Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Throughout the course of U.S. history, religious symbolism has played a role in memorials. This symbolism reached its height after World War I, and continues today. Since the last half of the 20th-century, legal cases have challenged religious symbolism in memorials on public or government property. The courts have developed legal tests to evaluate the use of this symbolism in war memorials. First, this study used historical analyses to examine how religious symbolism has been explicitly expressed in American war memorials. Second, legal analyses were applied to key cases involving conflicts between church and state, and memorials. Whereas past legal judgments focused on a memorial’s symbols, recent legal judgments included an evaluation of the environmental setting in which such religious symbols and memorials were placed. Thus, memorial designers must consider not only how they introduce symbolism into a memorial’s design, but also how their site designs involve potential religious symbolism.

Keywords

war memorials Latin cross Establishment Clause legal conflicts

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Barber, B. ( 1949). Place, symbol and utilitarian function in war memorials . Social Forces, 28, 64-68.

Belk, R.W. ( 1992). Attachment to possessions. In I. Altman & S. M. Low (Eds.), Place attachment (pp. 37-63). New York: Plenum .

Blair, W.A. ( 2004). Cities of the dead. Chapel Hill & London: University of North Carolina Press.

County of Allegheny v. ACLU, 492 U.S. 573 (1989).

Foster, G.M. ( 1987). Ghosts of the confederacy. New York : Oxford University Press.

Gonzales v. North Township of Lake County, Indiana, 4F.3d 1412, 1419 (7th Cir. 1993).

Goode, J.M. ( 1974). The outdoor sculpture of Washington, D.C. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press.

Greater Houston Chapter of ACLU v. Eckels, 589 F. Supp. 222 (S.D. Tex. 1984).

Grossman, E.G. ( 1984). Architecture for a public client: The monuments and chapels of the American Battle Monuments Commission. Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, 43, 119-143.

10.

Halbwachs, H. ( 1980). The collective memory (F. J. Ditter, Jr. & V. Y. Ditter, Trans.). New York: Harper & Row (Original work published 1925).

11.

Hubbard, W. ( 1984, Winter). A meaning for monuments. Public Interest, 74, 17-30.

12.

Hudnut, J. ( 1945, September). The monument does not remember. Atlantic Monthly, pp. 55-59.

13.

Lemon v. Kurtzman, 403 U.S. 602 (1971).

14.

Mayo, J.M. ( 1988). War memorials as political landscape. New York: Praeger.

15.

McCreary County v. ACLU of Kentucky, 545 U.S. 844 (2005).

16.

Piehler, G.K. ( 1995). Remembering war the American way. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press.

17.

Pleasant Grove City, Utah v. Summum, 555 U.S. 07-655 (2009).

18.

Robin, R. ( 1992). Enclaves of America: The rhetoric of political architecture abroad, 1900-1965. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

19.

Smith, D.G. ( 2007). The constitutionality of religious symbolism after McCreary and Van Orden. Texas Review of Law & Politics, 12, 94-135.

20.

Trunk v. City of San Diego, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 58549 (July 7, 2008).

21.

Van Orden v. Perry, 545 U.S. 677 at 685 n. 3 (2005).

22.

Winter, J. ( 1995). Sites of memory, sites of mourning: The great war in European cultural history. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

23.

Zelinsky, W. ( 1988). Nation into state. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina.

Commemorating God and Country in American War Memorials: Symbolic Evolution and Legality

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References