Sign up for a 14-day free trial and enjoy all the amazing features MyHeritage has to offer. If you decide to continue your subscription, you’ll get a 50% discount when you use this link bit.ly/FlashPointHistory_MH My first civil war video!! Please share on social media and spread word to that special someone who loves civil war history. Also, yes, I do like to say Beauregard's name.
@@FlashPointHx You are not alone. Most every channel I know of that delves into this war, gets shadow banned. The powers that be dont want factual history being taught, because it destroys their narrative, and makes it harder for them to make up their own version of why this war took place. Dont let them stop you from making these. RUclips wants every history channel to go away. I have lived my entire life 35 miles from Shiloh. Near the Hardeman/McNairy county line. I have spent countless hours driving around and walking that hallowed ground. It has always been my place of solace. Ironically, its the most peaceful place Ive ever been. Even though Ive been there over a hundred times in my 42 years of life, each time is a new experience. I still get chills everytime I'm there.
Nothing is underrated man! You’re either the GOAT or you’re a complete fraud and should be fired! Get with the internet mate lol, Yeah this a great channel I don’t know if he’s underrated because I don’t know where they keep the ratings but his voice is great and it’s well written and researched.
Started watching this channel a week or so ago while I’m at work and I’ve been running through the videos too fast, thanks for the putting out some of the best historical content on this site and keeping the monotony of the work day away
Ive been using RUclips for almost five years and in this time I have subscribed to many good history channels and yet only within the last week did this absolutely amazing channel appear in my recommendations. Unbelievable that have been missing out on content that could be tailor made for me. On the bright side I can look forward to binge watching the backlog of these epic uploads. THANKYOU.
This is great stuff. Your video on the bulge and the battle of Bastogne was excellent also. I like how you set up the battle with a 3-5 minute lesson, and then get granular with the details.
I don't know what to say, other than I really enjoy the presentation. The visual element of battles you've grown up just looking at on static maps in books- to THIS. Seriously next gen immersive, and so appreciated! Two thumbs up-
Jackson’s 1862 valley campaign is near and dear to my heart - I read an entire novel on that and spent three days in the Shennendoah Valley tracking Jackson’s path.
@@FlashPointHx Hotchkis (Jackson's map maker). His maps and recon. I have a book (quite large, weighs 5lbs) "The Official Atlas of the Civil War" by Major Davis, US Army, and Hotchkis' original maps of the Valley Campaign are there. If ever there was a campaign to highlight recon, cavalry screening, maneuver, concentration, deception, logistics, and overall strategy the Valley Campaign is a good one to choose. Jackson was from all accounts very "eccentric" (good side story?)
A little piece of trivia about the Battle of Shilo. A "Brown Bess," a 100 year mainstay of the British Army, was picked up off the battlefield. Making it the last known use of a Brown Bess in combat. The Confederate troops at the time, and well into the war, were using whatever arms they could muster.
I’ve always disliked that Shelby Foote quote, if not the man himself. The Civil War didn’t start because Americans refused to “compromise”, it started because some group of Americans wanted to own human beings as property and struck first to make sure they could continue to do so. Also I believe it’s spelled McClellan, but I’m okay with disrespecting the timid borderline Confederate sympathizer who considered himself Napoleon reborn 😅
In my opinion the actual changes from the reinforcements not arriving that night would not have been very momentous. True Grant would not have had the numbers to immediately go on the offensive but he was not at a numerical disadvantage at that point and had prepared defenses. Beauregard was down to 22-28,000 and would now haver to attack fixed positions against an enemy that could still receive resupply and artillery support via the river. Conventional wisdom is that an attacking army should have at least a 2 to 1 advantage to ensure victory. Even had Grant's army been destroyed, Buell's would have arrived shortly and no doubt cleaned up on what was left of the Confederate army.
All very valid points. The South's best shot was on day one if, and that's a big if, they could accomplish a rapid over run and capitulation of the union army and position. As it was the union managed to fall back somewhat intact upon a well prepared position. The significance of the Hornets Nest as a delaying tactic in this? Johnston's initial plan had it gone off as desired, and they never do, would have accomplished that by driving a confederate wedge between the union and their base. But that raises another ugly possibility. If the union army was not rapidly contained and surrendered or destroyed that would leave Johnston between an army to his front and an army to his back. It could have turned into a significant defeat for the south rather than the tactical draw for the battle that was a strategic union win for the overall war. IMO, the war in the west was lost initially when we failed to bring both Kentucky and Missouri fully into the war. Without control of Paducah, Cairo and St Louis the union held a dagger directly to the heart of the lower south. The loss of Johnston was the nail in the coffin.
@Fred brewer, good point. Army doctrine is three to one numerical advantage to attack a fixed fortified position. That is unless combat multipliers can negate the defenders positions advantage’s or add to the attackers capabilities to improve the three to one in favor of the attacker. @flash point history with the fixed fortified position and the water/river based larger caliber/longer range guns Grant not only had the terrain advantage, but had the numbers advantage (closer to 1-1) because of the fixed hasty/fortified position, and the, at that time, combat multiplier advantage for the defense from the guns.
@@FlashPointHx because of how detailed and insightful it is. It really took me there. I'm a career officer and have studied mil history since high school, so I've known about this battle for decades, but you brought it to life for me like nobody else.
Thanks - that’s true it was a French inventor. But I was referring more to the second word where it was called a ‘ball’ implying a spherical appearance - when it was more of a cone
but since he did not design the "ball" his only input was adding the cup in the bottom of the bullet. Something that was not used on American bullets. So the bullets used was in fact not Minies at all. (expect the british imports)
Thank you for saying this! I used to live in Charleston as well - Mt Pleasant to be exact, but my father was one of the managers of the Francis Marion Hotel on King Street - so we'd spent a bunch of time in the city. I've heard its even more beautiful now - the battery, the river along the Cooper etc has all been given a major upgrade.
Grant always had the big picture in mind and while Lee might have achieved brilliant tactical victories, he needlessly sacrificed soldiers he could ill afford to lose. We can "what if" forever, but the Union always had more resources to pour into the battle than their Confederate counterparts, in this way it really was a war of attrition dwindling down the ability of the South to continue to wage war. From the outset the "anaconda" approach initially schemed by Burnside to capture key strategic objectives and then "squeeze" the confederate army was a very effective plan of action to win the war.
I think it was less that this was the first industrialised modern war and more that, becauee of cultural and trade links with major colonial powers, Americans were the first to apply combined global principles peacemeal onto a blank page, by the best educated ppl in the world who were nevertheless, at this stage, operating with a largely untested military tradition. I dunno, I'm being finnicky - probably just repeated what you said, I just think it left a lot out. Awesome video, gonna binge the hell out this channel now! TY!
Another great video. And answer to your question on what would Grant would have done if he didn't get reinforced that night: being the engineer that he was (and yours truly. Go 12Bs. We lead the infantry! But I digress. Lol) He would have crossed the river and built fortifications on the other side, using the river as a natural barrier. I lived in Western Kentucky for a while and went to Columbus Belmont State Park many times. You can see how anybody who controlled that area controlled the Mississippi River. The bluffs were straight down and it was a circular area also. So you had a clear shot for probably two or three miles. Also, look up a picture of the anchor and chain that they used to drag across the Mississippi on rafts. There wasn't anything getting through that. Side note: they also had dug defensive positions with mounds. They had placed steel tubes in the bottom of them so they could communicate from one position to another, called speaking tubes.... obviously. Even 25 years ago you could talk to somebody 100 ft away. It was pretty cool. Pretty slick feat of engineering.
