Remembering a Veteran: Major George Hamilton, USMC

Contributed by Bob Knight 

Major George W. Hamilton, USMC

George Hamilton was born on 5 July 1892. He grew up in Washington DC and attended Central High School. After high school he attended Georgetown University, where he participated in football and track and field. After deciding to leave Georgetown in his first semester George decided to try working in the banking business. And after realizing banking was not for him he studied for and then passed the exam and received an Officers Commission in the Marine Corp. He reported for duty 29 November 1913 to the Marine barracks in Norfolk, VA. Marksmanship competitions were quite popular at that time, and George proved to be an excellent marksman. And in the Marines that was saying a lot! His exceptional athleticism and marksmanship would serve him well once WWI AEF action started in France. But first before seeing action in France George spent time at sea as an officer of shipboard Marines.  Once America entered the war  George was transferred with his detachment from ship duty to the Marine Corp Barracks in Quantico VA. And from there transferred to the AEF.

Major George Hamilton's WWI experience is like no other officer who served in WWI. He was never wounded by gas, bullet, or high explosive shell. His participation in 2nd Division/4th Marine Brigade/5th Marine Regiment  battles was comprehensive. Major Hamilton saw action as a company commander on Hill 142 near Belleau Wood. He was involved and led his troops in the Second Battle of the Marne.  He was the battalion commander at Blanc Mont who saved the 5th Marine Regiment  from disaster when they were surrounded in what is famously known as "The Box." And he is famously depicted in the painting "The Last Night of War" by Frederick Yohn showing him leading two battalions in the crossing of the Meuse river on 10 November 1918. He was the last American officer on 11 November 1918 to hear that the war was over. He was in the thick of action from the beginning of America's involvement in WWI to the very end. Major Hamilton received the Distinguished Service Cross and was twice decorated by the French. No Marines officers were awarded the Medal of Honor in WWI for service as an officer. If there was any man worthy of the Medal of Honor, George Hamilton's name would have been very high on the list. It was on the list because Marine brigade commander Bg. Gen. Wendell Neville had recommended Major Hamilton for the MOH but it was thought that the Army was still simmering about the credit the Marines received after Belleau Wood and the award was rejected. 

Major George Hamilton resigned from the Corps with feelings of disillusionment about what he considered to be a unfair promotion system. However he could not stay out long and quickly applied for reinstatement, which was granted with no loss of seniority. Once back in the Corps, George entered flight training. It was quite common to do maneuvers on former Civil War battlefields reenacting the Civil War. Captain Hamilton (his permanent rank after WWI) was scouting for the Marines participating in these maneuvers over the Gettysburg battlefield on 2 July 1922 when his plane plunged to the ground from 400 feet as he was preparing to land near the site of Pickett's charge. He was killed instantly. George Wallis Hamilton is buried in Arlington Cemetery in section SW, Site 4585.

More information on George W. Hamilton can be found in Mark Mortensen's biography titled George W. Hamilton, USMC. Mark's  grandfather, Orv Mortensen, served under Hamilton in WWI as a private and sharpshooter.

Over the Top: Alternate Histories of the First World War Reviewed by Bryan Alexander

Over the Top: Alternate Histories of the First World War

Edited by Peter Tsouras and Spencer Jones

Frontline Books: 2014

One of the intellectual challenges and delights of reading history is imagining how past events could have followed different paths. What would have happened had D-Day failed, or the birth control pill had not been invented, or John Kennedy had not been assassinated? A literary genre, alternate history, develops these what-ifs into narratives.

A Decisive British Victory at the Somme?

The anthology Over the Top offers ten short alternate histories along these lines, each driven by a single change to the First World War's actual history. In one the Brusilov Offense is more successful than it was, as the Russian Empire defeats the Austro-Hungarian, and as a result the 1917 Russian Revolution never occurs. In another chapter, an argument between Kaiser Wilhelm II and General Moltke goes astray, and thereby the guns of August 1914 fire up a very different war.

The other deviant histories include a German breakthrough at the first battle of Ypres (1914); a British amphibious attack on the Ottoman port of Alexandretta; the Greeks joining the Entente at Gallipoli to seize Istanbul; Teddy Roosevelt elected president in 1912 and taking America into the war in 1915; a clear British victory at Jutland; a clear British victory at the Somme; plus an earlier and more massive deployment of tanks on the Western Front.

As this is an anthology created by diverse hands, each story differs stylistically and historically. I was especially impressed by the Greek alternate ("The Queen of Cities Beckons"), as it included an impressive mix of political details, character development, and military chronicle. The author also seemed to be enjoying himself immensely. "The Brusilov Offensive, 1916" offers a very plausible variation, and also pays welcome attention to the eastern front. Indeed, I was impressed that the anthology ventured away from the western front as often as it did, although the preponderance of work favors that well-trodden terrain.

Would a President Roosevelt Led
America into the War in 1915?

Several chapters impressed me less. The Jutland alternate seemed both minor in impact and a bit implausible, doing some special pleading to ramp up British performance. "From Mud, Through Blood to the Green Fields Beyond" underestimates the resistance to new technologies—in this case, the tank. But I enjoyed reading both for their clarity of writing and general command of their respective histories.

Most chapters contain nifty details that reward the careful reader, such as a 1914 battle in Bastogne: "the valiant defense of that minor Belgian town thrilled the German people and became legend" (14) (a poke at the WWII battle there). In "Germania Demanda Est" an American force helps defend Verdun, which is supplied not by the Voie Sacrée of our timeline, but along "Henry Ford Drive" (98).

