Golden Thread Nathaniel Lyon: Hero, Devil, or both?

[Patrick H]

Understand. However, I forgot that Lyon had experience leading men in the murder of innocent Indian women and children in Cali.

Hmmmm.... Well, that's an important reminder, too. It's a rather dark one, but there we have it. Thanks again!

 

[archieclement]

Very good reminder, Lusty. Thanks for the insight. But let's remember that Ware was just recording things as they existed within his own memory and consciousness. He was mistaken historically, but I am not sure he realized that he was mistaken. Regardless, he was cutting some slack to Lyon, and he knew it. He was not recognizing the experience of Price or McCulloch.

Lyon had Mexican War experience as well. was wounded in the leg there. as well as the dubious Indian war.

 

[Lusty Murfax]

Thinking about what Ware says about Lyon's troops exceeding his expectations at Oak Hills. I suspect they did perform well, at least at first. His seven infantry regiments, including one of U.S. regulars from Ft. Leavenworth were better armed provisioned and trained than the recently recruited and ill equipped Missouri farm boys Price lead up Bloody Hill to face him. Additionally, Lyon had the advantage of relative surprise and he kept the bulk of his force concentrated with him posing minimal communications difficulties. It is unfortunate for the Union that Lyon failed to take advantage of his initial tactical situation by bolding forcing the Missourians off the reverse slope of the hill and down into their camp in the valley. I think I have posted here before that the Iowa Militia regiment (I forget now which one) on the extreme left of his line was lightly engaged and merely maintained position in line with those more heavily engaged, trading pot-shots with the Missourians right flank. A more experienced commander might have used those troops more aggressively to attempt to out-flank and turn Price's line before McCulloch brought his army up on the right to close off the opportunity.

 

[Patrick H]

Thinking about what Ware says about Lyon's troops exceeding his expectations at Oak Hills. I suspect they did perform well, at least at first. His seven infantry regiments, including one of U.S. regulars from Ft. Leavenworth were better armed provisioned and trained than the recently recruited and ill equipped Missouri farm boys Price lead up Bloody Hill to face him. Additionally, Lyon had the advantage of relative surprise and he kept the bulk of his force concentrated with him posing minimal communications difficulties. It is unfortunate for the Union that Lyon failed to take advantage of his initial tactical situation by bolding forcing the Missourians off the reverse slope of the hill and down into their camp in the valley. I think I have posted here before that the Iowa Militia regiment (I forget now which one) on the extreme left of his line was lightly engaged and merely maintained position in line with those more heavily engaged, trading pot-shots with the Missourians right flank. A more experienced commander might have used those troops more aggressively to attempt to out-flank and turn Price's line before McCulloch brought his army up on the right to close off the opportunity.

Thank you, Lusty. I admit I know next to nothing about the big fight at Wilson Creek. Keep the posts coming, as they relate to Lyon. I am learning and I will wager many other readers are, too.

 

[Lusty Murfax]

It was reported that the smoke of battle was so thick and hung over the area of heavy engagement and was not yet blown clear by the morning wind. Lyon's troops had crested the hill and initially took position firing down on Price's small army. Price's troops were able to approach from a defilade position below and crawl up within shooting range covered by the smoke. Remember that Price had so far received no firearms from the Confederacy, the Missourians had found very few modern rifles at the Liberty Arsenal and they had captured about 1,500 rifles dropped on the field by Sigel's Dutch, as they fled at Carthage. Most of Price's armed soldiers were armed with shotguns and squirrel rifles and necessarily needed to get into very close range, relative to the modern equipped Yankees. The Missouri boys were able to pick off Lyon's soldiers as they were backlit by the sky above the crest of the hill. The Missourians drove Lyon's small army back uphill beyond the military crest and after what amounted to a battle of attrition at close range, they broke, leaving Lyon's body and much of their arms and equipment on the field.

