a) Abolitionists were everything from abusive to humanitarians, according to Potter. Holt, on the other hand, was a professor so he provided a more lucid interpretation of the Civil War, as a matter of fact, Holt sees the conflict as a breakdown in America's democratic political process.
b) Potter's Historical Interpretations of the Civil War:
Students of history state that he had a lopsided scholarly history, since he offered a dimension of tolerance to the genius bondage philosophies that he doesn't grant to the abolitionist subjugation development. Abolitionists were everything from oppressive to helpful people, as per Potter.
Holt's Historical Interpretation of the Civil War:
Holt, then again, was a teacher so he given an increasingly clear translation of the Civil War, indeed, Holt sees the contention as a breakdown in America's majority rule political procedure. No longer contrasts must be settled inside the field of fight, as per him.
What gave them an advantage is economic prosperity due to rich soil and development of plantations based on slave labor. Many profit was accumulated from crops (tobacco) and also cotton. Later on in the 1800s when Eli Whitney created the cotton gin it created a boom in the slave industry and increased largely by 71%. After that the tool allowed mass production in textile industries.
During this period, the industrial growth of the United States had great effects on them. Cities have become the country's main economic centers, and the manufacturing and finance industry have overtaken agriculture and livestock as the main sources of income in the United States. The industrialization process drastically increased rural migration. At the end of the American Civil War, about a quarter of the American population lived in cities. In 1918, half of the country's population lived in urban areas. In addition, this period is also marked by the large and unfounded immigration of Europeans to the country.
Hes best known for serving as the president of the confederacy from 1861 to 1865
