Good Books on Verdun?

[Paul Hederer]

...He deserves credit, as a British historian, for making the French experience of the Great War come to life for the British reader...

Just to point out, his book has brought the French experience to many peoples, having been been translated into many languages...including American.

Paul

[aengland]

A fascinating series of posts. Bob, had you thought of writing a new and balanced view of the battle?...... accounting for both sides of the wire? Sounds like you have a goodly amount of information to hand. Perhaps a new treatment of the capture of Fort Vaux would be a good starting point? I always think that great information should be put in the public domain, and then people can make up their own minds.

Incidentally, Philidelphia..... a great city. Wife used to work for Campbells

Andrew

[bob lembke]

A fascinating series of posts. Bob, had you thought of writing a new and balanced view of the battle?...... accounting for both sides of the wire? Sounds like you have a goodly amount of information to hand. Perhaps a new treatment of the capture of Fort Vaux would be a good starting point? I always think that great information should be put in the public domain, and then people can make up their own minds.

Andrew

Thanks for the kind words. I have deamed up about nine book projects, have done substantial progress on about four, and with a writing partner am actually grinding out the first draft of one of them at the present time. Am guessing that I will get about four out the door before I croak.

None of these is a history of Verdun. But two planned and actually having some text written, as well as most of the research, are in good part on Verdun; one is a history of the Big German and Austrian siege guns (mostly 42 cm howitzers and 30.5 cm mortars) and the Belgian, French, and Russian forts that they dueled with, mostly in 1914, 1915, and 1916. These guns had an important role at Verdun, but in large part not against the many forts.

The second is a military (mostly) biography of my grand-father and my father. The latter fought at Verdun, as a flame-thrower operator, being wounded there twice. The Germans carried out 146 flame attacks at Verdun during the classic "Verdun" period of February to December 1916, some involving 60 or 100 FW teams (not 100% sure of the last statement, there certainly were flame attacks in WW I that large or larger, and the April 20 attack in Cailette Woods was led by 63 FW), and I maintain that many were met with considerable success. Anytime Horne mentioned FW, he seems to have gotten it seriously wrong, which has colored my opinion of the book, perhaps too much. He also has read sources that I have read, and not picked out fascinating details that I saw, or seemingly gotten something wrong. But I did enjoy my brief read just now.

Bob

[Paul Hederer]

It's been interesting reading the comments on books on Verdun--what strikes me is how little new has been written in almost the past 50 years. "A balanced view of the battle," was mentioned, and that, for sure has not been written.

It's a real shame that some of the works by the German authors have not been translated--Werth's Verdun would be a smash hit for sure, containing interviews with many Verdun veterans that the author recorded in the 50's and 60's. Hermann Wendt's PhD study, later published, is one of the finest books written about Verdun, though it remains almost completely unknown, even in German. I don't agree with his conclusions, but the book is valuable in the fact that he accessed the now destroyed German archives in a manner anyone writing a book about Verdun would like to do...

On Horne I would like to comment. One reviewer described "The Price of Glory," as a "brilliant, and deeply flawed work..." for me that sums up Horne. The book is by far the best work on Verdun in English, and as I pointed out (rather tongue in cheek) it's been translated into many languages, including German and French, which I think speaks for the worth and brilliance of the work itself.

Yes, the book has factual errors, and most Germans I know laugh a bit at its portrayal of the German side of the battle, but the book is evocative, and valuable. Verdun as a non-British battle could have been relegated to obscurity for modern readers if it hadn't been for Horne. For whole generations his book is their connection with the Great War. It is truly a popular work, which is a rarity for 1914-18. The only other work I can think of that touches it would be "The Guns of August," which seems to have fallen a bit out of favor in the past decade or so.

I think when asking about a "good" book on Verdun the answer would be, as with most other subjects, that a understanding of the subject requires reading a number of works. I like Wilhelm Hermann's work on Verdun very much, but it is anything but a balanced version of the German side of events! If you read only his work you would have a very slanted view of things.

I do agree with Bob, that (very) unfortunately, any serious study of Verdun is impossible without reading French and German.

Paul

[phil andrade]

The Price of Glory is heroic in historiographical terms.

