Why Did The South Lose The Civil War Essay

From 1861 to 1865, the United States of America was fighting itself. The northern part of the United States, known as the Union or simply the North, was trying to end slavery in the southern part of the United States. The South seceded from the Union and formed the Confederate States of America. The North consisted of Maine, New York, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Kansas, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, California, Nevada, and Oregon. The South consisted of Texas, Arkansas, Louisiana, Tennessee, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, Florida, South Carolina, North Carolina, and Virginia. The North wanted slavery to be abolished, but the South needed slaves for their economy; the conflict started war. The North and the South were both prepared for war.

The argument that I found to be most convincing was Fredrickson’s. The argument he presents to be the best is that the South ultimately lost due to their most glaring failure being in the area of coordination, collective adaptation to new conditions, and lack modernization. He talks about how the southern commanders during the war lacked leadership. Their army’s were undisciplined and insubordinate, many men abandoned their cause. The southern government couldn’t even get their states to give up control over a large quantity of arms to give those weapons to the fighting soldiers. Instead, they had to turn away over 200,000 volunteers in the first year. The north successfully modernized in various societies, when the south did now. This supports

Historians have argued inconclusively for years over the prime reason for Confederate defeat in the Civil War. The book Why the North Won the Civil War outlines five of the most agreed upon causes of Southern defeat, each written by a highly esteemed American historian. The author of each essay does acknowledge and discuss the views of the other authors. However, each author also goes on to explain their botheration and disagreement with their opposition. The purpose of this essay is to summarize each of the five arguments presented by Richard N. Current, T. Harry Williams, Norman A. Graebner, David Herbert Donald, and David M. Potter. Each author gives his insight on one of the following five reasons:

Although the Confederate Army was more successful than it should have been, it was not as successful as an army could have been. The Confederacy lost the Civil War because at some point what should have happened from the start of the Civil War began to happen. The Union began to use their size, strength, and commonness in the common belief of their citizens to their advantage. However, at the beginning of the war, the Confederate Army won battles that they did not have the size to win. Somehow, despite the close-mindedness of their beliefs of white supremacy, they were able to keep themselves undefeated for much longer than expected. The Confederate Army was smart but more than anything they were

North won the civil war for a few reasons, they had more people, more resources, and the North had won previous battles. Obviously North had some advantages in the Civil War, these reasons really helped the North during the Civil War. The North had way more people then what the South did, document 4 says “Northern states had a combined population of 22 million people. The Southern states had a combined population of about 9 million.” This clearly shows how the North had way more people, and when there are more people fighting there is a higher chance that you win.

The Civil War that took place in the United States from 1861 to 1865 could have easily swung either way at several points during the conflict. There is however several reasons that the North would emerge victorious from this bloody war that pit brother against brother. Some of the main contributing factors are superior industrial capabilities, more efficient logistical support, greater naval power, and a largely lopsided population in favor of the Union. Also one of the advantages the Union had was that of an experienced government, an advantage that very well might have been one of the greatest contributing factors to their success. There are many reasons factors that lead to the North's victory, and each of these elements in and

(Why Did the North Win the Civil War? https://www.historyonthenet.com/why-did-the-north-win-the-civil-war/). This meant that the North had more men at its disposal, and outnumbering your opponent gives you great advantages in military terms. Therefore, the lack of soldiers in the South's Army gave the North the supremacy, and eventually the victory in the Civil

However this effected the South because they failed to grow their industrial platform. The North had 66% of railroad mileage when the South had only 34%. This shows by far that the North was more industrialized than the South. Since the Union had more mileage of railroad they were able to have their men, food, and materials transported for a long distance in a short period of time. Unlike the North the South was unfortunate to not have such an advanced railroad. The South was able to transport some distance but not nearly the amount of mileage the North could cover. This shows very clearly the South simply lost the war due to their lack of interest in improving their resource industry and industrial

In 1861 the “United States” was in fact not united; they were divided. At the time the United states of America was going through a hard time. The south believed slavery was necessary and wanted to move westward to expand their land and plantations. When the North banned slavery in the West, the south was extremely upset and don't enjoy being told what to do. They began to secede from the union which began the civil war. I believe the north won the civil war because of their population, their advantage in supplies, exports/imports, and transportation, and because they had better finances.

First, the South couldn’t have won the civil war because state’s rights prevented unification of the South. The very issue that created the Confederacy helped to destroy it. In waging war, the South faced problems of politics and government that greatly complicated its problem of economic mobilization. No one would deny the troublesome effect of the conflict generated by differing ideas of how best to protect liberty and to organize southern society for the war effort. Southern people insisted upon retaining their democratic liberties in wartime, which proved fatal for the South. They had to struggle with a “confederacy formed by

The North’s overwhelming superiority in population, industry,and transportation, and preventing Britain from recognizing the south. The war took four full years for they to win the war. In my opinion about the North’s inability to win for so long was because the most important reason was the quality for military they had. Both sides Lee was from every angle the nation’s most splendid general, while Stonewall Jackson over and over showed the sort of brave and bluster that win triumphs. The North's commanders, then again, while skilled, were ease back to move. They were uncertain, generally neglecting to catch up triumphs by seeking after getting away southern armed forces with a specific end goal to devastate them. Solid cases that you ought

For one, the North wasn’t as united as the South. While the Confederacy fought for their way of life, the North fought for politicians (Confederate States). They were also fighting in unknown territory. In order to win, they would have to seize control over a large area of land (Davidson and Stoff pg 488). Finally, the North couldn’t find a good military leader for most of the war. Most of the military colleges were in the South, so the North was at a huge disadvantage in leadership and skill (Confederate States).

First of all, the North won the Civil War because they won the Battle of Gettysburg. This battle was one of the most crucial in the war. To win this was another step towards victory. The website, "Nps.gov" states, "The Union victory at the Battle of Gettysburg, sometimes referred to as the 'High Water Mark of the Rebellion' resulted not only in Lee's retreat to Virginia, but an end to the hopes of the Confederate States of America for independence" (Nps.gov). The evidence is saying that this loss for the South ended all of their hopes for victory. Since the North won the Battle of Gettysburg they are one step closer to victory, and bringing the Union back together again. The battle took away all the hope from the Southern states. The Northern states won the Civil war because they were able to defeat the Confederate armies at the battle of Gettysburg.

There is an issue that followed the Civil War that can only really be addressed in retrospect. Who won the Civil War? Not necessarily the war itself, but who won the peace. There is not really a single or definitive answer because the effects and the outcomes of the war are still being determined. This question is nebulous in the fact that certain aspects can be attributed to the South winning some aspects of the war and the North others. Also, do we include the impacts on former slaves as a Northern victory or do consider them to be their own side during this conflict. Many people will say that the North undoubtedly won the war, but the South's social hierarchy did not really change that much after the war.

"If wars are won by riches, there can be no question why the North eventually prevailed." The North was better equipped than the South, with the resources necessary to be successful in a long term war like the Civil War was, which was fought from 1861 – 1865. Prior, and during the Civil war, the North's economy was always stronger than the South's, boasting of resources that the Confederacy had no means of attaining. Compared to the South, The North had more factories available for production of war supplies and larger amounts of land for growing crops. Its population was several times of the South's, which was a potential source for military enlistees. Although the South had better naval leadership and commanders, such as Robert E. Lee