The Battle of Buena Vista 1847 (animated battle map)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 14 окт 2024
- If you are watching this, then you're probably a history buff like myself. It was hard not to put too many details in it but regardless it stretched a bit. Battle starts at 4:56 mark. This video is solely for EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES. It's a hobby of mine to visualize historical battles, I hope you enjoy watching it!
P.S. try to wait it at your highest setting possible so you can see the names of the commanders.
I do not own the rights to the songs or images
Credit-
No copyright intended, all Image rights go to:
-Alamy Stock Photo @ www.alamy.com/
-Granger Historical Archive @ www.granger.com/
-The Mississippi Rifles by Ken Riley
-The battle of Buena vista by Carl Nebel
-Battle of Buena Vista. VIEW OF THE BATTLE-GROUND AND BATTLE OF “THE ANGOSTURA” FOUGHT NEAR BUENA VISTA, MEXICO FEBRUARY 23RD 1847. by Henry R. Robinson
-Pintrest
-Flickr
-GoogleMaps and GoogleEarth
“Map data ©2017 Google"
Map from- Carney, S. A. (2008). Desperate stand: the Battle of Buena Vista. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Army Center of Military History.
No copyright intended, all MUSIC rights go to:
All songs by Kevin MacLeod
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0
-"Crusade"
-"We Got Trouble"
-"Volatile Reaction"
-"Failing Defense"
Download @
incompetech.co....
Sources-
Betancourt Cid, C. (n.d.). Los San Patricios . Relatos e Historias Mexico, (61), 62-67.
Carney, S. A. (2008). Desperate stand: the Battle of Buena Vista. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Army Center of Military History.
Eisenhower, J. S. (1989). So far from God: the U.S. war with Mexico, 1846-1848. New York: Random House.
Fowler, W. (2007). Santa Anna of Mexico. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
Lavender, D. (2003). Climax at Buena Vista: the decisive battle of the Mexican-American War. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Mansfield, E., Ripley, R., Carleton, J. H., & Henry, W. (1851). Battle of Buena Vista. The Southern Quarterly Review, 3(5). quod.lib.umich.....
Salisbury, Richard V. (1987). Kentuckians at the Battle of Buena Vista. The Filson Club History Quarterly Vol. 61, No. I, January 1987. www.latinameric....
Vicente, R. P. (1956). Mexico: a traves de los siglos. Mexico: Cumbre. pp. 608-627.
www.antorcha.ne....
Villarreal Lozano, J. V. (n.d.). La Batalla Que Mexico Pudo Ganar a Estados Unidos. Relatos e Historias Mexico, (93), 32-45.
"Without bayonets, forming a square would have been pointless." Ah! I see what you did there!
I don't get this reference?
HKO2006 pointless.. you know bayonets are pointy and without makes it pointless
Ah, got it! Thanks!
Hahahaha.
Also when he says “desertions were high (in the desert)” LMAO
Excellent video. I often go by a rubric of how much praise I should give these sorts of videos on RUclips: "if I looked up an article on Wikipedia, would I learn just as much?" I'm not dissing other RUclipsrs, because they still do hard work, but I think in actual educational content you have a significant advantage over others. Keep up the great work! The Mexican War videos just go to show that motivated soldiers, used poorly, will always be wasted.
wrr
I have a more pointed method: I compare a video to the Wikipedia article to see how much was obviously plagiarized especially word for word copying. For a great many history YT channels, it's common. Montemayor, however, clearly puts a lot of independent research into his videos and all the custom graphics are a huge value add.
Amazing! That was a close call indeed. Golden rule of any army marching into battle is that the army marches on its belly. Food and water supply is critical to any army.
Thank you. and yup this battle shows the importance of LOGISTICS, you can't send your army without food!
This led to the development of Mexican Taco Trucks which are now throughout the U.S. ready to re-supply the forward forces (lol)
Amateurs study tactics, professionals study logistics
+New Jerusalem Didn't the Hobbits eventually win in Lord of the Rings? :D
Ironic how a guy (Santa Ana) claimed to be the Napoleon of the America's didn't listen to the quote you made by Napoleon.
