Discussion Union vs CSA Guerrilla

leftyhunter

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
May 27, 2011
Location
los angeles ca
Ummmm because Mobile didn't fall until April 12th 1865 after the battles of Spanish Fort and Fort Blakely. There is correspondence between Grant and Sherman, A J Smiths division would have launched a mobile campaign after Atlanta if it hadn't been diverted to Missouri in response to Prices Raid
Once the Lower Bay of Mobile is captured Mobile
Ummmm because Mobile didn't fall until April 12th 1865 after the battles of Spanish Fort and Fort Blakely. There is correspondence between Grant and Sherman, A J Smiths division would have launched a mobile campaign after Atlanta if it hadn't been diverted to Missouri in response to Prices Raid
The fall of Mobile in 1865 wasn't that important. Per battlefields.org once the battle of Mobile Bay concluded in August of 1864 with the destruction of the Confederate fleet and the capture of Confederate ports the port of Mobile was effectively blockaded.
Price's Raid accomplished nothing useful for the Confederacy. Price's Raid did help the Union cause by causing the death of many Confederate soldiers and guerrillas at the cost of no lost territory for the Union.
Leftyhunter
 
Joined
Sep 17, 2011
Location
mo
Once the Lower Bay of Mobile is captured Mobile

The fall of Mobile in 1865 wasn't that important. Per battlefields.org once the battle of Mobile Bay concluded in August of 1864 with the destruction of the Confederate fleet and the capture of Confederate ports the port of Mobile was effectively blockaded.
Price's Raid accomplished nothing useful for the Confederacy. Price's Raid did help the Union cause by causing the death of many Confederate soldiers and guerrillas at the cost of no lost territory for the Union.
Leftyhunter
your opinion is noted, however actual generals at the time noted the delay of the Mobile campaign as a consequence, thats fact.

It was a raid to create a distraction, it distracted AJ Smiths division which did effect operations elsewhere. It was a limited effect, but what did you expect of a raid? They were expected to do something, when there was little they could do, so they did a raid at least trying to fulfill doing something. I'm not aware of any alternative they could even do.
 
Last edited:

USS ALASKA

1st Lieutenant
Joined
Mar 16, 2016
Collection; Combat Studies Institute (CSI)
Title; Third War irregular warfare on the western border 1861-1865.
Author; Martin, James B.

Abstract; Foreword by Roderick M. Cox: In 1979, the Combat Studies Institute published the first of the Leavenworth Papers. The series afforded the CGSC Faculty the opportunity to present their scholarship to the professional military community seeking to learn about contemporary and doctrinal issues from historical events. After an eight year hiatus I am excited to bring back the Leavenworth Papers series to once again contribute to our Army’s education and leader development. That first publication of the Leavenworth Papers examined the evolution of US Army tactical doctrine since World War II. The research offered historical insights to senior leaders and doctrine writers charged with refocusing the Army toward a possible conventional conflict with Warsaw Pact military forces. In the 25 years that followed, the Leavenworth Papers series grew to include 22 studies that addressed historical cases that were likewise of tactical, doctrinal, and organizational interest to the Army. The subjects of these studies varied but the authors were intent on making history relevant to military professionals engaged in thinking about current and future challenges. This latest publication of the Leavenworth Papers marks the continuation of this storied series. Third War offers a lucid and well-researched analysis of irregular warfare during the American Civil War. Dr. Martin’s focus on insurgent operations in the western border region brings fresh insights to this area of study. Moreover, the history of insurgency in these western states offers a greater understanding of irregular warfare to those who may be tasked with mounting counterinsurgency operations in the not so distant future. CSI – The Past is Prologue!

Series; Leavenworth Papers
Publisher[ Fort Leavenworth, KS : Combat Studies Institute Press, US Army Combined Arms Center,
Date, Original; 2012
Date, Digital; 2012
Release Statement; Approved for public release; Distribution is unlimited
Repository; Combined Arms Research Library
Library; Combined Arms Research Library Digital Library

Cheers,
USS ALASKA
 

Attachments

  • Third War irregular warfare on the western border 1861-1865.pdf
    1.2 MB · Views: 12

Patrick H

Lt. Colonel
Joined
Mar 7, 2014
Collection; Combat Studies Institute (CSI)
Title; Third War irregular warfare on the western border 1861-1865.
Author; Martin, James B.

