Good Books on Verdun?

[sassoon]

Hello,

I've just come back from a visit of Verdun. The place made such an impact on me that I feel the need to know more. I've studied the Somme much more than the French battles, and would very much like to expand my knowledge of this area of the war. If anyone has any suggestions, please post them here.

Thanks in advance.

[SalvoPeter]

I can make three suggestions...

"The Road to Verdun" by Ian Ousby. (Jonathan Cape)

"Verdun" by David Mason. (The Windrush Press)

"The Price of Glory" by Alistair Horne. (Penguin)

All good books which would serve as an introduction to Verdun.

[aengland]

Hi Sassoon

Well for me the best book is Alistair Horne's 'The Price of Glory'.... although it was written nearly 50 years ago (in 1962.... I couldn't believe it either!) it is one of those books that I return to when I need to brush on things Verdun. There have been others since e.g. 'Verdun' by David Mason (2000), and 'Verdun 1916' by Malcolm Brown (1999), but I think Horne's book stands tall. I do believe that Pen and Sword have it on their list.

Perhaps a new treatment is required? Step forward a volunteer!

Andrew

[Seadog]

I agree Andrew, if you have only have one book on Verdun let it be this one, The Price of Glory.

Norman

[mmckay395]

Don't forget Robert Foley's German Strategy and the Path to Verdun. It's an excellent revisionist interpretation of Falkenhayn's strategic plan for the German assault and how he envisaged executing a strategy of attrition against an enemy who were superior in men and material. I've read it twice in the past year and can't recommend it highly enough.

[gbillington]

Hi

I am a bit of a newby to the forum so hope this is posted

I have been to Verdun and visited the battlefields three times and find walking battlefields increadibly interesting. Good guide books on Verdun in English are rare so for visits and to the area there are two must haves in my opinion. They are callled Fort Douamont and Walking Verdun published by Pen and Sword. Both are written by Christina Holstein who is clearly an expert in this area of the Great War.

Fort Douamont covers the battles around the loss and recapture of Fort Douamont. It gives a good history of this part of the conflict and also includes a guided walk of the fort and surrounding area.

The next is Walking Verdun and includes 9 walks in the battlefield. Each is preceeded with a history of the conflict and guided route. These realy help gain an understanding of what went on. The area is now covered with trees and difficult to understand the importance of the forts and key ridges and ravines. These books point out key areas of the conflict and help plan a visit. Especially which areas to avoid on Mondays and Tuesday when the firing range is in use.

I hope you find this useful. I have several pictures of the battlefields and may try and post some on a relevent post.

All the best with your visit

Guy

[John(txic)]

For "readability", you can't beat "The Price of Glory".

[1690philip]

For a tour book it must be Christina Holstein Walking Verdun.

[nigelcave]

Christina for sheer knowledge of the battlefield today (note that I edited her books, but...)

AH, as others have said, for readability - but remember that it is part of a very interesting trilogy and should perhaps be read in conjunction with the other two.

[aengland]

Nigel

At the risk of taking this 'off thread', I have had Horne's book for more years than I care to mention, but never realised it was part of a trilogy! Please tell me / us about the other books...... thank you

Fascinated of Norfolk, otherwise Andrew

[sassoon]

Thank you Mr. England and company for all your wonderful suggestions/recommendations. I am anxious to find these books (hopefully they won't be too costly here in Canada, as things usually are!)

[Robert Dunlop]

There are several anecdotal accounts from both the German and French perspectives. Many books have been translated into English, including:

'In the Line: 1914-1918' by Georg Bucher

'The Holocaust: From a Survivor of Verdun' by William Hermanns

'Tragédie Bouffe: A Frenchman in the First World War' by René Arnaud

'A French Soldier's War Diary' by Henri Desagneaux

'The Battle of Verdun' by Henry Dugard

The latter book was published during the battle and includes an overview of the campaign to date, as well as numerous anecdotes.

Robert

[John(txic)]

Horne's "How far to Austerlitz" is also a belter.

[nigelcave]

Nigel

At the risk of taking this 'off thread', I have had Horne's book for more years than I care to mention, but never realised it was part of a trilogy! Please tell me / us about the other books...... thank you

Fascinated of Norfolk, otherwise Andrew

The other two relate to the Franco Prussian War - but in particular the Paris Commune; and the Fall of France in 1940 (sorry, can't be precise about titles as in Kenya at the moment - but any decent search engine will give you the apropriate information and I would imagine that they are both commonly available on the second hand market). They help in developing insights into France during a very traumatic period of seventy years or so - indeed going 'off thread' somewhat, but for those with wider interests very much worth the read and written in the same easy style.

[simonharley]

"The Fall of Paris" covers 1870-1871. "To Lose a Battle" covers the Fall of France in 1940. I've always considered "A Savage War of Peace", covering the war in Algeria, as part of the same series, although the book covers a longer period of time.