It's amazing how one-sided this war was when you zoom out, while most of the major battles are close as hell
You should see the results of the franco-prussian war. The Prussians were getting murdered left and right, but they kept the pressure on and won almost every battle, but the body count was high. The chassepot wrecked the Prussians.
That O'Brian guy is a rockstar.
I agree
Montemayor Where could I find more information on him?
O'Brian and two other artillery units was under the command of John J. Hardin who was killed in the battle. John J. Hardin funeral had 15,000 people attend in Jacksonville, Illinois. They named Hardin county Iowa after him. He was a US representative that supported the Mexican-American War. Lincoln opposed the Mexican-American War and because of hardin's death Lincoln became more popular.
wrg, not
The transition from google maps to the drawn map at 5 minutes was great
0:00 The birth of a legend
haha thanks man, I remember like it was yesterday when I uploaded it and felt so proud of myself.
This is without doubt one of the best battlefield animation maps I have ever seen! Your depiction of the battle of Buena Vista shows not only the defensive barriers and advantages that lied with the Mexican and American armies, respectively, but also makes clear that the effective free-hand given to Zachary Taylor's subordinates allowed for a truly effective defense.
What an awesome and well researched content. Not only this video, but all of the channel in general. Please, make more!
Great use of google earth to show the terrain! Looking forward to more videos. =)
thanks!
Seeing it laid bare just how important volunteer units were in this war makes you wonder about the contrast in societies and how that works its way in. The 'landed class' in Mexico had no desire to ever have an equipped much less trained 'working class' and the USA had enough guns in private ownership every rural town seemed to have its own militia.
Well Done! Thank you for the very informative video. Excellent use of maps and animation. I will be watching this one again and again.
Thank you! This was my first attempt at making these mini documentaries. I'm Glad you enjoyed it!
Really enjoying your very informative videos. Well thought out, rich in detail and excellent explanation of not only why 1 side won but why the other lost.
Thanks, I'm glad you liked it! since i do speak Spanish i was able to find Mexican sources/versions of the story and piece them together. it was an advantage while creating this.
Actually, it's pretty terrible. It uses a map that shows Texas, which had been first an independent republic and was by then a US state, as part of Mexico. Not just the disputed part, but the whole of Texas. If you're going to play by those rules, you might as well describe the USA as part of the British Empire.
+Howard Richards maybe I'm wrong or misunderstand, but I'd argue that the map you're talking about wasn't really significant to the core of the content. I don't know enough to even comment on the map being accurate, you might be totally right, but it doesn't really matter.
The maps of consequence were very helpful in understanding the use of local terrain, which is all that really matters when trying to grasp the movements of forces in a battle, which is a big part of this video, although it did focus on geopolitics, and that's what leads to battles it wasn't the main focus of the video.
I enjoyed it very much myself, and no doubt learned a thing or 2, even if there were minor inaccuracies... Such is history...
I fucking love watching your videos dude, I find myself at the edge of my seat, wide eyed, shoveling chips into my mouth. Keep up the good work man.
You're right. Santa Anna should have focused on Scott and left Taylor alone. Taylor's force was tiny compared to Scott's and there was a massive buffer zone of waterless terrain between him and any real targets. Strategically Taylor's army was neutralized. But no! Santa Anna apparently had to try to fight a battle for purely political reasons. And he lost 10.000 good soldiers doing it that could have been put to far better use at Veracruz. Such a waste.
1987MartinT There is a reason why he’s not touted as a hero by Mexicans.
Santa Anna was an arrogant bastard that called himself the "Napoleon of the West" that was highly successful attacking his own people and provinces but when met with any kind of determined resistance floundered repeatedly. His defeat at San Jacinto was so complete in just 18 minutes that Mexico should have kept this guy as far away from a military command as possible. He was bold and aggressive, but equally as impetuous and stupid. He had more in common with Marshal Ney than Napoleon.
