Talk:American Civil War

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the American Civil War article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24: 60 days

view · edit

Frequently asked questions

Many of these questions arise frequently on the talk page concerning the American Civil War.

To view an explanation to the answer, click the [show] link to the right of the question.

Q1: Should slavery be presented as the most important cause of the war? (Yes.)

A1: Yes. Slavery was the most important cause of the war. Wikipedia requires that we rely on the best officially documented research available, without any original research or undue weight to fringe theories.

After the war, some movements sought to advance Lost Cause interpretations, arguing that the Confederacy was not primarily fighting to defend slavery. While these have been popular in some quarters, the vast majority of historians do not support these interpretations, including best historians (McPherson, Nevins, Freehling and even the better Southern historians such as Potter). Ironically, during the crisis that led to the outbreak of war, Confederate politicians openly presented preservation of slavery as the central issue, in their own words. They mentioned fears for the future of slavery many times in their declarations of reasons for secession, political speeches and editorials. Abraham Lincoln and Alexander Stephens had the following to say:

"You think slavery is right and should be extended; while we think slavery is wrong and ought to be restricted. That I suppose is the rub." - From Abraham Lincoln's letter to Confederate Vice President Alexander Stephens, Dec 22, 1860

"We at the South do think African slavery, as it exists with us, both morally and politically right. This opinion is founded upon the inferiority of the black race. You, however, and perhaps a majority of the North, think it wrong." - From Stephens' reply to Lincoln, Dec 30, 1860

It is true that Abraham Lincoln and Jefferson Davis both downplayed the slavery issue after the war began. As historian James Ford Rhodes explained, Davis hoped to get support from Britain and France, where slavery was unpopular, and Lincoln needed to keep the loyalty of the border states, which were both pro-slavery and pro-Union. This is why in statements like the Crittenden–Johnson Resolution, northern politicians argued they were only fighting to preserve the Union. Similarly, Lincoln's sole justification for the Emancipation Proclamation was military necessity. Holzer, Striner and Brewster note that Lincoln needed to portray the emancipation in a way that was acceptable to the border states and War Democrats.

Q2: Were tariffs and states' rights similar in importance? (No.)

A2: No. The tariff issue and states' rights were factors, and there were others. These are all included in the article. However, no issue was as important as slavery.

The original secessionists were not very careful in separating states' rights from the slavery issue. They defended both states' rights (such as secession) and federal power (such as the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850), depending on which suited slavery with each controversy. South Carolina's declaration of reasons for secession is one example out of many. However, Lost Cause historians did subsequently portray the Confederacy as consistent defenders of states' rights.

The tariff issue had been a much larger issue three decades before the war, and even then John Calhoun, who led South Carolina's attempt to nullify the Tariff of 1828, said that the tariff issue was related to slavery. In his March 6, 1860 speech at New Haven, Lincoln had said that the slavery issue was more important than the tariff or any other issue.

Q3: Did Lincoln propose to immediately abolish slavery in the South when elected? (No.)

A3: No. Lincoln combined moral opposition to slavery (calling it "a monstrous injustice") with a moderate, gradual program of action. Lincoln, like most Republicans, believed that compromises of the Constitution (a three-fifths clause, a 20 year extension of the African slave trade and a fugitive slave clause) implied constitutional recognition of slavery where it existed. However, Lincoln would not compromise on preventing any expansion of slavery in the hope that this would put it "in the course of ultimate extinction."

Q4: Did Lincoln believe in racial equality? (Mostly.)

A4: In the context of the 19th century, being seen as a "Black Republican" abolitionist would be politically damaging. Lincoln was inconsistent on the equality issue during the Lincoln-Douglas debates of 1858, partly in order to deflect this charge. However, the things Lincoln said in favor of equality were many (including Abraham Lincoln's second inaugural address and his Cooper Union speech), while the things he said against it were few, and those few were combined with a great deal of political pressure. While Lincoln and other northern politicians did not always advocate equality, this should not be given undue weight, especially as they wanted to give far more rights to black people than the Confederate politicians. At a July 10, 1858 Speech at Chicago Lincoln said, "I have always hated slavery, I think as much as any Abolitionist."

Q5: Should the article refer to the states that allowed slavery as slave states? (Yes.)

