Civil War Flashcards

1
Q

Who were the border states? and what outcome did this have on the Confederacy?
was support unanimous?

A

In 1861 the states of Virginia, North Carolina, Arkansas and Tennessee joined the rebellion against the Union.

 Support for secession in these states were not unanimous.

 e.g. although Virginia seceded West Virginia remained loyal to the Union.

The border states consisted of:
- Delaware –> Slave state but had economic links with the union and few slaves.

  • Maryland –> initially divided –> e.g. when Union troops passed through the state confederate soldiers fired on them –> Lincoln used this as an excuse to suspend habeas corpus and arrest opponents.
  • Kentucky
  • Missouri –> also a relatively divided state but had strong unionist sentiments

 The slave states in the Union maintained slavery throughout the war.
 The loyalty of the border states robbed the confederacy of 2 million people and industrial resourced

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q
Military positions of the Union: 
% of US pop 
Pop (in numbers) 
Farm acreage % 
Manufacturing workers % 
Manufacturing output %
Factories 
Miles of railway 
States
A
% of US pop: 71% 
Pop (in numbers): 23,000,000 
Farm acreage: 65% 
Manufacturing workers: 92% 
Manufacturing output: 92% 
Factories: 110,000 
Miles of railway: 22,000 
States: 22
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q
Military positions of the Confederacy: 
% of US pop 
Pop (in numbers) 
Farm acreage 
Manufacturing workers 
Manufacturing output 
Factories 
Miles of railway 
States
A
29% 
9,000,000 (including 3.5m slaves) 
35% 
8% 
8% 
18,000 
9,000 
11
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Factors that helped the Souths military position?

A

 The south was used to horses and their cavalry units were often superior.

 In general, they had better military leadership

 They hoped to get foreign recognition because of the importance of cotton.

 The souths advantage was its sheer size.

 Actual physical conquest of the south would require a vast army from the North, not the 75,000 Lincoln initially called for.

 Rebels in the South simply needed to hold their ground

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

In military terms what was developed and what effect did this have?

A

 The development of the rifle musket and Minié bullet equalised opposing forces as both sides had access to this technology.

 The accuracy of these rifles was far greater than that of Napoleonic weaponry and therefore increased casualties.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Problems within the union which could affect their military position?

A

Lincoln had been elected by only 40% of voters in 1860. Not all of the North supported the war. Even fewer supported a war over slavery

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Military position at the beginning of the war conclusion?

A

 it appeared as though the South was destined to lose but the war ended up lasting for so long and resulting in 600,000 deaths.

 The outcome of the war was not a foregone conclusion in 1861

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

In terms of campaigns, how was the war split?

A

The war can be seen as two mainland campaign:

 One in the eastern theatre (mainly in Virginia)

 One in the Western theatre (near the Mississippi River)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

What were the Norths 2 military campaigns?

A
  1. The anaconda plan

2. Campaigning in the west

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

What was the anaconda plan?

A
  • Squeeze the south by cutting its communications and trade.
  • Blockade the South
  • Take over the Mississippi River and cut the Confederacy in half
  • Take Richmond
  • Once all this was done they would cut the Confederacy in half again and get Atlanta
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Why were the North not as effective in campaigning in the West initially?

A

The temptation to try for a swift victory in the eastern theatre was too much after the Confederacy established Richmond as their capital as it was so close to Washington DC.

 Thus, an eastern theatre took much of the available resources

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

What was the size of the Confederacy army and the union’s army and what can we conclude by this?

A
  • 2,100,000 served in the Union forces (out of a pop of 23,000,000)
  • 900,000 served in the Confederate forces (out of a pop of 9,000,000)

 the disparity in population was not reflected in the overall army size

 White southerners raised larger forces proportionally than the white population of the North.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

First attack at Manassas (Bull Run)
Year?
Outcome?
Events?

A

 Resulted in a humiliating defeat for the Union.

 Resulted in Lincoln relying on George McClellan

McClellan subsequently assembled a large force of 121,000 men with 44 artillery unity, 15,000 horses and naval support and landed in Virginia in March 1862.

He outnumbered the Confederate forces but believed he faced a large Confederate army so moved slowly.

 McClellan’s timid movements allowed Lee to build up Richmond’s defences and then to launch a series of counter-attacks in June 1862 called the Seven Days Battles.

