View lecture 13 & discuss the expectations, advantages, and disadvantages with which North and South entered the Civil War, to what extent do believe these affected the War's outcome. Comment is due by January 9th 2012. (100 word minimum)
The North had far more advantages than the south did. They had many more bank deposits, factories, 80 percent more railroads than the south and had a population of twenty-two and a half million. They were a big supplier of goods such as cloths and ships and had a functioning government and political parties already in place. The south however, being more of an agricultural union rather than the mechanist north, had their money invested in northern bank deposits. They had to buy goods and war materials like gunships from Britain and France because they had no navy. They would also later realize their supply for weapons would be depleting as the war went on and they were not well fed and clothed, mainly because the union was the supplier of the cloth and other goods. The south also only had thirteen and a half million people with nine million of those being white and the rest being black. However the greatest weakness for the south was that all their farms and factories were being worked by blacks. Being that the norths’ main goal was to abolish slavery, it is apparent to predict that the economy of the south would crumble. The few advantages that the south had was the Geography and if they had stayed on the defense in their own territory, the south may have been able to have held up longer and maybe even do some damage to the Union. A con about the geography however was that they were going to have Mexico riding on their backs the whole time, proving evermore that they are not prepared to stand as their own divided union with little to no government and politics. The south also had more people to enlist in their army and supplied them with a greater weapon than the average musket: the rifle musket. The union troops were depicted as cowards for the most part and had poor battle tactics as shown in their large retreat at Bull Run. If the confederates had stood their ground and utilized their numbers and arms effectively, they might not have won the war still, but they would have at least given the north a better run for their money. The south may have looked like they had a slim to no chance of winning the war but it is because of their retaliation and making a stand that made a statement to the north. Lincoln himself would come to contradiction by stating that they will not be recognized as a separate body, but yet he acted fully as if they were.
The north had many advantages compared to the south. The north had finances, manufacturing, transportation and man power on their side with the odds against the south. The north had four times the bank deposits than the north and the south had some of their deposits in the north as well. In the north there were as many manufacturing establishments as there were workers in the south. New Haven, Connecticut had ten times the firearms as the south in 1860 which helped them a lot because well obviously because of the war. Transportation was a major advantage having 80% of the railroads in the U.S being in the north and having 451 locomotives while the south only had 19. Along with that the north had more mechanics that worked on the railroads and the south had railroads with different sized gauges making them switch locomotives in each state. Man power was another advantage because in the north the population was much more than that of the south. The north had a population of 22.5 million people while the south only had 9 million white people and 4.5 million blacks. Along with that man power the north also produced 94% of the cloth, as well as high numbers of percentages of boats and ships. All these advantages led to the union winning the Civil War and the confederates didn’t.
When the Civil War first broke out in 1861, it seemed to many that the South was going against the odds by facing an enemy as strong and industrialized as the North, in many ways this was true. However, this isn’t to say that the South didn’t have plenty of advantages working in their favor as well. Some things that the North did already have working in their favor included several economic, financial, and industrial factors. To name a few, they had more materials and material goods at their disposal and were a much larger manufacturing power than the South was. The Professor presented some statistics on this that also included the fact that New Haven, Connecticut, one small area in the North, had ten times more firearms than all of the South did combined. They had the majority ( somewhere around the eightieth percentile ) of bank deposits, as well as the majority of railroad lines and locomotives in their territory and under their control. The North also greatly outnumbered the South by several million people, and therefore had more manpower. The South had the disadvantage of having to face a more centralized and much better coordinated enemy. In addition to that, they also had to build up an entire functioning government from scratch almost overnight. What they did have working in their favor though was the defensive advantage. As mentioned in the lecture, they may have been more effective in fighting the North had they stayed that way. The South didn’t have to win, rather they only had to hold out long enough as, like the Professor stated, “insurgents”. They only had to last long enough for the North to grow weary and fall into economic trauma, through this they had a clear advantage. The South also had several geographical advantages in that they had many rivers that they could use to their advantage and a very long coastline, which made it very hard for the Union Navy to blockade them completely so that they would not receive help from foreign powers. “The goal of the Confederacy was national independence”, their cause was clearer than that of the North and much less abstract. I believe these factors had great potential to influence the Civil War to a very large extent, but because mistakes were clearly made on both sides they weren’t completely taken advantage of. The Union had statistics on their side, and the Confederacy had more of a fundamental advantage in that they that they were on their home turf and had only to defend themselves. Had it been a shorter war, the South could have made it a close fight. In the long run though, they were limited in that they did not have the means of supporting their army nor the manufacturing ability that would have been required to sustain a fully independent nation.
As the professor went over the negatives and negatives for the north and the south it seemed as the north had much of the advantage in political when it came to government and some what economic when it came to manufacturing and industrial because the north having more than the south and I agree that the social of the south having slaves became the big factor since that the south played in their agriculture. Also the industry was being major and as if the north was upgrading with time and the south was still in old time barely falling into this phase. During the lecture it seemed that the north knew if the slaves were taken away from the south it would be a big advantage to the victory from the confederacy and it seemed as if it was kind of a game for example a football game there are two teams with advantages for example team I don’t know north has a good defense being the railroads and a good wide receiver being manufacturing as well as good coach which is their government. The south has a good quarterback being the agriculture since it being the main part of the south and a not so good coach being government, .f the north tries to get the quarterback injured and out of the game having a victory of winning the super bowl. That is what this north and south and situation means a competitive game to the big win of as the professor said conquest.
Like everyone else said the North seemed as they had a huge advantage over the South because they had a well-constructed government,they had a lot of manufacturing establishments and railroads and the north had most of the bank deposits.The south only had few advantages which the major one was their geographical position. But I think both, the North and South at one point of the war there was a time which the North or the South had completely advantage over the rival and had the opportunity to defeat them. It's obviously that the North had a lot of more opportunities to win the war faster because they were more advanced they had more good stuff compared to the south. However, the South had the necessary or the enough 'weapons' to defeat the North, because as the teacher said that the South had a superior generalship, better men, better soldiers. And also they invented a rifled musket which made the bullet move around 200 to 300 feet. Plus the geographical position, they had a great variety of good 'weapons' just enough to at least make the North weaker. Besides all the the advantages of the North, the south had a change to be victorious in the Civil War but at the end it wasn't enough what they had.
As pretty much everyone before me has said, the Union seemed to have an advantage over the south because the had a larger population and were more industrialized than the Confederacy. It's true that the confederates could have supplied plenty of food for themselves being that they were still very focused on agriculture, but it takes more than food to win a war, so unless there backup plan was to begin charging Union troops and beating them with the nearest vegetable they could find when their gun either broke or ran out of ammunition, they were going to need clothes and weaponry as well. However, many clothes and weapons were produced in the North, so as Philip said, the confederates had to begin trading with foreign countries to keep themselves supplied for the war effort. On the matter of population difference, the Union did heavily outnumber the Confederacy, but as John Anthony said the confederates were fighting on their own land and had a very large coastline so the Union could not place a very effective blockade to stop trade with other countries. Unfortunately, while the Confederacy did have these geological advantages, it wasn't enough to best the Union. As many people have brought up before, it seemed almost impossible for the Confederacy to beat the Union, but they still could've tried a bit harder and made the Union work a bit harder to bring the nation back together.
As many of you have said, the North had many more advantages over the South. Many thought that the war would be a quick one, lasting nothing over a year, because of the advantages that the Union had. Yes, the North had a heavy industry, had more than three quarters of the railroad system and had more than $331 million dollars in exports but the South had a warrior society about them and some of the best new weapons. Before the war, many men from the North and South attended West Point and trained there. A majority of these men were split one North Carolina seceded. Seventy-four cadets resigned from West Point because they refused to take an oath of allegiance to the United States. This meant that the South had an advantage of seventy-four well trained and conditioned Army Generals that had new strategies and weren’t stuck in the old ways of fighting. The Union military, though they didn’t have as many fresh new generals, had a plan that would constrict the South slowly. The North had the upper hand in military advantages because not only did they have an Army that was full and functioning but they also had a full functioning Navy. With the Navy, the Union constructed the Anaconda Plan in where they would make a blockade around the South using all available rivers from Virginia to the Mississippi. This would slowly kill the South because they depended so much on imports from other states and countries, especially in food imports from Texas, Louisiana, and Arkansas. This plan worked to an extent but it was the work of General McClellan that helped win the war for the Union. He trained the draftees in his methods that were proven to work. But another factor that helped the Union win the war was their political factors. The South had to create a new government in the course of one night and it had no political parties. This divided the people in the South further because you couldn’t agree on what was going on within the Confederacy. The North didn’t have to create a new government and they already had a president in place that they were able to elect, Jefferson Davis wasn’t elected, and they still had political parties in which they could voice their views. This did affect the outcome of the war because it allowed the Union to come together even though they didn’t have a motive like the South did until the Emancipation Proclomation.
(PART 1) Overtime, many have come to the immediate conclusion that the North and South differed greatly by one aspect throughout the Civil War- their existence if being an agricultural and industrial region. Of course, this did play a role in each region’s advantages and disadvantages throughout the war, but there are also greater and just as important characteristics of each division to look at. It’s obvious that the North had more advantages than the South throughout the Civil War, but these advantages shouldn’t be looked at as the only reason for their victory, but should rather as the foundation of the advantages that the North came to have. Of course, there were more factories and manufacturing that existed when compared to the South. With so many manufacturing establishments, the North had a greater benefit of being able produce more supplies and materials than the South, including firearm. This later went on to their advancement in transportation, which includes the capacity of railroads and locomotives needed to transport goods and supplies more efficiently and quickly. Although the South did have an amount of railroads in the region, they weren’t as efficiently built (, specifically its gages,) as those in the North. Of course, being an industrialized region of the country, the North was able to build better railroads due to the vast majority of skilled mechanics they had. With proper gages, trains wouldn’t have to waist valuable time changing and readjusting to the poor connection and linkage between railroads. Having a population of 22.5 million, the North also had greater manpower than the South, who unfortunately had only 9 million whites and nearly 4.2 million blacks to makes up their population. With a greater population (especially white), the North was able to hold more power than the South, whether it was economically, politically, socially, or industrially. Economically, due to their power in the industrial industry, there were more finances in the North as bank deposits in the South. This allowed the North to be economically stable when the war occurred, and not be so damaged in the aftermath as the South was (, being that they were so reliant on only their crops and slavery). Politically, the North had one of the greatest advancements throughout the entire Civil War. Because they politically already had a functioning government, they did not have stress over the issue of creating a new one (, as they did in the South). This also allowed the North to be more developed and sufficiently capable socially and economically, only adding onto to their advantages throughout the Civil War.
(PART 2) In the South, there were already existing characteristics that gave them a fair amount of advantages. The most common one that’s looked at is its geographic and agricultural being. Having a greater amount of territory, the South had the opportunity to obtain more power defensively, and being able to blockade a greater of land and area in the country. However, the South chose to give up their advantage of a defensive position and chose to invade the North. This resulted to be rather a disadvantage of the South, as they allowed larger Northern groups to take power in the South. As stated many times in the lecture, the South was seen as an insurgency, and could have settled for peace if they just held out long enough. Arguably, the South did have better soldiers than the North, having more improved men and not necessarily improved arm (, especially being that there were so many farmers already existing the South). As far as firearm, the South did hold the advantage of having possession of a more enhanced rifle that allowed them to shoot at a greater distance. This would greatly help them as a defensive position, but unfortunately they took the route of being the more offensive region. Now, this didn’t necessarily mean they had a great amount of supplies in the South. In fact, their suffered from the poor amount of it, especially as the war continued to grow. This affected the Confederate army greatly since they had poor care throughout the war (, whether it was medically, through food or clothing). This caused the South to rely greatly on imported goods from Great Britain and France, while the North stood independently as a far as supplies. The political aspect throughout this war showed a great importance in the advantages and disadvantages of both regions. While the North contained an already existing, functioning government, the South had the anxiety of creating this new government over night. As a disadvantage, the South was born through a state’s rights impulse, and now had to face the challenge of creating a centralized government based on a centralized war. On top of that, no one seemed to cooperate in establishing such a form of government, only adding on the vast amount of disadvantages in the South. The issue of slavery was probably the most controversial issues when it came to being whether an advantage or disadvantage. Slaves in the South did help supply both armies when put to work and obtaining a greater manpower. However, in the South, it seemed to only destroy the Confederacy. Ultimately, the only way to win the war was to destroy slave, which meant destroying the economic and social foundation in the South. As professor Blight stated in the lecture, this immediately “became a total war of conquest”. Both regions of the country were expected to engage in war, which meant the event of great conscription. No matter your race, age, or occupation/status in society, all men were expected to take oath and fight for their country. Of course, both sides were never mobilized for war against one another, and now had to decide how to fight and what it was to conclude in. Both the North and South came to face the common disadvantage of fighting their own brothers of their own nation.
