GDG- Corp size at GB

[Alan D. Brunelle]

Tom Ryan wrote:
> Esteemed GDG Member Contributes:
>
>
> <<I wonder how much of this Lee fostered - whereas Meade called those
> all-inclusive councils, Lee's management style almost seemed to
> encourage separate actions: talking to one commander, and then the
> next... For example, was Ewell ever included in conversations directly
> with Hill or Longstreet during the 3 days? I recall Lee, Hill and
> Longstreet meeting a couple of times, but these did not include Ewell.
> (Some of this is probably geographically induced - but I can't imagine
> that it would have been taxing for Lee, Longstreet, Ewell and Hill all
> to meet near the seminary for instance.)>>
>
> Alan,
>
> 	Lee's one-on-one style of communicating with his commanders seems to
> reflect the fact that Lee rarely looked for input regarding strategy.  He
> normally outlined the strategy and desired (perhaps expected ia a better
> word) his commanders to carry out his plans.  If he held councils like Meade
> did, he would have less control of the outcome of the meeting.  One-on-one
> meetings allowed him to better dictate the strategy, and motivate the
> commander to carry it out.
>
> Regards, Tom Ryan
>   
Hi Tom -

I'll think about this some, and probably look up a couple of articles in 
Gettysburg Magazine - I seem to recall that there was one (or two?) 
outlining Meade's actions during the battle, and another outlining 
Lee's. I'm concerned that Lee did not broadcast changes to the general 
plan consistently.

It seems better to me to have all your commanders in one place and time, 
both to collect information, and to present one consistent message to 
all involved. I think there are dangers in having Lee's approach:

(1) Time/information: Lee has a set of intelligence about the current 
situation; decides upon a plan; talks with commander #1 and presents his 
goal. Lee then heads over for the next commander; receives new 
intelligence on the way (or from commander #2), and has to modify his 
plan. Now what?

(2) Miscommunication: Meade gave one clear message to all of his 
commanders in one go - Lee would have to be very careful that each of 
his three chief subordinates (four, if you count Stuart) received 
identical instructions. Slight differences in wording could be 
interpreted by the corps commanders differently ("practicable", 
"possible", "required", ...)

Regards,
Alan
>                    ----------------------------------------------------------------
> You may unsubscribe by going to http://mailman.arthes.com/mailman/listinfo/gettysburg
>
> You can add yourself to the GDG map at: http://www.frappr.com/gettysburgdiscussiongroup
>
> View archived posts from May 2004 -  present at http://mailman.arthes.com/pipermail/gettysburg/
>