Karen L. Cox wrote “Five Myths About the Lost Cause” in The Washington Post. For those who have not studied American history or don’t remember what they should have learned, this summary should be useful. Cox is a professor of history at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte.
Cox wrote in 2021:
Some of the most enduring misconceptions around the Confederacy are part of a mythology, known as the Lost Cause, that developed after the Civil War. These ideas are generally understood as the means by which former Confederates came to terms with such a thoroughly crushing defeat. Over time, the narrative has expanded and been used to combat movements for racial justice, most recently Black Lives Matter and the calls for removal of Confederate monuments.
Here are some of the myths at the heart of the Lost Cause ethos.
Myth No. 1
The Civil War was not fought over slavery.
One of the most enduring ideas holds that the Civil War was fought over states’ rights. Confederate veterans were among the first to make this claim about “the rights of the States against the encroachments of the Federal power,” as one war vet wrote, and to this day, the Sons of Confederate Veterans (SCV) maintain this position.
Yet these original veterans and the SCV both engaged in a bit of historical amnesia, since documents about what led Southern states to secede are clear that the Civil War erupted over the issue of slavery. From Alexander Stephens’s 1861 “Cornerstone Speech” to state ordinances of secession, slavery was at the heart of their argument to leave the Union. Stephens, the vice president of the Confederacy, said that not only did slavery form the “cornerstone” of the foundation on which the new Confederate government was laid, but also that it was the “immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution.” Mississippi’s declaration of secession, like those of other states, did not mince words: “Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery.”
Myth No. 2
The South lost simply because the North had more resources.
In his speech at the unveiling of the Confederate monument in Augusta, Ga., in 1878, Charles Colcock Jones Jr. averred, “We were overborne by superior numbers and weightier munitions.” And in her “Catechism for Southern Children,” written in the early 20th century, Mrs. J.P. Allison of Concord, N.C., posed the question “If our cause was right why did we not succeed in gaining our independence?,” to which children were to respond, “The North overpowered us at last, with larger numbers.”
But the South’s military defeat was also driven by social and class divisions, as well as poor morale. As the war dragged on and losses stacked up, there were desertions and the emancipation of enslaved people — the primary source of labor supplying Confederate armies. Devotees of the Lost Cause tend to disregard these other factors.
Myth No. 3
Robert E. Lee abhorred slavery.
Some Americans point to the Confederacy’s most heralded military leader, Gen. Robert E. Lee, as an opponent of slavery. Conservative journalist Stephen Moore, once a Trump nominee to serve on the Federal Reserve Board, claimed that “Robert E. Lee hated slavery.” As recently as December, in response to the removal of Lee’s likeness from Statuary Hall in the U.S. Capitol, Twitter users perpetuated the myth, including one who tweeted: “Lee abhorred slavery. . . . he also taught the slaves he inherited to read, which was illegal.”
In reality, Lee benefited from the institution of slavery through his marriage into one of the wealthiest slaveholding families in Virginia. He was also known to be a cruel master who not only beat people he owned but, like other enslavers, treated them as property — selling them and separating families. Even in the last year of the war, 1865, Lee wrote that “the relation of master and slave . . . is the best that can exist between the white & black races.” Such words and actions offer a vivid contrast to another myth, which asserts that Lee was a noble and kindly gentleman.
Myth No. 4
Confederate monuments only recently became controversial.
In the aftermath of the deadly violence in Charlottesville in 2017, when white nationalists descended on the city under the pretense of protesting the removal of a Lee statue, journalists spilled a lot of ink on what these monuments represented. They wondered why Americans “suddenly” cared about them or asked, as one did, “Why are they being targeted now?,” suggesting that this event, and the Charleston church massacre of 2015, marked the beginning of the controversy across the South.
The truth is that they have long been controversial and despised by Black Southerners, for whom these statues symbolized their second-class citizenship. In 1932, for example, when the leading African American newspaper, the Chicago Defender, asked its readers about their support for a federal law that would abolish Confederate monuments, the collective response was a resounding “yes.” As a reader from Nebraska wrote, “If those monuments weren’t standing, the white South wouldn’t be so encouraged to practice hate and discrimination against our people.” During the Jim Crow era, it was difficult for African Americans to publicly protest the monuments as they have in the past few years, out of fear for their lives, but they have long protested statues located in their communities, especially after the passage of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
Myth No. 5
Removing a Confederate monument is erasing history.
