Civil War Historian Rates 9 American Civil War Battles In Movies | How Real Is It? | Insider
Garry Adelman, a historian, rates nine American Civil War battles in movies.
He comments on the Civil War-era artillery and rifles on display in “Free State of Jones” (2016), starring Matthew McConaughey; and “Emancipation” (2022), starring Will Smith. He explains the use of dynamite and other explosives seen in “Cold Mountain” (2003), starring Jude Law, Nicole Kidman, and Renée Zellweger; “Sahara” (2005), starring Matthew McConaughey; and “The Good, the Bad and the Ugly” (1967), starring Clint Eastwood. He breaks down the military strategy seen in the battle scenes in “Glory” (1989), starring Matthew Broderick, Morgan Freeman, and Denzel Washington; “Gettysburg” (1993), starring Jeff Daniels; and Steven Spielberg’s “Lincoln” (2012), starring Daniel Day-Lewis, Sally Field, and Tommy Lee Jones. And finally, he separates fact from fiction regarding Civil War-era surgeries as seen in “Dances with Wolves” (1990), starring Kevin Costner.
Adelman is the chief historian at the American Battlefield Trust. He has also been a licensed battlefield guide at Gettysburg National Military Park for 27 years.
You can find more information about the American Battlefield Trust at: www.battlefields.org/
/ @americanbattlefieldtrust
WATCH MORE HOW REAL IS IT VIDEOS:
Military Tank Expert Rates 9 More Tank Battles In Movies And TV
• Military Tank Expert R...
Military Experts Rate 70 Military Battles In Movies And TV
• Military Experts Rate ...
World War I Expert Rates 6 WWI Battles in Movies
• World War I Expert Rat...
------------------------------------------------------
#civilwar #insider #howrealisit
Insider is great journalism about what passionate people actually want to know. That’s everything from news to food, celebrity to science, politics to sports and all the rest. It’s smart. It’s fearless. It’s fun. We push the boundaries of digital storytelling. Our mission is to inform and inspire.
Visit our homepage for the top stories of the day: www.insider.com
Insider on Facebook: / insider
Insider on Instagram: / insider
Insider on Twitter: / thisisinsider
Insider on Snapchat: / 2708030621
Insider on TikTok: / insider
Civil War Historian Rates 9 American Civil War Battles In Movies | Insider | How Real Is It
Garry is a national treasure! He is an expert’s expert and his enthusiasm and knowledge are unparalleled. If you ever get the chance to take a tour with him, do it. I’ve never met someone who can run around a battlefield for 7 hours and somehow have more energy at the end than at the beginning.
Calm down
His lady must not be disappointed
Totally agree, very inspirational
@@TheDogGoesWoof69Political parties didn’t own slaves, people did. And those slave-owning people were “conservatives.” Abolitionists, on the other hand, were “progressives.” Do we need to spell it out any further?
@@nickrotunno7992 Idk why this comment came from out of nowhere unless u were talking to someone who deleted their comment. Either way you're mostly historically wrong
If y'all don't know about Gary, get ready for a treat. The man is an absolute legend in the Civil War enthusiast community, there's arguably nobody as knowledgeable and enthusiastic about sharing that knowledge. I've been on a tour of Gettysburg with this gentleman and it was an EXCELLENT experience. This is the expert you want, when talking about the American Civil War. Bravo, Insider. Once again, finding an extraordinary expert to present a breakdown video.
I knew he was going to rate "Glory" quite highly. Such a great film. Whenever Zwick is involved, you KNOW it's going to be heavy.
I was at the 154th anniversary for Antietam and Gary was there as well. I got to talk with him some that day - that was a treat indeed.
Seems to know his stuff and be well qualified for this. But why does he say you can't reload a musket/rifles musket with a socket bayonet attached? That's patently false
@@CrichtonNo5 He didn't say you can't. Watch it again. Word choice is extremely important if you're going to criticize what experts say.
@@7bootzy he said it is "all but impossible" to load a gun with the bayonet in the end, which is arguably false. I will agree with you that my previous comment was a tad too malicious in its message, but I still believe him to be in the wrong with this statement. I do historical reenactment in the Napoleonic era in Europe, and as a norm we always carry our muskets with the bayonet on and we reload them nonetheless without issue. It is true that it is slightly harder to load with the bayonet affixed, but still pretty easy to do.
He gives tours at more that 50 battlefields. Yeah I think he might somehow be overqualified to be just considered an expert. Edit: Being overqualified as an expert was mostly just a joke. My bad for not adding a lol. :)
Lmao
@@zoanth4 It wouldn't surprise me if he actually would know more than both Lincoln and General Lee if they were brought back to life because access to information was so slow back then. There was the telegraph but it was super limited if I'm not mistaken.
