That video didn't explain the most interesting part of that battle: The previous 3 months where the British set camp across the river, crossed it at night, climbed a steep cliff with a whole army and artillery and were on the field in the morning...
The whole documentary is 2 hours long. This is just an exerpt. This show was on tv something like 20 years ago, there are 17 episodes. They are all very interesting.
You forget the opening, the most interesting and human side of the war. Very sad, these unfortunate men were considered expendable. Cannon fodder. They fought and died in a far away land and then forgotten by their families.
@@fload46d The whole of Canada is way better than the USA. Everything about it is superior. People, correct English language, correct French language, decent cuisine, much better wines. Everything is better.
As an experiment, some friends and I tried to see if it was possible to sprint 100m in a military kilt, battle dress jacket and drill boots with gaiters, whilst playing a stirring March on the pipes. It proved possible, just, and the music suffered.
Have been piping in reenactments in the 80's and 90's (as well as during my -peacetime- national service in the Bundeswehr) and yes, it is feasible to charge playing a brisk strathspey (won't win you a first prize, though 😂) and it was indeed stirring up the spirits of all present! Met with a lot of real british army pipers of various real campaigns and they did confirm the effect upon their comrades in action!
Don't forget those instruments were instrumental ha ha in issuing orders during battle. I doubt they were playing a jig. I was just wondering if any of these soldiers had wigs on. I know it was heroically presented as such in period paintings but I highly doubt it. I know there's an English painting of Washington all dolled in a wig with a slave boy holding his horse. all complete fantasy but considered 'flattering' at the time.
I’m sure you’d be more proud to be Canadian, as soon as Trudeau gets booted out of office? As I’d be more proud to American, as soon as Biden gets booted out of office!…
This is story of my ancestors and my country. Being French Canadian I hold no hatred to the British because they us the country I proudly live in 🇬🇧 🇨🇦
When it came to the British Army during their explanation of the soldiers in both army's, they talked about how the Scottish and the Irish were forced to join the British Army because they had no other alternative (since the English had taken their land off them). However, I don't want you to get the wrong meaning and think that it was the dreaded last resort to join, because it wasn't. Now, this is because the British army was actually quite well civilized and set up for it's time (this includes well trained, well equipped, well paid and well fed). Meaning that a lot of the Scottish and Irish would of been willing and wanting to join the British army, instead of the hard life's that they had previously lived on on the farms of the North or in Ireland.
Academia is Anglophobic - and the people doing this video have been to uni. The reason they are anglophobic is that nobody has invented the word 'anglophobia'.
@@davewarwicker2512 The Quebecois wouldnt like it if anything positive was said about the English. I never met a more detestable group than the French Canadians.
This battle (and Plassey in India two years earlier) finally ened the long colonial contest between Britain and France that had begun at the end of the previous century. Apart from a few mishaps over the next fifty years or so Britain would emerge as a global super power.
I've read that the Seven Years' War was the first truly global/world war. Many of the engagements took place in far-flung colonies, a good number in the tropics. The colonial powers (particularly Grear Britain) knew they had to have mastery of the seas in an era of emerging capitalist trade and the prospect of unimaginable riches gained by ruthlessly exploiting the lands they invaded.
I have always been led to believe the French charged in that fearless way of theirs and at very close range the British fired and the double shot inflicted terrible damage,The French soldier did the same in 1914 with the bayonet and Cherry red trousers,if courage alone could carry the day but against machine guns its just not the case it wont win a war on its own.
@@davidmcintyre998 Reckless charges by European armies all but went away as the pike and musket displaced swords and axes. In order to be effective, muskets had to be fired en mass and only by order of the officers. The French were a classic example of unit discipline and were often equal to the British, but not at Quebec. Unit discipline was the reason small European armies defeated much larger armies during the wars of empires. They didn't charge head long into the enemy. Among the British, the Highlanders were the only regiments allowed to fight in the highland way. They were used as shock assault infantry, to be followed up with a quick closing by British Grenadiers to widen the breach. Grenadiers were the guys in the video wearing the tall miter headgear. Often they were hired from Hesse, Saxony, Brunswick, and other German states. Hessians fought for the British in the American Revolution.
@@OutnBacker The French due to reckless charges lost a large number of men in Allsace Lorraine in 1914 a very ill thought out tragedy and for some reason not one of the more well known at least outside of France episodes in the sh-t show known as the Great War.
@@davidmcintyre998 True, but I was talking about 1725-1815. That was the period of warefare prior to modern weapons. WW1 was an absolute slaughter, planned by elitists and paid for by 14 million soldiers.
Let’s not forget lots of Irish Scottish and English gentry became very rich from the British Empire all the working class were treated terrible by the ruling elite and let’s not forget it was a Scottish king who created the union of Great Britain, as an English man I am sick of hear the poor Irish and Scots the same happened to the English peasants.
Not quite; a Scottish king was the first joint ruler of England, Scotland and Ireland (James 1). His great grand-daughter, Anne, oversaw the union of Scotland and England.
The English only did to others what they had already done to their own people. The working population were virtual slaves in Elizabethan times, for example. 'Vagrants' might be put in stocks if they were looking for work outside their own parish, for instance. It's a tough story.
So, American Civil War reenactor here. While we're not using Dundas or the French manuals, we are using their descendants and for the same reasons. 'Weight of shot' matters. Attacking on pace and keeping your dressing [keeping your place in the line while moving forward] is actually harder to do than many people think. For one thing you have to have a good set of drummers... you'd be surprised how much that helps. And keeping formation is vital for keeping your regiment together under fire.
The battle of the plains of Abraham was not actually a battle but a skirmish, a surprise attack that lasted about 20 minutes. The British actually entered Quebec city by the backdoor without defeating the main French force. This is not the stuff of legends. The REAL battle happened the following spring, the battle of Ste-Foy, and the French won this one. However, the French were not able to take back Québec and had to withdraw to Montreal because British ships were coming through the Saint-Lawrence.
England celebrated this victory, but the Thirteen Colonies refused to pay the bill for these expensive military operations. A few years later in 1781, during the American Revolutionary War, a French fleet led by Admiral de Grasse, won the naval battle of the Chesapeake. This victory was strategically decisive, in that it prevented the Royal Navy from reinforcing or evacuating the besieged forces of Lieutenant General Lord Cornwallis at Yorktown, Virginia. The French were able to achieve control of the sea lanes against the British and provided the three Franco-American armies of Washington, Rochambaud and LaFayette with siege artillery and French reinforcements. These proved decisive in the Siege of Yorktown, effectively securing independence for the Thirteen American Colonies.
The taxes weren't there to serve the purpose of paying for the 7 years war. That would be utterly ridiculous, it was to pay for the defence of the colonies from further incursion.
What was it not paying tax without representation, Which I think the British answer was we the British people don't get any representation what makes you so special.
This British thing. Ok, let's nail this definitively. Britain comes from the word Britannia. Britannia was the territory the Romans conquered up to the Antonine Wall. It encompasses much of Scotland. Britain today is England, Scotland, and Wales. The United Kingdom is the uniting of two kingdoms. That of England and Scotland. Ireland became a part of the United Kingdom in 1801. After the Civil War in Ireland after 1916. The six counties of the North remained in the United Kingdom. I would remind you here that most British people have the mixed blood of all these places. Not so much Welsh, but English, Scottish, and Irish.
The Romans defeated the Scots at the battle of Mons Graupus. Very much further up from the Antonine wall. The Romans didn’t control Scotland the same as they didn’t control the North West of England. All villas from the midlands and South. All forts in the North showing Independence of mind verses subservience.
@@ralphraffles1394 some americans... the original settlers came from Ireland, Wales, Scotland, the Netherlands (Dutch surnames are still very common in America), and a surprisingingly large amount of Germans (ref. the Hamish for example.) Aparently, the original settlers had a vote at some point, as to which European language they were to use as the common launguage. English (being spoken and understood by the settlers from Brittain) won, but by a narrow margin over German (the language understood by most of the other European settlers)
The British always had a relatively small land army but a big navy. As such, the army was drilled to a very high level of unit discipline. Allowance was made for the Highland Regiments to keep their signature broadswords and to employ their wild charge, as the British had unpleasant experience at recieving it and therefor knew others woud be just as intimidated. British Regular Infantry were drilled to be the best at reloading their firelocks, as they were called, and to remain steady under fire. Fire discipline was the British army's stock-in-trade. They also perfected the school of bayonet tactics (Duke of Cumberland), which made each man responsible for protecting the guy to his right. It was devastating to the Scots at Culloden in 1746. The video showed the correct position of the musket when presenting the bayonet: Held shoulder high and level, musket in the short/recoiled position - ready to thrust, right hand holding the butt plate to be able to apply instant power and to achieve more stand-off reach. All other armies of the day held the musket at low guard at the waist, by the wrist and fore stock, which reduced initial reach by almost two feet.
Well, a very fine vid nice reenactment. I love this time of period. And if you guys know that the British at the start of The French and Indian War Were losing battles and sieges. The war that a young Virginian named George Washington and his militia, actions started and saw later British commander Major General Edward Braddock died in Monongahela in 1755 ambushed by the French and their Indians allies (Native Americans) and soldiers, such the "Braddocks massacre" and a lot of redcoats died that day and Washington was brave and lucky and managed to escape, at 1754 - 1755 campaign. Then the Siege of Fort William Henry 1757 and the Massacre of the British soldier men women and children from the Indians allied to the French was another win of Moncalm's. Montcalm was in Ticonderoga in 1758 and his victory against all odds then the tide of the war changed and we have Wolfe at the siege of Louisbourg 1758 won and took the city and then the final battle at Quebec that Montcalm's mistake to go and face the British out in the battlefield and not to stay in the walls and the errors in the battlefield as we see in this great video were a lot and that's all of the major battles of the war in America back then the British won the war the Fench lost the war. Some thoughts and info from my favorite period of wars and heroes and more again awesome vid!👍👍
"Seventeen hundred and fifty five... That was the year that Lisbon town saw the earth open up and gulp her down, And Braddock's army was done so brown and left without a scalp to it's crown..." Oliver Wendell Holmes The Wonderful One Hoss Shay
What she means is evicted by the Anglo Saxons who had been dominated by the warrior aristocrats of the Normans and have been Thier most realible pool of expendable cannon fodder
They make us brits sound so evil but infact NI and Scotland were part of the union at this time and all when she said they were driven into the army by force is a load of tosh 😂😂😂. 90% of the Scots were in the union. It was the highlanders who rebelled ... yano the Jacobite rebellion? Yeah we crushed them. Many of our soldiers at this time joined the army to seek a new life which they got but at the cost of there own life.
@@treerat7631 uhh that act of union was between the Kingdom of Great Britain and the Kingdom of Ireland England Wales and Scotland were already united by this time you could tell by their flags
My 7th grandfather Charles Grim of Winchester Virginia under General Wolfe was a pow at the battle of Quebec at 23 years old. He later got freed and ended up being very close friends with Daniel Morgan and drinking buddies. Charles grim was one of Daniel Morgan’s Dutch mess, closest confidants and part of Daniel’s elite sharpshooters
The man that brought my family name to this continent was one of those sent in America to fight in the 7 years war. He was a landless Alemannic German farm boy in what it now eastern France whom enlisted in a mercenary unit. The unit was contracted by the French crown to serve on a Compagnie Franche de la Marine ship bound to Acadia for the siege of Louisbourg in 1758. He deserted with most of his unit of "Volontaires étrangers" after a short time in the fortress. He ended up in Boston for a few years but settled in Quebec in 1765.