I visited Vicksburg Miss - its the same way. Big round hill that overlooked the river. You put enough guns on that hill and you've got a choke point - Quebec City on the St Lawrence is the same way.
I’m related to Gen. John Bell Hood, also I have stayed the night @ Shiloh before in 2010. We did a living history @ that time and I walked the field that night along the sunken road, bloody pond, water oaks pond, Farley field. From April 1861-June 1862 Congress had not declared war by the time they did the battles of: Bull Run Wilson Creek Balls Bluff Ft Henry Ft Donelson Shiloh And the peninsula campaign (7days) was in full swing when war was declared.
fun fact: General Leonias Polk of the Confederate left flank was originally a bishop and founded the Protestant Episcopal Church of the Confederate States of America. he was the second cousin of President Polk, the president who launched the Mexican American war, where Grant first made his name
Great video! Covered all the Shiloh high points. In response to your questions; Buell arriving on the evening of the 1st day was certainly a huge boost to the Union, no doubt. But I think Grant was aggressive enough to probably have counter-attacked early the next morning anyway, because he knew the Confederates weren't expecting it. "Yeah...lick 'em tomorrow though." Although having the extra four divisions surely helped ensure success. I don't think Lincoln would ever have pulled troops from the Army of the Potomac and sent them West. Although it was important, people in Washington considered the Western theater a side show. The Eastern theater is where the war would be won. To that point, and I know this is going down the dreaded 'Civil-War-what-if-rabbit-hole,' if Lincoln had brought Grant East to command the Army of the Potomac two years earlier, ie right after Shiloh, the war might have ended at the Battle of Antietam in Fall 1862. No way a General like Grant lets the Army of Northern VA escape destruction at Antietam/Sharpsburg. Only McClellan could have made that mistake.
Agree - Lee and McClellan faced off for a day on Sept 18. Grant would have attacked that day and the Army of Northern Virginia would have been destroyed with their backs to the Potomac.
I was not expecting the next video to be a video about Shiloh but as a southerner I thought the video was very well done I do declare, but for real though my biggest what if has always been what if Lee had decided to fight for the Union army, how would we remember him, how would the South remember him, would there even be a Arlington cemetery, could he have done a better job as president then Grant, if anyone would a new it would have probably been Shelby.
I think that had Lee commanded the army of the Potomac during the Peninsula campaign - the war would have been over much sooner. But he was from Virginia and he couldn't go against his home state
Well done and presented well. As a southern male of a certain age all of these battles and campaigns were fought and refought throughout our childhoods. No, the south could not have taken Washington. Not because the union could have stopped them but because neither side was organized well enough to recover and reform in the immediate aftermath of Manassas to do a pursuit and seige.
An interesting incident took place after the battle as described by Shelby Foote's "The Civil War." "As Beauregard's forces fell back to Corinth, Sherman followed with a brigade to make a show of pursuit, or at any rate to see that the Confederates did not linger. A show was all it was, however, for when he reached a point on the Corinth road, four miles beyond his camps, he was given a lesson hunters sometimes learned from closing in too quickly on a wounded animal. "The place was called the Fallen Timbers, a half-mile-wide boggy swale where a prewar logging project had been abandoned. The road dipped down, then crested a ridge on the far side, where he could see enemy horsemen grouped in silhouette against the sky. Not knowing their strength or what might lie beyond the ridge, he shook out a regiment of skirmishers, posted cavalry to back them up and guard their flanks, then sent them forward, following with the rest of the brigade in attack formation at an interval of about two hundred yards. The thing was done in strict professional style, according to the book But the man he was advancing against had never read the book, though he was presently to rewrite it by improvising tactics that would conform to his own notion of what war was all about. "War means fighting," he said. "And fighting means killing." It was [Nathan Bedford] Forrest. Breckinridge had assigned him a scratch collection of about 350 Tennessee, Kentucky, Mississippi, and Texas cavalrymen, turning over to him the task of protecting the rear of the retreating column. "As he prepared to defend the ridge, outnumbered five-to-one by the advancing blue brigade, he saw something that caused him to change his mind and his tactics. For a the skirmishers entered the vine-tangled hollow, picking their way around felled trees and stumbling through the brambles, they lost their neat alignment. In fact, they could hardly have been more disorganized if artillery had opened on them there in the swale. Forrest saw his chance. "Charge!" he shouted, and led his horsemen pounding down the slope. Most of the skirmishers had begun to run before he struck them, but those who stood were knocked sprawling by a blast from shotguns and revolvers. Beyond them, the Federal cavalry had panicked, firing their carbines wildly in the air. When they broke too, Forrest kept on after them, still brandishing his saber and crying, "Charge! Charge!" as he plowed into the solid ranks of the brigade drawn up beyond. The trouble was, he was charging by himself; the others, seeing the steady brigade front, had turned back and were already busy gathering up their 43 prisoners. Forrest was one gray uniform, high above a sea of blue. "Kill him! Kill the goddam rebel! Knock him off his horse!" It was no easy thing to do; the horse was kicking and plunging and Forrest was hacking and slashing; but one of the soldiers did his best. Reaching far out, he shoved the muzzle of his rifle into the colonel's side and pulled the trigger. The force of the explosion lifted Forrest clear of the saddle, but he regained his seat and sawed the horse around. As he came out of the mass of dark blue uniforms and furious white faces, clearing a path with his saber, he reached down and grabbed one of the soldiers by the collar, swung him onto the crupper of the horse, and galloped back to safety, using the Federal as a shield against the bullets fired after him. Once he was out of range, he flung the hapless fellow off and rode on up the ridge where his men were waiting in open-mouthed amazement. "The ball now lodged alongside Forrest's spine as he followed the column grinding its way toward Corinth." I recall that Forrest finally had the ball removed about two weeks later. Apparently, one tough SOB. It's a pity that the Ft. Pillow surrender and his involvement in the genesis of the KKK besmirched his image for us in the modern era. But I supposed he was a man of his times. As my Georgia father would say, "He was an unreconstructed Southern."
@@FlashPointHx Forrest had become interested in the area around Crowley's Ridge during the war, and took up civilian life in 1865 in Memphis, Tennessee. In 1866, Forrest and C.C. McCreanor contracted to finish the Memphis & Little Rock Railroad, including a right-of-way that passed over the ridge. The ridgetop commissary he built as a provisioning store for the 1,000 Irish laborers hired to lay the rails became the nucleus of a town, which most residents called "Forrest's Town" and which was incorporated as Forrest City, Arkansas in 1870. The historian Court Carney writes that Forrest was not universally popular in the white Memphis community: he alienated many of the city's businessmen in his commercial dealings and he was criticized for questionable business practices that caused him to default on debts. He later found employment at the Selma-based Marion & Memphis Railroad and eventually became the company president. He was not as successful in railroad promoting as in war and, under his direction, the company went bankrupt. Nearly ruined as the result of this failure, Forrest spent his final days running an eight-hundred acre farm on land he leased on President's Island in the Mississippi River, where he and his wife lived in a log cabin. There, with the labor of over a hundred prison convicts, he grew corn, potatoes, vegetables and cotton profitably, but his health was in steady decline.