 

[Patrick H]

It was reported that the smoke of battle was so thick and hung over the area of heavy engagement and was not yet blown clear by the morning wind. Lyon's troops had crested the hill and initially took position firing down on Price's small army. Price's troops were able to approach from a defilade position below and crawl up within shooting range covered by the smoke. Remember that Price had so far received no firearms from the Confederacy, the Missourians had found very few modern rifles at the Liberty Arsenal and they had captured about 1,500 rifles dropped on the field by Sigel's Dutch, as they fled at Carthage. Most of Price's armed soldiers were armed with shotguns and squirrel rifles and necessarily needed to get into very close range, relative to the modern equipped Yankees. The Missouri boys were able to pick off Lyon's soldiers as they were backlit by the sky above the crest of the hill. The Missourians drove Lyon's small army back uphill beyond the military crest and after what amounted to a battle of attrition at close range, they broke, leaving Lyon's body and much of their arms and equipment on the field.

Lusty, is this your summary or is this a direct quote from some resource that I need to read? I haven't seen it before, but it fits very well with my general understanding of the conflict at Wilson Creek.

I think whomever authored this report (I hope, not you) was somewhat ignorant of the range of a fine squirrel rifle. A military rifle might or might not throw a ball of heavier weight. In that era, there were plenty of sporting rifles that threw .50 caliber balls or even heavier. Of course, a shotgun is a closer weapon--hardly the best choice if one needed to line up against an opposing army and then slug it out to the death. On the other hand, we must remember that a shotgun loaded with buck shot can be a horrific weapon at ranges beyond bird shot. I'm talking ranges beyond 50 yards. Accuracy, no. Lethal spread, yes.

To my way of thinking, the absolute greatest hindrance in the armament of the MSG is that their calibers and loads were not standardized. Whether their squirrel rifles could kill at long range isn't an issue. Most of their rifles COULD.

The problem is that men on the field had rifles of different caliber. Thus, every rifle man had his own bullet mold with him (if he had planned ahead) and maybe he had a supply of pre-cast balls for his fine sporting rifle. The individual rifle man and his buddies could NOT resupply each other in a pinch. THERE is the great weakness of taking sporting rifles to fight a war!

There you have the biggest weakness, in my opinion.

And I can't explain it, but there you have an example of farm boys beating Lyon's well-equipped troops. I frankly don't know how they did it, but they did.

 

[SWMODave]

Thinking about what Ware says about Lyon's troops exceeding his expectations at Oak Hills. I suspect they did perform well, at least at first. His seven infantry regiments, including one of U.S. regulars from Ft. Leavenworth were better armed provisioned and trained than the recently recruited and ill equipped Missouri farm boys Price lead up Bloody Hill to face him. Additionally, Lyon had the advantage of relative surprise and he kept the bulk of his force concentrated with him posing minimal communications difficulties. It is unfortunate for the Union that Lyon failed to take advantage of his initial tactical situation by bolding forcing the Missourians off the reverse slope of the hill and down into their camp in the valley. I think I have posted here before that the Iowa Militia regiment (I forget now which one) on the extreme left of his line was lightly engaged and merely maintained position in line with those more heavily engaged, trading pot-shots with the Missourians right flank. A more experienced commander might have used those troops more aggressively to attempt to out-flank and turn Price's line before McCulloch brought his army up on the right to close off the opportunity.

#1 I believe Ware was making this comment about Lyon's troops exceeding his expectation because #1 he didn't trust the volunteers and #2 many of their terms had expired, including all of the 1st Iowa. They had served their time - they didn't need to be there. And Lyon who already didn;t trust them, had more reason.
#2 Lyon... kept the bulk of his force concentrated with him posing minimal communication difficulties" - just a reminder We are talking about Wilson's Creek where most historians agree Lyon's fatal flaw in this battle was allowing Sigel to take 1/3 of his complete force on a flanking movement- completely out of communication and sighte of Lyon
#3 The Iowa regiment, and the only Iowa troops at this battle, were the aforementioned 1st Iowa. Of 800 men entering the battle, 12 were killed, 138 wounded, 4 missing totaling 154 men. Not to the level of the 1st MO or 1st KS but those two regiments casualty rate put them in the top 10 regimental losses for the entire war - so probably not real fair comparing them. The Third Louisiana, that fought in the cornfield, against Sigel, and on Bloody Hill - went into battle with 700 men of which 9 were killed, 48 wounded. The entire Missouri State Guard shows about 5000 and another 2000 unarmed, and of these 173 were killed and 551 wounded. 154 out of 800 is 1 in 5 men being killed or injured - I would say for a bunch of guys who didn't need to be there - they served honorably and paid dearly for their patriotism. But if you want to call that 'lightly engaged' ....?
#4 from former posts on this thread - the Federal troops on Bloody Hill never dropped their guns and fled - that only happened when Sigel was attacked.
#5 from former posts on this thread - any claims of multiple sources that Missourian's sought to desecrate Lyon's body are rather bizarre as nearly all accounts talk about the respect the victorious troops treated Lyon's corpse with. Hundreds of wounded men laying round and guess who got the main bed in the Ray House - the biggest hospital? Yeah - Lyon.

