I live in a little community north of Vicksburg called Redwood. I hunt up in the hills overlooking the Yazoo River. There are still cannon pits along the ridge overlooking the river. The Union had a camp in my parent’s yard!
While Lee was winning flashy but totally ineffective victories that didn't do anything to the outcome of war except prolong it, Grant was obliterating enemy armies and dismantling the Confederacy through far less glorious but more effective means, like sieges and attrition. Lee got himself practically deified with his tactics, but Grant got results.
I agree with you mostly, but it is an over-simplification. Tactics and prolonging the war WERE key to the Confederacy's victory because prolonging the war makes war less attractive to the Union. It gives fuel those who sue for peace. It's why the US lost in Vietnam and Afghanistan: the Vietcong and the Taliban kept surviving and prolonging the war to the point that the US withdrew because the public was sick of war. So, yes, Lee was a good general. He probably did the best he could. Grant though was better because he actually used the Union's strengths to blow out the Confederates.
Spending 15 years in Virginia (living near Mount Vernon) as a young boy and man, I had a growing interest in the history of the CIVIL War which continues. I am currently re-reading Shelby Foote’s detailed and unmatched (in my humble opinion) account of the war. I learned a great deal from this video and look forward to watching the rest. Thank you for sharing your expertise and excellent presentation with us.
Rvr NV rve by be enevevrr re by v reeveebevreevr v be even e r reserve geebeevev tv reee verges even every every tv tv tv Eve be be egevr r rvevrvrebeegeevegeevrveveevrvrvrvrvevrvrvr Eve rvegrrvre brb re beebeevevrvergrv Eve be be be getting b Eve be be b evevrv enrvevev evevrv revenge reeeg energy energy Eve be g evevrvrv e e Eve v eve v reeves r revenge eervevevrvrvrvrrrve brb tv reeves rvevrvrvev rvevrvrvevr Greg energy rvevrvrvrv rvevrvrvrvrvevrvrvrvrvrvrvrrvrvrvrvrrvrvrrvr rvervrvrrbevr brb Eve Bebe evervrvrvr beebevrvrvevrvrrbevervrvrrvr rveevr Gregg rvevrvrrbevrvev rvrvrvrvrvrvrrrvrvrvrvrvrvrvrvr Bebe Bebe evevr bevervrrvrv be brb reverberate reverb rerveeebrvr beveevrvrvr be begervrv reeveverrrvrv rvevrvrvr be begerrvrrvrv reeegeebrvrv tv rvEve evevrvrvrvrvrvrvrvrvrbrrvrvrvr Bebe evevrvrrbevrvevrvrvrvrvrrrvrvrvrvrvrrrrv re v rverrvrvrrrvrrevevrv Eve be vegevrrvrrrvrv rvevrvrvrvrvr vegevr v Eve be vegevrvrvrvrrvrvrvrevervr veeerv tv tv evevrv r rvervrvrev evevrv rev Eve eeeve veeev Dr v eeeev evevrv Eve veeev evevrv r evevrv rvervrrrrv tv tv rvervrrv rvevrrrvrrvrvrvr Reece eeeveve evevr be be v Eve be be be b dev dev Ed bevervrvr reeves be Bebe evevrrrvrrvrrvrrvrrvrb reverb reeve rvr bevev eeeevr Bebe Bebe beverv eev everrrrrrerrv revrve beeeev e e tv reveneeeev r rvr evevr vebevrrvrrrvrv rvr v tv evevr r r rev rvr be brb tv r re brbrv rve even re b rvevrvrvrvrrrvrvrrrrvrvrrrv r evevr v revrve veeeev e even reeveeev eev e Eve v ever be evevr v evervrvrvrvrvrrvrvrvrrrvrv rvr v rvr vrrvrvrvrev rvr brb tv evevr rvr Greg r reeevrvevrv rvr Bebe v evevr evevrvrvrvrvr rvr eeev rreerebrrrrvrrrrrvrvrvrvrv r evevr r rvr be veervrv rvr veevrvr brown evevr eeev rgenveg rvevrvrvrv rve evevr veerrvevevrvrvrrv evevrv rve verve brown veeev e e rvr be eeevevr vebrv r r r re be ready b rvr v rverrrrrvr v Dr bevel Force dc did. C c. V v
Be careful with Shelby though. He is definitely a Southern sympathizer. Plus he is known not to correctly source his material. I really can't watch the ken burns documentary because of him. He makes it seem the civil war wasn't fought over slavery....which it was, maybe not in the first year of the war but later on. The confederacy was created because the issue over slavery. Shelby will not acknowledge that at all. Besides that the Ken Burns documentary does an amazing job at narrating such a hard time in America's history.
Have you read 7seals.yuku.com ? I have produced the “7 Seals revealed“ as ‘Beyond Einstein Theories‘ that only the returned Christ, Benjamin Franklin, Abraham Lincoln and Albert Einstein reincarnated could produce. That's triggered The Apocalypse/Revelation which is NOT the end of the world - it‘s the 2nd Coming (E=mc²).
Ask family & friends what they think of 7seals.blogspot.com .
Some people think that Grant was not great, but when you look at the Vicksburg campaign in detail, I do not see how this can be denied. First of all, for the Vicksburg campaign, Grant had about 73k men and the Confederates when Johnston's force is included about 65k. They say you usually shouldn't attack unless you have a 3 to 1 advantage. Indeed, it was such a close-run thing, with events often not going Grant's way, except when he needed them to. For all his difficulties with the canals, when he decided to circle Vicksburg all the way down to its south and then back up to its west, so many things fell his way, such as: 1) Porter's fleet steaming past the Vicksburg artillery largely unscathed; 2) Vicksburg lending its cavalry to Tennessee so it had no means of knowing how much Grant might be sneaking around; 3) Pemberton intercepting Grant with only three of his five divisions; 4) Johnston breaking off his relief expedition simply because he was "too late." What if Pemberton and Johnston had employed all of their resources in an all-out, coordinated, persistent effort focused on Grant? Where could Grant retreat? Back to the Mississippi? Maybe, but that seems to me difficult particularly because he had largely marooned himself from his supplies. I'm not sure how Union morale could have recovered from such a setback.
With regard to the Lake Providence Canal, the federals were able to prove viability of the route by sailing the 154 ton steamer Sam Young into Bayou Macon. Grant did not intend to use it as a route to Vicksburg, rather he was under orders to send an army corps to Banks at Port Hudson. However, the war department failed to send him sufficient steamboats of the Ohio River class to carry an army corps south via this route.
This was a most enjoyable, scholarly presentation by a professor with exceptional academic and military credentials.....I look forward to viewing more of Dr. DePue's lectures.....
Have you read 7seals.yuku.com ? I have produced the “7 Seals revealed“ as ‘Beyond Einstein Theories‘ that only the returned Christ, Benjamin Franklin, Abraham Lincoln and Albert Einstein reincarnated could produce. That's triggered The Apocalypse/Revelation which is NOT the end of the world - it‘s the 2nd Coming (E=mc²).
Ask family & friends what they think of 7seals.blogspot.com .
The myth is that the US troops for the most part just shelled or took pot shots at the Confederates and cruelly starved them out. If only they could have been fed the Confederates could have withstood the siege forever. The truth is that although there weren't a lot of Engineers in the Army of the Tennessee, all of the West Point schooled officers had taken (endured) Mahan's course on fortifications and siegecraft, so they knew how to engineer a siege. A series of approaches, parallels, rifle pits and advance batteries to suppress Confederate fire, and mines were built and advanced toward Confederate lines during those 47 days. 13 places along the Confederate lines were so vulnerable that they could be taken by early July. Mahan estimates that a siege, properly executed, should take 45 days. Vicksburg took 47. That's a failing of most of the writing on Vicksburg. Once it gets to Vicksburg it's all about engineering and siege tactics, the scholarly part of soldiering.
I did the same with regards to listening to this lecture first be fore I read Shelby Footes take on Vicksburg. I have the time life version which means I’m on the 7th book so far. Both of these 2 gentleman are an absolute gift with regards to any real understanding of this immense period our country went through back then. I can read and listen to this subject for hours. Like I said before what a true gift these men gave to us!
13:55 that's the first time I've heard that. The reference to Winfield Scott cutting himself off from supply lines Grant learning that skill which he used later. Fascinating stuff I'm glad I tuned in. And I I've been studying the civil war for many years now. Coincidentally I live in Richmond which is a hot bed for that sort of thing.
My grandfather is talking to me about his role in World War 1 in France. He's describing getting out of the trenches and moving forward with his fellow soldiers towards the enemy. I said grandpa I don't know if I'd be brave enough to move forward towards the enemy with everyone getting shot. He said well there was a whole line of ncos with 45 Colts who would shoot any man in the head who wasn't moving forward.
Big thanks to Dr. DePue! I watched this before going to the Vicksburg cemetery and this was a wonderful presentation to have as context. Hats off to showing the slides on the screen individually; it was great to follow along 👍
My second great grandfather, Private George Lancaster Nason, Company E, 3rd Battalion Mississippi Infantry State Troops was paroled at Vicksburg. I have a copy of his parole papers.
One of the frequently missed statistics is the number of African Americans enlisted during this time. The start of the campaign is about the same time as the Emancipation Proclamation which authorizes enlistment of African American as soldiers and sailors. About 24,000 African Americans from Mississippi and more from Louisiana enlisted and served. The 8th, 9th, 11th, and 13th Louisiana of African Descent were the first African American troops to see combat as they defended the supply depot at Milliken's Bend. Those units later became the 47th and 49th USCI and were stationed at Vicksburg for the rest of the war. Huge story, frequently untold.
My great-grandfather fought the yankees at Millikens Bend.15th Texas Co.F out of Henderson County.Whupped 'em good,just couldn't be more helpful in relieving Vicksburg.
@Patrick Ancona no one said otherwise, he just said it's notable for being the first time ever that black soldiers fought for the US. Which it is despite their number.
