Battle of Verdun 1916

[ypriana]

This is a question for Jack Sheldon.

Have you ever contemplated writing a new history of the Battle of Verdun 1916

Although Alistaire Horne's "Price of Glory" has yet to be bettered and we have had in the last few years a handful of English books covering this major battle we have not really had a comprehensive history of the battle - as you are fluent in German (not sure about French) have you ever considered starting such a project ?

many thanks in advance and best regards

[Jack Sheldon]

Thank you for you interest. I have plans for several titles, but Verdun is not one of them. It is a battle which interests me of course, but there are others far better qualified than I am to tackle Verdun. At present I am concentrating on the northern sector of the Western Front where the German army faced the British army for at least a part of the war. My current project concerns Vimy Ridge from 1914 - 1917, but it will not surface in the shops before spring 2008. As a taster a new Battleground guide, covering both sides of the 1917 battle, which I co-authored with Nigel Cave is due out imminently.

Jack

[Martin Bennitt]

A new book In French on Verdun came out last year. I've glanced at it in bookshops and may end up buying it.

There is a deluxe edition

http://www.italiques.com/italiques/index.p...amp;livre_id=50

and a cheaper one for €59.

cheers Martin B

[Halder]

A new book In French on Verdun came out last year. I've glanced at it in bookshops and may end up buying it.

There is a deluxe edition

http://www.italiques.com/italiques/index.p...amp;livre_id=50

and a cheaper one for €59.

cheers Martin B

I hope to write a book on Verdun one day, with the emphasis on the German viewpoint, although I think there are a couple of Pals who might beat me to it.

I'd always shied away from researching the battle because The Price of Glory's almost permanently in print; however, I was interested to hear that Pal Paul H had looked into Horne's book and found a few gaps and flaws... so I may yet do something. The only problem is that I'm committed to three books on the Wehrmacht from 1939-1941 for the next decade, sadly.

What I would say is that Horne's book is nearly 50 years old. A lot of fresh material has appeared in the interim, so revisiting Verdun in depth is perhaps a good idea. I mean Beevor made a mint from Stalingrad just 25 years after Enemy at the Gates...

[Christina Holstein]

I think Paul H would say 'minor gaps and flaws' about Horne's book. It's still brilliant. Horne understood the battle, which is saying something. A new history will no doubt be written one day but I really doubt whether it could improve on Horne as a general history of the battle which includes both sides. And Halder, I have to disagree with you on there being a lot of new material on Verdun in the last 50 years. Who's writing about it? The recent general histories of the battle in English don't add anything new. A good history of the battle from the German point of view would certainly be interesting but would it sell? Would a new general history sell anyway? The amount of interest in Verdun in the English-speaking world is infintessimal compared with the interest in the British and Empire battlefields.

The new French book on Verdun referred to in the italiques website doesn't add anything new. Anyone who wants to read a French history of the battle would really do better to read Pericard or Lefebvre. And they're cheaper.

Christina

[Jack Sheldon]

Dare I mention it, that there is one person who really has a handle on this area and she contributed the last post. I hope most sincerely that, whatever form it takes, it will not be long before Christina goes into print again on this subject.

Jack

[Martin Bennitt]

The new French book on Verdun referred to in the italiques website doesn't add anything new. Anyone who wants to read a French history of the battle would really do better to read Pericard or Lefebvre. And they're cheaper.

Christina

Hi Christina. I assume you've looked at the Italiques book. As I implied, I was hesitating about buying it, as I fear it is a coffeee-table book with more style than substance. N'est-ce pas?

cheers Martin B

[bob lembke]

The Price of Glory is, in my opinion, well written but a quite flawed history. As I tend not to work with secondary sources, I have not read it in a while. It is quite off, IMHO, on the area of my peculiar mania, flame throwers (FW). One of my two copies is a hard-bound copy that contains an autograph letter from Horne to the book's previous owner (I bought the book and the letter for $3), and as Horne's letter mentioned flame throwers, I was emboldened to write Horne, who is still writing, and ask him, as politely as I could, asking where he got the information behind something stated that is, to me, a particularly erronous pair of passages. I did not get a response, not surprisingly, how can you really ask such a question in a fashion that would appeal to an author?

The battle of Verdun is clearly one of the most important and dramatic battles of the war, but naturally of less interest to most people of an Anglo background. (I remember, as a schoolboy in about 1955, being taught in history, to my annoyance, that the battle of Chateau Thierry in 1918 was the most important battle of WW I.) I was already aware of Verdun, as my father was already recounting his oral history of the war, in which Verdun figured largely, and as we worked together in construction and I often saw the healed wound in the back of his upper left arm (the tricept) that appeared to be a minature Grand Canyon, and occurred on Dead Man's Hill on 28. 12. 16. He was in hospital for most of 1917, the wound spit bone fragments for over ten years, and he was still indignant 50 years later that the wound was formally designated a "light wound", as he may have had 20 or more small surgical procedures in 1917; his letters explained to his father that the doctor appologized and explained why they had to be performed without anesthetic.

Pop joined the flame regiment and was sent to Verdun about August 1916, when the battle had scaled back. His company there, the 2nd Company, was the only company there at that time, as much of the regiment was at the Somme. (That was the only time that the flame regiment had to perform many defensive operations, an unsuitable task, but I guess that they had to take their share of that great defensive effort.) The 2nd Company had carried out more flame attacks than any other of the 9 companies fighting at Verdun during the first half of the year (from memory, there were 149 flame attacks at Verdun in about the first 6 months of the battle), so perhaps their lighter duty at Verdun during the second half of the year was a reward for their heavy service during the peak of the battle. As it was, my father managed to get wounded twice in about four months.

John Mosier, who people seem to either love or hate, feels that The Price of Glory is brilliantly written but is often flawed as history. I have not read it in a while, while I have read a great deal about the battle since then in German and French, so I wonder what my opinion would be if I read it again.

This most emportant battle certainly deserves a fresh and deep investigation published in English.

Bob Lembke

[paul guthrie]

Since Mosier is not even an historian and his book on WW1 is utter tripe no attention should be paid to his judgement of another.

[bob lembke]

Since Mosier is not even an historian and his book on WW1 is utter tripe no attention should be paid to his judgement of another.

As I said, and Paul reinforces, some people like Mosier and others despise him as a historian. I read the book at the beginning of my serious WW I study and at that time generally liked it. Since then I have read hundreds of sources on WW I, and probably about 100 in German and French on Verdun, and written a super-chapter of possibly 60 pages on the battle, so it would be interesting to read him again and see into what side of the love-hate divide I fall on now.

I don't know if he is a "historian" or not, he has worked in other fields, but he obviously worked in a lot of primary sources, including the French and German (I gather his French is very good, his German perhaps "useful"), he walked the battlefields, he entered the cemetaries and counted the head-stones, etc., things that more "historians" should do, and that I think that more historians are now doing, thankfully. I had a neighbor with a Ph. D. in History, and he was very touchy that he was a "historian", and that the efforts of someone like myself was presumptious. He was a "Boy-toy", stunningly handsome, was unemployed, his wife had a hot-shot job in law, and finally he had to go to Chicago to get a job in "history" that probably paid $8000 a year, a part-time instructor. But he was a "historian" and looked down on anyone with a different education. But of course everyone fancies themselves some sort of historian; while few people other than, say, dentists would posture as a "dentist".

But Mosier has several books on military history in print, they seem to sell OK, they are done in academic mode, footnotes, bibliography, etc., so I would give him the doubt. He is an academic, but is something like a professor of film history at a southern university. When I started my serious study of WW I I read his book, was impressed with his use of sources, e-mailed him, and he kindly pointed me toward sources, bibliographical resources, etc. But then I realized that my new wife had these skills and resources in spades.

Bob Lembke

[paul guthrie]

I agree one does not have to be a trained historian to write good history, example Barbara Tuchman, Guns of August and A Distant Mirror are wonderful and on such very different eras. Zimmerman Telegram is quite good too.

Having said so I do regrad Mosier as absoulte bunk.

[bob lembke]

Tuchman? Now, there is an amateur historian! Was quite surprised a couple of weeks ago to find out that she is a close relative of the Morgenthaus, father and son; Ambassador to Turkey and author of the Morgenthau Plan. Their predjudices just drip from their books.

If I re-read Mosier today I might feel the same way. He certainly is provocative, and I can see how he can p--s people off. Just the sub-title of his book could probably send some people over the brink.

Bob Lembke

[Christina Holstein]

Bob,

Your posts are interesting - and one feels for your father and his awful injury - but I still disagree with you on Horne. I've also read lots of primary sources and it's generally clear - down to the use of words -which primary sources Horne got his stuff from. I would disagree with him on Kunze's role in the capture of Ft. Douaumont but I understand why he felt he could rely on the source. In my view, the great thing about Horne is that he understood the battle and could provide an overview. I don't think the Battle of Verdun is easy to understand, partly because the ground is so densely forested today. He was writing it from the French side and he doesn't claim that it is 50-50 French and German. I think that would be impossible, anyway. I'm not sure about 'new' material either. The material available today on Verdun was available then. The only 'new' stuff seems to me to be private archive material and there is plenty of that about, although the owners may not be interested in writing or publishing it. There may be new stuff in the German archives now that it's coming back from Russia but it will be years before anyone finds it.

In any case, I still doubt if there would be a serious market for another book on Verdun in English.

Martin, the 300 days book is a rehash of old material, like so many of those produced for the 90th anniversary. It's also expensive. If you read French, I'd go for one of those published in the 20s and 30s when there were plenty of veterans around, although I would include 'Combattre à Verdun, by Gerard Canini, which is more recent but really gives the flavour of the battle. If you read German and want a general history, go for German Werth's book 'Verdun, die Schlacht und der Mythos', which you'll find on Ebay.

Jack, thank you for your very kind words.

Christina

[Martin Bennitt]

Bob,

Martin, the 300 days book is a rehash of old material, like so many of those produced for the 90th anniversary. It's also expensive. If you read French, I'd go for one of those published in the 20s and 30s when there were plenty of veterans around, although I would include 'Combattre à Verdun, by Gerard Canini, which is more recent but really gives the flavour of the battle. If you read German and want a general history, go for German Werth's book 'Verdun, die Schlacht und der Mythos', which you'll find on Ebay.

Christina

Thanks Christina, I'll look for the French ones.

cheers Martin B

[Christina Holstein]

Martin,

I'd recommend 'Verdun 1916' by Jacques Pericard, or 'Verdun' by Jacques-Henri Lefebvre. They were friends who served in the 95th Infantry and were in the front lines before Douaumont village when the Germans took the fort. The myth of the Germans wearing Zouave uniform comes from Pericard but don't let that put you off. I don't think you can beat them if you want to know what the battle was actually like even if they are occasionally - and I stress occasionally - wrong on a detail. They are both available in paperback. Pericard in the original version is a huge book and will set you back an awful lot of money today, if you can find it. My only grouse with it is that it is stuck together and the pages fall out.

Christina

[Martin Bennitt]

Martin,

Pericard in the original version is a huge book and will set you back an awful lot of money today, if you can find it. My only grouse with it is that it is stuck together and the pages fall out.

Christina

Sounds like just about any French book up to fairly recent times

thanks again and cheers Martin B

[bob lembke]

Christina;

You obviously are a student of Verdun, and I think that I saw on a post that you are on the ground there at least sometimes. I visited Fort Douaumont say 20 years ago, but only very briefly.

Years ago my father told me many stories, repeatedly, and a few years ago I wrote it all down before I started studying WW I or before I even read the family letters. I was sceptical at first, and some things seemed wrong, but as I read and research, and correspond with Pals, the oral history seems extremely relyable, to my amazement.

Pop said that he was in Fort Douaumont twice during the German capture and after the explosion on May 1916. (He only reached Verdun about August 1916.) He described the dead from the explosion as "a battalion", probably as a statement of the scale, not a specific battalion. He described how they were linded up six feet high down a corridor, men, blankets, and quick-lime in layers. Most accounts seem to mention about 650 men, but I just saw an account that mentioned 1052 men, that they were entombed in a casemate and that a plaque on the wall stated that number.

Do you have any info or comments? Is that sealed-off casemate now visable? Is it correct that the Germans entombed them, or the French later?

I have seen a French explaination that it was a 400 mm French shell, but the two 400 mm guns only arrived at Verdun five months later.

Bob Lembke

[chrrip]

Bob

You will find accounts of more than one explosion in the fort in Christina's excellent book 'Douaumont' in the Battleground Europe series; many casualties from the May explosion still lie there whereas many from October were reinterred by the French

[egbert]

I have just finished Christina's superb booklet "Fort Douaumont" 5 minutes ago. Well done Christina!

And now Paul has reminded me to go back to re-read another excellent book "The myths of the Great War" from John Mosier which is truly recommendable for those with an open mind and who claim to be not biased.

[ypriana]

Christina

I think there would be a substantial market for a new English history of Verdun 1916

It was one of the major battles of WW1 - in fact, when you compare it with many of the battles throughout history it stands as one of the more horrific and fascinating accounts of men at war - it would be of major interest to military scholars/historians alike

If we compare the multitude of histories / personal memoirs etc covering the Russian-German battle at Stalingrad (indeed the whole Eastern Front of WW11) then this proves that there is massive interest in non-English/Empire battles

I would bet an indepth history of this battle would sell quite well

Fancy attempting it ? I for one would certainly buy a well researched book on the subject - the Somme and Third Ypres have all been covered extensively - we need a fresh book on the Western Front and Verdun 1916 is the perfect battle to be covered !!

Jack - can't wait for your new books to come out - is the Vimy Ridge book just an extended version of the Battlefield guide or a completely new book ?

[chrrip]

Have you seen 'A vivid new history of this epic clash between German and French troops during WW1' to quote the flyleaf - Verdun 1916 by Malcolm Brown published in 1999 - I am still a Horne fan though

[Christina Holstein]

Bob,

The explosion in Fort Douaumont on May 8th 1916 resulted from some sort of accidental fire that set off a chain of incidents, resulting in the massive explosion of French 155 shells that stood in the lower corridor of the fort and the grenades, rockets, etc. that stood in the nearby pioneer depot.

According to the doctor in the fort, who was one of the few who survived from the lower floor (he was in the infirmary, which was protected from the force of the blast by being down a staircase and below the corridor in which it occurred) the casualties numbered over 1000. I think the official figure on the plaque may refer to the identifiable dead. It is certainly lower than the doctor's figure.

The Germans tried at first to bury the casualties in the southern ditch of the fort but the French were shelling the fort hard and as fast as the Germans buried them, the bodies came up again. So instead they were carried through to two of the ammunition shelters outside the barracks on the north side of the fort, buried in quicklime and walled up. The wagon road out of the fort to the shelters was blocked up by shelling during the battle and has since been blocked up permanently. The shelters themselves have been shelled more or less flat.

The dead from the explosion were cleared and buried within about three days, so if your Dad was only in the fort in August, he wouldn't have seen the casualties from the explosion, which happened on May 8th. He would certainly have seen the dead who couldn't be evacuated from the fort piled up in barrack rooms in quicklime. They weren't piled up in corridors as, quite apart from anything else they would have impeded passage, and the fort was always fantastically crowded.

Re a new book on the battle of Verdun - Since 'Ft. Douaumont' came out I have been contacted by two publishers with a view to such a book but have had to say No to both, as I work full time at the moment and haven't got the time. I am writing more on Verdun at the moment but it's not a full-length history and I don't want to say more about it just now.

Malcolm Brown's book on Verdun is a good work and nicely written but it doesn't add anything new and follows Horne fairly closely. I suggest it to first time visitors to Verdun who don't fancy a full-length hardback.

Cvilla2 - I wish I could agree with you on this. There seems to be a great difference in attitude in the English-speaking world between Verdun and Stalingrad. I suppose that if you want to read about the greatest battle of WW2, you have to read about Stalingrad, whereas if you want to read about the greatest battle in WWI, you have a choice. Everything you can find in Verdun can also be found in the Somme and Passchendael and the British battles obviously have an immediacy for an English-speaker that is lacking at Verdun. What Verdun, the Argonne Forest and the St. Mihiel Salient do have, however - which the British battlefields don't have any longer - is the trench systems, railway lines, blockhouses, machine gun posts, command posts, etc, that have been abandoned and can still be visited and explored. To be able to take the war time maps and actually walk along the very trenches shown, following men going up to the front or into a specific position, is an extraordinary experience.

Christina

[Paul Hederer]

Jumping in a bit late on this topic (four months late)...just was searching through the forum after being away and this caught my eye.

It would seem that, at least from the publishing side of things, there is a market for a further book on Verdun in English.

There has never been an in-depth study of the battle done in English, and it still amazes me that a main-stream battle such as Verdun has never had a serious study written in English.

Christina's book is excellent, though only covering one facet of the battle. It is easy to see why she has been contacted on a further work.

A truly in-depth study would be a big task, let's say covering the real military nuts of bolts of the battle, as well as the personalities involved. I think there is a lack of appreciation as to what a huge influence the various German personalities had on the outcome of the battle, from Kaiser down to the various Corps commanders. I'm only discussing it from the German side--a true account from both sides would be mammoth.

I see there were comments made on Horne and also see my name mentioned. Yes, I think there are flaws in Horne's work, some of it because all the materials available today were not available at the time. I also see (and this is not uncommon) that he seems to have taken a specific anecdote and extrapolated into a general condition or situation. Having said that his work is still the best available in English.

Robert Foley's recent book has shed some new light on the subject, though the battle itself is covered only in a cursory fashion, but this is not the main thrust of his excellent work.

Christina has mentioned that she's been approached more than once, again supporting the idea there is a perceived market of a future Verdun book. She's been nice enough to steer some of these people my way, but I must admit I'm finding writing, while working full-time, and having a family to be daunting. I was in discussions with a publisher about the book, but have decided to press on by myself, as I just can't meet their timelines...no way.

The material is out there, both in the archives and in published German sources, to make an outstanding work on Verdun from the German perspective. The problem is just trying to find the time to write it, especially somthing that does more than just skim the surface of a very long, and complex battle. In my eight months of serious research here in Germany I have been very surprised at the amount of new things I've found on the battle that I've never seen in English...there is a lot of fresh ground to be covered here, and a lot of mistaken perceptions to clear up.

Best Regards,

Paul