Remember that this was being written in the run up to the fiftieth anniversary of the conflict,; on the threshold of the centennial we have so much more at our disposal to help us with research.....a click of a mouse and we can delve into archives that, in those days, were inaccessible to all but approved and vetted scholars.

Horne had to contend with some very raw feelings among the French, and about the French. Petain had been dead for only one decade. Collaboration memories were fresh to say the least. Algeria was a nightmarish presence.

For a British writer to confront the task of bringing the French military experience of the Great War to a British public that was still innately disdainful of the French nation after the debacle of 1940 was something indeed.

Phil (PJA)

[Paul Hederer]

Phil,

Exactly my point, and why it's good we have discussions like this for members interested in books on subjects related to the Great War, and for anyone else searching the internet later.

Any source must be read critically and with some background on the time-frame and events of the author's time.

The point being made by me (and others) is that Horne's book is brilliant, but it has factual errors, and it is not a balanced view of the battle. His efforts may have been "heroic" as you say, especially from a British standpoint, but the work stands on its own, as any work does.

It should be read and enjoyed for its poignant style and evocative power. It is not a balanced account of the battle, and readers (especially the uninitiated) should be aware.

As a factual account of the battle it should be read in conjunction with other (unfortunately none in English) accounts.

Paul

[bob lembke]

Paul has summed up this question masterfully.

Bob

[SWorrall]

'Les 300 Jours de Verdun' is a straight-forward narrative chronology of the battle published with assistance from the French Dept. of Defence, the Verdun Memorial and other partners.

At around 550 pages (French text only), rich with detail and photographs, it is a terrific piece of work. One might wish that other battles, including those of the BEF, could receive such a treatment.

The ISBN is 9782910536725 . This version (others are avilable) is the full-works hardback, it comes in a library-case, with a map of the battleground and a DVD (in French).

It's a large, heavyweight volume and not cheap. But for a non-judgemental retelling of the progress of the battle, the build-up and aftermath, it's very good.

If you seek a detailed 'what happened, when and where' I'd recomend it.

Simon.

[Paul Hederer]

Simon,

That's a great book! I actually bought mine at Ft. Douaumont, for a much lower price than I've seen elsewhere. I actually asked the nice lady at the small boutique there if the price was correct as it was much lower than at the museum.

Outstanding book--great illustrations and text. Really glad I bought it.

Paul

edit: I popped upstairs, and I see that I have the map, but no DVD, which probably explains the price difference, but that's OK by me.

'Les 300 Jours de Verdun' is a straight-forward narrative chronology of the battle published with assistance from the French Dept. of Defence, the Verdun Memorial and other partners.

At around 550 pages (French text only), rich with detail and photographs, it is a terrific piece of work. One might wish that other battles, including those of the BEF, could receive such a treatment.

The ISBN is 9782910536725 . This version (others are avilable) is the full-works hardback, it comes in a library-case, with a map of the battleground and a DVD (in French).

It's a large, heavyweight volume and not cheap. But for a non-judgemental retelling of the progress of the battle, the build-up and aftermath, it's very good.

If you seek a detailed 'what happened, when and where' I'd recomend it.

Simon.

[SWorrall]

The entrance/exit/retail outlet at Douaumont is a mine of useful books and material that you'll never see in the UK.

I'm planning a 2 week trip in early November, including 3 or 4 days around Verdun.

I'll have a few spare shekels to spend in there. That's a certainty.

Simon.

[Guest Ginchy]

Having been interested in this particular battle for many years i feel that an in depth English language history of Verdun has been long overdue.

The arguments that Horne's history cannot be bettered (very questionable) and that there is no interest in a battle that did not involve English participants falls flat on its face.

How can this argument hold true when one considers the extensive range of books on the Russian-German war of 1939-1945 ?

An English translation of some of the French books mentioned would be most welcome (although costly i would imagine).

Christina Holstein - would you undertake writing such a history ?

[bob lembke]

The entrance/exit/retail outlet at Douaumont is a mine of useful books and material that you'll never see in the UK.

I'm planning a 2 week trip in early November, including 3 or 4 days around Verdun.

I'll have a few spare shekels to spend in there. That's a certainty.

