One moral of the story. It's probably a bad idea to rely so heavily on one book for information.

Fun fact. Both James Madison and Alexander Hamilton contributed to what would become Washington's Farewell Address.

What's that smell waftin' over from the North? Is it the aroma of HYYY-POCRISY???

Girls When They Travel Back In Time: HI, I'm your granddaughter Boys When They Travel Back in Time: Gladiator games, so awesome! Someone pass the popcorn Historians When They Travel Back in Time: Eliza, slowly step away from the flame and hand me the letters. You too, Martha.

It's also funny, since they cut out a major immigrant from this story: Prussian general Friedrich Wilhelm von Steuben. He actually moved to the US and became an American citizen after the war. Not to mention his actual impact on the American military.

Broke: Dueling People Joke: Dueling Banjos Woke: DUELIN’ TIMELINES

"Maybe they are rapping, so the inaccuracies come faster" My favorite quote to date from you

Does this mean we are eventually going to get a John Adams miniseries Based on a True Story?

This musical is in many ways less accurate then some of the most infamous historical films I've seen. But it does not cause the historian in me to go on a rant, because it makes up for its inaccuracies by presenting its good parts in a unique, cohesive and respectable manner like nothing that has ever come before.

Hamilton reminded me of Disney's Hercules: both are popular projects via Disney, both have a lot of inaccuracies when it came to history (or mythology when it comes to Hercules), BUT the curiosity about fact vs. fiction is what inspired people to do their own homework to learn the truth. Honestly, I remember finding out as a kid that the story of Hercules was HIGHLY inaccurate in the Disney version. That sparked my interest in Greek mythology because I decided to read up on it. The same can be said about Hamilton because how many people were REALLY interested in studying U.S. history until it came out in hip hop/rap form? *Yes, I know Hamilton was a VERY successful Broadway project, but A LOT of people online have said they wished they got into it during its original run prior to it coming to Disney+

I keep forgetting how young most of the Founders were. It really makes sense they acted like a bunch of high school Mean Girls with lots of booze and no adult supervision. One of my favorite stories of political history is when Adams and Jefferson hired newspaper editors to trash each other and Jefferson's guy called Adams a hermaphrodite.

In ten more years we will finally have a trap musical about Woodrow Wilson, portrayed as he was always meant to be, a proud african-american fighting for democracy and social justice.

I personally love the musical and it got me more interested in early American history which I only knew the basics of before. The main thing is never get all information from one source and examine if the sources are meant to teach, persuade, or entertain. I think it's a good starting point, but don't take it as gospel.

TLDR Lafayette’s immigration status is a complicated no, rather than a simple no. Hi cypher, I want to comment on the question of Lafayette’s immigration status and explain where some of that misconception comes from. I have two B.A.s one in History and the other in screenwriting from Chapman university. Lafayette’s citizenship status was the subject of my undergraduate thesis, where I used it as a lens to analyze American concepts of citizenship for white men prior to the Dread Scott Case. For my sources I relied on the letters of Washington, Lafayette, his wife Adrienne, the diplomatic papers of Ambassadors Jefferson, Mourris, and Monroe, and revered to the biographies by Gottschalk and Spaulding (who covered Lafayette’s prison stay). Let’s get to that question. Ok Was Lafayette an immigrant? No, almost certainly not, but he very much wanted to be in the 1790s. But the misconception comes from his largely ambiguous citizenship status. In 1784, the Maryland General Assembly conferred citizenship to Lafayette in recognition for his service I the American Revolution. If you interpret the definition of immigrant to be anyone who had dual citizenship but not living in that country then Lafayette has an immigration case. But there’s several disputes on what that Maryland declaration actually meant. Under the Articles of confederation states largely had the right to confer citizenship to whomever, but that citizenship did not necessarily confer to being a citizen of the United States after the 1789 constitution. There were not many legal cases born out of that period. Lafayette was captured by the Austrian military in 1792 after he fled his post in the French military (he feared the French would arrest him and try him for many things including the champ de mars massacre.) Lafayette appealed to the American government to seek his freedom. After France stripped him of his citizenship, Lafayette relied on Maryland’s declaration that he was one of their citizens, and therefore he could not be held as a POW from a country that was not at war with Austria. Austria was not convinced, and the most the American government intervened was to facilitate the transfer of his wife and daughter from a French prison to Lafayette’s Austrian prison Olmutz. Lafayette made his claim at a time when many French veterans of the revolution made dubious American citizenship claims. James Monroe, the American Ambasador at the time, got in trouble for allegedly disseminating American passports to French citizens to escape. Lafayette has a serious claim to citizenship for a French man, but America never claimed him. In 1797 Lafayette was released due to Napoleons victory over Austria. Lafayette immediately sought to immigrate to America, but his wife was too ill for a journey. When she recovered Lafayette spent a year petitioning Washington (though it was The Adams admin) for passage. But by that time the French relationship with America was so poor that Washington advised him that the journey would spark a diplomatic incident. Then Washington died. So there we have it. Lafayette tried very hard to emigrate, but it never stuck. For what it’s worth the American media very rarely (I found one instance in the library of Congress) revered to him as an American. The newspapers more often referred to him as a “Friend of America.” In 1824 Maryland conferred honorary citizenship to Lafayette, which would have been 1 unconstitutional at that point(but this is still prior to Dred Scott.) and 2 moot if he was already considered a citizen. If he was a citizen he definitely lost it after Dred Scott, but America finally made him an honorary citizen during the Bush Admin. So to your point cypher, you are correct, nobody other than the State of Maryland considered him to be an immigrant and even their case for it is shaky and was never acted upon.

