Civil War Myths: The Civil War in Four Minutes

Garry Adelman of the American Battlefield Trust details the most common misconceptions about the Civil War including why did soldiers fight, was George McClellan really that bad of a general and what is up with all of those Civil War ghost tours?

[@Flashback2020]

I enjoyed that the only defense given of Braxton Bragg was that he "probably wasn't talking to himself all the time". Great video.

[@jlhill17]

General McClellan was great at managing his army (which was pretty huge) and whipping them into shape and making them into a strong fighting force. But he was not so good at leading them in battle. He was overly cautious and didn't like taking risks.

[@josephhewes3923]

There is nothing wrong with being cautious, unless of course your boss wants you to take risks. Which Abraham Lincoln wanted. And which of course historians love. But to McClellan, he thought that risks would lead to the deaths of thousands and thousands of soldiers, and he was right. And he thought preserving their lives might be important. Which was one of the reasons his Army loved him so. McClellan has gotten a raw deal through history. His performance in the Seven Days Battles can arguably be described as a draw, but politically it was taken as a defeat. And his performance in the Maryland campaign, where he defeated Lee at South Mountain and Antietam, was most certainly a victory. But of course history has taken a disliking to McClellan, and reported the political attacks against him as fact, and so a victory at Antietam was not enough, only destroying Lee's Army was acceptable. Which is of course was and is absurd. Over the last five or so years there has been a reevaluation of McClellan going on in the Civil War academic community, and it is being discovered that he is not nearly as bad a General as has traditionally been reported as history. And many of the negative things attached to him were in fact... myths.

[@garypulliam3740]

@@josephhewes3923 True.

[@Jcod_]

@@josephhewes3923 Managing a war at the highest levels also inherently includes managing political situations. I don't think anyone involved at the highest level of command on either side of the war managed everything perfectly. How could they when they had an opponent that was competent enough and had enough resources to cause problems? I think McClellan got a lot of flak because he failed to do what was wanted of him. In retrospect though we should be able to see pretty easily that what was wanted of him was unrealistic at best if not impossible. The Civil War was never going to be a fast and relatively bloodless affair. The technology, logistics, politics, and resources that both sides brought to bare guaranteed that.

[@Greenfield-yf1wh]

I am not saying McClellan was good at leading the army in battlefields, but what would become of Lee when he suffered multiple tactical defeats against McCellan (including Malvern Hill).

[@1963felonee]

@@josephhewes3923 McClellan is honestly my favourite and one of the few union generals I have any amount of respect for, it really doesn't help he was a Democrat, and I think he suffered a lot post war in the same way Longstreet did simply for being politically different than the side he fought on

[@gameoforbits3783]

don't know if this man is a historian but his passion to replace myths with facts is worthy and characteristic of historians

[@malafunkshun8086]

Gary’s one of the longtime battlefield historians at Gettysburg.

[@HemlockRidge]

Shoes were manufactured in Hanover, the next town to the east of Gettysburg.

[@jaein7779]

Glad someone brought this up. As I understood it, the shoes were not manufactured in Gettysburg, but the confederate army heard that a large supply of shoes were in or near Gettysburg and thus the column of soldiers went there to acquire the shoes.

[@TigerRifle1]

Its Heth's after the fact justification. They skirmished with Buford's Cavalry the evening of June 30th but weren't aware it was him. They moved in the next day to identify who they fought. Had nothing to do with shoes.

[@HemlockRidge]

@@TigerRifle1 Actually, it was. They just were misinformed over where they were.

[@frednesbittjr.7862]

Thank You...Lee was on a foraging mission...one wagon-train load back was 19 miles long.

[@ronzzzo1]

No one ever made a mention of shoes until Heth “mentioned” it 20 years later. If there had been shoes at all, they were long gone as Early’s troops had gone through Gettysburg and York several days before.

[@bradfortson6586]

And also there is no such thing as ghosts

[@dperry913MusicTracks]

Nope.

[@dperry913MusicTracks]

And, no, not all the stories on ghost tours are fake either. Some are, some aren't.

[@dperry913MusicTracks]

LOL, this.

[@dperry913MusicTracks]

Anyone who hasn't caught on that ghosts are in fact a real phenomenon yet is going to get a night visitor at some point in the future that will...suddenly change their mind.

[@dperry913MusicTracks]

Post it! Create a new channel around it. Webcam, etc.

[@skipcollinge9599]

Garry is one of my favorite video historians. I literally applauded sitting at my desk at the end of this video!

[@AmericanBattlefieldTrust]

😂 nice!

[@TermiteUSA]

Great job Gary. Especially glad to hear debunking of ghost tourism. The real war is way more fascinating than made up baloney!

[@snakey934Snakeybakey]

bravo! I'm only a minute and a half in and I've already decided that this is the best 4 minute video on the civil war I've ever seen.

[@JWFan221]

Beni Habibi wow disagree.

[@snakey934Snakeybakey]

@@JWFan221 why?

