Civil War Historian Rates 9 American Civil War Battles In Movies | How Real Is It? | Insider 

I knew he was going to rate "Glory" quite highly. Such a great film. Whenever Zwick is involved, you KNOW it's going to be heavy.

I was at the 154th anniversary for Antietam and Gary was there as well. I got to talk with him some that day - that was a treat indeed.

Seems to know his stuff and be well qualified for this. But why does he say you can't reload a musket/rifles musket with a socket bayonet attached? That's patently false

@@CrichtonNo5 He didn't say you can't. Watch it again. Word choice is extremely important if you're going to criticize what experts say.

@@7bootzy he said it is "all but impossible" to load a gun with the bayonet in the end, which is arguably false. I will agree with you that my previous comment was a tad too malicious in its message, but I still believe him to be in the wrong with this statement. I do historical reenactment in the Napoleonic era in Europe, and as a norm we always carry our muskets with the bayonet on and we reload them nonetheless without issue. It is true that it is slightly harder to load with the bayonet affixed, but still pretty easy to do.

Calm down

His lady must not be disappointed

Totally agree, very inspirational

@@TheDogGoesWoof69Political parties didn’t own slaves, people did. And those slave-owning people were “conservatives.” Abolitionists, on the other hand, were “progressives.” Do we need to spell it out any further?

@@nickrotunno7992 Idk why this comment came from out of nowhere unless u were talking to someone who deleted their comment. Either way you're mostly historically wrong

and that Denzel tear...

And the music!! It’s makes the film🥰

Matthew Broderick as Col. Shaw, dressing for a battle he knows he cannot win and will die in, is unbearably sad for me.

​@@josephhubisz8610He really plays that well. You see in his face and mannerisms the mix of pride, fear, and sadness. It had to be hard to know you were also leading many of your comrades in arms to their deaths.

My all-time favorite Civil War movie and one of my top movies ever. It is the Saving Private Ryan for that period. It has everything.

He didn't receive his medal of honor until 1900, thirty five years after the civil war......

@@anthonypeters6861 correct. Sent to him by mail even. Didn't get a ceremony.

Wikipedia says: "The action for which he received the Medal of Honor preceded that of any other African American Medal of Honor recipient; however, his medal was actually one of the last to be awarded for Civil War service.[1] Some African Americans received the Medal of Honor as early as April 1865."

In reality, William Carney was not the first African-American recipient of the MoH, he was the twenty-first. There are lots of MoH misconceptions out there, as demonstrated in this thread. The post-1919 MoH that we're familiar with is not the same MoH as the one that existed from the Civil War through WW1. In 1916-1919, Congress took several steps to elevate the MoH to the higher, far more exclusive award that we know today. One of those steps was the creation of a Medal of Honor Review Board in 1918, which resulted in 911 previously awarded MoH's being rescinded, although those recipients of rescinded MoH's were not required to physically surrender their medal. As a result of several strange (to modern eyes) MoH awards after that reformation, MoH criteria have been further adjusted and tightened in the years since 1919, most notably in 1942 and 1963. From the CW era when the MoH was created through WW1, the MoH was one of the few US medals in existence. They handed them out like candy for everything from mundane actions to bravery and anything in between, peacetime actions and civilians included. Using a MoH as a bribe or an "atta boy" wasn't uncommon. For example, 864 members of one regiment (27th Maine) got MoH's just for extending their service for a few weeks at a time when the government was desperate for troops to guard Washington. That regiment never served in combat, and even worse to modern eyes, due to faulty record keeping, only about 300 of the 864 who received the MoH actually extended their service for those few weeks. The majority of the regiment turned down the MoH bribe and went home after their original enlistment expired, and a few years later they received a MoH anyway (by mail, which btw was the most common way to receive a MoH back then). Apparently the MoH was seen as so common back then it wasn't even worth staying for a couple of weeks extra in Washington. Twenty-nine members of Lincoln's funeral detail also received the MoH. Out of the thousands of medical doctors who served in the Civil War, one civilian medical doctor (Mary Walker) received a MoH just for doing what physicians do, treating her patients. The list of such examples is long. Surely some of the MoH's given prior to the 1916-1919 reformation process and the 1942 and '63 amendments would also meet the modern MoH criteria, perhaps Carney's included, but many would not, even among those MoH's that were not rescinded in 1918. It was also very common for the MoH to be awarded years if not decades after the fact, and receiving the MoH back then typically did not come with any kind of ceremony. Again, don't confuse it with the modern MoH.

