- Arthur R. Thompson
- Why the War was Fought
- Dire Warnings from George Washington
- Exactly Who is Fighting?
- General Robert E. Lee and the Battle of Gettysburg
- The Battle of Atlanta
- Research Notes
JANUARY 21, 2019: I was working on this page but got pulled away. It is a mess right now. I expect to be back working on it very soon.
Arthur R. Thompson
I am not alone in my belief that the Civil War marks the rise of the European Illuminati in the United States. I discovered this man long after arriving at this conclusion. Nevertheless, given how radical a thought this is, I am glad to have someone else to point at. This “What You’re Not Supposed to Know About America’s Founding” video from the TheJohnBirchSociety has 1,335,952 views as of this writing. It claims Abraham Lincoln was not only a Rosicrucian but one of their leaders. The speaker, Arthur R. Thompson, is the author of To The Victor Go The Myths & Monuments: The History of the First 100 Years of the War Against God and the Constitution, 1776 – 1876, and Its Modern Impact.
As of this writing, I have not read the book, but I have found one factual error in this video which I discuss in the section on the Battle of Atlanta below. Generally, I agree with the sentiment, though I really need time to research his claims about Abraham Lincoln. They startled me the first time I heard them.
Why the War was Fought
Be careful here. We already know why the war was fought. What this guy is talking about is how the North instigated the war.
“The Civil War was Not for Slavery” from the Bode Lang channel
Dire Warnings from George Washington
But you do not have to take Arthur R. Thompson’s word for it (see previous section). George Washington made some dire warnings about the arrival of the Illuminati in the United States.
“too evident to be questioned”
After infiltrating the Freemason lodges in the North, the Illuminati used one of their own, President James Buchanan, to instigate the Civil War for the purpose of isolating the Freemasons in the South. They were consolidating their control over the country. Freeing slaves was never the objective. The abolitionists were tools. Nevertheless, depriving the Southern economy of slave labor was the final blow.
The transcripts, comments, and footnotes for the following oft quoted exchange of letters is from the National Archives, Founders Online, To George Washington from G. W. Snyder, 22 August 1798. This is the complete exchange of letters. Nothing has been omitted. Minor misspelling have been corrected and a few spellings have been updated so as not to distract the reader with an inordinate number of the usual [sic] markers. Only bold-red emphasis has been added. Copies of the original letters can be downloaded from the following Library of Congress links.
George Washington Papers, Series 4, General Correspondence: George Washington Snyder to George Washington, August 22, 1798
George Washington Papers, Series 4, General Correspondence: George Washington to George Washington Snyder, September 25, 1798
George Washington Papers, Series 4, General Correspondence: George Washington to George Washington Snyder, October 24, 1798
START OF NATIONAL ARCHIVES QUOTE
From G. W. Snyder
Frederick-Town (Maryland) Augt 22. 1798.
You will, I hope, not think it a Presumption in a Stranger, whose Name, perhaps never reached your Ears, to address himself to you the Commanding General of a great Nation. I am a German, born and liberally educated in the City of Heydelberg in the Palatinate of the Rhine. I came to this Country in 1776, and felt soon after my Arrival a close Attachment to the Liberty for which these confederated States then struggled. The same Attachment still remains not glowing, but burning in my Breast. At the same Time that I am exulting in the Measures adopted by our Government, I feel myself elevated in the Idea of my adopted Country. I am attached both from the Bent of Education and mature Enquiry and Search to the simple Doctrines of Christianity, which I have the Honor to teach in Public; and I do heartily despise all the Cavils of Infidelity. Our present Time, pregnant with the most shocking Evils and Calamities, threatens Ruin to our Liberty and Government. Secret, the most secret Plans are in Agitation: Plans, calculated to ensnare the Unwary, to attract the Gay and irreligious, and to entice even the Well-disposed to combine in the general Machine for overturning all Government and all Religion.
It was some Time since that a Book fell into my Hands entitled “Proofs of a Conspiracy &c. by John Robison,”1 which gives a full Account of a Society of Freemasons, that distinguishes itself by the Name “of Illuminati,” whose Plan is to overturn all Government and all Religion, even natural; and who endeavor to eradicate every Idea of a Supreme Being, and distinguish Man from Beast by his Shape only. A Thought suggested itself to me, that some of the Lodges in the United States might have caught the Infection, and might cooperate with the Illuminati or the Jacobine Club in France. Fauchet is mentioned by Robison as a zealous Member: and who can doubt of Genet and Adet? Have not these their Confidants in this Country? They use the same Expressions and are generally Men of no Religion. Upon serious Reflection I was led to think that it might be within your Power to prevent the horrid Plan from corrupting the Brethren of the English Lodge over which you preside.2
I send you the “Proof of a Conspiracy &c.” which, I doubt not, will give you Satisfaction and afford you Matter for a Train of Ideas, that may operate to our national Felicity. If, however, you have already perused the Book, it will not, I trust, be disagreeable to you that I have presumed to address you with this Letter and the Book accompanying it. It proceeded from the Sincerity of my Heart and my ardent Wishes for the common Good.
May the Supreme Ruler of all Things continue You long with us in these perilous Times: may he endow you with Strength and Wisdom to save our Country in the threatening Storms and gathering Clouds of Factions and Commotions! and after you have completed his Work on this terrene Spot, may He bring you to the full Possession of the glorious Liberty of the Children of God, is the hearty and most sincere Wish of Your Excellency’s very humble and devoted Servant
In May of this year, Snyder published in Philadelphia The Age of Reason Unreasonable; or The Folly of Rejecting Revealed Religion.. . .
1 John Robison’s Proofs of a Conspiracy against All the Religions and Governments of Europe, published in Philadelphia in 1798, was in GW’s library at his death. This letter from Snyder initiated a flurry of correspondence between him and GW.
2 The Illuminati was the name of a secret society founded in 1776 in Bavaria by Adam Weishaupt. It had an organization similar to the Freemasons and evinced republican and deistic principles.
GW replied on 25 Sept.:
Sir, Many apologies are due to you, for my not acknowledging the receipt of your obliging favor of the 22d Ulto, and for not thanking you, at an earlier period, for the Book you had the goodness to send me.
I have heard much of the nefarious, & dangerous plan, & doctrines of the Illuminati, but never saw the Book until you were pleased to send it to me. The same causes which have prevented my acknowledging the receipt of your letter, have prevented my reading the Book, hitherto; namely—the multiplicity of matters which pressed upon me before, & the debilitated state in which I was left after, a severe fever had been removed. And which allows me to add little more now, than thanks for your kind wishes and favourable sentiments, except to correct an error you have run into, of my Presiding over the English lodges in this Country. The fact is, I preside over none, nor have I been in one more than once or twice, within the last thirty years. I believe notwithstanding, that none of the Lodges in this Country are contaminated with the principles ascribed to the Society of the Illuminati. With respect I am Sir Your Obedt Hble Servt Go: Washington
Not having heard from GW, Snyder wrote GW again on 1 Oct. from Frederick:
Some Weeks ago I sent you a Letter with Robison’s Proof of a Conspiracy which I hope you have received. I have since been more confirmed in the Ideas I had suggested to you concerning an Order of Men, who in Germany have distinguished themselves by the Names of Illuminati—German Union—Reading Societies—and in France by that of the Jacobine-Club, that the same are now existing in the United States. It also occurred to me that you might have had Ideas to that Purport when you disapproved of the Meetings of the Democratic-Societies, which appeared to me to be a Branch of that Order, though many Members may be entirely ignorant of the Plan. Those Men who are so much attached to French Principles, have all the Marks of Jacobinism. They first cast off all religious Restraints, and then became fit for perpetrating every Act of Inhumanity. And, it is remarkable, that most of them are actually Scoffers at all religious Principles. It is said that the ‘Lodge Theodore in Bavaria became notorious for the many bold and dangerous Sentiments in Religion and Politics that were uttered in their Harangues, and its Members were remarkable for their Zeal in making Proselytes’; (and no Wonder since the Order was to rule the World.) Is not there a striking Similarity between their Proceedings and those of many Societies that oppose the Measures of our present Government? Even in this small Place the French-Faction is very numerous—their Expressions are like those of Bloody-Lutetia [Lutetia Parisiorum, or Paris]: their Sentiments in exact Unison with those of the Jacobine Club: their Hearts panting for Faggots and Guillotines. The Foundation of their Sanctuary is laid with Lies, and every Stone of the Superstructure reared with Falsehood. They are laboriously employed to excite Discord—to extinguish public Virtue—to break down the Barriers of Religion—to establish Atheism, and work the Downfall of our Civil—and Religious Liberty. Should their perfidious Schemes succeed (I tremble even at the Imagination of the Consequences) what would become of our Columbia?
