Jefferson Davis's Presidency

The southern states although far less populated and without initial means to manufacture war supplies did have the strengths to be very competitive. Strong, experienced Confederate leadership in their practiced military, and the overall will power to protect their way of life would prove to be their greatest assets. Jefferson Davis became the president of the Confederacy and was a model leader. He developed a distinguished political career with many years served in the senate, he was a West Point graduate, the former Secretary of War, and a veteran of the Mexican American War. He was the ideal candidate for a president in war times. He had the advantage of having General Robert E. Lee commanding his army after Joseph Johnston was injured in The Battle of Bull run. Robert E. Lee due to strong respect, character and performance in the Mexican American war was Lincoln’s first choice as the Union general but Lee’s patriotism to his home state

Jefferson Davis was undoubtedly an important figure in the Confederacy. Davis was placed in charge of nation that had very few soldiers, little industrialization, and a lack of unity. Many historians blame the defeat of the South on Davis for being a “hot-tempered micromanager”. After the war, Davis was made into a scapegoat; a symbol of treason and racism. Who was Jefferson Davis as a person, solider, statesmen, and leader? A focus on Davis’ life, leadership skills, speeches, and actions before, during, and after the war may offer evidence to show who Jefferson Davis truly was. Also, it is crucial to take into account circumstances that affected Davis and his decision making before, during, and after the

It can be said that the South began the Civil War from a winning position. They had declared their independence, formed their own country and government, and they needed only to keep what they already had. But this was a monumental task as the government was required to protect every inch of land within the Confederacy. As a new country, the Confederacy needed to demonstrate the ability to defend its own territory from external threat. Without this ability, the Confederacy could never receive the international recognition and support it needed to survive. Aside from this reason, the South also needed to protect the institution of slavery from outside interference. If the Northern armies took control of a particular Southern area, the Confederates felt that they would free all the slaves, thus destroying the entire structure of society and its economic value. Because of this, Jefferson Davis was forced to devise a flawed war strategy which attempted to preserve the entire Confederacy at the cost of concentrating his forces.

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:

When you put the two paragraphs together you can see that where Lincoln took a step back and planned his approach to not only the oncoming war but the presidency itself, Davis decided to bull on through and strive to please his own people while slandering those on the other side of the wall.

Jefferson Davis also influenced the loss of the South in the civil war by ineptly handling the military, with one of his mistakes being giving important positions to his friends. For example, Albert Sidney Johnston was the second highest-ranking Confederate general, but before that he had been an adjutant general, never having led an army before. Lucky for Johnston, however, he was good friends with Jefferson Davis, having attended West Point with him, so Davis promoted him to full general, a position in which he outranked much more experienced men like Robert E. Lee, P.G.T. Beauregard, and Joseph E. Johnston (Rafuse). Albert Sidney Johnston was later killed in the Battle of Shiloh, most likely by one of his own men, a fact which proves that he is inept in commanding an army (Sword 444). Davis’s cabinet was also not free from so-called “friend nepotism.” Judah P. Benjamin became friends with Jefferson Davis after a planned duel between the two, in which they both acknowledged that they respected each other. Davis, following his election as President, appointed him to three different cabinet positions: Attorney General, Secretary of War, and Secretary of State. As a lawyer who knew almost nothing about military strategy, he was more of a placeholder as Secretary of War, filling the position so Davis could control it behind the scenes (“Judah P. Benjamin Biography”). Jefferson kept taking up other people’s jobs (such as general-in-chief, see below), and it

The Commander of the Confederate Army of Northern Virginia was General Robert E. Lee. General Lee graduated second in his class from West Point in 1829 and served throughout the country, but is best known for his leadership during the Mexican-American War. General Lee believed in unity but when the state of Virginia decided to secede from the Union in April 1861, Lee decided to stay with Virginia. Confederate president Jefferson Davis asked Lee to serve as his senior military adviser and General Lee took command of the Army of Northern Virginia on June 1, 1862.

