Women In The Industrial Revolution Essays -- Womens Studies

Women's Work in the Industrial Revolution The industrial revolution swept through Europe and North America during the 19th century, affecting the class structure, economy, government, and even the religious practices of everyone who lived in or did commerce with these new "industrialized nations." It made the modern age possible, but it was not without its "growing pains." The position of women before the industrial revolution was often equivalent to chattel, and then as now, they were expected to take naturally to housework and child rearing. The history of working women in the Industrial Revolution is rife with accounts of abuse and tragedy, but overall it improved their position in capitalist societies. Below, I will explain the different positions women held in society, the home, and the workplace during the Industrial Revolution in Europe and America, and compare them to history and to contemporary women. Women in Victorian Society It is important to remember that the Industrial Revolution came to a close with the end of the Victorian era. The technology of the industrial revolution (and the economy of colonialism) made a large amount of surplus consumer materials available. Cheap food and clothing improved the average quality of life of the working poor, allowing them to have more children who lived longer, creating a larger labor pool. Larger families required mothers to work more hours in the home and out of it. This was reinforced in England and the US by the development of Victorian morality, which placed the ideal woman at the head of an ideal household, leading the moral life of the nation. At the beginning of the industrial revolution, women suffered from decreasing job opportunities, as "cotta... ...f indentured servitude that was one of the main motivations behind the labor movement. Conclusion Women's lives changed drastically in the Industrial Revolution, whether they stayed home and benefited from new advances in consumer-goods technology, or if they worked factory jobs. The opportunities that industrialization offered women carried the same risks to health and happiness as those offered to working men, but they also brought about a sea change in social acceptance of women's self-sufficiency and weakened the concept of woman as home- and baby-maker. Although tragedies like the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire and the exploitative practices of the Industrial Revolution affected women in negative ways that even now, the current economy has not fully eradicated, it was the first in a series of huge steps that gave gender equality considerable momentum.

Microsoft As A Monopoly :: Economics

Since the early 1990’s, the United States government and the Microsoft Corporation have ensued upon a battle in the United States courts. The main issue at hand is ultimately money, but one more importantly, the supposed "Microsoft Monopoly." The federal government maintains that Microsoft's monopolistic practices are detrimental to United States citizens, creating higher prices and potentially downgrading software quality, and should therefore be stopped. Microsoft and its supporter’s claim that they are not breaking any laws and they are just doing what they do; making money and providing a service. The only thing Microsoft is guilty of is taking advantage of free enterprise. There have been many arguments and issues that have been raised with the controversy over Microsoft and the U.S. Department of Justice’s claim against Microsoft of monopolistic practices in bundling its internet browser â€Å"Internet Explorer† into its popular Windows computer ope rating system. By doing this, Microsoft would effectively crush its competitors and acquire a monopoly over the software that people use to access the Internet. Sherman Anti-trust Act was passed in 1890. The Sherman Act says â€Å"Every contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is declared to be illegal. The Sherman Act also provided for "Every person who shall monopolize, or attempt to monopolize, or combine or conspire with any other person or persons, to monopolize any part of the trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, shall be deemed guilty of a felony. The Sherman Act put the responsibility in the hands of the government to investigate and prosecute those suspected to be guilty of this crime. In 1914, the Clayton Act was passed in conjunction with the Sherman Anti-trust Act to assist with anti-trust cases. The Clayton Act prohibited price discrimination between different purchasers if such discrimination substantially lessens competition or tends to create a monopoly ion any line of commerce. The Act also prohibits sales on the condition that the buyer or leaser not deal with the competitors of the seller or lesser â€Å"exclusive dealings†, or that the buyer also purchases another different product, but only when these acts substantially lessen competition. Mergers and acquisitions where the effect may substantially lessen competition are prohibited also by the act. The last prohibition of the act is that no person can be the director of two or more competing corporations.

Armenian Genocide Essay -- essays research papers

  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚     Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Can you imagine yourself living during the time that WWI was going on? I’m pretty sure you’d be terrified to even walk out of your house. Like it wasn’t bad enough that the whole world was at each other’s throat, but to know that your country may be at the hands of another leader. A leader who may have different perspectives on every day life, with the benefit of doubt that it may be extremely foreign to you, is pretty scary. I’m pretty sure that it would make you or anyone else feel extremely unsafe and uncomfortable. But imagine being unaware of the underlying plan to â€Å"cleanse† your ethnic group. The Armenian people faced this situation during the time of WWI. Life between the Turks (Armenia’s rival) and the Armenians was very complex. Not all Armenians hated the Turks, and not all Turks hated the Armenians. Consequently, the Armenian people were not aware of any forms of annihilation that were being plotted at the time.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚     Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  What exactly is the definition of a Genocide According to the World Book Dictionary, genocide means: The systematic extermination or destruction of a political, racial, or cultural group1. When the word genocide is brought up, many people usually think of the Holocaust. Although the Holocaust was a massive tragedy, many don’t recall the Armenian Genocide. The Armenian Genocide was just as terrifying as the Holocaust, and we should commemorate this tragedy. The people who are held responsible for this tragedy are a young group of Turks. Their plan was to exterminate all of the Armenian population. The Turks desired a Turkish State that extended to Central Asia, and thus to carry through the unity of the Turkish speaking people. This creation of such a state would create what they call â€Å"Pan-Turkism†2.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The Armenians had their first taste of aggression by the Turks on April 24, 19153. Three hundred Armenian leaders, writers, thinkers, and professionals in Constantinople were imprisoned in many parts of Turkey without any advanced warning. Shortly after they were imprisoned, they were brutally tortured and beaten by the Turkish authorities. Other methods of brutality included pulling out fingernails, teeth, and beards, branding on the chest with hot horseshoes and raising the feet abo... ...everal facts that backed up my thesis. My sixth grade teacher once told me that a genocide seeks no difference between men and women, between children and adults. That it understands no righteousness and tolerates no principle which invests life with meaning and individuals with rights. The Turks believed it was okay to kill a Armenian and to get away with it. They believed that it was okay to starve them and send them on â€Å"death marches†. They believed it was okay to rape the women, and it was okay to kill the men as well as the children. The Armenians were not humans in their eyes, they were considered animals, or even objects. Mechanically operated robots of some sort, who were expected to walk practically-forever, in the middle of a deserted desert with nothing living within hundreds of miles away. No one to witness the killings. No one to hear their cries for help. No one to come and rescue them. And the Turks are blameworthy. Between 1915-1923, more than one million Armenian lives were taken. It is described as the first genocide in the twentieth century. The people of Armenia suffered prolong despair, devastation, torture, and brutality that will remain in history forever.

