, including the descendants of George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry, George Mason along with US Senators, +40 year US war veterans, former Presidents and Vice Presidents, etc.   It doesn't matter if they won or lost, but should be preserved as reminders of the Americans who fought in the most significant and largest war in our history that occured on American soil.  They fought and died doing something that was very American; seeking Independence from a distant powerful Federal Government and protecting home and family from a deadly, destructive military invasion.

Leftists particularly wants to remove the Confederate monuments because its government was too American in nature and represents the greatest threat to their globalist agenda.  They know the Confederacy were the true heirs of US colonial ideals that carried on the legacy of the Thomas Jeffersonian view of the Constitution.  They malign the Confederacy because it remains the most successful limited-government/ conservative movement ever to stand up to a powerful, controlling, invasive federal government that was intent on conquest and subjugation of civilians. Even the British at the time recognized that the war between the states was an honorable attempt for Independence and freedom: "the Southerner is fighting, not only for his life, but for that which is dearer than life, for liberty; he is fighting against one of the most grinding, one of the most galling, one of the most irritating attempts to establish tyrannical government that ever disgraced the history of the World." - Mr G. W. Bentinck, then representing British house of Parliament.  It's no surprise the American Communist party has prominently displayed Lincoln between Lenin and Stalin after Lincoln permenantly "destroyed the old republic of the founding fathers and laid the foundation for a new order seen today." (Fleming Foundation)

Here's why Confederate Monuments & Memorials are being removed, so people don't know what they really fought for.  Here's a cursory review of what is engraved on Confederate Monumnents:

I think the following Confederate Monuments accurately capture the goals and objectives of Southern American/Confederates:

Austin, Texas: "Died for states rights guaranteed under the Constitution. The people of the south, animated by the spirit of 1776 to preserve their rights withdrew from the Federal compact in 1861. The north resorted to coercion. The south against overwhelming numbers and resources fought until exhausted.

Columbus, Georgia: "To honor the Confederate Soldiers who died to repel unconstitutional invasion, To protect the right reserved to the people, and to perpetuate forever the sovereignty of the states."

Richmond County, Georgia: "These men died in defense of the principles of the Declaration of Independence."

Augusta, Georgia: "For the Honor of Georgia. For the Rights of the States. For the Liberties of the South. For the Principles of the Union. As these were handed down to them from the Fathers of our common country.

St Louis, Missouri: "To the memory of the soldiers and sailors of the southern Confederacy who fought to uphold the right declared by the pen of Jefferson and achieved by the sword of Washington. With sublime self-sacrifice they battled to preserve the Independence of the States which was won from Great Britain and to perpetuate the Constitutional government which was established by the Founding Fathers."


It is alarming and immoral that there are individuals who  wish to  remove and distroy   vistidges  of our nations history for it is that history both good and bad that has forged our strength among nations. I fault our Congressional leaders and many in the media for their lack of educational background and context of our history. Are we going to enact changes to cover up our history and follow in the footsteps of the former Soviets, Chinese and North Koreans? It's bad enough that our teachers slant and inject their opinions/persuasions in the  classroom. Early in the building of our great country people came to our shores wanting to start anew...they "Americanized " their name, learned English and didn't expect anything but hard work to fulfill their dreams. They had no expectation of an entitlement to prosperity and success!  Nor did folks go around calling themselves African Americans....Mexican Americans...Asian Americans,  rather they were proud to be labeled as an American! 

Bottomline, if we are so ashamed and don't learn from our past mistakes then we are aptly going to fail in this "great experiment " of a Republic...for the people and by the people, one nation under God with liberty and justice for all!


If you knew nothing about the Battle of Gettysburg and visited the park you would be exposed to the true history and meaning of one of the most pivotal battles of the Civil War. The value of these parks derives not from the size or the number of statues present but from the interpretation we place of the history of the event that is marked.

The history of the Civil War was perhaps the most dramatic and significant event in the history of the United States as an independent nation. It was the climax of a half century of social, political, and economic rivalries growing out of an economy half slave, half free. In the race for territorial expansion in the West, in the evolution of the theories of centralized government, and in the conception of the rights of the individual, these rivalries became so intense as to find a solution only in the grim realities of civil strife.

It was on the great battlefields of this war, stretching from the Mexican border to Pennsylvania, that these differences were resolved in a new concept of national unity and an extension of freedom. In the scope of its operations, in the magnitude of its cost in human life and financial resources, the war had few, if any, parallels in the past. Its imprint upon the future was deep and lasting, its heroic sacrifice an inspiring tribute to the courage and valor of the American people.

The national attention of the issue of Confederate Monuments is giving Americans the opportunity to debate the intricacies of historic preservation and decide what course to support for the future. By telling the stories of the Civil War battles and individual preservation struggles at our parks examines the complexity of the idea of historic preservation as it has been practiced since the 150 years since the end of the war.

These parks with their associated monuments, literature, films and interpretive tours tell the story about previous generations of Americans and how they looked at their history and decided what to preserve and why the preservation of Civil War battlefields are important. The National Park Service is perfectly capable of interpreting the history of Gettysburg and the creation of the park without offending any visitors.

Just because Robert E. Lee was a slave owner does nothing to diminish his pivotal role in the war and especially the battle of Gettysburg. If the statue to Lee is large and imposing this tells us about how he was viewed by the generations of Americans who erected it.

Park preservation is defined by its sometimes conflicting roles of protecting a resource and using the resource to educate the public about its significance.  Park preservation works because it requires vigilance and commitment on the part of all Americans.

Yes, we can say that the previous generations of Americans were racist, xenophobic and intolerant. But are we any better today? Have we created a perfect non-racial society or is the march to equality and true history ended.

The removal of existing statues in our Civil War Parks will not change our history but make it more difficult of confront and examine our history. National Parks are the great American classroom where American history is taught. As a nation we need to remember our history with all of its warts, blemishes and great achievements. The answer is not to take down statues but to improve our interpretation and understanding of our history.  This is the great role for our National Parks and one that is increasing in danger of being lost in what passes for education today in our schools and universities.

 

The National Parks are for the American people--all the American people. They form the common bond of our shared heritage and should not be diminished to achieve political correctness. 


IS there any documentation proof R Lee BEAT ANY slave? Keeping in mind during his extensive military career PRIOR to the ACW, He was stationed abroad. He IN FACT inherited the slaves AFTER the death of his father in law.....


It's very concerning that the National Parks Traveler would publish such a deceptive and malignant article.  I would expect a more evn-handed approach that grasps why the monuments are where they are, instead of a "woke" diatribe condemning noble men of another era.  How does the author feel about slave-owning, tobacco-growing George Washington?