 He threw away any hope of a rapid attack with his superior forces and allowed Lee to keep the initiative.

 The failures led Lee to risk an attack into Maryland in September 1862 and ended the chance of a decisive early victory.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Robert E. Lee 1807-1870

A

Lee was from a prominent military family in Virginia.

He took part in the Mexican War with distinction and commanded the troops that defeated John Brown at Harper’s Ferry.

He was a chief military advisor to Davis cabinet from 1861.

He became field commander in 1862, showing himself to be a highly effective tactician and inspirational leader.

However, his invasions of the North failed. He held off union armies with smaller forces but was forced to surrender in April 1865.

He accepted the end of slavery but not civil rights for former slaves.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

What was the significance of the Battle of Shiloh? Year? Key events? Cost of war? Outcome?

A
  • The battle took place on April 6th and 7th 1862 in the western theatre.
  • General Grant was ordered to advance up the Tennessee River and await Union reinforcements.
  • He camped at Shiloh but made few defensive preparations and was surprised by a Confederate force attack under Beauregard and Johnston.
  • The attack drove Grant back to the river and weakened his forces
  • He planned a counter attack for the next day
  • This ended up driving Confederate forces back.

Cost of war:

  • The battle cost the Union 13,000 casualties and the Confederacy 10,600 casualties.

Outcome:

  •  It demonstrated the military weaknesses on both sides.
  •  It damaged Grants reputation, although he was saved by Lincolns support.
  •  The South lost Johnston, their most able commander.
  •  It demonstrated that the war would not be won by a decisive battle and that there would be heavy costs.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q
What was the significance of the battle of Antietam? 
When was it
Events? 
Who won? 
Impact?
A
  • On September 3rd, 1862, Lee took 55,000 troops to Maryland which was Union territory.
  • –> This was perhaps encouraged by the poor performance of the Union
  • –> Lee may have also wanted to demonstrate the souths ability to take the war into Union territory

–>This would have helped the Confederacy gain foreign recognition

  • Lee divided his forces and had 18,000 men at a defensive position in Antietam.
  • A Union army of 87,000 men attacked him
  • The attacks were poorly planned, and Lee defended ably
  • The superior union numbers and firepower forced a retreat
  • McClellan (union side) failed to follow up with a pursuit
  • The Union lost 12,410 with 2100 dead and the South lost 10,300 with 1500 dead

 Union victory had significant consequences

–> led to Lincoln issuing the Emancipation Proclamation (wartime measure to free slaves in all enemy-held territory)

  • In reality, no slaves were freed as the Union did not hold the territory and the proclamation did not apply to Union slaves.

However, –> It ended any hope that France or Britain would recognise the South as they could no longer on moral grounds after the Proclamation.

 Antietam was the most disastrous day in terms of deaths and injuries in American history

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

What was the significance of the battle of Vicksburg?
Events?
Who won and why?
Outcome?

A
  • Union forces continued to advance on Mississippi and forced Confederate soldiers onto the stronghold of Vicksburg.
  • Grant defeated Confederate reinforcements
  • However, –> The battle was not won due to any brilliant military action but rather by hunger, disease, relentless bombardments from Grant’s naval forces and the failure of the Confederate forces to relieve the city.

 By the end of July, Union forces controlled the whole of the Mississippi River

 This cut the Confederacy from Arkansas, Texas and Louisiana, disrupting communications and supplies of food.

Outcome:

 One of the major turning points of the war

 Grant was made commander in chief as a result which had a major outcome in the ultimate outcome of the war

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Why might the impact of Gettysburg be overstated?

A

 Lee was still capable of winning battles

 Meade had not destroyed his army

 The North still had to figure out how to bring about a decisive result on the battlefields of the West and how to occupy the huge areas in revolt.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

What was the significance of the Wilderness Campaign? 1864
Events?
Aim?
Who won and why?

