La Florida: Indian Traits and Leaders

Indians in general were crafty, devious, unpredictable, and employed deception, guile, ambush and stratagem. They were also relatively well organized locally and organizationally coherent in tribal areas, which were sometimes quite extensive.

They were an important source of operational-tactical information for Europeans, whose knowledge of events in LF was limited generally to the areas they control.

In terms of SF Actions! Indian traits are:
canny
slippery
undisciplined, but betters (Indians were undisciplined but saw themselves as betters, so this is different.)
expert shooters

No Indian can possess any of the following characteristics:
disciplined
swordsman
coward
bookish

When not detected, Indians can perform any two actions per turn (except, obviously, no. 7 “mount...”). (I’m going to see how this works in practice, so it’s provisional for now.)

They are allowed only one turn of HTH, unless successful. If unsuccessful, they will immediately withdraw from contact, facing the enemy. (Again, I want to see how this works in practice.)

Officer traits are:
tough
terrible
fanatical
Hero
Mars

For SF Actions! LF Indian equivalents are:

cacique = colonel
war chief = captain

Caciques were Indian chiefs in the La Florida-Caribbean region.

war party = squadron
warband = company

Current Reading: In the Saddle with Stuart

Reade, Frank Robertson, and Robert J. Trout. In the Saddle with Stuart: The Story of Frank Smith Robertson of Jeb Stuart's Staff. Gettysburg, Pa.: Thomas Publications, 1998.

Lt. Francis (“Frank”) Smith Robertson (1841-1926) was a student at the University of Virginia when the Civil War broke out in 1861. The son of former Virginia governor Wyndham Robertson, he was a child of privilege who went to war initially as an infantry officer. Contracting an illness that plagued him for months and killed dozens of his fellows in the 48th Va., he eventually recovered and found employment as an engineer officer on Gen. Jeb Stuart’s staff. Although he had no qualifications for his position (a distinction he shared with at least one other), he nevertheless served bravely and efficiently from April 1863 until Stuart’s death. Afterwards, he served on the staff of Gen. W.H.F. (“Rooney”) Lee.

This is another book of wartime reminiscences well edited by Robert J. Trout. Much of it was written contemporaneously with the events described, with clarifications and additions penned later. I found it especially useful for its descriptions of Brandy Station, Gettysburg, and Five Forks. Robertson brings home also in a most affecting manner the cavalryman’s relationship with his mounts – from Miranda, who saved his life by her speed; to Bostona, who couldn’t be made to turn except by dashing straight ahead for a considerable length and then gradually turning like a wagon (which almost got him killed at Brandy Station); to Yank, an uncomfortable ride about which the less said the better.

Current Reading: Lee’s Last Casualty

Parker, Robert W., and Catherine M. Wright. Lee's Last Casualty: The Life and Letters of Sgt. Robert W. Parker, Second Virginia Cavalry. Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, 2008.

As the title indicates, this book tells the story of Sgt. Robert William Parker’s Civil War service, spent predominantly in the ranks of the 2d Va. Cav., through his letters to his wife, Beck, and his parents. Parker is thought to have been the last soldier of the Army of Northern Virginia killed in action, and he is buried in the Confederate Cemetery at Appomattox.

The book is elegantly and knowledgeably edited by the young scholar Catherine M. Wright and provides a rare glimpse into the wartime experiences of a common soldier of the mounted arm, where the war was anything but “swords and roses.” Then, as now, communication with loved ones was vital in sustaining the morale of the individual faced with privation and suffering far from home.

Parker fought in numerous battles and actions, large and small, including First Manassas, Kelly’s Ford, Brandy Station, Aldie, Gettysburg, the Overland campaign, and of course, Petersburg and Appomattox. This is a fascinating read, even at times exhilarating, but overlaid with sadness.

Current Reading: Riding with Stuart

Garnett, Theodore Stanford, and Robert J. Trout. Riding with Stuart: Reminiscences of an Aide-de-Camp. Shippensburg, Pa.: White Mane Pub. Co., 1994.

Garnett (d. 1915) was an aide-de-camp to Confederate cavalryman Gen. Jeb Stuart, and this slim volume provides his reminiscences of the period October 1863-May 1864. Very ably edited by Robert J. Trout, who perhaps knows Stuart’s military household as well as anyone, its centerpiece is Garnett’s “Continuation of War Sketches,” covering Auburn, the Mine Run campaign, and the Overland campaign through Yellow Tavern and Stuart’s death.

Garnett’s recollection of Stuart’s mortal wounding at Yellow Tavern is perhaps the most expansive we have and is quite valuable in its own right.

The book also includes a biographical sketch of Garnett by editor Trout and the text of Garnett’s address delivered at the unveiling of Stuart’s equestrian monument in Richmond, Va., in 1907.

Garnett was a perceptive young man, and his reminiscences, though written many decades after the events they describe, provide a glimpse of a period little discussed in other memoirs of Stuart’s headquarters.

Horse-holders (3)

Above: 1st Maine Cavalry skirmishing during the fighting near Middleburg, Va., June 19, 1863. Pencil and Chinese white drawing by Alfred Waud. Library of Congress.

The narrative below, penned by Lt. Col. Arthur James Lyon Fremantle of the Coldstream Guards, in his book, Three Months in the Southern States (1864), describes a large skirmish near Franklin, Tenn., on June 4, 1863. The Confederate troops engaged belonged to Martin’s Division. It is clear from Fremantle’s account that the tactics employed were previously unknown to him.

“It was very curious to see three hundred horses suddenly emerge from the woods just in front of us, where they had been hidden--one man to every four horses, riding one and leading the other three, which were tied together by the heads. In this order I saw them cross a cotton-field at a smart trot, and take up a more secure position; two or three men cantered about in the rear, flanking up the led horses. They were shortly afterwards followed by the men of the regiment, retreating in skirmishing order under Colonel Webb, and they lined a fence parallel to us. The same thing went on on our right.”

And a little later …

“The way in which the horses were managed was very pretty, and seemed to answer admirably for this sort of skirmishing. They were never far from the men, who could mount and be off to another part of the field with rapidity, or retire to take up another position, or act as cavalry as the case might require. Both the superior officers and the men behaved with the most complete coolness; and, whilst we were waiting in hopes of a Yankee advance, I heard the soldiers remarking that they `didn’t like being done out of their good boots’--one of the principal objects in killing a Yankee being apparently to get hold of his valuable boots.”

Bucquoy (Part 2)

Above: Image of Bucquoy taken from a biography.

Our previous post on Bucquoy covered his career up to 1618. We resume here in late 1618.

Arriving in Bohemia, Bucquoy had to contend first against the mercenary army of the Peter Ernst, Graf zu Mansfeld, which had been subsidized on behalf of the rebels by Spain’s enemy, Charles Emmanuel, Duke of Savoy. Mansfeld had taken Catholic Pilsen (Nov. 21), and used it as a base. Meantime, the rebels’ own largely-peasant field army under Heinrich Matthias, Count Thurn, blockaded Vienna. Bucquoy concentrated against Mansfeld and caught a detachment of the freebooter’s army under Mansfeld’s own command at Zablat (modern Záblati, June 10, 1619) and destroyed it, although Mansfeld himself escaped the debacle.

Zablat caused the rebels to raise the siege of Budweis, recall Thurn’s army from Vienna, and redouble their appeal for aid throughout Europe. Ultimately, only Gabriel Bethlen, Prince of Transylvania, agreed to an alliance with the rebels.

In the skirmishing during the advance to Prague, Bucquoy was severely wounded (musket shot in the groin) while on reconnaissance at Rakonitz (Nov. 4 or 5). Feverish and confined to a coach, he is said by at least one author (Reade) to have given up his command to Tilly, but this was evidently not the case—or was temporary—since he played an active role at the ensuing Battle of White Mountain (Nov. 8, 1620) under the ramparts of Prague, no doubt spurred by the palpable mismanagement of the first phase of the battle by Maximilian and Tilly. In fact, he took to horseback and helped to restore order on both flanks, thus at least facilitating what was probably an inevitable final victory over the rebellion by the combined armies of the Emperor and the League. White Mountain was a battle of annihilation and settled the fate of Bohemia for 300 years.

AR Dampierre (Part 3): The Regiment in the Bohemian War

Above: The triumphal parade of AR Dampierre at the Hofburg, Vienna, on June 5, 1619 (see biography of Dampierre, posted previously).

Bohemian War. Sub-war of the Thirty Years’ War, lasting from May 23, 1618-1623.

The conflict began with the Defenestration of Prague (May 23, 1618), which also was the opening event of the Thirty Years’ War.

The regiment was involved in the following events:

Combat of Pilgram (Nov. 3, 1618)
Capture of Lomnitz (Nov. 9, 1618)
Combat of Unter-Wisternitz (Aug. 5, 1619)
Defense of Vienna (Dec. 1619)
Capture of Nikolsburg (Feb. 6, 1620)
Battle of the White Mountain at Prague (Nov. 8, 1620)
Combat at Neuhäusel (Jul. 10, 1621)
Action at Goutta (Jul. 17, 1621)
Combat at Wisternitz (Nov. 13, 1623)