Initial, Sustaining, and Combat Motivation as They Apply to Civil War Soldiers - Essay Example

Initial motivation, sustaining motivation and combat motivation as they apply to Civil War Soldiers Introduction The civil war was the most cruel and disastrous war ever to occur in American history. For a period of four years, army men from both the Union and Confederate faced the brutality of combat. During this period, millions of common men, majority of them being volunteers, came across indescribable affliction. In the war, they risked their lives, came across diseases and mutilation and were also separated from their homes, despite these challenges, they continued to fight and risk their lives throughout the war (McPherson, 12) According to historian John A. Lynn, the three categories of soldier motivation were initial motivation, sustaining motivation and combat motivation. McPherson’s thesis put forward that the Civil War soldiers stood as ideologically motivated and brave individuals who adhered to their society’s honor and duty. He is convinced that the soldiers were indeed deeply motivated by patriotic ideas to enhance their victory. In his thesis, McPherson began by discussing the sample of combatants’ letters and documentaries on which the book is based. Those who were Overrepresented in his sample were officers, because they had a better opportunity to be educated and were well-to-do. These sources provided great wealth of evidence, which takes us closer on what transpired on a soldier’s mind during the experiences of the Civil war. This consists of personal letters written to family members and friends. Accessibility of these thousands of collection of letters is available at local historical societies, in university and research libraries. This hence provides the rich source of information. Civil war militaries were the most knowledgeable in history during that period, since very high percentage of both Union and Confederate soldiers were literate. Thus, this accounts for the plenty of soldiers mails and diaries that exist from the Civil War. These letters provided more candid and far closer experiences of the soldiers than anything else the soldiers wrote for publication later. Anything else written by the scholars later is subject to critical defect. This is because, the authors can construct their own narratives with a public audience in mind. McPherson has borrowed part of his conceptual framework from John A. Lynn. The first consists of the reason the men solicited, the second alarms the factors that retained them in the army and kept the army lively over time, and the third centers on what prepared them to face thrilling danger their battles. He finds these categories, though separate are interrelated and he displays how they have closer relationships (McPherson, 19) Despite the soldiers’ concern to be with their family, each passing day they had a more religious feeling that the war was a crusade for the good of mankind. They were not ready to permit the enemy to destroy their country. This conviction caused the soldiers, both from the northern and southern to fight against each other in 1861. Fundamental ideologies of the civil war have been focused on, the utmost being honor. Honor in individual courage, honor in readiness to defend and fight for comrades, honor in fighting for liberty, and defending home. McPherson thus explores the Union and Confederate soldiers’ who are ready to commit themselves to duty and honor and the patriotism which both the Northern and Southern soldiers displayed during the first month of the war (McPherson, 38) Union ideology was to fight against the essence and anarchy, while the Confederate was in defense for their homeland. The images of combat that volunteers had before the first fight were adventure, themes of manhood and combat narcosis. Thus in the initial impulse to fight, officers had to appear brave. Religion and primary group cohesion display how civil war soldiers do share universal characteristics with other soldiers, at all times of war. McPherson observed that the striking difference is with the ideology. Officers in the battle had to lead by deeds. In this way, they will acquire respect and trust from volunteer soldiers for whom they had to exercise authority over. Hence by leading with example, volunteer soldiers gained motivation. When a group is once in the battle field, it’s when the commanding officer gains respect or not. Difficulties faced by volunteers, non – professional army are addressed here. While being greatly motivated in the cause, the soldiers exhibited independence of mind and had belief that people are equal to their officers. During the civil war, soldiers had group cohesion and peer pressure that impacted greatly in combat motivation, although this were interrelated with complex mixture of patriotism, ideology, honor, manhood and community (McPherson, 97) Despite coercive structures of army and state being key factors in sustaining existence of both Union and Confederate, sustainment of the army is of utmost challenge to the commander. The unit ought to built consistently and remain so through the period of the conflict. McPherson gives his overview on a few contributors, to maintaining an army in case of the long war. Attributes such as honor, religion, brotherhood, ideology and support at home also helps in sustaining the army. Since initially the soldiers were in such of adventure and rage militaire, when this fades, the soldiers’ spirits was triggered and