I know this is an old post and long past, but one of the most important aspects of the differences,between Arkansas and Texas, I think isthe lack of weapons, horses, uniforms and equipment. I know 1st Lieutenant of the 45th Arkansas mount was a large white mule, and to my understanding many of the 45th were so mounted. The 45th, to my understanding were primarily armed in a hodgepodge of weaponry and calibers. Most accounts they were armed with Infantry two and three band rifles. Some carried shotguns. Uniforms were rare. Accounts indicate they wore homemade straw hats. Even, with experienced and trained Calvary officers (of which Arkansas was short in 1864) they were not very efficient due to weapons and equipment. My understanding of the Texas troops, they were well armed with revolvers and carbines, and the quality of their mounts would be considerably better quality. I believe, based on photographs were well equipped and well supplied, at least in the beginning. Local story in one of the families whose ancestor served in the 45th, was fortunate enough to keep his same mount throughout the Missouri Raid and upon being paroled and returning home immediately turned his horse out to pasture,and stated a plow harness would never be on that horse again. I think that by and large the Texas horse was better prepared for Calvary service than a large Draft plow horse, which was common in the hill country of northern Arkansas. I think the quality of the key leadership was good for Infantry, but not trained as Calvary. Also as pointed out the 40 series regiments were mounted Infantry and made up of deserters, unionists, old men, young boys, and soldiers from other units who were convelscing or in the wrong place at wrong time and thrown into a regiment. I think several recruits were recruited at gunpoint. It is no wonder descriptions after Price’s Raid indicates that many deserted, through away their arms and went home. I am sure some took their arms home for personal protection,and not with intention of ever returning to service. Even a good commander would have difficulty. In the case of WO Coleman, he was not afraid to fight, and from all indications, fight hard, but his forces seemed to always be scattered, described as being poorly armed and supplied. It seems he was slammed nearly every time he went up against the Union Missouri regiments, and definitely had issues with the Nebraska and Iowa troops. I think the lack of formal Calvary training of his subordinates and lack of weapons and supplies, had a significant negative impact on his is ability. He was highly successful in raiding wagons, picking off Isolated patrols, but could not stand toe to toe with Missouri men. Many of the Arkansas men in Coleman’s and Barbers were prominent business Men, lawyers, store keepers, preachers, who after the war were successful and well respected. I think that trained right and given the proper mounts and equipment could give any other Calvary a run for their money.