Sign up to be emailed when this film is available on streaming services!
Earl Van Dorn is a controversial figure in American Civil War history.
Often overshadowed by his defeats as an infantry commander, Van Dorn’s unbroken string of successes as a cavalry commander have not received the recognition they deserve.
This article aims to provide a balanced view of General Van Dorn’s military career, highlighting his undeniable prowess as a cavalry commander while acknowledging the challenges he faced with infantry command.
Early Life and Military Career
Earl Van Dorn was born in Mississippi in 1820 and graduated from West Point in 1842.
He served with distinction in the Mexican-American War, where he earned two brevet promotions for bravery.
These early experiences laid the foundation for his military strategies and leadership style.
Earl Van Dorn’s Defense of a Native American Settlement from the Comanche
General Earl Van Dorn is often remembered for his role in the Civil War, but his earlier military career also includes notable exploits.
One such event was his defense of a Native American settlement from a series of Comanche attack.
In 1858, while serving as a captain in the U.S. Army, Van Dorn led a mission against the Comanche, a tribe known for their pursuit of war with all who were not Comanche – including other Native American Tribes.
The Comanche had been a dominant force on the Southern Plains, and their raids were a significant threat to both settlers and Native American communities.
General Van Dorn’s most notable action came during his command at the Second Battle of Adobe Walls, which, though primarily a retaliatory campaign, included the defense of allied Native American settlements and the forced retreat of the attacking Comanche.
Van Dorn saved several tribes from the Comanche including the Anadarko and the Cherokee tribes who the Comanche wanted to annihilate.
Key Aspects of Genral Van Dorn’s Defense:
- Strategic Positioning: Van Dorn utilized his knowledge of the terrain to position his forces effectively, anticipating the movements of the Comanche warriors. His strategic foresight was crucial in protecting the settlement from being overrun.
- Coordination with Native Allies: Van Dorn worked closely with allied Native American tribes, leveraging their knowledge of local conditions and combat techniques. This cooperation was essential in mounting a robust defense against the Comanche.
- Aggressive Tactics: Known for his boldness, Van Dorn often took the fight to the Comanche rather than waiting for them to strike. This proactive approach not only safeguarded the settlement but also diminished the morale and fighting capacity of the Comanche raiders.
- Leadership and Morale: Van Dorn’s leadership was instrumental in maintaining the morale of his troops and allied Native Americans. His ability to inspire and lead by example was a significant factor in the successful defense of the settlement.
The defense of the Native American settlement is a testament to Van Dorn’s tactical acumen and his capability to lead diverse groups in challenging circumstances.
This episode highlights a lesser-known aspect of his military career, showcasing his ability to protect and collaborate with Native American allies against common threats.
While Earl Van Dorn’s Civil War record is mixed, his earlier career, including actions like defending Native American settlements from Comanche attacks, underscores his capabilities as a military leader.
These events contribute to the complex legacy of a man who, despite his flaws, demonstrated remarkable bravery and strategic skill in the service of his country and its allies.
General Van Dorn’s Transition to the Civil War
When the Civil War broke out, Van Dorn attempted to keep peace among Americans, seizing a northern ship off the coast of Texas and allowing the men to keep their guns if they would sign a document promising they would not take up arms against their fellow Americans.
President Abraham Lincoln responded by proclaiming Van Dorn a pirate.
In the Confederate Army, he quickly rose to the rank of major general.
His initial assignments were predominantly infantry commands, where he faced significant challenges.
Notably, his defeats at the Battle of Pea Ridge and the Battle of Corinth were marked by troops who he inherited that were diseased, starving, and demoralized with only a few days for him to organize and prepare for battle.
Many of the officers under his command were placed in their positions due to the deaths of previous officers, leading to a lack of experience, cohesion and effectiveness.