GW responded on 10 Oct.:
Sir: It is more than a fortnight since I acknowledged the receipt of your first letter, on the subject of the Illuminati and thanked you for Robinson’s account of that society. It went to the post office as usual addressed to the Rev’d Mr Snyder, at Frederick Town Maryland. If it had not been received before this mishap must have attended it, of which I pray you to advise me, as it could not have been received, at the date of your last, not being mentioned. I am, &c. G. Washington
On 17 Oct. Snyder wrote GW:
Your Excellency’s Favor of the 25th of Septr last I had the Pleasure to receive on the 3d Current. My Pleasure, however, was interrupted, because I had sent another Letter [dated 1 Oct.] for your Excellency to the Post-Office about an Hour before I received Your’s.” After further pleasantries Snyder goes on to write: “I should be very happy in your Excellency’s good Opinion, that the Contagion of Illuminatism or Jacobinism had not yet reached this Country; but when I consider the anarchical and seditious Spirit, that shewed itself in the United States from the Time M. Genet and Fauchet (who certainly is of the Order) arrived in this Country and propagated their seditious Doctrines, which the illuminated Doctor from Birmingham has been zealously employed to strengthen, I confess I cannot divest myself of my Suspicions: yet I trust that the Alwise and Omnipotent Ruler of the Universe will so dispose the Minds of the People of these United States that true Religion and righteous Government may remain the Privileges of this Nation! I cannot conclude without acquainting your Excellency that I have made Extracts from ‘Robison’s Proofs of a Conspiracy,’ and arranged them in such a Manner as to give a compendious Information to the Public of the dangerous and pernicious Plan of the ‘Illuminati or Jacobins,’ and by some Remarks to caution them against it. I had them published in ‘Bartgis’s Federal Gazette’ of this Place, from which they were copied and inserted into the ‘Baltimore Federal Gazette[’] of the 9th Inst. I write under the Signature of Cicero. Whether my Endeavors shall benefit the Public Time alone can evince. Harm I am conscious I do not design. Should your Excellency have Leisure to peruse the Piece, I shall deem it a peculiar Favor to receive your Opinion upon it
GW’s response from Mount Vernon on 24 Oct. brought the exchange to a close:
Revd Sir I have your favor of the 17th instant before me; and my only motive to trouble you with the receipt of this letter, is to explain, and correct a mistake which I perceive the hurry in which I am obliged, often, to write letters, have led you into.
It was not my intention to doubt that, the Doctrines of the Iluminati, and principles of Jacobinism had not spread in the United States. On the contrary, no one is more fully satisfied of this fact than I am.
The idea I meant to convey, was, that I did not believe that the Lodges of Free Masons in this Country had, as Societies, endeavored to propagate the diabolical tenets of the first, or the pernicious principles of the latter (if they are susceptible of separation). That Individuals of them may have done it, and that the founder, or instrument employed to found, the Democratic Societies in the United States, may have had these objects—and actually had a separation of the People from their Government in view, is too evident to be questioned.
My occupations are such, that but little leisure is allowed me to read News Papers, or Books of any kind; the reading of letters, and preparing answers, absorb much of my time. With respect—I remain Revd Sir Your Most Obedt Hble Ser. Go: Washington
END OF NATIONAL ARCHIVES QUOTE
A simple search for “Illuminati” in the National Archives, Founders Online database yielded a few other gems.
The Illuminati became an issue in the United States when the Reverend Jedidiah Morse on May 9, 1798, announced from pulpits in Boston and Charlestown, Massachusetts, that the European Illuminati had invaded the United States and were seeking to overthrow this country’s religious and political institutions. The historian of the Illuminati in New England has written: “Morse’s warning by no means fell upon deaf ears.… Soon ministers were preaching, newspaper editors and contributors writing and clear-headed statesmen like Oliver Wolcott, Timothy Pickering, John Adams, and even the great Washington, inquiring and voicing their serious concerns over the secret presence in America of those conspirators whose greatest single achievement, a multitude had come to believe, was the enormities of the French Revolution.… Before two years had passed men generally began to admit the baseless nature of the alarm that Morse had sounded” (Vernon Stauffer, New England and the Bavarian Illuminati [New York, 1918], 10–12).
The only connection I’m aware of that George Washington had with the Illuminati are the two mentions he makes during a letter writing exchange with, if I remember correctly, Jedidiah Morse, a New England pastor influenced by Barruel’s Memoirs Illustrating a History of Jacobinism, an 18th century tome that outlined, if true, the Illuminati influence behind the French Revolution.
Minister Morse was concerned that Illuminati influence had reached the Masonic lodges of America, and wrote to President Washington numerous times in hopes of getting him to read Mr. Barruel’s book.
Although The President, a well-know Mason, did not mention reading the book in any of his letters to Minister Morse, he did assure the minister that, despite the rumors, the Illuminati had not infected the New England lodges.
Minister Morse was one of the voices that helped shape what has been come to be known as the Illuminati Panic at the end/turn of the 18th century detailed in New England and the Bavarian Illuminati.
Jedidiah Morse (1761–1826) was pastor of the First Congregational Church in Charlestown, Mass., 1789–1819, and a staunch defender of orthodoxy within the Congregational church. He also gained national attention for his writings on American geography, including the two volumes of the new edition of his 1789 American Geography, which was now titled the American Universal Geography (Boston, 1793). For this and other works by Morse in GW’s library, see Griffin, Catalogue of the Washington Collection, 144–47. In 1801 Morse assisted in the establishment of the Mercury and New-England Palladium (Boston), a Federalist newspaper.
Exactly Who is Fighting?
Freemasonry was a Southern Institution
Please note that the Scottish Rite of Freemasonry, Northern Jurisdiction does not include Washington, D.C. And all four of the Freemason Presidents prior to James Buchanan were from the Southern United States. Moreover, the headquarters of the Scottish Rite of Freemasonry, Southern Jurisdiction is the House of the Temple in Washington, D.C. It is the official “Home of The Supreme Council, 33°, Ancient & Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry, Southern Jurisdiction, Washington D.C., U.S.A.” (more commonly known as the Mother Supreme Council of the World). The dominance of the Southern Jurisdiction (founded in Charleston, South Carolina in May, 1801) over the Northern (the roots of which can be traced back to May 1, 1813) is beyond question. Are you getting the picture here?
If the Freemasons founded the United States of America in order to begin work on the Vault Profound in the Front Range of Colorado, prior to the Civil War this country was basically controlled by the South. But this is about to change. The Illuminati have been busy infiltrating the Scottish Rite of Freemasonry, Northern Jurisdiction with an eye on the Whitehouse.
The power-base for the Freemasons in the United States of American prior to the Civil War was in the South. These men had been in control of this country for over a hundred years and were becoming careless. The Illuminati from Europe first infiltrated the Supreme Council of the Northern Jurisdiction. Then they instigated the Civil War to suppress the Southern Jurisdiction of the Scottish Rite.
The confederates fired the first shot from Fort Sumpter because Charleston, South Carolina is where the Scottish Rite of Freemasonry was founded. You cannot understand my work without radically changing your concept of the Civil War. It was not a War Between the States. It was a war between the Freemasons who founded the United States of America and the Illuminati from Europe, the very same Illuminati that George Washington vilified. You really must read Dire Warnings from George Washington on the № 10. History of the Illuminati page to fully understand this subject. Although the African-American population benefited from the Civil War, it was not fought on their behalf. The abolitionists were tools. Please allow me to repeat this most critical of points, the Civil War was not a War Between the States. It was a war between the Freemasons who founded the United States of America and the Illuminati from Europe, the very same Illuminati who continue to pillage this country on a daily basis through that most vile of institutions, the Federal Reserve.
We lost the war. We lost our country in 1865. This is what I mean when I say “Destruction is the only way forward.” Change is delusion. I pray for the apocalypse (the “Day of the Lord”) with the same fervency as the prophets of old.
A month after James Buchanan left office, the American Civil War began. There is a very interesting passage in Wikipedia’s article on him.
He allied with the South in attempting to gain the admission of Kansas to the Union as a slave state under the Lecompton Constitution. In the process, he alienated both Republican abolitionists and Northern Democrats, most of whom supported the principle of popular sovereignty in determining a new state’s slaveholding status. He was often called a “doughface”, a Northerner with Southern sympathies, and he fought with Douglas, the leader of the popular sovereignty faction, for control of the Democratic Party. In the midst of the growing sectional crisis, the Panic of 1857 struck the nation. Buchanan indicated in his 1857 inaugural address that he would not seek a second term, and he kept his word and did not run for re-election in the 1860 presidential election. Buchanan supported the North during the Civil War and publicly defended himself against charges that he was responsible for the war. —Wikipedia, James Buchanan [bold-red emphasis added]
But one must step back here and look at the broader picture. James Buchanan is the first ever Freemason from the Northern United States to be elected President.