@@DarkFilmDirector It has often been said about Ney that he was The Bravest of the Brave, but was not The Smartest of the Smart. So the comparison is at least partially accurate. However Ney was much braver than Santa Anna. At least Ney had the courage to face death with honor when he was captured and sentenced in 1815. When Santa Anna was captured in 1836 he tried to hide by disguising himself as a private.
Trying to destroy Taylor’s army is not exactly that bad of an idea. Santa Anna could have restored in some measure the moral of the troops and nation by achieving a victory, and maybe even liberated the north while he was at it, then return to try to fight off the invasion of Veracruz. That is if the idiot hadn’t apparently disregarded his supply lines while formulating this plan, who in their right mind marches their army to battle with no supplies while in winter?
@DMC12Gauge Santa Anna wasn’t a total idiot, he still managed to get some achievements under his belt, although this defeats are more notorious than his victories. But with that said I believe you are heavily disrespecting Ney comparing him to Santa Anna, the guy was one of Napoleons generals for a reason after all.
Been listening to several books on this war, thank you for this visualization. Love the music too!!
I live not far from Manville, Indiana. Manville was settled by a few veterans from the Battle of Buena Vista. Manville was called Buena Vista for some time before the name changed to Manville. In the late 1900's we had a Buena Vista festival and invited all the Mexicans working mostly in tobacco. A good time was had by all.
This is really good work. There aren't many good videos on the Mexican-American war on RUclips unfortunately as it has become a bit of a "forgotten war" like the Spanish-American War or even the Korean War. You've done an excellent job pulling together the right mix of strategic and tactical insights laid out in a well-paced and well-illustrated format. I particularly appreciate your use of maps and satellite data.
Awesome video, The 19th century fighting gets hard to follow at times but your video is perfect showing the movement of the troops and the locations that they fought at and in. Keep up the amazing work!
Excellent set of 2 videos finalizing in this one. Your variety of map types and use of diagrams is superb. Good to see you concentrate on these less known battles of the Mexican-American war. Will be eager to see more on the Veracruz landing and the march to and capture of Mexico City.
(BTW: your microphone quality is much improved (essentially perfect) by the time you made the Battle of Midway Part 1 video with over 4 Million views. Felicidades!
thanks man! this one was my first video and it started it all. really all i had to do was simply buy a better quality mic to improve the sound. regarding the Mexican american war im thinking about covering the battle of San pasqual simply because its the only battle nearest my hometown, LA and because its rather obscure.
@@MontemayorChannel Great plan. I think covering San Pasqual battle will also be of interest to others since it was close to LA and this appeals to a lot of folks.
WHY ARE THESE VIDEOS SO ADDICTING!!!!!!?????????
They're laced with history! History is paramount to a great future! 😁🇺🇸
His excellent commentary.
Yeah. It's strangely awesome. I watch a lot of history, including similiar content, but this content is compelling for some reason. Too bad there isnt more.
Because they're based on structured information instead of sensational drama.
If you are at all interested in Roman history, Historia Civilis has some amazing videos. Montemayor is excellent, but Historia Civilis is the master of making you care dearly for little rectangles and squares.
11:58 Pointless. Ha. I don't care if that was intentional or not, but it was punny. Classic :D
haha yeah it was unintentional , only after i made it did i realize the pun. LOL
Thank you for this great video! My Great Uncle, Pvt Major James Updike Jr, was killed at about 14:00 when the 2nd KY was decimated.
It's interesting to hear of Braxton Bragg being a competent and reliable commander, but this may have been a major factor in why Jefferson Davis placed such trust in him during the Civil War.
exactly, i was surprised too. he performed well during the mexican american war, maybe that what led him to be posted in high commands.
Honestly, he himself wasn't a bad commander during the American civil war. Unfortunately there were factors working against him.
For one, he was constantly undermined by his subordinates. Many turned against him and tried to sabotage him after the failed Kentucky Invasion. And that campaign was doomed to failure from the start, since it hinged on vast numbers of Confederate sympathizers joining his army. And they never did, because they never existed in such numbers, despite what some of the advocates for the campaign had promised Bragg. And those same advocates turned around and blamed Bragg for the Kentucky Campaign's failure, to mask the fact that they themselves had greatly overestimated the popularity of the Confederate cause in that state.