After the 2017 Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, President Trump said removing the Confederate monument to Lee, or any such statue, was “changing history.” And as Texans began to reexamine their state’s memorial landscape, Sen. Ted Cruz (R) weighed in to suggest that it was a bad idea to “go through and simply try to erase from history prior chapters, even if they were wrong.”
Removing a Confederate monument, of course, does not erase history. These statues, which have represented only one point of view (a revisionist narrative of the Confederacy) throughout their existence, have never taught the first history lesson, although they have been used to reemphasize the racial status quo. The vast majority are, simply put, artifacts of the Jim Crow era, when most of them were built. Their history, like that of the “Whites only” signs of segregation, has not been lost. We will always know the history of Confederate monuments through photographs, postcards, dedication speeches and, most important, books written by historians.
Five myths is a weekly feature challenging everything you think you know. You can check out previous myths, read more from Outlook or follow our updates on Facebook and Twitter.

Bravo! Superb article. Exactly right.
LikeLike
Good morning Diane and everyone,
It’s unfortunate that so many writers use the word myth in an erroneous way. A false story is being created, yes, but it is not a myth. The word myth can mean a false idea but I think using the word in this way blurs the importance of myths as revelatory of aspects of human spiritual and psychological experience. But perhaps more importantly, it diminishes the nefariousness of the act of intentionally changing factual information of historical events to suit political purposes. The two would do well to be kept separate.
LikeLike
Point well taken.
LikeLike
However, The Lost Cause has many of the characteristics of myth, including its being taught to children as a means of passing on a worldview and the ethos and self-conception of the tribe (Southerners).
LikeLike
Hi Bob,
I see what you are saying. However, myth in our culture is often regarded as just nonsense stories with no meaning, and they are not that at all. I think it’s much more appropriate to say exactly what is happening – a false story is being created to appeal to peoples’ bias and political desires. That is certainly NOT myth. It should be called out for exactly what it is. 🙂 I am all for delineating and maintaining the importance of both mythological study and calling out the intentional creation of falsehoods for political gain.
LikeLike
Good points, Mamie. But often myths were precisely NOT symbolic and are misunderstood when people in our time impose symbolic meanings on them. The peoples of the ancient middle east thought of the sky as a firm structure with the stars stuck in it like raisins in a pudding, supported by pillars at the ends of the Earth. Thus “the firmament.” It’s often purest anachronism to impose symbolic meanings on what were actually primitive, superstitious, prescientific concrete views.
LikeLike
In this case, use of the term myth is precise and appropriate because The Lost Cause is a mythos.
LikeLike
And the fact that ancient, primitive peoples tended to think concretely instead of symbolically ought to be obvious enough from the ubiquity of early Animism. The wind is moving and speaking, so it is alive. This is not a symbolic attribution. It is a mistaken concrete one. People move and speak. The wind moves and speaks. So they must be the same kind of thing.
LikeLike
Myths are not always salutary revelations of aspects of human spiritual and psychological experience. Some are quite the contrary. E.g.: the myth of the Garden of Eden, which teaches such ugly notions as a) absolute obedience to the father figure, b) the dangers of knowledge and blissfulness of ignorance, c) the right of the father figure to exact extreme punishment (toil, pain in childbirth, and death for all generations of humans to come thereafter). Yikes. Primitive and creepy. Truly horrifying.
LikeLike
Myth is symbol not LITERAL. When we take a myth as literal, we lose our way! But who can think symbolically anymore? 🙂
LikeLike
But I see what you are saying, too, Mamie, and I too wish that people would be more careful about throwing the word myth around and try to reserve it for situations in which someone is peddling a mythos.
LikeLike
I would venture to say that for every myth that has a salutary message for us today (e.g., the story of the Flower Sermon), there are ten that embody truly horrifying primitive notions, especially if one ventures away from prettied-up retellings of myths and goes to original sources, including ones in the anthropological literature.
