Fight for Henry Hill at the First Battle of Bull Run | Animated Battle Map
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 18 ก.ย. 2024
- By July 1861, the young Confederate nation had formed its armies and prepared them for its defense. The first major clash between the armies of the United States and the Confederate States came in Northern Virginia along the Bull Run Creek and a railroad junction named Manassas about 30 miles from Washington D.C. The southern armies of Joseph E. Johnston and P.G.T. Beauregard combined at the junction to combat the Union Army under Irvin McDowell. The two major actions took place at the fords along the Bull Run Creek and on two hills to the northwest, Matthews Hill and Henry Hill. This battle would cement Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson as a national hero to the Confederacy and demonstrate that the war would be a far bloodier conflict than expected.
#CivilWar #StonewallJackson #FirstBullRun #BattlefieldTrust #History #HaveHistoryWillTravel #HistoryChannel #Historynerd #Historygeek #HistoryCritique #historymemes #historyofart #historyinthemaking #historybuff #historylover #historylesson #historyfacts #historyinpictures #historymaker #historylovers #historyteacher #historymakers #historymeme #historytour #historymade #historytv18 #historymuseum
/ havehistorywilltravel
teespring.com/...
/ havehistorywt
/ have-history-will-trav...
What impresses me about all the accounts of First Manassas, and in fact most of the major battles of the Civil War is that, far from being examples of superb generalship like you see in the campaigns 50 years earlier by Napoleon, most battles were decided by whoever made the worse blunders. In fact I remember one historian (Pohanka or McPherson) saying 'I could have won the civil war in a year with one set of walkie-talkies'.
If a "set" were more than 2? And which side had them?
Two thoughts: I wonder if the wars were and are discussed differently. Americans have a lovely tradition of viciously criticizing one another, and there was loads of political infighting on both sides, and truckloads of recrimination after the war. Do we simply talk about the generals in negative terms instead of positive terms? What if we simply started talking about Napoleons battles in terms of his enemy’s idiocy instead of his brilliance? Second, European wars were fought by long-standing professional armies, while the civil war was fought almost entirely by raw recruits. And many battles played out in absolute wilderness...how was any general of any age supposed to show brilliance at, say, Chickamauga? Well, Thomas did pretty well there I guess, but that was More a matter of keeping his men’s morale up and holding together a cohesive defensive line and not so much brilliant maneuvering. Then there’s the battle of The Wilderness.... Perhaps I’m not familiar enough with where napoleons battles took place, but I’ve always understood them to have mostly occurred in regions that had long been civilized, cultivated, and criss-crossed with roads.
@@mjfleming319 Your point about professional armies is a good one. In fact if you look at many of the battles of the civil war where things got botched it was often the political generals like Ben Butler or Dan Sickles who screwed the pooch, rather than the West Pointers. It may not have necessarily been the green troops so much as the senators and congressmen and captains of industry who used their pull to get themselves generalships with no military experience that might have been the source of much of the problem. Our host would probably have good information about that.
I read an account by one of Bernard Bee's staff officers that indicated that the name Stonewall was actually intended as an insult. According to him when Bee realized that he was about to get outflanked and was looking desperately for someone to come to his support, he spotted Jackson's Brigade at the top of the hill. Bee sent a courier to ask Jackson to advance and help him but Jackson disregarded the request. A few minutes later when a regimental officer asked about the status of reinforcements a very FURIOUS Bernard Bee pointed to the top of the hill and exclaimed "Jackson is standing there like a stonewall" and at that point he reluctantly ordered his men to abandon their position and reform behind the Virginia Brigade. He said Bee wasn't praising Jackson's determination, he was hurling insults at him for not coming to his aid.
You are correct that we don't know exactly if it was intended to be an insult or not. Since most of the accounts that I have read put Bee saying that after his men had given up Matthews Hill, I'm not in the camp of it being a compliment, but since he died the next day, we will never know I suspect. Thank you so much for watching.
