Preview

Why the North Won the Civil War

Powerful Essays
Open Document
Open Document
2915 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Why the North Won the Civil War
The American antebellum South, though steeped in pride and raised in military tradition, was to be no match for the burgeoning superiority of the rapidly developing North in the coming Civil War. The lack of emphasis on manufacturing and commercial interest, stemming from the
Southern desire to preserve their traditional agrarian society, surrendered to the North their ability to function independently, much less to wage war. It was neither Northern troops nor generals that won the Civil War, rather Northern guns and industry. From the onset of war, the Union had obvious advantages. Quite simply, the North had large amounts of just about everything that the South did not, boasting resources that the Confederacy had even no means of attaining (See Appendices, Brinkley et al. 415). Sheer manpower ratios were unbelievably one-sided, with only nine of the nation's 31 million inhabitants residing in the seceding states (Angle 7). The Union also had large amounts of land available for growing food crops which served the dual purpose of providing food for its hungry soldiers and money for its ever-growing industries. The South, on the other hand, devoted most of what arable land it had exclusively to its main cash crop: cotton
(Catton, The Coming Fury 38). Raw materials were almost entirely concentrated in Northern mines and refining industries. Railroads and telegraph lines, the veritable lifelines of any army, traced paths all across the Northern countryside but left the South isolated, outdated, and starving (See Appendices). The final death knell for a modern South developed in the form of economic colonialism. The Confederates were all too willing to sell what little raw materials they possessed to
Northern Industry for any profit they could get. Little did they know,
"King Cotton" could buy them time, but not the war. The South had bartered something that perhaps it had not intended: its independence
(Catton,

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    his 14

    • 906 Words
    • 3 Pages

    "The South did not lose the Civil War; the North won the conflict." Many consider the civil war to be a conflict over states rights and big government. Slavery was a major social issue that many Christians felt was wrong, but it was only part of the equation. The production of the south was growing larger than that of the north due to their fertile land and slavery. Southern merchants began to trade with the British and French through Charlestown, SC cutting out the merchants of New York. This was not acceptable to the North, who used slavery as a reason for aggression after the South seceded.…

    • 906 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    FRQ APUSH North vs. South

    • 411 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Economically, the South had one relied resource and one only: cotton. It was the root of their profits, their lives, their surroundings. Despite the white majority of the 1860’s not being a part of the planter aristocracy, it was still their personal American Dream: to own slaves on a plantation with a pretty wife and white kids. The Southern economy depended primarily on the production and working of slaves, as the cheap labor force. On the industrial hand, the North was all about hard work and…equal rights, but mostly hard work. Their primary focus for economic gain was industry. Railroads, telegraphs, machines…oh my! The North also had the advantage of economic stability from the California Gold Rush which aided them to flourish dramatically, though plummeted during the Panic of 1857, which negatively affected the North due to the inflation caused by the gold. Once California was accepted into the Union (as a free state), its abundance of gold deposits held the North on its high horse before the reoccurring panics.…

    • 411 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    The South wanted to use their cash crops in order to help them during a war if one ever ensued. They thought of a plan that could help them do just that: The Cotton Diplomacy. This idea was first brought up by a senator from South Carolina, by the name of James Henry Hammond. In an 1858 speech to the Senate, Hammond claimed that "Cotton was King" and the European nations with whom the South sold cotton to would back them up if there ever was a war (Dictionary of American History, 12/2/07).…

    • 513 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Historians have argued inconclusively for years over the prime reason for Confederate defeat in the Civil War. The book Why the North Won the Civil War outlines five of the most agreed upon causes of Southern defeat, each written by a highly esteemed American historian. The author of each essay does acknowledge and discuss the views of the other authors. However, each author also goes on to explain their botheration and disagreement with their opposition. The purpose of this essay is to summarize each of the five arguments presented by Richard N. Current, T. Harry Williams, Norman A. Graebner, David Herbert Donald, and David M. Potter. Each author gives his insight on one of the following five reasons: economic, military, diplomatic, social, and political, respectively.…

    • 1300 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The South's predominant economic principle before the War of Northern Aggression was "Cotton is King." The South, as it was known around the turn of the 19th century, was solely dependent upon its cotton production. Low prices, unmarketable goods, and over-used land were driving the necessity for slavery and the need for cotton production out. Were it not for a Yankee's ingenuity, the South as we study it now may have been vastly different.…

    • 1029 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Time. Time was the key reason for the North's victory and was achieved through a combination of the first and second reasons. As the war progressed the Union's blockade, largely a paper tiger at the beginning due to the fact that the Navy didn't have enough ships to properly enforce it, became a real blockade that slowly strangled the Confederacy to death. And as the war progressed the South, even before the end of the prisoner exchange, was losing men it could not afford to lose to attrition. Supplies and transportation of supplies. As stated in the first reason, the North was less dependant on Europe than the South was for supplies. There should be little doubt that the South was able to manufacture supplies needed to fight the war, but never in amounts it needed. Industry in the North was a bit larger than it was in the South and was thus able to out produce that of the South. But being able to out produce the South was all well and good unless the South could get the supplies to its troops in the field faster. It then became important to capture major railroad junctions and thus cut off the South's ability to move supplies in a timely…