I think expert is perfect here as the next word would be master or mastery and let’s just say talking about the civil war and being called a master is 😅
You can't be overqualified as an expert. Weird comment
@@shadowprince4482 Believe it or not, Lincoln was so into the telegraph, he had it wired to the White House and was known to micro manage his generals. He had crews following behind troops to put up telegraph wires and extend railways. Lincoln understood technology was a great advantage, and used it to his advantage.
Denzel's character in Glory is based on William Carney, who, unlike his film counterpart, survived the batte. He went on to be the first Black recipient of the Congressional Medal of Honor.
He didn't receive his medal of honor until 1900, thirty five years after the civil war......
@@anthonypeters6861 correct. Sent to him by mail even. Didn't get a ceremony.
Wikipedia says: "The action for which he received the Medal of Honor preceded that of any other African American Medal of Honor recipient; however, his medal was actually one of the last to be awarded for Civil War service.[1] Some African Americans received the Medal of Honor as early as April 1865."
In reality, William Carney was not the first African-American recipient of the MoH, he was the twenty-first. There are lots of MoH misconceptions out there, as demonstrated in this thread. The post-1919 MoH that we're familiar with is not the same MoH as the one that existed from the Civil War through WW1. In 1916-1919, Congress took several steps to elevate the MoH to the higher, far more exclusive award that we know today. One of those steps was the creation of a Medal of Honor Review Board in 1918, which resulted in 911 previously awarded MoH's being rescinded, although those recipients of rescinded MoH's were not required to physically surrender their medal. As a result of several strange (to modern eyes) MoH awards after that reformation, MoH criteria have been further adjusted and tightened in the years since 1919, most notably in 1942 and 1963. From the CW era when the MoH was created through WW1, the MoH was one of the few US medals in existence. They handed them out like candy for everything from mundane actions to bravery and anything in between, peacetime actions and civilians included. Using a MoH as a bribe or an "atta boy" wasn't uncommon. For example, 864 members of one regiment (27th Maine) got MoH's just for extending their service for a few weeks at a time when the government was desperate for troops to guard Washington. That regiment never served in combat, and even worse to modern eyes, due to faulty record keeping, only about 300 of the 864 who received the MoH actually extended their service for those few weeks. The majority of the regiment turned down the MoH bribe and went home after their original enlistment expired, and a few years later they received a MoH anyway (by mail, which btw was the most common way to receive a MoH back then). Apparently the MoH was seen as so common back then it wasn't even worth staying for a couple of weeks extra in Washington. Twenty-nine members of Lincoln's funeral detail also received the MoH. Out of the thousands of medical doctors who served in the Civil War, one civilian medical doctor (Mary Walker) received a MoH just for doing what physicians do, treating her patients. The list of such examples is long. Surely some of the MoH's given prior to the 1916-1919 reformation process and the 1942 and '63 amendments would also meet the modern MoH criteria, perhaps Carney's included, but many would not, even among those MoH's that were not rescinded in 1918. It was also very common for the MoH to be awarded years if not decades after the fact, and receiving the MoH back then typically did not come with any kind of ceremony. Again, don't confuse it with the modern MoH.
@@d23g32yes, but the date upon which he earned it was the earliest. He was not awarded it the first, true- but the actions he performed were, which is arguably more important.
Glory left me in tears, and I remember wanting so badly for it to be at least a respectable representation of the 54th’s efforts. I’m so glad to see it be ‘not perfect, but perfect enough.’
'Glory' is one of my favourite war movies ever made. The acting, writing, cinematography, and direction is amazing!
and that Denzel tear...
And the music!! It’s makes the film🥰
Matthew Broderick as Col. Shaw, dressing for a battle he knows he cannot win and will die in, is unbearably sad for me.
@@josephhubisz8610He really plays that well. You see in his face and mannerisms the mix of pride, fear, and sadness. It had to be hard to know you were also leading many of your comrades in arms to their deaths.
My all-time favorite Civil War movie and one of my top movies ever. It is the Saving Private Ryan for that period. It has everything.
The director of Cold Mountain was spot on with their details. The soldier who lit the fuse had 48 on his cap. The tunnel was dug by the 48th Pennsylvania. Coal miners from Schuylkill County Pa.
If you declare with your mouth, 'Jesus Is Lord' and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. -Romans 10:9
But the one who endures to the end will be saved. Matt 24:13 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. Mark 16:16 The one who eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day. John 6:54 Come join the One Holy Catholic and apostolic Church founded by Christ, the only Church that takes all of the data on salvation found in the Bible into account in their teachings on salvation.
