Comparing the Military Leaders of the Civil War Essay

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 â€Å"Army of the Potomac.† Whereas the Confederate generals, at least in the â€Å"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†¦show more content†¦On the other hand had the Confederates been able to press their advantage after the Union lines broke, they might have made things difficult for Washington. Later in the war, with more experience they certainly would not have passed up that sort of opportunity, but as it was they were quite happy with the victory they had won. After the loss at Manassas, Lincoln looked for another leader to replace McDowell, and some consideration settled on General McClellan. McClellan was at his best when he was organizing armies, not leading them into battle. Lincoln wanted the army to take over eastern Tennessee for political reasons, and McClellan for fairly sound military reasons wanted the same thing. The task was given to General Buell; it did not matter to McClellan that the area was impossible to take from the north, not to mention holding it. The area was too far away from the supplies that Buell would have needed, and logistically completely impossible to supply. Buell presented another plan to McClellan that called for General Halleck to march out of Kentucky and Buell to capture Nashville. This would leave the Confederates in east Tennessee in an untenable position, and force them into a desperate battle, or a withdrawal from the area. This trait played a major role in much of the rest of McClellan’s time in command of theShow MoreRelatedWhy The North Won The Civil War995 Words   |  4 Pagesthe North Won the Civil War? Even after wisely gaining victory over the British during the revolutionary war, problems for America did not stop, the biggest issue of rising sectionalism was yet to be solved. This time the conflict was not with any foreign power, but it was between the northern and southern American states. David Donald, the editor of the book titled, â€Å"Why the North Won the Civil War† attempts to cautiously scrutinize the reasons behind the outcome of the civil war by inspecting majorRead MoreThe Prince Of Machiavelli s Prince1186 Words   |  5 PagesWhen evaluating the political leaders in modern times there is one leader that wields his power the most like Niccolo Machiavelli’s Prince, from his book The Prince, that leader is President Vladimir Putin of the Russian Federation. Although, Putin does not hold the title of Prince, he has held influential positions throughout the years, i.e. Prime Minister and Acting President, that hold power similar to the Prince. Every positi on that Putin has held in Russia he has acted as if he were a PrinceRead MoreThe American Civil War Exploded In 1861 After Several Decades1092 Words   |  5 PagesAmerican Civil War exploded in 1861 after several decades of tension boiling between the southern and northern states over contagious disputes including slavery, westward expansion and the federal authority over the states’ rights. The presidential election of 1860 and the triumph of Republican Abraham Lincoln, who was an ardent supporter of abolition led to the secession of seven southern states that formed the Confederate States of America. The other four states joined after the civil war had kickedRead MoreComparing the Relative Importance of Political Leadership, Military Skill and Resources as Reasons for the Outcome of the American Civil War935 Words   |  4 PagesComparing the Relative Importance of Political Leadership, Military Skill and Resources as Reasons for the Outcome of the American Civil War The American Civil war was the bloodiest conflict in American history, with some 620,000 Americans to die in the four-year conflict. This inevitable conflict as William Seward a politician named the great animosity between the Union and the Confederacy, was the result of years of antagonism, due mainly to the particular institution of Read MoreEssay on Why The North Won the Civil War1518 Words   |  7 PagesIf wars are won by riches, there can be no question why the North eventually prevailed. The North was better equipped than the South, with the resources necessary to be successful in a long term war like the Civil War was, which was fought from 1861 Ââ€" 1865. Prior, and during the Civil war, the Norths economy was always stronger than the Souths, boasting of resources that the Confederacy had no means of attaining. Compared to the South, The North had more factories available for production ofRead MoreAmerica s Paradoxical Love Hate Relationship With War1374 Words   |  6 Pageswith war and how this relationship influences American warfare through the research and study of the interpretation and analyzation of American military models, policy and goal changes, the use of military technology, â€Å"American way of war,† and the re lationship with, preparation for, and application of war. In the two hundred years since 1775, there has been thirty-five years of fighting in what we consider major conflicts or wars. This averages out to about one year of war to everyRead MoreThe Civil War And Limits Of Destruction By Mark E. Neely And The Destructive War1929 Words   |  8 PagesIn the books The Civil War and Limits of Destruction by Mark E. Neely and The Destructive War by Charles Royster, both authors examine and question the destructiveness of the war. Neely is of the opinion that the Civil War was not a total war, while Royster argues the Civil War was the first modern war in American history. Both authors take different approaches to examining the war, as well as the role specific people played in the war. While both authors offer valid arguments to support theirRead MoreComparing The Political Leadership Of Lincoln and Davis Essay655 Words   |  3 PagesComparing The Political Leadership Of Lincoln and Davis It may seem self- evident that Lincoln was the greater political leader; Lincoln led the winning side while Davis was defeated. It has though, been thought that once the Northern advantages and Southern disadvantages have been considered, that it is possible, that almost anyone could have led the North to victory. If this is so, was it Daviss strong leadership, which ensured that the confederacy survived as longRead More Comparing the Views of Plato and Abraham Lincoln on the Civil War1285 Words   |  6 PagesComparing the Views of Plato and Abraham Lincoln on the Civil War Lincoln believed that a system of government divided among itself was doomed for collapse; a house divided cannot stand. This philosophy earliest roots are evident in Platos masterpiece, The Republic. Socrates states that perfection, which he refers to as justice, in a governed body is harmony among all classes of people-The rebellious part is by nature the whole of vice.1 In order for the United States to survive as a nationRead MoreThe Achaemenid Era Of The Persian Empire1652 Words   |  7 PagesEmpire. (Briant p. 59) These, combined with the large professional army and civil services, served to foster a sense of loyalty among the conquered people. The leadership and philosophy of one man lead to an Empire that lasted 200 years and ended when Xerxes began to impose heavier taxes on his impoverished people causing civil unrest and eventually leading to defeat at the hand of Alexander the Great and his military forces. (SNT p.145) In contrast, The Roman Empire actually began with the overthrow