@@indy_go_blue6048 Yep. The Federals did the same thing at Mary's Heights just a few weeks before, and they learned never to do it again. They thought because they outnumbered the Confederates it would work. It did not. They thought the rebels were crazy to charge them the same way here, and they were right. The sad thing is, despite the blunders of this campaign, the rebels almost succeeded. But Lee never seemed to understand that after the 2nd day, even if he had won, he lost too many Men to seriously consider going on with the invasion. The Union ultimately suffered heavy casualties and it was a Pyrrhic victory. In the end the rebels had to withdraw and cancel their invasion, so the sacrifice was deemed acceptable, but the cost was high.
indy_go_blue60 actually the worst ground for fighting he ever saw was the fortified union position at Franklin TN. Hood hurled his men against it anyway and they were massacred. Far bigger and worse attack than pickets charge yet it gets so little attention
John Bell “Sam” Hood. He went on to make some of the most horrendous tactical decisions in the history of the confederacy, but on this one he was full marks accurate.
@@chaist94 There was a group of Michigan sharpshooters on Big Round top, they were picking off guys in the valley of death all day. Big Round Top being totally unoccupied is one of the battles biggest myths
@@chaist94 Hood wasn't going to take any of that ground, it was a dumb attack plan. Gettysburg was not his fault, he failed up the ranks as any decent commanders above him either failed spectacularly or were killed.
@@rc59191 Yeah he was isolated cut off and had no supply base, his tactics were bad because his situation was bad. Sherman had supply bases in Illinois, Kentucky, Ohio and Tennessee at his back. All he had to do was make sure no one got behind him. He cut all those lines to burn his way to Savannah. Against Hood and Atlanta though Sherman had every advantage except for not having previous knowledge of the territory he was fighting in.
@@JohnReedy07163 True but what the mean was enemy in force such as infantry and artillery. A few regiments will eventually occupy the hill to monitor the flank. But it was too densely covered with brush and trees to make into a defensive position. The union lacked the men, resourse, stamina, and time to properly prepare the ground. Besides the Confederate attack move north .
That summer, Hood led assaults at the two bloodiest battles of the war, Gettysburg and Chickamauga. Lost the use of his arm at Gettysburg, and two months later lost his leg at Chickamauga.
Which of course as you argued multiple times in your videos, really messed him up mentally, influencing his blunders at Franklin and Nashville in 1864.
I may be mistaken but I believe it was made by Dirty Billy. He runs a hat shop in downtown Gettysburg. I know he did Sam Elliot's hat for the same movie. I bought a tricorn from him a while back and it is beautiful.
I still wonder why a lot of people don't like this film... Acting in scenes like this one are purely amazing... and the music at the end purely syncs with the cannonading.
Acdragonrider Videos The complaints I have seen of the film tend to say that it's too long with too many characters. Another complaint is that it glorifies the Confederates too much. I have to agree somewhat with the former. At times, especially before Pickets Charge, the movie seems to want to spend as much time as possible showing off the advancing Confederates.The movie is in general one of those films that is for a specific audience.
To show what instead? The union waiting most of the time while shooting with their artillery? The same way they spent all the time in the second day with the 20th Maine, they chose to show the bravery of that suicidal charge.
"glorifies the Confederates" while showing the viewpoint of the Confederates? I never understood this criticism. Of course they felt like what they were fighting for was right; there is no glorification in that.
I remember my father being steamed because it didn't mention the First Minnesota's heroic actions. He being a Minnesotan I guess I can understand his beef.
Maybe if they'd named it "Killer Angels" instead of Gettysburg people wouldn't have been as upset about it? Since it was intended as a m4tv movie, it got little publicity and it wasn't clear that it was based on Shaara's book. Too much talking as well. How many scenes were devoted to the Hancock-Armitage bromance? I can think of 3 long scenes, 4 if you include the Armitage wounded one.
this film was financed by Ted Turner himself. And the acting was wonderful! Great story line, perfect acting and very suspenseful. One of the best civil war movies ever.
SECRET AMERICA !!! TH-cam Channel with L.D. BRITE there was so much badly done with gods and generals though some truly brilliant parts don’t get me wrong but man that movie was like if the confederacy had a ww2 era propaganda department working.
I believe he actually has a small part in the movie. See here: www.baltimoresun.com/maryland/carroll/cct-arc-5993b1a5-fc79-5953-a08b-ed66efd88617-20130627-story.html
"Sam, the Commanding General will NOT allow a flanking movement around those hills. I argued it this morning, I argued it yesterday, hell I've been arguing against any kind of attack. I can't call this one off, and you know that."
@@victorting4313 "There ain't time. You'd have to cut down trees before you could place your artillery. It'd be dark before you would be in action. On the other hand, if they get batteries up there, we'll need buckets to catch the lead. You gotta take that hill."
That's an ignorant comment. Joe Smith didn't comment one way or another about the justice of the civil war. He was highlighting how the central organizing concept of the military is that you have to do whatever your superior orders. Fortunately we have established since WWII that no soldier has to obey an order to do something illegal or immoral. That's probably something that a lot of our top military are discussing among themselves in light of the current commander in chief.
@Clem Cornpone it was a purely tactical comment. Hood was accurate in saying he would have flanked right and had more success, but Lee left strict orders to move up the rocky hill and take it. Stuart was supposed to flank but got driven all the way round to Carlisle, having probed too far . Longstreet agreed with Hood but the orders were orders and he had to execute them. On the Union side, Dan Sickles broke formation and took the peach orchard, only to get clobbered by Confederate guns and charges, being lucky to be able to retreat to the stone wall. Following orders or not, there will be consequences.
I take your point Clem. If Joe Smith pops up all over the internet promoting Confederate hoo hah, call 'em out. I was just commenting on this particular post about military hierarchy. I'm actually more of a WWII buff, but have enjoyed the scenes from this movie.
@Titus Robertson It was the central economic issue at stake for the Confederacy. If the government of the USA banned slavery the Confederacy would basically collapse economically. I am not defending slavery but I am saying that it was a big deal. That's what the Compromise was about which lead to civil strife in bloody Kansas etc. and ultimately secession.
+ny_kia31 Makes me think of later on, when Longstreet is asked if Pickett should commence his charge, and all he can do is nod. He knows it'll all be for nothing.
ny_kia31 Well all the Hollywood glamour aside the tone is essentially correct. LS dis not agree with REL but he performed his orders as a good soldier does. LS like Pickett never really forgave REL for Gettysburg.
Douglas Lally,but the counter march Longstreet performed taking several hours of the same morning might have cost a considerable price. Had Longstreets men gone into action early in the day as was planed its very possible Hood would have occupied the roundtops before the Federal troops.
Windersranger1 You recall when Harrison first appeared before Longstreet? He said "You didn't know the Yankees was on the move, you being spread out as thin as you are." The AoNV was very spread out and concentrating all the Corps at Gettysburg was time consuming. You are probably correct however I don't think LS can faulted. It was simply the disposition of the army at the time.
I do indeed. also, there is an interesting argument of the possibility that Longstreet had his pride hurt by Lee on the morning of the 2nd I think it was. Lee briefed his commanders on the battle plan which placed Longstreet to the south and Ewell on the north. When Longstreet was to hear Ewell's guns later that morning he was directed to start his attack from the south also in the morning. Longstreet was supposed to attack in echelon from the south to the north hopeful driving the Yankees up Cemetery Rdige to where Ewell's men would by that time have take Cemetery and Culps Hill's. While giving his directions, Lee bypass the chain of command and went straight to one of Longstreet's subordinates (McLaws) and directed him without going through Longstreet. The argument is that Longstreet was a bit P.O. by this and consequently drug his feet through out the day partially because of this and the fact that he disagreed with the battle plan. As Longstreets men moved south they were ordered to stay out of sight of federal scouts and signal towers. I can't remember the road name LS and his moved south on initially but as they moved south his lead elements came up on a small rise and federal scouts could be seen in the distance to the south east. The Corrp stopped in its tracks and word had to be sent back to Longstreet who was not at the head of the column as one might think he should have have been. It turned out Longstreet was halfway or more to the rear with General Hood who had just turned south off Rt 30 several miles to the North. This in its self delayed Longstreet's movements on the 2nd by at least a couple of hours and when word finally made it to him of the Federal scouts he rode to the front to survey the situation. Once to the front he ordered a counter march back to the Hagerstown Pike. Once at the Hagerstown Pike his corp turned west to Willoughby Run Rd where they moved south again. The counter march cost LS and his men something like five hours to complete placing him on the field where Lee wanted him by mid to late afternoon. As the argument goes, was Longstreet simply following his orders to the letter? Or was his pride hurt by Lee going directly to McLaws and Longstreet was acting a little defiant? I don't know. I did a detailed battle walk with Gettysburg Park Rangers where we covered the route taken by Longstreet and we got to see the ground first hand. The other part to the puzzle was a unit of horses and artillery had moved south along the same road LS and his men had first taken. When the Artillery had reached the same hill they simply skirted the western base to stay out of site of the Federals. The Artillery surely would have left tracks and ruts in the earth offering a possible alternative to counter marching. Why weren't scouts sent out to see if they could move by the same path? to that end, do you just follow arbitrary marks in the sand?.... Its a very interesting argument and it presents very strong points on both sides. Personally I think LS was very loyal to Lee and he demonstrated this time and time again through out the war. I think for his Loyalty it is also possible that his pride was in fact hurt and that he meant no ill will to the army in his actions. But our hind sight is much closer to 20/20 than his was the morning of July 2nd and many reviewers of History see Longstreet's actions at Gettysburg not so favorably.
Longstreet didn't really have a choice here. He was given a series of bad orders that he'd already protested to Lee, and had to now hear his own subordinates practically quote his own words at him.
The stakes are higher in the military but this absolutely happens in the corporate world. It is usually followed by the platitude "I know you can do it". Make my damn blood boil.
@@michaeldolch9126 “Make it happen!” and “I know you can do it.” are what passes for leadership in the corporate world. And the sports world. And the military. It’s as silly now as its ever been.
I've been to Gettysburg multiple times. Hood was 100000% right. Little round top and Big round top is impossible to take. Lee was way too cocky at Gettysburg.
IVE BEEN TO GETTYSBURG. the rangers explain it well(even though they are northern) Lee did not have his usual info. He didnt understand the lines as he normally did. JEB wasnt able to do what he had always done with cavalry..
on the first day, Lee had the opportunity to achieve his objective. On the second day, his plans were a calculated risk at best. On the third day, he was delusional. While Meade was no geniuses himself, he played a defensive battle that would make the Duke of Wellington proud. Secure the flanks, use natural cover, and use the enemy's record of aggressiveness against them.
@@PPLL463 He was under pressure to win a decisive victory and end the war. He new his forces were getting weak in men and equipment and food. Every victory cost him more than he could replace. Classic examples of this were Napolians failed Russian campaign and Hitlers invasion of Russia
Longstreet recognized the value of fighting a defensive war. The Union army was in the perfect position and well reinforced with good lines of communication and supply. Lee without knowledge of the terrain or the strength of the opposing forces, attacked anyway and lost. Longstreet was right to suggest that they could not attack as planned and take the position.
Longstreet was correct tactically, but Lee was right strategically. The CSA was losing badly in the West; the South's one hope was to deliver a sharp defeat to the AoP on northern soil to encourage the peace party. Without Stuart, Lee moved into contact with the AoP, and ended up with a fight on ground not of his choosing; however, Lee know that to withdraw would ruin the campaign. His only hope was to win a victory in place. Longstreets' foot-dragging, particularly on the second day, did much to doom the South's hopes.
@@jdsmith542 Nah even in the movie and all the sources, Lee fucked up. We have this romantic notion of what a great and respected General Lee was but in reality he cost them Gettysburg. He bullishly forced and forced the issue and refused to heed the advice of his commanders. Longstreet urged to break contact, bait the Army of Potomac into a field of THEIR choosing and denied it. Hood and others pressed Lee to take the Round Tops when they were still largely undefended and denied it. Hood as shown here wanted to flank around or get on the Big Round Top and he denied it and after losing the fighting at the Round Top, his answer to it all was a suicidal charge to the center of the Union lines over a mile long almost killing field. Union center didn't need to be strong to hold it. Attacking it was folly no matter what. TLDR: Lee sucks and he lost them the war.
@@HorFell well, I hate to contradict an opinion based upon a movie based on a work of fiction, but you are wrong. In reality, Hood recommended a move to the right, but did so after Meade had shifted his cavalry (without knowing that, as they were still blind). Longstreet was always geared to defensive battles, notorious for his near-insubordinate ‘slows’ (which in fairness the movie did touch on), and was not aware of the discussions between Davis and Lee when the campaign was planned. Like most without a grasp of the conflict, and especially the events of 1863, you are trying to view Gettysburg as a battle. It was not. Lee, Meade, and Lincoln all grasped that, which is why they made the choices that they did. Once the first shots were fired, Gettysburg was a crucible out of which would be forged a legend. Which side would own the legend was the only question in point. The was no turning away for either side. Whichever way it played out would shape the rest of the conflict. Longstreet, typically short-sighted, never grasped that until it was far too late. Hood, brave but dim, never did get it, as his later efforts outside Atlanta proved. Lee got it: if the Union held their ground, everything else was pointless.
They didn't even have to take the defensive. All they had to do was move like Longstreet said before the first day or maybe it was after the first day but he asked Lee to head twords Washington and the union army would have had to pursue them then on ground of their own choosing the could get the union out in the open and destroy the union army. And my friend had Lee listened to him. We'd be living in a different America right now. Different but BETTER. Because slavery was going out regardless but ALL of us citizens would be in a freer more properties America
@@jdsmith542 not s withdrawal a redeploy they could have headed twords Washington the union army would have had no choice but to pursue them then when Stewart was back in touch they could have scouted out the ground went to a spot they wanted to fight on. Then they could have entrenched in the high ground and mead would have came in cautious and the union army would have been destroyed not to mention there would have been nothing in-between the confederats and Washington which in turn the end of the war and the separation of the United States which is all they wanted.
