On March 27, President Donald Trump signed an Executive Order, insisting that our history must “focus on the greatness of the achievements and progress of the American people.” At the root of Trump’s order was the belief that historians have pushed a “factually baseless ideology aimed at diminishing American achievement.”
Trump’s order included critiques of historians “interrogating institutional racism” and an exhibit at the Smithsonian American Art Museum which suggests that “[s]ocieties including the United States have used race to establish and maintain systems of power, privilege, and disenfranchisement.”
However, modern scholarship asks us to reckon honestly, and unflinchingly, with complex facts and not gloss over painful parts of our history. Trump’s order therefore raises the question: should Americans accept incomplete, or inaccurate, stories of national “greatness” in place of the messy realities of history?
The case of one of the famous moments in American history—Robert E. Lee’s surrender at Appomattox—dramatically illustrates the dangers of letting myth substitute for accurate history.
For generations, Americans learned the same basic story about the end of the Civil War. On April 9, 1865, Lee surrendered to Ulysses S. Grant at Appomattox Court House, Va. In a sublime moment of selflessness, the two great leaders nobly transcended their differences and chose the path of peace and reconciliation. Grant paid homage to Confederate courage by setting lenient surrender terms, which let the defeated rebels go home unpunished. In a reciprocal show of respect, Lee handed over his ceremonial sword to Grant, only to have his counterpart return it. The two men effectively ended the war and set the stage for America’s rise as a world power.
This story, however, was never true. Instead, it originated in 19th-century Americans’ yearning for a swift reunion, which could sweep away the unresolved issues of the war. The story served as a…