A
  • By 1864 Grant was in overall command of the Union armies
  • He and Lincoln coordinated a campaign of advances on all fronts
  • Grant took 118,000 men into Virginia to destroy Lee’s 64,000 men.
  • The aim was to destroy Confederate forced rather than take Richmond
  • It involved crossing an area of dense shrub called the Wilderness.
  •  Lee fell back on Petersburg in order to safeguard Richmond
  •  lee lacked the forces to withstand the constant losses.
  •  By 1865 Lee had 50,000 against Grants 125,000
  •  The final attack took place in April and Richmond fell
  •  Lee retreated and surrender to Grant at Appomattox

The success of the Wilderness campaign was due to its objective in destroying Lees forces rather than taking cities, as well as the willingness of Grant to absorb more casualties than Lee.

The relentless advances of the Union made the Confederacy surrender. This could only have been achieved with the superiority of supplies, artillery and manpower.

–> Grant emerged the victor through his understanding of modern war

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

How much did the military leadership of the North account for the final victory?

Who had the greater advantage and in terms of what?

What similarities did they have?

In what way was Mclellan mistaken?

What did Mclellans failures lead to?

What did Grant bring with him?

A

The Northern generals had a greater advantage in terms of resources and their ability to create soldiers from civilians.

However, the two sides had broad similarities in their tactics and similarities in their weaponry and number of forces which meant that a quick decisive battle was unlikely.

McClellan’s whole 1862 campaign rested on the doubtful assumption that the fall of Richmond would mean the end of the war. He lacked crucial information about the size of enemy forces which led to the defeat at the battle of bull run.

Frustration with McClellan led to Lincoln turning to more aggressive leaders such as Grant who were more willing to accept casualties.

–> McClellan’s failures saw a new kind of general ship emerge.

–> After the campaigns of 1862-62 Union military leaders developed a greater strategic sense.

The taking of Vicksburg by Grant was of considerable strategic importance in cutting the Confederacy in two.
 But Meade after Gettysburg could not follow up his victory by pursuit.

It was Grant who saw that a different kind of warfare was necessary
 Individual battles must be integrated into bigger campaigns

Grants campaigns shows how far Union military leadership changed during the war and also how it changed the nature of warfare.

–> It took a change of outlook among the generals to make superior resources and strong political leadership lead to victory.

21
Q

Was Grant or Lee the more effective general?

  • Arguments that Lee was an effective general
A

Lee was an inspirational leader who managed to maintain the loyalty of his troops and sustain campaigns with fewer men and resources.

In 1862 he defended and safeguarded Richmond.

He conducted able defences against stronger forces at Fredericksburg.

At the Battle of Chancellorsville, he divided his forces and defended his position against Union attacks.

He carried the war into the North in 2 invasions in 1862 and 1862 and in both cases considerable damage was done to Union forces.

Lee made Grant fight in unfavourable terrain at the Wilderness.

Lee was defeated by sheer lack of resources rather than any personal failings.

Lee was able to maintain the respect and affection of his forces which was a major element in his leadership.

22
Q

Was Grant or Lee the more effective general?

  • Arguments that Lee was not an effective general
A

Lee was wasteful and pursued a deeply flawed strategy of offence at both Antietam and Gettysburg

Lees campaigns were costly and the relative lack of manpower of the South meant this was more damaging.

Lee’s tactics which relied on frontal assaults were costly.
–> e.g. Chancellorsville, although usually seen as a victory it brought about heavy casualties

The invasion of the North in 1862 resulted in Antietam and was not well managed.
–> Lee divided his forces leaving him vulnerable to attacks.

Gettysburg lacked a precise focus.

Lee failed to save Richmond, despite giving the Virginia campaign priority.

Lee failed to see the importance in allocating enough forces to the western sector.
–> The fall of Vicksburg allowed Union forces to take Atlanta and pursue the March through Georgia which weakened the effectiveness of the South’s overall campaign.

His view of the conflict of war rather than a rebellion may have made victory impossible

23
Q

Arguments that Grant was an effective General

A

Grant was able to deliver victories fairly consistently.

It was his initiatives that led to early successes in Tennessee which led to the Mississippi campaign.
–> the victory at Vicksburg was possibly only because of the way Grant deceived and defeated Confederate forces prior to the siege.

His subsequent invasion of Mississippi and taking of Atlanta helped continue the war
Grant showed awareness of the realities of modern war by allowing Sherman to drive through Georgia, destroying resources.

The campaigns of 1864-1865 were decisive because Grant accepted that the aim of the war must be the destruction of Confederate armies not taking the cities.

