The South v. South

6 June 2017

The South vs. The South William W. Freehling I-How anti-Confederate Southerners determined the course/outcome of the civil war. Specific information was given by Freehlng to show how the anti-confederates southerners determined the course and outcome of the civil war. The information is discussed in the following paragraph. According to Freehling, the events beyond the battlefields partially determined military verdicts. Furthermore, home front and battlefront unveiled defining aspects of civil war.

We will write a custom essay sample on
The South v. South
or any similar topic specifically for you
Do Not Waste
Your Time

Only $13.90 / page

The division within the south also helped pave the path toward the war and also, the division among the southern and ome front dissensions determined battlefield verdicts. The outcome of the war was the collapse of the confederacy that was caused by the defeat in the military sphere, rather than dissolution behind the lines. Anti-confederate southerners piled on psychological, economical and geographical burdens that ultimately helped flatten white confederate’s resiliency.

President Abraham Lincoln’s statecrafts, the union’s anaconda military strategy, northern democrats and English men’s attitudes seemingly tangential matters bore vitally on southern anti-confederates capacity to nfluence the battlefields and to illuminate important characteristics of civil war. The tale of the southern house divided, highlights under appreciated gems of civil war lore, including revealing code words, colorful luminaries, key battles and vital military orders, this tells why the war came.

In conclusion, the anti-confederate southerners in so many ways that are discussed in the paragraph above determined the course/outcome of the civil war. 2-North had the resources to win the war but the South had specific advantages that made it difficult to do so The North which had more men, more materials more ophisticated weapons to military points of contacts were thought to defeat the less well endowed foe but it was not accomplished because the south had advantages that made it difficult for the North to do so. The North also faced some difficulties that hurt them and on the other side helped the confederates.

The difficulties and south’s advantages will be discussed in the paragraphs below according to how Freehling made account of it and to the way he illustrated it. The slave south’s land mass was as large as the Western Europe and it was ten percent more extensive han Northern land which required the Yankee troops to walk thousands of miles to storm hundreds fortification to make themselves seen farther from the North’s better railroads and factories. The rebels in terms of exploding railroad tunnels, torching railroad bridges, and twisting railroad tracks successfully used the irregular warfare.

They threatened to cut-off invaders from the Yankee home base, isolate federals from enforcement, and also subject them to revenge of an enraged citizenry, wild to redeem heart and home from detected Yankees. The southern tinkers fashioned a ea monster from a buried corpse, they raised the USS Merrimack and shaped it like a barn root witn root planted witn irons and i t became the world’s first ironclad, power-driven warship and renamed it the CSS Virginia which seemed a threat to sink the federals Atlantic fleet. The CSS Virginia sank two union wooden warships.

The new rifle reduced the more industrialized north’s military advantage. Rifles could be mass-produced in the south, mass purchased in England and mass confiscated from Yankee corpses. The confederacy adequately possessed the new weapon that boosted undermanned defender’s power. In conclusion, with more railroad tracks, more ships, more firearms, more irons and more fighting men, it would have been thought that northerners should have easily crushed under industrialized, under populated southerners but with southerners advantages, it made it difficult for the northerners to win.

This account will best fit the provide which says ‘Those with head doesn’t have cap and those who have cap doesn’t have head’ this means that some gets the advantage but some had the resources, yet they were unable to win Just because of the advantages others have. -Why did non-slaveholding whites in areas of heavy black concentration side with slaveholders? How were the slaves prevented from escaping in large numbers? What plans did some whites in the Border South propose as a means to free their state of slavery? How did Mason’s Fugitive Slave Law fit into all this?

The non-slaveholding whites in areas of heavy blacks concentration side with slaveholders and some slave were prevented from escaping in large numbers. The border south whites proposed a means to free their states of slavery. The following paragraph will answer the above questions. Whites in black belts had a pretty bad image about blacks that were free, they viewed them as rioters, rapists, arsonists and cannibals and they believed that enslavering the blacks in order to control the alleged barbarians was meant to save civilization.

The whites were also obsessed with racial salvation and involvement with slave control. There was a proslavery theorist who declared that the entire inferior including the whites inferior needed a master, the non-slaveholding whites that could vote against the pretious squires and bring it down got offended by the theorist’s declaration. This caused the wise patriarchs declare that those who needed a master was the blacks and not white. The rich white men raised the poor white to equality in the brotherhood of the white men, dedicating to keep the blacks unequal.

Some whites who were non-slaveholders had believed that they would become slaveholders too so they supported slavery with the hope that someday they will be slaveholders too. The border proposed a delayed legislative edict to declare slavery as illegal and the revolts that was held was a means in freeing the border state of slavery. The Mason’s fugitive slave law on its own was passed as a compromise that ave power to master seeking an alleged runaway to protect a northern commissioner to enforce law.

In conclusion, the hatred the whites had for the black and the thought that when blacks are given opportunity to be free then they will have power and this made the blacks remain enslaved to the slaveholders with the support of the white non-slaveholders. The blacks were not even allowed to read or learn Just because the whites thought that that would make the blacks powerful. 4-wnat was Lincoln’s and the Republican’s position on slavery prior to Lincoln’s election as President? How did the Southerners interpret his and the Republican stance?

What did Southern secessionists reason/predict would happen with the Republicans and Lincoln in power? How did this interpretation and stance help to divide the south? How did it also cause great distress to anti-slavery people in the North? What was Slave power and why was it a threat to anti-slavery people? The Republicans and Lincoln took position prior to slavery; they helped in the abolition of it. The southern secessionists also predicted what would happen with the Republicans and Lincoln in power. The next paragraph consists of the information/ nswers to the questions above.

The republicans introduced the anti-slave power and agenda that almost got the elected in 1856. They shunned every proposal to impose abolition in southern states and tried all efforts to stop the slave power from putting minority law on the northern majorities. They permitted no expansion of slaveholders into national territories. They hoped that the restriction of slavery to southern state would lead to extinction of the institution. Lincoln who was a republican also supported that slavery was a bad thing and must be treated as something wrong.

Lincoln thought that the freed black slaves will be sent back to Africa once they were freed but the southerners state didn’t agree with him but insisted that they have to decide about emancipation in their states. The southerners said Lincoln’s anti-slavery was bad and they didn’t tolerate the reprimand. Some secessionists said that without expansion, institution couldn’t endure. They predicted that the republicans would abolish slavery in Washington D. C. and that slavery would fade away in Maryland and the border south within a decade and that north and border state would possess three-fourths free labor state majority.

The upper south stood against the new confederacy at the time Lincoln became the president, in the four middle south state, it was Just Arkansas and Virginia that called state convention to consider secession before the civil war began. Some southern states left the union after Lincoln’s election and some waved the confederate flag. Some middle south voted against disunion and some favored union that led to the division of the southerners. The northerners used the slave power to describe slaveholders offensive minded defense. It alleged slaveholders to silence antislavery agitation, ictorially suppressed white men’s democratic rights.

In conclusion, Lincoln was more concerned about a way in which he can put an end to slavery and give freedom to people especially the blacks and he accomplished this during his regime as the president. 5-What were the difficulties faced by the North and what would the north have been required to do to actually achieve their victory? Freehling states that union could have still won the war but that it would have been much difficult. In the paragraph below, the difficulties faced by the North (Union) and what they were required to do o actually achieve their victory will be discussed.

How to cite this essay

Choose cite format:
The South v. South. (2017, Jun 09). Retrieved December 5, 2019, from
A limited
time offer!
Get authentic custom
ESSAY SAMPLEwritten strictly according
to your requirements