Civil War

CAUSES
While it is said the seeds of the civil war were sown the day African slaves first arrived in
Jamestown in the beginning if the 17th century. Over another 200 years, a build up of events
culminated into a war like situation. These causes cover a wide range of aspects, from
economic and social gap between the northern and southern states to a small issue like
Harriet Beecher’s novel “Uncle Stowe’s Cabin”. Following are the various big and small
causes:—

1. ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL DIFFERENCES BETWEEN NORTH &SOUTH The

foremost reason is believed to be the economic and social differences between the northern
and the southern states that created a drift between them which only widened over the years.
The southern economy developed into a one crop economy, depending on cotton and
therefore on slavery. Meanwhile, the northern economy had a wider industrial base than
agriculture. In fact, the northern industries purchased the raw cotton and manufactured it into
finished goods. The South was based on the plantation system while the North was focused
on city life. This change in the North meant that society evolved as people of different
cultures and classes had to work together. On the other hand, the South continued to hold
onto an antiquated social order. This disparity between the two regions set up major
differences in the lifestyle of its inhabitants and in their overall economic position.

2. STATE’S RIGHTS

States’ Rights is in regards to the struggle between the federal government and individual
states over political power. The first formal government in the US after the American
Revolution was formed under the Articles of Confederation with the thirteen states forming a
loose confederation with a very weak federal government. It was felt time and again that the
new constitution ignored the rights of states to continue to act independently after the the
State’s right to decide on acceptance of a federal act was denied. States felt that they were no
longer respected and moved towards secession.
In the Civil War era, this struggle focused heavily on the institution of slavery and whether
the federal government had the right to regulate or even abolish slavery within an individual
state. The sides of this debate were largely drawn between northern and southern states, thus
widened the growing divide within the nation.

3. SLAVERY
Slavery had been a source of conflict between the northern Free states and the southern Slave
states for many years by the middle of the 19th century. Across the late 18th and early 19th
centuries, slavery was prohibited in the majority of the north. However, it was intricately
linked to the economies of the southern states, who were now the main suppliers of
unprocessed cotton to the industries in Britain and Europe. By the start of the Civil War, the
South employed 4 million Africans and their ancestors as slave labourers. Whites in the
South had double the wealth per capita as those in the North. The southern states produced
three-fifths of the wealthiest people in the Union, and they had strong ties to slavery. In
contrast, despite having a working class that was mostly in poverty, the north had larger
investments in business and industry. A battle or significant compromise was required to end
slavery since the political and social atmosphere in the north had become increasingly hostile
to the institution.

4. GROWTH OF ABOLITION MOVEMENT

Northerners' opposition to slavery became more divisive over time. Growing sympathy was
felt for abolitionists as well as opposition to slavery and its practitioners. Many people in the
North began to believe that slavery was morally wrong in addition to being socially unjust.
There were many different perspectives among the abolitionists. Frederick Douglass and
William Lloyd Garrison, among others, fought for the instant emancipation of all slaves.
Theodore Weld and Arthur Tappan were part of a group that favoured emancipating slaves
gradually. Others, like Abraham Lincoln, merely wished to prevent the spread of slavery. In
the 1850s, a lot of things happened that fueled the movement for abolition. "Uncle Tom's
Cabin," a well-known book by Harriet Beecher Stowe, helped many people understand the
reality of slavery. The Supreme Court was confronted with the rights, freedom, and
citizenship of enslaved individuals as a result of the Dred Scott Case. In addition, some
abolitionists chose a less peaceful strategy for battling slavery. In "Bleeding Kansas," John
Brown and his family campaigned for the abolition of slavery. They carried out the
Pottawatomie Massacre, killing five settlers who supported slavery. However, Brown's most
well-known battle would also be his last when the party stormed Harper's Ferry in 1859; he
would be executed for the crime.

5. THE MISSOURI COMPROMISE

One of the major events in the growth of abolition movement was the Missouri
compromise. It was a law that admitted Missouri to the Union as a slave state and Maine
as a free state, while banning slavery from the remaining Louisiana Purchase lands. the
compromise was reached as a result of the argument between the pro- slavery and
anti-slavery factions within the congress, the abolitionist pushed for ban of slavery in the
 new state as was the case in Illinois , Michigan, and Wisconsin, while the pro-slavery
factions worried that if slavery was to be banned in anymore states it will diminish the
slave-holding states. The Missouri compromise stayed in power for only 30years before it
was deemed unconstitutional in the Dred Scott decision.