In Prussia everyone can live according to his farsoone said Friederich the Great and Germany took in most of the french protestants the hugenotes they lived in Mannheim Lübeck Berlin and they were for them a great asset for Germany. The biggest names were carrye actor roofer cavier in Lübeck entire cities came to Germany many Prussian generals Carl von Drais the inventor of the bicycle in Mannheim the birthplace of the car. I'm a German roofer my Gessele's name was Dieter von Nice and the great Huguenote was the the star of Africa was one of the best fighter pilots of all time Hans-Joachim Marseille with over 175 winst
Timber & hemp rope were vital war material for the Royal Navy. The British Parliament passed acts requiring North American colonies largely only trade with Britain with few exceptions. (The majority sourced from North America) The colonies in North America viewed themselves as British citizens who simply lived overseas, legally different from Crown Colonies, or Crown Dependencies, etc. Because of the specific enumerated legal rights and privileges from the various founding Letters Patent, Royal Charters, & etc. which allowed for above average colonial autonomy. (Think of English Marcher Lords, or German Counts Palantine who possessed greater than normal independence) The ruling aristocrats (the rich landed jerks) in the North American colonies didn't want to stop being British. They wanted to be dealt with as legal equals. Many wrote scathing (prejudiced) open letters insisting they weren't like colonies in places like the Indian Ocean populated by "natives". (Offensive but unfortunately legally correct at the time.) George Washington had living family in Oxford, England at the time of the American revolution. Similar arguments were used when the UK government finally admitted Irish MP's to the UK parliament. British citizens in the North American colonies were required to room & board British military personnel WITHOUT reimbursement in most cases. >> 3rd Amendment to the USA constitution explicitly bans requiring citizens to quarter soldiers. The number of soldiers required was proportional to individual wealth. For example, John Hancock, the wealthiest person in the colonies at the time had to feed & house hundreds of soldiers. Many of the USA founders only turned rebel because they were being financially bled by years long presence of British troops.
Germans fought against slavery and they were the only ones who kept the contracts with the natives. Texas Germans were also hunted by the Texas Rangers because they were against slavery. The Armisch and other German groups would never have used slaves. 100,000 Germans fought against slavery on the Union side, all well-trained soldiers! who fought in the Baden revolt. They held the bridges that led to New York and Washington since none of the southerners got through.
Ich bin mir sicher, dass man in den USA im 19. Jahrhundert Menschen unterschiedlicher Nationalität und ethnischer Herkunft finden kann, die im Bürgerkrieg für den Norden kämpften. Nicht alle kämpfenden Menschen kämpften für die Abschaffung der Sklaverei. Der Bürgerkrieg war kein Ein-Themen-Krieg. Ich vermute, Sie wollen vielleicht sagen, dass Deutschland nicht an der Sklaverei beteiligt war. Wir wissen natürlich, dass dies nicht der Fall war. Wir müssen uns nur den Sklavenhandel ansehen, an dem sie seit dem 17. Jahrhundert beteiligt waren, die deutschen Kolonien in Afrika und natürlich die Versklavung der Menschen während des Zweiten Weltkriegs. I am sure you can find in nineteenth-century people in the USA of many nationalities and ethnic backgrounds who fought for the North in the Civil War. Not all the people fighting were fighting to end slavery. The Civil War was not a one issue war. I am guessing you are perhaps trying to say Germany had not participated in slavery. We know of course this was not the case. We only have to look at the slave trading they had been involved in since the seventeenth-century, at the German colonies in Africa, and of course the enslavement of people during World War Two.
I don't like the fact that the head of state has no power. That is the queen. I simply can't stand living in a country without a head, an individual, a true human soul as the supreme leader of the nation. The Prime Minister is the servant of Her Majesty, not you! Some call that focus on the personality, Fascism; I call it the foundation of Civilization. I can't stand this country because of that, seriously call me traitor, but as a Québecois, that's how I feel about Canada.
Alan Mac your source? This battle was fought over 10 years after the Battle of Culloden where highland clans subsequently suffered cultural genocide. The banning of Gaelic, traditional music and dress, along with merciless evictions and forfeiture of lands.
i'm mostly of Scot descent with Acadian and Scot on my fathers side too some north american wakanabi native too scots who were rewarded for military service in Massachusetts so you might say my ancestors blood was spilled all over north america east not to mention northern france and belgium in ww1 i hope that's the end of it
fun fact. New Hampshire British Governor John Wentworth named the town of Wolfeborough (now simply Wolfeboro) after Lord Wolfe for his victory in at the Battle of Quebec. Lord Wolfe's regiment banners and memorial can be seen today inside Westminster Abbey.... They don't like it when you take cell phone pics of it.......
I like to console myself for this battle by telling myself that in the end it is the French army that lost the battle. not Canadians. the canadians on this day won her a place in the british empire. finally have little to see things from this angle
This omits how the British surprised the French by moving their army were the French thought it was impossible to move an army. That is what made it one of the greatest feats of arms in military history.
@@dalepeto9620 The 60th Rifles KRRC (60th Royal Americans) were members of The Wolfe Society which was passed onto The Royal Green Jackets. It’s interesting that The British Army have revived the Rangers name for the new SF regiment, Rangers first being raised in North America. Wolfe gave the 60th the motto Celer et Audax, the English version Swift & Bold has been carried forward into The Rifles via The RGJ. You are right about the uniform colours, 5th Bn Royal Americans changed to green jackets in the 1800’s when they became a rifle armed battalion.
My understanding of history is that the Scottish Lords started the clearances, and if you go to the bone it was the wife of a Scottish Lord who came up with the idea.
In the church of all hallows in Tottenham North London in the bell tower hangs the bell captured in the battle of qebec. Apparently this bell was the warning bell for the garrison.
@Eligar Esoo eligar what about gengis khan Attila the Hun Napoleon and the Romans are they going after them. they stole lots including thousands of slaves. not a chance.
2:16, Yes they destroyed the clan system. But if anything it was for the better; given how much of an oppressive system it was. The aspect of their lives being destroyed can work if these men had been kicked from their land (lord's land) during the land clearings.
@@racheltaylor6578 That’s a great bit of info, thanks. 4/5 of the English army at Culloden were actually Scottish. Lowland non Catholics against Highland Gaels. George Washington fought in the British army for nine years ( not a lot of people know that)!
The reasons for the loss of Canada by France: 1) The kings of France were never really interested in Canada and thus never seek to develop it or to populate it: in 1756 there were 70,000 French colonists for 1.3 million British colonists 2) The proof of contempt and disinterest of the king towards his subjects of Canada, is the cession in 1713 from Acadia to England even though the region was populated by French colonists 3) Throughout the war, the King of France sent only 6,000 men to Canada, while England sent 28,000 men to America in 1758 alone. 4) England has mastery of the seas, she can prevent French aid from arriving in Canada! 5) The King of France is mainly interested in the war in Europe and has invested all his forces completely neglecting America 6) The duality in the French high command between Montcalm and Vaudreuil the governor who interferes with the defense of the colony 7) Mistakes were made during the siege of Quebec, Montcalm had cards in hand that he chose not to play, in fact instead of throwing himself into a battle with an uncertain outcome Montcalm could afford to wait behind the fortifications. First, the season was well advanced and we were approaching the end of summer, in Canada winter was coming very quickly, especially since it was a very harsh winter, the English army could not have held up to it in the extreme cold. Then, reinforcements from Montreal were on the way, they would have taken the English army from the rear and forced it, thus, to give up the siege, but he chose to give battle, without delay, at the head of a troop composed of demoralized regulars professional soldiers and unruly Canadian and Indian auxiliaries (whose effectiveness was zero in an open battlefield) who are mutually annoyed in battle
Votre analyse est excellente! En fin de compte Montcalm a été pris par surprise et a paniqué. Maintenant, même après cette défaite. les Français tenaient toujours Québec. La reddition de la ville n'a eu lieu que 5 jours plus tard. Enfin même la capitulation de Montréal ne signifiait pas la fin de la Nouvelle-France. La guerre de Sept Ans a eu lieu sur plusieurs théâtres (Antilles, Europe, Inde, Afrique de l'Ouest) et lors des négos de paix du Traité de Paris de 1763, la France aurait pu garder le Canada et céder d'autres colonies ailleurs dans son empire. Le Canada était immense, peu peuplé, rapportait peu et couteux à défendre. Le choix a été fait à Versailles de se séparer de ces quelques arpents de neige (Voltaire). Aujourd'hui en voyant la puissance des USA, des Français (pas tous) réalisent à quel point la cession du Canada à l'Angleterre fut une erreur magistrale.
@@jean-louislalonde6070 Ce que vous dites est juste surtout quand vous affirmez que lors des négociations de paix la France aurait pu garder le Canada en échange d'autres territoires. C'est comme ça qu'était la diplomatie à l'époque Mais la 1er remarque est la suivante ; est ce que la France avait d'autre colonie à échanger pour récupérer le Canada ? sachant que la victoire anglaise était partout totale, y compris en Inde et aux Caraïbes (Guadeloupe et Martinique avaient été conquis par les Anglais (les Britanniques les rendront d'eux mêmes aux Français car les marchands britanniques ne voulaient pas de leurs concurrences au sein de l'empire britannique) sauf Saint Domingue (qui rapportait énormément aux finances du roi) demeurait encore Français et le roi ne voulait pas à l’échanger contre le Canada "ces quelques arpents de neige" sous-peuplé. Y' a t-il des regrets à avoir ?car en y réfléchissant on se rend compte que l'aventure colonial Français en Amérique ne pouvait finir que de cette manière vu le sous peuplement et le désintérêt non seulement du roi mais aussi des marchands ( n'oublions pas que la colonisation des treize colonies anglaises étaient en grande partie due aux entrepreneurs et marchands privées) et du peuple français qui ne voulaient pas partir colonisé le Canada (point de vue qui pouvait entre en partie compréhensible du fait du climat extrême qui y règne). Par contre la Louisiane aurait pu être colonisé du fait d'un climat beaucoup plus accueillant. Cette partie de l’Amérique au lieu d’être peuplé par des anglophones aurait pu être peuplé par des "Américains "francophone. Car le sort des populations autochtones était scellé le jour où le premier européens avait posé le pied en Amérique. Mais malgré tout quelque chose de bien est sortie de ces pertes car les colons Anglais se sont révoltés contre leurs mere-patrie et une fois devenu "Americains", ils ont aidés la France pendant la première et surtout la seconde guerre mondiale.
Good analyses all. I had thought that instead of beaver/other animal pelts France found the sugar/rum/slave trade of the West Indies much more lucrative. So the costs to defend of N. America by France
@@scottbailey5964 Napoleon’s army got fucked in Haiti on the way to American colonies, lost so many men to disease during unexpected long campaign that French went home. Decided to cut their losses and sold half of the continent to the Americans.
One of my ancestors, by the name of Pierre Durand, likely took part in this fight. He would have been in the militia coming from everywhere in the colony!
Hold on! Historic events have many nuances. The highlanders mentioned had not lost their homes solely because of the 'British' as stated in the video, but were turfed out by wealthy Scottish land owners/clan chiefs who saw greater prosperity with sheep.