@@d23g32yes, but the date upon which he earned it was the earliest. He was not awarded it the first, true- but the actions he performed were, which is arguably more important.

Lmao

@@zoanth4 It wouldn't surprise me if he actually would know more than both Lincoln and General Lee if they were brought back to life because access to information was so slow back then. There was the telegraph but it was super limited if I'm not mistaken.

I think expert is perfect here as the next word would be master or mastery and let’s just say talking about the civil war and being called a master is 😅

You can't be overqualified as an expert. Weird comment

@@shadowprince4482 Believe it or not, Lincoln was so into the telegraph, he had it wired to the White House and was known to micro manage his generals. He had crews following behind troops to put up telegraph wires and extend railways. Lincoln understood technology was a great advantage, and used it to his advantage.

Love to see another Adelman that loves details as much as me!

Something about Ferris Bueller leading a regiment really is exciting

Amazing movie

That headshot with the cannon always sticks in my mind.

Or David Liechman. "Shall we play a game?'@@XSDX3R0

​@@XSDX3R0He did more in his day than we knew.

If you declare with your mouth, 'Jesus Is Lord' and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. -Romans 10:9

But the one who endures to the end will be saved. Matt 24:13 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. Mark 16:16 The one who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. John 6:54 Come join the One Holy Catholic and apostolic Church founded by Christ, the only Church that takes all of the data on salvation found in the Bible into account in their teachings on salvation.

The 48th PA had a lot Welsh immigrants or first generation in it!

​@@dizo-jp2tdThe heck are you weirdos doing here?

​@@gijoe508Please take your cannibalism and vampirism elsewhere, mm'kay?

If you declare with your mouth, 'Jesus Is Lord' and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. -Romans 10:9

Free State of Jones was horrible.

​@@dougmarkham6791 it's not perfect but at least it's not Gods and Generals.

​@@imnotyourfriendbuddy1883True dat!!

@@dizo-jp2td If you declare with your mouth, Hail Satan, and believe in your heart that Satan will raise you from the dead, you will be saved. Wisconsin 38:10/205

The only thing the movie got wrong. The real attack was from the south to the north for Fort Wagner. Not, south to north as portrayed in the movie

@@ds9109 This is true. Still really good.

Literally gives me chills Everytime I hear it!

Yes. I refuse to watch Dumb & Dumber after seeing a commercial with Daniel’s in it. He did such a phenomenal job in Gettysburg and then you see him carrying on like a 35 year old juvenile delinquent.

​@@mako88sbThat is is his mastery of his craft. The fact that he could pull off an utterly serious and an utterly comedic role.

@@mako88sb D&D is one of the best movies I ever watched.

The battle scene was not filmed on Little Round Top itself, but there is a scene of the Chamberlain brothers early on July 3 that was. They're supposed to be on Big Round Top at that point, but if you look closely you can see the feet of the Gouverneur Warren statue that they tried (and failed) to cover with branches, etc.

@@jspotter89 yeah. They tried hard to do things in the original places. I know from accounts that when Jeff Daniels did Chamberlains speech to the "defectors" he did it so well that some of the extras actually cried due to his emotional performance

ㄒEㄨㄒ ME±𝟏𝟑𝟐𝟑𝟐𝟖𝟗𝟎𝟓𝟎𝟖👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻💬💬 5:06

I agree. Bigger guns more powder guns evolving. More abled body people in the conflict. For the guns I look at very beginning of the american civil war smoothbore some flintlock still some converted to percussion cap some had percussion cap rifles then look at the end of the war. Then look into the 1870s and 1880s Rifles to early 1900s. Even pistols the confederates were able to get ahold of a lematte revolver which had an "underbarrel shotgun" its very interesting.