[@JWFan221]

Beni Habibi 1, I don’t argue online and 2 , if this is your version of peak history, you need to do A LOT more studying and research. That’s all.

[@snakey934Snakeybakey]

@@JWFan221 If you don't argue online then why join/start a debate? And also, this video accurately dispelled lots of myths in a short amount of time. If you disagree, then don't just say "uR wRoNg" but actually explain why.

[@snakey934Snakeybakey]

@@JWFan221 not asking you to lecture me, just asking you to explain yourself so that you don't look like someone who just pretends to know stuff.

[@benjaminbutler1646]

I think the reason McClellan gets flak isn’t because he was a terrible general, but because he was so pompous and arrogant. He genuinely thought he was the new Napoleon.

[@SetoKaibaYu-Gi-OhChannel]

I think and believe that people did not really start to thinking of him as pompous or truly arrogant tell after his death. If I remember correctly it was after his death that his wife released all the letters that he wrote to her. Which show a lot of what your talking about. I believe Grant said," I dont know any man who could of done what Mac did in 61-62. We were all green then. I think if he had been in charge in 64-65 he may have preformed differently with experience."Or something to that effect.

[@hillbillyscholar8126]

He had his own Presidential aspirations too.

[@TomCook-jw6ur]

Benjamin Butler Pretty stupid; Little Mac loved his men and feared unnecessary loss of lives. Had Booth killed the tyrant in1860, MacClellan would have been elected President and there would have been no war.

[@shawnn7502]

@@TomCook-jw6ur Wrong on all accounts but the fear of "necessary" loss of life. No reason for Booth to kill Lincoln in 1860, who was never a tyrant and wasn't even President yet. McClellan was an unknown colonel in 1860. If not for Lincoln's promotion of McClellan in 1861, no one would have ever heard of him. If Lincoln is assassinated in on the way to Washington, as was feared, then war becomes even more guaranteed. And if even by some other miracle war could have been avoided in 1860, then that means slavery would have continued on, merely kicking the can down the road for war later on.

[@jimplummer4879]

@@shawnn7502 Absolutely Correct. Lincoln did not attack anyone, it was the south who attacked first.

[@droidlittle582]

Good rant! Some of the crap that gets perpetuated is just down right laughable! Keep up the good work guys!

[@FlynBrian]

A well spoken commentary.

[@decimated550]

Or Burnside. Wow I didn’t know if he defeated launch Street in Battle!

[@phokjiouh59]

He sounds like an idiot.

[@SoCalYar]

Okay so there is NO shoe factory in Gettysburg, but there IS a basement in the Alamo!

[@lesliefranklin1870]

Never heard about a shoe factory. However, I'm guessing they had a general store where they sold shoes and perhaps a cobbler.

[@ws2228]

Lol, thats where they keep bicycles.

[@ws2228]

@@lesliefranklin1870 I have read about the factory for decades, I'm old.

[@herbmartin2271]

Except there's all kind of shoe factories in the area

[@burtonhollabaugh3767]

JEB Stuart stole whatever he could find.

[@manuelgchapajr2000]

My Family were Hispanic and owned a Ranch in South Texas. They fought for the South, their reason was the amount of taxes that they were being forced to pay on exporting beef to Mexico and to the Northern States was running them out of business. They has 20 ex-slaves working on the ranch as share croppers. My Great Great Grandparents bought all of their Freedom from other Ranchers in the area. I had contact with one of these Families up to the 1990’s. The War was an economic as well as political issue for my Family all of the Ranch Hands Hispanic Irish and African Served with the Southern Army’s with Gen. Hoods Texas Brigade.

[@JohnRebCSA]

Brian Glover false. There’s hundreds of muster rolls that says otherwise

[@Greenfield-yf1wh]

Sorry you are either misinformed or flat-out lying. There was no export duty on any product in the United States before the Civil War.

[@savanahmclary4465]

Amen! Thanks for sharing

[@savanahmclary4465]

@@Greenfield-yf1wh What was the UNCONSTITUTIONAL Morill Tariff act? That Abe Lincoln sent ships to Charleston, South Carolina to collect and to enforce? Oh the rewriting of American History for a RACIAL DIVISION AGENDA.

[@richardmccarthy3066]

No African-American served in a southern army.... at least not in battle!

[@mattdignam5459]

Great video, Whenever Gary is doing the video I feel like I learn something new every time and if I already know it, he gives me a new way of looking at the events and people of the Civil War

[@SouthernGentleman]

“Slavery is a political evil in every country.” “I will not raise my sword against Virginia.” “I am rejoiced that slavery had been abolished.” - Robert E Lee

[@johnhoudyshell7551]

To the communist personal property and capitalism are evils to be abolished, slavery was both, so if your an abolitionist or a communist how do you reconcile property rights when a soul political party dictates what rights you have at the point of a gun ?

