Civil War on the Missouri-Kansas Border

by Donald L. Gilmore

During the Civil War, the western front was the scene of some of that conflict's bloodiest and most barbaric encounters as Union raiders and Confederate guerrillas pursued each other from farm to farm with equal disregard for civilian casualties. Historical accounts of these events overwhelmingly favor the victorious Union standpoint, characterizing the Southern fighters as wanton, unprincipled savages. But in fact, as the author, himself a descendant of Union soldiers, discovered, the bushwhackers' violent reactions were understandable, given the reign of terror they endured as a result of Lincoln's total war in the West.

In reexamining many of the long-held historical assumptions about this period, Gilmore discusses President Lincoln's utmost desire to keep Missouri in the Union by any and all means. As early as 1858, Kansan and Union troops carried out unbridled confiscation or destruction of Missouri private property, until the state became known as "the burnt region." These outrages escalated to include martial law throughout Missouri and finally the infamous General Orders Number 11 of September 1863 in which Union general Thomas Ewing, federal commander of the region, ordered the deportation of the entire population of the border counties. It is no wonder that, faced with the loss of their farms and their livelihoods, Missourians struck back with equal force.

Genres: American Civil War, Transmississippi, Civil War, Nonfiction, History

384 pages, Hardcover

First published October 1, 2005

Reviews

[Sean Chick · Rating 2 out of 5]

At first, I liked the book. It is not a great read, but has its moments, while offering a more nuanced view of the Missouri guerillas and not going in for the usual narrative about "bleeding Kansas." Gradually, though, it seemed like a book written by Josey Wales on his deathbed. Nearly all the jayhawkers are murderous thugs, and the bushwhackers are treated not as heroes by at least as subjects of sympathy. Then there is the fact that at no point does Gilmore discuss the Lecompoton Constitution. I started to think, "did I miss it?" I kept looking and could not find it. Then it struck me. The Lecompoton Constitution undermines his whole narrative, since it would make the Missouri side of the struggle look bad. I cannot abide such a bias.

The book started well enough. Rarely have I felt this disappointed by a history book.

[Joe Keefhaver · Rating 3 out of 5]

When studying the subjects of slavery and the Civil War, I will readily concede there are countless angles to consider. This book is interesting to me because I have lived my entire life in Missouri and Kansas, near many of the locations figuring prominently in the episodes of the author chronicles. Gilmore gives much detailed, valuable information and purports to give an unbiased accounting of the events leading up to the Civil War and the war itself. Unfortunately, he has a clear bias in favor of the slaveholders and the Confederacy. In his view, the "Border Ruffians" all seem to be the sons of the noble Missouri elite (read slaveholders), while the Kansas Jayhawkers are the common murderers and thieves of the story. Sympathy is expressed for William Clarke Quantrill and even "Bloody Bill" Anderson, and there are some things that might lead a person to have such sympathy at least for Anderson. But no character on the anti-slavery side elicits such feelings from the author. I currently live not far from the Mine Creek battlefield site, and I think Gilmore minimizes the degree of defeat and disintegration Sterling Price's army suffered there and in the skirmishes following. Also, a minor complaint regarding a factual error: On Page 35, he identifies the David Rice Atchison statue as being in front of the Daviess County Courthouse in Plattsburg, MO. It's Clinton, not Daviess County. Overall, I would recommend reading this book, but recognize the bias.

[Jimmy · Rating 3 out of 5]

I'm giving this book three stars, but only because it is mostly about guerilla warfare (I'm mostly interested in the battles and campaigns of the conventional forces, not guerrilla actions). However, the book does an excellent job corrected the often pro-Union biased books about the region, showing how the Union authorities themselves were responsible for pushing many Missourians into guerilla warfare. The parts of the book covering conventional military actions (Price's 1864 Missouri campaign, etc.) are also very good.

[Travis · Rating 2 out of 5]

Although purported to be a balanced work, it definitely skews to favor the rebel side of the equation, rather than accurately portraying the entire conflict from both sides without bias.