Abstract; Foreword by Roderick M. Cox: In 1979, the Combat Studies Institute published the first of the Leavenworth Papers. The series afforded the CGSC Faculty the opportunity to present their scholarship to the professional military community seeking to learn about contemporary and doctrinal issues from historical events. After an eight year hiatus I am excited to bring back the Leavenworth Papers series to once again contribute to our Army’s education and leader development. That first publication of the Leavenworth Papers examined the evolution of US Army tactical doctrine since World War II. The research offered historical insights to senior leaders and doctrine writers charged with refocusing the Army toward a possible conventional conflict with Warsaw Pact military forces. In the 25 years that followed, the Leavenworth Papers series grew to include 22 studies that addressed historical cases that were likewise of tactical, doctrinal, and organizational interest to the Army. The subjects of these studies varied but the authors were intent on making history relevant to military professionals engaged in thinking about current and future challenges. This latest publication of the Leavenworth Papers marks the continuation of this storied series. Third War offers a lucid and well-researched analysis of irregular warfare during the American Civil War. Dr. Martin’s focus on insurgent operations in the western border region brings fresh insights to this area of study. Moreover, the history of insurgency in these western states offers a greater understanding of irregular warfare to those who may be tasked with mounting counterinsurgency operations in the not so distant future. CSI – The Past is Prologue!

Series; Leavenworth Papers
Publisher[ Fort Leavenworth, KS : Combat Studies Institute Press, US Army Combined Arms Center,
Date, Original; 2012
Date, Digital; 2012
Release Statement; Approved for public release; Distribution is unlimited
Repository; Combined Arms Research Library
Library; Combined Arms Research Library Digital Library

Cheers,
USS ALASKA
Thanks for this excellent link. I have downloaded the PDF.
 

leftyhunter

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
May 27, 2011
Location
los angeles ca
If you're interested check out this link starting with "CHAPTER XII. War Times and Afterwards." Also search the book for "James (Jim) Hartley, Kirk, and Blalock, for even more insight. It will give you an excellent look into the subject from first hand accounts of people who lived it. As I've stated before. This area of NC was a hornets nest during that time in history due to the situation in TN, Eastern NC, and the fact that every other person here had loyalties to one side or the other and by 64 the Unionist, deserted Union and Confederate guerrilla's had become very brave due to the Northern army gaining the upper hand in the war by that time and Burnside's occupation of Knoxville TN, along with the fact that other than a few homeguard, Vances soldiers were the only regular Confederate unit ordered to this area between central TN and central NC.

https://archive.org/stream/historyofwataug00arth/historyofwataug00arth_djvu.txt
@Scott1967 ,
This thread has twenty four pages and discuues the overall Guerrilla Warfare situation in the ACW but some posts deal with North Carolina.
Leftyhunter
 

leftyhunter

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
May 27, 2011
Location
los angeles ca
Has we know both sides actively used guerrilla warfare during the CW. There are differences how ever.
For the purpose of discussion a guerrilla does not wear a uniform or has was often the case in Mo wore captured enemy uniforms. Therefore cavalry raiders such has Morgan, Marmaduke and Shelpy do not count has guerrillas has long has they are in uniform.
Arguably the CSA had the most guerrillas vs the Union mostly in but by no means limited to Mo. I have not read any figure that gives a round number estimate of X amount of CSA guerrillas vs Y amount of Union troops and militia. Has a general rule it has been argued that it takes ten conventional troops to counter one guerrilla.
Based on the number of Union cavalry and a few Infantry regiments that where assigned to Mo (although often rotated out of Mo) plus the 10k men of the Mo State Militia (the only Union militia that was full time and paid for by the federal govt and fought mostly but not always in Mo) there where quite a few CSA guerrillas or has often referred to has"bushwackers".

Both sides used guerrillas to cooperate with conventional troops. For example Quantril provided an escort for recruiting commands in Mo and in AL Unionist guerrillas from time to time would fight alongside convention Union troops.
The Union could supply at least some guerrillas on a regular basis for example Gen. Dodge in Al could supply Unionist guerrillas and the US Navy supplied Unionist guerrillas in Fl and Ga and even sent an officer to form and lead the 2nd Fl cavalry USV.
Unionist guerrillas where arguably more successful in that by the late summer of 1864 they could sieze and hold areas of the CSA vs CSA guerrillas who could not.
Many guerrillas on both sides became guerrillas due to resentment of being drafted or conscripted by the other side.
Questions.
1. What side really had the most?
2. Which side more effectively supported their guerrillas?
2. Which sides guerrillas ultimately achieved the most good for their side?
Leftyhunter
@Reconstructed Rebel ,
It's a long thread but it got a lot of participation. Guerrlla warfare is nothing new the first written or at least on of the first written accounts of guerrlla warfare is the Book of Macabbes where Jewish guerrllas over 2k years ago defeated the Hellenic Syrians.
Americans have been engaged in guerrilla or counterinsurgency warfare against the Indians well before the American Revolution and of course during and after the ACW. Both the Colonial Rebels and the British used guerrlla warfare during the ARW.
I have other threads but this is a good start any questions let me know.
Leftyhunter
 