[@SouthernGentleman]

John Houdyshell I fail to see your relevance. The founding fathers like George Washington were anti slavery, but lived in a country that had slavery for 86 years. Robert E Lee’s cause was Virginia.

[@jacksons1010]

Robert E. Lee was a good man fighting for a deplorable cause. It was a tragedy, and he came to realize it far more personally than most Southerners. I could offer some parallels to Gen. Erwin Rommel in WW2.

[@SouthernGentleman]

Jon Jackson Fighting for his home is not a deplorable cause.

[@Sphere723]

@@SouthernGentleman I disagree. If he thought slavery was evil he should have sided with the Union like fellow Virginian George Thomas. It was a roll of the dice whether he was born in Virginia or a hundred miles farther north in Maryland. Chance is not morality.

[@MegaWillieo]

Brilliant organizer and discipline. I think his failure was he was afraid to fail. He was constantly out numbered and wanted to maneuver his opponent rather than fight. Burnside knew he wasn’t qualified to command an army,but forced to take command. The lack of bridges due to Halleck’s stupidity and failure to find fords across the Potomac doomed his campaign. The Mud March doomed his command. Yet he captured Roanoke Island and beat Longstreet at Knoxvillr

[@davidmerzig6196]

Great statement! Of course, all history is murky, two witnesses to an accident will sometimes give very different accounts of what “really” happened. But there’s a whole lot that is not murky, just complicated. Humans love easy answers to complex events. Thanks for reminding us all to be diligent.

[@MVelt7]

Excellent video! Much of history gets altered or mixed up as we pass it down to the next generations. We owe it to them -- past and future -- to know truth from fiction, to better understand the reasons behind the decisions and events. This way we all learn to improve our society.

[@jamielancaster01]

Of course the Gettysburg battle was fought over shoes - stilettos😏

[@keithmccormick4768]

Really good commentary on a war that has been misrepresented today for political purposes.

[@jacksons1010]

Right, at the national level it was ultimately about slavery and those who deny it today do so for political reasons. Individual soldiers on the other hand may have had no opinion on the subject and entirely different reasons for fighting. Both things are true - but many people find that impossible to grasp.

[@SgtMjr]

I like the observation on human intelligence. We are no more intelligent now than humans in the 19th century. The difference is knowledge and experience.

[@Joker-jt3vn]

Wow! Excellent and well balanced! The South WAS fighting for “states rights“ the main “right” for which the governments seceded was the right to continue and expand the institution of slavery. I come from generations of Southerners, some of whom fought in the Civil War, and I know this is true. Among their reasons for fighting, the average Southerner enlisted to defend his family, friends and state against Northern domination, not to maintain slavery. Most Southerners didn’t even own slaves.

[@ronzzzo1]

Joker 64 And most northern soldiers didn’t fight to free the slaves, they signed up to preserve the union, adventure and peer pressure.

[@Joker-jt3vn]

Ron Zanoni Yes, excellent point.

[@Joker-jt3vn]

Brian Glover Very impressive. I will briefly and only mildly disagree on two points. I think when Lee makes reference to his “country” he was referring to Virginia, not to the CSA. At least this was so at the time he resigned his commission in the army. His concern with taking up arms against his fellow Virginians was of primary importance and arguably a key factor in his decision to resign. I believe that he initially hoped to avoid service at all. A misguided decision and a naive hope, no doubt. I do not believe one can confidently assign specific motives to individual Southerners as to their support of the war. Although, without a doubt, they wished to preserve their “way of life”, I would argue that this is more broad than slavery. Certainly it included slavery, but it may be more accurate to say, as you mention, they wished to preserve the “racial hierarchy” and if this meant preserving slavery, so be it. Poor Southerners, as would be proven out during and after reconstruction, did not wish to be placed on equal footing with blacks. The poor feared this, as they were already near the bottom of the social pecking order. The “lost cause” myth and the interpretation of history it spawned, muddied the waters relating to individual motivations for fighting the war. I agree that the main reason for the war revolved around the issue of slavery and, like it or not, that’s what the South was fighting for. The euphemism “states rights” was and is merely a smoke screen. As I said, I would argue, with admittedly less data than you have, that preserving their place in the pecking order and not necessarily the preservation of slavery as an institution, was at the front of mind to the average soldier in the CSA. Further, I would argue that if the average soldier in the Union army believed that they were fighting to end slavery, as opposed to fighting to preserve the union, they would have been much less motivated to fight. The belief in white supremacy was not just a Southern belief. Few people were purely motivated by the thought of ending the injustice that was slavery.

[@Joker-jt3vn]

Brian Glover Good information and great discussion.

[@waltdortch4320]

Loved it. Great video Garry.

[@GenghisVern]

That was very good. Now take a few deep breaths, count to 10 and relax.

[@thomaslance5428]

YES. LOL.

[@johngeverett]

The stories of the Civil War are exciting enough without the myths. Great way to put it! BTW, McClellan's problem was "Ready, Ready, Aim, Aim, Aim, . . . " and he'd never pull the trigger! Even so, Robert E. Lee said after the war that of all the generals he faced, McClellan was the best "by a long shot".