Fun fact: hospital records revealed that the majority of gunshots were to the left side of the body: guys were getting shot as they were aiming their weapons, or charging forward.
That's bot a bad method but If your body gets hit from the side it'll take out all your organs and not pass through you so any rare occasion you'd survive a shot would be gone and you'll definitely be garrinteed to die if you get hit.
Or you could use a better technique and lie down and shoot in the prone position. Or kneel. Much more accurate and presents less of a target for the enemy. Why do modern American soldiers/ marines/ seals advance with their weapons up to their eyes standing erect ? That’s asking for a bullet !
This battle like all others make me very sad, all this brave men giving their lives with out any other alternative, just to conquer wealth and power for a few, you can call them monarchs or emperors, but nothing left for the brave men and their family, very sad.
As noted, the British defeated the French in Canada - but the War DEBT - led to the victory of the 13 Colonies breaking away from Great Britain with the indispensable help of France… But I don’t see the follow up… the two wars and the failure to profit from colonization bankrupt the “paper currency” of France (see John Law) which lead to the French Revolution which put most of French Leaders under the National Razor…
A line taken from "Elegy in a Country Churchyard" by Thomas Gray, in my opinion the finest poem ever written in the English Language (that I've come across). It seems certain that Wolfe himself knew the poem although the suggestion that he remarked that he would rather have written that poem than win Quebec is explicitly denied in his last letter to his mother written two weeks before the battle. The relevant verse goes The boast of heraldry, the pomp of pow'r, And all that beauty, all that wealth e'er gave, Awaits alike th' inevitable hour. The paths of glory lead but to the grave.
@@tonyves That's, a least in part, the poem's message "The boast of heraldry, the pomp of pow'r, And all that beauty, all that wealth e'er gave, Awaits alike th' inevitable hour. The paths of glory lead but to the grave."
4:25 While I am not sure if it would be appropriate to refer to this formation as "two lines" in a civilian context, it is certainly incorrect and misleading in a military context: A "line" describes the entire body of men. What the video calls "lines" are actually two RANKS. This is misleading, because the army could also form a second line of several ranks behind the first line, provided they had enough men.
Yes it was two ranks but was in effect an extra long thin line. Revolutionary idea and very risky due to no depth or mutual support. 100 years later in Crimea 1854 it would be immortalised as the thin red line. Erroneously so , the journalist actually wrote that the highlanders were “a thin red streak “across the hill.
Then Kipling wrote a poem and thin red line stuck. I think that we’ll let him off though as he wrote lots of good stuff and saw some horrific things in Afghanistan etc.
If I were Wolfe when the long column of French came toward me I would have boxed them in their flanks but if I was Montcalm and Wolfe did that I would have had a reserve force take the British flanks when they block in the French.
Yeah he should have waited for reinforcements and have both of the generals attack at once preforming a pincer maneuver which would destroy the British
@@RaphaelHebert The city was getting fired at by canons across the river, if I remember well. They were low on supplies, and you have to keep in mind all the other context; like that Montcalm was getting confident from his previous miraculous wins.
Wolfe’s genius extended line plan prevented the possibility of being out flanked. No one had ever done it before, the French saw it as a weakness with no defensive depth so attacked expecting the British to run away after being punched through by the French column. The “Thin Red Line “ something that other armies would like to be able to do but know that they can’t. British are very stubborn and don’t do sensible. Then sit down and have a cup of tea.
Our family tradition is that our James Beyea fought for the British in the battle of Quebec. He was of British descent but New York born and according to tradition was a descendant of a Huguenot. He also was a Loyalist/Tory during the Amer Revolution.
I’m English descended from French Huguenot. Huguenots fled France as religious asylum seekers because the Pope was ethnically cleansing France of them. I bet your ancestor relished the chance to even the score a bit.
@@EdinburghFive 👍 Religion is a thing that causes people problems if you are not in the gang of the people in charge. It’s a terrible thing if those people are committed to ethnic cleansing of your area of living in. See Ukraine now ?! is similar.
So basically, cutting through the bullshit. All this is saying is that both armies were composed of volunteers, who admittedly signed up in order to secure the bounty on offer and because their lives were crap. The reason their lives were crap had nothing to do with the fact that they decided to volunteer. This is completely different to later armies where men were forced to serve because their name was picked out of a ballot box, or because they were part of the next draft of conscripts and didn't have the money to pay someone to take their place. These men actually had a choice and chose to take the king's shilling.
The redcoats of this vintage would almost certainly be flogged at least once during their hitch. The usual punishment was 100 lashes of a cat 'o nine tailsm but it could be 300. Recruits were often 'pressed' into the Royal Navy. Commissions were bought and sold. Yeah, the British Army offered real opportunities.
@@barrythompson5680 Bullshit! I'm sorry but this is just lazy history and propaganda. Almost every army of this period used corporal punishment as a final deterrent for indiscipline but the idea that every British volunteer was routinely flogged is just nonsense, The most common punishment in the British Army of this period was actually the docking of pay whipping was reserved for serious offenses and the incidence of it occurrence can easily be checked by looking through the regimental punishment books of regiments from this period. It's also worth putting this into the context of the period where corporal punishment including flogging was universally accepted as a punishment for all manner of offenses and generally accepted as just,
If it is obvious that Louise XV did not want to give the military means necessary to hold Quebec, it is necessary to recognize the superiority of the "English fire" during this military campaign.
The poor brave Frenchman. How sad. They were taken by surprise and lost because they didn't have enough conviction. Montcalm was shot in the back as he fled the British. How's that for optics?
Wrong about the quality of the British soldier…Wolfe had expected a force of 12,000 men, but the garrisons of Nova Scotia had been reduced considerably beneath their proper strength. However the quality of the troops, was excellent and Wolfe counted on the quality of his troops to compensate for his numerical inferiority.
Family already in Quebec and upper Canada. This was beginning of trend. Every conflict has seen Americans escaping their warlords for land of the freewill.
From U.K. Much of this is complete garbage. Remember that the Scotish Parliament voted to join England, Wales and Ireland in the U.K. No Englishman took land from people in Scotland. People were displaced, but it was the clan chiefs who owned the land that were responsible. England gave a home to many of those displaced. Those soldiers were volunteers and very professional. Even today the Irish guards are one of the best regiments in the British Army.
The act of union resulted from too many Scottish nobles accepting English bribes. The creation of Great Briton is probably too problematic to be resolved here.
The error of Montcalm was that of all French commanders on through the Peninsular War up to Waterloo. They attacked in a block which only allowed a few at the front to fire. The British Army fought in ranks that allowed them to hit the front and sides of the block. They also used "platoon fire" that meant the fire rippled up and down the ranks not just one volley and then a long pause as they reloaded.
Decent video but I fully expected to hear Darth Vader and Star Wars music whenever they showed the British troops. The Brits ruled. Period. Pity, Canada might have benefited from being solely French
Why (apart from the food). From what I have seen Quebec province is very French in terms of culture, language etc and does it's own thing. There were never enough French settlers in Canada to make the whole country a French Colony or indeed French.
France had to fight against whole Europe in succession wars, Britain did not engage on the continent and let Prussians and Austrians do the job, so it could fully concentrate on the colonies. As for "freedom and democracy" some ppl state below: Whats about poisoned blankets and a million killed Indians and the sayin "Right or wrong - my country"? And, on the contrary, how did the French behave with the Indians, stating them as human beings equal to themselves? Wasn't it a Frenchman - La Fayette - who contributed to the final british defeat during America's fight for independence and, at the same time, fought against slavery?
We had to fight the American rebels/traitors, Spanish and French empires all at the same time, yes we eventually lost the 13 colonies but we defeated France and Spain afterwards which helped plunge France into revolution suffering another defeat by the British empire. # It was the British Empire which ended the African slave trade.
I agree with you the French where great soldiers and had to deal with the mainland powers of europe and I have alot of respect for them. You've also got to look at the seven years war when it was only Britain, Hanover and Prussia and Portugal later on fighting against France, Spain, Austria, Russia and Sweden. You know the French coalition could've drestryoyed Prussia and Hanover but they couldn't. While Britain took on both the French and Spanish colonial empires and would eventually win in those theatres like America and India. But I think we can both agree that both Britain and France and the other European powers where and still are great nations who have won and lot their fair amount of wars.
The American revolutionary war was fought between the British Loyalists and British Colonists. Thanks to the peace of Paris in 1783 the United Kingdom of Great Britain recognized the new country the United States of America.
@@finlaylewis9390Yes, they both are great nations and both contributed a lot to all, what our western civilisation, based on Rome and the Greeks, make so extraordinary, and thankfully those wars between Europeans are over - I hope, forever. What if 300 years ago the great european nations had worked together - we would have been unstoppable. Concerning the topic of our and other usual discussions involving the French, it stands out, that mostly from the "country-point-of-view" the foe are / were the French. The Germans (Prussians, Hannoverans, Bavarians, Saxons...) discuss this, the British see them as the great enemy, and we Austrians do, too, besides some clashes with Frederic the Great, whom we defeated also, but, for example, there's nothing equal with Austria vs Britain, Prussia vs Britain and so on. For me, this shows, that the French seemed to be the most powerful force at that time - otherwise, there would be no need to always emphasize how they were beaten here and there. You have to make somebody small with the storys you tell only when he is big, a dwarf has not to be discussed. To describe another important issue which never is heard about the French - just to come to an end about our thoughts of the seven year's war and following (Napoleon etc): Until the mid of the 18th century, it were the French who ruled the seas, they won most of all sea-battles and had formidable ships and sailors. But then it was again a question of maintaining this force due to all the costfully land-wars around. They tried to change their economic situation and laws (eg Jean-Baptiste Colbert / Mercantilism), which shows, how big this problems were, but the situation could not be improved enough. Later on, due to the revolution, most of the formidable and experienced naval officers and sailors fell apart - they refused to serve, being loyal to the king, they were killed in civil war or they retired. That's why they lost more naval battles at this time. But I don't want to minimize the efforts and performance of the British building a formidable sea-power, too. One also should consider, that, when the french revolution was on its way, all european powers declared war on France and tried to smash them, invading the country from all sides, because - being kingdoms - they feared the ideas of the revolutions and that they could sweep the away, so they all tried to prevent this with war. The French crushed them all, and they ALL could not occupy the country. The British have their figures from this time in literatur, I got to know that there are books and even films, where a certain Sharpe always wins against the stupid frogs. But the French have real figures to answer with, but they are less known, because, coming up from this time, the french revolution is considered as something evil (a story, told from the royal governments around and remaining somehow in the sublevels of psyche and with pictures; only, when discussed theoretically and aiming at the result - democracy everywhere in Europe - it estimated well); to mention one of this outstanding characters, who were real, nevertheless there are no films and books for him sharpe-style, I tell about Antoine Charles Louis de Lasalle, who conquered alone a british battery, when they tried to invade France as I told above. Afterwards, during the battle of Vicenca, he ordered his 18 men to attack 100 Austrians, winning the fight. The same in Egypt - rode an attack being hugely outnumbered, and won. He stated, if someone is Hussar and older than 30 must have done something wrong. He died against us Austrians during the battle of Wagram. Learning this in school 35 years ago impressed me and it does still. There is nothing bad in honoring former opponents when they deserve it. Greetings from Austria - stay well and healthy!
The British left the Prussians and Austrians to do most of the fighting in Europe, yes, but the British had the biggest, most badass navy the world had ever seen at that point. It was an independent trader who tried to use germs against the Aboriginals, and Lafayette was a dickhead.
L'Amérique française était déjà virtuellement perdue au début du 18e siècle quand la marine royale française n'était pas de taille pour rivaliser avec le Royal Navy... Plus le 18e siècle avançait, plus l'Amérique française se faisait grignoter des bouts de territoire, et le coup de grâce arriva lors de la Guerre de Sept ans... Conserver Québec en 1759 lors d'une hypothétique victoire n'aurait fait que retarder de peu la future victoire anglaise, tellement que l'Angleterre investissait massivement pour chasser les Français hors d'Amérique...
Pas d'accord. Faire la guerre ça coute cher. Une victoire de la France en Amérique du Nord aurait probablement ruiné l'Angleterre (les taxes imposées aux 13 colonies par la suite confirment ce fait) et rendu impossible une nouvelle attaque contre le Canada avant 20 ou 30 ans. Pendant ce temps la France aurait eu le temps de hausser la population du Canada au point de rendre sa prise impossible.
@@jean-louislalonde6070 C'est un point intéressant. Merci. Il est vrai que le Royaume-Uni a dû faire payer ses colonies pour arriver à ses fins. Ceci dit, la France a eu 160 ans environ pour hausser la population de sa Nouvelle-France, et elle n'a jamais assuré. Alors 20 ou 30 ans n'aurait probablement rien changé au final.
@@mcgiver6977 Et puis l'argument du nombre est toujours présenté 70 000 Canadiens vs 1,2 M coloniaux américains. Il est incomplet car il ne tient pas compte de l'Alliance des nations autochtones (Grande Paix de MTL 1701) qui défendent leurs territoires. Quand les batailles livrées se font style guérilla, les Anglais se font tailler en pièces (défaite totale de Braddock à la Monongahela). Cette alliance a pesé lourd dans cette guerre. Ensuite quand Montcalm bien préparé attend l'armée anglaise à Carillon, cette fois sans l'aide amérindienne, il ne reste pas dans le fort mais installe à l'avance un périmètre défensif d'abattis sur lesquels vient s'embrocher l'armée du général Abercromby. Les 13 colonies étaient divisées entre elles alors que le commandement de la N-F était unifié. Cet avantage a toutefois été annulé en raison de la dispute grandissante entre Montcalm et ses officiers contre Vaudreuil, gouverneur canadien.
@@jean-louislalonde6070 Et cette bataille à la Monongahela en 1755, loin des murs de Fort Duquesne, a subi en 1758 une défaite, cette fois-ci à Fort Duquesne alors que le fort a été abandonné par les Français. L'étau britannique se resserrait. Il est vrai que la guérilla aura servi les intérêts français/canadiens. Plus souvent qu'elle aura servi les intérêts britanniques. Ceci dit, au final, les Anglais auront quand même réussi à converger vers Montréal en partant du sud. L'étau à nouveau se resserrait. La véritable défaite française lors de cette guerre de la conquête, là où ça comptait vraiment, aura été lorsque Louisbourg et Québec ont été prises successivement en 1758 et 1759, et où les campagnes françaises de la côte nord - je suis moins sûr pour la côte sud - ont été brûlées, semant la terreur dans la population. La colonie était fortement assaillie de toutes parts et les alliés amérindiens, absents du terrain, n'étaient d'aucune utilité là où ça comptait vraiment, c'est-à-dire là où pouvait débarquer impunément par voie de mer l'armée britannique. Incapable de se faire ravitailler par la mère patrie car la Royal Navy verrouillait la France de tous les côtés et car la France cherchait de moins en moins à ravitailler sa colonie nord-américaine, la victoire anglaise était inévitable. Les Amérindiens auront bien sûr été utiles en quelques escarmouches dans ce qui est aujourd'hui l'État du New York, mais leur aide aura peu pesé dans l'ensemble de la guerre. C'est intéressant de discuter avec vous monsieur Lalonde.
Yes, he was. Not for the Spanish, though. Wolfe was a hero because he got 4,400 men, their guns and equipment up a cliff in under five hours and successfully won against a French stronghold. This gave Great Britain a decisive victory and signified the beginning of the end for France and their colonies in North America.
"for Canada and for the cause of freedom and democracy." Lol what? this was for nothing more than territorial gain and to hit France in it's weaker colonies, since the french were wining in Europe at the time. where does this for freedom and democracy bull come from?
Do anyone ever wonder why the french second volley didn't do any big damage to the british line, but british volley basiclly crush them, although they put two bullet, but i don't think it has many damage to the french line.
The French fired too early for their muskets to be of great effect against the British, the British waited for their opponents to get within range of their muskets so when they would fire the British volley would devastate the enemy.
The French second volley was from 40 yards though. Two thin lines was the key which you can only carry out with highly disciplined and well trained soldiers that resist the urge to run away. The French advance in column so less muskets come into play. British were able to hit three sides of the column and less musket balls would miss as the French were several men deep.
That video didn't explain the most interesting part of that battle: The previous 3 months where the British set camp across the river, crossed it at night, climbed a steep cliff with a whole army and artillery and were on the field in the morning...
The whole documentary is 2 hours long. This is just an exerpt. This show was on tv something like 20 years ago, there are 17 episodes. They are all very interesting.
@@lasauceproductions7514 We used to watch these in my Ontario public school in the late 90's
@Eligar Esoo The night crossing and climbing of the steep hill on the plains part is more memorable, especially if you visited
You forget the opening, the most interesting and human side of the war. Very sad, these unfortunate men were considered expendable. Cannon fodder. They fought and died in a far away land and then forgotten by their families.
@@ndorobei4391 Which was talked about for 4 minutes....
I have walked the plains of Abraham in Quebec City...what a nice national historic park.
Heikki DTW I really hope I’ll go there someday
I visited Canada and I love Montreal it was pretty
Quebec City is fantastic.
@@fload46d The whole of Canada is way better than the USA. Everything about it is superior. People, correct English language, correct French language, decent cuisine, much better wines. Everything is better.
I was there in 1999. Quite a feeling to stand in the place where the whole course of North American history changed in 15 minutes.
As an experiment, some friends and I tried to see if it was possible to sprint 100m in a military kilt, battle dress jacket and drill boots with gaiters, whilst playing a stirring March on the pipes. It proved possible, just, and the music suffered.
Have been piping in reenactments in the 80's and 90's (as well as during my -peacetime- national service in the Bundeswehr) and yes, it is feasible to charge playing a brisk strathspey (won't win you a first prize, though 😂) and it was indeed stirring up the spirits of all present! Met with a lot of real british army pipers of various real campaigns and they did confirm the effect upon their comrades in action!
0coiuld do it in the 70-80's when i was a long dist runner, but dout it anymore :D
Who said reenactment was a waste of time.
@@wr1120 Our ancestors did this in the mud charging Maxim machine guns. True heroes.
Don't forget those instruments were instrumental ha ha in issuing orders during battle. I doubt they were playing a jig. I was just wondering if any of these soldiers had wigs on. I know it was heroically presented as such in period paintings but I highly doubt it. I know there's an English painting of Washington all dolled in a wig with a slave boy holding his horse. all complete fantasy but considered 'flattering' at the time.
My mother's side has been in Canada for 200 years . I am so proud to be Canadian .
I’m sure you’d be more proud to be Canadian, as soon as Trudeau gets booted out of office? As I’d be more proud to American, as soon as Biden gets booted out of office!…
This film owes a lot to Peter Watkin’s film ‘Culloden’ made for the BBC in the 1960s, and it’s none the worse for that.
All that smoke from musket fire was dope low key
You did not watch an 18th century battle. Because of the smoke, you listened to it.
Thanks to all who fought in this brutal battle for providing me with ten minutes of entertainment to sate my morbid curiosity, cheers lads
This is story of my ancestors and my country. Being French Canadian I hold no hatred to the British because they us the country I proudly live in 🇬🇧 🇨🇦
Amen....the miserable separatist Quebecois could stand to learn a lot from you.
JE ME SOUVIENS. FREE QUEBEC
@@Fionn1014 free from what you nincompoop?
Un beau discours de vendu ça.
@@Fionn1014 Quebec is the most autonomous province in Canada. You guys can do whatever you want....
When it came to the British Army during their explanation of the soldiers in both army's, they talked about how the Scottish and the Irish were forced to join the British Army because they had no other alternative (since the English had taken their land off them). However, I don't want you to get the wrong meaning and think that it was the dreaded last resort to join, because it wasn't. Now, this is because the British army was actually quite well civilized and set up for it's time (this includes well trained, well equipped, well paid and well fed). Meaning that a lot of the Scottish and Irish would of been willing and wanting to join the British army, instead of the hard life's that they had previously lived on on the farms of the North or in Ireland.
That’s Americans for you attempting to rewrite history to make them selves feel like everyone else is terrible and they’re the only good people ever
Academia is Anglophobic - and the people doing this video have been to uni. The reason they are anglophobic is that nobody has invented the word 'anglophobia'.
@@davewarwicker2512 The Quebecois wouldnt like it if anything positive was said about the English. I never met a more detestable group than the French Canadians.
@@davewarwicker2512 🤣🤣🇬🇧🇬🇧👍
@@davewarwicker2512 we gave them Quebec to shut the French whinging, which they are still doing in Canada 🤷♂️
This battle (and Plassey in India two years earlier) finally ened the long colonial contest between Britain and France that had begun at the end of the previous century. Apart from a few mishaps over the next fifty years or so Britain would emerge as a global super power.
Just remember that both British and French merchant ships got raided by SPANISH Pirates 🏴☠️ 🇪🇸!…
@@whatforaaron2494 The Spanish probably lost more treasure to pirates than any other nation in history.
I've read that the Seven Years' War was the first truly global/world war. Many of the engagements took place in far-flung colonies, a good number in the tropics. The colonial powers (particularly Grear Britain) knew they had to have mastery of the seas in an era of emerging capitalist trade and the prospect of unimaginable riches gained by ruthlessly exploiting the lands they invaded.
This is about as close as the British Empire came to world domination. But then the American Revolution happened.
Yes and no. The War of Austrian Succession (1740-48) has also be called WWI.
whoever made this is french!
My teacher put this on For online school
Stay safe
sammmmme
Same
Lol same! My history teacher DX
same :(
same
Excellent re-enactment. The troops were well turned out, movements well done, cinematography very high end.
I have always been led to believe the French charged in that fearless way of theirs and at very close range the British fired and the double shot inflicted terrible damage,The French soldier did the same in 1914 with the bayonet and Cherry red trousers,if courage alone could carry the day but against machine guns its just not the case it wont win a war on its own.
@@davidmcintyre998 Reckless charges by European armies all but went away as the pike and musket displaced swords and axes. In order to be effective, muskets had to be fired en mass and only by order of the officers. The French were a classic example of unit discipline and were often equal to the British, but not at Quebec. Unit discipline was the reason small European armies defeated much larger armies during the wars of empires. They didn't charge head long into the enemy. Among the British, the Highlanders were the only regiments allowed to fight in the highland way. They were used as shock assault infantry, to be followed up with a quick closing by British Grenadiers to widen the breach. Grenadiers were the guys in the video wearing the tall miter headgear. Often they were hired from Hesse, Saxony, Brunswick, and other German states. Hessians fought for the British in the American Revolution.