Each chapter, or story, consists of several parts. The first and largest part is a narrative history which starts from the history we know, then gradually breaks off into a new timeline. That story is followed by a brief account of what would happen as a result. A short (one page) comparison with the actual historical record comes next, followed by an intriguing bibliography. I realize that "intriguing bibliography" often seems like a contradiction in terms, but what happens in each Over the Top chapter is the insertion of real-seeming but made-up sources. These are "references in the form of end notes that reflects [an alternate history's] own literature - the memoirs, histories, and other accounts that it would have generated." (xxix)

This expands the alternate history approach in an unusual way—and might be a snare for the "unwary" reader. It also allows some more imagination and humor, as in one note to the chapter where Teddy Roosevelt leads the U.S. into war:

See also Edward M. House, He Kept Us Out of the War: An Alternate History of the Presidency of Woodrow Wilson (New York: Simpson & Sons, 2009), p. 22. This popular alternate history speculates on the twentieth century without American intervention in the Great War, particularly how the neutrality of a fictitious Wilson administration, elected twice in 1912 and 1916, allowed the victory of the Central Powers in 1918 and the subsequent naval war between the United States and Germany, 1928–9. (103 n6)

To be clear, that's an alternate history embedded within an alternate history. (I think the great American writer Phillip K. Dick first did this, in The Man in the High Castle). Note, too, the author, Woodrow Wilson's right hand man when it came to international diplomacy!

Physically, this book is very nicely done. Many black and white photos help flesh out the personalities sustained or changed in the stories. A generous and all too rare helping of maps lets readers track the divergences very nicely.

Overall, Over the Top: Alternate Histories of the First World War has much to recommend it. The deviations from history are thought-provoking, giving readers a good sense of just how many different ways the Great War could have gone, and shedding insight into strategic decision-making. It might not be suited to readers new to WWI, as the historical immersion presumes some knowledge, as does the book's imaginative power.

Bryan Alexander

Ouch, Andrew Bacevich Has a Point About WWI

The retired Army Officer, Professor, and All-Around Contrarian included this nugget in his 2012 George C. Marshall lecture:

Enshrined today as a story of freedom besieged, but ultimately triumphant, the familiar story began back in 1914 and continued until its (apparently) definitive conclusion in 1989. Call this the Short Twentieth Century.

Professor Bacevich

The less familiar alternative recounts a story in which freedom as such has figured only intermittently. It has centered on the question of who will dominate the region that we today call the Greater Middle East. Also kicking into high gear in 1914, this story continues to unfold in the present day, with no end in sight. Call this the story of the Long Twentieth Century.

The Short Twentieth Century, geographically centered on Eurasia, pitted great powers against one another. Although alignments shifted depending on circumstance, the roster of major players remained fairly constant. That roster consisted of Great Britain, France, Germany, Russia, and Japan, with the United States biding its time before eventually picking up most of the marbles.

From time to time, the Long Twentieth Century has also pitted great powers against one another. Yet that struggle has always had a second element. It has been a contest between outsiders and insiders. Western intruders with large ambitions, preeminently Great Britain until succeeded by the United States, pursued their dreams of empire or hegemony, typically cloaked in professions of “benevolent assimilation,” uplift, or the pursuit of world peace. The beneficiaries of imperial ministrations—from Arabs in North Africa to Moros in the southern Philippines along with sundry groups in between—seldom proved grateful and frequently resisted.

The Short Twentieth Century had a moral and ideological aspect. If not especially evident at first, this became clearer over time.

Viewed in retrospect, President Woodrow Wilson’s effort to portray the cataclysm of 1914–1918 as a struggle of democracy versus militarism appears more than a little strained. The problem is not that Germany was innocent of the charge of militarism. It is, rather, that Western theories of democracy in those days left more than a little to be desired. After all, those who labored under the yoke of British, French, and American rule across large swathes of Africa, Asia, and the Middle East enjoyed precious little freedom. 

Source:  "The Revisionist Imperative: Rethinking Twentieth Century Wars," 2012 George C. Marshall Lecture; photo from Boston University.

Hymn of Hate

From Connie Ruzich's Behind Their Lines Blog

Ernst Lissauer

The  most famous hate-the-enemy, nationalistic poem of the war was written by Ernst Lissauer, a German-Jewish poet.  His “Hymn of Hate” was composed shortly after war broke out in 1914, and in just a few short months, it was translated and published in the United States (then a neutral nation). The New York Times admired Lissauer’s technical skill but described the poem as “simply abominable” and “a brutal and wicked production.”* In Germany, not surprisingly, the poem was an immediate success.  The Kaiser honored Lissauer and the Crown Prince of Bavaria ordered that the poem be printed and distributed to his troops.

Hymn of Hate

"May God Punish England"—
John Bull Bribes the Devil

French and Russian, they matter not,
A blow for a blow and a shot for a shot!
We love them not, we hate them not,
We hold the Weichsel and Vosges gate.
We have but one and only hate,
We love as one, we hate as one,
We have one foe and one alone.
He is known to you all, he is known to you all,
He crouches behind the dark gray flood,


Full of envy, of rage, of craft, of gall,
Cut off by waves that are thicker than  blood.                                         


Come, let us stand at the Judgment Place,
An oath to swear to, face to face,
An oath of bronze no wind can shake,
An oath for our sons and their sons to take.
Come, hear the word, repeat the word,
Throughout the Fatherland make it heard.
We will never forego our hate,
We have all but a single hate,
We love as one, we hate as one,
We have one foe and one alone —
ENGLAND!

German Sword 
Thrust into Britain

In the Captain's Mess, in the banquet hall,
Sat feasting the officers, one and all,
Like a sabre blow, like the swing of a sail,
One seized his glass and held high to hail;
Sharp-snapped like the stroke of a rudder's play,
Spoke three words only: "To the Day!"
Whose glass this fate?
They had all but a single hate.
Who was thus known?
They had one foe and one alone--
ENGLAND!



