Brilliant piece of history brought to life. Well told and acted out. Cheers from a Yank whose people came from Sandwich, England on the HMS Hercules in 1635 at Plymouth and were rebels in the revolution.
I was just given a book on my families genealogy, and found out that James Hamilton (my ancestor) fought with Wolfe, I am absolutely enthralled with this battle now. I have so many questions.
I found this historical clip very informative and interesting, yet when we learned about this significant battle at school 60 tears ago, it was so full of indoctrination that most of us kid's hated history... and the rote memorizing of dates & names. Hopefully by now, people like those who produced this excellent video have changed all that.
Bravo! Great rendition of an important piece of the history of the Americas. What would have been nice to see are the gardens and magnificent statue of Saint Joan of Arc, where the Plains of Abraham border the City of Québec.
Too bad the people who did this did not have sense enough to lower the background noise/music when the narrator is speaking. They also seem to forget that not all Indians fought with the French. The Iroquois were English allies.
It's kinda funny how it gets painted when we learn about it in history class today, we're always taught that because of the different ways the British and French went about colonizing the new world, the Natives saw the French as less intrusive... which may be true relatively speaking, since Napoleon had no problem selling massive amounts of french territory in the new world. Kinda suggests they didn't put down roots too deep. However, the Iroquoise almost never get mentioned and you're almost forced to guess they sided with the French, without knowing any better.
@@Templarspartan Louis XV was King of France during the twilight years of New France (Quebec) and Acadia (New Brunswick and Cape Breton), Napoleon became Emperor after the French Revolution which happened a couple decades after the British had control of upper and lower Canada. The French being outnumbered by the British colonies in North America went to greater lengths to secure native allies. The Iroqouis confederacy weren't particularly fans of the British but absolutely hated the Huron, who where allied with the French
The Iroquois traded either the English but for most of the time were neutral when it came to war. The French most definitely were better to the Indians. The integrated with them in settlements and ways of life. Because they didn't seek to conquer by the time of the Seven years War, they were outnumbered by the English something like 20:1.
@@flintandball6093 , you need to go look up the facts instead of just giving opinions that suit your agenda. One of Champlain's first adventures was to go with the Hurons and Algonquins in an attack on the Iroquois in 1609, just one year after he founded Quebec. This laid the foundation for the alliances thereafter. Nice attempt at setting up a strawman argument. The facts that the English out numbered the French has nothing at all to do with what I wrote.
Well I'm sure they learned real quick when they got slaughtered few years later by the English they should have stay with the French and not turned on them for money🤔 💵
The script has the participants using the term "guerrilla warfare" . That term was not yet coined at that time ; not until Napoleonic Wars. Perhaps it might have been more accurate to have them using the term "Indian Style" warfare.
The fact the term 'guerilla war' was not invented in the 1700s does not mean it cannot be used today to describe the use of this method of fighting. A 'skulking way of war' might be a term to use as well, as this style of war was not unique to the 'Indians' of the New World.
This story takes serious shortcuts with reality. Looking back it is easy to say that this battle was the turning point that gave North America to England. It was not. Quebec surrenderred five days later. There was another battle fought almost on the same premises the following spring, a battle won by the French led by chevalier de Lévis. Moreover, the Seven Years War was fought on various continents (India, West Africa, the West Indies, Europe). The fate of New France could have been way different had the French negociators decided to keep it. But then France would have had to cede something else somewhere.
You are right that a second engagement was fought and won by the French the following year. But it failed to take back Quebec, and ultimately changed very little towards the forgone conclusion that it was all over for France. When three British columns converged on Montreal, causing final capitulation, the British had won and conquered Quebec and Canada without a doubt. To deny this is to depart wishfully from reality.
@@safeysmith6720 You missed my point. Battles are won or lost but the final result is decided at the negociation table. Granted France lost the war and had to cede something but it could have ceded the West Indies or Louisiana in order to keep Canada. The fact that the British army was in Quebec and Montreal is irrelevant. Empires are all about gaining/accessing resources. France accounted its losses and decided to: 1) let go of Canada (fur trade) while keeping a foothold in St-Pierre et Miquelon (fishing), 2) cede Louisiana to Spain BEFORE the final peace treaty so Britain wouldn't get it and 3) recovering the West Indies (sugar). But France could have decided to keep Canada and let go of the fishing industry and/or sugar plantations and/or Louisiana. Then the British army would have left Canada. There were in England some people who, while the war was ongoing, had concerns regarding France losing in America. They feared the colonists, freed from the French presence, would push for secession. I also know that Choiseul-Pralin, the French negociator, felt that way as well and considered the peace treaty was the best outcome he could get given the context.
