To determine the best explanation for the difference between Tennessee and Mississippi based on battles, it is important to consider historical context:
-
Tennessee had many more battles because it was closer to Union territory. - This option is plausible because Tennessee was a significant battleground due to its strategic location between the Union and Confederate states.
-
Mississippi had more battles because it was on the coast. - This is less accurate, as Mississippi has a relatively small coastline compared to other states and key battles in Mississippi were typically fought inland.
-
Tennessee had many more battles because it remained part of the Union. - This is incorrect because Tennessee was a Confederate state and had a high number of battles as a result.
-
Mississippi had fewer battles because it was on the Mississippi River. - This option is misleading; while the Mississippi River was strategically significant, it did not directly correlate to having fewer battles.
Based on these interpretations, the most logical choice is:
Tennessee had many more battles because it was closer to Union territory.
This option suggests its strategic position that led to significant military activity during the Civil War.
1 answer