This is my favorite Civil War movie. I had to watch Glory in history class because of Black History Month but I can honestly say it doesn't hold a candle to the Awesomeness of this epic film. I didn't even know it was over 2 hours long at first. I was so hooked on the reality of it all and the plot. Also the actors were amazing. I still get goosebumps from the General Lee with his men cheering him scene. Hell I was even cheering and I'm from the North 🤣
Outstanding scene. Hood's passion is evident...he can already see that his orders place his command in a low chance of success situation. Longstreet doesn't get the credit he deserves. He understood the limitations of the rebel army as far as manpower and material reserves and that a toe to toe slug feast of attrition would not work. Great movie. Imagine if they had a real Hollywood budget it could have done a better job of showing the true carnage of the combat.
Longstreet was "cautious" in all of the campaigns, not just in this instance. As I understand it, he also took up with the Yankee carpetbaggers after the War, and was despised for it.
@@karenbartlett1307 Ole Pete was cautious for good reason. He understood that the rebel army was most effective on the defensive....spar and counter maneuver as the situation dictated and exploit any enemy errors. 2nd Manassas is a perfect example of that. We must remember that Longstreet and Grant were good friends, so it shouldn't be a surprise that he would become part of the Grant administration's ambassadors corps after the war. The southern historian had effectively written Longstreet off as a turncoat since he didn't support the bull crap Lost Cause narrative like so many of the other ANV senior officers. Really look at Longstreet's combat record as ANV 1st Corps commander and you won't find a more effective Corp commander in the enter Confederate Army. And yes I place Longsteet ahead of Stonewall as far as his total impact on the successes of the ANV. He's a much more important figure in Confederate military history than biased southern historians care to admit.
@@k.r.truthseeker7156 Every historian is biased, as you are yourself and as I am. I get my information about Longstreet from Shelby Foote's "The Civil War: A Narrative" which you would do well to read, especially the 2nd volume, "Fredericksburg to Meridian", which covers Gettysburg. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Civil_War:_A_Narrative and th-cam.com/video/3bhOqObhz3o/w-d-xo.html (Mr. Foote was not an historian, however. He was a novelist. But he spent 20 years researching and writing "The Civil War" and is very balanced in his writing.)
@@karenbartlett1307 I'm very familiar with Shelby Foote's works and being that he was a novelist I'd expect his works would be filled with more subjective opinions over strictly researched documented facts of events. You have your opinion on Longstreet which is absolutely fine. It's perfectly ok for us to have differing views. No need to reply this discussion is closed. Thank you for the feedback.
It's hard to pick favorite moments from Gettysburg, but this is definitely one of them. Patrick Gorman's line about doing this "under protest" is powerful. The movie is great on its own (a true feat of historical fiction) but it is really elevated when you understand the meaning, subtext and context of what all was going on and being said. Truly one of the greatest films ever made.
Longstreet was the better general. He should have defied Lee. Lee would have chewed him out, but nothing more; Lee knew Longstreet was right and the best.
The problem was that Lee needed a decisive victory in Union territory in order to turn the tide of the war. While the Confederates had the better of the war in almost all major battles leading to Gettysburg, the were suffering appalling losses just like the Union, losses they could not afford. Gettysburg perfectly defined the whole of the Civil War until Grant and Sherman took over as acting commanders. Up to that point, the Union was close to completing their naval blockade of the South, meaning that they had the luxury of waiting out the Confederates until they starved. In fact, the only reason CSA troops entered Gettysburg was for much needed supplies on their thrust into the Union states. The same battle had happened time and time before. The Union would waste time to amass into a strong defensive position and would only attack the reinforced Confederates once they had a foothold to fall back on. The back and forth actions that followed led to the high casualties and indecisive victories that yielded plenty of glory for little ground. Lee knew that outflanking the enemy on the second day may have given him an edge, but the cautious Union generals would always come back stronger in the event of a retreat. In the movie, Lee is incorrectly quoted as saying "I have never left the enemy in command of the field." In reality, Lee was bent on tearing a bloody swathe into the North before turning back to trap Washington between his army and another coming in from the South. He knew he could win unlikely victories, but Gettysburg was different because it meant that if he wasted time flanking the enemy, they would have enough sense to have an escape plan in the event of defeat, which would leave tens of thousands of Union troops in friendly territory free to choose where they wanted to fight Lee next. Lee had the knowledge to back up his decision, even if it was one of the riskiest plans of his career. His experience outlined a decision for the war, while Longstreet and Hood's experience outlined a plan just for the battle.
Derrick B I am of the belief that after the first day of battle Lee could have left the Union trapped on the ridge while he positioned his army between the Union army and Washington, forcing a desperate union attack on the ground of Lee’s choosing.
Hood got as far as the entrance to Slyder's lane. It was there, as he and his staff were watching Law's and Robertson's brigades advance, Hood was hit in the arm by a shell fragment, most likely from Smith's New York battery. Hood's division lost it's commander right as the assault began to unfold. It would be nearly an hour before Law found out HE was the now the division commander. Not how Longstreet or anyone else would have wanted a major attack to begin.
Amazingly nearly half Hoods initial wave still went up the big hill. And robbed combat power from smashing the main Union line at a moment when Little Round Top was still unoccupied. Word is they were chasing sharpshooters. And it was right after Hood was wounded. I have to wonder after watching this scene if he thought he could still get away with sending part of his Division over Big round top and used the sharpshooters as a way to do it without violating orders. Either way the attacking force that hit Sickles flank was only a fraction of the actual attack force available. And bought time.. about 30-45 min for troops from the Union to occupy Little Round Top
TheStapleGunKid was there multiple 'General Hood' as in this movie General Armistead asks Longstreet 'have you heard about Sam hood' (or something along those lines. And Longstreet replies 'may lose an arm' referring to the general we see here.
Lee repeated the mistakes made by the Union side at Fredericksburg. He acted like Napoleon against Wellington at Waterloo, using direct assaults uphill against heavily defended Union positions instead of outflanking manoeuvres.
One of my favorite scenes from one of my favorite movies. I’ve read thousands of pages on the civil war because I watched this movie. Thank you Ted Turner and all who were involved. It’s a shame they couldn’t have made a movie about the nighttime attack on cemetery ridge at the end of day 2 or the culps hill battles.
That place is so cool. It's surreal walking along little round top as well. It's actually kind of weird how close everything is, You can see Little and Big Round Top from the peach orchard and devils den. The fighting must've gotten really close contact.
The only thing that bothers me about this scene is when Longstreet cuts Hood off, it's a bit mechanical. you see and hear that the man who plays Hood stops talking and then Longstreet comes in with his dialogue. but the scene in general is good. really good.
Hood was spot on at Gettysburg and it cost him the use of his left arm. If he would have been allowed to flank and take Big Round Top, it could’ve made a difference in the battle. But it wasn’t meant to be, and two months later, he would lose his right leg at chickamauga , and later after that be given command of an army, which he gets utterly destroyed at Franklin and Nashville. His “army” after Nashville was reduced to the size of a division and was effectively neautralized as a fighting force after that battle
RE Lee and the rest of these men were moved up north to a little town in Pennsylvania, an obscure little place where a battle was brewing, a town called Gettysburg, and this one was fought without the help of the Devil. Small historical note not to be found in any known books, but part of the records in the Twilight Zone.
Lee was in charge of an undefeated army with highly motivated and battle hardened men acting far from their home ground. He aimed for a decisive battle. Kind like Waterloo or Austerlitz to end the war. And since the CSA army untill then nearly always had been successfull he took a big gamble, but trusted that it would pay off. But the Union army and its commanders had learned from their previous mistakes and at Gettysburg they used the defensive battle tactics of their opponents, which proved to be to right thing to do at day 2, when they were attacked at the flank. Lee didn't regard this and decided for a big hammer strike at the center, going in with nearly all his remaining infantry. Which turned out to be a Fredericksburg in reverse. Like many army commanders at that time Lee disregarded the much increased accuracy and firepower of the percussion rifle and the Minet bullet compared to the smooth bore muskets of no more than 30 years earlier. Picketts charge would probably have been a success, allthough with a high butchers bill, if the smooth bore musket was still in use
Not undefeated, they had lost at Antietam (arguably a more important battle). Lee were successful, however he lost way more men, than he could afford (especially officers), in almost all of his battles... Main reason Lee was successful was the lack of a determined commander on the union side (with enough room, and time to get his situation in order). Regarding Picketts charge, he went in against a force of equal size, and shorter internal lines of communication... He might have been able to make a bigger breakthrough, but it is doubtful if he would have been able to hold the position against a determined union counterattack. What Gettysburg were is perhaps more a vision of how the war was lost because of CSA stubbornness, an lack of union determination... Fighting an offensive battle without intel, and not trying to schatter the CSA army after its defeat in the field.
bandholm They didn't lose Antietam. It was a strategic defeat but a tactical stalemate. A defeat is when you leave the enemy in command of the field after a battle and Lee didn't. The day after the fight there was a truce so the wounded could be collected. Lee only headed south 2 days after the battle. While Lee didn't win at Antietam, he certainly wasn't defeated. His only defeats were at Gettysburg, the third siege of Petersburg and Five Forks.
@stueyguerreiro Semantics and revisionist history. First of all, Lee wasn't still at Sharpsburg "two days after the battle". The battle was on September 17th and Lee's army withdrew the evening of the 18th, leaving the Union army in possession of the field after the battle. In fact, the Union army was there for weeks instead of being in pursuit of Lee's army as the ANV retreated back across the Potomac, a fact which drove Lincoln crazy. Lincoln even came to Antietam several days later to personally meet with McClellan and see if he could get him to move. If that isn't being "in command of the field" I don't know what is. As for listing Lee's "only" defeats, aside from several "inconclusive" battles where Lee failed to achieve his objective(s), you left out several of Lee's losses - Mechanicsville, Malvern Hill, South Mountain, and the big one - the Civil War itself. Does Appomattox Court House ring a bell? Bottom line, Lee was a much better defensive general fighting on his own turf than an offensive general taking the war to the enemy, as the Union army was required to do in order to win the war. Both times that Lee tried to move the war north of the Potomac he failed in his objective and his army suffered massive casualties. In military terms, that's known as "being defeated".
True. But Lee at Gettysburg was faced with the dilemma of every militairy commander; if you want to win a war, you have to engage the enemy in battle; TINA, there is no alternative. And just like the British at the Somme and the Germans at Stalingrad and Kursk the Confederates fell for the idea and the lure of a final and decisive battle that would bring an end to the war. Offensive militairy methods of the period however were still based upon the time of the smooth bore musket and artillery from the era of Napoleon, which made the American civil war such a bloody conflict on both sides, because large groups of men in formation were faced against eachother in an open field, as was the case at Antietam. And at Gettysburg and Fredericksburg those large grouped formations had to march towards the enemy under artillery and rifle fire with a far more increased accuracy and effectiveness compared to hardly 30 years earlier. Lee failed to recognise this, but so did his opponents. In the movie the only high ranking Confederate officers who knew what was going to happen were Longstreet, the experienced tactician, and Alexander, the artillery expert.. But at Gettysburg they too were faced with the same TINA (there is no alternative) dilemma. The only other option was to cut off the Union supply lines, by means of the cavalry. Thus forcing them to leave their positions. But Lee didn't have his cavalry at that moment and it would have taken too much time anyway, because the CSA army could not sustain itself so far away from their home ground over a prolonged period of time.
+stueyguerreiro It was very much a defeat... Lee and his army retreated, as a direct consequences of the battle... He gave up his plans for an offensive, and retreated... That is the definition of a defeat. Regardless that he waited a day or two (to collect his wounded).
Still to this day, one of my all-time favorite scenes from this movie. Especially when you take into the broader context of their successes in assaulting those rocky heights and just how much they accomplished in the face of overwhelming adversity.
It was Buford that saved the Union Army. If not for him, Heath and behind him, AP Hill, would have moved into Gettysburg, observed the hills to the North and East of the town and occupied them. Then, exactly what both Lee and Longstreet wanted, would have happened. Instead Buford was able to take advantage of Confederate blindness due to Stewart's showboating, and delay Hill's corp, allowing the Union troops to occupy the heights instead. Learning of this, Lee tried to force the issue twice, and was stopped on Day 2, and wrecked on Day 3, as more Union troops moved into the lines each day. Lee forced it, and it didnt work. Longstreet was the only one who figured it out before hand.
General Lee wanted to have the final battle a major victory and God Bless the man, he made a bad decision. Gen. Lee should have listen to Gen. Longstreet advice and REDEPLOYED, and they could choose a fighting ground of their choice, going to Washington. Gen. Mead would have chased the confederates.
+Rogue's Refuge It wasn't really true, though. Lee was in command of an army that hadn't been beaten on the field and would do ANYthing he ordered them to do. The morale hit for "redeploying" looks ridiculous to worry about when compared to the morale hit for the disaster of Day 3. The ANV won Day 1 decisively - Lee could have easily moved south, or back to Cashtown, without hurting the morale of the troops. The General could do no wrong - would they have *really* been dispirited to move where he wanted to go? I'm not saying you are wrong that Lee had morale on his mind - just that, if Lee really was worried about it, it was a mistake if it influenced his decisions to stay and fight it out at Gettysburg.
Be interesting if we went around Gettysburg & headed right to Washington but the confederates were needing supply's & food & surprise, Gen. Buford arrives & engaged.
An attack on Washington would never have worked. Washington was the most well defended city on earth at that point, surrounded by a massive series of fortifications and garrisoned by 40,000 men. There was no way Lee could try to assault that with the Army of the Patomic intact. Even if he did take the city, he would have lost so many men that the Army of the Potomic would simply obliterate whatever remained of his own force.
Not to mention the thousands of Union troops at Harper's Ferry, the ones that Hooker wanted to use to cut Lee's supply lines and harass his rear as the ANV moved north through Maryland. Halleck refused his request and Hooker submitted his resignation in protest. His resignation was accepted and Meade was put in command of the AoP just a few days before the battle at Gettysburg. If "Washington City" had been seriously threatened those troops from Harper's Ferry would likely have been brought to bear in conjunction with the AoP (what good is Harper's Ferry if Washington falls?).
Very true. Gettysburg especially. It really was the “high tide”. The fate of both sides was locked in that idyllic landscape. Ever been there? If not, you should go.
Please, do not forget the 10.000 italians who volunteered and fought for the Confederacy. The militia of Louisiana had an italian guards battalion, later renamed 6th Regiment European Brigade, and other companies within regiments from Alabama, Virginia, Tennessee and Louisiana. General William Booth Taliaferro served in the Confederate Army as well as the commanders of the 6th Regiment European Brigade, Lt.Della Valle, Captain Marzoni, Captain Santini, First Lieutenant Marinoni and Second Lieutenant Baselli. Thank you from Italy for remembering them.