The 48th PA had a lot Welsh immigrants or first generation in it!
@@dizo-jp2tdThe heck are you weirdos doing here?
@@gijoe508Please take your cannibalism and vampirism elsewhere, mm'kay?
6:59 to 8:44 GLORY's depiction of the Battle of Antietam set the standards for how American Civil War battles are portrayed in modern cinema.
Something about Ferris Bueller leading a regiment really is exciting
Amazing movie
That headshot with the cannon always sticks in my mind.
Or David Liechman. "Shall we play a game?'@@XSDX3R0
@@XSDX3R0He did more in his day than we knew.
00:31 The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly (1967) 03:07 Free State of Jones (2016) 04:42 Emancipation (2022) 06:59 Glory (1989) 09:58 Lincoln (2012) 11:18 Dances with Wolves (1990) 13:40 Gettysburg (1993) 16:04 Cold Mountain (2003) 18:42 Sahara (2005)
If you declare with your mouth, 'Jesus Is Lord' and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. -Romans 10:9
Free State of Jones was horrible.
@@dougmarkham6791 it's not perfect but at least it's not Gods and Generals.
@@imnotyourfriendbuddy1883True dat!!
@@dizo-jp2td If you declare with your mouth, Hail Satan, and believe in your heart that Satan will raise you from the dead, you will be saved. Wisconsin 38:10/205
I see Garry Adelman, I click. I was fortunate to see him at the 160th Antietam after we walked the Cornfield fight, and even experienced living historians were in awe of him. Such a cool guy!
Love to see another Adelman that loves details as much as me!
I'm glad they showed "BAYONETS!" My absolute favorite scene in any civil war movie
Literally gives me chills Everytime I hear it!
I'm so glad Garry gave Glory a 9/10, my favorite movie depicting the era of US civil war
The only thing the movie got wrong. The real attack was from the south to the north for Fort Wagner. Not, south to north as portrayed in the movie
@@ds9109 This is true. Still really good.
One thing that i think it was not mentioned was the gunpowder smoke and how it affected infantry combat. We often see in civil war movies lines exchanging fire at short distance or soldiers still marching slowly even when they get near the enemies. (this is mostly because movies tend to "concentrate" fighting that actually took up more space) This type of fighting was possible also because of how much smoke the massive and concentrated use of gunpowder made, most times you fired in the GENERAL DIRECTION of your enemy, and by command. since soldiers could not actually see the enemy formations until they were very close, the coordination of a battle back then was done using scores of cavalrymen roaming the battle, scouting and giving reports and orders of what was going on and what to do back and forth. I ve read numerous accounts of this my favorite being in the "recollections of rifleman harris" (although from the napoleonic wars) "The only complaint that i have with our present system of fighting is that once the battle has started, the common soldier has no more knowledge of what goes on around him than the very dead lying on the ground" (something like that) Loved this video and cheers from Italy.
This was true for most of human history up until World War One. Even without gunpowder, horses and troops stir up a lot of dust. At the Battle of Cannae, for example, Hannibal deliberately planned on dust/sand being stirred up into the sunlight that would block the Romans' vision, which is why the Romans didn't realize they had gotten themselves surrounded. The American Civil War (and other wars during that time period) had similar problems on top of all the smoke from gunpowder. It's the reason people fought in formations with flags and instruments. It's impossible to coordinate any kind of maneuvers at the ground level. Even the natural elevation of hills and fields messes up a soldier's vision. Couple that with the inaccuracy of rifles and how devastating a cavalry charge could be (less so by the time of the ACW), fighting in blocks makes way more sense.
@@nekrataaliafter ww1 we started using smoke grenades to generate the same concealment. I used dozens of them in Iraq. Nearly every military vehicle is equipped with launchers that deploy smoke grenades in all 4 directions 4 launchers a piece
The thing that bugged me the most in that scene in Dances With Wolves is that the general has three stars on his shoulders. There were no lieutenant generals in the US Army at that time.
If i remember my movie trivia correctly. The reason that they didn't film the "Little round top" part of the Gettysburg movie in the actual place was because of the memorial placed there. The movie was unique in that it was the only time (if my memory serves) that a movie was allowed to be filmed on the actual location of the battle. And with hundreds of volounteer historical reenactors.. I love that film.. Also, Jeff Daniels truly was born to portray colonel Chamberlain..
Yes. I refuse to watch Dumb & Dumber after seeing a commercial with Daniel’s in it. He did such a phenomenal job in Gettysburg and then you see him carrying on like a 35 year old juvenile delinquent.
@@mako88sbThat is is his mastery of his craft. The fact that he could pull off an utterly serious and an utterly comedic role.