@@OutnBacker The French due to reckless charges lost a large number of men in Allsace Lorraine in 1914 a very ill thought out tragedy and for some reason not one of the more well known at least outside of France episodes in the sh-t show known as the Great War.
@@davidmcintyre998 True, but I was talking about 1725-1815. That was the period of warefare prior to modern weapons.
WW1 was an absolute slaughter, planned by elitists and paid for by 14 million soldiers.
@@OutnBacker Your "American Revolution"? Was that the Secession War that finished in 1776?
The clan chief Fraser gave his men to the British army, they were not forced to join the British army by the British.
All very anti English!
The Scott’s are British 🙈🙈🙈
reminds of the empire total war
That’s actually a good idea, a Canadian total war
I have French Noble blood in my family as one of my ancestors was an Officer in the Royal French Army during the American War of Independence.
Um what kind of brag is this.
@@edwhite7078 My ancestor after the war ended moved to Canada.
@@zaffronthebountyhunter4196 did he tell people he had noble blood as well.
@@edwhite7078 He was rich so people already knew it.
@@zaffronthebountyhunter4196 lmao burn 😂
Let’s not forget lots of Irish Scottish and English gentry became very rich from the British Empire all the working class were treated terrible by the ruling elite and let’s not forget it was a Scottish king who created the union of Great Britain, as an English man I am sick of hear the poor Irish and Scots the same happened to the English peasants.
Spot on mate
Yes mate it's always the same.We have become everyone's f**king scape goats.
@@sunnyxdays1036 Isn't he just 🇬🇧👍
Not quite; a Scottish king was the first joint ruler of England, Scotland and Ireland (James 1). His great grand-daughter, Anne, oversaw the union of Scotland and England.
The English only did to others what they had already done to their own people. The working population were virtual slaves in Elizabethan times, for example. 'Vagrants' might be put in stocks if they were looking for work outside their own parish, for instance. It's a tough story.
So, American Civil War reenactor here.
While we're not using Dundas or the French manuals, we are using their descendants and for the same reasons. 'Weight of shot' matters.
Attacking on pace and keeping your dressing [keeping your place in the line while moving forward] is actually harder to do than many people think. For one thing you have to have a good set of drummers... you'd be surprised how much that helps.
And keeping formation is vital for keeping your regiment together under fire.
The battle of the plains of Abraham was not actually a battle but a skirmish, a surprise attack that lasted about 20 minutes. The British actually entered Quebec city by the backdoor without defeating the main French force. This is not the stuff of legends. The REAL battle happened the following spring, the battle of Ste-Foy, and the French won this one. However, the French were not able to take back Québec and had to withdraw to Montreal because British ships were coming through the Saint-Lawrence.
I used this to write my history essay of 200 words last minute
I'm not sure 200 words can qualify as an essay LOL
same dude, same
England celebrated this victory, but the Thirteen Colonies refused to pay the bill for these expensive military operations.
A few years later in 1781, during the American Revolutionary War, a French fleet led by Admiral de Grasse, won the naval battle of the Chesapeake. This victory was strategically decisive, in that it prevented the Royal Navy from reinforcing or evacuating the besieged forces of Lieutenant General Lord Cornwallis at Yorktown, Virginia. The French were able to achieve control of the sea lanes against the British and provided the three Franco-American armies of Washington, Rochambaud and LaFayette with siege artillery and French reinforcements. These proved decisive in the Siege of Yorktown, effectively securing independence for the Thirteen American Colonies.
The taxes weren't there to serve the purpose of paying for the 7 years war. That would be utterly ridiculous, it was to pay for the defence of the colonies from further incursion.
@@rmk3155 Incursions by whom? The French capitulated in September 1760,. The french soldiers returned to France and the British took over.
@Dod oThe French are not very popular nowadays in USA. It is of good note to minimize their key role in the revolutionary war.
@@rmk3155 No the taxes were too pay off war debt from seven years war .
What was it not paying tax without representation, Which I think the British answer was we the British people don't get any representation what makes you so special.
This British thing. Ok, let's nail this definitively. Britain comes from the word Britannia. Britannia was the territory the Romans conquered up to the Antonine Wall. It encompasses much of Scotland. Britain today is England, Scotland, and Wales. The United Kingdom is the uniting of two kingdoms. That of England and Scotland. Ireland became a part of the United Kingdom in 1801. After the Civil War in Ireland after 1916. The six counties of the North remained in the United Kingdom. I would remind you here that most British people have the mixed blood of all these places. Not so much Welsh, but English, Scottish, and Irish.
The Romans defeated the Scots at the battle of Mons Graupus. Very much further up from the Antonine wall. The Romans didn’t control Scotland the same as they didn’t control the North West of England. All villas from the midlands and South. All forts in the North showing Independence of mind verses subservience.
Graupius
Many Americans have almost 100% English blood. Which is not so common in England itself.
1916 was the Easter Rising Rebellion against the British, the Irish Civil War didn't take place until 1922.
@@ralphraffles1394 some americans... the original settlers came from Ireland, Wales, Scotland, the Netherlands (Dutch surnames are still very common in America), and a surprisingingly large amount of Germans (ref. the Hamish for example.) Aparently, the original settlers had a vote at some point, as to which European language they were to use as the common launguage. English (being spoken and understood by the settlers from Brittain) won, but by a narrow margin over German (the language understood by most of the other European settlers)
The British were very much different from the French, because the British were all volunteers in a standing army. Full-time professionals.
@@inankeles5553 They were better than the rest.
@@inankeles5553 And yet the British Army was better. There were no draftees in it. Not a single one.
The British always had a relatively small land army but a big navy. As such, the army was drilled to a very high level of unit discipline. Allowance was made for the Highland Regiments to keep their signature broadswords and to employ their wild charge, as the British had unpleasant experience at recieving it and therefor knew others woud be just as intimidated.
British Regular Infantry were drilled to be the best at reloading their firelocks, as they were called, and to remain steady under fire. Fire discipline was the British army's stock-in-trade. They also perfected the school of bayonet tactics (Duke of Cumberland), which made each man responsible for protecting the guy to his right. It was devastating to the Scots at Culloden in 1746. The video showed the correct position of the musket when presenting the bayonet: Held shoulder high and level, musket in the short/recoiled position - ready to thrust, right hand holding the butt plate to be able to apply instant power and to achieve more stand-off reach.
All other armies of the day held the musket at low guard at the waist, by the wrist and fore stock, which reduced initial reach by almost two feet.
British regular: an average soldier
Highlander: wild and raging beast
Amen
Well, a very fine vid nice reenactment. I love this time of period. And if you guys know that the British at the start of The French and Indian War Were losing battles and sieges. The war that a young Virginian named George Washington and his militia, actions started and saw later British commander Major General Edward Braddock died in Monongahela in 1755 ambushed by the French and their Indians allies (Native Americans) and soldiers, such the "Braddocks massacre" and a lot of redcoats died that day and Washington was brave and lucky and managed to escape, at 1754 - 1755 campaign. Then the Siege of Fort William Henry 1757 and the Massacre of the British soldier men women and children from the Indians allied to the French was another win of Moncalm's. Montcalm was in Ticonderoga in 1758 and his victory against all odds then the tide of the war changed and we have Wolfe at the siege of Louisbourg 1758 won and took the city and then the final battle at Quebec that Montcalm's mistake to go and face the British out in the battlefield and not to stay in the walls and the errors in the battlefield as we see in this great video were a lot and that's all of the major battles of the war in America back then the British won the war the Fench lost the war. Some thoughts and info from my favorite period of wars and heroes and more again awesome vid!👍👍
"Seventeen hundred and fifty five...
That was the year that Lisbon town saw the earth open up and gulp her down,
And Braddock's army was done so brown and left without a scalp to it's crown..."
Oliver Wendell Holmes
The Wonderful One Hoss Shay
"Evicted by the British"
So you're telling me, kind ma'am, that Scots are not British?😂
What she means is evicted by the Anglo Saxons who had been dominated by the warrior aristocrats of the Normans and have been Thier most realible pool of expendable cannon fodder
Don't forget there is white British and white European tribalism they just call it nationalism to make it different from the tribalism of dark people
they were most likely Jacobite supports and had their land taken after the battle of Culloden
English
@@abidashraf7104 Because tribes aren't nations
yes , my ancestor was there ,with the 42nd Regiment of Foot
The 42nd Regiment is the Black Watch.
@@Murph945 Yes, I know
They were all British troops. You clearly are an Anglophone. Best Anglophone rant heard for years.
Anglophone? It's Anglophobe you ignoramus!
They make us brits sound so evil but infact NI and Scotland were part of the union at this time and all when she said they were driven into the army by force is a load of tosh 😂😂😂. 90% of the Scots were in the union. It was the highlanders who rebelled ... yano the Jacobite rebellion? Yeah we crushed them. Many of our soldiers at this time joined the army to seek a new life which they got but at the cost of there own life.
You guys ain't evil honestly as I was learning about in hisptry I on your side
Not until 1801 this is in 1759 . At the time it was Britain did not become great Britain until act of union 1801
@@treerat7631 uhh that act of union was between the Kingdom of Great Britain and the Kingdom of Ireland England Wales and Scotland were already united by this time you could tell by their flags
@@treerat7631 your forgetting about 1601 when the Stuart’s took the throne after Elizabeth’s death
@@matthewaleman4401 took it ? they were given it ,, and then lost it twice in four generations
My 7th grandfather Charles Grim of Winchester Virginia under General Wolfe was a pow at the battle of Quebec at 23 years old. He later got freed and ended up being very close friends with Daniel Morgan and drinking buddies. Charles grim was one of Daniel Morgan’s Dutch mess, closest confidants and part of Daniel’s elite sharpshooters
4:50 The commander's face is like:
We're F*&¥$d
He's like "Tabarnak"
I’d say that better describes the look on Joseph’s face at 10:48
The Scottish highlanders was powerful assault, like shock troops
Especially if their kilts were flying up too high.
Actually 🤓☝️it was the grenadier that were used as shock troops most of the time the highlanders were just used as regular line infantry
The man that brought my family name to this continent was one of those sent in America to fight in the 7 years war. He was a landless Alemannic German farm boy in what it now eastern France whom enlisted in a mercenary unit. The unit was contracted by the French crown to serve on a Compagnie Franche de la Marine ship bound to Acadia for the siege of Louisbourg in 1758. He deserted with most of his unit of "Volontaires étrangers" after a short time in the fortress. He ended up in Boston for a few years but settled in Quebec in 1765.
New subscriber. Great channel. Love your voice
In Prussia everyone can live according to his farsoone said Friederich the Great and Germany took in most of the french protestants the hugenotes they lived in Mannheim Lübeck Berlin and they were for them a great asset for Germany.
The biggest names were carrye actor roofer cavier in Lübeck entire cities came to Germany many Prussian generals Carl von Drais the inventor of the bicycle in Mannheim the birthplace of the car.