The worst offender was by far Leonidas Polk, for the simple reason that he was extremely arrogant, and refused to serve under any general he considered less skilled than himself(i.e. any general). And the man was an invenerate schemer who managed to turn many others in the army who were hesitant to undermine their superior officer into joining him. Among the most important members in his clique were Simon Buckner and William Hardee, both of whom were in crucial positions in and around the Confederate Army of Tennessee.
The reason Bragg never got rid of the men who were undermining him was because he couldn't. Unlike Lee, Bragg didn't have the authority to choose his own subordinate officers. He had them assigned to him by the government. It wasn't until during the siege of Chattanooga that Jefferson Davis removed the agitator, Polk, from the army and gave him an independent command elsewhere(much to Polk's aggravation, as he had been hoping that he would get to replace Bragg).
Another major problem was that the Confederate Army of Tennessee was second on the priority list for EVERYTHING going to the armies. On the top of the list was always the Army of Northern Virginia. They got more supplies, more reinforcements, and they got the cream of the crop when it came to officers. The latter was why the officers assigned to Bragg(with the exception of a few standouts) weren't the best. Because Lee got to assemble his own dream team of generals it inadvertently weakened Bragg, because it meant that quite often he had to make due with the men Lee didn't want. And, more often than not, Lee didn't want them for a reason. The slow flow of reinforcements also meant that the odds Bragg faced were frequently as bad, and sometimes worse than Lee's. And he faced them with an army in a far worse state. 3.4 to 1 at Perryville(the only reason this battle was even survivable was because of Buell's slowness to bring his full might to bear), 1.24 to 1 at Stones River, 1.77 to 1 at Tullahoma, 2 to 1 at Chattanooga(once Longstreet moved off to Knoxville). The only battle Bragg fought where he had the numerical advantage was Chickamauga. And even then it was 62.000 Federals against 68.000 Confederates. With the numbers that close, I'd argue he hadn't really achieved numerical superiority to a degree that mattered. Only numerical equality.
At the end of the day Braxton Bragg was not a very successful general during the American Civil War. But it would be difficult for any generals to be successful against the odds and obstacles he had to face. In fact many would probably have done far worse. And arguing that he was the worst general of the war is way off. There were much worse.
@@1987MartinT I must concur with your valid points. As a student of the Mexican-American War, the Civil War, and the Indian Wars, I did find it hard to believe that the competent performance given by Bragg during the Mexican-American War was not surpassed by an equally effective command during the American Civil War. He displayed decisive decision-making skills during the Mexican War with his battery of artillery being at the forefront of many of the most important engagements of the conflict, yet then was a mediocre leader during the Civil War. You seemed to have filled this void with the fact that not only was Bragg in command of many questionably good officers (Hardee, Cheatham, Breckinridge, and, of course, Cleburne, being the exceptions to the rule), his biggest problem was that he never received the resources the Army of Northern Virginia did, much like his past subordinate from the Kentucky Campaign and longest serving commander of the Army of the Trans-Mississippi West, Kirby Smith. Both men had to make do with fewer numbers, illusions of substantial aid from slave states still attached to the Union (Bragg with Kentucky, Smith with Kentucky and Missouri), limited industrial output, and either a paucity or mirage-like existence of railroads and adequate road networks.
Tbf he did decently in the american civil war, but the greater achievements of Lee in the eastern theatre meant any small success in the west was always ultimately overshadowed by Grant smashing the confederates in the next battle.
@@1987MartinT I agree with you but there is also a need for charisma in higher command and it seems like Bragg was quite lacking in that department. He was certainly not helped nor was he balanced out by his subordinates like Lee was, but part of that was his own doing. We are talking about a guy who while serving as a Company Commander got in an argument with the post Quartermaster, which was himself, and had to take the issue to the post commander. His performance in this battle though does show that he was quite capable and could do exactly what needed to be done just in the nick of time and does show why Jefferson Davis thought so high of him.