Look guys, I realize most of you know each other and if you all want to spend another Missouri thread bashing Lyon, that's your right. But let's try and be a little more accurate when we are quoting 'history'. Men, including officers, from both sides, fought honorably at Wilson's Creek. It's a free country and you can pick out your bad guy if you need to, but the story can be told without making history up.

1500 rifles picked up when Sigel ran??" Where are we getting this stuff?

 

[Patrick H]

#1 I believe Ware was making this comment about Lyon's troops exceeding his expectation because #1 he didn't trust the volunteers and #2 many of their terms had expired, including all of the 1st Iowa. They had served their time - they didn't need to be there. And Lyon who already didn;t trust them, had more reason.
#2 Lyon... kept the bulk of his force concentrated with him posing minimal communication difficulties" - just a reminder We are talking about Wilson's Creek where most historians agree Lyon's fatal flaw in this battle was allowing Sigel to take 1/3 of his complete force on a flanking movement- completely out of communication and sighte of Lyon
#3 The Iowa regiment, and the only Iowa troops at this battle, were the aforementioned 1st Iowa. Of 800 men entering the battle, 12 were killed, 138 wounded, 4 missing totaling 154 men. Not to the level of the 1st MO or 1st KS but those two regiments casualty rate put them in the top 10 regimental losses for the entire war - so probably not real fair comparing them. The Third Louisiana, that fought in the cornfield, against Sigel, and on Bloody Hill - went into battle with 700 men of which 9 were killed, 48 wounded. The entire Missouri State Guard shows about 5000 and another 2000 unarmed, and of these 173 were killed and 551 wounded. 154 out of 800 is 1 in 5 men being killed or injured - I would say for a bunch of guys who didn't need to be there - they served honorably and paid dearly for their patriotism. But if you want to call that 'lightly engaged' ....?
#4 from former posts on this thread - the Federal troops on Bloody Hill never dropped their guns and fled - that only happened when Sigel was attacked.
#5 from former posts on this thread - any claims of multiple sources that Missourian's sought to desecrate Lyon's body are rather bizarre as nearly all accounts talk about the respect the victorious troops treated Lyon's corpse with. Hundreds of wounded men laying round and guess who got the main bed in the Ray House - the biggest hospital? Yeah - Lyon.

Look guys, I realize most of you know each other and if you all want to spend another Missouri thread bashing Lyon, that's your right. But let's try and be a little more accurate when we are quoting 'history'. Men, including officers, from both sides, fought honorably at Wilson's Creek. It's a free country and you can pick out your bad guy if you need to, but the story can be told without making history up.

1500 rifles picked up when Sigel ran??" Where are we getting this stuff?

I think I understand your concerns. I don't want phony history here, either. I butted heads with a poster who I thought was trying to post ungrounded statements here. I think there will be plenty of evidence to paint Lyon either way, as I hope I intimated in my thread title. He's a hero, or he's a devil, or he's both, as I suggested. Most times, it will depend who is posting. I would like to cite real sources.

I am trying to be very fair with my posts, and only expressing my personal opinion of displeasure with Lyon on specific issues. When I do, you will see those posts clearly stated as my opinion. Read my posts carefully and you will see that I am trying to point out why he was a hero to some and why he was the devil to others. I think he earned both appellations. I don't think I've been unfair to him at all.

Please keep coming back with your insights. I value them. I think I can assure you that @Booner will value them, too--even if we do or don't always agree with you.

Please keep coming back!

 

[Lusty Murfax]

Lusty, is this your summary or is this a direct quote from some resource that I need to read? I haven't seen it before, but it fits very well with my general understanding of the conflict at Wilson Creek.

I think whomever authored this report (I hope, not you) was somewhat ignorant of the range of a fine squirrel rifle. A military rifle might or might not throw a ball of heavier weight. In that era, there were plenty of sporting rifles that threw .50 caliber balls or even heavier. Of course, a shotgun is a closer weapon--hardly the best choice if one needed to line up against an opposing army and then slug it out to the death. On the other hand, we must remember that a shotgun loaded with buck shot can be a horrific weapon at ranges beyond bird shot.

Yeah, well they didn't have any Sheetz Kentucky Rifles (ask @Booner about those). In addition, the Missourians were forced to manufacture their own ammunition, while in camp/on the march south from the River. They didn't even have cartridge boxes and sewed them together from rawhide. I've read that lead supplies were low and they made do with rock chips and nails. Doubt there was a military supply of buckshot, but I don't know on that. I understand that powder was not short in comparison to the ammo. Up to a full third of Price's troops were completely unarmed and he held them back from the battle.

I have several books on the Missouri Confederates authored by Phil Gottschalk, Phillip Tucker, James McGhee, Joseph Boyce, Donald Gilmore and of course Thomas Snead, respectively. I also sourced from the first person accounts recorded in the State Archives (Mo Sec. of State). Many of the first person accounts of battle appear to match or possibly are the primary source of some of the accounts published by the listed authors. I know this is the case for several first person accounts. Pretty sure Col. Bevier was one of the Missourians whose story was recorded. Battlefield Trust and other web based sources are not comprehensive and offer almost no detail. As you know, the Wiki is almost useless.

 

[Patrick H]

#1 I believe Ware was making this comment about Lyon's troops exceeding his expectation because #1 he didn't trust the volunteers and #2 many of their terms had expired, including all of the 1st Iowa. They had served their time - they didn't need to be there. And Lyon who already didn;t trust them, had more reason.
#2 Lyon... kept the bulk of his force concentrated with him posing minimal communication difficulties" - just a reminder We are talking about Wilson's Creek where most historians agree Lyon's fatal flaw in this battle was allowing Sigel to take 1/3 of his complete force on a flanking movement- completely out of communication and sighte of Lyon
#3 The Iowa regiment, and the only Iowa troops at this battle, were the aforementioned 1st Iowa. Of 800 men entering the battle, 12 were killed, 138 wounded, 4 missing totaling 154 men. Not to the level of the 1st MO or 1st KS but those two regiments casualty rate put them in the top 10 regimental losses for the entire war - so probably not real fair comparing them. The Third Louisiana, that fought in the cornfield, against Sigel, and on Bloody Hill - went into battle with 700 men of which 9 were killed, 48 wounded. The entire Missouri State Guard shows about 5000 and another 2000 unarmed, and of these 173 were killed and 551 wounded. 154 out of 800 is 1 in 5 men being killed or injured - I would say for a bunch of guys who didn't need to be there - they served honorably and paid dearly for their patriotism. But if you want to call that 'lightly engaged' ....?
#4 from former posts on this thread - the Federal troops on Bloody Hill never dropped their guns and fled - that only happened when Sigel was attacked.
#5 from former posts on this thread - any claims of multiple sources that Missourian's sought to desecrate Lyon's body are rather bizarre as nearly all accounts talk about the respect the victorious troops treated Lyon's corpse with. Hundreds of wounded men laying round and guess who got the main bed in the Ray House - the biggest hospital? Yeah - Lyon.

Look guys, I realize most of you know each other and if you all want to spend another Missouri thread bashing Lyon, that's your right. But let's try and be a little more accurate when we are quoting 'history'. Men, including officers, from both sides, fought honorably at Wilson's Creek. It's a free country and you can pick out your bad guy if you need to, but the story can be told without making history up.

1500 rifles picked up when Sigel ran??" Where are we getting this stuff?

SWMODave, let me just add this to my previous reply:

This is a thread I launched and I try to direct it into fair-minded Lyon discussions. As long as I'm directing it, your insights will ALWAYS be most welcome here. I will check in each day and I will hope to see further posts from you. They will always be respected--whether or not they find universal agreement. If someone else makes mock, we will ask that person to leave. That is my promise.

Please keep coming back.

Okay, boys, where did the claim of 1,500 rifles come from?

 

[4th-MSM]

At one point in the midst of the battle at Wilson's Creek, Lyon nearly advanced ahead of his lines when an opportunity presented itself for him to engage in a personal fight with Sterling Price.

