By the request of many of our viewers, we have added narration to our already existing original set of battle maps. We appreciate your support and hope you enjoy the update! For our more modern animated maps, please visit the top of our Animated Battle Maps playlist th-cam.com/play/PLZrhqv_T1O1sdxRNm5SNc6cGSWr7xiWZs.html.
Feels weird knowing all of this history while living in Kings Mountain NC but at the same time traveling to all of these places be it for vacation or work!
I still find it HILARIOUS that the South was angry about Lincoln being elected. The Southern Democratic Party ran their own candidate in the election and split the Democratic vote with the Northern Democratic candidate . Seriously, like WTF did you think was going to happen, duh. Also, Lost Cause twits droning about the "War of Northern Aggression" when the CSA fired the first shots. /eyeroll
The North goaded the South to fire upon them, it was a false flag. The South had no reason for war, they were no longer part of the United States. Lincoln wouldn't allow them their independence which is why he needed this battle. An excuse for war. Shortly after, he made the outrageous call for 75,000 men across the nation. Other Southern states balked at this and left the Union.
Not at all, they only needed to duck and cover, occasionally firing back. There would be no storming of the fort. Getting the south to fire on the fort at all was the objective.
@Ronnie Willet yeah but what about the rest of the war. Did his daughter ever marry? Did he serve during the rest of the war? What work did he do in the army?
@@natedlc854 His name was Robert E. Lee. Once captured, he heard a speech about Confederacy and said, "Good point." That's why he switched sides. His daughter, Amy Lee. She's immortal.
I live in Salford uk, my granddaughter bought me a very good book about the beginning of the civil war in USA, focusing on the events of Fort Sumter, I read it with great interest and I feel a connection with the soldiers defending Sumter, I don’t know why , maybe the injustice of slavery, but I was intrigued by the actions of Anderson and also fascinated with the history of the whole thing, god bless all the working class young me on both sides who perished. ( by the way the book is called “brother against brother- the war begins “
@@Crazyfrog41 Iron, actually. Cannon balls didn't fit tightly in the bore, plus most of the artillery in those days was smoothbore. So they didn't have to be made of lead or anything that soft. Besides, cast iron projectiles were better for breaking walls.
little piece of info as well. James Island along with Morris Island is where the 54th Massachusetts black regiment fought and ultimately fell at Fort Wagner on the southern end of Morris Island. It's inspirational that the same location that sparked the civil war was beaten back by those who they tried to oppress.
Southern aggression actually started months before when, even before seceding, militias in Texas and Arkansas began seizing federal military property and besieging U.S. forts. There was no shooting, but several forts were forced to capitulate and American soldiers were taken prisoner.
Library of Congress' website. All of Matthew Brady's (and everyone who worked for/with him) war photos have been digitized and available for public viewing.
"...For the next 20 months..." Battery Wagner was a part of the ongoing attempt to capture Charleston, and it actually went on for quite a bit more than 20 months. It was actually captured without a fight when Sherman turned north in Jan. '65 and D. H. Hill (IIRC) pulled his forces out and joined with Johnston rather than getting pinned in and being forced to surrender.
During the battle Robert Anderson commanded the fort, and yes he was born in Louisville, Kentucky. You can learn more about him here: www.battlefields.org/learn/biographies/robert-anderson
He was also ordered to KY after he returned from Ft. Sumpter, but he resigned either in late '61 or early '62 d/t bad health. IIRC he then moved to NYC.
The 'lost cause' mythology seeks to try to justify the awful choices...because it is painful to recognize that your ancestors were foolish and evil people...and that those dumb choices caused the deaths of millions and the near total destruction of your home. It is far easier to blame this catastrophe on an outside group...rather than accept responsibility for it and move on. The flip side is that ALL of our ancestors were foolish and evil people...and no one can really look back on their past with a perfect sense of pride. The whole thing is a pride trap...and a way that evil cycles in life.
@@dclark142002my heritage is the confederacy, and I’m proud. (Obviously not proud of slavery and stuff, sure y‘know what I’m tryna say) but I’m proud of how the America I lived in persevered
@@Syrup_Boi Same here. This event was not all the South's fault. Our form of government has allowed for various secessionist movements to crop up whenever a region feels vulnerable in Congress. What we should learn from this event is that our system has a weakness to be wary of.
I don't understand why Fort Sumter was the start of the Civil War. If the Confederates had never fired on the fort, would the war never happened? What was the US government doing for the months that the CSA declared independence?
The USA needed to build up its forces before it could hope to retake the occupied southern states. They had just lost a massive amount of military strength in the area, and were in no position to defend themselves from an insurrection this massive. Given enough time to prepare, the north would have eventually fired first to emancipate the south.
Secession was legal, and Lincoln didn't want to appear as an aggressor. There was some hope that the seceding states would voluntarily return to the Union; however, a case can be made that Lincoln maneuvered the Confederacy into firing on Fort Sumter- an entirely legal action, since the Confederates were not forced to do so. It's also worth remembering that Fort Sumter was the property of the United States government.
@@indy_go_blue6048 Frankly, loss of face wasn't a factor imho. Personal pride 'may' have been one. Short- sightedness was the probable reason, because Fort Sumter had been the property of the United States for twenty- five years, and had never been part of the Confederacy.
Until Lincoln was inaugurated, the lame duck Buchanan administration was letting the rebels have their way with a variety of bloodless attacks on American forts, ships, and other property. The reason Fort Sumter triggered the war was because Lincoln was in office and decided to take seriously the president's duty to suppress insurrection (or defend the nation from foreign enemies, if you'd like to argue that the Confederacy was a legitimate nation and not a rebellion).
@@Rex-gu1bu A. The southern states secceeded from the Union. B. The confederates shot first. C. The confederate army soon entered northern territory. Remind me, how is all of that not aggression?
@@Kojak0 the south could have ended the whole war because the battle of Bull Run was literally right in front of the capital of Washington. But they were more concerned about defending there homes. They wanted nothing to do with the capital because they had already formed their own nation. Does that sound like southern aggression to you? It was a defensive war for the south
It's a stroke of brilliance, really, when you think about it. Lincoln and Anderson both knew that Sumter would fall; it was desperately undermanned and completely cut off from reinforcements and supplies, unlike the surrounding rebel strongholds. Firing on the Confederates would have been suicidal, not only literally in the context of Sumter itself, but also politically, as it would have made the North the aggressors, likely swaying public sentiment in the South's favor. All Anderson had to do was sit back and wait for the rebels to lose their patience, and then simply let the inevitable play itself out. Basically, the North baited the South into a one-sided game of chicken, successfully making the latter the instigators of the war.
Yep.. The biggest mistake the Confederates made was firing on the Fort. Lincoln had no choice but to go to war and would had started it anyway. But it's likely that world opinions would had come to the Souths side if the North would had started the war. Thus possibly bringing England ,France or both into the fight on the Southern side ..
The rebels had already besieged and seized a number of forts, just not during the Lincoln administration. It didn't take a lot of genius to guess that the fire eaters would come for Sumter next.
