Question of the Week: Lake Calhoun Name Change?
Featured, History — By Cedar Phillips on May 20, 2011 10:23 am
There’s been lots of buzz lately about one local resident’s proposed name change for Lake Calhoun. What do you think? Does a Lake Calhoun have a place in Uptown?
Digg This
Bookmark
Stumble
8 Comments
I can’t imagine it being called anything other than Calhoun – seems like its part of the fabric of the city. But at the same time, defending keeping the name as is for this reason is sort of like flying the confederate flag in the south (which, by the way, makes me want to puke). Perhaps there is somebody else named Calhoun who has done great things that we could rededicate the lake’s name to? That way we could change the name without changing the name.
The question is: “What is in a name?”
John Calhoun was, amongst other undesirable things, a racist. But, when I think of Lake Calhoun, I think of Calhoun about as much as I think of King Louis XIV when I think of the Louisiana. Lake Calhoun is symbolic to the citizens of Minneapolis, not as a homage to a bygone racist, but to that of memories at a great, urban lake and park.
I read this comment online and found it very telling: “This discussion is moot. The Park Board renamed Lake Calhoun to Lake Mendoza on December 20, 1890. It was never named for John C. Calhoun in the first place, but rather a “Lieutenant Calhoun of early days” (Minneapolis Tribune, December 21, 1890). The newspaper predicted that the new name would not stick. “It may be Mendoza on the maps, on the records of the park board and on the minutes of the council, but on the hearts of Minneapolitans, old and young, it is indelibly stamped as Calhoun.” I have seen some maps from the early 1890s labeling it as “Lake Mendoza (formerly Lake Calhoun)” but by 1895 even this formality was dispensed with.”
However, some name changes can stick: Lake Nokomis was once called Lake Amelia; and Minnehaha Creek was formerly Brown’s Creek.
I’ve also read the comment citing the 1890 Tribune article, but am not yet convinced; another Tribune article (see, for example, March 14, 1904) claims otherwise, and cites the journals of William H. Keating (published 1825): “A body of water which is not represented upon any map that we known of has been discovered in this vicinity within a few years, and has received the name of Lake Calhoun in honor of the war secretary.” (vol. I, p.315) I haven’t read Keating’s journal for myself and can’t say whether the Tribune quoted him correctly or not, but if so, Keating would be a more accurate source than a newspaper article written decades after the fact.
I think it’s almost certain that the lake was named for John C. Calhoun, but at the same time I think it would still be a poor decision to change it. There’s no compelling reason to do so. John C. Calhoun was indeed a pro-slavery racist, but unless we’re willing to go through ALL of our city’s official names and vet their namesakes for viewpoints that meet our modern viewpoints (which I assume we are not) then one can only wonder: why this one? Lake Calhoun was named long before the Civil War, and like it or not, many of our nation’s historical figures have pasts and held viewpoints that do not past muster with our current standards.
Are you people crazy? Really? Calhoun the name is of Scottish origin originally spelled Colquhon. There are ENUMEROUS people named Calhoun other than John C. Calhoun.
I am a Southerner in Exile. If I felt my windows wouldn’t get blown out I’d fly a Confederate Flag if I had one. The Civil War was NOT nor ever was about slavery entirely. It was economics. Do I think anyone should be an owner of another human- absolutely not! However I understand why it existed and that it was destined to cause great pain and suffering. England had slavery until 1807 when it was abolished.
Do you understand that there were slaves in the North also? Did that make it acceptable because those states didn’t succeed from the Union?
My great, great grandfather died on July 3, 1863 at Gettysburg under Pickett’s Charge. He was a farmer with a wife and two small boys at home in Virginia. I have said this before and it bares repeating- I truly believe this man died for what he believed in and in my heart- I know it was not to keep slaves.
Patti,
You sound like a really nice person, and I’m sorry for this, but I have to call you out on this BS.
It WAS about slavery – amongst other things, such as the Constitution, State rights, economics and cultural differences. Yet, no matter the argument is made- they all come back and/or can be directly related to the institution of slavery.
Slavery was one issue of the Civil War, and it’s the one issue that history books remember it for being. However, there were many confederates who said that it would have been smart to abolish slavery in their states and then secede from the states. The confederates labeled the Civil War as the second American Revolution. Abraham Lincoln originally wasn’t for abolishing slavery. The English and the French were actually thinking of supporting the confederates in the war, but slavery was the one thing that kept them from doing so. By the way, I know a black man who once wore a Civil War hat with a confederate flag on it.
It’s stupid and a waste of time to change the name of a lake, street, park, and more just because one man goes on a rant about it saying it offends him. This is AMERICA, with millions of people, and we can’t please everyone. I have never heard of this John Calhoun, and could care less if he was a racist, he’s long since dead now. And I am sure there are other people with the name Calhoun. What if some guy named “Johnson” was a bigot or racist, now the name “Johnson” is a very common name. So can one bad “Johnson” apple ruin the hole bucket for all those named “Johnson” so nothing would ever get named after “Johnson”??
What if I find it offensive when people wear sunglasses indoor?? Should i rant and petition to make it illegal to wear sunglasses in doors just because it offends me?
This guy who started this name change for Lake Calhoun is just a grumpy old geezer who needs to get out and live life and stop worrying about stupid things like the names of lakes! This is Minnesota, land of 10,000 lakes, is he going to research every single one and complain about others?? Get a life, really!
George Washington was a slave owner. I guess we should change the name of Washington D.C. and the state of Washington to something like Lincoln D.C. or Lincoln state.