By the time of the Civil War, the Illuminati have infiltrated and taken control of the Supreme Council of the Northern Jurisdiction of the Scottish Rite. Now one of their own has been elected President of the United States of America. War is about logistics, and the South cannot win a war with the North. They know this, and they are about to instigate a war with the South in order to permanently wrestle control of the Federal government away from the Freemasons in the South. It is a betrayal of the brotherhood the Southern Freemasons did not see coming.
And Buchanan did it while pretending to be a Southern sympathizer. It was a brilliant strategy, but a strategy nonetheless. Here is a Smithsonian.com article about how he deliberately infuriated the Abolitionists in the North.
At his inauguration on March 4, 1857, James Buchanan endorsed the Supreme Court’s upcoming decision in the case of Dred Scott v. Sanford. Scott was an enslaved African-American man who had sued for his freedom, saying that because he had lived for four years in states and territories where slavery was illegal, he should be emancipated.
In what is widely acknowledged to be a shameful moment in American racial and legal history, on this day 160 years ago the United States Supreme Court ruled against Scott, declaring that all black people “were not and could never become citizens of the United States,” writes PBS. Therefore, Scott had no grounds to sue in the first place, the court said.
Abolitionists were furious, and the decision was one of the factors in destroying the balance between North and South, igniting the Civil War which began in 1861. That wasn’t the outcome Buchanan sought when he put his thumb on the scales of justice to influence the case’s outcome, according to a biography published by the White House Historical Association.
Buchanan thought he could make the friction between slave- and non-slave-holding parts of the country disappear by convincing the public “to accept constitutional law as the Supreme Court interpreted it,” it reads. In his inaugural address two days before the decision, Buchanan said that the question of where slaves could or could not be held was “happily a matter of but little practical importance” about to be settled “speedily and finally” by the Supreme Court.
In the decision that followed that address two days later, the Supreme Court said that because Scott was black he was not a citizen and the Declaration of Independence precept that “all men are created equal” did not apply to him or other black people. Seven of the nine judges on the Supreme Court voted in favor of this decision, which was put into writing by Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, a staunch supporter of slavery.
Buchanan started working to influence the outcome of the Dred Scott decision in early February 1857, writes Jean H. Baker in her biography of the fifteenth American president. He wrote to Justice John Catron, his friend and a Supreme Court judge from Tennessee, asking about the status of the case. It was the beginning of a larger plan, she writes:
Following Catron’s advice, a few weeks before his inauguration the president-elect wrote to Justice Grier, urging a comprehensive judgment that moved beyond the particulars of Dred Scott’s individual status into that of all black Americans—slave and free, North and South. If a decision was reached, he wanted to use it as a turning point for a triumphant program of national harmony.
With pressure from Buchanan, Grier, Catron and four other justices threw their support behind a decision that did what he had wanted, and created a broader policy legitimizing slavery while nullifying the Missouri Compromise which had prohibited slavery in some U.S. territories.
If Buchanan had not tried to directly influence the Supreme Court—something that was then considered highly inappropriate, as it would be today—Grier, a Northerner, might have also dissented, she writes, meaning the decision would have been split along party lines. That would have weakened the decision and left it open for a future challenge.
General Robert E. Lee and the Battle of Gettysburg
The “high-water mark of the Confederacy” was the day Colonel Robert E. Lee, U.S. Army showed his true colors and no one ever suspected for a moment that he had done so, until now.
I was born in Hagerstown, Pennsylvania, less than 30 miles from the battlefield. And I was raised in Northern Virginia. As far as I know, all of my relatives fought for the South. Some of them even moved out of Pennsylvania to do so. While attending public school (12 or 13 years old), I took a field trip to the Gettysburg battlefield. From that day to this, every bone in my body tells me that General Robert E. Lee deliberately sacrificed his troops when he ordered Longstreet to attack the Union center on Cemetery Ridge across open country.
Longstreet later confessed that he was never so depressed as on July 3. He felt his men were to be sacrificed and that he “should have to order them to make a hopeless charge.”
When Pickett asked permission to advance, Longstreet was so overcome with the certainty of what lay ahead for his men, that he could not speak and could only bow his approval. —James Longstreet and Pickett’s Charge (Condensed from the 1998 Gettysburg Seminar paper) by Karlton Smith, accessed January 15, 2019 [bold-red emphasis added]
Through the years I have learned to trust my intuition. I felt this way while standing on the battlefield that day as a very young man. I am certain of it now, almost a half century later. Lee graduated second in his class at West Point and later became a West Point commandant. The last subsection will address the wisdom of what he did at the Battle of Gettysburg and the counter arguments that he was physically ill and possibly suffering from “victory disease.”
This section probes for connections between Robert E. Lee and Freemasonry, but in the end can offer no proof. However, there are a few general statements I am comfortable making after having written it.
- If Robert E. Lee is a Freemason, he is a Royal Arch, the same as George Washington and he obtained this rank covertly
- If he is not a Freemason, he is acting out of a sense of loyalty to George Washington
In either case, his decision to fight for the South is subterfuge and his goals remains the same, the defeat of the South. Before finishing this work, I deliberately subjected it to a great bunch of Civil War buffs. It was a pummeling I wanted to take, to help me find the best balance. I do not want to be disrespectful. On the contrary, I am trying to provide the necessary background information for understanding the Georgia Guidestones, which I believe are the heritage of the Freemasons who founded this country. They are an entirely different breed of men from the European Illuminati of whom no less than George Washington warned us. (See Dire Warnings from George Washington for a discussion.)
When I think about General Robert E. Lee’s decision not to support Pemberton in Vicksburg (doubtless because he saw the futility of that battle), his decision to invade the North for the second time, and the miraculous timing of the battle of Gettysburg that ended the day before Independence Day, I am reminded of Executive Order 11236 establishing the “National Crime Commission” on July 23, 1965 (which included the recommendation for the national emergency telephone number 911) and the audacity of planning the destruction of the World Trade Center in NYC on September 11, 2001. The timing of the Battle of Gettysburg was for the Civil War era what 911 was for us.
I cannot in this one section take up the argument that the entire history of not only this country but of the the entire world has been written for us by the progeny of Jove. That is the work of this website, and requires great resolve to assimilate. The most common reaction of the Civil War buffs was to reject everything said as ludicrous, but it was a useful exercise in making sure there were no counter claims to basic facts such as the only time General Robert E. Lee ever wore the insignia of a general in the Confederate States Army was when surrendering the 28,000 men of the Army of Northern Virginia to General Ulysses S. Grant on April 9, 1865 at Appomattox. I owed it to my fellow Southerners to vet this work as carefully as possible. It speaks volumes of the new political correctness sweeping the country that I was not tarred and feathered. They were amazingly civil.
Robert E. Lee had an amazingly subtle mind. To have done what he did and have it go unnoticed by history fills me with awe for the man. One of the most common objections by the Civil War buffs is that there were much easier ways for Lee to lose the war than Gettysburg. My desire to provide an answer to this question is what makes me bemoan the fact that you cannot make forays into understanding the progeny of Jove. The world is not that simple. A greater commitment to the truth is required.
The thing that will be missing for the majority of readers who land on this page without any other exposure to my work is an understanding of the stakes involved. The progeny of Jove are not like other human beings. Nor are they Freemasons. They were from 1717 until 1947, but after the Civil War they stopped being the same breed of Freemasons who founded this country. Immediately after the Civil War their obsession was creating a central bank to finance their future endeavors, primarily building all of the infrastructure necessary to begin tunneling into the Pikes Peak granite batholith in the Front Range. There is much talk about the Donald Rumsfeld’s testimony before Congress that “we cannot track $2.3 trillion in transactions,” but that is a drop in the bucket. This country has financed Virgil’s “vault profound” since the founding of the U.S. Department of the Interior on March 3, 1849. This is precisely why the establishment of a central bank was the number one priority after the progeny of Jove “changing of the guard” we remember as the American Civil War.
What is at stake here is the survival of the human race. Are we ever going to be able to break out of this permanent amnesia caused by never-ending cycles of destruction on this defective planet in a solar system that is way too close to the gravitational behemoth Sirius? This is the mindset you need in order to understand how and why General Robert E. Lee bided his time so carefully until the Battle of Gettysburg. I am and will forever remain utterly convinced that General Robert E. lee, though he may not have been a Freemason, was appraised of what is about to happen to this planet and acted accordingly. One need go no further than his adopted father, George Washington Custis Lee, to make this argument. Who can doubt that President George Washington was privy to this information or that he would have shared it with his only son?
The Question of Insignia
Robert E. Lee only wore the rank of a general in the Confederate States Army (CSA) one day.
