When reflecting on American soldiers of the past to the present, the soldiers of the Civil War are remarkably different than the rest. While the Civil War in itself was one of the most brutal and bloodiest wars known to the world, what differentiates the soldiers from every other war is their unwavering dedication to sacrifices their lives for a greater cause. In James M. McPherson, For Causes and Comrades: Why Men Fought in the Civil War, the author analysis over 25,000 letters and personal diaries to discover the answer to his question. Why did the Civil War soldiers do it? In the beginning of McPherson’s novel, he reflects on the most repeated questions from his students over the past twenty years. “What possessed those men? How could they sacrifice themselves in that way? Why did Civil War soldiers do …show more content…
With first hand perspectives of the war from the individuals who fought it and experienced it, he was able to grasp the uncensored view of both sides. These sources are truly remarkable because there unfiltered which gives the author the ability to draw his conclusion , like the motivations, without others opinion restraints. McPherson skillfully integrates the letters through many primary and secondary reasons for fighting on both sides like the reasons for volunteering and continuing to fight, letters from home, secession and emancipation, the place of "the Negro" in "the cause" and in battle, courage and its meaning, and the challenges of each day. The men's thoughts depicted by the author show they were men of courage, conviction, and commitment. Going into reading this novel, I expected the repetitive expected reasons for the war to be drawn out. I was pleasantly surprised after finishing this novel because the author didn’t force his views on you but allowed the soldier’s writings to describe the in-depth and complex reasons to
It is 1865, and the war between the states has just ended. Booth’s rage is peaking as he recalls Union General Ulysses Grant’s participation in the fall of the Confederacy….
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
This would create a productive discussion between readers, not the sporadic, vague, non-committal suggestions the author currently included. McPherson only begins to touch upon an idea for an argument in the last two pages, where he looks into the suggestion of whether or not John Brown was a terrorist or not. However, he leaves this answer up in the air with the statement that what one person believes counts as terrorism, another believes is an act of heroism – yet another open-ended thought with no assertions as to what a firm answer may be. For me, this was the only part in which I was truly made to think deeper into the impact of an individual’s actions as a symbol beyond the Civil War. It was only after that I was able to look back and dig through the essay to find the vague assertion of the broader impact that was woven through the narratives of these individuals’ lives. I understand that these topics are incredibly subjective and sensitive, but that is why, more than any other reason, that McPherson should be writing towards a clear answer in this hotly debated topic as opposed to subtle
Shaara’s novel Killer Angels shows the battle of Gettysburg through a number of unique viewpoints. Shaara offers a more intimate view of the battle than other Civil War novels. A reader can see the battle through the eyes of both Union and Confederate leaders. Through the novel the reader is able to see why each character is fighting and what they hope to gain from the war. Readers can also see the effect that the war has on the different characters. I will examine the war through the eyes of several different characters from Shaara’s novel.
The book “For Cause and Comrades: Why Men Fought In The Civil War” by James M. McPherson examines the motivations of the soldiers who fought in the Civil War. McPherson wanted to understand why the men fought in the Civil War and why they fought so ferociously for such a large amount of time even though there was a huge possibility of death, disease and injurys.To answer the question regarding the reasons why men fought in the Civil War so viciously, and for such a long period of time, James McPherson studied countless amounts of letters, diaries and other mails that were written or sent by the soldiers who fought in the Civil War.
The book begins with an in-depth explanation of what happened in the latter stages of the Civil War. Major battles like Sayler’s Creek, High Bridge and Richmond are described through detailed language. For instance, at High Bridge, “Each man wages his own individual battle with a ferocity only a life-and-death situation can bring. Bullets pierce eyes. Screams and curses fill the air. The grassy plain runs blood red.” (page 61). All of these iconic Civil War battles led up to the Confederate surrender at the Appomattox Courthouse and the inescapable rebuilding of a new nation Abraham Lincoln had to deal with. Next, John Wilkes Booth is introduced and his pro-Confederate motives are made clear. His conspiracy to kill the president is described and his co-conspirators like Lewis Powell, David Herold, and George Atzerodt who also attempted to kill Secretary of State Seward a...
In James McPherson’s novel, What They Fought For, a variety of Civil War soldier documents are examined to show the diverse personal beliefs and motives for being involved in the war. McPherson’s sample, “is biased toward genuine fighting soldiers” (McPherson, 17) meaning he discusses what the ordinary soldier fought for. The Confederacy was often viewed as the favorable side because their life style relied on the war; Confederates surrounded their lives with practices like slavery and agriculture, and these practices were at stake during the war. On the other hand, Northerners fought to keep the country together. Although the Civil War was brutal, McPherson presents his research to show the dedication and patriotism of the soldiers that fought and died for a cause.