It was mentioned in "Wilson's Creek: the Second Battle of the Civil War and the Men who Fought it" by William Piston, but the original source is from "Wilson's Creek and the Death of Lyon" by William Wherry:

"Lyon, accompanied by an aide and his six or eight orderlies, followed closely the right of the Iowa regiment. After proceeding a short distance, his attention was called by the aide to a line of men drawn up on the prolongation of the left of our main line and nearly perpendicular to the 1st Iowa as it moved to the eastward. A party of horsemen came out in front of this line of the enemy and proceeded to reconnoiter. General Price and Major Emmett Mac Donald (who had sworn that he would not cut his hair till the Confederacy was acknowledged) were easily recognized. General Lyon started as if to confront them, ordering his party to "draw pistols and follow" him, when the aide protested against his exposing himself to the fire of the line, which was partly concealed by the mass of dense underbrush, and asked if he should not bring up some other troops. To this Lyon assented, and directed the aide to order up the 2d Kansas. The general advanced a short distance, joining two companies of the 1st Iowa, left to protect an exposed position."



https://books.google.com/books?id=R...wilson's creek and the death of Lyon"&f=false

 

[Patrick H]

Yeah, well they didn't have any Sheetz Kentucky Rifles (ask @Booner about those). In addition, the Missourians were forced to manufacture their own ammunition, while in camp/on the march south from the River. They didn't even have cartridge boxes and sewed them together from rawhide. I've read that lead supplies were low and they made do with rock chips and nails. Doubt there was a military supply of buckshot, but I don't know on that. I understand that powder was not short in comparison to the ammo. Up to a full third of Price's troops were completely unarmed and he held them back from the battle.

I have several books on the Missouri Confederates authored by Phil Gottschalk, Phillip Tucker, James McGhee, Joseph Boyce, Donald Gilmore and of course Thomas Snead, respectively. I also sourced from the first person accounts recorded in the State Archives (Mo Sec. of State). Many of the first person accounts of battle appear to match or possibly are the primary source of some of the accounts published by the listed authors. I know this is the case for several first person accounts. Pretty sure Col. Bevier was one of the Missourians whose story was recorded. Battlefield Trust and other web based sources are not comprehensive and offer almost no detail. As you know, the Wiki is almost useless.

Don't get your feathers ruffled, Lusty. Who knows what rifles they had? I stand by my point that a squirrel rifle was not necessarily an inferior weapon. I also made the point that the MSG didn't have standardized bores or standardized ammo. In my view, THAT was their big weakness (well....if you can get past the fact that so many of them weren't even armed!)

 

[Lusty Murfax]

#1 I believe Ware was making this comment about Lyon's troops exceeding his expectation because #1 he didn't trust the volunteers and #2 many of their terms had expired, including all of the 1st Iowa. They had served their time - they didn't need to be there. And Lyon who already didn;t trust them, had more reason.
#2 Lyon... kept the bulk of his force concentrated with him posing minimal communication difficulties" - just a reminder We are talking about Wilson's Creek where most historians agree Lyon's fatal flaw in this battle was allowing Sigel to take 1/3 of his complete force on a flanking movement- completely out of communication and sighte of Lyon
#3 The Iowa regiment, and the only Iowa troops at this battle, were the aforementioned 1st Iowa. Of 800 men entering the battle, 12 were killed, 138 wounded, 4 missing totaling 154 men. Not to the level of the 1st MO or 1st KS but those two regiments casualty rate put them in the top 10 regimental losses for the entire war - so probably not real fair comparing them. The Third Louisiana, that fought in the cornfield, against Sigel, and on Bloody Hill - went into battle with 700 men of which 9 were killed, 48 wounded. The entire Missouri State Guard shows about 5000 and another 2000 unarmed, and of these 173 were killed and 551 wounded. 154 out of 800 is 1 in 5 men being killed or injured - I would say for a bunch of guys who didn't need to be there - they served honorably and paid dearly for their patriotism. But if you want to call that 'lightly engaged' ....?
#4 from former posts on this thread - the Federal troops on Bloody Hill never dropped their guns and fled - that only happened when Sigel was attacked.
#5 from former posts on this thread - any claims of multiple sources that Missourian's sought to desecrate Lyon's body are rather bizarre as nearly all accounts talk about the respect the victorious troops treated Lyon's corpse with. Hundreds of wounded men laying round and guess who got the main bed in the Ray House - the biggest hospital? Yeah - Lyon.