On April 9, 1865 at Appomattox, the day he surrendered the 28,000 troops of the Army of Northern Virginia (commonly referred to as “Lee’s Army”) to General Ulysses S. Grant, General Robert E. Lee wore the insignia of a Confederate general (three stars surrounded by a wreath) for the first and last time in his life. Now you need to stop and ask yourself, Why?
Here is a picture of the showcase housing the blouse and gloves worn by Robert E. Lee when he surrendered the 28,000 men of the Army of Northern Virginia to General Ulysses S. Grant on April 9, 1865 at Appomattox.
I don’t know who Anne Mason Lee is.
FIX THIS: She is the mother of Fitzhugh Lee, wife of Sydney Smith Lee (Robert E. Lee’s older brother). Her full name is Anna Maria Mason Lee. This only makes it more intriguing because Fitzhugh
This make for a direct link to Lodge 209
However, I have written to the Museum of the Confederacy in Appomattox, Virginia in asking them to tell me as much as possible about her. I don’t need to wait for an answer to say this though. I have studied the progeny of Jove for years during which time I have developed a sixth sense about how they think and their peculiar sense of humor. What I see when I look at this plague is “Lee a
nne Mason” associated with the Freemason number 33.
The following quote is from an address before the Southern Historical Society, Atlanta, Georgia, February 18, 1874. The speaker is Benjamin Harvey Hill, Sr. (a lifetime politician who served as a Confederate senator representing Georgia in the Congress of the Confederate States during the Civil War).
He was a foe without hate; a friend without treachery; a soldier without cruelty; a victor without oppression, and a victim without murmuring. He was a public officer without vices; a private citizen without wrong; a neighbor without reproach; a Christian without hypocrisy, and a man without guile. He was a Caesar, without his ambition; Frederick, without his tyranny; Napoleon, without his selfishness, and Washington, without his reward.
—Senator Benjamin H. Hill of Georgia; His Life, Speeches and Writings, Benjamin H. Hill, Jr., p. 406 (1893).
We live in a world of opposites.
At the outbreak of war, Lee was appointed to command all of Virginia’s forces, but upon the formation of the Confederate States Army, he was named one of its first five full generals. Lee did not wear the insignia of a Confederate general, but only the three stars of a Confederate colonel, equivalent to his last U.S. Army rank. He did not intend to wear a general’s insignia until the Civil War had been won and he could be promoted, in peacetime, to general in the Confederate Army. —Wikipedia, Robert E. Lee [bold-red emphasis added]
During the Civil War, the Confederate Army maintained a unique insignia for colonel, three stars worn on the collar of a uniform. Robert E. Lee wore this insignia due to his former rank in the United States Army and refused to wear the insignia of a Confederate general, stating that he would only accept permanent promotion when the South had achieved independence. —Wikipedia, Colonel, United States [bold-red emphasis added]
In this section I argue that Robert E. Lee is not only a Freemason but a Royal Arch as was George Washington, and that he is on a sacred mission to assure that the North won war because any other outcome would be a disaster for the progeny of Jove. He was their ace up the sleeve and bided his time until the Battle of Gettysburg where he showed his true colors. That he is such a celebrated hero in the South to this very day is one of the greatest ironies of all time.
Colonel Robert E. Lee maintained his rank of Colonel throughout the Civil War not out of humility, but because he actually was a Colonel in the U.S. Army. The display of his actual rank in the U.S. Army was a brazen act of defiance. He was only ever play acting the role of a general in the Confederate States Army (CSA). His Oscar was the surrender of the CSA to Union General Ulysses S. Grant at Appomattox Court House, Virginia. Colonel Robert E. Lee bided his time until the Battle of Gettysburg.
I saw General Wilcox (an officer who wears a short round jacket and a battered straw hat) come up to him, and explain, almost crying, the state of his brigade. General Lee immediately shook hands with him and said cheerfully, “Never mind, General, all this has been MY fault–it is I that have lost this fight, and you must help me out of it in the best way you can.” In this manner I saw General Lee encourage and reanimate his somewhat dispirited troops, and magnanimously take upon his own shoulders the whole weight of the repulse. —Three Months in the Southern States: April, June, 1863, Sir Arthur James Lyon Fremantle, 1864, p. 135-136, Rare Book Collection, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Accessed January 13, 2019 [bold-red emphasis added]
And when he met the retreating troops who somehow managed to survive the murderous Pickett’s Charge and said “all this has been MY fault,” he was not apologizing to his men. He was bragging to posterity.
This is the mind of the progeny of Jove. It does not make Colonel Robert E. Lee any less respectable. You just need to understand that the progeny of Jove are trying to save mankind. Their’s is an infinitely higher mission. There could be no chance whatsoever of the Union dissolving. That was his real mission.
The Benjamin Franklin Reinhardt Portrait of 1861-1862
This and the 1865 Edward Calledon Bruce portrait of Robert E. Lee (seen below) belong together. They are the front and back cover of a book that will never be written.
Rare Benjamin Franklin Reinhardt portrait image of a young-looking Robert E. Lee wearing a hexagram or six-pointed star. (This is a cropped version of the painting to emphasize the insignia and avoid copyright issues.) What you will want to notice here is that the other two stars are the more usual pentagrams or five pointed stars. Not only that, but the hexagram is decidedly larger than the pentagrams. What’s going on here?
This portrait is owned by the R. W. Norton Art Gallery. Images of it on the Internet are rare. As discussed in detail below, Robert E. Lee sat for this portrait in 1861 at that age of 54. Believe me I know this is a little hard to believe. So as a means of comparison, here is a photograph of him taken in 1850 at the age of 43.
At least in part what is happening here is the artist “reviving”his subject. For example, compare the following picture from 1963 to a portrait in 1865. Lee looks decided much young in the later even though it is two two year later.
Notice the emphasis on his insignia in the Edward Calledon Bruce portrait of 1865. It is unmistakable, almost awkward. In his Benjamin Franklin Reinhardt portrait in 1861-1862 before the war, he looked to his right over the hexagonal or six-pointed star. Now he looks to the left over his Colonel Robert E. Lee, U.S. Army insignia. And are we to believe that in this 1865 painting the light is making his gray uniform seem blue. Or was this blueish gray a deliberate choice intended to convey some greater meaning regarding his real loyalties? Is it not possible that throughout his military career Robert E. Lee uses portrait to convey subtle meaning? Is it not at least possible that in the mind of Robert E. Lee that these two portraits are intimately related. What I wouldn’t do to see them side-by-side in a publicly accessible gallery!
The Smithsonian National Portrait Gallery list the date of theBenjamin Franklin Reinhardt portrait as 1862. Indeed, ’62 can be clearly read on the front of the painting.
The date of the painting is further confirmed in the book Robert E. Lee: A Life Portrait by David J. Eicher, which says that the face was painted in 1861 and the portrait was then finished in England in 1862.
This unusual portrait of Lee was produced in 1862 by Benjamin Franklin Reinhardt. Lee’s face was allegedly painted from life in 1861 and the portrait finished in England the following year. —Robert E. Lee: A Life Portrait by David J. Eicher, 1997
A young-looking Lee posed for Benjamin F. Reinhardt in 1861, just before he grew his beard. The artist completed the painting in 1862.
this is 1861 and , is authorizing the last portrait of himself in which he will ever be seen without his beard. This strikes me as highly unusual. I do not think he would have left the details of the uniform he is wearing up to a painter. I seriously doubt this.
Now I don’t want to make too much out of a painting because one can always argue that the painter has taken poetic license, but from my perspective there is something profoundly important about Reinhardt’s portrait.Robert E. Lee is reported to have only been photographed about 40 times in life. (Eicher’s book cited above mentions over 70 photographs but then unwittingly uses duplicates.)
When did Lee grow the beard? For a man who was throughout his entire life impeccably neat, the scraggly beard strikes me as out of character. One can argue that it is a battlefield necessity, but even in the field he was known to be exceptionally tidy.
I think the beard is what makes it easier for him to play the role of his life as General Robert E. Lee of the Confederate States Army. I think the beard is his alter ego. That and his insignia constantly remind him that he has a job to do that is infinitely higher than what surrounds him on a daily basis.
Lee grew his beard during the western Virginia assignment, August-October 1861. I cover this in my “Robert E Lee at War” series, volume one titled Tragic Secessionist. —Scott Bowden, February 2, 1017 on CivilWarTalk.com
It is impossible to say precisely when he stopped shaving, but he had a beard by October 20, for he quoted some remarks Robert made about it when he saw his son as he passed through Charlottesville that day (letter to Mildred Lee, Nov. 15, 1861; R. E. Lee, Jr., 54‑55). After his return to Richmond, when Miss Mary Pegram complained of his changed appearance, Lee laughingly protested: “Why, you would not have a soldier in the field not to look rough, would you? There is little time there for shaving and personal adornment” (Mrs. Mary Pegram Anderson in Richmond Times-Dispatch, Jan. 20, 1907). —R. E. Lee: A Biography by Douglas Southall Freeman, 1934, Chapter XXXIII, Lee Conducts His First CampaignFootnote 78, p. 575, accessed January 15, 2019
He is about to assume a new identity as General Robert E. Lee of the Confederate States Army, and he will never again be photographed or painted without a beard. He know this. That is what makes this portrait so special. And I do not think for a minute the insignia was left to chance, as if it were nothing more than an adornment added by the painter after he returned to England to finish the painting.