[@kennethkellogg6556]

Granted, McClellan was an outstanding administrator who made the Army of the Potomac into a truly efficient army. However, he had the end of the war handed to him on a silver platter with Special Orders 191 (Lee's marching orders for the Antietam campaign) and couldn't manage more than a battlefield draw.

[@justinmiller3754]

Garry droppin facts. It amazes me what some people believe, simply because of popular culture, or just being mislead from early on. We have all believed in such things at one time or another. The issue is when presented with the facts; there are still some whom only see it "their" way. Either thru pride or stubbornness they refuse to accept that they are wrong.

[@jennhoff03]

This is SO well said!!!! Everyone seems to think that everyone from the north fought bc they hated slavery and everyone on the south fought because they wanted slavery. But how many people do you know who signed up for a war because of one idealistic reason it started? Certainly everyone in WWI didn't fight because they were upset about the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand. And everyone who has gone to Iraq hasn't done so because they were making weapons (or had oil, or whichever reason you choose to believe it started). People sign up for all kinds of reasons, and those reasons are usually a lot closer to home than one ideal.

[@jennhoff03]

@emosh73 Oh, yeah, it was definitely a factor. Certainly the main factor the war was fought in general. But I'm talking about the reasons that specific people signed up. Ted Smith in Michigan was just as likely to conscript because he wanted the money, or because his friends were all doing it, or because he wanted to be a war hero, as he was to sign up because of his hatred of slavery. I hear a lot of people who find out their ancestors fought on the south say, "darn, they loved slavery," or visa versa. But I just don't think you can always assume that was the reason. Even though it definitely was A reason. And it was the biggest reason the war took place in general.

[@SantomPh]

@@jennhoff03 Lincoln called for volunteers and a lot of men signed up just to get paid. No one really thought about slavery, at the time it was because some states had risen in rebellion and were threatening the Union at best. The talk of ending slavery etc came from many of the officers, the fighting men didn't really think much about it; the Colored Units that eventually joined the Union were not well received by many Union troops either, other than in the Navy. The overriding reason to join up was to get paid and have an adventure of sorts. That doesn't mean the Yankees fought for fun.

[@Brandon_737]

I enjoy these videos its always nice waking up in the morning with something new from the ABT. I will say though certain things that are claimed to be myths can really just be different equations to the same story. For instance when the man mentions slavery as a reason for secession everyone know slavery had its role in the war but, iv read and watched videos of other reasons as well such as taxes, tariffs and a difference in opinion if a state could govern itself or separate from the union if it felt its rights were being violated. I wouldnt call these myths I would say wars are a very complex and complicated event and theirs several sides and reason for everything.

[@nightflight83]

I feel like I just got yelled at.

[@michaelthompson342]

Well said! People fall for myths and other agendas pushed by some without asking themselves “Is what I’m hearing true?” If you are taught something explore the veracity before accepting it as gospel!!!

[@darkangel6662000]

Well said sir

[@owen-nd7om]

Great video I hate it when people say everyone died to keep or free the slaves

[@malafunkshun8086]

A little bit ranty, but in a good way. The four minute format also perfectly suits 21st century attention spans. Aloha 😊🤙🏼👏🏼

[@bongnp]

The shoes thing for Gettysburg, I understood it as an interception of a shipment of shoes, not to raid a show factory that of course is not there.

[@A_Startled_Deer]

wow, he got his blood pressure up, almost to the level of Major general George G. Meade on a good day ;-)

[@KermitTheGamer21]

Ghost tours are a sham, but I have seen ghosts of Civil War soldiers myself before, when I visited my grandma a few miles away from the Shiloh battlefield. This is when I was a young child, too. I knew of the Civil War but I did not know of the Battle of Shiloh. My grandma's house had these giant windows that seemed to stretch from floor to ceiling, and one night I looked out the window and saw the full figures of two Civil War soldiers marching by, glowing a misty green before fading into the darkness after only a few seconds. I often wonder who they were and if they were Union or Confederate. I hope I can visit the Shiloh battlefield someday.

[@lukederkovitz2297]

Love your passion decifering myths from truth

[@davidhull1481]

The first and third are news to me, so thanks for that. The second and fourth I haven’t heard before.

[@MM-qi5mk]

Thank you ! They myth you smashed about why they fought is what I always tell people. Secession was about slavery, The Civil War was about Union troops being marched into the South.

[@dancnkc]

That's not really what he said. Yes, the civil war, from the politicians' point of view, was indeed about slavery and preserving economies.. As the industrial revolution was ramping up in the north, the south's biggest export was cotton and other labor intensive agricultural products. A huge cost of labor differential was developing that caused the south to lag pretty far behind the north economically speaking, and it was getting worse. The gap between rich and poor was widening in the south rather quickly. Losing slavery, in the politician's eyes, meant worsening economies and the end to political careers. The south lead the world in cotton production, but it was the one bright spot they had and required cheap labor. The common confederate soldier, however, didn't have any of that. Most young men that were enlisted didn't come from a rich plantation. They came from small farming communities that were nearly destitute. Becoming a soldier offered income, status and a possible ticket out of the misery they lived in. Education was also poor in the south, so these young men were very impressionable and the politicians seized upon that.