Scenario Thinking

Scenario thinking is a tool of finding out what will happen in the coming future (Mahaffie, J. 2008). It is a new way of planning in which the organization thinks through all the future possibilities and the decisions are made based on the possibilities that benefit the most (Fahey, L & Robert M. Randall, 1997). This strategic planning tool removes uncertainty and allows organizations to realize the risks and dangers that might occur if a certain project is carried out. Now that we have a clear idea of what Scenario thinking is, we can move on and elaborate how our consulting team applies this in our sporting and concert events at major locations. Planning is very important in each and every activity especially in event management. Therefore, before anything else, there is a planning phase. This phase is very important for obvious reasons and because of this it is given the utmost importance. In this phase each and every aspect of the event is taken into consideration. Each element of the event is planned out in detail. This helps us have an insight in the future by predicting the event before it actually takes place and hence we are in a better position to develop contingency plans for each and every event. The planning is also done on the basis of previous events managed by our consulting team. We learn from experience and since we have a lot of that, we believe that this becomes our strength. As the contingency plans for every possible occurrence are developed before hand, there is a very low chance of any kind of risk involved. By asking ‘what if’ questions, we develop causal relationships between various factors (Scearce, D. Katherine Fulton, 2004). For example in this planning phase, we ask ourselves what if the regulations set by the authorities change in a way which negatively affects our event. The next step would be answering this questions and coming up with a contingency plan. Hence a causal relationship has been developed between the cause (changes in governmental regulations) and our action. By the end of the planning phase, we have a clear idea of how to go about things and hence there is no room for any kind of uncertainties. All the findings that are established in the planning phase are documented and will be available at all times in the next phase with everyone who is involved in the event in any way. Next is the implementing phase. This again is very important and everything in this phase is developed on the basis of what was established in the previous phase. This phase is important because this is when the planning becomes reality. This is the reason why the implementation of planned event is done by people who specialize in their respective fields. The experience and the skills with these specialists remove any chance for errors and hence the risk and failure rate is very low. All our events are carried out on locations that are most popular and enjoyed by the audience. These are therefore the major locations and hence we have another reason to ensure to that all our events are at par with the level that is expected by the audience. Conclusion In conclusion, we would once again like to emphasize that the step by step scenario thinking procedure adopted by our consulting team ensures that our events stand out from the rest. The failure rate is very low therefore the bidders and the investors do not have to worry about the risks that are normally involved in any kind of event. References Fahey, L & Robert M. Randall. (1997) Learning from the Future: Competitive Foresight Scenarios. John Wiley and Sons Scearce, D. & Katherine Fulton. (2004, July) What if? Retrieved January 2, 2009, from http://www. gbn. com/ArticleDisplayServlet. srv? aid=32655 Mahaffie, J. (2008, Feb 12) Why I love introducing scenario thinking to people? Retrieved January 2, 2009, from http://foresightculture. com/2008/02/12/why-i-love-introducing-scenario-thinking-to-people

Government Health Campaign: The Change4Life campaign

The Change4Life campaign aims to help families to eat healthier and educate them on the importance of exercise. This is because it hopes to tackle the rising issues of obesity in households. Change4Life responds to an urgent need to tackle the disturbing rise in obesity. It was launched in England in 2009. The original purpose for the campaign was a societal movement, which meant that it was a childhood obesity prevention strategy. The campaign is reinforced by the Department of Health and intends to target the growing problem of obesity in a very hands-on, positive way, by implanting healthy eating and exercise habits into people from a young age. The campaign had targeted parents of children between the ages of 5-11. Particularly those from boroughs of the population where parental attitudes, beliefs and behaviours showed that their children were more likely to gain excess weight. Change4Life mission today is to encourage individuals to eat well, move more and live longer. http://www.physicalactivityandnutritionwales.org.uk/Documents/740/DH_summaryof_change4lifeoneyearon.pdf (accessed on 05/01/2016) https://www.noo.org.uk/core/eval_reports (accessed on 05/01/2016)Government Regulation on Media in America It is a government programme to tackle children obesity by helping families recognise the effect of unhealthy or excessive eating can have on a child’s life. This is important because children that are obese would cost the NHS later on because they would need to be provided with beds and treatment. Britain is a welfare state and therefore, the government has to provide medical care to the general public through taxation. The Change4Life is a programme for the government to reduce the rising issues on obesity for children. The health campaign programme is helpful in containing the spread of obesity and educating families with children to eat healthier and exercise regularly. http://www.weightlossresources.co.uk/healthy_eating/healthy-lifestyle/change-for-life.htm (accessed on 05/01/2016) http://www.nhs.uk/Change4Life/Pages/what-is-change-for-life.aspx (accessed on 05/01/2016) http://campaigns.dh.gov.uk/category/change-4-life/ (accessed on 05/01/2016) Change4Life is a social market that hopes to imprint their ideas of achieving a healthy active lifestyle and why it is important to the general public. This is because obesity has a severe impact health of individuals; increasing the risk of type-2 diabetes, some cancers, and heart and liver disease. This is problematic for the government and the general public because the money for treatment comes from taxation. Tackling the increase of obesity is vital. Research has shown that 10% of all cancer deaths among non-smokers are connected to obesity. The danger of Coronary Artery Disease rises 3.6 times for obese people and the risk of developing type 2 diabetes is about 20 times larger for people who have a BMI over 35 when compared to individuals with a BMI between 18 and 25. These illnesses can