Simon.

I was once at Douaumont, but only for minutes, having a disinterested wife in tow. (Have since swapped wives.) My father told me that he was there long after the great explosion and the about 600 dead from the explosion of May 9, 1916 (from memory) were still lining a corridor, layered quicklime, corpses, blankets, quicklime, etc., etc. up to a height of 6 feet. Many would have been killed if they tried to take them outside and bury them. I gather that they are still there, behind a wall.

Pardon the deviation OT; I think that many would like to hear my father's stories; I don't think that we have many Pals left with a father who fought at Gallipoli and Verdun. He loved the war, often told me it was the "best years of his life", and told me many, many stories, which I wrote down carefully, that I now realize are 99% accurate. (Within two weeks of being demobbed from WW I he signed up for another, the civil war with the Bolsheviks in Berlin.)

Bob

[Halder]

It's been interesting reading the comments on books on Verdun--what strikes me is how little new has been written in almost the past 50 years. "A balanced view of the battle," was mentioned, and that, for sure has not been written.

It's a real shame that some of the works by the German authors have not been translated--Werth's Verdun would be a smash hit for sure, containing interviews with many Verdun veterans that the author recorded in the 50's and 60's. Hermann Wendt's PhD study, later published, is one of the finest books written about Verdun, though it remains almost completely unknown, even in German. I don't agree with his conclusions, but the book is valuable in the fact that he accessed the now destroyed German archives in a manner anyone writing a book about Verdun would like to do...

On Horne I would like to comment. One reviewer described "The Price of Glory," as a "brilliant, and deeply flawed work..." for me that sums up Horne. The book is by far the best work on Verdun in English, and as I pointed out (rather tongue in cheek) it's been translated into many languages, including German and French, which I think speaks for the worth and brilliance of the work itself.

Yes, the book has factual errors, and most Germans I know laugh a bit at its portrayal of the German side of the battle, but the book is evocative, and valuable. Verdun as a non-British battle could have been relegated to obscurity for modern readers if it hadn't been for Horne. For whole generations his book is their connection with the Great War. It is truly a popular work, which is a rarity for 1914-18. The only other work I can think of that touches it would be "The Guns of August," which seems to have fallen a bit out of favor in the past decade or so.

Excellent post, Paul and I concur wholeheartedly. I think I said a couple of years ago that Horne's the 'elephant in the room'. We tiptoe around the Price of Glory. We shouldn't. Don't ditch Horne, but treat his book for what it is: a 50-year-old study and, though wonderfully readable, I think it's rather past its sell-by date. I mean, you wouldn't use Wolff as the chief study for Passchendaele in 2011, or Carell for Normandy or North Africa for that matter.

A lot of material has been unearthed in that time, be it on the human level with personal papers (I wonder what treasures the Msg 1 and 2 series at BA-MA hold, for example; historians are only just beginning to tap them) and the serious studies like Robert Foley's book on Falkenhayn, or the Afflerbach biography of the same. I can't speak for the French side because it's most definitely außer meiner Kompetenz.

I would like to think of a new book on Verdun as a remake, as the cinema might call it, a new interpretation of an well-known story, shedding fresh light and giving new insights.

I hope that in 2016 there'll be a 100th anniversary book, good, solid, readable, narrative history, a worthy successor to Horne, based on research from both sides. And now's the time to start researching it...

[Paul Hederer]

Hello Richard!

I think the challenge lies between telling what happened and telling why it happened. I'm not sure we even have the first bit right, and for sure the second part has caused historians to scratch their heads for 90 some years.

My epiphany came when I was in the German military archives looking through the working folders of the official history writers. Reading the transcripts of the interviews they had with various figures involved with Falkenhayn and Verdun you can clearly see that they didn't understand the battle. They asked exactly the types of questions I would ask today. "How was the concept of attrition to be implemented?" "Why were not enough forces allocated to attack on both banks?" "What was the intent of the battle?" The answers are not very illuminating.

I am convinced that Es ist etwas faul im Staate Dänemark when it comes to our understanding of Verdun. Sure, we know what happened (more or less considering the confusion of war) but I'm not sure we understand the concept of the battle. I think there was a lot of track covering done later to save what shreds of reputation were involved.

