IF "Practical or Practicable" ... which one...

5fish

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2019
Messages
10,626
Reaction score
4,544
There has been much debate over the way Gen. Lee issued his orders. Like: Gen. Lee would usual issue what are called discretionary orders with that famous end phrase "If Practical or Practicable."

Most historians claim that Gen. Lee like to encourage initiative in his subordinates; that is why he like to issue these discretionary type orders.

I argue that maybe Gen. Lee wanted initiative from his generals but unlike Gen. Stuart who developed a system to encourage initiative. Gen. Lee failed to develop a good system to encourage the development of officers taking bold action.

Just think: The only officers at the corp. level that truly took initiative{ or bold action ) was Gen. Jackson and Gen. Stuart for the rest that held that position for Gen. Lee never took bold action.

Why? History wants to blame those generals like Anderson, A.P. Hill and Ewell for their lack of initiative. I argue that if the historians say Gen. Lee wanted his generals to take the initiative then those generals under him knew this too.

So the question becomes if the generals under Gen. Lee knew he wanted his generals to take the initiative. Why did they never step up and be bold?

The only answer is Gen. Lee must have punished failure. It also means Gen. Lee never had a true system to develop initiative taking type leaders.

Gen. Lee may have wanted initiative taking type of leaders but in truth he discourage bold risk taking leaders and this does make sense. Why?

Everyone makes Gen. Lee to be this perfect person and he was a fine person but he had personality failures as any human. He was a control freak and neat freak but unlike most people with these traits who tend to be rude. Gen Lee was a southern gentleman which softens his control freak and neat freak nature to people.

Now think: a person who is a control nut and neat freak can he truly develop initiative in others rarely for their standards for one to meet is set to high. In most cases control freaks and neat freaks more often punish initiative then reward it.

A note: Gen. Lee did transfer out a lot of officers form his command and in many cases no reason can be found why. Historians just say Gen Lee was getting rid of dead weight like political appointees.

A note: An over looked item, Gen. Lee made his battle plans in private. He never develop a battle with his generals only used them for information gathering. The battle plan always came directly from Gen. Lee.


In summary: Gen Lee may have wanted his generals to be bold and take the initiative but his personal failing of being a control and neat freak made him unable to develop initiative taking leaders he wanted. He was his own worse enemy in developing the type of officers he wanted.

Remember, A control and neat freak is never able to recognized that he is one and that he discourage people from taking the initiative. JUST THINK! Of the control and neat freaks you have worked under over the years. They are demanding and hard to please. So what do you do? You wait tell they tell you what they want, Why? Because if you take the initiative and it is not what they want. You catch hell.

Think of those poor generals under Gen Lee.
 

5fish

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2019
Messages
10,626
Reaction score
4,544
practicable
adjective

prac·ti·ca·ble | \ ˈprak-ti-kə-bəl \

Definition of practicable

1: capable of being put into practice or of being done or accomplished : FEASIBLEa practicable plan

2: capable of being used : USABLEa practicable weapon
 
Last edited:

5fish

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2019
Messages
10,626
Reaction score
4,544
practical
adjective
prac·ti·cal | \ ˈprak-ti-kəl \

Definition of practical
(Entry 1 of 2)
1a: of, relating to, or manifested in practice or action
a: not theoretical or ideal
b: being such in practice or effect: VIRTUALa practical failure

2: actively engaged in some course of action or occupation a practical farmer

3: capable of being put to use or account: USEFULhe had a practical knowledge of French

4a: disposed to action as opposed to speculation or abstraction
b(1): qualified by practice or practical training a good practical mechanic
(2): designed to supplement theoretical training by experience

5: concerned with voluntary action and ethical decisions
 

Kirk's Raider's

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 16, 2019
Messages
2,251
Reaction score
922
There has been much debate over the way Gen. Lee issued his orders. Like: Gen. Lee would usual issue what are called discretionary orders with that famous end phrase "If Practical or Practicable."

