Vicksburg an Earl Van Dorn

major bill

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Forum Host
Joined
Aug 25, 2012
I understand Van Dorn had be relieved, but just for thought, what if Van Dorn was still in charge at Vicksburg?

Van Dorn was more aggressive than Pemberton, but I am not sure he was a better general. Would have Van Dorn did a better job at Vicksburg?
 
I am not sure Van Dorn could have hung on to command after the Second Battle of Corinth. But did Davis believe Pemberton was a better general than Van Dorn? Perhaps Davis simply did not have anyone better than Pemberton.
 
I do know that Van Dorn is greatly responsible for the C.S.S. Arkansas and its success in 1862.
I think Van Dorn gets a bad rap when it comes to his performance as the Vicksburg commander. Oh, he messed up by attacking Corinth, I totally agree. But even though tactically the Baton Rouge campaign was a failure...the Confederates failed to take the town and the Arkansas self-destructed...but strategically it allowed the Confederates to fortify Port Hudson with the withdrawal of the upper and lower Federal fleets and this in turn allowed them to hang onto a 150-mile stretch of the Mississippi River with the Red River being able to deliver goods from the Trans-Mississippi. It essentially kept Vicksburg from falling a year earlier than would otherwise have been the case.
 
Interesting document offered for sale on Ebay, having to do with Vicksburg and Van Dorn's 1862 defense.
Vicksburg Order.jpg
 
This battle IMO was lost before it ever started. Supplies were not laid in for a long siege and perhaps even all non combatants should have been evacuated, many fewer mouths to feed.
 
Pemberton seemed to have not reacted well to Grant. In fact Pemberton seemed confused.
 
In fact Pemberton seemed confused.
Oh course he was confused.

He was receiving contradictory instructions from his military superiors and the President of the Confederate States of America.

The fact he had no adequate cavalry to provide basic intelligence did not help matters.

But as we have many detailed threads about this fact on CWT, I shall only agree that Pemberton was indeed consfused !
 
I understand Van Dorn had be relieved, but just for thought, what if Van Dorn was still in charge at Vicksburg?

Van Dorn was more aggressive than Pemberton, but I am not sure he was a better general. Would have Van Dorn did a better job at Vicksburg?
I think Van Dorn might have done a better job, but I think the Confederacy (Davis) thought he could be more aggressive in other places and that maybe Vicksburg was a done deal after Van Dorn defeated Grant. It was after that that General Van Dorn was stationed in Spring Hill, Tennessee with General Forrest and he defeated the Union's General Coburn. So the Confederates gained from Van Dorn's move out of Vicksburg but the argument is certainly there that it might have gone better for the Bonnie Blue if Van Dorn had been kept in command at Vicksburg.
 
Interesting question, I will be glad to hear the ideas. I do know that Van Dorn is greatly responsible for the C.S.S. Arkansas and its success in 1862.
While Van Dorn was in command at Vicksburg during the combat life of the Arkansas, he was hardly "greatly responsible" for its success. He played virtually no role in the Arkansas's construction/completion. The success of the Arkansas belongs to the brave officers and crew (including volunteers) of the ship.

Actually Van Dorn is responsible for the destruction of the Arkansas by irresponsibly ordering it to join in the attack on Baton Rouge when it was not fully repaired and operational. He refused to listen to the Naval Officers' protests and overruled them. As a result, the Arkansas was lost.
 
Back
Top