[@MM-qi5mk]

dancnkc, yup I agree

[@xjcaro]

OMG! I am totally devastated! I love these myths so much that I swallowed them, hook line and sinker! Ha ha ha. Thank you so much for enlightening me.

[@vukmicovic1132]

Another wonderful video, thank you very much for making them. Eave though I am from Europe I enjoy your videos very much. One myth that I have found repeated even by university lecturers is that the British Empire supported the Confederacy. Does anybody know how that myth got started? Thank you.

[@td4805]

The British Empire did support the Confederates. They continued trade with them including weapons for cotton.

[@vukmicovic1132]

@@td4805 Neutrality means not picking a side, and treating both sides more or less equally. This is what the British Empire did. They traded with both sides, in fact they sold at least twice as many weapons to the Union than to the Confederacy, which stands to reason since the Union was richer and was not under naval blockade. What you said is like saying that the US supported the Central Powers during the first half of the Great War (First World War), since the US continued trading with them including selling them weapons, but the US sold much more to the Entente for the exact same reason. Refusing to trade with the Confederacy would be picking a side, and while the British public was strongly abolitionist they were not that interested in intervening. Best Regards.

[@cathalodiubhain5739]

@@vukmicovic1132 very interesting, thanks for that......

[@Ulfcytel]

@@td4805 That was less because of an inclination towards the Confederate cause than the fact the blockade was strangling the fabric industry in northern England. Getting hold of raw cotton was vital to keep factories running and people in jobs. There was a lot of hardship in places like Lancashire during the American Civil War.

[@jamesthepatriot6213]

The British Empire didn't come out for the South but it was very, very close to doing so for a while. There was a lot of sympathy for the South among the aristocracy, but the common folk couldn't stand the idea of supporting a slave cause. It's fair to say the British government was amicable with the South, at least, while technically remaining neutral.

[@dukeman7595]

People love a great story.

[@ihateyankees3655]

If the south seceded over slavery, why didn't they rejoin and force through the Corwin amendment? The south loved America and secession wasn't a choice made lightly. They wouldn't have done it if they saw themselves as having any other choice.

[@TigerRifle1]

Because it didn't address slavery in the territories.

[@ihateyankees3655]

@@TigerRifle1 That doesn't account for the non slavery related changes in the Confederate Constitution. They banned protective tariffs, banned government managed public works projects, and banned corporate subsidies. They reaffirmed state sovereignty and allowed states to impeach federal officials operating within their borders.

[@ihateyankees3655]

@Brian Glover Dead wrong. You're completely ignoring both the Corwin amendment and Lincoln's repeated promises not to abolish slavery where it already existed. Abolition was purely a way to weaken and isolate the south.

[@SantomPh]

the war pretty much removed slavery from the books. The Corwin Ammendment was also not supported by the southern states largely because the first and only states to ratify it were all Union states during the war. By the time the war was over the Amendment was no longer discussed in Congress, given the more pressing issues of the Reconstruction Era. Also, had the southern states not seceded they might have kept their precious slavery via the Amendment; but because South Carolina was so childish and fearful it seceded before Lincoln did, triggering all the secession that followed.

[@ihateyankees3655]

@@SantomPh Throughout most of the war, Lincoln repeatedly stated that the Confederacy could keep slavery if they just returned to the union. Why would they consistently turn down that offer if they cared about slavery above all else?

[@zacharyclark5617]

This is my sentiment. Why do we use the Civil War to bash eachother?

[@personalvideoarchive6988]

If I remember correctly the war ended in 1865. So why are we still fighting it?

[@NA-ck6cz]

Because of lost causers

[@dillonsparks3492]

Because of Northerners who think they are the moral superior. Despite there ancestors committing a genocide against Native Americans after the war, for the crime of siding with the Confederacy. Despite the North offering former slaves 40-acres and a mule in the newly conquered south, as a way to keep their new reliable voters in the South, and never actually granting the land. Despite the fact the only reason there were no slaves in the North, is because Northerners thought slaves were too stupid to work in manufacturing. Instead they decided to subjugate irish-endentured servants, to worse conditions than a southern black slave ever experienced. That's why the Irish and Native Americans fled to the South during the Civil War. But naaahhhhhh......yall are the good-guys!! 🤣😂😭 Only good Unioner was Cutler, for leaving those rat soldiers of his so exposed!

[@NA-ck6cz]

@@dillonsparks3492 Also, nobody was fleeing to the south. Actually the opposite took place, since the confederacy was the first "government" in North America to implement a military draft.

