Disadvantages Of The Civil War

No other war seems to hold our focus like the Civil War. Scholars have chosen to make it their life's work, authors have written reams about it, and we all feel some kind of connection to the Civil War. This paper was created to highlight some of the major battles that took place during that conflict. Major battles usually marked a drastic change in the momentum from one side to the other or led to massive losses of troops. These battles and their results all played a huge part in the outcome of the war.

In the books The Civil War and Limits of Destruction by Mark E. Neely and The Destructive War by Charles Royster, both authors examine and question the destructiveness of the war. Neely is of the opinion that the Civil War was not a total war, while Royster argues the Civil War was the first modern war in American history. Both authors take different approaches to examining the war, as well as the role specific people played in the war. While both authors offer valid arguments to support their positions, there is no argument from either author that the Civil War had a major historical impact on our nation. While both books focus on the destructiveness of the Civil War, they differ not only on their view of the war as a total war, but also on the level of destruction, the approach used to support each authors point of view and the role that race played in the war.

The text “The Negro's Civil War: How American Blacks Felt and Acted During the War for the Union”, by James Mcpherson, gave me great research information on the 54th Regiment Massachusetts Infantry. McPherson tells African-American history using their feelings and actions during the Civil War as his evidence. Specifically, the book contains many letters written by heroes of this time period to tell the story forgotten by the United States. Teachers usually focus on famous battles and strategies of the two sides during the war. However, students could have grasp a better history of the war if given a broader sense of the account-which can only accomplished when one gains more knowledge on who were most affected by the war, American Blacks.

The United States began as a united country and the concept of America had revolved around unity and freedoms. However, when the north and the south began to view slavery differently, the United States changed forever. The north wanted African American slaves to be released as free men while the south wanted the keep slavery to work in the fields. The north wasn’t completely against slavery due to the fact that the north would get the cotton from the south which was picked by slaves which were used in factories. However, in the Blue Over Gray: Sources of Success and failure in the Civil War, George M. Fredrickson the author is expressing his thoughts on the advantages the north had such as greater population and resources. “The north’s advantages in manpower resources and industrial capacity were clearly overwhelming.”. In James M. McPherson’s article, Why the North Won explains the north's victory from a military perspective, he explains the north reason for victory and the souths reason for the loss. After the war, the articles in Hollitz express their thought on advantages, disadvantages, and outcomes of the civil war to end slavery.

The American Civil War was a military conflict between the United States of America (the Union), and 11 secessionist Southern states, organized as the Confederate States of America (the Confederacy). It was the culmination of four decades of intense sectional conflict and it reflected deep-seated economic, social, and political differences between the North and the South. Many books have been written on this “first modern war” describing how over 620,000 men were killed. Jeff Shaara goes deeper and explores the personal conflicts of four historical figures, two from the South and two from North: General Lee, General Jackson, Colonel Chamberlain, and Hancock.

Lieutenant General James Longstreet contributed to the Civil War despite the lack of appreciation from his fellow men. Longstreet opposed offensive warfare in Gettysburg and argued that the “enemy outnumbered you and outgunned you and would come looking for you anyway if you waited somewhere on your own ground” (10). He did not openly express his arguments all the time but was often ignored by General Robert E. Lee and many of the Confederate troops when he warned them that an offensive tactic at Gettysburg would cost the Confederacy numerous casualties. Even though soldiers like Brigadier General Lewis Armistead agreed with many of Longstreet theories of defensives, the South would never listen to Longstreet. The problem was the

Through journals and diaries, Mary Chesnut, Warren Goss, and Randolph Mckim provide diverse views of the civil war and no military and that time period. Because of the perspectives of the authors, their views vary in both subject matter and opinion, Chesnut was not affected by the war, only would be if the south loses, Warren goss told us about the military, through his experience in the military. Mckim illustrates what life is like is like on the battlefield. Based on these differences, Mckim provides the most compelling and accurate account of life during this time period.

The Civil War of 1861 – 1865 remains one of the most tragic pages in the American history. It claimed about 700,000 lives and nearly destroyed the unity of the nation (American Civil War). Naturally, such a massive clash could not have burst out inadvertently. Decades of differences between the North and South had led to a full-scale military clash. Two events cannot be overlooked when analyzing the roots of the conflict: the Dred Scott case and Southern secession.

During the American Civil War, the Union was successful because of their numerous factories, population, and transportation. The Confederate was unsuccessful because of their economic failures. They started out strong and failed during the war during The Civil War. They could really only make cotton. The Union came up with a plan called the Anaconda Plan to shut down the Confederate economically and it worked. This plan was an idea to make the Confederate crumble economically. They used their navy to surround there harbors and the Mississippi to stop any imports or exports to the Confederate. The Union had more factories than the Confederate allowing them to be able to produce goods way faster. This also allowed them to make guns, clothing, and railroads. The union had more people fighting in the war giving them more troops to fight in battles, and all of the troops had supplies thanks to their numerous factories. The Unionerners had better transportation than the Confederate giving them the ability to travel through the country faster. This also allowed them to transport goods faster. The Union and the Confederate both had their strengths and weaknesses but at the end of the war the Union showed that they were stronger than the Confederate.

What was your understanding of the Civil War prior to reading Unit 4. What is your understanding of it now?

The Civil War’s effects on America can be interpreted differently depending on time period. Tony Horwitz’s 150 Years of Misunderstanding the Civil War examines different views historians possessed when examining the war. With this trend in mind textbook American History: Connecting with the Past by Alan Brinkley presents a specific view on the war. Brinkley portrays the civil war inaccurately by deemphasizing of the Emancipation Proclamation, casualties , and failure to explain the war’s impact on the south; this discrepancy glorifies the war’s outcome by disregarding negative effects.

The Civil War began in the year 1861 and ended four years later. The end result was the Union becoming victorious in 1865. There are many advantages and disadvantages that both sides faced during the war, which ultimately contributed to the final outcome. The advantages and disadvantages that each side faced shared many similarities, but the Northern advantages ultimately outweighed the Southern’s. These advantages thus contributed to the North winning the Civil War.

Was the result of the Civil War set in stone? The Union winning the Civil War was inevitable. The Union had many more resources and would always have beaten the Confederacy. The Union had a higher population, they were more industrialized, and had more farms. The amount of advantages the Union had compared to the Confederacy is indisputable.

“A house divided against itself cannot stand.”1 These words, spoken by Abraham Lincoln, foreshadowed the war that became the bloodiest in all of the United State's history. The Civil War was a brutal conflict between the North and South; brother against brother. With slavery as the root cause, Southern states had seceded from the Union and were fighting for their independence. They became the Confederate States of America (CSA) and were a force to be reckoned with. The Union, however, put up a fierce struggle to preserve the country. If the Civil War was to be a war of attrition, the North had the upper hand because of its large population, industrialization, raw materials, railroad mileage, and navy. But if the war was short lived, the

As you are aware, the Civil War is a momentous historical event in American history that has altered our present, and will continue to have influence on the future. Additionally, what was understood or accepted at the time of the war, differs in various ways from how it is viewed today. This trend ultimately reflects in literary works published at the time of the war in the 19th century, until the present 21st century. In researching this era of our history, I decided to focus my interest on how the Civil War has served as a vehicle for breaking down gender, and social class barriers among the American population. In collaboration to do what was necessary to win the war, people ultimately set aside differences to pursue the greater purpose of social unity. As time progressed after the