I think the most significant reason as to why the South lost the civil war was due to problems at home. Issues such as dire food shortages amongst southern civilians and outrageous inflation levels, weighed heavily on southern soldiers on the frontlines, as they were constantly concerned for the wellbeing of their families. This undoubtedly impacted on soldiers’ resilience and commitment to the southern cause, which consequently led to the demise of the confederate army.
To say that the North won on it's 'superior' sources, supplies and soldiers cannot simply justify the complexity to the down fall of the confederate army. Without a strong centralised government power, the raising of funds for the army seemed to fall. On the other hand, the rise of inflation was growing, and the increase of starvation rocked Southern families. Women and children would have notified their husbands, brothers and fathers of terrible situation, giving growing unease until the end of the war. Not to mention, Sherman's 1864 Marches through Atlanta, Savannah and Columbia would have increased the disarray and breakdown of the Old South. Tara Crivari
The civil was supposed to be a quick battle that would see the resolution between north and south. Many years on and many bloody battles and people in the south were losing optimism. On the home front woman and children were suffering as a result of the famine and extreme inflation. Letter to the battlefront told of the hardships and from many of the men they felt there calling was no longer in battle. Inflation not only made it difficult for the home front but the money for weapons and equipment was scarce. Julia Lindner 18551475
Historians offer various interpretations why the South lost the war or why the North won; importantly, none of the answers seem comprehensive enough. It is improvident to state that either shortage of human resources or lack of morale at the home front resulted in a Confederate defeat. Also one might say that Southerners lacked a strong sense of nationalism and failed to mobilise men and resources for the war due to “despotic” state rights and constant conflicts between the governments. Some can go even further and explain the Southerners’ defeat in terms of external forces claiming that the North had better generals or better politicians. Others might say that Northerners were able to win battlefields that could be described as turning points in the war, thus if the South could hold out and convince the North that the price of the war was too high, then, probably, there would be a different result. However, to any of these interpretations it is possible to find arguments for and against.
No war can be explained merely on the basis of any single factor that could have been contributed to a Confederate defeat. Of course, these interpretations have credibility to be accounted as reasons why the South lost the war, but it is also important to emphasise how the momentum or the mere chance could change an outcome of the war.
It becomes evident through the unfolding events during the American Civil war that the definite reason as to South’s suffer of defeat were indeed multiple and cannot be specified down to one main ideal. The Confederate soldiers lacked devotion, where they lost sight of liberty, losing belief, as a vast amount of the confederate army had never been previous slave owners. The Union army however was superior, gaining advantages with Northern soldiers whom deeply believed in emancipation of slaves grasping honor and dignity worth the battle of a long endured war. Moreover the North possessed more wealth with superior political leadership, Lincoln who controlled stabilized devoted generals, where strategic planned battles won them over through their style of war. Primarily it seems that soldiers with both their beliefs and devotions towards war could ultimately determine a defeat.
The South lost the war due to many factors. Not only were resources running out at home, the women struggling to keep the state going, but also because of military and political aspects. The North was more industrialised and had easy access to maintain their living standards. The North’s relentless take on the battles fought and Sherman’s humiliation of the South seemed to weaken them gradually as a society The North had many policies that appealed to people in the South, especially the slaves of the north. From the beginning, both the North and South had a chance at winning the war. It was relentlessness and humiliation from the North that weakened the South and inevitably won the war. Grace Hicks
It seems apparent that the South went into the conflict at a significant disadvantage; they possessed a much smaller overall population and pool of resources. However when taking into consideration the objectives of the two forces, the South did not have to ‘win’ the civil war per se, but it had to prevent subjugation by the North. Ultimately though, they were unable to do this: key Southern losses at Gettysburg and Atlanta for instance rewarded Northern tactics and tenacity and the Southern army, economy and perhaps most importantly, morale, was exhausted by April 1865.
In addition, the South lacked a unifying cause. This is evident in the rate of desertions in the Southern army, as well as reactions to the Confederate emancipation; if Southerners weren’t fighting for the right to retain slavery, then why continue fighting?
The south lost because of militaristic, political and economical reasons, but also because of the disintegration of the home front. Firstly, there were a lot more internal divisions within the south than in the north, such as the decentralization of the southern government. Secondly, the southern armies could not defend the attack of ‘total war’ led by Sherman, which left the population impoverished and successfully destroyed all elements of the ‘old south.’ And finally, the low morale of the southern home front contributed to the decreasing optimism of the soldiers, most of whom had no direct ties to the cause in the first place. Tayla Dowling
The South's fate was sealed when the North condoned the tactics of 'Total War' and brought the types of devastation which, up until that time, had only been felt and witnessed by those serving on the frontlines, or assisiting near the battlefields. With 'Total War' came complete annihilation as farms, families and entire towns, who were seen to support the Southern Confederate cause, were razed. It was the enforcement of a new northern mentality which eventually brought the South to its knees.