His acceptance of high casualties was the way the war was won. His leadership gave his troops the confidence in ultimate victory.

24
Q

Arguments that Grant was not an effective General

A

Grant was not an effective General

Despite early successes in the West he was careless before the Battle of Shiloh and was surprised and driven back.

His victory at Vicksburg depended on dealing with less numerous Confederate forces and the south’s failure to protect the stronghold.

Grants strategy depended on persistence and willingness to take heavy casualties.

He was forced by Lee to fight in the wilderness.
–> The Wilderness campaign has the aim of wearing down the south and relied on smaller confederate numbers and sacrificing large numbers of his own men.

Grant’s siege of Petersburg was effective but mainly because of Confederate sickness and hunger.

25
Q

Overview as to who was the better general?

A

In terms of understanding the needs of war Grant might be seen as the more effective General.
Lee’s successes were mostly defensive.

–> Both generals relied heavily on mass attacks and both accepted high levels of casualties as being inevitable.

–> However, it was Grant’s bleak vision of modern warfare that makes him the more effective general.

26
Q

How far was the war won because of resources?

A
  • The disparity in resources had a huge impact on the war
  • The North was able to switch its resources to war production
  • The South relied more heavily on imports, especially firearms from Britain
  • The greatest disparity was in population
27
Q

How far was the war won because of resources?

  • Financial

How much did each side spend on the war?

Impact of each sides financial system?

What percentage of the cost of war was financed by taxation for each side?

How much damage was done to the South?

What did the weakness of the South’s financial sector mean?

A
  • The North was able to spend $2303 million on the war
  • The South was only able to spend $1032 million

–> The cost of physical destruction to the south was $1487 million whereas it was limited in the North as most major battles were not fought there and they did not suffer from loss of slave property

  • The North had a more developed financial system which led to only a 75% inflation rate.
  • The South faced such a currency deflation that by the end of the war the Confederate dollar was virtually worthless.
  • The south met only 11% of the cost of war through taxation
  • The North met 25%

–> The weakness of the South’s financial sector and ore limited industrial capacity meant that the south did not have the resources to carry on the war regardless of military factors by 1864-65

–> this was compounded by the physical damage done in Georgia in 1864.

28
Q

How far was the war won because of resources?

  • Population
A
  • Population was the greatest resource
  • The North could afford to lose more men.
  • Southern military leadership had to content with being outnumbered for much of the war which restricted the success of offensives into the North
29
Q

How far was the war won because of resources?

  • Transport:
  • did economic and transport inferiority mean the south was bound to lose?

Examples of how despite the Unions advantage they did not always win

Why were railways perhaps not so important?

When did the problem of resources become important?

A

==> Economic resources and inferior transport did not mean that the south was bound to lose.

–> Militarily, its forces were formidable

e.g. McClellan failed in gaining Richmond because he could not make effective use of his advantaged.

==> For all the industrial power and financial sophistication, the Union army could not successfully invade and conquer Virginia in 1862 and 1863.

e.g. Despite the general superiority of resources, Meads troops could not follow up their victory at Gettysburg.

==> Despite Union superiority of railways, most campaigns were conducted by infantry which marched to battlefields, they didn’t use railways.

However, –> When it became clear the war was going to drag on then the issue of resources became important

==> A better supplied and better equipped Union were able to wear down resistance easier.

30
Q

How far did the Norths naval blockade and the international situation affect the outcome of the war?

  • events
  • overall impact
A
  • Lincoln proclaimed a blockade of Southern ports on April 19th, 1861
  • –> This gave the rebels the status of recognised belligerents.
  • The blockade was not effective until 1863
  • The South pursued a policy of embargoing (imposing a ban) trade in cotton in the hoped that Britain and France would recognise the South as a state in order to regain their cotton imports.
  • However, –> This blockade alienated European powers
  • The North constructed ironclad ships and the Confederacy was unable to counter the Northern armed vessels.

==> The Northern blockade shut the Confederacy off from the world, deprived it of supplies and wreaked its military and naval strength

31
Q

impact of the blockade on the souths trade

A
  • The Souths trade was reduced by over 50%
  • From 1862-1865 the South shipped 0.5 million bales of cotton to Europe, the pre-war average was 10 million.

–> The shortage of imported good contributed to the high inflation.