[@TigerRifle1]

Some of them fought for the North too. The Cherokees were divided but were really the only tribe to participate. The Sioux, Cheyenne, Lokota, Apaches weren't involved and the Plains War had nothing to do with siding with the Confederates.

[@AlGreenLightThroughGlass]

Well said...

[@stevecarry6016]

Thank you very much. Re peat this many times

[@faffabout9412]

Well said, good video!

[@amywaters7246]

GREAT freaking video! 100% nailed it! I sorta disagree with you about McClellan though. I guess he deserves some credit for organizing the Army of the Potomac but beyond that he was terrible. He continually overestimated the size of the ANV, and he was just a pompous jerk to Lincoln. Granted, Stanton was a pompous jerk to Lincoln AND McClellan...anyway, so I guess I agree with you 95% of the way? John Hay was with Lincoln on the train to Gettysburg and confirmed he didn't do any writing the whole trip.

[@nathanjohnson1853]

"You try to manage the largest army in the world AND be a great strategist AND great communicator..." von Moltke: "Okay, what next?"

[@DoctorX101]

Yes, yes, but Lincoln WAS a Vampire Hunter! I saw a documentary! 😁

[@paulmicheldenverco1]

McClellan was good at training troops, but he ended up wasting thousands of lives because he wouldn't take the aggressive action that would have destroyed Lee's army. He could have destroyed the army in '62 on the Peninsula when Joseph Johnston was still commanding the confederates. Back then before the fighting became really nasty, capturing Richmond may have compelled the confederates to capitulate or in the least it would have denied them the Tredegar Iron Works. McClelland also could have destroyed Lee at Antietam. I mean he was given Lee's battle plans and still he did nothing. I don't see how you can say Mac is the great undervalued general of the war. Put Grant in either of those two situations and he would have prevailed. Plus, Garry talks to fast like he's ADD and didn't take his meds today. But I agree that I don't think the confederates were looking for shoes at Gettysburg. The thing about Mac was he ended up squandering lives by his inaction. He had confederates on the ropes and he let 'em out of their pickle.

[@dougwatt6303]

Well presented. Thank you!

[@andrewsilverstein6186]

Another myth is that "Shilo" means something like "place of peace", when in reality, the Hebrew word means, "his gift", or just, "his". I also heard that the name Kershaw has the accent on the second syllable and not the first (Ker-'shaw).

[@hitmeinsteadofyourkid4967]

My favorite myth is that the entire war took place between Grant and Lee

[@twostickzach1739]

Grant would have won 1v1 tho. Pistols only, Nuketown, Lee is taking the L there for sure

[@Kyleandbet]

Get em' Garry!

[@davidsoderberg8726]

Thank you, well stated!

[@rollotwomassey]

@3:42...they thought there was? And one can criticize generals even if you’re not a general. “Well, YOU couldn’t do it any better!” is not valid. Not my job to do it better. It’s yours. McClellan prolonged the war another 2 years. He was a good organizer- which IS something good that is said about him. And Sherman chased Longstreet off at Knoxville, Burnside held him off under siege for a few weeks.

[@Adam-bq2vw]

I thought you handled the topic of why the Civil War took place pretty well. And THANK YOU for your succinctness and brevity. No wasted time, here.

[@Sana_a04]

To all those saying "civil war not about slavery," I encourage you to read this en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cornerstone_Speech

[@bowen1704]

“I think it would be better for Virginia if she could get rid of slavery. That is no new opinion with me. I have always thought so, and have always been in favor of emancipation - gradual emancipation.” - Robert E Lee

[@MrBassmann15]

It doesn't matter what the individual soldiers of the Confederacy fought for but why the South succeded in the first place for which was Slavery.

[@bowen1704]

Alexander Backert Nope, in 1828 the south almost left because of the tariffs of abominations financially destroyed the south. In 1859, northerners killed 9 southerners at Harpers Ferry and that caused the south to want to leave.

[@bowen1704]

