How did Southern historians soon after the Civil War interpret the war? Northern historians?

The Civil War has been studied from the point of view of the North and the South, and the different interpretations of historians of these regions continue to be influential nowadays.

Northern historians often link the Civil War to the secession of the South, and they argue that such an act was unconstitutional and one-sided. They also emphasize the importance of preserving the Union and abolishing slavery. The North often celebrates the figure of Abraham Lincoln and holds little respect for the Confederacy.

On the other hand, the South often presents a different view of the war. The South is kinder with its depiction of the Confederacy, often presenting it in terms of autonomy and freedom. It also tends to minimize the role that slavery played during the war, and instead focuses in the problems that the South had within the Union, such as maintaining the balance of power and protecting its autonomy. The South is also more likely to romanticize the Antebellum period.

the statement the greek philosophers aristotle and plato would be most likely to agree with is statement c, a countries leader should be motivated by the common good of the country.

typical characteristics of global cities include all of the following except being culturally isolationist.

explanation: