Quantrill. Good soldier?

[Patrick H]

I am reading John McCorkles narrative on Patrick H's recommendation and having first read Connelley's book and formed one opinion of Quantrill, it's strange to be reading McCorkles and being presented with an entirely different view, a Quantrill who was seeking revenge for a dead brother murdered by Jayhawkers, a Quantrill rushing his command over the country to try to save Missouri towns from Federal depredations, a Quantrill reluctantly fighting at all but fighting within the rules of 'civilised' warfare. If I'd picked up McCorkles book first that would have been the impression of Quantrill I'd have gone away with.

You do have to take portions of it with a grain of salt. McCorkle probably sugar coated some of the things he reports in that memoir. It gets especially interesting when he discusses some of the other characters. You do get some balance to the general picture that is usually painted of all of them, but you have to remain a bit skeptical, too. When I said earlier (and in previous threads) that I thought Quantrill had a bizarre duality in his character, I meant that he seems to be all of the things that we read about him. He's compassionate at times and cold bloodedly murderous other times. He's charming and cunning. He's charismatic and duplicitous. He's loyal to his men one time and threatens them the next.
He's undoubtedly guilty of a lot, but, as Diane said, he's probably not bad to the bone. I used to be firmly in the camp that demonizes him. Only in the past few years have I started to think somewhat differently. I don't think he was well understood in life. I don't think we can ever fully understand him in death.

 

[18thVirginia]

I think there's a lot of truth in that, although I'm not convinced Quantrill was bad to the bone. But he did attract a certain type. However, some of those 'certain types' were youngsters who were at a point in life where they could go one way or the other, depending on the push. The push came as events in the war. Missouri, well before the war, attracted an element, I guess you'd say, with the argument about slavery or no slavery, such as John Brown. Was he a murdering thug or a valiant freedom fighter? Nuts or not? Would John Brown have been a killer if he'd stayed a farmer elsewhere and not come west of the Mississippi? Considering how many pivotal characters came out of the Trans-Mississippi, it's peculiar that it's so little studied.

To me, it's a scary sort of revisionism to try and rehabilitate the reputations of men who are best known for murdering a lot of people. I don't find Quantrill to be any kind of pivotal character, just a murderous thug. The excuse for individuals such as Quantrill or Anderson, that someone in their family had been killed or their farms burned down, to me disparages all the rest of the Confederate males who'd had a similar experience, but didn't go on killing sprees.

When I worked in the child sexual abuse area, people would say of child molesters, "Well, they were abused as children." A psychologist who did a training for us once took that apart and pointed out that lots of people are abused as children, and may find ways, such as being a drunk, a drug user, an alcoholic, a workaholic--none of which molested children. I think we should look at the Civil War murderers like Quantrill the same way.

I went to college in Lawrence, KS and my great-grandmother was jailed for aiding bushwhackers during the Civil War; Jesse James came to her house for lunch after the War when they lived in North Texas. Both sides seem to me to get caught up in defending people who in other eras would have been known just for being bad to the bone. It was a tough time, but most of the people who were in the Civil War didn't attract people who just liked killing people to them.

My great-grandmother lived an exemplary life after the Civil War, a hard working, respected woman. I'm sure there were many men who rode with one side or another who were not killers, who'd been simple farmers that may have ridden with the wrong people, but lived out the rest of their lives without murdering people. We don't know their names because of that.

 

[alexjack]

You do have to take portions of it with a grain of salt. McCorkle probably sugar coated some of the things he reports in that memoir. It gets especially interesting when he discusses some of the other characters. You do get some balance to the general picture that is usually painted of all of them, but you have to remain a bit skeptical, too. When I said earlier (and in previous threads) that I thought Quantrill had a bizarre duality in his character, I meant that he seems to be all of the things that we read about him. He's compassionate at times and cold bloodedly murderous other times. He's charming and cunning. He's charismatic and duplicitous. He's loyal to his men one time and threatens them the next.
He's undoubtedly guilty of a lot, but, as Diane said, he's probably not bad to the bone. I used to be firmly in the camp that demonizes him. Only in the past few years have I started to think somewhat differently. I don't think he was well understood in life. I don't think we can ever fully understand him in death.

Yes of course. The truth lies somewhere between Connelley and McCorkle.

 

[5fish]

Quantrill was a good criminal leader. He ran a big gang of outlaws... Lets call him the first big crime boss of the west...

 

[diane]

To me, it's a scary sort of revisionism to try and rehabilitate the reputations of men who are best known for murdering a lot of people. I don't find Quantrill to be any kind of pivotal character, just a murderous thug. The excuse for individuals such as Quantrill or Anderson, that someone in their family had been killed or their farms burned down, to me disparages all the rest of the Confederate males who'd had a similar experience, but didn't go on killing sprees.

When I worked in the child sexual abuse area, people would say of child molesters, "Well, they were abused as children." A psychologist who did a training for us once took that apart and pointed out that lots of people are abused as children, and may find ways, such as being a drunk, a drug user, an alcoholic, a workaholic--none of which molested children. I think we should look at the Civil War murderers like Quantrill the same way.

I went to college in Lawrence, KS and my great-grandmother was jailed for aiding bushwhackers during the Civil War; Jesse James came to her house for lunch after the War when they lived in North Texas. Both sides seem to me to get caught up in defending people who in other eras would have been known just for being bad to the bone. It was a tough time, but most of the people who were in the Civil War didn't attract people who just liked killing people to them.

My great-grandmother lived an exemplary life after the Civil War, a hard working, respected woman. I'm sure there were many men who rode with one side or another who were not killers, who'd been simple farmers that may have ridden with the wrong people, but lived out the rest of their lives without murdering people. We don't know their names because of that.

I'm not trying to revise or rehabilitate anybody but I don't think it's good to go the other way, either. But it's quite true that a person whose proclivity to mayhem was held in check only by the possibility of being caught might find opportunity to let go in a lawless time. Woo-hoo, I can kill everybody I want and not go to jail! These psychos were taken care of rather sooner than later, it should be noted, and sometimes by someone of their own bunch. It was also a good time to catch up on all the grudges, wrongs, feuds and all else that had nothing to do with the war. It's also quite true that there were more good men who held in these urges, and those of others, who will never be heard of - which is a shame.

 

[Patrick H]

I'm not trying to revise or rehabilitate anybody but I don't think it's good to go the other way, either. But it's quite true that a person whose proclivity to mayhem was held in check only by the possibility of being caught might find opportunity to let go in a lawless time. Woo-hoo, I can kill everybody I want and not go to jail! These psychos were taken care of rather sooner than later, it should be noted, and sometimes by someone of their own bunch. It was also a good time to catch up on all the grudges, wrongs, feuds and all else that had nothing to do with the war. It's also quite true that there were more good men who held in these urges, and those of others, who will never be heard of - which is a shame.

For me, it's also worth considering that some men left the guerrilla bands because of the excesses. Others were drawn to the bands for the same reason. Missouri didn't have a Confederate presence for most of the war, so some guys joined irregular units because they wanted to stay near home and protect their families and property. Others were predators. It does no good to judge them all alike. They weren't all alike.

 

[Bee]

@alexjack , thank you for this thread. I just spent the last half hour asking Who? What? The Younger & James gang came out of this? The nearest sheet of paper is soon filled with "Jayhawkers" "Bloody Bill".....too bad I didn't turn the paper over first: it's a work document that will now need some 'splaining

 

[alexjack]

@alexjack , thank you for this thread. I just spent the last half hour asking Who? What? The Younger & James gang came out of this? The nearest sheet of paper is soon filled with "Jayhawkers" "Bloody Bill".....too bad I didn't turn the paper over first: it's a work document that will now need some 'splaining

If your boss isn't from Kansas you might get away with it.

 

[Borderruffian]

I am reading John McCorkles narrative on Patrick H's recommendation and having first read Connelley's book and formed one opinion of Quantrill, it's strange to be reading McCorkles and being presented with an entirely different view, a Quantrill who was seeking revenge for a dead brother murdered by Jayhawkers, a Quantrill rushing his command over the country to try to save Missouri towns from Federal depredations, a Quantrill reluctantly fighting at all but fighting within the rules of 'civilised' warfare. If I'd picked up McCorkles book first that would have been the impression of Quantrill I'd have gone away with.

Watch out for McCorkle or his writers POV.There are factual errors in the book and McCorkel did have a high opinion of WCQ.There are also "1st hand"accounts that McCorkel could not have been present for and a bit of gliding of lilies involved.

It does contain much good information but be careful.

 

[Borderruffian]

Well if you talk about outlaws coming out of the Partisan bands of Missouri like Frank Jesse Cole Jim some of the Liddles and Shepards it would serve you to look at Post-WarMissouri and the measures taken by the Radical Republicans such as the Drake Constition and disenfrancishing former Southern Soldiers and Partisans as well as the Iron Clad oaths needed for many things, Because of this many former Guerillas used the tactics the learned in the Brush to strike in a way at the "Chicago"Money that they believed was oppressing them and not allowing them to live a decent life.

The majority of the Guerillas took paroles and the majority lived decent lives and were not part of outlaw bands, some in Missouri some in Texas,some in other western territories and states.

The greater part of the bands were young men driven to the brush by whatever be it Jayhawkers,Redlegs,Union Volunteers or MSM depredations or forced service in the MSM,many would have been content to stay out of the wae, but actions from Jeff City did not allow that and thus the Partisan Bands were givin life and the State was a bloody mess until 1866 or there abouts.

Quantrill was not a soldier he was a pre-war teacher and theif a sometimes frieghter,He liead about his background to Missourins after he turned coat on hit slave stealing abolitionist comrades at the Walker farm he created his own myth so to speak, one that was bought by a great many including McCorkel.

Yes he was a good leader of Guerillas,agood raider and a good light cavalry leader skilled in ambush and small unit tactics.But he was all about Wm Clarke Quantrill nothing more nothing less,no great reason,no great cause.

However many many of those that joined and rode with him did have their reasons and causes and were soldiers. Me thinks, it is okay to not call WCQ a soldier even though he held two and possibly three commisions he was an opportunist of the highest order, However not all or even the majority of the mean who at one time or another were.

 

[Borderruffian]

Quantrill was a good criminal leader. He ran a big gang of outlaws... Lets call him the first big crime boss of the west...

Kinda like Lane,Jennison,Hoyt and Tough huh? Well thats good to know.

 

[alexjack]

Watch out for McCorkle or his writers POV.There are factual errors in the book and McCorkel did have a high opinion of WCQ.There are also "1st hand"accounts that McCorkel could not have been present for and a bit of gliding of lilies involved.

It does contain much good information but be careful.

Yes I was thinking John must have had a great memory. Reading his story though and I suppose some of it may have been for dramatic effect, sensationalism if you like but it makes my blood run cold to read of the casual way men were put to death, "....then they took him out into his yard and in front of his wife and daughters, hanged him from a tree limb" and " Andersons men took every Federal soldier off the train and shot them." The situation in Kansas and Missouri during those times reminded me very much of the situation in Northern Ireland during the Troubles of the 1970s and 80s. Some friends of ours lived in Ulster through those terrible times and they told us that one of the worst aspects of it was that any stranger you met could be someone not of your religion and therefore ' on the other side '. You just never knew.

 

[Patrick H]

Yes I was thinking John must have had a great memory. Reading his story though and I suppose some of it may have been for dramatic effect, sensationalism if you like but it makes my blood run cold to read of the casual way men were put to death, "....then they took him out into his yard and in front of his wife and daughters, hanged him from a tree limb" and " Andersons men took every Federal soldier off the train and shot them." The situation in Kansas and Missouri during those times reminded me very much of the situation in Northern Ireland during the Troubles of the 1970s and 80s. Some friends of ours lived in Ulster through those terrible times and they told us that one of the worst aspects of it was that any stranger you met could be someone not of your religion and therefore ' on the other side '. You just never knew.

alexjack,
I am not sure which version of the book is available at that link I posted. I purchased a somewhat recent reprint of it a couple of years ago, and my edition is annotated by Albert Castle. It's very easy to read through the chapter notes and pick up where Castle says there's an error. He will clarify whether it's a simple wrong date, whether it's questionable or whether he thinks McCorkle was fabricating at that point. He gives evidence for every situation. So, in that way, it's pretty easy to figure out where you can believe John and where you need to be skeptical.

Read that Gregg manuscript link I posted, too. He's pretty factual and doesn't get into a lot of emotion or flag waving. He pretty much just reports what he witnessed. It's a quick read and a good one.

 

[Patrick H]

Kinda like Lane,Jennison,Hoyt and Tough huh? Well thats good to know.