The north had far more advantages that the south did in the civil war. The North had four times the bank deposits that the south meaning they had more money to buy supplies for their military. The North had for more factories that the south, meaning they could produce the supplies needed to keep the military going. Also the north had a bigger population than the south did. The north had a population of about 22 million, and the south had a population of about 9 million with about another 4.5 million blacks. The south also had far less transportation than the north. The north had about 80% of the railroad tracks, making it easier for them to get supplies. Also the north had far more locomotives that the south did and far more mechanics to work on the railroads that the south did. Also the south did have a set gauges for the tracks, which meant the south had to be constantly changing locomotives. I believe that all these advantages help the Union with the war.
The Union and the Confederacy were constantly colliding with issues and problems regarding their economical, political, and social issues. We all agreed on that the North had a lot more advantages than the South that eventually led the Union to win the Civil War. Although, I came across an interesting topic during my readings of the lecture. The South had the geographical features to maintain themselves during the war. The professor had made a suggestion of which the South had to play a defensive game when waging war with the Union armies. Instead of attacking the North and allowing free shots for the Union armies to attack on southern grounds, they should’ve staid behind and defended their territories. They didn’t have a well established government as it is, and they did have the necessary tools to keep their economy up and running, so why didn’t they just fought long enough until the North had economic recessions? After all, the Confederacy’s main goal was national independence. Plus, they had European help from Great Britain and the French. The North did make the most of their advantages and the South made mistakes on how to plan out the winning of this war.
When analyzing the circumstances in which the North and South entered the Civil War, it is clear that the North had the greater advantage. However, the effort of the South was not exactly to conquer the North or overwhelmingly defeat them, but to force the Union into either weariness or economic trouble in order to maintain their independence. Due to the advantages of the South, this goal certainly seemed attainable. For one, like others have mentioned, the geographical position of the Confederacy not only allowed them to be on the defense and use their rivers for transportation, but get supplies from foreign countries despite the naval blockade. Additionally, like Annissa mentioned, the warrior mentality instilled in the South allowed for a united and strong military, despite their considerably small numbers compared to the Union. It can be argued that the Confederacy had better leadership, and although there wasn’t much political stability, there was a united cause. The South also had better weapons, but as the war carried on, it became clear that quantity overruled quality. The North’s goal was now to destroy the social and economic structure of the South, and they definitely had the numbers to do so. Not only did the North had the manpower, outnumbering the Southern population by 9 million people, but they also had the vast majority of weapons in the country, a stable economy, stable government, efficient military leadership, and 80 percent more railroads than the South. In this way, the North defeated the South, but not without a struggle, even though the war was expected to be very short. Although the South wasn’t able to defeat the North, they were certainly successful In putting up a fight.
The north had many advantages including a bank system where most of the nation’s currency was at hold and a much superior industrialized society compared to the south, the north was the nation’s trade center most of everything that came in was arriving at the North’s ports. The south was a slave society which meant their economy and lifestyle was based mostly on slaves and their labor. Now the south had some advantages for example they had some good and well known generals and they invented some good weapons like the musket but they had no navy they had to import most war materials from other countries like Britain and France. South’s biggest advantage was their geographical position but that only played a big role at the beginning of the war as it progressed it wasn’t that big of a deal. Their weapons differed and so did their strategies and that is what helped the north. Like I had mentioned the south had many good old generals but that’s the thing they were used to old style fighting just charging in a straight line and the north realized that the only way to defeat the was to come up with a new tactic and they did that is what gave them the lead. In the end the north won because they had a better and stronger society with a good economy and they were just ahead and more industrialized compared to the south.
During the Civil war, the north was clearly in the advantage. However, the south never planned on taking over the northern parts or anything similar. All they wanted to gain was respect and show the Union and the North that they will fight for their rights. This was was very costly for everybody, but in the end one can say that the south got what they wanted. During the 18th century the north felt a lot more powerful than the south due to their industrialization. That is one of the reasons why they thought they could basically tell the south what to do. However, the north was at least as dependent on the south as the other way around. While the south had trading partners all over the world, the north was just working with the raw materials they received from the south. Of course the north was still in the advantage, but the south wanted to show that they are not as weak as many thought. Some of you said that the south would have done "better" if they would have used a more defensive strategy, and that may be correct. However, the south had something to proof and if they would have hidden, nobody would have respected them.
Everyone pretty much agrees that the North had many of the advantages that led them to win the war. This didn’t mean that the South had no advantages at all though. Like it said, the South did have some advantages when it came to geography and their expansive territory. Although the South didn’t have as many people as the North did, they had the blacks which did help them out quite a bit when it came to having more soldiers, nurses, and workers. This though, was what led the North to want to destroy slavery. The professor also talked about how the people in the South had much more of a drive to fight because of possible warrior cultures. Even though the South had some advantages that were valid, they could not compare to the advantages that the North had. Like mentioned in the video and in the comments, the Union had industrial capacity (that even the South relied on) as well as a strong field in manufacturing. They had as many establishments in the North as they had workers in the South and also had 80% or higher of railroads, locomotives, cloth, and iron. Because they had all of this, they must have not had any problems with supplies for the war. For the South on the other hand, supply was a major issue making them resort to Great Britain and France. Another thing that worked to the Union’s advantage was that they already had a set government and political party and the South didn’t, leaving them to try to figure something out as the professor said, “over night”. Overall, the South had a couple of good advantages but the North (although it did have some disadvantages as well) had an outstanding number of advantages over the South, leading them to victory.
The Civil War was a battle where one side was industrialized and the other was not. The south only had one advantage in my perspective, though they were not industrialized, the fact that a large amount of the battle was fought on their territory. The fact that they were in a domestic type of battle, could have been a major advantage for the south. But their population was much smaller than the north having a smaller army. Therefore, even though they had an advantage by fighting on their territory their disadvantages overthrew their chance of winning the battle, because regardless of where the battle took place they had a small and weak army. Furthermore, the south truly had no major advantage. The north had a larger population and was very industrialized; it was more common for foreign governments to recognize the north rather than the south. Due to this the confederacy had a harder time obtaining aid. Aside from the north had several advantages such as, larger population, a stronger army, more resources, and a better economical status. It is not hard to understand why the north defeated the south, the south had no advantages on their side while the north had several advantages which of course made it easier for them to defeat the south. Now the outcomes of the Civil War were highly influenced by the north and south differences to a wide extent when looking at the economic outcomes. The rise of taxes and the debt of the economy are things that were caused by the north and south during the war. Simply because of the lack of compromise and agreement between both sides and political groups caused the war for a longer time period, which affected the economic by a large extent. Now when speaking of freeing the slaves afterwards, was due to the war to a certain extent but I believe without the war they would have still gained their freedom in some way.
It's well-known that fighting a defensive side in a war might be the best advantage you can have. Look at the American Revolution. The 13 colonies won because Britain had to cross the Atlantic to get here and then they had to fight, and by then soldiers were already sick and supplies lacking. The South had this advantage and like Annissa and Daniela mentioned, they had the military mentality and were much more "prepared" for war as they were fighting for cause: independence from the Union and freedom of slavery (what a lovely oxymoron). It was clear that this war was a lost cause seeing as the South did not have the necessary number of men to fight against the North's "cowardly men" and because about half of the population were slaves. Like Ashley and Professor said, the impulsive state-rights Confederacy had to form a new government overnight whereas the government in the Union had been established since the century before, so the Confederacy was screwed politically and socially. Economically they were suffering there too. Like Philip mentioned, the Union had 80% more railroads than the South (and Kansas. Who can forget about dreary, bloody Kansas) and the Confederacy's money was invested in Unionists banks. Trading with foreign countries could have been a solution but that would mean raising tariffs and who likes to pay high taxes? True, it has been mentioned that the Confederacy's ultra-super war tactic was to wary the Union's pocketbook and eventually send them to bankruptcy (something that our present-day politicians should have taken in count before continuing a pointless war) which would ward them off and leave them the new-country alone, but it seems that they underestimated the deepness of the Union's wallet seeing as the end of the war, the North's economy was not as shaken as the South's.
The freeing of slaves was due in part of the war in my opinion because there was already the necessary legal documents/laws/speeches and all (Emancipation Proclamation, 13th Amendment) but also because seeing as the Confederacy failed terribly, what other methods could the Southern planters used to retain their slaves if they had lost politically, socially, and economically (seeing as slaves would not work since they were legally considered free)?
I agree with everyone that has posted so far the North was indeed the superior force in the Civil War because of their advantages in economy, being having a very stable bank income or deposit than the south, their 110,000 manufacturing plants with 1.2 million workers, and having states like Connecticut which could produce 10 times the amount of firearms than any other southern state as well as having 80% of the railroads and locomotives which were highly organized when compared to the South’s mixed up and confusing tracks. The North’s last two advantages discussed during the lecture was their population of 22.5 million people and the North’s highly functional and stable government and political parties. The South had fewer advantages but were major in war such as their geography having a huge territory and coastline, also the many rivers that ran through the South. The South’s purpose for fighting was another advantage as they really didn’t need to they just had to wait it out and fight for as long as possible and the North would eventually tire and destroy itself. The South in truth also boasted better weapons, Generals and officers, and possibly soldiers. However the South could not supply its troops after some time, had no navy, were finding even harder to organize a government and weren’t aided by other counties for it and of course slavery.
As the past comments of stated, The Union won the civil war due to the many advantages they consisted of. One of the main reasons The Union ruled over the south was because they had an establish government, they were already being led by a federal government for a while. Through this the north was very experienced in making economic and political decisions concerning a war, therefore, they south was already two, three, steps behind in this confrontation. Anther main advantage The Union had over The Confederacy was the amount of favor they had in trading imports and exports. Not only had this but they had the upper hand in established railroads this then giving them easier access to arriving to their territories quicker as well as delivering goods to their soldiers too. Banks were also a play changer because the north had large amounts of deposits from both their own areas as well as some of The Confederacy areas. Therefore, The Union had the upper hand in controlling division of the money and currency. One last cause that led to the victory of the north was due to the fact that they had a Navy surround the south and the south had no established Navy. Once more The Union was three steps ahead of The Confederacy.
I'm going to have to challenge what Cristy said. Not being industrialized is in no way, shape, or form an advantage. It was a terrible disadvantage for them in fact. Without the factories the industrialized north possessed it was that much harder for the south to obtain ammunition and such. Also, not having any factories could be detrimental to the people living in the south as well as the army. Like Esti said, I am going to have to agree that the Union mostly one because they were already established. As I said before, the south wasn't industrial. Having to form a government with the principles the aristocratic southerners had and also having do do that very deed overnight was impossible. The fact is, the south's lack of common sense killed them ultimately. The North was destined to win. The only disadvantage I would have to say they had to deal with was not having very many railroads to the south as well as having terrible generals. If they did, the Civil War wouldn't have been very war-like at all. Finally, the larger population the north possessed provided more soliders to fight the war. Unlike the south, the north allowed the freedpeople to fight.
Between the North and South, one can conclude that the North had a clear advantage over the South. The North was more industrialized and organized which gave them an upper hand in many of the events that occurred during the Civil War. In comparison to the Confederates, the Union in political terms, had a functioning government with a running two party system. With a stable government, the Union's ability to organize power, loyalty, and patronage came easier. Unlike the Confederates, who had yet created a running government. Economically, the industry in the North provided them with a sufficient amount of money and supplies. They had 80% of the industry, 10 times the fire arm than the South, 94% of cloth production, 4 times the bank deposits, etc. Railroads also helped in the transportation of supplies and troops. The North had more organized railroads compared to the South. The railroads in the South would later cause trouble for them. Lastly, there is the advantage of geography that the South contained. The South was an expansive territory with many geographical features such as rivers that would aid in invading the North. If the South would have stayed on the defensive, their chances for an upper advantage over the North, would have probably sustained a better chance of victory.
Viewing the expectations, advantages, and the disadvantages, the North had the South beat. (Not in outcome terms) Overall the North had many advantages of the South. They were well off financially, in manufacturing, in transportation, and in all industrial capacity. Financially, the North had four times the bank deposits as the southern states. In manufacturing, there were 110,000 manufacturing establishments in northern states with over 1 million workers. In transportation, most of all the railroads in the United States were in, again, the northern states. With over four hundred locomotives in the United States, there were only about nineteen in the South. The many skilled mechanics working on railroads in the North probably helped them a great deal while the South built their railroads state by state. This could have slowed the South down tremendously which could have been a cause to their defeat. Population in the North crushed the population in the South. This lead to much more manpower that was probably another main cause to the South’s defeat. One of the North’s greatest advantages, and the South’s greatest disadvantage, in personal opinion, was the political aspect of this era. This could have been one of the chief reasons that South lost the war. Not having to create a functioning government helped the North. Along with that, they had a functioning political party system. A functioning government and political party system maintained a sense of organization in all aspects. The South, however, had no government and no political party system. This in terms, lead to no sense of organization. The South had a few great advantages over the North. Their land was one along with new firearm and great generalship. This helped that South fight back against the North. The few advantages the South had were nowhere compared to those of the North. The North had many more advantages and the South had many disadvantages. Personally, the main cause of the South’s defeat was the lack of government. The lack of government and political party system left the South with no sense of organization which could have caused them the war.
