Why Did The North Win The Civil War

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

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

Several factors played in to the American Civil War that made it have the outcome that it did. Although the South had better trained officials due to their military school, the North was far more advanced than they. The North had the advantage over the South in several ways. However, the outcome of the Civil War was not inevitable: it was determined as much by human decisions and human willpower as by physical resources, although the North’s resources gave them an edge over the South.

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

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.

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

Both sides in the civil were fighting for a reason, and both sides had their advantages and disadvantages. But why did the Union win,Was it because of their number of men, was it because the government was on their side, or was it because they were richer. The North (Union) actually won the civil war because they Government on their side,they had more men, had more money,and had a skilled military. One reason the north won the civil war is because they had more money than the south and they had more more people.

The antebellum era exposed the entirely different views and ways of life between the North and the South. These differences can be observed on the economic aspect. The North was industrialized enabling them to have functioning economy without the use of many labors; however, in the south, people relied on agriculture, and thus they needed a large number of slaved labors to help them work on the plantations. Such difference led to the main distinction which existed throughout the entire Civil War, the dependence on the slavery. These differences sparked conflict between the North and the South placing them in an indisputable position, eventually leading to the Civil War. The prosecution of the Civil War of North and South differed drastically. The North fought to preserve the Union which entailed abolishing slavery, enlisting the black in the army and also paying them proper wages, and the South fought to withdraw and preserve slavery and their agricultural lifestyle. These conflicting views did not disappear after the war. Although the North won the Civil War, they still wanted to unify the country, not only territorially, but also economically and politically by enforcing many new laws and amending the Constitution. And the South, even after the abolishment of slavery, people in the south remained hostile toward the freed people, saw themselves more superior than the freed people, and tried to resurrect the “Old South”.(192~198) To achieve the real union and realize the

"The North won the war, but the South won the peace," in other words means, the North has won the power of moving the country in a new direction and the south is slowly moving with them. After the civil war reconstruction in the south took great time and energy. Although it took time the north was able to pull the south along in the direction Abraham Lincoln sent them in.

"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

The northern states and the southern states shared different economic prospects where the former had embraced mechanization while the latter still employed human slaves as a factor of production. The southern states were therefore facing economic doldrums and would not entertain any ideas that may have led to an insurrection from its enslaved populace.

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.

Another reason why North won was because, they had more resources, document 1 shows how the North had 1.3 million workers while South only had 110,000 workers. Also the North

Neither the Union or Confederacy armies had the experience of being in battle. Majority of the soldiers were just everyday people; they were volunteers so they did not have much discipline. This showed when the Union took their first shot and attempted to attack at Richmond, which was the Southern capital (“Opening Moves of the Civil War”, 2015). Unfortunately, the North was not victorious at this battle and Lincoln felt the need to find a new leader. George B. McClellan was the next leader in line to become the commander of the Union army. McClellan did his job correctly for a while by managing to get the men back stabilized, and soon it was time for change again. Because of the incompetence of the leadership in the Union army, the South saw this as a weakness. However, this could be a strength of the North. Since Lincoln constantly change the leadership, this could throw off the Confederate armies because they would never know what is next to come. The Union’s moves could not be easily tracked because each leader had different tactics and strategies. Leaders in the Union were either organized, incompetent, or aggressive (Heidler D. & Heidler J., 2015), thus giving the Union one up on the opposing side in some