Battle of Lake George

Short film about the Battle of Lake George created as part of the educational documentary project "Forgotten War: The Struggle for North America" www.forgottenwaronline.org. Project created by Mountain Lake PBS (www.mountainlake.org) in partnership with Lakes to Locks Passage (www.lakestolocks.com.)

[@Bayan1905]

My own family history is in this region, I am directly descended from a local man who was part of the militia raised to defend Fort William Henry and then on another part of my family are Mohawk, who were most certainly there. It's a fascinating history that doesn't get told often enough.

[@tylercole5218]

That's awesome

[@DirtObseXXion]

Wilderness Empire by Allan Eckert has a fantastic account of this battle. The "Winning America" series, especially Wilderness Empire is a must read for anyone interested in this critical time period of Colonial America. It follows William Johnson, his struggles to maintain the 6 Nations alliance with the British, and the events leading up to and immediately following this battle.

[@ace3442]

I just found out that I had a GGG Grandfather who died at the Battle of Lake George. His name was John Fahy/Fay!

[@BigMrFirebird]

Which colony unit did he fight with?

[@oldmaidwhovianakanancyg4425]

If I'm not mistaken, I believe at least part of this was filmed in the Pack Forest just north of the town of Warrensburg.

[@matthewcalder9583]

Very interesting piece. I have but one minor issue, at least two times the film seems to be flipped. The sciences where a musket is being fired from the left shoulder. Flintlocks are fired from the right shoulder due to the position of the lock so it will be away from the face. Left hand muskets would be unheard of at this time. Hence my belief the film was flipped

[@relicsartifacts4239]

GREAT VIDEO

[@ChipmunkRapidsMadMan1869]

Listening to this is like Last Of The Mohicans jumping from the fiction section to non fiction.

[@ticco2873]

Ay I live there

[@whitewarrior4777]

The war was between Britain and France, but everyone forgets that the ones fighting in these battles were colonial Americans. The French colonists were from Acadia(Maine) and Louisiana while the British colonists were from Massachusetts, New York, and Virginia. It was basically Britain and France fighting proxy wars with American colonies in order to gain more territory in America before they rebelled and gained Independence. This is colonial American history.

[@denithemalice]

Acadian are not from Maine!!! They are from New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island and Nova Scotia, Canada, and during this battle ''seven year war'' it was Nouvelle-France. I understand that you dont know the story of the deportation of Acadians... In 1755 the english separated the men from their wifes and deportated Acadian men (left their wife and children behind) in differrent places, some back to France, some in the east cost of USA , but most of them in Louisiana and the Missippi. Acadien (in French), but the english pronunce it ''acajun'', and then just ''cajun''. But this battle was with the French colonist from Nouvelle-France (until 1763), now it is Québec, Canada.After the battle of Monongahela, French fund plans from the english whom were about to attacks Fort Niagara (Ontario Canada) and Fort Frédéric (Lake Champlain), so the French decided to contre-fight Fort Oswego (Lake Ontario, NY). While doing this attack they heard that english were on their way to Fort Frédéric, so the French colonist decided to go fight it, and on they way, English were alerted and this is the rought explanation of how the Bataille of Lake George happen. But this battle has nothing to do with ''gainning more territory in America'' (sic)

[@BigMrFirebird]

There's no way that you don't know that both French and British regulars were heavily involved in this war. So why say what you've said? What's your agenda?

[@Fyrdman]

Lol The majority of the fighting was done by British regulars. Colonial auxiliaries were noted for being very unreliable

[@condorlegion89]

@TheSmokeSignal That´s awesome man... Have you tried making one of your own? I´d like to make a roach too.. Can Porcupine hair be replaced with something different? do you know of any website that gives directions to making these things? Thank you Smoke

[@ajatashatrukenway4804]

Super glue.

[@daviddalton5544]

Okayyyy

[@bobsmalser8304]

Cool that everyone is left-handed.

[@pilotboy217]

Anyone hear about the story of the guy who was being chased by the natives and he had to turn his shows backwards and scaled down the face of Roger's Rock to confuse them and made it look like he went up instead of down. Then swam to the other side of the lake. Not sure how true this tale is cause I know how hard it would be to swim from one side of the lake to the other.

[@BigMrFirebird]

The commentary is brief, generalised and to the point of being questionable. Nothing is said of the superb fighting retreat of the British colonial force, involving Connecticut, Massachusetts and Mohawks after they were ambushed in the Bloody Morning Scout. Neither was it just the French regulars who attacked Johnson's camp. The French allied Indians and Canadian militia did as well.

[@BigMrFirebird]

No redcoat units were present at this battle, so their depiction in this clip is wrong.

[@brysonbutler8942]

John 3;16

[@Lion718]

7:03 White mans war? The implication in that statement is that Indian nations particularly Iroquois never went to war with each other for land and resources and always lived in peace and harmony with their fellow natives. When in actuality history documents that the Iroquois and other Algonquin nations were always in a state of conflict way before the white man came.