@Patrick Ancona Confederate armies were all fighting to preserve and expand African American slavery. Slavery was what the Civil War was all about regardless of post war propaganda. Read your articles of secession and the CSA Constitution.
@@willoutlaw4971 Exactly. The southern elites wanted to keep their feudal/slave-holder life style. The politicians could see that in time slavery would eventually end. So they decided to secede from the union. To accomplish this they demanded that all territories would have mandatory slavery. Of course that would never pass so they had their excuse. I think the point that people get to arguing over is Joe Lunchpail, the common soldier. They grew up around slavery and just accepted it, neither as right or wrong but just the way things were. Joe answered the call not over an ideal but as loyalty to his state.
Will Outlaw , Wrong, the War was fought to preserve the Union. Lincoln, and the GOP, were against the expansion of Slavery and not the abolition. Abolition became a goal during and after the War so the War could have a redeeming quality. Learn some history!
Porter was not in command of the Western Gunboat Flotilla (which just prior had become the Mississippi squadron) until October 1862. During Farragut's bombardment of Vicksburg in June/July of that year Porter was in charge of the mortar boats that accompanied Farragut. The WGF was under command of Flag Officer Charles Henry Davis.
Grierson's raid was dramatized to the big screen in "The Horse Soldiers" with John Wayne, his toupee, and William Holden. As in movies of the time, the writers were not much interested in historical accuracy, but stayed fairly close to the events. The movie did not fair well at the box office, but I've always enjoyed it.
I felt it was hard to take the movie seriously. Like the scene where Confederate reinforcements come to town and Wayne's men kill all of them. Literally all of them. Like seriously, what Civil War battle has a 100% fatality rate?
I watched this for over half an hour continually hearing him say "here" this, "here" that, and "here" such and such happened, while all I was seeing were giant maps of vast areas. Finally about halfway thru this vid I saw the (tiny, not very bright) white light that was serving as his curser.
@@Jhossack What? Did you mean to post your question in response to someone else's comment? Ids how it follows from mine, being as mine wasn't about anything more than how t curser was so small that i couldn't see it.
My peak of interest was that mention was made of a relative int the 24 Division of iowa. I had a great grandfather who was a Captain of Company H, Twenty-Fourth Iowa Volunteer Infantry and died in the Battle of Champion Hill. I'd think they knew each other and was wondering where he lived in Iowa.
Pemberton lost Vicksburg at Champion Hill when he had to retreat back into the city...which set up the siege A much more important battle than Gettysburg IMO
Vicksburg was a shocking tactical loss for the CSA and an amazing operational win for the Union. The overall battle plan devised by Scott was sound for the North and the South lacked a battle plan of that scale of complete comprehension. Winfield Scott is the unsung hero of the Civil War for his "overall strategy". Lee should have been thinking of Scott's strategy and been countering the whole time from a defensive strategy (for which he is brilliant)... which I think he could have given the overall command of the CSA and the "not just Virginia" battle plan philosophy . Lincoln, unlike Davis, was far more prescient on these matters and saw the whole chess field for what it was and signed off on the "Scott Plan."
@@Conn30Mtenor The way I would phrase it is the week of July 4th 1863 was a catastrophe all around. Lee was beat back at Gettysburg (and they really couldn't afford the losses they took there), Vicksburg surrenders (along with about 35,000 to 40,000 men) and, in an often overlooked smaller engagement, the 54th Massachusetts first sees real combat at Belle Isle SC. All of those combined were, as you said, a strategic catastrophe.
My 3rd ggfather fought at Vicksburg, we amazingly have a copy of his diary he kept during the war. He was a Sgt. in 32nd Missouri Regiment D, and I’m always in awe when I look at the list of all the battles and skirmishes..swamps..disease..he survived and marched in D.C.‘s grand review. He struggled with alcohol the rest of his life and was therefore an outcast in our small town. Sigh. But he was in everything from Yazoo, to Vicksburg, Jackson, Chattanooga, Lookout Mountain, Chickasaw Bluffs & Bayou 🥴, Kenesaw Mtn, Siege of Atlanta, Sherman’s March, Savannah..to name just a few. He also seemed a compassionate man from his diary and I wish I could have known him. Samuel E. McMullin. His nickname was “Stormy” 😆 in his diary, it’s entry after entry..today walked 13 miles.. Next day 19 miles. Next, 30 miles. He must have marched countless hundreds and hundreds of miles all over the western theater then to Washington.
That said, I love this lecture. it connects so many dots I’ve tried to connect over the years in reading my grandfather’s diary and what they experienced
Building two lines of trenches so that you can keep up a siege while being besieged yourself is a Julius Caesar move as well. He did it against the Gauls at Alesia.
"Those two things are supposed to happen simultaneously" no. Chickasaw Bayou was never part of Grant's plan. It was foist upon him by Lincoln and Halleck at McClernand's suggestion that a direct assault was feasible. In fact, if you review how Grant reacted to the order in PUSG, you can see he called Sherman to his HQ to discuss disobeying the order. Halleck not only dictated the timeframe and location of the attack, but the commander (Sherman) as well. Grant planned to cooperate by following Pemberton's army, but that would have been contingent on some initial success by Sherman.
Halleck was a pathetic little man, if you call him a man. He was jealous of Grant and his talent, Halleck and John A. McClernand spread the rumors that Grant was drinking and drunk on all the campaigns.
Overall, a great analysis of Grant's Vicksburg Campaign. Still, the maps as visual aides were inadequate. We need better close-ups to see what the speaker is talking about. They are invisible to any internet viewer. His pointer is invisible as well. Secondly, the 160 year old picture of Vicksburg is inadequate as well. I have a shaky and imperfect idea of the cliffs of Vicksburg facing the Mississippi, as I do the eastern approaches to the city where the seven mile fortifications of forts and redoubts were set up. Are there no modern pictures of Vicksburg today that could resolve these issues for American Civil War buffs? And finally, Grant didn't need to worry about his supply lines very much during this campaign, as regards to food and water. He was in the bread basket of the south after all. He had all the corn, beef cattle, chickens, rice, sugarcane, and molasses his troops could stand. The noble African American slave who told Grant where the dry ground and roads south of Vicksburg were, also told him where the wealthiest southern plantations were. Why not build a statue to this fine man? He helped Grant out in the Vicksburg campaign as much as Lincoln and Halleck did. This info is in Shelby Foote's wonderful description of the Vicksburg campaign in The Civil War, in the section called "The Beleaguered City. The primary source documents used in this documentary were wonderful. The descriptions of life inside Vicksburg during the 48 day siege were excellent. And the letter that Lincoln wrote to Grant was awesome. It wasn't as good as the Gettysburg Address, but it comes close.
Why does it no longer show the date a video was uploaded? When is this from? Yes, I could go back to the previous screen and maybe it would show how many years ago it was, but why doesn't it show the date in the description while the video is playing? Why?
Great video. I have a few questions, not necessarily limited to this video: * Why so many generals? In one of those org charts, I see a Major General (MG) over another MG who, in turn, is in command of yet another MG. My *GUESS* is that it was due to the technological limitations in command and control during the 19th century. * I see commanders on the Confederate side simply listed as "General" so-and-so. What was the equivalent rank of their Union counterparts?
Just speculating--they didn't want anyone to have a rank equal to George Washington. Although he was called "General" when it was the Continental Army, he was "Lieutenant General" later in the United States Army so there were no more lieutenant generals until that prejudice was overcome, and even then Congress promoted Washington posthumously and with prior dates of rank.
Until later in the war the highest rank anyone could get in the Union Army was Major General, seniority by date of rank was the way in which the line of command was sorted among generals of the same rank (that unless a junior officer was promoted either by merit or politicking to a position in which he would command a senior general), got to consider though that some of those charts you speak of may not have all the details and do not always show if the general was a MG of the regular army or if he was a MG of volunteers or if the person in question was an actual MG or a Brevet MG. In the CSA they had Lt. Generals and Generals (Full General) above the grade of MG, the highest ranked officer killed in action in the war Albert S. Johnston had the rank of (full) General.
Does no one check to see if the speaker is using the same names as on the displayed map? I'm lost most of the time. Very disappointing, I want to know how the men moved and who was leading, but to hear names and not see them on the map just confuses me..
My opinion of the Anaconda Plan was it was a good way to start the war. Scott clearly understood the economic situation of the South. You cut the Confederacy in two while simultaneously cutting them off commercially from the outside world. This was why they ran into so many problems economically later in the war. The South didn't have a ton of heavy industry and as such they had to get things, especially war material, imported. The blockade really did begin to work by 1862 and they had large problems getting much needed equipment and consumables (especially guns and ammunition). While they ultimately did need the full scale invasion of the south by Grant and Sherman, the initial Anaconda Plan really did set the stage for Union Victory.
the Mississippi squadron...Porter's gunboats...were susceptable to plunging fire...but otherwise quite formidable...II'm sitting here looking at a nice model of the USS Pittsburg..one of the members of that group..I now have models of three out of four of the ships that bore that name...those gunboats were quite slow...only capable of a few knots....but the confederates were unable to depress their guns to strike them as they passed by...only one of that group survives to this day, largely because it was later raised from the river after striking a confederate "torpedo"....all of them that survived were quickly scrapped after the war...this was also the point at which command of them passed from the army to the navy...trying to move them through the swamps proved quite difficult resulting in a rain of "critters"....even bears and poisonous snakes...which proved quite challenging to the sailors!.....
@@TheGravitywerks that's the only one of the city gunboats that survived..(partially)...the rest were either sunk or sold for scrap at the end of the war when their usefulness was at an end....
@@frankpienkosky5688 Wow,... the only thing as striking as the personal affects of the crew...was the scale of it! The shaft from the boiler to the props is enormous...makes you wonder how they made something of that size in that day! I was on another one in Columbus, Georgia but don't recall the type...looked similar to the Tennessee type. Again, awesome!
