Results
It is clearly shown in the analysis of the Civil War Generals that the South had greater military excellence. A few questions remain:
-Why did the Union win the war, even though the Confederates possessed better military leaders?
-If a few factors had been reversed, would the Confederates have won?
-How would the war have been changed if the Confederate Generals were defending the North instead of the South?
-Why did the Union win the war, even though the Confederates possessed better military leaders?
-If a few factors had been reversed, would the Confederates have won?
-How would the war have been changed if the Confederate Generals were defending the North instead of the South?
Firstly, the Union's victory was not brought about by superior military tactics. While the North did boast some great leaders, the South had the majority of the best generals. It was, in fact, the abundant resources that aided the North during the Civil War.
Southern forces were very aware of their poor resources. J.E.B. Stuart commented on this, saying, "I realize that if we oppose force to force we cannot win, for their resources are greater than ours. We must make up in quality what we lack in numbers. We must substitute esprit for numbers. Therefore, I strive to inculcate in my men the spirit of the chase". Most of the Confederate Generals lived up to these words, evening the playing field. If the South had be graced with a few more resources or even the support of European nations, the Confederacy almost certainly would have prevailed.
If the Confederate Generals had all of the resources of the North, there is no question that they would have crushed the Union. The combination of soldiers, natural resources, and military leaders would be an unstoppable force that would skew the battles toward Confederate victory.