Anybody watch the History Channel special on the War of 1812?

Motors?? Seems to me they could have used them to make the ships faster instead of lobbing them at the Colonials!!

I wonder if they were small-block Chevys or Fords...probably Mopars, 'cause that's about all they're good for anyways!!

Just kidding...mortar rounds falling on your head are not fun...

Jeff

I saw the making of it on Saturday. They disscussed how they made the effects of the ships in Baltimore Harbor and the Whitehouse.

The show was very good indeed.

I usually go to bed no later than 10 o'clock on weeknights, but I got caught up in this program and stayed up to the end (even watched Mail Call afterwards). It was really done well. I discovered a lot of stuff that I had been unaware of. I didn't realize that the Guerrierre was as notorious as it was. No wonder it was such a big deal that the Constitution defeated her. Most of what I knew about the battle of New Orleans came from that old song. I kept waiting for them to grab an alligator and powder its behind.

I though it was very good also.
Hasn't been much said about that war, I live in CT and I remember when I was a kid and we were travelling through New York State and we saw a War Monument to the 1812 war. I asked my Dad how come we don't have war Monuments to this war back home? My Dad said Most of the New Englanders did not fight in that war, In fact many were outright against it. I know some will say somethings never change, he he
This show brought out that and other neat things like the storm that hit Washington and how really Kool Dolly Madison was... I enjoyed it.

I had mixed reactions to it. I thought it did some things really well - the burning of Washington and the defense of Ft. McHenry. The re-enactors were a little too clean and shiny to be believable, but that's almost always a problem with such projects. And I liked the actors who impersonated the famous people. The Andrew Jackson actor looked just about like I visualize the real Jackson of that time. (In the movie The Buccaneer, Charleton Heston made a good Jackson but they made him up to look like the guy on the $20 bill - about fifteen years older than Jackson was at New Orleans.)

But it sure left out a lot. The naval war barely got mentioned. (A minute on the Constitution vs. the Guerriere, some references to privateering, quite a bit about the British fleet in the Chesapeake, and a couple of sentences about the Jeffersonian gunboats that slowed down Packenham's army before New Orleans. Nothing about the other frigate actions, or the Battle of Lake Erie, or the Battle of Lake Champlain.) The story of the campaigns around the Great Lakes got dropped in midstream - and one of the graphics seemed to suggest (vaguely) that the British advanced across the Lakes and well into Ohio and Indiana. That, of course, never happened. The causes of the war barely got discussed; the political ramifications (e.g., the fact that the Federalists blamed the whole thing on the Republicans - not without reason) were referred to only in passing. There was, for instance, virtually no mention of the fact that Jefferson's embargo did far more damage to American foreign trade than the British blockade did.

I found myself wondering if the thing perhaps had been edited too heavily, in order to force it into a 2-hour (minus commercials) time slot. It would have been a better topic for a mini-series.

On the other hand, it was so much better than TV historical documentaries used to be that complaining about it is probably sour grapes. The historical analysis was pretty good (though to my taste they inflated the idea of the war as a great American victory a little too much), the narrative was sound, and the computer-generated special effects were great. Shows like this, and the "Decisive Battles" series that's also running on the History Channel, make me slightly less pessimistic about the fate of history as it's presented to the public. If that show gets some folks interested in the War of 1812 who otherwise wouldn't be, I'm a hundred percent in favor of it.

I saw it. I enjoyed it, but, as someone else mentioned, was somewhat disappointed in the very brief summary of the naval war aspect. It's good to see subjects like this getting some air time, though. It looks like this Sunday a special on the war with Tripoli is scheduled. That should be interesting as well.

-Devin

I'm astonished by the fact that Britain had a 1,000 ship Navy at the time. I think Reagan was pushing for a 1,000 ship Navy for the U.S. and I'm not sure if it ever happened. Amazing they could man all those ships with the lower population figures of the early 19th century. Apparently they did have trouble filling the crews as they resorted to impressment.
I wonder if in the bombardment of Ft. McHenry, whether or not they used the line formation and each ship took turns lobbing shells in a cycle?

Dave

I haven't seen the show yet, just the making of it last Saturday. And it seemed it was all based on the actions of the Army. I'm as well am surprised that the show will have the impression that the American's were defeating the British in the war, when in fact, it was the other way around. The Naval war is what turned the tide in favor of the American's. The British were surprised and awed at the designs and handling of the American ships, to the point, that one Frigate tied up an entire British squadron and sent them half way around the world to capture it while it wreaked havoc on the British whaling industry. The conquests of the Constitution and United States and the exploits of the Essex and Chesapeak were the top news of the day and the nucleus for the American propaganda engine. The American land victories in Canada would not have been made possible if not for their naval upswing in the Great Lakes. So I'm kinda dissapointed in that this show would not balance out the naval and land engagements.

Scott

RE djrost's comment - One really thought-provoking aspect of this is that the British Royal Navy today, which is a shadow of its former self, has a shore-based bureaucracy that's far bigger than the one that existed in 1812. At that time a tiny handful of administrators in London ran a navy that was exerting a major influence on events all over the world. And they did it without computers, xerox machines, radios, or even typewriters. Kinda makes you wonder.