Was Abraham Lincoln gay? Letters of tenderness, a bed shared with a man, and a question that still divides historians today
The sexual orientation of historical figures is being discussed more and more openly. And we are also asking questions that were taboo just a few decades ago with more courage. One of the most discussed names of recent years is undoubtedly Abraham Lincoln. The man who led the United States during the Civil War and abolished slavery has also become a figure in the cultural debate about queer history. Was the sixteenth president of the United States merely a "product of another time" - or could he have been what we would call gay today?
The answer is not simple. And that's what makes it a fascinating story.
An intimacy between men that raises questions today
The debate most often revolves around Lincoln's relationships with several men, most notably his close friend Joshua Speed. In their youth, they shared a bed together - which today sounds like a clear signal of an intimate relationship. But in the first half of the 19th century it was a common practice, especially among young men who could not afford their own accommodation.
But what has intrigued historians and queer scholars more than the actual sleeping together are the letters. In his correspondence, Lincoln uses language that is very emotive by today's standards. He writes of deep affection, of longing for closeness, of emotional connection. Some scholars say it's evidence of a romantic relationship. Others point out that the culture of male friendship at the time was much more expressive than we are used to today.
And this is where the key question arises - are we reading the past through contemporary categories?
A documentary that has stirred debate
In recent years, the debate has been reignited by the documentary Lover of Men, which argues that Lincoln may have had several romantic relationships with men in his life. The film works with surviving documents, testimonies, and historical interpretations to situate the president's intimacy within the larger context of queer history.
The filmmakers point out that the modern concept of "gay" did not exist in Lincoln's time. Sexuality was not defined by identity, but rather by behavior - and even that was perceived differently than today. What we would describe today as a homosexual relationship could then be understood as a deep friendship without sexual connotations.
So the debate is not just about "whether Lincoln was gay" but about how we actually work with the concept of orientation historically.
Historians vs. queer readings of the past
Some in academia are skeptical of these interpretations. They point out that there is no direct evidence of a sexual relationship between Lincoln and another man. There is no explicit testimony, no unequivocal document. Only texts that can be read in different ways.
But at the same time, another argument is made - queer history has long been systematically ignored. Intimacy between men has been interpreted as "innocent" while heterosexuality has been taken for granted. Some scholars therefore argue that historians often apply a double standard - they consider evidence of heterosexual relationships sufficient, while demanding almost irrefutable proof for possible same-sex relationships.
The result is a stalemate. Lincoln remains an icon of American politics - and a figure symbolically appropriated by various communities.
Why does this matter, anyway?
Perhaps even more important than the orientation question itself is what this debate says about us. About the need to find queer representation in the past. About the desire to know that even the greatest historical figures may have shared the experience of a minority. And also about how the language of intimacy has changed.
In the 19th century, men routinely wrote tender letters to each other, expressing feelings without fear of being challenged. Today, male emotionality is often more limited - ironically, at a time when we talk more openly about sexuality than ever before.
So maybe it's not just about whether Abraham Lincoln was gay. Perhaps it's more interesting to ask why we are so fascinated by the question.
An identity that came later
The concept of sexual orientation as an identity - that is, that one "is gay" or "is heterosexual" - did not take shape until the late 19th century. In Lincoln's time, people did not define themselves in this way. Historians therefore point out that carrying contemporary labels into the past is methodologically problematic.
But at the same time, queer people have always existed. They just didn't have the language to describe their experience. And that opens up space for interpretation.
Lincoln remains shrouded in mystery. And perhaps that's why we return to him again and again.
So what is the truth?
We won't know for sure - and perhaps rightly so. The story of Abraham Lincoln remains open, straddling the line between fact, conjecture and interpretation. Not because we can't get at the truth, but because the past is not an archival filing cabinet with clear drawers of "gay" and "straight." It is a tangle of emotions, contexts and languages that have changed dramatically over 150 years.
And perhaps that's the power of the whole debate. It's not about retroactively ascribing an identity to someone that they themselves never expressed. It's about acknowledging that history can be more colorful than we've long allowed ourselves to see - and that even a symbol of American statehood can be part of a larger story about intimacy, masculinity, and the courage to be different.