Major Robert Anderson is my 3rd cousin, 6 generations removed. I do a lot of family history, and after 50 years, I have concluded that I'm related to almost everybody (as we all are at some level). One of Anderson's sets of great-great-grandparents were William Williams (1665-1712) and Jael Harrison (1674-1734). This same couple was one my sets of 8 x great-grandparents. - Dr Dave Menke, Tucson. PS: history is far more interesting when one realizes one's relatives were part of history.
As far as I can ascertain I had only one relative, a cousin x? times removed who fought in the ACW; most of mine came after the war. But he has the distinction of having served in an Indiana cavalry regiment and was twice captured by Bedford Forrest's men. He spent the last 10 months of the war in a PW camp then died 10 years later.
@@indy_go_blue6048 My great-grandfather, Captain H. H. McAleney, served in the 11th Illinois Cavalry, Company K, under General Grant at the Siege of Vicksburg, spring and summer 1863. He met his wife during the siege and they married in Vicksburg after General Pemberton surrendered and moved to Atlanta to invent Coca Cola.
Every video about Fort Sumter needs to begin with the conclusive evidence that the United States, not South Carolina, owned Fort Sumter: "That the state do cede to the United States, all right, title, and claim of South Carolina to the site of Fort Sumter and the requisite quantity of adjacent territory..." South Carolina legislature "Reports and Resolutions of the General assembly", page 115.
My ancestor is tied to the Star of the West. "Captain William Moore, brother-in-law to the ship’s captain and a steamboat captain himself, wishing a remembrance, visited the wreck and obtained a port hole window that is a part of the family’s mausoleum in Greenlawn Cemetery." My dad told me the port hole was destroyed by vandals as his father told him. But after the cemetery underwent a cleanup in the last 3 years they found it in storage instead. It's now back at it's rightful place. Also the family 'story' was embellished over the years. My dad believed the boat was one of the City-Class Gunboats and my ancestor went down with the ship. It was only in the last 5 years he studied our family history and realized the true history. But it's neat to be tied so closely to the start of the Civil War.
"Reports and Resolutions of the General assembly" of South Carolina, page 115, which reads in part: "That the state do cede to the United States, all right, title, and claim of South Carolina to the site of Fort Sumter and the requisite quantity of adjacent territory..." So...not your house. Maybe the dog house on the edge of your property that you sold to someone else, but seller's remorse doesn't give you the right to start shooting at someone.
At 4:18 it says that the Star of the West approached as an unarmed ship. This is not true. I believe the SoW was escorted by two other Union ships. The SoW also had 200 armed soldiers beneath decks. Charleston's forts were South Carolina's land. It was always the property of South Carolina. Any land leased to the Federal Govt. was a lease, not a grant. If the North did not want war, they should have left Charleston instead of trying to resupply it with men of arms.
"That the state do cede to the United States, all right, title, and claim of South Carolina to the site of Fort Sumter and the requisite quantity of adjacent territory..." South Carolina legislature "Reports and Resolutions of the General assembly", page 115.
If I am correct no one died at the first battle for Fort Sumter. The reasons stated seem to be erroneous, the war was unnecessary, the struggle was more about economics. Britain wanted America divided, smarting from the lose of their colony, and falsely encouraged the South. The Czar sent his navy to block the influence of Britain and France. Lincoln did not free all the slaves, only those in the South in 1863, so the Blacks would become guerilla soldiers. After the war we all became slaves to the Federal system and the bankers. Jackson at the beginning of the conflict told Davis that with 20,000 troops he would deliver Washington, DC in two weeks. Davis did not support Stonewall, the war was lost upon his death.
Slavery was the cause of the war, because that's why the South fought it. They made it clear in their statements and secession documents that slavery was their cause. I suppose you are right that the war was about economics, in that slavery was so profitable for the South that they were not willing to let it peacefully go into terminal decline.
Even though Lincoln did not free all the slaves at the time of the Emancipation Declaration, the job was finished with the 13th Amendment to the Constitution that outlawed slavery. That was Lincoln's and the Republican party's goal the whole time. However Lincoln was a pragmatist and knew he couldn't get legislation through without enough support from Congress. He could get enough support from new states that entered the union as long as slavery was blocked from being allowed in those states. With his election, Lincoln's long term strategy was inevitable. The southern slave states knew this as well which is why they succeeded. There wasn't huge popular support for slavery even in the southern states which is why the southern leadership emphasized states' right more than keeping slavery. But the primary issue was always slavery. There would have been no civil war without the issue of slavery.
War is awful. Maybe Davis and Walker should have thought of that before assaulting a fort whose commander told you would surrender in three more days...just to try to force the upper southern states into secession...
Instead of repeating 'slave labor ran south's economy,' it may be more correct to phrase it 'sotherners became rich with the help of free slave labor.'
“I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so.” - Abraham Lincoln, March 4th, 1861 Antislavery? 🤔
Chaotic WJ In 1863, the cause switched to slavery only superficially. Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation was issued as a “war measure” to prevent the British and/or French from intervening in a war the Union was losing. “It had got to be midsummer 1862. Things had gone from bad to worse, until I felt that we had reached the end of our rope on the plan of operations we had been pursuing; that we had about played our last card, and must change our tactics, or lose the game! I now determined upon the adoption of the emancipation policy.” - Abraham Lincoln Lincoln’s Proclamation only applied to “any State or designated part of a State, the people people whereof shall then be in rebellion...” Meaning, States that did not recognize Lincoln’s authority to begin with. The Proclamation also excluded regions of the Southern States under Union control. “Louisiana, (except the Parishes of St. Bernard, Plaquemines, Jefferson, St. John, St. Charles, St. James Ascension, Assumption, Terrebonne, Lafourche, St. Mary, St. Martin, and Orleans, including the City of New Orleans)...and Virginia, (except the forty-eight counties designated as West Virginia, and also the counties of Berkley, Accomac, Northampton, Elizabeth City, York, Princess Ann, and Norfolk, including the cities of Norfolk and Portsmouth[)]” In the words of Secretary of State William Seward, “Where [Lincoln] could, he didn’t. Where he did, he couldn’t.” At the Hampton Roads Conference in 1865, Lincoln told his friend Alexander Stephens that Georgia could postpone the passage of the 13th Amendment, as long as Georgia ‘rejoined’ the Union. “Preserving the Union” (centralization) was still the ultimate goal even towards the end of the War. It was Lincoln’s unwavering desire to couple emancipation with the colonization of freed slaves. www.amazon.com/Colonization-After-Emancipation-Movement-Resettlement/dp/0826219098
Personal vs political views. He hated slavery but he wasn't an abolitionist, and also felt he had no constitutional right to ban slavery where it already existed. Well since the South withdrew from constitutional protection (to quote Sherman IIRC) that didn't apply anymore. But in 1861 he had to be very careful so KY and MO wouldn't secede. To quote Lincoln, "I pray that God is on our side, but I must have Kentucky."