challenged by victory or loss at war field. Another challenge is uncertainty over support from home, political events, and fear that the great sacrifice will be in vain. Moreover, McPherson on the other hand argues that, religion and ideology had crucial roles in the North and South, hence keeping the armies in an operational state. Strong religious faith was observed by both armies, but greatly by the South. In this case, it reminds us that the actions of war led to fatalism and this brought about concern for one’s soul, hence making the combatants to find refuge in religion. The contrast characterized by the two conflicting groups was that, the strength of religion was more dominant in the south, while ideology was strongest in the north. In their fight, the two groups hoped for freedom, but the north fought for union while McPherson point of view was ultimate abolition. McPherson brings out a war where determination by the soldiers is exhibited, and he argued that the South lost since their soldiers no longer had the will to fight (McPherson, 101) Combat motivation has a sense of adventure and ideals, these fade upon contact with the enemy McPherson tells how soldiers, being weary and exhausted from war, never march forward into hails of bullets for glory. They do out of sense of personal honor and acknowledgement of each individual. Moreover, he writes that a soldier would rather die before showing cowardice. He gives account of soldiers fighting in a sick state, and legitimately excused from a battle to prevent a suggestion that they were shirkers. In the band of brothers topic of the book, personal honor is one of the most valued thing almost like life itself, theme of brotherhood is examined, the focus now being that, once a soldier, is seasoned, there are reason as to why a soldier goes to war and the reason why he performs on the battlefield. Once the battle begins, the fight is thus considered for the preservation of self and comrades. This refers to the fact that individual are responsible for protecting each (McPherson, 29) Majority of Union soldiers did fight for the Union curse, they stopped any form of rebellion and feared for consequences if they allowed slave power to destroy the government. Patriotism attributed by Civil war soldiers was presented in specific. Americans who were present during the civil war reverend their revolutionary forebears. Furthermore, McPherson carried out a study on how the rhetoric and the legacy of revolution, issues of slavery and emancipation, support from home, and the display of vengeance and revenge made soldiers more aggressive and were motivated to continue participating in the battle of the Civil War. On the other hand, soldiers were equally plain spoken; a country without slaves would be completely worth less (McPherson, 40) Confederate prospects for victory appeared brightest during the month following the emancipation declaration, partially because this extent separated the northern people and strengthened a confidence crisis in union armies. In the cause of liberty, there was specific historical context in which civil war soldiers exhibited patriotism. The Civil War generation portrayed a deep respect of their revolutionary forebears. Thus, every schoolboy and schoolgirl knew how they had fought against the odds, hence forging a new republic being conceived in liberty. In this case, Northerners and Southerners both believed themselves custodians of the legacy of 1776. Moreover, McPherson concurs with the fact that soldiers undergo grim experiences of combat, diseases, exhaustion and death. This made many soldiers war-weary and disillusioned despite of the language of duty and honor that persisted in their writings, an indication that the soldiers battled on to the end (McPherson, 78). Conclusion In his thesis, McPherson has illustrated the relevance of the three categories of soldier motivation. He relied on the letters written largely from the front line, and he was able to focus on the initial motivation for the war, sustaining motivation and combat motivation. The use of original letters and personal diaries was the strongest element. This is because those were the writings of the soldiers thus valuable insights are acquired from the minds and experiences of soldiers. The use of letters by the soldiers gives their own story with their own words. It brings out what actually transpired in the battle field in detail, hence bringing out vividly the soldiers’ willingness to fight and despite the challenges, they had focus to fight and defend themselves even if they risked death. Besides the above mentioned, McPherson regards other factors that were at the core of the Civil War soldier attitude. Command authority and Military discipline noticeably sustained combat motivation, particularly the officers’ personal bravery. The group’s cohesion that was “band of brothers” was a very essential factor of solidarity that was forged for the common experience of combat. Further, the motivating power of officers’ manhood ideals and honor tended to increase during the last awful year of the Civil War. In trying to prove his thesis, McPherson also puts forward how change with time was important in motivating the soldiers; they retained their pledge in spite of hopeless letters from their homes discouraging them from fighting, thus making union victory more feasible. Work Cited McPherson, J. M. (1997). For Cause and Comrades: Why Men Fought in the Civil War. New York: Oxford University Press. Read More