• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

How far were southerners to blame for the civil war?

Extracts from this document...


How far were southerners to blame for the civil war? During and for years after the war, Northerners blamed Southerners and Southerners blamed Northerners for starting the war. With hindsight today, it is easy to dish out blame and easiest to point the finger at the South. After all it was the Southern states that seceded from the union, and it was obvious to many Southerners at the time, and to most Northerners that the result of such secession would be war. It was the Confederates that fired the first shots of the war at Fort Sumter in April 1861, and in doing so they provoked a conflict that would leave one in four white adult male southerners dead, the South's economy devastated and slavery, the "peculiar institution" they fought to defend, abolished. However because slavery is seen today to be such a morally and ethically wrong and evil thing, people's views can be blurred, leading them to side automatically with the North. There were of course many events that furthered America's sectionalism and eventually led to the civil war, most of which blame can be divided equally. It is therefore necessary to be objective and take each into account, concluding perhaps that the South was not entirely to blame for the civil war, just as Germany was not entirely to blame for the first world war. ...read more.


He also said that any state had the right to secede. In 1832 South Carolina ignored the new import duties and President Jackson threatened to send in troops. Eventually they backed down and excepted a lower set of duties. This escapade and Calhoun's statement about secession threatened the very existence of the union. Blame for this can fall on both the North for selfishly looking after their interests without regard for the South, and on the South for supporting Calhoun's idea of secession which threatened to tear apart the country at such an early stage. Next came the dispute over California and New Mexico. In 1846 USA won a war against Mexico and gained the lands of California and New Mexico. Congressman Wilmot from Pennsylvania proposed that slavery should be banned in all land taken from Mexico. The South opposed Wilmot's proviso, as according to the Missouri compromise, California should be part free and part slave. However the climate of California and New Mexico was unsuitable for cotton growth and it was unlikely that slavery would expand that far west anyway, so there was no need for Wilmot to say what he did. By opening his mouth, Wilmot opened an old wound, making the South firmer in their defense of slavery. Calhoun reiterated his views on secession in his doctrine and tension grew with the Californian gold rush. ...read more.


In 1861 there was no immediate threat to slavery, Lincoln said when he was elected that he would not interfere with slavery in states where it was already established. He thought it would take a hundred years or more before slavery would fade away, and considering the Republicans did not have a majority in Congress in 1860, there was little Lincoln could do to threaten slavery. Despite this, Southern politicians, representing the wishes of their constituents, acted irrationally and established an independent Southern nation, believing they were protecting themselves from the wrath of the North. Most Southerners knew that in doing so they would start a war and some realized at the time the full extent of their mistake. They knew they would start a war and they realized they would lose. The North was far more industrialized and stronger in numbers of men and it was very likely that they would win. Jonathan Worth from North Carolina said in spring 1861 "I think the South is committing suicide, but my lot is cast with the South and being unable to manage the ship, I intend to face the breakers manfully and go down with my companions" If all Southerners had realized their foolishness a lot of bloodshed could have been avoided. However a mass delusion seemed to effect the South, they believed they had to fight to survive. Southerners picked the fight; they fired first and were made to lie in the grave they dug for themselves. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level International History, 1945-1991 section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level International History, 1945-1991 essays

  1. How far were White weaknesses responsible for Red success in Russian Civil War?

    Inevitably, War Communism resistance from the peasants at Tandov Province in 1923 and through the Kronstadt Mutiny, where 30 000 were killed, the memory of the old order and of how the Tsar dealt with opposition was refreshed in people's minds.

  2. To what extent was the Civil War the main factor in the Bolshevik

    them actually establishing the Cheka instead of letting the Red army take care of it. The view that the internal opposition within Russia was much more important than the war against the Whites is shared. "It is estimated that the Cheka killed more than 250,000 people between 1917 and 1924"15.

  1. The Not So Free.

    This was where they decide what to do next. Chapter 2 After a long discussion and still no answer from any of the generals, Major Roberts cuts in. "What missile sites that can reach us do the Russians have?" General Williams knowing a fair amount on the intelligence side of this replies in quick response "Not that many".

  2. The Prelude to the 1975 War and the Cairo Agreement.

    When the Fateh leadership condemned this, Arafat himself was deported from Syria to Tunis on June 24, surviving an assassination attempt on his way. On June 27, the Syrians assassinated Saad Sayel, the commander of pro-Arafat forces in Lebanon. Pro-Syrian units of al-Sa'iqa, the PFLP-GC, PLA, and even Syrian Army units, backed Abu Musa's forces.

  1. How did Black Southerners respond to the rising tide of racism and to attempts ...

    Obviously, former slaveholders and their support used such tactics to regain control. To some extent this approach worked, by the 1880's, sharecropping and peonage had replaced slavery and ensured poverty for the majority of blacks until well into the twentieth century.

  2. Why did the South lose the Civil War?

    Not once did a Southern army surrender for want of ammunition, and despite being in terrible disrepair, the Confederacy's railroads somehow fulfilled their task of transporting troops to battle on several notable occasions. Historian Edward Pollard commented that 'something more than numbers make armies', and Southern leader P G T

  1. American Civil War (1861-1865).

    would free all slaves in areas rebelling against the United States, effective January 1, 1863. 1863 In January, in an effort to placate the slave-holding border states, Lincoln resisted the demands of radical republicans for complete abolition. Yet some Union generals, such as General B.F.

  2. To what extent can the Southerners be held responsible for the outbreak of the ...

    However the planters of the South ignored such advice and continued to invest their profits into land and slavery to grow more of the staple crops. Many Southerners got rich by using slave labour to produce agricultural staples, so would be very reluctant to have to give it up in order to placate the North.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work