eventually decrease life expectancy. http://www.nhs.uk/change4life/supporter-resources/downloads/change4life_marketing%20strategy_april09.pdf (accessed on 05/01/2016) The Main Purpose of Change4Life Change4Life focuses on the lifestyle elements that can be directly related to a healthy active lifestyle. The campaign focuses on the cause of the childhood obesity and therefore, aims to tackle the rising issues by targeting households with children. This is because if families are familiar with the basics of nutrition then they are armed with the knowledge to make positive decisions with regards to their diet. For example; a family who eats processed food like microwavable lasagnes frequently, might change eating habits and actually cook their lasagnes. A few simple changes, such as exchanging ready meals for healthy, homemade dinners, or snacking on fruit as an alternative of chocolate; can have a massive effect on health and weight problems. Change4Life advertise on television, newspapers and schools to attract households with families in order to fulfil their aim of childhood obesity. Leaflets are sent to households in order for them to understand what food can do to a person’s development. This is vital because understanding of the importance that specific foods and ingredients have for general health and welfare can have a great impact on overall health. http://www.theguardian.com/society/joepublic/2008/dec/31/change4life-campaign-obesity (accessed on 05/01/2016) https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-change4life-campaign-encourages-families-to-make-sugar-swaps (accessed on 02/02/2016) http://www.activelifeltd.co.uk/change-4-life/ (accessed on 02/02/2016) Another purpose for the government establishing Change4Life health campaign was that the increase in obesity numbers among adults and children which was costing the NHS billions every year. The Government Office for Science’s Foresight Report implied that â€Å"if we don’t take action now, our society will be consumed by a major public health problem matched only by climate change in both its scale and complexity.† This further shows the risk and completion associated with obesity can have on society. It also highlights the importance of Change4Life campaign in society. The phrase â€Å"major public health problem† can imply that obesity can cause the NHS billions, further making it less likely to have an NHS in future. According to Prime Minster David Cameroon obesity cost on the NHS was  £4.2 billion in 2014 had risen to  £6.4 billion by the end of 2015. The Government Office for Science’s Foresight Report implies that by 2050 the figure would drastically rise to  £50 billion. Further, becoming a finical and social problem for the general public and government. This also shows the importance of Change4Life campaign because it might http://www.nhs.uk/Change4Life/supporter-resources/downloads/Help_stop_childhood_obesity.pdf (accessed on 05/01/2016) https://fullfact.org/news/how-much-does-obesity-cost-nhs/ (accessed on 05/01/2016) Impact of Change4Life Read also Six Dimensions of Health Worksheet The Change4Life had been successful in impacting 85% of their target audience, who were households with children. The health campaign had won fifteen industry awards and multiple sub-campaign such as; Start4Life, which is only targeted for women and middle-aged adult. There are other multiple sub-campaigns for everyone else needs such as Cook4Life, Walk4Life, Swim4Life, Moreactive4Life, Muckin4Life, Bike4Life, and Smallsteps4Life. The Change4Life health campaign and its sub-campaign were made available to local and national partners in order that the campaign and the sub-campaigns are more successful. Change4Life was successful in making an impact on 570,000 families and 61,000 children to eat healthier and move more for a healthy active lifestyle. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/213719/dh_130488.pdf (accessed on 05/01/2016) http://www.marketingmagazine.co.uk/article/1167544/healthy-eating-change4life-check-up (accessed on 05/01/2016) https://www.gov.uk/government/news/purchase-of-sugary-drinks-falls-during-healthy-swaps-campaign (accessed on 05/01/2016) The health campaign has come in for disapproval, but the government states that one million mothers have pursued to change their families' lifestyles in the past year. This shows that Change4Life campaign is changing the perspective of mothers who were not focused on what food their children eat were considering that food can affect the health. Normally these mothers are from a working-class background because that is their target audience when advertising. Working-class households more likely to be unaware of what processed or fast-food can have on a human body and more likely to buy and eat those foods due to being cheaper and less time-consuming. Therefore, the government claiming that Change4Life had changed the viewpoint of mothers shows the success of the health campaign due to increasing the awareness of the problems associated with obesity. Mothers are also seen as the dominate role in the household because she controls the food eaten by their family. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/8518251.stm (accessed on 05/01/2016) https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-change4life-campaign-encourages-families-to-make-sugar-swaps (accessed on 05/01/2016) http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20130107105354/http:/www.dh.gov.uk/prod_consum_dh/groups/dh_digitalassets/@dh/@en/documents/digitalasset/dh_115511.pdf (accessed on 05/01/2016) Impact of Change4Life in Schools School Meals Due to the popularity of Change4Life in the first year; the government was inspired to created standards in 2010 where children would be given a healthy school meal. This is because Change4Life had been a success in identify the causes and ways of preventing obesity levels rising. Schools meals have been altered by the government. The portions of fruits and vegetables in school meals in 2005 was 12.5% and the statistics has increased to 67% in 2014. Venue machine with chocolates and crisps were banned from schools in order to make sure that children eat healthier food. It also made sure that children were less likely to become diabetic because sweets would be limited and also the government has increased the VAT on sweets and soft drinks. There are over 500,00 school which has signed up to the Change4Life programmes across England and Wales. This shows the successful impact Change4Life had on schools because meals have become healthier in order to provide a balance diet. Breakfast clubs are another example of how schools provide a balance meal for students. Children that are feed quickly or do not have breakfast; can be provided a good meal to start an active date. https://www.nhs.uk/change4life-beta/campaigns/sugar-smart/home?gclid=COvl5_DB8MoCFQkq0wodIoUC8A;gclsrc=aw.ds (accessed on 