@@mako88sb D&D is one of the best movies I ever watched.
The battle scene was not filmed on Little Round Top itself, but there is a scene of the Chamberlain brothers early on July 3 that was. They're supposed to be on Big Round Top at that point, but if you look closely you can see the feet of the Gouverneur Warren statue that they tried (and failed) to cover with branches, etc.
@@jspotter89 yeah. They tried hard to do things in the original places. I know from accounts that when Jeff Daniels did Chamberlains speech to the "defectors" he did it so well that some of the extras actually cried due to his emotional performance
You can reload a musket with the socket bayonet on; the socket bayonet was designed to allow the musketeer to do so for over a hundred years by the time of the ACW.
Later he said that he had never heard of anybody grabbing a bayonet because they were pretty sharp. I'm pretty sure he has never seen or held a triangular socket bayonet before...
Garry Adelman is a walking encyclopedia of the American Civil War. I’ve seen this guy give a 2-hour walking tour of Gettysburg. He spoke for the entire 2 hours spitting out facts of everything that happened there.
I'm really glad to see that Glory, an all time fave, ranked high for accuracy (at least for the scenes being scrutinized). And I could listen to Garry talk about the historic battles all day long.
I was in ROTC in the mid 80s. Our classes in Military History and Military Science had a lot of emphasis on the US Civil War as the tactics and strategies used on both sides were starting to diverge from the way that Armies had previously fought. WWI was also a major turning point. There is discussion among military historians whether the Civil War or WWI was the advent of modern warfare. Personally, I think the tactics started during the Civil War, and the technology available 50 years later made it the turning point for "industrial warfare".
ㄒEㄨㄒ ME±𝟏𝟑𝟐𝟑𝟐𝟖𝟗𝟎𝟓𝟎𝟖👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻💬💬 5:06
I agree. Bigger guns more powder guns evolving. More abled body people in the conflict. For the guns I look at very beginning of the american civil war smoothbore some flintlock still some converted to percussion cap some had percussion cap rifles then look at the end of the war. Then look into the 1870s and 1880s Rifles to early 1900s. Even pistols the confederates were able to get ahold of a lematte revolver which had an "underbarrel shotgun" its very interesting.
I bought a non firing colt revolving rifle I thought the tech and stories with that rifle were very interestingly cool. It turned a confederate unit away at snodgrass Hill in georgia they thought they were up against more men then they thought in reality it was a few companies with colts revolving rifle.
Longstreet definitely saw the future
It's possible, but not ideal, to load with a fixed bayonet. I've done it a few times for living history demos, as a historic site interpreter. The socket style bayonets were specifically designed to not interfere with the muzzle.
yeah, when he said that i was like "what?". people were loading and shooting just fine with bayonets all over Europe since the early 18th century, long before the american civil war
most inconvenience a bayonet poses is in long term handling, thanks to the weight. But I have reloaded countless times both blanks and live rounds. His comment made me immediately question his knowledge and qualification.
@@lutzderlurch7877 And "bayonets are really sharp" preventing you from grabbing them...
@@denysbeecher5629 yeah, he seriously dropped the ball, there
That was the main reason socket bayonets were made. So you could load a musket while having a bayonet. The first bayonets that were made were plug bayonets and that went into the muzzle of the gun but that was back in the 16th century
Gary is a legend thank you for all your work with the American battlefield trust!
I participated in Civil War reenactments for over a decade ( 11:34 is an old friend of mine Jim Mitchell, you can spot him portraying a Confederate sniper in Gettysburg as well) and this guy gets a couple of minor things wrong that I want to point them out. You can reload a musket with a fixed bayonet and it's only a minor inconvience. Also bayonets are absolutely not too sharp to handle with your hands. They are stabbing weapons with only a sharp point.
Yeah, my father was a collector of civil war paraphernalia and owns 2 bayonets. Neither one of them has any signs of ever having sharp edges, but the points, they're going to go right in you with a little effort.
The issue with using a bayonet as a knife in the particular scene when he said that your hand is probably going to be slipping down the blade. It probably won't cut you, but it's not the most effective way of using it
My quibble as a vet and a former reenactor was that every time he held his arms up like he was shooting, he had awful form. His pretend butt-stock was nowhere near his shoulder. :)
We appreciate Civil War content like this not enough of it out there. Thank you!
