Display Full Text | Download Full Text
607.21 kB PDF file

Degree

MA, Kent State University, College of Arts and Sciences / Department of History, 2009.

Abstract

In the mid-nineteenth century, prevailing military theory held that a commanding general was supposed to use his personal staff to deliver his orders and supervise their execution by his subordinates, thus facilitating his command and control over his army. Historians have usually portrayed Confederate General Robert E. Lee’s personal staff as inept or incompetent to perform these tasks. An in-depth examination of the historical record, however, reveals that despite its inexperience, Lee’s personal staff performed its assigned duties with skill and dedication. Lee, on the other hand, often did not use his personal staff officers as military theory dictated. While his usage of the staff improved as the war progressed, he never fully realized the Jominian ideal of using his staff as an extension of himself, to assert his will over the Army of Northern Virginia. Because of this failure, the Confederate Army of Northern Virginia suffered from mistakes in coordination and communication which often led to battlefield reverses. This thesis does not suggest that better staff work alone would have changed the outcome of the Civil War; rather, it argues that if General Lee had better utilized his personal staff, the outcomes of several battles might have been different.

Subject Headings

Military history

Keywords

military history; U. S. Civil War; Confederate army; Army of Northern Virginia; Lee, Robert E.; staff

Committee / Advisors

Kevin Adams (Advisor)
Kim Gruenwald (Committee Member)
Leonne Hudson (Committee Member)

Pages

145p.

Document number: kent1239652034
Permalink: http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=kent1239652034

This ETD has been downloaded 918 times (through March 2013)