Several messages throughout the video, I felt, were interpreted differently than I perceived. For example, when the professor talks about the 'negatives and negatives' for the North and South, I found the political viewpoint extremely interesting, however I don't think I really understood all of what the professor was trying to explain. The professor made it seem as if the North was far superior than the South, and that the North has some kind of a prior knowledge of the South's inability to function properly without slaves. As Anely mentioned, "... it seemed that the north knew if the slaves were taken away from the south it would be a big advantage to the vistory from the confederacy...". I completely agree with her, in the sense that the knowledge of our split nation's economical differences wasn't very hard to understand; the North was based on industrial revenue, while the South was more focused on income from the slaves. As Daniela mentioned, it could be argued that the Confederacy had better leaders, however, it wasn't the leadership that eventually made the South fall. How could the South possibley have any advantage, when they were being deprived of their sources? Since their economy was based on slavey, they had no other alternatives to provide any income to soldiers. Without slavery, the south had nothing. They couldn't pay their soldiers; they couldn't provide proper training to anyone either way, so even if willing soldiers participated, how would they fend for themselves? With sources limited and very few alternatives open, I don't think the South really had a fighting chance, whether or not their leadership skills were excellent. I would say that you could pinpoint the major disadvantage of the South on it's economy. Because they had no other alternatives of major income for that part of the nation, their economy suffered greatly which in term, led to the downfall of everything else. The North in this department however, was more suited for the freedom of slaves. I think the major advantage, or disadvantage, of the North and South, were their economies. Like a domino effect, their economies either cause a major economical downfall (the South), or it caused the other part of the nation (the North) to appear more flourished, as it wasn't as effected as the South.
The union had three distinct advantages one of which was that they had a stable economy. The reason that this was so important is that wars are very expensive and usually the best funded side and best prepared side will win the north had the money to pay troops buy weapons by the thousands and for enough medical supplies to also support the south. But the north did have to buy they already had plenty of supplies and weaponry which the south didn’t such as rifles or warships. The south didn’t have an established navy unlike the north which had a pretty powerful naval fleet. I have to agree with Estibaliz on that the north had an advantage on the fact that they had an established government which meant cooperation within the country. Unlike the south which was centralized on states right which made it difficult to pass federal laws and things.
As basically everyone said, the Union did have quite a few advantages over the south in the beginning of the war such as finances, factories, transportation, political advantages (no need to create a new government) and the astonishing overpowering population of the north over the south but the Union wasn't too prepared in a military standpoint with regiments that hadn't be prepared for battle. The confederacy on the other hand had some advantages such as having a clear cause and not needed to conquer or win the war, they just had to last it out until they had worn down the north into ensuing a peace agreement, they also had superior general ship and a bit more of a warrior culture to them and better weapons but in terms of the war this could only take them so far. They still had to create a completely new government overnight and contrary to everyone's comment that this cause unified them together the Confederacy was based on states rights but the war forced them to come together as one, which as Professor Blight said didn't always work. I think these advantages and disadvantages did affect the war because to be a lot of the differences between the union and the confederacy were the differences between an industrial society and an agricultural society. Union had supplies, money, and supplies but the confederacy has soldiers, leadership, and a clear cause that didn't call for a win. But through all of this to me it seemed a battle of who could outlast who and through all these things the confederacy just didn't have what it took to out last the union.
"No nation of agriculturalist ever made war on a nation of mechanics and survived” (West Point soldier William Sherman, April 1861); the power of innovative industrialism within the North has established a superior form of prominence against the South and its agricultural force. Despite the authoritarian role of the North during the Civil War, both powers suffered in the midst of turbulence within a “remorseless revolutionary struggle” (2nd inaugural address of Abraham Lincoln). Therefore, this is why the imminence of “a result less fundamental and astounding” (Abraham Lincoln). I agree with Daniela, Annissa, and Establiz on the account that the South was far more mobilized mentally for war in contrast to the North despite its industrial capacity. The South obtains several advantages above the North due to its geographical state allowing free territories for expansion. In addition, agricultural production made within the South aids and helps support the ascendancy of the states. The Northern powers are composed of several beneficiary aspects economically and politically. Manufacturing entails the increasing of factories and industrial workers as well as the additional breakthrough of the creation of railroads with numerous skilled mechanics; this resulted in the finances’ accumulation four times abundant than that of the South. The population provided the ultimate heightening man power for these states, for advocates of the North emerge. Politically the federal government was built on a basis of states’ rights and localism allowing an overbearing source of support (organization of power, patronage, and loyalty) over the Southern states and their hastily-made government with the Confederate federal policy apt to creating a centralized government all in efforts for national independence. The Confederacy’s investment of finances in unionist banks allowed for an assembly of allies for their power, and resorting to foreign dependencies would slowly diminish the ability their forces. However, the advantage of slavery subtly helped the usage of slaves towards building the Confederate Army against the Union. In conclusion, the freedom of slaves led to the conflicts raised between both sides of the northern and southern powers. Freedmen were liberated legally through proof of documents, yet the contradictory viewpoints were stubborn in attaining their procession of actions towards increasing their power of opinion.
There were several useful advantages for both sides of the of the United States during the Civil War. Beginning with the North, they had more money, which could be used in various ways to aid the efforts of the war. They also possessed a far higher population than the Southern states, which obviously helped them in battle situaitions. However, the industry advantage mentioned a couple of times, in the video and on the blog posts, had little to no effect on the war itself. It was merely the form of business the North specialized in. It might have had an effect on its economic status, though. The North also had a strong political advantage by having a structured, organized and well run government. The South had several advantages as well, though not as numerous as the North. The South was very geographically strategic in terms of in this situation, and if they would have remained purely defensive, their geography might have won them the war. They also had developed better and more modern war tatics, such as the musket, that could be used against the old, neopolianic warfare used by the North. It must be said, however, that the South's strategies were still quite outdated, seen at the Battle of Bull Run. Lastly, the South also possessed purpose and, until General Grant, possessed better leadership. Both the Confederacy and the Union had weaknesses. The North's primary weakness was that they fought a generally offensive war. It is said many times throughout the lecture and sources, if the South would have kept a defensive front, they might have won the war. The South had many weaknesses compared to the North. Their political situation was the main problem in the effort. The government was brand new and created overnight. It was a one-party system that was not very functional, especially in a states' rights enviornment (the states could not agree with each other). They did not have as large as a population as the North, and a sizeable amount of the army was the slaves. Slavery became the "Achille's Heel" (term used by the professor) to the South, because when the the War became a slavery arguement, the South's foundation and social structure crumbled. The advantages and disadvantages of the North and South describe the war's outcome in itself. The South simply could not hold up to the immense strength of the North, economically and politically. The South's advantages could have been used better, especially the geographic advantage and that they fought a defensive war, and helped them change the outcome of the war.The North fought under better circumstances, and though the beginning of the war seemed like a Union struggle, their advantages helped them in the long run.
In the lecture its easy to determine that the North had overall the tactical and economical advantages during an after the war. The North as mentioned in the lecture was the dominant of the the two being that their transportation was extremely far superior than the South's. The Norht's economy was of course based on industry and the South's was based mostly on slavery because of their lack in transportation. I have to oppose to Priscilla though when she mentioned,'' the South didn’t have as many people as the North did, they had the blacks which did help them out quite a bit when it came to having more soldiers, nurses, and workers. This though, was what led the North to want to destroy slavery.'' In fact the North didn't actually oppose of slavery because the North themselves used slavery in house work, small farms, and factory labor. The main reasons the South had a higher number in slaves was because there were more larger plantations and the need for cheap labor was in the high.While supporting your claim the North thought it went against democracy and on the plus side the slaves in the south were taking white jobs in the South which gave the South another reason to oppose. By 1861 less than 25% of southerners owned slaves because of the slave taking so many occupations for such a cheap price.I believe that one of the main reasons the North opposed of slavery was simply because it was the main issue in the states which lead to a great problem in states' rights which the federal government didn't want to invlove themselves in becuase then it would look as if the federal government was picking sides. For this the North specifically abolitionists were strictly against the idea of slavery, also because some were racist but that isn't of much importance.Also the South's industry was based upon the manufacturing of cotton and tabacco which is why slaves turned to the South for labour rather than going to the North where their factories demanded free labour rather than a pay.Furthermroe slavery essentially sparked war amongst the colonies but wasn't the best idea for the South.In conclusion, going into war for the South was suicide both for their people and their economy, the North as previously mentioned was far more prestigous than the South.
The disadvantages of the South definitely outnumbered the disadvantages of the North.First off, the South's population paled in comparison of the North's population. Obviously the North had more man power and strength to fight in the Civil War. A big advantage was the stable goverment the union had. The North needn't worry about who to elect and run the country in the time of war.The South had disadvantages too, including fact that its economy wasn't as strong as the North's. An ironic point is that the Southern government had some of its money invested in Northern banks. The political system in the South was very unstable. Becoming a new country and having to fight a war caused distress in the South. Another disadvantage was the outdated fighting stratgies that they used, which was the shoulder to shoulder tatic. Instead of trying to invade and capture the South, the North should of instead waited for the South to attack. The North would have faired better by fighting a defensive war, as oppsed to an offensive war. However, the South's more modern weapons was a huge advantage for them. The creation of the Musket Gun proved to be helpful in defeating the old fashion fighting style of the North. The South also had the motivation to fight. The South was fighting for state's rights, while the North just wanted to save the Union. The south also had better leaders compaired to the North. Union leader, General McDowell couldn't even keep his men from retreating from Confederate leader, Stonewall Jackson. All of these advantages and disadvantages lead to the North winning because the Southern advantages weren't nearly as important as the Northern advantages. However, if the South had played their cards right, then they had a chance of winning.
After watching the video, it became clear the advantages as well as the disadvantages that the North harbored as well as the South. The North was far more developed economically, politically, and man power wise. The south had more tactical knowledge in fighting, and geographically had an advantage, but did they use it wisely or to their advantage is another thing. In my opinion, the South wasn’t so disadvantaged that they did not have a chance to last longer in the war. One of the things that the professor mentioned that was if they had stayed and used a more defensive attack method rather than the more offensive method, then they may have had a chance to last long enough to become independent from the Union. One thing that came to mind throughout the lecture when points were made that the South had less supplies, and not as many factories to produce weapons more timely (although they had longer range reaching rifles), and the North being more industrialized were able to produce mass quantities of weapons was something that the South just couldn’t match up to. I honestly believe that to a certain extent, all the factors included on both sides, that if the South had used their land, as well as people and a better method that they would have had a chance to last through the war until they gained Independence. I’m not saying they would have won the war, but if they had been more organized and used what they had no matter how minimal their supplies were and man power or any of those factors, they may have had a chance to have lasted long enough to achieve their goal. Two advantages that the South had that could’ve helped them if they had used them smartly were the rifled musket and the fact that they had strong leaders and so called better soldiers, yeomen they were called. Indeed the defensive position with the rifled musket was a huge advantage, if used. Due to their lack of structure and were political organization, this possibility, did not happen. They were scrambling to form an Army and to form everything that the Union didn’t have to because they were more stable economically, and politically, whereas the South lacked here. I think that these two advantages for the North were the main ones that hurt the south. So yes, the advantages that the North had that the South lacked really did hinder the South’s chance to last long enough to gain Independence.
