Talk:Names of the American Civil War

message: I've seen "War of Southern Treason" used a number of times on the web (typically in response to someone using "War of Northern Aggression".  Is this a notable enough term to be mentioned in the article (I don't know of any examples that would meet the reliable sources rule, but maybe someone else does).
:The Clayton Library in Houston Texas (Noted genealogical library) houses the official documents of the war (aka the civil war), there are two sets which include many volumes each, The one set is titled 'The Official Documents of the War of Northern Aggression'; The other set is titled 'The Official Documents of the War of Southern Rebellion'.Suijur (talk) 22:26, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: If you can find reliable, published sources, I say go for it. But just because you've seen it used in internet forums, especially as a retort to "War of Northern Agression", I say these don't qualify for its inclusion.Mmyers1976 (talk) 17:02, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

text: While such a name would be apropos, considering the blatant aggression of the Slave Power not only in the opening of the war, but for the thirty years prior to it, I for one have never run across it used historically.  The War of Southern Aggression, on the other hand, is indeed a specific phrase of that nature that one can find in published historical sources.  Rogue 9 (talk) 13:42, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  War of Southern Treason 

message: No one within the U.S. ever though to call this horrendous war the "Civil War of the United States" or variation of it. I find that hard to believe and wish I had sources that demonstrated at least a similar name to it. The closes to me it seems is the “War Between the States” as that was what it ended up being after the so called “Union” won, because the CSA was never recognized as a sovereign country, making the States seceding still part of the U.S. in the world-view, and the other names that point out the geographic locations of (at least most of) the belligerents, to me this is just taking sides as to who was attacking who in the other’s view. This comment is not to be taken as if I want the article’s name to be changed, is just that I have never heard this war being called this specifically and if it has been used I would like it to be added to this article. -- sion8 (talk) 5:34, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: You might want to review the "Civil War" section of the article one more time. Between the general U.S.-centric mind-set of many Americans, and the long-lasting toll of the horrendous conflict on the American psyche, the locational qualifier is not generally needed. Fat&Happy (talk) 06:09, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: In my haste I miss this, thank you for correcting my error. -- sion8 (talk) 2:50, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

text: Of course a locational qualifier isn't needed for Americans, everyone refers to their own civil war as 'the civil war'. 2A00:23A8:4C05:DB00:F8A4:146C:7A32:354 (talk) 21:00, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: It IS referred to as the "American Civil War", though, which is in keeping with the standard English convention of how to refer to civil wars (e.g., English Civil War, Spanish Civil War, Russian Civil War etc). In English the demonym for a person from the US is "American", because that was the label chosen by the founders of the US; prior to that, "American" exclusively meant American Indians, so adopting that label for themselves by people who had previously been called "English" was done in the spirit of wildness. But I've gone off on a tangent... Firejuggler86 (talk) 23:42, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  So no one has called it the U.S. civil war?! 

message: Why does Wikipedia consistently use the northern names for the battles of the War? For example, search for "Battle of Sharpsburg," and "Battle of Antietam" pops up. If there is any page that has as its default the southern name of a battle, I can't find it. CsikosLo (talk) 02:57, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Why is this important? deisenbe (talk) 12:40, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia parisanship 

message: * One might distinguish [a civil war where rival forces seek to gain control of an entire state] from [a war of secession]. If the secessionists are victorious then the war will be called a war of independence; otherwise it may be called a rebellion. It is interesting to me that more [foreign-language wikipedia articles] are called "War of Secession" than "American War of Secession"; I don't know whether this is because other wars of secession are described using some other term than "war of secession" or because the American example is so pre-emininent.
* I note also Icelandic Wikipedia has w:is:Þrælastríðið "Slave War", though that has .
jnestorius(talk) 10:10, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Foreign languages 

message: A name used during and briefly after the war was the Slaveholder's Rebellion.
Frederick Douglas referred to it as such in speech:
Frederick Douglass. “The Slaveholders’ Rebellion”. Speech, July 04, 1862. From Teaching American History. https://teachingamericanhistory.org/document/the-slaveholders-rebellion/ (accessed December 7, 2021).
Kansas senator Pomeroy introduced "A bill for the Suppression of the Slaveholder's Rebellion" in 1861.
Some informal discussion on its usage: https://civilwartalk.com/threads/war-of-northern-agression-v-slaveholders-rebellion-only-one-is-historically-correct.152621/
LSU professor Gaines Foster proposes that few used this term, or President Lincoln's proposed Abolition War:
"Abraham Lincoln and most northerners initially referred to a civil war or an insurrection but quickly adopted "Rebellion," which stressed the goal of preserving the Union and stigmatized secession. Frederick Douglass and others proposed "Abolition war" or the "Slaveholders' Rebellion," but few northerners adopted them."  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.215.51.198 (talk) 05:55, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Slaveholder's Rebellion