5 Myths About the American Civil War People Don't Know Are False

One of the enduring topics in American history, the Civil War continues to capture public attention more than 160 years since its beginning. While a large portion of the conversation about the war is based on real information, there are some aspects that have become exaggerated with the passage of time. Presented below are five misconceptions that need debunking.

FALSE: Robert E. Lee didn't own slaves or support slavery

In the years following the American Civil War, significant effort was made to portray Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee as a heroic figure of moral virtue. This narrative included assertions that he opposed slavery and didn't personally own slaves.

The historical evidence contradicts this portrayal. In 1857, Lee's wife inherited 189 enslaved people upon the death of her father, George Washington Parke Curtis, according to his will. The document stipulated the slaves be freed five years after Curtis' death. Records indicate Lee sold several of the individuals to settle debts and took legal action to prevent the emancipation of others.

Lee may have been described as paternalistic toward his slaves, but this doesn't alter the fundamental reality of his ownership of them. Civil War historian Eric Foner elaborates on this in an article published in The New York Times , saying, "He was not a pro-slavery ideologue. But I think equally important is that, unlike some White Southerners, he never spoke out against slavery."

FALSE: Ulysses S. Grant was drunk during the Battle of Shiloh

Ulysses S. Grant led the Union Army to victory during the Civil War , emerging as a national hero. However, throughout his military and political career, accusations of his alcohol consumption persisted. Some of these allegations surfaced after his triumph at the Battle of Shiloh , with a reporter from the New York Herald claiming Grant was intoxicated during the battle.

Grant, indeed, struggled with alcohol throughout his life, possessing a lower tolerance than many. In Ron Chernow's 2017 biography Grant , it's noted that while the Union general had this issue, he would never jeopardize a forthcoming battle by drinking beforehand.

The rumors prompted calls for President Abraham Lincoln to dismiss Grant. According to State Senator Alexander McClure, Lincoln responded , "I can’t spare this man. He fights." In a letter to his wife, Julia, Grant swore, "[I was] sober as a deacon no matter what was said to the contrary."

FALSE: Amputations were frequently performed without anaesthesia

Numerous portrayals in both Civil War movies and books portray a scarcity of anesthesia during the war, often depicting soldiers enduring surgery while biting onto wood and consuming whiskey. While such occurrences did happen, they were not as widespread as depicted in Hollywood.

In actuality, doctors during the Civil War era acknowledged the significance of anesthesia, with the majority employing chloroform and ether for major surgical procedures. According to History Collection , "Over [90 percent] of all amputations performed during the war were accomplished with the patient under anesthesia."

Among those subjected to these amputations was the renowned Confederate  Gen. Stonewall Jackson . He suffered the loss of his left arm due to friendly fire following the Battle of Chancellorsville and died of pneumonia a week later.

FALSE: The Confederate Army was made up of volunteers

Another claim is that all soldiers within the Confederate Army had volunteered for service. This is so ingrained in our minds that the sports teams at the University of Tennessee are nicknamed the "Volunteers." This is untrue, despite the majority of troops volunteering to join the fight. Knowing that many soldiers would be needed for the war, the Confederate Army began a conscription program .

Between 1862-64, the Confederate government passed a number of conscription acts geared toward ensuring the Army had enough men to win the war. They initially made it so that all White men between the ages of 18 and 35 were to serve three years in the military. This range eventually widened to include those who were between 17 and 50 years old. What's more, they were to serve in the military for an unlimited amount of time.

Like many conscription programs, the wealthy were favored. Any man who owned more than 20 slaves was exempt from the draft, so they could manage their property. Wealthy men also had the choice to hire a substitute to serve in the Army for them. While this created resentment among those who were hired, the poor had little choice but to go to war.

FALSE: States' rights were the cause of the war

One of the main arguments from Confederate apologists is that the cause of the conflict was not slavery. They frequently argue that the cause was states' rights, and that the Union infringed upon the South's right to continue owning slaves, despite there being no bills put forth to end the practice. Unfortunately for them, this argument doesn't hold much weight.

There was furious debate in the two decades leading up to the Civil War, regarding the practice of slavery, and, for the South, Lincoln's election was a bridge too far.

Want War History Online 's content sent directly to your inbox? Sign up for our newsletter here!

When the Confederates formed their own government, their constitution made it so that slavery could only be ruled upon at the federal level and not by individual states. One passage, in particular, stood out, reading, "No bill of attainder, ex post facto law, or law denying or impairing the right of property in negro slaves shall be passed."