Greetings from Singapore 😊 I'm wondering how it was possible for a Pvt with the 24th Iowa, who was mortally wounded on Champion's Hill, to be buried with a Confederate grave marker? His photo and grave stone photo are at a Confederate soldiers cabin in VA. Can anybody please help to explain. Thanks! ❤️
I have a question. Back in 2008, took a family visit to the Vicksburg battle site along with other great spots in the City. My question is are there any monuments of the Confederate side. Thanks. I can't recall, but wasn't an issue then with tearing down our history's past.
In hindsight, it was obvious that Porter's gunboats would have minimal damage. They were ironclads, and as such were cannonball-proof. If the transport ships were leeward (not aft) of the gunboats, the gunboats protected them from the cannonfire. But did Porter know that? The Monitor and Merrimack had battled a year earlier. Would Porter have known the results of the battle and deduce that he was safe from Confederate cannon?
far from invulnerable...they had wooden hulls and their top armor was quite thin...also their steering gear..[exposed chains]...were an easy target.....
To save on weight, armored ships are well protected from laterally traveling shot and have vulnerabilities to plunging shots. The Monitor, for example, had only thin armoring on its flat deck, and it was very vulnerable to shot coming in from a high position. There were no ironclads with no armor flaws against plunging shot. Even the dreadnoughts of WW1 and WW2 had such armor flaws.
Anoyher fascinating lecture. Just hammers home that Vicksburg and Gettysburg were the turning point of the war. And if. at the outset, Lee had put Country before State, Realism before Idealism, the war wou;d have been over much sooner with far fewer casualties on both sides. The word "despot" was mentioned towards the end of this lecture. To me, the despot was Robert E. Lee.
The sad fact was known by Johnston that the Union would not give up on Vicksburg and he (Johnston) would only succeed in the destruction of both CSA armies there. At least that's what I've gleaned from it.
He did try but it was just a probe. Johnston had no artillery and not a lot of bang bang supplies. He was outnumbered and the Union was dug in very well. The defender, Sherman, had more supplies, more men and good defensive terrain. Grant said after the war Pemberton's best choice would have been to break out of Vicksburg and save his army.
Interestign reading in Grant's autobiography about Johnston. He writes that initally he shared the high opinion of his skills. But from what he (Grant) learned about details after the war, he came to a much more critical judgement of Johnston in this campaign. But the historical narrative is very much set by Davies and his claim that he was possibly the best General of the CSA... Oh and Grant isn't overly enthusiastic about McClernand..
wonderful talk. The constant jumping around of the visuals greatly detracts from the presentation. Why does the viewer need to periodically see the heads of the audience? Very shoddily done Sir. As the speaker talks to the visuals surely the focus should be on the visuals.
Johnston could have attacked Grant from behind Pemberton actually repeatedly asked Johnston for relief which he never sent. Pemberton never forgave Johnston after the war. Also there are conflicting stories about whether or not Grant actually went on a bender. He had many detractors.
I know that Pemberton was Johnston's subordinate. That was why he was requesting help from Johnston. I agree the leadership structure was a clusterfuck because Davis put Johnston in command of the western theater. But at the same time he told Pemberton to hold Vicksburg at all costs, and that Pemberton should report to him instead of Johnston. This put Pemberton in an awkward position. Vicksburg was the key to the Confederacy due to it's place on the Miss. River. He was essentially trying to hold back Grant's entire army after they got a foothold on the east bank of the Mississippi. If Johnston had engaged Sherman it would have come close to evening the odds and he would be attacking from the east as the Union pushed west towards Vicksburg, essentially forcing them to fight on two fronts with limited supply. Grant was actually weary that this would happen and why they moved so fast so that they could lay siege to the town. The only way for Pemberton to break out would be if Johnston came to his aid, and even then he would be disobeying Davis' order to hold the city no matter what. I think that Vicksburg was the battle that turned the tide of the war, much more so than Gettysburg.
@Doug Bevins Johnston is an interesting study. He indeed had a keen strategic mind but Davis did not. There are times that I feel Johnston should have attacked in this campaign and the Georgia campaign but I do know that when Sherman hit Johnston, he got bloodied. Davis would not let Johnston command. Johnston's focus was always on preserving his army and maximizing any advantage perhaps to a fault. He understood, better than Davis, the advantages held by the Union but was too conservative.
@@frankpienkosky5688 Yep! It's an interesting study and Davis made some serious mistakes. If Johnston had destroyed his army against Grant at Vicksburg or Sherman before Atl, there wouldn't have been anything for the courageous, idiot Hood to destroy at Atl and TN. Even though my GG grandfather was with Sherman, I've always been fascinated with Johnston. I think Atl should have been garrisoned with the GA Guard and a division or two of Army of TN and Johnstons' main force left outside to disrupt Sherman. Also the refusal to commit Forrest in Shermans' rear was a mistake. With major forces outside Atl, Sherman would have had to split his forces to seige Atl, chase Forrest and fight Johnston. A lot more level position for CSA. Sherman would have had a much harder time supplying his armies either by rail or foraging. Would love to hear your assessment of this.
Have you read 7seals.yuku.com ? I have produced the “7 Seals revealed“ as ‘Beyond Einstein Theories‘ that only the returned Christ, Benjamin Franklin, Abraham Lincoln and Albert Einstein reincarnated could produce. That's triggered The Apocalypse/Revelation which is NOT the end of the world - it‘s the 2nd Coming (E=mc²).
Ask family & friends what they think of 7seals.blogspot.com .
As far as the Gettysburg vs. Vicksburg debate, I look at it like this. If Gettysburg was not decisive, if neither side achieved a successful/decisive outcome, nothing much would have changed as far as the status of the war. If Grant was not successful at Vicksburg, if the South had kept that city for the duration of the war, the war would have probably continued for 2+ more years.
While it is a great program to listen to, the graphics are worthless. The camera only briefly shows anything on the screen before zooming out to the point you can only see the speaker clearly. It turns this entire video into more of an audio book instead of a video broadcast.
I think there are several main reasons Gettysburg gets more attention than Vicksburg: 1) It's a major defeat that Lee suffered, and he had been on an absolute tear earlier that year. Lee's victories at Fredericksburg and Chancellorsville were near legendary by that point. Losing at Gettysburg really took some of the shine off of Lee and effected him as well. 2) Gettysburg is one of the biggest and bloodiest battles ever fought in the Western Hemisphere. 3) The battle was lot closer to DC and had a lot more reporters and photographers present. As such it got more attention in the media at the time and afterwards. Vicksburg was a long way away for a lot of people. 4) The victory at Gettysburg has more immediate consequences than Vicksburg. Lee's army immediately withdraws from Union territory and Lee is never quite that aggressive again. By cutting the Confederacy in two and closing them off from foodstuffs in Arkansas and Texas as well as reinforcements Vicksburg is arguably the more important victory in the long run. But again, a lot of that wasn't immediately apparent to a lot of people.
To paraphrase Pres. Lincoln, and the major media today, if it didn't happen in the east it didn't happen. Abe was extremely upset that all of the Union victories in the West didn't seem to mean anything because of Lee's victories of the Seven Days and 2cd Manassas. I think Gettysburg (along with 1st Manassas and Antietam) is one of those rare ACW battles that's easy to visualize and walk, map, etc., unlike Shiloh, Chancellorsville, Chickamauga etc. fought in huge woods, and Vicksburg and Atlanta fought on a large scale over a vast territory.
Chickamauga was the most significant Union defeat in the Western Theater. Amazing that the most important battle fought at Chickamauga is denied by amateurs. Chickamauga had the second highest numbers of casualties after the Battle of Gettysburg.
I never heard that, thanks for sharing. If you hear about the battle at all it's usually to slam Bragg for not being more aggressive following the victory.
Chickamauga was important and the casualties on both sides were very very high, but it was overshadowed by the preceding catastrophic (for the CSA) seizure of Chattanooga, which Rosecrans captured almost without firing a shot. The Union defeat of Chickamauga delayed the inevitable massive invasion into the Confederate heartland that would be launched from Chattanooga. Ultimately Sherman marched right down from Chattanooga to Atlanta and sacked it.
Naw, Rosecrans might’ve gotten his 20th Corps routed and crushed, but he still had Chattanooga. The Army of TN also had a ton of KIA for no strategic advantage.
Not quite sure what point you're trying to make. The manpower losses the Union suffered at Chickamauga barely made them blink. But were devastating to the South. The true definition of a Pyrrhic victory....
A. Lincoln was towering above some of our current crop of pols. I won't name names, but it is the most self-centered who is the complete opposite of Lincoln, who would have beared any indignity, if that would mean winning the war and saving the union. A word about his demise; I have always felt there should have been an attempt to remove the bullet from Lincoln's brain, rather than doing nothing. I forget how many doctors were at his bedside. I think it might have been three, but at the crucial time after the injury, I believe anything was superior than trying nothing, but bloodletting, which any half-wit should have known was stupid. If saved, Lincoln may not have been the legend he was in death. He might have gotten the same grief Johnson got, but I know he would not have stood by while freedmen were murdered in Louisiana where the army did nothing to lift a hand. Was it racism? Who knows.
during a mind numbing boring lull in the fighting at 1:20:50 a half starved mule wandered near the trenches. a hundred itchy trigger fingers pulled at once, and the animal was no more
Our Maternal Grandfather WAS from IOWA!! He married Mattie McDowell from whom I get my "southern" roots. They claim their marriage "officially" ended to Civil War or War between the States.
This was a huge loss for the Confederacy but an oft overlooked battle is Monocacy in 1864- Lee Wallace slowed the CSA long enough for Grant to send reinforcements to defend Washington
The bender story is very shaky and should not be given as fact. Other than that this is good, although the proper name of that sad sack unit was "The Forlorn Hope".
Lee was a general for the south and the south lost its Mississippi supply line. Things are now getting desperate for the south and lee is now getting desperate. Lee was not a good general and who made him look brilliant was the traitor Edwin Stanton.