The actor playing General Hood is Patrick Gorman, was 58 at the time this scene was filmed. John Bell Hood had just turned 32 at this point in the war (June 29, 1831).
@@1helluvaguy738 I've been up there, and took a picture of the monument to the 20th Maine, we can't stay where we are, we can't retreat-only leaves, charge. It's a very moving place.
After just getting back from the battlefield and looking over the "Valley of Death" from the monuments up on Little Round Top, you really have to appreciate the testicular fortitude that Hood's men had to fight on that ground. It's really awful and you don't get much of a feeling for it until you walk down there among the rocks and crags. Completely shitty terrain for massed-line formation. Those guys were sitting ducks.
I never even knew about the huge snakes in Devils Den until i watched a video on it the other day. Rumor was that there is/or was an enormous 1 there that is called The Devil
Heh. I walked down Big Round Top to the base and back uphill, it was pitch dark before I returned to the top, and practically tripped over someone lying on a path. I don't know for sure but I guess it was one of those people that try to see ghosts at night - there were a few of them there. I just kept moving! :D It was so pitch black that I could barely find my vehicle parked along the road between Big and Little Round Tops.
Hood was only 37 at the time of Gettysburg, he looks much older in this film. Moving around Big Round Top was a silly idea, Hood would have found himself in a corridor with the Round Tops on his left, Rock Creek on his right, with no artillery and no room to maneuver. The V Corps was in position to block his front, with the VI Corps arriving to hit his right flank. That would have left Mclaws' Division alone to contend with the III Corps, which had more men than Mclaws alone. As it was, Hood had diverted Law's Brigade and half of Robertson's Brigade from the assault on Devil's Den which prolonged the time it took to drive Sickle's off that position allowing the II Corps and V Corps reserves to come up to the Wheatfield. Longstreet did not give Lee the attack that Lee had ordered. Lee wanted an attack perpendicular to the Emmitsburg Rd. with McLaws leading and Hood in support. Longstreet attacked with Hood and McLaws in line parallel to the Emmitsburg Rd. Lee wanted possession of the Peach Orchard so he could move his artillery onto that elevated position so he could drop shells on Cemetery Ridge in preparation for a continuation of the assault by Anderson's Division. Lot's of what if's, just don't think Hood's idea would have been any better.
This is why all generals no matter how great, make terrible mistakes. Lee was no exception, he knew he had unfavourable ground by day 2 but still persisted.
Quite true. Burnside lost 12000 at Fredericksburg. Grant loss 12000 at Cold Harbor. Lee lost 12000 on the third day. What happen? Modern weapons (for that time) made old fashion mass frontal assaults obsolete but as always even the military is slow to adapt.
When I stood looking over the battlefield from Cemetery Ridge 2 years ago, I wept bitterly for all the lives that were lost there. Whatever Lee's inhibitions were to attack the ridge in disastrous frontal assaults on that fateful 3rd day...they would prove to be the bloodiest and most wasteful expenditure of human lives in the entire war. It was a critical error of judgment that proved to be the nail in the coffin for the Confederacy, and for my beloved Texas. We were the last state to see the liberation of federal troops in 1877.
As a Virginian, I feel your pain, brother. It was mostly Virginians made that suicidal charge. My beloved Commonwealth led both the Thirteen colonies in the First War of Independence and the Confederacy in the Second War of Independence. I wish I could have seen what the South was like before it was burned, brutalized, and conquered.
Before the election of Trump I had really wished that the confederate army had won because the American people have a track record for electing leaders without a spine. I live in Texas as well and wonder to this day what that state would be like had the south won.
It's kinda ironic that Hood argues against a frontal assault when later on during his years in command in the west he became known for launching one reckless frontal assault after another 🤨
for the record Longstreet's command was farthest from Gettysburg when the battle started , Pickett was west of Cashtown and arrived very late on July 2d . McClaws and Hood both marched at least 15 miles ( including counter march ) before assaulting Sickles and the rest of the Federals thrown into this action late in the afternoon on a very hot day . Lee promoted Longstreet twice over Jackson , the first sent a day before sending Jackson's promotion to major general , and the second sent promoting them both to lieutenant general on the same day effectively giving Longstreet date of rank seniority . Jackson was a truly gifted general , but not one without faults . Jackson was very late ( if ever ) in understanding the effect that rifling had to musketry , thus negating Napoleonic tactics taught to officers on both sides . Longstreet developed the " traverse " trench at Fredericksburg the December prior , setting the stage for tactics used until the German " blitzkrieg " in WWII . When did Jackson use trenching or cover for his troops ? Come on Jackson defenders.....
Do you know why is Jackson the master? Because he advocated rapid movements and FLANKING. He would never attack frontally entrenched positions, he would do the similar stuff as in Chancellorsville. On the other hand they all must obey Lee's orders, but if there is a window for personal initiative, or even liberty to use his corps at his own discretion, Jackson would seize the opportunity. And maybe the battle and the war would have been victorious for the South.
Sam Packinpah was a classical composer jackson attacked frontal positions all the time in the seven days battles, especially at malvern hill. He was talented but not without flaws. His men at the front even had pikes for godsake
MrBuckshot44 Jackson was dead by the time of Gettysburg. He died at Chancellorsville. Had he still been alive at Gettysburg, he would undoubtedly have agreed with Longstreet's position to "redeploy" the army between Mead and Washington.
Longstreet knew the advantages of defense, yes, whereas Jackson's offense was obviously extremely effective. It should be pointed out that the first months of WWI were very much maneuver based, on open ground. Static warfare is usually not preferred by commanders because of the cost of sustaining a constant fighting front. I think Longstreet was more practical, and I think he saw the war (perhaps rightfully so) as a numbers game. Jackson, on the other hand, would attack the gates of hell with a troop of Girl Scouts, and probably still pull off a miracle. Both were very capable commanders, just very different in their approach to warfare.
@Christopher Smith Slavery ended and civilization in the US advanced by leaps and bounds in spite of all the Democrat efforts, before during and after the Civil War. They are are all just as heathen today as they were then, always threatening to ruin if they don't rule.
Lee actually had a lot in common with Napoleon. Both are what I call "Tactical Generals". They were really good at adeptly moving small units to defeat the enemy on a battlefield. They were always looking for that decisive battle to win the war. The 2 problems with Lee and Napoleon was they didn't understand the greater strategic level and they didn't know when to quit. The Union got beat by Lee many times, but almost none of them were Decisive Defeats. Now when you consider someone like Grant, he wasn't the most adept Tactical General, but I would say he was a Strategic General. Like General Eisenhower or George Washington, he saw the greater picture. You could lose some battles, as long as they didn't prevent you from achieving the end goal.
It seems to me, no matter how lucky and gifted you are, if you are a "tactical general" in command of an army (instead of say, a division) you've been promoted too far up the chain of command.
Napoleon didn't understand strategic level? Rotfl. His sucesses were due to strategic level and because he maneuvered his opponents and defeated their armies severally (Maybe we should name this operational level). However he did some spectacular strategic blunders, like attacking Russia and starting war in Spain.
Napoleon and Lee were both, two of the greatest strategic minds of their generations. What Lee understood, is this simple fact, and its implications. By 1860, 90 percent of the nation's manufacturing output came from northern states. There are two ways to win a war. Materially, or through will. The South had no chance materially, so every day the war lingered on meant the consumption of resources the South really didn't have to expend. The invasion of Pennsylvania was an attempt to break Northern will. It failed. The mistake was to continue the war after that point. Lee wasn't the only one responsible for that. Of course, when we step outside the context of the South's perspective, the mistake was starting the war in the first place, and refusing to adapt to a changing world. A familiar refrain in history.
@@that_heretic Lee is overrated. He was a very smart tactical commander, but he was not very strategic. That is, he understood a battlefield, but did not comprehend larger theaters of war. Robert E. Lee was chasing a decisive victory that he was never going to achieve. He stayed way too long at Gettysburg and should've realized it was lost before even ordering Pickett to charge. The Confederacy's only chance of winning the war was dragging it out and making the Union give up. As soon as Lee lost Gettysburg and Grant cut the Confederacy in half at Vicksburg (happened the same day), the Confederacy was doomed. Lee could've threatened Washington DC or sent his units as reinforcements to Vicksburg, but he denied sending anything to Vicksburg because he was convinced that a decisive victory over the Union at Gettysburg would win the war. The Union would not have given up had it lost at Gettysburg. Napoleon had multiple chances to end the wars in Europe but he refused too. He refused any compromise right up until the end. Tactically, he was brilliant. He dominated any battlefield. But he lost the larger strategic view in chasing glory. "I have tasted command, and I cannot give it up." Napoleon Bonaparte
I live near Gettysburg. I've been to the battlefield so many times and this is one of my favorite movies. And I STILL cannot understand Lee's decision making here. Correct me if I am wrong, but on Day 1, they forced the Union to fall back, but in essence, the Union retreated into an even better position from where they started. However, Lee basically backed the Union into the woods and hills. They really had an opening on what is modern day US 15, PA Rt 97 and PA Rt 116, all of which would have connected them straight to Washington. Why didn't Lee just make a turn south and head there. The whole movie talks about breaking through the Union on their way to Washington, but they already accomplished that on Day 1 no?
The thing that Lee didn't know, and couldn't know without ol' Jeb, was that the entire AoP was united by noon on 7/2 with the exception of the VI Corp which was without hailing distance. Even with that, if Anderson's division had performed properly, they still might have taken Cemetery Ridge.
have a guide drive you through the battlefield tour! It is worth the money! They know the details and explain it well. Check out Sach's Bridge while you are there. The cementary is cool but just remember its only union soldiers buried there. They left the Rebs out in the battlefield. Hope you have a blast!
Anyone know if General Hood started to lose his mind later after losing his arm? He seems like a really smart guy but his frontal attacks later in the war just made no sense and more like desperation.
@@VloggingThroughHistory was it true he had to start taking morphine everyday because of his arm and leg? Couldn't imagine the pain he had to be in because of that.
Hood shows his true self here. he was a knowledgeable general, but he seemed to do worse the more he was given to command, and he never recovered from Gettysburg. He then suffered his worst defeat at Atlanta against Sherman.
Been there, and was really surprised how "tight" certain areas of the battlefield really were. Little Round Top was a postage stamp compared to what I'd always envisioned, barely worth calling a "hill"
@bluegrassreb1 Actually, Lee's plan for Day Three was to launch a coordinated attack on both flanks early that morning at the same time thus limiting Meades ability to use his interior lines. Ewell had to launch his attack on Culp's Hill too early and Longstreet took way to long to get his attack underway. Lee altered his plan & attack the center which a similar attack came very close to succeeding the previous day had reserves rushed up to exploit the gap made thru Sickles' Corps
Ewell didn't begin his attack until after Longstreet was engaged. If Ewell had attacked earlier then the union reinforcements would have been tied up on the right flank.
l actually had a brief conversation with Patrick Gorman, the actor who plays Hood, on facebook a few years ago, when he had a fan page and would occasionally personally interact with people. He learned I'd worked at a Civil War battlefield and was nice enough to chat a bit on the subject.
Hood was a fine Division commander and an excellent soldier. But he failed in Georgia as a commanding General at Franklin. A good man for the fighting but he lacked strategic judgement and it shows in this scene.
Meh, just copied this from wiki. Explains pretty easily when you add up that a lot of these military bases weren't created and named until after the 1870s. "Longstreet was subject to vigorous attacks over his war record beginning in the 1870s and continuing until after his death. After Longstreet died, his widow Helen Dortch Longstreet published Lee and Longstreet at High Tide in his defense and stated that "the South was seditiously taught to believe that the Federal Victory was wholly the fortuitous outcome of the culpable disobedience of General Longstreet".[291] Despite the writings of both James and Helen Longstreet, his reputation was heavily blackened well into the 20th century.[292] In the first half of the 20th century, Freeman kept criticism of Longstreet foremost in Civil War scholarship in his biography of Lee. Speaking of Gettysburg on July 2, 1863, he writes: "The battle was being decided at that very hour in the mind of Longstreet, who at his camp, a few miles away, was eating his heart away in sullen resentment that Lee had rejected his long cherished plan of a strategic offensive and a tactical defensive."[293] He called Longstreet's performance on July 2 so sluggish that "it has often been asked why Lee did not arrest him for insubordination or order him before a court-martial".[293] Freeman moderated his views in his later three-volume set, Lee's Lieutenants: a Study in Command, where he states that Longstreet's "attitude was wrong but his instinct was correct. He should have obeyed orders, but the order should not have been given."[293] Clifford Dowdey, a Virginia newspaperman and novelist, was noted for his severe criticism of Longstreet in the 1950s and 1960s.[294] In 1974, Michael Shaara's novel The Killer Angels about the Battle of Gettysburg was published, and was based in part on Longstreet's memoirs. In 1993 the book was adapted into a film, Gettysburg, with Tom Berenger portraying Longstreet. Longstreet is depicted very favorably in both, significantly improving his standing in popular imagination.[295] God and General Longstreet (1982), also upgraded Longstreet "through an attack on Lee, the Lost Cause, and the Virginia revisionists".[296] In 1993, Wert published a new Longstreet biography, stating that his subject was "the finest corps commander in the Army of Northern Virginia; in fact, he was arguably the best corps commander in the conflict on either side."[297] Military historian Richard L. DiNardo wrote: "Even Longstreet's most virulent critics have conceded that he put together the best staff employed by any commander, and that his de facto chief of staff, Lieutenant Colonel G. Moxley Sorrel, was the best staff officer in the Confederacy."[298] Noting Longstreet's delegation of control of battlefield movements to his staff, DiNardo argues that this allowed him to communicate more effectively during battles than the staffs of other Confederate generals.[298] Praise for Longstreet's political conduct after the war in modern times is tempered by the fact that he urged white acceptance of Reconstruction at least in part so that whites, and not blacks, would have the preeminent role in rebuilding the South.[299] Nevertheless, he has been commended for his willingness to work with the North, support for black voting rights, and bravery in leading a partially black militia force to suppress a white supremacist insurrection." Longstreet served his country before the Civil War, then served the Confederacy because of where he was from (South Carolina and Georgia) and then once the war was over returned to serving his country however he could in several official government positions until his death. If Lincoln wasn't assassinated and reconstruction didn't become a fiasco, both the US and Longstreet would look very differently today - and probably so would the names of our military bases.