    • 510 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    The loss of the South in the Civil War was the result of various contributions. First of all, they were underequipped in artillery and production factories. The South’s population was about one fourth of the North’s excluding slaves. They were not united and lost because their own philosophical beliefs that destroyed them. Further, the South was underequipped and outclassed in everything industrially. They’re only hope of taking a military advantage was support from European countries. However, those connections were cut when the North blockaded the South and when the North incited the European public to support the North’s effort preventing European interference. Although there was a high morale to serving the Confederacy and to destroying the Union cause, they didn’t have the materials to do so. Many would just fight with stones or any primitive makeshift weapon they could use when they were depleted of bullets because of their low artillery production. The South also had much less supply lines. Their railroads were half that of the North’s and became less as the North decimated the South’s rail lines. The North figured that it would be wiser to destroy their supply lines and weaken the troops. However destroying food lines wouldn’t be a problem because the South couldn’t even supply food because as men were drafted into the army, the agricultural farms withered away due to lack of maintenance. Another disadvantage would be the size of the South. The ratio of people of South to North was about 3 to 7. However 3.5 million of those Southern people were slaves, so the actual ratio would be about 1 to 4. Considering the North’s territorial advantage over the South, it is impressive to see that the South could sustain such a defense over the four years of the war. The reason could be that the South had better trained generals such as…

    • 1221 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    In order to win the war, the Union had to think smart and play it to their advantage. In the book The Civil War: A Visual History, author John E. Stanchak declared, “During the 19th century, the new era of rail and steam that marked the Industrial Revolution was centered in the Northern states, and a summary of economics and human resources shows their advantages” (Stanchak 54). The North had a lot of railroads which helped them travel faster. They also had more money and organizations than the South. These advantages boosted them further into victory.…

    • 913 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    In 1862 many people truly believed that the Confederacy was winning the Civil War. The Union believed it and the other countries believed it. The Union struggled with their military leaders and they weren’t familiar with the South's land. The struggles that the North had before Gettysburg led to everyone believing that the South was going to win the Civil War.…

    • 331 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    The Union and Confederate armies fought against each other in the Civil War. This essay is about comparing and contrasting the Union Army and the Confederate Army. The better well supplied Union Army had more factories and soldiers against the Confederate Army who wasn’t as well supplied.…

    • 372 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Better Essays

    With a shortage of supplies due to lack of industrial bases, the South suffered greatly in the Civil War, ultimately causing their loss. The North’s ability to bring its industry to manufacture supplies allowed it to gain and maintain its dominance over the South. The South, having just 20,000 factories, was no competition for the North, which had 105,000 factories. However, the South at one point did have an opportunity to gain more supplies through foreign aid, which might have caused the Civil War to have a different outcome if the South would have received that aid. Britain and France were willing to give the South money, food, drugs, weapons, and many more supplies. However, the South practiced the institution of slavery, which prevented European aid. Because the middle-classes of France and Britain were against the “peculiar institution”, they chose to side with the North, rather than the South. The South’s deficiency of materials ultimately caused them to lose the Civil War because they were often not prepared for battles and did not have the necessary supplies to compete with the North’s numerous weapons from their large industries.…

    • 1101 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Leading up to the Civil War, there were many similarities and differences between the three regions of the United States. They all had their own ways of carrying out everyday life and dealing with politics in their region. Tension between the regions continued to grow over controversial issues, which soon led to the Civil War taking place. In the North, the economy was largely based off of production. There were lots of factories in the North that produced many jobs for people and helped with mass production of goods.…

    • 683 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    South and North Side

    • 541 Words
    • 3 Pages

    The Union population of 22 million was greater than the Confederate population of 9 million. Further, the North was better able to supply those armies because it produced far more than did the South. Agriculture was the cornerstone of the Southern economy, commerce and industry were more important to the Northern economy. So the north could produce its needs, and the South had to rely on foreign trade for its necessities. The south was always short on supplies and basic necessities in the war.…

    • 541 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    In this source, Lincoln explains how the house would not stay the way it was, which was divided. Half of the United States supported slavery and the other half did not. Lincoln states, “A house divided against itself cannot stand”, concluding that something needed and was going to happen to change that. When relating this to the question of whether the Civil War was inevitable or not, this supports that is was indeed inevitable. The question of slavery was too grand of an issue to not result in some type of event in order for it to change. The events previous to the Civil War, such as the growing abolition movement and “Bleeding Kansas”, helped the tension between the North and the South grow.…

    • 491 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Northern states, also known as the Union, had a very strong economy based on agriculture, industry, and free labor. They were independent and did not have to rely on the South for any of their goods or products. They also favored federal spending on internal improvements and wanted high tariffs. Their views on the way the country should be run included slavery as illegal. As a result of winning the 1860…

    • 623 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays