Having read the thesis, I'd say that in general, it's...... OK. Just OK.
It guess I expect more from a military officer in the regions of fact checking; he's lucky I wasn't on his thesis review board.
He mentions several times where the border ruffians of "Bleeding Kansas" later became guerrillas, and going so far as to call Quantrill and Anderson border ruffians. I can't agree with this as I believe the border ruffian period ended around 1858 when it was a for-gone conclusion that Kansas would enter the union as a free state. From 1858 to 1861 it was a period of Jayhawker interdictions into Missouri. And I would never include Quantrill or Anderson as border ruffians-they would have both been too young for that time period.
This one is a minor mistake that few would catch; in the summer of 1864 Anderson's band had a battle with the 7th Illinois Cavalry where they kill several of the Illinois troopers. My g g grandfather was in the 7th Illinois Cavalry, and in 1864 his regiment was in Tennessee, not central Missouri. In his order of battle, the author does mention the correct Illinois cavalry unit, the 17th Illinois.
The author mentions a change of Union command in the "Central Missouri District, also known as the Burnt District." No, Central Missouri is about 75 miles east of the Burnt District which happens to be in a string of Missouri counties that border on Kansas. Perhaps the Central Missouri District went as far west as to include the Burnt District, but he should have made that clear.
At the end of the 5th section, the author says something to the effect that it was the guerrilla's fault that's Prices raid was a disaster because the guerrillas didnt work in consort with Price. Then in the 6th section, it was Prices fault that his raid was a disaster because he didn't use the guerrillas effectively. So, which is it? How about this; Prices' raid into Missouri in 1864 was flawed from the beginning, that it was a for long hope of an old man with the meagerest of chance for success, with no hope of holding on to the state for the confederacy if he, Price, had been successful. 200 Guerrillas wouldn't have changed the outcome.
There are several more areas where the thesis is sloppy, including grammatical errors, and I find it remarkable that this paper was submitted in this state.
The paper did, however, support my ideas of the independent nature of the Missouri guerrilla, that he fought not for some lofty idea of an independent country, but for a real world, personal need to protect his family and property, and for revenge.