@ However negotiations go, and who decides to trade this for that, doesn’t change that on the tactical level, Britain had taken complete possession of Quebec/Canada on the map. It was now a bargaining chip for Britain. France could “decide” to keep it in exchange for something else, only if Britain agreed. France did not have possession of it when negotiations began. Britain did.
To England? You surely mean to Great Britain. The 1707 Act of Union created Great Britain, it was the British Army made up of English/Scots/Welsh/Irish not an English Army that sat under a British Parliament as the English parliament had ceased to exist. Its a common mistake by North Americans to refer to England/English.
This significant battle is very fascinating and sadly overlooked. It just proves that 1 battle can win a war. The real mystery to me is how Montcalm performed so brilliantly and Fort Carillon and then blundered so bad at Quebec. Why wouldn't he just stay locked up in the fort and wait for Bougainville!!
This was an excellent film & Documentary about those Historic events. But one thing I believe they got wrong? Was the practice of taking scalp's by the Native tribes on both sides. They said that it was the Natives that used the practice prior too the Europeans arrival in North America. This I think was wrong? And always had read & understood that the English & the other Colonial power's had started these brutal practices of exchanging them in their Fur trading ventures amongst the interior Tribe's. Whose member's weren't allied or associated too them. The scalping was a way of their agent's paying duties too their Indian Allies for killing off the then opposing forces, of their competition. So the practices was started and begun by the Europeans. Not by the Natives as was mentioned in the Film 📽️🎥???
8:30 Sounds like he says William Pitt the Younger here... He means Elder, right? The Younger would've been 3 months old during the Battle of the Plains of Abraham.
Superb documentary! Very interesting period and conflict. A book just published, titled "Aukewingeketawso", including reproduced period documents, summarizes the French Indian War era with special focus on a man named Charles Langlade (1729 - 1800), who initially led Native American warriors, Canadians and French against the British between 1752-60 before afterwards swearing allegiance to British after the French were defeated and later aided the former in their (failed) efforts in American Revolution against the United States. A very interesting read.
Wolf was an officer at the final battle Culloden in Scotland. He seen what "Buther Billy did to the Scots " He burned, created a desert & called it peace. Burning, consuming, killing inhabitants that resist is common throughout history. An admire of the fighting Scots Wolf had many in his army. Curling first happen on the St Lawrence during the Winter seige
Well, a very fine vid nice. I love this time of period. And if you guys know that the British at the start of The French and Indian War were losing battles and sieges. The war that a young Virginian named George Washington and his militia, actions started and saw later British commander Major General Edward Braddock died in Monongahela in 1755 ambushed by the French and their Indians allies (Native Americans) and soldiers, such the "Braddocks massacre" and a lot of redcoats died that day and Washington was brave and lucky and managed to escape, at 1754 - 1755 campaign. Then the Siege of Fort William Henry in 1757 and the Massacre of the British soldiers' men women and children from the Indians allied to the French was another win of Moncalm's. Montcalm was in Ticonderoga in 1758 and his victory against all odds then the tide of the war changed and we have Wolfe at the siege of Louisbourg 1758 won and took the city and then the final battle at Quebec Montcalm's mistake to go and faced the British out in the battlefield and not to stay in the walls and the errors in the battlefield were a lot and that's all of the major battles of the war in America back then the British won the war the French lost the war. Some thoughts and info from my favorite period of wars and heroes and more again awesome vid!👍👍
The final battle was not at Quebec. It took another year with the fall of Montreal to finally subdue the French in New France. It is such an American myopic idea that "George Washington and his militia, actions started" the French and Indian/Seven Years War. It is odd as well, as it almost seems like this is stated with pride. Clearly there is little to no understanding of the interlude of détente that took place between the end of the War of the Austrian succession and the opening of the French and Indian War/Seven Years War. During this period there were episodes of open conflict and efforts at destabilisation between France and Britain. Washington's little fracas was just one of these.
@@EdinburghFive Yeah you have a point I missed that about Montreal I just read in Wikipedia. All that I posted are from reading books and I have not read anything about Montreal before but yeah as you said it was the final battle at 1760 good point.
Pitt the elder or Pitt the younger - a 50/50 choice which this documentary got wrong. lf only there were some history book the makers could have consulted.
Brother says “the First World War” like the war of the grand alliance, war of Spanish succession, and war of Austrian succession weren’t that before this war. Like this is just a part 4 of a 70 years long on and off “world war”. I still love the documentary but that term is a pet peeve of mine 😂
At 47 minutes, the British advance flying the later union flag, at this time the Irish state was not part of the union and the diagonal red strips were not part of the British flag.