I'm a German roofer my Gessele's name was Dieter von Nice and the great Huguenote was the the star of Africa was one of the best fighter pilots of all time Hans-Joachim Marseille
with over 175 winst
Timber & hemp rope were vital war material for the Royal Navy. The British Parliament passed acts requiring North American colonies largely only trade with Britain with few exceptions. (The majority sourced from North America) The colonies in North America viewed themselves as British citizens who simply lived overseas, legally different from Crown Colonies, or Crown Dependencies, etc. Because of the specific enumerated legal rights and privileges from the various founding Letters Patent, Royal Charters, & etc. which allowed for above average colonial autonomy. (Think of English Marcher Lords, or German Counts Palantine who possessed greater than normal independence)
The ruling aristocrats (the rich landed jerks) in the North American colonies didn't want to stop being British. They wanted to be dealt with as legal equals. Many wrote scathing (prejudiced) open letters insisting they weren't like colonies in places like the Indian Ocean populated by "natives". (Offensive but unfortunately legally correct at the time.) George Washington had living family in Oxford, England at the time of the American revolution. Similar arguments were used when the UK government finally admitted Irish MP's to the UK parliament.
British citizens in the North American colonies were required to room & board British military personnel WITHOUT reimbursement in most cases. >> 3rd Amendment to the USA constitution explicitly bans requiring citizens to quarter soldiers.
The number of soldiers required was proportional to individual wealth. For example, John Hancock, the wealthiest person in the colonies at the time had to feed & house hundreds of soldiers. Many of the USA founders only turned rebel because they were being financially bled by years long presence of British troops.
Germans fought against slavery and they were the only ones who kept the contracts with the natives. Texas Germans were also hunted by the Texas Rangers because they were against slavery.
The Armisch and other German groups would never have used slaves.
100,000 Germans fought against slavery on the Union side, all well-trained soldiers!
who fought in the Baden revolt. They held the bridges that led to New York and Washington since none of the southerners got through.
Ich bin mir sicher, dass man in den USA im 19. Jahrhundert Menschen unterschiedlicher Nationalität und ethnischer Herkunft finden kann, die im Bürgerkrieg für den Norden kämpften. Nicht alle kämpfenden Menschen kämpften für die Abschaffung der Sklaverei. Der Bürgerkrieg war kein Ein-Themen-Krieg. Ich vermute, Sie wollen vielleicht sagen, dass Deutschland nicht an der Sklaverei beteiligt war. Wir wissen natürlich, dass dies nicht der Fall war. Wir müssen uns nur den Sklavenhandel ansehen, an dem sie seit dem 17. Jahrhundert beteiligt waren, die deutschen Kolonien in Afrika und natürlich die Versklavung der Menschen während des Zweiten Weltkriegs.
I am sure you can find in nineteenth-century people in the USA of many nationalities and ethnic backgrounds who fought for the North in the Civil War. Not all the people fighting were fighting to end slavery. The Civil War was not a one issue war. I am guessing you are perhaps trying to say Germany had not participated in slavery. We know of course this was not the case. We only have to look at the slave trading they had been involved in since the seventeenth-century, at the German colonies in Africa, and of course the enslavement of people during World War Two.
This reenactment is very good. 👏
Quite a good depiction of the provenance of the soldiers.
Paul Ehrlich- I agree. It really was. Well stated.
Im not French, Im not British, Im French Canadian.
My sympathies
Maintenant, je suis québécois et c'est tout ce qu'il me reste avant de disparaitre pour de bon.
Why not just Canadian,a lovely country and fine people.
Sorry to hear that, Pierre Trudeau wiped out the Inuit culture but give government grants to anything remotely French. His son is no better.
Pretty cool thing to be I imagine.
The original documentary is not avaible anymore, what a shame... 😢
10:36 - when you realise that your life is now basically over.
Jack Tanner *realize*
18th century banzai charge
@@butterfunger5081 I believe both ways of spelling are acceptable.
That first sound of bagpipes is telling you get running as fast as you can because if you don’t your becoming a stain on the ground
@@butterfunger5081 Realise is correct English.
1:52 The Fraser Highlanders were not, "Evicted from the Scottish Highlands by the British". What sort of school did you go to?
Can we go just for a Republic already?
That monarchy thing really bores me stiff.
Monarchy is boring, and you think a republic won't be?
I don't like the fact that the head of state has no power. That is the queen. I simply can't stand living in a country without a head, an individual, a true human soul as the supreme leader of the nation. The Prime Minister is the servant of Her Majesty, not you!
Some call that focus on the personality, Fascism; I call it the foundation of Civilization.
I can't stand this country because of that, seriously call me traitor, but as a Québecois, that's how I feel about Canada.
Alan Mac your source? This battle was fought over 10 years after the Battle of Culloden where highland clans subsequently suffered cultural genocide. The banning of Gaelic, traditional music and dress, along with merciless evictions and forfeiture of lands.
'Cultural Genocide' = Being evicted from your home and drafted into the army?
is a mile wide...gulp
i'm mostly of Scot descent with Acadian and Scot on my fathers side too some north american wakanabi native too scots who were rewarded for military service in Massachusetts so you might say my ancestors blood was spilled all over north america east not to mention northern france and belgium in ww1 i hope that's the end of it
Only tells half the story and then falls short at the end
fun fact. New Hampshire British Governor John Wentworth named the town of Wolfeborough (now simply Wolfeboro) after Lord Wolfe for his victory in at the Battle of Quebec. Lord Wolfe's regiment banners and memorial can be seen today inside Westminster Abbey.... They don't like it when you take cell phone pics of it.......
I like to console myself for this battle by telling myself that in the end it is the French army that lost the battle. not Canadians. the canadians on this day won her a place in the british empire. finally have little to see things from this angle
Absolutely,and the bond between Britain and Canada is as strong as it's ever been🇬🇧🇨🇦👍
The French have more or less abandoned Quebecans ever since.
The Canadians certainly won. The Québécois certainly lost.
@@Anglo_Saxon1 France was intending to win the war in Europe but lost in in America.France abandonned 60 000 settlers in the St-Laurent valley.
It's pretty interesting the battle lasted more than 1 hour, but the fight ing only last 15 mins
Bagpipes and the Highland charge is spine tingling❤️
This omits how the British surprised the French by moving their army were the French thought it was impossible to move an army. That is what made it one of the greatest feats of arms in military history.
You (not ewe🐑) misspelt Where. 😐
My Great Great Grandfather fought in this battle. Major General Sir James Wolffe.
Also at the battle an American recruited regiment - The 60th Royal American Regiment (later renamed The King’s Royal Rifle Corps) Celer et Audax.
I think the 60th was in western Pa. also (Ft Pitt, Ft. Ligionier) where I'm from, navy blue pants and blue facings
@@dalepeto9620 The 60th Rifles KRRC (60th Royal Americans) were members of The Wolfe Society which was passed onto The Royal Green Jackets. It’s interesting that The British Army have revived the Rangers name for the new SF regiment, Rangers first being raised in North America. Wolfe gave the 60th the motto Celer et Audax, the English version Swift & Bold has been carried forward into The Rifles via The RGJ. You are right about the uniform colours, 5th Bn Royal Americans changed to green jackets in the 1800’s when they became a rifle armed battalion.
My ancestor was in the American militia on the plains of Abraham, but I know nothing about the details....
My understanding of history is that the Scottish Lords started the clearances, and if you go to the bone it was the wife of a Scottish Lord who came up with the idea.
My Teacher Made me watch this
same
same
Canadian politics 😂
I love this Country ! Love Canada in all it's history
I enjoyed my visit to Canada too. Now the Canadians need to get rid of the tyrant Trudeau, and it would be a much better place!…
@@whatforaaron2494You don't live in Canada, so what"s it to you (not ewe 🐑) ?? 🤐
@@jimmyohara2601 Said the hoser!…
In the church of all hallows in Tottenham North London in the bell tower hangs the bell captured in the battle of qebec. Apparently this bell was the warning bell for the garrison.
@Eligar Esoo eligar what about gengis khan Attila the Hun Napoleon and the Romans are they going after them. they stole lots including thousands of slaves. not a chance.
Who else here in 2020?
thanks
2:16, Yes they destroyed the clan system. But if anything it was for the better; given how much of an oppressive system it was. The aspect of their lives being destroyed can work if these men had been kicked from their land (lord's land) during the land clearings.
Yeah and according to a history video if a family didn’t muster for there clan there house would be burnt down
They were cleared by their own clan chiefs.It wasn’t the government.
James Wolfe fought at Culloden.
Yeah
@@racheltaylor6578 That’s a great bit of info, thanks. 4/5 of the English army at Culloden were actually Scottish. Lowland non Catholics against Highland Gaels. George Washington fought in the British army for nine years ( not a lot of people know that)!
The reasons for the loss of Canada by France:
1) The kings of France were never really interested in Canada and thus never seek to develop it or to populate it: in 1756 there were 70,000 French colonists for 1.3 million British colonists
2) The proof of contempt and disinterest of the king towards his subjects of Canada, is the cession in 1713 from Acadia to England even though the region was populated by French colonists
3) Throughout the war, the King of France sent only 6,000 men to Canada, while England sent 28,000 men to America in 1758 alone.
4) England has mastery of the seas, she can prevent French aid from arriving in Canada!
5) The King of France is mainly interested in the war in Europe and has invested all his forces completely neglecting America
6) The duality in the French high command between Montcalm and Vaudreuil the governor who interferes with the defense of the colony
7) Mistakes were made during the siege of Quebec, Montcalm had cards in hand that he chose not to play, in fact instead of throwing himself into a battle with an uncertain outcome Montcalm could afford to wait behind the fortifications. First, the season was well advanced and we were approaching the end of summer, in Canada winter was coming very quickly, especially since it was a very harsh winter, the English army could not have held up to it in the extreme cold. Then, reinforcements from Montreal were on the way, they would have taken the English army from the rear and forced it, thus, to give up the siege, but he chose to give battle, without delay, at the head of a troop composed of demoralized regulars professional soldiers and unruly Canadian and Indian auxiliaries (whose effectiveness was zero in an open battlefield) who are mutually annoyed in battle
Votre analyse est excellente! En fin de compte Montcalm a été pris par surprise et a paniqué. Maintenant, même après cette défaite. les Français tenaient toujours Québec. La reddition de la ville n'a eu lieu que 5 jours plus tard. Enfin même la capitulation de Montréal ne signifiait pas la fin de la Nouvelle-France. La guerre de Sept Ans a eu lieu sur plusieurs théâtres (Antilles, Europe, Inde, Afrique de l'Ouest) et lors des négos de paix du Traité de Paris de 1763, la France aurait pu garder le Canada et céder d'autres colonies ailleurs dans son empire. Le Canada était immense, peu peuplé, rapportait peu et couteux à défendre. Le choix a été fait à Versailles de se séparer de ces quelques arpents de neige (Voltaire). Aujourd'hui en voyant la puissance des USA, des Français (pas tous) réalisent à quel point la cession du Canada à l'Angleterre fut une erreur magistrale.