5.2THE UNDER GROUND RAILROAD SYSTEM

The Underground Railroad system provided aid, support and offered shelter to the slaves
who escaped from the south from states like Kentucky , Virginia and Maryland . It was
active from the late 18th century till the civil war , people who helped the escapees where
known as “conductors”and the safe houses for the fugitive slaves like private houses,
churches and school houses were called “ Stations”. There were instances of the
abolitionists attacking those who came to retrieve the slaves.Known as the ‘ Moses’ of
her people Harriet Tubman was the most famous activist of the system. She had escaped
the plantation in Maryland herself and had come back to rescue others. Another famous “
conductor “ was John Brown.

5.3 JOHN BROWN AND THE RAID ON HARPERS FERRY

On October 16th an abolitionist named John Brown led a group to raid the federal
armoury in Harpers Ferry, Virginia in an attempt to start an armed revolt of enslaved
people. Before this incident in 1856 brown and his sons attacked cabins at Pottawatomie
creek killing five people and started a summer of warfare in the troubled territory. Brown
was tried for treason against Virginia and hanged.
Before his execution, he handed his guard a slip of paper that read, “I, John Brown, am
now quite certain that the crimes of this guilty land will never be purged away but with
blood.” It was a prophetic statement. Although the raid failed, it inflamed sectional
tensions and raised the stakes for the 1860 presidential election. Brown’s raid helped
make any further accommodation between North and South nearly impossible and thus
became an important impetus of the Civil War. Some northern revolutionist made a
martyr of John Brown which brought some southerners a realisation.

6. THE ELECTION OF ABRAHAM LINCOLN

Abraham Lincoln was elected the 16th president of the United States over a deeply divided
Democratic Party, becoming the first Republican to win the presidency. Lincoln received
only 40 percent of the popular vote but handily defeated the three other candidates: Southern
Democrat John C. Breckinridge, Constitutional Union candidate John Bell, and Northern
Democrat Stephen Douglas, a U.S. senator for Illinois.
In the November 1860 election, Lincoln again faced Douglas, who represented the Northern
faction of a heavily divided Democratic Party, as well as Breckinridge and Bell. The
announcement of Lincoln’s victory signalled the secession of the Southern states, which
since the beginning of the year had been publicly threatening secession if the Republicans
gained the White House.

8. SOUTHERN SECESSION

In response to the election of Abraham Lincoln to the presidency of the United States on a
political platform that opposed the expansion of slavery, South Carolina issued its
“Declaration of the Causes of Secession” and seceded from the Union on December 20,
1860. Six more states followed: Mississippi, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, and
Texas. In February 1861, they formed the Confederate States of America, an entity
considered illegal by the United States government. On April 12, 1861, Confederate forces
attacked Fort Sumter, a Union fort in the harbour of Charleston, South Carolina. This began
the first battle of the deadliest conflict in US history, the American Civil War.

The American Civil War was fought between 1861 and 1865 when a total of eleven states
seceded to form the Confederate States of America.

“THE SOUL OF AMERICA” At the heart of the conflict were the interconnected issues
of slavery, territorial and sectional political control. Tensions over these concerns had
existed since the founding of the nation and only grown over the decades. James M.
Mcpherson and Etcheson Nicole have elucidated them as follows.

These differences were rooted in the deep cultural, social and economic divergences between
the North and the South. By the 19th century, the northern states had developed a more
urbane, capitalistic, commercial and industrialised character. In comparison, the Southern
states remained static, agrarian and minimally agrarian. The backbone of the agrarian
economy of south were the slave worked plantations producing raw materials for export,
chiefly raw cotton. As cotton plantations bloomed in the Antebellum South, the divergences
between the two regions became even wider. Cultural differences also perpetuated hostile
perceptions about one another. To the northerner - brought up in the mielie of individualism,
reformist zeal, hunger for progress and intellectualism, the slave south seemed backward and
feudal. Allen Nevins noted that Southern culture was deeply influenced by Protestantism and
traces of feudal class structure were evident here.

Another bone of contention was the differing interpretations of the Constitution by the
Northern and Southern states. One issue was the power sharing arrangement between the
national government and the states. While the AOC had provided for a loose union of
autonomous states under a weak federal government, the greater centralisation of power
under the federal government was despised by many southern states. The latter felt that the
new constitution ignored the rights of states to continue to act independently, gradually
moving towards political secession. Example: Carolina Ordinance.