@@HistoryGoneWilder
The accounts I have read seem to indicate that the name originated from the frustration the Jackson was not advancing. And it turned out later that this was a good thing because he provided an anchor for other fleeing regiments. Bit when first uttered, it was a slur.
It seems that there's enough evidence and common sense that it was intended as an insult. For what reason would he be praising Jackson? He wasn't doing anything
These animated maps always bring clarity & detail that just reading doesn't seem to do. Excellent work as always.
The incompetence showed by the Union in this battle is truly stunning.
emknight84 almost unfathomable that they thought they could fight a war with 90-day volunteers, isn’t it? That’s not enough time to teach men how to do a route march effectively, let alone maneuver effectively on a battlefield. This battle was mostly Lincoln’s fault for rushing his commanders into action prematurely.
The union did fairly well despite it all. They caused more wounded/deaths (tho more of them got captured)
The reason they lost was over extension and exhaustion, not really tactics and strategy
Man, that's a great description of the battle of 1st Bull Run. It was like the scene in Gods and Generals which showed the battle of Henry House Hill. Jackson was ordered to hold his position by Johnston. Overall, this is good.
Too bad that movie was not better done. There should have been a whole series of movies based on Jeff Sharra's books.
Very good description/animation. I've read from several sources that up until this battle the Union forces thought the war would be over after one fight and that it would somehow be easy and exciting. There were plenty on the Confederate side who viewed it as some kind of adventure as well.
The casualties as you said certainly shocked the Union and the Confederacy, and those numbers were nothing compared to what was to come.
Basically after this the Union in particular leaner that it would be no easy victory, if a victory at all.
The arrogance of ignorance. How many times have you heard our political leaders tell us that our 'enemy' is cowardly and will shrink after a single battle? Fast forward to today's Middle East.
@@cdjhyoung Winfield Scott didn't think that. He said the exact opposite! But nobody wanted to "listen" to an "older" but "wiser" and more experienced point of view from a man thought to be "befuddled" and useless. Sounds eerily familiar!
They thought those losses were bad, in later battles, that was the list for division losses.
Great video. I learned much more from this video than anything else I have read about this battle. This engagement is of particular interest to me for I had ancestors on both sides.
I'm so glad that this video could help you understand what your ancestors did in the battle.
@@HistoryGoneWilder The one on the Confederate side was with Longstreet command D Company 1st VA INF. I am not sure exactly where my northern people were except for , Great great Grandfather who commanded the heavy artillery in Washington
General Charles Griffin played a big role in the battle of Henry Hill .The cannons on the flank most have been a moment that shook up the rebels .Your research was amazing the details kept me on edge . Griffin is a close cousin in my family tree
Thank you so much for watching and supporting the channel, as well as the kind words. Please consider subscribing to the channel if you have not done so already and check out my other videos.
Excellent job, Mr. Wilder Historian! My fiance and I were just there on Saturday! Kind of difficult to wrap your mind around the battle because of Manassas I & II but once you get your bearings, it all makes sense. Well done yet again! Wish I saw this before I went. Looking forward to go back in cool weather. Any battlefield tour is quite arduous in 99 degree heat!
Thank you so much. It is definitely a more complicated battle than it initially appears. I was there just two weeks ago. Very difficult to tour in the heat. I want to explore Matthews Hill more when I go back. Such a beautiful battlefield and fairly well preserved.
@@HistoryGoneWilder and great hiking as well! Really nice place!
My two favorite battlefields to visit are Manassas and Antietam. They are both very well preserved.
@@johnnychaos152 Yes, Antietam is very well preserved but the best preserved is Shiloh. Essentially untouched since the battle. Such an amazing battlefield.
@@johnnychaos152 how is Chickamauga and Shilo? Ever been? They're on my bucket list.
I am reading “Stonewall” Jackson in the Civil War and am on this chapter and so many thanks for this.