@@jamesreagle245 ....far from the truth....the south would have lost much sooner absent his battlefield brilliance...always seemed to do more with less.....
@@frankpienkosky5688 I think lee was helped by Edwin Stanton giving mcclelland erroneous information about confederate troop strength. I think lee being portrayed as brilliant may need further investigation
HA! I see a lot of statements here about differences in or lack of strategy and comprehension so let me help those of you saying this comprehend something about that supposed strategy; nothing overcomes a 5-1 manpower advantage and 10-1 (and thats being nice) material advantage but terroristic guerilla warfare, something the Confederacy was not willing to do. So everything else after that decision, no matter how glorious or bloody, was ineffectual to the actual outcome.
While my g-g-grandfather, Charles Fleetwood, fought for the North, my g-grandfather John Mallard Stuckey fought for the South! John was wounded at captured by the North in the battle of Vicksburg! He was later traded out for prisoners that the South held who were Masons! Apparently, the brotherhood of Masons carried some weight in the Civil War! Google John Mallard Stuckey, by Aquilla Fleetwood, youtube! Sgt. Charles Fleetwood had married a young Indian girl who had walked the "Trail of Tears" in 1834! He met her at Fort Gibson in Indian Territory! Charles was 53 years old when he re-enlisted for the North! Charles led a 1,000 man all Cherokee regiment in the Battle of Honey Springs! My g-g-g-g-grandfather Nicholas Thomas Fain was killed in the Revoluntionary war in the Battle of King Mountain in Tennessee! Family info......
The only ACW ascendant I've been able to trace was a maternal g-g-g-uncle who served in both an IL and IN cavalry brigade and had the dubious honor of being captured by Forrest's men twice, once in 1862 and again in 1863. AFAIK he survived without a wound, married the sister of my g-g-g-grandmother and had 13 children.
Grant didn’t need to physically take Vicksburg , because the union already controlled nearly the entire river at that point - it was the rail and telegraph communication lines - West to east- that made it the crux of the western front- which was already taken out of commission. Even if the confederates had obeyed Davis, and “held the fort” they would have been starved out.
I have to agree. Just for fun though makes you wonder if the confederates has Lee, Stonewall Jackson and Nathan Bedford Forrest there giving back to the Union as much they got. Yes I know warfare never happens that way buts it’s fun sometimes to do the what if’s kinda thing.
Steven Hammel In some alternative universe, the south won. But I doubt both countries would have fought together during ww2, and possibly eliminated themselves from post war technological advancements. It’s likely that even the south would have fractured and split from itself, and North America would resemble South America, being separate weak countries.
It’s true he didn’t have to take it by force even though they had made a couple of attempts earlier. I think Grant knew that after that regardless of how weak the Confederate forces were it still would have been a blood bath. In the end it’s true the siege ultimately worked and I suppose saved many lives because of it. A good portion of the prisoners , especially the officers were paroled out. I assume you’ve read Shelby Footes brilliant account of it. If not I highly recommend it.
Steven Hammel it was the ultimate feather in Grants hat- had he not took Vicksburg I doubt he would have earned the highest esteem by Lincoln - and without the armies of Illinois, Indiana and Ohio, the north would not have won the civil war
@@andywalkerplumber Right on. Further breaking up already started as soon as the bullets began flying. North Carolina attempted to secede from the Confederacy twice. So did NY City.
TWO JACKSONS. In May of 1863 the Confederacy lost two Jacksons, Stonewall and Jackson, Mississippi. The LCM (Lost Cause Mythmakers) don’t seem to mention Jackson, Mississippi surrendering, as they would say, to “The Drunk” or “The Butcher”. Grant’s Masterpiece, the Vicksburg Campaign, was begun around the same time of Chancellorsville, “Lee’s Greatest Victory” where the ANV lost more killed and wounded than the AOP. The LCM likes to talk about the brilliant flank attack where Jackson’s hubris driven fiasco gets himself killed. The LCM still thought the Civil War was an event that occurred in a 100 mile square in Virginia. After 160 years of myth and demonizing, it is time to shine a little light on the truth. Stonewall died on May 10, 1863 the same day as Confederate General Joseph E. Johnston was sent to Jackson for an ill-fated defense of that city, surrendering it on May 14, 1863 to the greatest General in American History, Ulysses S. Grant.
When I'm shopping at my local @Walmart*. Many, many, many gorgeous women ask me, "Bill. Which Civil War Battle is among your favorites? I'd say Vicksburg. It's there GRANT showed his genius. Though, he had the pressure of LINCOLN and too, all the "Peasants" picking on him. He stuck it out and pulled through. I'm also a "Fan" of his sidekick SHERMAN. I see a lot of him in me. -Bill "Humble" Howes.
@@frankpienkosky5688 It did. "Vicksburg went on for over a year! I believe General Grant started his approaches in April of 1862. That may have been when the navy first bombed Vicksburg. Whatever. Listen to "Depue's" lectures on this and Gettysburg. Very enjoyable.
This gentleman is certainly well educated on these matters and knows his history, but this overall presentation could’ve been.much better done with proper coordination using the maps and visual aids. Also, and I’m showing my southern bias here, but Shelby Foote could’ve held my interest much more through this.
This was a great presentation with serious depth, but it is hardly to DePue's credit by starting out with a verbal assault against the importance of Gettysburg. Yes, Vicksburg was a very prominent loss for the Confederacy. Just the same, for various reasons it would of been a tremendous blow to the North if the Pennsylvania battle(s) led to anything but a Union victory. Originally, Lee had good designs in making the attempt, though he heavily over committed his forces. A bit of balancing of diplomacy would do this speaker well going that route instead of clearly showing such an unprofessional degree of bias.
I live in a little community north of Vicksburg called Redwood. I hunt up in the hills overlooking the Yazoo River. There are still cannon pits along the ridge overlooking the river. The Union had a camp in my parent’s yard!
Wow!!
Wow!!
You are lucky, get a metal detector!
While Lee was winning flashy but totally ineffective victories that didn't do anything to the outcome of war except prolong it, Grant was obliterating enemy armies and dismantling the Confederacy through far less glorious but more effective means, like sieges and attrition. Lee got himself practically deified with his tactics, but Grant got results.
I agree with you mostly, but it is an over-simplification. Tactics and prolonging the war WERE key to the Confederacy's victory because prolonging the war makes war less attractive to the Union. It gives fuel those who sue for peace. It's why the US lost in Vietnam and Afghanistan: the Vietcong and the Taliban kept surviving and prolonging the war to the point that the US withdrew because the public was sick of war. So, yes, Lee was a good general. He probably did the best he could. Grant though was better because he actually used the Union's strengths to blow out the Confederates.
Correct.
Spending 15 years in Virginia (living near Mount Vernon) as a young boy and man, I had a growing interest in the history of the CIVIL War which continues. I am currently re-reading Shelby Foote’s detailed and unmatched (in my humble opinion) account of the war. I learned a great deal from this video and look forward to watching the rest. Thank you for sharing your expertise and excellent presentation with us.
Rvr NV rve by be enevevrr re by v reeveebevreevr v be even e r reserve geebeevev tv reee verges even every every tv tv tv Eve be be egevr r rvevrvrebeegeevegeevrveveevrvrvrvrvevrvrvr Eve rvegrrvre brb re beebeevevrvergrv Eve be be be getting b Eve be be b evevrv enrvevev evevrv revenge reeeg energy energy Eve be g evevrvrv e e Eve v eve v reeves r revenge eervevevrvrvrvrrrve brb tv reeves rvevrvrvev rvevrvrvevr Greg energy rvevrvrvrv rvevrvrvrvrvevrvrvrvrvrvrvrrvrvrvrvrrvrvrrvr rvervrvrrbevr brb Eve Bebe evervrvrvr beebevrvrvevrvrrbevervrvrrvr rveevr Gregg rvevrvrrbevrvev rvrvrvrvrvrvrrrvrvrvrvrvrvrvrvr Bebe Bebe evevr bevervrrvrv be brb reverberate reverb rerveeebrvr beveevrvrvr be begervrv reeveverrrvrv rvevrvrvr be begerrvrrvrv reeegeebrvrv tv rvEve evevrvrvrvrvrvrvrvrvrbrrvrvrvr Bebe evevrvrrbevrvevrvrvrvrvrrrvrvrvrvrvrrrrv re v rverrvrvrrrvrrevevrv Eve be vegevrrvrrrvrv rvevrvrvrvrvr vegevr v Eve be vegevrvrvrvrrvrvrvrevervr veeerv tv tv evevrv r rvervrvrev evevrv rev Eve eeeve veeev Dr v eeeev evevrv Eve veeev evevrv r evevrv rvervrrrrv tv tv rvervrrv rvevrrrvrrvrvrvr Reece eeeveve evevr be be v Eve be be be b dev dev Ed bevervrvr reeves be Bebe evevrrrvrrvrrvrrvrrvrb reverb reeve rvr bevev eeeevr Bebe Bebe beverv eev everrrrrrerrv revrve beeeev e e tv reveneeeev r rvr evevr vebevrrvrrrvrv rvr v tv evevr r r rev rvr be brb tv r re brbrv rve even re b rvevrvrvrvrrrvrvrrrrvrvrrrv r evevr v revrve veeeev e even reeveeev eev e Eve v ever be evevr v evervrvrvrvrvrrvrvrvrrrvrv rvr v rvr vrrvrvrvrev rvr brb tv evevr rvr Greg r reeevrvevrv rvr Bebe v evevr evevrvrvrvrvr rvr eeev rreerebrrrrvrrrrrvrvrvrvrv r evevr r rvr be veervrv rvr veevrvr brown evevr eeev rgenveg rvevrvrvrv rve evevr veerrvevevrvrvrrv evevrv rve verve brown veeev e e rvr be eeevevr vebrv r r r re be ready b rvr v rverrrrrvr v Dr bevel
Force dc did. C c. V v
I love listening to Shelby.