05/01/2016) http://www.nhs.uk/change4life/Pages/schools-supporters.aspx?filter=SchoolResourceSetting (accessed on 05/01/2016) https://campaignresources.phe.gov.uk/schools (accessed on 05/01/2016) Sport Clubs in Secondary and Primary Schools Change4Life had established sports clubs to attract the interest of children and young people who have not usually taken part in physical education or sport and are consequently less active. The sports clubs were designed to educate children and young people about how to lead a health active lifestyle. The sport activity for children was surrounding five different multi-sport themes, such as creativity, treasure hunt, and combat. For young people the clubs were related to Olympic and Paralympic sports, such as wheelchair basketball and softball. http://www.nhs.uk/change4life/Pages/sports-clubs.aspx (accessed on 05/01/2016) http://www.nhs.uk/change4life/Pages/primary-schools-sports-clubs.aspx (accessed on 05/01/2016) http://www.youthsporttrust.org/how-we-can-help/programmes/change4life-sports-clubs.aspx (accessed on 05/01/2016) The latest evaluation of the sports clubs from Change4Life had shown that since the clubs started in 2011 a remarkable two hundred twenty-five thousand children and young people have joined. Primary schools had seventy thousand children who took part in over four-thousand primary school clubs in the previous year with over fifty thousand clubs sessions being put on for young people. Since joining the primary clubs over one hundred one thousand children now feel positive about being active and playing games, whilst almost seventy-five thousand are now achieving sixty minutes of activity on most days of the week. https://www.canterbury.ac.uk/social-and-applied-sciences/human-and-life-sciences/spear/research-projects/change-4-life-school-sports-club.aspx (accessed on 05/01/2016) https://www.jfhc.co.uk/uploadedFiles/Redbox/Pavilion_Content/Our_Content/Social_Care_and_Health/videos/JFHC_videos/2a%20Chris%20Wright%20Change4Life%20JFHC.pdf (accessed on 05/01/2016)

Battle of Frediericksburg Analysis

The Battle of Fredericksburg David P. Wrighten, CPT, MS Class 09-002 Small Group 6, MAJ Sims 03 April 2009 Abstract In early December 1862, the Union Army of the Potomac had massed on the northern bank of the Rappahannock River as it was in position to strike the Confederate capital of Richmond, Virginia. The Union also position themselves to cut off the Confederate Army’s main supply route for the import and export of goods in the south. The Confederate Army of Northern Virginia confronted the Union Army’s attempted strike on the south side of the Rappahannock by occupying the high ground overlooking the riverside town of Fredericksburg. Caught between the two opposing armies, Fredericksburg was destined to the battleground for a bloody prelude of major battles between the Union and Confederate armies in the open fields of the south. The Battle of Fredericksburg Introduction The Battle of Fredericksburg occurred on 11 December 1862 on the banks of the Rappahannock River near the small town of Fredericksburg, Virginia. Pitting three divisions of the Union Forces commanded by MG Edwin V. Sumner, MG Joseph Hooker, and MG William B. Franklin, approximately 120,000 Soldiers against the two Confederate Forces Corps of Northern Virginia commanded by LTG James Longstreet and LTG Thomas L. Jackson approximately 90,000 Soldiers. This battle emphasized the effective use of Weather, Maneuver, Observation Fields of Fire, Cover, and concealment, Obstacles, Key Terrain, and Avenues of Approach. The use of the Battlefield Operating Systems was instrumental in the success of the mission. The primary source used to gather information was, Decisive Battles of the Civil War: the Battle of Fredericksburg by LT. COL. Joseph B. MitchellDrama on the Rappahannock: the Fredericksburg Campaign by Edward J. Stackpole. Secondary sources used were The Battle of Fredericksburg a Special Edition of: Civil War Times by Edward J. Stackpole and Guide to the Battles of Chancellorsville and Fredericksburg by Jay Luvaas and Harold W. Nelson. Strategic Setting Fredericksburg, Virginia during the 1860s had developed into a family oriented community. This town happened to be the farthest point to navigate up the Rappahannock River. It was a very important site for trading for imported and exported goods. However, the larger, newer sailing vessels had difficulties in navigating the Rappahannock, which greatly hinder the international trade with other less modern customers of trade. This allowed members of Fredericksburg to live a more normal or less congested big city lifestyle. Militarily, this river is important for resupplying Soldiers critical supplies in order to fight effectively. The town of Fredericksburg changed hands many times throughout the war. Being located so closely to Richmond and Washington, it can greatly assist or resist in a potential attack on Richmond or Washington. In addition, this town could act as a staging area prior to launching an attack on the nation’s capital. Furthermore, four major battles fought within a seventeen-mile radius of Fredericksburg, Virginia. The major encounter during the Battle of Fredericksburg took place in Virginia. MG Ambrose Burnside’s Federal Army of the Potomac tried to countermine Gen Robert E. Lee’s Army of Northern Virginia and capture Richmond. However, this would be a difficult task, since the Confederates were deeply entrenched into a defensive position west of town. Tactical Situation 1. Mission: Gen Burnside’s was to cross the Rappahannock River and seize the heights behind Fredericksburg, Virginia before Gen Lee’s army arrived. After seizing the town of Fredericksburg, the Army of the Potomac would then advance south to Richmond. In order to cross the Rappahannock Burnside had to build multiple bridges; for this purpose, support elements sent pontoon bridge equipment to Fredericksburg. The Union Forces arrived to the northern banks of the Rappahannock; there were no Confederate Forces in sight. It ould seem as if the advantage would be on the side of the Union Forces. 2. Equipment: Gen Hunt deployed riflemen to provide covering fire for the engineers at each end of the three construction points. He also possessed 147 artillery pieces to serve as the main deterrent to the Confederate Forces opposing the Union effort and accommodate a moderate logistics train. His ammo and other classes of supply were plentiful but the distance wou ld slowly cause these resources to erode. The Confederates had sufficient food and water, but other classes of supply were scarce, particularly their ammo. Many carried hunting rifles and shotguns of varying caliber. The Union Forces had a clear advantage. 