Compare and contrast Counter guerrilla operations Union vs Confederate

What about this motley crew 'The Snake Hunters' I don't really know anything about them other than a few short articles that I have briefly read.
'These Snake Hunters are daring, fearless men. They are armed with ----- rifles and sword bayonets and go where and when they please. They frequently pass the rebel pickets and sometimes even enter their camp, passing themselves off as rebels. They go sometimes on foot and when it is more convenient they are well mounted. Their horses and clothes do not cost the government anything. They are the most efficient spies we have and we obtain from them much valuable information.'
Were these 'Snake Hunters' waging guerrilla warfare? it seems to me that if you were a 'Union Guerrilla', you were referred to a spy, which seems to give a more legitimate feel to their work.
http://www.lindapages.com/cwar/11wvi-jbaggs.htm
Hi Waterloo50,
Based on the above link it appears that the Snake hunters are regular enlisted Union soldiers and thus not guerrillas . They did not always wear Union uniforms and today would be in the special force category. If we check the muster rolls of their Wv regiment one should find Union pension records at least for some. I don't know if the Brandenburg Brigade was based on them but I would not be surprised.
Leftyhunter
 
Per Dyers Compendium it is not clear if the 1st Alabama Cavalry was engaged against guerrillas. They certainly saw a lot of action. The USCT regiments from Al did a lot of static defense but no indication of active guerrilla fighting.
The regiments from California did spend a lot of time fighting Indians which does qualify as anti-guerrilla fighting.
The 1st regiment cavalry spent quite a lot of time fighting Indians in the present day states of Az and Nm.
The 2nd regiment of Cavalry did as well much of it in Ca. I can't seem to find anestimate of how many soldiers they had but they had 7 companies the problem is how many men per company can variy.
Leftyhunter
 
The Colorado Territory had a number of regiments that fought guerrillas and Indians the most famous and arguably effective was the 2nd Colorado Cavalry they fought both Indians and latter in 1864 guerrillas in Mo and they fought against Gen. Prices raid into Mo.
Few of the men from Co where born there and they came from all states in the Union per the book" 3 1/2 year in the army or my life in the Second Colorados " which is now a free online pdf.
The 1st Colorado Cavalry regiment was used to fight Indians including the Sand Creek Massacre. Not the first US troops to commit massacres and far from the last. Fighting Indians was an ugly business and the Confederates didn't shy away from it during the CW by any means. It is what it is.
The Second Regiment has mentioned saw quite a bit of service and per T. J. Stiles was considered a very hard core fighting outfit. The 2nd Colo often disguised themselves as Mo CSA guerrillas to find out who was supporting them. The CSA guerrillas often disguised themselves as Union soldiers. It's a down and dirty technique and it has been very much used since in modern COIN conflicts.
Leftyhunter
 
The 2nd Regiment of Colorado appears to have had some contact with guerrillas and Indians prior to consolidating with the 3rd Regiment of Colorado and then becoming the 2nd Col0rado Cavalry regiment which as mentioned saw quite a bit of combat against guerrillas.
Leftyhunter
 
It wasn't just Unionist troops that fought guerrillas and Indians. From the great state of Connecticut we have the First regiment of Cavalry. They fought guerrillas in Wv from roughly February 1862 to May 1862.This unit saw a lot of conventional combat as well. No figures on how many men enlisted.
The 5th Con Regiment of Infantry was used in static defense in Tn guarding rail road lines. They may of clashed with guerrillas as Confederate guerrillas where plentiful in Tn.
Leftyhunter
 
The Dakota Territory produced only one Union military unit as the Dakotas had few white people at the time. The 1st Battalion Cavalry saw action against Indians.
Leftyhunter
 
Not all states regiments fought guerrillas so I won't list them. One state saw a lot of men fight guerrillas and that is Illinois.
The First regiment Cavalry saw against guerrillas in Mo and Ar it appears to of only been a one year regiment.
Leftyhunter
 
The 1st Il Cav was not the only Il Cav to fight guerrillas . The 2nd Il Cav saw quite a bit of service against guerrillas in Mo and Ky.
The 3rd Il Cav saw quite a bit of COIN service in Mo Ark and Miss.
The 4th Il appears to have fought Guerrillas in Miss and La.
The 5th Il Cav saw a fair amount of COIN fighting in Mo and Ark.
The 6th Il Cav fought guerrillas mostly in Miss and appear to have fought some in La.
The 7th appears to have fought guerrillas in Mo but mostly in Miss and La.
The 8th Il Cav appear to have just done conventional fighting the 9th Il Cav appears to have fought a fair amount in Ark and Miss and some in Tn.
The 10th Il Cav fought guerrillas quite a bit in Mo and Ark. So far the 10th may of spent the most time on COIN duty of the Il Cav regiments.
The 11th Il Cav fought guerrillas mostly in Miss.
Leftyhunter
 
War against partisans on both sides was nasty and dirty and very frequently bloody. Nobody did it right not the south and not the north.Not the Militias not the home Guards and not the regulars, on eitheir side.

There was no great plan or system or tactic to deal with partisans and their support (civilian) element. The Federals didn't have one, the Confederates didn't have one.
 
War against partisans on both sides was nasty and dirty and very frequently bloody. Nobody did it right not the south and not the north.Not the Militias not the home Guards and not the regulars, on eitheir side.