Most historians claim that Gen. Lee like to encourage initiative in his subordinates; that is why he like to issue these discretionary type orders.

I argue that maybe Gen. Lee wanted initiative from his generals but unlike Gen. Stuart who developed a system to encourage initiative. Gen. Lee failed to develop a good system to encourage the development of officers taking bold action.

Just think: The only officers at the corp. level that truly took initiative{ or bold action ) was Gen. Jackson and Gen. Stuart for the rest that held that position for Gen. Lee never took bold action.

Why? History wants to blame those generals like Anderson, A.P. Hill and Ewell for their lack of initiative. I argue that if the historians say Gen. Lee wanted his generals to take the initiative then those generals under him knew this too.

So the question becomes if the generals under Gen. Lee knew he wanted his generals to take the initiative. Why did they never step up and be bold?

The only answer is Gen. Lee must have punished failure. It also means Gen. Lee never had a true system to develop initiative taking type leaders.

Gen. Lee may have wanted initiative taking type of leaders but in truth he discourage bold risk taking leaders and this does make sense. Why?

Everyone makes Gen. Lee to be this perfect person and he was a fine person but he had personality failures as any human. He was a control freak and neat freak but unlike most people with these traits who tend to be rude. Gen Lee was a southern gentleman which softens his control freak and neat freak nature to people.

Now think: a person who is a control nut and neat freak can he truly develop initiative in others rarely for their standards for one to meet is set to high. In most cases control freaks and neat freaks more often punish initiative then reward it.

A note: Gen. Lee did transfer out a lot of officers form his command and in many cases no reason can be found why. Historians just say Gen Lee was getting rid of dead weight like political appointees.

A note: An over looked item, Gen. Lee made his battle plans in private. He never develop a battle with his generals only used them for information gathering. The battle plan always came directly from Gen. Lee.


In summary: Gen Lee may have wanted his generals to be bold and take the initiative but his personal failing of being a control and neat freak made him unable to develop initiative taking leaders he wanted. He was his own worse enemy in developing the type of officers he wanted.

Remember, A control and neat freak is never able to recognized that he is one and that he discourage people from taking the initiative. JUST THINK! Of the control and neat freaks you have worked under over the years. They are demanding and hard to please. So what do you do? You wait tell they tell you what they want, Why? Because if you take the initiative and it is not what they want. You catch hell.

Think of those poor generals under Gen Lee.
A man who owns slaves and relishes whipping them plus fighting for slavery is not a fine man.
Kirk's Raiders
 

5fish

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2019
Messages
10,626
Reaction score
4,544
Here is why Ewell never again took a risk with Lee's orders... You will see Gettysburg in a different light... Lee held his army back on day one...

LINK: https://www.historynet.com/did-lt-gen-richard-ewell-lose-the-battle-of-gettysburg.htm

Ewell, with only Maj. Gen. Robert E. Rodes’ division in hand, arrived at Gettysburg at about noon. As he came out of the woods that crowned Oak Hill, Ewell saw the exposed Union flank below him and knew he had an unparalleled opportunity to rout the enemy.

After giving Rodes orders to deploy his 8,125 soldiers for battle, Ewell sent Major Campbell Brown, his stepson and principal aide, to find Lee and tell him that Ewell meant to join the fray. Brown found Lee on Herr Ridge, where both he and Hill had come after hearing the bark of muskets and bellow of cannons. Lee sent Campbell back to Ewell with an astounding order: ‘Do not charge; I want to avoid a general engagement.’

Had Stonewall Jackson sent Ewell those instructions, he would have meekly complied without question. Jackson, who had died in May, never granted his subordinates any discretion. Lee, however, was a different type of commander, one who expected his leaders to use their own judgment. He had, for example, told Ewell to bypass Winchester while heading through the Shenandoah Valley to Pennsylvania. When Ewell saw that he could rout the Yankees occupying the small village, he decided to disobey Lee’s orders, attacked the enemy and won a decisive victory over the Northern defenders. Lee did not reprove Ewell for disregarding his instructions at Winchester. Now Ewell saw a similar chance for glory at Gettysburg, and he again elected to flout Lee’s directive.