Take you the folk of the Earth in pay,
With bars of gold your ramparts lay,
Bedeck the ocean with bow on bow,
Ye reckon well, but not well enough now.
French and Russian, they matter not,
A blow for a blow, a shot for a shot,
We fight the battle with bronze and steel,
And the time that is coming Peace will seal.
You we will hate with a lasting hate,
We will never forego our hate,
Hate by water and hate by land,
Hate of the head and hate of the hand,
Hate of the hammer and hate of the crown,
Hate of seventy millions choking down.
We love as one, we hate as one,
We have one foe and one alone--
ENGLAND!

Unlike Cammaerts’s “New Year’s Wishes to the German Army,” this poem doesn’t focus on the harm it wishes to the enemy or the specific tortures it wishes to inflict on opposing troops.  Instead, the repeated "We" is the focus of the poem, as Germans join together in song, feasts, and toasts to vow their common hatred of ENGLAND!  The British are mocked as cowards who crouch behind the “dark grey flood” of the English Channel, and Germany's shared sense of outrage at England's perceived betrayal fosters German unity: “We love as one, we hate as one.” The German loathing for England inspires battle zeal as they “fight the battle with bronze and steel.” While the poem is titled as a hymn, its sentiment seems nearer to a rousing drinking song, and it’s easy to imagine with that a few editorial changes, it could work as a modern sports anthem. 

1915 News Article

Curiously, the poem became almost as popular in England as in Germany.  Lissauer, who had also coined the German Army’s slogan Gott Strafe England (May God Punish England), could not have anticipated that the British would view his war slogan as a compliment nor that the British would find a great deal of amusement in parodying his “Hymn of Hate.” Newspapers in England published the text of the poem with an accompanying musical score, and the choir at the Royal College of Music performed it as a joke.  A review of the performance noted that although the 100-member British choir was instructed to sing “with plenty of snarl,” their laughter made this difficult, and “when they came to the word England, they rolled it out in fine style.” 

Lissauer himself grew to regret writing the poem.  In 1926, he wrote that instead of writing a poem of hatred against England, he should have written a poem of love for Germany. In the years following World War I, Germany, the country he so loved, rejected him as a Jew and accused him of “fanatical hatred” that was “utterly un-German” and “characteristic of nothing so much as the Jewish race.” Tragically, the hatred that inspired his poem did not end with the First World War. 

 *This and other historical information on the poem and its author can be found in the 1987 History Today article by C.C. Aronsfeld, “Ernst Lissauer and the Hymn of Hate.”

Visit Connie Ruzich's outstanding war poetry site, BEHIND THEIR LINES, here:

http://behindtheirlines.blogspot.com/

Distinctive Cap Badges of the Irish Regiments of the Great War

A Clémenceau Chronology

Material and Photos from the MUSÉE CLÉMENCEAU, Paris

28 September 1841

Born in Mouilleron en Pareds, in France’s Vendee region

1858–1865

Medical studies in Nantes and then Paris

Opposition to Napoléon III

1852–1870 Second Empire

1865–1869

Departure to the United States–Marries Mary Plummer

1865–U.S. Civil War ends

1870–1876

Mayor of Paris’s 18th district–City councilman and then President of the Paris municipal council, Paris deputy

On 18 January 1871, King William I of Prussia is proclaimed Emperor of Germany at Versailles and armistice is signed with the German invader a week later. Georges Clémenceau, mayor of Montmartre and a Paris deputy, refuses to accept the annexation of Alsace and Moselle and resigns from the National Assembly. In March 1871 he welcomes the patriotic uprising in Paris, without officially joining the Commune. Again elected deputy for Paris’s 18th district in 1876, Clémenceau breaks with Gambetta and the rest of the government shortly after the republican success in 1877, judging them too cautious in their approach to reform. He campaigns alongside Victor Hugo for amnesty for the Communards.

Reelected as deputy on a radical program in 1881, he becomes opposition leader for the extreme left and fights for his vision of a strong and united republic for all citizens. Actively opposed to colonialization, Clémenceau draws on his eloquence in parliament to bring down successive minsters, including Jules Ferry, his main adversary.

The Third Republic (1870–1940)–Paris Commune (spring 1871)

1879 

Edouard Manet paints two portraits of Clémenceau

1880

Founds La Justice newspaper

1885

Deputy for Var

Political debate with Jules Ferry on colonialization and the concept of the "inferior race"

Clémenceau the duelist also fights with words, and his tongue is as feared as his sword or pistol. His parliamentary eloquence- intense, concise, and devastating, a weapon unleashed triumphantly against successive cabinets that earns him the nickname "destroyer of ministries." Notably, Clemenceau’s violent attacks on Jules Ferry’s colonial policy that was founded on the superiority of the white race cause Ferry’s fall in 1885. His words have remained famous: "Superior races, inferior races, that’s easy to say...The Hindus an inferior race? With their great refined civilization emerged from the mists of time…The Chinese an inferior race? Their origins unknown but seemingly from the dawn of ages..."

1891

Resumes contact with Monet thanks to Gustave Geffroy

1892

Panama scandal

1893

Loses election in Var

Clémenceau dedicates himself to journalism and writing

Alfred Dreyfus is convicted

1894

Clémenceau sells Asian art collections to raise money

1895

Publishes an article on Monet’s cathedrals in 1895 in La Justice and speaks at the Goncourt banquet

1896

Moves to rue Franklin

1898

"J’accuse" is published in l’Aurore

Clémenceau is a central player from 1897 onward in the rehabilitation of Captain Dreyfus, who had been unjustly convicted by a military tribunal for spying. Alongside Jean Jaurès and other writers and intellectuals, he fights tirelessly to overturn the judgement. In January 1898, he gives the famous title of "J’accuse" to Emile Zola’s decisive l’Aurore diatribe against the Army General Staff. Clémenceau would produce no less than 665 articles in various publications until truth and justice prevails. In 1908 and just a few years after Zola’s death, Clémenceau as head of the government arranges for Zola’s ashes to be moved to the Pantheon.

