Two Infamous Guerrillas

[LtRusell]

According to the military, which became much more interested in what transpired in Missouri during the war, after entering Vietnam, and even more so, with the present fight on terrorism, the "tactics" worked - but the" strategy" failed. There are other military studies online but this one looks at Bloody Bill (the thread topic) and the massacre and battle at Centralia.

The Ironic Hindrances of Slaughter
A Case Study in Mission Command and Moral Autonomy
by Lt Colonel Peter D Fromm, US Army Retired

You can read (here)

It's one thing to kill an enemy to protect 'house and home', but its entirely something different to feel a need to take human body parts as trophies. If you want to defend "partisan rangers", you will find the task much easier for groups east of the Mississippi, because the comparisons with the guerilla's in Missouri, from either side, are few and far between.

It's interesting that the strategy failed. From what I can surmise it work but success in the long run didn't. In any thing there has to be someone to, no pun intended, field test the thing. Doubtful we would have ever reached the moon without use of the V2. I live by KSC. I have a few very funny stories I have heard about said "terror weapons" in our tests.

Which leads me to terror itself. It's very easy to say "We don't...". They do. Fear can be brought to a people or an army in many different ways. I'm pragmatic in the extreme on this. Vlad Tepes was a terrifying man. He didn't have a "nice stay" with the Ottoman Empire while being held as a "good faith" token. When the Ottoman troops came to fight, it wasn't pretty for them either. In fact very Centrailia-esque.

No matter on this conversation really. Rules of war are like rules in a knife fight.

I will read the link and I thank you for your thoughts. Always good to get another opinion.

Feel free to message me. I would enjoy this debate to carry on off this thread.

 

[Booner]

....It's one thing to kill an enemy to protect 'house and home', but its entirely something different to feel a need to take human body parts as trophies. If you want to defend "partisan rangers", you will find the task much easier for groups east of the Mississippi, because the comparisons with the guerilla's in Missouri, from either side, are few and far between.

In Bruce Nichols' book, "Guerrilla Warfare in Civil War Missouri, Vol. II, 1863" on page 227 he mentions where guerrilla sub-chief Andy Blunt and his group of newly-made guerrilla's from Saline, County, MO came across the body of Absolom Haller, who had recently been killed and scalped. This was in late August in 1863, just after the Lawrence raid, when Union troops in western Mo were on the "Great Guerrilla Hunt" for those guerrillas who had taken part in the Lawrence Massacre. When Blunt came across Haller's body in the woods, he was so shocked and incensed over the scalping that he was supposed to have said, "we have something to learn yet, boys. Scalp for scalp hereafter." The news of Haller's mutilation was quickly spread to other guerrilla bands, and according to Nichols, prior to this incident, guerrillas had not been know to mutilate their enemy. However, they quickly pick up the practice, especially Bill Anderson's' band. The practice had the duel effect of personifying the "intense hatred each side had developed for each other," as well as demonizing future guerrilla warfare. It is unknown what troops did the scalping; the 2nd Colorado, Kansas and Missouri Union troops had all been hunting guerrillas in the area where Haller had been killed.

The Lawrence Raid, the subsequent "Great Guerrilla Hunt," and the taking of scalps all seem to indicate to me that by mid 1863, the guerrilla war in MO had taken on a new aspect, where the extremist or radicals on both sides had taken over the conduct of the war.

 

[LtRusell]

In Bruce Nichols' book, "Guerrilla Warfare in Civil War Missouri, Vol. II, 1863" on page 227 he mentions where guerrilla sub-chief Andy Blunt and his group of newly-made guerrilla's from Saline, County, MO came across the body of Absolom Haller, who had recently been killed and scalped. This was in late August in 1863, just after the Lawrence raid, when Union troops in western Mo were on the "Great Guerrilla Hunt" for those guerrillas who had taken part in the Lawrence Massacre. When Blunt came across Haller's body in the woods, he was so shocked and incensed over the scalping that he was supposed to have said, "we have something to learn yet, boys. Scalp for scalp hereafter." The news of Haller's mutilation was quickly spread to other guerrilla bands, and according to Nichols, prior to this incident, guerrillas had not been know to mutilate their enemy. However, they quickly pick up the practice, especially Bill Anderson's' band. The practice had the duel effect of personifying the "intense hatred each side had developed for each other," as well as demonizing future guerrilla warfare. It is unknown what troops did the scalping; the 2nd Colorado, Kansas and Missouri Union troops had all been hunting guerrillas in the area where Haller had been killed.