Well done! Thanks very much, this is great! ♥️
Correction: Bull Run is A RUN not A CREEK. You're a Virginian, I would expect you to know this. A Run is a constantly flowing, usually spring and rain fed waterway. They are usually deep and generally not as wide as a creek which is only dwarfed in width by a river. Some runs are navigable by small craft while only the largest creeks are, for example Neabsco Creek or Occoquan Creek, both in eastern Prince William Co. Woodbridge or Aquia Creek in Stafford Co. are all heavilly trafficed by sportsman. Today Bull Run is shallow enough in places to ford by wading because of the diversion of rain runoff to other bodies. As a child I fished, hunted crawfish & bull frogs, muskrats and snakes in and around Bull Run. On those old maps, flowing waterways in Virginia progress in size something as follows: Lick, Spring, Branch, Run, Creek and River. Please keep them coming, I love all your videos. This just hit a nerve, historians frequently make this mistake and I had to set it straight, especially to a fellow Virginian.
Love it!
Interesting. I thought they were just regional terms used interchangeably. We just use the terms creeks or rivers up here. I've never heard anyone use the words lick or branch. Of course our topography is much different here, being rolling prairie land.
This Canadian thanks you for clarifying that. We use the words differently here.
Bill D. in Iowa hey Bill, fellow Iowan here, I also had no idea there was a difference between all those terms. To me a creek (or crick) is smaller than a river and a run was just an eastern creek. Well I guess I got a good education on the internet today!
Great comment, as a Midwesterner I had no idea what the difference was...I figured they were all just different terms for what we call a creek.
keep up the great work man, these types of videos are great
Thank you so much. I've got much more to come. The patrons are voting on aspects of Second Manassas to be animated.
There was a two hour lull from the fighting on Matthew's Hill until the assault on Henry Hill which allowed the Confederates to regroup. Rickett's and Griffin's batteries were rifled cannon, ineffective at close range since they can't fire canister without destroying the rifled grooves. McDowell needed smoothbore cannon for the assault on Henry Hill. Jackson had 13 smoothbore cannon arrayed on Henry Hill which gave him the antipersonnel advantage. It also didn't help that McDowell sent his infantry in piecemeal attacks.
What a great treat after work! Posted 15 hours ago why didn’t I check before work!? Thank you!
Thanks for another great presentation! I’ve had the opportunity to tour the battlefield and the Henry house. I wasn’t aware of the Confederates tactics but it sounds like a pretty good idea with soldiers on both sides wearing blue and gray!
Thank you so much for watching and supporting the channel.
It's excellent research and explanation. Love the maps
Henry Hill..when he left Manassass he moved to Long Island and hooked up with gangsters. :)
Overall theme: despite a huge numerical advantage, piecemeal and uncoordinated American attacks on the rebel position resulted in failure...
bill harris not such a big numerical advantage, but yes, terribly piecemeal and uncoordinated attacks.
@@mjfleming319 Total battlefield commitment does seem equal; I'm referring to four other dimensions:
1) Americans available to attack Henry House Hill prior to the arrival of rebel reinforcements.
2) a fully un-committed American Corps present and available.
3) An over-commitment on the second, 'Bull-Run east-west axis. Rebels understood that no attack was possible & moved troops to the north, while the Americans did not.
4) Prompt rebel arrival from the lost W Va campaign. Again, the Americans did not follow accordingly.
In sum, the potential American involvement should have been 75,000 at a 2 to one ratio in their favor...
bill harris I’ve always seen 35,000 as the force McDowell had at Bull Run, with him only able to get 18,000 into action as you note. How are you getting the figure of 75,000 available? Again I agree with the clear premise that the American forces were not well deployed.
@@mjfleming319 The geometry and #'s appear to be simple: the traitors were able to marshal the entirety of their 36,000 troops to defend positions facing north and east. This includes the arrival of the troops from W Va.,which was lost. All 3 basic corps were at 12.000,or 2/3's strength of the Americans.