During the early months of the war the North believed it would not last long. The belief being that the North would be able to quickly overcome any fight the South put up and this was due to several reasons. A large majority of the Continental Railroad passed through Northern states, limiting the South's ability to transport large amounts of goods for the war effort. Also the number of industrial factories in the North was equivalent to the number of industrial workers in the South. Fifty percent of white men in the North would join the Union Army. Eighty percent of white men in the South would join the Confederate Army. The Union Army would still vastly outnumber the Confederate Army. Also, one of the major concerns for the South during the early months of the war, was the fact that the South did not have a stable government. The nation's capital and major government offices were situated in the North leaving the South without a set government and, therefore, needing to create an entire political system almost overnight. The South had few advantages in comparison to the North. One advantage was the loyalty exhibited by Southern born men. West Point Military Academy helped train the large majority of United States military commanders for decades but it would see a large drop during the beginning of the war. When those in training were asked to make an oath, pledging their allegiance to the United States and, in extension, the Union, many Southern born men left, unable to turn their back on their home. This surge of military expertise now fighting for the South would help tip the odds in the South's favor and, at the least, help them hold off any major Union onslaughts. Also, the South displayed a remarkable ability to improvise for their lack of ammunition and weaponry. Though they would turn to the British for aid, often buying weapons and ships, the South would create their own ammunition and weapons to be used on the battlefield. One of the reasons why the war would last so long would be the fact that the tactics used to fight were outdated. The generals would use old Napoleonic war tactics, not taking into consideration the advancements of weaponry. The creation if the rifle musket barrel allowed shots to be fired as far as eight hundred yards. This would change the tide of war for any side choosing to take a defensive position and using these weapons. Napoleonic fight tactics called for long rows of men to march down a battle field and withstand enemy fire long enough to overtake the enemy position but, with the new rifle barely, and eventually rifle cannon, armies would be torn asunder in mere minutes. Eventually the North would realize that they could not simply win the war via military assault. Several methods would be used to try and shut down the south. The "Anaconda" tactic called for a naval blockade along the South's border with the ocean and large Union armies along the South's northern border as well as naval gunships along Southern waterways. The idea was to suffocate the South by cutting them off from their own supply points and effectively shutting down the fragile structure of Southern society. Though it would never be fully implemented, often due to the people's decision to march into the South hoping for an easy win, it became clear that the tactic that would be used to win the war would be an economic one. The best way to defeat the South would be to destroy its structure and watch the Confederacy crumble from the inside out.
The advantages and disadvantages that the professor talked about are all things I would have expected, the North having economic advantages and the South having geographical advantages. Something that caught me off guard was the professor’s mentioning of a political disadvantage in the South. I had never thought that the South would have had trouble setting up a unifying government to be able to defend itself when the entire region had been far rooted in state’s rights, that it would prove difficult to get the states in cooperating positions. Another thing I found quite interesting was the mention of whether slavery was an advantage or disadvantage of the south, while the professor only talked about the advantages it sounded quite interesting to see what the disadvantages were. The only thing that comes to mind is how the institution of slavery halts innovation thus leading to more disadvantages but this seems to be more of a long term disadvantage and wouldn’t seem to affect the South during the Civil War, which leads me to wonder what other disadvantages slavery gave to the South that would cause them to lose this war.
The North and the South had a series of advantages and disadvantage including social, economical, and political issues. The South had the upper hand in a couple of instances including one common goal, decent leadership, vast land, foreign importation, and advanced firearm. The South was working towards something and wanted to become independent. This was an advantage because they were working for a united cause of preserving their slave society. The south didn't exactly have the strongest most united and efficient leadership; however it was decent enough to move forward. The south was also able to explore foreign importation of goods with Great Britain and France which proved the South didn't need the North. Lastly the South had a better rifle which was more enhanced than the North’s. However there also comes a numerous amount of advantages from the North. The North had a larger population and their railroads were much more efficiently built. The North also was able to produce their own ammunition and was able to transport them using their advanced transportation system. The North also had the upper hand politically because the North already had a sound government with a constitution and the three branches of government. And the South had the troubling issue of attempting to create a centralized government. This was difficult because the whole reason the South wanted to secede was because of trying to preserve state's rights as well. So in the end yes the South had better ammunition and vast land but it wasn't enough, the North truly had the upper hand because the North was politically sound, economically stable with all the factories and industrial style of life, and because they had 22.5 mills ion people while the South only had 9 million whites and 4.2 million blacks. The North had more soldiers.
P.S. Mr.Serrato I had originally sent this post yesterday and when I came back to check blogspot today it said it had failed to post my comment. So I quickly resent it. So I apologize for the late post.
As many of you have stated, at the beginning of the war many people expected the war to be short. It seems as if people just wanted to fight for the fun of it and not really fight for what is truly in mind. People where afraid. They didn’t want a long war because they didn’t know how to change their ability to fight. It aimed for strategies and purpose, which was stated in the presentation, and since it was a battle against brothers, we all had the same techniques. Lincoln had also expected the war to be short because he didn’t want to take sides on this revolution, since it would break the country apart. Now, basically it was a battle between the industrial power and agricultural power. Which is self explanatory on who had the advantages, the North had a larger population as many of the past post had said and since it was stronger in technology means, they finished goods faster and more of it. That said when it came to the war; they could produce more useful material to finish off the south. North also contained more money and better developed railroads which was a major factor fought in the war. The list goes on and on, and as you can tell from previous comments, the north was filled with advantages from transportation, to political stability to a well military infrastructure to money, and even a large population. But one major disadvantage the north contained was that the soldiers were restricted to unfamiliar land, which could have affected their newly developed strategies. The south was well, weak and had little to nothing compared to the north. But one large advantage that they had is they had better generals, which in my opinion would have trained the soldiers better to do better on the battle field as to convince northern voters that winning was not worth the price in blood and treasure, which would replace Lincoln with someone who would make peace with southern independence. I thus come to a conclusion, which I believe all these advantages and disadvantages did affect the War’s outcome because if at least one of these factors would have changed, the war would’ve been seen differently and the result would have been changed dramatically.
P.S Sorry for the lateness, I got home really late.
The outcome of the Civil War was an inevitable result due to the various advantages that the Union had. These unbalanced advantages of the Union over the Confederacy were the result of how each section of the country had developed. The North had developed into an industrial region, while the South was an agricultural region. The Union being the industrial region; had numerous amounts factories and could create supplies and materials needed for the war, such as firearms, and could keep resupplying its troops. The Confederacy, in the other hand, could not resupply its troops as efficiently as the Union. They were an agricultural region, and did not possess the amount of factories to resupply its troops as efficiently and as constantly as the Union. Another disadvantage of the South was that the Confederacy only produced mainly cash crops; cotton and tobacco. Their main production was not food, and therefore there troops were also not well fed. Also, the Confederacy could not trade with Europe anymore since their supplies were sent to the north and then shipped off to Europe. As a result, the Confederacy sent for an approval to Europe so they could now trade with them directly. However, Europe just waited on the decision and never aided the south or the north. Therefore, the Confederacy’s supplies depleted persistently. Another major advantage that the Union had was the better built railroad system and almost double the amount of railroads as the Confederacy. This allowed for the Union to transport their supplies more efficiently to their troops than the South. The Union also had the advantage of having more population, a total of 22.5 million, almost twice as the Confederacy which only had 13.2 million. However, the Confederacy had 4.2 million black men and they were not allowed to fight but only to be in the troops. Therefore, they only had a population of 9 million whites, and unlike the Union; they could not keep replacing men. The Union had more than twice the amount of population, and even though there was a war going on; immigrants kept on migrating to the northern U.S., therefore they could keep replacing their men. The final advantage that the Union had, was the already structured government and developed executive power. Unlike the Confederacy, that had to stress about creating a government and a strong executive, in order for Jefferson Davis to use the money of the southern states. However, despite the major disadvantages, the South did have some advantages. One of the advantages was the geographical aspect. They had a greater amount of land, and therefore blockade more territory. Another advantage of the Confederacy was the great leadership. They had great generals, and therefore were well led in a military sense. The Confederacy also had now obtained a new weapon that could shoot farther and could hold more bullets, a major advantage for the type of war that they fought. All these advantages, only contributed to prolonging the war, they were not advantages that would win the Civil War for the Confederacy. If the south would have stayed in the defensive position, instead of going on an offensive strategy after Gettysburg; the war would have only become more stretched. However, Jefferson Davis observed that their supplies and men, unlike the north, were depleting, and therefore they would have to win soon or they would never win the war; but the advantages of the north were too many, and the Confederacy could not defeat the Union.
Sorry for the late post. I just got back today, and slept for most of it since sleeping on a bus gives you no rest.
The Union obviously had more advantages as everybody has stated so far such as a larger population of 22.5 million, they were more industrialized, and already had a government formed. The Confederacy had advantages as well which is one reason I believe the war lasted as long as it did. The Confederacy did have the better army with, as many have said, a warrior like mentality. They were also fighting a defensive war which had they used as an advantage the entire time, they might have had more of a chance at winning their national independence. The Confederate army also had the rifle musket which could shoot from almost 800 feet away, and was a very deadly weapon used in war. The result of the war is not surprising because the Union had the advantage, but what was surprising to people back then was the length of the war which should have been a predictable because both sides had advantages that could help them win the war. The Confederacy had, what I would call short term advantages and long term disadvantages because their advantages were used in the beginning of the war, and obviously they did not last. The Union had long term advantages which helped them to win the war and short term disadvantages which would prevent them from winning faster. The fact that the Union army was not properly trained and the generals were not competant was short term because it was later fixed.
P.S. If there are a lot of typos, I apologize. I did this on my iPod.
Sorry for my late post I figured I should still at least try to do it :P I also want to point out that the professor also finds Ken Burns’ use of violins in his documentaries interesting. Haha. That made me laugh. Anyways…… The North had far more advantages than the Confederacy had during the Civil War. The only major advantages that the Confederacy had over the North were the better geography and the ability to fight a defensive war and obviously a defensive war is a far easier war to win in comparison to an offensive war. They didn’t have to conquer the North. They just had to fight long enough to hold out long enough and wear out the North. Another advantage that the South had was the black population that helped during the war as nurses, soldiers, and workers. Those advantages seem minor when compared to all the advantages that the North had over the South. The Union had industrial capability, manufacturing, a strong Navy, finances, and a larger population allowing more man power. The point that I found really interesting that I didn’t ever think of before was the Union’s governmental stability. The Union already had a president with a set government and a functioning political party system, whereas the Confederacy was still trying to set up a government and had a one party system in which Jefferson Davis was merely appointed. I had never considered the government as an advantage that the Union had over the Confederacy. Another fact to take into consideration was the expectations for the war. I found it interesting that the war was expected to be short, so both sides were somewhat surprised when it lasted as long as it did, which affected the outcome of the war. All in all, I think that the advantages that the North had over the South had a huge impact on the outcome of the war because like the professor pointed out, a war involving agriculture against manufacturing, the agriculture would lose. It was as simple as that, but the Union even had more advantages over the Confederacy.
Everyone is apologizing for their lateness and I am a bagillion days late. Anyways…
The North was definitely expecting to win the war and win it faster than they did. As the famous saying states, “the North fought the war with one hand behind their backs” just shows how confident the North was towards winning the war. Had they not “fought the war with one hand behind their back,” they probably would have one the war at a faster pace than it was. This just reminds me of the story of the turtle and the rabbit that race each other, because the rabbit is so confident it will beat the turtle that it doesn’t win. Of course in this case, the North does win but only because it had so many more advantages over the South and they knew were to attack them with. I think the South could have had a chance to win though. As the professor stated, the South only had a supply problem as the war got bigger. Meaning that if the war stayed small and the South used their geographical and agricultural advantages they had a fair shot at winning. On the other hand, the North not only had more people but as many of you have stated, they were industrialized and an industrial economy will always beat an agricultural economy. This economy in the north helped them get their supplies and placed them at a higher advantage including in transportation. The south couldn’t rely on their transportation because all of their railroads weren’t even the same size! And that is that the south had a vast amount of land that was on coastline which they could have use to their advantage but the North did place a successful naval blockade. The South still had rivers they could use but again so could the North. On top of that, the North also had an organized centralized government while the South pretty much had poop. They weren’t organized, they didn’t have a real political party system, and overnight Jefferson Davis had to try to get things together. All the South had to do was defend itself from the North but the North figured out how to attack the South. As the professor mentioned, the North learned that the only way to beat the South was to attack its system and that is what they did. They needed to destroy slavery and that is why I believe the North truly won the war.
During the Civil War the North had more advantages than the South did. The North had more support from bank deposits than the south this means that they had more money in order to buy more supplies for their military. The North also had more factories than the South did, this means that the North was helping America grow more and also the products they were making in the factories were supplies for their military. The North had a larger population than the South did also. The North had a population of 22 million and the South had a population of 9 million with 4.5 million of blacks which were mainly slaves. The North had an advantage of transportation than the South did. The North had about 80% of railroad tracks which made it easier for them to get supplies such as food or military support. I believe all these advantages helped the North with the war.
The North had far more advantages than the south did. They had many more bank deposits, factories, 80 percent more railroads than the south and had a population of twenty-two and a half million. They were a big supplier of goods such as cloths and ships and had a functioning government and political parties already in place.