The Lawrence Raid, the subsequent "Great Guerrilla Hunt," and the taking of scalps all seem to indicate to me that by mid 1863, the guerrilla war in MO had taken on a new aspect, where the extremist or radicals on both sides had taken over the conduct of the war.

"After a dead raider was scalped by a Union-allied Lenape Indian during the pursuit, one guerrilla leader pledged to adopt the practice of scalping.[50]"
-Subject 3.1 on Wikipedia.

It backs exactly what you say.

 

[TerryB]

It's not calling their service into question, not even actions. The 2ns Missouri Partisans have been recognized as a military unit. Period.

With the war made on the people of Georgia and South Carolina makes gasping at Missouri Partisans seem like a bit of a joke. It's great for the papers, and the laurels go to the victors. As do the histories.

Call me an apologist for those who fought for home in Missouri, Kansas, and west Tennessee if you must. If you're fighting for home, family, your way of life then the manor in which you fight is a non issue. Odds and fear become paramount.You pit a small group of very young men against a government and army that took special care to go after families, farms, crops and live stock, it's game on.

The Raising of Atlanta and Columbia, as well as the two mile swath through Georgia on the way to Savanna, give little room for saying that the Partisans in Missouri were some sort of insane group wandering around killing people for fun.
Point is I really don't care about the backgrounds of the people involved. Horse theif, parson, or one with a noble and lofty ideal. Either side had more than enough men in under arms who were more than willing to go "above and beyond" to send a message. The tactics used by Quantril & Anderson, the hit and run, have been used since, both by the US and our enemies. Why?

They work.

If you care to we can carry this conversation on in PM as to not upset the apple cart.

I will leave you with though, this from Sherman himself:

"You might as well appeal against a thunderstorm as against these terrible hardships of war. War is cruelty, there is no use trying to reform it; the crueler it is, the sooner it will be over."
― William T. Sherman

We all have a right to voice our opinions in this great country of ours. I just don't happen to agree with the methods of a Bloody Bill or Champ Ferguson, whatever made them do it. And some day Sherman will have to answer for his methods as well. None of them gets a free pass.

 

[LtRusell]

We all have a right to voice our opinions in this great country of ours. I just don't happen to agree with the methods of a Bloody Bill or Champ Ferguson, whatever made them do it. And some day Sherman will have to answer for his methods as well. None of them gets a free pass.

Funny that you bring up Sherman (or if you had brought up Sheridan I'd say the same thing).

Sherman was the subject of a review after the burning of Atlanta. It could have been the first war crimes trial. Nothing came of it. I don't dislike Sherman's tactics. Total war makes sense. I was using him as an example of large scale destruction vs. extreme violence on a smaller, but as deadly scale.

All that about Sherman being said, I'm from the south too.

One last thing. I think some of the news back then, as it is now, is sensationalized or straight BS. Scalps? Oh yeah, Anderson had 'em on his bridal. He also used to cry on his way into battle. Losing a sister can make someone come unhinged. Also many other of his men, and Quantrill's, had wives, sweethearts and sisters who were killed in the building collapse too.

If you look at the Pinkerton's going after the James/Younger gang you can see the same tactics used before and during the war.

Violence is violence, and it goes hand in hand with war. No one can rise above it.

 

[Booner]

"After a dead raider was scalped by a Union-allied Lenape Indian during the pursuit, one guerrilla leader pledged to adopt the practice of scalping.[50]"
-Subject 3.1 on Wikipedia.

It backs exactly what you say.

Thank you.

If anyone knows of an instance of scalping before this, I'd like to know. Not that it really makes any difference on who did what first, I'd just like to add it to my history.

I have heard of cases where, I think it was Kansas Jayhawkers, who notched the ears of suspected Mo southerners so they (the jayhawkers), would know if the southerners took part in anti-union activities later on. This happened in early 1862, I think.

 

[mofederal]

Archie Clement (left) and supposedly Jesse James.

 

[archieclement]

Thank you.

If anyone knows of an instance of scalping before this, I'd like to know. Not that it really makes any difference on who did what first, I'd just like to add it to my history.

