New York : Three Rivers Press

Mission command belongs to the Army’s list of seven war fighting functions. While the other six of the Army’s war fighting functions specifically align to the application of combat power, mission command applies to leadership and its application. Mission command redefines the old construct of C2, command and control, by morphing the ideology into two distinct thoughts, the art of command and the science of control. Although mission command is a relatively new concept, it’s principles and application transcend time. This paper examines General Robert E. Lee’s application of the mission command principles at the Battle of Gettysburg.

Another thing that stood out to me about General Lee was that he was not a big fan of slavery. He had command of Northern Virginia during the Civil War, so it does make sense. Lee through out this book shows his love for Virginia. Let’s face it, he is solely in this war because Virginia made the decision to leave the Union. He is very loyal to his home state, and it shows through out the

Lee and Grant would both serve under General Winfield Scott, a man whom they both admired, during his campaign to Mexico City. General Scott saw greatness in Lee and stated his “…success in Mexico was largely due to the skill, valor, and undaunted energy of Robert E. Lee.”15 Scott was also heard commenting a few years later that; “Lee is the greatest military genius in America.”16 Grant, only a first lieutenant, did not get an opportunity to show much leadership. Grant did however serve with valor. At the Battle of Monterey, Grant would gain some respect among his peers by successfully carrying much needed ammunition to his regiment while under fire.17 During the Civil War, Lee and Grant would implement skills learned while under the command of General Winfield Scott.

Robert E. Lee was a man of family, culture and tradition. Lee was a man who believed in the old English ways in chivalry. The Southern states fought for the same ideals that Lee stood for. Lee believed that this way of life made men to be of a higher class. He was convinced that these old values can build a better nation. Catton express the Confederacy loyalty to these values by saying: “For four years, the southern states had fought a separate war to up held the ideals for which Lee; as if he himself was the Confederacy… the best thing that the way of life for which the Confederacy stood could have ever had to offer” (410).

Lee, who is from Virginia, had very traditional and old fashioned beliefs. He strongly believed in the idea that having unequal, leadership, and social categories provided an advantage to society. The Confederacy embraced Lee as their leader as well. Furthermore, Confederate soldiers considered Lee

General Lee’s Army had been in mainly defensive positions and he wanted to surround Washington, because he believed if he could capture it then he could end the war. General Lee had also begun reorganizing his Army and in doing so, he gave a great unbalance to the experience in his command positions. Of the forty-nine command positions 14 on them were in experienced in the position in which they held. The planning required at the corps level was remarkable different from the planning required at the division level. In addition, the planning at the

Robert Edward Lee was born in Stratford, Virginia on January 19, 1807 to an aristocratic family. His parents both played a major role in Lee’s success. His mother Ann Hill Carter descended from a wealthy family while his father Colonel Henry Lee, served as a cavalry leader during the Revolutionary War. At a young age his father passed away, and his leadership roles were challenged. He was one of the six men in his family and had to help support the household. At eighteen he attended West Point MIlitary Academy, where he excelled in artillery, infantry and cavalry. Shortly after his mother’s passing in 1829, Lee was appointed to second lieutenant in the U.S. Military Corps of Engineers. He began courting Mary Curtis who is a member of the Virginia’s aristocracy. After getting Mr. Curtis’s approval they get married and have seven children together.

The focus of this investigation will be, “To what extent was Robert E. Lee an effective leader of the Confederate Army?” The investigation will analyze Lee’s strengths and weaknesses that contributed to his effectiveness and the overall loss of the Confederacy in the Civil War. The overall character of Lee throughout his lifetime is too broad, therefore, this investigation will focus solely on the testimony of his military background, and the personality traits that led to Lee’s decisions during the Civil War. As a result, Lee the American by Gamaliel Bradford Jr. and Robert E. Lee: The Soldier by Sir F. Maurice are important sources to this investigation, due to the background they give on Lee’s military training, personality, and victories in the battles leading up to Gettysburg.

Robert E. Lee once said of leadership, “I cannot trust a man to control others who cannot control himself” (Jones, 1875). This is an instance where I believe that even though this idea or thought was mentioned many years ago, it still has relevance today. I do not have an exact date of that quote, but with General Lee fighting in the Civil War, I would imagine it came somewhere in the mid-1800’s (The book it is found in was published after his death). Our current military leaders need to listen to advice like this quote, get out and know the people they put in charge so they are better able to make decisions on who should and should not actually be leading.

Shaara, through his commentary on General Lee, explains that Lee did not want to fight the war but had to. Lee felt it was his duty to fight for his fellow countrymen, but not for a cause, land, or slavery. “So it was no cause and no country he fought for, no ideal and no justice. He fought for his people, for the children, and the kin, and not even the land, because the land was worth the war, but the people were,” General Lee says (Shaara 263). General Lee fights for himself and has no choice but to fight, knowing in the end that he might be wrong with his cause and pay the price someday. General Lee is not a proponent of war, but he will serve his country with honor and duty if necessary.

Throughout history, there have been people whose names and faces have become synonymous with the time periods in which they lived. For example, Julius Caesar is synonymous with the late Roman Republic and George Washington is synonymous with the American Revolution. Just like these two men, the name Robert E. Lee has become synonymous with the American Civil War. Not only did Lee rise to become the most important and recognizable person in the Southern Confederacy, but his honor and virtuous acts during and after the war made him a hero to modern-day Americans. Even though he fought for what many consider the morally erroneous side of the war, the virtues of his character have made him a figure in American history

Robert E. Lee had many successes in leading the United States Army. What made Lee so remarkable was he carried a lot about what the United States government was doing and believed in a good relationship with the personal that are working for the government. We know that Lee held high standards. He was big on honor, and held people to high standards. He graduated West Point as a military commander. Lee was considered one of the bluest of Virginia blue bloods. Lee was a full blown southerner who would give anything he could to get a southern victory. Lee would be the general of the Confederate Army during the Civil War. Lee first will take over and will be in charge from 1861-1865. What Lee’s first task will be to take his army at Second Bull Run and lead them to a Confederate victory.

135) This describes Major Jackson’s general attitude towards war and towards God. Jackson is extremely pious and does all he can to please God and to follow His path. Newspaper coverage of his battles quickly publicized him and the title Hero was given to Jackson. Throughout the war, Jackson shows dedication, going beyond his orders and chasing away his enemies. He also shows an immense concern for his troops, he “had seen the bare feet, the bloody impressions, and he felt a deep pain, a sadness.” (Pg. 289) His men were shabby compared to the forces of Hancock and Chamberlain.

Ulysses Grant and Robert Lee were vital to the United States during the Civil War. Their meeting in a small parlor in Virginia, where they wrote out and signed the terms of the end of the war, brought the war to its near finish. In the article “Grant and Lee: A Study in Contrasts”, author Bruce Catton analyzes the similarities and differences between these leaders’ points of view and qualities. Thus, author, Bruce Catton compares Grant and Lee to demonstrate that all successful people have the same underlying qualities shown through their tenacity and fidelity, while also contrasting them to demonstrate that there are different paths of success, shown through their different backgrounds.

During the times of Civil War, there were many Commanding Generals that came along. But two stand out amongst all, Ulysses S. Grant of United States of America and Robert E. Lee of Confederate States of America. Both men had formally fought, not along side of each other, in the Mexican-American War. At one point Robert E. Lee and Ulysses S. Grant worked together in the Mexican-American War. They both gained a war time experience, Grant as a quartermaster and Lee as an engineer who positioned troops and artillery during their participation in the Scott’s march from the coastal town of Vera Cruz to Mexico City. Both men were vastly different with different styles and background who not only won the affection of their men but respect of