1901

Clémenceau’s play, The Veil of Happiness, is staged at Théâtre de la Renaissance

1906–1909

Elected senator for Var in 1902, Clémenceau becomes interior minister and president of the Council

Clémenceau is chosen by President Armand Fallières to form a new government and he succeeds Sarrien in October 1906.

Miners’ strike–Wine workers protest in the south

1911

Auguste Rodin works on a bust of Clémenceau

1913

Founds newspaper l’Homme Libre (The Free Man), which becomes L’Homme Enchaîné (The Chained Man) in 1914

1914

2 August—World War I begins

Numerous visits to the front

1917–1920

Minister of War and president of the Council–Rents house at Bélébat

In November 1917, at the height of France’s national distress, President Raymond Poincaré calls on Clémenceau to form the government. Serving both as president of the Council and Minister of War until his withdrawal in early 1920, Clémenceau exhibits an iron will and undisputed authority. He imposes the union of Allied forces under the sole command of Ferdinand Foch, announces the armistice in the National Assembly on 11 November 1918 and is the main French architect of the Treaty of Versailles negotiated with British prime minister Lloyd George and the American president Woodrow Wilson. Clémenceau would later write about this period in his posthumous work, Grandeur and Misery of Victory.

1919

Armistice, Treaty of Versailles (1919)

1920–1922

Travels in Asia as far as Indonesia and lecture tour in the United States

Versailles Treaty application problems

Near the End

1923–1929

Final works

Meets Marguerite Baldensperger, his last love, and writes Démosthène at her request.

1927

Inaugurates the "Water Lilies" installation at l’Orangerie a few months after Claude Monet’s death

Late in life, his longstanding friendship deepens with Claude Monet. Clémenceau is an untiring supporter and encourages Monet’s "Water Lilies" donation and installation at the l’Orangerie museum. "When the water garden lilies transport us from the liquid plain to the travelling clouds of infinite space, we leave the earth and its sky to experience fully the supreme harmony of thing."

24 November 1929—Georges Clémenceau dies at rue Franklin

Source:  The Musée Clémenceau Website

Best Unknown General of the War?

General von Bothmer on Right in 1916

One candidate for this honor would certainly be Generaloberst Felix Graf von Bothmer (1852–1937). He was a veteran of the Franco-Prussian war who had served for 40 years with the Bavarian Army before the Great War broke out. Inactive after 1910, von Bothmer was recalled to service when war was declared but did not serve actively until December 1914 due to a leg injury. After a brief tour in Flanders, he was shifted to the Eastern Front where he seems to have defeated numerically superior Russian forces whenever he encountered them. 

His successes included the defense of the Carpathian passes, actions along the Dniester and Gnila-Lipa Rivers, and victories in his zone of responsibility during both the Brusilov and Kerensky offensives. He was awarded the Pour le Mérite for his victories in 1917. At the end of the war he was charged with organizing the defenses of Bavaria against an Allied invasion. He retired soon after the Armistice. Later,  although an anti-Nazi, he was given a state funeral by the German government in 1937 contrary to the family's wishes.

The Thomas-Morse Scout

The Thomas-Morse Scout became the favorite single-seat training airplane for U.S. pilots during World War I. The Scout first appeared with an order for 100 S4Bs in the summer of 1917. The U.S. Army Air Service later purchased nearly 500 of a slightly modified version, the S4C. Dubbed the "Tommy" by its pilots, the plane had a long and varied career.

Tommies flew at practically every pursuit flying school in the United States during 1918. After the war ended, the Air Service sold them as surplus to civilian flying schools, sportsman pilots, and ex-Army fliers. Some were still being used in the mid-1930s for WWI aviation movies filmed in Hollywood.

It was designed by Benjamin Douglas Thomas (no relation to the company owners), who also assisted with the design of the Curtiss JN-4 Jenny. The Scout was a trim little single-seat, biplane that was originally powered by a 100 hp Gnome Monosoupape 9-B rotary engine, but beginning with the 52d aircraft, the engine was replaced with the more reliable 80 hp (60 kW) Le Rhône C-9. The first flight was in June 1917 and it attained a speed of 95 mph (153 km/h). The first order was for six prototypes, with 100 improved S-4Bs ordered on 3 October 1917 and an additional 25 aircraft ordered for Britain. 

US Navy S-5 Seaplane

It could be easily converted into a seaplane and was given the US Navy designation S-5. It was identical to the S-4B, but the top speed was reduced to 90 mph (145 km/h).  It was tested at the Naval Air Station at Diner Key, off Miami, Florida, and six S-5s with floats were ordered for the U.S. Navy.

On 18 January 1918 the U.S. War Department placed an order for 400 improved S-4C models. Instead of using cables for the ailerons, the C model used a torque tube system, the ailerons and elevators were reduced in area, and provisions were made for a .30 caliber Marlin machine gun, synchronized to fire through the propeller, although not all aircraft were delivered that way. A total of 447 S-4Cs were built.

Sources:  USAF National Museum, Aviation-history.com, Wikipedia

Tomlinson Prize 2017 Co-Winner: Pershing's Crusaders: The American Soldier in World War I

The World War One Historical Association (WW1HA) annual Norman B. Tomlinson, Jr., prize for 2017 for the best work of history in English on World War One has been awarded to two exceptional historians: Robert Gerwarth for his The Vanquished: Why the First World War Failed to End (Farrar, Straus & Giroux); and Richard Faulkner for Pershing's Crusaders: The American Soldier in World War I (University Press of Kansas). Last week we presented our review of Mr.Gerwarth's The Vanquished.  Today we are publishing our review of Pershing's Crusaders, first presented in ROADS TO THE GREAT WAR on 15 August 2017.