@@britishpatriot7386It's definitely the wrong flag, the current union flag did not exist until decades following this war. It's a common error, as the 3-cross union flag WAS used during the Napoleonic Wars/ War of 1812. The wrong union flag is shown numerous times throughout this documentary, both CGI and real flags. Napoleonic era ensigns tend to be more common on a lot of existing "age of sail" ships which weren't terribly different between the 7 Years War and Napoleonic Wars, thus they often appear in shots of Napoleonic-styled ships being used as stand-ins for a slightly earlier era. Lots of people also just don't know the difference in the first place, hence the mix of union flags throughout the film.
You know that the Anse au Foulon landing plan drawn up and decided upon by Captain Cook and General Wolfe was taken up by the Allies during the Second World War. The Allies were partly inspired by it for the Normandy landings. Not too bad for 18th century men who didn't have our technology
Did Wolfe commit war crimes? Well, I suppose it depends on your perspective. From mine all war is a crime, but that's only because I hold strong anti-war views. The burning of homes and farms, while giving explicit orders not to harm civilians, might seem like just a good strategy -- and it is in much the same way that the Indians scalping people as a terror tactic is. Consider that, back in the 1700s, people didn't just go to the store and get food the way we do today. People had to grow and store their food and the basic necessities of survival. Burning down someone's farm and homes, leaving them with nothing but the clothes on their backs (if that) is practically condemning people to slow starvation. The fact that it is mentioned that winter would be coming soon, and you can add exposure as another certain hardship. Is that a war crime? You tell me.
Yes, it can be considered as a war crime. Burning farms, stealing crops, killing cattle and horses to feed the Brits along with even cutting apple orchards and taking away farmers' hunting muskets. Civilians were killed and left to starve just ahead of the long hard winter ahead. Wolfe took also part in the deportation of Acadians along with Lawrence and other commanding officers who took part in the battle on the Plains of Abraham, They rooted most Acadians out of what is now Nova Scotia in 1755, taking away all their belongings, theirs homes, their land and sending 10 000 Acadians throughout their colonies and Europe.
You ridiculous wannabe victims of nothing invaded England just before that battle, you Scots slaughtered whole towns on the way to London until you realised the English were coming for a fight then ran back to Scotland, you got your butts kicked and it was justified. It was the Irish and Scottish who for hundreds of years used to invade England and slaughtered many innocent people and took thousands of slaves too but then the tables turned and you got a taste of your own medicine ( then you play the little victims) so don't give me the English are bad crap you ridiculous hypocrite.
Wolfe was aide-de-camp to the Duke of Cumberland during the Jacobite Rising. He was implacable because he had no choice. The duke himself killed these men who refused to obey a direct order. I have the biography book on General Wolfe at home. He mentions in these memoirs that he had bad memories of this campaign
A 30-minute battle that changed the course of history in North America. Unfortunately, the war for independence among individuals and countries rages today just check the latest news on January 6th, 2020 in Washington D.C.
Dumb democrats and leftist woke types and the pathetic hypocrite race hustlers vs the sane Americans. My money is on the sane Americans who are waking up in huge numbers like in Europe too nowadays.
Montcalm doesn't have the choice to go on this battlefield....he had to take the chance.....better to fight there than into the city with civils who could be killed in their own place...
2.54 It wasn't England, it was Great Britain, you even show Great Britain on the map. England is just one part of Great Britain. 12.26 "A16,000 English army" 12.40 "The French fire into the English Army" , 12.44 "The British are shot to pieces", 42.56 "undaunted the young Scotsmen practically bound up" Make you mind up, is it the British or just the English or now is it the Scots? For the record, after 1707 and the Act of Union there was no English Army, no Scottish Army, no Welsh Army, there was a British Army made up of the afore mentioned and Irish lads. why do you choose to ignore and disrespect the Scots/Welsh/Irish who fought by ignoring them? Not a bad docu but a lot could not be heard due to battle ambience, it was the first world war with the Revolutionary war being the second world war.
What a great movie and it validates my thoughts moncalm was a incompetent general moncalm had the biggest and best fort of all of America's and he fought outside its walls thats incompetent all he had to do was hold the British and wait for reinforcements a few hours away the French gave that win to the British on purpose
@@BlackFlameOfHatred Quite the opposite, Wolfe was clearly a competent general and strategist who outsmarted Montcalm, that is fact, not the fiction from your statement...Doh!
Montcalm didn't lose on purpose, he made a bad decision by attacking and not waiting for reinforcements. If he had held his position and waited for Bougainville, Wolfe's position would have been untenable. Alas it was not to be. My ancestors (and sympathies) were all on the French side but I find it incredibly sad that the British graves are lost and under a road or parking lot. This dishonors both sides treating them like this.
Too bad entirely that the British won this war. France would have been a far better master for Canada and the native peoples. For the most part I think they understood this.
