Weapons of the Civil War: Why Did The North Win?
Battles have been fought since the dawn of time. Weapons have gradually become more technological and sophisticated each and every time. People learn from their mistakes, as did the Indians in the late 1700s, as well as the Confederate troops from the Civil War. The Union was victorious in this war for freedom, and to this day, the north is more the heart of the country’s economy.
Weapons have been around from the Neanderthals of the post-ice age, to the Taliban in Afghanistan. Rocks became knives, sticks became spears, and bayonets became AK-47’s. The technology from the French and Indian War was revolutionized and manufactured by the newly opened weaponry companies. Colt and Winchester had a new end of the market during the times of conflict in the United States.
The First Modern War was a battle of brothers vs. brothers, north vs. south. Weapons proved effective throughout this war, with over 620,000 deaths related to artillery wounds (Bender 24). The north had the advantage. With a plentiful supply of factories and skilled workers, the north was far ahead of the game in the race of manufacturing. New technologies such as submarines, multiple-shot weapons, and exploding bullets aided the northern manufacturing economy.
Handguns played a major role in the Civil War as far as weaponry was concerned. For instance, the most popular sidearm in the Union army was the Colt Army model 1860, which was a .36 caliber. The Army model 1860 was remodeled after the 1848 Dragoon, which was used in the Mexican War. The Colt model 1860 was a .44 caliber six shot weapon weighing two pounds eleven ounces. During the Civil War, more than 146,800 Colt revolvers were purchased. This made up more than 40 percent of all the handguns bought by the government at that time. In 1851, the .36 caliber revolver was produced by Colt. Colt then sold approximately 215,000 navy models, as they were called. The Star Revolver was a .44 caliber, six shot, double action weapon, which weighed approximately three pounds. 25,000 revolvers were then sold to the government for twelve dollars each. The Figure Eight Revolver was built especially for Civil War use. More than 12,000 of these revolvers were sold to the United States Government in the early war from Great Britain. The most popular pistol was the Le Mat Revo...
... middle of paper ...
...dified form (the mini-gun)” (Stewart 67).
Throughout the American Civil War, the north proved victorious and superior to the south. The Union had the power and wealth, and, “he who has the money has the power” proved so as the north defeated the south and embraced the trophy of power. There were many key factors in this accomplishment, the factories, the money, the resources, the commanders, the manpower, the skill and determination, but most importantly, the weapons.
Works Cited
Bender, David L. The Civil War: The North.
California: Gayle Books, 2001
Davis, William D. The Blue and the Grey.
Illinois: Publishers International LTD, 1996.
Olmstead, Edwin. The Big Guns: Civil War Siege.
Connecticut: Seacoast and Naval Cannon, 1997.
Pikes, Joe Brown. The Civil War Society’s “Civil War Dictionary”.
Seattle: Civil War Society, 1999
Ripley, Warren. Artillery and Ammunition of the Civil War.
New York: McCormick Press Inc, 1984.
Stewart, Gail B. Weapons of War.
New York: Lucent Books, 2000.
"Weapons of the Civil War" December 7, 2001,. Online. Internet. February 14, 2002.
http://www.instaweb.com/p/pmoade/weapons.htm
The North and South benefited in many different ways, and both sides would use dissimilar approaches. The Southerners were fighting for a way of life they believed in. Comparing the two, the North had an extensive amount of people which made it easier to establish armies. In the beginning, the Union army only consisted of 16,000 soldiers or less. Southerners deserted the army because they didn’t have the things they needed for fig...
One weapon used in the Civil War is a Sharps Carbine. It was developed primarily for Calvary, because of the shorter barrel. They were much easier to handle on horse back than their longer brother the Breech-Loader. Sharps were preferred because they could be loaded on a moving horse, something virtually impossible with a Muzzle-Loader. Also, Breech-Loaders carbine which fired moisture proof metallic cartridges, where more reliable than rifles that fired paper cartridges. As I said be fore it is easier to load a Sharps than a Muzzle-Loader. A Muzzle-Loader took 9 long hard steps just to fire one shot. Even the most skilled solder could only get three rounds off in a minute on the old Civil War Muzzle-Loader. And No wonder. After each shot you have to (1) steady the gun on the ground take out a new cartridge out of a belt pouch. (2) Tear open a piece of paper with your teeth. (3) Empty the powder in the barrel and insert a bullet in to the muzzle. (4) Draw the long “rummer” out of its carrying groove under the barrel. (5) ram the bullet all the way down. (6) Return the rod back to its groove. (7) Lift the weapon half-cocked the hammer. (8) Fully cock the hammer, aim, and finally,(9) fire.
The North entered the Civil War with many distinct assets that rendered them more competent than the Southern states. Those assets consisted of having more men, more financial stability, economic strength, and far reaching transportation systems. According to the book: Why the North Won the Civil War by Donald, David Herbert, and Richard Nelson the primary cause to the North’s success was given by, “the vast superiority of the North in men and materials, in instruments of production, in communication facilities, in business organization and skill – and assuming for the sake of the argument no more than rough quality in statecraft and generalship – the final outcome seems all but inevitable.” In many ways the north, during the Civil, was more economically dominant than the South
The Differences between the North and South on the Eve of the Civil War On the eve of the Civil war, both the North and the South had differences, both minor and large. The main difference was Slavery where both sides had a completely dissimilar view point on how the treat black people an example of this is the Missouri compromise in 1820. There were also differences in the rate of industrialisation and Education. The largest difference between the North and the South was the number of free black people. The North had hardly any slaves; however the South had around 4 million slaves.