Astonishing! Learned a lot...much praise for the information derived and deciphered in order to make this presentation. So in 2022 we look back and see the courage, the sacrifice and the vision of the men on both sides of this battle...
Another awesome documentary! I've watched almost all of them now, and I'm really glad I discovered your channel. I like the way you always give the details and narrative in a complete and straight forward manner without wasting time or slanting the story toward one side or the other, and I'm looking forward to all your future content. Thanks for posting these, you do a fine job, and make a great presentation!
This channel and your insights and production value are awesome! Especially valuable were the strategic movements displayed on the google earth map of the area. Thanks and keep up the great work :)
I love the feel of your videos, there like a nother (pretty famus) youtuber called historia civilis.
But he does rome and you the U.S.A.
At this battle, a 3rd great uncle of mine, 19 year-old John Alexander Graham, from southern Indiana, was killed on February 23, 1847: "a musket ball of the enemy striking him in the neck which caused instantaneous death" according to a sworn statement by his father. This sparked my interest in the Battle of Buena Vista. Your presentation makes far more clear than any text I've read about he movement of his unit, the 3rd Indiana. John was the son of a Scots-Irish immigrant from the Ireland. The only reference I could find to the burial of the American dead were that they were buried by regiment, but that by 1965 only the foundation of wall remained of the burial area, with bones sticking out of the ground. According the the University of Texas, Arlington library website "A Continent Divided", the burial site is on the grounds of the Coahuila Agricultural Station located on the site of the former Hacienda Buena Vista. Does anyone have current information on the status of these burial grounds?
I'd say "by the skin of his teeth" would be an understatement for this battle.
Another very excellent video. You certainly are the best at explaining battles I've ever seen.
You do a really good job of mixing digital maps from Google and the context to follow it up with. Great work all around, I appreciate you putting these videos out there, much love from California
Wonderful video. Incredibly informative.
Amazing video! Definitely helped me with my research and is just a good explanation of a topic that doesn't get the attention it deserves. Thank you!
The end of battle was a bit of a "Not cowards, sir. Willing enough. But they’re all [...] dead" moment. For context, this quote was from a soldier who fought in the battle of Loos, on the western front of WWI, responding to his platoon commander ordering an attack. Can't attack with no food. Although, in Buena Vista, at least the commanders realized the dire situation of their troops.
Awesome job sir. I loved the topographical breakdown.
This is VERY well done, as are the others you did. You should do more!
This was an excellent presentation. Thank you.
These videos are addictive, in this war I don't trust the numbers so much as they vary depending on the source.
Could you make a video about they first battle of Tabasco?, it would be an interesting battle to review
It would have been nice if you had left the Americanized vision of the battle and mentioned more information about the Mexican army.
Since many political and even cultural events that would affect Mexico arose from this battle
, like the mythical "Dragon March"
I like the battle movements and commentary. This map is not as good as the civil war ones. Not sure if this was done first. But I like to learn more about these battles. Well done commentary.
I figured this is a better way to reach you, but do you think it might be possible to have more Mexican-American war videos? Its a little selfish to say, but the WW2 videos are absolutely fantastic and provide an excellent description of the events, but Unf to your more avid history fans, they are a bit over done, Maybe not your specific battles you cover, but just WW2 in general is very much over done, and I would love to see more smaller known stuff such as the Mexican American war like you have listed here, Heck maybe even some civil war battles covered! That seems to be a section that hasn't been covered very good! Just an idea. Overall have been with this channel for quite some time before you kinda got a bit more famous, but I have to say overall you're content is top quality stuff.