I immediately subscribed after watching the Bastogne video just prior to watching this one. Great commentary and I loved both. I'm really looking forward to more videos in this series and will soon be enjoying (I'm sure) past videos of yours that I already see will interest me. I appreciate how you weave smaller details into these larger historical events that often give them such a delicious irony - exactly why I absolutely love history to begin with. Thank you for that. One note...maybe more about me than you. I've always been a fan of US Grant and was thoroughly engrossed in this video on a battle that I did know of, and had watched videos of as well, yet did not realize how close to defeat Grant was here. Thorough enjoyment throughout...until the maudlin music at the end. Some songs just give a body-wide cringe. I felt like unsubscribing. LOL but my cooler side prevailed and I'm again willing to wait, anxiously, for the next addition to this video series. Well done.
Thanks for this Doyle! He's just about done. I'm going to post some of his latest on my community tab in a bit. I've got a bunch of pictures for soldiers / generals for the Battle of Toro and I'll have updated pictures of Isabella and Ferdinand in a day or so. I start dictating Isabella starting the day after tomorrow.
@@FlashPointHx The story about the Bloody Pond was haunting. Makes me think of the results of the battles I have read about in the Middle Ages. So many men crawling off to die. Very few times this reality is ever mentioned. Glad you included this.
Texan here, my great great grandfather on my dads side was a Confederate captain and took part in the second Battle of Galveston helping expel the union soldiers and lift the blockade for four days.
A lot of praise goes to Lee for good cause but Grant was a way better supreme commander. He was an good tactician but a master at strategy. I believe he was one of few to see the big picture. He realized in modern war you dont win the war by single battles but by men and material
His eyes in the begining only look animated because he's moving like Eber from the table of nations if you make him move like Assur he wouldn't look fake.
The Battle of Shiloh even if it was early in the Civil War stands out to me as one on the top 5 battles of the war. You could cite a number of reasons, but Shiloh is where the partnership and friendship of US Grant and William T. Sherman started. It was mentioned that Sherman was going to suggest to Grant that the retreat, but something held him back. Grant would have lost respect for Sherman if he had suggested retreat. The other point often overlooked about Shiloh is the change in the relationship between Grant and General Halleck. Halleck could have made Grant the scapegoat in his report, instead he blames some other lower ranking officers. He demotes Grant to second in command, but I think this shield Grant from the storm about Shiloh until larger battles in 1862 showed that Shiloh was not a one-of-a-kind event. Also, Grant is a West Point graduate not a political general. The war is getting more political and for good or bad, the West Point men will stand together.
You bring up great points here! After this Sheman and Grant were are well honed machine. They trusted one another. I wasn't aware of what Halleck did - thank you for that. Yes he definitely was more a general than a politician. I think there was an encounter with Grant and Lincoln when he took over the armies in the East in Washington D.C. Grant was practically scare of the political arena and Lincoln just eased him in. His administration as president grant was renowned for its corruption however
@@FlashPointHx Yes there was corruption in Grant's administration. But he was the only President to be elected to serve two terms until Woodrow Wilson, he crushed the Klan, resolved the claims concerning the CSS Alabama against Great Britain, pushed for passage of the 15th amendment on voting rights, pushed for a modern civil service and passed civil rights legislation. Oh yes, he established the first National Park-Yellowstone.
@@jmad627 Yes Halleck was jealous of Grant, and tried to get Grant relieved in February/March 1862, but that changed as the war went on. They were not friends, but they were West Point graduates. During the Vicksburg Campaign Lincoln and Stanton gave John McClendon in the fall of 1862 support for an independent campaign against Vicksburg. McClendon was a political general, not a West Point man. Halleck and Grant conspired against McClendon stopped McClendon from going on his own to attack Vicksburg. Read Chernow's biography on Grant for more.
Was this truly a counterattack? And if so it wasn't (in my eyes) perfection. Yes it worked but because he had greater numbers and time to rest. Great video i just find the battle not to be a counterattack masterpiece
We’ll definitely a counter attack - but think about what all the other northern generals would have done at this point. As for having better numbers and rest - that was lucky grant got reinforced just when he did so he could launch a crushing counter - what better time to show case use of one’s advantages?
Just saying but I would love to see you do a video on the battle of cedar creek and I am saying that because just like at Shiloh when it looked like the south was gaining the upper hand the union counterattacked.
Not sure if your applause for Lee's aggressiveness is really warranted. You say yourself that in most of his engagements, he was outnumbered. But as an attacker, you're likely to have higher losses. One of the fundamental problems of the Confederacy was that they couldn't even afford their victories, whereas the North often could afford even their defeats, being able to compensate the losses in manpower and try again somewhere else.
He lost a ton of men for his 'victories' - sacrificing in individual battles for the bigger strategic win. The north was no different - but most of them didn't know what to do after a win or a loss, Lee did
@@FlashPointHx so have I as well as Spotsylvania, crater, Petersburg, Richmond, 7 days (Peninsula), Antietam, Appomattox, Chancellorsville, Gettysburg, balls bluff, Wilson creek. I live 70 miles from Shiloh 50 from Corinth, 10 minutes from Brice crossroads, 2 minutes from tupelo, and 3 hours from Vicksburg.
@@FlashPointHx Yeh, my family land is part of the 2nd day battle of tupelo (Harrisburg) July 14/15,1864, near old town creek. Where Forrest units fought desperately, when I was about 12 I found a CSA battlefield grave that had been forgotten, and in 2006 we had a full 1864 military funeral reburial and transferred him to the Verona cemetery.
4:04 That is unmitigated bullshit. The war was entirely on the Confederacy. Just read the articles. He may have been a historian, but that was pushed aside to be an apologist.
If Jackson was released as Sherman later was in the south, considering his skill and ability on the battlefield, and he was actually the one in charge, I believe he could have taken Washington Unfortunately, it seems the South was a bit timid to this idea ( the invasion of Washington) Could have saved a lot of people, though I don't see the average Southern soldier disregarding the civilians of the North either as the north later did in the south, which began a whole nother horrible consequence of the Civil War by both sides - what a waste of life....
You say the election of Lincoln pushed southern states to secede. Hmm…. You quote Shelby Foote saying people failed to compromise. Hmmm. Actually the Southern states leaders wanted to expand and extend slavery. The South rejected the 1820 and 1850 compromises. I realize that this video is about military strategy and tactics. But all military action contains political dimensions so an offhand remark that the south was pushed to secede minimizes the fact that the South was fighting to preserve and ultimately to expand slavery. And this despite the fact that slavery did not benefit the vast mass of southern people except perhaps to let them feel superior to another group of people. An excellent example of the southern approach is Texas. Texans wanted to have slavery. When the Mexican government prohibited slavery the Texans decided to form their own county so they could have it. So though this is an excellent video, its start suggests the idea that the South was somehow justified in its actions.