Pershing's Crusaders: The American Soldier in World War I

by Richard S. Faulkner

University Press of Kansas, 2017

If you want to know almost everything there is to know about the varied backgrounds, feelings, and experiences of the men who were drafted and served in the American Expeditionary Force from 1917 to 1919, then this is the book for you. Richard Faulkner has produced a nearly 800-page volume, with copious notes and detailed index, that is virtually encyclopedic in scope. Thus the 24 chapters of Pershing's Crusaders take us in detailed yet readable narrative from the earliest days of recruitment to final homecomings. After finishing the book I had to agree that the author has done exactly what he set out to do, namely "present a more holistic and detailed exploration of the many facets of the doughboys' lives and attitudes than has been given in previous accounts" (p. 5).

Not surprisingly, a recurrent theme throughout is the extent to which the military and the country were unprepared to fight in a world war. The situation necessitated an explosion of haste, often with unfortunate results. Although not everyone was enthusiastic about the war, millions of men eagerly reported to draft boards and were processed to training camps that were being rapidly constructed. It was impossible to organize these men and train them all without some pitfalls. Medical exams were cursory and resulted sometimes in passing unfit recruits for training. The most startling example given by Faulkner is of the recruit who was sent on to training camp where he was found to have only one hand. As in Britain in 1914, many recruits trained in their own clothes, uniforms being in initial short supply. Training was often, as the author puts it, "wildly uneven and woefully incomplete" (p. 326). Sometimes this resulted in green young soldiers finding themselves at the front without having fired their rifles, let alone being prepared for the smells, sounds, and sights of trench warfare.

From beginning to end, Faulkner provides statistics on every aspect of the war, the fruit of his having combed through thousands of letters, memoirs, documents, and reports of the American Expeditionary Forces. For example, the recruiting process garnered a great deal of information about America's youth: the weight of the average inductee was 141.54 pounds, his chest measured about 34.7 inches, and his average height ran around 67.5 inches. (Texans were on average an inch taller than the rest.) We find out how many of these soldiers and sailors were drowned on their way to Europe and how many were never to return.

Doughboy experience, from fighting to drinking to venereal disease to relationships with chaplains and the British and French soldiers, all is covered with intriguing statistics in this book. It's interesting to find that the Doughboys had little respect for their French or British comrades (excepting the Scots) but liked the ANZACS and Canadians. On the other hand, the British Tommy tended to "look with contempt on the striplings who had come in to win the war" (p. 291), and the French could be quite impatient with the newcomers—"One Frenchman told his American charges that their failure to grasp trigonometry left him dumbfounded that they held commissions in artillery" (p.287).

By the time I finished this book I felt there was little left to know about the various experiences of the American soldiers in the Great War. This includes their interactions with YMCA, Knights of Columbus, and other civilian volunteer groups plus the impressive array of educational opportunities offered to our soldiers in France. Faulkner also provides the sad details of racism, wounds, death, mutilation—including the legend of a "basket case"—and the impact of the influenza epidemic on the army. And true to his statistical style, the author reminds us that 4,452 members of the AEF are still missing today (p. 598).

Additionally, many soldiers (although not all of them) suffered keen disappointment at getting to France but never coming close to combat. Some 546,000 troops were assigned to non-combat duties with the Services of Supply and another 173,008 worked in other noncombatant jobs behind the lines (p. 351). Moreover, about "half of the soldiers mobilized for the war, some two million men, never made it closer to France than Camp Upton, New York" (p. 606). Nevertheless, in one way or another WWI inevitably changed millions of Americans. As one West Virginia Doughboy admitted on his return home, "I am out of the army, but I have a feeling it will be a long time before the army is out of me" (p. 633). This book is not only a fascinating read but also a seminal volume to keep as a reference and a reminder of how things were for Pershing's Doughboys.

David F. Beer


A full listing of the past Tomlinson Prize winners can be found here:

https://ww1ha.org/lens-bookshelf/the-tomlinson-book-prize/

Western Front: May 2018

In May,  I led a 10-day tour of the Western Front.  Our theme combined the Ludendorff Offensives with the British 100 Days, so we were all over the place.  Here are 10 photos by our lead photographer David Gaddis.  This is what it looks like 100 years after fact.

We were one of the first groups to visit Mark IV Tank Deborah's
new museum at Flesquieres 

Plateau Californie on the Chemin des Dames — Launch point for
Germany's May BLÜCHER Offensive

British Memorial, Soissons

A War Horse at Flanders Field Museum

Your Editor at Moreuil Wood,
 Where Lt. Gordon Flowerdew of the Canadian Cavalry Earned the VC

Australian Memorial,  Villers-Bretonneux
The group found the new Monash Centre (positioned behind the tower) somewhat disappointing—very techie and the accessing needs improvement. However, some of the displays were exciting and spectacular.

58th Division Memorial, Chipilly.  U.S. units participated in this action.

The Group at the Famous Pillbox on Hill 60, Ypres

A Bunker Atop Mt. Kemmel, South of Ypres

On 8 May, everywhere we stopped there were commemorations of VE Day. 
This one was in Péronne.

Recommended: World War I Commemorative Brochures from the U.S. Army Center for Military History

The Army has released four volumes in their new series of WWI brochures that will eventually cover the entire war.  Here's one of the covers. The works are very informative and well illustrated, using Signal Corps photos and official U.S. Army artwork from the war. They  can be downloaded as PDF documents from the address below.  Currently available are the works covering up through Cantigny and operations around Château-Thierry.

https://history.army.mil/html/bookshelves/collect/wwi-cb.html

Remembering a Veteran, Ensign Logan C. Ramsey, USN

Ramsey During
World War II

Fresh out of Annapolis, newly commissioned Ensign Logan C. Ramsey, USN, served in WWI on the battleship USS Texas, part of the American squadron assigned to the Grand Fleet.  Ramsey and his crewmates were present at the surrender of the High Seas Fleet on 21 November 1918. Today, the Texas is the last surviving dreadnought of the Great War. 