ReplyDeleteThe south however, being more of an agricultural union rather than the mechanist north, had their money invested in northern bank deposits. They had to buy goods and war materials like gunships from Britain and France because they had no navy. They would also later realize their supply for weapons would be depleting as the war went on and they were not well fed and clothed, mainly because the union was the supplier of the cloth and other goods. The south also only had thirteen and a half million people with nine million of those being white and the rest being black. However the greatest weakness for the south was that all their farms and factories were being worked by blacks. Being that the norths’ main goal was to abolish slavery, it is apparent to predict that the economy of the south would crumble.
The few advantages that the south had was the Geography and if they had stayed on the defense in their own territory, the south may have been able to have held up longer and maybe even do some damage to the Union. A con about the geography however was that they were going to have Mexico riding on their backs the whole time, proving evermore that they are not prepared to stand as their own divided union with little to no government and politics. The south also had more people to enlist in their army and supplied them with a greater weapon than the average musket: the rifle musket. The union troops were depicted as cowards for the most part and had poor battle tactics as shown in their large retreat at Bull Run. If the confederates had stood their ground and utilized their numbers and arms effectively, they might not have won the war still, but they would have at least given the north a better run for their money. The south may have looked like they had a slim to no chance of winning the war but it is because of their retaliation and making a stand that made a statement to the north. Lincoln himself would come to contradiction by stating that they will not be recognized as a separate body, but yet he acted fully as if they were.
The north had many advantages compared to the south. The north had finances, manufacturing, transportation and man power on their side with the odds against the south. The north had four times the bank deposits than the north and the south had some of their deposits in the north as well. In the north there were as many manufacturing establishments as there were workers in the south. New Haven, Connecticut had ten times the firearms as the south in 1860 which helped them a lot because well obviously because of the war. Transportation was a major advantage having 80% of the railroads in the U.S being in the north and having 451 locomotives while the south only had 19. Along with that the north had more mechanics that worked on the railroads and the south had railroads with different sized gauges making them switch locomotives in each state. Man power was another advantage because in the north the population was much more than that of the south. The north had a population of 22.5 million people while the south only had 9 million white people and 4.5 million blacks. Along with that man power the north also produced 94% of the cloth, as well as high numbers of percentages of boats and ships. All these advantages led to the union winning the Civil War and the confederates didn’t.
ReplyDeleteWhen the Civil War first broke out in 1861, it seemed to many that the South was going against the odds by facing an enemy as strong and industrialized as the North, in many ways this was true. However, this isn’t to say that the South didn’t have plenty of advantages working in their favor as well. Some things that the North did already have working in their favor included several economic, financial, and industrial factors. To name a few, they had more materials and material goods at their disposal and were a much larger manufacturing power than the South was. The Professor presented some statistics on this that also included the fact that New Haven, Connecticut, one small area in the North, had ten times more firearms than all of the South did combined. They had the majority ( somewhere around the eightieth percentile ) of bank deposits, as well as the majority of railroad lines and locomotives in their territory and under their control. The North also greatly outnumbered the South by several million people, and therefore had more manpower. The South had the disadvantage of having to face a more centralized and much better coordinated enemy. In addition to that, they also had to build up an entire functioning government from scratch almost overnight. What they did have working in their favor though was the defensive advantage. As mentioned in the lecture, they may have been more effective in fighting the North had they stayed that way. The South didn’t have to win, rather they only had to hold out long enough as, like the Professor stated, “insurgents”. They only had to last long enough for the North to grow weary and fall into economic trauma, through this they had a clear advantage. The South also had several geographical advantages in that they had many rivers that they could use to their advantage and a very long coastline, which made it very hard for the Union Navy to blockade them completely so that they would not receive help from foreign powers. “The goal of the Confederacy was national independence”, their cause was clearer than that of the North and much less abstract. I believe these factors had great potential to influence the Civil War to a very large extent, but because mistakes were clearly made on both sides they weren’t completely taken advantage of. The Union had statistics on their side, and the Confederacy had more of a fundamental advantage in that they that they were on their home turf and had only to defend themselves. Had it been a shorter war, the South could have made it a close fight. In the long run though, they were limited in that they did not have the means of supporting their army nor the manufacturing ability that would have been required to sustain a fully independent nation.
ReplyDeleteAs the professor went over the negatives and negatives for the north and the south it seemed as the north had much of the advantage in political when it came to government and some what economic when it came to manufacturing and industrial because the north having more than the south and I agree that the social of the south having slaves became the big factor since that the south played in their agriculture. Also the industry was being major and as if the north was upgrading with time and the south was still in old time barely falling into this phase. During the lecture it seemed that the north knew if the slaves were taken away from the south it would be a big advantage to the victory from the confederacy and it seemed as if it was kind of a game for example a football game there are two teams with advantages for example team I don’t know north has a good defense being the railroads and a good wide receiver being manufacturing as well as good coach which is their government. The south has a good quarterback being the agriculture since it being the main part of the south and a not so good coach being government, .f the north tries to get the quarterback injured and out of the game having a victory of winning the super bowl. That is what this north and south and situation means a competitive game to the big win of as the professor said conquest.
ReplyDeleteLike everyone else said the North seemed as they had a huge advantage over the South because they had a well-constructed government,they had a lot of manufacturing establishments and railroads and the north had most of the bank deposits.The south only had few advantages which the major one was their geographical position. But I think both, the North and South at one point of the war there was a time which the North or the South had completely advantage over the rival and had the opportunity to defeat them. It's obviously that the North had a lot of more opportunities to win the war faster because they were more advanced they had more good stuff compared to the south. However, the South had the necessary or the enough 'weapons' to defeat the North, because as the teacher said that the South had a superior generalship, better men, better soldiers. And also they invented a rifled musket which made the bullet move around 200 to 300 feet. Plus the geographical position, they had a great variety of good 'weapons' just enough to at least make the North weaker. Besides all the the advantages of the North, the south had a change to be victorious in the Civil War but at the end it wasn't enough what they had.
ReplyDeleteAs pretty much everyone before me has said, the Union seemed to have an advantage over the south because the had a larger population and were more industrialized than the Confederacy. It's true that the confederates could have supplied plenty of food for themselves being that they were still very focused on agriculture, but it takes more than food to win a war, so unless there backup plan was to begin charging Union troops and beating them with the nearest vegetable they could find when their gun either broke or ran out of ammunition, they were going to need clothes and weaponry as well. However, many clothes and weapons were produced in the North, so as Philip said, the confederates had to begin trading with foreign countries to keep themselves supplied for the war effort. On the matter of population difference, the Union did heavily outnumber the Confederacy, but as John Anthony said the confederates were fighting on their own land and had a very large coastline so the Union could not place a very effective blockade to stop trade with other countries. Unfortunately, while the Confederacy did have these geological advantages, it wasn't enough to best the Union. As many people have brought up before, it seemed almost impossible for the Confederacy to beat the Union, but they still could've tried a bit harder and made the Union work a bit harder to bring the nation back together.
ReplyDeleteAs many of you have said, the North had many more advantages over the South. Many thought that the war would be a quick one, lasting nothing over a year, because of the advantages that the Union had. Yes, the North had a heavy industry, had more than three quarters of the railroad system and had more than $331 million dollars in exports but the South had a warrior society about them and some of the best new weapons. Before the war, many men from the North and South attended West Point and trained there. A majority of these men were split one North Carolina seceded. Seventy-four cadets resigned from West Point because they refused to take an oath of allegiance to the United States. This meant that the South had an advantage of seventy-four well trained and conditioned Army Generals that had new strategies and weren’t stuck in the old ways of fighting. The Union military, though they didn’t have as many fresh new generals, had a plan that would constrict the South slowly. The North had the upper hand in military advantages because not only did they have an Army that was full and functioning but they also had a full functioning Navy. With the Navy, the Union constructed the Anaconda Plan in where they would make a blockade around the South using all available rivers from Virginia to the Mississippi. This would slowly kill the South because they depended so much on imports from other states and countries, especially in food imports from Texas, Louisiana, and Arkansas. This plan worked to an extent but it was the work of General McClellan that helped win the war for the Union. He trained the draftees in his methods that were proven to work. But another factor that helped the Union win the war was their political factors. The South had to create a new government in the course of one night and it had no political parties. This divided the people in the South further because you couldn’t agree on what was going on within the Confederacy. The North didn’t have to create a new government and they already had a president in place that they were able to elect, Jefferson Davis wasn’t elected, and they still had political parties in which they could voice their views. This did affect the outcome of the war because it allowed the Union to come together even though they didn’t have a motive like the South did until the Emancipation Proclomation.
ReplyDelete(PART 1) Overtime, many have come to the immediate conclusion that the North and South differed greatly by one aspect throughout the Civil War- their existence if being an agricultural and industrial region. Of course, this did play a role in each region’s advantages and disadvantages throughout the war, but there are also greater and just as important characteristics of each division to look at.
ReplyDeleteIt’s obvious that the North had more advantages than the South throughout the Civil War, but these advantages shouldn’t be looked at as the only reason for their victory, but should rather as the foundation of the advantages that the North came to have. Of course, there were more factories and manufacturing that existed when compared to the South. With so many manufacturing establishments, the North had a greater benefit of being able produce more supplies and materials than the South, including firearm. This later went on to their advancement in transportation, which includes the capacity of railroads and locomotives needed to transport goods and supplies more efficiently and quickly. Although the South did have an amount of railroads in the region, they weren’t as efficiently built (, specifically its gages,) as those in the North. Of course, being an industrialized region of the country, the North was able to build better railroads due to the vast majority of skilled mechanics they had. With proper gages, trains wouldn’t have to waist valuable time changing and readjusting to the poor connection and linkage between railroads. Having a population of 22.5 million, the North also had greater manpower than the South, who unfortunately had only 9 million whites and nearly 4.2 million blacks to makes up their population. With a greater population (especially white), the North was able to hold more power than the South, whether it was economically, politically, socially, or industrially. Economically, due to their power in the industrial industry, there were more finances in the North as bank deposits in the South. This allowed the North to be economically stable when the war occurred, and not be so damaged in the aftermath as the South was (, being that they were so reliant on only their crops and slavery). Politically, the North had one of the greatest advancements throughout the entire Civil War. Because they politically already had a functioning government, they did not have stress over the issue of creating a new one (, as they did in the South). This also allowed the North to be more developed and sufficiently capable socially and economically, only adding onto to their advantages throughout the Civil War.
(PART 2)
ReplyDeleteIn the South, there were already existing characteristics that gave them a fair amount of advantages. The most common one that’s looked at is its geographic and agricultural being. Having a greater amount of territory, the South had the opportunity to obtain more power defensively, and being able to blockade a greater of land and area in the country. However, the South chose to give up their advantage of a defensive position and chose to invade the North. This resulted to be rather a disadvantage of the South, as they allowed larger Northern groups to take power in the South. As stated many times in the lecture, the South was seen as an insurgency, and could have settled for peace if they just held out long enough. Arguably, the South did have better soldiers than the North, having more improved men and not necessarily improved arm (, especially being that there were so many farmers already existing the South). As far as firearm, the South did hold the advantage of having possession of a more enhanced rifle that allowed them to shoot at a greater distance. This would greatly help them as a defensive position, but unfortunately they took the route of being the more offensive region. Now, this didn’t necessarily mean they had a great amount of supplies in the South. In fact, their suffered from the poor amount of it, especially as the war continued to grow. This affected the Confederate army greatly since they had poor care throughout the war (, whether it was medically, through food or clothing). This caused the South to rely greatly on imported goods from Great Britain and France, while the North stood independently as a far as supplies. The political aspect throughout this war showed a great importance in the advantages and disadvantages of both regions. While the North contained an already existing, functioning government, the South had the anxiety of creating this new government over night. As a disadvantage, the South was born through a state’s rights impulse, and now had to face the challenge of creating a centralized government based on a centralized war. On top of that, no one seemed to cooperate in establishing such a form of government, only adding on the vast amount of disadvantages in the South. The issue of slavery was probably the most controversial issues when it came to being whether an advantage or disadvantage. Slaves in the South did help supply both armies when put to work and obtaining a greater manpower. However, in the South, it seemed to only destroy the Confederacy. Ultimately, the only way to win the war was to destroy slave, which meant destroying the economic and social foundation in the South. As professor Blight stated in the lecture, this immediately “became a total war of conquest”.
Both regions of the country were expected to engage in war, which meant the event of great conscription. No matter your race, age, or occupation/status in society, all men were expected to take oath and fight for their country. Of course, both sides were never mobilized for war against one another, and now had to decide how to fight and what it was to conclude in. Both the North and South came to face the common disadvantage of fighting their own brothers of their own nation.