Hamilton, huh didn't hear about this musical must have not been talked about much.

Got a like from brother. I'm black man who's a big fan of the musical and I thought you did a great job in explaining both sides. For myself and many others the play was a inspiration and caused me to look into the real-life history behind the events . Regarding the show, I think LMM does a good job at showing that the Founders weren't ideal with the lead being a dogmatic status-checker, others being bigoted hypocrites, or in Washington's case complacent to all the misdeeds going on around them. Truthfully will always be a mixed bag and two-hours is not enough to detail a man's ( let alone a nation's) history. That said something like Hamilton can hit people in a way that history lessons at school can't and cam inspire people to seek out their own answers

To quote Lindsey Ellis, the founding fathers were not immigrants, they were colonisers.

Very disappointed to learn that the Hamilton vs Jefferson rap battle didn't actually happen.

Hail King George, the true best character, you know I'm right!

Excellent play; subpar scholarship. In the same way I have no problem watching any of Shakespeare's many "Henry" plays, I have no problem watching Hamilton. But, then again, I am keenly aware that there are serious historical issues all around.

can't wait for the MLK jr musical, starring Daniel Day-Lewis, coming out in 2022

Hamilton WAS thought of as an immigrant by some, being half-Scottish and half-French and from the islands. Thomas Jefferson once referred to him as "that foreign bastard."

The more I learned about founding fathers, the more surprised that America had even existed at all.

I knew there was a reason why John adams wasn’t even a character and he was shit talked the entire musical.

Going through all the inaccuracies in the musical Hamilton is exactly what I have wanted to see. Thank you so much for this. And even when you know so much of it is inaccurate, I still think it's just incredible and an excellently crafted piece of art.

I think in the play when Washington said that he lead his men into a massacre, he's referring to the battle of Fort Necessity where he was forced to surrender to a force of French and native troops. That's what I gathered from that line.

I really hope no one thought this was an accurate musical.

Every time you call this musical a play, a Newsie dies.

I actually prefer your longer videos over your shorter ones. They're better than documentaries most of the time. Keep on fighting the good fight, Sir.

As a non-American fan of the show who had barely heard of Alexander Hamilton before the musical (he came up in economic editorials sometimes, so I was aware he had something to do with creating the banking system, and maybe that he was on some bill or other, I'd probably read about the duel at some point but forgot about it), I had absorbed nearly all of your lightning round inaccuracies through engagement with the fandom, including by reading lengthy works of fan fiction (yes, really). My experience has been that Hamilton fans LOVE to discuss all this stuff... but maybe that just reflects my own media and internet habits. And of course this video would have been very unlikely to come up in my KZfaq recommendations unless I'd become interested in Hamilton specifically and the FFs in general because of the musical. I will continue to enjoy the musical 'Hamilton' much as I enjoy Inglorious Basterds and Django Unchained. And interesting critiques of those works of art!