Young Ensign Ramsey, himself, had a future date with history. As a duty officer on 7 December 1941 Lt. Commander Ramsey would be the author of on one of the most famous war messages in American history—"Air raid Pearl Harbor, this is no drill." He retired from the Navy as a rear admiral in 1949 after commanding an escort carrier and holding high staff positions in WWII.

Photo: National Naval Museum, Pensacola Florida

The Consequences of Mobilizing Germany's Youth for War

Commentary by Bryan Ganaway from a review of Youth in the Fatherless Land: War Pedagogy, Nationalism, and Authority in Germany, 1914–1918. By Andrew Donson, 2010

Before 1914 Imperial Germany used education to regulate and control children to a greater degree than France, England, and the United States. This included nearly fifty thousand officials whose sole job was to mobilize patriotic youth via extracurricular activities. However, plenty of teachers wanted to reform the regimented curriculum in an effort to cultivate critical thinkers rather than manufacture chauvinists.

When war began in 1914, the government worked hard to remake the curriculum and institute "war pedagogy" to mobilize children behind the state. This included a document by Theobald Ziegler entitled "Ten Commandments of War Pedagogy." Commandment seven reads as follows: "Thou shalt speak of battles in history class and be happy" (p. 244). In the short run, the new curriculum succeeded in mobilizing youth across diverse segments of society (male and female, middle-class and working-class, Protestant and Catholic, German and non-German) behind the monarchy. Over the long run, however, [End Page 164] war pedagogy functioned in quite a different way. Implemented by progressive teachers who saw it as a way to finally enact their reform program, it provided a framework for free essay writing, critical discussion in class, and individualized reading programs. In other words, the instructors told children to support the war, but also to think about it regularly.

There is no doubt that the government worked hard to mobilize youth in school and via massive, state-sponsored volunteer programs. Popular juvenile war literature and movies also supported these initiatives. By 1916, however, the dreadful mismanagement of the home front by the military led to severe shortages of food, coal, and clothing that completely undermined "war pedagogy" and caused at least some youth to question their teachers and the state. Over one million urban children had to be taken out of school and sent to farms so they could eat. Many of their teachers (not to mention their fathers) had long since been conscripted, and this weakened both the schools and the family as institutions designed to maintain order. The result was an increase in independence for many youth. From the perspective of parents this led to a rise in impertinence, sexual experimentation, and crime. Starving urban teachers lost enthusiasm for "war pedagogy," and the most mobilized youth drifted to the right or left fringes of the political spectrum in search of an alternative to the government in Berlin.

"When the soldiers go marching through the town"

For all its undoubted military success, the regime in Berlin criminally mismanaged the home front, and this thwarted its efforts to indoctrinate youth. As the war situation worsened, youth slowly moved away from the government (both on the left and on the right), showing the limits of state authority even in time of war. The author reminds us that many of the early Nazis were from the birth cohort of 1900–1908. Similarly, some of the most die-hard Communists reached political consciousness in Social Democratic youth organizations during the war. 

Photos: Europeanan Blog

General Jack Pershing: War Booster Rooster

During World War I, auctions were held across Iowa to raise money for the Red Cross Nursing Corps. Mark Dunkerson of Fontanelle had nothing to offer except a spare rooster, and the farmer who bought him decided that he was too mean to take home. The other bidders found that hilarious, and the rooster was auctioned again and again, each time being returned to the auctioneer.

A Pre-Stuffed General Jack Pershing and
Auctioneer D. R. "Casey" Jones

By the end of the war "General Jack Pershing" (named in honor of America's top general) had crisscrossed the state and raised $40,000, and was allowed to live out his retirement unmolested. He was eventually stuffed and put on display in the Iowa State Historical Museum at 600 E. Locust St., Des Moines. His success inspired the more elaborate exploits of King Neptune the Pig in World War II.

In 2001, Jack Pershing was again put up for auction, this time to raise money for the Red Cross September 11th Disaster Relief Fund. His stuffed carcass brought in over $1,800, and was then returned to its glass case, more loved by Iowa than ever.

From: Roadsideamerica.com

The Captain of the Emden Reflects on the German Naval Disasters of 1914

Crew of SMS Emden Abandoning Their Beached Ship

Captain Karl von Müller of the Cruiser SMS Emden, was taken prisoner after his ship was defeated and by the Australian cruiser HMAS Sydney and subsequently beached in the Battle of Cocos, 9 November 1914.  A prisoner of war for the duration, he wrote this letter to his parents sometime in the late stages of the struggle. His father was a retired colonel in the Prussian Army.

Captain Karl von Müller

"And so, dearest mother and father, I near the end of my story. Only Dresden got away from the carnage off the Falklands. This lone ship of our proud East Asiatic Squadron remained afloat. But Admiral Sturdee's avengers eventually caught up with her too, sending her down to join Scharnhorst, Gneisenau, Nürnberg, and Leipzig at the bottom of the ocean. Of ships' companies of 2,800 officers and men that had sailed from Valparaiso into history in November 1914, less than 500 lived to tell their tales. Most of these were from Dresden. The large part of her crew was able to abandon ship and thus avoid a cruel death at sea.

The same could not be said for SMS Karlsruhe, whose magazines exploded mysteriously in Barbados. She met her end five days before we did—if Graf Spee had made it to the Caribbean he would have searched for her in vain.

And what of those of us who had sailed west into the Indian Ocean? Most men of the Emden never saw home again either. Mücke and Lauterbach were among the lucky ones, but they made their own luck. My first officer and fifty men of the landing party on Cocos Island commandeered a schooner and, after many harrowing adventures in the Indian Ocean, made landfall in Arabia. From there they went to Istanbul, and eventually back to the Fatherland. Lauterbach and the crew of our collier Exford were captured by the British and imprisoned in Singapore with the crew of our first collier, Markomannia, and those aboard Pontoporos. The big man led a daring prison break, however, and, like Mücke, returned home.