LikeLike
And, of course, that myth was used for millennia by ecclesiastical and secular authors in the West to justify extreme misogyny. I could easily compile an entire library of works that do exactly that.
LikeLike
Works that start with Eve and then go into a litany of accusations against women and calls for male rule over them. One might call this the Eve and Pandora v. Patient Griselda thematic strand in Western literature.
LikeLike
Five truths:
1. Our country is awash in bigotry propelled by greed.
2. Ignorance is NOT bliss.
3. Human power is a terminal illness.
4. Humans reach for religions that are the antithesis of faith.
5. We have to work harder to bend that arc toward justice.
LikeLike
“Humans reach for religions that are the antithesis of faith.”
I’m not sure what you are saying with that statement.
Seems to me that faith beliefs are the basic theses of religions. Faith beliefs are the antitheses of rationo-logical scientific thinking.
Which religions do you consider to be the ones that are reached for?
LikeLike
I thought about that after I wrote it. What I am trying to say is that when power and prominence become the justification for religion, like the Roman Catholics of the Middle Ages, contemporary Iran, or today’s Christian Nationalists, the premise of the faith gets lost in our human need for control and desire for dominance. In other words, we have no room for diverse perspectives on who or what God is. I think that exists in radical forms of other faiths as well. The current struggle in the Middle East is between two Abrahamic traditions that see their struggle as existential and cannot see their common heritage as a call for unity but a struggle over region and land. I think my perspective on faith is that a belief in a higher power requires a letting go of earthly desires or at least understanding that I should not act to control others for my own well being. Everything in this existence is temporal and human organizational tactics in many religious structures tend to resist that reality.
LikeLike
This happened from the very beginning. One of the most significant events in the history of the world was the conversion of Constantine and the consequent Christianization of the Roman Empire. In the first couple hundred years after Christ, hundreds of vastly differing Christianities emerged. A great survey of those can be found in the superb book Lost Christianities, by Bart Ehrman. A great survey of the truly bizarre gnostic Christianities of the period can be found in The Gnostic Religion, by Hans Jonas. Many of these had their own scriptures, and they had very, very different belief systems. Some believed in two gods, an evil Rex Mundi who made the world and the good god who was the father of Christ. In other words, they were Manichean. Some believed that Christ did not make a special claim for himself but taught that we are all sons and daughters of god. Some believed in hundreds of different heavens. Some believed that only a small elect would be saved, those possessing special occult knowledge. There were a great many differing belief systems regarding the nature of Christ himself. And so on. (I’ll stop there.) Constantine got tired of the constant fighting in the streets among all these factions, and he established one. This in turn led to centuries of the OFFICIAL Western church ruthlessly hunting down and slaughtering heretics–followers of other Christian creeds. So, from the beginning of the Church, the official Church backed by Constantine, it was all about power. Suffice it to say that without this political intervention and the exertion of the power of the state from early on, Christianity could have taken vastly different form from what it did and could have had vastly different official scriptures. (There are over two hundred surviving gospels, acts, epistles, collections of sayings, and so on surviving from the first couple centuries CE that are NOT part of the official Christian canon today. And I am not talking about modern forgeries like the supposed Essene Gospels of Peace, which were written by a hippie leader of a sex commune in Baja.)
LikeLike
The Manichean movement and the Roman effort to squelch it fascinates me. I have not had the time to study it in detail, but I can’t help but think the ecumenical approach to religion was influenced by the east-west trade routes, what we call the Silk Road, that influenced all religions from as early as the 5th century BCE. Much of what we understand to be Judaism, including the creation stories, was profoundly influenced by Persian religions after the diaspora around 500 BCE. 1500 years before that, Abraham supposedly came out of the same region into the Fertile Crescent. There was significant intermingling of faiths from Buddhism to Christianity that was squashed by Constantine’s Roman Empire and inevitably by the Roman Catholic Church that decided their interpretation provided their power over the rest of Europe. The western interpretation of Christianity in the fourth century rejected the legitimacy of efforts that went East. Kashmir claims to have the tomb of Jesus. Many mysteries with few answers.
