In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

• 9 • PARTISAN RANGER,1862–65 A fter his first year in the Confederate Army, Walter Lane looked upon his contribution to the war effort with pride. He made up for the debacle at Wilson’s Creek with spectacular cavalry charges at Chustenahlah and Pea Ridge, and his performance at Corinth earned him a commendation from his commanding general. As lieutenant colonel of the Third Texas Cavalry, however, Lane was impatient with subordination to Elkanah Greer, and the dismounting of the regiment convinced him to seek opportunities for a different command. Over the next year and a half, sickness and favoritism seemed to thwart his ambitions. The years of service with the boys from East Texas also revealed Lane’s maturing ideas about manliness. Lane’s fondness for masculine camaraderie had helped fuel his longing for adventure. His time with Greer’s regiment created similar bonds but differed in one important aspect—age. Fifteen years before, for example, he was not much older than the rangers he commanded in Mexico, but at forty-five, he stood as a paternal symbol among the boys of the Third Texas. This was a new relationship that created another dimension to Lane’s notions of manhood. Concern for the welfare of his men illustrated one aspect of Lane’s newfound paternalism. The day before Pea Ridge, he contradicted James McIntosh ’s order to charge into Yankee guns and spared many of his men from certain harm. During the cold and wet train ride between Memphis and Corinth, the discomfort of the his men led him to commandeer the crew and ignore the priority mission of an express. As a good soldier, Lane followed orders that risked the lives of his men and himself, but if his estimation of the potential gains did not justify the sacrifice, he had few qualms about defying his superiors, as later events would testify.1 CHAPTER 9 126 This fatherly concern could also create lasting bonds of affection. At Farmington, for example, Cpl. Thomas Cellum faltered as the Texans withdrew from the field, but Lane found him and then pulled his young comrade up onto his horse. Cellum reported that the lieutenant colonel “said no boy like me should be left behind while he was able to carry me on.” This act inspired the young soldier “on to better deeds then I had ever done.” Perhaps seeking to earn Lane’s fatherly esteem, Cellum promised that “his confidence should not be misplaced,” and expressed the affection that the act forged between the two, “[B]eside my Father and mother I had the Col to love me.”2 Assuming the symbolic role of father, the protector, might have endeared Lane to many of his soldiers, but his role as the disciplinarian, coupled with his often highhanded attitude, could draw their resentment. As a lieutenant colonel of the Third Texas, Lane attained the reputation as a martinet. During his farewell speech, he admitted that he exhibited an “arbitrary conduct” toward the regiment but refused to apologize for it. “[I]f I had done my duty as an officer, I would have carried out orders much more strictly than I had done,” he assured them, and characterized the Third Texas as “the hardest regiment to control I had ever seen.” Considering his experience in commanding Texas Rangers during the U.S.-Mexican War, this was a damning assessment, indeed.3 In the fifteen years since his service in Mexico, Lane’s attitude toward discipline apparently underwent a transformation. The rangers of his battalion , while operating in Nuevo León and Coahuila, hardly represented a model of good soldierly conduct. His superiors constantly reminded Lane to control his unruly Texans while scouting, but he made little effort to comply. Maturity probably lay at the root of Lane’s change in temperment. As an officer in the Texas cavalry, Lane consistently expected adherence to discipline from those under his command. He steadfastly supported Capt. Thomas W. Winston, when several troopers—enduring intense drill—sought to remove him from rank. At their Memphis encampment, he ordered infantry practice twice a day and restricted the movement of his men between evening and morning drills. In the months to come, Lane would toss out of the service both enlisted men and officers alike for their poor conduct. His soldiers often resented Lane’s arbitrary disposition, but they also admired and responded to his leadership while under fire. Most would agree with Sgt. Samuel B. Barron’s assessment. “In...

Share