Rereading Shelby myself, kudos
Appreciate your comment here. THIS is why the comment section was added.
Be careful with Shelby though. He is definitely a Southern sympathizer. Plus he is known not to correctly source his material. I really can't watch the ken burns documentary because of him. He makes it seem the civil war wasn't fought over slavery....which it was, maybe not in the first year of the war but later on. The confederacy was created because the issue over slavery. Shelby will not acknowledge that at all. Besides that the Ken Burns documentary does an amazing job at narrating such a hard time in America's history.
I just want to thank Dr. DePue, and congratulate him, and encourage him to continue with his good and valuable scholarship. :))
jjpbdm uhhv. N I icf
Agree!
Have you read 7seals.yuku.com ? I have produced the “7 Seals revealed“ as ‘Beyond Einstein Theories‘ that only the returned Christ, Benjamin Franklin, Abraham Lincoln and Albert Einstein reincarnated could produce. That's triggered The Apocalypse/Revelation which is NOT the end of the world - it‘s the 2nd Coming (E=mc²).
Ask family & friends what they think of 7seals.blogspot.com .
Fantastic story about Dr. Mark DePue's grandparents. Jaw-dropping.
Some people think that Grant was not great, but when you look at the Vicksburg campaign in detail, I do not see how this can be denied. First of all, for the Vicksburg campaign, Grant had about 73k men and the Confederates when Johnston's force is included about 65k. They say you usually shouldn't attack unless you have a 3 to 1 advantage. Indeed, it was such a close-run thing, with events often not going Grant's way, except when he needed them to. For all his difficulties with the canals, when he decided to circle Vicksburg all the way down to its south and then back up to its west, so many things fell his way, such as: 1) Porter's fleet steaming past the Vicksburg artillery largely unscathed; 2) Vicksburg lending its cavalry to Tennessee so it had no means of knowing how much Grant might be sneaking around; 3) Pemberton intercepting Grant with only three of his five divisions; 4) Johnston breaking off his relief expedition simply because he was "too late." What if Pemberton and Johnston had employed all of their resources in an all-out, coordinated, persistent effort focused on Grant? Where could Grant retreat? Back to the Mississippi? Maybe, but that seems to me difficult particularly because he had largely marooned himself from his supplies. I'm not sure how Union morale could have recovered from such a setback.
Excellent presentation! Thoroughly enjoyed it!
With regard to the Lake Providence Canal, the federals were able to prove viability of the route by sailing the 154 ton steamer Sam Young into Bayou Macon. Grant did not intend to use it as a route to Vicksburg, rather he was under orders to send an army corps to Banks at Port Hudson. However, the war department failed to send him sufficient steamboats of the Ohio River class to carry an army corps south via this route.
This was a most enjoyable, scholarly presentation by a professor with exceptional academic and military credentials.....I look forward to viewing more of Dr. DePue's lectures.....
Have you read 7seals.yuku.com ? I have produced the “7 Seals revealed“ as ‘Beyond Einstein Theories‘ that only the returned Christ, Benjamin Franklin, Abraham Lincoln and Albert Einstein reincarnated could produce. That's triggered The Apocalypse/Revelation which is NOT the end of the world - it‘s the 2nd Coming (E=mc²).
Ask family & friends what they think of 7seals.blogspot.com .
The myth is that the US troops for the most part just shelled or took pot shots at the Confederates and cruelly starved them out. If only they could have been fed the Confederates could have withstood the siege forever. The truth is that although there weren't a lot of Engineers in the Army of the Tennessee, all of the West Point schooled officers had taken (endured) Mahan's course on fortifications and siegecraft, so they knew how to engineer a siege. A series of approaches, parallels, rifle pits and advance batteries to suppress Confederate fire, and mines were built and advanced toward Confederate lines during those 47 days. 13 places along the Confederate lines were so vulnerable that they could be taken by early July. Mahan estimates that a siege, properly executed, should take 45 days. Vicksburg took 47. That's a failing of most of the writing on Vicksburg. Once it gets to Vicksburg it's all about engineering and siege tactics, the scholarly part of soldiering.
This is one of the best lectures on the topic of Vicksburg out there. I paired this with Shelby Foote’s book as a primer before I read the book.
I did the same with regards to listening to this lecture first be fore I read Shelby Footes take on Vicksburg. I have the time life version which means I’m on the 7th book so far. Both of these 2 gentleman are an absolute gift with regards to any real understanding of this immense period our country went through back then. I can read and listen to this subject for hours. Like I said before what a true gift these men gave to us!
I'm just finishing book 2 right now
@@stevenhammel8027 ....the civilians suffered heavily in this fight.....
13:55 that's the first time I've heard that. The reference to Winfield Scott cutting himself off from supply lines Grant learning that skill which he used later. Fascinating stuff I'm glad I tuned in. And I I've been studying the civil war for many years now. Coincidentally I live in Richmond which is a hot bed for that sort of thing.
Tidewater VA James River
i love your lectures, you are very gifted. thank you, the creator has blessed you!
My grandfather is talking to me about his role in World War 1 in France. He's describing getting out of the trenches and moving forward with his fellow soldiers towards the enemy. I said grandpa I don't know if I'd be brave enough to move forward towards the enemy with everyone getting shot. He said well there was a whole line of ncos with 45 Colts who would shoot any man in the head who wasn't moving forward.
huh, God lord you're a puppy son
@@hoss-lk4bg I have no idea what that means.
That's a pile of Bull! American soldiers aren't motivated by threats; to preform. That was Saddam Husain! American fighters ran towards the gunfire!
Big thanks to Dr. DePue! I watched this before going to the Vicksburg cemetery and this was a wonderful presentation to have as context. Hats off to showing the slides on the screen individually; it was great to follow along 👍
Very informative and an excellent presentation.
Are the slides available anywhere to download?
Mr. DePue's lectures are wonderful.
My second great grandfather, Private George Lancaster Nason, Company E, 3rd Battalion Mississippi Infantry State Troops was paroled at Vicksburg. I have a copy of his parole papers.
Gre
lie
alcohol and loneliness has really taken its toll on dapue...
lie
One of the frequently missed statistics is the number of African Americans enlisted during this time. The start of the campaign is about the same time as the Emancipation Proclamation which authorizes enlistment of African American as soldiers and sailors. About 24,000 African Americans from Mississippi and more from Louisiana enlisted and served. The 8th, 9th, 11th, and 13th Louisiana of African Descent were the first African American troops to see combat as they defended the supply depot at Milliken's Bend. Those units later became the 47th and 49th USCI and were stationed at Vicksburg for the rest of the war. Huge story, frequently untold.
My great-grandfather fought the yankees at Millikens Bend.15th Texas Co.F out of Henderson County.Whupped 'em good,just couldn't be more helpful in relieving Vicksburg.
@Patrick Ancona no one said otherwise, he just said it's notable for being the first time ever that black soldiers fought for the US. Which it is despite their number.
@Patrick Ancona Confederate armies were all fighting to preserve and expand African American slavery. Slavery was what the Civil War was all about regardless of post war propaganda. Read your articles of secession and the CSA Constitution.
@@willoutlaw4971 Exactly. The southern elites wanted to keep their feudal/slave-holder life style. The politicians could see that in time slavery would eventually end. So they decided to secede from the union. To accomplish this they demanded that all territories would have mandatory slavery. Of course that would never pass so they had their excuse.
I think the point that people get to arguing over is Joe Lunchpail, the common soldier. They grew up around slavery and just accepted it, neither as right or wrong but just the way things were. Joe answered the call not over an ideal but as loyalty to his state.
Will Outlaw , Wrong, the War was fought to preserve the Union. Lincoln, and the GOP, were against the expansion of Slavery and not the abolition. Abolition became a goal during and after the War so the War could have a redeeming quality. Learn some history!
Accepting & admitting that you are WRONG about something IS a mark of GOOD CHARACTER. Those that can't or struggle have little or NO good character.
Very good presentation. Interesting that his great grandfather was in one of the described battles.
Porter was not in command of the Western Gunboat Flotilla (which just prior had become the Mississippi squadron) until October 1862. During Farragut's bombardment of Vicksburg in June/July of that year Porter was in charge of the mortar boats that accompanied Farragut. The WGF was under command of Flag Officer Charles Henry Davis.
Grierson's raid was dramatized to the big screen in "The Horse Soldiers" with John Wayne, his toupee, and William Holden. As in movies of the time, the writers were not much interested in historical accuracy, but stayed fairly close to the events.
The movie did not fair well at the box office, but I've always enjoyed it.
I felt it was hard to take the movie seriously. Like the scene where Confederate reinforcements come to town and Wayne's men kill all of them. Literally all of them. Like seriously, what Civil War battle has a 100% fatality rate?
The movie did not fare well
I watched this for over half an hour continually hearing him say "here" this, "here" that, and "here" such and such happened, while all I was seeing were giant maps of vast areas. Finally about halfway thru this vid I saw the (tiny, not very bright) white light that was serving as his curser.
But never mind. You were there, right?
@@Jhossack What? Did you mean to post your question in response to someone else's comment?
Ids how it follows from mine, being as mine wasn't about anything more than how t curser was so small that i couldn't see it.
really bad
@@hoss-lk4bg What was "really bad", my eyesight? Maybe.
I downloaded this. Thank you
From where?
Could you enable closed captioning for the video?
My peak of interest was that mention was made of a relative int the 24 Division of iowa. I had a great grandfather who was a Captain of Company H, Twenty-Fourth Iowa Volunteer Infantry and died in the Battle of Champion Hill. I'd think they knew each other and was wondering where he lived in Iowa.