Garry Adelman is an absolute inspiration to me as a history student! Him and the rest of the crew at the ABT have done so much great work without the recognition they deserve! Also, the worst scene in this is by far Sahara. A field gun crew (with a gun that looks to be a Howitzer no more than 24 lbs, no hope of penetrating ironclad armor), and the shot it fires looks like something out of Sea of Thieves. The shell (why use shell against iron armor) arches like it was a long shot and takes 3 seconds to impact, but you can clearly see it is aimed almost parallel to the ground at no more than 100 meters. It bounces off (obviously), but other than that I think that's the worst depiction of artillery I've ever seen.
I've only seen Glory and DWW out of all these movies, and I'm so happy Glory got a good rating. It's one of my fav movies of all time I'll happily rewatch over and over, with a very underrated soundtrack.
@@nahor88 Glory is probably agreed upon as the model for a Civil War movie. Is it 100% historically accurate? No, but the cast, plot, performances and enough historical accuracy contribute to an amazing film. My general consensus on most of these movies as a student of history is that they alter events or make changes to the way technology worked or the way soldiers fought to make a more interesting film. Glory does this in less offensive and more necessary ways like shortening the range of the fights and having unrealistic looking artillery, but that is born out of necessity. Films like the Good, Bad and the Ugly just completely fabricate events to make them look interesting, thats when I take issue with historical inaccuracies.
@@lukesmith1003 I fully agree about Glory and the rest of your comment--but being upset about a lack of realism from a Sergio Leone film is like being upset when the Big Mac you demanded medium rare gives you salmonella
@@brendanfrost9775 I respectfully do not care about the names of producers. I’ve never seen Sahara, but that scene was highly unrealistic, and should expect to be criticized for it. May be an amazing movie for all I know, but that scene was supposed to be depicting history, and it failed to do so in many ways.
Another instance of hand to hand fighting during the Civil War was also far more horrific than the movie scene. Bloody Angle at Spotsylvania on May 12, 1864 saw a massive Union attack, and the Confederate forces desperately resisted, despite being low on ammunition. Fighting lasted almost a whole day, men killing each other in vicious hand to hand combat with clubs, muskets, knives, bayonets... All while fighting in the rain.
Jeezus…
Also, The Battle of Jenkin's Ferry wasn't fought in a field. It was on the banks of the swollen Saline River.
"Gettysburg" is absolutely my favorite movie of all time, followed closely by "Raiders Of The Lost Ark." The movie, as filmed, is already a masterpiece, but the musical score elevates it to legendary status.
I love Garrys enthusiasm in this and every video I´ve seen with him, he is a truly well learned and passionate historian and a joy to listen to
Glory is one of my all time favorite war movies. From the acting to the production and as he said, the historical accuracy. It truly is a masterful film that showcased the times and hardships of one of the most influential and iconic regiments of the war.
?@@paulkreider9441
I'm so happy Glory got a 9/10. It's one of my favorite movies. Always brings a tear
Brilliant casting too. Matthew Broderick could be a descendant of Col. Shaw. The resemblance is incredibly strong.
The quality of the sounds is terrible, i have turned my earphones to the max just to get blasted by ads.
16:20 LMAO The guy who fixed that fuse should have got to sit the rest of the war out just for that ballsy move.
I don't know much about American history. Enjoyed this, thank you!
Loved this! I wish we had more movies and/or tv shows set in this era.
Insider has a knack for bringing in experts that really show their love and enthusiasm for their fields.
Glory is one of my favorite films ever. Very historically accurate- great film all around
Glory was insane. Truly an outstanding movie in many ways. This video was great. Thanks for making this.
17:51 It’s worth noting that this was recorded specifically at the Battle of the Crater. On a side note, the man who ended up forcing the Union troops back was William Mahone; a native of the city of Petersburg, which the entire assault was attempting to seize.
Any video with Civil War Master Historian Garry Adelmen is a do not miss!
How bloody and devastating the civil war was but it helped change our world today
It’s awesome seeing Garry get more exposure! He’s truly an incredible historian, passionate about the material and educating the public. He’s also one of the nicest people you’ll ever meet, albeit with his rapid fire speech and movements😄
The score "Glory" got is what I came to see.
I have been subscribed to American Battlefield Trust for a while. Rarely have I seen such a worthy channel of support! Also I'm not surprised they had to cut around him a lot, the man is a verbal fountain for American history!
He’s an interviewee in the Grant miniseries. Highly highly recommend it to anyone who cares at all about the Union.
That was a great miniseries. Grant is criminally underrated
@@cleverusername9369 amen
Where can I watch it?
12:12 The image of some random soldier shouting 🗣"That man is too brave!! Don't shoot him!!" has me rolling 😂
There are several accounts of that actually happening. Look up the "Angel of Fredericksburg".
Why? That happened in a couple battles during the war. Most notably with General John Adams at the Battle of Franklin, riding his horse up on the Union works, but eventually being shot down, despite some Union soldiers calling for him not to be shot, being a lone rider in front of them.
