Видео

The 1st Minnesota continued to serve in the Army of the Potomac until their enlistments expired in the spring of '64. Many men of the 1st Minnesota reenlisted and continued service as the 1st Minnesota Infantry Battalion and until their second enlistment end in July, 1865.

Thank you, sir.

It is indeed an excellent book!

Another recommended title: A Brotherhood of Valor: The Common Soldiers of the Stonewall Brigade, C.S.A. and the Iron Brigade, U.S.A, Jeffrey Wert.

@@AmericanCivilWarFacts That's a good one too!

I have over 200 shorts and don't have the time to select an individual tune for each 10 second clip, nor are there 200 separate CW tunes in my stock library. So, you'll hear it again! :-) But if it helps, BBF was written to the melody of "The Irish Jaunting Car", an Irish/UK tune from the late 1850s. Thanks for watching and commenting!

As a Yankee, I'd expect you'd know about the 1st MN. ;-) But Southerners may not. It's a big country and not everyone is a buff. As I commented last week: Of course if one is a student of the war, you'd know about the 1st MN & 20th Maine. But if someone's knowledge about Gettysburg is only from The Killer Angels and the movie based on it, then, yes, I would consider it "unknown". And how many views would I have gotten if I named it "Another story about something you already know about"? :-)

Agreed. I and my friends in the UK have heard of the 1st Minnesota and what they did here.

🤣

N.C. lost the most soldiers on the Confederate side at G-burg.

Y'all just gave me an idea for a short. ;-)

@@edwil111 the 26rh NC lost 85% of it's men on the 1st fighting the IR n Brigade

They met the 24th Michigan.

Please, no political discussions here unless it's about mid-19th century politics. And since you don't know your history and think the Civil War ended in 1863, let me explain that the 19th century was the 1800s.

I'm glad you liked it! Personally, I'm fascinated by Antietam, but I have some books on Gettysburg you might like. These are amazon associate links so I may get a commission on any purchases but I've bought these myself: Gettysburg: The Story of the Battle with Maps - amzn.to/3Ln63M0 The Gettysburg Companion: amzn.to/3We0Mgf If you want to really get into the details of the battle, the the Companion is the one I recommend over the two.

82% casualties - 215 men out of 262 total. EDIT: no other unit in the entire history of the U.S. ARMY has ever suffered such casualties without surrendering or being utterly destroyed. But the survivors of the 1st Minnesota Regiment (all 47 of them) helped repel Pickett’s Charge on the third day. After the war those survivors went home to Minnesota and were greeted as heroes.

Love his book!

I do. I read the book about them, The Last Full Measure

More history,less twerking

I do, but I'm a WI boy.

I wish their charge had been in the movie

@@johncooper8537 - Yessss! It would be awesome if someone made a movie on the 1st MN! On the 3rd day, it was the 1st MN that ended up in the center of the union line, to take the brunt of Picketts Charge. 20th Maine was not moved to the Angle on the 3rd day, that was totally false. I love the film Gettysburg, but it's falsehoods, and being based on a fiction novel creates some very annoying historical inaccuracies. There are not enough good films of Gettysburg and other Civil War battles...just the story of the Taylor Brothers of the 1st Minnesota would make a fantastic film...a film from the perspective of infantry privates, there is too much focus on officers, and famous personalities

Sorry, it’s Jeb Stewart not Jen Stewart, damn auto correct!

Valid points! Lee gave Stuart the option to cross the Potomac River either east or west of the Blue Ridge Mountains, depending on the movements of the Union forces. Stuart chose to ride around the Union army, which resulted in him losing contact with Lee. Stuart's decision is debatable, some arguing that Stuart exceeded his orders and some contending that he was operating within the discretion Lee had granted him.

@@AmericanCivilWarFacts Of course, that was a major problem with General Lee, his orders were generally so vague that one could never be quite sure where the limits of discretion were. Not to mention that Lee would toss out an idea and then expect his subordinates to fill out the details as well as coordinate their actions. But, Stuart did have sufficient Calvary to do both. All he had to do was to assign the Brigades which were formerly assigned to the Shenandoah to accompany the Army. But, he did not, they remained in the Shenandoah.

Lee was treading a fine line. Good commanders give their subordinates room to assess the situation and adapt to complete the mission. Jackson and Longstreet were both experienced corps commanders and responded well to Lee's use of discretionary orders. Ewell was new to corps command and, by some accounts, need ed definitive instructions to be effective. His wounding at 2nd Manassas and the loss of his leg may have also tempered what enthusiasm he had for battle. Granted, Ewell's concerns about the state of his men, possible Union troops coming on the York road, etc. were valid but if Lee wanted Culp's hill taken at all hazards, then he should have ordered it that way.