Pemberton lost Vicksburg at Champion Hill when he had to retreat back into the city...which set up the siege
A much more important battle than Gettysburg IMO
Vicksburg was a shocking tactical loss for the CSA and an amazing operational win for the Union. The overall battle plan devised by Scott was sound for the North and the South lacked a battle plan of that scale of complete comprehension. Winfield Scott is the unsung hero of the Civil War for his "overall strategy". Lee should have been thinking of Scott's strategy and been countering the whole time from a defensive strategy (for which he is brilliant)... which I think he could have given the overall command of the CSA and the "not just Virginia" battle plan philosophy . Lincoln, unlike Davis, was far more prescient on these matters and saw the whole chess field for what it was and signed off on the "Scott Plan."
I'd take that further- a strategic catastrophe.
@@Conn30Mtenor The way I would phrase it is the week of July 4th 1863 was a catastrophe all around. Lee was beat back at Gettysburg (and they really couldn't afford the losses they took there), Vicksburg surrenders (along with about 35,000 to 40,000 men) and, in an often overlooked smaller engagement, the 54th Massachusetts first sees real combat at Belle Isle SC. All of those combined were, as you said, a strategic catastrophe.
Correct, The North had large< grand stratagies while the South had none. The South was tactically about to fight, but never had a real stratagy.
U
@@1987phillybilly ....other than to hold them off till they got tired of it......
This was an informative and balanced speech on Vicksburg.
@Cpl Soletrain ....Andersonville?......
@Cpl Soletrain ....and the commandant hung for it...but that didn't exist until 1864...so any mention of it in "The Horse Soldiers" was inaccurate....
This is a great lecture series
@Thomas Headley ....or yankee greenbacks....
My 3rd ggfather fought at Vicksburg, we amazingly have a copy of his diary he kept during the war. He was a Sgt. in 32nd Missouri Regiment D, and I’m always in awe when I look at the list of all the battles and skirmishes..swamps..disease..he survived and marched in D.C.‘s grand review. He struggled with alcohol the rest of his life and was therefore an outcast in our small town. Sigh. But he was in everything from Yazoo, to Vicksburg, Jackson, Chattanooga, Lookout Mountain, Chickasaw Bluffs & Bayou 🥴, Kenesaw Mtn, Siege of Atlanta, Sherman’s March, Savannah..to name just a few. He also seemed a compassionate man from his diary and I wish I could have known him. Samuel E. McMullin. His nickname was “Stormy” 😆 in his diary, it’s entry after entry..today walked 13 miles.. Next day 19 miles. Next, 30 miles. He must have marched countless hundreds and hundreds of miles all over the western theater then to Washington.
That said, I love this lecture. it connects so many dots I’ve tried to connect over the years in reading my grandfather’s diary and what they experienced
please take photos of that diary and save them somewhere to keep a copy of it! please also publish it or put it up for free, i would love to see it.
Building a giant canal to get behind the enemy is like Alexander connecting an island to the mainland to attack the island with siege towers.
Building two lines of trenches so that you can keep up a siege while being besieged yourself is a Julius Caesar move as well. He did it against the Gauls at Alesia.
"Those two things are supposed to happen simultaneously" no. Chickasaw Bayou was never part of Grant's plan. It was foist upon him by Lincoln and Halleck at McClernand's suggestion that a direct assault was feasible. In fact, if you review how Grant reacted to the order in PUSG, you can see he called Sherman to his HQ to discuss disobeying the order. Halleck not only dictated the timeframe and location of the attack, but the commander (Sherman) as well. Grant planned to cooperate by following Pemberton's army, but that would have been contingent on some initial success by Sherman.
Halleck was a pathetic little man, if you call him a man. He was jealous of Grant and his talent, Halleck and John A. McClernand spread the rumors that Grant was drinking and drunk on all the campaigns.
Apart from the difficulty in reading the maps, this is a fascinating lecture.
If you are interested in finding them, I believe most of the maps used are from Wikipedia pages of the battles.
@@samd8669 Thank you
@@Ettrick8 also many battles have maps by the American Battlefield Trust, at www.battlefields.org/learn/battles
Overall, a great analysis of Grant's Vicksburg Campaign. Still, the maps as visual aides were inadequate. We need better close-ups to see what the speaker is talking about. They are invisible to any internet viewer. His pointer is invisible as well. Secondly, the 160 year old picture of Vicksburg is inadequate as well. I have a shaky and imperfect idea of the cliffs of Vicksburg facing the Mississippi, as I do the eastern
approaches to the city where the seven mile fortifications of forts and redoubts were set up. Are there no modern pictures of Vicksburg today that could resolve these issues for American Civil War buffs? And finally, Grant didn't need to worry about his supply lines very much during this campaign, as regards to food and water. He was in the bread basket of the south after all. He had all the corn, beef cattle, chickens, rice, sugarcane, and molasses his troops could stand. The noble African American slave who told Grant where the dry ground and roads south of Vicksburg were, also told him where the wealthiest southern plantations were. Why not build a statue to this fine man?
He helped Grant out in the Vicksburg campaign as much
as Lincoln and Halleck did. This
info is in Shelby Foote's wonderful
description of the Vicksburg campaign in The Civil War, in the section called "The Beleaguered
City.
The primary source documents used in this documentary were wonderful. The descriptions of life
inside Vicksburg during the 48 day siege were excellent. And the letter that Lincoln wrote to Grant was awesome. It wasn't as good as the Gettysburg Address, but it comes close.
wonder how many have seen the recent tv series on Grant?
I agree.
@@stripes497 Thanks, MOMMA TIGER!
Why does it no longer show the date a video was uploaded?
When is this from? Yes, I could go back to the previous screen and maybe it would show how many years ago it was, but why doesn't it show the date in the description while the video is playing? Why?
It would be 100% enjoyable if the slidedeck and especially the maps would be longer in the video in stead of the speaker.
exactly!! the material we need to study and stare out is NOT the audience heads and speaker.
It would be nice if we could download the presentation slides to follow along.
Great video. I have a few questions, not necessarily limited to this video:
* Why so many generals? In one of those org charts, I see a Major General (MG) over another MG who, in turn, is in command of yet another MG. My *GUESS* is that it was due to the technological limitations in command and control during the 19th century.
* I see commanders on the Confederate side simply listed as "General" so-and-so. What was the equivalent rank of their Union counterparts?
Just speculating--they didn't want anyone to have a rank equal to George Washington. Although he was called "General" when it was the Continental Army, he was "Lieutenant General" later in the United States Army so there were no more lieutenant generals until that prejudice was overcome, and even then Congress promoted Washington posthumously and with prior dates of rank.
Until later in the war the highest rank anyone could get in the Union Army was Major General, seniority by date of rank was the way in which the line of command was sorted among generals of the same rank (that unless a junior officer was promoted either by merit or politicking to a position in which he would command a senior general), got to consider though that some of those charts you speak of may not have all the details and do not always show if the general was a MG of the regular army or if he was a MG of volunteers or if the person in question was an actual MG or a Brevet MG. In the CSA they had Lt. Generals and Generals (Full General) above the grade of MG, the highest ranked officer killed in action in the war Albert S. Johnston had the rank of (full) General.
Does no one check to see if the speaker is using the same names as on the displayed map? I'm lost most of the time. Very disappointing, I want to know how the men moved and who was leading, but to hear names and not see them on the map just confuses me..
It is called the "Anaconda Plan" But it is all Scott in macro strategy. Winfield Scott is the most forward thinking American general of that time.
My opinion of the Anaconda Plan was it was a good way to start the war. Scott clearly understood the economic situation of the South. You cut the Confederacy in two while simultaneously cutting them off commercially from the outside world. This was why they ran into so many problems economically later in the war. The South didn't have a ton of heavy industry and as such they had to get things, especially war material, imported. The blockade really did begin to work by 1862 and they had large problems getting much needed equipment and consumables (especially guns and ammunition). While they ultimately did need the full scale invasion of the south by Grant and Sherman, the initial Anaconda Plan really did set the stage for Union Victory.
Dew Ed
Winfield Scott was an amazing general, probably the best one of the war including grant but unfortunately he was too old to command.
Awesome presentation...thank you.
the Mississippi squadron...Porter's gunboats...were susceptable to plunging fire...but otherwise quite formidable...II'm sitting here looking at a nice model of the USS Pittsburg..one of the members of that group..I now have models of three out of four of the ships that bore that name...those gunboats were quite slow...only capable of a few knots....but the confederates were unable to depress their guns to strike them as they passed by...only one of that group survives to this day, largely because it was later raised from the river after striking a confederate "torpedo"....all of them that survived were quickly scrapped after the war...this was also the point at which command of them passed from the army to the navy...trying to move them through the swamps proved quite difficult resulting in a rain of "critters"....even bears and poisonous snakes...which proved quite challenging to the sailors!.....
@@frankpienkosky5688 Yes, the U.S.S. Cairo...first electrically detonated mine...at the mouth of the Yazoo. Been on its remains. Very cool. Thanks
@@TheGravitywerks that's the only one of the city gunboats that survived..(partially)...the rest were either sunk or sold for scrap at the end of the war when their usefulness was at an end....
@@frankpienkosky5688 Wow,... the only thing as striking as the personal affects of the crew...was the scale of it! The shaft from the boiler to the props is enormous...makes you wonder how they made something of that size in that day! I was on another one in Columbus, Georgia but don't recall the type...looked similar to the Tennessee type. Again, awesome!
Excellent enjoyed that. Second the comment on the maps
Greetings from Singapore 😊
I'm wondering how it was possible for a Pvt with the 24th Iowa, who was mortally wounded on Champion's Hill, to be buried with a Confederate grave marker? His photo and grave stone photo are at a Confederate soldiers cabin in VA. Can anybody please help to explain. Thanks! ❤️
“These slides are pretty busy”
Camera guy - “too busy. Just show the speaker”
amen
My GGGuncle from the ohio 56th was shot in the left leg on may 18 at vicksburg. Released from duty on July 4th.
Basically The Union adopted the Confederate tactics of a movable unit (let's remember the Union troops lack movility) and aplied to a large army.
it looks like most of the people in the audience should remember the civil war.