At franklin,hood was in sad shape . He was missing a arm and a leg, laudnum was was a daily thing. Yes, the frontal attack on intrenched union forces was doomed. They had no supplies, horses where dying, all eight confederate generals died. Some troops lived,but without the union supplies they'd hoped to acquirer, the army of Tennessee was broken.
Hood's arm was never missing, he just lost the use of it. His leg however was but he is one of the first men in the USA/CSA to get a cork made leg which allowed him to continue his career. They raise $3,100 and had several sent from Europe.
@@libbyclark1360 no, Hood was redeployed to the Army of Tennessee following Gettysburg, and eventually was given command of it during the Atlanta campaign
Fun fact; in 1993, Patrick Gorman was age 58 or 59 when portraying the 32-year-old Gen. Hood. Now Gorman looked the part and acted brilliantly, but then again those monochrome photographs had the effect of aging men beyond their years
Back then, everyone was aged beyond their years. Childhood diseases, painfully bad teeth with frequent extractions hard work, and always the risk of some seasonal fever. Those things, and the early responsibilities of life aged people quickly. They had a lot to do before they died on average at about 45. There were primarily two reasons peole never smiled for photos, 1) it was considered an auspicious moment, not to be taken lightly by frivolous humour, and 2) they were conscious of NOT showing their missing , rotten teeth. That's why so many pics show the subject with hollow cheeks, because the back teeth go first. Most people probably spoke with the sound of a person not wearing their partials or dentures today. It wasn't an easy time to be alive.
He probably thought it to be one giant Charlie Foxtrot situation. Something best avoided or dealt with in a different way. Here are a few sims of an alternative strategy. Devils Den - Battle of Gettysburg - Ultimate General: Civil War th-cam.com/video/IAqG7GkbLJw/w-d-xo.html The Battle of Gettysburg - Ultimate General: Civil War - CSA th-cam.com/video/kzxiXIVBnF8/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/8im2r3_rmUk/w-d-xo.html
i went to devils den. pretty cool place. found alot of bullet holes from cannons and caves it looked like they slept in. there was giant bees following us though. that sort of ruined it.
Any position of high responsibility ages the man holding it. I'd say early 50s at the oldest though. His beard is shot with gray but he doesn't look all that old.
That fake beard was abhorrible. Like something for Halloween out of Dollar General. The hat would have fit Longstreet's large stature, but on Berenger's pate he almost takes on the appearance of a hobbit. Who did the costumes?!
Lee almost won every battle against the Union and chased them out the Virginia and Richmond. But his victories blinded his decision that is why he lost in Gettysburg, Longstreet was a great CO but i think it was better that he was the second in command of Lee, i wish Lee listened to him more..
@@mr.tobacco1708 The whole idea behind them going into Pennsylvania was to pull the Federal Army into attacking them. He got baited into attacking them. Lee reminds me of Hannibal. Won countless battles but never took Rome and in the end lost the war.
@MrDixieLove Wishful thinking is not histroy. Sorry. By the way, this face-to-face discussion in the clip you're enjoying never happened. Hood and Longstreet communicated entirely via courrier that evening. Longstreet was with McLaws' men to Hood's left. Hood DID send messages asking to attack undefended Round Top. Three in fact. Three times Longstreet sent back no. On the fourth he simply wrote: "It is General Lee's orders. Attack at once!"
Umm... imagine that Jackson was present at this battle.. we all know that Ewell did NOT take the hills.. but if Jackson were alive he would've taken it come Hell or high water.. The confederates would be entrenched and would've made minced meat of the Feds.. You do realize how dangerous a confederate victory at Gettysburg would be? Like free reign on southern Pennsylvania kind of dangerous. This could be the demoralizing blow to Northern morale that Lee was striving for.. History would be changed drastically by a difference in outcome of this battle
@@LionofJudah444 Except the Army of Northern Virginia didn't have the supplies to sustain an extended campaign in Pennsylvania, and Lee was literally tied to Richmond. His Number One Priority was the defence of the Confederate capital and he had to be able to rush back to its rescue if it was threatened. This limited Lee's scope of manoeuver even before his troops set off northward. The idea supposedly was to put the ANV into a position to cut Meade's retreat toward Washington, but Meade was in a far superior position to cut off Lee's route back to Virginia with BOTH Washington and Richmond at his back, and Meade can fall back along his own supply line so he will be well victualed on a strategic retreat. Demoralising blow to the North? Uh uh, not in this war. That is the kind of hope an army could count on if this had been a Napoleonic or Age of Reason war, but this was an industrial war. Such wars are not won by "blows to morale" or "decisive" battles but through long campaigns sustained by continuing manpower and material support, as well as political will, to achieve strategic objectives of advantage to control the enemy country, cut off all supply to the enemy armies in the field, and use captured objectives to help sustain your own armies in the field until the enemy is ground down to nothing. It involves the complete mobilisation of industrial and agricultural resources and transport to maintain the war effort. Whichever side has more and can deliver more with far greater efficiency while destroying what the enemy has, and can steadily erode enemy morale over the long haul as it steadily erodes its military fortunes, is the side that will win. This is what Southerners back in 1861 didn't understand then and what the Confederacy's modern apologists and cheerleaders don't understand today. The idea that Stonewall Jackson could have won the war for the South at Gettysburg is Lost Cause romanticism and nothing more than that. Gettysburg, to begin with, was a wholly accidental battle which started when the two armies literally blundered into one another. The town itself was of no military importance. Jackson takes the Round Tops that Ewell failed to attack? So what? Had Jackson been alive and taken the Round Tops on July 1st, then Meade would have left Gettysburg to the Confederates without a second thought and started his strategic fall-back along his own supply line, to position himself to cut Lee off from Richmond. Lee and Jackson would have been forced to react to Meade, not the other way around, and Meade was of an altogether different quality than his incompetent predecessors in command of the Army of the Potomac. In the end, Lee's Pennsylvania campaign was just wishful thinking and pointless. With Meade in command, there is no way Lee will be able to manoeuver or goad the Army of the Potomac into a position of disadvantage. Lee can only stay in Pennsylvania for as long as his supplies hold out and his supply line is far more vulnerable than Meade's. Lee must not stray too far from Richmond and must always be able to rush back to its defence. Meade can simply manoeuver and avoid battle, and frustrate the plans of Lee to achieve anything before he must return to Virginia. Lee will never get anywhere near Washington or even Baltimore for that matter, because both are at Meade's back --- as is Richmond. Any demonstration in the direction of the rebel capital would be enough to force Lee to rush back, and Meade knows this. Meanwhile, Vicksburg will surrender long before Lee manages to do anything in Pennsylvania, the Confederacy will still be cut in two and the Federals regain full control of the Mississippi River, the blockade will still strangle every remaining major seaport the South still has to receive anything coming from across the Atlantic. The British will never recognise the Confederacy and neither will the French. Before the end of 1863, the Union will secure full control of both Kentucky and Tennessee and be in position to launch the invasion of the Confederate heartland, Georgia, in the coming year. The Union's war industries and farms will continue to produce everything its armies need in superabundance and its rail networks will transport that superabundance anywhere in mere days while the Confederacy struggles to simply keep its shaky economy from collapsing into complete ruin. So no, history will not be radically changed by the outcome of a battle that likely won't even happen if circumstances are slightly different and Jackson still alive. Lee will eventually have to return to Virginia, accomplishing little more than a glorified cattle raid, because he will have no choice and nothing will have changed strategically or materially as a result. The South will still lose the war. It will merely be a question of when, not if. Just as it was in real life.
Magnificent film. Something else that I love, it didn't say which side was the correct one. One of the things that sold that was that both sides had loveable characters played by loveable actors.
(0:40) It's at this moment that Hood has to face one of the true horrors of this war. Even the music changes here to add to the drama between Longstreet and Hood. When attacking a well defended position you could lose half your force and still not achieve your objective. Longstreet doesn't even use Lee's name when he tells Hood that the "Commanding general" won 't allow a flanking movement. Even though he knows Hood is right, Longstreet can't call this one off and they both know many men will die that day, but they had their orders and they obeyed them. Hood lost an arm in the engagement and it was Longstreet who gave the command for Picket's charge that lost so many men.
@@greenleader3520yeah they want their freedom and their slaves so they left. If it not for slavery for reason. I doubt the north will happy to allow the south to succeed. They want to leave it was the south that forced them to stay.
Walking the actual battlefield brings this movie to life, having fired historically accurate replicas and seeing how the bullets destroy everything in its path… frightening
They were absolutely deadly accurate at Gettysburg but I disagree that they couldn't hit the broadside of a barn prior to that. Perhaps the greatest level of dominance they achieved during the entire war was a full year before Gettysburg at the Battle of Malvern Hill during McClellan's Peninsular Campaign. The Confederates attacked repeatedly but never got close to the Union line. Henry Hunt's artillery inflicted over 5600 casualties.
Artillery was finicky back then though. Look at Pickett’s charge, largest artillery barrage on American soil by confederates and because of the wind was blinded by smoke from their own cannons and the barrage was rendered ineffective.
Of interest perhaps..the Union cannons were well over four hundred to around two hundred for the South. And after Gen. Lee’s barrage on the third day the South had no ammunition left as the reserves hadn’t reach the battlefield. The Union withheld their fire until the South had finished its barrange. For the most part it is Sid that the cannon assault had little effect. The Union barrage, however, was a cross fire and the attack had very little chance of succeeding. That perhaps 200 men actually reached the stone wall objective can only be seen as a miracle
"Hell, they won't even need guns to defend that, all they'll have to do is roll rocks down on us!" Best line in the entire movie.
I liked his post battle "worst ground for fighting I ever saw." He was right.
@@indy_go_blue6048 Yep. The Federals did the same thing at Mary's Heights just a few weeks before, and they learned never to do it again. They thought because they outnumbered the Confederates it would work. It did not. They thought the rebels were crazy to charge them the same way here, and they were right. The sad thing is, despite the blunders of this campaign, the rebels almost succeeded. But Lee never seemed to understand that after the 2nd day, even if he had won, he lost too many Men to seriously consider going on with the invasion. The Union ultimately suffered heavy casualties and it was a Pyrrhic victory. In the end the rebels had to withdraw and cancel their invasion, so the sacrifice was deemed acceptable, but the cost was high.
Definitely not the best line. I loved Chamberlain's speech to the Maine boys so much I have it memorized
My personal favorite is Longstreet about attacking the center. “Those are Hancocks boys”. The respect in that sentence alone.
indy_go_blue60 actually the worst ground for fighting he ever saw was the fortified union position at Franklin TN. Hood hurled his men against it anyway and they were massacred. Far bigger and worse attack than pickets charge yet it gets so little attention
John Bell “Sam” Hood. He went on to make some of the most horrendous tactical decisions in the history of the confederacy, but on this one he was full marks accurate.
@@chaist94 There was a group of Michigan sharpshooters on Big Round top, they were picking off guys in the valley of death all day. Big Round Top being totally unoccupied is one of the battles biggest myths
Any idea why he messed up so bad when he was fighting Sherman? His tactics just didn't make any sense for someone as smart as him.
@@chaist94 Hood wasn't going to take any of that ground, it was a dumb attack plan. Gettysburg was not his fault, he failed up the ranks as any decent commanders above him either failed spectacularly or were killed.
@@rc59191 Yeah he was isolated cut off and had no supply base, his tactics were bad because his situation was bad. Sherman had supply bases in Illinois, Kentucky, Ohio and Tennessee at his back. All he had to do was make sure no one got behind him. He cut all those lines to burn his way to Savannah. Against Hood and Atlanta though Sherman had every advantage except for not having previous knowledge of the territory he was fighting in.
@@JohnReedy07163 True but what the mean was enemy in force such as infantry and artillery. A few regiments will eventually occupy the hill to monitor the flank. But it was too densely covered with brush and trees to make into a defensive position. The union lacked the men, resourse, stamina, and time to properly prepare the ground. Besides the Confederate attack move north .
That summer, Hood led assaults at the two bloodiest battles of the war, Gettysburg and Chickamauga. Lost the use of his arm at Gettysburg, and two months later lost his leg at Chickamauga.
Chris, I love your videos, and your GTCW series is the best on TH-cam
Then later destroyed the Army of Tennessee thorough the worst possible leadership. A self-serving ass.
Fancy seeing you here Chris
Which of course as you argued multiple times in your videos, really messed him up mentally, influencing his blunders at Franklin and Nashville in 1864.
He’s the Monty python black knight of the confederacy
Tom Berenger's hat has got to be the most impressive hat in history.
*Jeb Stuart “Hold my beard!”
That is an impeccable hat , Sir
I've seen better to be honest.
Which hat was historical, this or in Gods & Generals ?
I may be mistaken but I believe it was made by Dirty Billy. He runs a hat shop in downtown Gettysburg. I know he did Sam Elliot's hat for the same movie. I bought a tricorn from him a while back and it is beautiful.
I still wonder why a lot of people don't like this film... Acting in scenes like this one are purely amazing... and the music at the end purely syncs with the cannonading.
Acdragonrider Videos The complaints I have seen of the film tend to say that it's too long with too many characters. Another complaint is that it glorifies the Confederates too much. I have to agree somewhat with the former. At times, especially before Pickets Charge, the movie seems to want to spend as much time as possible showing off the advancing Confederates.The movie is in general one of those films that is for a specific audience.
To show what instead? The union waiting most of the time while shooting with their artillery? The same way they spent all the time in the second day with the 20th Maine, they chose to show the bravery of that suicidal charge.
"glorifies the Confederates" while showing the viewpoint of the Confederates? I never understood this criticism. Of course they felt like what they were fighting for was right; there is no glorification in that.
I remember my father being steamed because it didn't mention the First Minnesota's heroic actions. He being a Minnesotan I guess I can understand his beef.
Maybe if they'd named it "Killer Angels" instead of Gettysburg people wouldn't have been as upset about it? Since it was intended as a m4tv movie, it got little publicity and it wasn't clear that it was based on Shaara's book. Too much talking as well. How many scenes were devoted to the Hancock-Armitage bromance? I can think of 3 long scenes, 4 if you include the Armitage wounded one.
this film was financed by Ted Turner himself. And the acting was wonderful! Great story line, perfect acting and very suspenseful. One of the best civil war movies ever.