A5: Yes, because their politicians referred to them as slave states, and because slavery related concerns were by far the major complaint mentioned by secessionists. After the outbreak of war, the slave states became divided between the Confederate states and the border states.

Q6: Did some slave states fight for the North? (Yes.)

A6: Yes, the five border states. These states had less slavery and more support for the Union than the Confederate slave states. They opposed emancipation at first, but largely accepted the military need for it eventually. Kentucky and Missouri had more slavery than the rest, and had loyalties that were more divided than the rest. For example, Missouri's Governor Claiborne Jackson was a southern sympathizer, but was prevented from seceding by Union Brigadier General Nathaniel Lyon. Missouri saw some of the worst guerrilla fighting of the entire war because of its divisions over slavery.

Q7: Should the title be American Civil War? (Yes.)

A7: Yes. The title "American Civil War" is used only because it is the most common international name for the war. It is used in order to be understood, regardless of whether it could be better. The title does ignore the South's point of view, and it ignores the fact that Central America and South America are also America, in a sense. The other names should be mentioned, but not in this article. They are mentioned in Naming the American Civil War. The main article links to this.

Q8: Did the South start the war? (Yes.)

A8: The South bombarded and seized Fort Sumter, a federal fort in South Carolina. Historians regard this as the incident in which the actual fighting began.

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

American Civil War was one of the Warfare good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
April 10, 2006	Peer review	Reviewed
November 4, 2006	Good article nominee	Listed
November 26, 2006	Good article reassessment	Delisted
December 10, 2006	Good article nominee	Listed
March 22, 2007	WikiProject A-class review	Not approved
March 28, 2007	WikiProject A-class review	Approved
April 21, 2007	Good article reassessment	Kept
October 14, 2007	Good article reassessment	Kept
November 5, 2007	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
December 10, 2008	Good article reassessment	Kept
March 23, 2011	Peer review	Reviewed
July 28, 2012	Good article reassessment	Delisted
May 30, 2014	WikiProject A-class review	Demoted
December 12, 2015	Peer review	Reviewed
May 25, 2021	Good article nominee	Not listed
Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on December 20, 2004, December 20, 2005, and December 20, 2006.
Current status: Delisted good article

Military history: North America / United States / American Civil War

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force
	American Civil War task force

Additional information:
/
	This article has failed an A-Class review.

Politics: American Mid‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by American politics task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

United States: Old West / Civil War / Military history / History Top‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject American Old West (assessed as High-importance).
	American Civil War portal This article is supported by WikiProject Military history - American Civil War task force.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Military history - U.S. military history task force.
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. history (assessed as Top-importance).
	This article has been selected for use on the United States portal.

African diaspora Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject African diaspora, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of African diaspora on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.African diasporaWikipedia:WikiProject African diasporaTemplate:WikiProject African diasporaAfrican diaspora articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Guild of Copy Editors

This article was copy edited by geraldshields11, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on February 15, 2013.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles

This article has been mentioned by a media organization:

Daniel Nasaw (4 April 2012). "Who, What, Why: How many soldiers died in the US Civil War?". BBC.