There was no great plan or system or tactic to deal with partisans and their support (civilian) element. The Federals didn't have one, the Confederates didn't have one.
I agree neither side waged a textbook perfect counter guerrilla/insurgent/ anti bandit campaign. On the other hand who in the last 150 odd years has? It haz been argued that the British during the Maylaya Emergency 1948 to 1960 did but a fairly new book argues the British did masscare at least one large group of civilians.
I did list what I think are valid and intetsting questions..Right now I am trying to get a reasonable round number estimate on how many regular troops on both sides spent at least some time on basic active counter guerrilla opetations.
We know per Dyers quite a few Union infantry regiments especially the USCT regiments where tied down in static defense. Was it due to cavalry raidetz guerrillas and or a combinaton of both is hard to say. What ever the number was it is in the tens of thousands.
Missouri alone tied down tens of thousands of full time troops over the course of the civil war. Any help in this regard be appreciated.
Leftyhunter
 
Perhaps that is why Jim Lane committed suicide and Jennison was arrested/court martialed.
How were Jim Lane or Jennison guerrillas? Answer they weren't. Did they lead Union troops into battle against guerrillas? Where their techniques effective or ineffective? Perhaps you should develop your theme a bit. Not all our friends know about Lane and Jennison.
Leftyhunter
 
I agree neither side waged a textbook perfect counter guerrilla/insurgent/ anti bandit campaign. On the other hand who in the last 150 odd years has? It haz been argued that the British during the Maylaya Emergency 1948 to 1960 did but a fairly new book argues the British did masscare at least one large group of civilians.
I did list what I think are valid and intetsting questions..Right now I am trying to get a reasonable round number estimate on how many regular troops on both sides spent at least some time on basic active counter guerrilla opetations.
We know per Dyers quite a few Union infantry regiments especially the USCT regiments where tied down in static defense. Was it due to cavalry raidetz guerrillas and or a combinaton of both is hard to say. What ever the number was it is in the tens of thousands.
Missouri alone tied down tens of thousands of full time troops over the course of the civil war. Any help in this regard be appreciated.
Leftyhunter


The USCT especially those recruited from former slaves in the south were generally made Artillerymen due to a belief thet came from the USN that blacks were better adapted to heat and working in it, and more able to move large artillery pieces or naval guns, many of these arty units were later reclassed to infantry in late 64 early 65. That is why many USCT troops were in static positions , such as the elements of the 2nd USCT Artillery at Ft.Pillow.

Infantry did fight guerillas, not well in Missouri as foot soldiers, because the Partisans had an advantage of faster and longer movements over foot sloggers, but some MSM infantry served in a mounted rifle type capacity although they were generally poorly mounted often om plow horses brood mares or candidates for the glue factory, Johnstons force at Centralia was the 39th MSM Infantry, they were mounted for all the good it did them. The MSM unit that killed Bloody Bill, near Richmond Missouri was also infantry a portion of which was mounted.

Missouri and to an extent Tennessee often put garrisons in towns to try and protect Unionists that may have lived there, secure rail lines, river lines, road junctions etc. Holding populated centers is still done, that being said if you don't control the boonies than populated areas are all you got.

Yes the guerillas did tie up a fair amount of troops in Missouri, both Federal and State,but then that is what happens in a fluid guerilla type conflict, if they don't know where you are or where you'll strike next it ties up alot of troops that could be used else where and drains manpower and supplies away from the "main" war.
 
How were Jim Lane or Jennison guerrillas? Answer they weren't. Did they lead Union troops into battle against guerrillas? Where their techniques effective or ineffective? Perhaps you should develop your theme a bit. Not all our friends know about Lane and Jennison.
Leftyhunter

The Grim Chieftan and Doc Jennison and other RedLege JayHawkers may have had a quasi-blessing from the yankee government as far commission's and volunteer commands but they fought mainly against civilians more than Partisans or regular formations.
 
The USCT especially those recruited from former slaves in the south were generally made Artillerymen due to a belief thet came from the USN that blacks were better adapted to heat and working in it, and more able to move large artillery pieces or naval guns, many of these arty units were later reclassed to infantry in late 64 early 65. That is why many USCT troops were in static positions , such as the elements of the 2nd USCT Artillery at Ft.Pillow.

Infantry did fight guerillas, not well in Missouri as foot soldiers, because the Partisans had an advantage of faster and longer movements over foot sloggers, but some MSM infantry served in a mounted rifle type capacity although they were generally poorly mounted often om plow horses brood mares or candidates for the glue factory, Johnstons force at Centralia was the 39th MSM Infantry, they were mounted for all the good it did them. The MSM unit that killed Bloody Bill, near Richmond Missouri was also infantry a portion of which was mounted.

Missouri and to an extent Tennessee often put garrisons in towns to try and protect Unionists that may have lived there, secure rail lines, river lines, road junctions etc. Holding populated centers is still done, that being said if you don't control the boonies than populated areas are all you got.

Yes the guerillas did tie up a fair amount of troops in Missouri, both Federal and State,but then that is what happens in a fluid guerilla type conflict, if they don't know where you are or where you'll strike next it ties up alot of troops that could be used else where and drains manpower and supplies away from the "main" war.
It's been said one guerrilla ties down ten conventional troops. I don't know if that is true in the Civil War or not. All I can do is use Dyers to get a rough estimate of how many conventional troops were tied doown in guerrilla warfare. I have probably missed some straight leg regiments.
Leftyhunter
 
Back
Top