It was about slavery, the expansion of slavery in federal territories mind you, which in turn would have affected the continuation of slavery in the south in the long term. Thus, the seccession was about slavery, AND the war was about seccession.
@@augustosolari7721 But why was the "expansion of slavery" important to Republicans? Because they were dedicated segregationists. When they say they're "anti-slavery" they mean "anti-black" because they were against race-mixing, and the labor competition that slavery brought. More importantly, the 3/5 would lead to a greater Southern representation in Congress if those States became "slave states" through popular sovereignty. If the secession was about slavery, why didn't any of the seceded states accept the Corwin Amendment and return to the Union?
No the south finished it the north started it the north didn’t force the south to surrender General lee did to stop the blood shed both sides could of went on killing each other by General made sure it would stop and the south won the last battle of the war...
@@unknown-dq6df All the south had to do was say we are breaking away from the Union. No shots needed to be fired unless the Union fired firey. Problem is, all the first blood was drawn by the South.
He was, and was adamantly opposed to the spread of slavery to the territories, but he also realized it was protected by the Constitution and could do nothing about it where it already existed. Ironically the 15 former slave states could still block the ratification of the 13th-15th amendments.
Fort Sumter was a sacrificial lamb offered up by Abraham Lincoln. Lincoln knew the war was inevitable but didn't want to be the one who fired the first shot
Sumter wasn't in glory. The fort they attacked was a fort defending a fort which defended Fort Sumter. Needless to say, the Confederates held Sumter until the end of the war.
“On January 20 [South Carolina Governor Francis] Pickens suddenly sent a boat to Sumter with a supply of fresh food. Two hundred pounds of beef. Fresh potatoes and turnips. Other things. The men happily unloaded it and rushed in to the mess hall. A feast was planned. Then [Major Robert] Anderson heard about its arrival. He sent word immediately to pack up those provisions and send them back. He would not permit Francis Pickens to act Lord Bountiful, the plantation master deigning to be generous to his “people.” The garrison returned to its sorry diet of dubious pork and iffy hardtack. [Dr. Samuel] Crawford’s diary made increasing note of their lack of provisions.” - Detzer, David. Allegiance: Fort Sumter, Charleston, and the Beginning of the Civil War. New York City, NY: Mariner Books. 2002. Print. [page 181]
Imagine the fortitude necessary to do such a thing, to turn away good food while your supplies run dry, in order to keep your morals in good order. Anderson was good man, and we shouldn't think low of those in his command for eagerly accepting the food...may we all have that strength should America's enemies once again try to dominate us.
@@laizalott Anderson wanted to abandon Fort Sumter, but was waiting for orders from Lincoln (which never came). He could have simply left the fort, like most other did after the State where the forts were seceded. Negotiation saves lives, not stubborn posturing towards a group that no longer wants you in their country. Bad decisions all around, it was entirely avoidable.
They got the list of causes of the Civil War straight from the Union Army recruitment propaganda. Only one CSA state mentioned slavery in its secession declaration. Slavery was an issue, but so was blatant disregard of state's rights. If a state votes into a relationship, and the relationship goes sour, it should be able to leave the relationship.
Apparently you've never read the original seven states secession documents, all of which mention slavery as well as Stephen's "cornerstone" speech. Neo-Confederates need a different argument. Btw, "Union recruitment propaganda" was about saving the Union, not destroying slavery.
The disregard of State's rights argument only holds water if you understand that the rights being trampled were those of free states. Remember, Dred Scott essentially said that no state could declare any slave free for any reason...and could not outlaw slavery within their borders so long as any other state in the union had not done so. Free citizens of, say, Massachusetts could be kidnapped and made slaves without due process...just because someone from Virginia claimed they owned them.
The South may have fired the first shot, but it was the North that started occupying Southern territory. In my minds that makes the North the aggressors in this, they push the South into this. And I say this as a Pennsylvanian.
@@constantdarkfog49 Can't argue with that, it was like a festering wound from the start. There wasn't anyway to stop a war from happening as both sides were entrenched with their views so deeply.
The confederate states were ordering the seizure of federal arsenals in the deep south before Sumter. Sumter was not necessarily the first aggressive actions the confederates took. But it is where the first shots were fired.
The confederates invaded the USA, occupied its lands, and enslaved its people. There was no north and south, there was the USA, and the rebels who sought to destroy it. The confederates were basically redcoats.
The South was stealing citizens from northern states to use as slaves. The South was demanding that no state be allowed to be a free state. The South was openly arming and financing political terrorism in the west in order to prevent places like Kansas and Nebraska from forming government 'of the people, by the people, and for the people.' The South was kidnapping Federal soldiers, assaulting Federal soldiers, and stealing Federal property. Furthermore, the south was refusing to recognize the legitimate electoral process in a fit of pique over not getting everything they ever wanted over slavery. Furthermore, the decision to fire on Fort Sumter was made with the sole purpose of blackmailing the middle south into joining the secession movement. Major Anderson had made it clear he would have to surrender the fort by the 15th April because of his supply situation...without a fight. It was a huge hint to the South as to a good strategy...but Davis and Walker believed they needed a war to coerce North Carolina and Virginia into joinging the Confederacy.
@@AnthonyMartinez-pr3fg the North heavily benefited from cheap cotton prices for their mills, don't kid yourself. The South fought the war over state's rights and the 10th Amendment, the North fought a war of aggression.
@@jimknowlton342 The confederates occupied the south, enslaved the people living there, and tried to undue everything Americans fought for in the previous century. The confederates were nothing more than redcoats in grey uniforms, fighting for their own version of monarchy. The USA was far too lenient; they should have hanged every last southern redcoat who attacked the union.
@@allent1152 over here we have color codes for what political party leaning states such as blue for leftist democrat states and red for right wing republican states. Lincoln was a republican with most northern states supporting red republican Lincoln vs Blue leftist southern democrat states. There is a myth that democrats like to push and that is that in the 1960s the southern democrats all changed to republican while the then republicans switched to democrat so they could feel better about being a part of the party that went to war to protect the evil institution of slavery and after the war the systemic state sanctioned racism brought about racial segregation laws and other racist laws. The fact is that there never was a flip flop. These racist idiots are just as democrat today as they were in the 1960s including the modern KKK and extremists who claim they are republican yet engage in democrat activities as anti American behavior and open racism, they are republican in name only, as much republican as Christian as they claim to be but I doubt if Jesus were real he’d very much agree with their behavior and hate.
@@keithwhisman No i know they like to say Lincoln is a leftist. Im just saying i dont think the channel meant anything by the color scheme they chose. I know full well of the flip flop lie they like to tell.
@@keithwhisman You realize that blue and red were only used when the networks began broadcasting election returns in color in the 1960s and that the colors had no other significance than allowing the viewers to distinguish which party had won the state's electoral votes? The colors were chosen at random and for best contrast; nothing more nothing less. If any color was used for the 1860 Republicans it was black, i.e. "black republicans."