@@detsportsfan18 because it's funny
Glory really is an AMAZING movie!! Everyone should see it...
Agreed! It should be required viewing in American high schools. I was in 7th grade when it came out (13 yrs old) and it made a deep impression on me. It's a gutwrenching film, but an effective way to tell a very important story.
Young Denzel, a great musical score by James Horner, and oh , don’t forget Morgan Freeman, Cary Elwes, and Matthew Broderick.
Shaw was an amateur...
Fabulous job from Gary, as usual. Great insights and observations.
9:39 Ƭx̷Ƭ Ꮇe±𝟏𝟑𝟐𝟑𝟐𝟖𝟗𝟎𝟓𝟎𝟖👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻💬💬
So glad to see Gary!
Gettysburg is easily one of... if not the... best Civil War films ever made. I have watched parts 1 and 2 so many times on original VHS. The actors nailing their roles, the musical scores, and the accuracy to the original battle always makes it an incredible thing to watch.
Me too. I make it a point of watching the film every July 2nd to commemorate the battle
Same here, watched gettysburg first time at 9 years old and have watched it at least once a year. Som tilmed more. Love the movie, especially how far they managed to stretch such a limited budget with the help of civil war reenactors
@@alexiaNBCcourse you do
Both Gettysburg and God's and Generals are straight up revisionist, lost cause porn!!!!
The fact the it was filmed on the battlefield on location only made it better. I remember when growing up in area at the time; and for many kids in the area it was just the summer reenactment on steroids and we loved it. So much history in the Centeral Pa area...
The bridge scene in TGTBTU was not Glorieta pass. That was mentioned early in the movie. We can safely assume that after Battersville they are somewhere different, perhaps over the Arkansas river.
peeved me a bit as well
I used to re-enact at Glorietta in the '70's. There is no river... but a creek/arroyo you could jump across with a running start. 😀
GARRY! THAT'S MY GUY! Made me feel like an old friend the brief time i got to chat him, we are lucky to he around the same time as him. Love this for him
Gary! Been following this dude on the American Battlefield Trust channel! So glad to see him getting his flowers!
Apparently, he never heard of the Battle of Chantilly where there was hand to hand in the middle of a severe thunderstorm.
Cant get enough of expert react type videos!
I just rewatched Grant (2020) for x time already, a documentary-series and one of the subject matter experts was Garry, such a treat and hoped that there were similar TV-documentary series not just for Grant but for other key events and persons during the American Civil war and looking forward to watching/hearing Garry again. Looking forward as well to a collaboration between Jared Frederick and Garry Adelman be it a review/documentary and whatnot. I'm a big fan from the far south-east asia.
10:18 Ƭx̷Ƭ Ꮇe±𝟏𝟑𝟐𝟑𝟐𝟖𝟗𝟎𝟓𝟎𝟖👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻💬💬
You are a true treasure Mr Gary. Thank you sir.
Battle of Fredericksburg in Gods & Generals was pretty great. Really showed the tragedy of a civil war.
A shame the better part of the rest of the movie sucked
@@turinturambar8622 eh i liked the bullrun part, it was pretty accurate to how the battle ended, a shame it didnt show the entire battle with the skirmishes in the woodline.
There are two inaccuracies in practically every Civil War movie that drive me crazy. First, the opposing troops are way too close together. I understand that you have to fit everything into the camera frame, but with the rifled muskets both sides used, 100 yards was considered point blank range, so the troops would be a lot further apart in general than what we see. Second, the soldiers are too old. I understand that, especially for masses of troops, you use reenactors, but the average reenactor is middle-aged. I can't speak for the Union Army, but by 1864, probably close to half of Confederate troops were 20 or younger. But people that age aren't really interested in Civil War re-enacting ...
I love it when they have passionate speakers Gary Adelman definitely shows this
Well done always a treat listening to garry and battlefield trust in general thank you for sharing
Love when a history geek gets to cut loose on a topic they're passionate about. ONLY people like this should be allowed to teach history... Now, we need to figure out how to create more people like this...
The Novel Dances with Wolves is a must read. The extended version of the movie is a great example of union hesitancy to charge into battle with out a consensus of generals to agree that it appears of little benefit to fight today.
It was one of my favourite novels as a kid. That scene in particular stands out, the generals and majors "not really feeling it" while the rank and file exchanged shots and wondered if today was the day they died, or if the just had to wait for another day in apathy and filth.
@@Corellian also the scene where the surgeons are tired and need to coffee up before going to work again. They said “we ran out of ether” so yes the hectic pace was to operate quickly before the supply of ether was gone.
