American Artifacts: Jackson's Flank Attack at Chancellorsville - Full Tour
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 12 ก.ย. 2024
- The Civil War Battle of Chancellorsville was fought April 30 to May 6, 1863, in Spotsylvania County, Virginia. Many historians consider the battle to be Confederate General Robert E. Lee's greatest victory. Facing a Union Army more than twice the size of his own, Lee divided his forces, sending 27,000 men under "Stonewall" Jackson on a 12-mile march to deliver a flank attack. In this program, we follow two National Park Service historians on a tour as they walk the same ground exactly 150 years after Jackson launched his attack.
Thank you for posting this video on behalf of all American Civil War history lovers
Last fall, I was driving with my wife back from Charlottesville and stopped at the Chancellorsville Battlefield visitor center. The woman in this video was there and spent a good deal of time answering questions about books on display, about this battle, and was obviously passionate about the subject matter-not just punching a clock. I bought one of the books after hearing her recommendations, and checked out the interesting exhibit. I believe she-or her colleague-mentioned that she studied Civil War history in college. I meant to shoot her a quick note of thanks, for her time and generosity. Nice to see here here.
James Wagner my friends and family see me as the bane of these folk's existence , I've argued with them from Gettysburg to Pea Ridge , leaving out none on a basis of sex or color . There are no finer historians available on a daily basis anywhere on the planet . They all show up for work with a passion more worthy than the salary that they receive , comport themselves with dignity , answer inane repetitive questions with grace , and share their knowledge freely . Let me add my voice to your compliments ,at least until I can size this young woman up on my next visit to Chancellorsville . I make no claim as to ever winning the argument , these folks are good , and occasionally have facts on their side . Kudos NPS..............I could not agree with you more , James , well said .
Jackson was a brilliant battle strategist. He himself was a military historian, who studied the great military leaders and incorporated it into his own battles. He visited Waterloo (the Napoleonic way of fighting was taught at West Point and most military academies at the time) and walked the fields at the site of the battle of the plains of Abraham, where British General James Wolfe died fighting the French against the Marquis de Montcalm, in Quebec. and now, people like me, study him and his ways of engaging war.
Hell ye!
Jackson's flank attack is studied to this day @ West Point and every military academy in the world. It is revered as the most brilliant and daring maneuver ever contrived by military ambition.
The flank attack was only special because it worked. If Howard had faced his troops east--as he was ordered--instead of south, the attack might not be so well remembered today. If officers had listened to pickets who reported the confederate movements, that might have made the attack less historic.
auerstadt06 That is so weak! History, in fact every day life itself, is full of shoulda, coulda, wouldas. For example. if you could not read or write, you wouldn't have displayed such a shallow comment and removed all doubt as to the foolish logic required to arrive at such a conclusion.
auerstadt06 That made it audacious and - as it worked - brilliant. It takes a very courageous and resolute commander to make it work and so the success was not just accidental, even though it might well have failed. Napoleon often won his battles in a similar way.
Frederic II, the Prussian king once said had he demanded from his general to have luck.
If courage and audacity were brilliance, General Hood would have been a brilliant General. He wasn't. The only thing brilliant about it was Lee's understanding of his opponent, not the tactical plan itself. If he had tried it against Grant--or even Maclellan, it might have been a disaster.
auerstadt06 You're focusing more on Lee than on Jackson, but you also overestimate the role of the judgement, the shere intellectual side. I agree that this is an important part of brillance, but it's by far not sufficient. The guess that your opponent might not do this or might do that is one thing, but executing an audacious and risky plan based on such a judgement takes much self-confidence, steadfastness and energy. Most of those who had the same idea would start trembling and hesitating rather than making it reality. Jackson, that bizarre character, was certainly not stupid, but his "stonewallish" qualities, not his brightness in first place, made him successful.
Great to see History kept so 'alive' & well preserved.
God Bless Ol Stonewall and his Boys
Loved it. Those Park Rangers were terrific in their accurate description of what took place during the battle...thanks for posting!!!
My great great grandfather of co F 12th Ga, Doles brigade, Rodes division, 2nd corps, was in the front of this historic charge into the union camp.
I'd love to walk that ground someday.
Two Battles Perfect during the Civil War and both by Confederate Generals. Jackson at Chancellorsville and Forrest at Brices Crossroads. Forrest was was numbered five to one in Cavalry and almost four to one in Infrantry at the beginning and most the battle. Forrest did recieved reinforcements later in the day but Forrest just out foved Sturgis and put the fear of God in him. Sturgis retired as soon as he got back to Memphis.
The Aug. 18 comment about Grant vs Lee: that has been a debate going on since the war.