Each author agreed that the battles were not the only reason for the fall and death of the Confederacy. While battles were being fought on the battlefields, the home fronts were had their own battles to fight. McPherson discusses what he calls as the “internal conflict” thesis, which blames the uneasiness among the southerners. The government was being blamed. Southerners were opposing conscription, taxes, and habeus corpus. McPherson points out that these could not have been reasons for the loss. The same thing was happening in the North. Therefore this internal conflict with the home front government does not have a plausible role in why the South lost the war. If the North was fighting the same type of opposition at home, then shouldn’t the war have ended in a stalemate? Also, the non-slaveholding whites and the slaves were feeling alienated. Rich slaveholders who wanted to keep slave labor alive were fighting the war. The two alienated groups were fighting a war on the wrong side. The non-slaveholders opposed sec...
This magnificent novel is a definite must read for military men because Bahr effectively combines the interesting history of the Battle of Franklin with the psychological affects of battle. Though the novel inherits some natural flaws, the pros outweigh the cons. This short read becomes very satisfying as the story progresses. Also, Bahr shatters the concept of the Confederates being hicks and cruel slave owners, but that they are actual people too, who experience war just the same as someone form the Union.
I felt like the author could clearly show the true contributing factors of the civil war. As an admirer of history, I could use utilize his book for references later on in my academic studies. The book is 127 pages chronicling the events that led to the civil war. Holt gives novices history readers a wonder firsthand look into the world of young America pre-civil war. His book brought out new ways to approach the study of pre-civil war events. The question whether the Civil War was inevitable or could have been derailed was answered in The Fate of Their Country. Holt places the spotlight on the behaviors Politicians and the many congressional compromises that unintendedly involved the actions of the residents of American. These factors at hand placed the Civil war as inevitable. Most of the politician’s views in The Fate of Their Country were egotistical and shortsighted which left gaps in American’s social future. To consider the subject of why, first we need to understand the contributing causes, America’s great expansion project, the Manifest Destiny the driving factor behind the loss of virtue and political discord.
“All up and down the lines the men blinked at one another, unable to realize that the hour they had waited for so long was actually at hand. There was a truce…” Bruce Catton’s Pulitzer prize winning book A Stillness at Appomattox chronicles the final year of the American Civil War. This book taught me a lot more about the Civil War than I ever learned through the public school system. Bruce Catton brought to life the real day to day life of the soldiers and the generals who led them into battle.
The narrator’s father is being freed from slavery after the civil war, leads a quiet life. On his deathbed, the narrator’s grandfather is bitter and feels as a traitor to the blacks’ common goal. He advises the narrator’s father to undermine the white people and “agree’em to death and destruction (Ellison 21)” The old man deemed meekness to be treachery. The narrator’s father brings into the book element of emotional and moral ambiguity. Despite the old man’s warnings, the narrator believes that genuine obedience can win him respect and praise.
The story opens with the impending hanging of Peyton Farquhar, a “well-to-do planter, of an old and highly-respected Alabama family” (Bierce 400). First published in 1890, Bierce’s introduces Peyton as a proud Southern slaveholder who, naturally, supported the effort for secession. Unlike most narratives published after Reconstruction, however, Bierce neither glorifies nor condemns Peyton’s politics. Instead, Bierce focuses on the war’s impact on a personal level; through this approach, Bierce provides insight into the period by temporarily exculpating the losing side and giving a human voice to one of America’s darker periods. This perspective allows the reader to connect with an unlikely protagonist and root for his survival, even in the modern day, when audiences generally vilify the South due to an innate distaste for slavery. Additionally, Bierce forces his readers to abandon any preconceived notions they may possess regarding the Confederacy for the sake of immersion in the story and, in doing so, causes them to question whether their opinions are the result of biased accounts from the winning side. By using this rhetorical device, he effectively forces the modern reader to
After reading this novel, the reader begins to realize what war actually means. To Lee, it is fighting for a way of life, while for Grant, it is the value of the Union and it’s dwindling future. The reader also realizes the hardships that come from war. For Lee, it would be not being able to see his family grow, while for Grant, it would be his struggle with alcoholism and depression. Also while reading the book, the reader is able to pick up two sides to almost every situation, the sides of Lee and Grant.
Not all soldiers had a definite answer of why they fought, but it was definitely an open-ended question. In order to find a realistic answer to the question, McPherson gathered physical emotions from personal letters and diaries from soldiers during their war experience (1). The two sides, Confederate and Union, both had their reasons for going into war voluntarily and forcefully. He wanted to know what motivated volunteer soldiers to