LikeLiked by 1 person
All this is endlessly fascinating, which is why I have given a lot of time, over the years, to studying the evolution of religions around the globe. So, totally with you, Paul! You will appreciate this, from my unpublished book Trillions of Universes:
The Babylonian creation epic known as the Enûma Elish tells of a goddess called Tiamat—the primordial saltwater ocean—envisioned as a serpent or dragon. She mixes with (mates with) freshwater god Abzu and gives birth to various monsters. Her name is cognate with the Hebrew word tehom—the abyss, or the deep—featured in Genesis 1.2: “And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.” The Genesis story is clearly a development from the previously existing Middle Eastern myth. In the Babylonian tale, Marduk, of the sixth generation of gods born of Tiamat and Abzu, defeats the primordial monsters and establishes his supreme reign; he also creates humans.
LikeLike
As I understand it, the creation story in Genesis was put on papyrus around 500 BCE as jewish scribes worked to put the various parts of scripture into a sequential order while exiled in Persia. I always found it interesting that the 6 day order saw creation as a sequential development. Although the order is somewhat different from contemporary scientific understanding of the development of life on the planet, there was a periodic understanding of the earth without our benefit of the details we now see in our universe. It was around 200 years later that Greek intellectuals first understood the earth as a sphere through mathematical supposition. When the Greeks first encountered the Jews during the time of Alexander, they were fascinated by Hebrew perspectives. I have read that this is why Israel was spared much of the devastation experienced in Persia at the time. I think the ongoing east west interaction influenced a great deal of the cognitive revolution that eventually brought us to science. I find it puzzling that conservative Christians insist on a 6000+ year time frame for the earth when there is no mention of such in the scriptures. Both science and the Abrahamic religions acknowledge a beginning and end, global floods, and catastrophic events. When this all happened is immaterial.
LikeLike
I think the ongoing east west interaction influenced a great deal of the cognitive revolution that eventually brought us to science.
A fascinating idea.
BTW, the primordial ocean giving birth to monsters, followed by a hero who subdued those monsters and established the current order, is also found in a number of the Greek creation myths (of which there were many). So, yeah, there was a lot of borrowing and a lot of different groups sharing a common ancestral mythology.
LikeLike
You also might find this interesting, Paul. I was part of a philosophy discussion group a few years back that met weekly, and I prepared this for a week when we were going to be discussing the origins of religion:
LikeLike
Thanks Bob. Great stuff. I have a lot of reading to do!
LikeLike
And here is an explication of the Japanese anime series Death Note as Christian and Shinto allegory. It contains so more on how the official Christian Church was born:
LikeLike
I totally agree. Tangentially speaking of myths, I would question whether the American War of Independence aka Revolutionary War was not mainly fought over slavery? The pursuit of property(edited to Happiness in the Declaration of Independence )? So deep in our veins.
LikeLike
A lot of wealthy New England merchants and Southern planters didn’t want to pay the taxes imposed by England to pay for its war with France, the Seven Years’ War. So, they got a lot of poor people to fight and die to keep them from having to pay those, and they created a lot of fine rhetoric to convince them but created a country where propertied white men ruled.
LikeLike
And to readers generally, sorry, but that’s what actually happened (as opposed to the myth).
LikeLike
You are correct. That was one of the reasons, But speaking of myths, the colonists did have representation in the Parliament. The fact that the colonists refused to participate does not equate to taxation without representation.
LikeLike
And then a lot of those poor farmers who fought the Revolutionary War returned to find tax liens placed on their property to pay for the war and for reconstruction after the war, and they revolted against those in what is known as Shay’s Rebellion, which was put down violently and led the rich planters and merchants to create a new Constitution that gave them more centralized muscle to deal with such insurrectionists. Welcome to the new boss, . . .
LikeLike
Are you referring to the theory of “virtual representation” advanced by the British? That’s a stretch and they knew it. LOL.
LikeLike
You are correct. Though the colonies had official agents to Parliament, no colony had sitting representatives. Thank you.
LikeLike