As a Southern kid I was raised on Lee, Jackson, Stuart; but as an adult I have come to appreciate Grant.
Grant knew he was dealing with a tactical genius in Lee(who blocked Grant a number of times), but a good general plays his strengths against an enemy's weakness.
Grant knew he had more men, food,equipment,and guns...so a grinding firepower battle was his strength.
Being human, he did get impatient to win a tactical victory sometimes...like at Cold Harbor(or Sherman at Kennesaw Mtn.),
but, to his credit, he learned from bloody mistakes and went back to what was working.
Grant and Sherman, I think, have influenced modern American military thinking more than anyone else.
They were, in a sense, the first modern generals: targeting the civilian population as well as the opposing army.
Many thanks to the park rangers. They are awesome.
I grew up here. Lived on "Catharpin" Road, just minutes from Chancellorsville, Wilderness, and the courthouse.
We would play in our woods as kids, and I remember trenches and foxhole out there near the little creek that met Piney Branch Road. No big deal as a kid playing war in the trenches dug by civil war soldiers. I would like to research what part of which army/battle exactly may have been there, in that exact place
I was a Virginian, and my ancestor was Matthew Fontaine Maury. Anyhoo, I'm getting older now so I'm starting to appreciate how special that all is.
Our Park Rangers at our National Battlefields do such a phenomenal job. I took a Civil War battlefield road trip a few years ago and the vast majority of the locations I visited were wonderfully preserved and every last Ranger I encountered was extremely knowledgeable and engaging.
Gotta love a yeller.... God bless them.
Split your army in the face of the enemy. Audacity was a trademark of Gen. Lee.
THAT WAS WONDERFUL simply WONDERFUL
Good tour!!
This is awesome. I live next to Oakley Farm. I'm all over these woods. Can't wait to take this tour after watching this. Godbless America!
outflank the flankers.... with half the men..... wow.
I've been doing my family history and my great great grandmother Mary E Winn (Walton) is General Stonewall Jackson 2nd cousin!
A Jacksonian Movement. Hear -hear.
Lee's favored battlefield tactic was the holding attack - fixing the enemy in position with a portion of your force and maneuvering another force onto their flank or rear. No surprise that Lee employed the tactic at Chancellorsville but it was extremely risky since his fixing force was so small and subject to being overwhelmed if Hooker had the nerve to attack. Though initially successful in dislodging the XI corps from it's position on the Union right flank, the attack did not destroy the XI Corps or dislodge the Union center from Hazel Grove. Running out of daylight the attack stalled. The next day, Jackson having been wounded, Stuart was placed in command and ordered frontal assaults on the Hazel Grove position. Hooker had the V and I Corps on his right flank in position to drive into Stuart's left flank but failed to pull the trigger. Hooker was content to stay on the defensive. The flank attack inflicted about 2,500 casualties on the XI Corps but did not destroy it as a fighting force. Lee himself did not consider Chancellorsville a great victory. For his 12,000 casualties he had gained no ground and had not destroyed any portion of the AoP.
General Colston, General Hill, and General Rhodes masterfully executed their orders. We saw incredible success due to this attack.
there's no way to pull of such a success without men who were capable. Had Grant , Hooker pulled off the equivalent we would never hear the end of how grand they were ! and there's always the excuses why this person should have done this or that, the same was just as true for the Southern men and leaders. Bottom line the success of this battle proves just how confident the inferior solder was. They absolutely knew they could win and proved it !
A 12 mile march? I guess today's average national guard or reservist would have cardio event if he was force marched 12 miles. Indolence is bliss in today's America.
you are right, and then after a 12 mile march go right into battle for even more miles being shot at ..
i was active duty Army Infantry several years ago and we regularly did 20k (12.5 mi) as part of a series of different readiness requirements. But i agree the National Guard and Reserve dont seem to be up to it.
The guys I've seen are obese, it makes me wonder if there are any pt requirements. My understanding is the army turns down something like 80% of its potential enlistees for obesity and drug usage, consequently the training is more like a fat farm than military training. I served in the Vietnam era, 1968-70. I don't remember one fat guy in basic. I wonder if you still have to do a number of pullups to enter the mess hall? (I'm 71 and I still do pullups).
The infantry is only a small part of the entire army, support is much larger. Is it fair to say the military has only about 50 thousand battle ready troops?
+Jiminy Cricketer When i was in Basic Training we had to do pullups when entering and leaving the mess hall. I lost about 17lbs during that time but things have changed. Ive seen videos on youtube where Drill Sergeant caught a guy sleeping while hes supposed to be pulling security....to my chagrin he didnt suffer as i know i wouldve had i transgressed in such a way.
