What do you think?
Rate this book
History's Mysteries
Why Buy Quantrill's Bones?
Five years before the national Civil War began, it was being fought on the Missouri-Kansas border. William Quantrill, a vicious leader in those border battles, was killed and buried. Twenty years later, his mother had his bones dug up because she wanted to sell them.
But why would anyone buy them?
But why would anyone buy them?
48 pages, Hardcover
First published December 31, 1992
About the author
Gail B. Stewart
214 books3 followersCurrent Home:
Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Stewart taught English and reading for more than ten years.
Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Stewart taught English and reading for more than ten years.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
October 16, 2024
***Content May Not Be Suitable To Sensitive Readers***
A random book that appeared on my reading table. Given its short format I chose to give it a read to see what it was about.
First I would just like to point out records show that it wasn't Quantrill's mother who sold his bones but rather a childhood friend and then later the man's wife. The brief story I looked over furthermore doesn't mention whether his mother was privy to or gave permission to the transactions that included only a few of the bones but nor does it say she was a victim of a manipulative man out to get a quick buck.
The same source also gave a pretty good idea of who bought the bones and what happened in their time away from the rest of the body all before the publication of this book so I would argue that this is one solved mystery rather than unsolved even if the story hadn't been fully put together.
Anyway Why Buy Quantrill's Bones is a book that looks into the deed that led to the title of the book, the man whose remains are the subject and his "contributions" to history. Although the book isn't detailed for a full biography, Gail does a great job in providing enough so the reader gets the gist of it in simple reading format that isn't boring.
Instead what I find confusing is her writing and her intentions. She mentions most of the South wanted slavery, which isn't truthful as only the rich could afford slaves. She also stated that the Quantrills didn't want to bury him in their family plot when sources mentioned one of the reason for the retrieval of his remains was to be buried with his family although the city didn't want to.
Secondly, the author points out he was a bully and an animal abuser(signs of a psychopath) when a boy whose rap sheet grew even longer as well as darker when he aged. He made weird dark comments that made other people uncomfortable and/or consider him rather barbaric by others of his own time, he had no cause he stood for, no morals for the most part and cold eyes with a frozen glare.
And yet the author waves this all away and states that it was because of war as well as being on the losing side that he's considered a monster along with his murderous men who strangely enough didn't fit the regimented side of war. The other side - all poor farmers with an envious chip on their shoulders - was just as bad but since they won, they're considered heroes, and that the old boy if he had lived long enough may have turned out to be an upstanding citizen. These thoughts are mind-boggling.
What I think the book teaches is that yes war is a monster but there are also monsters who live among us, well disguised sometimes and sometimes with good reasons for their anger. And yes those monsters can attract others of like kind, especially in chaotic times when the law of the land gives way to high passions and eye-for-an-eye justice.
But what it overlooks is that even with all that said and done, we are still responsible for our own decisions and actions. Quantrill fought on the winning side for a moment but he also switched sides and he killed whether you were armed, unarmed, visiting or even helping him out. And his victims included killing a 24-day old infant while leaving behind many broken families who relied on their men and boys. Furthermore he burned, looted, sold free men into slavery, rustled livestock, tricked and betrayed those who relied on him just to name a few of his most notable accomplishments. As they say live by the sword, you'll die by the sword.
All in all the book will make for a nice starter addition to a history library for non-sensitive children so they can see what it took to be the man who destroyed a city and to get a taste of the bloody events leading up to the Civil War.
A random book that appeared on my reading table. Given its short format I chose to give it a read to see what it was about.
First I would just like to point out records show that it wasn't Quantrill's mother who sold his bones but rather a childhood friend and then later the man's wife. The brief story I looked over furthermore doesn't mention whether his mother was privy to or gave permission to the transactions that included only a few of the bones but nor does it say she was a victim of a manipulative man out to get a quick buck.
The same source also gave a pretty good idea of who bought the bones and what happened in their time away from the rest of the body all before the publication of this book so I would argue that this is one solved mystery rather than unsolved even if the story hadn't been fully put together.
Anyway Why Buy Quantrill's Bones is a book that looks into the deed that led to the title of the book, the man whose remains are the subject and his "contributions" to history. Although the book isn't detailed for a full biography, Gail does a great job in providing enough so the reader gets the gist of it in simple reading format that isn't boring.
Instead what I find confusing is her writing and her intentions. She mentions most of the South wanted slavery, which isn't truthful as only the rich could afford slaves. She also stated that the Quantrills didn't want to bury him in their family plot when sources mentioned one of the reason for the retrieval of his remains was to be buried with his family although the city didn't want to.
Secondly, the author points out he was a bully and an animal abuser(signs of a psychopath) when a boy whose rap sheet grew even longer as well as darker when he aged. He made weird dark comments that made other people uncomfortable and/or consider him rather barbaric by others of his own time, he had no cause he stood for, no morals for the most part and cold eyes with a frozen glare.
And yet the author waves this all away and states that it was because of war as well as being on the losing side that he's considered a monster along with his murderous men who strangely enough didn't fit the regimented side of war. The other side - all poor farmers with an envious chip on their shoulders - was just as bad but since they won, they're considered heroes, and that the old boy if he had lived long enough may have turned out to be an upstanding citizen. These thoughts are mind-boggling.
What I think the book teaches is that yes war is a monster but there are also monsters who live among us, well disguised sometimes and sometimes with good reasons for their anger. And yes those monsters can attract others of like kind, especially in chaotic times when the law of the land gives way to high passions and eye-for-an-eye justice.
But what it overlooks is that even with all that said and done, we are still responsible for our own decisions and actions. Quantrill fought on the winning side for a moment but he also switched sides and he killed whether you were armed, unarmed, visiting or even helping him out. And his victims included killing a 24-day old infant while leaving behind many broken families who relied on their men and boys. Furthermore he burned, looted, sold free men into slavery, rustled livestock, tricked and betrayed those who relied on him just to name a few of his most notable accomplishments. As they say live by the sword, you'll die by the sword.
All in all the book will make for a nice starter addition to a history library for non-sensitive children so they can see what it took to be the man who destroyed a city and to get a taste of the bloody events leading up to the Civil War.
Displaying 1 of 1 review