I have the extended on blu ray but 4 hours and 20 minutes... ooff
@@Njbear7453 I know that is a long movie. But it does add context to the crazy Colonel. And the first scene with the union army balloon and the stalemate between the two sides. But oof it is long!
@@Irish381 I enjoyed the theatrical a lot ! I will definitely Watch the extended at some point
Garry is unparalleled in his passion, enthusiasm and knowledge of the Civil War. It's always a treat listening to him talk.
I remember as a kid going to the Gettysburg wax museum and hearing the figures scream as the used a saw to cut a leg off.
Though Gatling Guns were not deployed for use until 1864, the "Coffee Mill" gun (Agar Gun) was used by the Union during McClellan's Peninsula Campaign in 1862, McClellan having purchased 50 of them in late 1861. The single barrel design was prone to overheating and limited the rate of fire. The ammunition was .58 caliber paper cartridges inserted into steel tubes that were fed into a hopper. Refilling the steel tubes quickly enough also slowed the rate of fire. Several Ager guns saw action at Gaines's Mill, where soldiers reported hearing "the quick popping of a rapid firing gun" above the din of battle. The Agers had little effect at Gaines's Mill but had far more significant influence in inspiring inventors to create evermore devastating weapons and usher in the age of quick and efficient wholesale destruction that is the hallmark of modern technological warfare.
Not sure I agree with the Good/Bad/Ugly one. Just wondering if he only saw this one scene. (There is so much more in that film to comment on!) I always thought the bridge scene was something post-Glorietta, because it takes place after Sibley has to retreat under fire from Canby. (Am I wrong?) This bridge scene would be different units, just besieging some bridge that both want, and neither wants to give to the enemy. It is a horrible stupid meat grinder, and that was the point - a waste of lives in a nameless battle. In the end, soldiers do not blow up the bridge - the main characters do, just to force the two armies to leave the area so they can reach their destination. In any case, one does not watch Spaghetti westerns for their historical accuracy.
You're right. It wasn't glorieta pass. The last third of that movie might take place in Missouri or Arkansas since Tuco at one point says they have to go through all of Texas to get to Sad hill cemetery.
Garry is absolutely contagious in his energy and passion of the Civil War
Agree .. Glory is an immortal classic
In artillery terminology, mortars and howitzers aren't technically "guns", which refers to high velocity, long-barreled, mostly direct fire cannon, with a flat trajectory. Today however, there are gun-howitzers, capable of high elevation, plunging fire but also featuring long barrels.
Garry is a fantastic teacher. His enthusiasm is so contagious, and his knowledge is unquestionable. What a fantastic guest, he is.
As expert in this specific period of history as he is, I don't think this guy understands the plot points of TGTBTU. "...for god sake come on!..."
Love the video. One note, 10:30 remember while blade bayonets were used, many socket bayonets up to the civil war were still spike and triangle type bayonets since they were much cheaper and quicker to produce. These were definitely possible to grab with your had since they don’t have sharp edges. However, agreed that it’s not likely, but it is possible
Gettysburg's Soundtrack is fire
I’m surprised that in “The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly” that he didn’t point out that dynamite wasn’t invented until 1867.
...or the plethora of cartridge fed revolvers and rifles. 98% of the firearms were still cap and ball.
Cried as a kid when Col. Shaw died. Then as an adult i learnt that he & the regiment is real history, cried once again.
They threw Col. Shaw into a mass grave with the rest of his regiment as an insult. His father's elegant and defiant response was that they were honouring the memory of his son by burying him with the men under his command.
@@Corellian bet thats what he wanted too.
Garry is fantastic. I highly recommend any of his many videos.
Nice analysis of the scenes.
I must say I am a little confused that an expert historian tells us bayonets are sharp.
Excellent video with one exception, it's entirely possible to load a musket with the bayonet fixed, I've done it. This is in reference to what is said at around 6:00.
I'm glad 'Glory' gets a 9, its my favorite American Civil War movie.
Damn, this was some fantastic and entertaining analysis.
I loved every history teacher I had in high school and college, but I wish all my teachers were this knowledgeable and enthusiastic about their content. Bring Gary back if you can, it's fun just to listen to him talk.
How accurate could you really be with a musketball? There's no rifling and I would expect it would react a bit like a knuckleball and tumble unpredictably due to the Magnus effect.
Most civil war muskets had rifling, and shot a bullet shaped projectile, not a ball. You're thinking of earlier muskets.
They didn't shoot actual balls. Ball ammunition refers to solid projectiles in the military and during the civil war, they fired what we would instantly look at and identify as a bullet, just one on massive amounts of steroids. The soldiers typically carried only 60 rounds on them, but those 60 rounds weighed a couple pounds, while 60 rounds today is mere ounces.
