Date: Fri, 14 Nov 1997 19:27:50 -0500
From: "Barry A. Popik" Bapopik[AT SYMBOL GOES HERE]AOL.COM
Subject: VETERANS DAY SPECIAL: World War
This is from the San Francisco Chronicle, 2 December 1919, pg. 20, cols.
6-7:
NAMING THE WAR
As a name for the war which began in the August of 1914 and ended in the
November of 1918, the one formally adopted by our War Department--"The World
War"--is not a bad one. It is as good, perhaps, as any of the two or three
others that have been suggested, and more than possibly none better will be
found. Yet it is not a name to excite instant and enthusiastic acceptance,
and its fate with the people of the world could not be prophesied with any
safety. Of all the innumerable wars that have been waged since history
began, comparatively few have required any name at all. The great majority
of them, from that insignificant enough to merit Hume's comparison with "the
skirmishes of kites and crows" up to those that appreciably affected human
destiny and racial conditions, have had to go with no better designation than
a phrase telling when and where they were fought and by whom. We have not
yet fully agreed on a name for the war between our North and South, and
American independence was gained by a war which we are usually content to
call "the Revolution"--which is quite undistinctive for anybody except
ourselves. The "Mexican War" and "the War of 1812" can hardly be said to
have names, and "the war with Spain" is of designation similarly dubious.
"The World War" is a fairly natural growth from the facts, and its element
of exaggeration, though obvious and real, is so small as to offend only a few
nations that did manage to keep out of it, and nobody much minds what they
say. It might have been as wise if our departmental officials had waited a
while before they named the greatest of wars. There is some excuse for
denying that the war is over yet, and while that can be done nobody can be
sure what name will fit the war or stand permanent wear.--New York Times.