Bushwhackers

Guerrilla Warfare, Manhood, and the Household in Civil War Missouri

De: Joseph M. Beilein Jr.

Narrado por: Clyde Walker

Bushwhackers adds to the growing body of literature that examines the various irregular conflicts that took place during the American Civil War. Author Joseph M. Beilein Jr. looks at the ways in which several different bands of guerrillas across Missouri conducted their war in concert with their house- holds and their female kin who provided logistical support in many forms. Whether noted fighters like Frank James, William Clarke Quantrill, and "Bloody Bill" Anderson, or less well-known figures such as Clifton Holtzclaw and Jim Jackson, Beilein provides a close examination of how these warriors imagined themselves as fighters, offering a brand-new interpretation that gets us closer to seeing how the men and women who participated in the war in Missouri must have understood it.

Beilein answers some of the tough questions: Why did men fight as guerrillas? Where did their tactics come from? What were their goals? Why were they so successful? Bushwhackers demonstrates that the guerrilla war in Missouri was not just an opportunity to settle antebellum feuds, nor was it some collective plummet by society into a state of chaotic bloodshed. Rather, the guerrilla war was the only logical response by men and women in Missouri, and one that was more in keeping with their worldview than the conventional warfare of the day.

As guerrilla conflicts rage around the world and violence remains closely linked with masculine identity here in America, this look into the past offers timely insight into our modern world and several of its current struggles.

The book is published by The Kent State University Press.

©2016 The Kent State University Press (P)2017 Redwood Audiobooks

Deeply sensitive and insightful

An excellent study of the culture of these civil war fighters and their community of cousins on the edge of the frontier. Enjoyed listening to the narrator whose Midwest draw lends a sense of authenticity and perspective.

Guerrilla warfare's impact on the civil war

In “Bushwhackers,” the author explores the impact guerrilla warfare had on Kansas and Missouri during the civil war. Beilein’s assessment is that the Bushwhackers were murderers first, martyrs second. He contends that journalist John Newman Edwards was a propagandist for the south, and portrayed the Bushwackers as reluctant killers, with heroic virtues. Edwards is commonly viewed as turning the ruthless James-Younger gang into folk heroes.

The Bushwackers didn’t travel far from home, which created a division within their communities. They had their supporters, who would feed, cloth, and hide them, however, others detested their tactics. The author details the war on food, horses, and ammo. The Bushwackers would often participate in target practice, where many become skilled marksmen. These would include the James boys, and Cole Younger, who joined in 1862 after his father was murdered by the Jayhawkers.

Beilein attempts to separate myth from reality regarding guerrilla leader, William Quantrill, who planned the deadly raid on Lawrence, Kansas. The author outlines Quantrill’s plunge into darkness, and switching sides. Much of the misinformation about Quantrill came as a result of the guerrilla leader’s exaggerated stories. Despite being in his mid 20’s, Quantrill feel in love with a thirteen year girl, and despite her family’s objections, engaged in a relationship with her.

The author describes many of the events that led to guerrilla warfare and triggered further hostilities, including a makeshift union prison that collapsed in Kansas City. Quantrill’s right hand man, “Bloody” Bill Anderson suffered the loss of his fourteen year old sister Josephine in the collapse, along with a sister that was left crippled, and a ten year old sister that suffered broken legs. This event truly added fuel to the fire.

Comprehensive

Previous reviews criticized the narrator for his tone and "lecture" sound. I disagree. I think the narrator did a fine job. He changes his tone whenever quoting someone, which makes listening more interesting. This is also a history book, so I'm not sure what people were really expecting the narrator to do to make things more engaging.

Magnificent study of Rebel Bushwhackers

An excellent anthropology of Confederate Guerrillas.

The author looks at all aspects of these men from the culture of the families that spawned them to the food, clothing and weapons that they used to their tactics.

The author doesn’t have a political axe to grind either way and analyzes them as Men.

Disapoited

The author is obviously learned on the subject but shows too much byest from cover to cover.
if you want to endure this work be prepared to listen to a Pen State Professor putting down the white male page after page.
I was disappointed and will never read anything from this Author again.

A bit one sided

The author of this text gives the impression that he leans slightly to the union perspective in that he acquits the northern army of its atrocities while condemning in his text the acts of southern forces. It is to be expected because most text heavily favor the Victor.

what absolute garbage

The narrator did a great job. He was solid. This book is garbage. It is hero worship of some of the most horrendous humans to have ever crawled out the cesspool of the antebellum south. None of these characters are heros. None of them are men. The author argues that the Bushwackers created their own masculinity and that society they created justified slaughter. It doesn't. The authors attempt to justify slaughter is poorly attempted. Even at the time these men where viewed as monsters. The taking of trophies wasn't mimicking natives because these men had no spiritual foundation to themselves. They have no depth outside of the pleasure they get from taking power. This book is trash. The author should resign from writing and get a job as a garbage men. It's a better use of his talents.

Anti southern propaganda

This author has distain for the southern white male and shows it in every chapter

Not very good.

It repeated a few points over and over. The narrator was over dramatic in the reading.

Good subject

Didn't like re narrater,sounds like he is in pain,voice tght,reads very lecture wise nothing en e taining