Challenges as an Infantry Commander
Van Dorn’s role as an infantry commander is often criticized due to these early defeats. However, it’s essential to consider the context:
Pea Ridge (March 1862): Van Dorn’s forces were significantly outnumbered, and his troops were in poor condition. Despite these disadvantages, his aggressive tactics almost turned the tide.
Corinth (October 1862): The Confederate forces suffered from inadequate supplies and rampant disease. The failures of his subordinates, many of whom were inexperienced and had only recently been appointed, further compounded these issues.
Confederate President Jefferson David referred to the battle at Corinth as, “an impossibility.”
While these battles resulted in losses, it’s crucial to understand that Van Dorn inherited numerous problems that would have challenged any commander.
Unmatched Cavalry Commander
Van Dorn’s true genius emerged in his cavalry operations. His ability to lead and inspire his men was unparalleled, and he achieved remarkable success in this role. Notably, he was never defeated as a cavalry commander, a testament to his strategic acumen and leadership skills.
Defeat of General Ulysses S. Grant at Holly Springs (December 1862):
Holly Springs Raid: Perhaps Van Dorn’s most notable and famous achievement was the raid on Holly Springs, Mississippi.
General Van Dorn’s cavalry attacked the Union garrison, capturing the town and destroying Grant’s supplies. This raid forced Grant to abandon his advance on Vicksburg, showcasing Van Dorn’s strategic brilliance.
Grant had not been caught unaware of Van Dorn’s raid but was, instead, outmaneuvered. Grant had placed his U.S. cavalry on a 24-hour watch to protect his supply line. U.S. cavalry commander T. Lyle Dickie had warned Grant that Van Dorn had left Grenada and was headed northeast to attack him. Grant had warned commanders of Van Dorn’s raid by telegraph post to no avail. Colonel Murphy had been warned by Grant twice that Van Dorn was headed his way, but his preparations were no match for Van Dorn’s forces. Grant’s wife Julia and son Jesse left the night before the attack to meetup with a fleeing Grant at Oxford.
The Legacy of Van Dorn’s Cavalry Command
General Van Dorn’s men held him in high regard, a testament to his strong leadership and the trust he inspired.
Texas Colonel John S. Griffith’s letter to General Pemberton is particularly revealing.
He wrote, “If you will fit up a cavalry expedition comprising three or four thousand men, and give us Major General Earl Van Dorn, than whom no braver man lives, we will…capture Holly Springs, Memphis and other points, and perhaps, force [the enemy]…to retreat.”
This quote underscores the confidence and admiration Van Dorn’s men had for him.
Another soldier’s account captures the inspirational effect Van Dorn had on his troops, noting that Van Dorn’s presence made him feel he could “stand up to hell itself.”
Such testimonials highlight Van Dorn’s ability to motivate and lead his men under the most challenging circumstances.
Flaws and Controversies
Despite his successes, General Van Dorn was not without flaws.
His impulsive nature and occasional lapses in judgment sometimes led to criticism from his peers and superiors.
Additionally, his personal life was marred by scandal, culminating in his murder in 1863, allegedly due to an affair with another man’s wife.
These personal shortcomings, however, do not diminish his military achievements.
Conclusion: A Complex Legacy
Earl Van Dorn’s legacy as a general is complex.
His defeats as an infantry commander are often highlighted, but a closer examination reveals that these were largely due to factors beyond his control, such as diseased and starving troops, being appointed commander with little preparation time before battle, and the failures of inherited officers.
Conversely, his record as a cavalry commander is exemplary.
Van Dorn’s ability to inspire his men, coupled with his unbeaten record in cavalry operations, including the significant raid on Holly Springs, and the Battle of Thompson’s Station cements his reputation as one of the finest cavalry commanders in history.
In the broader context of Civil War history, Van Dorn’s contributions should be viewed with a nuanced understanding.
While his flaws and failures are part of his story, so too are his undeniable successes and the respect he garnered from those who served under him that demonstrate that he was a good general. His strategic brilliance and leadership in cavalry operations remain a significant part of his military legacy, worthy of recognition and respect.