Jackson's men not only had to march through the woods but had to cut and clear the path along the way, and once in place on the Union right they still had more marching and charging ahead of them, into the enemy, so the total distance added as the day went along. I've read where the southern solder was often barefooted during the war. My great grandfather was remembered coming home from Virginia with nothing but a shirt and pants and body lice. The southern man had much more to endure than his counterpart did.
Very well done
What about the other Confederate victories at Cold Harbor and I think there were a few other Confederate victories?
Christopher Taylor Yes, this is true, but this battle holds a special place in the hearts of Southerners. Jackson was killed, and to many, this was the actual 'death knell' for the Confederacy. It was General Lee's finest hour, for when he divided his forces, it was an audacious move, one not ever considered before.
Richard Wahl You mean white Southerners.
+wolverineeagle Well, I guess that would depend on just what you are referring to. Could be yes, then again, it could be no.
The first battle of Bull Run or Manassis was an overwhelming confederate victory and if the confederates had followed through to Washington would virtually have ended the war. Billy Russell of The London Times reported "why the South didn't chase 5he Union army all the way to Washington, I know not".
wolverineeagle don’t be an NPC.
FYI that rebel yell is the same yell Celts take been yelling since time in memorial.
they didnt call him stonewall, for nothing ..
Great narration by the guides. 13:07 "This is not dinner. This is something much worse."
Fantastic video. Makes you wish you could have gone on that tour with those two guides.
Bull Run Battle, Fredericksburg, Bull Run 2nd Battle. Maybe a few more Confederate victories at least for the Army of Northern Virginia.
the pinnacle of his career
I love Jackson but I don't believe he would appreciate these Modern generals of desert storm putting a claim to his good name. Stone wall Jackson fought against larger and better equipped army's than his own. He fought against impossible odds and won anyway. That is why he was famous. All these modern day soldiers and generals, only fight against countries and people who lack the weapons and tech to even fight back at all.
They all want to be thought of as and treated like heroes and freedom fighters though, when in fact they are not.
None of these modern generals would ever make a pimple on Jackson or Lee's ass and America has become a disgrace .
Jackson, a Presbyterian, son of Ulsterman, failed professor, to many mad as a coot, to others a genius. This tragic figure from history had his fare share of heartache, yet here on this battle field Jackson proved himself to be one of the greatest military minds that ever lived. It is ironic that in his greatest moment he would be killed by his own men.
All great generals are touched by a bit of madness.thats what makes them take chances that others wouldn't.
General Lee ordered the movement, Jackson executed it. Calling Jackson one of the greatest military minds that ever lived for following orders is a bit of a stretch.
@@hvymettle Jackson's Valley Campaign (1862) made his name as a general. Jakson was not under Lee's command then, but was in contact with Lee. Jackson presented a plan to Lee and Davis to start a scorched earth campain in the North just like Sherman did in the South. Jackson's plan was dismissed as being without honour and Davis called him mad. If the CSA had listened Jakson perhaps the Shock would have brougt the Union to the table.
I read History at Ulster University, and I writing Lee at the moment. Most of my study is centered aroud Lee, however one can't take away from Jackson, his mad brilliance.
Thank you for your comment.
@@Oscarhobbit Sure, Jackson gets credit for the Valley Campaign, but he was luckier than good. As I remember, after Jackson joined Lee in front of Richmond he screwed the pooch during the Seven Days battles, his lethargy costing the South the best opportunity it ever had for destroying the Army of the Potomac. Kind of silly to speculate on what might have been, it's fun but pointless.
@@Oscarhobbit l believe you have validity in your statement about Jackson's scorched earth policy on northern soil. It would have raised dire emotional turmoil and brought the people to their senses.
I don't condone slavery, for it would have been abolished anyway with the invention of the steam tractor in the 1870's.
Modern day folks can't grasp ahold of what technology brought about then, nor how far we have come in just the last hundred years.
A few words from a Texican with roots out of Ireland and England.
the blond park ranger girl is cuuuute, ball cap and that hair sticking out..mmm
You should see the one down at Richmond National Battlefield Parks who rotates from Cold Harbor and a few others. She's smokin.
@@danpeterson4362And what is she smokin'?
@@carywest9256 why am I tagged in this?
Didn't Stonewall Jackson lose his life during the Wilderness Campaign. I think he was shot by one of his own sentry at night. The sentry said that he had mistaken him as a Union officer.
lol
Yes he was shot by his own men. He actually survived the removal of his arm but shortly developed pneumonia and died not long after.
Jackson was shot by his own troops at Chancellorsville in May of 1863. The Wilderness Campaign was fought the following year, during which Longstreet was shot by his own men.