Look guys, I realize most of you know each other and if you all want to spend another Missouri thread bashing Lyon, that's your right. But let's try and be a little more accurate when we are quoting 'history'. Men, including officers, from both sides, fought honorably at Wilson's Creek. It's a free country and you can pick out your bad guy if you need to, but the story can be told without making history up.

1500 rifles picked up when Sigel ran??" Where are we getting this stuff?

#3 Yeah, I get it, didn't mean to run them down. However, I based this on Slack's losses in facing the 1st Iowa, as well as a first hand account of one of the Iowa soldiers recorded in the Mo. SoS Archives. Additionally, there was no force across the creek to the left or east until after Sigel was routed. One of the interesting things the soldier said was that when they received orders to retreat, the soldiers were confused, because they thought they had won the battle on their side of the line. Now, given what we know about the area of the main fight, I find this admission enlightening. I was not saying the Iowans didn't want to fight. I'm saying they were asked to, in comparison to the regiments on their right. I don't know if the 1st Iowa ever fought in another battle, but it was my understanding that those casualty figures for the entire war.

#4 Sigel's troops did this both at Carthage and at Oak Hills. Missouri officers reported capture of about 1500 rifles at Oak Hills, according to Tucker and others. Their accounts indicate the Union did not gather up their dead and wounded before fleeing. Troops still engaged often drop their gear when the time comes to escape. There are no reports of rear guard action to cover the withdrawl by the Union. Price didn't follow the victory with a pursuit and he couldn't get McCulloch to join him. The living left the field quickly enough not to get shot in the back. It stands to reason that some of the rifles were dropped, since 1500 were not killed. To a Missourian, I suspect retreating troops marching, trotting or running at the double quick would look just like a mass of uniformed individuals fleeing the battlefield.

#5 Read this in one or both of Tucker's books. I believe he said that one of the officers of the 5th Missouri prevented the desecration and saw to it that Lyon's body was taken to a nearby farm house for safe keeping.

"1500 rifles picked up when Sigel ran??" Where are we getting this stuff?" Read this in both Gottschalk and Tucker. Believe that Bevier mentioned it also and he was there.

 

[SWMODave]

Let me suggest the following books on Wilson's Creek.

An Account of the Battle of Wilson's Creek or Oak Hills by Holcombe and Adams - free online
The Second Battle of the Civil War and the Men Who Fought by Piston and Harcher - hands down the best
The Battle of Wilson's Creek by Edwin Bearss - the most bang for the buck, imo

Snead's account is a good one, as if Tunnard's and Bearss 'A Southern Record', and Franc Wilkie - and many, many other first hand accounts, many online.

The final recommendation would be 'Campaign for Wilson's Creek' by Jeff Patrick. Jeff is the current librarian at Wilson's Creek so if you have a question, he is usually happy to help. BTW - Wilson's Creek has the second largest 'Civil War' NPS library and largest east of the Appalachians - at last check. I recently asked Jeff for a source for something he quoted in his book - that residents of Boonville presented Lyon a bouquet of red, white and blue flowers when he started his march to Springfield. He provided it.

Hero or devil? I chose to look at the men and boys and women of the Civil War era as historical figures, and since they are all dead and gone, I imagine the final verdict has been handed down. I think Lyon was a hero to the North and a devil to the South. To me, he is merely a historical character with strengths and flaws, who played an important role in Missouri history.

 

[Lusty Murfax]

SWMODave, let me just add this to my previous reply:

This is a thread I launched and I try to direct it into fair-minded Lyon discussions. As long as I'm directing it, your insights will ALWAYS be most welcome here. I will check in each day and I will hope to see further posts from you. They will always be respected--whether or not they find universal agreement. If someone else makes mock, we will ask that person to leave. That is my promise.

Please keep coming back.

Okay, boys, where did the claim of 1,500 rifles come from?

