Ephraim McLean Brank. From Wikipedia (and from a dismayed Brit):
We marched in solid column in a direct line, upon the American defenses. …[W]hat attracted our attention most was the figure of a tall man standing on the breastworks dressed in linsey-woolsey, with buckskin leggins and a broad-brimmed hat that fell around his face almost concealing his features. He was standing in one of those picturesque graceful attitudes peculiar to those natural men dwelling in forests. The body rested on the left leg and swayed with a curved line upward. The right arm was extended, the hand grasping the rifle near the muzzle, the butt of which rested near the toe of his right foot. With his left hand he raised the rim of his hat from his eyes and seemed gazing intently on our advancing column. The cannon of the enemy had opened up on us and tore through our ranks with dreadful slaughter; but we continued to advance unwavering and cool, as if nothing threatened our program.
The roar of the cannon had no effect upon the figure before us; he seemed fixed and motionless as a statute. At last he moved, threw back his hat rim over the crown with his left hand, raised his rifle and took aim at our group. At whom had he leveled his piece? But the distance was so great that we looked at each other and smiled. We saw the rifle flash and very rightly conjectured that his aim was in the direction of our party. My right hand companion, as noble a fellow as ever rode at the head of a regiment, fell from his saddle. The hunter paused a few moments without moving the gun from his shoulder. Then he reloaded and resumed his former attitude. Throwing the hat rim over his eyes and again holding it up with the left hand, he fixed his piercing gaze upon us, as if hunting out another victim. Once more, the hat rim was thrown back, and the gun raised to his shoulder. This time we did not smile, but cast our glances at each other, to see which of us must die. When again the rifle flashed another of our party dropped to the earth. There was something most awful in this marching to certain death. The cannon and thousands of musket balls played upon our ranks, we cared not for; for there was a chance of escaping them. Most of us had walked as coolly upon batteries more destructive, without quailing, but to know that every time that rifle was leveled toward us, and its bullet sprang from the barrel, one of us must surely fall; to see it rest, motionless as if poised on a rack, and know, when the hammer came down, that the messenger of death drove unerringly to its goal, to know this, and still march on, was awful.
I could see nothing but the tall figure standing on the breastworks; he seemed to grow, phantom-like, higher and higher, assuming through the smoke the supernatural appearance of some great spirit of death. Again did he reload and discharge and reload and discharge his rifle with the same unfailing aim, and the same unfailing result; and it was with indescribable pleasure that I beheld, as we marched [towards] the American lines, the sulphorous clouds gathering around us, and shutting that spectral hunter from our gaze.
We lost the battle, and to my mind, that Kentucky Rifleman contributed more to our defeat than anything else; for which he remained to our sight, our attention was drawn from our duties. And when at last, we became enshrouded in the smoke, the work was completed, we were in utter confusion and unable, in the extremity, to restore order sufficient to make any successful attack. The battle was lost.

Ah, but we are told that we cannot prevail this time… that our enemy has tanks, hellfire missiles and all manner of terrible engines of war.
Can courage, endurance, and the will to live free prevail?
Are there enough Kentucky riflemen to get the job done?
Time will tell.
“Firefly militia: millions strong, one at a time.”
~~~
“We lost the battle, and to my mind, that Kentucky Rifleman contributed more to our defeat than anything else; for which he remained to our sight, our attention was drawn from our duties.”
How best to achieve the distraction…
that image is beautiful in its stark terrible way
Pat- I hadn’t thought about the Firefly militia in a while. Thanks for the reminder.
I could read stories like this all day, every day. I had never heard of the firefly militia. Thanks, as usual, for sharing.
Oh Claire, having my first contest. Would be honored if you visited.
“Firefly militia: millions strong, one at a time.”
Kind of like mosquitos, until someone comes along with a canister of DDT.
@Matt Not going to buy that argument. One of the problems in guerrilla warfare is identifying your enemy. You can’t kill everyone indiscriminately. In some places that sort of action would lead to your side losing by mobilizing support against you, and anywhere that doesn’t happen you simply have to face the fact that you can’t kill the entire populace.
Look at the current situation in the Mideast. Even though there are a lot of people dying, none of the governments are killing so many as to cause a mass uprising. It seems they are stopping short of that, and I believe it’s on purpose.
A true Firefly Militia, organized as cells of one, would be the worst case situation for any government. A few anonymous but charismatic leaders could keep a lot of trouble stirred up for a long, long time and at (in real terms) a very low cost to their side.
The remark was really a tongue in cheek piece of sarcasm.
I don’t know if this saying is attributable to a historic person or not, but here goes, “You don’t have to kill all of them, you just have to kill enough.” History is rife with governments killing large percentages of their own populations without any serious backlash. You can find good examples from antiquity to as recently as the last century. The few uprisings that did occur were put down with more troops and deprarvity.
To put a positive spin, remember the Boer War with the British. The Boers, a well led citizin militia fought the British to a standstill. Better marskmen, better fighters, better strategists. Then, the British (Lord Kitchener I believe) invested the time and money to partition the country with railroads and strongly defended wire fences. They also imprisoned the Boers families in concentration camps, depriving the Boers of support and using the death of their families through starvation and disease as a bargaining point, they won the war. The British did not care at all about the civilians, or winning the hearts and minds of the Boer.
I really do like the Firefly Militia concept, and am a big supporter of open source warfare to counter traditional militaries. Please don’t forget though our government and military has no qualms about killing everyone in a house to get to one person inside, or destroying and entire village to get to a few dedicated fighters. According to some, the U.S. Gov has already built the concentration camps, just waiting to fill them.
Every militiaman will have to ask themselves if they are willing to sacrifice the lives, well being and future of their families for the fight. Are they willing to sacrifice their personal comfort and futures for the fight?
You can die on your feet, or “live” on your knees as a slave. No guarantees either way… I know what I’ve chosen.
Sometimes you have to fight the good fight even when you know you can not win.
Loved this. Thanks Claire. Fear of death and wounds win more battles than actual death and wounds, so yeah, it rings true.
As to the Boers, not very affective. What often happens in war, and the recent goings on in Iraq are a classic example, the enemy becomes ten feet tall after the fact. It’s very heroic to slaughter a few poorly armed and equipped rural farmers (or Arabs) if you get the right spin. Gs wear down the oppressor, the Boers tried to fight them. A much different scenario than actual Guerilla war. The US government, unlike the Brit governments of 1901-10 time frame, is a gangrenous body underneath the freshly dressed facade. I would also hazard a guess that most government lackies willing to fight for the government would do it for money but would be quite unwilling to die for it. “You just have to kill enough of them” and they’ll go on the defense at the worst and quit altogether at best. The idea that going “Roman Army” on us could win is correct, but it only works if you have legionaries. The US government does not.
My father went ashore on D-Day. Literally the “Old man” of his outfit at 35 years of age. He never talked much about the war but for an occasional comment or short vignette. From his descriptions and phrasing, it has always seemed to me that he regarded the whole affair as a rather more interesting form of deer hunt.
That has always seemed to me to be a rather useful attitude…
Thanks claire! That made my week..as to the rest…”live free or die, death is not the worst of evils”
Great excerpt! I was thinking of Saratoga this past week — of the troubles the British Army had as they marched further from Canada and into the briar patch of American marksmen (esp. the Virginians of Daniel Morgan).