Dont forget Gods and Generals too also Ted Turner
SECRET AMERICA !!! TH-cam Channel with L.D. BRITE there was so much badly done with gods and generals though some truly brilliant parts don’t get me wrong but man that movie was like if the confederacy had a ww2 era propaganda department working.
I believe he actually has a small part in the movie. See here: www.baltimoresun.com/maryland/carroll/cct-arc-5993b1a5-fc79-5953-a08b-ed66efd88617-20130627-story.html
@@michaeldolch9126 yes he was. He played George Patton's grandfather and was killed just after he climbed the wooden fence.
Its too bad, they all sported pristine hats and uniforms Very unrealistic.
"Sam, the Commanding General will NOT allow a flanking movement around those hills. I argued it this morning, I argued it yesterday, hell I've been arguing against any kind of attack. I can't call this one off, and you know that."
“Let me move up the big round hill to the south, there’s nobody on that, now if i could get a battery..”
@@victorting4313 "There ain't time. You'd have to cut down trees before you could place your artillery. It'd be dark before you would be in action. On the other hand, if they get batteries up there, we'll need buckets to catch the lead. You gotta take that hill."
@@LordZontar "Hell, they won't even need guns to defend that, all they'll have to do is roll rocks down on us!"
@@victorting4313 "Just take it."
@@LordZontar “General, I’m doing this, under protest!”
Great scene of military discipline. Right or wrong.
That's an ignorant comment. Joe Smith didn't comment one way or another about the justice of the civil war. He was highlighting how the central organizing concept of the military is that you have to do whatever your superior orders. Fortunately we have established since WWII that no soldier has to obey an order to do something illegal or immoral. That's probably something that a lot of our top military are discussing among themselves in light of the current commander in chief.
@Clem Cornpone it was a purely tactical comment. Hood was accurate in saying he would have flanked right and had more success, but Lee left strict orders to move up the rocky hill and take it. Stuart was supposed to flank but got driven all the way round to Carlisle, having probed too far . Longstreet agreed with Hood but the orders were orders and he had to execute them.
On the Union side, Dan Sickles broke formation and took the peach orchard, only to get clobbered by Confederate guns and charges, being lucky to be able to retreat to the stone wall.
Following orders or not, there will be consequences.
I take your point Clem. If Joe Smith pops up all over the internet promoting Confederate hoo hah, call 'em out. I was just commenting on this particular post about military hierarchy. I'm actually more of a WWII buff, but have enjoyed the scenes from this movie.
Established fact that people who put "buhahaha" in their comments are losers. Case in point: the post above.
@Titus Robertson It was the central economic issue at stake for the Confederacy. If the government of the USA banned slavery the Confederacy would basically collapse economically.
I am not defending slavery but I am saying that it was a big deal. That's what the Compromise was about which lead to civil strife in bloody Kansas etc. and ultimately secession.
I liked the condescending tone in Longstreet's voice when he says "The commanding general..."
+ny_kia31 Makes me think of later on, when Longstreet is asked if Pickett should commence his charge, and all he can do is nod. He knows it'll all be for nothing.
ny_kia31 Well all the Hollywood glamour aside the tone is essentially correct. LS dis not agree with REL but he performed his orders as a good soldier does. LS like Pickett never really forgave REL for Gettysburg.
Douglas Lally,but the counter march Longstreet performed taking several hours of the same morning might have cost a considerable price. Had Longstreets men gone into action early in the day as was planed its very possible Hood would have occupied the roundtops before the Federal troops.
Windersranger1 You recall when Harrison first appeared before Longstreet? He said "You didn't know the Yankees was on the move, you being spread out as thin as you are." The AoNV was very spread out and concentrating all the Corps at Gettysburg was time consuming. You are probably correct however I don't think LS can faulted. It was simply the disposition of the army at the time.
I do indeed. also, there is an interesting argument of the possibility that Longstreet had his pride hurt by Lee on the morning of the 2nd I think it was. Lee briefed his commanders on the battle plan which placed Longstreet to the south and Ewell on the north. When Longstreet was to hear Ewell's guns later that morning he was directed to start his attack from the south also in the morning. Longstreet was supposed to attack in echelon from the south to the north hopeful driving the Yankees up Cemetery Rdige to where Ewell's men would by that time have take Cemetery and Culps Hill's. While giving his directions, Lee bypass the chain of command and went straight to one of Longstreet's subordinates (McLaws) and directed him without going through Longstreet. The argument is that Longstreet was a bit P.O. by this and consequently drug his feet through out the day partially because of this and the fact that he disagreed with the battle plan.
As Longstreets men moved south they were ordered to stay out of sight of federal scouts and signal towers. I can't remember the road name LS and his moved south on initially but as they moved south his lead elements came up on a small rise and federal scouts could be seen in the distance to the south east. The Corrp stopped in its tracks and word had to be sent back to Longstreet who was not at the head of the column as one might think he should have have been. It turned out Longstreet was halfway or more to the rear with General Hood who had just turned south off Rt 30 several miles to the North. This in its self delayed Longstreet's movements on the 2nd by at least a couple of hours and when word finally made it to him of the Federal scouts he rode to the front to survey the situation. Once to the front he ordered a counter march back to the Hagerstown Pike. Once at the Hagerstown Pike his corp turned west to Willoughby Run Rd where they moved south again. The counter march cost LS and his men something like five hours to complete placing him on the field where Lee wanted him by mid to late afternoon.
As the argument goes, was Longstreet simply following his orders to the letter? Or was his pride hurt by Lee going directly to McLaws and Longstreet was acting a little defiant? I don't know. I did a detailed battle walk with Gettysburg Park Rangers where we covered the route taken by Longstreet and we got to see the ground first hand. The other part to the puzzle was a unit of horses and artillery had moved south along the same road LS and his men had first taken. When the Artillery had reached the same hill they simply skirted the western base to stay out of site of the Federals. The Artillery surely would have left tracks and ruts in the earth offering a possible alternative to counter marching. Why weren't scouts sent out to see if they could move by the same path? to that end, do you just follow arbitrary marks in the sand?.... Its a very interesting argument and it presents very strong points on both sides. Personally I think LS was very loyal to Lee and he demonstrated this time and time again through out the war. I think for his Loyalty it is also possible that his pride was in fact hurt and that he meant no ill will to the army in his actions. But our hind sight is much closer to 20/20 than his was the morning of July 2nd and many reviewers of History see Longstreet's actions at Gettysburg not so favorably.
In other words MAKE IT HAPPEN! Nothing's changed in the military folks..believe me.
Haha, spoken like a true vet. I totally agree.
Longstreet didn't really have a choice here. He was given a series of bad orders that he'd already protested to Lee, and had to now hear his own subordinates practically quote his own words at him.
The stakes are higher in the military but this absolutely happens in the corporate world. It is usually followed by the platitude "I know you can do it". Make my damn blood boil.
I doubt that reloading is no longer a bitch so we got that wired down at least
@@michaeldolch9126 “Make it happen!” and “I know you can do it.” are what passes for leadership in the corporate world. And the sports world. And the military. It’s as silly now as its ever been.
I've been to Gettysburg multiple times. Hood was 100000% right. Little round top and Big round top is impossible to take. Lee was way too cocky at Gettysburg.
IVE BEEN TO GETTYSBURG. the rangers explain it well(even though they are northern) Lee did not have his usual info. He didnt understand the lines as he normally did. JEB wasnt able to do what he had always done with cavalry..
I've been there. That terrain is formidable.
on the first day, Lee had the opportunity to achieve his objective. On the second day, his plans were a calculated risk at best. On the third day, he was delusional. While Meade was no geniuses himself, he played a defensive battle that would make the Duke of Wellington proud. Secure the flanks, use natural cover, and use the enemy's record of aggressiveness against them.
Big Round Too wasn’t impossible to take because the Confederates took it. However, they immediately moved on Little Round Top.
@@PPLL463 He was under pressure to win a decisive victory and end the war. He new his forces were getting weak in men and equipment and food. Every victory cost him more than he could replace. Classic examples of this were Napolians failed Russian campaign and Hitlers invasion of Russia
Longstreet recognized the value of fighting a defensive war. The Union army was in the perfect position and well reinforced with good lines of communication and supply. Lee without knowledge of the terrain or the strength of the opposing forces, attacked anyway and lost. Longstreet was right to suggest that they could not attack as planned and take the position.
Longstreet was correct tactically, but Lee was right strategically. The CSA was losing badly in the West; the South's one hope was to deliver a sharp defeat to the AoP on northern soil to encourage the peace party. Without Stuart, Lee moved into contact with the AoP, and ended up with a fight on ground not of his choosing; however, Lee know that to withdraw would ruin the campaign. His only hope was to win a victory in place. Longstreets' foot-dragging, particularly on the second day, did much to doom the South's hopes.
@@jdsmith542 Nah even in the movie and all the sources, Lee fucked up. We have this romantic notion of what a great and respected General Lee was but in reality he cost them Gettysburg. He bullishly forced and forced the issue and refused to heed the advice of his commanders. Longstreet urged to break contact, bait the Army of Potomac into a field of THEIR choosing and denied it. Hood and others pressed Lee to take the Round Tops when they were still largely undefended and denied it. Hood as shown here wanted to flank around or get on the Big Round Top and he denied it and after losing the fighting at the Round Top, his answer to it all was a suicidal charge to the center of the Union lines over a mile long almost killing field. Union center didn't need to be strong to hold it. Attacking it was folly no matter what.
TLDR: Lee sucks and he lost them the war.
@@HorFell well, I hate to contradict an opinion based upon a movie based on a work of fiction, but you are wrong. In reality, Hood recommended a move to the right, but did so after Meade had shifted his cavalry (without knowing that, as they were still blind). Longstreet was always geared to defensive battles, notorious for his near-insubordinate ‘slows’ (which in fairness the movie did touch on), and was not aware of the discussions between Davis and Lee when the campaign was planned. Like most without a grasp of the conflict, and especially the events of 1863, you are trying to view Gettysburg as a battle. It was not. Lee, Meade, and Lincoln all grasped that, which is why they made the choices that they did. Once the first shots were fired, Gettysburg was a crucible out of which would be forged a legend. Which side would own the legend was the only question in point. The was no turning away for either side. Whichever way it played out would shape the rest of the conflict. Longstreet, typically short-sighted, never grasped that until it was far too late. Hood, brave but dim, never did get it, as his later efforts outside Atlanta proved. Lee got it: if the Union held their ground, everything else was pointless.
They didn't even have to take the defensive. All they had to do was move like Longstreet said before the first day or maybe it was after the first day but he asked Lee to head twords Washington and the union army would have had to pursue them then on ground of their own choosing the could get the union out in the open and destroy the union army. And my friend had Lee listened to him. We'd be living in a different America right now. Different but BETTER. Because slavery was going out regardless but ALL of us citizens would be in a freer more properties America
@@jdsmith542 not s withdrawal a redeploy they could have headed twords Washington the union army would have had no choice but to pursue them then when Stewart was back in touch they could have scouted out the ground went to a spot they wanted to fight on. Then they could have entrenched in the high ground and mead would have came in cautious and the union army would have been destroyed not to mention there would have been nothing in-between the confederats and Washington which in turn the end of the war and the separation of the United States which is all they wanted.
I try to watch this movie the first week of every July. One cannot be reminded often enough of the sacrifice these men made (blue and gray).
This is my favorite Civil War movie.
I had to watch Glory in history class because of Black History Month but I can honestly say it doesn't hold a candle to the Awesomeness of this epic film. I didn't even know it was over 2 hours long at first. I was so hooked on the reality of it all and the plot. Also the actors were amazing. I still get goosebumps from the General Lee with his men cheering him scene. Hell I was even cheering and I'm from the North 🤣
Oh yeah. Gettysburg is a far superior movie compared to Glory. Gods and Generals is better than Glory also.
Gen. John B. Hood was 32 years old at Gettysburg. The actor that played him was in his late 50's.
It's even worse in the prequel they made ten years later.
Outstanding scene. Hood's passion is evident...he can already see that his orders place his command in a low chance of success situation. Longstreet doesn't get the credit he deserves. He understood the limitations of the rebel army as far as manpower and material reserves and that a toe to toe slug feast of attrition would not work. Great movie. Imagine if they had a real Hollywood budget it could have done a better job of showing the true carnage of the combat.
Longstreet was "cautious" in all of the campaigns, not just in this instance. As I understand it, he also took up with the Yankee carpetbaggers after the War, and was despised for it.
@@karenbartlett1307 Ole Pete was cautious for good reason. He understood that the rebel army was most effective on the defensive....spar and counter maneuver as the situation dictated and exploit any enemy errors. 2nd Manassas is a perfect example of that. We must remember that Longstreet and Grant were good friends, so it shouldn't be a surprise that he would become part of the Grant administration's ambassadors corps after the war. The southern historian had effectively written Longstreet off as a turncoat since he didn't support the bull crap Lost Cause narrative like so many of the other ANV senior officers. Really look at Longstreet's combat record as ANV 1st Corps commander and you won't find a more effective Corp commander in the enter Confederate Army. And yes I place Longsteet ahead of Stonewall as far as his total impact on the successes of the ANV. He's a much more important figure in Confederate military history than biased southern historians care to admit.
@@k.r.truthseeker7156 Every historian is biased, as you are yourself and as I am. I get my information about Longstreet from Shelby Foote's "The Civil War: A Narrative" which you would do well to read, especially the 2nd volume, "Fredericksburg to Meridian", which covers Gettysburg. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Civil_War:_A_Narrative and
th-cam.com/video/3bhOqObhz3o/w-d-xo.html (Mr. Foote was not an historian, however. He was a novelist. But he spent 20 years researching and writing "The Civil War" and is very balanced in his writing.)
@@karenbartlett1307 I'm very familiar with Shelby Foote's works and being that he was a novelist I'd expect his works would be filled with more subjective opinions over strictly researched documented facts of events. You have your opinion on Longstreet which is absolutely fine. It's perfectly ok for us to have differing views. No need to reply this discussion is closed. Thank you for the feedback.
@@k.r.truthseeker7156 If you "expect his works... [to]be filled with subjective opinions" then you haven't read Shelby Foote.
It's hard to pick favorite moments from Gettysburg, but this is definitely one of them. Patrick Gorman's line about doing this "under protest" is powerful. The movie is great on its own (a true feat of historical fiction) but it is really elevated when you understand the meaning, subtext and context of what all was going on and being said. Truly one of the greatest films ever made.