Well I keep it vague and open for a reason - as you said yourself - this is a talk about military history. Didn't want to get dragged into the rabbit hole of causes for the civil war. That said, you do bring up good points in your comment. Appreciate that
Obsolete tactics did NOT cause the high casualties of the American Civil War. This is commonly held myth, infinitely recited. Casualties were high simply because both sides wouldn't quit. If soldiers stand and bang in close packed ranks, as at the start of the war, then casualties accrue rapidly in short battles. If, conversely, soldiers hide in trenches, as in later stages of the war, then casualties accrue steadily over days and weeks. But either way it's the same result.
Finally got some free time to watch the video and LOVED it! This is the best video under one hour. I have to respectfully disagree with those that say Robert E. Lee was one of the greatest generals in history for two reasons: 1. He was known to give very vague and confusing orders. This came to bite him in the butt after Stonewall Jackson died as his win/loss record suffered considerably. 2. His ordering of Pickett's charge defies logic. He seemed to completely disregard the sage advice of General Longstreet that such an attack was essentially a guaranteed failure. P.S. please go back to hour-plus videos my friend 🙏 😉😊
Hey Chris - always good to hear from you. Lee had some genius ideas - but a lot of his success was based on luck as well. He was also blessed with having idiot union commanders go up against him. During the 7 days he had McCellan - nuff said. 2nd Bull Rull - he did use Jackson's steadfastness with a brilliant flank attack using Longstreet. At Fredericksburg he won because Burnside was dum enough to march across a river then up hill in the snow against an enemy entrenched and reinforced with artillery, At Chancellorsville, I'd say Hooker was actually a good general with a good plan - but too many things went wrong at JUST the right time and Lee won. At Antietam - McClellan again - nuff said. Then at Gettysburg - you're right he gave a vague command to Ewell and was used to giving commands to Jackson who would have pushed the offensive to the extreme. Ewell had his leg blown off and had become timid allowing the union troops to entrench on Cemetery ridge. Plus lee was a victim of his own success - he figured his men could overcome the union center - ignoring the fact that he was repeating burnsides' mistake at Fredericksburg - and he and his army paid the price. Even defeated at Gettysburg, Lee was still a vicious animal in the overland campaign - and had he been in direct command at St Anna - he might have reversed Grant . . . . well for a while. Also, I'll combine some videos together for the >1 hr format, but those usually kill me to make.
@@FlashPointHx excellent analysis! I completely agree that much of the success was based off incompetent Union generals. I shutter every time I think of how Lincoln could have shortened the war if he just listened to Winfield Scott and employed the Anaconda Plan.
This comment blew my mind! Your family has truly given the ‘Last full measure of devotion’ to this country. Curious - did you have family on both sides during the civil war?
@@FlashPointHx I suspected you were raised in the South the moment you first pronounced Beauregard's name. However, there was no detectable Southern accent in the rest of your well paced narration. But if you're going fall back on your Southern accent in saying his name, then what a missed opportunity not to have said his entire name of Pierre Gustave Toutant Beauregard. I'm sure you could have pulled it off to point of causing us listeners to imagine grits and molasses on your lips.
Sign up for a 14-day free trial and enjoy all the amazing features MyHeritage has to offer. If you decide to continue your subscription, you’ll get a 50% discount when you use this link bit.ly/FlashPointHistory_MH
My first civil war video!! Please share on social media and spread word to that special someone who loves civil war history.
Also, yes, I do like to say Beauregard's name.
The algorithm didn't seem to like this video, commenting to bring it up! Your channel is extremely underrated.
Appreciate it - yeah I'm a little dismayed that it doesn't seem to be gaining traction - really liked how this one came out
@@FlashPointHx You are not alone. Most every channel I know of that delves into this war, gets shadow banned. The powers that be dont want factual history being taught, because it destroys their narrative, and makes it harder for them to make up their own version of why this war took place. Dont let them stop you from making these. RUclips wants every history channel to go away. I have lived my entire life 35 miles from Shiloh. Near the Hardeman/McNairy county line. I have spent countless hours driving around and walking that hallowed ground. It has always been my place of solace. Ironically, its the most peaceful place Ive ever been. Even though Ive been there over a hundred times in my 42 years of life, each time is a new experience. I still get chills everytime I'm there.
I'd like to see a series on some of history's most interesting civil wars of which, there are plenty including American, English, Ceaser's.
Nothing is underrated man! You’re either the GOAT or you’re a complete fraud and should be fired! Get with the internet mate lol, Yeah this a great channel I don’t know if he’s underrated because I don’t know where they keep the ratings but his voice is great and it’s well written and researched.
This is how you present history. No whitewashing or taking sides in a subtle way, just straight up facts presented in a storytelling fashion. Perfect!
Thank you!
i grew up in south carolina and took a military history class in high school. teacher was a mr.sherman and a lot of the class was about the civil war
With a name like that, I'm sure it was. Must have been an interesting class
Started watching this channel a week or so ago while I’m at work and I’ve been running through the videos too fast, thanks for the putting out some of the best historical content on this site and keeping the monotony of the work day away
Hey awesome - glad I could make your day better
Excellent job! You brought this battle to life! That 40 minutes went by quick!
Glad you enjoyed it!
Very well done! Easy to follow, and the graphics were about the best I've seen. The narration was clear and compelling. Thank you!
Glad you enjoyed it!
Ive been using RUclips for almost five years and in this time I have subscribed to many good history channels and yet only within the last week did this absolutely amazing channel appear in my recommendations.
Unbelievable that have been missing out on content that could be tailor made for me.
On the bright side I can look forward to binge watching the backlog of these epic uploads.
THANKYOU.
Wow, thank you for the awesome comment and welcome!
You must check out his War of the Worlds series, amazing work 👍👍
This is great stuff. Your video on the bulge and the battle of Bastogne was excellent also. I like how you set up the battle with a 3-5 minute lesson, and then get granular with the details.
Like that - "granular" haven't heard that before. appreciate that
I don't know what to say, other than I really enjoy the presentation. The visual element of battles you've grown up just looking at on static maps in books- to THIS. Seriously next gen immersive, and so appreciated! Two thumbs up-
Really appreciate the comment - also like your avatar
The old maps, and photos are splendidly done! Nice visuals, and as always excellent narrative.
Hey thanks! Yeah I used old maps from 1863 for this video - it gave it an authentic feel imho
@@FlashPointHx Jackson's Valley Campaign? Art of War?
Jackson’s 1862 valley campaign is near and dear to my heart - I read an entire novel on that and spent three days in the Shennendoah Valley tracking Jackson’s path.
@@FlashPointHx SWEET!
@@FlashPointHx Hotchkis (Jackson's map maker). His maps and recon. I have a book (quite large, weighs 5lbs) "The Official Atlas of the Civil War" by Major Davis, US Army, and Hotchkis' original maps of the Valley Campaign are there. If ever there was a campaign to highlight recon, cavalry screening, maneuver, concentration, deception, logistics, and overall strategy the Valley Campaign is a good one to choose. Jackson was from all accounts very "eccentric" (good side story?)
Live near Shiloh, love going there 3-4 times a year and just spend hours exploring the park
Another great video! looking forward to the next part
Appreciate it k!
👍👍👍👍
The first video about the civil war I watched and the BEST one I’ve seen this month. Amazing and full of details.
A little piece of trivia about the Battle of Shilo. A "Brown Bess," a 100 year mainstay of the British Army, was picked up off the battlefield. Making it the last known use of a Brown Bess in combat. The Confederate troops at the time, and well into the war, were using whatever arms they could muster.