I agree with the idea that the North had won the Civil War before it began to the extent of Lincoln’s conservative political stands. Trying to receive the favor of the South while winning in the North would require Lincoln to take neutral stands in heated political issues like slavery. It wasn’t really wan by the North until he broke away from these stands to enact the Emancipation Proclamation and turn the tides of war in favor of the North. “This Lincoln always publicly condemned the abolitionists who fought slavery by extra constitutional means – and condemned also the mobs who deprived them of their right of free speech and free press.” (Holfstadter, Lincoln and the Self-Made Myth) Other than that, the North had the upper hand in nearly all aspects that really mattered in times of war. With this information it is clear that without Lincoln’s conservative political stands a “Quick War” would have been much more realistic. Either way, the North had won the Civil War before it began. While the North thought about attacking and invading, the South thought about defending and causing attrition.
The Union Army was able to match the intensity of the Confederacy, with the similar practice of dedication until death and patriotism, but for different reasons. The Union soldiers’s lifestyles and families did not surround the war to the extent of the Confederates; yet, their heritage and prosperity relied heavily on it. Union soldiers had to save what their ancestors fought for, democracy. “Our (Union soldiers) Fathers made this country, we, their children are to save it” (McPherson, 29). These soldiers understood that a depleted group of countries rather than one unified one could not flourish; “it is essential that but one Government shall exercise authority from the Gulf of Mexico to Canada, and from the Atlantic to the Pacific” (Ledger, 1861).
... In the end, I believe the war’s end results came down to the cultures of each side’s economy and the cultures of their military style. Obviously, the North had more of the advantage in resources than the South, but the Confederates put up a good fight to conserve their way of life. The Civil War demonstrates how different cultures, economies, and their political strategies can affect how well we do in battle. Things can be accomplished when an army is well equipped and prepared with the right resources.
Streich, Michael. "Northern Advantages in the Civil War." Suite. Strayer University, n.d. Web. 24 Mar. 2014.
"If 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 1865. Prior, and during the Civil war, the North's economy was always stronger than the South's, boasting of resources that the Confederacy had no means of attaining. Compared to the South, The North had more factories available for production of war supplies and larger amounts of land for growing crops. Its population was several times of the South's, which was a potential source for military enlistees. Although the South had better naval leadership and commanders, such as Robert E. Lee and "Stonewall" Jackson, they lacked the number of factories and industries to produce needed war materials. Therefore, the North won the American Civil War due to the strength of their industrialized economy, rather than their commanders and strategies.
The North was just simply better at maintaining the two most important elements to win a war: men and weapons. They did not have better tactics or leadership, they just had more men. Therefore, the North won the American Civil War due to their possession of greater manpower and resources although the South maintained more stable and efficient military leaders and strategies.
In the early American colonies, the south and the north developed into two distinctly different colonies. Although their origins were both from Europe, their customs and living habits became so different that it would play a major role in America’s history. There are many reasons why these differences occurred but only a few major reasons stand out. Religion, greed and the composition of the colonies are some of the major reasons why the north and south grew to be so different in the late 1600’s. Different religions in specific colonies varied, but the people from the New England region were generally more devoted to their religious beliefs, whereas people from the south felt religion wasn’t as important. Children from the north are taught from The Bible as soon as possible and this instills high moral values into the people. In the south only the wealthiest families could afford education, causing the common population to be ignorant and un-educated. The people of New England were willing to work together and help each other for the sake of the community because they felt that they were working under God’s will. (Doc. A) The south on the other hand worked to better themselves through the Headright System, which ended up pitting the people against each other instead of working with each other. The people of Massachusetts agreed: "We whose names are underwritten, being by God’s providence engaged together to make a plantation…" (Doc. D) This shows that reli...
...iled to gain the recognition of the European nations, North's superior resources made the outcome inevitable, and moral of the South towards the end of the war. The Civil War was a trying time for both the North and the South alike, but the question of its outcome was obvious from the start. The North was guaranteed a decisive victory over the ill-equipped South. Northerners, prepared to endure the deficit of war, were startled to find that they were experiencing an enormous industrial boom even after the first year of war. To the South, however, the war was a draining and debilitating leech, sucking the land dry of any appearance of economical formidability. The debate continues whether or not the South could have won the Civil war. It’s always going to be a bunch of “what ifs?”
...f wearing down the north's patience. The south's idea of northerns as "city slickers" who did not know how to ride or shoot was wrong. Many of the men who formed the Union forces came from rural backgrounds and were just as familiar with riding and shooting as their southern enemies. Finally, the south's confidence in its ability to fund through sales of export crops such as cotton did not take into consideration the northern blockade. France and Britain were not willing to become involved in a military conflict for the sake of something they had already stockpiled. The help the south had received from France and Britain turned out to be a lot less than they expected. In conclusion, while all the south's reasons for confidence were based on reality, they were too hopeful. The south's commitment to a cause was probably what caused their blindness to reality.
The Civil War that took place in the United States from 1861 to 1865 could have easily swung either way at several points during the conflict. There is however several reasons that the North would emerge victorious from this bloody war that pit brother against brother. Some of the main contributing factors are superior industrial capabilities, more efficient logistical support, greater naval power, and a largely lopsided population in favor of the Union. Also one of the advantages the Union had was that of an experienced government, an advantage that very well might have been one of the greatest contributing factors to their success. There are many reasons factors that lead to the North's victory, and each of these elements in and amongst themselves was extremely vital to the effectiveness of the Northern military forces. Had any one of these factors not been in place the outcome of the war could have been significantly different, and the United States as we know it today could be quite a different place to live.
These kinds of weapons were impractical for military use, but attracted many people to the arms race for weapons that could sweep the battlefield. “They had limitations in practice, among them slow re...