Simon

[bob lembke]

I have always had an interest in Verdun, as I knew that my father fought there and was wounded twice in combat, as a German flame-thrower operator. (I still have a piece of his upper left arm bone knocked off by a French 75 splinter on "Dead Man's Hill" during a flame attack.) I bought a copy of The Price of Glory many years ago and it was my first book on Verdun.

11 years ago I found my father's and grand-father's letters from the front, including about 12 from Verdun; also have a lot of other material, including about 40 pages of oral history from my father, documents of his from France, etc. When I found the letters I started my serious study of WW I, with a lot of focus on my ancestors' activities.

I have done a lot of study of Verdun. I probably have not read a book in English on it since Horne. (Actually, one, see below.) Most of my work is from primary sources, memoires, "official histories", unit histories, documents, etc., but I have also read a few French and German secondary sources (like Horne).

I have to say, in a primary focus of mine, the use of the flame-thrower (the Germans made 146 flame attacks at Verdun up thru December 1916; it was the greatest flame-thrower battle in history), Horne's observations are extraordinarily incorrect. In addition, there was an important attack on April 20, 1916, in which Bavarian troops conducted a well-prepared attack, led by 63 flame-throwers, and captured an entire French infantry brigade (2883 POWs)in about half an hour, including all three HQs captured intact. His mention of this engagement is completely off, and interestingly is one page after he stated that the flame-thrower was an almost useless, suicide weapon (Interestingly, the captured French brigade commander complained that he had not heard a shot. He was captured in his command dugout, they only managed to get a one sentence phone call out to division: "The Germans are here." click. (In the whole war, the German flame regiment lost, on average, about one man killed in action, died of wounds, missing, or died of illness, per assault. The majority of these attacks were on the west front. Can you think of another unit that can make such a claim? In most attacks they lost not a single man.)

I'm sounding like a crank here, but this is the aspect of the battle that I know the best. The book is very well written, but I feel that it is very dated, and a lot of information is not correct. But if you do not know a lot about the battle (I probably have read about 60-100 books about it, all in German and French, the official histories, etc.), which is the situation of most English-language readers, the books reads well, and you think that you have the real stuff.

I have a long autograph letter of Horne's discussing his book, which was inside a second copy of the book, that I bought for $3, letter included; and, encouraged by my possession of the letter, I have written him about this (as politely as I could manage), but I did not receive a reply.

Having said that, the only other book in English on Verdun that I have read is the "The Road to Verdun" book, several years ago, but it did not help me a lot, and I don't remember it well. So I really can't recommend an overview book in English. But don't read Horne and think that you have been exposed to revealed truth.

Bob Lembke

[Seadog]

Fine Bob but what is "Truth"?

Norman

[bob lembke]

Fine Bob but what is "Truth"?

Norman

Norman;

Certainly there can be a range of conclusions reasonably arrived at when looking at many questions regarding the Great War. But Horne's conclusions in this admittedly narrow topic are at such variance with the reality on the ground that one must conclude that, at least on this topic, he has missed the "truth".

He made two basic assertions; that the Flammenwerfer (in WW I contemporaneous writings British authors more likely than not used the German term, but without the capitalization; I shall abbreviate to FW.) was an almost useless weapon; the other is that it was an almost suicidal weapon, as the operator was easily shot, and often that when shot the flame device would explode and burn the operator to death.

This is in fact the decision arrived at by the British command staff in France even before the first FW attack against British troops, at Hooge. (I do not know if the British staff actually believed their announced conclusions, or simply made the best of a bad thing, perhaps with an eye towards questions of morale, and issued their really ineffective and even silly conclusions.) I have to restate that this opinion, that the FW was not an effective weapon, if dramatic in appearance; and that all you had to do when attacked with FW is simply bend over, and just let the flame pass over you, supposedly harmlessly. And, secondly, the satisfactory defense is to simply shoot the FW operators.

Reflecting my real-life work most of my life as an analyst, I have for years collected statistics on the success or lack of same of the roughly 700 German FW attacks in WW I. They really are so spectacular that I generally keep them to myself, while I improve them and address a couple of methodological problems. The records of the German flame regiment are, to my mind, uniquely accurate, as every FW attack, even by a Trupp with two FW, had to have a report written and presented to the OHL, or Highest Army Command, Hindenburg and Ludendorff's HQ, and these reports were compiled and presented by the CO of the flame regiment, Major Dr. Reddemann, a published scientist, who during the war continued editing two scientific journals as well as performing his complex military duties.