32
Q

What did the Northern Blockade lead to hope of in the South?

A

The Norths blockade led to Confederate hope that European nations would intervene to stop as they hoped that cutting off cotton exports to Europe would cause distress in Europe and promote intervention on the Souths behalf

–> They hoped that if the Confederacy was recognised then the war would become one between 2 nations rather than a rebellion.

33
Q

When did Britain declare neutrality?

A

Britain declared neutrality in May 1861

34
Q

Why did European powers not recognise the Confederacy as legitimate?

cotton?
change in demand?
main reason?
emancipation proclamation?
final straw?
A
  • Europe already had a surplus of cotton in Europe due to high cotton exports between 1857-1860
  • Europe now had alternative supplies of cotton from India and Egypt
  • Demand for cotton was falling
  • Crop failures in Europe in 1860 increased demand for US corn which was mainly grown in the North
  • The main reason was that European powers did not want to be drawn into another war.
    • -> Britain did not want to have to strengthen its Canadian border
  • The issuing of the Emancipation proclamation after Antietam made the moral issue of slavery more prominent and made recognition of the South more difficult
  • After 1863 it became clear the South was less likely to win and Britain and France did not want to back the losing side.
35
Q

How well did Lincoln lead the Union during the civil war?

  • inexperience
  • -> despite this what was he able to achieve
A

Lincoln had little experience and was even thought to be too inexperienced by his own secretary of state as he had never even fought in a war let alone run one.

  • Lincoln sustained the greatest war effort of any president to date and managed to raise an unprecedentedly large force whilst also managing the finance of the war exceptionally well.
  • Lincoln developed a leadership style that was highly effective and kept together his “team of rivals”
  • He managed to maintain morale through terrible losses.
  • He eventually ensured that he right men were appointed to lead the army.
  • He passes the Emancipation Proclamation.
  • He used all his political skill to get support for the 13th amendment, ending slavery.
  • His foreign policy avoided dangerous conflict with Britain
36
Q

Argumants that Lincoln was a good leader

A

Lincoln took decisive action to ensure that the border states remained within the Union, thus ensuring that the war was not an abolitionist campaign against slavery.

Lincoln ensures secession was seen as an act of rebellion which enabled him and ensured that any actions against the South

  • -> e.g. the emancipation proclamation and acts against the north
  • -> e.g. suspension of habeas corpus were legitimate actions of a gov.

He allowed able cabinet ministers the freedom to act effectively while retaining overall control at vital times
–> e.g. he intervened to prevent a war with Britain over the Trent Affair in 1861.

His laid-back management style and use of humour to diffuse tension was accompanied by an ability to use political manipulation
–> e.g. he was able to use persuasion and bribery through patronage to ensure support for the 13th amendment.

He gave backing to his generals but was not afraid to exert control

  • -> e.g. when he finally got tired of McClellan
  • -> his support for Grant and Sherman’s tactics

His sense of timing was strong
–> he used the victory at Antietam to propose the Emancipation Proclamation

37
Q

Arguments that Lincoln was not a good leader

A

Lincoln was criticised for his failure to get a grip on the war for the 1st 2 years and his over reliance on the wrong generals.

  • -> Battle of Bull Run was a catastrophe.
  • -> Lincoln was lured into costly efforts to take Richmond.
  • -> There was no real coordinated military strategy until 1863.

His administration was criticised for the unfair way it dealt with the draft, allowing substitutions and men to escape via payment.

  • -> this caused unrest
  • -> there were anti-draft riots in NY in 1863 which led to violent attacks on AA by Irish workers

Lincoln was criticised for failing to make clear the status of key groups in the restored Union which would follow a northern victory
–> e.g. there was little firm indication of the status of freed slaves in the south.

Lincoln was not widely respected in 1861 and almost lost the 1864 election.

38
Q

Emancipation Proclamation?
When was it
What did it declare
What was the actual impact on slaves?

A

Initially Lincoln’s cabinet was unwilling to agree to the emancipation but the defeat at Antietam changed the mood.

  • From January 1st, 1863 slaves in all rebel states were declared free
  • Lincoln did not free the slaves in any of the border states, he only freed those not under Union control.

–> The proclamation did not free single slave

39
Q

Emancipation Proclamation?