So we must assume he made a conscious choice to be painted with this insignia. Again, why? If the hexagram or six pointed star in the Benjamin Franklin Reinhardt is a deliberate choice of Colonel Robert E. Lee (which I would argue it is solely based on fact that the other two stars are pentagrams or five-pointed stars suggesting a very deliberate and conscious emphasis on the hexagram or six pointed star that is showing.), what meaning does it convey? You cannot seriously think the artist would make such a choice without first consulting his professional military client.
The answer is simple. The hexagram or six-pointed star is an important symbol for the Freemasons. You can find everywhere from the facade of the oldest Masonic temple in the world to the Great Seal of the United States of America, where is spells MASON for all but the most hopeless skeptics. What I am telling you is that the Benjamin Franklin Reinhardt portrait was especially meaningful to Robert E. Lee. He was about to embark on the most important mission of his life, which was to assure the defeat of the South. The character this man exuded during the war which Southerners felt and deeply admired was his profound devotion to a higher purpose all but a handful of men understood.
Ultimately, I think the hexagram or six-pointed star in the Benjamin Franklin Reinhardt Portrait of 1861-1862 was intended as a message to posterity to express his loyalty to family, represented by his devotion to the life’s work of General George Washington (decidedly a Freemason) in founding the United States of America.
The three stars he worn while fighting for the South served as a constant reminder of the sacrifices George Washington made during the American Revolutionary War.
In his own day, Washington had been appointed and served as “General and Commander in chief of the Army of the [United States]”. but only wore the three-star insignia of an Army lieutenant general. As of 1782, when Washington was listed as a lieutenant general on the rolls of the United States Army, his rank was informally called “three-star general”. The United States at this point had no four-star general rank and would not until 1866. (Wikipedia, General of the Armies)
In 1775, George Washington was appointed “General and Commander in Chief of the United Colonies” and all its forces. Although Washington ranked as a full general in the Continental Army, he resigned his commission prior to the establishment of the U.S. Army in 1784 and he is therefore considered never to have held the U.S. Army rank of general. In 1798, Washington was commissioned lieutenant general in the U.S. Army and appointed Commander in Chief of the armies of the United States. The following year, Congress created the rank of General of the Armies of the United States, but Washington died before accepting it and the rank lapsed until 1866. Washington was finally promoted to General of the Armies in 1976. (Wikipedia, List of United States Army four-star generals)
What convinces me more than anything else that the Benjamin Franklin Reinhardt Portrait of 1861-1862 conveys a secret message of loyalty to George Washington and the United States of America is the fact that George Washington always wore three hexagrams or six-sided stars on his uniform. The message is subtle, but it is nonetheless there for anyone to read. As far as I am concerned, the only question here is why did George Washington favor hexagrams or six-pointed stars? I think the answer is the same for both men.
The use of hexagrams or six-sided stars as insignia was common in Europe, but not in the United States. Here is a list of hexagrams or six-pointed star in the military of which I am aware
- Officers in the American Revolutionary War wore hexagrams or six-side stars as insignia
- The VIII Corps (Union Army) used a hexagram as their badge
- The blade specifications for both the U.S. and British military swords require the six–pointed “Damascus” star with the word “Proved” etched on the blade. In the early days, this meant the sword was made of Damascus steel, which is to say the sword of of comparable quality to an ancient Samurai sword in that the metal was folded hundreds of times for strength. I have taken the time to research how far back this practice dates
There is a lengthy Wikipedia excerpt below in the “God, Family, Country” section that makes it clear to at least me that Robert E. Lee was not the kind of man who would ever betray family, and fighting for the South would have been the worst betrayal of George Washington possible. If you don’t think those two men were kinfolk, you need to read that section. Their families were intimately close. Please remember these excerpts from Wikipedia regarding the number of start
Freemason Symbolism in the “Let Us Have Peace” Painting
A word of caution here. The painter, Jean-Leon Gerome Ferris, though extremely popular in the post-Civil War years is eventually rejected by art critics for historical inaccuracies. I have included a number of quotes from art critics at the bottom of this section so that you can draw you own conclusions.
The sword, the sword. the sword. There are so many things that can be said about this painting, but the sword is for me the most important. It is arguably the centerpiece of this painting, and for good reason. He was presented with George Washington upon his arrival at the Secession Convention in Richmond, Virginia. Here he is (at least symbolically) returning it. I cannot say for sure if it was actually George Washington’s sword he had with him that day, or even if it was actually surrendered.
The handshake in this painting is unmistakably one of a Master Mason, a fact that would have been only known by Freemasons at the time of this painting.
Notice that Confederate General Robert E. Lee’s thumb is between the second and third knuckle of Union General Ulysses S. Grant. This is what makes this painting so curious. The artist has taken great care to make the position of Lee’s thumb very clear. Why? Because this is a Freemason handshake that has a very specific meaning.
Colonel Robert E. Lee’s thumb is between the second and third knuckle of his Brother Mason, Union General Ulysses S. Grant. This is the Tubalcain handshake (or “pass grip”) of a Master Mason. The two men are not only Brother Masons; they are brothers in arms, too.
Confederate General Robert E. Lee is a third generation Master Mason.
By the time you are done reading this section you will understand why this fact had to be kept a secret. If you study this website long enough, you will know why this fact is being celebrated in a painting that was created over a half a century later. The depth and meaning of this painting approaches that of the Georgia Guidestones. I wish everyone could see it through my eyes.
At the time of this writing, I cannot devote more time to researching the arcana of Freemason symbolism. It does not entice me in the least. However, the only other Confederate officer in the room is hiding his hand. Wikipedia discusses this gesture on a page entitled Hand-in-waistcoat, on which page it is suggested that this is nothing more than a fad in 18th and 19th centuries portraiture. I seriously doubt this. There are clear Masonic references to this pose in the “ROYAL ARCH, OR SEVENTH DEGREE” chapter of Duncan’s Masonic Ritual and Monitor by Malcom C. Duncan, 1866.
“…and can never be exceeded by any human institution”
Here is the image used on the front cover of this 1835 book.
Notice all the similarities(e.g. the arch, seven stars, comet, and coffin) with the artwork below involving George Washington. It is perfectly clear that President George Washington was a Royal Arch, and when you learn about exactly how close he was to Colonel Robert E. Lee, then you will understand that the latter was not only a Master Mason, but most assuredly a Royal Arch also, a Freemason degree that “can never be exceeded by any human institution” including loyalties to Lee’s home state of Virginia or the Confederate States Army.
And so I think the connection intended in the “Let Us Have Peace” painting is not just to Freemasonry, but to George Washington in particular. There are a number of “hidden hand” portraits of him.
See also: The Vigilant Citizen 2018 Volume 1: Hidden Knowledge (the title page read The Vigilant Citizen: “Symbols Rule The World, Not Words Nor Laws,” Articles Compilation — 2018 Edition), Chapter 3, The Hidden Hand that Shaped History. Also available online at The Hidden Hand that Shaped History
See also: Hidden hand (Freemasonry)
Notice the position of the feet in this Fig. 34 from Duncan’s Masonic Ritual and Monitor. This is the stance of a Master Mason. Now compare the position of the feet in the third portrait of George Washington on the right to those of Robert E. Lee in the “Let Us Have Peace” paining. They mirror each other.
Now look at the stance of Colonel Robert E. Lee in the Let Us Have Peace painting above.
Allowing for spurs and the necessity for some measure of subtlety on the part of the Freemason painter, I would argue that this is clearly intended to be suggestive of a Freemason stance, if not that of a Master Mason.
Colonel Robert E. Lee’s boots in the “Let Us Have Peace” painting tell their own story. It is believed that they were a gift from two sisters in Vicksburg (May 18, 1863 – Jul 4, 1863). This would be the critical link to the Battle of Gettysburg (July 1–3, 1863) where Colonel Robert E. Lee showed his true colors. These were concurrent battles that ended a day apart and both of which were devastating for the South.
Vicksburg and the War by Gordon A. Cotton
So what! The painter Jean-Leon Gerome Ferris is a Freemason. That doesn’t necessarily mean Robert E. Lee was a Freemason. I freely admit this is true, but this analysis of a painting is only my introduction to the subject.