The English had been fighting for the maintenance of the Union with France for hundreds of years. After having successfully defeated Napoleon they finished the job they started in the Independence war. When the dust settled all was unified under British control and ready for WW1.
The confederacy was actually massively supported by England. The British had economic interests in helping the confederates occupy the American south, and supplied them with warships and other ships designed to outrun American trade blockades, despite their declaration of neutrality. In the end, the confederacy was fighting the same war the redcoats had fought almost a century earlier; they wanted those in power to maintain their absolute dominance over the people, curtailing their rights at the whims of the land-owners. To the confederates occupying the south, England was a powerful ally; to the Americans elsewhere, England was the country who burned down the white house in the war of 1812. Sorry dude, but your history needs some learning.
The material produced from the slave labor of the south was what funded 90% of the northern revenue... really hate that yall left that our at the beginning...... wish the trust had shead a little more light on the Confederate perspective during its attempts to have the federal forces to surrender.. the telegrams are very interresting reads. In the end, good video!
Check your facts dude; the confederate slave trade was of massive financial benefit to England, and international interests, but not the USA. New York City alone outperformed the entire southern economy simply due to the economies of scale. This is why England had to officially maintain a neutral stance while still supplying warships and blockade runners to the confederate invaders; England wanted to benefit from that confederate southern slave-labor, but didn't want to risk war with the USA.
Bender Rodriguez Who was convicted of treason? Lincoln invaded Virginia, treason as defined in the Constitution (Article III Section 3). You won’t learn that watching Battlefield Trust videos.
@CelticSaxon88 The confederates were occupiers in American lands. They sought to enslave the American people in order to maintain their wealth at the expense of human misery. The whole nation was our nation; the confederates were simply invaders, and should never have been shown mercy at the end.
So was it 90% complete or "Nowhere complete" since you say both . Not even getting into the War was over slavery or it was a Civil War since neither is true . You know , I have watched a few of your videos and as disappointed as I am to say it , I get the impression this is a simple propaganda channel since every video I have watched has been full of half truths and plain , outright wrong information .
Thank you for you interest, we are sorry that you feel that way. We have proudly saved over 50,000 acres of hallowed battlefield ground and it is our mission to tell the stories of what happened on that land. You can learn more about us here: www.battlefields.org/about
@ taloob What does my sleep schedule have to do with the truth ? I notice you didn't answer my question either .... Was Fort Sumter 90% complete or nowhere near complete when the attack started ? Those are two different statuses which imply two different things .
Always one bonehead who cant answer a simple question but just HAS to comment even though he doesn't know what the answer is . Never understood why people would want to show how uneducated they are in public but you seem pretty comfortable with it so thanks anyways but I prefer a genuine conversation instead of talking to a grunting monkey .
By the request of many of our viewers, we have added narration to our already existing original set of battle maps. We appreciate your support and hope you enjoy the update! For our more modern animated maps, please visit the top of our Animated Battle Maps playlist th-cam.com/play/PLZrhqv_T1O1sdxRNm5SNc6cGSWr7xiWZs.html.
We need a stones river pls
Going back there to raise that flag like that after the end
This narrator is boss.
Feels weird knowing all of this history while living in Kings Mountain NC but at the same time traveling to all of these places be it for vacation or work!
I still find it HILARIOUS that the South was angry about Lincoln being elected. The Southern Democratic Party ran their own candidate in the election and split the Democratic vote with the Northern Democratic candidate
. Seriously, like WTF did you think was going to happen, duh.
Also, Lost Cause twits droning about the "War of Northern Aggression" when the CSA fired the first shots. /eyeroll
The North goaded the South to fire upon them, it was a false flag. The South had no reason for war, they were no longer part of the United States. Lincoln wouldn't allow them their independence which is why he needed this battle. An excuse for war. Shortly after, he made the outrageous call for 75,000 men across the nation. Other Southern states balked at this and left the Union.
🤣😂🤣😂
And where was the 1860 Democratic convention? Charleston!
I live in SC mount pleasant and have a view of it from my dock. Watched this on the dock and looked at it and said, „wow“
Less than a 100 men, stood against 4000! What bravery! the kind of quality that both sides respects.
Not at all, they only needed to duck and cover, occasionally firing back. There would be no storming of the fort. Getting the south to fire on the fort at all was the objective.
@@Rex-gu1bu Someone here has done some research...you are 100% correct
@@Rex-gu1bu Firing on the re-supply ship was an act of war. In truth the North did not want the war.
@@garyhenderson690 The yankees were offered the chance to leave twice but refused. they wanted to be fired upon.
@@bluegrassreb1of course they wanted to force engagement. So the union navy would've had a reason to push into the harbor so he probably thought.
I just wanna know what happened to the widowed sergent and his daughter
They're dead
@@nickroberts6984 I think he means what happened to them during the capture of that fort.
@@danielkohli1542 lmao
@Ronnie Willet yeah but what about the rest of the war. Did his daughter ever marry? Did he serve during the rest of the war? What work did he do in the army?
@@natedlc854 His name was Robert E. Lee. Once captured, he heard a speech about Confederacy and said, "Good point." That's why he switched sides. His daughter, Amy Lee. She's immortal.
I just went to fort Sumter last week. Because I was on vacation. It was very cool to see. Can’t believe it’s still standing.
I live in Salford uk, my granddaughter bought me a very good book about the beginning of the civil war in USA, focusing on the events of Fort Sumter, I read it with great interest and I feel a connection with the soldiers defending Sumter, I don’t know why , maybe the injustice of slavery, but I was intrigued by the actions of Anderson and also fascinated with the history of the whole thing, god bless all the working class young me on both sides who perished. ( by the way the book is called “brother against brother- the war begins “
How did the fort go from 90% complete to far from complete?
I presume that the walls and structure of the fort was 90% complete, while the interior and defenses like cannons were far from complete.
When the walls are the only thing between you and a 12 pound ball of lead... 10% looks a lot bigger
@@Crazyfrog41 Iron, actually. Cannon balls didn't fit tightly in the bore, plus most of the artillery in those days was smoothbore. So they didn't have to be made of lead or anything that soft. Besides, cast iron projectiles were better for breaking walls.
@@schechter01 you are correct, I actually knew that, I just forgot in the moment... Just replace lead with iron and my original point still stands
little piece of info as well. James Island along with Morris Island is where the 54th Massachusetts black regiment fought and ultimately fell at Fort Wagner on the southern end of Morris Island. It's inspirational that the same location that sparked the civil war was beaten back by those who they tried to oppress.
So that's the site where the War of Southern Aggression started?
Southern aggression actually started months before when, even before seceding, militias in Texas and Arkansas began seizing federal military property and besieging U.S. forts. There was no shooting, but several forts were forced to capitulate and American soldiers were taken prisoner.
Less than 100 years after the War of 13 Colonist Aggression.
Thanks!
who else is here because of distance learning
Me
Oh, so are your schools posted this video for history class? This is fun to me. I hope I can learn these kind of stuffs in my country's history class.
Not I. TH-cam is a poor source for education.