I think the most significant reason as to why the South lost the civil war was due to problems at home. Issues such as dire food shortages amongst southern civilians and outrageous inflation levels, weighed heavily on southern soldiers on the frontlines, as they were constantly concerned for the wellbeing of their families. This undoubtedly impacted on soldiers’ resilience and commitment to the southern cause, which consequently led to the demise of the confederate army.
ReplyDeleteTo say that the North won on it's 'superior' sources, supplies and soldiers cannot simply justify the complexity to the down fall of the confederate army. Without a strong centralised government power, the raising of funds for the army seemed to fall. On the other hand, the rise of inflation was growing, and the increase of starvation rocked Southern families. Women and children would have notified their husbands, brothers and fathers of terrible situation, giving growing unease until the end of the war. Not to mention, Sherman's 1864 Marches through Atlanta, Savannah and Columbia would have increased the disarray and breakdown of the Old South.
ReplyDeleteTara Crivari
The civil was supposed to be a quick battle that would see the resolution between north and south. Many years on and many bloody battles and people in the south were losing optimism. On the home front woman and children were suffering as a result of the famine and extreme inflation. Letter to the battlefront told of the hardships and from many of the men they felt there calling was no longer in battle. Inflation not only made it difficult for the home front but the money for weapons and equipment was scarce.
ReplyDeleteJulia Lindner
18551475
Historians offer various interpretations why the South lost the war or why the North won; importantly, none of the answers seem comprehensive enough. It is improvident to state that either shortage of human resources or lack of morale at the home front resulted in a Confederate defeat. Also one might say that Southerners lacked a strong sense of nationalism and failed to mobilise men and resources for the war due to “despotic” state rights and constant conflicts between the governments. Some can go even further and explain the Southerners’ defeat in terms of external forces claiming that the North had better generals or better politicians. Others might say that Northerners were able to win battlefields that could be described as turning points in the war, thus if the South could hold out and convince the North that the price of the war was too high, then, probably, there would be a different result. However, to any of these interpretations it is possible to find arguments for and against.
ReplyDeleteNo war can be explained merely on the basis of any single factor that could have been contributed to a Confederate defeat. Of course, these interpretations have credibility to be accounted as reasons why the South lost the war, but it is also important to emphasise how the momentum or the mere chance could change an outcome of the war.
Maria (22504079)
It becomes evident through the unfolding events during the American Civil war that the definite reason as to South’s suffer of defeat were indeed multiple and cannot be specified down to one main ideal. The Confederate soldiers lacked devotion, where they lost sight of liberty, losing belief, as a vast amount of the confederate army had never been previous slave owners. The Union army however was superior, gaining advantages with Northern soldiers whom deeply believed in emancipation of slaves grasping honor and dignity worth the battle of a long endured war. Moreover the North possessed more wealth with superior political leadership, Lincoln who controlled stabilized devoted generals, where strategic planned battles won them over through their style of war. Primarily it seems that soldiers with both their beliefs and devotions towards war could ultimately determine a defeat.
ReplyDeleteThe South lost the war due to many factors. Not only were resources running out at home, the women struggling to keep the state going, but also because of military and political aspects. The North was more industrialised and had easy access to maintain their living standards. The North’s relentless take on the battles fought and Sherman’s humiliation of the South seemed to weaken them gradually as a society The North had many policies that appealed to people in the South, especially the slaves of the north. From the beginning, both the North and South had a chance at winning the war. It was relentlessness and humiliation from the North that weakened the South and inevitably won the war.
ReplyDeleteGrace Hicks
It seems apparent that the South went into the conflict at a significant disadvantage; they possessed a much smaller overall population and pool of resources. However when taking into consideration the objectives of the two forces, the South did not have to ‘win’ the civil war per se, but it had to prevent subjugation by the North. Ultimately though, they were unable to do this: key Southern losses at Gettysburg and Atlanta for instance rewarded Northern tactics and tenacity and the Southern army, economy and perhaps most importantly, morale, was exhausted by April 1865.
ReplyDeleteIn addition, the South lacked a unifying cause. This is evident in the rate of desertions in the Southern army, as well as reactions to the Confederate emancipation; if Southerners weren’t fighting for the right to retain slavery, then why continue fighting?
The south lost because of militaristic, political and economical reasons, but also because of the disintegration of the home front. Firstly, there were a lot more internal divisions within the south than in the north, such as the decentralization of the southern government. Secondly, the southern armies could not defend the attack of ‘total war’ led by Sherman, which left the population impoverished and successfully destroyed all elements of the ‘old south.’ And finally, the low morale of the southern home front contributed to the decreasing optimism of the soldiers, most of whom had no direct ties to the cause in the first place.
ReplyDeleteTayla Dowling
The South's fate was sealed when the North condoned the tactics of 'Total War' and brought the types of devastation which, up until that time, had only been felt and witnessed by those serving on the frontlines, or assisiting near the battlefields. With 'Total War' came complete annihilation as farms, families and entire towns, who were seen to support the Southern Confederate cause, were razed. It was the enforcement of a new northern mentality which eventually brought the South to its knees.
ReplyDelete