Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- foster_what_s_not_in_a_name [2025/01/16 16:37] – itiblin
+++ foster_what_s_not_in_a_name [2025/01/17 21:01] (current) – ovanrooy
@@ Line 20: / Line 20: @@
 For many African Americans, especially Frederick Douglass, they wanted to focus the name of the war on the issue of slavery. They would have called it “The Abolition War” or “The War of Emancipation”. These names would highlight the abject horror of slavery, and how it was the utmost important cause in why the Confederacy attempted to succeed. That is notably different from the more neutral names like “Civil War” which effectively glosses over the issue of slavery. (Tanner Gillikin)
+It is incredibly interesting how the leaders of America at the time sought to emphasize the countries unity despite the existing internal conflict. It was important to present a united front and a strong nation despite the "civil war." Early on no mentions were mad eof civil war but focus was placed on it being an uprising or revolution. -Declan F.
+The term rebellion allowed for Americans to gloss over the major reason for the war, a conflict over slavery. The politics of the war were more relevant to its beginnings yet we see focus placed on insurrection rather than whether or not slavery should be legal. Declan F.
 It's amazing how a name can change the meaning of a war. This constant decision on what the war should be called and the way the name actively changes until "Civil War" was eventually decided on is really intriguing. Both the South and the North came up with different names to identify the conflict that was going on. Some common terms in the North were "Rebellion, Slaveholderrs' Rebellion, and Abolition War", while the South had "Confederate War, War of Northern Aggression, and Late Unpleasantness". Both sides focused on names that pitted blame on the other end, fueling this idea that one side was the cause of all this violence while the other was fighting for justice. The name "Civil War" gave both sides a leeway to both give and take responsibility for war that had taken place. (Lexi St. John)
@@ Line 32: / Line 36: @@
 Foster’s article highlights the development of the label for the American Civil War.  Interestingly, northerners and southerners had their own names for the conflict that either blamed the other side or tried to reach justification for the violence.  For example, Foster explains that the name “The War between the States”, proposed by white Southerners, implies that the Civil War was constitutionally legal and avoid the term “Rebellion.”  Eventually, “Civil War” was the name that was adopted for the conflict because it is a neutral term that afforded no accountability or justification. - Ian Tiblin
+Lincoln deliberately called the war a "rebellion" when it came to putting down southern legitimacy. He then switched to civil war in speeches where he was trying to invoke reconciliation. Lincoln was using different names to invoke different connotations to the war. (Guy)
+-The term “abolition war” was actually used by White Southerners to rally the south to their cause, knowing that Whites would be mobilized by the threat on slavery. It was also used by Northern peace Democrats to criticize the American government for making the war too much about slavery (421). Abolitionists like Frederick Douglas used the term abolition war to reaffirm what the war was really about (slavery). He saw the abolition of slavery as the only way to preserve the union and the constitution (422). -Sophia Prewitt
+-The “War Between the States” became a very popular term after it appeared in a former confederate book. The term was popular because it stood on the idea that America was never one whole body, and that it was regularly divided between a Northern and Southern Republic, therefore it was a war between these two long standing American Republics (It also emphasized State Rights) (425).-Sophia Prewitt
+-There were a few times, namely in 1907 and 1911, where the name for the war was brought before congress. In both instances, Southerners objected to terms like “Rebellion” and instead wanted the term “The Civil War.” In actuality, Southerners preferred terms like “War Between the States,” but recognized the controversy, so settled for Civil War. Also missing from these debates were any mentions of slavery, which likely had to do with the early 20th century rise of radical white racism (434).- Sophia Prewitt
+During the early stages of the Civil War, Lincoln repeatedly flipped between names. The two most consistent names he would use early on were “Rebellion” and “Insurrection”. There are many legal implications to the language Lincoln used. The most notable being the suspension of Habeas Corpus. (Hank L)
+Later in the War, the different names of the Civil War were looked at more closely. One of the main reasons for this was because Lincoln wanted to reunite the North and South. By calling it the “Civil War”, there are less political implications. Unification would have been much more difficult had the Union continued to call the war an “insurrection” or “rebellion”. (Hank L)
+By calling the Civil War the “Civil War”, there can be many interpretations for its causes. For example, Southerners may say that the war was for States’ rights; while many Northerns would say that the South wanted to preserve slavery. This generic name allowed for everyone to see their respective causes as right. (Hank L)
+The final term "Civil War" was ultimately a compromise between white Northerners and Southerners. Both had adopted it since it was generic and "inoffensive" enough for them to not only directly call the other out for its cause, but also so that they could project their own meanings and interpretations onto. Of course, this obscured the central cause of slavery from its wording and pushed out any African-American memory building around the naming convention of the war. (Orion van Rooy)