User Tools

Site Tools


foster_what_s_not_in_a_name

Differences

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

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision
Next revision
Previous revision
foster_what_s_not_in_a_name [2025/01/16 17:35] dforrerfoster_what_s_not_in_a_name [2025/01/17 21:01] (current) ovanrooy
Line 44: Line 44:
  
 -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 -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)
foster_what_s_not_in_a_name.1737048928.txt.gz · Last modified: 2025/01/16 17:35 by dforrer