@@frederickmagill9454 Yes indeed, French administration of Algeria was a great model (sic) for the administration of colonies. Such a kind and loving imperialism.
@@frederickmagill9454that was a different french regime. Algeria was under french Republic. New France was under the Kingdom of France. Actually if the French won the war. The american revolution would have never happened thus preventing the French revolution.
Give me a break 😂😂😂, France is falling apart from immigration and the corruption of the EU which the rest of the world is laughing at. France voted for a globalist banker who destroyed France who are now the bank of Europe now Britian has left the unelected unaccountable greedy corrupt thieving traitorous EU for many reasons. Your comment is hilarious and desperate 😂😂😂 no wonder the British always kicked the french arses in battle alot more often than not. Enjoy your new movie Napoleon 😂😂😂 that fake history load of nonsense. 🇬🇧🇺🇲🇬🇧🇺🇲🇬🇧🇺🇲🇮🇱
At the point in September 1759, after two and a half months of siege and bombardment, the whole city was into rubbles, famine was rampant and their was not hope for help from France especially when the Saint-Laurent was completely controlled by the British.
The sad impression you get from this is a sort of sulking resentment by many of the French that a force (administrative, navy, army, marines, etc) superior in each and every respect achieved its objective. Canadians can only be grateful that the British won. What would Canada be like if the French had won? As successful and attractive as it is today? (obviously, like all countries, with its own faults). Thankfully, there is no need to even consider the question.
And with that kind of reasoning, the British can only be sorry that the Grande Armée was unable to cross the Channel and that the RAF won the battle of Britain, making it impossible for Hitler's army to do the same. What would Britain be like if the French or nazi Germany had won?
@@jean-louislalonde6070 Can you just imagine the Nazis hand over Quebec to the Vichy French to govern. I suspect the Quebecois would not have willing gone along with that.
wolfe was the biggest coward he was so scared of Montcalm, therefore, he burned villages killed innocent natives, children's and women. Le Marquis de Montcalm was a great general even with 10 times lesser soldiers than the Brits
General Wolfe was clearly a great general and strategist, despite how his faults are emphasised here three fold. Also disappointing how the French graves have statues, grave stones, inscriptions etc plus a building holding Montcalm's supposed bones (now confirmed not his), but the British graves are under a roadway. This shows how the French Canadians have tried to erase the true happenings at Quebec...very sad !
You don't honor the memory of a man who ordered the raping of women and burning of villages and whose conquest threatened your very own survival. Last time I was in London I didn't see any Adolf Hitler statue, and I am certain there are none either anywhere in the former Soviet Union.
Brilliant piece of history brought to life. Well told and acted out. Cheers from a Yank whose people came from Sandwich, England on the HMS Hercules in 1635 at Plymouth and were rebels in the revolution.
Greetings Cousin !!...👍 🇬🇧 !
Excellent presentation!
Really need to do something about the background music and battlefield noise drowning out the narration.
I was just given a book on my families genealogy, and found out that James Hamilton (my ancestor) fought with Wolfe, I am absolutely enthralled with this battle now. I have so many questions.
The French handed Quebec over to the British so many things just don't make sense
R you serious, we didn’t hand over shit
My ancestors were Canadian Maritime Acadians, proven by DNA, which means you owe me reparations.
Excellent documentary!!!!
The worst pain imaginable to any many are kidney stones. I am surprised Wolfe could even stand.
@user-sc3ts6lf8rhow could you possibly know that you ridiculous person 😂😂😂
I found this historical clip very informative and interesting, yet when we learned about this significant battle at school 60 tears ago, it was so full of indoctrination that most of us kid's hated history... and the rote memorizing of dates & names. Hopefully by now, people like those who produced this excellent video have changed all that.
Bravo! Great rendition of an important piece of the history of the Americas.
What would have been nice to see are the gardens and magnificent statue of Saint Joan of Arc, where the Plains of Abraham border the City of Québec.
I'm heading to Quebec in October (2024). Thanks for posting!
Too bad the people who did this did not have sense enough to lower the background noise/music when the narrator is speaking. They also seem to forget that not all Indians fought with the French. The Iroquois were English allies.
It's kinda funny how it gets painted when we learn about it in history class today, we're always taught that because of the different ways the British and French went about colonizing the new world, the Natives saw the French as less intrusive... which may be true relatively speaking, since Napoleon had no problem selling massive amounts of french territory in the new world. Kinda suggests they didn't put down roots too deep. However, the Iroquoise almost never get mentioned and you're almost forced to guess they sided with the French, without knowing any better.
@@Templarspartan Louis XV was King of France during the twilight years of New France (Quebec) and Acadia (New Brunswick and Cape Breton), Napoleon became Emperor after the French Revolution which happened a couple decades after the British had control of upper and lower Canada. The French being outnumbered by the British colonies in North America went to greater lengths to secure native allies. The Iroqouis confederacy weren't particularly fans of the British but absolutely hated the Huron, who where allied with the French
The Iroquois traded either the English but for most of the time were neutral when it came to war.