Me
na i just love the civil war
Is there a site for all the old original pictures?
check out Harper's magazine
Library of Congress' website. All of Matthew Brady's (and everyone who worked for/with him) war photos have been digitized and available for public viewing.
All of these videos are amazing, I wish they could do more.
what is wrong with you
@@frostwy2001 ?
@@frostwy2001you okay, sweetie?
A house divided against itself cannot stand.
Amen...
And it didn't.
Mr.Kuhels(cool) class!! Skinner West Elem Chicago, IL we are the superstars and you are one too!!!
Thanks for mentioning the Star of the west and The Citadel. Regimental Band/ Class of 1984
the image used at the 6:39 mark is the Battle of Battery Wagner. Not Sumter
"...For the next 20 months..." Battery Wagner was a part of the ongoing attempt to capture Charleston, and it actually went on for quite a bit more than 20 months. It was actually captured without a fight when Sherman turned north in Jan. '65 and D. H. Hill (IIRC) pulled his forces out and joined with Johnston rather than getting pinned in and being forced to surrender.
who else is here for class >o
me
Meeee haha
yeppp
@@juliegrace6348 oh hi Julie haha
@@juliegrace6348 Haha
Question . was the commander of fort Sumter from Kentucky ? It seems like i heard that somewhere.
During the battle Robert Anderson commanded the fort, and yes he was born in Louisville, Kentucky. You can learn more about him here: www.battlefields.org/learn/biographies/robert-anderson
He was also ordered to KY after he returned from Ft. Sumpter, but he resigned either in late '61 or early '62 d/t bad health. IIRC he then moved to NYC.
Who else here cuz of distance learning?
Me
Great video man 👍🏾
The Citadel cadets, Haynes & Pickens fired the first shots at the Star of the West Union supply ship of the Civil War. Class of 80.
Like the avatar
Love it
I liked the context of the situation at Fort Sumpter
Why is there even an argument by anyone stating that it was "the South that was invaded" when this & history clearly shows the opposite.
The 'lost cause' mythology seeks to try to justify the awful choices...because it is painful to recognize that your ancestors were foolish and evil people...and that those dumb choices caused the deaths of millions and the near total destruction of your home.
It is far easier to blame this catastrophe on an outside group...rather than accept responsibility for it and move on.
The flip side is that ALL of our ancestors were foolish and evil people...and no one can really look back on their past with a perfect sense of pride. The whole thing is a pride trap...and a way that evil cycles in life.
@@dclark142002my heritage is the confederacy, and I’m proud. (Obviously not proud of slavery and stuff, sure y‘know what I’m tryna say) but I’m proud of how the America I lived in persevered
@@Syrup_Boi Same here. This event was not all the South's fault. Our form of government has allowed for various secessionist movements to crop up whenever a region feels vulnerable in Congress. What we should learn from this event is that our system has a weakness to be wary of.
I don't understand why Fort Sumter was the start of the Civil War. If the Confederates had never fired on the fort, would the war never happened? What was the US government doing for the months that the CSA declared independence?
The USA needed to build up its forces before it could hope to retake the occupied southern states. They had just lost a massive amount of military strength in the area, and were in no position to defend themselves from an insurrection this massive. Given enough time to prepare, the north would have eventually fired first to emancipate the south.
Secession was legal, and Lincoln didn't want to appear as an aggressor. There was some hope that the seceding states would voluntarily return to the Union; however, a case can be made that Lincoln maneuvered the Confederacy into firing on Fort Sumter- an entirely legal action, since the Confederates were not forced to do so. It's also worth remembering that Fort Sumter was the property of the United States government.
@@manilajohn0182 Undoubtedly he maneuvered them into firing the first shots or "losing face" which at that point they couldn't afford to do.
@@indy_go_blue6048 Frankly, loss of face wasn't a factor imho. Personal pride 'may' have been one. Short- sightedness was the probable reason, because Fort Sumter had been the property of the United States for twenty- five years, and had never been part of the Confederacy.
Until Lincoln was inaugurated, the lame duck Buchanan administration was letting the rebels have their way with a variety of bloodless attacks on American forts, ships, and other property. The reason Fort Sumter triggered the war was because Lincoln was in office and decided to take seriously the president's duty to suppress insurrection (or defend the nation from foreign enemies, if you'd like to argue that the Confederacy was a legitimate nation and not a rebellion).
thanks.
I'm glad that the North won. Our nation stayed together and is much better off for it.
United we stand, divided we fall 🇺🇲
Well done! 😊
The battle that started the War of Southern Aggression
There was no war of Southern aggression, that is propaganda.
@@Rex-gu1bu A. The southern states secceeded from the Union. B. The confederates shot first. C. The confederate army soon entered northern territory.
Remind me, how is all of that not aggression?
The War of Southern Treason would be more accurate, since both sides were quite aggressive (though at different times) when their leaders demanded it.
@@Kojak0 the south could have ended the whole war because the battle of Bull Run was literally right in front of the capital of Washington. But they were more concerned about defending there homes. They wanted nothing to do with the capital because they had already formed their own nation. Does that sound like southern aggression to you? It was a defensive war for the south
@@Redbeardedbadass you can only truly go on the defensive after you've aggravated someone enough to attack you....
0:56 - John "Chandler Bing" Breckinridge
excellent.
I'm here for learning no matter how far the distance or different or differences
Please do a video about Fort Jefferson!!
What happened there?
It's a stroke of brilliance, really, when you think about it. Lincoln and Anderson both knew that Sumter would fall; it was desperately undermanned and completely cut off from reinforcements and supplies, unlike the surrounding rebel strongholds. Firing on the Confederates would have been suicidal, not only literally in the context of Sumter itself, but also politically, as it would have made the North the aggressors, likely swaying public sentiment in the South's favor. All Anderson had to do was sit back and wait for the rebels to lose their patience, and then simply let the inevitable play itself out. Basically, the North baited the South into a one-sided game of chicken, successfully making the latter the instigators of the war.
do i have permission to use this as my summary for the video💀💀💀
Your comment is art
Yep.. The biggest mistake the Confederates made was firing on the Fort. Lincoln had no choice but to go to war and would had started it anyway. But it's likely that world opinions would had come to the Souths side if the North would had started the war. Thus possibly bringing England ,France or both into the fight on the Southern side ..
@@patrickg301 France was busy of invading Mexico by this time, so I doubt they would’ve bothered.
The rebels had already besieged and seized a number of forts, just not during the Lincoln administration. It didn't take a lot of genius to guess that the fire eaters would come for Sumter next.
Major Robert Anderson is my 3rd cousin, 6 generations removed. I do a lot of family history, and after 50 years, I have concluded that I'm related to almost everybody (as we all are at some level). One of Anderson's sets of great-great-grandparents were William Williams (1665-1712) and Jael Harrison (1674-1734). This same couple was one my sets of 8 x great-grandparents. - Dr Dave Menke, Tucson. PS: history is far more interesting when one realizes one's relatives were part of history.
no
@@gabrielatyia6703 ?