3. Terrain: The city and its environs along the Rappahannock River in north-central Virginia were significant obstacles to Union advances on Richmond, the Confederate capital. The battlefield consists of a series of flood plains and river terraces with gentle slopes paralleled by north-south ridges that provide structural boundaries on either side, all comprised of Tertiary and Quaternary Coastal Plain sediments. The Confederates, led by Gen Robert E. Lee, effectively used natural terrain features to impede attacks made by the Union army. Tactical benefits also accrued by the Confederates from manufactured obstacles on the battlefield, e. g. , stone walls and fences. After crossing the Rappahannock River, the Union Army, had to attack uphill with little cover in their unsuccessful attempts to dislodge the Confederates. This gave the Confederate Forces the advantage against the Union strike. 4. Troops: Strategically the Union Forces had the advantage with the number of troops under Gen Burnsides command at nearly 120,000. The Confederate Forces had the advantage as having set up their defensive positions and direct access through their supply routes to their headquarters in Richmond, Virginia. The Confederate Forces did lack military training in the ranks as well as standard issue items that would help in the success of their campaign. The Union Forces had a clear advantage as far as personnel, but Confederate Forces had an advantage for their ability to resupply the units. 5. Time: This historic Fredericksburg Campaign planned and executed over a two-month period in November – December of 1862. This was during an extremely cold and harsh winter season. It reduced both the Union and Confederate forces from quiet movements, clear line of sight during pre-dawn hours (fog on the river), heavy snowfall, which restricted movements, thick terrain made of oak, maple, cedar, and highly thick entangled brush cause limited mobility, counter mobility and reduced eyes on the enemy. Therefore, even though the weather did not favor either side, it did not kept tactical goals of either side from being established. The Battle After, the Battle of Bull Run both armies devoted the second half of 1861 and part of 1862 to make serious adjustments for more important battles to come. Procurement of supplies, training, recruiting new soldiers, and other military activities was the primary training mission of both armies. Neither force was in any particular hurry to conduct an offensive operation. An impatient President waited in the White House to see how his popular commanding officer will retrain and utilize his powerful forces. Gen McClellan moved his forces in March 1862, via water, to the Virginia Peninsula between the York and James Rivers. The intent of this move was to take Richmond, Virginia. However, Johnston countered this plan by moving his Confederate soldiers overland in the same direction. Therefore, Gen Mc McClellan staged his troops at Fort Monroe. At the same time, Stonewall Jackson began his Shenandoah Valley Campaign, wounded in battle General Johnston was succeed by Robert E. Lee. On Oct. 6, the President instructed Gen McClellan to â€Å"cross the Potomac and give battle to the enemy, or drive him South. Your army must now move,† â€Å"he said, â€Å"while the roads are good. † Twenty-four days spent in correspondence before Gen McClellan obeyed the order of the president. Gen McClellan complained of a lack of men and supplies to make it prudent to move forward. At length, October had nearly passed by and Gen Lee’s army thoroughly rested and reorganized, and communications with Richmond re-established, the Army of the Potomac began to cross the river (Oct. 26), 100,000 strong. The Nationals led down the east side of the Blue Ridge, but failed to strike the retreating Confederates over the mountain in flank or to get ahead of them; and Gen Lee pushed Gen Longstreet’s troops over the Blue Ridge to Culpeper Courthouse, between the Army of the Potomac and Richmond, ready to dispute the advance of the Nationals. Quick and energetic movements were now necessary to sever and defeat, in detail, Gen Lee’s army. (See Map 1) On Nov. 75, the President relieved Gen McClellan of command, and Gen Burnside took command of the Corps. A sense of responsibility made the latter commander exceedingly cautious. Before he moved, he endeavored to get his 120,000 men well in hand. Gen Burnside determined Aquia Creek Landing as his resupply hub and main base for his assault. His overall decision was to, and he moved the army towards Fredericksburg down the Fredericksburg Route towards Fredericksburg. The allowed his forces to cover Washington and assure better protection of his lines of resupply and communication. Oon Nov. 150 Gen. Sumner led the movement from Warrenton down the left bank of the Rappahannock and covered almost 40 miles in two and one-half days to Falmouth. By November 21, Gen Longstreet's Corps had arrived near Fredericksburg, and Gen Jackson's (which had been downstream along the Rappahannock to prevent crossings there) was following rapidly. Gen Lee at first anticipated that he would fight Gen Burnside northwest of Fredericksburg and that it might be necessary to drop back behind the North Anna River. However, when he saw how slowly Gen Burnside was moving, he directed all of his army toward Fredericksburg. The first pontoon bridges arrived at Falmouth on November 25, much too late to enable the Army of the Potomac to cross the river without opposition. Gen Burnside still had an opportunity, however, because he was facing only half of Gen Lee's army, not yet dug in, and if he acted quickly, he might be able to attack Longstreet and defeat him before Jackson arrived. Once again, he squandered his opportunity. The bridges arrived at the end of the month, and by this time, Gen Jackson was present and Gen Longstreet was preparing strong defenses. Gen Burnside originally plannedplanned to use Gen McClellan’s original plan of to crossing his army east of Fredericksburg; 10 miles (16 km) downstream at Skinker's Neck, but Early's division arrived there and blocked him. Therefore,So he Gen Burnside decided to cross directly at Fredericksburg. On December 9, he wrote to Halleck, â€Å"I think now the enemy will be more surprised by a crossing immediately in our front than any other part of the river. †¦ I'm convinced that a large force of the enemy is now concentrated at Port Royal, its left resting on Fredericksburg, which we hope to turn. † In addition to, his numerical advantage in troop strength, Gen Burnside also had the advantage of knowing his army could not be attacked effectively. On the other side of the Rappahannock, 220 artillery pieces had been located on the ridge known as Stafford Heights to prevent Gen Lee's army from mounting any major counterattacks. (See Map 1) On the morning of December 11, Union Engineers began the construction of six pontoon bridges in preparation for the passage of Union Forces across the Rappahannock River. Two placed north of the Town Center, a third on the southern end of town, and three further south near the confluence of the Rappahannock and Deep Run. During the assembly of the pontoon bridges, Union Engineers