The north had far more advantages that the south did in the civil war. The North had four times the bank deposits that the south meaning they had more money to buy supplies for their military. The North had for more factories that the south, meaning they could produce the supplies needed to keep the military going. Also the north had a bigger population than the south did. The north had a population of about 22 million, and the south had a population of about 9 million with about another 4.5 million blacks. The south also had far less transportation than the north. The north had about 80% of the railroad tracks, making it easier for them to get supplies. Also the north had far more locomotives that the south did and far more mechanics to work on the railroads that the south did. Also the south did have a set gauges for the tracks, which meant the south had to be constantly changing locomotives. I believe that all these advantages help the Union with the war.
ReplyDeleteThe Union and the Confederacy were constantly colliding with issues and problems regarding their economical, political, and social issues. We all agreed on that the North had a lot more advantages than the South that eventually led the Union to win the Civil War. Although, I came across an interesting topic during my readings of the lecture. The South had the geographical features to maintain themselves during the war. The professor had made a suggestion of which the South had to play a defensive game when waging war with the Union armies. Instead of attacking the North and allowing free shots for the Union armies to attack on southern grounds, they should’ve staid behind and defended their territories. They didn’t have a well established government as it is, and they did have the necessary tools to keep their economy up and running, so why didn’t they just fought long enough until the North had economic recessions? After all, the Confederacy’s main goal was national independence. Plus, they had European help from Great Britain and the French. The North did make the most of their advantages and the South made mistakes on how to plan out the winning of this war.
ReplyDeleteWhen analyzing the circumstances in which the North and South entered the Civil War, it is clear that the North had the greater advantage. However, the effort of the South was not exactly to conquer the North or overwhelmingly defeat them, but to force the Union into either weariness or economic trouble in order to maintain their independence. Due to the advantages of the South, this goal certainly seemed attainable. For one, like others have mentioned, the geographical position of the Confederacy not only allowed them to be on the defense and use their rivers for transportation, but get supplies from foreign countries despite the naval blockade. Additionally, like Annissa mentioned, the warrior mentality instilled in the South allowed for a united and strong military, despite their considerably small numbers compared to the Union. It can be argued that the Confederacy had better leadership, and although there wasn’t much political stability, there was a united cause. The South also had better weapons, but as the war carried on, it became clear that quantity overruled quality. The North’s goal was now to destroy the social and economic structure of the South, and they definitely had the numbers to do so. Not only did the North had the manpower, outnumbering the Southern population by 9 million people, but they also had the vast majority of weapons in the country, a stable economy, stable government, efficient military leadership, and 80 percent more railroads than the South. In this way, the North defeated the South, but not without a struggle, even though the war was expected to be very short. Although the South wasn’t able to defeat the North, they were certainly successful In putting up a fight.
ReplyDeleteThe north had many advantages including a bank system where most of the nation’s currency was at hold and a much superior industrialized society compared to the south, the north was the nation’s trade center most of everything that came in was arriving at the North’s ports. The south was a slave society which meant their economy and lifestyle was based mostly on slaves and their labor. Now the south had some advantages for example they had some good and well known generals and they invented some good weapons like the musket but they had no navy they had to import most war materials from other countries like Britain and France. South’s biggest advantage was their geographical position but that only played a big role at the beginning of the war as it progressed it wasn’t that big of a deal. Their weapons differed and so did their strategies and that is what helped the north. Like I had mentioned the south had many good old generals but that’s the thing they were used to old style fighting just charging in a straight line and the north realized that the only way to defeat the was to come up with a new tactic and they did that is what gave them the lead. In the end the north won because they had a better and stronger society with a good economy and they were just ahead and more industrialized compared to the south.
ReplyDeleteDuring the Civil war, the north was clearly in the advantage. However, the south never planned on taking over the northern parts or anything similar. All they wanted
ReplyDeleteto gain was respect and show the Union and the North that they will fight for their rights. This was was very costly for everybody, but in the end one can say that the
south got what they wanted. During the 18th century the north felt a lot more powerful than the south due to their industrialization. That is one of the reasons why
they thought they could basically tell the south what to do. However, the north was at least as dependent on the south as the other way around. While the south had trading
partners all over the world, the north was just working with the raw materials they received from the south. Of course the north was still in the advantage, but the south
wanted to show that they are not as weak as many thought. Some of you said that the south would have done "better" if they would have used a more defensive strategy, and
that may be correct. However, the south had something to proof and if they would have hidden, nobody would have respected them.
Everyone pretty much agrees that the North had many of the advantages that led them to win the war. This didn’t mean that the South had no advantages at all though. Like it said, the South did have some advantages when it came to geography and their expansive territory. Although the South didn’t have as many people as the North did, they had the blacks which did help them out quite a bit when it came to having more soldiers, nurses, and workers. This though, was what led the North to want to destroy slavery. The professor also talked about how the people in the South had much more of a drive to fight because of possible warrior cultures. Even though the South had some advantages that were valid, they could not compare to the advantages that the North had. Like mentioned in the video and in the comments, the Union had industrial capacity (that even the South relied on) as well as a strong field in manufacturing. They had as many establishments in the North as they had workers in the South and also had 80% or higher of railroads, locomotives, cloth, and iron. Because they had all of this, they must have not had any problems with supplies for the war. For the South on the other hand, supply was a major issue making them resort to Great Britain and France. Another thing that worked to the Union’s advantage was that they already had a set government and political party and the South didn’t, leaving them to try to figure something out as the professor said, “over night”. Overall, the South had a couple of good advantages but the North (although it did have some disadvantages as well) had an outstanding number of advantages over the South, leading them to victory.
ReplyDeleteThe Civil War was a battle where one side was industrialized and the other was not. The south only had one advantage in my perspective, though they were not industrialized, the fact that a large amount of the battle was fought on their territory. The fact that they were in a domestic type of battle, could have been a major advantage for the south. But their population was much smaller than the north having a smaller army. Therefore, even though they had an advantage by fighting on their territory their disadvantages overthrew their chance of winning the battle, because regardless of where the battle took place they had a small and weak army. Furthermore, the south truly had no major advantage. The north had a larger population and was very industrialized; it was more common for foreign governments to recognize the north rather than the south. Due to this the confederacy had a harder time obtaining aid. Aside from the north had several advantages such as, larger population, a stronger army, more resources, and a better economical status. It is not hard to understand why the north defeated the south, the south had no advantages on their side while the north had several advantages which of course made it easier for them to defeat the south. Now the outcomes of the Civil War were highly influenced by the north and south differences to a wide extent when looking at the economic outcomes. The rise of taxes and the debt of the economy are things that were caused by the north and south during the war. Simply because of the lack of compromise and agreement between both sides and political groups caused the war for a longer time period, which affected the economic by a large extent. Now when speaking of freeing the slaves afterwards, was due to the war to a certain extent but I believe without the war they would have still gained their freedom in some way.
ReplyDeleteIt's well-known that fighting a defensive side in a war might be the best advantage you can have. Look at the American Revolution. The 13 colonies won because Britain had to cross the Atlantic to get here and then they had to fight, and by then soldiers were already sick and supplies lacking.
ReplyDeleteThe South had this advantage and like Annissa and Daniela mentioned, they had the military mentality and were much more "prepared" for war as they were fighting for cause: independence from the Union and freedom of slavery (what a lovely oxymoron).
It was clear that this war was a lost cause seeing as the South did not have the necessary number of men to fight against the North's "cowardly men" and because about half of the population were slaves.
Like Ashley and Professor said, the impulsive state-rights Confederacy had to form a new government overnight whereas the government in the Union had been established since the century before, so the Confederacy was screwed politically and socially.
Economically they were suffering there too. Like Philip mentioned, the Union had 80% more railroads than the South (and Kansas. Who can forget about dreary, bloody Kansas) and the Confederacy's money was invested in Unionists banks. Trading with foreign countries could have been a solution but that would mean raising tariffs and who likes to pay high taxes? True, it has been mentioned that the Confederacy's ultra-super war tactic was to wary the Union's pocketbook and eventually send them to bankruptcy (something that our present-day politicians should have taken in count before continuing a pointless war) which would ward them off and leave them the new-country alone, but it seems that they underestimated the deepness of the Union's wallet seeing as the end of the war, the North's economy was not as shaken as the South's.
The freeing of slaves was due in part of the war in my opinion because there was already the necessary legal documents/laws/speeches and all (Emancipation Proclamation, 13th Amendment) but also because seeing as the Confederacy failed terribly, what other methods could the Southern planters used to retain their slaves if they had lost politically, socially, and economically (seeing as slaves would not work since they were legally considered free)?
I agree with everyone that has posted so far the North was indeed the superior force in the Civil War because of their advantages in economy, being having a very stable bank income or deposit than the south, their 110,000 manufacturing plants with 1.2 million workers, and having states like Connecticut which could produce 10 times the amount of firearms than any other southern state as well as having 80% of the railroads and locomotives which were highly organized when compared to the South’s mixed up and confusing tracks. The North’s last two advantages discussed during the lecture was their population of 22.5 million people and the North’s highly functional and stable government and political parties. The South had fewer advantages but were major in war such as their geography having a huge territory and coastline, also the many rivers that ran through the South. The South’s purpose for fighting was another advantage as they really didn’t need to they just had to wait it out and fight for as long as possible and the North would eventually tire and destroy itself. The South in truth also boasted better weapons, Generals and officers, and possibly soldiers. However the South could not supply its troops after some time, had no navy, were finding even harder to organize a government and weren’t aided by other counties for it and of course slavery.
ReplyDeleteAs the past comments of stated, The Union won the civil war due to the many advantages they consisted of. One of the main reasons The Union ruled over the south was because they had an establish government, they were already being led by a federal government for a while. Through this the north was very experienced in making economic and political decisions concerning a war, therefore, they south was already two, three, steps behind in this confrontation. Anther main advantage The Union had over The Confederacy was the amount of favor they had in trading imports and exports. Not only had this but they had the upper hand in established railroads this then giving them easier access to arriving to their territories quicker as well as delivering goods to their soldiers too. Banks were also a play changer because the north had large amounts of deposits from both their own areas as well as some of The Confederacy areas. Therefore, The Union had the upper hand in controlling division of the money and currency. One last cause that led to the victory of the north was due to the fact that they had a Navy surround the south and the south had no established Navy. Once more The Union was three steps ahead of The Confederacy.
ReplyDeleteI'm going to have to challenge what Cristy said. Not being industrialized is in no way, shape, or form an advantage. It was a terrible disadvantage for them in fact. Without the factories the industrialized north possessed it was that much harder for the south to obtain ammunition and such. Also, not having any factories could be detrimental to the people living in the south as well as the army.
ReplyDeleteLike Esti said, I am going to have to agree that the Union mostly one because they were already established. As I said before, the south wasn't industrial. Having to form a government with the principles the aristocratic southerners had and also having do do that very deed overnight was impossible. The fact is, the south's lack of common sense killed them ultimately.
The North was destined to win. The only disadvantage I would have to say they had to deal with was not having very many railroads to the south as well as having terrible generals. If they did, the Civil War wouldn't have been very war-like at all. Finally, the larger population the north possessed provided more soliders to fight the war. Unlike the south, the north allowed the freedpeople to fight.
Between the North and South, one can conclude that the North had a clear advantage over the South. The North was more industrialized and organized which gave them an upper hand in many of the events that occurred during the Civil War. In comparison to the Confederates, the Union in political terms, had a functioning government with a running two party system. With a stable government, the Union's ability to organize power, loyalty, and patronage came easier. Unlike the Confederates, who had yet created a running government. Economically, the industry in the North provided them with a sufficient amount of money and supplies. They had 80% of the industry, 10 times the fire arm than the South, 94% of cloth production, 4 times the bank deposits, etc. Railroads also helped in the transportation of supplies and troops. The North had more organized railroads compared to the South. The railroads in the South would later cause trouble for them. Lastly, there is the advantage of geography that the South contained. The South was an expansive territory with many geographical features such as rivers that would aid in invading the North. If the South would have stayed on the defensive, their chances for an upper advantage over the North, would have probably sustained a better chance of victory.
ReplyDeleteViewing the expectations, advantages, and the disadvantages, the North had the South beat. (Not in outcome terms) Overall the North had many advantages of the South. They were well off financially, in manufacturing, in transportation, and in all industrial capacity. Financially, the North had four times the bank deposits as the southern states. In manufacturing, there were 110,000 manufacturing establishments in northern states with over 1 million workers. In transportation, most of all the railroads in the United States were in, again, the northern states. With over four hundred locomotives in the United States, there were only about nineteen in the South. The many skilled mechanics working on railroads in the North probably helped them a great deal while the South built their railroads state by state. This could have slowed the South down tremendously which could have been a cause to their defeat. Population in the North crushed the population in the South. This lead to much more manpower that was probably another main cause to the South’s defeat. One of the North’s greatest advantages, and the South’s greatest disadvantage, in personal opinion, was the political aspect of this era. This could have been one of the chief reasons that South lost the war. Not having to create a functioning government helped the North. Along with that, they had a functioning political party system. A functioning government and political party system maintained a sense of organization in all aspects. The South, however, had no government and no political party system. This in terms, lead to no sense of organization. The South had a few great advantages over the North. Their land was one along with new firearm and great generalship. This helped that South fight back against the North. The few advantages the South had were nowhere compared to those of the North. The North had many more advantages and the South had many disadvantages. Personally, the main cause of the South’s defeat was the lack of government. The lack of government and political party system left the South with no sense of organization which could have caused them the war.