The last generation of smoothbore muskets where effective out to about 150-175 yards in the hand of well trained men. This is much better than the numbers you some times get from "experts." The reason is that most people when talking about smoothbores are thinking the Brown Bess or similar flintlock musket. But the change from flintlock to percussion and the fact that the last smoothbores had both front and rear sights do allow long range fire against an enemy infantry line. Also using a riflemusket at more than this distance require a lot of training. Something none of the two sides provided. It was common for soldiers on both sides to enter combat without ever having fired their gun before. The result is that firing at more than about 100 yards was very rarely effective and the officers therefor usually held their fire until this range. The result is that the typical combat range during the civil war was about 100yards. The abyssal marksmanship skills of both sides is what caused the creation of the NRA post war.
Coldmountain made the cut so good
Gary is a legend.
10:40ish as far as I know the socket-type bayonet shown here are not sharp at all. They do have somewhat of an "edge" but not nearly enough to cut anything. The whole geometry is ment for thrusting.
I don't remember ever seeing or handling any sharp-sided triangle bayonets like Mr. Adelman described in my eight years of Civil War reeanacting, including a few original ones from the Civil and Crimean wars.
GARY ADLEMAN!!!! Best civil war historian, especially with Gettysburg!
I really wish we could get a movie about the naval battles of the war and, especially, the Louisiana Campaign
I LOVE your knowledge!
6:22 sorry but no, bayonets for muskets are designed to not interfer with loading them. Thats why they have that unusual shape compared to later knife bayonets used with breech loaders and repeating firearms.
Yeah. Harder to reload? Sure. To point where it makes sense to have a designated loader just reloading muskets? Why not, in a tight space. But impossible to reload? No. Armies had been using muskets with bayonets for near 200 years at that point, that clearly was proven, feasible technology.
@@johnsmith-bb6gi Depends on the bayonet. I found the late 17th century for the ones where you could reload. I mean, before (30 years war etc) there were still plenty of pike men around.
@@535phobos Yes, your chronology is exactly right - the first bayonets (used from the 1640s onwards) were still stuck into the muzzle of the gun and therefore couldn't yet be used to shoot AND stab, which means they were useless for the crucial matter of protecting musketeers against cavalry charges. Only by the 1690ies did socket bayonets become a thing in European armies, but once that innovation was out in the open, they completely replaced pikemen within no more than a decade.
Leone (an Italian) never meant it to be an historically accurate depiction of the Civil War. Hollywood films set during the time of the Civil War are also not known for their historical accuracy. "THE GOOD, THE BAD AND THE UGLY" was intended as entertainment, and in that regard it scores a 10 out of 10.
Missing the most important detail about civil war bullets. The bullets will push clothing into the wond. Thats why infections were so common. They could get the bullets but not all the cotton
What's your source for this?
It’s true even in todays gun shots, we irrigate the wound to get dirt and clothing and then antibiotic rinse and powder
Very interesting and informative. Thanks!
Ƭx̷Ƭ Ꮇe±𝟏𝟑𝟐𝟑𝟐𝟖𝟗𝟎𝟓𝟎𝟖👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻💬💬 8:28
The only thing I didn’t quite get was how in Emancipation he went over how accurate things were and then gave it a 6/10.
You can tell by a couple of the cuts you don't see his full statement, so he may have made some criticisms that didnt make it in to the video's final cut
Great guy to take tours with. Met him several times. Although he says bayonets are sharp to grab (on the sides) is wrong I own many originals his knowledge is top notch. I suggest anyone in Gettysburg that can take one of his tours do so.
Great Video! Suggestion: Brazillian Jui-Jistu Artist rates grappling scenes in movies.
Glory and Gettysburg and Andersonville are my fav civil war movies
I'm a bit confused why the expert is claiming that you can't load a rifle with a socket bayonet attached. The whole point of the socket bayonet is that you can load and shot while it's on there so that in engagement where you think you might get in range to use it, you don't have to fumble around trying to get it attached. I'm also curious why he is claiming that what looks to be a triangular socket bayonet would be too sharp to grab near the socket. Those things are designed for stabbing, not cutting.
yepp, totally flabbergasted by his claims
well, he is totally wrong on both claims.
Im from Mexico and just listening to this man makes me wanna learn more about us civil war, super entertaining and i really love the way he explains everything
The one big omission from 20th Maine at Gettysburg were the sharpshooters that were further left and fired side on rebel forces that added to confusion and helped prevent further flanking.
Great presentation. Greetings from a Historian from Brazil..