Otoh, the Americans failed to more their 18,000 corps from occupied W Va southwards.
Present at Bull Run were 2 active corps facing west and south. Again, westwards was useless because of the forest and Bull Run as an obstacle. However, the soth-facing corps made good progress due to a 3 to 2 advantage and good terrain.
yet when the traitor line conflated southwards, it created an 'internal line effect' which means that, given equal numbers, the inside member maintains an advantage. Gettysburg is another good example of this principle...
Parity of #'s, again was achieved by: arrival of W va Troops, and a transfer of units from Bull Run (west) to Henry House (north). Plus, again,t the farilue to move an available 3rd corps and the lack of troops from WVa.
Even Wiki, btw, gives the presence of the in-committed 3rd corps,,,
bill harris by the uncommitted corps do you mean Patterson’s command? Patterson wasn’t just uncommitted, he was way the heck over In The Shenandoah Valley. Was supposed to keep Johnston pinned down but let him slip away.
what a damn mess. thanks virginian loved it. very much. very cool. your awesome hero. sorry but the union screwed that up at the very outset. luv this stuff brother
This entire battle was mostly a cluster "F" on both sides! However, it was clearly evident, and would continue to be so for the better part of 2 more years; That the Rebels had already identified the most ablest commanders in their ranks!! While the Union struggled to find even barely competent generals! As far as actual casualties (KIA, wounded) it was pretty even! The 1300 Union missing and captured were Mostly "missing!!" having skedaddled back to DC! So..only temporary casualties. The Old but WISE CinC of the US ARMY, Winfield Scott had predicted before this battle that it would indeed be a long protracted struggle that "would not" be decided by one big battle. Of course he was even more correct than anyone would have EVER thought!
David Grant I am sure you know it had more to do with than just slavery. I am a Southerner and hate the idea of owning another human being. I just don't believe that I should follow a government that doesn't represent me as most of these felt. You need to look up the Jeffersonian economy. You might understand then why a lot of people were for leaving the union.
@@volslover1504 NO, I don't know that at all! Give one reason that can't be directly tied to the institution of slavery? And, uh, if I recall correctly, the Constitution provides for the representation of ALL the citizens of the US...doesn't it? At least that's what black people were told AFTER the CW...right? So, just because the southern states LOST the ability to control the Congress and feared that their "peculiar situation" might have restrictions (perfectly legal) put on it then, apparently "all of a sudden" their NOT being FAIRLY represented? Is that it? I hate Trump with a passion, he LOST the popular vote! But by our "peculiar" outdated electoral college, he was still "Duly" elected. I don't feel that I'm NOT fairly represented. Do you? No, because YOU probably voted for him, right? And I would appreciate if you would address the proper subject in the proper thread! Thank you.
@@USGrant-rr2by I see that your lack of knowledge and tempermeant is getting the best of you so I will back away and let you continue on with your rant sir.
@@USGrant-rr2by also you need a little Candace Owens and a little less sharpton. lol
@@USGrant-rr2byI thought this was a history discussion not political. Have a blessed day sir.
Well, you read about the to and fro of battle and its confusion. This is a good example of such a thing.
I really am going to have to look up more of the battles. If nothing else so as the know Henry Hill was not a person.
Thanks for the video. Definitely informative and enlightening.
He was, his last name was Henry!
And many horses died on both sides 😢
Yes, sadly, more than a million! Innocent, loyal, loving animals made to be apart of Humankind's folly!
Awesome!
So glad you enjoyed it.
Every time I see or hear or read about this battle, I am left thinking that if only the Union could have coordinated it's actions effectively and attacked en-mass, they would have simply driven Jackson and company off the field. One strong, multi-unit attack would have done it. But was not to be ... and a legend was born that lives to this day.
Thank you so much for watching and supporting the channel. If you have not done so please consider subscribing to the channel and check out my other videos. I think you will enjoy them. Thank you so much.