came under punishing fire from the Confederate Forces primarily from the sharpshooters of the Mississippi Brigade commanded by Gen Barksdale. Gen Burnside. tThen ordered his Union artillery batteries then to shelled the city. The artillery fire lasted for an hour in terrific bombardment in hopes to drive the Confederate sharpshooters out of their positions. The bombardment failed to dampen the spirits of Barksdale’s sharpshooters, as soon as the artillery fire ceased the musketeers popped out of the holes and resumed firing. Thus, the first attempt to cross the river was a failure due to the Confederates’ fires on federal engineers constructing pontoon bridges on the river. Gen Burnsides’ staff immediately began mission analysis on another plan to cross the river. Gen Hunt suggested the only solution to cross the river are volunteers to cross by ferry rowing in pontoons to secure the opposite side of the river a lay suppressive fire on Confederate sharpshooters to cover the bridge layers. Because of a lack in confidence on his part, Gen BurnsideIf he was confident and swift in issuing was slow in issuing his tactical instructions,instructions; the Union Army of the Potomac may have caught the Confederates unready to defend their positions properly. In addition to the failure of the first attempt to cross, there wasAdditionally, a decrease in morale of the Union ForcesArmy of the Potomac and their senior commandeleadershipr due to the hesitation of Gen Burnsides decisionstheir overall commander on not just one critical occasion but several occasions. Other occasions of indecisiveness and lack of initiative in dealing with the blunder of getting the pontoons transferred from Washington also attributed to the decrease in morale of not only the Leadership leadership but also the Soldiers. Furthermore, the inability of Burnside to consider the advice advice, from Gen Halleck, was trying to give on where to cross the river showed the lack of communication from the field commander to Washington Headquarters. The Chief Engineer of the Army ordered his engineers in the following format (Stackpole, p122): (These were the actual orders that were issued) Engineers will place two pontoons bridges to be constructed at the site of old pontoon bridge, one of them to have approaches for artillery. One pontoon bridge at site of old canal-boat bridge; approaches for artillery. Additionally, we will place two pontoon bridges just below mouth of Deep Run, a mile below Fredericksburg one to have artillery approach. Major Spaulding to throw three uppe r ones: major Magruder to throw the next, and Lieutenant Cross the lowest one. Bridge equipage, now at White Oak Church, to move up and go into park near Phillip’s house by dark. At midnight trains to move down within 400 yards of river, and to move down and begin unloading a two in the morning. If enemy fire is kept down, bridges to be thrown as soon as are unloaded; if too hot, wait until artillery silences it† The battle opened south of the city at 8:30 a. m. on December 13, when Maj. Gen. William Franklin ordered two of the divisions from the Left Grand Division to maneuver themselves through an unseen gap in Gen Jackson's defenses on the right and head towards Hamilton’s Crossing. By 10 a. m. , a thick fog began to lift, and the initially sluggish movements picked up speed. Gen Meade's division of 4,500 men formed the main attack, in direct support of Gen Meade’sthese movements the divisions of Gen Doubleday and Gen Gibbon. The Virginia Horse Artillery under Major John Pelham stalled the attack, and an artillery duel between Pelham and the Union artillery batteries lasted for approximately an hour. MAJ Pelham started his artillery attack with only two cannons—a 12-pounder Napoleon smoothbore and a rifled Blakely—but continued with only one after counter-battery fire disabled one of the cannons. Gen Lee observed the action and commented about Pelham, age 24, â€Å"It is glorious to see such courage in one so young. † As Meade finally made traction, he ran into Brig. Gen. Maxcy Gregg's brigade, scattering it. Gen Gregg was shot and mortally wounded; he died two days later. To Gen Meade's right, Gen Gibbon's attack against the brigades of Brig. Gen. William Dorsey Pender and Edward L. Thomas made good progress, but Gen Meade and Gen Gibbon men became separated; by 1:30 p. m. , a heavy Confederate counterattack pushed them back to the beachhead of the Rappahannock. Because of the foggy conditions, Federal artillery could not provide much assistance because of the inability to discern between Union and Confederate Forces. Driven back and chased by the Confederate infantry, raised some concerns with Gen Burnside, his divisions may be trapped at the river. The Federal line strengthened with addition of Brig. Gen. Daniel E. Sickles and Brig. Gen. David B. Birney divisions, and Stonewall Jackson's counterattack grounded to a halt. The focus of action moved north to Marye Heights. The initial assaults west of Fredericksburg began at 11 a. . as French's divisiontwo divisions from Gen Couch’s Corps, Gen French’s division and Gen Hancock’s division, moved along the Plank Road, facing a steep-banked drainage ditch and a wide, open plain of 400 yards (370 m), dominated by Confederate infantry and artillery behind a sunken road and stone wall. Earlier, artillerist Edward Porter Alexander, â€Å"A chicken could not live on that field w hen we open on it,† had assured Gen Longstreet. The Union men attacking had to file d into columns over two small bridges across the drainage ditch, making them a massed target. Attempts to shift the attack farther to the right failed because of swampy ground. As in the south, Union artillery was prevented by fog from effectively silencing the Confederate guns as from Stafford Heights Union guns were unable to reach the Confederate positions. Gen Burnside had anticipated this attack on the right would be merely supportive of his main effort on the left, but Franklin had stalled and resisted entreaties to continue, so Gen Burnside shifted his emphasis. After French's division was repulsed with heavy losses, Gen Burnside sent in the divisions of Gen Hancock and Gen Howard, which met a similar fate. By this time, Gen Pickett's division and one of Gen Hood's brigades had marched north to reinforce Marye Heights. Gen Griffin's division renewed the attack at 3:30 p. m. , followed by Gen Humphrey's division at 4 p. m. At dusk, Gen Getty's division assaulted from the east and was repulsed. Gen Burnside sent six Union Divisions in, virtually one brigade at a time, for sixteen individual charges, all of which failed, costing them from 6,000 to 8,000 casualties. Watching the carnage from the center of his line, a position now known as Lee's Hill, Gen Lee quoted as saying, â€Å"It is well that war is so terrible, or we should grow too fond of it. The action on the heights also included the charge of the Irish Brigade, which lost 50% of its