Ian,

I wish you luck on getting published. One of the problems with the subject of the Border War and the war in the West, in general, is that it's considered tangential to the publishers; our history is considered, regional ("Ugh!"), even by many established historians. Too few historians and publishers are willing to recognize the significance of what was happening out here, even though the Civil War virtually started out here during the Territorial period, almost like a political brush fire that finally enveloped the entire nation. This area is considered a sort of backwater area of the war, and publishers consider how many people are likely to buy your book, in a field where the big setpiece battles in the East are what people seem to be interested in buying until they are awash with it. But I think you'd agree that the contest out here is as interesting as anything associated with the Civil War in its complexity, variety of experiences and events, and violence. Too often, the focus is on this violence instead of on why it was happening here so much more virulently than elsewhere. Thus, we get a lot of "Bleeding Kansas" books (note the deliberate use of the word "Bleeding"!) and "Bloody Bill" and "bloody" and "bleeding" this and that. When you publish about the West, you just start out with a large handicap. I hope you and others on this site who are writing books or planning on writing them overcome this difficulty.

Don G.