Alexander Backert List of causes of the Civil War- Harpers Ferry On the night of October 16, 1859, Brown and a band of followers seized the federal arsenal at Harper’s Ferry, Virginia (now West Virginia), in what is believed to have been an attempt to arm a slave insurrection. (Brown denied this at his trial, but evidence indicated otherwise.) They were dislodged by a force of U.S. Marines led by Army lieutenant colonel Robert E. Lee. Brown was swiftly tried for treason against Virginia and hanged. Southern reaction initially was that his acts were those of a mad fanatic, of little consequence. But when Northern abolitionists made a martyr of him, Southerners came to believe this was proof the North intended to wage a war of extermination against white Southerners. Brown’s raid thus became a step on the road to war between the sections. States' Rights The idea of states' rights was not new to the Civil War. Since the Constitution was first written there had been arguments about how much power the states should have versus how much power the federal government should have. The southern states felt that the federal government was taking away their rights and powers. Political power That was not enough to calm the fears of delegates to an 1860 secession convention in South Carolina. To the surprise of other Southern states-and even to many South Carolinians-the convention voted to dissolve the state’s contract with the United States and strike off on its own. South Carolina had threatened this before in the 1830s during the presidency of Andrew Jackson, over a tariff that benefited Northern manufacturers but increased the cost of goods in the South. Jackson had vowed to send an army to force the state to stay in the Union, and Congress authorized him to raise such an army (all Southern senators walked out in protest before the vote was taken), but a compromise prevented the confrontation from occurring. Perhaps learning from that experience the danger of going it alone, in 1860 and early 1861 South Carolina sent emissaries to other slave holding states urging their legislatures to follow its lead, nullify their contract with the United States and form a new Southern Confederacy. Six more states heeded the siren call: Mississippi, Florida, Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, and Texas. Others voted down secession-temporarily. When President Lincoln called for Volunteers to invade the south, six southern states voted to join the Confederacy. The issue of slavery The burning issue that led to the disruption of the union was the debate over the future of slavery. Secession brought about a war in which the Northern and Western states and territories fought to preserve the Union, and the South fought to establish Southern independence as a new confederation of states under its own constitution. Most of the states of the North, meanwhile, one by one had gradually abolished slavery. A steady flow of immigrants, especially from Ireland and Germany during the potato famine of the 1840s and 1850s, insured the North a ready pool of laborers, many of whom could be hired at low wages, diminishing the need to cling to the institution of slavery. Child labor was also a growing trend in the North. The agrarian South utilized slaves to tend its large plantations and perform other duties. On the eve of the Civil War, some 4 million Africans and their descendants toiled as slave laborers in the South. Slavery was interwoven into the Southern economy although only a relatively small portion of the population actually owned slaves. - History . net

[@bowen1704]

Alexander Backert Only 30% of the Confederacy had slavery and the north had 5 slave states. Lincoln said slavery wasn’t in danger.

[@MrBassmann15]

@@bowen1704 I would love to reply but I don't have time for this. I'm busy teaching people the truth about the war in real life among other things.

[@fiddlesing5130]

Really, no ghosts?? There goes my bucket list.

[@jackcoleman5955]

Great video Garry! Thanks for the reminder to us non-historians: Look to the source documents available.

[@billtilson2442]

The southerners were trying to get shoes in Hanover east of Gettysburg. It was a shoe making center and they had to march through Gettysburg to get there.

[@ws2228]

Less than 2 weeks..... August 19th is National Potato Day!

[@davepalmer6511]

Understanding combat relative Trauma, such as gun shot victim, I would say that most victims of the Battle of the civil war, were in Shock, they were lethargic, dehydrated, and their body Dopamine receptors in the brain and released out Dopamine traumatize victim to chill them out, for example. GEN. SICKLES SMOKE WHILE BE CARRY OUT. There no evidence of him screaming out in bloody murder. It also depend on what was wrong with soldier when he was brought to the field hospital. Hollywood like to over Dramatize, Trauma in war movies.

[@stacyvonn8036]

The posts ( here , here ) attribute to Lincoln the words: “If I could save the Union without freeing any slave, I would do it” and to Lee the quote: “There is a terrible war coming and these young men who have never seen war cannot wait for it to happen, but I can tell you, I wish that I owned every slave in the south, for I would free them all to avoid this war.” They are accompanied by the caption, “Two quotes you won’t see in school.”....The full sentence in the letter makes it clear that not freeing slaves is just one policy option Lincoln is presenting in the letter alongside the idea of freeing all slaves: “My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the union without freeing any slaves I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that.”........I feel that freeing slaves had nothing to do with the goals of the North.... I don't think it was Fought to keep slaves in slavery or to set them free... It was all about what Lincoln called "Saving the Union".... Which was the equivalent of beating one's Girlfriend to keep her from leaving.... And that's the kind of relationship we have with our Government now...... Just my Opinion....

[@GarethBryant15]

I respect This-Video...like I always tell People: The Most-Important History-Lesson I've ever learned is that Historians are the Best-Liars.

[@ssudweeks4280]

Great commentary!

[@2011Matz]

Here's one for ya. Foot officers and cavalrymen attacking with arm and sword extended. Try it sometime, see how long you can hold that weapon out in front of you.

[@BenFaffler]

Finally McClellan is being shown accurately!

[@paulelliott3220]

Quite right - well said

[@user-cb1xx9vg3k]

Guy seems pretty pissed

[@bobbyb.6644]

Micromanagement lethal in all cases ?

[@bmille2121]

good job. ❤️🇺🇸

[@theunfortunategeneral]

I suddenly got more instested in Old burney....

[@an-tm3250]

BILL TILSON: Lee was enroute to Hanover for shoes. He should have focused on that goal. Speculated that he had a mild heart attack the day before. God bless those brave men.

[@telubrico]

According to several historical sources, including PBS "The American Experience", it is estimated that 100,000 Union soldiers were under 15 years old and 20% of all civil war soldiers were under the age of 18 and 48 boys under the age of 18 received the Medal of Honor.