I have heard of cases where, I think it was Kansas Jayhawkers, who notched the ears of suspected Mo southerners so they (the jayhawkers), would know if the southerners took part in anti-union activities later on. This happened in early 1862, I think.

Larkin Skaggs was scalped at Lawrence amongst a list of other atrocities committed to him...........

 

[archieclement]

According to the military, which became much more interested in what transpired in Missouri during the war, after entering Vietnam, and even more so, with the present fight on terrorism, the "tactics" worked - but the" strategy" failed. There are other military studies online but this one looks at Bloody Bill (the thread topic) and the massacre and battle at Centralia.

The Ironic Hindrances of Slaughter
A Case Study in Mission Command and Moral Autonomy
by Lt Colonel Peter D Fromm, US Army Retired

You can read (here)

It's one thing to kill an enemy to protect 'house and home', but its entirely something different to feel a need to take human body parts as trophies. If you want to defend "partisan rangers", you will find the task much easier for groups east of the Mississippi, because the comparisons with the guerilla's in Missouri, from either side, are few and far between.

LOL it was a strategic failure because "After Centralia, the Union Army made every effort to eradicate the bushwhackers"........so seriously up to Sept 27 1864 the Union hadn't been trying to eradicate the bushwhackers?.......hadn't heard that one before..........

And then he even notes later the Union mutilated Andersons corpse.....so is he saying the Union mutilating the dead was a strategic failure too?

 

[mofederal]

Bloody Bill Anderson in death.

 

[archieclement]

View attachment 163427

Bloody Bill Anderson in death.

Every time I see people posing with dead bodies as if its a trophy, it reminds me of the unforgiven exchange where lil bill says you just shot an unarmed man, and Muny replies well he should have armed himself if he's going to decorate his saloon with my friend.............................

Always wonder too, why didn't they take the picture AFTER they cut his head off?

 

[LtRusell]

Every time I see people posing with dead bodies as if its a trophy, it reminds me of the unforgiven exchange where lil bill says you just shot an unarmed man, and Muny replies well he should have armed himself if he's going to decorate his saloon with my friend.............................

Always wonder too, why didn't they take the picture AFTER they cut his head off?

Well, you never want to look like you're not doing the same thing. Decapitation, scalping, dragging bodies around, creepy death photos....

I think some doth protest too much.

 

[mofederal]

I don't know if some had ever seen Anderson in death. It show how he was dressed, what his shirt looked like, his weapons, etc., I think the two or so views were taken to prove he was dead. I saw one of a couple of views taken after Clement's death, but I wasn't sure if it is really him. It is a poor image at best.

 

[LtRusell]

I'm pretty sure that was Clement's body... unless one might say that the papers back then had a whole lot of sparkle but not much story.

 

[archieclement]

I don't know if some had ever seen Anderson in death. It show how he was dressed, what his shirt looked like, his weapons, tec., I think the two or so views were taken to prove he was dead. I saw one of a couple of views taken after Clement's death, but I wasn't sure if it is really him. It is a poor image at best.

I've only seen one, and think its hard to say its him comparing to known others, but same is true of some of jesse's.

The death one, his face seemed rounder and eyebrows were bushier

 

[mofederal]

A drawing, rather a water color, I found of Anderson.

 

[LtRusell]

I've only seen one, and think its hard to say its him comparing to known others, but same is true of some of jesse's.

The death one, his face seemed rounder and eyebrows were bushier

I think the only way to really tell is for forensics pin point features on his face (I saw it done with Jack the Ripper suspect John Kelly, almost an exact match).

I seriously doubt we get someone to take the time to do that. Unless we got together enough circumstantial evidence for a History channel special.

 

[LtRusell]

Come to think of it, we have raised enough ire here as well as questions of ethics/morality in war, to say nothing of mysteries surrounding "several" (my pet weasel word) Partisans deaths, that the execs over there might bite.

 

[diane]

There's doubt that dead guy is Bill Anderson? I didn't know that but one thing that always bothered me about the photo was it was pretty tidy...didn't he get two bullets in the head?

 

[mofederal]

According to all accounts Bloody Bill took a shot to the back of his head. You would think it would have exited somewhere out the face, but I am no ballistics expert. he does appear pretty clean.