Chuck U. Farley It was a tough time, eating all that weevil infested hardtack and all. We made it somehow, though. Seems like yesterday.
If only the south would av won .ther would be peace .in the world.get a life u protesters .dixie forever
@@thomasfoster1899 Generals Meade, Grant, Sherman, and Sheridan didn't kill enough Confederstes.
@@willoutlaw4971 ...they didn't call Grant "butcher" for nothing...but it was his own troops they were referring to......
😆 😆 lol
I have a question. Back in 2008, took a family visit to the Vicksburg battle site along with other great spots in the City. My question is are there any monuments of the Confederate side. Thanks. I can't recall, but wasn't an issue then with tearing down our history's past.
If I remember correctly when I went in 2017 there are. There are signs all over stating whose line was where as well.
In hindsight, it was obvious that Porter's gunboats would have minimal damage. They were ironclads, and as such were cannonball-proof. If the transport ships were leeward (not aft) of the gunboats, the gunboats protected them from the cannonfire.
But did Porter know that? The Monitor and Merrimack had battled a year earlier. Would Porter have known the results of the battle and deduce that he was safe from Confederate cannon?
far from invulnerable...they had wooden hulls and their top armor was quite thin...also their steering gear..[exposed chains]...were an easy target.....
To save on weight, armored ships are well protected from laterally traveling shot and have vulnerabilities to plunging shots. The Monitor, for example, had only thin armoring on its flat deck, and it was very vulnerable to shot coming in from a high position.
There were no ironclads with no armor flaws against plunging shot. Even the dreadnoughts of WW1 and WW2 had such armor flaws.
At some point. Could Grant get resupply up the Mississippi from New Orleans below Vicksburg or above Vicksburg with barges from St. Lawrence?
So goooooooooooooood!!!
"The war could be won in the West but lost in the East. " Heard that somewhere.
Anoyher fascinating lecture. Just hammers home that Vicksburg and Gettysburg were the turning point of the war. And if. at the outset, Lee had put Country before State, Realism before Idealism, the war wou;d have been over much sooner with far fewer casualties on both sides. The word "despot" was mentioned towards the end of this lecture. To me, the despot was Robert E. Lee.
at that time many had a higher loyalty to their states than the country...especially after being invaded!....
Thank you very much for this lecture. I don't understand why Johnston didn't try at least once to relieve the city.
Good question. People have been asking that question since July 5, 1863.
@@docclabo6350 ...Grant found himself between two armies....but was able to neutralize both because of their slowness to respond....
The sad fact was known by Johnston that the Union would not give up on Vicksburg and he (Johnston) would only succeed in the destruction of both CSA armies there. At least that's what I've gleaned from it.
He did try but it was just a probe. Johnston had no artillery and not a lot of bang bang supplies. He was outnumbered and the Union was dug in very well. The defender, Sherman, had more supplies, more men and good defensive terrain.
Grant said after the war Pemberton's best choice would have been to break out of Vicksburg and save his army.
I wish you had close ups full screen maps cannot see the action
I agree with this. Poor camera location
A lot of these CW videos don''t even show the maps due to copyrigt issues. It is a shame.
Agreed. Seems like every time Dr. DePue says "Look here (on the map)" the camera view goes away from the map.
Interestign reading in Grant's autobiography about Johnston. He writes that initally he shared the high opinion of his skills. But from what he (Grant) learned about details after the war, he came to a much more critical judgement of Johnston in this campaign.
But the historical narrative is very much set by Davies and his claim that he was possibly the best General of the CSA...
Oh and Grant isn't overly enthusiastic about McClernand..
Vicksburg and Gettysburg happened at the exact same time.
wonderful talk. The constant jumping around of the visuals greatly detracts from the presentation. Why does the viewer need to periodically see the heads of the audience? Very shoddily done Sir. As the speaker talks to the visuals surely the focus should be on the visuals.
Perhaps the speaker wasn’t in control of the camera. i thought it was great IMHO
42:46 Look at the guy on the bottom left who raised his hand then tried to play it off.
The first syllable of Yazoo rhymes with "jazz". I lived in Vicksburg for eight years. I've been to Yazoo City many times.
Z
Johnston could have attacked Grant from behind
Pemberton actually repeatedly asked Johnston for relief which he never sent. Pemberton never forgave Johnston after the war. Also there are conflicting stories about whether or not Grant actually went on a bender. He had many detractors.
I know that Pemberton was Johnston's subordinate. That was why he was requesting help from Johnston. I agree the leadership structure was a clusterfuck because Davis put Johnston in command of the western theater. But at the same time he told Pemberton to hold Vicksburg at all costs, and that Pemberton should report to him instead of Johnston. This put Pemberton in an awkward position. Vicksburg was the key to the Confederacy due to it's place on the Miss. River. He was essentially trying to hold back Grant's entire army after they got a foothold on the east bank of the Mississippi. If Johnston had engaged Sherman it would have come close to evening the odds and he would be attacking from the east as the Union pushed west towards Vicksburg, essentially forcing them to fight on two fronts with limited supply. Grant was actually weary that this would happen and why they moved so fast so that they could lay siege to the town. The only way for Pemberton to break out would be if Johnston came to his aid, and even then he would be disobeying Davis' order to hold the city no matter what. I think that Vicksburg was the battle that turned the tide of the war, much more so than Gettysburg.
@Doug Bevins Johnston is an interesting study. He indeed had a keen strategic mind but Davis did not. There are times that I feel Johnston should have attacked in this campaign and the Georgia campaign but I do know that when Sherman hit Johnston, he got bloodied. Davis would not let Johnston command. Johnston's focus was always on preserving his army and maximizing any advantage perhaps to a fault. He understood, better than Davis, the advantages held by the Union but was too conservative.
@@kanifalam7835 ....Pemberton was committed to a defensive strategy....once the siege began his fate was sealed....
@@robertbates6057 Johnston and Sherman were actually the ones that ended the war after Lee surrendered....
@@frankpienkosky5688 Yep! It's an interesting study and Davis made some serious mistakes. If Johnston had destroyed his army against Grant at Vicksburg or Sherman before Atl, there wouldn't have been anything for the courageous, idiot Hood to destroy at Atl and TN. Even though my GG grandfather was with Sherman, I've always been fascinated with Johnston. I think Atl should have been garrisoned with the GA Guard and a division or two of Army of TN and Johnstons' main force left outside to disrupt Sherman. Also the refusal to commit Forrest in Shermans' rear was a mistake. With major forces outside Atl, Sherman would have had to split his forces to seige Atl, chase Forrest and fight Johnston. A lot more level position for CSA. Sherman would have had a much harder time supplying his armies either by rail or foraging. Would love to hear your assessment of this.
The quote by Sherman says it all.
Someone really needs to take over the cameras in these talks. It would have been better to just leave the cameras on the maps.
This lecture should have been broken up inot three smaller segments.
@@71volare I agree Dr..
Have you read 7seals.yuku.com ? I have produced the “7 Seals revealed“ as ‘Beyond Einstein Theories‘ that only the returned Christ, Benjamin Franklin, Abraham Lincoln and Albert Einstein reincarnated could produce. That's triggered The Apocalypse/Revelation which is NOT the end of the world - it‘s the 2nd Coming (E=mc²).
Ask family & friends what they think of 7seals.blogspot.com .
thanks for the heads up! stay in your own Lane.
Exactly, who NEEDS to SEE the speaker.
As far as the Gettysburg vs. Vicksburg debate, I look at it like this.
If Gettysburg was not decisive, if neither side achieved a successful/decisive outcome, nothing much would have changed as far as the status of the war.
If Grant was not successful at Vicksburg, if the South had kept that city for the duration of the war, the war would have probably continued for 2+ more years.
During the war I am sure that a lot of West Point school fights were resurrected.
You were supposed to mention Battle of Milliken's Bend, June 7, 1863
While it is a great program to listen to, the graphics are worthless. The camera only briefly shows anything on the screen before zooming out to the point you can only see the speaker clearly. It turns this entire video into more of an audio book instead of a video broadcast.
Gettysburg gets the recognition over Vicksburg for one reason.....It’s a defeat for Robert E Lee.
And it is bloodier
It's also on yankee soil.
It would have been the most important battle had the Confederate troops won.
I think there are several main reasons Gettysburg gets more attention than Vicksburg:
1) It's a major defeat that Lee suffered, and he had been on an absolute tear earlier that year. Lee's victories at Fredericksburg and Chancellorsville were near legendary by that point. Losing at Gettysburg really took some of the shine off of Lee and effected him as well.
2) Gettysburg is one of the biggest and bloodiest battles ever fought in the Western Hemisphere.
3) The battle was lot closer to DC and had a lot more reporters and photographers present. As such it got more attention in the media at the time and afterwards. Vicksburg was a long way away for a lot of people.
4) The victory at Gettysburg has more immediate consequences than Vicksburg. Lee's army immediately withdraws from Union territory and Lee is never quite that aggressive again. By cutting the Confederacy in two and closing them off from foodstuffs in Arkansas and Texas as well as reinforcements Vicksburg is arguably the more important victory in the long run. But again, a lot of that wasn't immediately apparent to a lot of people.
To paraphrase Pres. Lincoln, and the major media today, if it didn't happen in the east it didn't happen. Abe was extremely upset that all of the Union victories in the West didn't seem to mean anything because of Lee's victories of the Seven Days and 2cd Manassas. I think Gettysburg (along with 1st Manassas and Antietam) is one of those rare ACW battles that's easy to visualize and walk, map, etc., unlike Shiloh, Chancellorsville, Chickamauga etc. fought in huge woods, and Vicksburg and Atlanta fought on a large scale over a vast territory.
@TMWSITY .....and Jeb Stuart's failure to support Pickett...Custer played a big part in that....
I’m reading Vicksburg by Miller 😊
Chickamauga was the most significant Union defeat in the Western Theater. Amazing that the most important battle fought at Chickamauga is denied by amateurs. Chickamauga had the second highest numbers of casualties after the Battle of Gettysburg.
