In the decades preceding the American Civil War, geography played a crucial role in dividing the Nation. As a result of economic competition, geography, and climate, Northern and Southern states became geographically and climatically distinct. Historically, national boundaries were determined primarily by physical and human geography. One side is more likely to win when fighting from advantageous terrains, such as higher ground. Throughout the conflict, Lincoln and his army used this information to their advantage. The vastness of the southern coast, the Appalachian Mountains, and the Mississippi River were considered. They could sever the Confederate army’s supply lines if they controlled the mountain and the river. During 1790-1861, the Nation experienced significant locational, political and economic divisions that are analyzed in this paper.
The Civil War was effective as a national schism due to the vast geographic divide between the North and the South. Northern armies had to invade Southern territory to defeat the Confederacy since the Union did not possess any southern territory1. The Appalachian Mountains and the Mississippi River’s strategic location were significant in slicing up and eventually seizing control of former Confederate territory. The North adopted a strategy that relied heavily on isolating and destroying Southern military units and supply lines to win the war2. When a country has been torn apart by war for a long time, especially if it is a sizable country, geography is likely to have played a significant role in the overall strategy.
The political division of the country was significantly influenced by its geographical makeup. In formulating their strategy for the war, Lincoln and his military strategists took into account geographical factors3. A combination of the Union blockade and other geographical factors severed the supply lines leading to the South. After receiving this education, Abraham Lincoln devised a strategy for ending slavery in the southern states after he was elected president4. In recent times, the institution of slavery has been a significant factor in the development of the civil war.
Location in the North and the South gave each area a distinct economic advantage. Recognizing the significance of the economy is crucial to understanding geography’s role. The southern specialized in mass-producing goods like cotton and tobacco after the country split in two due to the region’s mild winters and nutrient-rich soil5. The locals did not see a need for an active manufacturing sector to develop because of the weather. In the past, cities in the American South were essential distribution points for agricultural goods shipped to European cities via ocean and river routes6. Despite the North’s rich ore deposits of iron and copper, the region’s climate makes it inappropriate for plantation agriculture. The area’s economy benefited from these discoveries in the long run.
Finally, geographical factors already well before the Civil War aggravated countries’ relations. It is economically significant because of the hospitable climate and geography of the Southern and Northern States. Its political significance stems from its geographical location and the efforts of its various leaders to centralize and implement policy. Since the country split along regional lines, the Appalachians and other southern landscapes helped the North win.
Bibliography
Ian Beamish et al., “The Cotton Revolution,” Andrew Wegman, ed., in The American Yawp, eds. Joseph Locke and Ben Wright (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2018)
Irwin, Douglas. “U.S. Trade Policy in Historical Perspective” (2019): 1–42.
Lockard, Joe. “Slavery, Market Censorship and US Antebellum Schoolbook Publishing.” History of Education 51, no. 2 (2022): 207–223.
Smith, Adam I. P. “The Emergence of Conservatism as a Political Concept in the United States before the Civil War.” Journal of the Early Republic 66, no. 3 (2020): 231–255.
Smith, Mark Power. “The Young America Movement, the Koszta Affair of 1853, and the Construction of Nationalism before the Civil War.” Journal of the Early Republic 41, no. 1 (2021): 87–114.
Thomas Balcerski et al., “The Civil War,” Angela Esco Elder and David Thomson, eds., in The American Yawp, eds. Joseph Locke and Ben Wright (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2018).
Footnotes
- Thomas Balcerski et al., “The Civil War,” Angela Esco Elder and David Thomson, eds., in The American Yawp, eds. Joseph Locke and Ben Wright
- Smith, Adam I. P. “The Emergence of Conservatism as a Political Concept in the United States before the Civil War.” Journal of the Early Republic 66, no. 3 (2020): 231–255. 247
- Irwin, Douglas. “U.S. Trade Policy in Historical Perspective” (2019): 1–42. 32
- Lockard, Joe. “Slavery, Market Censorship and US Antebellum Schoolbook Publishing.” History of Education 51, no. 2 (2022): 207–223. 211
- Ian Beamish et al., “The Cotton Revolution,” Andrew Wegman, ed., in The American Yawp, eds. Joseph Locke and Ben Wright
- Smith, Mark Power. “The Young America Movement, the Koszta Affair of 1853, and the Construction of Nationalism before the Civil War.” Journal of the Early Republic 41, no. 1 (2021): 87–114. 93