Joined
Jun 7, 2021
@Reconstructed Rebel ,
It's a long thread but it got a lot of participation. Guerrlla warfare is nothing new the first written or at least on of the first written accounts of guerrlla warfare is the Book of Macabbes where Jewish guerrllas over 2k years ago defeated the Hellenic Syrians.
Americans have been engaged in guerrilla or counterinsurgency warfare against the Indians well before the American Revolution and of course during and after the ACW. Both the Colonial Rebels and the British used guerrlla warfare during the ARW.
I have other threads but this is a good start any questions let me know.
Leftyhunter
Really excellent info!
 

leftyhunter

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
May 27, 2011
Location
los angeles ca
Really excellent info!
I have other threads as do some other posters on guerrlla warfare. ACW era guerrlla warfare has been written about since Samual Hildebrand wrote his autobiography not to long after the ACW but much more attention has been given to the subject over the last 35 years or so. Unionist guerrillas were more or less ignored until fairly recently although there was a 1950s era movie based very loosly on Unionist guerrillas in Jones County , Mississippi.
While many troops were involved with guerrlla warfare plus of course quite a few milita/homeguards the subject or field manual of how to actually fight guerrllas wouldn't be published until the 1928 counterinsurgency warfare USMC " Small Wars Manual". Some the ACW era counterinsurgency techniques are still used today. The US Army didn't really review it's ACW era Counterinsurgency until the conflict in Iraq and not sure how well those lessons were incoporated.
Leftyhunter
 

Borderruffian

1st Lieutenant
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Location
Marshfield Missouri
I have other threads as do some other posters on guerrlla warfare. ACW era guerrlla warfare has been written about since Samual Hildebrand wrote his autobiography not to long after the ACW but much more attention has been given to the subject over the last 35 years or so. Unionist guerrillas were more or less ignored until fairly recently although there was a 1950s era movie based very loosly on Unionist guerrillas in Jones County , Mississippi.
While many troops were involved with guerrlla warfare plus of course quite a few milita/homeguards the subject or field manual of how to actually fight guerrllas wouldn't be published until the 1928 counterinsurgency warfare USMC " Small Wars Manual". Some the ACW era counterinsurgency techniques are still used today. The US Army didn't really review it's ACW era Counterinsurgency until the conflict in Iraq and not sure how well those lessons were incoporated.
Leftyhunter
One more time. The Small Wars Manual was written post Latin and Caribbean interventions it was published in 1940 and is still required in the syllabus of many USMC advanced courses. It had very,very little to do with ACW counterinsurgency, because in the ACW there was no counterinsurgency doctorine.
 

leftyhunter

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Joined
May 27, 2011
Location
los angeles ca
Really excellent info!
I have other threads as do some other posters on guerrlla warfare. ACW era guerrlla warfare has been written about since Samual Hildebrand wrote his autobiography not to long after the ACW but much more attention has been given to the subject over the last 35 years or so. Unionist guerrillas were more or less ignored until fairly recently although there was a 1950s era movie based very loosly on Unionist guerrillas in Jones County , Mississippi.
While many troops were involved with guerrlla warfare plus of course quite a few milita/homeguards the subject or field manual of how to actually fight guerrllas wouldn't be published until the 1928 counterinsurgency warfare USMC " Small Wars Manual". Some the ACW era counterinsurgency techniques are still used today. The US Army didn't really review it's ACW era Counterinsurgency until the conflict in Iraq and not sure how well those lessons were incoporated
One more time. The Small Wars Manual was written post Latin and Caribbean interventions it was published in 1940 and is still required in the syllabus of many USMC advanced courses. It had very,very little to do with ACW counterinsurgency, because in the ACW there was no counterinsurgency doctorine.
True I got the date wrong it was 1940 and yes it was not based on the ACW especially because the USMC was not employed in ACW era Counterinsurgency so my apologies to @Reconstructed Rebel however my point is the US military did not teach counterinsurgency until 1940 and only to the USMC the smallest Branch of the US military so in that I am correct.
There certainly was a counterinsurgency doctrine by the US Army that today would be called " hard counterinsurgency" vs the more modern " hearts and minds" which came about from USAF Colonel Lansdale in the late 1940s. The US Army in the ACW basically used the same techniques as the Romans although the use of US troops disquising themselves as guerrllas to gage popular support for the guerrllas such as the 2nd Colorado Cavalry in Missouri was used quite a bit in post WWII Africa.
Leftyhunter
 
Top