"The collapse of the Confederacy, then, came not from deficient economic resources, insufficient manpower, defective strategy, or weak political leadership. All of these were handicaps; but none was fatal. The real weakness of the Confederacy was that the Southern people insisted upon retaining their democratic libertioes in wartime. If they were fighting for freedom, they asked, why should they start fighting for it? As soldiers, as critics of their government, and as voters they stuck to their democratic, individualistic rights. In the administration of the Southern army, in the management of Southern civilian affairs, and in the conduct of Southern political life, there is, then, extensive evidence that we should write on the tombstone of the Confederacy: "Died of Democracy."
David Donald, 'Died of Democracy', 'Why the North Won The Civil War', Collier Books, 1960
2007-05-09 13:52:26
·
answer #1
·
answered by WMD 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Solid Leadership at the Army Command Level and a very capable junior officers (particularly in the Army of Northern Virginia) trained at the Virginia Military Institute.
Terrain....much of the war was fought in the South and often the Southern troops had the greater advantage of knowing the terrain or of having the support of the local populace. The success of Jackson's flank attack at Chancellorsville is an example of this advantage.
Horsemanship...initially the Southerners, who were on average living in more rural settings, were the better horseman up until 1863 when the Union Cavalry finally found their mojo.
2007-05-09 21:24:45
·
answer #2
·
answered by KERMIT M 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
The Confederate had several major advantages one is that they had better Generals and the second advantage was that they knew their land better so when the Union was invading the South the South had a better chance to repel that attack
2007-05-09 21:42:06
·
answer #3
·
answered by Y G 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
What John said, plus most of the war was fought on Southern soil---the Confederates knew the terrain!
2007-05-09 20:19:46
·
answer #4
·
answered by chedderhead 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Also better military designers. The South made a bunch of iron clads that were giving the North a very hard time. The South also made the first successful submarine attack on a ship. (Interestingly enough, the US Navy Submarine Museum in Connecticut does not count that as the first successful American sub!)
Lastly, better Generals. Robert E. Lee graduated at the top of his class at West Point and was the best general of the time. Lincoln had such a wealth of "bad" generals he fired about 10 of them due to their reluctance to actually fight.
2007-05-09 21:52:18
·
answer #5
·
answered by forgivebutdonotforget911 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
While the north had more people and better transportation, the south did have a strong military tradition.
I know it sorta sucks for the south, but theres your answer
2007-05-09 20:27:09
·
answer #6
·
answered by katlover251 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Better generals
Better horsemen
They didn't have to win, just keep from losing (a draw was okay for them)
They were fighting for their homes
2007-05-09 20:09:27
·
answer #7
·
answered by John B 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Better generals, better maps (although still not great), better knowledge of the terrain.
2007-05-09 21:00:04
·
answer #8
·
answered by Megan Leggett 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
In what respect? I'd love to answer your question, but it's just too broad. Can you be a bit more specific, Please.?
2007-05-09 20:10:24
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