One of the most heavily debated topics when people discuss the War Between the States is the "correct" name for the conflict. The most commonly used name (by most, not by me) is "The American Civil War," or just "The Civil War." What I think is the second most commonly used name is the one I use, "The War Between the States." Some of the other names I've heard used are "The War for Southern Independence," "The War of the Rebellion," and "The Second American Revolution." I'm sure there are more, but these are the ones I've heard.
I refuse to use "American Civil War" or "Civil War" for one reason - the conflict was not a 'civil war.' For those of you who may not know what the definition of 'civil war' is, here it is right out of the Merriam-Webster Dictionary:
"Civil war (noun) - a war between opposing groups of citizens of the same country."
Since the Southern states had seceded from the Union and formed their own country, what took place was a war between two separate countries (or nations); therefore, the conflict was NOT a 'civil war,' and I don't give a damn that Lincoln used that term in the Gettysburg Address, either.
And this brings us smack dab into the debate of whether or not secession was legal, a topic I'll save for a later date. But I do have a question concerning that which I'll ask at the end of this post.
But back to the name - I use the WBTS because I think that's the most accurate description of what took place. Sure, you could call it the "War for Southern Independence" and you wouldn't be wrong; you could also call it the "Second American Revolution" and you still wouldn't be wrong because after all, the Southerners were Americans, were they not? Even "War of the Rebellion" wouldn't be wrong, but only if you looked at it from the Yankee's point of view.
No, what took place was a war between two different nations, and since these nations were both composed of individual states, I use the term "War Between the States." There are those who will claim that the Confederacy was not a 'sovereign' nation because it was never formally recognized by another nation such as Great Britain, and they wouldn't be wrong. And that's one of the reasons I use the term that I do - you cannot deny that both the US and the CS were composed of individual states, and those states were at war with each other.
Now, about that question I mentioned earlier...
In his Gettysburg Address Lincoln referred to the conflict as "a great civil war," publicly affirming his opinion and the opinion of the Federal government that secession was illegal and that the Southern states were still a part of the United States. After all, that was the reason for issuing the call for 75,000 troops in 1861 'to preserve the Union,' right?
So if that was the case, then why did the Southern states have to be readmitted to the Union when the war was over?
Good question, huh?
Think about it.