It's kinda sad how much better 1776 was when that came out nearly 50 years ago. Still, impressive on 1776's part.

In the interest of accuracy, young Hamilton actually went to work for Beekman and Cruger, New York merchants. Not his mother's ex husband. He moved in with the Thomas Stevens family. And befriended Edward Stevens, a year older. Who also moved to New York in adulthood. They were noted to have a strong physical resemblance. In New York, Hamilton started a militia group with some of his "scholarship" money. They stole British cannon and became an artillery group. The King sang "when you're gone I'll go mad." It was foreshadowing. Not a reference to his current condition. I liked Chernow's book but have read others on Hamilton.

I think your video is kind of perfect because it is a bridge. So, Hamilton was great in the sense it really did get many young persons very interested in history. However, you're right, when presented with ugly truths or complex timelines otherwise explained, it really can be a stop gate and discouraging. History is a lot to take in and process, so having videos like this with the important details mirroring what you're critiquing makes it really easy to understand and appreciate. As someone who has learning challenges and loves world history I think more commentary like this is needed.

Was Benjamin Franklin more of an abolitionist than Hamilton? I know he owned two house slaves and later became the president of the Pennsylvania Society for Promoting Abolition of Slavery, did he do that because he genuinely believed slavery was wrong or just to vindicate him from his past as a slave owner?

This is possibly your most savage review yet. 😂 Don’t stop tho. This roast is hilarious.

The biggest flaw of the musical is obviously that, while they could put Lafayette in New York in 1776, they didn't put Kościuszko anywhere, even in mentioning. I'm kidding of course, but only a little. ; )

If Miranda is Puerto Rican doesn’t that make him a similar “immigrant” to Hamilton?

As a 1st gen Puerto Rican born on the mainland, this musical helped me connect with American history is a way I hadn’t before. I always saw it was “their” history, not mine. Thank you fir not trashing it while still outlining the historical inaccuracies. I knew while watching that it was probably NOT accurate but was too engrossed in my own representation as an American to care. Thank you 🙏

My favorite part was Worf vehemently shaking his head when asked to sing by Picard.

I just watched your pop history recently which is a great companion to this. Hamilton is entertaining and does do a lot to talk about the politics (pretty squabbles) of the founding fathers. As said in the video and Mr Beat's comment it suffers from using one source as it's basis. Of course Lin Manuel Miranda is not a historian so we can forgive for that because he does push some important messages about history through a popular piece of entertainment. I really enjoy the perceptive on it placing in the neoliberalism beliefs that dominate politics today. I think 2020 is really challenging neoliberalism from a variety of angles so I wouldn't be surprised if in 10 or so years people (on the "left") will widely hold this view. Another excellent and thoughtful video!

Miranda himself is not a neoliberal even if he incorporated many neoliberal ideas into his work. He campaigned with Alexandria Ocasio Cortez for example in 2020. I do have to say you bring up good points and it’s honestly kind of sad to me that I can’t argue with them. I really enjoyed the play and loved the fact that it was finally a piece of popular media that depicted this period without portraying these men as gods. Although I now realize it fell victim to many of those same traps. I think I agree with your final conclusion: Miranda meant no ill will with this play and could’ve made it better if he used more sources. Makes me feel bad that I allowed some of its misconceptions to influence me though as a staunch progressive.

Heh. I say that "Burn" is the song that makes historians cry for the exact reason of all those primary sources lost. But yes, I absolutely love how they incorporated historiography into the play here and there. My favorite songs include it in spades. So many people out there hold the belief that history doesn't change or that history is written by the 'victors.' While the latter is true if you widen the scope of what you consider a 'victor,' the former has never once been true in all of human history. We will always be finding and losing primary sources, then reinterpreting that information through the current lens of the present.