Brown advised that now was not the time to disobey Lee. He described Lee as seething with anger,’showing a querulous impatience … I never saw before.’ Lee’s ire was the result of cavalry head Maj. Gen. J.E.B. Stuart’s disregarding his instructions. ‘He’s gone off around the Federal Army,’ Lee groused, ‘failing to keep in constant communication with me.’

Despite Brown’s warning that Lee was in no mood to see his orders ignored, Ewell could not pass up the opportunity to assault the open Union flank. The enemy troops were so vulnerable that they could be quickly routed, which would not be a ‘general engagement,’ Ewell reasoned. He decided to gamble his rank and career by proceeding with a charge. In giving the written order to his division commanders, Rodes and Maj. Gen. Jubal Early, Ewell stressed that, after driving the enemy from the ground, they must break off their engagement. This point was also verbally emphasized by the messengers dispatched to both Rodes and Early.

Before he could launch his attack, Rodes had to switch from column into battle formation. He moved Brig. Gen. Junius Daniel’s brigade west to flank the Federals along McPherson’s Ridge; Brig. Gen. Alfred Iverson’s men would slip behind the Union forces on the hill to take the enemy from the rear. Meanwhile, Brig. Gen. Edward A. O’Neal’s troops would come down Oak Ridge, where they would be in a position to block a Union retreat. Brigadier General George Doles would guard Rodes’ left flank; Brig. Gen. Stephen Ramseur’s brigade would be his reserve.


Snip...

Heth, on Herr Ridge, saw Ewell’s attack falter. Turning to Lee, he asked if he should press Pettigrew’s and Brockenbrough’s brigades into the fray. ‘No,’ Lee curtly replied. ‘I am not prepared to bring on a general engagement today.’ He was determined to shun battle that day, and no doubt was incensed at Ewell for having defied his orders.

Snip...

Lee, who was personally commanding Hill’s troops (he had at first refused to order them into battle, then changed his mind and sent them forward), decided at the time to accept what had been accomplished that afternoon. He did not instruct Ewell to mount a charge against Cemetery Hill. He allowed Perrin to return to Seminary Ridge. Had Lee wanted to deny the enemy the heights, he could have sent Maj. Gen. Richard Anderson’s division — just now arriving and ready to fight — ahead to Cemetery Hill. Instead, Lee told Anderson to prepare to camp for the night.

When he wrote his report, Hill recalled Lee’s words, ‘Prudence led me to be content with what had been gained [in the fight], and not push forward troops [who were] exhausted and necessarily disordered … to encounter fresh troops from the enemy.’
 

jgoodguy

Webmaster
Staff member
Administrator
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
7,116
Reaction score
4,148
There has been much debate over the way Gen. Lee issued his orders. Like: Gen. Lee would usual issue what are called discretionary orders with that famous end phrase "If Practical or Practicable."

Most historians claim that Gen. Lee like to encourage initiative in his subordinates; that is why he like to issue these discretionary type orders.

I argue that maybe Gen. Lee wanted initiative from his generals but unlike Gen. Stuart who developed a system to encourage initiative. Gen. Lee failed to develop a good system to encourage the development of officers taking bold action.

Just think: The only officers at the corp. level that truly took initiative{ or bold action ) was Gen. Jackson and Gen. Stuart for the rest that held that position for Gen. Lee never took bold action.

Why? History wants to blame those generals like Anderson, A.P. Hill and Ewell for their lack of initiative. I argue that if the historians say Gen. Lee wanted his generals to take the initiative then those generals under him knew this too.

So the question becomes if the generals under Gen. Lee knew he wanted his generals to take the initiative. Why did they never step up and be bold?

The only answer is Gen. Lee must have punished failure. It also means Gen. Lee never had a true system to develop initiative taking type leaders.

Gen. Lee may have wanted initiative taking type of leaders but in truth he discourage bold risk taking leaders and this does make sense. Why?