A long-standing economic, and also constitutional issue was slavery. Following the War
of Independence, many northern states had begun passing legislation to abolish or limit
slavery such that by 1805, slavery was banned totally in the north, making it the “peculiar
institution” of the South alone. For southerners in Antebellum South, slavery was crucial to
their economic fortunes. Export of raw cotton in both domestic and international markets -
the mainstay of the southern economy - was grown by some 4 million enslaved Blacks. The
wealth from cotton enriched the white planters, with the southern states producing three-fifths
of the wealthiest people in the Union.

Another issue was whether the institution of slavery should be discontinued; and
whether the federal government had the right to regulate or even abolish slavery within
an individual state.

Northerners' opposition to slavery took shape in the abolitionist movement. Gradually,

many northerners were convinced of the immoral and unjust nature of slavery. Perspectives
were diverse: the likes of Frederick Douglass and William Lloyd Garrison favoured total and
instant emancipation while others favoured a gradual process. Yet others, like President
Abraham Lincoln, merely wished to prevent the spread of slavery. Many events in the 1850s
spurred the abolition movement ahead, and towards a conflict. Publication of Harriet Beecher
Stowe’s "Uncle Tom's Cabin" in 1852 helped many people understand the reality of slavery
and the Supreme Court was confronted with the rights, freedom, and citizenship of enslaved
individuals with the Dred Scott Case.
As the United States expanded westwards, debates now raged over whether the new
territories would be admitted to the nation as free or slave states. In particular, the
“Missouri Compromise” between the abolitionist north and pro-slavery south - a law that
admitted Missouri as a slave state and Maine as a free state and declared a policy of
prohibiting slavery in the remaining Louisiana Purchase lands north of the 36°30′ parallel -
was found humiliating by the former. Abolitionists felt that a slave owning aristocracy of
Southerners would come to dominate the republic and strip everyone of their liberties.
Increasingly, the South believed the North was blocking any westward expansion of slavery.
They worried that if slavery was to be banned in anymore states it will diminish the
slave-holding states. Moreover, Violent encounters, such as that at Harper's Ferry (1859) also
precipitated war.

Abraham Lincoln was elected the 16th president of the United States. In response, South
Carolina swiftly issued its "Declaration of the Causes of Secession" on December 24, 1860.
They believed that Lincoln was anti-slavery and in favor of Northern interests. In the coming
months, South Carolina, Mississippi, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, and Texas also
succeeded. Alexander Stephens, Vice President of the Confederate States, in his famed
“Cornerstone Speech” clearly pointed out slavery as the reason for the seccession. In
February 1861, they formed the Confederate States of America, an entity considered illegal
by the United States government. In April, the Confederate forces attacked Fort Sumter, a
Union fort in Charleston. The Civil War had finally begun.

After four protracted years of bloody conflict, the Union eventually forced the surrender of
the Confederacy on 9 April 1865, though victory celebrations were marred by Lincoln’s
assassination several days later. While the Civil War did give the country, as Lincoln said, a
'new birth of freedom', it cast a long shadow on the history of the South and its legacy shaped
much of the subsequent development of the American nation.
Historiographical interpretations:

Causes of civil war - hot debate for decades. Many explanations offered.

Immediately after the war:

In the decades following the civil war, authors published their own evaluations of the causes
of the war. Most of these authors participated indirectly or directly in the war and hence their
books represented an attempt to justify their own actions. According to contemporary
northern scholars like Henry Wilson, the war resulted from a conspiracy of slave owners
committed to an immoral intuition and in response the north was defending the union and the
constitution. On the other hand, Southern writers argued that Abraham Lincoln and the
Republican Party deliberately provoked the conflict by their aggressive and unwarranted
actions in 1860 and 1861. They rejected terms like the “Civil War” and used terms like ‘War
Between the States.’ A third group of contemporary scholars were developing the concept of
a ‘needless’ or ‘avoidable conflict’. These three contemporary views on the causes of the
civil war set the stage for the historical debate that continues even now.

Nationalists after 1890s:

In the 1890s, civil war was enough in the past for historians to look at it with greater
objectivity and nuance. This was also a period when politically both North and the South had
come to a conclusion that the war was a blessing in disguise resulting in phenomenal
industrial growth. It is in this context that the Nationalist School emerged. (1) They provided
a more balanced picture of the war, which for them cemented bonds of American nationality.
(2) The results were more important than the causes. Nationalist historians approved the
outcome of the war and felt that the growth of industry was a significant development made
possible by the unification of North and the South.