The truth is I cannot find any evidence that the painter Jean-Leon Gerome Ferris was a Freemason, beyond a mere suggestion to that effect on an obscure article on the henrymakow.com website. But if the painter is not a Freemason, that only makes it more intriguing for me because the painting itself is proof that the composition was informed by a Master Mason. In either case, for a Freemason, especially circa 1920, who understood the symbolism used in this painting, to use that symbolism to wrongly suggest that General Robert E. Lee was a Freemason is unthinkable. Nothing would be more contrary to their sacred vows.
But for the sake of completeness, I feel obligated to mention that the historical accuracy of Jean-Leon Gerome Ferris’s painting is at once attacked and praised. As always, you must arrive at your own conclusions.
The compositions reflect meticulous research of paintings, material culture, and historical accounts. The result is a work of art that confuses verity with verisimilitude. The historical paintings formed a bridge between fact and fiction over which the viewers…were willing travelers. —History of the Portrait Collection, Independence National Historical Park By Doris Devine Fanelli, Karie Diethorn
The paintings showed idealized portrayals of famous moments from American history, but were often historically inaccurate. The Landing of William Penn, for example, shows Penn being greeted at New Castle by American Indians who are clothed in the tradition of tribes from the Great Plains. In The First Thanksgiving 1621, the black outfits the Pilgrims are shown wearing are wrong, and the Wampanoag did not wear feathered war bonnets, nor would they have been sitting on the ground. —Jean Leon Gerome Ferris, American (1863 – 1930)
His paintings, so painstakingly researched down to the tiniest detail… —Painter of American History J. L. G. FERRIS By: Roy Nuhn As seen in The Antique Shoppe Newspaper, April 2007
Ferris explored the events in his pictures very carefully and emphasized authenticity. This was supported by his access to the Academy of Fine Arts and Historical Society of Pennsylvania as well as the Independence Hall with all its historical portraits. —J.L.G. Ferris (1863-1930) An unjustly forgotten great-American historical painter? by Rudolf Sponsel, Erlangen (original in German)
Me? If pushed to tell what I really think, I would suggest that these painting were allowed to pass into obscurity precisely because “Let Us Have Peace” is dangerously revealing. As Rudolf Sponsel wrote at the beginning of his German language review
J. L. G. Ferris is an unjustly forgotten great-American painter who no longer no longer appears in many art histories, art encyclopedias and dictionaries. He does not even rate a single mention in Thieme-Becker or Kindler’s painting lexicon. This in no way corresponds to his artistic significance, his skill and his works.
Oddly enough, J. L. G. Ferris has also disappeared from American art history, encyclopedias or art lexicons.
In a way, this is an impressive example of a very important political nationality characteristic of the USA: lack of continuity, consistency and reliability. Although, on the other hand, it does not fit in at all with another typical characteristic: patriotic nationalism. Probably Ferris has disappeared from art history and encyclopedias because he may not have been mentioned in a more important standard work – which many people follow and copy – due to copyright problems. —Translation by using a combination of Google and Pons
I can promise you one thing, though; the “Let Us Have Peace” painting will find its way to the underground granite tunnels in the Front Range. It will be preserved for posterity. The progeny of Jove are very proud of their history and look forward to one day being able to display it to their children in the New World, along with other curious artifacts of our world such as Wikipedia.
Robert E. Lee, like his father and George Washington is not only a Master Mason. He is a Royal Arch. If you really want to get past this tiresome necessity of convincing you of the truth that Robert E. Lee was a high ranking Freemason, what peaks my interest after years of studying the progeny of Jove is why was it kept a secret. As I am found of saying, the progeny of Jove are consummate, brilliant planners. How far in advance did they know young Robert E. Lee would be used to assure nothing could go wrong with their plans to defeat the South in a war. How long did Lee know? From childhood? When did they explain to him why he could not follow in his father’s footstep or those of George Washington because his involvement in the Freemasons must be kept a secret from history?. And how much effort was put into assuring this man never died in battle? What most people regard as preposterous, is only the starting point for my thinking about the same subject. Yet I do so with a high degree of confidence because my highly abstract mind has been piecing together the footsteps of the progeny of Jove
“God, Family, Country”
“First in war- first in peace- and first in the hearts of his countrymen, he was second to none in the humble and endearing scenes of private life”
These famous words (in black) from the eulogy for George Washington were written by Henry “Light Horse Harry” Lee, the father of Robert E. Lee. In a paper entitled Washington and Lee written by the Deputy Grand Master of the Grand Lodge A.F. & A.M. of Minnesota and a lifetime member of the Masonic Philosophical Society (see also the MPS page on the Universal Co-Masonry website). Edward R. Halpaus, MPS (Lifetime) suggests the words in red are a direct reference to a youthful infatuation of George Washington (when he was about 15 years old) for a girl named Lucy Grymes who he famously described in his diary at the time as his “Lowland Beauty.” Lucy Grymes would later become the paternal grandmother of Robert E. Lee.
Someone actually wrote a 100 page book entitled The Lowland Beauty, George Washington’s First Love: An Historical Novel by William Martin, 1914
—Threads of Grey and Gold By Myrtle Reed, 1902, p. 17-19
I cannot explain the misidentification of Lucy “Lowland Beauty” Grymes (as she is sometimes called) as Mary Bland, even though she is propery identified and the grandmother of Robert E. Lee. Whatever the reason, there is near universal agreement that the “Lowland Beauty” was Lucy Grymes.
So when Henry “Light Horse Harry” Lee said President George Washington was “second to none in the humble and endearing scenes of private life,” he was telling a secret his mother must have confided in him; namely, that she never forgot her childhood beau and maintained a fondness for George Washington throughout her entire life that must have exceeded the affection she felt for the man she married. Otherwise, what else would “second to none” mean? This is so much more than posthumous gossip. The closeness of these two families is critical to understanding why Robert E. Lee could have never fought against the Union. These families are so entangled that nothing less than a chart is required to explain their intimate relationship.
Washington Family Tree v5
“Freemasons, Family, Country”
Any way you cut it, family comes before the State of Virginia. Robert E. Lee’s professed loyalty to the State of Virginia was subterfuge. In the end, he did what he thought was right for his Brothers in the Freemasons, his family (which most decidedly in his mind included the late George Washington), and the United States of America. But in reality there was only ever only one priority. Robert E. Lee is the progeny of Jove. He is the “deep state” of his time.
Now let us look at the Lee Family tree:Lee Family Tree
Some explanation is required here. Henry ‘Light Horse Harry’ Lee was never really a father to Robert E. Lee. In April, 1813, he sailed for the Caribbean without his wife or any of their children and never returned. Little Robert E Lee was only six years old at the time. He never saw his biological father again. But even before that, his father was in debtor’s prison for almost two years from April 1808 to March 1810. There is a detailed account of his father’s life available online. It is entitled “Light Horse- Harry Lee: Overreaching Hero of the Revolution,” by Robert M. Poole (reprinted from the American History Magazine). Robert E. Lee’s father-in law, George Washington Parke Custis (see chart above) became his adopted father, just as President George Washington regarded the same George Washington Parke Custis as his adopted son. This is perhaps the most intimate of links between Robert E. Lee and President George Washington. He would have felt the same respect and admiration for his “grandfather” George Washington as did his adopted father.
From all evidence George Washington Parke Custis was a fine man and a great father and grandfather, in addition he and his Son-in-law Robert E. Lee got along famously, which is evidenced by the fact that Robert E. Lee named his eldest son after his Father-in-law. After the death of his wife’s father Lee said: “[He] has been for me all a father could, and whom I never cease fondly to regard and love as such.” —Washington and Lee By Ed Halpaus, Originally published in T.F.S. #61 October 20, 2005 [bold-red emphasis added]
All of this family information very important in understanding the man Robert E. Lee. Without it you cannot understand how close he must have felt to President George Washington and his legacy, the United States of America.
Now we are ready to review the numerous personal and family ties between Robert E. Lee and George Washington. We are asked to believe the Lee put his loyalty and devotion to the State of Virginia ahead of these more personal considerations. I will quote a lengthy Wikipedia except after this that I think just makes this suggestion nothing less than preposterous. It would have been completely contrary to his personality. And none of this takes into account his Freemason obligations which would have been paramount in his life.
The only living progeny of George Washington
- Robert E. Lee’s wife is the great granddaughter of Martha Washington
- George Washington regarded George Washington Custis Lee as his adopted son
- George Washington Custis Lee was Robert E. Lee’s father-in-law but Lee regarded him as an adopted father. The feeling was mutual. I think one of the most critical things about understanding young Robert E. Lee is that his adopted father had four daughters, but three of them died young. Only Mary Anna Randolf Custis survived. Of course this also means that little Robert E. Lee is their only son. George Washington died six years before Robert E. Lee was born. The two never met. But in the mind of young Robert E. Lee (and this is vitally important to understanding the man) he was the only living progeny of George Washington. He therefore must have felt an intense personal obligation to fill his shoes. And I do not think it a stretch to say that others of his contemporaries familiar with the facts that I have just presented to you would have felt the same way about him as he doubtless felt about himself. He is the “heir apparent” of the greatest man in living memory. I think this is about the only thing that can explain why to this very day Robert E. Lee is the only West Point cadet to graduate without receiving a single demerit.