LOL this is a better way to reach me as a fact, not too many comment on this video so Ill notice it. but yeah man, my goal has always been to cover battles that arent that widely known. at the moment Im fascinated with the pacific war 1941-1942. so ill be working on those in the near future. for the good news im definitely going to cover Mexican revolution, with pancho villa and all. the Mexican american war, not so much anymore... after Buenas vista the mexican army was never at a strength to actually threaten the US army so when i read about the battles of 1847 the writing is on the wall and thus i dont find those battles particularly interesting. other battles i do plan to cover are the New mexico campaign 1862, Lees seven days battle, Grants Fort henry battle. and honestly i was going to go straight for Napoleonic battles but at the moment theres so many other channels focusing on them so id rather not. but remember I don't upload frequently so, Itll be a while before i get to those lesser known battles. and thanks for the compliment! a year ago i never thought my channel would have grown so much but it did, i appreciate the support.
Thank you for making video, both about the strategic and tactical aspects. Without this video, it is very difficult to get a good understanding of this battle.
St. Patrick's batalion is an interesting side note to the history of this conflict, gladly not lost to time. Thanks for mentioning.
My Great-Great-Great Grandfather, commanded a company of Texas Rangers that scouted for Zackary Taylor at the Battle of Buena Vista. They did a great job of letting Taylor know what Santa Anna was up to. This was the second time my Great-Great-Great Grandfather fought against Santa Anna. The first time was at the Battle San Jacinto, where he commanded the artillery for the Texas Revolutionaries.
Love this content, its uploaded 4 years ago, i know, but i still love it.
The "S" in Illinois is usually silent unless you are pluralizing. Other than that, great video and many thanks for all the hard work!
🚓 watch your grammar 🚨
Thank You for your effort and hard work
I appreciate the kind words, thanks man !
@@MontemayorChannel Do you know if there are any recent photos of the battlefield on the internet ?
Called flying artillery, played a huge part in this battle
You mean the horse artillery?
Well, at least it wasn't the levels of incompetence displayed by some WW1 generals.
Cadorna and Hötzendorf come to mind instantly.
@@finderdiler Legit answer. There hardly are any worse ones.
Hey, great summary. Looks like logistics (once again) in war was the deciding factor.
You need to do more Mexican war videos. I want to know how it ends.
Can you document the carrizal, skirmish during the american expedition of 1916.
Omaha beach next please :)
I would like to see what happen in every area of the beach, the mines, shingle, bunker, and american waves!
I heard that!!!! Been binge watching these things!
it's funny how if a losing army had just done one think they might have won like training or feeding the troops
Logistics always play a huge role, though it is somewhat surprising that on their controlled land the Mexicans lacked a sufficient supply line.
ShogunBean - Thanks for the info!
That’s why there are places name Buena Vista all over USA
Here in Kentucky too
Lots of places name Buena Vista
Any general who describes himself as the new Napoleon, or who accepts that description from others, is guaranteed to NOT be a Napoleon, and should be relieved of command.
1. Before everything collapsed in the retreat from Russia and the disaster at Leipzig, Napoleon took pains to have excellent staff officers administer the logistical support of his armies, constantly reviewing these plans himself, as befitted one who'd declared that an army marches on its stomach. Practically every so-called "new Napoleon" (with perhaps the exception of McClellan) disdains logistics.
2. As a former artillery officer, Napoleon was an innovator and champion of light artillery, which revolutionized the battlefield, and was copied by every competent army. Unexpectedly for a fan of Napoleon, Santa Ana practically ignored modernizing the Mexican army's artillery, so that it was little more than siege artillery sluggishly hauled by draft animals...once set in place, guns couldn't be moved around quickly to adapt to changes on the battlefield.
Santa Anna never described himself as a new Napoleon. That was an American invention.
the reason why mexico lost this war, it was not because of the lack of logistics or weapons technology, it was because of the complete political chaos that mexico had at that time, in the middle of the war, a state of mexico declared itself independent, not only Texas, really "Mexico" as such, did not exist at that time, many felt more attached to the old Spanish colonial government than to the independent elite that created Mexico, in addition, that their inefficiency did not help, Mexico as such, was I believe in 1867, with the victory over France.
Fantastic presentation!! Congratulations!
In the area of Southwestern Georgia, one town is named Montezuma. It was named so by veterans returning from this was. Another town about 35 miles away is named Buena Vista. I wonder if it was named after this battle .