@@AmericanCivilWarFacts In my opinion, Lee had a tendency to give his subordinates far too much discretion and had far too much faith that they would fill in the details and coordinate actions between them. Stonewall Jackson was the opposite in being far too detailed with his orders and not giving his subordinates any discretion at all. Then turning around and reamng them when they changed any detail at all. But, his Valley Campaign was Brilliant! General Ewell was a Division Commander under Jackson and was used to following his orders to the letter. (One of a very small number who was never reamed by Jackson). Ewell would eventually lose his job because he couldn’t adjust to the difference of simply following orders to having to give detailed orders. Lee at times seemed to be throwing out a general suggestion at what he wanted done rather than giving orders. And too many of those times he ended up being disappointed at the outcome! Like at Gettysburg.

1st MN, the Iron Brigade; y'all Westerners were a stout lot!

@@AmericanCivilWarFacts We aint westerners, we are northerners

I was writing from the perspective of the people at the time. In the mid-1800s people from WI, MN, etc, were called "westerners".

Of course if one is a student of the war, you'd know about the 1st MN & 20th Maine. But if someone's knowledge about Gettysburg is only from The Killer Angels and the movie based on it, then, yes, I would consider it "unknown". And how many views would I have gotten if I named it "Another story about something you already know about"? :-) Thanks for the comment!

I know about them! Decimated.

​@@TennesseeHomesteadUSADecimated is one out of ten men down... This is closer to annihilated

@@ozzyphil74 "Decimate definition: to kill or destroy a great number or proportion of." A great proportion of the 1st Minnesota was decimated. You're using the ancient Roman definition. The colloquial definition changed...

If you studied this battle , you know the 1st Minnesota Volunteers heroics

Glad you liked it!

I lived in N. VA and S. Maryland for 20 years and visited every battlefield within reach.

??

A Fallout reference? I like it!

Union prisons were not. Elmira's death toll almost matched Andersonville's.

@@AmericanCivilWarFacts thx for your input.

He did have a breakdown while commanding the Kentucky district and was placed on leave. The newspapers called him insane. He hated reporters.

Yes, they sound similar, but the Lorena is what I embedded in some of the shorts.

My pleasure.. Thanks for commenting!

The damage has been estimated at $2.5 Billion, in today's dollars.

Glad you liked it!

Thanks for that!

Five of the seven regiments in the center were PA militia on 3 July -- according to "They Met At Gettysburg". Little Round Top was the Union left flank -- not the center.

Believe it or not, I wrote about this in 2008. Charles Mason graduated ahead of Robert E. Lee in the West Point class of 1829. Charles graduated first; Lee was second. But, interestingly Mason did not serve in the military during the Civil War, but instead became a lawyer. During the war, Mason was a Copperhead (an Anti-war Democrat).

Sure not yoy

What is the song name?

@@Missanthrope1000" Lorena" by Jay Ungar.

He got 2nd place in the Civil War too

You're correct, Sir.

Search results don't explicitly state cherries were Lee's absolute favorite fruit, but written evidence points to him greatly enjoying and indulging in cherries, likely more so than other fruits, as they were available during his Northern invasions.

so having a issue with your land being taken and being taxed out the wazoo is being a traitor? So using your logic, the settlers that fought the British were traitors? Research before spreading slander.

If you look at it logically, could you agree that the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution contradict each other? One one hand, the Declaration states: "Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness." Yet the military oath circa 1830 was: ""I, _____, appointed a _____ in the Army of the United States, do solemnly swear, or affirm, that I will bear true allegiance to the United States of America, and that I will serve them honestly and faithfully against all their enemies or opposers whatsoever, and observe and obey the orders of the President of the United States, and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to the rules and articles for the government of the Armies of the United States." So, on hand the Declaration give the people the right to oppose the government - yet the 1830 oath binds the person to the United States. Only in 1884 did the oath include loyalty to the Constitution. I'm not advocating one view over the other, only pointing out the tremendous emotional conflict those men endured. It was an extremely personal decision and I'm not going to sit here 160 years later and discount their feelings.

Technically true. Also true is that the Founding Fathers were traitors to the British Crown. Theirs was an emotionally charged decision. Duty, Honor, Loyalty and State Allegiance meant a great deal more in 1861 than they do in 2024.

@@AmericanCivilWarFacts You are using whataboutism.

You said Lee was a traitor. I said that is true. And the Founders were as well. If you're going to accuse me of "whataboutism", then that implies that you do not agree that the Founders were traitors? Declaring logical fallacies without providing a counter-argument is also a logical fallacy.

@@AmericanCivilWarFacts blah blah blah. You added the Founding Fathers trying to put him in the same category. You and I both know what you are doing. Conservative Confederates are the worst.

Thanks for your input.