ReplyDeleteSeveral messages throughout the video, I felt, were interpreted differently than I perceived. For example, when the professor talks about the 'negatives and negatives' for the North and South, I found the political viewpoint extremely interesting, however I don't think I really understood all of what the professor was trying to explain.
ReplyDeleteThe professor made it seem as if the North was far superior than the South, and that the North has some kind of a prior knowledge of the South's inability to function properly without slaves. As Anely mentioned, "... it seemed that the north knew if the slaves were taken away from the south it would be a big advantage to the vistory from the confederacy...". I completely agree with her, in the sense that the knowledge of our split nation's economical differences wasn't very hard to understand; the North was based on industrial revenue, while the South was more focused on income from the slaves.
As Daniela mentioned, it could be argued that the Confederacy had better leaders, however, it wasn't the leadership that eventually made the South fall. How could the South possibley have any advantage, when they were being deprived of their sources? Since their economy was based on slavey, they had no other alternatives to provide any income to soldiers. Without slavery, the south had nothing. They couldn't pay their soldiers; they couldn't provide proper training to anyone either way, so even if willing soldiers participated, how would they fend for themselves? With sources limited and very few alternatives open, I don't think the South really had a fighting chance, whether or not their leadership skills were excellent.
I would say that you could pinpoint the major disadvantage of the South on it's economy. Because they had no other alternatives of major income for that part of the nation, their economy suffered greatly which in term, led to the downfall of everything else. The North in this department however, was more suited for the freedom of slaves. I think the major advantage, or disadvantage, of the North and South, were their economies. Like a domino effect, their economies either cause a major economical downfall (the South), or it caused the other part of the nation (the North) to appear more flourished, as it wasn't as effected as the South.
The union had three distinct advantages one of which was that they had a stable economy. The reason that this was so important is that wars are very expensive and usually the best funded side and best prepared side will win the north had the money to pay troops buy weapons by the thousands and for enough medical supplies to also support the south. But the north did have to buy they already had plenty of supplies and weaponry which the south didn’t such as rifles or warships. The south didn’t have an established navy unlike the north which had a pretty powerful naval fleet.
ReplyDeleteI have to agree with Estibaliz on that the north had an advantage on the fact that they had an established government which meant cooperation within the country. Unlike the south which was centralized on states right which made it difficult to pass federal laws and things.
As basically everyone said, the Union did have quite a few advantages over the south in the beginning of the war such as finances, factories, transportation, political advantages (no need to create a new government) and the astonishing overpowering population of the north over the south but the Union wasn't too prepared in a military standpoint with regiments that hadn't be prepared for battle. The confederacy on the other hand had some advantages such as having a clear cause and not needed to conquer or win the war, they just had to last it out until they had worn down the north into ensuing a peace agreement, they also had superior general ship and a bit more of a warrior culture to them and better weapons but in terms of the war this could only take them so far. They still had to create a completely new government overnight and contrary to everyone's comment that this cause unified them together the Confederacy was based on states rights but the war forced them to come together as one, which as Professor Blight said didn't always work.
ReplyDeleteI think these advantages and disadvantages did affect the war because to be a lot of the differences between the union and the confederacy were the differences between an industrial society and an agricultural society. Union had supplies, money, and supplies but the confederacy has soldiers, leadership, and a clear cause that didn't call for a win. But through all of this to me it seemed a battle of who could outlast who and through all these things the confederacy just didn't have what it took to out last the union.
"No nation of agriculturalist ever made war on a nation of mechanics and survived” (West Point soldier William Sherman, April 1861); the power of innovative industrialism within the North has established a superior form of prominence against the South and its agricultural force. Despite the authoritarian role of the North during the Civil War, both powers suffered in the midst of turbulence within a “remorseless revolutionary struggle” (2nd inaugural address of Abraham Lincoln). Therefore, this is why the imminence of “a result less fundamental and astounding” (Abraham Lincoln).
ReplyDeleteI agree with Daniela, Annissa, and Establiz on the account that the South was far more mobilized mentally for war in contrast to the North despite its industrial capacity. The South obtains several advantages above the North due to its geographical state allowing free territories for expansion. In addition, agricultural production made within the South aids and helps support the ascendancy of the states. The Northern powers are composed of several beneficiary aspects economically and politically. Manufacturing entails the increasing of factories and industrial workers as well as the additional breakthrough of the creation of railroads with numerous skilled mechanics; this resulted in the finances’ accumulation four times abundant than that of the South. The population provided the ultimate heightening man power for these states, for advocates of the North emerge. Politically the federal government was built on a basis of states’ rights and localism allowing an overbearing source of support (organization of power, patronage, and loyalty) over the Southern states and their hastily-made government with the Confederate federal policy apt to creating a centralized government all in efforts for national independence. The Confederacy’s investment of finances in unionist banks allowed for an assembly of allies for their power, and resorting to foreign dependencies would slowly diminish the ability their forces. However, the advantage of slavery subtly helped the usage of slaves towards building the Confederate Army against the Union.
In conclusion, the freedom of slaves led to the conflicts raised between both sides of the northern and southern powers. Freedmen were liberated legally through proof of documents, yet the contradictory viewpoints were stubborn in attaining their procession of actions towards increasing their power of opinion.
There were several useful advantages for both sides of the of the United States during the Civil War. Beginning with the North, they had more money, which could be used in various ways to aid the efforts of the war. They also possessed a far higher population than the Southern states, which obviously helped them in battle situaitions. However, the industry advantage mentioned a couple of times, in the video and on the blog posts, had little to no effect on the war itself. It was merely the form of business the North specialized in. It might have had an effect on its economic status, though. The North also had a strong political advantage by having a structured, organized and well run government. The South had several advantages as well, though not as numerous as the North. The South was very geographically strategic in terms of in this situation, and if they would have remained purely defensive, their geography might have won them the war. They also had developed better and more modern war tatics, such as the musket, that could be used against the old, neopolianic warfare used by the North. It must be said, however, that the South's strategies were still quite outdated, seen at the Battle of Bull Run. Lastly, the South also possessed purpose and, until General Grant, possessed better leadership. Both the Confederacy and the Union had weaknesses. The North's primary weakness was that they fought a generally offensive war. It is said many times throughout the lecture and sources, if the South would have kept a defensive front, they might have won the war. The South had many weaknesses compared to the North. Their political situation was the main problem in the effort. The government was brand new and created overnight. It was a one-party system that was not very functional, especially in a states' rights enviornment (the states could not agree with each other). They did not have as large as a population as the North, and a sizeable amount of the army was the slaves. Slavery became the "Achille's Heel" (term used by the professor) to the South, because when the the War became a slavery arguement, the South's foundation and social structure crumbled. The advantages and disadvantages of the North and South describe the war's outcome in itself. The South simply could not hold up to the immense strength of the North, economically and politically. The South's advantages could have been used better, especially the geographic advantage and that they fought a defensive war, and helped them change the outcome of the war.The North fought under better circumstances, and though the beginning of the war seemed like a Union struggle, their advantages helped them in the long run.
ReplyDeleteIn the lecture its easy to determine that the North had overall the tactical and economical advantages during an after the war. The North as mentioned in the lecture was the dominant of the the two being that their transportation was extremely far superior than the South's. The Norht's economy was of course based on industry and the South's was based mostly on slavery because of their lack in transportation.
ReplyDeleteI have to oppose to Priscilla though when she mentioned,'' the South didn’t have as many people as the North did, they had the blacks which did help them out quite a bit when it came to having more soldiers, nurses, and workers. This though, was what led the North to want to destroy slavery.'' In fact the North didn't actually oppose of slavery because the North themselves used slavery in house work, small farms, and factory labor. The main reasons the South had a higher number in slaves was because there were more larger plantations and the need for cheap labor was in the high.While supporting your claim the North thought it went against democracy and on the plus side the slaves in the south were taking white jobs in the South which gave the South another reason to oppose. By 1861 less than 25% of southerners owned slaves because of the slave taking so many occupations for such a cheap price.I believe that one of the main reasons the North opposed of slavery was simply because it was the main issue in the states which lead to a great problem in states' rights which the federal government didn't want to invlove themselves in becuase then it would look as if the federal government was picking sides. For this the North specifically abolitionists were strictly against the idea of slavery, also because some were racist but that isn't of much importance.Also the South's industry was based upon the manufacturing of cotton and tabacco which is why slaves turned to the South for labour rather than going to the North where their factories demanded free labour rather than a pay.Furthermroe slavery essentially sparked war amongst the colonies but wasn't the best idea for the South.In conclusion, going into war for the South was suicide both for their people and their economy, the North as previously mentioned was far more prestigous than the South.
The disadvantages of the South definitely outnumbered the disadvantages of the North.First off, the South's population paled in comparison of the North's population. Obviously the North had more man power and strength to fight in the Civil War. A big advantage was the stable goverment the union had. The North needn't worry about who to elect and run the country in the time of war.The South had disadvantages too, including fact that its economy wasn't as strong as the North's. An ironic point is that the Southern government had some of its money invested in Northern banks. The political system in the South was very unstable. Becoming a new country and having to fight a war caused distress in the South. Another disadvantage was the outdated fighting stratgies that they used, which was the shoulder to shoulder tatic. Instead of trying to invade and capture the South, the North should of instead waited for the South to attack. The North would have faired better by fighting a defensive war, as oppsed to an offensive war. However, the South's more modern weapons was a huge advantage for them. The creation of the Musket Gun proved to be helpful in defeating the old fashion fighting style of the North. The South also had the motivation to fight. The South was fighting for state's rights, while the North just wanted to save the Union. The south also had better leaders compaired to the North. Union leader, General McDowell couldn't even keep his men from retreating from Confederate leader, Stonewall Jackson. All of these advantages and disadvantages lead to the North winning because the Southern advantages weren't nearly as important as the Northern advantages. However, if the South had played their cards right, then they had a chance of winning.
ReplyDeleteAfter watching the video, it became clear the advantages as well as the disadvantages that the North harbored as well as the South. The North was far more developed economically, politically, and man power wise. The south had more tactical knowledge in fighting, and geographically had an advantage, but did they use it wisely or to their advantage is another thing. In my opinion, the South wasn’t so disadvantaged that they did not have a chance to last longer in the war. One of the things that the professor mentioned that was if they had stayed and used a more defensive attack method rather than the more offensive method, then they may have had a chance to last long enough to become independent from the Union. One thing that came to mind throughout the lecture when points were made that the South had less supplies, and not as many factories to produce weapons more timely (although they had longer range reaching rifles), and the North being more industrialized were able to produce mass quantities of weapons was something that the South just couldn’t match up to. I honestly believe that to a certain extent, all the factors included on both sides, that if the South had used their land, as well as people and a better method that they would have had a chance to last through the war until they gained Independence. I’m not saying they would have won the war, but if they had been more organized and used what they had no matter how minimal their supplies were and man power or any of those factors, they may have had a chance to have lasted long enough to achieve their goal. Two advantages that the South had that could’ve helped them if they had used them smartly were the rifled musket and the fact that they had strong leaders and so called better soldiers, yeomen they were called. Indeed the defensive position with the rifled musket was a huge advantage, if used. Due to their lack of structure and were political organization, this possibility, did not happen. They were scrambling to form an Army and to form everything that the Union didn’t have to because they were more stable economically, and politically, whereas the South lacked here. I think that these two advantages for the North were the main ones that hurt the south. So yes, the advantages that the North had that the South lacked really did hinder the South’s chance to last long enough to gain Independence.
ReplyDeleteDuring the early months of the war the North believed it would not last long. The belief being that the North would be able to quickly overcome any fight the South put up and this was due to several reasons. A large majority of the Continental Railroad passed through Northern states, limiting the South's ability to transport large amounts of goods for the war effort. Also the number of industrial factories in the North was equivalent to the number of industrial workers in the South. Fifty percent of white men in the North would join the Union Army. Eighty percent of white men in the South would join the Confederate Army. The Union Army would still vastly outnumber the Confederate Army. Also, one of the major concerns for the South during the early months of the war, was the fact that the South did not have a stable government. The nation's capital and major government offices were situated in the North leaving the South without a set government and, therefore, needing to create an entire political system almost overnight.