Great vid. Thanks !
Great presentation. I love all of your videos. Truly informative. I am an author of historical fiction and military history. I truly appreciate the information. You should be proud.
One thing about these videos, you would never guess by the way the battle is described, that Mexico lost these battles, except for it being mentioned almost in passing at the very end of the video.
This battle also highlights the failure of leadership to mimic European tactics. This goes for both the United States and Mexico, as the American army's tactics were also very outdated even up until WW1. Simple concepts such as food depots in cities, concentration of forces, and independent functional divisions (such as Napoleon corps system but at a smaller level) would have allowed for Mexico to have a much greater advantage against the Americans. Santa Anna's attempt at leading a massed force where logistics obviously were going to be harsh the bigger the force was, is a huge failure in simple military thought. He would have had a much better chance at sending an advantageous number of men against Taylor whilst still retreating with a major portion of his army to fight against Scott's army. The Mexicans never had technological superiority, but with some good leadership they could have exploited their existing numerical superiority several times.
Could you go back to cover the Mexican American war? This is sadly a very unrecognized war and it’s pretty cool seeing it talked about with videos of this quality.
When you try to get a political victory, but you end up giving the enemy a political and military victory in one battle:
Santa Anna to his past self at the battle's conclusion:
*You weren't supposed to do that.*
......VERY INFORMATIVE..... WELL
NARRATED.... INTERESTING & WELL PUT MILITARY NARRATIVES VIDS .
About to binge all your stuff. :D
I'd like to work with you on doing the battles of Sacramento and Brazito. Sacramento was the greatest feat of arms by the Americans in the war, so often overlooked.
You called the San Patricio's " American" Deserters. I beg to differ. Most of them were not even American Citizens in the First Place. They were Irish Immigrants who were drafted into the Army before they even got off of the boat in their new Country. While in the Army, they were persecuted because of their Catholic Faith. They never saw themselves as "Americans", what they saw themselves as were Free Men, Fighting for their Rights as Catholics, so they joined a Catholic Army. Forty years Later, American Catholics were still undergoing the same kind of Oppression, which led Father Michael Mcgivney, ( Now Saint Michael Mcgivney) to form the Knights of Columbus, so you might say that in a way, the San Patricios were a Precursor to the Knights of Columbus
Also Mexico had outlawed slavery which resonated with the Irish whose life back in Ireland was little better than that of slaves in that there were harshly treated by the English land owners.
The Mexican American war is little more than a footnote in most High School history classes, but it shaped much of the attitude with which the US would later deal all of Latin America.
These videos are so good.
But for the love of god, please say "CAV-ALRY"... not "cal-vary"
haha my bad on that one, I'm sure ill be more alert next time. & thanks!
please god, get this right. For some reason it really makes me wince.
Lol who cares, obviously you knew what he meant
Jack it matters because one is Jesus, and the other is the opposite of Jesus. ;)
Jack, Calvary is the hill where Jesus was crucified and cavalry are horse soldiers.
I wonder if after the retreat of the Mexican army, any of the American commanders where heard to say, "A couple more strategic losses like that and we'll win this war." 🤔
" But remeber this is an exhausted army "
Swedish Empire: I like those odds
I must say that this presentation in my view was very well produced..
Very factual for the most part throughout even though some of your conclusions seem to have arisen from your personal opinions...
I've been very interested in the battles of the Mexican American War myself.
I've had the opportunity to visit, study, photograph and metal detector the Battle site many times over the last six years having lived in Saltillo..
Do you know if there are any photos of the battlefield here on the internet ?
You don't pronounce the S in Illinois. Great work btw!
Yes you do
No you don't. @@TheCrazierz
@@felixthecat580 I do. Deal with it.
WOW so edgy.
People in Illinois mut not be very mart! ;) :D (j/k)
You should talk about the shortcomings that the Mexican army had since 1821, even having a good general it was almost impossible to win, so Mexico never looked for a war against the USA but the USA He always sent offers to buy Mexican territory and sent many illegal settlers to Mexico, the semi-independence of California was also done by American settlers
Love your content!!!