The French most definitely were better to the Indians. The integrated with them in settlements and ways of life. Because they didn't seek to conquer by the time of the Seven years War, they were outnumbered by the English something like 20:1.
@@flintandball6093 , you need to go look up the facts instead of just giving opinions that suit your agenda. One of Champlain's first adventures was to go with the Hurons and Algonquins in an attack on the Iroquois in 1609, just one year after he founded Quebec. This laid the foundation for the alliances thereafter. Nice attempt at setting up a strawman argument. The facts that the English out numbered the French has nothing at all to do with what I wrote.
Well I'm sure they learned real quick when they got slaughtered few years later by the English they should have stay with the French and not turned on them for money🤔 💵
Great documentary
Merci beaucoup !
The script has the participants using the term "guerrilla warfare" . That term was not yet coined at that time ; not until Napoleonic Wars. Perhaps it might have been more accurate to have them using the term "Indian Style" warfare.
The fact the term 'guerilla war' was not invented in the 1700s does not mean it cannot be used today to describe the use of this method of fighting. A 'skulking way of war' might be a term to use as well, as this style of war was not unique to the 'Indians' of the New World.
Great video but they could lose the music
This story takes serious shortcuts with reality. Looking back it is easy to say that this battle was the turning point that gave North America to England. It was not. Quebec surrenderred five days later. There was another battle fought almost on the same premises the following spring, a battle won by the French led by chevalier de Lévis. Moreover, the Seven Years War was fought on various continents (India, West Africa, the West Indies, Europe). The fate of New France could have been way different had the French negociators decided to keep it. But then France would have had to cede something else somewhere.
You are right that a second engagement was fought and won by the French the following year. But it failed to take back Quebec, and ultimately changed very little towards the forgone conclusion that it was all over for France.
When three British columns converged on Montreal, causing final capitulation, the British had won and conquered Quebec and Canada without a doubt. To deny this is to depart wishfully from reality.
@@safeysmith6720 You missed my point. Battles are won or lost but the final result is decided at the negociation table. Granted France lost the war and had to cede something but it could have ceded the West Indies or Louisiana in order to keep Canada.
The fact that the British army was in Quebec and Montreal is irrelevant. Empires are all about gaining/accessing resources. France accounted its losses and decided to: 1) let go of Canada (fur trade) while keeping a foothold in St-Pierre et Miquelon (fishing), 2) cede Louisiana to Spain BEFORE the final peace treaty so Britain wouldn't get it and 3) recovering the West Indies (sugar). But France could have decided to keep Canada and let go of the fishing industry and/or sugar plantations and/or Louisiana. Then the British army would have left Canada.
There were in England some people who, while the war was ongoing, had concerns regarding France losing in America. They feared the colonists, freed from the French presence, would push for secession. I also know that Choiseul-Pralin, the French negociator, felt that way as well and considered the peace treaty was the best outcome he could get given the context.
@ However negotiations go, and who decides to trade this for that, doesn’t change that on the tactical level, Britain had taken complete possession of Quebec/Canada on the map.
It was now a bargaining chip for Britain. France could “decide” to keep it in exchange for something else, only if Britain agreed. France did not have possession of it when negotiations began. Britain did.
To England? You surely mean to Great Britain. The 1707 Act of Union created Great Britain, it was the British Army made up of English/Scots/Welsh/Irish not an English Army that sat under a British Parliament as the English parliament had ceased to exist. Its a common mistake by North Americans to refer to England/English.
@@1984isHereNow You're right. Scots, Welsh, Irish, other nations conquered by the English.
Excellent!
The British Empire - - - not the English Empire, who wrote the introductory speel?
Oh I'm sure your tears will set it right 😭
Very good!
I really like that they do a lot of scenes with the highlanders.
Only the British ( Capt. Cook), could have achieved such a feat !
True
😅
Wolfe is my 8th great uncle! So proud of my history.
This significant battle is very fascinating and sadly overlooked. It just proves that 1 battle can win a war. The real mystery to me is how Montcalm performed so brilliantly and Fort Carillon and then blundered so bad at Quebec. Why wouldn't he just stay locked up in the fort and wait for Bougainville!!
Brilliant
William Pitt the Older, not the Younger, was politician in charge of British efforts in the war.