After the war, the US was deeply in debt and the economy was in ruins. Hamilton favored Britain because the trade was key to his financial plans. I actually love Chernows new book on Grant. The revisionists ruined his reputation which was not fair. When Grant was elected president and he created the Justice Department to crush the first KKK because the sheriffs and juries wouldn’t convict in the south. He also made sure the 14th and 15th amendments were passed to give black people the right to vote and made them citizens. He also pushed for Reconstruction where black people were elected and able to be educated with the push for public schooling. He kept the country together after winning the war (he was also unfairly categorized as a butcher when he had the lowest casualty rates while Lee was held up as a god afterward by southerners when he had the highest rates). Afterward they made deals for votes to undo everything he did and then the southern “lost causers” pushed untrue facts (like they were fighting for “states rights when Lee’s lieutenant most trusted Longstreet said the whole war all he heard was they were fighting for slavery but that didn’t “sound good”) to ruin his historical reputation.

"The thought of grandchildren makes me go 'bur'" ~ Johnathan Edwards

I've said it before and I'll say it again: As a Non-American (filthy socialist Nordic European sort), while the musical itself is very entertaining, there is a clear streak of American exceptionalism in the show. Listening to the Schuyler (spelling?) Sisters song about equality, when so many other countries gave women full suffarage before the US? Yeah... that song doesn't hold much water. And characters like Hamilton talking about how they came from the bottom of society when really they had more privilege than most in their time. I still enjoy the musical (I've gotten so many laughs out of my friends singing "You'll be Back" and "Wait for It" is a great emotional song), but I won't hold any illusions of it being historically accurate. It's about as accurate as The Pirate Queen and less accurate than Elizabeth.

Before I even start watching I just want to say I was looking for this video a few weeks ago after watching the musical, so glad you made it!

I love the video and watched it twice. I had some slight issues with it and fleshed out some others with my different view... Reality: Hamilton didn't go to work for his mother's ex-husband. He worked for New York/St Croix merchant Nicholas Cruger. Hamilton's half-brother got their mother's belongings since he was the only legitimate son. Scholarship: I think people should read from a wide range of books. Founders chic, or dad history as it's often classed now, isn't all bad. Chernow is terrible because he forms crushes on his book subjects and kisses their butts often with wrongly assumed narratives, the blaming of bad actions on other "characters" and "facts" that might appear to be true but if researched even a little bit, aren't true or aren't exactly true. He can tell an engaging story but it's more biographical fiction than its history. Inaccuracy: 1). Hamilton tried to get into Princeton but wasn't accepted on an independent study. He got into some words with admissions but no fighting. That section was added so that they could have Hamilton say punch the bursar (punch the burr sir wordplay). Afterward is when Ham went to Kings College. Big problems: Immigration: Hamilton wasn't an immigrant in the way we look at it today but the different parts of the British empire were considered different. Hamilton had lived most of his childhood on two Dutch islands and New York many moons back was a Dutch Colony, so it was the perfect place to move. Hamilton was multilingual and looked decidedly Scottish. Washington, Jefferson, and Hamilton all had red hair and complexion. But the fact that Hamilton wasn't from the US did come up. Jefferson 1792: "I will not suffer my retirement to be clouded by the slanders of a man whose history, from the moment at which history can stoop to notice him, is a tissue of machinations against the liberty of the country which has not only recieved and given him bread, but heaped it’s honors on his head." founders.archives.gov/documents/Jefferson/01-24-02-0330 Hamilton 1995: "To see the character of the Government and the country so sported with, exposed to so indelible a blot puts my heart to the Torture. Am I then more of an American than those who drew their first breath on American Ground?" founders.archives.gov/documents/Hamilton/01-18-02-0170 John Adams in 1798: "Hamilton is not a native of the United States but a Foreigner, and I believe has not resided longer at least not much longer in North America, than Albert Gallatin" founders.archives.gov/documents/Adams/99-02-02-3021 Hamilton on immigrants just to contextualize your quote a bit. Hamilton June 1798. Right before the Alien acts passed at the start of the Quasi-War: "If an alien Bill passes...The provisions in our Treaties in favour of Merchants ought to be observed & there ought to be guarded exceptions of characters whose situations would expose them too much if sent away & whose demeanour among us has been unexceptionable... founders.archives.gov/documents/Hamilton/01-21-02-0276 Hamilton 1802 when Jefferson was deciding his immigration policy post Quasi-War: "Some reasonable term ought to be allowed to enable aliens to get rid of foreign and acquire American attachments; to learn the principles and imbibe the spirit of our government; and to admit of at least a probability of their feeling a real interest in our affairs. A residence of at least five years ought to be required." -The Examination Number VIII founders.archives.gov/documents/Hamilton/01-25-02-0282

I love the fact you use turn washington's spies clips in this video. It's such an underrated series.

