Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Civil war tactics and strategies
Major battles of the civil war and victors
Military strategies used in civil war
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Civil war tactics and strategies
When we compare the military leaders of both North and South during the Civil War, it is not hard to see what the differences are. One of the first things that stand out is the numerous number of Northern generals that led the “Army of the Potomac.” Whereas the Confederate generals, at least in the “Army of Northern Virginia” were much more stable in their position. Personalities, ambitions and emotions also played a big part in effective they were in the field, as well as their interactions with other officers. Each general that was appointed commander of the army in the east had his own plans when it came to defeating the Confederates. Beginning with McDowell, the first general to command a large army in the war, the task seemed insurmountable at first. He had an army of 30,000 men, most of whom were extremely green. Despite Lincoln’s desire that he attack immediately, McDowell knew that he wasn’t ready, and initially had no plans to move against the Confederates during that first summer of the war. Lincoln insisted that he attack at Manassas with the resulting disastrous outcome. Perhaps had McDowell came along later in the war, it might have turned out differently, but that wasn’t a likely outcome. McDowell’s opponent at Manassas was General Beauregard, commanding the 22,000 troops facing McDowell, while at the same time General Joseph Johnston commanded the Army of the Shenandoah with some 10,000 troops. When Beauregard determined that the Union forces were on the way toward Manassas, he asked for help, at which time the Confederate Government sent Johnston east via the “Manassas Gap Railroad,” to act as reinforcements for Beauregard. Their arrival at Manassas at a critical time turned the tide in favor of the South,... ... middle of paper ... ...s that he was unable to completely drive the Union forces from the South. His decisions to invade the north on two occasions were less than sound in many ways, and shows what I feel was wishful thinking on his part. Lee had supreme confidence in his army, and believed that it could accomplish whatever he asked of it. This confidence sometimes led him to ask too much, such as in the case of Picket’s charge during the battle of Gettysburg. In Lee’s mind he was first and foremost a Christian, and a gentleman. These facts, although not bad, certainly caused Lee to be less aggressive, and to fight the war in a very old-fashioned manner. This was not so with Grant, who seemed to believe in a more modern type of total warfare. Perhaps because this war, as many contend, was the first modern war, it was impossible for the South, and it’s leaders to adapt to the situation.
Sears’ thesis is the Union could have won the war faster. McClellan was an incompetent commander and to take the initiative to attack an defeat the Confederate army. The Army of Northern Virginia, under...
Nevertheless, an attitude they show is their cause for engaging in the war. On page 110, Lee describes, “With every step of a soldier, with every tick of the clock, the army was gaining safety, closer to victory, closer to the dream of independence.” His words reveal that their reason for coming was to gain their long overdue independence. Without a cause worth fighting for on each side, the war would have no fuel or reason to continue. In like manner, another attitude of the South was their admiration for their commander general. On page 251, Longstreet proclaims, “Colonel, let me explain something. The secret of General Lee is that men love him and follow him with faith in him. That’s one secret.” I believe this clarifies that the bond of brotherhood and respect for each other in this army would allow for these soldiers to follow their leader blindly. The overwhelming amount of faith and trust among the Army of the Northern Virginia is inspiring. The Confederates prove in these appearances that they do indeed have an important cause that they are willing to die
The Army of the Potomac differs greatly in composition than the South's army. Although they have a common goal, to defeat the Southerners, the men who make up this army have little else in common. They are led by Major General George Meade. Most of these 80,000 men are volunteers. Language barriers exist within this group. Also, a shared religion does not exist. Unlike the Army of Northe...
One of the best commanders in the Confederate army was Lee still; the Union stood at a better standpoint during the battle. “Perhaps the most significant lesson from July 3, 1863, concerns the method of decision-making. Though he may not have seen it as such, Lee’s decision to attack was at best a close call.” (Gompert 2006, pg.7). The battle of Gettysburg did not happen intentionally, planned however Lee did an astounding job and his best to defeat the Union army. Ultimately Robert E. Lee was responsible for the South’s loss
Lee to confederate President Davis written in the days following The Battle of Gettysburg. In these letters, Lee expresses that he no longer feels capable of fulfilling his duties as general and asks President Davis to replace him. President Davis decides to reject Davis’s request leaving a man who is not confident in his abilities to guide the Confederate Troops. General Lee’s lack in confidence could have caused him to become a weak leader which resulted in a weak army.