Haven't watched this channel in years, but what a video to come back to. Thanks YT algo and ofc FPH for the vid.
Well good to have you back =)
I saw this in my inbox this morning. Imazing narration and animations.
Glad you enjoyed it!
Very good overview of the first year of the Civil War and of the Battle of Shiloh.
I am beyond excited!!!! I am in cocoa visiting siblings on the beach and this is perfect timing!!!!!
So happy to hear this! Now, Shiloh - you get to watch Shiloh.
I’ve always disliked that Shelby Foote quote, if not the man himself. The Civil War didn’t start because Americans refused to “compromise”, it started because some group of Americans wanted to own human beings as property and struck first to make sure they could continue to do so.
Also I believe it’s spelled McClellan, but I’m okay with disrespecting the timid borderline Confederate sympathizer who considered himself Napoleon reborn 😅
I couldn't get through his anthology - you're right about McClellan - was writing it too fast
This is just great. Presented very well, unbiased historical facts. You really brought the battle to life, well done. Thanks for posting.
Thank you very much!
I love your channel and tell everybody about it. Great Stuff - Thank you for your efford!!
Much appreciated Martin!
This is a top notch vid, these new videos need alot more views
I visited Shiloh battlefield about 12 years ago. Very humbling for me
So cool! What parts did you visit ?
@@FlashPointHx spent the entire day there and I remember going to Pittsburgh landing and the hornets nest.
Hornets nest must have had an Eerie feel
In my opinion the actual changes from the reinforcements not arriving that night would not have been very momentous. True Grant would not have had the numbers to immediately go on the offensive but he was not at a numerical disadvantage at that point and had prepared defenses. Beauregard was down to 22-28,000 and would now haver to attack fixed positions against an enemy that could still receive resupply and artillery support via the river. Conventional wisdom is that an attacking army should have at least a 2 to 1 advantage to ensure victory. Even had Grant's army been destroyed, Buell's would have arrived shortly and no doubt cleaned up on what was left of the Confederate army.
Good points - plus Grant had naval support
All very valid points. The South's best shot was on day one if, and that's a big if, they could accomplish a rapid over run and capitulation of the union army and position. As it was the union managed to fall back somewhat intact upon a well prepared position.
The significance of the Hornets Nest as a delaying tactic in this?
Johnston's initial plan had it gone off as desired, and they never do, would have accomplished that by driving a confederate wedge between the union and their base.
But that raises another ugly possibility. If the union army was not rapidly contained and surrendered or destroyed that would leave Johnston between an army to his front and an army to his back. It could have turned into a significant defeat for the south rather than the tactical draw for the battle that was a strategic union win for the overall war.
IMO, the war in the west was lost initially when we failed to bring both Kentucky and Missouri fully into the war. Without control of Paducah, Cairo and St Louis the union held a dagger directly to the heart of the lower south.
The loss of Johnston was the nail in the coffin.
@Fred brewer, good point. Army doctrine is three to one numerical advantage to attack a fixed fortified position. That is unless combat multipliers can negate the defenders positions advantage’s or add to the attackers capabilities to improve the three to one in favor of the attacker. @flash point history with the fixed fortified position and the water/river based larger caliber/longer range guns Grant not only had the terrain advantage, but had the numbers advantage (closer to 1-1) because of the fixed hasty/fortified position, and the, at that time, combat multiplier advantage for the defense from the guns.
Just under 40 minutes. A valiant effort indeed.
I try for a 10 minute video - seems like it gots to 40
Love all your work, brilliant
Thank you!
great documentary
What I learned about the Civil War, absolutely everyone had fantastic names.
hahahaha
An really underrated channel
Excellent overview and analysis.
This may be some of your best work yet.
Happy that you liked it - but curious why you think it’s my best - I felt like the animations for Isabella were better
@@FlashPointHx because of how detailed and insightful it is. It really took me there. I'm a career officer and have studied mil history since high school, so I've known about this battle for decades, but you brought it to life for me like nobody else.
I'm more audio-oriented so that content is what gets me the most
Great work, well done, Shiloh my favourite civil war battle. More civil war battles please.
I was thinking of doing Antietam
The video is here!!
I really enjoyed the ability to vote on the topic, i hope you allow us to vote on some future video options again sometime.
I post polls all the time =)
Great video,
ps the Minie ball was names after it's designer (Claude-Étienne Minié) not it's shape
Thanks - that’s true it was a French inventor. But I was referring more to the second word where it was called a ‘ball’ implying a spherical appearance - when it was more of a cone
but since he did not design the "ball" his only input was adding the cup in the bottom of the bullet. Something that was not used on American bullets.
So the bullets used was in fact not Minies at all. (expect the british imports)
Informative & amazing introduced
Thanks ! Happy you liked the intro as well - wanted something to catch one’s attention
Well put together.
Maybe the best I’ve seen.
Thank you!!
Very nicely done, sir!
Thank you kindly!
Great video. You deserve more views.
Hey thanks!
Yay! Absolutely adore every video you make (and voice).
Thanks =) Haven't seen one of your comments in awhile Mahelania - good to see you back!
This was great! Thanks.
You're welcome!
Another Absolutely Wonderful Story... I'm from Charleston S.C.. ..Ken Burns Can't Do Any Better
Thank you for saying this! I used to live in Charleston as well - Mt Pleasant to be exact, but my father was one of the managers of the Francis Marion Hotel on King Street - so we'd spent a bunch of time in the city. I've heard its even more beautiful now - the battery, the river along the Cooper etc has all been given a major upgrade.
I went to R.B STALL HIGH SCHOOL CLSSS OF 91...GOOD TO KINDA TALK TO A FELLOW CHARLESTONIAN..KEEP UP THE GREAT WORK ...FROM THE ♥ U REALLY HAVE TALLENT
@@kenchesnut4425 Appreciate that my friend! Intend to get my family back to SC at someone. Such a beautiful gem of a city
this is a pretty good video Flash Point.
Hey thanks Jacob!
Well Done Maestro! Now I won't be able to wait for the next one! My bell is ON!
That was awesome
Pretty cool stuff dude I love American history it's so rich
Yeah me too - I went with a buddy of mine to visit 10 battlefields in the East
When you display portraits, @@FlashPointHx, you called McClellan 'McClennan'...
@@FlashPointHx I would love to do that trip.
Grant always had the big picture in mind and while Lee might have achieved brilliant tactical victories, he needlessly sacrificed soldiers he could ill afford to lose. We can "what if" forever, but the Union always had more resources to pour into the battle than their Confederate counterparts, in this way it really was a war of attrition dwindling down the ability of the South to continue to wage war. From the outset the "anaconda" approach initially schemed by Burnside to capture key strategic objectives and then "squeeze" the confederate army was a very effective plan of action to win the war.
I think it was less that this was the first industrialised modern war and more that, becauee of cultural and trade links with major colonial powers, Americans were the first to apply combined global principles peacemeal onto a blank page, by the best educated ppl in the world who were nevertheless, at this stage, operating with a largely untested military tradition. I dunno, I'm being finnicky - probably just repeated what you said, I just think it left a lot out.
Awesome video, gonna binge the hell out this channel now! TY!
Well Done
Thanks!!