22 - I believe the landslide they are referring to is the 36th ballot in Congress, where after being deadlocked for the first 35 ballots, Jefferson accumulated 10 votes to Burr’s 4.

Wood's Empire of Liberty is where i first fell in love with Hamilton. My favorite snippet is how Hamilton wasn't originally writing the financial plan for debts -- that was a congressional task force --- but the task force knew hamilton was going to review and make his own so the two went to him that summer and were like "homie do you just wanna do this?"

I am really enjoying the biographies you lament, and perhaps it may be helpful for folks to hear your further critiques of McCollugh's John Adams or Washington by Chernow.

I noticed you used a clip from Turn, would you consider doing an episode on it's accuracy or just an editorial on your thoughts?

You really snuck in a Pirates of Penzanse reference and nobody caught it, hot damn

For those looking for great entertainment and some interesting history along the way, Hamilton is totally the way to go, but the one that take the cake for historical accuracy is 1776. I love Hamilton, but historical accuracy just isn't its forte.

I love the background track around 12:00 fits perfectly, keep it up!

@ 3:32 For those wondering what the quarrel was between Washington and Hamilton: apparently, Washington wanted to speak to Hamilton. Hamilton, who was apparently a bit overworked, said he'd tend to him. However, he ended up running into Lafayette on his way and spent too much time chatting with him. He found Washington fuming, and was told he was 10 minutes late, and that this is disrespectful behavior for an aide. Hamilton replied that he hadn't realized that, and that Washington's remark induced him to quit. Washington told him if that was what he wanted, he wouldn't stop him. Hamilton stormed off. Lafayette talked to Washington about this (feeling a bit guilty he contributed to this--clearly a decent fellow, but not his fault), and Washington agreed to try and smooth things over. Hamilton, however, wouldn't take it. That's the quarrel. Yes, it's stupid. He could have simply apologized for what was clearly a mistake: he fucked up, and Washington was just doing his job. Having said that, Washington probably shouldn't have replied to Hamilton's offer that way.

Hamilton is just modern Julius Caesar, tells the story of a historical figure as a young and ambitious man, whose cunning military prowess has him rise above the ranks quickly, the protagonist continues to have sky high ambitions, he has an affair, and then said protagonists’ prideful actions lead to his downfall at the hands of his closest friend

For the next Based on a True Story, could you do the John Adams HBO series? I find it incredible how historically accurate it is, even if it does get some of the minor stuff wrong.

I don't think that being a great theatrical piece excuses falsifying history. There's long record of such in the US, particularly in film, and I don't think anyone should be excusing them either.

What about Fort Necessity Cypher?! WHAT ABOUT FORT NECESSITY???!!! And Lin and cast addressed a lot of the inaccuracies too for the sake of narrative like you said haha. 😆

Hamilton historiography is interesting. He was attacked by old progressives who preferred Jefferson and disliked his nationalism, and now there’s an up and coming far-right libertarian series of attacks on his centralizing nature

Before going into Hamilton, I knew before hand it wasn't going to be accurate. Our school textbooks aren't accurate, and Hamilton is a form of entertainment, so obviously, it's not going to be even halfway as accurate. That being said, when I finished Hamilton, the show itself gave me the impression that Alexander Hamilton was a greedy POS, nothing more, nothing less.

After walking from Wisconsin to NYC in spring of 2018, I had the honor of viewing Hamilton at the Rogers Theater. I thoroughly enjoyed the musical, but at the same time I had a good understanding of history. Personally, I don't think it's historical inaccuracies detract from the enjoy-ability of the musical, but I also don't think the musical should be taken as a historical work.

It’s cool to learn you see Zinn as nuanced and free of over-moralizing; too many demonize him :) PS: great video, also with good nuance

You kinda look the the "Ackchyually" meme 😂. On a more serious note, this was a very good vid. Liked and subscribed.

Me, someone who enjoys the musical: well, this is interesting

I never do understand the hype around George Washington. He was not all that.