I have the complete death roll of the flame regiment, compiled by Major Dr. Reddemann, and it reflects an average of one death; KIA, DoW, or missing, per flame attack. While there were a number of small attacks, the typical attack was by a platoon of eight FW and about 60 men, or by a flame company of perhaps 32 FW and about 200 men performing. Flame attacks, in the German style, were from the front (for obvious reasons); the FW led the attacking troops, and in many cases the only attacking troops were the Flamm=Pioniere. Let's assume that the typical flame attack on the Western Front was carried out by about 100 or more men, an average of one death per attack is quite remarkable (In the majority of attacks not a single flame trooper died), given the butcher's bill of the Western Front. (The largest flame attack was on the Russian Front, 154 FW attacking an extremely strong Russian square mile complex of concrete fortifications that previous conventional attacks had failed to take, 21 FW troops died, including several who died later in Russian hospitals, but they captured the complex and took 4400 prisoners.) To describe this form of attack as "suicidal" and "almost useless" is clearly "untrue", Norman.

Let me climb out even further on my limb, and present my summary "success" statistics. Here is my methodology. I have selected every German flame attack for which I have a reliable report of how many prisoners were taken. No "cherry picking", no leaving out a small attack where five POWs were taken, but three men died in the attack. Also, I have only included attacks in which the FW performed a major role. I have excluded a few attacks where the FW were brought but ended up not being used, no FW troops lost, I do not include this. Or a large attack with only a few FW used.

My sample to date is 50 flame attacks. (I have details on about 300 flame attacks, but do not have POW figures for most of them.) Of course these attacks tend to be the most successful attacks, but Major Dr. Reddemann stated that, overall, 82% of the flame attacks by his units were "successful". In these 50 attacks, 67,390 POWs were taken. I have MGs captured statistics for 27 of these attacks, it was 914 MGs captured. I have "Guns captured" statistics for 11 attacks, in these 504 cannon were captured. (Most of these were captured in a few large attacks in Russia; I will present an adjustment later.) I have a statistic for the number of mortars captured in 9 of these attacks, 143 mortars. I have a figure for the square kilometers of front captured in 13 of these attacks, it is 431.8 sq km. One tank was knocked out in one attack. The number of flame pioneers killed, mortally wounded, or missing in these 50 attacks? 121 men of the flame regiment.

Several of these attacks were very large, and while many FW were used, and they had a significant role in breaking the resistance, it is perhaps unreasonable to attribute the overall success to the FW, especially the capture of cannon. Studying the 50 attacks, I feel that three clearly fall into this category. Removing these (two against the Russians, one against the British, at Kemmel), we have 47 attacks, with 46,290 POWs, 481 MGs taken in 24 attacks, 71 guns taken in 8 attacks (in one Russian attack that I excluded in the second pass 325 guns were taken), still 143 mortars taken in 9 attacks, 31.8 sq km in 12 attacks, and still 1 tank in one attack. The number of dead Flamm=Pioniere? 100. Of course, supporting infantry were also lost, but these troops led from the front, and some of these attacks were carried out only by flame troops.

I could also give anecdotal evidence, or details of individual attacks, but I think that my study is more objective.

Suicidal? Successful? I think that Horne's statements here were clearly not the truth. But he seems to have been influenced by the dumb opinions formed by UK command staff, even before the first flame attack against British troops, and also by the literary excessive stereotype of the "exploding FW", something that almost never happened. (Another discussion we can avoid. Allied FW did explode, even spontaneously, due to usual awful and dangerous design and material.)

Bob

[connaughtranger]

I can make three suggestions...

"The Road to Verdun" by Ian Ousby. (Jonathan Cape)

"Verdun" by David Mason. (The Windrush Press)

"The Price of Glory" by Alistair Horne. (Penguin)

All good books which would serve as an introduction to Verdun.

Verdun by Georges Blond has been translated into English

Martin

[bob lembke]

Verdun by Georges Blond has been translated into English

Martin

Yes, I have read and used it.

Also, and a bit closer to a primary source: Lefebvre, Jacques-Henri; VERDUN - la plus grande bataille de l'Histoire racontee par les survivants ("Verdun - the greatest battle in history, recounted by the survivors" - 500 pages, mostly a series of interviews or comments by participants, including some Germans.)

Ettighoffer, Paul; Verdun - Das grosse Gericht - The Great 'Gericht' could mean Court (of Law), Judgement, Decision The form is that of a secondary source, but Ettighoffer was a storm unit leader at Verdun.

Werth, German - VERDUN - Die Schlacht und der Mythos - (VERDUN - The Battle and the Myth)

Three books on finer details of the battle:

Klauer, Markus - Die Hoehe Toter Mann - The Hill Dead Man - A book detailing the fighting on the important Dead Man's Hill - I have corresponded with Klauer, a captain in the Bundeswehr; ha was amazed when I pointed out that an incident vividly described, of an un-named trooper saving the life of a German officer who just had his hand shot off, was my father, and that I have four letters of my father's at Verdun describing that incident and the larger combat. I have a photo of the lieutenant in 1918, with brother officers, hiding the stump of his right hand behind his back, probably not to spook wives and girlfriends,

Klauer, Marcus - Die Hoehe 304 - The Hill 304 - A similar book on the fighting on Hill 304. My father was wounded there also, foolishly trying to save the life of a French officer on a pre-dawn flame raid, the guy shot my father from a distance of about 2" rather than surrender. Klauer and I tried to identify the raid, but we were not able to do so.