Well, I stand corrected, you were right, Jackson died during the Chancellorsville Battle. You know when you laugh, you laugh in disbelief. I hope I did not insult anyone with my comments.
it is kinda funny to hear a pleasant voiced lady introduce this video. I was more expecting a grizzled old veteran guy growl out the words.
Had Jackson not been injured (wounds he later died from) would the outcome of Chancellorsville and ultimately the Civil War have been different? Could Jackson have destroyed Hooker’s Army?
The world will never know.As a history buff and a maven for The War for Southern Independence l don't dwell on what if's.
He tragically was shot and succumbed to pneumonia. Case closed!
If Jackson would have been alive at Gettysburg Jackson would have Lee's ear and flanked Meade but Lee would ot take the advice of Longstreet ad flank LRTop It was Jackson's idea to flank Hooker at Chancellorsville not Lee Lee was great as long as he had his 4 aces to work for him after Jackson's death and Lee not listening to Old Pete at Getty'rb he never again had command his orders were left open ended for his aces they filled them in and worst of all the union poor generalship ran out and Grant took over Lee had no answer for Grant Phi and William he now faced the men and not the boy's or political leaders of the North Aces always beat jokers but when the aces played out the new hand of power took over Lee was great when playing against the weak but not against Grand the Great
that's great to say when you out number your opponent. out supplied him too. What outcome do you predict would have come about had the south been equal in numbers and industry? really ! brag as you wish, you lost any sense of credit.
No different Lee would have had no change in mind about loosing his men in battle he was great as long as he had Jackson Stuart Longstreet and Alexander when he lost Jackson he did not listen to Longstreet a Gettysburg he listen to Ewell over his Old War Horse abut the flanking of LR he gave orders so undirected to Stuart and then expect him to do as he thought he would do without telling Stuart what to do, Alexander did the best he could with out date canon and fuses tom deliver a fire in an Nepolianic style attack Lee did not adjust to the change in battle methods or adjust to the changing weapons Lee would have had the same out come in the war maybe it would have lasted a little longer and cost more men but he would have lost Grant was in much higher pay grade than Lee
you speak as though both side had equal numbers and resources, if that were true I'd could give you some credence to your opinion. but you know very well from the very beginning it wasn't true. You can rationalize anything when you ignore facts. One can say the southern victories were because of good leadership especially against a much more supplied and equipped army. The question really becomes what could have happen if all things were equal? Shiloh is one example where more resources won the day. Franklin is another example. Had the numbers been equal at these encounters things would have been different. You have more you can loose more and keep going. The southern army just didn't have the numbers, only a determined individual could do as they did.
Need one forget that Lee had the first day in hand had Meade out numbered and did nothing to obtain a victory except give hollow orders if practical . to an unproven corp commander. History does not allow historians to question facts. Lee places on the 3rd day his men right where he had Burnside's men, in the open up hill under cannon + a mile walk it is hard to think that a great commander would place his men in that kid of a situation and pay no attention to the advice of his main man. In his mind he had the strength in numbers to attack the ridge Lee knew as him and Davis had agreed that a war would be a defense war when he was give the army he used up his best weapon his men in an offence war he did well against weak union leaders At Gettysburg he made Meade a strong leader because of his poor leadership After Grant took over Lee was finisher as he was out general by Grant and his generals Lee used up his shot supply of men on offence and if he had more men he would have used more up with his out dated poor attacks Weapons changed Lee did not change to compensate Lee was good against poor northern leaders but very poor against poor northern leaders
No way one battle tells the whole story, way too many other encounters. Grant's talent was only to keep attacking and not retreat against an inferior foe of depleted numbers how hard is it when you have so much more then your enemy. It was just a matter of time regardless who led the South. Gettysburg did not determine the war. Proof Grant had more is the fact he sent lots of men to the grave at the Wilderness and Cold Harbor, Cold Harbor was in fact just as ridiculous as Lee at Gettysburg if not more so because he wanted another attack. Doesn't seem to me Grant had any real expertise just had more and made them fight against odds in their favor, only time was needed and he knew it.
It’s always the confederates got lucky and the Union bungled orders. That’s the only way the,confederates win is what I’m picking up in some of these classes. Pure Boulder dash!
Cute girl
"matched wits"? did they play chess or something lol?
of course ;) wars were big chess games back then
We wonder if the rifles and bullets used by his own troops to kill him are on display at any of the "confederate" museums?
What were the names of Stonewalls troops who killed him? Congratulations to them for a job well done sirs.
You make me sick. You are just as bad as the "South Will Rise" people.
the union win was inevitable.Tha draft of men from the north hadn't even really started .Let's deal with reality.