Most of my crew was not so fortunate. The Battle of the Cocos Islands killed or wounded 208 men. Only 117 of us were uninjured when the British brought us to our POW cells on Malta. We all suffered terribly from the guilt that the survivors of wars always feel.

Admiral Graf von Spee

Yes, our war was tragic, but after it ended for me, Graf Spee and his sons, and 2,500 sailors from the squadron who did not survive, things got worse, much worse—it is with good reason that they are calling it the 'Great War.' More than ten million soldiers will die before it is all over. Prisoners have not been taken. Unthinkable atrocities have been committed against civilians: hostages have been shot, innocents hung as assassins or spies, passenger liners sunk without warning, and whole peoples uprooted and driven mercilessly to their deaths—Jews, Poles, Greeks, and Armenians. And, as you know better than I, hundreds of thousands are dying of starvation and disease in Germany and Austria-Hungary during these years of Great Britain's merciless hunger blockade. There is no honor in this war. I am ashamed for humanity.

My parents, I fear for our times. The Great War has cut down the Russian monarchy, and it will fell both of our allied empires too. Later they may be reestablished and united, but it will surely happen under the evil banner of nationalistic fanatics who will trigger another great war that will scourge Europe and the world and inflict far higher human cost. And when that second great world war comes to an end the terrible weapons it will surely spawn—weapons much worse than our already terrible killing machines—will certainly grip the entire world in fear. And what if terrorists like those that killed Archduke Ferdinand in 1914 acquire these weapons of truly mass destruction? There will never be peace in our time. Alas, we played our role in starting all of this in 1914—we were so naïve and unexpecting. But all of us in every country opened this terrorizing Pandora's Box. All of this happened under the teary eyes of God."

Will we, his children, ever learn?

Co-Winner of the 2017 Tomlinson Prize: The Vanquished: Why the First World War Failed to End

The World War One Historical Association (WW1HA) annual Norman B. Tomlinson, Jr., prize for 2017 for the best work of history in English on World War One has been awarded to two exceptional historians: Robert Gerwarth for his The Vanquished: Why the First World War Failed to End (Farrar, Straus & Giroux); and Richard Faulkner for Pershing's Crusaders: The American Soldier in World War I (University Press of Kansas). This week we present our review of The Vanquished, first presented in ROADS TO THE GREAT WAR on 8 August 2017.  Next week we will present our review of Mr. Faulkner's award-winning volume.

The Vanquished: Why the First World War Failed to End

by Robert Gerwarth

Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2016

On 11 November 1918, at precisely 11:00 a.m., all of the guns on the Western Front fell silent. For the first time in four years of horrific war, every cannon, rifle, machine gun ceased, according to the provisions of a just-signed armistice. Apparently, soldiers experienced the sudden silence as something like the onset of divine mercy. Men wept openly, overcome by the quiet and shattering arrival of peace.

Paris, 11 November 1918—Not the End

Many people take this astonishing moment as the end of World War I, with some good reason. Hostilities did end in France. Soon after a semblance of liberal democracy began to spread, abetted by American president Wilson's idealism. Yet Robert Gerwath's The Vanquished shows that the war did not end on that date. In fact, several wars continued, and several others sprang into terrible life, wrecking havoc largely among the many peoples whose nations lost in the war. World War I did not so much end as fall apart, stagger along, and mutate. For those living in Riga, Kiev, Smyrna, or many other places in eastern, central, and southeastern Europe in 1919, there was no peace, only continuous violence (4).

More than 4 million people died of violence right after WWI, in revolts, civil wars, invasions, and coups (7). So much for "peace."

This isn't a question of pedantic detail. Instead, paying attention to what happened alongside and right after the Armistice of Compiègne honors the enormous struggles that also occurred, while shedding light on subsequent events, including the rise of fascism and WWII.

This is rich and complex history, so I'll summarize all too quickly.

In eastern Europe, the Russian revolutions of 1917 (the fall of the tsar, the Bolshevik revolt, the construction of a Soviet state) gave way to a spectacular civil war, which included a war with Poland, an attempted invasion of Germany, and invasion by multiple other nations (including the United States, Britain, France, and Japan), only ending in 1922. Newly independent Baltic states experienced revolts and invasions, like the Latvian War for Independence (1918–1920). Newly independent Finland fought an intense civil war in 1918, killing 1 percent of its population. (As a visitor to that country, I can testify that that war's impact is still a living thing in the 21st century.) Bulgarians revolted against their state, which led to a reign of terror against its putative supporters. Hungary had a Soviet-style state in 1918, which was overwhelmed by its neighbors in still more fighting.

Soldiers from the defeated German empire formed independent groups (Freikorps) to fight in these wars, and also at home, since Germany itself went through at least one revolution, plus a series of revolts and attempted coups. For instance, left-wingers created a Bavarian Soviet Republic in 1918, which lasted until demolished by Freikorps and others in 1919.

Farther east, European powers dismantled the Ottoman Empire, which led to a bitter war primarily between Greece and newly formed Turkey, along with newly formed Armenia and victorious France

Western Europe fared better than the aforementioned central and eastern Europe, but still endured further strife. Spain underwent "three Bolshevik years" of revolts and instability, culminating in a dictatorship. Ireland fought for independence from Britain, then lunged into civil war. Across the Atlantic the United States spasmed into a Red Scare, with multiple civil liberty violations and acts of violence.

Another victor, Italy, experienced postwar unrest which grew into "what seemed increasingly like an open civil war...About 3,000 people were killed in Italy between 1919 and 1922" (161). What ended that was Mussolini's March on Rome and the birth of the first fascist state in 1922.