As far as I can ascertain I had only one relative, a cousin x? times removed who fought in the ACW; most of mine came after the war. But he has the distinction of having served in an Indiana cavalry regiment and was twice captured by Bedford Forrest's men. He spent the last 10 months of the war in a PW camp then died 10 years later.
@@indy_go_blue6048 My great-grandfather, Captain H. H. McAleney, served in the 11th Illinois Cavalry, Company K, under General Grant at the Siege of Vicksburg, spring and summer 1863. He met his wife during the siege and they married in Vicksburg after General Pemberton surrendered and moved to Atlanta to invent Coca Cola.
I mean, everyone is related
Adam and Eve
Nice vid!
I don't recall the 54th assaulting Sumter. But still enjoyed the video.
I think I read that the 54th's attack on Fort Wagner was part of the campaign to regain Fort Sumter.
🇺🇸💥🐴🗽
Nick Roberts ahh that’d make more sense. Thank you!
54th assaulted Fort Wagner. Fort Sumter was retaken by the Union in 1865.
@@nickroberts6984 It was part of the campaign against Charleston, though had the city been taken Sumpter would've fallen by default.
If I could get a loop of that singing at 7:10 I'd never open my eyes again.
Every video about Fort Sumter needs to begin with the conclusive evidence that the United States, not South Carolina, owned Fort Sumter:
"That the state do cede to the United States, all right, title, and claim of South Carolina to the site of Fort Sumter and the requisite quantity of adjacent territory..."
South Carolina legislature "Reports and Resolutions of the General assembly", page 115.
My ancestor is tied to the Star of the West. "Captain William Moore, brother-in-law to the ship’s captain and a steamboat captain himself, wishing a remembrance, visited the wreck and obtained a port hole window that is a part of the family’s mausoleum in Greenlawn Cemetery." My dad told me the port hole was destroyed by vandals as his father told him. But after the cemetery underwent a cleanup in the last 3 years they found it in storage instead. It's now back at it's rightful place. Also the family 'story' was embellished over the years. My dad believed the boat was one of the City-Class Gunboats and my ancestor went down with the ship. It was only in the last 5 years he studied our family history and realized the true history. But it's neat to be tied so closely to the start of the Civil War.
[ MY 3RD GREAT UNCLE WILLIAM H KENT COA 2ND LT 40TH VA INF CSA FOUGHT IN THIS WAR FORT SUMTER]
The bias is Subtle. Im impressed. As a teacher i hope im doing better.
hey, sup?
"git outta my house!"
But it's not your house...
"Reports and Resolutions of the General assembly" of South Carolina, page 115, which reads in part: "That the state do cede to the United States, all right, title, and claim of South Carolina to the site of Fort Sumter and the requisite quantity of adjacent territory..."
So...not your house. Maybe the dog house on the edge of your property that you sold to someone else, but seller's remorse doesn't give you the right to start shooting at someone.
At 4:18 it says that the Star of the West approached as an unarmed ship. This is not true. I believe the SoW was escorted by two other Union ships. The SoW also had 200 armed soldiers beneath decks. Charleston's forts were South Carolina's land. It was always the property of South Carolina. Any land leased to the Federal Govt. was a lease, not a grant. If the North did not want war, they should have left Charleston instead of trying to resupply it with men of arms.
"That the state do cede to the United States, all right, title, and claim of South Carolina to the site of Fort Sumter and the requisite quantity of adjacent territory..."
South Carolina legislature "Reports and Resolutions of the General assembly", page 115.
@@aaronfleming9426hit him with the receipts and he won’t reply back I bet. 😂
I couldn't hear the narrator because the music was too loud.
Where it all began
Atun-Shei Films disagrees 🙅 look him up, a lot of fun.
If I am correct no one died at the first battle for Fort Sumter. The reasons stated seem to be erroneous, the war was unnecessary, the struggle was more about economics. Britain wanted America divided, smarting from the lose of their colony, and falsely encouraged the South. The Czar sent his navy to block the influence of Britain and France. Lincoln did not free all the slaves, only those in the South in 1863, so the Blacks would become guerilla soldiers. After the war we all became slaves to the Federal system and the bankers. Jackson at the beginning of the conflict told Davis that with 20,000 troops he would deliver Washington, DC in two weeks. Davis did not support Stonewall, the war was lost upon his death.
Slavery was the cause of the war, because that's why the South fought it. They made it clear in their statements and secession documents that slavery was their cause. I suppose you are right that the war was about economics, in that slavery was so profitable for the South that they were not willing to let it peacefully go into terminal decline.
Even though Lincoln did not free all the slaves at the time of the Emancipation Declaration, the job was finished with the 13th Amendment to the Constitution that outlawed slavery. That was Lincoln's and the Republican party's goal the whole time. However Lincoln was a pragmatist and knew he couldn't get legislation through without enough support from Congress. He could get enough support from new states that entered the union as long as slavery was blocked from being allowed in those states. With his election, Lincoln's long term strategy was inevitable. The southern slave states knew this as well which is why they succeeded. There wasn't huge popular support for slavery even in the southern states which is why the southern leadership emphasized states' right more than keeping slavery. But the primary issue was always slavery. There would have been no civil war without the issue of slavery.
There were many more artillery shots dropped in Richmond or Atlanta then fort Sumter
War is awful.
Maybe Davis and Walker should have thought of that before assaulting a fort whose commander told you would surrender in three more days...just to try to force the upper southern states into secession...
Instead of repeating 'slave labor ran south's economy,' it may be more correct to phrase it 'sotherners became rich with the help of free slave labor.'
0:28
me doing school work
yessir
Before even watching the video, I predict Castle Pinckney with its two defenders will hold back the rebels until the end of the War.
Im here cuz of distance learning WBU
Me
Me
still bro damn @@fool4563
Love that old saying nation divided????well as time turns divided again again again....ohhh why?ohhh I don't know?okkk
Payback is a mother
The Rebs wanted Fort Sumter "reduced", so......
🇺🇸💥🗽🐴
“I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so.”
- Abraham Lincoln, March 4th, 1861
Antislavery? 🤔
Joshua Clements The war was about slavery by 1863.
Chaotic WJ In 1863, the cause switched to slavery only superficially. Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation was issued as a “war measure” to prevent the British and/or French from intervening in a war the Union was losing.
“It had got to be midsummer 1862. Things had gone from bad to worse, until I felt that we had reached the end of our rope on the plan of operations we had been pursuing; that we had about played our last card, and must change our tactics, or lose the game! I now determined upon the adoption of the emancipation policy.” - Abraham Lincoln
Lincoln’s Proclamation only applied to “any State or designated part of a State, the people people whereof shall then be in rebellion...” Meaning, States that did not recognize Lincoln’s authority to begin with.
