Question 1
Evaluate the interpretations in both of the two passages and explain which you think is more convincing as an explanation of the reasons why the South (Confederacy) lost the American
Civil War.
Passage A
The South compounded its difficulties by weakness in its handling of finance, diplomacy, and internal politics, all of which had severe military consequences. First, it is a curious historical fact that most civil wars are lost by one side running out of money, and the American Civil War was an outstanding case in point. The South had no local gold or silver supplies and no bullion reserves, and was entirely dependent on its own paper money. The North had the enormous advantage of a large, well‑trained navy and, almost from the start, was able to impose a blockade, often ineffective at first but progressively tighter as the war proceeded. As a result, import and export taxes, the way of raising money traditionally preferred by the South, raised little. Import duties brought in only about $1 million in metal coins during the entire war, and the Union navy was so vigilant in running down cotton‑export ships that only about $6,000 in metal coins was collected from cotton exports. With its limited capacity to produce armaments, the South was forced to shop abroad. France, always happy to supply arms to dodgy regimes, duly obliged but insisted on being paid in metal coins, as did independent gun‑runners. As his Treasury Secretary, Davis appointed C.G. Memminger, a local South Carolina politician. This was an extraordinary choice: Memminger had virtually no experience of finance and, more important, lacked the creative skill to overcome the almost impossible difficulty of raising hard cash. In 1864 Davis appointed a real economic wizard, but by then it was too late: the South’s finances were beyond repair. Inflation became runaway, the gold dollar being quoted at 40 paper ones in December 1864 and 100 shortly thereafter. Inflation, if nothing else, doomed the South.
Adapted from P. Johnson, A History of the American People, published in 1997.
Passage B
A major explanation for Confederate defeat holds that the Confederacy could have won if the Southern people had possessed the will to make the sacrifices necessary for victory. The main argument is that the Confederacy, given its short existence, did not generate a strong sense of nationalism and Southerners, therefore, did not have as firm a conviction as Northerners of fighting for a country. Southerners, loyal Americans before they became Confederates, had much in common with Northerners. Thus, when the going got tough, it is claimed, Southerners found it tough to keep going. If the nationalist spirit had been strong enough, the Confederacy would have continued a savage guerilla struggle against Union forces after April 1865.
By 1862, as a result of the Northern blockade, there was a shortage of almost everything in the Southern states. The South’s inability to maintain its transport system worsened the economic situation. Most families were also victimised by impressment or suffered from shortage of labour caused by volunteering or conscription. Severe hardship on the home front led to a relentless growth of defeatism. However, there is a significant difference between loss and lack of will. A people whose armies are beaten, railways wrecked, factories and cities burned, countryside occupied and crops laid waste, quite naturally lose their will to continue fighting because they have lost the means to do so. That is what happened to the Confederacy. It was Union military success which created war weariness and destroyed morale. By 1865 the Confederacy had lost its will for sacrifice. But primarily it was military defeat which caused loss of will, not lack of will which caused military defeat.
Adapted from A. Farmer, The American Civil War 1861–1865, published in 1996.
[30]
Answer