[@michaelhauser6440]

If PBS said so, it must be true

[@davidowens7304]

Not a huge fan on this video entirely, but that said - I would fact check PBS.

[@JoeOvercoat]

Shoes?

[@robertzelin9713]

loved it keep them coming great presentation. Their are ghosts and the tooth fairy is real because i got money under my pillow. lol

[@ricardodesotorodriguez3503]

I love (adore) to read or hear post bellum apología correcting history to their own Wicked ends while the Lord obviously was in favor of the winners. And nothing can change that fact Jack!

[@JamesMartinelli-jr9mh]

Secession for slavery? It was mentioned because tariffs were constitutional. The statesmen needed a reason to leave based on the Constitution. The real reason was that Lincoln lied to the Governor of South Carolina about provisioning Ft. Sumter.

[@SantomPh]

no James, hello again. It was slavery and the business of slavery. Read the secession documents again please.

[@dougackerman6945]

Well said!

[@ms33401]

Lee said McClellan was the general who gave him the most trouble and I don't think he was just pissing up Grant's sleeve.

[@MarcTheUtahan]

So glad for the kind words to McClellan. He’s my guy

[@TheSaiyanLink]

It's honestly the first time I've ever heard anyone say anything positive about McClellan. I was shocked when he started talking about him like that lmaooo

[@unknownrider3071]

Great video - thanks. Maybe next time do a bit about how overrated the battle of Little Round Top has become. I seem to remember somebody wrote a book about that....

[@thomasbaagaard]

The civil war was the first modern war. The rifle musket was a new weapon Civil war armies used Napoleonic tactics.

[@charlie11ng42]

That was awesome

[@hearmeout9138]

A toast (or four or five) to you! Regards, "Unconditional Surrender" Grant, Lt. Gen, US Army 🤓🇺🇸

[@djolley61]

I totally thought the shoe factory thing was true.

[@bub7771]

Sure. But we all know Abraham Lincoln was a vampire hunter

[@adammuncy8475]

McClellan's problem was that he was an arrogant ass. Burnside wasn't that bad of a commander, it's mainly the weather that screwed him out of his command. The explosive demolition at Cold Harbor was a brilliant idea that Mead overruled and became a cluster truck.

[@kennethkellogg6556]

I believe you're thinking of the Battle of the Crater, near Petersburg.

[@nickroberts6984]

Yep ! Longstreet lost 800 men in 20 minutes against Burnside, at the battle of Fort Sanders in my hometown Knoxville TN. 🇺🇸💥🗽🐴📜🎩 The battle was faught only 10 days after Lincoln's Gettysburg Address was spoken.

[@thatonefordf-1502]

1:32 you have that map wrong, Arkansas and North Carolina joined the confederacy to, just saying.

[@TonyWright8121]

Thank you so much for this video and thank you for saying that although slavery caused the Civil War, IT was not 100% about slavery. there’s also why soldiers on either side fought. The Civil War is about what caused the war as well as why soldiers fought on either side. And it was NOT solely, 100% on the issue of slavery like the people of the left say so. they can take down Confederate Monuments and get rid of the confederate flag and all other confederate symbols.... but they’re not 100% right on the CivilWar when they say that the whole world was all about slavery. thank you so much. this is a relief to hear.

[@TonyWright8121]

emosh73 my point is we have justification to have monuments and other confederate symbols.

[@_warren6659]

stop yelling at me.

[@CW-dl2dd]

I have a question! So as we all know, the Confederacy has gotten some pretty big hate, especially in recent years. We know that the southern rebellion was treasonous and unconstitutional and, yes, conducted to preserve slavery. But should we continue to remember those that gave their service and lives for the South or is creating villains out of the Johnny Rebs completely necessary and logical? Which opinion is a better way to truly remember the Civil War and it's events and key figures and also to teach future generations?

[@Mugofbrown]

Cheers. I wish rhat our National Civil War Centre follows your example of a great channel. Myths? The "English" Civil War involved Wales, Scotland and Ireland not just England. 1940 "Britain stood alone"; Canada, India, New Zealand, the Caribbean, Australia, etc didn't exist then? Free forces of Poland, the Netherlands, Norway, what about them? So many myths, so much BS.

[@paulstan9828]

Wow! Great information. How gullible I thought all those things were true.

[@davewallace8219]

ken burns...warps history!

[@jamessummers5946]

the myth I hate the most: Gettysburg was the largest battle of the Civil war yes, Gettysburg is arguably the most crucial battle of the war, but it wasn't the largest. in total, about 165,000 men fought there, one of the largest. but at Fredricksburg, about 170,000 men fought making it the largest battle of the Civil War.

[@CH-em2wu]

Your numbers are off but you're not wrong. About 20k more men were present at the first battle of Fredericksburg than at Gettysburg. But if you count the estimated number of troops that were actually engaged than the totals are almost even for both battles.