The Civil War On The Losing End

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?” is only half of a question by itself, for the other half is “Why did the South lose the Civil War?” To this day historians have tried to put their finger on the exact reason for the South losing the war. Some historians blame the head of the confederacy Jefferson Davis; however others believe that it was the shear numbers of the Union (North). The advantages and disadvantages are abundant on either sides of the argument, but the most dominate arguments on why the South lost the war would be the fact that state’s rights prevented unification of the South, Jefferson Davis poor leadership and his failure to work together with his generals, the South failed to gain the recognition of the European nations, North’s superior resources made the outcome inevitable, and moral of the South towards the end of the war.

The Civil War that occurred was one of the darkest times in our history as a country. It was a time where there was a complete breakdown of social and political systems. Hundreds of thousands were killed and hundreds of thousands more were aversely affected. However, it was also a time of remembrance and significant moral progress. It is remembered as the turning point in American History and would be the foundation for the Civil Rights movement many years later.

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:

There were several reasons for the defeat of the Confederacy which included no industrial base, (Donald 1996, p. 99) inadequate transportation net (Donald, 1996, p. 99), and bickering among the generals (McPherson & Hogue, 2009, p. 365) etc., but the overriding factor was that the Confederacy never became a nation (Donald, 1996, p. 100). That is, they seceded because the Southern states believed they had the right as independent States to do so (Donald, 1996, p. 7). The South lost because they never stopped believing this. No state could depend on any other for full support of the war. The Governor of Georgia specifically prohibited his troops from fighting outside the state for many months. Many governors set limits on how many

The Civil War came to be because the South seceded and declared war on the North. From the firing at Fort Sumter on April 12, 1861 to the surrender at Appomattox Court House, The Union (North) waged war against the Confederacy (South). The South seceded because of the balance of power in America. There was more free states, which would mean they would have a bigger voice in the Senate than the fewer slave states. To protect their way of life, they had to go to war. The war before Vicksburg was leaning towards the Confederacy, the Confederacy won battles, such as The 1st Bull Run, Chancellorsville, Shiloh, and Fredericksburg; meanwhile the Union’s only major victory was the capture of New Orleans but the true decider of the War was the Siege of Vicksburg. Vicksburg was the gateway to the Trans-Mississippi region from the eastern region, when it fell, it became the beginning of the end for the Confederacy.

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).

From the time war was declared all odds were against the South. The North would have inevitably won. Due to the fact that the confederacy lacked in population and a drafting system, had a poor resource industry, and faced the struggle of internal conflict they lost the Civil war. This war that ripped our country apart lasted over four long years in constant battle.

To add to the problem, the Confederacy only had 1.2 million people to replace the soldiers, as opposed to the Union, who had 6 million men available to fight (Doc B). The Union was obviously trumping the Confederacy with the number of men they had. The Confederacy was extremely hurt by their losses. Their army was weakened and the Union was getting stronger by the day.

Over the past hundred years, there has been some controversy over the idea of the reasons why the North/Union won the civil war. Some people may say the North won because they had better strategies, while others will say it was because of how big the Union was. But let it be heard from this point forward that the North won the civil war because the North had better resources, way more troops, won the Battle of Gettysburg, had better strategic and noble generals, and was always on the offensive during the war.

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.

North won by number. They had a bigger army, larger navy, and a tremendous difference between population with the south; twenty-one million to seven million, and more infrastructure, factories that could produce weapons and goods and better managerial skills.

Although the North won the war, the outcome could have been different if the South was more successful. One way the South could have been more successful is they could have produced more railroads and telegraph lines. To elaborate, if the South produced more telegraph lines, they would have been able to send forts information quicker. Not to mention, if the Confederate States of America fabricated more railroads during the Civil War, traveling for soldiers would have been quicker and more efficient. In like manner, another way the South could have been more successful was if they made better battle strategies. To give more information, due to the farming economy of the South, they were able to produce a lot of cotton, which was important to

Lesson 1 1. I think because a lot of people didn’t want to go to war or enter the military service because of many different reasons and beliefs they had also some democrats that wanted peace and to reunite the states through negotiation rather than force. 2. Attrition, the wearing down of one side by the other through exhaustion of soldiers and resources, played a critical role as the war dragged on. The north, with its large population, could replace its troops much more easily than the south. 3. The confederate constitution emphasized states’ rights and limited the central government’s power. This commitment to states’ rights often interfered with Davis’s ability to conduct the war. Although many southern leaders supported the war, some opposed Jefferson Davis when he supported conscription and established martials law early in 1862. 4.The north had a strong naval tradition. More than three-fourths of the united states navy’s officers came from the north. Also most of the navy’s warships and all but two of the nation’s shipyards remained under union control. The north also had several economic advantages. The north had a larger population, giving it an advantage in raising an army and in supporting the war effort. In addition, in 1860 the north produced almost 90 percent of total manufacturing weapons and equipment. The north also had more railroad lines to enable the movement of armies and supplies. The north also had

The North was also able to create a blockade towards the South which prevented the South from accessing ships or any way that they had to transport goods. Stated in an article called “Why did the Union Win/ Confederacy Lose?” by Carl Zebrowski states, “But of course the factors that enter into the South’s ultimate defeat are those things that you hear time and time again, and with a great amount of validity: the North’s industrial base; the North’s manpower resources; the fact that foreign recognition was denied the Confederacy” (Zebrowski 3). The bottom line as to why the Union had won was clear and it as because of their ability to cope with the situation in a way that would be realistic and they had more than enough people going to war compared to the South. The North had weapons and men that were able to fight the war with easy access to weapons, the South had weapons but not enough men to fight for them during the war. It was evident that the South lacked people because in article it is mentioned that the manpower between the North and South was conflicting in a large amount.