Therefore, neither of the generals exceeded the other when it comes to military strategies, which rather debunks Shaara’s depiction of Longstreet’s advanced knowledge of modern warfare. Despite of the importance of the Battle of Gettysburg, often marked as the turning point of the war, General Longstreet should not obey an order that results in a significant loss of men that would be extremely difficult to replace at this time. Already limited by the amount of men still able to fight, pushing additional forces in an open battle would just nearly deplete the confederate soldiers completely. Since this battle was one that went on until a majority of ones sided were depleted, the south should have played it safe against the Unions nearly surplus supply of
Several factors played in to the American Civil War that made it have the outcome that it did. Although the South had better trained officials due to their military school, the North was far more advanced than they. The North had the advantage over the South in several ways. However, the outcome of the Civil War was not inevitable: it was determined as much by human decisions and human willpower as by physical resources, although the North’s resources gave them an edge over the South.
The Union Army was able to match the intensity of the Confederacy, with the similar practice of dedication until death and patriotism, but for different reasons. The Union soldiers’s lifestyles and families did not surround the war to the extent of the Confederates; yet, their heritage and prosperity relied heavily on it. Union soldiers had to save what their ancestors fought for, democracy. “Our (Union soldiers) Fathers made this country, we, their children are to save it” (McPherson, 29). These soldiers understood that a depleted group of countries rather than one unified one could not flourish; “it is essential that but one Government shall exercise authority from the Gulf of Mexico to Canada, and from the Atlantic to the Pacific” (Ledger, 1861).
At the eve of the Civil War, it would’ve seemed that the south had the edge in military. Why? Because the south had strong and talented officers such as Robert E. Lee and Thomas “Stonewall” Jackson. The south also had a larger army in terms of size, and all the military colleges were in the Confederacy except for West Pointe. One of the few disadvantages of the south was the lack and shortage of appropriate war attire such as shoes, etc. Despite having a smaller size, the north had greater manpower and a stronger, unified government. The north also lacked many talented military leaders when the war was off to a
The Civil War that took place in the United States from 1861 to 1865 could have easily swung either way at several points during the conflict. There is however several reasons that the North would emerge victorious from this bloody war that pit brother against brother. Some of the main contributing factors are superior industrial capabilities, more efficient logistical support, greater naval power, and a largely lopsided population in favor of the Union. Also one of the advantages the Union had was that of an experienced government, an advantage that very well might have been one of the greatest contributing factors to their success. There are many reasons factors that lead to the North's victory, and each of these elements in and amongst themselves was extremely vital to the effectiveness of the Northern military forces. Had any one of these factors not been in place the outcome of the war could have been significantly different, and the United States as we know it today could be quite a different place to live.
... by the war and fight more viciously. Lincoln was very careful not to underestimate his enemies in the South and sternly advised the American public not to get overconfident, “Let us not be over-sanguine of a speedy final triumph. Let us diligently apply the means, never doubting that just God, in His good time, will us the right result.” The siege of Vicksburg was in many ways the hardest blow to the South, because they lost their control of the river there, and lost communication with their western territories. In many respects, this was the day that I believe most of the southern soldiers believed the war had ended, and with Sherman making his march, the psychological impact was devastating. Without their beliefs, their way of life taken away, they had no reason to fight, and no reason to continue fighting because if Old Dixie could fall, so could anyone else.
“Why did the North win the Civil War?” is only half of a question by itself, for the other half is “Why did the South lose the Civil War?” To this day historians have tried to put their finger on the exact reason for the South losing the war. Some historians blame the head of the confederacy Jefferson Davis; however others believe that it was the shear numbers of the Union (North). The advantages and disadvantages are abundant on either sides of the argument, but the most dominate arguments on why the South lost the war would be the fact that state’s rights prevented unification of the South, Jefferson Davis' poor leadership and his failure to work together with his generals, the South failed to gain the recognition of the European nations, North's superior resources made the outcome inevitable, and moral of the South towards the end of the war.
...ld not protect the interest of the Southern states. Coupled with the hostilities, lack of votes for Lincoln from the South and disregard for the constitutional protection of slavery is a justifiable reason from the Southern leaders to secede from the Union.
The Confederate Army was very successful in the South.... ... middle of paper ... ... Gettysburg: A Study in Command.
The Battle of Antietam could have been a devastating and fatal blow to the Confederate Army if Gen. McClellan acted decisively, took calculated risks, and veered away from his cautious approach to war. There are many instances leading up to the battle and during the battle in which he lacks the necessary offensive initiative to effectively cripple and ultimately win the war. This paper is intended to articulate the failure of Mission Command by GEN McClellan by pointing out how he failed to understand, visualize, describe and direct the battlefield to his benefit.