|
|
|
Go 
|
Post 
|
Find 
|
Notify 
|
|
Reply 
|
|
Admin 
|
New PM! 
|
|
|
So many factors, so little time. While it is true that Lincoln's election suggested compromise was possible, his absence on many ballots in the south made it difficult for the southern states - to them it was another indication of dwindling power within the union. Even if northern states didn't demand an end to slavery, they were gaining the support to stop its spread into new states - if outlawed in the west, this would lead to a strengthening of votes in both senate and house. A very real threat the south felt would eventually lead to the abolition of slavery everywhere. It is also a different outlook from our world today - to realize that people, many north and almost everyone south, saw their "land" as the state they lived in rather than the union of the whole. With a republican victory, there was the added impression that assumed the federal government was going to disregard the rights of the states - had the south not fired the first shot, it would have made the war difficult to pursue - many northern states would have rejected the idea of using troops to "invade" another state. We entered a war of leaders - few southern soldiers were concerned about maintaining slavery. If anything, it might have been a benefit to many of them if it ended - an increase in their ability to compete with large land owners. What the southern soldier fought for was to protect his state, though his officer corps held interest in maintaining the status quo of the pre-war conditions.
If not extreme, there was at least an inability to compromise - in itself, extreme. That the leadership was no longer willing to seek other solutions is a failure.
There is so much more, especially leading up to the war - a good reference is the first chapter of a book called "Grant and Lee - A study in Personality and Generalship" by Fuller. Without reading whole thing, the first chapter discusses economic and political situation of pre-war days. Lots of other authors do the same, but would require reading whole book. Without having your course material/references at hand, can't really add much more - sorry.
[This message was edited by Prothero on 12-14-02 at 06:50 PM.]
|
| |
| Posts: 423 | Location: . . . | Registered: 09-05-02 |    |
|
Gold Enthusiast
|
"The Civil War was not inevitable; it was the result of extremism and failures of leadership on both sides." Assess this statement, using the following documents and your knowledge of the period from 1830 to 1860 I don't necessarily agree with the statement that the Civil war was not inevitable, because although slavery is the popular notion for the cause of the war, it, I think was more about land, money and control, than anything else. Slavery was a way to maintain that part of the country, and a way of life through 'slave labor'. Cotton fields, for example, must have been an enormous task to tend, harvest, and if the owners had to pay field hands, I imagine they would not have had a lot of money in their pocket at the end of the season. I don't know much about President Davis, or his leadership during the Civil War, however, there is some information on the web, but, depending on your time frame, you should rent the lengthy video The Civil War, made by, I think his name is Ken Burns, the same guy that made the documentary about baseball the actually made baseball sound interesting.  Anyway, I have watched some, but not all of it while it was on T.V., and it is one of the best studies of the civil war out there.
|
| |
|
Diamond Enthusiast


|
|
| |
| Posts: 2277 | Location: Martinsville, IL | Registered: 06-03-02 |    |
|
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
© 2002-2008 AnswerPool.com
Visit DiscussionPool.com! |