What aim and effect did it have?

A
  • The proclamation also had the aim of preventing European powers from recognising the Confederacy.
  • It was able to do this by linking the war to a moral issue

–> Union success would see the end of slavery

  • It now ensured that the South would not receive foreign aid as France and Britain could not appear to support slavery.
40
Q

Emancipation Proclamation?

Impact on the South:

A
  • It reduced the South’s ability to raise foreign loans as slave property was no longer considered an asset and couldn’t be relied on by creditors.
  • It helped weaken the bonds between slaves and masters
41
Q

Emancipation Proclamation?

Impact on the North:

A
  • It motivated 179,000 AA to join union forces

However, –> it was not universally supported in the North

–> There were racial attacks in 1863

42
Q

Emancipation Proclamation?

Overall:

A

As a war winning measure it had limited impact, but it was a key step towards major change and it was of huge importance as a way of ending a morally unacceptable practise.

43
Q

1864 Election

Why was it not an easy victory for Lincoln?

A
  • Republicans disliked the slow progress to end slavery
  • Military failures of 1862 saw unrest
  • led to Democrats making gains in the midterm elections
  • High taxation and conscription in 1863 caused unrest
  • Lincoln’s use of arbitrary arrest caused criticism of Lincoln as “King Lincoln”
44
Q

1864 Election

How did Lincoln gain support?

A
  • Lincoln was forced to appoint Johnson as his vice-presidential candidate to gain the support of Northern Democrats.
  • Lincoln had to reject the Wade Davis Bill
  • -> This would have made a majority within former rebel states take an oath of loyalty and agree to AA civil rights in order to re-join the Union.
  • Some decisive military developments turned the tide
  • -> e.g. The fall of Atlanta which opened up a war of destruction with the march through Georgia
  • There began to be visual signs of Union superiority when Sheridan led his forces through Shenandoah Valley
45
Q

1864 Election: Outcome

A

–> Lincoln ended up beating McClellan by only 400,000 popular votes but 212 electoral college votes to 21

46
Q

How well did Davis lead the Confederacy?

Overview of challenges faced by Davis

A

Although Davis was a colder personality he had military experience but faced high levels of discontent brought about my food shortages.

Davis did not have access to the food supplies that the North did as most of the Souths economy was based on cash crops (e.g. tobacco and cotton).

He also was unable to become internationally recognised and could not access the financial resources Lincoln could.

His government did not have the benefits of the North’s infrastructure of roads, canals and railways.

47
Q

What issue did Davis face?

A

Southern states were in rebellion over protection of states’ rights however, in order to fight a modern war, they were going to have to accept a strong government which imposed strong controls.

–> In other words, to defeat the “tyranny” of the North the south would have to accept restriction in their freedoms.

48
Q

Arguments that Davis was a good leader

A

Davis’ administration managed to maintain the supply of weapons.

The appointment of Josiah Gorgas as head of the Bureau of Ordnance was highly effective.

Given the belief in states’ rights Davis managed to sustain a united war effort for a considerable amount of time against very heavy odds.

Despite Lincoln’s charm and skill he came close to losing the election of 1864 which suggests that the importance in the difference in personalities between Lincoln and Davis can be overstressed.

Davis had greater experience of military command, both as a serving officer and as secretary for war

49
Q

Arguments that Davis was not a good leader

A

Davis kept the management of war in his own hands (until the appointment of Lee).

His relations with generals were not always good and he could not prevent disagreements.
His commanders rejected his hands-on management.

The embargo imposed failed to put pressure on foreign powers and harmed the souths economy.

The decision to allow Lee to invade the North was flawed and took away the advantages of a purely defensive strategy.

Davis mismanaged the western campaigns which allowed Vicksburg to fall in 1863 and failed to send enough forces to prevent the taking of Atlanta.

Davis had serious disagreements within his cabinet which resulted in the resignation of the secretary of war.

His political and personal skills were not equal to that of Lincolns and he appeared autocratic.

Davis communicated poorly and lacked warmth –> his outlook was often authoritarian.

His inflexible attitude led to the south neglecting the 3.5m slaves they could have used as military manpower.

He presided over a flawed financial system which could not prevent rapid inflation and relied too heavily on borrowing.

His administration was not able to meet the food shortages