Could the South Have Won the Civil War?

It was well believed until Jackson’s forces began unloading rounds on the Union army stopping McDowell’s forces from advancing, holding the line like “a stone wall.” As the new Union recruits witnessed battle for the first time and felt the lack of preparation, they were quick to retreat back to Washington DC. The Southern victory and the tens of thousands of lives lost proved to the Union that this war was not going to be easily won.

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

Who would have thought that a nation could split and turn on each other? The Civil war has main causes, key people, and battles. All of the people, events, and causes effected how the war came to be and how the Civil War was fought. The important people of the Civil war made important decisions that may have caused one side to a victory or a horrific lose. The battles of the war were bloody and devastating, and the causes of the Civil War show how different the North was from the South. Many people know the Civil War was extremely significant, but most people don't know what caused this major battle in history.

“A true man of honor feels humbled himself when he cannot help humbling others.” This quote was made in 1871 by one of the greatest generals and probably men in American History; Robert Edward Lee. Robert Edward Lee was a general in the American Civil War. He led his men and stood with them in each and every they were in and got many of them out safely.

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:

During the American Civil War, leadership within the Union’s army was constantly an issue. Within the Union, various generals were found at times to be at odds with the political leaders in Washington. This was especially evident in the relationship between General George McClellan and President Lincoln. This tension was the result of McClellan’s approach to waging war. By examining the differing approaches to waging war of U.S. Grant and George B. McClellan one can gain a better appreciation for the decision making that was necessary by leaders like Lincoln, in selecting military

In my belief, the civil war couldn't have been avoided. The biggest cause of the civil war was the dispute over the future of the slavery. Without the was, there was no possibility for the southern state to abolish slavery because slaves were a;ready being used for a large variety of jobs. Southerners believed that slaves were cheaper and more manageable form of labor who could be trained to work in the factories. Slavery was economic foundation for the south, which meant they wouldn't have ended slavery without the war.

A frequently, and sometimes hotly, discussed subject; the outcome of the American Civil War has fascinated historians for generations. Some argue that the North's economic advantages proved too much for the South, others that Southern strategy was faulty, offensive when it should have been defensive, and vice-versa. Internal division in the South is often referred to, and complaints made against Davis' somewhat makeshift, inexperienced, government. Doubts are sometimes raised over the commitment of Southerners to a cause many of them were half-hearted about. Many historians have argued that the South lost the will to fight long before defeat was inevitable. However, many of these criticisms could easily be applied to the North, had the

Union officer William Tecumseh Sherman observed to a Southern friend that, "In all history, no nation of mere agriculturists ever made successful war against a nation of mechanics. . . .You are bound to fail." While Sherman's statement proved to be correct, its flaw is in its assumption of a decided victory for the North and failure to account for the long years of difficult fighting it took the Union to secure victory. Unquestionably, the war was won and lost on the battlefield, but there were many factors that swayed the war effort in favor of the North and impeded the South's ability to stage a successful campaign.

South and had cost the Union dearly. Later, Antietam had given the Union a small victory and prompted President Lincoln to issue the Emancipation Proclamation announcing all slaves in the Confederate territory still in rebellion were freed. Unfortunately for the North, this was soon followed by another Confederate victory at the battle of Fredericksburg. So, why did the South eventually lose? When the question is asked that way, it somewhat implies that the South lost the war all by itself and that it really could have won it. One answer is that the North won it. The South lost because the North outmanned and outclassed it at almost every point, militarily.

Williams shows an interesting side of Lincoln’s patience that wears thin when there are no early victories and from the lack of aggressiveness on the Union side. Williams shows a gradual transformation on Lincoln’s selection process. Initially each general was selected on characteristics such as battle experience and political backing. As the enemy holds out and there is inaction, Lincoln starts to doubt the ability of his generals and starts to seek generals who can win without excuses.

     I agree with the idea that the North had won the Civil War before it began to the extent of Lincoln’s conservative political stands. Trying to receive the favor of the South while winning in the North would require Lincoln to take neutral stands in heated political issues like slavery. It wasn’t really wan by the North until he broke away from these stands to enact the Emancipation Proclamation and turn the tides of war in favor of the North. “This Lincoln always publicly condemned the abolitionists who fought slavery by extra constitutional means – and condemned also the mobs who deprived them of their right of free speech and free press.” (Holfstadter, Lincoln and the Self-Made

The Confederacy lost the war due to its biggest lost – Southern morality. Among civilians and Confederate soldiers alike, they lost the will to fight against the Union. They quickly realized how many more troubles they had during the war than before it. Taxation,

At the end of 1864, Sherman was in charge of over 60,000 union fighting men. Sherman realized that he had to find a way to bring about a quicker resolution to the war. To bring about this resolution he wanted to get the people of the Confederacy to feel the effects of war. He was not interested in the limited war that had been fought in the preceding years. Sherman, and his superior Grant, both understood that if the Confederacy’s spirit could be broken the north would prevail quickly. Unlike many others in the union army, these men knew that “as long as the southern psyche remained whole, southerners would support the war effort, no matter the casualties suffered or the territory lost” (Lance). Sherman understood that by affecting southern morale and the southern will to fight, he could win the war. His “March to the Sea” was determined to break the back of the Confederacy and bring a speedy end to the Civil War. To do this there needed to be new tactics and a new type of warfare. Sherman had institutionalized a type of warfare new to the Civil War. His desire to crush southern resolve had embraced the principle of total war.

In James M. McPherson story “What They Fought for” almost immediately in McPherson opening paragraph he comes out and says. “They didn’t know what they were fighting, for exactly, and they fought on anyways that’s what made them heroes.” I found this quote to be quite brilliant showing the courage of both the sides that were at odds with one another highlighting their bravery and willing ness to fight for their country and out weighting their fear of the unknown. Even though to some of soldiers the reason for fighting wasn’t the clearest they answered to the call of duty. This is one of the many reason why I believe the Union and the Confederacy had so many similar ideas in common but could not agree on how to reach these shared interest in