James F. Rhodes the civil war was an ‘irrepressible conflict’ between the North and the
South, and the South had been clearly in the wrong for it defended an institution that was
morally wrong. But, he, argued that slavery had prospered because of technological progress
and the cotton gin had prevented the peaceful abolition of slavery. Edward Channing argued
that two distinct social organization represented by the agrarian slave economy of the South
and industrial wage system of the North had emerged which could not co-exist under one
government.
Southern Nationalists:

Southern nationalist scholars emphasised nationalism, sectional conflict, and integration of

the South into the union again by virtue of which they were able to benefit from
industrialization and prosperity. They were never critical of the South, but they condemned
secession and the institution of slavery because it had prevented the South from making
progress in economic, cultural, social and political avenues. (1) Woodrow Wilson argued
that that the South remained outside the spirit of Nationalism, primarily because of slavery
and consequently it was isolated from the rest of the country.

Progressive School:

By the early 20th century, the dominance of the nationalist school was challenged by the
rising progressive school. (1) they studied American history as conflict between democracy
and aristocracy and between the have not and the haves in America. Like Charles and Mary
Beard, the civil war was merely a façade for much a more deeply rooted conflict. For them,
the Civil war was essentially a ‘Social War’ ending in the unquestioned establishment of a
new power in the government. Such a social cataclysm, for them, was similar to the puritan
and French revolution and can be termed as ‘The Second American Revolution’. (2)
Progressive historians frowned upon the results of the civil war. According to Matthew
Josephson, the post war period saw the rise of the ‘Robber Barons’ - denoting the rich
capitalist class that exploited the poor masses for their own benefit.

Marxist scholars:

In the backdrop of the economic depression of the 1930s, Marxist scholars also began to
emphasise on the economic sectionalism as the main factor of the CW. They argued that the
civil war was essentially a class conflict between the newly emerging capitalist class of the
north and the feudal planter aristocracy of the South. In this conflict, Louis Hacker believed
that the capitalist class was able to destroy the “slave power” that was hindering it’s
economic and political expansion.

Romantics and Revisionists:

Simultaneously two other schools of historical approach also arose: The first of these schools
waa defined as Romantic Movement. The Movement attempted to portray the Southern way
of life as being far better than the urbanised and industrialised way of life that seemed
characteristic of 20th century America. The Rise of Southern Nationalism in the 1930’s was
best mirrored in the works of native historians like U.B Phillips, Charles W. Ramsdell and
Frank L. Owsley. According to Owsley, the basic cause of the civil war was the egocentric
sectionalism in the north. He argued that the North destroyed the sectional balance of power
by insisting on its own dominance and it failed to respect the dignity and self-respect of the
people in the other sections.

The second dominant school was the ‘Revisionist School.’ (1) Rejected earlier explanations
of the war and focussed on human emotions. (2) They, in general, believed that war was an
evil phenomena. (3) For most Revisionist Historians, the war was an avoidable and
‘repressible conflict.’ Avery Craven and James G. Randall were convinced that (1) the
civil war could be avoided and that the war never approximated the noble claims that were
made by both sides; and (2) the war was caused by the pathological emotions and
irrationalism of the generation of the 1850’s and 1860’s.

However, the revisionist stance has been criticised by the likes of Bernard De Veto for
ignoring the role of slavery and completely basing the civil war on the irresponsible behavior
of the leadership.

More Recent:

Mark W. Summers argued that the Republican Party exploited the fears that a ‘slave power
conspiracy’ to strengthen its appeal in the northern electorates. Kenneth M. Stamp on the
other hand emphasised the rigidity and ineptitude of President James Buchanan which was
responsible for intensifying the sectional conflict. Both Stamp and Avery Cravens saw the
war as a breakdown of the democratic process.

Conclusion:

Though the debate continues today, scholars of all strains agree that (1) slavery had an
important causal role to play in the CW; and (2) that CW was a watershed moment in
American history, it led to the abolition of slavery; forged greater political unity in the nation;
and also paved way for the rapid industrialisation that marked the “Gilded Age” and (3) As
Eric Foner said, causes are complex and thus cannot be isolated in any way from the nature of
the American political system and the social and economic values that became the foundation
of competing ideologies.