The Proclamation also excluded regions of the Southern States under Union control. “Louisiana, (except the Parishes of St. Bernard, Plaquemines, Jefferson, St. John, St. Charles, St. James Ascension, Assumption, Terrebonne, Lafourche, St. Mary, St. Martin, and Orleans, including the City of New Orleans)...and Virginia, (except the forty-eight counties designated as West Virginia, and also the counties of Berkley, Accomac, Northampton, Elizabeth City, York, Princess Ann, and Norfolk, including the cities of Norfolk and Portsmouth[)]”
In the words of Secretary of State William Seward, “Where [Lincoln] could, he didn’t. Where he did, he couldn’t.”
At the Hampton Roads Conference in 1865, Lincoln told his friend Alexander Stephens that Georgia could postpone the passage of the 13th Amendment, as long as Georgia ‘rejoined’ the Union.
“Preserving the Union” (centralization) was still the ultimate goal even towards the end of the War. It was Lincoln’s unwavering desire to couple emancipation with the colonization of freed slaves. www.amazon.com/Colonization-After-Emancipation-Movement-Resettlement/dp/0826219098
Personal vs political views. He hated slavery but he wasn't an abolitionist, and also felt he had no constitutional right to ban slavery where it already existed. Well since the South withdrew from constitutional protection (to quote Sherman IIRC) that didn't apply anymore. But in 1861 he had to be very careful so KY and MO wouldn't secede. To quote Lincoln, "I pray that God is on our side, but I must have Kentucky."
It was about slavery, the expansion of slavery in federal territories mind you, which in turn would have affected the continuation of slavery in the south in the long term. Thus, the seccession was about slavery, AND the war was about seccession.
@@augustosolari7721 But why was the "expansion of slavery" important to Republicans? Because they were dedicated segregationists. When they say they're "anti-slavery" they mean "anti-black" because they were against race-mixing, and the labor competition that slavery brought. More importantly, the 3/5 would lead to a greater Southern representation in Congress if those States became "slave states" through popular sovereignty. If the secession was about slavery, why didn't any of the seceded states accept the Corwin Amendment and return to the Union?
Being retired military, I don't see anything civil about war. Semper fidelis. Thanks for the education about our history.
Southern war of aggression
the original Jan 6th
War of Northern Aggression indeed...
One only has to read the comments to realize the ACW still isn't over while another civil war is close at hand.
One hopes not...as the resolve to destroy that old set of viewpoints is exceptionally strong.
May the South rise again!
idk bout this one chief
It's amazing and Southerners say the North invaded the South that's why they were fighting. They started the war. We finished it.
Carolina seceded so why should federal troops remain on their land?
No the south finished it the north started it the north didn’t force the south to surrender General lee did to stop the blood shed both sides could of went on killing each other by General made sure it would stop and the south won the last battle of the war...
@@unknown-dq6df All the south had to do was say we are breaking away from the Union. No shots needed to be fired unless the Union fired firey. Problem is, all the first blood was drawn by the South.
Substitute red for gray, and we know who the new enemy is -- 160 years later.
online school
You lost me at Lincoln was anti slavery
He was, and was adamantly opposed to the spread of slavery to the territories, but he also realized it was protected by the Constitution and could do nothing about it where it already existed. Ironically the 15 former slave states could still block the ratification of the 13th-15th amendments.
Is anyone still claiming that the Civil War was about state rights and not slavery?
Fort Sumter was a sacrificial lamb offered up by Abraham Lincoln. Lincoln knew the war was inevitable but didn't want to be the one who fired the first shot
Chris's your navy with that black chick
The movie glory is where i learned fort sumter was a very defensive fortress .
Sumter wasn't in glory. The fort they attacked was a fort defending a fort which defended Fort Sumter. Needless to say, the Confederates held Sumter until the end of the war.
@@Sphere723 Fort Wagner
Fort Wagner
“On January 20 [South Carolina Governor Francis] Pickens suddenly sent a boat to Sumter with a supply of fresh food. Two hundred pounds of beef. Fresh potatoes and turnips. Other things. The men happily unloaded it and rushed in to the mess hall. A feast was planned. Then [Major Robert] Anderson heard about its arrival. He sent word immediately to pack up those provisions and send them back. He would not permit Francis Pickens to act Lord Bountiful, the plantation master deigning to be generous to his “people.” The garrison returned to its sorry diet of dubious pork and iffy hardtack. [Dr. Samuel] Crawford’s diary made increasing note of their lack of provisions.”
- Detzer, David. Allegiance: Fort Sumter, Charleston, and the Beginning of the Civil War. New York City, NY:
Mariner Books. 2002. Print. [page 181]
Imagine the fortitude necessary to do such a thing, to turn away good food while your supplies run dry, in order to keep your morals in good order. Anderson was good man, and we shouldn't think low of those in his command for eagerly accepting the food...may we all have that strength should America's enemies once again try to dominate us.
@@laizalott Anderson wanted to abandon Fort Sumter, but was waiting for orders from Lincoln (which never came). He could have simply left the fort, like most other did after the State where the forts were seceded. Negotiation saves lives, not stubborn posturing towards a group that no longer wants you in their country. Bad decisions all around, it was entirely avoidable.
@@joshuaclements9684 "Their country"? Fort Sumter was the property of the United States, my friend.
@@manilajohn0182 Incorrect, South Carolina seceded December 20th, 1860.
@@joshuaclements9684 So what? Fort Sumter was the property of the United States.
God Bless Dixie. The South Will Rise Again
This was the opening act of a 4 year struggle between North and South that would lead to over 1 million Americans on both sides dead.
Bullshit!
The xenophobic icicle proximally help because rabbit behaviourally extend amongst a graceful trunk. aware, important eggnog
Google translate 🕵️🎑
Debatable
They got the list of causes of the Civil War straight from the Union Army recruitment propaganda. Only one CSA state mentioned slavery in its secession declaration. Slavery was an issue, but so was blatant disregard of state's rights. If a state votes into a relationship, and the relationship goes sour, it should be able to leave the relationship.
Lol, what were the state rights they were fighting for exactly?
Apparently you've never read the original seven states secession documents, all of which mention slavery as well as Stephen's "cornerstone" speech. Neo-Confederates need a different argument. Btw, "Union recruitment propaganda" was about saving the Union, not destroying slavery.
The disregard of State's rights argument only holds water if you understand that the rights being trampled were those of free states. Remember, Dred Scott essentially said that no state could declare any slave free for any reason...and could not outlaw slavery within their borders so long as any other state in the union had not done so.
Free citizens of, say, Massachusetts could be kidnapped and made slaves without due process...just because someone from Virginia claimed they owned them.
No one was killed. The only injury was to the Union's pride. And for that, Lincoln started a war that killed a million.
Confederates: *shoots at Americans, steals land and supplies*
Americans: This means war!
This simp in 2020: LinColN StaRTeD A WaR oVEr nOThINg!
@@laizalott As they had seceded union troops were acting as an occupying force at this point.
@@Psyclonknight Fort Sumter was the property of the United States government.
@@manilajohn0182 Then they should have dismantled it
@@Psyclonknight Why?
The South may have fired the first shot, but it was the North that started occupying Southern territory. In my minds that makes the North the aggressors in this, they push the South into this.