@@jean-louislalonde6070 Ce que vous dites est juste surtout quand vous affirmez que lors des négociations de paix la France aurait pu garder le Canada en échange d'autres territoires. C'est comme ça qu'était la diplomatie à l'époque Mais la 1er remarque est la suivante ; est ce que la France avait d'autre colonie à échanger pour récupérer le Canada ? sachant que la victoire anglaise était partout totale, y compris en Inde et aux Caraïbes (Guadeloupe et Martinique avaient été conquis par les Anglais (les Britanniques les rendront d'eux mêmes aux Français car les marchands britanniques ne voulaient pas de leurs concurrences au sein de l'empire britannique) sauf Saint Domingue (qui rapportait énormément aux finances du roi) demeurait encore Français et le roi ne voulait pas à l’échanger contre le Canada "ces quelques arpents de neige" sous-peuplé. Y' a t-il des regrets à avoir ?car en y réfléchissant on se rend compte que l'aventure colonial Français en Amérique ne pouvait finir que de cette manière vu le sous peuplement et le désintérêt non seulement du roi mais aussi des marchands ( n'oublions pas que la colonisation des treize colonies anglaises étaient en grande partie due aux entrepreneurs et marchands privées) et du peuple français qui ne voulaient pas partir colonisé le Canada (point de vue qui pouvait entre en partie compréhensible du fait du climat extrême qui y règne). Par contre la Louisiane aurait pu être colonisé du fait d'un climat beaucoup plus accueillant. Cette partie de l’Amérique au lieu d’être peuplé par des anglophones aurait pu être peuplé par des "Américains "francophone. Car le sort des populations autochtones était scellé le jour où le premier européens avait posé le pied en Amérique. Mais malgré tout quelque chose de bien est sortie de ces pertes car les colons Anglais se sont révoltés contre leurs mere-patrie et une fois devenu "Americains", ils ont aidés la France pendant la première et surtout la seconde guerre mondiale.
Good analyses all. I had thought that instead of beaver/other animal pelts France found the sugar/rum/slave trade of the West Indies much more lucrative.
So the costs to defend of N. America by France
@@scottbailey5964 Napoleon’s army got fucked in Haiti on the way to American colonies, lost so many men to disease during unexpected long campaign that French went home. Decided to cut their losses and sold half of the continent to the Americans.
@@jean-louislalonde6070 yes and our error was to not try hard enough to keep it.
One of my ancestors, by the name of Pierre Durand, likely took part in this fight. He would have been in the militia coming from everywhere in the colony!
Hold on! Historic events have many nuances. The highlanders mentioned had not lost their homes solely because of the 'British' as stated in the video, but were turfed out by wealthy Scottish land owners/clan chiefs who saw greater prosperity with sheep.
This is incredible . I never saw such great action well one movie I watched . Hollywood take notes ...
Except it’s bollocks?
I get the whole gentleman war fare thing, but I'd be turning before a volley. Give em a shoulder. Thinner target. Damn. The guts of these men.
Fun fact: hospital records revealed that the majority of gunshots were to the left side of the body: guys were getting shot as they were aiming their weapons, or charging forward.
Albukhshi the men who survived perhaps
That's bot a bad method but If your body gets hit from the side it'll take out all your organs and not pass through you so any rare occasion you'd survive a shot would be gone and you'll definitely be garrinteed to die if you get hit.
Its all just different degrees of bad choices.
Or you could use a better technique and lie down and shoot in the prone position. Or kneel. Much more accurate and presents less of a target for the enemy. Why do modern American soldiers/ marines/ seals advance with their weapons up to their eyes standing erect ? That’s asking for a bullet !
@2:16 What did she mean by "Nothing left Toulouse"?
It is a Nice phase
My ancestors came to America in the 1600's..And fought in these wars..French and Indian.And married into the Haudensaunee..six Nations tribes .
This battle like all others make me very sad, all this brave men giving their lives with out any other alternative, just to conquer wealth and power for a few, you can call them monarchs or emperors, but nothing left for the brave men and their family, very sad.
Not quite, it was important for Britain to ensure the French did not become too powerful and be able to invade Britain.
History shows us that's the way it is for most wars unfortunately including some recent ones Americans have fought in.
As noted, the British defeated the French in Canada - but the War DEBT - led to the victory of the 13 Colonies breaking away from Great Britain with the indispensable help of France…
But I don’t see the follow up… the two wars and the failure to profit from colonization bankrupt the “paper currency” of France (see John Law) which lead to the French Revolution which put most of French Leaders under the National Razor…
En effet, tous ces événements sont liés.
"The Paths of Glory lead but to the Grave..."
A line taken from "Elegy in a Country Churchyard" by Thomas Gray, in my opinion the finest poem ever written in the English Language (that I've come across). It seems certain that Wolfe himself knew the poem although the suggestion that he remarked that he would rather have written that poem than win Quebec is explicitly denied in his last letter to his mother written two weeks before the battle.
The relevant verse goes
The boast of heraldry, the pomp of pow'r,
And all that beauty, all that wealth e'er gave,
Awaits alike th' inevitable hour.
The paths of glory lead but to the grave.
Well yes, but so do the Paths of Cowardice/Inertia. Indeed every blinking path.
@@tonyves That's, a least in part, the poem's message
"The boast of heraldry, the pomp of pow'r,
And all that beauty, all that wealth e'er gave,
Awaits alike th' inevitable hour.
The paths of glory lead but to the grave."
4:25 While I am not sure if it would be appropriate to refer to this formation as "two lines" in a civilian context, it is certainly incorrect and misleading in a military context: A "line" describes the entire body of men. What the video calls "lines" are actually two RANKS.
This is misleading, because the army could also form a second line of several ranks behind the first line, provided they had enough men.
Yes it was two ranks but was in effect an extra long thin line. Revolutionary idea and very risky due to no depth or mutual support. 100 years later in Crimea 1854 it would be immortalised as the thin red line. Erroneously so , the journalist actually wrote that the highlanders were “a thin red streak “across the hill.
Then Kipling wrote a poem and thin red line stuck. I think that we’ll let him off though as he wrote lots of good stuff and saw some horrific things in Afghanistan etc.
If I were Wolfe when the long column of French came toward me I would have boxed them in their flanks but if I was Montcalm and Wolfe did that I would have had a reserve force take the British flanks when they block in the French.
Montcalm never shoulda left the city imo
Yeah he should have waited for reinforcements and have both of the generals attack at once preforming a pincer maneuver which would destroy the British
@@RaphaelHebert The city was getting fired at by canons across the river, if I remember well. They were low on supplies, and you have to keep in mind all the other context; like that Montcalm was getting confident from his previous miraculous wins.
Wolfe’s genius extended line plan prevented the possibility of being out flanked. No one had ever done it before, the French saw it as a weakness with no defensive depth so attacked expecting the British to run away after being punched through by the French column. The “Thin Red Line “ something that other armies would like to be able to do but know that they can’t. British are very stubborn and don’t do sensible. Then sit down and have a cup of tea.
Our family tradition is that our James Beyea fought for the British in the battle of Quebec. He was of British descent but New York born and according to tradition was a descendant of a Huguenot. He also was a Loyalist/Tory during the Amer Revolution.
I’m English descended from French Huguenot. Huguenots fled France as religious asylum seekers because the Pope was ethnically cleansing France of them. I bet your ancestor relished the chance to even the score a bit.
@@johnbooth3073 I imagine so. I think their loyalty to England was great because England was a refuge for the huguenots.
@@johnbooth3073 It was not so much the Pope fighting the French Protestants. The French Catholics were doing a pretty good job of that.
@@EdinburghFive 👍 Religion is a thing that causes people problems if you are not in the gang of the people in charge. It’s a terrible thing if those people are committed to ethnic cleansing of your area of living in. See Ukraine now ?! is similar.
@@EdinburghFive How about the treatment of the catholic irish people in Ireland ? Many fled to France. Same for catholic scotts.
Thank you .
Oh dear, how sad, never mind….
Is there a full version of this video?
the full video was deleted :(
search Canada, a peoples history
@@demonhorse103 episode 4
So basically, cutting through the bullshit. All this is saying is that both armies were composed of volunteers, who admittedly signed up in order to secure the bounty on offer and because their lives were crap. The reason their lives were crap had nothing to do with the fact that they decided to volunteer. This is completely different to later armies where men were forced to serve because their name was picked out of a ballot box, or because they were part of the next draft of conscripts and didn't have the money to pay someone to take their place. These men actually had a choice and chose to take the king's shilling.
The redcoats of this vintage would almost certainly be flogged at least once during their hitch. The usual punishment was 100 lashes of a cat 'o nine tailsm but it could be 300. Recruits were often 'pressed' into the Royal Navy. Commissions were bought and sold. Yeah, the British Army offered real opportunities.
@@barrythompson5680 Bullshit! I'm sorry but this is just lazy history and propaganda. Almost every army of this period used corporal punishment as a final deterrent for indiscipline but the idea that every British volunteer was routinely flogged is just nonsense, The most common punishment in the British Army of this period was actually the docking of pay whipping was reserved for serious offenses and the incidence of it occurrence can easily be checked by looking through the regimental punishment books of regiments from this period.
It's also worth putting this into the context of the period where corporal punishment including flogging was universally accepted as a punishment for all manner of offenses and generally accepted as just,
@@barrythompson5680 ever thus ,“ see the world, meet interesting people and then kill them”.
If it is obvious that Louise XV did not want to give the military means necessary to hold Quebec, it is necessary to recognize the superiority of the "English fire" during this military campaign.
The poor brave Frenchman. How sad. They were taken by surprise and lost because they didn't have enough conviction. Montcalm was shot in the back as he fled the British. How's that for optics?
Very good docudrama (even with a little franco bias) enjoyable.
Personne qui parle français icitte?
Moi
Tabarnac
Moé.
Mwa
Wrong about the quality of the British soldier…Wolfe had expected a force of 12,000 men, but the garrisons of Nova Scotia had been reduced considerably beneath their proper strength. However the quality of the troops, was excellent and Wolfe counted on the quality of his troops to compensate for his numerical inferiority.
Do please narrate with you own bias.
Hate it when people say we ran like cowards don't say shit if you weren't there didn't see you facing a wall of lead.
And having to fight a people who fought with such fury they were thought they were from hell
I am British (Co Durham) and have never ever thought of the French as cowards.
Aye
Not to mention that France won lots of wars and has the highest battle success record
They only got that myth after WW2 you know the big one
Canadians have made some excellent shows
we used to now it's just woke shit and reality tv
Family already in Quebec and upper Canada. This was beginning of trend. Every conflict has seen Americans escaping their warlords for land of the freewill.
Un jour, l’occupation anglaise ne sera que chose du passé, car les Québécois auront eu le courage de faire du Québec un pays ⚜️
Ça ne se fera pas par la stratégie souverainiste qui a échouée mais bien par l'étapisme radical.
En attendant il faut stopper le grand remplacement avant de n'avoir plus de poids démographique.
From U.K. Much of this is complete garbage. Remember that the Scotish Parliament voted to join England, Wales and Ireland in the U.K. No Englishman took land from people in Scotland. People were displaced, but it was the clan chiefs who owned the land that were responsible. England gave a home to many of those displaced. Those soldiers were volunteers and very professional. Even today the Irish guards are one of the best regiments in the British Army.
John Willetts
I am guessing this is a CBC production? If so, I would definitely take it with a grain of salt.
The act of union resulted from too many Scottish nobles accepting English bribes. The creation of Great Briton is probably too problematic to be resolved here.
@@lawrencewright2816 This is a CBC's production.