2:07 were the "Islanders' sins" slavery itself (that was my first thought, but then who has the wealth and the pull to get him educated in the Caribbean but Caribbean slaveowners)? or absentee landlords / bigotry of European-born white people against American-born white people / bigotry of white slaveowners against mixed-race slave owners? or was it something specific like a mismanaged harvest or being too nice to slaves or something else random? (can't think of what those sins would have to be.)

Best part, is without movies like this we may miss out on discussions, such as these

Oh boy. It's been a long time coming.

As somebody who isn't American (and knows very little about the founding of the US), I went into the musical just assuming that every single good thing they said about those people was probably wrong somehow. Just knowing how Americans usually talk about their country and its founding. The inaccuracies (which I later read up on) didn't actually bother me much, the patriotic vibe was much worse. I do love the music greatly, and I've watched it countless times. Still, on some lines I can't help but cringe at this level of _Americanism_

I'd be down for some Founding Fathers Shipping Fan Ficts

You missed the sly Sally Hennings reference when Thomas Jefferson is introduced.

At least we got some cool music and dancing lol

I have to disagree with your statement that Hamilton "stayed aloof" during the election of 1800. In fact, he wrote a pamphlet that was highly critical of Adams, "Letter from Alexander Hamilton, Concerning the Public Conduct and Character of John Adams, Esq. President of the United States", which most likely hurt Adams' election chances, and made the Federalists appear to be divided.

Yes, can't wait to see your take on this musical

Sooooo...you are telling me that Marquis De LaFayette never actually jumped on a table and rap Guns and Ships??? 😭😭😭

Hey cypher, any thoughts on jellow`s alternative tentacles wwjd videos?

I simply love Hamilton, but as any reasonable person I did not expect for it to be historically accurate. In fact when I did some research it surprised me that it had that much actual history in it.

Thanks for making this - gonna be great to watch!

Finally I'm in the room were it happens.

As a huge Hamilton fan, I loved your video! It picked out things, that I often thought and you gave them the "historian blessing" haha. I have one and a half questions: I heard of a lot of theories, that Hamilton and Laurens had a gay relationship. As well as the theory of Hamilton and Angelica having feelings for each other. Yet you say, that this is often a misconception due to the heavy correspondence and that being normal at the time. But how do we (or better you, as in "the historians") know, that there was no connection between the heavy correspondence and feelings? And: What do you think of the "Sappho and her friends" meme? :D Thanks for the good work, keep it up! :D

You expressed every problem(and more) I had with this from me watching ten minutes of this on Disney plus and I didn't make the Obama connection til I read his book last week.(That's probably why it got greenlit) Hamilton is one of most romanticized founders...Thank you sir...Great video...

Would you consider doing an episode on Freedom Writers (2007)?

I've been waiting a long time for this

I would love to see you look at Joyeux Noel as a Christmas special. Maybe not this year but some year.

I love any video with Turn: Washington Spies being mentioned.

45 minutes. Oh boy, this is going to be good!

Dear Cynical Historian Please, never Ever Use the phrase "Founding fathers threesome" spoken with THAT voice.

I didn't know you went to Cal Poly! I'm currently an undergrad there.

What would be a biography that accurately depicts hamilton’s true character?

I'm always happy to see your videos. you're really doing great work.

It's funny, since if you want the actual man of the people, you don't want Alexander Hamilton, you want Aaron Burr. That's part of the reason they fought so often. Hamilton was elitist and anti-immigrant, while Burr was a lot more open to the common people, being an early feminist and anti-slavery/pro African integration, pro-immigration, and more. I'd say Aaron Burr is a lot more interesting as a historical figure and I would love something to fully focus on Burr.

Can you do a video on the historical accuracy of Hamiltoe: An American Porn Parody?

Thank you Cypher for this wonderful video!

Hamilton isn't and shouldn't be approached as an accurate history text. It's a foundational myth, the American Aeneid or Illiad, and in that regard it works pretty damn well

Just as a curiosity how does the finally of the play align with Eliza's life after Alexander's death? Did she actually push against slavery?

Nathaniel Greene waiting for his won musical..

"Manumissionist" as far as I'm aware meant buying slaves so you could set them free. So, one would expect a bill of sale for this type of abolitionist, of course one would. If we only have a bill of sale, then we have no proof either way.

PLEASE do Turn: Washington’s Spies