strength in the battle but advanced further up the heights than any other Union Brigade. Confederate losses at Marye Heights totaled around 1,200. The falling of darkness and the pleas of Gen Burnside's subordinates were enough to put an end to the a ttacks. Gen Longstreet later wrote, â€Å"The charges had been desperate and bloody, but utterly hopeless. † Thousands of Union soldiers spent the cold December night on the fields leading to the Heights, unable to move or assist the wounded because of Confederate fire. The armies remained in position throughout the day on December 14, when Gen Burnside briefly considered leading his old IX Corps in one final attack on Marye Heights, but with the suggestions of many of his officers, he reconsidered and abandoned his campaign sending his troops to northern bank of the Rappahannock River. That afternoon, Burnside asked Lee for a truce to attend to his wounded, which Lee graciously granted. The next day the Federal forces retreated across the river, and the campaign ended. SIGNIFICANCE 1. Short Term: The Battle at Fredericksburg clearly showed how disastrous the Union Army Tactics were; President Abraham Lincoln relieved Gen Burnside of command a month after this battle. 2. Long Term: This was a major victory for the Army of Northern Virginia and costly to the Army of the Potomac. Many believe that Gen Lee lost his best chances to destroy the Gen Burnside’s forces at Fredericksburg. Overall, the loss broke the morale of the Army of the Potomac and showed a weakness in the indecisiveness and lack of imagination in part of Gen Burnside. ANALYSIS Gen Burnside failed to achieve the tenant of Initiative and his overall objective of destroying the enemy forces securing the town of Fredericksburg because he violated the Principle of Security and the Battle Operating System of Intelligence. The bulk of his forces fought to cross the river and very few were concerned with providing suppressive fire for the unit crossing. Gen Lee’s forces upon making contact with what he believed to be the enemies fleeing main force at Devil’s Swamp, he committed himself to battle without pausing to use his cavalry to reconnoiter the country. Gen Lee used his CCavalry Troops conducted rereconnaissancecon'd to the east and west of the Rappahannock marshy lowlandsRiver;, an action that gave him an extreme advantage into witnessing the movement of Gen Burnside's forceswhich might have permitted him to cross unmolested at a point up or downstream from the swamp. Thus, outflanking Culpepper and forcing him to withdraw without an opportunity to spring his cleverly crafted trap. The use of the terrain also gave Gen Lee a clear advantage as the Rappahannock River and extended entrenchments gave Gen Burnside’s forces great difficulty. For his part, Brigadier CulpepperGen Lee effectively adhered to the Principles of Maneuver, Mass, and Economy of Force. Through the Tenant of Synchronization, these factors combined to create the culminating Principle of Surprise. Outnumbered and outgunned, he realized that he could not achieve his objective of ascertaining Morgan’s Gen Burnside’s force and denying it control of the rail and road junction, as well as Yearlingvilletown of Fredericksburg, by engaging in a conventional battle on anything approaching even terms he used unconventional tactics to achieve his goal. He possessed a clear understanding of what he had to accomplish and how he had to do so. He Gen Lee employed Maneuver and Mass of critical combat power at the decisive time and place while making effective use of both the weak and strong points of the units he led. By marring Morgan in the swampsstalling Burnside’s movement across the river, he placed his enemy in a position of disadvantage. He shifted the battle to one where he positioned his massed combat power into a fixed enemy whose only option was to sink and die discontinue its efforts of seizing the town of Fredericksburg and retreat to the north side of the Rappahannock River. Culpepper Gen Lee exercised effective Synchronization and Economy of Force, deftly controlling the movements and fires of the disparate elements of his force in accordance with the elements of an intelligently conceived and workable plan of action in order to bring about the desired combat power at the decisive point. His employment of his cavalry, guerrillas, and militia reflected a thorough thought process of utilizing each element in ana precisely orchestrated maneuver exact orchestration to achieve the desired effect of ousting the Army of the Potomac from the town of Fredericksburg back to the northern banks of the Rappahannock River. uring Morgan’s troops into the killing field of overwhelming force. His exploitation of Union Forces weaknesses in decisive movement and execution of a sound plan display Gen Lee’s his Seminole scouts’ superior knowledge of critical terrain features while denying the enemy the opportunity to effectively reconnoiter the same gro und gave the critical element of Surprise once the battle was opened in accordance with the time, place and circumstances of his own choosing. Stackpole, Edward J. Drama on the Rappahannock: The Fredericksburg Campaign. Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania: Stackpole Books, 1991 P. 23 Stackpole, Edward J. Drama on the Rappahannock: The Fredericksburg Campaign. Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania: Stackpole Books, 1991 P. 121 Stackpole, Edward J. Drama on the Rappahannock: The Fredericksburg Campaign. Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania: Stackpole Books, 1991, P. 122 O'Reilly, Francis Augustin, The Fredericksburg Campaign: Winter War on the Rappahannock, Louisiana State University Press, 2003, P. 148 Goolrick, William K. and the Editors of Time-Life Books, Rebels Resurgent: Fredericksburg to Chancellorsville, Time-Life Books, 1985, P. 87 BIBLIOGRAPHY FM 3-0 Operations. Washington, D. C. : Headquarters Department of the Army, 2001. Goolrick, William K. Rebels Resurgent: Fredericksburg to Chancellorsville. Time-Life Books, 1985. Kennedy, Frances H. The Civil War Battlefield Guide. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1990. Luvaas, Jay and Nelson, Harold W. The U. S. Army War College Guides to the Battles of Chancellorsville & Fredericksburg. Lawrence: the University Press of Kansas, 1994. Mitchell, Joseph B. Decisive Battles of the Civil War. New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1955. O'Reilly, Francis Augustin. The Fredericksburg Campaign: Winter War on the Rappahannock. Louisiana State University Press, 2003. Palfrey, Francis W. The Army in the Civil War: The Antietam & Fredericksburg. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1885. Parish, Peter J. The American Civil War. New York: Holmes & Meier Publishers, Inc, 1991. Stackpole, Edward J. Drama on the Rappahannock: The Fredericksburg Campaign. Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvannia: Stackpole Books, 1991.