I read that Missouri officers reported this number to Price after the battles. I know I read in in one of Tucker's books, Gottschalk and probably Bevier. I believe Gottschalk mentioned that if it weren't for these rifles and those taken at Lexington from the Illinois regiment, the MSG would not have been armed and able to fight at Elkhorn Tavern.

 

[Lusty Murfax]

At one point in the midst of the battle at Wilson's Creek, Lyon nearly advanced ahead of his lines when an opportunity presented itself for him to engage in a personal fight with Sterling Price.

It was mentioned in "Wilson's Creek: the Second Battle of the Civil War and the Men who Fought it" by William Piston, but the original source is from "Wilson's Creek and the Death of Lyon" by William Wherry:

"Lyon, accompanied by an aide and his six or eight orderlies, followed closely the right of the Iowa regiment. After proceeding a short distance, his attention was called by the aide to a line of men drawn up on the prolongation of the left of our main line and nearly perpendicular to the 1st Iowa as it moved to the eastward. A party of horsemen came out in front of this line of the enemy and proceeded to reconnoiter. General Price and Major Emmett Mac Donald (who had sworn that he would not cut his hair till the Confederacy was acknowledged) were easily recognized. General Lyon started as if to confront them, ordering his party to "draw pistols and follow" him, when the aide protested against his exposing himself to the fire of the line, which was partly concealed by the mass of dense underbrush, and asked if he should not bring up some other troops. To this Lyon assented, and directed the aide to order up the 2d Kansas. The general advanced a short distance, joining two companies of the 1st Iowa, left to protect an exposed position."



https://books.google.com/books?id=RntKAAAAYAAJ&lpg=PR16&ots=3OM6JmetpQ&dq="wilson's creek and the death of Lyon"&pg=PA295#v=onepage&q="wilson's creek and the death of Lyon"&f=false

Most maps I've viewed indicate the 2nd Kansas was deployed over on the extreme right of Lyon's line, opposite of the position of the 1st Iowa, which was situated on the extreme left and on the other side of Bloody Hill. The 2nd Kansas would have likely not been able to view the eastern or Wilson's Creek side of the hill and McCulloch's troops advancing from the east toward the extreme left flank of the 1st Iowa. Maybe, he meant the 1st Kansas Rgt.

 

[Lusty Murfax]

Don't get your feathers ruffled, Lusty. Who knows what rifles they had? I stand by my point that a squirrel rifle was not necessarily an inferior weapon. I also made the point that the MSG didn't have standardized bores or standardized ammo. In my view, THAT was their big weakness (well....if you can get past the fact that so many of them weren't even armed!)

Oh, I didn't. The caliber and range would have been less. Much has been written regarding the necessity of the Missourians to get up close to fire. The troops were untrained and they would get up and run back for cover in order to reload, then run back up and take another shot. I have no idea why Lyon did simply order a bayonet charge by his entire line. He might have put the Missouri boys to a route, as they had no bayonets.

 

[Patrick H]

The caliber and range would have been less.

I get your overall point. I really do. But, as many of these rifles were of .50 caliber or bigger, some of those rifles could have brought down a deer, a bison (think Hawken gun), a bear, or one of Lyon's men. Some of them could have performed comparably to military rifles or muskets.

...but not all of them...

Once again, I'll point out that if I had a .36-caliber rifle and you had a .54-caliber rifle, we each could have been awesome marksmen.......until we ran out of ball. Then we couldn't have re-supplied each other.

THAT was the weakness of bringing sporting arms to a war!

 

[4th-MSM]

Most maps I've viewed indicate the 2nd Kansas was deployed over on the extreme right of Lyon's line, opposite of the position of the 1st Iowa, which was situated on the extreme left and on the other side of Bloody Hill. The 2nd Kansas would have likely not been able to view the eastern or Wilson's Creek side of the hill and McCulloch's troops advancing from the east toward the extreme left flank of the 1st Iowa. Maybe, he meant the 1st Kansas Rgt.

Thanks, I forgot about that.

I just checked one of the maps in Piston's book again and it shows Co. B of the 2nd Kansas at the extreme right of Lyon's line with the 2nd KS nearby behind the 1st Mo. The 2nd KS then moves from the west to the east of the sinkhole, taking a position to the right of the 1st KS. Co. B of the 2nd KS remains on the extreme right.

 

[Patrick H]

Lusty, can you post some maps? They would be a great help to our discussion!