This was an excellent film & Documentary about those Historic events. But one thing I believe they got wrong? Was the practice of taking scalp's by the Native tribes on both sides. They said that it was the Natives that used the practice prior too the Europeans arrival in North America. This I think was wrong? And always had read & understood that the English & the other Colonial power's had started these brutal practices of exchanging them in their Fur trading ventures amongst the interior Tribe's. Whose member's weren't allied or associated too them. The scalping was a way of their agent's paying duties too their Indian Allies for killing off the then opposing forces, of their competition. So the practices was started and begun by the Europeans. Not by the Natives as was mentioned in the Film 📽️🎥???
Music louder than narration.
8:30 Sounds like he says William Pitt the Younger here... He means Elder, right? The Younger would've been 3 months old during the Battle of the Plains of Abraham.
Superb documentary! Very interesting period and conflict. A book just published, titled "Aukewingeketawso", including reproduced period documents, summarizes the French Indian War era with special focus on a man named Charles Langlade (1729 - 1800), who initially led Native American warriors, Canadians and French against the British between 1752-60 before afterwards swearing allegiance to British after the French were defeated and later aided the former in their (failed) efforts in American Revolution against the United States. A very interesting read.
Wolfe gave them hot stuff !
Yeah bloody pee
@@marcafterdark1003and still beat the French.
Wolf was an officer at the final battle Culloden in Scotland. He seen what "Buther Billy did to the Scots " He burned, created a desert & called it peace.
Burning, consuming, killing inhabitants that resist is common throughout history.
An admire of the fighting Scots Wolf had many in his army.
Curling first happen on the St Lawrence during the Winter seige
Well, a very fine vid nice. I love this time of period. And if you guys know that the British at the start of The French and Indian War were losing battles and sieges. The war that a young Virginian named George Washington and his militia, actions started and saw later British commander Major General Edward Braddock died in Monongahela in 1755 ambushed by the French and their Indians allies (Native Americans) and soldiers, such the "Braddocks massacre" and a lot of redcoats died that day and Washington was brave and lucky and managed to escape, at 1754 - 1755 campaign. Then the Siege of Fort William Henry in 1757 and the Massacre of the British soldiers' men women and children from the Indians allied to the French was another win of Moncalm's. Montcalm was in Ticonderoga in 1758 and his victory against all odds then the tide of the war changed and we have Wolfe at the siege of Louisbourg 1758 won and took the city and then the final battle at Quebec Montcalm's mistake to go and faced the British out in the battlefield and not to stay in the walls and the errors in the battlefield were a lot and that's all of the major battles of the war in America back then the British won the war the French lost the war. Some thoughts and info from my favorite period of wars and heroes and more again awesome vid!👍👍
The final battle was not at Quebec. It took another year with the fall of Montreal to finally subdue the French in New France.
It is such an American myopic idea that "George Washington and his militia, actions started" the French and Indian/Seven Years War. It is odd as well, as it almost seems like this is stated with pride.
Clearly there is little to no understanding of the interlude of détente that took place between the end of the War of the Austrian succession and the opening of the French and Indian War/Seven Years War. During this period there were episodes of open conflict and efforts at destabilisation between France and Britain. Washington's little fracas was just one of these.
@@EdinburghFive Yeah you have a point I missed that about Montreal I just read in Wikipedia. All that I posted are from reading books and I have not read anything about Montreal before but yeah as you said it was the final battle at 1760 good point.
@@MHG571 A lot of the history books focus on Quebec and forget the rest.
Pitt the elder or Pitt the younger - a 50/50 choice which this documentary got wrong. lf only there were some history book the makers could have consulted.
Brother says “the First World War” like the war of the grand alliance, war of Spanish succession, and war of Austrian succession weren’t that before this war. Like this is just a part 4 of a 70 years long on and off “world war”. I still love the documentary but that term is a pet peeve of mine 😂
Roman was my history teacher in high school😉
Wolfe's death in battle may have saved him from an excruciating death. Sad on all accounts.
At 47 minutes, the British advance flying the later union flag, at this time the Irish state was not part of the union and the diagonal red strips were not part of the British flag.
Irish Catholic fought with the French and Irish Protestant fought with the British
@@marcafterdark1003 This does not explain the wrong flag being used in the video reenactment.
@@EdinburghFiveit wasn't wrong actually, please do your research properly.
@@britishpatriot7386It's definitely the wrong flag, the current union flag did not exist until decades following this war. It's a common error, as the 3-cross union flag WAS used during the Napoleonic Wars/ War of 1812. The wrong union flag is shown numerous times throughout this documentary, both CGI and real flags. Napoleonic era ensigns tend to be more common on a lot of existing "age of sail" ships which weren't terribly different between the 7 Years War and Napoleonic Wars, thus they often appear in shots of Napoleonic-styled ships being used as stand-ins for a slightly earlier era. Lots of people also just don't know the difference in the first place, hence the mix of union flags throughout the film.