Border Ruffian, that's the way I feel, too. It's not that any of these guys are good guys. It's just that Quantrill's name is the one every knows. Even George Todd and Little Archie fly under the radar of a lot of people. Quantrill and Anderson are the two names that really stick in most minds. Lane, Jennison and the others are pretty much unknown to many. They deserve their fair share of the blame.

 

[Borderruffian]

The Quantrill raid of Lawrence Kansas where women, men and children were shot and killed and the town burned regardless of age or civilian status is the Civil War equivalent of the Mai Lai massacre in Viet Nam. That's the end of it.

Don't buy the hype, women were not killed children (except boys big enough to carry a gun per WCQ's orders) were not killed. yes the town was burned or at least a good portion of it. First understand that WCQ had a beef with Lawrence from a pre-war indictment against him for horse theft among other things, and believe that was his reason for leading that raid,second understand that Lawrence was the "Mecca" of the Abolition Movement and prior to that the Free State Movement in Kansas, and also the home sweet home of Jim Lane, not a popular figure in Missouri , so it was an easy sell for WCQ.Couple that with Lawrence being a clearing house for household goods, furniture and live stock stolen by Jayhawkers and Redlegs in Missouri many Missourians were more than happy to strike back at Lawrence again (yes it was raided during the border war) which explains how Wm C.Quantrill (Known as Charley Hart during his time there pre-war) was able to assemble some 400 give or take to make the raid.

In reality if you don't look at the bloodshed and looting and burning that did occur or the drunkeness that likely fueled at least part of it then Lawrence the infiltration of Ewings border defense and the surprise with which the town was struck it was a military coup for WCQ not that I condone the killing of unarmed men and boys (and make no mistake they were unarmed) but it was a masterful stroke on the part of the Bushwhackers.

 

[alexjack]

Border Ruffian, that's the way I feel, too. It's not that any of these guys are good guys. It's just that Quantrill's name is the one every knows. Even George Todd and Little Archie fly under the radar of a lot of people. Quantrill and Anderson are the two names that really stick in most minds. Lane, Jennison and the others are pretty much unknown to many. They deserve their fair share of the blame.

Well as a know nothing I can vouch for this.

 

[Borderruffian]

Border Ruffian, that's the way I feel, too. It's not that any of these guys are good guys. It's just that Quantrill's name is the one every knows. Even George Todd and Little Archie fly under the radar of a lot of people. Quantrill and Anderson are the two names that really stick in most minds. Lane, Jennison and the others are pretty much unknown to many. They deserve their fair share of the blame.

I agree 110% people like to hammer on the Southern partisans and ignore the Union partisans, perhaps because of the outcome of the war but IMHO you should excuse me they should delve into the conditions in Missouri and the reasons for the guerilla bands.

 

[leftyhunter]

Yes I was thinking John must have had a great memory. Reading his story though and I suppose some of it may have been for dramatic effect, sensationalism if you like but it makes my blood run cold to read of the casual way men were put to death, "....then they took him out into his yard and in front of his wife and daughters, hanged him from a tree limb" and " Andersons men took every Federal soldier off the train and shot them." The situation in Kansas and Missouri during those times reminded me very much of the situation in Northern Ireland during the Troubles of the 1970s and 80s. Some friends of ours lived in Ulster through those terrible times and they told us that one of the worst aspects of it was that any stranger you met could be someone not of your religion and therefore ' on the other side '. You just never knew.

I agree their are similarities between the conflict in Northern Ireland and guerrilla warfare during the Civil War. One major difference is Union troops and militias where given a much freer hand then British security forces.To be fair and balanced Confederate security forces where also given a free hand to fight Unionist guerrillas.
Leftyhunter

 

[damYankee]

"In reality if you don't look at the bloodshed and looting and burning that did occur or the drunkeness that likely fueled at least part of it then Lawrence the infiltration of Ewings border defense and the surprise with which the town was struck it was a military coup for WCQ not that I condone the killing of unarmed men and boys (and make no mistake they were unarmed) but it was a masterful stroke on the part of the Bushwhackers."

Well heck, if we don't look at all the killing and looting and bloodshed the Civil War was a great time of peace!

 

[texaswildcat]

In reading about Quantrill, I wouldn't call him a good soldier. As a leader, though, he showed skill in irregular actions with his band, able to blend in, get in and attack with small units, and get out and evade pursuit.

But following events like the Lawrence Massacre I would say he was more of a butcher and a murderer than a soldier. Such actions weren't tolerated, even by the Confederate government.