I remember a quip from a German writer, I forget who, who said something like, "I've heard a rumour that Knobelsdorf is writing his memoirs. I guess he has enough to hide to make it worth while for him to do so."

The destruction of the archives makes it a very formidable task to tell the German side of things. Even Wendt, who I mentioned earlier, who had access to the archives, came to some pretty strange conclusions about Falkenhayn and his intentions.

Paul

[SteveMarsdin]

I am convinced that Es ist etwas faul im Staate Dänemark when it comes to our understanding of Verdun.

Paul

Well, I suppose some people's understanding of Agincourt is based on Shakespeare's "Henry V"; if only the bard was around to write up Verdun for us

[Paul Hederer]

Well, I suppose some people's understanding of Agincourt is based on Shakespeare's "Henry V"; if only the bard was around to write up Verdun for us

Adroitly done, Sir!

[phil andrade]

Why is this battle so enigmatic ?

Other battles retain their reputations for controversy ; but they are not, as far as I know, so elusive when it comes to determining their provenance.

Horne does not dwell on this mystery : he accepts Falkenhayn's notorious Christmas Memorandum at face value, and makes the narrative intelligible in its light.

The historiography of Verdun drives home that old saying that the more you find out about something, the more you realise how little you know about it.

Phil (PJA)

[Halder]

The historiography of Verdun drives home that old saying that the more you find out about something, the more you realise how little you know about it.

Phil (PJA)

Indeed so. I'm currently knee-deep in Stalingrad (mercifully not literally) and coming across fresh insights and accounts even after 70 years, and it's one of the most analysed battles of WW2. What's struck me is that we've pretty much forgotten that Stalingrad was a sideshow - history's been so fixated on that battle, it's overlooked that the Caucasus was the goal of the 1942 campaign and the defeat there was even more decisive, it's just there wasn't an Entscheidungsschlacht, it just sort of petered out before Vladikavkas...

As for Verdun, I'd be tempted to have a go at it if a publisher would stump up £20K (because with time in the archives and source material, battlefield visits, I'd say that's a sensible estimate to give the battle the sort of Beevor or Hastings-esque treatment it deserves for modern readers). It's not a good time to go cap in hand to publishers (as I've found) unless you're a 'big name' and there aren't really any of the 'big names' writing about WW1 presently to the best of my knowledge.

[Halder]

The destruction of the archives makes it a very formidable task to tell the German side of things. Even Wendt, who I mentioned earlier, who had access to the archives, came to some pretty strange conclusions about Falkenhayn and his intentions.

Paul

Hi Paul,

Do any of the Nachlaß of the commanders plug some of the gaps caused by the archive's destruction? I ask because quite a few of the senior commanders in WW2 seemed to have kept copies of war diaries/Anlagen with their personal papers - Heinrici and Guderian spring to mind; the latter had a copy of his Corps' war diaries certainly when writing his memoirs of the Polish and French campaigns in the early 50s - long, long before they were officially released to historians in the archives.

[Paul Hederer]

Hey Richard,

I have not found any smoking guns in the archives, no--and I know others have been where I've been before. There is new material to be found. This summer I stumbled on some material that offers a good and rational explanation why the initial ammunition allocation was six days for the battle--something I had always wondered about. I also looked for the ammunition expenditure statistics for the artillery, and drew a blank. On intuition I took a look at a file on artillery on the Somme and found that some RA historian had hand copied all the statistics for Verdun into the file for comparison! So it goes.

A look at the military aspect explains a lot of the "mysteries" surrounding the battle. I think it's been looked at so much as a human tragedy that the military aspect has been lost. There is a lot to be learned by looking at 5. AOK's operations. A lot of later speculation about the battle simply doesn't hold water when you look at the hard facts of logistics and the likes.

Robert Foley did a lot of great work in putting the battle into perspective--there is a lot more to be done.