Schmitz, Bernhard; Fort Vaux - just translate the rest of the title - Seven Glorious Days of Combat from June 3 to June 10 1916 of the Fusilier Regiment General Ludendorff (Lower Rhine) Nr. 39 - The battle over Fort Vaux, much foot by foot in underground tunnels, was outrageously brutal, even by the standards of Verdun. (No, my father was not there, but they did use FW underground, simply awful.)

Sorry, I just don't read about Verdun in English. I am currently studying the fighting in Belgium and France in 1914, and read French, German, and Flemish about 4-5 hours a day. (I know - I am pompous. I taught myself to read German and the old handwriting systems at 60 when I found my father's and grand-father's letters from the front in 2000. I started reading Flemish last year when a Pal on the GWF started sending me articles in Flemish. But I am blessed with a wife who, I mean this literally, works at her library in about 80 languages. I just shouted up the stairs for a clarification of a phrase above. And she is English - the rumor of the "English gene" that blocks people from the UK understanding other languages is just that, an urban legend. I had dinner with a German self-described "brain scientist" in Dubrovnik a few years ago, and he said that the best way to prevent your aging brain from turning to mush as you age is to learn a new language. Don't believe that "English gene" nonsense.)

Bob

[marsyao]

what about Georges Blond's Verdun? I understand it is a 200+ pages book, and that makes me a little suspicious, would you guys recommend it? I am interested in this battle, but poor me could only read English

[bob lembke]

what about Georges Blond's Verdun? I understand it is a 200+ pages book, and that makes me a little suspicious, would you guys recommend it? I am interested in this battle, but poor me could only read English

Just looked for my copy (in French), but I can't find it at the moment. It's been a couple of years at least since I worked on Verdun, and I try to avoid secondary sources, but I think that I liked it and used it a bit.

Feeling that my comments on The Price of Glory were harsh, I grabbed one of my copies, I looked at its sources, Horne's comments on his research, and read a chapter on a part of the battle that I have studied especially closely, the capture of Fort Vaux. I would like to throttle back my criticism a bit, but I still found several examples of Horne not having a good understanding of German Pionier equipment and weapons, which of course were important in this battle. But in balance my opinion is a bit better, and if you do not have German and/or French it certainly should be worth reading, although I can see places where IMHO he will misinterpret some things or leave out something that I find important. He used many of the same sources on the battle that I have used. The book is a classic, and reads very well.

Sorry about my language snobbishness, but I can't really see a serious study of the battle without French and German. Wern't a lot of English speakers (as in none) fighting there.

Bob

[healdav]

Just looked for my copy (in French), but I can't find it at the moment. It's been a couple of years at least since I worked on Verdun, and I try to avoid secondary sources, but I think that I liked it and used it a bit.

Feeling that my comments on The Price of Glory were harsh, I grabbed one of my copies, I looked at its sources, Horne's comments on his research, and read a chapter on a part of the battle that I have studied especially closely, the capture of Fort Vaux. I would like to throttle back my criticism a bit, but I still found several examples of Horne not having a good understanding of German Pionier equipment and weapons, which of course were important in this battle. But in balance my opinion is a bit better, and if you do not have German and/or French it certainly should be worth reading, although I can see places where IMHO he will misinterpret some things or leave out something that I find important. He used many of the same sources on the battle that I have used. The book is a classic, and reads very well.

Sorry about my language snobbishness, but I can't really see a serious study of the battle without French and German. Wern't a lot of English speakers (as in none) fighting there.

Bob

Horne is by no means infallible, but he is the best there is. The French authors all suffer from the syndrome that if you cut out the word 'gloire' the book is only half the length. The Germans are much the same but in the opposite direction.

[marsyao]

hi, bob, though I still have my doubt about a 200+ page book could provide enough information about the battle of Verdun, but since the books about Verdun published in English were very rarely, and since you like it, I decide to give it a try, thanks!

[phil andrade]

Wern't a lot of English speakers (as in none) fighting there.

Bob

Quite so.....which makes Horne's account all the more praiseworthy.

He deserves credit, as a British historian, for making the French experience of the Great War come to life for the British reader. Without him, we would have been impoverished in our perceptions of the conflict.

I read the book as a teenager, shortly after it was published, and along with the BBC's iconic Great War documentary, it really grabbed me by the throat.

Inaccuracies notwithstanding, it stands the test of time : thoroughly recommended. One of the best - perhaps the best - of all the Great War books on my shelves.

Phil (PJA)