General Hood was right
yes Gen. Lee was arrogant and wrong
Longstreet was the better general. He should have defied Lee. Lee would have chewed him out, but nothing more; Lee knew Longstreet was right and the best.
The problem was that Lee needed a decisive victory in Union territory in order to turn the tide of the war. While the Confederates had the better of the war in almost all major battles leading to Gettysburg, the were suffering appalling losses just like the Union, losses they could not afford. Gettysburg perfectly defined the whole of the Civil War until Grant and Sherman took over as acting commanders. Up to that point, the Union was close to completing their naval blockade of the South, meaning that they had the luxury of waiting out the Confederates until they starved. In fact, the only reason CSA troops entered Gettysburg was for much needed supplies on their thrust into the Union states. The same battle had happened time and time before. The Union would waste time to amass into a strong defensive position and would only attack the reinforced Confederates once they had a foothold to fall back on. The back and forth actions that followed led to the high casualties and indecisive victories that yielded plenty of glory for little ground. Lee knew that outflanking the enemy on the second day may have given him an edge, but the cautious Union generals would always come back stronger in the event of a retreat. In the movie, Lee is incorrectly quoted as saying "I have never left the enemy in command of the field." In reality, Lee was bent on tearing a bloody swathe into the North before turning back to trap Washington between his army and another coming in from the South. He knew he could win unlikely victories, but Gettysburg was different because it meant that if he wasted time flanking the enemy, they would have enough sense to have an escape plan in the event of defeat, which would leave tens of thousands of Union troops in friendly territory free to choose where they wanted to fight Lee next. Lee had the knowledge to back up his decision, even if it was one of the riskiest plans of his career. His experience outlined a decision for the war, while Longstreet and Hood's experience outlined a plan just for the battle.
Derrick B I am of the belief that after the first day of battle Lee could have left the Union trapped on the ridge while he positioned his army between the Union army and Washington, forcing a desperate union attack on the ground of Lee’s choosing.
@@datguitarplayer1656 You are wrong sir. Longstreet was the most stable and distinguished officer in Confederate ranks.
Hood got as far as the entrance to Slyder's lane. It was there, as he and his staff were watching Law's and Robertson's brigades advance, Hood was hit in the arm by a shell fragment, most likely from Smith's New York battery. Hood's division lost it's commander right as the assault began to unfold. It would be nearly an hour before Law found out HE was the now the division commander. Not how Longstreet or anyone else would have wanted a major attack to begin.
What a great movie. After all these years, still great.
Amazingly nearly half Hoods initial wave still went up the big hill. And robbed combat power from smashing the main Union line at a moment when Little Round Top was still unoccupied. Word is they were chasing sharpshooters. And it was right after Hood was wounded. I have to wonder after watching this scene if he thought he could still get away with sending part of his Division over Big round top and used the sharpshooters as a way to do it without violating orders. Either way the attacking force that hit Sickles flank was only a fraction of the actual attack force available. And bought time.. about 30-45 min for troops from the Union to occupy Little Round Top
LOVE the line hell I've been arguing against any attack at all.
Absolutely the BEST movie concerning the battle of Gettysburg. Bar none. All of the cast looks so much like thier historical counterparts it's spooky
He was pissed when he took off knowing he would lose half his division. The music is spot on !!
I've watched this movie more than a dozen times....
Great film
We’re gonna need buckets to catch the lead....Favorite line.
Every time I’m stuck doing something I know is stupid I channel General Hood’s last parting words
HYAAAA
Fantastic actor, the guy playing Hood. He was standing up for his division, knowing that a wipeout was coming. Terrific scene !
Why they cast a guy old enough to be Hoods father is beyond me..
@@lasselippert3892 That always bothered me too, although Patrick Gorman gave a good effort.
Is this the same Sam Hood who launched costly frontal attacks on well-fortified and entrenched Union positions at Franklin and Nashville?
His name was John Hood, not Sam, but yes it is.
JOHN BELL HOOD!!!.
TheStapleGunKid was there multiple 'General Hood' as in this movie General Armistead asks Longstreet 'have you heard about Sam hood' (or something along those lines. And Longstreet replies 'may lose an arm' referring to the general we see here.
His nickname was "Sam" .... like Longstreet, his nickname was "Pete"
Is your Google broken?
What an underrated movie. So many great scenes.
Lee repeated the mistakes made by the Union side at Fredericksburg. He acted like Napoleon against Wellington at Waterloo, using direct assaults uphill against heavily defended Union positions instead of outflanking manoeuvres.
I often wonder how differently Gettysburg might have gone had Stonewall Jackson had been there.
One of my favorite scenes from one of my favorite movies. I’ve read thousands of pages on the civil war because I watched this movie. Thank you Ted Turner and all who were involved. It’s a shame they couldn’t have made a movie about the nighttime attack on cemetery ridge at the end of day 2 or the culps hill battles.
me as Gen Hood dealing with my wife, every day :D
anon2999 this is my favorite comment ever 🤓
Southern women bro..
Hope you didn't lose an arm.
You need to circle around and take her from the rear
🤣👍
I've been to Devil's Den. I can only imagine what it was like to fight in that great big pile of rocks.
That place is so cool. It's surreal walking along little round top as well. It's actually kind of weird how close everything is, You can see Little and Big Round Top from the peach orchard and devils den. The fighting must've gotten really close contact.
The civil war
Also known as
The war over who had the best facial hair
The only thing that bothers me about this scene is when Longstreet cuts Hood off, it's a bit mechanical. you see and hear that the man who plays Hood stops talking and then Longstreet comes in with his dialogue. but the scene in general is good. really good.
Hood knew it was hopeless, he had no shot. Sounds like a suicide mission !!!
He was to wear his defeat to his eternal shame!!!
Didn’t have that kind of wisdom at Franklin....
Hood was spot on at Gettysburg and it cost him the use of his left arm. If he would have been allowed to flank and take Big Round Top, it could’ve made a difference in the battle. But it wasn’t meant to be, and two months later, he would lose his right leg at chickamauga , and later after that be given command of an army, which he gets utterly destroyed at Franklin and Nashville. His “army” after Nashville was reduced to the size of a division and was effectively neautralized as a fighting force after that battle
RE Lee and the rest of these men were moved up north to a little town in Pennsylvania, an obscure little place where a battle was brewing, a town called Gettysburg, and this one was fought without the help of the Devil. Small historical note not to be found in any known books, but part of the records in the Twilight Zone.
Lee was in charge of an undefeated army with highly motivated and battle hardened men acting far from their home ground. He aimed for a decisive battle. Kind like Waterloo or Austerlitz to end the war. And since the CSA army untill then nearly always had been successfull he took a big gamble, but trusted that it would pay off.
But the Union army and its commanders had learned from their previous mistakes and at Gettysburg they used the defensive battle tactics of their opponents, which proved to be to right thing to do at day 2, when they were attacked at the flank.
Lee didn't regard this and decided for a big hammer strike at the center, going in with nearly all his remaining infantry.
Which turned out to be a Fredericksburg in reverse.
Like many army commanders at that time Lee disregarded the much increased accuracy and firepower of the percussion rifle and the Minet bullet compared to the smooth bore muskets of no more than 30 years earlier.
Picketts charge would probably have been a success, allthough with a high butchers bill, if the smooth bore musket was still in use
Not undefeated, they had lost at Antietam (arguably a more important battle).
Lee were successful, however he lost way more men, than he could afford (especially officers), in almost all of his battles... Main reason Lee was successful was the lack of a determined commander on the union side (with enough room, and time to get his situation in order).
Regarding Picketts charge, he went in against a force of equal size, and shorter internal lines of communication... He might have been able to make a bigger breakthrough, but it is doubtful if he would have been able to hold the position against a determined union counterattack.
What Gettysburg were is perhaps more a vision of how the war was lost because of CSA stubbornness, an lack of union determination... Fighting an offensive battle without intel, and not trying to schatter the CSA army after its defeat in the field.
bandholm They didn't lose Antietam. It was a strategic defeat but a tactical stalemate. A defeat is when you leave the enemy in command of the field after a battle and Lee didn't. The day after the fight there was a truce so the wounded could be collected. Lee only headed south 2 days after the battle. While Lee didn't win at Antietam, he certainly wasn't defeated. His only defeats were at Gettysburg, the third siege of Petersburg and Five Forks.
@stueyguerreiro Semantics and revisionist history. First of all, Lee wasn't still at Sharpsburg "two days after the battle". The battle was on September 17th and Lee's army withdrew the evening of the 18th, leaving the Union army in possession of the field after the battle. In fact, the Union army was there for weeks instead of being in pursuit of Lee's army as the ANV retreated back across the Potomac, a fact which drove Lincoln crazy. Lincoln even came to Antietam several days later to personally meet with McClellan and see if he could get him to move. If that isn't being "in command of the field" I don't know what is.
As for listing Lee's "only" defeats, aside from several "inconclusive" battles where Lee failed to achieve his objective(s), you left out several of Lee's losses - Mechanicsville, Malvern Hill, South Mountain, and the big one - the Civil War itself. Does Appomattox Court House ring a bell?
Bottom line, Lee was a much better defensive general fighting on his own turf than an offensive general taking the war to the enemy, as the Union army was required to do in order to win the war. Both times that Lee tried to move the war north of the Potomac he failed in his objective and his army suffered massive casualties. In military terms, that's known as "being defeated".
True.
But Lee at Gettysburg was faced with the dilemma of every militairy commander; if you want to win a war, you have to engage the enemy in battle; TINA, there is no alternative. And just like the British at the Somme and the Germans at Stalingrad and Kursk the Confederates fell for the idea and the lure of a final and decisive battle that would bring an end to the war.
Offensive militairy methods of the period however were still based upon the time of the smooth bore musket and artillery from the era of Napoleon, which made the American civil war such a bloody conflict on both sides, because large groups of men in formation were faced against eachother in an open field, as was the case at Antietam. And at Gettysburg and Fredericksburg those large grouped formations had to march towards the enemy under artillery and rifle fire with a far more increased accuracy and effectiveness compared to hardly 30 years earlier.
Lee failed to recognise this, but so did his opponents.
In the movie the only high ranking Confederate officers who knew what was going to happen were Longstreet, the experienced tactician, and Alexander, the artillery expert.. But at Gettysburg they too were faced with the same TINA (there is no alternative) dilemma.
The only other option was to cut off the Union supply lines, by means of the cavalry. Thus forcing them to leave their positions. But Lee didn't have his cavalry at that moment and it would have taken too much time anyway, because the CSA army could not sustain itself so far away from their home ground over a prolonged period of time.
+stueyguerreiro It was very much a defeat... Lee and his army retreated, as a direct consequences of the battle... He gave up his plans for an offensive, and retreated... That is the definition of a defeat.
Regardless that he waited a day or two (to collect his wounded).
Still to this day, one of my all-time favorite scenes from this movie. Especially when you take into the broader context of their successes in assaulting those rocky heights and just how much they accomplished in the face of overwhelming adversity.
He knows he's sending his men to a slaughter
It was Buford that saved the Union Army. If not for him, Heath and behind him, AP Hill, would have moved into Gettysburg, observed the hills to the North and East of the town and occupied them. Then, exactly what both Lee and Longstreet wanted, would have happened. Instead Buford was able to take advantage of Confederate blindness due to Stewart's showboating, and delay Hill's corp, allowing the Union troops to occupy the heights instead. Learning of this, Lee tried to force the issue twice, and was stopped on Day 2, and wrecked on Day 3, as more Union troops moved into the lines each day.
Lee forced it, and it didnt work. Longstreet was the only one who figured it out before hand.
General Lee wanted to have the final battle a major victory and God Bless the man, he made a bad decision. Gen. Lee should have listen to Gen. Longstreet advice and REDEPLOYED, and they could choose a fighting ground of their choice, going to Washington. Gen. Mead would have chased the confederates.
+Rogue's Refuge It wasn't really true, though. Lee was in command of an army that hadn't been beaten on the field and would do ANYthing he ordered them to do. The morale hit for "redeploying" looks ridiculous to worry about when compared to the morale hit for the disaster of Day 3.
The ANV won Day 1 decisively - Lee could have easily moved south, or back to Cashtown, without hurting the morale of the troops. The General could do no wrong - would they have *really* been dispirited to move where he wanted to go? I'm not saying you are wrong that Lee had morale on his mind - just that, if Lee really was worried about it, it was a mistake if it influenced his decisions to stay and fight it out at Gettysburg.
Be interesting if we went around Gettysburg & headed right to Washington but the confederates were needing supply's & food & surprise, Gen. Buford arrives & engaged.
An attack on Washington would never have worked. Washington was the most well defended city on earth at that point, surrounded by a massive series of fortifications and garrisoned by 40,000 men. There was no way Lee could try to assault that with the Army of the Patomic intact. Even if he did take the city, he would have lost so many men that the Army of the Potomic would simply obliterate whatever remained of his own force.
Not to mention the thousands of Union troops at Harper's Ferry, the ones that Hooker wanted to use to cut Lee's supply lines and harass his rear as the ANV moved north through Maryland. Halleck refused his request and Hooker submitted his resignation in protest. His resignation was accepted and Meade was put in command of the AoP just a few days before the battle at Gettysburg. If "Washington City" had been seriously threatened those troops from Harper's Ferry would likely have been brought to bear in conjunction with the AoP (what good is Harper's Ferry if Washington falls?).
Washington wasn't that well defended at that point. Most of the regiments/divisions/Armies where out on different missions.
So many "what if" moments from that battle on both sides. Even after the second day Lee refused to to see the writing on the wall.
Very true. Gettysburg especially. It really was the “high tide”. The fate of both sides was locked in that idyllic landscape. Ever been there? If not, you should go.
@@dontask6863 Yeah my old man took my brother and I there when we were 12 or 13. Even though I was just a kid it was a very enlightening experience.
Lee didn’t expect Meade to stay and fight. He was wrong.
Please, do not forget the 10.000 italians who volunteered and fought for the Confederacy.
The militia of Louisiana had an italian guards battalion, later renamed 6th Regiment European Brigade, and other companies within regiments from Alabama, Virginia, Tennessee and Louisiana.
General William Booth Taliaferro served in the Confederate Army as well as the commanders of the 6th Regiment European Brigade, Lt.Della Valle, Captain Marzoni, Captain Santini, First Lieutenant Marinoni and Second Lieutenant Baselli.
Thank you from Italy for remembering them.