Everyone makes Gen. Lee to be this perfect person and he was a fine person but he had personality failures as any human. He was a control freak and neat freak but unlike most people with these traits who tend to be rude. Gen Lee was a southern gentleman which softens his control freak and neat freak nature to people.

Now think: a person who is a control nut and neat freak can he truly develop initiative in others rarely for their standards for one to meet is set to high. In most cases control freaks and neat freaks more often punish initiative then reward it.

A note: Gen. Lee did transfer out a lot of officers form his command and in many cases no reason can be found why. Historians just say Gen Lee was getting rid of dead weight like political appointees.

A note: An over looked item, Gen. Lee made his battle plans in private. He never develop a battle with his generals only used them for information gathering. The battle plan always came directly from Gen. Lee.


In summary: Gen Lee may have wanted his generals to be bold and take the initiative but his personal failing of being a control and neat freak made him unable to develop initiative taking leaders he wanted. He was his own worse enemy in developing the type of officers he wanted.

Remember, A control and neat freak is never able to recognized that he is one and that he discourage people from taking the initiative. JUST THINK! Of the control and neat freaks you have worked under over the years. They are demanding and hard to please. So what do you do? You wait tell they tell you what they want, Why? Because if you take the initiative and it is not what they want. You catch hell.

Think of those poor generals under Gen Lee.
Good points.

IMHO Lee won until Gettysburg. If Ewell had attacked and lost, then we would be arguing the opposite side of this question.
Ditto for the theoretical Jackson. There is more to the order than "If Practical or Practicable.".
In addition

Ewell had several possible reasons for not attacking. The orders from Lee contained an innate contradiction. He was "to carry the hill occupied by the enemy, if he found it practicable, but to avoid a general engagement until the arrival of the other divisions of the army."[14]
 

5fish

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2019
Messages
10,626
Reaction score
4,544
Ewell had several possible reasons for not attacking. The orders from Lee contained an innate contradiction. He was "to carry the hill occupied by the enemy, if he found it practicable, but to avoid a general engagement until the arrival of the other divisions of the army."[14]
If you , read the article Lee never sent the message. He sent the message do not engage.

Late in the afternoon of July 1, 1863, after a full day of fierce fighting, Confederate troops finally drove the Union defenders from the fields west of Gettysburg. As the Union troops fled east toward the haven of Cemetery Hill, General Robert E. Lee sent the following order to Lieutenant General Richard S. Ewell, commander of the II Corps, whose men had gained victory that day: ‘The enemy [is] retreating over those hills … in great confusion. You only need press those people to secure possession of the heights … .Do this, if possible.’ Legend tells us that, at that crucial moment, ‘Old Bald Head’ lost his nerve. Instead of pursuing the fleeing Union soldiers, who were so panicked they could not defend themselves, Ewell held back, allowing the Federals to entrench atop Cemetery Hill. The advantage of holding the heights led to the Union victory at Gettysburg. Ewell’s indecision supposedly cost the South the battle.

While this is an interesting story — and one that has been repeated again and again in many books about the Civil War it is also a lie that libels Ewell. The story was concocted by Lee’s apologists in a postwar attempt to shift the blame for losing the battle from their hero onto Ewell. In truth, Lee sent no definitive orders directing Ewell to pursue the enemy when the Union lines broke at Gettysburg, and Ewell was not benumbed by indecision when he should have been chasing the Federals to prevent them from establishing an impregnable position on top of Cemetery Hill. The proof of this lies in a close study of the battle, including the location and strength of the opposing forces once the first day’s fighting had ended, and in how the key participants reacted to the changing events of the day.
 

jgoodguy

Webmaster
Staff member
Administrator
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
7,116
Reaction score
4,148
If you , read the article Lee never sent the message. He sent the message do not engage.