Although James McPherson presents Lincoln as having numerous qualities that defined him as a brilliant leader, he wastes no time in revealing what he believes to be Lincoln’s greatest strength. In his Introduction, McPherson states regarding Lincoln’s political leadership: “In a civil war whose origins lay in a political conflict over the future of slavery and a political decision by certain states to secede, policy could never be separated from national strategy…. And neither policy nor national strategy could be separated from military strategy” (McPherson, p.6). Lincoln could not approach the war from a purely martial standpoint—instead, he needed to focus on the issues that caused it. For the catalyst of the war was also the tool for its solution; a war started by differing ideologies could only be resolved through the military application of ideology. This non-objective approach to the waging of the war almost resembles the inspired approach McPherson brings to his examination of Lincoln himself.

Many historians have tried to offer their ideology on the outcome of the Civil War. McPherson in his “American Victory, American Defeat” writes about what other historians have decreed their answers to why the Confederacy lost. He tells us the reasons that could not be the explanation for the loss, and explains the internal reasons but leaves the true cause of the loss untold. Freehling explains the defeat by discussing what could have been and then gives reasons to negate some of the cases that he states for the outcome of the Confederacy. Both McPherson and Freehling both agreed that there were other factors besides battles that needed to be looked at.

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

From 1861 to 1865, Lincoln and Davis oversaw different perspectives of their nation. We may well wonder how much of Kentucky these men took with them in their very different lives. Abraham Lincoln and Jefferson Davis had a passion for their beliefs. Both men were willing to sacrifice all they had for their respective countries. Abraham fought for what he thought was right and what many other people thought were right, but he did at times override the Constitution when he felt it was necessary. As for Davis could be a cold and demanding leader.

When we compare the military leaders of both North and South during the Civil War, it is not hard to see what the differences are. One of the first things that stand out is the numerous number of Northern generals that led the “Army of the Potomac.” Whereas the Confederate generals, at least in the “Army of Northern Virginia” were much more stable in their position. Personalities, ambitions and emotions also played a big part in effective they were in the field, as well as their interactions with other officers.

On February 18, 1861, the provisional Congress of the Confederate States made him provisional president. He was elected to the office by popular vote the same year for a 6-year term and was inaugurated in Richmond, Virginia, the capital of the Confederacy, on February 22, 1862. Davis failed to raise sufficient money to fight the American Civil War and could not obtain recognition and help for the Confederacy from foreign governments. He was in constant conflict with extreme exponents of the doctrine of states' rights, and his attempts to have high military officers appointed by the president were opposed by the governors of the states. The judges of state courts constantly interfered in military matters through judicial decisions. Davis was nevertheless responsible for the raising of the formidable Confederate armies, the notable appointment of General Robert E. Lee as commander of the Army of Virginia, and the encouragement of industrial enterprise throughout the South. His zeal, energy, and faith in the cause of the South were a source of much of the tenacity with which the Confederacy fought the Civil War. Even in 1865 Davis still hoped the South would be able to

Jefferson Davis ,most famously known as the president of the Confederate States during the Civil War, was an interesting subject of the 19th century. You would think it was because of his contributions to the war or lack thereof, but unfortunately he is associated more with his peculiar characteristics. Many of the characteristics are equivalent to those of basic people carrying out normal lives. The expectancy of loyalty and respect, indecisiveness, and not being capable of admitting faults, we all know someone with at least one of these traits, maybe even all of them. So why was it so unique in the case of Jefferson Davis? Although these were normal traits, the life that Davis lived was not. With such a public demanding job, every aspect of his life was showcased and under close observation. The struggle between Davis and his overpowering attributes not only had an effect on his relationships and friendships, but they also had an impact, not completely negative or positive, on the way he completed his job.

For this reason he chose a narrative rather than a thematic format, integrating political and military events to emphasize complex patterns of cause and effect. Thus, he emphasizes that the failure of the Army of the Potomac to reach Richmond during the Seven Days’ Battle in the spring of 1862 changed Union policy from the limited goal of restoring the Union into one of total war to destroy the Old South and consequently gave rise to the Copperhead faction of antiwar Democrats in the North. Antietam was a major turning point not only because Lee 's Army of Northern Virginia was driven back across the Potomac, but also because it ended Confederate hopes for European recognition and military assistance, and gave Lincoln the military victory he had been waiting for as a backdrop for his Emancipation Proclamation.