Italians also sided with the nazis so not surprising they fought for the confederacy
@@patricktalbot8980 they are not similar
@@winchester1351 racist white supremacist regime that abused millions of people who didn't look like them? No they were pretty similar
The actor playing General Hood is Patrick Gorman, was 58 at the time this scene was filmed. John Bell Hood had just turned 32 at this point in the war (June 29, 1831).
And so Texas and Alabama’s best men attacked
But Maine’s best were waiting for them.
Dirigo
Much love from the Pine Tree State.
Yeah. Hood's brigades were arguably the best in Lee's army here
And got their asses whipped.
@Rameen Raza And as I said, they got their asses whipped.
@@1helluvaguy738 I've been up there, and took a picture of the monument to the 20th Maine, we can't stay where we are, we can't retreat-only leaves, charge. It's a very moving place.
After just getting back from the battlefield and looking over the "Valley of Death" from the monuments up on Little Round Top, you really have to appreciate the testicular fortitude that Hood's men had to fight on that ground. It's really awful and you don't get much of a feeling for it until you walk down there among the rocks and crags. Completely shitty terrain for massed-line formation. Those guys were sitting ducks.
I never even knew about the huge snakes in Devils Den until i watched a video on it the other day. Rumor was that there is/or was an enormous 1 there that is called The Devil
Heh. I walked down Big Round Top to the base and back uphill, it was pitch dark before I returned to the top, and practically tripped over someone lying on a path. I don't know for sure but I guess it was one of those people that try to see ghosts at night - there were a few of them there. I just kept moving! :D It was so pitch black that I could barely find my vehicle parked along the road between Big and Little Round Tops.
Hood was only 37 at the time of Gettysburg, he looks much older in this film. Moving around Big Round Top was a silly idea, Hood would have found himself in a corridor with the Round Tops on his left, Rock Creek on his right, with no artillery and no room to maneuver. The V Corps was in position to block his front, with the VI Corps arriving to hit his right flank. That would have left Mclaws' Division alone to contend with the III Corps, which had more men than Mclaws alone. As it was, Hood had diverted Law's Brigade and half of Robertson's Brigade from the assault on Devil's Den which prolonged the time it took to drive Sickle's off that position allowing the II Corps and V Corps reserves to come up to the Wheatfield. Longstreet did not give Lee the attack that Lee had ordered. Lee wanted an attack perpendicular to the Emmitsburg Rd. with McLaws leading and Hood in support. Longstreet attacked with Hood and McLaws in line parallel to the Emmitsburg Rd. Lee wanted possession of the Peach Orchard so he could move his artillery onto that elevated position so he could drop shells on Cemetery Ridge in preparation for a continuation of the assault by Anderson's Division. Lot's of what if's, just don't think Hood's idea would have been any better.
My great grandfather caught a rifle ball at Gettysburg. It rolled off the counter at the giftshop.
Hero
This is why all generals no matter how great, make terrible mistakes. Lee was no exception, he knew he had unfavourable ground by day 2 but still persisted.
Quite true. Burnside lost 12000 at Fredericksburg. Grant loss 12000 at Cold Harbor. Lee lost 12000 on the third day. What happen? Modern weapons (for that time) made old fashion mass frontal assaults obsolete but as always even the military is slow to adapt.
The only two generals who knew that fighting in Gettysburg was a mistake.
When I stood looking over the battlefield from Cemetery Ridge 2 years ago, I wept bitterly for all the lives that were lost there. Whatever Lee's inhibitions were to attack the ridge in disastrous frontal assaults on that fateful 3rd day...they would prove to be the bloodiest and most wasteful expenditure of human lives in the entire war. It was a critical error of judgment that proved to be the nail in the coffin for the Confederacy, and for my beloved Texas. We were the last state to see the liberation of federal troops in 1877.
As a Virginian, I feel your pain, brother. It was mostly Virginians made that suicidal charge. My beloved Commonwealth led both the Thirteen colonies in the First War of Independence and the Confederacy in the Second War of Independence. I wish I could have seen what the South was like before it was burned, brutalized, and conquered.
Before the election of Trump I had really wished that the confederate army had won because the American people have a track record for electing leaders without a spine. I live in Texas as well and wonder to this day what that state would be like had the south won.
“Now sir, if you are ready-why don’t you take that hill”
Best line in the entire movie -
It's kinda ironic that Hood argues against a frontal assault when later on during his years in command in the west he became known for launching one reckless frontal assault after another 🤨
Dude was probably not thinking straight after losing his children and his limbs.
Yes, Davis should never have placed him in charge of Atlanta.
Great acting. The ridin off at the end is top cinema
for the record Longstreet's command was farthest from Gettysburg when the battle started , Pickett was west of Cashtown and arrived very late on July 2d . McClaws and Hood both marched at least 15 miles ( including counter march ) before assaulting Sickles and the rest of the Federals thrown into this action late in the afternoon on a very hot day . Lee promoted Longstreet twice over Jackson , the first sent a day before sending Jackson's promotion to major general , and the second sent promoting them both to lieutenant general on the same day effectively giving Longstreet date of rank seniority . Jackson was a truly gifted general , but not one without faults . Jackson was very late ( if ever ) in understanding the effect that rifling had to musketry , thus negating Napoleonic tactics taught to officers on both sides . Longstreet developed the " traverse " trench at Fredericksburg the December prior , setting the stage for tactics used until the German " blitzkrieg " in WWII . When did Jackson use trenching or cover for his troops ? Come on Jackson defenders.....
Do you know why is Jackson the master? Because he advocated rapid movements and FLANKING. He would never attack frontally entrenched positions, he would do the similar stuff as in Chancellorsville.
On the other hand they all must obey Lee's orders, but if there is a window for personal initiative, or even liberty to use his corps at his own discretion, Jackson would seize the opportunity.
And maybe the battle and the war would have been victorious for the South.
Sam Packinpah was a classical composer jackson attacked frontal positions all the time in the seven days battles, especially at malvern hill. He was talented but not without flaws. His men at the front even had pikes for godsake
MrBuckshot44 Jackson was dead by the time of Gettysburg. He died at Chancellorsville. Had he still been alive at Gettysburg, he would undoubtedly have agreed with Longstreet's position to "redeploy" the army between Mead and Washington.
Longstreet knew the advantages of defense, yes, whereas Jackson's offense was obviously extremely effective. It should be pointed out that the first months of WWI were very much maneuver based, on open ground. Static warfare is usually not preferred by commanders because of the cost of sustaining a constant fighting front. I think Longstreet was more practical, and I think he saw the war (perhaps rightfully so) as a numbers game. Jackson, on the other hand, would attack the gates of hell with a troop of Girl Scouts, and probably still pull off a miracle. Both were very capable commanders, just very different in their approach to warfare.
@Christopher Smith Slavery ended and civilization in the US advanced by leaps and bounds in spite of all the Democrat efforts, before during and after the Civil War. They are are all just as heathen today as they were then, always threatening to ruin if they don't rule.
What a great scene.
Lee actually had a lot in common with Napoleon. Both are what I call "Tactical Generals". They were really good at adeptly moving small units to defeat the enemy on a battlefield. They were always looking for that decisive battle to win the war. The 2 problems with Lee and Napoleon was they didn't understand the greater strategic level and they didn't know when to quit. The Union got beat by Lee many times, but almost none of them were Decisive Defeats.
Now when you consider someone like Grant, he wasn't the most adept Tactical General, but I would say he was a Strategic General. Like General Eisenhower or George Washington, he saw the greater picture. You could lose some battles, as long as they didn't prevent you from achieving the end goal.
It seems to me, no matter how lucky and gifted you are, if you are a "tactical general" in command of an army (instead of say, a division) you've been promoted too far up the chain of command.
Another thing they had in common was being the 2nd best generals in their particular wars
Napoleon didn't understand strategic level? Rotfl. His sucesses were due to strategic level and because he maneuvered his opponents and defeated their armies severally (Maybe we should name this operational level). However he did some spectacular strategic blunders, like attacking Russia and starting war in Spain.
Napoleon and Lee were both, two of the greatest strategic minds of their generations. What Lee understood, is this simple fact, and its implications.
By 1860, 90 percent of the nation's manufacturing output came from northern states.
There are two ways to win a war. Materially, or through will. The South had no chance materially, so every day the war lingered on meant the consumption of resources the South really didn't have to expend. The invasion of Pennsylvania was an attempt to break Northern will. It failed.
The mistake was to continue the war after that point. Lee wasn't the only one responsible for that.
Of course, when we step outside the context of the South's perspective, the mistake was starting the war in the first place, and refusing to adapt to a changing world. A familiar refrain in history.
@@that_heretic Lee is overrated. He was a very smart tactical commander, but he was not very strategic. That is, he understood a battlefield, but did not comprehend larger theaters of war. Robert E. Lee was chasing a decisive victory that he was never going to achieve. He stayed way too long at Gettysburg and should've realized it was lost before even ordering Pickett to charge. The Confederacy's only chance of winning the war was dragging it out and making the Union give up. As soon as Lee lost Gettysburg and Grant cut the Confederacy in half at Vicksburg (happened the same day), the Confederacy was doomed. Lee could've threatened Washington DC or sent his units as reinforcements to Vicksburg, but he denied sending anything to Vicksburg because he was convinced that a decisive victory over the Union at Gettysburg would win the war. The Union would not have given up had it lost at Gettysburg.
Napoleon had multiple chances to end the wars in Europe but he refused too. He refused any compromise right up until the end. Tactically, he was brilliant. He dominated any battlefield. But he lost the larger strategic view in chasing glory.
"I have tasted command, and I cannot give it up." Napoleon Bonaparte
I live near Gettysburg. I've been to the battlefield so many times and this is one of my favorite movies. And I STILL cannot understand Lee's decision making here. Correct me if I am wrong, but on Day 1, they forced the Union to fall back, but in essence, the Union retreated into an even better position from where they started.
However, Lee basically backed the Union into the woods and hills. They really had an opening on what is modern day US 15, PA Rt 97 and PA Rt 116, all of which would have connected them straight to Washington.
Why didn't Lee just make a turn south and head there. The whole movie talks about breaking through the Union on their way to Washington, but they already accomplished that on Day 1 no?
The thing that Lee didn't know, and couldn't know without ol' Jeb, was that the entire AoP was united by noon on 7/2 with the exception of the VI Corp which was without hailing distance. Even with that, if Anderson's division had performed properly, they still might have taken Cemetery Ridge.
In today's military speak, "Make it happen!"
GOD BLESS MY AWESOME FRIEND MOCTESUMA ESPARZA. I AM VERY PROUD OF YOU AND VERY HAPPY FOR YOU MR. ESPARZA. THANK YOU SO VERY MUCH MY FRIEND. 😊
have a guide drive you through the battlefield tour! It is worth the money! They know the details and explain it well. Check out Sach's Bridge while you are there. The cementary is cool but just remember its only union soldiers buried there. They left the Rebs out in the battlefield. Hope you have a blast!
I say that line to my boss every time I think what we are working on has no point. "I do this under protest."
Gen. Hood was a God Damn hero. He knew the terrain. Lost his arm in the battle.
@ScripsitVeritas there was no dawn attack order on the second, for Lee still did not know where the flank was to attack it.
Anyone know if General Hood started to lose his mind later after losing his arm? He seems like a really smart guy but his frontal attacks later in the war just made no sense and more like desperation.
not just losing the use of his arm but 2 months later he lost a leg at Chickamauga.
@@VloggingThroughHistory was it true he had to start taking morphine everyday because of his arm and leg? Couldn't imagine the pain he had to be in because of that.
Hood was on medication after Gettysburg and at times issued conflicting orders which contributed to several Confederate defeats.
Hood shows his true self here. he was a knowledgeable general, but he seemed to do worse the more he was given to command, and he never recovered from Gettysburg. He then suffered his worst defeat at Atlanta against Sherman.
After the war, Longstreet said that Barksdale's ensuing attack was the greatest of anything he saw in the war.
Barksdale was left for dead. Still makes me weep.
Been there, and was really surprised how "tight" certain areas of the battlefield really were. Little Round Top was a postage stamp compared to what I'd always envisioned, barely worth calling a "hill"
@bluegrassreb1 Actually, Lee's plan for Day Three was to launch a coordinated attack on both flanks early that morning at the same time thus limiting Meades ability to use his interior lines. Ewell had to launch his attack on Culp's Hill too early and Longstreet took way to long to get his attack underway. Lee altered his plan & attack the center which a similar attack came very close to succeeding the previous day had reserves rushed up to exploit the gap made thru Sickles' Corps
Ewell didn't begin his attack until after Longstreet was engaged. If Ewell had attacked earlier then the union reinforcements would have been tied up on the right flank.
l actually had a brief conversation with Patrick Gorman, the actor who plays Hood, on facebook a few years ago, when he had a fan page and would occasionally personally interact with people. He learned I'd worked at a Civil War battlefield and was nice enough to chat a bit on the subject.
Hood was a fine Division commander and an excellent soldier. But he failed in Georgia as a commanding General at Franklin. A good man for the fighting but he lacked strategic judgement and it shows in this scene.
Lee said he was all lion and no fox...you need both.
That was Jefferson Davis' fault. He knew what Hood would do and put Hood in command anyway.
Anyone notice that Longstreet never got an Army base named after him? Even though he was a much better general than Hood?
Southerners named those bases. They were never going to name a base after a man they saw as a turncoat.
Meh, just copied this from wiki. Explains pretty easily when you add up that a lot of these military bases weren't created and named until after the 1870s.