- Not only was his father, Henry ‘Light Horse Harry’ Lee, an American Revolutionary War hero (he received the only gold medal for an officer under the rank of general), but he was also the eldest son of George Washington’s “Lowland Beauty.” He is often described as Washington’s military protégé. They were close friends and brothers in arms.
- The Sixth United States Congress was unanimous in commissioning Robert E. Lee’s father to write the official eulogy for President George Washington
- According to Wikipedia, Lucy Grymes’ father was “twice related to President George Washington” —Wikipedia, Henry Lee II
- Both men were born on plantations on the Potomac. George Washington at Popes Creek, and Robert E. Lee at Stratford Hall, less than five miles away as the crow flies.
- He attended the same Episcopal Christ Church on Washington Street at in Alexandria, Virginia as did George Washington. “Washington helped found the church, attended the church for more than 20 years, and bought a pew in 1773 when the Church opened…General Lee was a regular attendee of the church since infancy, and his daughter left it $10,000 in her will, a significant part of its endowment” (George Washington Taken from the Heights By Michael Curtis).
- He attended the Alexandria Academy which George Washington endowed
- Brevet Lieutenant Robert E. Lee’s first assignment in the U.S. Army was to survey an island. “As he grew to maturity, young George had little use for the meager prospects at the Ferry Farm plantation. After flirting briefly with the idea of a career in the Royal Navy, he began studying geometry and surveying, using a set of surveyor’s instruments from the storehouse at Ferry Farm.” —Washington as Public Land Surveyor, Library of Congress, George Washington Papers
All of these similarities between the two men has led at least one individual to wonder if Robert E. Lee was not a reincarnation of George Washington.
Now I need to ask your forbearance in reading this rather lengthy excerpt from the Wikipedia article for Robert E. Lee. It is the entire subsection labeled “Resignation from the United States Army” in the “Civil War” section. My reason for asking you to thoughtfully read it will become apparent momentarily.
“an unconstitutional betrayal of the efforts of the Founding Fathers”
Resignation from United States Army
Unlike many Southerners who expected a glorious war, Lee correctly predicted it as protracted and devastating. He privately opposed the new Confederate States of America in letters in early 1861, denouncing secession as “nothing but revolution” and an unconstitutional betrayal of the efforts of the Founding Fathers. Writing to George Washington Custis in January, Lee stated:
The South, in my opinion, has been aggrieved by the acts of the North, as you say. I feel the aggression, and am willing to take every proper step for redress. It is the principle I contend for, not individual or private benefit. As an American citizen, I take great pride in my country, her prosperity and institutions, and would defend any State if her rights were invaded. But I can anticipate no greater calamity for the country than a dissolution of the Union. It would be an accumulation of all the evils we complain of, and I am willing to sacrifice everything but honor for its preservation. I hope, therefore, that all constitutional means will be exhausted before there is a resort to force. Secession is nothing but revolution. The framers of our Constitution never exhausted so much labor, wisdom, and forbearance in its formation, and surrounded it with so many guards and securities, if it was intended to be broken by every member of the Confederacy at will. It was intended for “perpetual union,” so expressed in the preamble, and for the establishment of a government, not a compact, which can only be dissolved by revolution, or the consent of all the people in convention assembled.
Despite opposing secession, Lee said in January that “we can with a clear conscience separate” if all peaceful means failed. He agreed with secessionists in most areas, such as dislike of Northern anti-slavery criticisms and prevention of expanding slavery to new territories, and fear of its larger population. Lee supported the Crittenden Compromise, which would have constitutionally protected slavery.
Lee’s objection to secession was ultimately outweighed by a sense of personal honor, reservations about the legitimacy of a strife-ridden “Union that can only be maintained by swords and bayonets”, and duty to defend his native Virginia if attacked. He was asked while leaving Texas by a lieutenant if he intended to fight for the Confederacy or the Union, to which Lee replied, “I shall never bear arms against the Union, but it may be necessary for me to carry a musket in the defense of my native state, Virginia, in which case I shall not prove recreant to my duty”.
Although Virginia had the most slaves of any state, it was more similar to Maryland, which stayed in the Union, than the Deep South; a convention voted against secession in early 1861. Scott, commanding general of the Union Army and Lee’s mentor, told Lincoln he wanted him for a top command, telling Secretary of War Simon Cameron that he had “entire confidence” in Lee. He accepted a promotion to colonel of the 1st Cavalry Regiment on March 28, again swearing an oath to the United States. Meanwhile, Lee ignored an offer of command from the Confederacy. After Lincoln’s call for troops to put down the rebellion, a second Virginia convention in Richmond voted to secede on April 17, and a May 23 referendum would likely ratify the decision. That night Lee dined with brother Smith and cousin Phillips, naval officers. Because of Lee’s indecision, Phillips went to the War Department the next morning to warn that the Union might lose his cousin if the government did not act quickly.
In Washington that day, Lee was offered by presidential advisor Francis P. Blair a role as major general to command the defense of the national capital. He replied:
Mr. Blair, I look upon secession as anarchy. If I owned the four millions of slaves in the South I would sacrifice them all to the Union; but how can I draw my sword upon Virginia, my native state?
Lee immediately went to Scott, who tried to persuade him that Union forces would be large enough to prevent the South from fighting, so he would not have to oppose his state; Lee disagreed. When Lee asked if he could go home and not fight, the fellow Virginian said that the army did not need equivocal soldiers and that if he wanted to resign, he should do so before receiving official orders. Scott told him that he had made “the greatest mistake of your life”.
Lee agreed that to avoid dishonor he had to resign before receiving unwanted orders. While historians have usually called his decision inevitable (“the answer he was born to make”, wrote Douglas Southall Freeman; another called it a “no-brainer”) given the ties to family and state, an 1871 letter from his eldest daughter, Mary Custis Lee, to a biographer described Lee as “worn and harassed” yet calm as he deliberated alone in his office. People on the street noticed Lee’s grim face as he tried to decide over the next two days, and he later said that he kept the resignation letter for a day before sending it on April 20. Two days later the Richmond convention invited Lee to the city. It elected him as commander of Virginia state forces before his arrival on April 23, and almost immediately gave him George Washington’s sword as symbol of his appointment; whether he was told of a decision he did not want without time to decide, or did want the excitement and opportunity of command, is unclear.
A cousin on Scott’s staff told the family that Lee’s decision so upset Scott that he collapsed on a sofa and mourned as if he had lost a son, and asked to not hear Lee’s name. When Lee told family his decision he said “I suppose you will all think I have done very wrong”, as the others were mostly pro-Union; only Mary Custis was a secessionist, and her mother especially wanted to choose the Union but told her husband that she would support whatever he decided. Many younger men like nephew Fitzhugh wanted to support the Confederacy, but Lee’s three sons joined the Confederate military only after their father’s decision.
Most family members like brother Smith reluctantly also chose the South, but Smith’s wife and Anne, Lee’s sister, still supported the Union; Anne’s son joined the Union Army, and no one in his family ever spoke to Lee again. Many cousins fought for the Confederacy, but Phillips and John Fitzgerald told Lee in person that they would uphold their oaths; John H. Upshur stayed with the Union military despite much family pressure; Roger Jones stayed in the Union army after Lee refused to advise him on what to do; and two of Philip Fendall’s sons fought for the Union. Forty percent of Virginian officers stayed with the North.
—Wikipedia, Robert E. Lee [bold-red emphasis added]
Here it is important to realize that Lee’s opposition to a War Between the States is more philosophical than emotional. Phrases such as
(1) relate this Wikipedia section to his feelings about family…wife and other family members against Virginia not unanimous
(2) Who wanted to stay with the North…make point VA divided more so than other southern states
Robert E. Lee and Freemasonry
“It is satisfactory always to have facts to go on; they restrain supposition and conjecture, confirm faith and bring contentment.” – Robert E. Lee
Lee Lodge No. 209 A.F. & A.M. Waynesboro, Virginia
Why Waynesboro? The progeny of Jove never leave things like this to chance. They are always imbued with meaning. In this case, the answer is simple. The Battle of Waynesboro “mark[ed] the end of the Confederate presence in the Shenandoah Valley” (History.com, Battle of Waynesboro, Virginia) through which General Robert E. Lee marched on his retreat after the Battle of Gettysburg. Lee Lodge No. 209 was chartered December 12, 1866. The 1866 is symbolic both for the 66 and as the first year after the end of the Civil War.