Another great video. And answer to your question on what would Grant would have done if he didn't get reinforced that night: being the engineer that he was (and yours truly. Go 12Bs. We lead the infantry! But I digress. Lol) He would have crossed the river and built fortifications on the other side, using the river as a natural barrier.
I lived in Western Kentucky for a while and went to Columbus Belmont State Park many times. You can see how anybody who controlled that area controlled the Mississippi River. The bluffs were straight down and it was a circular area also. So you had a clear shot for probably two or three miles. Also, look up a picture of the anchor and chain that they used to drag across the Mississippi on rafts. There wasn't anything getting through that.
Side note: they also had dug defensive positions with mounds. They had placed steel tubes in the bottom of them so they could communicate from one position to another, called speaking tubes.... obviously. Even 25 years ago you could talk to somebody 100 ft away. It was pretty cool. Pretty slick feat of engineering.
I visited Vicksburg Miss - its the same way. Big round hill that overlooked the river. You put enough guns on that hill and you've got a choke point - Quebec City on the St Lawrence is the same way.
I’m related to Gen. John Bell Hood, also I have stayed the night @ Shiloh before in 2010. We did a living history @ that time and I walked the field that night along the sunken road, bloody pond, water oaks pond, Farley field.
From April 1861-June 1862 Congress had not declared war by the time they did the battles of:
Bull Run
Wilson Creek
Balls Bluff
Ft Henry
Ft Donelson
Shiloh
And the peninsula campaign (7days) was in full swing when war was declared.
I remember walking Gettysburg at night with a friend - it was a surreal yet awesome experience. There was such an amazing tranquility to the field
@@FlashPointHx I’ve also done Gettysburg @ night as well
Ulysses S Grant, the greatest American in history second to no one. Great video
fun fact: General Leonias Polk of the Confederate left flank was originally a bishop and founded the Protestant Episcopal Church of the Confederate States of America. he was the second cousin of President Polk, the president who launched the Mexican American war, where Grant first made his name
He was a bishop? ! what? How do you go from that to warfare?
Great video! Covered all the Shiloh high points. In response to your questions; Buell arriving on the evening of the 1st day was certainly a huge boost to the Union, no doubt. But I think Grant was aggressive enough to probably have counter-attacked early the next morning anyway, because he knew the Confederates weren't expecting it. "Yeah...lick 'em tomorrow though." Although having the extra four divisions surely helped ensure success. I don't think Lincoln would ever have pulled troops from the Army of the Potomac and sent them West. Although it was important, people in Washington considered the Western theater a side show. The Eastern theater is where the war would be won. To that point, and I know this is going down the dreaded 'Civil-War-what-if-rabbit-hole,' if Lincoln had brought Grant East to command the Army of the Potomac two years earlier, ie right after Shiloh, the war might have ended at the Battle of Antietam in Fall 1862. No way a General like Grant lets the Army of Northern VA escape destruction at Antietam/Sharpsburg. Only McClellan could have made that mistake.
Agree - Lee and McClellan faced off for a day on Sept 18. Grant would have attacked that day and the Army of Northern Virginia would have been destroyed with their backs to the Potomac.
I was not expecting the next video to be a video about Shiloh but as a southerner I thought the video was very well done I do declare, but for real though my biggest what if has always been what if Lee had decided to fight for the Union army, how would we remember him, how would the South remember him, would there even be a Arlington cemetery, could he have done a better job as president then Grant, if anyone would a new it would have probably been Shelby.
I think that had Lee commanded the army of the Potomac during the Peninsula campaign - the war would have been over much sooner. But he was from Virginia and he couldn't go against his home state
cool pamphlet, good video
hahaha - Thanks!
Well done and presented well. As a southern male of a certain age all of these battles and campaigns were fought and refought throughout our childhoods.
No, the south could not have taken Washington. Not because the union could have stopped them but because neither side was organized well enough to recover and reform in the immediate aftermath of Manassas to do a pursuit and seige.
well said my friend - I agree
But if we had the Jackson of the Valley Campaign at that time, who knows.
very well done.
Thank you! Cheers!
An interesting incident took place after the battle as described by Shelby Foote's "The Civil War."
"As Beauregard's forces fell back to Corinth, Sherman followed with a brigade to make a show of pursuit, or at any rate to see that the Confederates did not linger. A show was all it was, however, for when he reached a point on the Corinth road, four miles beyond his camps, he was given a lesson hunters sometimes learned from closing in too quickly on a wounded animal.
"The place was called the Fallen Timbers, a half-mile-wide boggy swale where a prewar logging project had been abandoned. The road dipped down, then crested a ridge on the far side, where he could see enemy horsemen grouped in silhouette against the sky. Not knowing their strength or what might lie beyond the ridge, he shook out a regiment of skirmishers, posted cavalry to back them up and guard their flanks, then sent them forward, following with the rest of the brigade in attack formation at an interval of about two hundred yards. The thing was done in strict professional style, according to the book But the man he was advancing against had never read the book, though he was presently to rewrite it by improvising tactics that would conform to his own notion of what war was all about. "War means fighting," he said. "And fighting means killing." It was [Nathan Bedford] Forrest. Breckinridge had assigned him a scratch collection of about 350 Tennessee, Kentucky, Mississippi, and Texas cavalrymen, turning over to him the task of protecting the rear of the retreating column.
"As he prepared to defend the ridge, outnumbered five-to-one by the advancing blue brigade, he saw something that caused him to change his mind and his tactics. For a the skirmishers entered the vine-tangled hollow, picking their way around felled trees and stumbling through the brambles, they lost their neat alignment. In fact, they could hardly have been more disorganized if artillery had opened on them there in the swale. Forrest saw his chance. "Charge!" he shouted, and led his horsemen pounding down the slope. Most of the skirmishers had begun to run before he struck them, but those who stood were knocked sprawling by a blast from shotguns and revolvers. Beyond them, the Federal cavalry had panicked, firing their carbines wildly in the air. When they broke too, Forrest kept on after them, still brandishing his saber and crying, "Charge! Charge!" as he plowed into the solid ranks of the brigade drawn up beyond. The trouble was, he was charging by himself; the others, seeing the steady brigade front, had turned back and were already busy gathering up their 43 prisoners. Forrest was one gray uniform, high above a sea of blue. "Kill him! Kill the goddam rebel! Knock him off his horse!" It was no easy thing to do; the horse was kicking and plunging and Forrest was hacking and slashing; but one of the soldiers did his best. Reaching far out, he shoved the muzzle of his rifle into the colonel's side and pulled the trigger. The force of the explosion lifted Forrest clear of the saddle, but he regained his seat and sawed the horse around. As he came out of the mass of dark blue uniforms and furious white faces, clearing a path with his saber, he reached down and grabbed one of the soldiers by the collar, swung him onto the crupper of the horse, and galloped back to safety, using the Federal as a shield against the bullets fired after him. Once he was out of range, he flung the hapless fellow off and rode on up the ridge where his men were waiting in open-mouthed amazement.
"The ball now lodged alongside Forrest's spine as he followed the column grinding its way toward Corinth."
I recall that Forrest finally had the ball removed about two weeks later. Apparently, one tough SOB. It's a pity that the Ft. Pillow surrender and his involvement in the genesis of the KKK besmirched his image for us in the modern era. But I supposed he was a man of his times. As my Georgia father would say, "He was an unreconstructed Southern."
