Home » History » U.S. History 1865-1900 » Why the South Lost or How the North Won? : A Perception of the American Civil War

Why the South Lost or How the North Won? : A Perception of the American Civil War

© Melanie Storie

Since the final handshake between Robert E. Lee and Ulysses S. Grant on April 9, 1865 at Appomattox, Virginia, historians have sought the reasons for the Confederacy's defeat. Almost 140 years have past since the end of the war and there have been numerous books and articles written with various explanations. It seems most of the interpretations fall into two schools of thought: "Why the South Lost" and "How the North Won". The "Why the South Lost" historians tend to focus exclusively on the failures of the Confederacy and allow southerners to preserve their pride. This explanation states that the South lost not because they fought badly, but because the North had more men and better weapons. Meanwhile the exponents of "How the North Won" examine both the North and the South and tend to assert that a Northern victory was inevitable. While a more comprehensive view makes the most sense in explaining the outcome of the war, it was never a given that the North would be victorious over the South.

At the onset of hostilities both the North and the South were woefully unprepared to fight a long, full-scale war. Though, in terms of comparison, the manpower and materials of the North were vastly superior to those of the South. Despite these overwhelming odds, Southerners believed they had a fighting chance and adopted a strategy to take into account their strengths and weaknesses. The North was able to begin the war with numerous advantages over the South. First, the North had an established government and therefore did not have to waste time trying to set up a governing system as did the South. Second, almost all of the nation's industry was located in the North. This diversified industry allowed the North the ability to mass produce adequate amounts of artillery, rifles, and munitions which permitted the North the ability to fight a protracted, modern war. The South on the other hand lacked any major industrial facilities that could mass produce weapons. Third, the majority of the nation's farms were in the North. This provided agricultural resources for an army and its civilians. In contrast, Southern farms primarily produced staple crops like cotton, tobacco and sugar cane. This made it difficult to have adequate food to feed an army, not to mention the civilian population. Fourth, the North enjoyed control over the transportation system. Of the 30,000 miles of railroads the North controlled 20,000 of them. Additionally, the North began the war with an existing Navy and the ability to expand its naval resources. However, the South had no navy of which to speak and few resources to build one. Finally, the North had a much greater population on which to draw from in fighting the South. The twenty-three Northern states with a population of 22 million people greatly overshadowed the eleven Southern states with a population of 9 million (of which included 3 million slaves). Despite these overwhelming odds, the South believed it had a chance to win its independence.

The copyright of the article Why the South Lost or How the North Won? : A Perception of the American Civil War in U.S. History 1865-1900 is owned by . Permission to republish Why the South Lost or How the North Won? : A Perception of the American Civil War in print or online must be granted by the author in writing.