Other talk page banners

Section sizes

Section size for American Civil War (60 sections)
Section name	Byte count	Section total
(Top)	20,607	20,607
Origins	5,998	7,421
Lincoln's election	1,423	1,423
Outbreak of the war	24	20,481
Secession crisis	10,004	10,004
Battle of Fort Sumter	3,314	3,314
Attitude of the border states	7,139	7,139
War	680	25,898
Mobilization	6,133	6,133
Prisoners	778	778
Women	1,848	1,848
Naval tactics	2,925	2,925
Union blockade	1,305	6,574
Blockade runners	1,803	1,803
Economic impact	3,466	3,466
Diplomacy	6,960	6,960
Eastern theater	757	10,508
Background	19	2,792
Army of the Potomac	527	527
Army of Northern Virginia	2,246	2,246
Battles	6,959	6,959
Western theater	606	8,247
Background	19	1,220
Army of the Tennessee and Army of the Cumberland	845	845
Army of Tennessee	356	356
Battles	6,421	6,421
Trans-Mississippi theater	94	4,891
Background	802	802
Battles	3,995	3,995
Lower Seaboard theater	91	4,018
Background	446	446
Battles	3,481	3,481
Pacific Coast theater	476	476
Conquest of Virginia	2,067	6,259
Grant's Overland Campaign	1,344	1,344
Sheridan's Valley Campaign	803	803
Sherman's March to the Sea	1,289	1,289
The Waterloo of the Confederacy	756	756
End of the war	11,705	11,705
Union victory and aftermath	9,917	9,917
Casualties	8,934	8,934
Emancipation	2,898	15,322
Emancipation Proclamation	12,424	12,424
Reconstruction	4,459	4,459
Memory and historiography	2,622	12,105
Lost Cause	2,278	2,278
Battlefield preservation	3,371	3,371
Commemoration	1,795	1,795
Technological significance	2,039	2,039
In works of culture and art	1,002	4,481
Literature	1,022	1,022
Film	1,134	1,134
Music	362	362
Video games	961	961
See also	297	297
Notes	46	46
References	13,970	32,837
Bibliography	16,913	16,913
Soldier life: North and South	1,954	1,954
External links	2,758	2,758
Total	211,667	211,667

This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report. The week in which this happened:

August 13 to 19, 2017 (21st)

The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:

Leonard, Elizabeth D. (1999). All the Daring of the Soldier: Women of the Civil War Armies (1st ed.). W.W. Norton & Co. ISBN 0-3930-4712-1.

There is a request, submitted by Catfurball, for an audio version of this article to be created. For further information, see WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia.

The rationale behind the request is: "Important".

The federal holiday Juneteenth

The federal holiday Juneteenth says your end of the Civil War date of May 26,1865 is wrong. The Juneteenth holiday celebrates the end of the civil war in Texas and the freeing of the slaves in Texas. Between your clamed of the end of the war on May 26 and the end of the war in Texas June 19 uniformed confederates were active in Texas and blacks were still slaves in that area. The true end of the Civil war is June 23, 1865, when the last confederate general surrendered all his forces. After that only scattered troops were still resisting and not a threat. 2600:1015:A011:BFA0:C82:AAB8:8474:6668 (talk) 12:48, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1965? do you have a source for that? 12:50, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

Note the above comment was edited. Slatersteven (talk) 13:30, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Appomattox marks the official end of the fighting, even though some skirmishes happened afterward. After Lee surrendered on April 9, 1865, Confederate Lt. Gen. Simon B. Buckner, acting for General Edmund Kirby Smith, surrendered the Confederate trans-Mississippi Department forces on May 26, 1865.Michaelbtfsplk (talk) 22:46, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comparison Chart

The chart Comparison of Union and Confederacy, 1860–1864 shows a decrease in the population of the Confederacy of six million and a comparable increase in the population of the Union. This calls for an explanation. As I understand it, there was no large-scale movement of people in the course of the war from the south to the north. The Confederacy did not experience anywhere near that number of deaths due to the war, nor can natural population increase or immigration account for the increase in the population of the Union. I suspect that something is wrong, or that the chart perhaps represents the population of areas controlled by the Union and the Confederacy, with the population of the Union including that of those parts of the Confederacy conquered by the Union as of 1864, and the population of the Confederacy excluding the population of the areas lost by the Confederacy. If that is the case, at the very least an explanation should be provided, but better yet, the figures should be revised so that the 1864 figures are for the same areas as in the 1860 figures. After all, the population advantage of the Union was not really increased by the population of the conquered areas of the Confederacy.Bill (talk) 22:18, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 5 July 2024

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Excessive amount of text add more subheadings. 64.189.18.48 (talk) 07:42, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Charliehdb (talk) 14:19, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 28 July 2024

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Article must be condensed. 64.189.18.53 (talk) 01:04, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Add more subheadings to background to cil war and early years of the war. 64.189.18.53 (talk) 01:05, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Left guide (talk) 02:06, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Too long still

The article at 16,000 words readable prose size is still 1,000 words above the size guideline. It's probably worth cutting down the causes section as there's a whole sub article on that. any help would be greatly appreciated, Tom B (talk) 17:02, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I can give it a whirl in about a week when I've got more time. It was long on my to do list! CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 07:14, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

thank you! Tom B (talk) 10:59, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]