William Quantrill: Murderer or Soldier?
Saturday November 8, 2008
The controversy swirls around William Clarke Quantrill. Some people would consider him a patriot of the South, doing his part again Northern tyranny. Others would consider him to be a lawless butcher that took advantage of the disarray brought about by the Civil War to assuage his need for brutality and cruelty. Which was he? Read this article to get a historical look at this controversial man.
Comments
Classic quandry set up by winners writing the history books. Had the South won the war, there’d be no question, Quantrill is a hero, General Sherman is Satan incarnate. Since the North won…….
Quantrill was a product of his times. he was probably less cruel and murderous than the average Kansas Redleg or “Jayhawker”,and definately less of a fanatic than Lane or Jennison. The raid on Lawrence was a just retaliation for the many incursions by the Kansans, and no more violent than the examples left by anti-slavery parties. One cannot judge him without also judging the forces that help draw out his anger and vengeance.
Where is the modern Quantrill. We need his ferocity, determination, and tactical capabilities to protect our southern borders from the invading hordes of the Civil War II.
Quantrill was clearly a murdering opportunist. Slaughtering 150 noncombatants is despicable and cowardly, regardless of the era in which he lived. Sure, he wasn’t the only one who committed such atrocities (both sides did), but you don’t justify unconscienable behavior by providing other examples of immoral actions. Honorable soldiers such as Lee and Grant never slaughtered innocents. Quantrill was nothing more than a common criminal who murdered, terrorized and looted indiscriminately.
War is War. Think of all the unarmed civilians (german and japanese) we killed with bombs in WW11. He was a warrior doing what he could to hasten the end. I have no problem with that
How can anyone in their right mind consider
Quantrill a hero. He was nothing but a murdering thief. No cammander in his right mind
would sanction what he and his men did. Comparing him to William T Sherman was an insult
to Sherman. What Sherman did was an act of war,
meant to break the backbone of the South. As far as I know the man never killed, robbed or
did anything else. Sherman was a carreer army
man. Quantrill was an opportunist who took
advantage of the Civil War to rob murder and
loot. Sherman led a path of destruction throughout the South But it was in time of
war and then you do what you must do to defeat
the enemy. Repeating Quantrill was nothing
short of a robber and murderer
Saying Sherman was a career Army man means nothing. The south had the constitutional right to succeed from the union,so really who was the in the wrong. The union federals were the first to show occupation and aggression. Men like Quantrill,and those that rode with him like the James Gang, Bloody Bill Anderson and such, had every right to protect themselves from these hordes. Many of their family was slaughtered at the hand of agents that worked for the railroads and federal banks. You saying Sherman never killed anyone is not a fact. They slaughtered many innocents including women and children, not to mention burning everything in their path(kind of makes me think of Waco, Gordon Kahl,and such). In my eyes and what I have studied these were fearless Christian men doing what most didn’t have the guts or spine to do. May God rest his soul.