The is some controversy as to whether or not Lee passed through Waynesboro while retreating from the Battle of Gettysburg.
July 2, 1913
Did Lee pass Through Waynesboro in 1863?
Did General Lee pass through Waynesboro on his retreat from Gettysburg?
The Record, yesterday, said that he did and said it on the authority of three people who say they saw the great confederate leader.
It is informed, by very good authority, that Lee did not come to Waynesboro but went south by way of Rouzerville and Ringgold.
This version of the movements of General Lee after the battle of Gettysburg is based on the assertion of a confederate officer, one of several whom found a temporary lodging place in an East Main street residence immediately after the end of the three-days struggle.
The members of the family, in whose house he was, were anxious to see the southern army leader and made known their wish to the officer. He promised he would point out General Lee when he passed through.
It was with a disappointed air that he went to the women of the family and made the announcement:
‘I am very sorry, but you will not see General Lee. He went south via Waterloo.’
This story has been a heritage in one of Waynesboro’s best-known families since the war.
The difference in the various statements is sufficient, of course, to provoke argument but there would be nothing gained by a resort to it as it would be exceedingly difficult – perhaps impossible – to find any one to act as a competent referee.
July 3, 1913
Mrs. D.C. Weller Saw Genl. Lee in Town
There is another addition to the list of the Waynesboro people who say that General Lee passed through Waynesboro on his retreat from Gettysburg.
Mrs. D.C. Weller, wife of borough engineer, recalls distinctly seeing the confederate leader water his horse in the public square and afterward pass on out Main street, going west.
Mrs. Weller was a daughter of John R. Eckman, proprietor of the Central hotel. She and a number of other persons were standing together at the hotel when the cavalcade of confederate officers entered the public square.
A confederate officer who had been at the hotel for a brief time, pointed out General Lee to Mrs. Weller and her companions.
It would not have been necessary for him to do this, Mrs. Weller says, as she and other Waynesboro people had been made familiar with the southern chieftain by the pictures of him they had seen.
Mrs. Weller recalls that her mother was compelled to bake several hundred loaves of bread for the confederate officers.
—TheRecordHerald.com, Did Gen. Robert E. Lee pass through Waynesboro?, access January 17, 2019
The following excerpt is from the Lodger History pager for Lee Lodge No. 209.
Waynesboro was fertile ground for its own Masonic Lodge following the American Civil War, with many soldiers returning home and many veterans choosing to remain in the Shenandoah Valley. On January 19, 1867, the first meeting of Lee Lodge No. 209 was held under its new charter, granted by the Grand Lodge of Virginia on December 12, 1866.
This new Lodge in Waynesboro was begun by a group of Masons from Staunton Lodge No. 13 in Staunton, Va. Dr. Samuel Kennerly was elected the first Worshipful Master…Worshipful and Dr. Samuel Kennerly, Jr.…was also active in the Royal Arch Chapter of Staunton, serving as High Priest of Union Royal Arch Chapter No. 2 from 1872 to 1873…
Lee, the name chosen for the Waynesboro Lodge was one of great importance in that period. The Lodge requested and received permission from General Robert E. Lee to use his family name. It was the only time that General Lee gave permission for his name to be used for any such purpose.
There is believed to be a direct connection between the current Lee Lodge No. 209, and the Lee Lodge No. 209 chartered as a traveling Confederate military Lodge in December of 1863 and issued to Wickham’s Brigade, Virginia Cavalry.
Very little is known of the early history of the Lodge because of a fire which destroyed all the records…
Colonel Williams Carter Wickham commanded the 4th Virginia Volunteer Cavalry Regiment during the Battle of Gettysburg, which was part Fitzhugh Lee’s Brigade, one of the three brigades that J.E.B. Stuart took with him when he flanked the Union Army and arrived late to Gettysburg. After Gettysburg he was promoted to brigadier general on September 9, 1863, and put in command of Wickham’s brigade of Fitzhugh Lee’s division. Fitzhugh Lee is the son of Sydney Smith Lee, who is the older brother of Robert E. Lee. In other words, Fitzhugh Lee is Robert E. Lee’s nephew. And all of these unites are part of the Army of Northern Virginia. What I take away from all of this is simply that Dr. Samuel Kennerly as a Royal Arch is honoring the memory of Robert E. Lee. Nothing else. It is significant to me because I think Robert E. Lee was a Royal Arch also. His approval of the family name for a Masonic lodge is at the very least noteworthy.
Letter to Winfield explaining his resignatioon
General Robert E. Lee: Copy of U.S. Army Resignation Letter (Original Copy)
Robert E. Lee’s Letter to General Winfield Scott Explaining his Resignation
April 20, 1861
On the night of April 19, 1861, Colonel Robert E. Lee resolved to resign his commission in the U.S. Army. He wrote two letters. The first was a brief letter to the Secretary of War resigning his commission in the U.S. Army. The second was to his commanding officer and mentor, General Winfield Scott.
Lee served under Scott during the Mexican-American War and respected him as a leader and a friend. In this letter, Lee explained his reasons for his resignation and thanked General Scott for his kindness. Only a few days earlier, Scott had sent him to the office of Francis Blair, where Lee was offered command of the U.S. Army. Lee declined this offer and in this letter, explained his decision to General Scott.
Arlington, Washington City, P.O
20 Apr 1861
Lt. Genl Winfield Scott
Commd U.S. Army
Since my interview with you on the 18th Inst: I have felt that I ought not longer to retain any Commission in the Army. I therefore tender my resignation which I request you will recommend for acceptance. It would have been presented at once but for the struggle it has Cost me to separate myself from a Service to which I have devoted all the best years of my life, & all the ability I possessed. During the whole of that time, more than a quarter of a century, I have experienced nothing but kindness from my superiors & the most Cordial friendships from any Comrades. To no one Genl have I been as much indebted as to yourself for kindness & Consideration & it has always been my ardent desire to merit your approbation. I shall carry with me, to the grave the most grateful recollections of your kind Consideration, & your name & fame will always be dear to me. Save in the defense of my native state shall I ever again draw my sword. Be pleased to accept any more [illegible] wishes for “the Continuance of your happiness & prosperity & believe me
Most truly yours
R E Lee
Source: Paper. L 32.7, W 29.3 cm
Arlington House, The Robert E. Lee Memorial, ARHO 5623
—Thomas’ Legion : The 69th North Carolina Regiment, Robert E. Lee: Resignation Letter
XXXXXXX END 209
a member of Hiram Lodge #59 of Westmoreland County, Virginia. his father
Ulysses S. Grant, who, in fact, freed his only known slave in 1859, though he managed his father-in-law’s large plantation in Missouri.
George Washington was made a Mason November 4, 1752 in Fredericksburg Lodge, which later became Fredericksburg Lodge #4 in the Grand Lodge of Virginia. On March 3, 1753 he was passed to the degree of Fellow Craft. On August 4, 1753 when Brother Washington was Raised to the Sublime Degree
“From the minutes of the Lodge at Fredericksburg” the following is quoted: “ 4th November Charles Lewis & George Washington entered an Apprentice. 3rd March George Washington passed to Fellow Craft 4th August 5753 , which day the Lodge being assembled present, Right Worshipful Daniel Campbell, [Master], I. Neilson, S.W. Robert Halkerson, J.W., George Washington, James Strakan, Alexander Wodrow, Secretary Pro Tem, Thomas Robertson, William McWilliams, Treasurer. Transactions of the evening are – George Washington Raised Master Mason, Thomas James, Entered Apprentice. —Washington and Lee By Ed Halpaus, Originally published in T.F.S. #61 October 20, 2005
The red sash on this second Confederate officer is also noteworthy.
A society of Royal Arch Masons is called a Chapter, and not a Lodge, as in the previous Degrees. All Chapters of Royal Arch Masons are “dedicated to Zerubbabel,” and the symbolic color of this Degree is scarlet. —Duncan’s Masoic Ritual and Monitor by Malcom C. Duncan, 1866, p. 218
The Battle of Atlanta
In her novel Gone with the Wind, Margaret Mitchell made reference to Governor Brown, and the reception that “Joe Brown’s Pets” received during General Sherman’s march through Georgia in 1864. Brown had tried to keep Georgia troops in the state for local defense. Mitchell wrote:
Yes, Governor Brown’s darlings are likely to smell powder at last, and I imagine most of them will be much surprised. Certainly they never expected to see action. The Governor as good as promised them they wouldn’t. Well, that’s a good joke on them. They thought they had bomb proofs because the Governor stood up to even Jeff Davis and refused to send them to Virginia. Said they were needed for the defense of their state. Who’d have ever thought the war would come to their own back yard and they’d really have to defend their state?
The is no better video about the Battle of Atlanta, in every respect, than this one. It was superbly made.
“When Georgia Howled: Sherman on the March” from the GPB channel: