Why Japan Was Involved in World War One?

 

Imperial Japanese Naval officers Stationed
in the Mediterranean

In August 2018, Theo Mayer of the staff for the World War One Centennial Commission conducted the following interview with Professor Frederick Dickson of the University of Pennsylvania.

TM:  Now those who've never been exposed to what happened in the far east during World War I are often surprised by the fact that Japan declared war almost as soon as hostilities broke out in 1914, years before America entered the fray, and many of those same people are also surprised to learn that Japan fought on the side of the Allies. And, those who know just a little about Japan in World War I tend to hold some preconceptions about Japan, and Japan in World War I, including the accepted Western concept that Japan was an isolated nation, and stalked away from the Versailles Treaty, having been seriously insulted by the non-acceptance of their proposal for racial equality for the League Of Nations. Now, I'm one of those people, so it was really great to have some of my ideas realigned by our next guest, Dr. Frederick Dickinson, Professor of Japanese History at the University of Pennsylvania. Dr. Dickinson didn't just study Japan; he was born in Tokyo and raised in Kanazawa and Kyoto. He's written a series of books including War and National Reinvention: Japan and the Great War, 1914-1919. Dr. Dickinson, thank you for joining us.

Dr. Dickinson:  Sure, thanks Theo, thanks for having me. Delighted to talk about Japan, delighted to have an audience for Japan.

TM:  Okay, let's start with the isolation issue.

Dr. Dickinson:  I would say number one, that Japan was never isolated, but we have this impression because Japan was very adept at essentially controlling its own foreign policy up through the Early Modern Period. Had a little bit of issue in the mid-19th century, obviously, when Commodore Perry came along, and it turned out that the Americans were going to sort of decide the terms of trade and negotiation, but the Japanese are first defeating the Chinese in war in 1895. They're also a very important part of the international coalition to suppress the Boxer Rebellion in China in 1900. In the late 19th century, it's the Age of Empire, so there are a few things you have to do in order to be taken seriously on the international stage. You have to create a modern state, and you have to create a modern empire. In order to do both of those things, you have to create a modern navy and a modern army. Essentially, Japan is doing that. The Japanese, already by 1885 are looking to Korea as the principal target of their potential empire building enterprise, and that very much begins with the Sino-Japanese War, and just continues. So, Japan is very much on the radar screen, and this is the main reason for the Anglo-Japanese alliance of 1902. The British recognize, number one, that Russia is a problem, and they recognize, number two, that the Japanese are the ones to help deal with the Russians.

TM:  World War I breaks out, and within months Japan invades the Tsingtao region of China, presumably because it was held by Germans at the time. Is that true?

Dr. Dickinson:  Definitely, but even more important than the within months idea, is that the Japanese are declaring war on Germany, August 23rd of 1914. This is quite remarkable. I mean obviously it's after the British, after the French, but it's before the Americans, it's before the Italians, it's before the Ottoman Empire gets involved in this war. They're very much out there, at the beginning of the war. And, yes, you have to ask yourself, well, what's going on? Essentially, it's the Anglo-Japanese alliance, and in particular it has to do with the one man who was basically in charge, in August of 1914, and he was the one who made almost single-handedly the decision to go to war against Germany. That was Katō Takaaki. He was the foreign minister at the time.

Click on Image to Enlarge

Depiction of the Capture of Tsingtao

TM:   So what role did Japan play during the War?

Dr. Dickinson:  Well, it's an interesting question and important one, and one that you would probably be surprised to learn, but I would say to put in a nutshell, the Japanese belligerence against the Central Powers was a deciding factor in the victory of the Allied Powers. The Germans essentially are knocked out of the war in Asia by November of 1914. And, I would simply say that had the Japanese decided instead of declaring war on Germany, to declare war on Britain and its Allies, we would be living in a very, different world right now, and that was not necessarily out of the realm of possibility.

TM:  It's a fascinating role. They also played a fairly large part in keeping the U-boat threat down in the Mediterranean.

Dr. Dickinson:   Exactly, so all kinds of supporting roles that the Japanese are playing throughout the war, in fact.

TM:  So now the war wraps up, and Japan is at the table at Versailles. How'd that go, and what role did classic American racism play in the outcome?

Dr. Dickinson:   We usually simply hear the issue of the racial non-discrimination clause that the Japanese put up, for inclusion in the Covenant of the League of Nations, but you have to remember that was a very minor issue for the Japanese. They essentially got everything they wanted except that clause and then some. And what they actually wanted was confirmation of their newfound power in China, number one, and they also got confirmation of their newfound empire. That is, they're given German Micronesia as League of Nations mandate territories, to essentially develop as part of their sort of informal empire, after 1919. So those are the two things that the Japanese were really interested in, and they got them without a problem. Plus, they got recognition of being a world power. They were one of the five victor powers that were present at the table to discuss not simply issues in Asia but [also] to discuss issues of world peace.

TM:  Okay, so moving forward again, Japan was allied with the Anglo-Franco Alliance during World War I. What happened between World War I and World War II, that caused Japan to align themselves against the Allies 25 years later?

U.S. Secretary of State Hughes Greets Japan's Delegates to the Washington Arms Conference, 1921

Dr. Dickinson: The changes from the Manchurian Incident onward. The Manchurian Incident in September of 1931. After becoming a pivotal player at the Paris Peace Conference, a pivotal player at the Washington Conference, at the Geneva Conference, and Naval Arms Reductions at the London Conference in 1930, a very important signatory to the Kellogg-Briand Pact of 1928. After that, clearly something different is going on. 

Essentially, I would say it's a problem of domestic politics in Japan. Political parties are sort of a new phenomenon in Japan until the First World War, essentially. The oligarchs had been in charge, the bureaucratic decision makers had been in charge, so the 1920s is a new era of political party management, and there are some within Japan that do not benefit politically by this arrangement, and they try as hard as they can throughout the 1920s to put Japan on a different path. They finally find a solution, a formula, and that is just to start shooting at home and abroad. So these folks are doing that in early 1930s, and this obviously ultimately changes Japan's trajectory, puts it on a path toward alliance with Germany and Italy, rather than with Britain and the United States.

TM:  Dr. Dickinson, thank you so much for providing our listeners with this great overview of a story that many people I've spoken with are actually surprised at, and really a story that's pretty much untold. Thank you for coming in.

Dr. Dickinson:   My pleasure. Thanks for having me, Theo.

Dr. Frederick Dickinson is Professor of Japanese History at the University of Pennsylvania.

Lonesome Memorial #20 The 170th and 174th French Infantry Regiments at Sommepy-Tahure

Located in the Champagne between two battlefields where American forces would become engaged in the fall of 1918, this monument was erected in memory of the soldiers of the 170th and 174th Infantry Regiments of Epinal (Vosges) who fell during that period of brutal fighting. At the base of the memorial is inscribed: 

In these places

under the fire of /enemy machine guns

the 170th and 174th Infantry Regiments from Epinal (Vosges)

captured

extremely fortified positions

and continued the fight

as far as Vouziers

Another  inscription on the monument states "200 meters north of this monument, at the head of his regiment, the 170th Infantry Regiment, Lieutenant Colonel Joseph Charlet fell gloriously on September 28, 1918." 

The monument was designed by the architect Henri Chailleux, a soldier in the 170th Infantry Regiment,  

Just behind the war memorial are the ruins of a German bunker, covered by vegetation. Near it is a sign that reads, "This German bunker halted the advance of the 170th and 174th Infantry Regiments for many hours, causing them heavy losses." 

The 170th RI saw notable service throughout the war starting in 1914 at the Battle of Mulhouse and ending with Allied victory campaign honored here. The regiment suffered 2,890 officers and enlisted men killed in the war, while earning the nickname "Swallows of Death" from their opponents. This is believed to be the inspiration for the nickname "Black Swallow of Death" of noted aviator Eugene Ballard, who served with the regiment before joining the air service. 

The 174th IR was a newer formation than the 170th, seeing its first action at Notre Dame de Lorette in 1915. It was very active during the 1918 fighting, credited with capturing the nearby Butte de Souain and village of Somme-Py. Both regiments very flanked by American forces during the late-war fighting—the 2nd and 36th Divisions at Blanc Mont to the the west and three regiments (369th, 371st, and 372nd) of the 92nd Division serving under French command of the French Fourth Army to the east.

Just west of the main monument is the grave and marker for a member of the French tank brigade, Georges Emile Estival, who died in combat on 28 September 1918. 

Directions: The monument is about 50km east of Rheims. From that departure point:

1.  Take the D931 (Marked as the  Voie de la Liberté) to Rue de Souain/D19 in Saint-Hilaire-le-Grand

2.  Follow D19 east to Souain-Perthes-les-Hurlus

3.  Turn north on D977 past Navarin Farm on left (worth a stop) to D977/D20 crossroads

4.  Turn right on D20

5.  The memorial will be on your right after 2km

Note:  This route will bring you past many important WWI sites. I recommend you include a visit to the 170/174th  regiment's memorial in a full day of exploring the battlefields of the Champagne.

Sources: Guerre1914-1918.FR; American Armies and Battlefields in Europe

Ypres #2 Tourism Happening: The Festival of the Cats

 

I've been to Ypres many times over the years, but on my May 2015 visit I was surprised to be greeted with an onslaught of cats. Not real cats, mind you,  but on that trip, I observed countless people walking around the beautiful medieval town in stylish cat outfits,  all sorts of feline objets d'art being peddled and kitten-themed posters plastered everywhere advertising a forthcoming event titled "Kattenstoet" that somehow involved a Rose Bowl/Thanksgiving Day-style parade with floats, balloons, bands, and marching groups.  

Well, sadly, I missed the parade, being kept busy leading a group around Ypres's #1 tourist attraction—the surrounding World War One battlefields combined with the nightly Last Post ceremony.  I was, however, enthused by all the catnip in the air, and I resolved to plan a future tour to correspond with the next Kattenstoet and include an itinerary allocating sufficient time for attendance at the big parade. However as 2018 approached (did I mention the festival is a triennial event?) my planning got steered by the centennial events for the Great War's conclusion and I wasn't able to schedule a tour in May. That was my last year of traveling to Europe, so I guess I'll never experience  Kattenstoet in person.

Yet,  I'm still a reporter and still have the readers of Roads to the Great War to report to. So,  here's some background on the Ypres Cat Festival borrowed from the New York Times and elaborated on by me.

In the Middle Ages, when Ypres main industry was textiles, they used cats to keep their wool warehouses free of mice and other vermin. When the felines began reproducing too quickly (and probably pooping on and clawing apart the fabrics), town officials developed a ghastly  an imaginative  solution. During the second week of Lent, on a re-designated “Cat Wednesday,” surplus  especially naughty  cats were tossed to their deaths from atop the Cloth Hall tower onto the town square below. At the time, the animals were seen as symbols of witchcraft and evil, so their sacrificial deaths were celebrated.  Apparently, a joyous time was had by all at these mass executions, except by the kitties, of course.

The last live cat was reportedly thrown in 1817, but Ypres civic leaders reinvented Kattenstoet in 1937 as a tradition to atone for the city’s gruesome anti-feline history, curry favor with the international alliance of cat lovers, and increase tourism revenues for the locals.  On all these goals, they've succeeded admirably—just look at the crowds in the photos above.

The humdinger of a parade, now held on the second Sunday in May, is filled with elaborate floats, musicians, costumed performers, and some just indescribable stuff. [See previous photo.] Given its origins, the modern version is surprisingly and overwhelmingly cat friendly, with mice and rats now playing the designated villains. Nevertheless, in admirable fidelity to its origins, at the grand conclusion, a person dressed as a jester tosses simulated, non-organic cats from the belfry of the Cloth Hall down to the street before the thousands of onlookers who, in the YouTube video I watched, cheer enthusiastically. [Somewhere in the proceedings—surely—some official announcement must be made to the effect, "No living cats were murdered during this event."]  There is also a ritual witch burning as part of the festival, but I've been unable to determine whether that is merely symbolic or actual. 

In any case,  should you be in the vicinity of Ypres, Belgium, on 8-9 May 2027, I'd recommend dropping by for the next Kattenstoet. 

From your editor, MH

When News of the Assassination Reached Vienna

The Emperor and Archduke at a 1913 Ceremony

Manfried Rauchensteiner

28 June 1914 was a Sunday. Time and again, attempts have been made to capture the mood of that day far away from Sarajevo, and particularly in Vienna. It was a sleepy Sunday, but in contrast to today, when only a few people in positions of influence are likely to be found in Vienna on their day of rest, in 1914, there was a large number in the city—politicians, officials and members of the military alike. Only the Emperor and his household had already left for the royal holiday residence in Bad Ischl. On top of this, the following day, June was a public holiday, offering the prospect of two days of early summer relaxation. However, shortly after midday, the peace was suddenly broken. Telegrams and telephone calls buzzed across the Monarchy. In fact, it was astonishing how quickly news of the murder of the heir to the throne and his wife was disseminated, reaching one person here and another there. Nobody was left unmoved. Shock, helplessness, anger and verbal aggression were expressed. Joyous reactions were also reported. Count Ottokar Czernin, the envoy in Bucharest at the time who would later become Foreign Minister, noted in his memoirs that in Vienna and Budapest, expressions of joy outweighed those of sorrow. 

Josef Redlich whose diary is one of the most important sources for this period, since it has the advantage of being authentic rather than having been written  subsequently, noted the oft quoted words  : ‘In the city [Vienna], there is no  atmosphere of mourning  ; in the Prater and out here where we are in Grinzing, there has been music playing everywhere on both days [i.e. 28 and 29 June].’  Joy was also reported in Hungary. And why should individuals here or there not have experienced a pleasant shock on hearing the news  ? The heir to the throne had certainly not only made friends. Quite the opposite  ! Hans Schlitter, the Director of the State Archives, who had been very close to the Archduke, noted in his diary  : ‘When one looks back at the catastrophe with a philosophical calm, one could conclude that as a result of the satanic act, Austria has been saved from greater catastrophes and that a difficult problem has been resolved at a stroke. But this can never be proven.’  

The diplomat Emerich Csáky, who at that time was posted in Bucharest, made a simple assessment  : Franz Ferdinand may have had ‘supporters, although they were very limited in number, but friends he had none. Instead, his enemies were all the greater in number  ; in Hungary, he was literally hated.’  For this reason, no attempt was made in Hungary to hide the fact that the murder triggered a sense of relief. The aristocracy went one step further, arranging the requiem for Franz Ferdinand on the very same day as the grand wedding celebrations by members of the Szápáry and Esterházy families. No member of the upper aristocracy and top echelons of society wanted to miss the opportunity to attend the wedding, unless there was an express reason for staying away.  

Ultimately, the tables were turned, and the Viennese court was subjected to a barrage of criticism for rendering it impossible for the Hungarian nobility to pay its last respects to Franz Ferdinand. A lengthier interpellation on the matter was even made by Count Gyula Andrassy in the Hungarian Reichstag (Imperial Diet), demanding clarification from Prime Minister Tisza regarding the events leading to the assassination and its immediate consequences. Crocodile tears were shed.

The Archduke at Military Maneuvers the Day Before His Death

Rumours began to spread, soon catching up with verified information  : the assassin was the son of Crown Prince Rudolf, who had killed Franz Ferdinand because he believed he had murdered his father  ; the Freemasons were mentioned, as well as the German ‘secret service’, the Hungarian prime minister Count Tisza, who was in league with ‘Apis’, the Russian General Staff, etc.

However, the predominant reaction was shock and a desire for revenge. The fact that the Archduke was a symbol, and that a hope had been destroyed, which was by all means intact, that the Habsburg Monarchy would have the opportunity to shake off the rigidity of the late Franz Joseph years, provoked a sense of outrage and gave cause for hatred. For those in authority, it became clear almost straight away that the trail led to Belgrade, and that accountability and atonement must be demanded from Serbia. Conrad von Hötzendorf, who until   June had accompanied the heir to the throne before departing for Sremski Karlovci, where he received news of the murder, expressed a view that was widely held  : "The murder in Sarajevo was the last link in a long chain. It was not the work of an individual fanatic, but the result of a well-organized attack ; it was a declaration of war by Serbia on Austria-Hungary. It can only be answered by war." 

No mention was made of the fact that Conrad would have known how far-reaching the effects of the murder of Franz Ferdinand would be. No mention that Austria-Hungary suddenly had no prospects. No further reference to the fact that a re-organisation at state level could have reshaped the Monarchy from its foundations upwards and made it viable. 

At a single stroke, everything that Franz Ferdinand had planned and prepared with the aim of reforming the Empire was no longer of interest. And the fact that in the shorter or longer term, this would have brought about an end to dualism was also in effect considered irrelevant. After all, the alternative to reform of the Empire was collapse. No mention was made of the plan to seek an understanding with Russia. Suddenly, the "secondary rule" by the Archduke, which had been the subject of repeated criticism, also no longer existed.

Archduke Franz Ferdinand and his wife Sophie were
laid out on 28 June 1914 in the official residence
of the governor of Sarajevo.

 

The murder in Sarajevo strengthened the position of the Emperor. Not that this was what Franz Joseph had wanted, since it had been clear to him, too, that  reparations must be made for the transition to his successor. Yet now, suddenly, the entire  structure, so laboriously assembled, had become obsolete. The words ascribed to Franz Joseph on hearing of the double murder in Sarajevo are  : "A superior power has restored that order which I unfortunately was unable to maintain." In this context, they took on a stark double meaning. As it quickly transpired, Franz Joseph was not of a mind to experiment with "secondary rule" a second time. The next in line, Archduke Karl Franz Josef, who automatically adopted the mantle of heir to the throne, was neither to take over the Military Chancellery run by his murdered uncle, nor inherit control of the staff of civilian advisors that Franz Ferdinand had sought. Now, there could also be no mention of the fact that Conrad von Hötzendorf had been due to be replaced half a year later .

The Chief of the General Staff was the man who in terms of military matters had the fullest confidence of the Emperor, and who had the final say. He would also certainly be needed in the very near future. Domestic policy experiments were frowned upon, and not only that  : the new heir to the throne was initially to be involved as little as possible and be given the role of observer at best. Just how thoroughly this was put into practice already became evident during the weeks that followed. This was by no means due to negligence, but was entirely deliberate  : Emperor Franz Joseph was making one more attempt at a neo-absolutist about-turn. The hidden reality behind this apparent fierce determination and show of power was a terrible dilemma  : at the top of the Habsburg Empire, a huge power vacuum began to spread—slowly, but surely.

Even after the news of the murder in Sarajevo had lost its novelty, and attention had turned to the new heir to the throne and above all the position taken by Austria immediately following the assassination, a certain degree of international goodwill could still be felt. It is also certainly not incorrect, as has been repeatedly remarked, to say that the community of European states would initially have fully understood any immediate action taken by Austria against Serbia. However, these simple sentiments, which were founded on a sense of solidarity, were not to be held for long.

Excerpted from: The First World War and the End of the Habsburg Monarchy

Raoul Lufbery and Marc Pourpe: From The Birth Of Aviation to the Lafayette Escadrille

By Jacques Mortane, updated by Dennis Gordon and Raoul Lufbery III 

Schiffer Military 2023 

Adrian Roberts, Reviewer

Marc Pourpe

This volume must be the last word on Lafayette ace Raoul Lufbery and his mentor, aviation pioneer Marc Pourpe. It is 236 pages, 11 ¼  x 8 ¾ inches, and if ordered from Schiffer is $45. (Mine was a review copy!) However, it is worth it if you want to research these men in depth. 

Part 1 of the book was originally written by their friend and fellow pre-WWI aviator Jacques Mortane in 1936, in French under the title Two Great Knights of Adventure. It has now been translated and a second part added with extra material, particularly on Lufbery, by Lafayette Escadrille specialist Dennis Gordon, and Lufbery’s great nephew Raoul Lufbery III. 

Pourpe became involved in aviation before Lufbery but was actually two years younger, born in 1887. Lufbery’s father was American, but he was born in France to a French mother who died when he was very young.  Pourpe’s father died young and his mother abandoned him, so both were brought up by maternal grandparents. Both left home in their teens and traveled around the world. Pourpe became involved in the early aviation scene and learned to fly as early as 1909, in Australia. From October 1912, he spent six months flying a Blériot in India and Indo-China (now Vietnam and Cambodia), the first person ever to do so. The book makes very clear the struggles, business sense, and determination necessary to obtain funding for his flying activities, as well as the perils and organization of flying in these primitive aeroplanes where no aviation infrastructure existed, often in very adverse climate conditions. Your interest in aviation would need to encompass more than just WWI combat to appreciate this part, but it is well worth it. 

Lufbery, who had spent two years in the U.S. Army in the Philippines, met Pourpe in Calcutta in January 1913, and was taken on as a mechanic, despite needing to learn on the job. He continued to provide the ground support for Pourpe in early 1914 when the latter became the first person to fly from Cairo to Khartoum, often in sandstorms, in a Morane monoplane, a type that was notoriously unstable, requiring continuous “hands-on” flying. At the start of the Great War in August 1914, Pourpe and his aviator friends volunteered for service with the French Aviation Militaire, and Pourpe got Lufbery accepted as his mechanic despite the latter’s U.S. nationality. Pourpe joined Escadrille (roughly a squadron) MS23, flying the Morane-Saulnier Type L parasol monoplane. From mid-September until the beginning of December, he flew 27 reconnaissance flights over enemy lines, totaling 78 hours, often in appalling weather, but on 2 December 1914, his death was witnessed by Lufbery. Returning from a mission in low cloud and blustery weather, his aircraft was seen to exit a cloud “in a side-slip" and crash. Almost certainly, when cold and tired, he had had to descend through cloud in an unstable aeroplane with zero blind-flying instrumentation, became disorientated, stalled, and spun in. 

Raoul Lufbery and Whiskey of the Lafayette Escadrille

Lufbery vowed to avenge his friend, and applied for pilot training, on that very day according to Montane, but it was June 1915 before his training started. On completion, he flew Voisin bombers (Mortane says his squadron was VB102; other sources say VB106). His skill was recognized even at this stage, and he was awarded the Medaille Militaire. Meanwhile, N124, the Lafayette Escadrille, had been formed—a squadron of Nieuport 11 Scouts, flown by American volunteers, named after the Marquis de Lafayette, who had fought for the United States in the War of Independence. Lufbery applied to be posted to this unit, and after a month training on the Nieuport, joined in May 1916, so he was not quite a founding member and differed from most of the others in that he was already a member of the French armed forces and a combat pilot. He always considered himself more French than American and spoke English with a French accent.

Over the next 18 months he flew more patrols than any other member of the unit, and was its highest scoring pilot, with 14 victories during this period. He was awarded the French Legion of Honour and the Croix de Guerre. The book covers the official and unofficial activities of the unit well, including the pilots’ purchase of two lion cubs, Whiskey and Soda, as mascots. Whiskey especially was tame and could be played with like a dog, apart from a tendency to eat uniform caps. 

The United States entered the war in April 1917, and by the end of the year the American Expeditionary Force was operational on the Western Front. The Lafayette Escadrille was disbanded in December, and the pilots were given commissions in the United States Air Service (USAS). There was a period of confusion during which some of the pilots did not even realize this. Lufbery, by now a major, was initially put to work at a desk writing operational manuals for the new service, which he hated but in fact was an appropriate use of his experience. 

By February, however, he was back in action with the 94th Pursuit Squadron USAS as a combat instructor, flying the Nieuport 28, and shot down at least two more hostile aircraft. On 28 March, he led future aces Eddie Rickenbacker and Douglas Campbell on their first combat patrol. However, on 19 May 1918, he took off in pursuit of a German Rumpler two-seater that had overflown the airfield. It seems that his fuel tank was hit by return fire from the gunner, and with his flight suit on fire, he either jumped or fell to his death. He was buried first in the local American cemetery but now lies with his comrades in the Lafayette Memorial, eight miles from Paris. 

Fortunately, the authors have plenty of source material for this book. I have read all too many well-meaning biographies of WWI airmen and soldiers, sometimes written by their descendants, which suffer from the fact that the men concerned left no written letters or other material. All that those authors can do is pad out the book with generic accounts of the type of training that he would have had and the records of his units. Even if the pilot was an ace, if he left no material of his own the books resort to quoting his combat reports, which are sparse and soon become tedious, the reader left with no feel for the man as a person. For this book, however, Mortane had copious correspondence with Pourpe in which he recounted his trials and adventures, and he also met Lufbery. 

The more recent authors of Part 2 have been able to reproduce some lengthy articles which Lufbery wrote for the Indianapolis News about his career, shortly before his death. It has to be said that Part 2 also contains considerable material that at best comes across as “laundry list” documentation and some that may be useful as background for readers with no knowledge of WWI aviation but can seem like padding. There is a gratuitous and irrelevant photo of the body of German ace Oswald Boelcke; the caption states that he was killed flying a Fokker E.IV, whereas he was actually in an Albatros D.II, a basic error for a supposed WWI expert author, and in any case the identity of the body is disputed. There is a lengthy chapter on Marc Pourpe’s mother, whose stage name was Liane de Pougy and who led, shall we say, an unconventional life; strictly speaking this is padding, but I found it fascinating!  

Order HERE

Overall, however, the book is well worth it if you seek this much detail on WWI and pre-WWI aviation  

Adrian Roberts, December 2025

 

Forgotten German Heroes of the Dardanelles Naval Defense of 18 March 1915

German Naval Officers and Sailors Manning
an Observation Post on the Dardanelles

Ayhan Aktar, Chair Professor, Istanbul Bilgi University

It is unfortunate that the stories have not also been recorded of the German soldiers who fought within the Ottoman army during the Gallipoli campaign. Near the beginning of World War I, the number of German staff and military personnel was around 1,100, but toward the end of 1918, this figure reached 18,000 to 20,000. Although initially the memoirs of a few officers were published, including those of Field Marshal Liman von Sanders, the commanding officer of the 5th Army, the notorious bombardment of Potsdam in 1945 destroyed the German military archives and prevented comprehensive academic research being done on this topic. [However, Professor Aktar has extracted some information about German participation in the fighting from other  available sources, which are not cited for this article.]

Admiral Usedom Accompanies Kaiser Wilhelm II
and Enver Pasha on a 1917 Visit to the Straits

If we need to look for "heroes" for 18 March, we are better off looking at Cevat (later Çobanlı) Pasha, the commander of the Fortified Zone at Dardanelles, and German Admiral Guido von Usedom, who was entrusted by Enver Pasha, the Minister of War, with the special mission of defending the Straits, that is, the Dardanelles and the Bosphorus (Istanbul). In fact, these two men prepared the plans, laid the mines, commanded the forces, and defended the Dardanelles on 18 March 1915. . .

Lower Right: German Naval Personnel Serving on Nusret

We also hear a lot on these occasions about the legendary minelayer Nusret. Yes, the Nusret did lay mines parallel to the shore at the Bay of Erenköy in the morning of 8 March, causing catastrophic damage to the enemy fleet ten days later. Thanks to these mines, the enemy battleships Irresistible and Ocean were sunk and three more battleships were put out of action. Recently, it was established also that the Bouvet sank due to artillery fire coming from Ottoman coastal artillery.  Rightly, we hear about Captain Hakki of Tophane, the captain of the Nusret, and Major Hafiz Nazmi, the commanding officer of the Mine Group Command in the navy. But no one mentions the critical roles played by German military personnel on the Nusret that day, such as the mine specialist Lieutenant Colonel Geehl, the torpedo specialist Senior NCO Rudolf Bettaque, and the navy engineer Captain Reeder, who managed to run the Nusret’s engines without releasing dark smoke through her funnel. This made it less visible to enemy reconnaissance.

Lt. Hans Woermann, KIA

Leaving aside the Ottoman officers who contributed to the victory but who are not mentioned, our Turkish "national history" deems the German officers non-existent. On 18 March, while there were 79 dead and wounded among Ottoman forces, the loss in the German camp was 18 soldiers. So, for every four Ottoman losses, there was one German loss too. In the same fashion, the loss of German artillery Lieutenant Hans Woermann is glossed over. In his memoirs, Colonel Hans Kannengiesser, the commander of the 16th Army Corps at the Suvla battles in August 1915, describes the funeral of Lieutenant Hans Woermann, as follows: "As befitting an officer of the Turco-German Alliance, the Salâ was recited from the mosque’s minaret [in Çanakkale] and, his body wrapped under the Turkish flag, his face was turned by a Hodja toward Mecca as he was buried’. Ottoman officers did not hesitate to show their respect to the comrades-in-arms who died in defence of the Ottoman fatherland. Dismissing the dead of their allies and ‘crying only after their own dead" is a skill unfortunately developed by the historians of the Turkish Republic! . . .

Sources: "Gallipoli commemorations of Turkish youth tell us much about politics in Turkey",  The Conversation, April 23, 2018; "Defence Preparations of the Dardanelles", Die Schlacht von Gallipoli 1915;  Encyclopedia 1914-1918

America Demobilizes the AEF

The 26th Yankee Division Arrives in Boston aboard USS Agamemnon, 7 April 1919

The U.S. Army was utterly unprepared to demobilize its unprecedentedly huge army when the Armistice occurred. Secretary of War Newton D. Baker, later wrote: "The collapse of the Central Powers came more quickly than even the best informed military experts believed possible." In fact, planning for eventual demobilization had begun only a month before hostilities ceased. The wartime American military had grown to 4.7 million with the largest part serving in the army, including 2 million men in France on 11 November 1918. The easiest group to deal with were the men in training camps stateside who had recently entered the service. Between the Armistice and New Year's Day, 690,000 men were mustered out of the Army. However, the much bigger issue was what to do about the men overseas and the forces ready to ship out had the fighting continued into 1919.

Taking the welfare of the nation as well as that of the Army into account, the demobilization planners considered four distinctly different ways of demobilizing the emergency troops: soldiers could be separated by length of service; by industrial needs or occupation; by locality (through the use of local draft boards); or by military units. For the Great War, length of service didn't make any sense. The first three possibilities offered insurmountable difficulties. Most of the combat forces had been overseas for less than a year. Compiling records for every soldier's occupational history and need for those skills in the peacetime economy would take an unacceptably long time. Finally, placing the load of mustering out military men on local draft boards was simply unworkable. The boards had no facilities for processing troops and they were semi-independent local entities making an effort to make the process uniform across the country futile. The Secretary of War described the implementation of the fourth option:

. . . the policy adopted was to demobilize by complete organizations as their services could be spared, thus ensuring the maximum efficiency of those organizations remaining, instead of demobilizing by special classes with the resulting discontent among those not given preferential treatment and retained in the service, thus lowering their morale and efficiency and disrupting all organizations with the attendant general discontent.

                    The 27th New York National Guard Division Marches Down Fifth Avenue, 24 March 1919

Discharge of troops was largely accomplished at demobilization centers throughout the country, where camp personnel conducted physical examinations, made up the necessary papers to close all records, checked up property, adjusted financial and other accounts, and generally gathered up the loose ends. Many organizations remaining in the zone of interior were not immediately inactivated. Men were needed to man the ports of debarkation, the convalescent and demobilization centers, the supply depots, the base and general hospitals, and the garrisons along the Mexican border and bases outside of the United States. Accordingly, many men assigned to these duties were retained in service for many months.

Most important, the processes of demobilization were to be as rapid as conditions would permit. Three groups–coal miners, railroad employees, and railway mail clerks—were discharged immediately; and instructions were issued specifying the order in which various organizations should be demobilized, beginning with the replacement battalions in the zone of the interior and ending with the combat divisions. It was General Pershing's job to say who should return from Europe and when.

When a soldier was discharged, he received all pay and allowances due him, plus a bonus of $60. Each enlisted man was also given a uniform, shoes, and overcoat, if the weather was cold, otherwise a raincoat. It is interesting to note that men returning from overseas were allowed to retain their gas masks and helmets as souvenirs. When a soldier had been paid his allowance, he was marched directly to a place where he could purchase a railroad ticket to his home.

The 363rd Infantry Regiment at San Francisco's Palace of Fine Arts Just Before Mustering Out, 22 April 1919
(The Presidio is right next door.)

The process proved chaotic—the term "madhouse" was occasionally invoked—and was subject to countless complaints, many well deserved. America's World War One demobilization, however, did work quickly. Within one year of the Armistice, the Army had sent 3.4 million officers and men back to civilian life.

Sources: History of Personnel Demobilization in the United States Army, U.S. Army Quartermaster Corps; Panoramic Photos from the Library of Congress, New York from the National Archives

The Kaiserliche Marine's Raid on Zanzibar (Video)

The Havoc of War from the National Archives

I've discovered a treasure chest of World War One photographs from the U.S. National Archives labelled "Havoc of War" available at Wiki Commons. Below are a dozen from the set of nearly 800, many of which I've never seen before, including all of these. (And I've viewed thousands over the years.) MH

Click on images to enlarge.  Display=580px, Expanded=800px.

Mine Pit Destroyed by Germans, Courrieres

Two Women of Lens, France, Return Home After the Battle

French Soldiers about to Bury German Dead
Killed by Shell Fire

Part of Saloniki Destroyed by Fire, 18 August 1917

Destroyed Marne River Bridge, Château-Thierry

American Soldiers Among Ruins of Brabant,
Verdun Sector

Armentières Cathedral 

Wrecked Railway Bridged, Tournai, France

Refugees at a Red Cross Center, Vladivostok, Russia

National Road Between Soissons and Chavignis, France

British Dead from Shell Burst at the Lille Gate of Ypres

Russian Farmer Hung on Orders of Austrian Commander

King George V's Battlefield Pilgrimage

 

As our dead were equal in sacrifice, so are they equal in honour, for the greatest and the least of them have proved that sacrifice and honour are no vain things but truths by which the world lives.

King George V, Terlicthun Cemetery

From the Royal Family Website

During the First World War, hundreds of thousands of soldiers had died on the battlefield. Many bodies were left, unretrievable, in no man’s land. Others were buried by comrades: a simple wooden cross marking their grave. The Commonwealth (then Imperial) War Graves Commission was set up with the mammoth task of commemorating every soldier who died in WW1.

There was doubt over whether these cemeteries would be well received, with many relatives wanting their loved ones’ bodies repatriated rather than commemorated overseas. However, the first "experimental: cemeteries were favourably reported by the press in 1920, and construction began on the larger cemeteries we know today.

Relatives of the fallen began visiting the battlefields and cemeteries in their tens of thousands to pay their respects, and it was as part of this wider pilgrimage that King George V and Queen Mary visited in May 1922.

As part of a State Visit to Belgium, the King undertook a three-day tour of the battlefield cemeteries accompanied by Sir Fabien Ware, Vice-Chairman of the IWGC, Field Marshal Douglas Haig, and Admiral David Beatty. This three-day tour soon became known as The King's Pilgrimage."

The King was issued with passes to allow him to visit the war graves in 1922. These passes were to enable close relatives to visit the grave of a fallen family member in France and Belgium without the need for a passport. It is not clear why two separate passes were issued other than that the King is wearing the uniform of the Royal Navy in one and of the Army in the other.

On 11 May 1922, King George V recorded his visits to military cemeteries in Belgium in his diary:

I left at 9.0 in my train with Haig & Sir Fabien Ware (Permanent Vice Chairman of the Imperial War Graves Commission), Fritz, Wigram & Seymour for Zeebrugee where I arrived at 11.0. Went to see the German cemetery where some English are buried, visited the mole & left at 12.40. Luncheon in the train. Arrived at Zonnebeke at 2.30. Left in motors & visited the British cemeteries at Tyne Cot, Ypres, Vlamertinghe, Hop Store, Brandhoek, Poperinghe & Lijssenthoek. Joined the train at Poperinghe & left at 6.10. At each I was received by the Mayor & a crowd of people. The cemeteries are very well arranged & looked after by ex service men under the Commission. Very interesting passing through all the battle area, nearly all the houses have been rebuilt…

On 13 May, after visiting the Meerut cemetery, where Indian soldiers are buried, King George V travelled to Terlincthun cemetery, where he was joined by Queen Mary and the Earl and Countess of Athlone. Queen Mary, herself laying a wreath at the stone of remembrance, recorded the events in her diary:

Motored to the British soldiers cemetery at Terlincthun where we were met by the members of the War Graves Commission & General Castelnau, etc. We walked to the cross where G laid a wreath & then made a charming speech, General Castelnau ditto. Made a short tour in the cemetery. A very impressive but upsetting ceremony.  

  

 Map showing locations of IWGC cemeteries visited by
King George V on 12 and 13 May 1922

Rudyard Kipling commemorated the King's pilgrimage with this poem:

Our King went forth on pilgrimage  

His prayers and vows to pay       

To them that saved our heritage   

And cast their own away.    

And there was little show of pride,   

Or prows of belted steel,    

For the clean-swept oceans every side   

Lay free to every keel.

And the first land he found, it was shoal and banky ground -   

Where the broader seas begin,   

And a pale tide grieving at the broken harbour-mouth  

Where they worked the death-ships in. 

And there was neither gull on the wing,  

Nor wave that could not tell   

Of the bodies that were buckled in the life-buoy's ring    

That slid from swell to swell.

All that they had they gave - they gave; and they shall not return,  

For these are those that have no grave where any heart may mourn.

And the next land he found, it was low and hollow ground -   

Where once the cities stood,       

But the man-high thistle had been master of it all,  

Or the bulrush by the flood.        

And there was neither blade of grass,      

Nor lone star in the sky 

But shook to see some spirit pass  

And took its agony.

And the next land he found, it was bare and hilly ground - 

Where once the bread-corn grew, 

But the fields were cankered and the water was defiled,   

And the trees were riven through.  

And there was neither paved highway,    

Nor secret path in the wood,       

But had borne its weight of the broken clay 

And darkened 'neath the blood.

Father and mother they put aside, and the nearer love also -    

An hundred thousand men who died whose graves shall no man know.

And the last land he found, it was fair and level ground  

About a carven stone,  

And a stark Sword brooding on the bosom of the Cross 

Where high and low are one.

And there was grass and the living trees,   

And the flowers of the spring,   

And there lay gentlemen from out of all the seas   

That ever called him King.

'Twixt Nieuport sands and the eastward lands where the Four Red Rivers spring,  

Five hundred thousand gentlemen of those that served their King.

All that they had they gave - they gave -  

In sure and single faith. 

There can no knowledge reach the grave 

To make them grudge their death    

Save only if they understood    

That, after all was done,  

We they redeemed denied their blood  

And mocked the gains it won.