I bought a non firing colt revolving rifle I thought the tech and stories with that rifle were very interestingly cool. It turned a confederate unit away at snodgrass Hill in georgia they thought they were up against more men then they thought in reality it was a few companies with colts revolving rifle.

Longstreet definitely saw the future

Later he said that he had never heard of anybody grabbing a bayonet because they were pretty sharp. I'm pretty sure he has never seen or held a triangular socket bayonet before...

This was true for most of human history up until World War One. Even without gunpowder, horses and troops stir up a lot of dust. At the Battle of Cannae, for example, Hannibal deliberately planned on dust/sand being stirred up into the sunlight that would block the Romans' vision, which is why the Romans didn't realize they had gotten themselves surrounded. The American Civil War (and other wars during that time period) had similar problems on top of all the smoke from gunpowder. It's the reason people fought in formations with flags and instruments. It's impossible to coordinate any kind of maneuvers at the ground level. Even the natural elevation of hills and fields messes up a soldier's vision. Couple that with the inaccuracy of rifles and how devastating a cavalry charge could be (less so by the time of the ACW), fighting in blocks makes way more sense.

​@@nekrataaliafter ww1 we started using smoke grenades to generate the same concealment. I used dozens of them in Iraq. Nearly every military vehicle is equipped with launchers that deploy smoke grenades in all 4 directions 4 launchers a piece

yeah, when he said that i was like "what?". people were loading and shooting just fine with bayonets all over Europe since the early 18th century, long before the american civil war

most inconvenience a bayonet poses is in long term handling, thanks to the weight. But I have reloaded countless times both blanks and live rounds. His comment made me immediately question his knowledge and qualification.

@@lutzderlurch7877 And "bayonets are really sharp" preventing you from grabbing them...

@@denysbeecher5629 yeah, he seriously dropped the ball, there

That was the main reason socket bayonets were made. So you could load a musket while having a bayonet. The first bayonets that were made were plug bayonets and that went into the muzzle of the gun but that was back in the 16th century

9:39 Ƭx̷Ƭ Ꮇe±𝟏𝟑𝟐𝟑𝟐𝟖𝟗𝟎𝟓𝟎𝟖👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻💬💬

?@@paulkreider9441

Brilliant casting too. Matthew Broderick could be a descendant of Col. Shaw. The resemblance is incredibly strong.

Yeah, my father was a collector of civil war paraphernalia and owns 2 bayonets. Neither one of them has any signs of ever having sharp edges, but the points, they're going to go right in you with a little effort.

The issue with using a bayonet as a knife in the particular scene when he said that your hand is probably going to be slipping down the blade. It probably won't cut you, but it's not the most effective way of using it

My quibble as a vet and a former reenactor was that every time he held his arms up like he was shooting, he had awful form. His pretend butt-stock was nowhere near his shoulder. :)

10:18 Ƭx̷Ƭ Ꮇe±𝟏𝟑𝟐𝟑𝟐𝟖𝟗𝟎𝟓𝟎𝟖👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻💬💬

Agreed! It should be required viewing in American high schools. I was in 7th grade when it came out (13 yrs old) and it made a deep impression on me. It's a gutwrenching film, but an effective way to tell a very important story.

Young Denzel, a great musical score by James Horner, and oh , don’t forget Morgan Freeman, Cary Elwes, and Matthew Broderick.

Shaw was an amateur...

I've only seen Glory and DWW out of all these movies, and I'm so happy Glory got a good rating. It's one of my fav movies of all time I'll happily rewatch over and over, with a very underrated soundtrack.

@@nahor88 Glory is probably agreed upon as the model for a Civil War movie. Is it 100% historically accurate? No, but the cast, plot, performances and enough historical accuracy contribute to an amazing film. My general consensus on most of these movies as a student of history is that they alter events or make changes to the way technology worked or the way soldiers fought to make a more interesting film. Glory does this in less offensive and more necessary ways like shortening the range of the fights and having unrealistic looking artillery, but that is born out of necessity. Films like the Good, Bad and the Ugly just completely fabricate events to make them look interesting, thats when I take issue with historical inaccuracies.