"Longstreet was subject to vigorous attacks over his war record beginning in the 1870s and continuing until after his death. After Longstreet died, his widow Helen Dortch Longstreet published Lee and Longstreet at High Tide in his defense and stated that "the South was seditiously taught to believe that the Federal Victory was wholly the fortuitous outcome of the culpable disobedience of General Longstreet".[291] Despite the writings of both James and Helen Longstreet, his reputation was heavily blackened well into the 20th century.[292]
In the first half of the 20th century, Freeman kept criticism of Longstreet foremost in Civil War scholarship in his biography of Lee. Speaking of Gettysburg on July 2, 1863, he writes: "The battle was being decided at that very hour in the mind of Longstreet, who at his camp, a few miles away, was eating his heart away in sullen resentment that Lee had rejected his long cherished plan of a strategic offensive and a tactical defensive."[293] He called Longstreet's performance on July 2 so sluggish that "it has often been asked why Lee did not arrest him for insubordination or order him before a court-martial".[293] Freeman moderated his views in his later three-volume set, Lee's Lieutenants: a Study in Command, where he states that Longstreet's "attitude was wrong but his instinct was correct. He should have obeyed orders, but the order should not have been given."[293] Clifford Dowdey, a Virginia newspaperman and novelist, was noted for his severe criticism of Longstreet in the 1950s and 1960s.[294]
In 1974, Michael Shaara's novel The Killer Angels about the Battle of Gettysburg was published, and was based in part on Longstreet's memoirs. In 1993 the book was adapted into a film, Gettysburg, with Tom Berenger portraying Longstreet. Longstreet is depicted very favorably in both, significantly improving his standing in popular imagination.[295] God and General Longstreet (1982), also upgraded Longstreet "through an attack on Lee, the Lost Cause, and the Virginia revisionists".[296] In 1993, Wert published a new Longstreet biography, stating that his subject was "the finest corps commander in the Army of Northern Virginia; in fact, he was arguably the best corps commander in the conflict on either side."[297] Military historian Richard L. DiNardo wrote: "Even Longstreet's most virulent critics have conceded that he put together the best staff employed by any commander, and that his de facto chief of staff, Lieutenant Colonel G. Moxley Sorrel, was the best staff officer in the Confederacy."[298] Noting Longstreet's delegation of control of battlefield movements to his staff, DiNardo argues that this allowed him to communicate more effectively during battles than the staffs of other Confederate generals.[298] Praise for Longstreet's political conduct after the war in modern times is tempered by the fact that he urged white acceptance of Reconstruction at least in part so that whites, and not blacks, would have the preeminent role in rebuilding the South.[299] Nevertheless, he has been commended for his willingness to work with the North, support for black voting rights, and bravery in leading a partially black militia force to suppress a white supremacist insurrection."
Longstreet served his country before the Civil War, then served the Confederacy because of where he was from (South Carolina and Georgia) and then once the war was over returned to serving his country however he could in several official government positions until his death. If Lincoln wasn't assassinated and reconstruction didn't become a fiasco, both the US and Longstreet would look very differently today - and probably so would the names of our military bases.
At franklin,hood was in sad shape . He was missing a arm and a leg, laudnum was was a daily thing. Yes, the frontal attack on intrenched union forces was doomed. They had no supplies, horses where dying, all eight confederate generals died. Some troops lived,but without the union supplies they'd hoped to acquirer, the army of Tennessee was broken.
Hood's arm was never missing, he just lost the use of it. His leg however was but he is one of the first men in the USA/CSA to get a cork made leg which allowed him to continue his career. They raise $3,100 and had several sent from Europe.
Wasn't that the Army of Northern Virginia?
@@libbyclark1360 no, Hood was redeployed to the Army of Tennessee following Gettysburg, and eventually was given command of it during the Atlanta campaign
@@AttyDouro22
Agreed. My mistake.
Fun fact; in 1993, Patrick Gorman was age 58 or 59 when portraying the 32-year-old Gen. Hood. Now Gorman looked the part and acted brilliantly, but then again those monochrome photographs had the effect of aging men beyond their years
Back then, everyone was aged beyond their years. Childhood diseases, painfully bad teeth with frequent extractions hard work, and always the risk of some seasonal fever. Those things, and the early responsibilities of life aged people quickly. They had a lot to do before they died on average at about 45.
There were primarily two reasons peole never smiled for photos, 1) it was considered an auspicious moment, not to be taken lightly by frivolous humour, and 2) they were conscious of NOT showing their missing , rotten teeth. That's why so many pics show the subject with hollow cheeks, because the back teeth go first.
Most people probably spoke with the sound of a person not wearing their partials or dentures today. It wasn't an easy time to be alive.
Amazing scene of a very desperate day
What in Sam Hill are you doing?
Need buckets to catch the lead!
"They got this Chamberlain fella up there defending that hill."
"Neville?"
"Nah. Joshua Lawrence."
"We're screwed."
rinck17 General Weed!
Watched this movie as a kid, 43 now and it's still Great
I wonder what Longstreet was thinking those 3 days in Gettysburg.
+Michel Roque "This is some bullshit"
"Fuck my life"
Bad idea to fight here. Bad call/yankees have the high ground.
He probably thought it to be one giant Charlie Foxtrot situation. Something best avoided or dealt with in a different way.
Here are a few sims of an alternative strategy.
Devils Den - Battle of Gettysburg - Ultimate General: Civil War
th-cam.com/video/IAqG7GkbLJw/w-d-xo.html
The Battle of Gettysburg - Ultimate General: Civil War - CSA
th-cam.com/video/kzxiXIVBnF8/w-d-xo.html
th-cam.com/video/8im2r3_rmUk/w-d-xo.html
He thought that this old fart is going to get all of us killed !
i went to devils den. pretty cool place. found alot of bullet holes from cannons and caves it looked like they slept in. there was giant bees following us though. that sort of ruined it.
John bell hood was in his early 30's during this battle. This guy looks like he's in his 60's
Any position of high responsibility ages the man holding it.
I'd say early 50s at the oldest though. His beard is shot with gray but he doesn't look all that old.
Hood had lived a hard life.
Lopido *Good sir, Longstreet lost two limbs in battle. Wouldst that not age any officer?*
@@alexanderhamilton2192 I think you mean Hood, and he still had them here.
“Never fight up hill me boys. Never fight up hill.”
Ugh. I groaned when I heard that. It is hard to believe our educational system allowed such an idiot to emerge unscathed by learning.
I just can't see Tom Berenger behind that beard
+DodgeGuy67 Try watching him as Theodore Roosevelt in Rough Riders. You'd swear it was two different actors.
#sgtBarnes
Everybody got to die sometime, [Sam].
So true.....what were they thinking
That fake beard was abhorrible. Like something for Halloween out of Dollar General. The hat would have fit Longstreet's large stature, but on Berenger's pate he almost takes on the appearance of a hobbit. Who did the costumes?!
Back in the 1981 I took my father to Gettysburg. The main place he wanted to see was Devil's Den because he knew men who fought there.
I think if Longstreet commanded the armies and not Lee the Confederates would've had a better shot. They probably would have pulled out of Gettysburg
Lee almost won every battle against the Union and chased them out the Virginia and Richmond.
But his victories blinded his decision that is why he lost in Gettysburg, Longstreet was a great CO but i think it was better that he was the second in command of Lee, i wish Lee listened to him more..
@@mr.tobacco1708 The whole idea behind them going into Pennsylvania was to pull the Federal Army into attacking them. He got baited into attacking them. Lee reminds me of Hannibal. Won countless battles but never took Rome and in the end lost the war.
My great great great grandfather was a sergeant major in Benning's Brigade, which would fight for Devil's den. Deo Vindice!
The scene that follwed was great film making. Longstreet vists the wounded Hood at an old farm house.
@MrDixieLove Wishful thinking is not histroy. Sorry. By the way, this face-to-face discussion in the clip you're enjoying never happened. Hood and Longstreet communicated entirely via courrier that evening. Longstreet was with McLaws' men to Hood's left. Hood DID send messages asking to attack undefended Round Top. Three in fact. Three times Longstreet sent back no. On the fourth he simply wrote: "It is General Lee's orders. Attack at once!"
There are stupid decisions in every war. Problem is the dead can not be reused.
These days, the dead vote, primarily democrat.
Regardless of Hood’s final status as a command officer, Patrick Gorman portrays the role amazingly!
Despite the fact that the Confederacy didn't have a snowball's chance in a blast furnace of winning, they did what they could.
Umm... imagine that Jackson was present at this battle.. we all know that Ewell did NOT take the hills.. but if Jackson were alive he would've taken it come Hell or high water.. The confederates would be entrenched and would've made minced meat of the Feds.. You do realize how dangerous a confederate victory at Gettysburg would be? Like free reign on southern Pennsylvania kind of dangerous. This could be the demoralizing blow to Northern morale that Lee was striving for.. History would be changed drastically by a difference in outcome of this battle
Funny thing was they were "winning" before this day.
@@LionofJudah444 Except the Army of Northern Virginia didn't have the supplies to sustain an extended campaign in Pennsylvania, and Lee was literally tied to Richmond. His Number One Priority was the defence of the Confederate capital and he had to be able to rush back to its rescue if it was threatened. This limited Lee's scope of manoeuver even before his troops set off northward. The idea supposedly was to put the ANV into a position to cut Meade's retreat toward Washington, but Meade was in a far superior position to cut off Lee's route back to Virginia with BOTH Washington and Richmond at his back, and Meade can fall back along his own supply line so he will be well victualed on a strategic retreat.
Demoralising blow to the North? Uh uh, not in this war. That is the kind of hope an army could count on if this had been a Napoleonic or Age of Reason war, but this was an industrial war. Such wars are not won by "blows to morale" or "decisive" battles but through long campaigns sustained by continuing manpower and material support, as well as political will, to achieve strategic objectives of advantage to control the enemy country, cut off all supply to the enemy armies in the field, and use captured objectives to help sustain your own armies in the field until the enemy is ground down to nothing. It involves the complete mobilisation of industrial and agricultural resources and transport to maintain the war effort. Whichever side has more and can deliver more with far greater efficiency while destroying what the enemy has, and can steadily erode enemy morale over the long haul as it steadily erodes its military fortunes, is the side that will win. This is what Southerners back in 1861 didn't understand then and what the Confederacy's modern apologists and cheerleaders don't understand today.
The idea that Stonewall Jackson could have won the war for the South at Gettysburg is Lost Cause romanticism and nothing more than that. Gettysburg, to begin with, was a wholly accidental battle which started when the two armies literally blundered into one another. The town itself was of no military importance. Jackson takes the Round Tops that Ewell failed to attack? So what? Had Jackson been alive and taken the Round Tops on July 1st, then Meade would have left Gettysburg to the Confederates without a second thought and started his strategic fall-back along his own supply line, to position himself to cut Lee off from Richmond. Lee and Jackson would have been forced to react to Meade, not the other way around, and Meade was of an altogether different quality than his incompetent predecessors in command of the Army of the Potomac.
In the end, Lee's Pennsylvania campaign was just wishful thinking and pointless. With Meade in command, there is no way Lee will be able to manoeuver or goad the Army of the Potomac into a position of disadvantage. Lee can only stay in Pennsylvania for as long as his supplies hold out and his supply line is far more vulnerable than Meade's. Lee must not stray too far from Richmond and must always be able to rush back to its defence. Meade can simply manoeuver and avoid battle, and frustrate the plans of Lee to achieve anything before he must return to Virginia. Lee will never get anywhere near Washington or even Baltimore for that matter, because both are at Meade's back --- as is Richmond. Any demonstration in the direction of the rebel capital would be enough to force Lee to rush back, and Meade knows this. Meanwhile, Vicksburg will surrender long before Lee manages to do anything in Pennsylvania, the Confederacy will still be cut in two and the Federals regain full control of the Mississippi River, the blockade will still strangle every remaining major seaport the South still has to receive anything coming from across the Atlantic. The British will never recognise the Confederacy and neither will the French. Before the end of 1863, the Union will secure full control of both Kentucky and Tennessee and be in position to launch the invasion of the Confederate heartland, Georgia, in the coming year. The Union's war industries and farms will continue to produce everything its armies need in superabundance and its rail networks will transport that superabundance anywhere in mere days while the Confederacy struggles to simply keep its shaky economy from collapsing into complete ruin.
So no, history will not be radically changed by the outcome of a battle that likely won't even happen if circumstances are slightly different and Jackson still alive. Lee will eventually have to return to Virginia, accomplishing little more than a glorified cattle raid, because he will have no choice and nothing will have changed strategically or materially as a result. The South will still lose the war. It will merely be a question of when, not if. Just as it was in real life.
This movie was chocked full of exceptional dialogue.
Magnificent film. Something else that I love, it didn't say which side was the correct one. One of the things that sold that was that both sides had loveable characters played by loveable actors.
I thinks the side trhatwanted to en slavery was the right one, just an opinion
(0:40) It's at this moment that Hood has to face one of the true horrors of this war. Even the music changes here to add to the drama between Longstreet and Hood. When attacking a well defended position you could lose half your force and still not achieve your objective. Longstreet doesn't even use Lee's name when he tells Hood that the "Commanding general" won 't allow a flanking movement. Even though he knows Hood is right, Longstreet can't call this one off and they both know many men will die that day, but they had their orders and they obeyed them. Hood lost an arm in the engagement and it was Longstreet who gave the command for Picket's charge that lost so many men.
He lost use of an arm, not the actual arm itself.
I'm very proud of the fact that 2 of my family ancestors fought against Lee to help bring freedom to the southern States
My g g grandmother's 2nd husband was a corporal with the 66th ohio .
Monument to them on culp's hill.
You do know after the war, Kentucky Missouri Maryland and Washington DC allowed slavery still… all northern states or under their control.
Oh how ironic, please read more and learn.
@@greenleader3520yeah they want their freedom and their slaves so they left. If it not for slavery for reason. I doubt the north will happy to allow the south to succeed.
They want to leave it was the south that forced them to stay.
@@toryquinton2677You're an absolute clown.
Walking the actual battlefield brings this movie to life, having fired historically accurate replicas and seeing how the bullets destroy everything in its path… frightening
Until Gettysburg the northern artillery couldn't hit the broad side of a barn. But, at Gettysburg the northern artillery was deadly accurate.
They were absolutely deadly accurate at Gettysburg but I disagree that they couldn't hit the broadside of a barn prior to that. Perhaps the greatest level of dominance they achieved during the entire war was a full year before Gettysburg at the Battle of Malvern Hill during McClellan's Peninsular Campaign. The Confederates attacked repeatedly but never got close to the Union line. Henry Hunt's artillery inflicted over 5600 casualties.
Artillery was finicky back then though. Look at Pickett’s charge, largest artillery barrage on American soil by confederates and because of the wind was blinded by smoke from their own cannons and the barrage was rendered ineffective.
Of interest perhaps..the Union cannons were well over four hundred to around two hundred for the South. And after Gen. Lee’s barrage on the third day the South had no ammunition left as the reserves hadn’t reach the battlefield. The Union withheld their fire until the South had finished its barrange. For the most part it is Sid that the cannon assault had little effect. The Union barrage, however, was a cross fire and the attack had very little chance of succeeding. That perhaps 200 men actually reached the stone wall objective can only be seen as a miracle