Plantation Management in the Old South Essay

William Scarborough’s, The Overseer, examines the importance and the daily duties of the plantation overseer and how they influenced and contributed to the production and efficiency of slaves in the â€Å"Old South†. This position was unarguably, the most important position in the southern plantation system as they determined the success or failure of a plantation. In some small plantations, but mostly larger ones, the overseer was in charge of the supervision of enslaved Africans, care of the land, planting, farm tools, and harvesting. The overseer has been especially known in history as the handler of harsh disciplinary actions against slaves for breaking heavy or mild rules. The emergence of job advertising stormed through the south with higher number of individuals owning slaves. Over time leading up to the Civil War, the position of overseer has been professionalized with some planters even requiring letters of recommendations from their applicants. The goal of the author is to gather facts and accurate evidence that demonstrate how overseers effectively completed their task set forth by plantation owners and were less concerned about the torture and harsh beating of the enslaved Africans. The writer focuses more on the profession itself as opposed to examining the individual’s social class or morals in society. He also attempts to provide a valuable interpretation of one of many groups that made up the white middle class of the Old South. The book is divided into three sections with the first concerning the history and role of the overseer in the plantation establishment. It also gives key details on contract negotiations between the overseer and the plantation owner. Lastly, this section shows the view of the overseer by the general public. The second section examines the managerial duties and responsibilities and some of the disagreements between the plantation master and the overseer. The final section shows the occupation and the importance of the plantation supervisor during the Civil War and how the loss or reduction in available overseers affected the surviving plantations after the war ended. The overseer system was first introduced in the United States by the Virginia Company of England with the primary job function of upholding gained territory. When Africans were shipped to the Louisiana Territory as slaves, this very system was implemented. The vast majority of overseers during the colonial period were indentured servants whose terms of service had expired. One major reason for the increase in overseers in the antebellum south, during the 18th century were the cultural change that demanded plantation owners to indulge in the arts and other cultural pursuits. The profile of many of the men that went into this profession were most likely either the son of a planter, white lower class men, and men who actually saw the economic benefits of being an overseer. One distinctive feature of the overseer system during the colonial period was the practice of leasing developed plantations with slaves as stock. With this agreement the overseer was in charge for maintenance of the s lave force, and in return received one-third of the net proceeds from the selling of the crops. This profession would soon become highly profitable when cotton became the forefront of agriculture in the United States although to some had a negative view of the position. Although most of the overseers were originally poor and uneducated, they still gained enough respect by their employers to be acknowledged as a semi-elite professional with a very profitable position. Whatever may have been the view of the planter class regarding the step on the â€Å"social ladder† occupied by slave managers, the overseer himself had no feeling of class inferiority and showed little resentment toward the proprietary group. One of the major duties of the overseer was the welfare and discipline of the slaves, the care of livestock and other agriculture implements, and the production of staple and subsistence crops. The overseer assigned certain task to specific slave groups and supervised the labor of slaves in the field. The overseer was expected to have basic medical understanding to be able to examine the slaves and make note of any who actually needed professional treatment to treat certain physical hinders. The slave manager was obliged to make periodic inspections of slave cabins and was responsible for the distribution of clothing for the slaves. Lastly, and most importantly, the overseer was expected to ensure the security of the whites against uprisings of slaves, which was to some, inevitable. Depending of the plantation, there were also a second set of rules that were handed down from the planter to the overseer to instruct to the slaves. Some plantations had very harsh working conditions and required long hours, regardless of age or gender, while other were pretty mild with less work demanded from pregnant women and children under the age of seven. Some planters stated that â€Å"a happy slave is a productive slave† and the overseer had to abide by the wishes of the planter although they may have had different views on the use and managing of the slaves. The relationship between the overseer and the planter became pivotal leading up to the Civil War in 1861. As the Civil War began to run its course, the production of agriculture (with slave labor) was extremely important in the surviving and continuity of the south. The role of the overseer became even greater than ever with the departure of healthy white men leaving to join the Confederate Army. In many areas in the south, the only remaining security against insurgencies from the slaves was the overseers. It was no surprise that the drafting of plantation managers to the Confederate Army, angered many planters knowing that there would not be enough qualified managers to keep the slaves productive and fearful. There were even laws put into place in states such as Georgia, South Carolina, Mississippi, Alabama, and Louisiana that limited the number of overseers that could be drafted into the army. The south also made a rule stating that any wounded soldier who is able must return and oversee a plantation in order to contribute to the production of goods in the south. With this reduction in overseers, many slaves were able to escape and a number of large plantations fell due to the absence of the â€Å"slave Manager†. Scarborough’s The Overseer, examines the life and impact of the plantation overseer and how it shaped the working system of slavery and production in the United States. The author’s uses key facts to back his thesis on the importance and professionalism of the overseer. Scarborough did extensive research by exploring primary sources such as the memoirs of planters, public records, legal documents, and advertising posters. He incorporates a number of different employment contracts between planters and overseers and compared them based on the size of the plantation, state and region, and number of slaves. The author seemed to look at this job description from a professional standpoint as opposed to the ills and negative view that society and some historians have placed on the managers of plantations. He mentions that some overseers who were uneducated or inexperienced greatly affected the outlook for this profession and shadowed the somewhat complex job of managing an entire plantation.