General Wolfe was one of my relatives :D
Britain won North America at the naval battle of Quiberon Bay, from that point on France could no longer reinforce any of her overseas holdings
You know that the Anse au Foulon landing plan drawn up and decided upon by Captain Cook and General Wolfe was taken up by the Allies during the Second World War. The Allies were partly inspired by it for the Normandy landings.
Not too bad for 18th century men who didn't have our technology
Where are the cannons? They had cannons.
I think this is Canadian made definitely not made in America and I'm Canadian
And?
Je suis sûr qu'il y a eu complicité du côté français i.e. traîtrise.
Did Wolfe commit war crimes?
Well, I suppose it depends on your perspective. From mine all war is a crime, but that's only because I hold strong anti-war views.
The burning of homes and farms, while giving explicit orders not to harm civilians, might seem like just a good strategy -- and it is in much the same way that the Indians scalping people as a terror tactic is.
Consider that, back in the 1700s, people didn't just go to the store and get food the way we do today. People had to grow and store their food and the basic necessities of survival. Burning down someone's farm and homes, leaving them with nothing but the clothes on their backs (if that) is practically condemning people to slow starvation. The fact that it is mentioned that winter would be coming soon, and you can add exposure as another certain hardship.
Is that a war crime? You tell me.
Yes, it can be considered as a war crime. Burning farms, stealing crops, killing cattle and horses to feed the Brits along with even cutting apple orchards and taking away farmers' hunting muskets. Civilians were killed and left to starve just ahead of the long hard winter ahead.
Wolfe took also part in the deportation of Acadians along with Lawrence and other commanding officers who took part in the battle on the Plains of Abraham, They rooted most Acadians out of what is now Nova Scotia in 1755, taking away all their belongings, theirs homes, their land and sending 10 000 Acadians throughout their colonies and Europe.
very good....................i could have ancestors on both sides
I being Scottish decent, would have stood with Montcalm, for what Wolf did at Culloden , to Hell with Butcher Cumberland !
You ridiculous wannabe victims of nothing invaded England just before that battle, you Scots slaughtered whole towns on the way to London until you realised the English were coming for a fight then ran back to Scotland, you got your butts kicked and it was justified. It was the Irish and Scottish who for hundreds of years used to invade England and slaughtered many innocent people and took thousands of slaves too but then the tables turned and you got a taste of your own medicine ( then you play the little victims) so don't give me the English are bad crap you ridiculous hypocrite.
Half the soldiers on the " English " side
were Scots l! Try fact checking...
If it wasn't for Fake History Scotland would have NO history at all...!!
Wolfe was aide-de-camp to the Duke of Cumberland during the Jacobite Rising. He was implacable because he had no choice. The duke himself killed these men who refused to obey a direct order. I have the biography book on General Wolfe at home. He mentions in these memoirs that he had bad memories of this campaign
A 30-minute battle that changed the course of history in North America. Unfortunately, the war for independence among individuals and countries rages today just check the latest news on January 6th, 2020 in Washington D.C.
Dumb democrats and leftist woke types and the pathetic hypocrite race hustlers vs the sane Americans. My money is on the sane Americans who are waking up in huge numbers like in Europe too nowadays.
Montcalm doesn't have the choice to go on this battlefield....he had to take the chance.....better to fight there than into the city with civils who could be killed in their own place...
The Act of Union was in 1707, why does this narrator keep calling the United Kingdom "England"?
2.54 It wasn't England, it was Great Britain, you even show Great Britain on the map. England is just one part of Great Britain. 12.26 "A16,000 English army" 12.40 "The French fire into the English Army" , 12.44 "The British are shot to pieces", 42.56 "undaunted the young Scotsmen practically bound up" Make you mind up, is it the British or just the English or now is it the Scots? For the record, after 1707 and the Act of Union there was no English Army, no Scottish Army, no Welsh Army, there was a British Army made up of the afore mentioned and Irish lads. why do you choose to ignore and disrespect the Scots/Welsh/Irish who fought by ignoring them? Not a bad docu but a lot could not be heard due to battle ambience, it was the first world war with the Revolutionary war being the second world war.
You know in 2009 people stopped calling Native Canadian/Americans "Indian".
Oh America, any chance to be racist lmao
what is with the stupid music, one can hardly hear what is spoken.
🇬🇧イギリス 杉本全充すぎもとまさみち 🇫🇷フランス 滝川雅美たきがわまさみ
What a great movie and it validates my thoughts moncalm was a incompetent general moncalm had the biggest and best fort of all of America's and he fought outside its walls thats incompetent all he had to do was hold the British and wait for reinforcements a few hours away the French gave that win to the British on purpose
Also show how coward Wolf was
@@BlackFlameOfHatred Quite the opposite, Wolfe was clearly a competent general and strategist who outsmarted Montcalm, that is fact, not the fiction from your statement...Doh!