Late in the afternoon of July 1, 1863, after a full day of fierce fighting, Confederate troops finally drove the Union defenders from the fields west of Gettysburg. As the Union troops fled east toward the haven of Cemetery Hill, General Robert E. Lee sent the following order to Lieutenant General Richard S. Ewell, commander of the II Corps, whose men had gained victory that day: ‘The enemy [is] retreating over those hills … in great confusion. You only need press those people to secure possession of the heights … .Do this, if possible.’ Legend tells us that, at that crucial moment, ‘Old Bald Head’ lost his nerve. Instead of pursuing the fleeing Union soldiers, who were so panicked they could not defend themselves, Ewell held back, allowing the Federals to entrench atop Cemetery Hill. The advantage of holding the heights led to the Union victory at Gettysburg. Ewell’s indecision supposedly cost the South the battle.

While this is an interesting story — and one that has been repeated again and again in many books about the Civil War it is also a lie that libels Ewell. The story was concocted by Lee’s apologists in a postwar attempt to shift the blame for losing the battle from their hero onto Ewell. In truth, Lee sent no definitive orders directing Ewell to pursue the enemy when the Union lines broke at Gettysburg, and Ewell was not benumbed by indecision when he should have been chasing the Federals to prevent them from establishing an impregnable position on top of Cemetery Hill. The proof of this lies in a close study of the battle, including the location and strength of the opposing forces once the first day’s fighting had ended, and in how the key participants reacted to the changing events of the day.
I certainly agree that post-war 'Lee Worship' colored a lot of history.
 

5fish

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2019
Messages
10,626
Reaction score
4,544
My point Ewell is argessive during the Gettysburg campaign.

Let's move to Wilderness battle, Ewell on the Union right and remember Gordon found the union flank open. He tells Ewell and he declines to advantage of this union oversight. Why?

As I have shown Ewell most likely got crushed by Lee for his action on day one at Gettysburg. He rather wait instead of being bold. We know Lee shows up and tells Gordon to flank the union position but with too little and too late.
 

5fish

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2019
Messages
10,626
Reaction score
4,544
Let's talk about A. P. Hill ... Battle of Bristoe Station

During the autumn campaign of the same year, Hill launched his Corps "too hastily" in the Battle of Bristoe Station and was bloodily repulsed by Maj. Gen. Gouverneur K. Warren's II Corps. Lee did not criticize him for this afterward, but ordered him to detail himself to the dead and wounded after hearing his account. Hill's corps also took part in the Battle of Mine Run. Other than a brief visit to Richmond in January 1864, Hill remained with his corps in its winter encampments near Orange Court House

Snip...

Lt. Gen. A. P. Hill, leading the Confederate Third Corps, was advancing on Ewell's left. He reached Bristoe Station on October 14. (The town is variously called Bristoe, Bristow, and Bristo in contemporary newspapers.) Hill tried to harass the rearguard of V Corps just across Broad Run, but he missed the presence of II Corps just coming up from Auburn.[5] Seeing Heth's advance, Warren rapidly deployed his forces behind an embankment of the Orange and Alexandria Railroad near Bristoe Station. The result was a powerful ambush as Hill's corps moved to attack the Union rear guard across Broad Run.[6]
Union casualties were 540, Confederate about 1,380.[2] Warren, seeing Lt. Gen. Richard S. Ewell's Second Corps coming up on his left, eventually had to withdraw.[9]
Lee is said to have cut off Hill's excuses for this defeat by saying, "Well, well, general, bury these poor men and let us say no more about it."[

AS far as I know A. P Hill never took bold action for the rest of the war...

AS the started to go wrong Lee's control-freak took over...
 

5fish

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2019
Messages
10,626
Reaction score
4,544
You read the Overland campaign Lee just gives orders even at times leads the counter-attacks like at Spotsylvania. He goes and selects the regiments and leads them to where they need to go. It is obvious he has lost respect for his Corps officers... History blames them but it all Lee...
 

5fish

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2019
Messages
10,626
Reaction score
4,544
At North Anna , Lee is sick and no one was willing to take the reigns. It a sign that everyone was in fear of Lee and only acted when told to by Lee...
 
Top