And I say this as a Pennsylvanian.
It was going too start, one way or another. President Lincoln had an agenda too complete. It was the most terrible war ever.
@@constantdarkfog49 Can't argue with that, it was like a festering wound from the start. There wasn't anyway to stop a war from happening as both sides were entrenched with their views so deeply.
The confederate states were ordering the seizure of federal arsenals in the deep south before Sumter. Sumter was not necessarily the first aggressive actions the confederates took. But it is where the first shots were fired.
The confederates invaded the USA, occupied its lands, and enslaved its people. There was no north and south, there was the USA, and the rebels who sought to destroy it. The confederates were basically redcoats.
The South was stealing citizens from northern states to use as slaves.
The South was demanding that no state be allowed to be a free state.
The South was openly arming and financing political terrorism in the west in order to prevent places like Kansas and Nebraska from forming government 'of the people, by the people, and for the people.'
The South was kidnapping Federal soldiers, assaulting Federal soldiers, and stealing Federal property.
Furthermore, the south was refusing to recognize the legitimate electoral process in a fit of pique over not getting everything they ever wanted over slavery.
Furthermore, the decision to fire on Fort Sumter was made with the sole purpose of blackmailing the middle south into joining the secession movement. Major Anderson had made it clear he would have to surrender the fort by the 15th April because of his supply situation...without a fight. It was a huge hint to the South as to a good strategy...but Davis and Walker believed they needed a war to coerce North Carolina and Virginia into joinging the Confederacy.
The South was right, the north had the might.
any side that advocated for the right to own other people, is never right.
The South was a slave empire that deserved to lose.
@@AnthonyMartinez-pr3fg the North heavily benefited from cheap cotton prices for their mills, don't kid yourself. The South fought the war over state's rights and the 10th Amendment, the North fought a war of aggression.
@@jimknowlton342 The north fought to preserve the Union, the south fought for slavery. After all, it was founded on the principles of slavery.
@@jimknowlton342 The confederates occupied the south, enslaved the people living there, and tried to undue everything Americans fought for in the previous century. The confederates were nothing more than redcoats in grey uniforms, fighting for their own version of monarchy. The USA was far too lenient; they should have hanged every last southern redcoat who attacked the union.
Tbh the south should've won
Nah the North winning was for the best of everyone invovled, except rich slave owning aristocrats
Only people with 0 accomplishments think their skin color is an accomplishment
I quit watching when you decided to paint the Lincoln Republican union states blue and southern democrat states Red. There was no flip flop.
I suppose we'll have to paint FL blue as well. And GA and TX. SC?
The union did wear blue uniforms. You know colors are colors, not political parties right?
@@allent1152 over here we have color codes for what political party leaning states such as blue for leftist democrat states and red for right wing republican states. Lincoln was a republican with most northern states supporting red republican Lincoln vs Blue leftist southern democrat states. There is a myth that democrats like to push and that is that in the 1960s the southern democrats all changed to republican while the then republicans switched to democrat so they could feel better about being a part of the party that went to war to protect the evil institution of slavery and after the war the systemic state sanctioned racism brought about racial segregation laws and other racist laws. The fact is that there never was a flip flop. These racist idiots are just as democrat today as they were in the 1960s including the modern KKK and extremists who claim they are republican yet engage in democrat activities as anti American behavior and open racism, they are republican in name only, as much republican as Christian as they claim to be but I doubt if Jesus were real he’d very much agree with their behavior and hate.
@@keithwhisman No i know they like to say Lincoln is a leftist. Im just saying i dont think the channel meant anything by the color scheme they chose. I know full well of the flip flop lie they like to tell.
@@keithwhisman You realize that blue and red were only used when the networks began broadcasting election returns in color in the 1960s and that the colors had no other significance than allowing the viewers to distinguish which party had won the state's electoral votes? The colors were chosen at random and for best contrast; nothing more nothing less. If any color was used for the 1860 Republicans it was black, i.e. "black republicans."
He was supposed to marry a Scottish or a IRA LAND MINE PRINCESS
The English had been fighting for the maintenance of the Union with France for hundreds of years. After having successfully defeated Napoleon they finished the job they started in the Independence war. When the dust settled all was unified under British control and ready for WW1.
The confederacy was actually massively supported by England. The British had economic interests in helping the confederates occupy the American south, and supplied them with warships and other ships designed to outrun American trade blockades, despite their declaration of neutrality.
In the end, the confederacy was fighting the same war the redcoats had fought almost a century earlier; they wanted those in power to maintain their absolute dominance over the people, curtailing their rights at the whims of the land-owners. To the confederates occupying the south, England was a powerful ally; to the Americans elsewhere, England was the country who burned down the white house in the war of 1812.
Sorry dude, but your history needs some learning.
The material produced from the slave labor of the south was what funded 90% of the northern revenue... really hate that yall left that our at the beginning...... wish the trust had shead a little more light on the Confederate perspective during its attempts to have the federal forces to surrender.. the telegrams are very interresting reads. In the end, good video!
Check your facts dude; the confederate slave trade was of massive financial benefit to England, and international interests, but not the USA. New York City alone outperformed the entire southern economy simply due to the economies of scale.
This is why England had to officially maintain a neutral stance while still supplying warships and blockade runners to the confederate invaders; England wanted to benefit from that confederate southern slave-labor, but didn't want to risk war with the USA.
Nice made up fact!
Better w/out winners version of history
Oh, yeah... Cause traitors to the nation are trustworthy 🤣
Bender Rodriguez Who was convicted of treason?
Lincoln invaded Virginia, treason as defined in the Constitution (Article III Section 3).
You won’t learn that watching Battlefield Trust videos.
@CelticSaxon88 The confederates were occupiers in American lands. They sought to enslave the American people in order to maintain their wealth at the expense of human misery. The whole nation was our nation; the confederates were simply invaders, and should never have been shown mercy at the end.
So was it 90% complete or "Nowhere complete" since you say both . Not even getting into the War was over slavery or it was a Civil War since neither is true . You know , I have watched a few of your videos and as disappointed as I am to say it , I get the impression this is a simple propaganda channel since every video I have watched has been full of half truths and plain , outright wrong information .
Thank you for you interest, we are sorry that you feel that way. We have proudly saved over 50,000 acres of hallowed battlefield ground and it is our mission to tell the stories of what happened on that land. You can learn more about us here: www.battlefields.org/about
Sure buddy. Whatever you tell yourself to sleep at night.
@ taloob What does my sleep schedule have to do with the truth ? I notice you didn't answer my question either .... Was Fort Sumter 90% complete or nowhere near complete when the attack started ? Those are two different statuses which imply two different things .
@@I_am_Diogenes yup, gotcha. Right on
Always one bonehead who cant answer a simple question but just HAS to comment even though he doesn't know what the answer is . Never understood why people would want to show how uneducated they are in public but you seem pretty comfortable with it so thanks anyways but I prefer a genuine conversation instead of talking to a grunting monkey .
That’s the best ultimatum I’m the world 😂