@@garrysmith-w3g sorry but 8.7 million person disagree with you !
@@garrysmith-w3g yeah he was all british are coward!
Montcalm didn't lose on purpose, he made a bad decision by attacking and not waiting for reinforcements. If he had held his position and waited for Bougainville, Wolfe's position would have been untenable. Alas it was not to be.
My ancestors (and sympathies) were all on the French side but I find it incredibly sad that the British graves are lost and under a road or parking lot. This dishonors both sides treating them like this.
Too bad entirely that the British won this war. France would have been a far better master for Canada and the native peoples. For the most part I think they understood this.
Yes Joseph you are correct, Algeria has shown us that.
@@frederickmagill9454 Yes indeed, French administration of Algeria was a great model (sic) for the administration of colonies. Such a kind and loving imperialism.
@@EdinburghFivewell said.
@@frederickmagill9454that was a different french regime. Algeria was under french Republic. New France was under the Kingdom of France. Actually if the French won the war. The american revolution would have never happened thus preventing the French revolution.
Give me a break 😂😂😂, France is falling apart from immigration and the corruption of the EU which the rest of the world is laughing at. France voted for a globalist banker who destroyed France who are now the bank of Europe now Britian has left the unelected unaccountable greedy corrupt thieving traitorous EU for many reasons. Your comment is hilarious and desperate 😂😂😂 no wonder the British always kicked the french arses in battle alot more often than not. Enjoy your new movie Napoleon 😂😂😂 that fake history load of nonsense. 🇬🇧🇺🇲🇬🇧🇺🇲🇬🇧🇺🇲🇮🇱
This day will go dOwn in infamy. ..
Why did the French not stay behind their walls? They had every advantage.
There was no wall outside the city!
At the point in September 1759, after two and a half months of siege and bombardment, the whole city was into rubbles, famine was rampant and their was not hope for help from France especially when the Saint-Laurent was completely controlled by the British.
Walker James Miller Elizabeth Garcia Susan
I’m glad the British won.
I'm not.
@@angusyates828 Too bad.
@@angusyates828 Are you an apologist its the fashion now.?
Why ? U must be british then...
British : “You French fight for money, while we British fight for honor.”
French: “Sir, a man fights for what he lacks the most.”
French being cowardly
As usual 😂
They fought for their country, braver than most
yea like in Dunkirk ...
@@slambam6191 They were brave there
@@brandonmireles3249 cognitive dissonance much?
God Bless Wolfe
The sad impression you get from this is a sort of sulking resentment by many of the French that a force (administrative, navy, army, marines, etc) superior in each and every respect achieved its objective. Canadians can only be grateful that the British won. What would Canada be like if the French had won? As successful and attractive as it is today? (obviously, like all countries, with its own faults). Thankfully, there is no need to even consider the question.
And with that kind of reasoning, the British can only be sorry that the Grande Armée was unable to cross the Channel and that the RAF won the battle of Britain, making it impossible for Hitler's army to do the same. What would Britain be like if the French or nazi Germany had won?
@@jean-louislalonde6070 Can you just imagine the Nazis hand over Quebec to the Vichy French to govern. I suspect the Quebecois would not have willing gone along with that.
@@jean-louislalonde6070you still crying 😭😭😭 grow up crybaby 😂
Quebec would be free
You would have Croissants for breakfast instead of Bacon and Eggs..?? Quel horreur...!!!
wolfe was the biggest coward he was so scared of Montcalm, therefore, he burned villages killed innocent natives, children's and women. Le Marquis de Montcalm was a great general even with 10 times lesser soldiers than the Brits
Shhhh, go back to playing with your crayons 🖍
Appreciate his struggle, ok? I'm an Indonesian but i love Wolfe
What matters is....who won?
I don’t know a ton about this, but…Wolfe won and Montcalm lost. What else matters?
The French and Natives had been burning, looting and killing at New England homes and settlements for decades.
Learn history.
A whiff of grapeshot and 264 years of Quebec cope.
General Wolfe was clearly a great general and strategist, despite how his faults are emphasised here three fold. Also disappointing how the French graves have statues, grave stones, inscriptions etc plus a building holding Montcalm's supposed bones (now confirmed not his), but the British graves are under a roadway. This shows how the French Canadians have tried to erase the true happenings at Quebec...very sad !
You don't honor the memory of a man who ordered the raping of women and burning of villages and whose conquest threatened your very own survival. Last time I was in London I didn't see any Adolf Hitler statue, and I am certain there are none either anywhere in the former Soviet Union.
They are soft crybaby losers.
The signs of Quebecs loss have been everywhere and is everywhere, we do not hide the history of our country