[@sykeraid4944]

What are you going on with? The term "white man's war" does not implicate that at all. It implicates that Indians were doing the bidding of the white men and that it should have been fought between the white men. Stop trying to see problems where none lay.

[@johnwall7968]

I think in this instance that term is used to illustrate the absurdity of Iroquois killing other Iroquois. The Iroquois confederacy had existed for a few hundred years before this point, and one of the provisions made by that confederacy was peaceful alliance between the Seneca, Onondaga, Cayuga, Oneida, Tuscarora, and Mohawk. In this battle, Native Americans, who would have otherwise not fought one another, were killing each other at the behest of their European allies. It's certainly true that the various Indian nations were at war with one another before the arrival of Europeans (and after), but this is a specific case where members of the same nation (or allied nations) were killing each other because of the war between the French and British.

[@condorlegion89]

Thats cool :) are they expensive? I'm not a capitalist though, I like to make things myself ;)

[@akillerpacman1709]

I've been there before and heard that the French could have taken fort Henry if the British didn't burn it down .

[@andrewmccloud8581]

Funny how the French did that, too.

[@AryanAleviZaza]

The French needed the Indians to resist the English and their colonies. The French were outnumbered. They were 70000 against 1300000 English settlers. The Indians knew that the French, unlike the English colonists, did not represent a danger for them because of their weak numerical impotence. So they needed the French to resist the settlers. The British crown wanted the war against the French because of their imperialist rivalry and because they knew that the American colonies were not a priority for the King of France. Because Louis XV had to think about protecting its borders against the other European powers. Great Britain being an island, King George had no problem and could therefore spend most of his income in the sea-dominated navy and cut off the eventual aid that the King of France could send to his colonies. France occupied in Europe, the Great Betagne could devoted almost exclusively to America and the rest of the world. The settlers also wanted the war because they were ogle the lands of the Indians. The rich seized the land near the coast, it no longer rests on them but the frontier on which to settle, added to that the demographic pressure, immigration and the apat of gain. But the French presence in America prevented them from seizing the land. it was first necessary to drive the French from America. That is why George Washington made an early commitment in 1754, as a soldier of His Majesty, to drive the French out of the Ohio Valley. Once that was done. The Indians could no longer play rivalries between Europeans to protect themselves, henceforth they were alone against the voracious appetite of the English settlers. The settlers hoped to settle on his new lands but instead of that, the crown makes it impossible for them to settle west of the Appalachians. These lands, which they had always coveted, were placed under the administrative authority of Quebec, where the French Papists lived. Why did they make this war then? As if that were not enough, the king had decided to tax them to cover the expenses related to the war and that without even asking them their opinion. It was too much. They were not going to let themselves go. Why the government of his majesty had undertaken his unjust laws? Because some businessmen in London had become aware that the settlers had become rich, richer than the English of Europe, and that these settlers exercised a formidable competition to the merchants of London. It was necessary to slow down or stop this rise which would not fail to overshadow the economy of the mother country. There is no doubt that giving these new lands to the settlers would further strengthen the colonial economy at the expense of Britain's economy. In the passt, the British government, to develop and protect its colonies had on the one hand encouraged immigration and on the other hand granted very advantageous privileges particularly in the economic field. These favorable measures were justified as long as France was a threat but now that this threat had ceased to exist, these favorable measures towards the settlers were no longer justified. To make matters worse, his majesty's soldiers are haughty and arousing. Thus began a war that could be described without a problem of civil war. Because even if the colonists had decided to take the name of "American". This war opposed the English of America to their king and his soldiers. "The Americans" ended up winning the war and quite ironically thanks to the help of their old enemy Papist: France. They won with the same reasons that the Vietnamese won against the Americans almost two centuries later. This is why we can consider the American revolution on certain aspecs as a conservative revolution because the colonists wanted preserved the privileges that the English sovereigns had hitherto accoded to them. Anyway. The advent of the United States sounded the death knell of the Amerindians. Because, now, no one could not oppose the voracity of the former British colonists. All obstacles had disappeared. And they did not make lace, nor did they make quarters. they were ruthless to those who had helped their English ancestors, the pilgrim fathers, when they had just landed and were dying of hunger and disease.

[@hughcenterville8999]

What an amazing day. 3 battles in one day, Iroquois kill Iroquois, a colonial general with no military experience defeats a German professional, and the morning's battle is immortalized, The Bloody Morning Scout.

[@switchdaily]

I am abanaki Indian but I'm like 25 percent

[@condorlegion89]

how did indians attach those feathers thing onto their hair?

[@hopatease1]

super glue

[@BrianDornTFP]

*****

[@christ7288]

sneaky

[@flintlock1777]

hey i make turkey roachs for sale

[@jimilove7773]

Love this part of history but will not subscribe because pbs is garbage ! Trump!

[@jaywinters2483]

Poorly written