Whatever happened to dear Forrest - aside from the klan after the war? He seemed like man of intense bravado
@@FlashPointHx Forrest had become interested in the area around Crowley's Ridge during the war, and took up civilian life in 1865 in Memphis, Tennessee. In 1866, Forrest and C.C. McCreanor contracted to finish the Memphis & Little Rock Railroad, including a right-of-way that passed over the ridge. The ridgetop commissary he built as a provisioning store for the 1,000 Irish laborers hired to lay the rails became the nucleus of a town, which most residents called "Forrest's Town" and which was incorporated as Forrest City, Arkansas in 1870.
The historian Court Carney writes that Forrest was not universally popular in the white Memphis community: he alienated many of the city's businessmen in his commercial dealings and he was criticized for questionable business practices that caused him to default on debts.
He later found employment at the Selma-based Marion & Memphis Railroad and eventually became the company president. He was not as successful in railroad promoting as in war and, under his direction, the company went bankrupt. Nearly ruined as the result of this failure, Forrest spent his final days running an eight-hundred acre farm on land he leased on President's Island in the Mississippi River, where he and his wife lived in a log cabin. There, with the labor of over a hundred prison convicts, he grew corn, potatoes, vegetables and cotton profitably, but his health was in steady decline.
Always stunning!;-)
Thank you! Cheers Hans!
ANother fantastic release
Hey thanks!!
I immediately subscribed after watching the Bastogne video just prior to watching this one. Great commentary and I loved both. I'm really looking forward to more videos in this series and will soon be enjoying (I'm sure) past videos of yours that I already see will interest me. I appreciate how you weave smaller details into these larger historical events that often give them such a delicious irony - exactly why I absolutely love history to begin with. Thank you for that.
One note...maybe more about me than you. I've always been a fan of US Grant and was thoroughly engrossed in this video on a battle that I did know of, and had watched videos of as well, yet did not realize how close to defeat Grant was here. Thorough enjoyment throughout...until the maudlin music at the end. Some songs just give a body-wide cringe. I felt like unsubscribing. LOL but my cooler side prevailed and I'm again willing to wait, anxiously, for the next addition to this video series. Well done.
Next video is going old school with caesar - Alesia!
Everytime I hear the name “Beauregard” I’m now going to pronounce it exactly how you do in this video
I used to live in Charleston SC - they add extra syllables to every word
Great video
Thanks!
Just played a round of apex with you had a blast Heres a sub.
Hey Shiny!! Yes remember that! Love your avatar
@@FlashPointHx thanks I'm liking the videos
Great video Nitin. The old pictures were amazing...how is your artist going?
Thanks for this Doyle! He's just about done. I'm going to post some of his latest on my community tab in a bit. I've got a bunch of pictures for soldiers / generals for the Battle of Toro and I'll have updated pictures of Isabella and Ferdinand in a day or so. I start dictating Isabella starting the day after tomorrow.
@@FlashPointHx The story about the Bloody Pond was haunting. Makes me think of the results of the battles I have read about in the Middle Ages. So many men crawling off to die. Very few times this reality is ever mentioned. Glad you included this.
Texan here, my great great grandfather on my dads side was a Confederate captain and took part in the second Battle of Galveston helping expel the union soldiers and lift the blockade for four days.
That must of been a difficult task
A lot of praise goes to Lee for good cause but Grant was a way better supreme commander. He was an good tactician but a master at strategy. I believe he was one of few to see the big picture. He realized in modern war you dont win the war by single battles but by men and material
Lee was a better tactical commander IMHO. Grant was like Eisenhower - he saw the bigger picture
His eyes in the begining only look animated because he's moving like Eber from the table of nations if you make him move like Assur he wouldn't look fake.
The Battle of Shiloh even if it was early in the Civil War stands out to me as one on the top 5 battles of the war. You could cite a number of reasons, but Shiloh is where the partnership and friendship of US Grant and William T. Sherman started. It was mentioned that Sherman was going to suggest to Grant that the retreat, but something held him back. Grant would have lost respect for Sherman if he had suggested retreat. The other point often overlooked about Shiloh is the change in the relationship between Grant and General Halleck. Halleck could have made Grant the scapegoat in his report, instead he blames some other lower ranking officers. He demotes Grant to second in command, but I think this shield Grant from the storm about Shiloh until larger battles in 1862 showed that Shiloh was not a one-of-a-kind event. Also, Grant is a West Point graduate not a political general. The war is getting more political and for good or bad, the West Point men will stand together.
You bring up great points here! After this Sheman and Grant were are well honed machine. They trusted one another. I wasn't aware of what Halleck did - thank you for that. Yes he definitely was more a general than a politician. I think there was an encounter with Grant and Lincoln when he took over the armies in the East in Washington D.C. Grant was practically scare of the political arena and Lincoln just eased him in. His administration as president grant was renowned for its corruption however
@@FlashPointHx Yes there was corruption in Grant's administration. But he was the only President to be elected to serve two terms until Woodrow Wilson, he crushed the Klan, resolved the claims concerning the CSS Alabama against Great Britain, pushed for passage of the 15th amendment on voting rights, pushed for a modern civil service and passed civil rights legislation. Oh yes, he established the first National Park-Yellowstone.
I always read that Halleck was a bit jealous of Grant’s success.
@@jmad627 Yes Halleck was jealous of Grant, and tried to get Grant relieved in February/March 1862, but that changed as the war went on. They were not friends, but they were West Point graduates. During the Vicksburg Campaign Lincoln and Stanton gave John McClendon in the fall of 1862 support for an independent campaign against Vicksburg. McClendon was a political general, not a West Point man. Halleck and Grant conspired against McClendon stopped McClendon from going on his own to attack Vicksburg. Read Chernow's biography on Grant for more.
Excellent job, Ken Burns should be jealous 😉
Thanks! 😃
visited Shiloh nearly a decade ago. Would say, that heavily forested area would have contributed to the units loosing their cohesion
I went to visit the Wilderness in Virginia - exactly the same sentiment
Please, more Civil War videos!
I take it you really liked this one Dylan?
@@FlashPointHx yes, an amazing video! Very clear and easy to understand, informative and interesting. The maps and animation were very helpful.
Was this truly a counterattack? And if so it wasn't (in my eyes) perfection. Yes it worked but because he had greater numbers and time to rest.
Great video i just find the battle not to be a counterattack masterpiece
We’ll definitely a counter attack - but think about what all the other northern generals would have done at this point. As for having better numbers and rest - that was lucky grant got reinforced just when he did so he could launch a crushing counter - what better time to show case use of one’s advantages?
Just saying but I would love to see you do a video on the battle of cedar creek and I am saying that because just like at Shiloh when it looked like the south was gaining the upper hand the union counterattacked.
I've read about this battle. Id be nice to have a confederate victory as well
@@FlashPointHx NO solice for the traitors. Please.
Not sure if your applause for Lee's aggressiveness is really warranted. You say yourself that in most of his engagements, he was outnumbered. But as an attacker, you're likely to have higher losses. One of the fundamental problems of the Confederacy was that they couldn't even afford their victories, whereas the North often could afford even their defeats, being able to compensate the losses in manpower and try again somewhere else.