@@lukesmith1003 I fully agree about Glory and the rest of your comment--but being upset about a lack of realism from a Sergio Leone film is like being upset when the Big Mac you demanded medium rare gives you salmonella

@@brendanfrost9775 I respectfully do not care about the names of producers. I’ve never seen Sahara, but that scene was highly unrealistic, and should expect to be criticized for it. May be an amazing movie for all I know, but that scene was supposed to be depicting history, and it failed to do so in many ways.

There are several accounts of that actually happening. Look up the "Angel of Fredericksburg".

Why? That happened in a couple battles during the war. Most notably with General John Adams at the Battle of Franklin, riding his horse up on the Union works, but eventually being shot down, despite some Union soldiers calling for him not to be shot, being a lone rider in front of them.

@@detsportsfan18 because it's funny

Jeezus…

Also, The Battle of Jenkin's Ferry wasn't fought in a field. It was on the banks of the swollen Saline River.

Ƭx̷Ƭ Ꮇe±𝟏𝟑𝟐𝟑𝟐𝟖𝟗𝟎𝟓𝟎𝟖👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻💬💬 8:28

peeved me a bit as well

I used to re-enact at Glorietta in the '70's. There is no river... but a creek/arroyo you could jump across with a running start. 😀

I agree. There was no mention in the movie that this is suppose to be Glorieta pass. As far as I remember the movie is set in 1865 or at least 1864 since some graves in the cemetary are marked 1864.

Me too. I make it a point of watching the film every July 2nd to commemorate the battle

Same here, watched gettysburg first time at 9 years old and have watched it at least once a year. Som tilmed more. Love the movie, especially how far they managed to stretch such a limited budget with the help of civil war reenactors

​@@alexiaNBCcourse you do

Both Gettysburg and God's and Generals are straight up revisionist, lost cause porn!!!!

The fact the it was filmed on the battlefield on location only made it better. I remember when growing up in area at the time; and for many kids in the area it was just the summer reenactment on steroids and we loved it. So much history in the Centeral Pa area...

That was a great miniseries. Grant is criminally underrated

@@cleverusername9369 amen

Where can I watch it?

It was one of my favourite novels as a kid. That scene in particular stands out, the generals and majors "not really feeling it" while the rank and file exchanged shots and wondered if today was the day they died, or if the just had to wait for another day in apathy and filth.

@@Corellian also the scene where the surgeons are tired and need to coffee up before going to work again. They said “we ran out of ether” so yes the hectic pace was to operate quickly before the supply of ether was gone.

I have the extended on blu ray but 4 hours and 20 minutes... ooff

@@Njbear7453 I know that is a long movie. But it does add context to the crazy Colonel. And the first scene with the union army balloon and the stalemate between the two sides. But oof it is long!

@@Irish381 I enjoyed the theatrical a lot ! I will definitely Watch the extended at some point

A shame the better part of the rest of the movie sucked

@@turinturambar8622 eh i liked the bullrun part, it was pretty accurate to how the battle ended, a shame it didnt show the entire battle with the skirmishes in the woodline.

...or the plethora of cartridge fed revolvers and rifles. 98% of the firearms were still cap and ball.

11:41 Ƭx̷Ƭ Ꮇe±𝟏𝟑𝟐𝟑𝟐𝟖𝟗𝟎𝟓𝟎𝟖👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻💬💬

Shaw took many black lives out of ego.

You can tell by a couple of the cuts you don't see his full statement, so he may have made some criticisms that didnt make it in to the video's final cut

They threw Col. Shaw into a mass grave with the rest of his regiment as an insult. His father's elegant and defiant response was that they were honouring the memory of his son by burying him with the men under his command.

@@Corellian bet thats what he wanted too.

You're right. It wasn't glorieta pass. The last third of that movie might take place in Missouri or Arkansas since Tuco at one point says they have to go through all of Texas to get to Sad hill cemetery.

I don't remember ever seeing or handling any sharp-sided triangle bayonets like Mr. Adelman described in my eight years of Civil War reeanacting, including a few original ones from the Civil and Crimean wars.

We got off easy. It could have been 3 days long, just like the battle.