Why is this video 17 minutes while the one in spanish is 20 when they move at the same speed?
Before the war, Santa had already been exiled from México, it was a bad choice to position him again as leader of the militia. In general, the logistics of supplying military and medical resources were not ready for this war.
Another great video. I think it is interesting that the American light artillery could be considered a natural evolution, especially when considering that such forces were first formed by Swedish King Gustavus Adolphus and, later, perfected by Napoleon.
Matthew Kuchinski
I think it was supposed to be revolutionary as in revolutionary in America. Before this battle the Americans didn’t really consider light arty to be useful/effective.
thanks!
very good, thanks fot this
The reason why General Miñon, The 'Lion' of Mexico didn't attack Taylor's force from behind was because of a a red-haired Yankee 'Delilah' her name was Caroline Porter. She was from Lowell Massachusetts and moved to Mexico three years before the war in 1844 to work at a Cotton Factory owned by General Artista himself. She was there to teach the señoritas how to weave cotton cloth. When General Miñon an his 2,500-3,000 lancers left Paloma Pass to surround the U.S force he rode up to the Cotton Factory for refreshments. Here he saw a red-haired lady on top of the factories flat roof waving a handkerchief. The 'Lion' recognized her! Two years before when he was commander at Saltillo that Red-haired lady; Caroline Porter was his mistress! After a cruel war had separated them, they met once again in the cotton factory. He 'surrendered' himself to his mistress. Hours passed so his officers growing impatient went up to the factory and called from him. So then he and his men finally attacked Saltillo. Those two attacks failed and so he retreated to the cotton factory and spent the night with his red-haired mistress. The next day he rejoined Santa Anna at Agua Nueva. He was then placed under arrest and sent to Mexico City. She herself even claimed that the US was victorious because of her, since if General Miñon not stayed in the cotton factory and instead attacked the rear of Taylor's army the U.S army would be surrounded and defeated in no less than one hour. Somehow this did not make any newspapers in the U.S. The only thing I know about her after the battle is that she married a Dragoon.
Yeah...I was thinking, "Wait...Santa Ana wanted to attack north...across the desert? Didn't he order all the water supplies destroyed? Yup! There it is!"
So good! More pls.
Mexican American War showed that volunteer forces ARE capable of fighting and winning, even moreso sometimes, than professional regiments.
Morale plays the largest role in a battle after all
Great job
What Animation Software are you using?!
REPLY
I replied to your message, did you not receive it?
No
"Fighting spirits were still high"
"He was scared of suffering more desertions"
Lol pick one
wrg, any be ok. no such thing as hl
@@zes7215 wtf is wrong you with, you keep commenting "wrg, [nonsense]" you on the spectrum?
its technically fighting if your fighting your own army
fighting spirits were high... he did not want that to change and have more deserters. things were actually going good for a bit and he didn't wanna screw things up anymore. he had thousands desert on the way there
what's so hard to understand? both statements made perfect sense to me
Lee and Grant fighting alongside of each other. 14 years latter battling each other.
Please re do this with better audio. Love your work!
IDK tho, Juvera followed orders and was prepared to execute the plan when the Americans did in fact retreat, plus he could have been enveloped by the dragoons and Mississippi if he tried to attack the American front no?
hey what program do you use for these videos?
for this video powerpoint and then a video editor. but now im using adobe aftereffects, premiere.
Well done!
Great tactical narrative. Santa Ana almost had it!
Excellent
Awesome!
St Patrick's battalion in the Mexican army were n the US army but were treated very by Officer's and after this war it changed for the better. The Irish were on both sides like in many a war since
What was O'Brien's full name? Where could I find more information on him?
This logistics based beginning makes me shudder when I wonder what a commander like Napoleon or Caesar could do with a modern military.
Neither of those generals would have ever moved an army like that. Santa Anna was delusional at best, incompetent at worst. He wasn't capable of leading an army
Here from the battle of Monterrey...quiero saber q paso !!!!!