He lost a ton of men for his 'victories' - sacrificing in individual battles for the bigger strategic win. The north was no different - but most of them didn't know what to do after a win or a loss, Lee did
Now that u have done shiloh u should do one on Antietam
I've been to the Antietam battlefield - amazing place
@@FlashPointHx so have I as well as Spotsylvania, crater, Petersburg, Richmond, 7 days (Peninsula), Antietam, Appomattox, Chancellorsville, Gettysburg, balls bluff, Wilson creek.
I live 70 miles from Shiloh 50 from Corinth, 10 minutes from Brice crossroads, 2 minutes from tupelo, and 3 hours from Vicksburg.
@@CSAFD Wow - impressive - you're big into Civ War then
@@FlashPointHx
Yeh, my family land is part of the 2nd day battle of tupelo (Harrisburg) July 14/15,1864, near old town creek. Where Forrest units fought desperately, when I was about 12 I found a CSA battlefield grave that had been forgotten, and in 2006 we had a full 1864 military funeral reburial and transferred him to the Verona cemetery.
👑
4:04 That is unmitigated bullshit. The war was entirely on the Confederacy. Just read the articles. He may have been a historian, but that was pushed aside to be an apologist.
Thank you from the bottom of my heart. This is a masterpiece!🤌
Really happy that you liked it that much Daniel
If Jackson was released as Sherman later was in the south, considering his skill and ability on the battlefield, and he was actually the one in charge, I believe he could have taken Washington
Unfortunately, it seems the South was a bit timid to this idea ( the invasion of Washington)
Could have saved a lot of people, though
I don't see the average Southern soldier disregarding the civilians of the North either as the north later did in the south, which began a whole nother horrible consequence of the Civil War by both sides - what a waste of life....
You say the election of Lincoln pushed southern states to secede. Hmm…. You quote Shelby Foote saying people failed to compromise. Hmmm. Actually the Southern states leaders wanted to expand and extend slavery. The South rejected the 1820 and 1850 compromises.
I realize that this video is about military strategy and tactics. But all military action contains political dimensions so an offhand remark that the south was pushed to secede minimizes the fact that the South was fighting to preserve and ultimately to expand slavery. And this despite the fact that slavery did not benefit the vast mass of southern people except perhaps to let them feel superior to another group of people. An excellent example of the southern approach is Texas. Texans wanted to have slavery. When the Mexican government prohibited slavery the Texans decided to form their own county so they could have it. So though this is an excellent video, its start suggests the idea that the South was somehow justified in its actions.
Well I keep it vague and open for a reason - as you said yourself - this is a talk about military history. Didn't want to get dragged into the rabbit hole of causes for the civil war. That said, you do bring up good points in your comment. Appreciate that
War is never like Call of duty game. People forget that especially armchair generals, War is the last tool of diplomacy as Bismarck preached.
Well said. As Sun Tsu would say - to win without fighting is best
why am I paying for RUclips Premium if I still have to watch commercials??
Apologize - to create these videos it does cost to buy clips / music / software etc. You're supporting that
Oscar Mike!
Sir, yes sir!
Obsolete tactics did NOT cause the high casualties of the American Civil War. This is commonly held myth, infinitely recited.
Casualties were high simply because both sides wouldn't quit. If soldiers stand and bang in close packed ranks, as at the start of the war, then casualties accrue rapidly in short battles. If, conversely, soldiers hide in trenches, as in later stages of the war, then casualties accrue steadily over days and weeks. But either way it's the same result.
yeah, most civil wars tend to have the highest percentages of casualties (with the exception of ww1 and 2)
Robo Voice no more.
Straight to RUclips's DON'T RECOMMEND Hell.
Dude sounds just like the voice on CSX recordings
CSX?
@@FlashPointHx railroad
Finally got some free time to watch the video and LOVED it! This is the best video under one hour. I have to respectfully disagree with those that say Robert E. Lee was one of the greatest generals in history for two reasons: 1. He was known to give very vague and confusing orders. This came to bite him in the butt after Stonewall Jackson died as his win/loss record suffered considerably. 2. His ordering of Pickett's charge defies logic. He seemed to completely disregard the sage advice of General Longstreet that such an attack was essentially a guaranteed failure.
P.S. please go back to hour-plus videos my friend 🙏 😉😊
Hey Chris - always good to hear from you. Lee had some genius ideas - but a lot of his success was based on luck as well. He was also blessed with having idiot union commanders go up against him. During the 7 days he had McCellan - nuff said. 2nd Bull Rull - he did use Jackson's steadfastness with a brilliant flank attack using Longstreet. At Fredericksburg he won because Burnside was dum enough to march across a river then up hill in the snow against an enemy entrenched and reinforced with artillery, At Chancellorsville, I'd say Hooker was actually a good general with a good plan - but too many things went wrong at JUST the right time and Lee won. At Antietam - McClellan again - nuff said. Then at Gettysburg - you're right he gave a vague command to Ewell and was used to giving commands to Jackson who would have pushed the offensive to the extreme. Ewell had his leg blown off and had become timid allowing the union troops to entrench on Cemetery ridge. Plus lee was a victim of his own success - he figured his men could overcome the union center - ignoring the fact that he was repeating burnsides' mistake at Fredericksburg - and he and his army paid the price. Even defeated at Gettysburg, Lee was still a vicious animal in the overland campaign - and had he been in direct command at St Anna - he might have reversed Grant . . . . well for a while. Also, I'll combine some videos together for the >1 hr format, but those usually kill me to make.
@@FlashPointHx excellent analysis! I completely agree that much of the success was based off incompetent Union generals. I shutter every time I think of how Lincoln could have shortened the war if he just listened to Winfield Scott and employed the Anaconda Plan.
Criticisms of Grant aside, he beat the hell out of the Confederates at Shiloh. And ultimately Lee and his army surrendered to him at Appomattox.
Might I ask why you only use a southern drawl when saying the name "Beauregard"??
hahah - I used to live in Charleston SC - that drawl has a tendency to come out from time to time
My family lost 1 man in the revolution war, two in w.w.1 four in w.w 2 and nine in the Civil war.
This comment blew my mind! Your family has truly given the ‘Last full measure of devotion’ to this country. Curious - did you have family on both sides during the civil war?
@@FlashPointHx no all on the north.
What is the name of the narrator please
This is a one man show Hannibal - the name is Nitin Sil
i typed first first
hahaha - think you got it Hamza!
What if. A game delusionists play, to sooth their angst
Or a game to challenge the mind
Bit heavy on the exposition, lol , dang. :p
I think the man's name was McClellan, not McClennan🙁
Crap it is - my bad
Is it Corinth? Or cornith?
Corinth
@@FlashPointHx ah right right
Sean Chick
Why you saying Beauregard's name like that? Please stop it's weird hahaha. The video is great though
I used to live in Charleston SC - still have a little of that southern draw left I guess
@@FlashPointHx I suspected you were raised in the South the moment you first pronounced Beauregard's name. However, there was no detectable Southern accent in the rest of your well paced narration. But if you're going fall back on your Southern accent in saying his name, then what a missed opportunity not to have said his entire name of Pierre Gustave Toutant Beauregard. I'm sure you could have pulled it off to point of causing us listeners to imagine grits and molasses on your lips.