ReplyDeleteThe South had few advantages in comparison to the North. One advantage was the loyalty exhibited by Southern born men. West Point Military Academy helped train the large majority of United States military commanders for decades but it would see a large drop during the beginning of the war. When those in training were asked to make an oath, pledging their allegiance to the United States and, in extension, the Union, many Southern born men left, unable to turn their back on their home. This surge of military expertise now fighting for the South would help tip the odds in the South's favor and, at the least, help them hold off any major Union onslaughts. Also, the South displayed a remarkable ability to improvise for their lack of ammunition and weaponry. Though they would turn to the British for aid, often buying weapons and ships, the South would create their own ammunition and weapons to be used on the battlefield.
One of the reasons why the war would last so long would be the fact that the tactics used to fight were outdated. The generals would use old Napoleonic war tactics, not taking into consideration the advancements of weaponry. The creation if the rifle musket barrel allowed shots to be fired as far as eight hundred yards. This would change the tide of war for any side choosing to take a defensive position and using these weapons. Napoleonic fight tactics called for long rows of men to march down a battle field and withstand enemy fire long enough to overtake the enemy position but, with the new rifle barely, and eventually rifle cannon, armies would be torn asunder in mere minutes.
Eventually the North would realize that they could not simply win the war via military assault. Several methods would be used to try and shut down the south. The "Anaconda" tactic called for a naval blockade along the South's border with the ocean and large Union armies along the South's northern border as well as naval gunships along Southern waterways. The idea was to suffocate the South by cutting them off from their own supply points and effectively shutting down the fragile structure of Southern society. Though it would never be fully implemented, often due to the people's decision to march into the South hoping for an easy win, it became clear that the tactic that would be used to win the war would be an economic one. The best way to defeat the South would be to destroy its structure and watch the Confederacy crumble from the inside out.
The advantages and disadvantages that the professor talked about are all things I would have expected, the North having economic advantages and the South having geographical advantages. Something that caught me off guard was the professor’s mentioning of a political disadvantage in the South. I had never thought that the South would have had trouble setting up a unifying government to be able to defend itself when the entire region had been far rooted in state’s rights, that it would prove difficult to get the states in cooperating positions. Another thing I found quite interesting was the mention of whether slavery was an advantage or disadvantage of the south, while the professor only talked about the advantages it sounded quite interesting to see what the disadvantages were. The only thing that comes to mind is how the institution of slavery halts innovation thus leading to more disadvantages but this seems to be more of a long term disadvantage and wouldn’t seem to affect the South during the Civil War, which leads me to wonder what other disadvantages slavery gave to the South that would cause them to lose this war.
ReplyDeleteThe North and the South had a series of advantages and disadvantage including social, economical, and political issues. The South had the upper hand in a couple of instances including one common goal, decent leadership, vast land, foreign importation, and advanced firearm. The South was working towards something and wanted to become independent. This was an advantage because they were working for a united cause of preserving their slave society. The south didn't exactly have the strongest most united and efficient leadership; however it was decent enough to move forward. The south was also able to explore foreign importation of goods with Great Britain and France which proved the South didn't need the North. Lastly the South had a better rifle which was more enhanced than the North’s. However there also comes a numerous amount of advantages from the North. The North had a larger population and their railroads were much more efficiently built. The North also was able to produce their own ammunition and was able to transport them using their advanced transportation system. The North also had the upper hand politically because the North already had a sound government with a constitution and the three branches of government. And the South had the troubling issue of attempting to create a centralized government. This was difficult because the whole reason the South wanted to secede was because of trying to preserve state's rights as well. So in the end yes the South had better ammunition and vast land but it wasn't enough, the North truly had the upper hand because the North was politically sound, economically stable with all the factories and industrial style of life, and because they had 22.5 mills ion people while the South only had 9 million whites and 4.2 million blacks. The North had more soldiers.
ReplyDeleteP.S. Mr.Serrato I had originally sent this post yesterday and when I came back to check blogspot today it said it had failed to post my comment. So I quickly resent it. So I apologize for the late post.
ReplyDeleteAs many of you have stated, at the beginning of the war many people expected the war to be short. It seems as if people just wanted to fight for the fun of it and not really fight for what is truly in mind. People where afraid. They didn’t want a long war because they didn’t know how to change their ability to fight. It aimed for strategies and purpose, which was stated in the presentation, and since it was a battle against brothers, we all had the same techniques. Lincoln had also expected the war to be short because he didn’t want to take sides on this revolution, since it would break the country apart. Now, basically it was a battle between the industrial power and agricultural power. Which is self explanatory on who had the advantages, the North had a larger population as many of the past post had said and since it was stronger in technology means, they finished goods faster and more of it. That said when it came to the war; they could produce more useful material to finish off the south. North also contained more money and better developed railroads which was a major factor fought in the war. The list goes on and on, and as you can tell from previous comments, the north was filled with advantages from transportation, to political stability to a well military infrastructure to money, and even a large population. But one major disadvantage the north contained was that the soldiers were restricted to unfamiliar land, which could have affected their newly developed strategies. The south was well, weak and had little to nothing compared to the north. But one large advantage that they had is they had better generals, which in my opinion would have trained the soldiers better to do better on the battle field as to convince northern voters that winning was not worth the price in blood and treasure, which would replace Lincoln with someone who would make peace with southern independence. I thus come to a conclusion, which I believe all these advantages and disadvantages did affect the War’s outcome because if at least one of these factors would have changed, the war would’ve been seen differently and the result would have been changed dramatically.
ReplyDeleteP.S Sorry for the lateness, I got home really late.
The outcome of the Civil War was an inevitable result due to the various advantages that the Union had. These unbalanced advantages of the Union over the Confederacy were the result of how each section of the country had developed. The North had developed into an industrial region, while the South was an agricultural region. The Union being the industrial region; had numerous amounts factories and could create supplies and materials needed for the war, such as firearms, and could keep resupplying its troops. The Confederacy, in the other hand, could not resupply its troops as efficiently as the Union. They were an agricultural region, and did not possess the amount of factories to resupply its troops as efficiently and as constantly as the Union. Another disadvantage of the South was that the Confederacy only produced mainly cash crops; cotton and tobacco. Their main production was not food, and therefore there troops were also not well fed. Also, the Confederacy could not trade with Europe anymore since their supplies were sent to the north and then shipped off to Europe. As a result, the Confederacy sent for an approval to Europe so they could now trade with them directly. However, Europe just waited on the decision and never aided the south or the north. Therefore, the Confederacy’s supplies depleted persistently. Another major advantage that the Union had was the better built railroad system and almost double the amount of railroads as the Confederacy. This allowed for the Union to transport their supplies more efficiently to their troops than the South. The Union also had the advantage of having more population, a total of 22.5 million, almost twice as the Confederacy which only had 13.2 million. However, the Confederacy had 4.2 million black men and they were not allowed to fight but only to be in the troops. Therefore, they only had a population of 9 million whites, and unlike the Union; they could not keep replacing men. The Union had more than twice the amount of population, and even though there was a war going on; immigrants kept on migrating to the northern U.S., therefore they could keep replacing their men. The final advantage that the Union had, was the already structured government and developed executive power. Unlike the Confederacy, that had to stress about creating a government and a strong executive, in order for Jefferson Davis to use the money of the southern states. However, despite the major disadvantages, the South did have some advantages. One of the advantages was the geographical aspect. They had a greater amount of land, and therefore blockade more territory. Another advantage of the Confederacy was the great leadership. They had great generals, and therefore were well led in a military sense. The Confederacy also had now obtained a new weapon that could shoot farther and could hold more bullets, a major advantage for the type of war that they fought. All these advantages, only contributed to prolonging the war, they were not advantages that would win the Civil War for the Confederacy. If the south would have stayed in the defensive position, instead of going on an offensive strategy after Gettysburg; the war would have only become more stretched. However, Jefferson Davis observed that their supplies and men, unlike the north, were depleting, and therefore they would have to win soon or they would never win the war; but the advantages of the north were too many, and the Confederacy could not defeat the Union.
ReplyDeleteSorry for the late post. I just got back today, and slept for most of it since sleeping on a bus gives you no rest.
ReplyDeleteThe Union obviously had more advantages as everybody has stated so far such as a larger population of 22.5 million, they were more industrialized, and already had a government formed. The Confederacy had advantages as well which is one reason I believe the war lasted as long as it did. The Confederacy did have the better army with, as many have said, a warrior like mentality. They were also fighting a defensive war which had they used as an advantage the entire time, they might have had more of a chance at winning their national independence. The Confederate army also had the rifle musket which could shoot from almost 800 feet away, and was a very deadly weapon used in war. The result of the war is not surprising because the Union had the advantage, but what was surprising to people back then was the length of the war which should have been a predictable because both sides had advantages that could help them win the war. The Confederacy had, what I would call short term advantages and long term disadvantages because their advantages were used in the beginning of the war, and obviously they did not last. The Union had long term advantages which helped them to win the war and short term disadvantages which would prevent them from winning faster. The fact that the Union army was not properly trained and the generals were not competant was short term because it was later fixed.
P.S. If there are a lot of typos, I apologize. I did this on my iPod.
Sorry for my late post I figured I should still at least try to do it :P
ReplyDeleteI also want to point out that the professor also finds Ken Burns’ use of violins in his documentaries interesting. Haha. That made me laugh. Anyways……
The North had far more advantages than the Confederacy had during the Civil War. The only major advantages that the Confederacy had over the North were the better geography and the ability to fight a defensive war and obviously a defensive war is a far easier war to win in comparison to an offensive war. They didn’t have to conquer the North. They just had to fight long enough to hold out long enough and wear out the North. Another advantage that the South had was the black population that helped during the war as nurses, soldiers, and workers. Those advantages seem minor when compared to all the advantages that the North had over the South. The Union had industrial capability, manufacturing, a strong Navy, finances, and a larger population allowing more man power. The point that I found really interesting that I didn’t ever think of before was the Union’s governmental stability. The Union already had a president with a set government and a functioning political party system, whereas the Confederacy was still trying to set up a government and had a one party system in which Jefferson Davis was merely appointed. I had never considered the government as an advantage that the Union had over the Confederacy. Another fact to take into consideration was the expectations for the war. I found it interesting that the war was expected to be short, so both sides were somewhat surprised when it lasted as long as it did, which affected the outcome of the war. All in all, I think that the advantages that the North had over the South had a huge impact on the outcome of the war because like the professor pointed out, a war involving agriculture against manufacturing, the agriculture would lose. It was as simple as that, but the Union even had more advantages over the Confederacy.
Everyone is apologizing for their lateness and I am a bagillion days late. Anyways…
ReplyDeleteThe North was definitely expecting to win the war and win it faster than they did. As the famous saying states, “the North fought the war with one hand behind their backs” just shows how confident the North was towards winning the war. Had they not “fought the war with one hand behind their back,” they probably would have one the war at a faster pace than it was. This just reminds me of the story of the turtle and the rabbit that race each other, because the rabbit is so confident it will beat the turtle that it doesn’t win. Of course in this case, the North does win but only because it had so many more advantages over the South and they knew were to attack them with. I think the South could have had a chance to win though. As the professor stated, the South only had a supply problem as the war got bigger. Meaning that if the war stayed small and the South used their geographical and agricultural advantages they had a fair shot at winning. On the other hand, the North not only had more people but as many of you have stated, they were industrialized and an industrial economy will always beat an agricultural economy. This economy in the north helped them get their supplies and placed them at a higher advantage including in transportation. The south couldn’t rely on their transportation because all of their railroads weren’t even the same size! And that is that the south had a vast amount of land that was on coastline which they could have use to their advantage but the North did place a successful naval blockade. The South still had rivers they could use but again so could the North. On top of that, the North also had an organized centralized government while the South pretty much had poop. They weren’t organized, they didn’t have a real political party system, and overnight Jefferson Davis had to try to get things together. All the South had to do was defend itself from the North but the North figured out how to attack the South. As the professor mentioned, the North learned that the only way to beat the South was to attack its system and that is what they did. They needed to destroy slavery and that is why I believe the North truly won the war.
During the Civil War the North had more advantages than the South did. The North had more support from bank deposits than the south this means that they had more money in order to buy more supplies for their military. The North also had more factories than the South did, this means that the North was helping America grow more and also the products they were making in the factories were supplies for their military. The North had a larger population than the South did also. The North had a population of 22 million and the South had a population of 9 million with 4.5 million of blacks which were mainly slaves. The North had an advantage of transportation than the South did. The North had about 80% of railroad tracks which made it easier for them to get supplies such as food or military support. I believe all these advantages helped the North with the war.
ReplyDelete