In fact, Gerwarth argues, WWI only ended in 1923, giving way to a far too brief period of peace broken up once more in 1939 (16, 248).

What drove all of this horror and chaos? To begin with, nationalism continued to chew up European borders, as relatively recent nationalist feelings ran up against older delineations of empire. WWI's victors, while containing national republics of various sorts, were also intercontinental empires, and fought to balance these contradictions. Moreover, the successful Soviet revolution of 1917 inspired workers' uprisings around the world, along with anticommunist movements; this is, after all, the start of the longest struggle of the 20th century, the Cold War.

Furthermore, the victors were a mess. The Vanquished shreds the reputation of the Treaty of Versailles or, more to the point, the character of its signatories, who managed the epic hypocrisy of mouthing slogans of national self-determination while engaging in historical land grabs and meting out harsh, eventually self-defeating terms to the defeated Central Powers. That much is well known. Gerwarth goes further, showing that the Versailles leaders added incompetence to hypocrisy, gradually losing control of the European area situation. Violence and sharp politics on the ground undid the victors' achievements and plans repeatedly. Wilson's dream of spreading democracy actually backfired, with dictatorships on the rise, not retreat, by the mid-1920s (245).

Versailles, 28 June 1919—Not the End

Along the way terrible precedents were set, and old ones renewed. WWI began with strong efforts to avoid killing civilians (Entente/Allied propaganda would overstate German atrocities), but the post-1918 conflicts blurred the civilian-soldier boundary thoroughly. Irregular forces of many kinds would take to the streets, setting up a matrix for fascism's rise. And ethnic cleansing became a serious policy tool, especially with the Greek-Turkish population exchange of 2 million people across the Aegean.

There are many good things to approve of in this book. Gerwarth writes clearly and at times with passion, nicely organizing a great deal of complexity into clarity. He relies on a rich range of sources. At a smaller level, I was pleased to see Gerwarth accurately refer to the Sykes-Picot agreement as Sykes-Picot-Sazonov (57).

There are some weaknesses, however. The biggest is neglecting the Spanish influenza, which ravaged the world at precisely this time, and killed a mind-boggling 50 million or so people. On the political side, I wanted to learn more about colonial lands as they took up nationalism against victorious empires, from India to Vietnam. And, with Richard Fulton, I also wanted more on the post-Ottoman Middle East.

These, I confess, are complaints of greed based on a book that does so much so well. Strongly recommended.

Bryan Alexander 

A full listing of the past Tomlinson prize winners can be found here:
https://ww1ha.org/lens-bookshelf/the-tomlinson-book-prize/

Ludendorff: Foch's Opponent in 1918

As He Seemed to Famed Correspondent Hamilton Fyfe at War's End

Ludendorff's "Gamble" in the West

Erich von Ludendorff

Ludendorff was a "Westerner." He declared the war must be won or lost in France and Flanders. The Westerners had their way and failed at Verdun, also giving Brusilov the chance to pull off a successful offensive against the Austrians. That summer a German officer was sent to Bukarest to offer the Rumanians inducements to throw in their lot with the Central Powers. He told his intimates that it had been decided to try no more in the west. "Neither side can break through there," he said, and it was known that he was repeating Hindenburg's view.

But after Russia had been put out of the war the hopes of Ludendorff and his faction revived. Now, they said, we are in a different position. We have no longer to meet attacks from the east. We can concentrate all our strength on the Western front and nothing can stop us. So the March offensive was prepared, Hindenburg looking on doubtfully, Ludendorff assuring everybody that he was about to bring the war to an end with "a German peace."

It was in September, 1916, that he had taken over the duties of First Quartermaster- General, under Hindenburg, installed as Chief of Staff, to the puppet Emperor — "puppet" I mean so far as his title of Commander-in-Chief was concerned. He had quickly made his heavy hand felt. It was he who had at first declared unrestricted U-boat warfare inadvisable ; it was he who later gave the word for it to begin. Nothing was done without consulting him. In the popular mind he ranked as Hindenburg's equal, and by degrees the legend grew that it was really Ludendorff and not Hindenburg who was "the man behind the throne."

Such was his great position in the spring of this year when he and his seven assistants laid the plans for the attack upon the British Fourth and Fifth Armies. At first the result seemed to justify his confidence. He was a gambler who had staked everything upon one throw, and it looked as if he had won. But from the early days of the vast struggle Ludendorff felt that things had not gone too well for him. I could read in his Army Orders, which I used to see in France, an anxiety, a striving to do better, an impatience against officers who did not spare their men sufficiently and men who failed to hold positions long enough.

"According to Plan"

He must have been feeling pretty hopeless during June, after his advance had come to a standstill, but he was to have a Field-Marshal's baton all the same. The Emperor went to Headquarters in July with the baton in his trunk, but before he had time to present it Foch struck his blow at the unguarded German right flank. That was the beginning of the end of Ludendorff's greatness. He put a bold face on, assured interviewers that all would be well, told the German public in his official despatches that all the retirements were "according to plan." The phrase became a joke in Germany. 

When he replied to the appeal for help sent by the Burgomaster of Vienna, the note of despair sounded in his tone. "Germany cannot do more than she has done," he telegraphed. In September he began to break down. He could not sleep. He began to hint at retirement. But so long as there was any chance of the German Army recovering he was kept in his command. Only when peace was demanded with menaces and the old order in Germany had come down with a run did the unhappy Ludendorff get his orders to go.

After the first week of the Battle of St. Quentin [Michael] he said : "A great battle has been fought and a victory has been gained. Nobody however, can foresee what will be the result of it." Even with his capacity for taking "a long-range view of every contingency," as a German newspaper once put it, he can hardly have foreseen that the result would be his dismissal and disgrace.

Source: The War Illustrated, "Men and Cities of the War: General Ludendorff," 9 November 1918