The error of Montcalm was that of all French commanders on through the Peninsular War up to Waterloo. They attacked in a block which only allowed a few at the front to fire. The British Army fought in ranks that allowed them to hit the front and sides of the block. They also used "platoon fire" that meant the fire rippled up and down the ranks not just one volley and then a long pause as they reloaded.
You have to remember, years and years before this conflict. Danish and Norwegian Vikings raided the British Isles.
WHERE CAN I SEE THE WHOLE DOCUMENTRY
The CBC website
Decent video but I fully expected to hear Darth Vader and Star Wars music whenever they showed the British troops. The Brits ruled. Period. Pity, Canada might have benefited from being solely French
Why (apart from the food). From what I have seen Quebec province is very French in terms of culture, language etc and does it's own thing. There were never enough French settlers in Canada to make the whole country a French Colony or indeed French.
IN DAYS OF YORE, FROM BRITAIN’S SHORE, WOLFE THE DAUNTLESS HERO CAME!
And planted firms britannia flag on canada fair domain
Who got his ass kicked by Montcalm at the Battle of Beauport
@@guillaumedarcoit7371 the french army outnumbered Wolfe 2:1 there and ultimately Wolfe won the war at Abraham Plains
@@guillaumedarcoit7371 A set back that didn't change the outcome of the war. Wolfe and Montcalm were both talented Generals it has to be said
Long Live His Majesty the King.
which one
King George of Britain.
@@robnewman6101 He died
God Save The King. Long Live The King.
@@robnewman6101 But he is dead
Where do I find all the originals of this series
i think this os Canada: a personal history- episode 3 maybe- lot of episodes- im watching it now!
France had to fight against whole Europe in succession wars, Britain did not engage on the continent and let Prussians and Austrians do the job, so it could fully concentrate on the colonies. As for "freedom and democracy" some ppl state below: Whats about poisoned blankets and a million killed Indians and the sayin "Right or wrong - my country"? And, on the contrary, how did the French behave with the Indians, stating them as human beings equal to themselves? Wasn't it a Frenchman - La Fayette - who contributed to the final british defeat during America's fight for independence and, at the same time, fought against slavery?
We had to fight the American rebels/traitors, Spanish and French empires all at the same time, yes we eventually lost the 13 colonies but we defeated France and Spain afterwards which helped plunge France into revolution suffering another defeat by the British empire.
# It was the British Empire which ended the African slave trade.
I agree with you the French where great soldiers and had to deal with the mainland powers of europe and I have alot of respect for them.
You've also got to look at the seven years war when it was only Britain, Hanover and Prussia and Portugal later on fighting against France, Spain, Austria, Russia and Sweden. You know the French coalition could've drestryoyed Prussia and Hanover but they couldn't. While Britain took on both the French and Spanish colonial empires and would eventually win in those theatres like America and India.
But I think we can both agree that both Britain and France and the other European powers where and still are great nations who have won and lot their fair amount of wars.
The American revolutionary war was fought between the British Loyalists and British Colonists. Thanks to the peace of Paris in 1783 the United Kingdom of Great Britain recognized the new country the United States of America.
@@finlaylewis9390Yes, they both are great nations and both contributed a lot to all, what our western civilisation, based on Rome and the Greeks, make so extraordinary, and thankfully those wars between Europeans are over - I hope, forever. What if 300 years ago the great european nations had worked together - we would have been unstoppable. Concerning the topic of our and other usual discussions involving the French, it stands out, that mostly from the "country-point-of-view" the foe are / were the French. The Germans (Prussians, Hannoverans, Bavarians, Saxons...) discuss this, the British see them as the great enemy, and we Austrians do, too, besides some clashes with Frederic the Great, whom we defeated also, but, for example, there's nothing equal with Austria vs Britain, Prussia vs Britain and so on. For me, this shows, that the French seemed to be the most powerful force at that time - otherwise, there would be no need to always emphasize how they were beaten here and there. You have to make somebody small with the storys you tell only when he is big, a dwarf has not to be discussed. To describe another important issue which never is heard about the French - just to come to an end about our thoughts of the seven year's war and following (Napoleon etc): Until the mid of the 18th century, it were the French who ruled the seas, they won most of all sea-battles and had formidable ships and sailors. But then it was again a question of maintaining this force due to all the costfully land-wars around. They tried to change their economic situation and laws (eg Jean-Baptiste Colbert / Mercantilism), which shows, how big this problems were, but the situation could not be improved enough. Later on, due to the revolution, most of the formidable and experienced naval officers and sailors fell apart - they refused to serve, being loyal to the king, they were killed in civil war or they retired. That's why they lost more naval battles at this time. But I don't want to minimize the efforts and performance of the British building a formidable sea-power, too. One also should consider, that, when the french revolution was on its way, all european powers declared war on France and tried to smash them, invading the country from all sides, because - being kingdoms - they feared the ideas of the revolutions and that they could sweep the away, so they all tried to prevent this with war. The French crushed them all, and they ALL could not occupy the country. The British have their figures from this time in literatur, I got to know that there are books and even films, where a certain Sharpe always wins against the stupid frogs. But the French have real figures to answer with, but they are less known, because, coming up from this time, the french revolution is considered as something evil (a story, told from the royal governments around and remaining somehow in the sublevels of psyche and with pictures; only, when discussed theoretically and aiming at the result - democracy everywhere in Europe - it estimated well); to mention one of this outstanding characters, who were real, nevertheless there are no films and books for him sharpe-style, I tell about Antoine Charles Louis de Lasalle, who conquered alone a british battery, when they tried to invade France as I told above. Afterwards, during the battle of Vicenca, he ordered his 18 men to attack 100 Austrians, winning the fight. The same in Egypt - rode an attack being hugely outnumbered, and won. He stated, if someone is Hussar and older than 30 must have done something wrong. He died against us Austrians during the battle of Wagram.
Learning this in school 35 years ago impressed me and it does still. There is nothing bad in honoring former opponents when they deserve it. Greetings from Austria - stay well and healthy!
The British left the Prussians and Austrians to do most of the fighting in Europe, yes, but the British had the biggest, most badass navy the world had ever seen at that point. It was an independent trader who tried to use germs against the Aboriginals, and Lafayette was a dickhead.
L'Amérique française était déjà virtuellement perdue au début du 18e siècle quand la marine royale française n'était pas de taille pour rivaliser avec le Royal Navy...
Plus le 18e siècle avançait, plus l'Amérique française se faisait grignoter des bouts de territoire, et le coup de grâce arriva lors de la Guerre de Sept ans...
Conserver Québec en 1759 lors d'une hypothétique victoire n'aurait fait que retarder de peu la future victoire anglaise, tellement que l'Angleterre investissait massivement pour chasser les Français hors d'Amérique...
Pas d'accord. Faire la guerre ça coute cher. Une victoire de la France en Amérique du Nord aurait probablement ruiné l'Angleterre (les taxes imposées aux 13 colonies par la suite confirment ce fait) et rendu impossible une nouvelle attaque contre le Canada avant 20 ou 30 ans. Pendant ce temps la France aurait eu le temps de hausser la population du Canada au point de rendre sa prise impossible.
@@jean-louislalonde6070 C'est un point intéressant. Merci. Il est vrai que le Royaume-Uni a dû faire payer ses colonies pour arriver à ses fins.
Ceci dit, la France a eu 160 ans environ pour hausser la population de sa Nouvelle-France, et elle n'a jamais assuré. Alors 20 ou 30 ans n'aurait probablement rien changé au final.
@@mcgiver6977 Et puis l'argument du nombre est toujours présenté 70 000 Canadiens vs 1,2 M coloniaux américains. Il est incomplet car il ne tient pas compte de l'Alliance des nations autochtones (Grande Paix de MTL 1701) qui défendent leurs territoires. Quand les batailles livrées se font style guérilla, les Anglais se font tailler en pièces (défaite totale de Braddock à la Monongahela). Cette alliance a pesé lourd dans cette guerre. Ensuite quand Montcalm bien préparé attend l'armée anglaise à Carillon, cette fois sans l'aide amérindienne, il ne reste pas dans le fort mais installe à l'avance un périmètre défensif d'abattis sur lesquels vient s'embrocher l'armée du général Abercromby. Les 13 colonies étaient divisées entre elles alors que le commandement de la N-F était unifié. Cet avantage a toutefois été annulé en raison de la dispute grandissante entre Montcalm et ses officiers contre Vaudreuil, gouverneur canadien.
@@jean-louislalonde6070 Et cette bataille à la Monongahela en 1755, loin des murs de Fort Duquesne, a subi en 1758 une défaite, cette fois-ci à Fort Duquesne alors que le fort a été abandonné par les Français. L'étau britannique se resserrait.
Il est vrai que la guérilla aura servi les intérêts français/canadiens. Plus souvent qu'elle aura servi les intérêts britanniques.
Ceci dit, au final, les Anglais auront quand même réussi à converger vers Montréal en partant du sud. L'étau à nouveau se resserrait.
La véritable défaite française lors de cette guerre de la conquête, là où ça comptait vraiment, aura été lorsque Louisbourg et Québec ont été prises successivement en 1758 et 1759, et où les campagnes françaises de la côte nord - je suis moins sûr pour la côte sud - ont été brûlées, semant la terreur dans la population. La colonie était fortement assaillie de toutes parts et les alliés amérindiens, absents du terrain, n'étaient d'aucune utilité là où ça comptait vraiment, c'est-à-dire là où pouvait débarquer impunément par voie de mer l'armée britannique. Incapable de se faire ravitailler par la mère patrie car la Royal Navy verrouillait la France de tous les côtés et car la France cherchait de moins en moins à ravitailler sa colonie nord-américaine, la victoire anglaise était inévitable.
Les Amérindiens auront bien sûr été utiles en quelques escarmouches dans ce qui est aujourd'hui l'État du New York, mais leur aide aura peu pesé dans l'ensemble de la guerre.
C'est intéressant de discuter avec vous monsieur Lalonde.
@@mcgiver6977 Pareillement! Je vous retourne le compliment.
hi
The hell where youth and laughter go.
Another victory for Britain, for Canada and for the cause of freedom and democracy. Wolfe was a hero.
JAJAJAJAJAJAJAJAJAJA euh...non, pas du tout
Yes, he was. Not for the Spanish, though. Wolfe was a hero because he got 4,400 men, their guns and equipment up a cliff in under five hours and successfully won against a French stronghold. This gave Great Britain a decisive victory and signified the beginning of the end for France and their colonies in North America.
"for Canada and for the cause of freedom and democracy."
Lol what? this was for nothing more than territorial gain and to hit France in it's weaker colonies, since the french were wining in Europe at the time.
where does this for freedom and democracy bull come from?
@@mckenzie.latham91Agreed
Well, France was an absolute monarchy at the time and Britain had (has) a parliament, so....
Do anyone ever wonder why the french second volley didn't do any big damage to the british line, but british volley basiclly crush them, although they put two bullet, but i don't think it has many damage to the french line.
The French fired too early for their muskets to be of great effect against the British, the British waited for their opponents to get within range of their muskets so when they would fire the British volley would devastate the enemy.
The French second volley was from 40 yards though. Two thin lines was the key which you can only carry out with highly disciplined and well trained soldiers that resist the urge to run away. The French advance in column so less muskets come into play. British were able to hit three sides of the column and less musket balls would miss as the French were several men deep.
See answer below 👍
14:46
Above now 🙄☝️