Yes, but his defeat of the federals on that day was not a fluke or a one off, he went on to defeat them time and time again over the next two full years.
🙋🏻♂️Dr. Wilder History, I am curious. Did there ever come a tipping point in this battle where IF the Yankees did or didn’t do something differently, could they have won? Thank-you.
Those initial Union attacks on Henry Hill should have been in full force instead of in a piecemeal fashion. That would have drastically tipped the scale. Or if the 14th Brooklyn had been supported when they pushed back the 33rd Virginia. Thank you so much for watching.
Have History Will Travel Thank-you for answering, Doctor. 🙏🏻
Do you think that it is possible that civil war could have been played out to cover up and destroy the memory of antiquity? Thank you have a great day.
Please explain your theory, sounds interesting?
@@USGrant-rr2by Happily! It seems strange to me that there are grand, domed buildings that are found all over the wold that seem out of place due to the technology those people had.
Horse and carts, no cranes, or enough of a population to justify the building of them. I will refer you to the autodictactic and jon levi channel. Thank you for the interest. Have a great day. Be safe.
What, no Goodfellas jokes?
Dem tigahs tho>>
My paternal g g grandfather was in the 7th Ga
Never realised there were marines at bull run
I wonder why the Union had over 400 less wounded than the confederacy but nearly 50 more killed.... The first thought is that that many of the Federal captured probably were wounded.... I hate those people that talk about how the South should have marched on Washington right after the battle.... First the south Especially during the early part of the war was undertaking a complete defensive war for several reasons, lack of resources, to appeal to England and the rest of Europe that they were being invaded and only protecting themselves amongst other reasons.... 2nd Even though the casualties of the First Bull Run seem light compared to other civil war battles at the time they were astronomical. The south was not prepared to treat so many wounded and most the army was completely exhausted from battle... Also maybe a raid on Washington if lightly defended would have had some use (defiantly for moral and propaganda) but the idea that the South could hold Washington is ridiculous... Washington is flanked by water on 3 sides with only the northern approach attached to land such as a peninsula... If the south actually attempted to hold Washington with an army they would have been surrounded by the superior Federal Navy.... Sorry for the rant, and I do understand my opinion doesn’t count for everything, but I got kicked out of 8th grade US history for arguing with my teacher about this point.
1st Manassas
CHAAARRRGGEE!!!!! BAYONETS!!!!!!!
I see you in every video that involves stonewall Jackson
@@strengeman6737 Why wouldn't I be? It's about me after all lol.
Alabaman, not Alabamian
North Carolinian, not North Carolinan
Otherwise, a very informative and boring video. Thumbs up.
I noticed the North Carolinan when I was editing it, but had no way to cut it out without cutting a huge section out or redo it. I apologize.
So Have History will Travel your telling me if Hamton and the 7 georgia had not held on as long as they did Jackson would have not had time to deploy and the CSA would have lost the battel. I'm I right in saying that.
C.s.a
“The new nation”? It was an insurrection, not a nation.
New nation is correct.
not a insurrection a patriotic revolt against tyranny. do your history.
Jay, historians general call it a new nation, since they did create a government and defended territory with an army. They had the infrastructure of a nation. I can be considered both a nation and an insurrection at the same time. I hope that clears up why I used that phrase and I can see the confusion. Thank you so much for watching and supporting the channel.
@Roger Trent You really need to do some serious US history study if you think that is what occurred as to OUR revolution. And you just stated one of the reasons that a US state NEVER had the right to legally secede. The revolutionary war was fought to form ONE United nation, NOT 13 independently sovereign states! E PLURIBUS UNUM....from many.....ONE!
Of course YOU are correct!! Regardless of the erroneous opinions of others. We refer to the "confederacy" because that is the 'revolutionary name" they gave themselves! No other "recognized" Nation gave official credence to the CSA as a true independently sovereign nation, no matter what type of "semantics" they may use to justify their claim.