I never heard that, thanks for sharing.
If you hear about the battle at all it's usually to slam Bragg for not being more aggressive following the victory.
@@edmonddantes3640... a bloody affair,...but just a temporary setback in the overall scheme of things.....
Chickamauga was important and the casualties on both sides were very very high, but it was overshadowed by the preceding catastrophic (for the CSA) seizure of Chattanooga, which Rosecrans captured almost without firing a shot. The Union defeat of Chickamauga delayed the inevitable massive invasion into the Confederate heartland that would be launched from Chattanooga. Ultimately Sherman marched right down from Chattanooga to Atlanta and sacked it.
Naw, Rosecrans might’ve gotten his 20th Corps routed and crushed, but he still had Chattanooga. The Army of TN also had a ton of KIA for no strategic advantage.
Not quite sure what point you're trying to make.
The manpower losses the Union suffered at Chickamauga barely made them blink.
But were devastating to the South.
The true definition of a Pyrrhic victory....
Good Louisiana civil war history
Quite engrossing. 👍
A. Lincoln was towering above some of our current crop of pols. I won't name names, but it is the most self-centered who is the complete opposite of Lincoln, who would have beared any indignity, if that would mean winning the war and saving the union. A word about his demise; I have always felt there should have been an attempt to remove the bullet from Lincoln's brain, rather than doing nothing. I forget how many doctors were at his bedside. I think it might have been three, but at the crucial time after the injury, I believe anything was superior than trying nothing, but bloodletting, which any half-wit should have known was stupid. If saved, Lincoln may not have been the legend he was in death. He might have gotten the same grief Johnson got, but I know he would not have stood by while freedmen were murdered in Louisiana where the army did nothing to lift a hand. Was it racism? Who knows.
during a mind numbing boring lull in the fighting at 1:20:50 a half starved mule wandered near the trenches. a hundred itchy trigger fingers pulled at once, and the animal was no more
Our Maternal Grandfather WAS from IOWA!! He married Mattie McDowell from whom I get my "southern" roots. They claim their marriage "officially" ended to Civil War or War between the States.
This was a huge loss for the Confederacy but an oft overlooked battle is Monocacy in 1864- Lee Wallace slowed the CSA long enough for Grant to send reinforcements to defend Washington
The bender story is very shaky and should not be given as fact. Other than that this is good, although the proper name of that sad sack unit was "The Forlorn Hope".
Agreed it was more rumor than fact.
Vicksburg made Lee think as a desperate soldier . Lee should have listened to Longstreet but Lee lost his mind when Vicksburg was lost.
Lee never commanded forces in the Vicksburg theatre, he was the commander of the army of northern VIRGINIA
Lee lost his mind before he learned Vicksburg was lost.
Lee was a general for the south and the south lost its Mississippi supply line. Things are now getting desperate for the south and lee is now getting desperate. Lee was not a good general and who made him look brilliant was the traitor Edwin Stanton.
@@jamesreagle245 ....far from the truth....the south would have lost much sooner absent his battlefield brilliance...always seemed to do more with less.....
@@frankpienkosky5688 I think lee was helped by Edwin Stanton giving mcclelland erroneous information about confederate troop strength. I think lee being portrayed as brilliant may need further investigation
Grant emailing Lincoln lmao
You didn't know that mid-19th C technology was so great, did you? Learn something new every day. (Btw, it was top secret until the 1980s.)
@17:14
“Don’t believe everything you see on the internet.” ~Abraham Lincoln
444@@indy_go_blue6048 344344
I d love to look for relics Virginia is the most important state back then
ALWAYS HAS BEEN!!!
HA! I see a lot of statements here about differences in or lack of strategy and comprehension so let me help those of you saying this comprehend something about that supposed strategy; nothing overcomes a 5-1 manpower advantage and 10-1 (and thats being nice) material advantage but terroristic guerilla warfare, something the Confederacy was not willing to do. So everything else after that decision, no matter how glorious or bloody, was ineffectual to the actual outcome.
The battle that matters is the one that you win
While my g-g-grandfather, Charles Fleetwood, fought for the North, my g-grandfather John Mallard Stuckey fought for the South! John was wounded at captured by the North in the battle of Vicksburg! He was later traded out for prisoners that the South held who were Masons! Apparently, the brotherhood of Masons carried some weight in the Civil War!
Google John Mallard Stuckey, by Aquilla Fleetwood, youtube!
Sgt. Charles Fleetwood had married a young Indian girl who had walked the "Trail of Tears" in 1834! He met her at Fort Gibson in Indian Territory! Charles was 53 years old when he re-enlisted for the North! Charles led a 1,000 man all Cherokee regiment in the Battle of Honey Springs!
My g-g-g-g-grandfather Nicholas Thomas Fain was killed in the Revoluntionary war in the Battle of King Mountain in Tennessee!
Family info......
The only ACW ascendant I've been able to trace was a maternal g-g-g-uncle who served in both an IL and IN cavalry brigade and had the dubious honor of being captured by Forrest's men twice, once in 1862 and again in 1863. AFAIK he survived without a wound, married the sister of my g-g-g-grandmother and had 13 children.
Grant didn’t need to physically take Vicksburg , because the union already controlled nearly the entire river at that point - it was the rail and telegraph communication lines - West to east- that made it the crux of the western front- which was already taken out of commission. Even if the confederates had obeyed Davis, and “held the fort” they would have been starved out.
I have to agree. Just for fun though makes you wonder if the confederates has Lee, Stonewall Jackson and Nathan Bedford Forrest there giving back to the Union as much they got. Yes I know warfare never happens that way buts it’s fun sometimes to do the what if’s kinda thing.
Steven Hammel In some alternative universe, the south won. But I doubt both countries would have fought together during ww2, and possibly eliminated themselves from post war technological advancements. It’s likely that even the south would have fractured and split from itself, and North America would resemble South America, being separate weak countries.
It’s true he didn’t have to take it by force even though they had made a couple of attempts earlier. I think Grant knew that after that regardless of how weak the Confederate forces were it still would have been a blood bath. In the end it’s true the siege ultimately worked and I suppose saved many lives because of it. A good portion of the prisoners , especially the officers were paroled out. I assume you’ve read Shelby Footes brilliant account of it. If not I highly recommend it.
Steven Hammel it was the ultimate feather in Grants hat- had he not took Vicksburg I doubt he would have earned the highest esteem by Lincoln - and without the armies of Illinois, Indiana and Ohio, the north would not have won the civil war
@@andywalkerplumber Right on. Further breaking up already started as soon as the bullets began flying. North Carolina attempted to secede from the Confederacy twice. So did NY City.
It seems as if Grant had some hard times before he got to Hard Times
"He emails..." LOL
TWO JACKSONS. In May of 1863 the Confederacy lost two Jacksons, Stonewall and Jackson, Mississippi. The LCM (Lost Cause Mythmakers) don’t seem to mention Jackson, Mississippi surrendering, as they would say, to “The Drunk” or “The Butcher”. Grant’s Masterpiece, the Vicksburg Campaign, was begun around the same time of Chancellorsville, “Lee’s Greatest Victory” where the ANV lost more killed and wounded than the AOP. The LCM likes to talk about the brilliant flank attack where Jackson’s hubris driven fiasco gets himself killed. The LCM still thought the Civil War was an event that occurred in a 100 mile square in Virginia. After 160 years of myth and demonizing, it is time to shine a little light on the truth. Stonewall died on May 10, 1863 the same day as Confederate General Joseph E. Johnston was sent to Jackson for an ill-fated defense of that city, surrendering it on May 14, 1863 to the greatest General in American History, Ulysses S. Grant.
When I'm shopping at my local @Walmart*. Many, many, many gorgeous women ask me, "Bill. Which Civil War Battle is among your favorites? I'd say Vicksburg. It's there GRANT showed his genius. Though, he had the pressure of LINCOLN and too, all the "Peasants" picking on him. He stuck it out and pulled through. I'm also a "Fan" of his sidekick SHERMAN. I see a lot of him in me. -Bill "Humble" Howes.
Gettysburg only lasted three days...this campaign seemed to go on forever......
"many, many, many gorgeous women"....ask you that?????????????
@@frankpienkosky5688 It did. "Vicksburg went on for over a year! I believe General Grant started his approaches in April of 1862. That may have been when the navy first bombed Vicksburg. Whatever. Listen to "Depue's" lectures on this and Gettysburg. Very enjoyable.
Bill breaking balls and hearts 😂😂
alcohol and loneliness has sure taken its toll on depue
we sure miss Shelby foote
Butler's men faced all kinds of abuse from all kinds of Southerners in New Orleans.
Gee, l wonder why?
@@edmonddantes3640 I bet you do.
@@Raison_d-etre It's called ironic humor but being a smug, self important bore, you have difficulty fathoming such subtlety..
@@edmonddantes3640 Iyss, bro.
dumping chamber pots on their heads...usually by women...tended to put them in a foul mood....
Just stay on the maps
Very good talk but very poor camera management.
Maybe covering Gettysburg is less work for them.
This gentleman is certainly well educated on these matters and knows his history, but this overall presentation could’ve been.much better done with proper coordination using the maps and visual aids. Also, and I’m showing my southern bias here, but Shelby Foote could’ve held my interest much more through this.
This was a great presentation with serious depth, but it is hardly to DePue's credit by starting out with a verbal assault against the importance of Gettysburg. Yes, Vicksburg was a very prominent loss for the Confederacy. Just the same, for various reasons it would of been a tremendous blow to the North if the Pennsylvania battle(s) led to anything but a Union victory. Originally, Lee had good designs in making the attempt, though he heavily over committed his forces. A bit of balancing of diplomacy would do this speaker well going that route instead of clearly showing such an unprofessional degree of bias.
158 years ago today
Way more important than Gettysburg
I have to be “that guy” …
The last syllable in the name is pronounced “NAND”, not “ILAND”
Mc Clernand