Paul

[truthergw]

I am enjoying this thread enormously. I am also delighted that the nagging feeling that something was missing in the story of Verdun was not just my fevered imagination. Although I still don't know what it is, It's good to know that other people have sensed it too. One of the complicating factors in trying to analyse Verdun is the amount of political baggage it generated, both at the time and some years later. That means that a certain amount of cynicism should be applied when reading the memoirs and accounts. The OP asked for a good book on Verdun and I believe Horne fits that description. I also think it is one of the classic books of the Great War. If anyone wishes to be well read in WW1, Paths of Glory is a must.

[phil andrade]

Paul,

You remind me of the story of Prometheus. When will you break your bonds and unleash all your knowledge about Verdun in print ?

Edit : Would you mind divulging those stats. about munitions expenditure from the RA, comparing Somme and Verdun ?

Phil (PJA)

[Paul Hederer]

Paul,

You remind me of the story of Prometheus. When will you break your bonds and unleash all your knowledge about Verdun in print ?

Edit : Would you mind divulging those stats. about munitions expenditure from the RA, comparing Somme and Verdun ?

Phil (PJA)

Phil,

Well, I have been working on my doctoral thesis on Verdun for almost two years now. It has been slow going. The focus is Verdun in the context of Germany's development of a Festungskrieg (fortress or siege warfare) capacity and capability. This is centered on the development of guidance and regulations, and the growth of the Pioniere and Schwere Artillerie.

It has been an interesting journey, and has not taken me where I expected to go. My initial inspiration for following this course was the amount of debate that surrounded Verdun in German military circles discussing what type of battle it could be classified as. I think some of this reflects the ambivalence felt about the battle by military professionals.

This is understandable, when looked at in context of the changes in warfare that occurred in the period 1870-1914. The "intrusion" of elements of fortress warfare into open warfare generated a lot of thought and confusion. Some German theoreticians wrote on the convergence of the two types of warfare--and this is the view I have adopted as well. It does explain a lot of what happened in 1914-1918. This theory was not universally accepted or recognized.

So, getting back to Verdun. I wanted to make a military examination of the battle. What methods did 5. AOK use to capture their objectives at Verdun. To do this I've had to go back to 1870, and work forwards to establish "normal." I do believe what is lacking in some military history is context of procedures and methods--if we don't know what constituted "normal" in the minds of soldiers of the day, how can we correctly evaluate later events.

Some would argue that a study of fortress warfare has no bearing on Verdun, as the fortress was unarmed, not considered a fortress, etc. This I do not agree with--simply put, warfare on the Western Front had evolved into a creature that possessed almost every facet of prewar concepts of fortress warfare. Throw in the fact that Verdun had some of the best fortifications of the time, and an advanced infrastructure of defenses in the fortress intervals, and I think the case is easily made.

What makes the context even more compelling was that once you establish what "normal" was in the realm of fortress warfare, you can see where a lot of the elements of 5. AOK's plan for the Verdun offensive came from--a good deal of it comes almost word for word out of the guidance (the 1910 instruction for fortress warfare). Some, but not all. The plan seems to be an unfortunate concoction of some elements, incorrectly applied, and others perhaps developed during the war.

A good example--one of the aspects of the plan that has been debated by historians was the statement in the attack orders that the attack must not be allowed to slow or stop. There has been a lot of teeth sucking trying to reconcile this with the understanding of the concept of the battle (keep German casualties at a minimum, inflict maximum French casualties). The statement is taken almost word for word out if the instructions--not hard to track down its origin if you read the regulations. 5. AOK wanted to capture the fortress--as defined by capturing the east bank (this is clearly defined in the attack instructions) they were not interested in minimizing casualties, they were interested in "winning" the battle.

That there was a disconnect between Falkenhayn's concept and 5. AOK's conduct of the battle is an acknowledged fact. I do believe that Falkenhayn wanted to generate instability on the Western Front by a series of offensives, and by provoking the Allies to attack as well. That makes perfect sense, and it's basically the same plan as Ludendorff undertook in 1918 with a lot more forces. See Robert Foley's German Strategy and the Path to Verdun, for a great explanation of this.

Now I think enters our own disconnect in our understanding of the battle. Falkenhayn had a concept, Verdun was one facet of the concept, not the means to reach the goal. It was to be the initial stage of the plan, not the end. I do not think the way we have perceived the battle is correct--we are seeing it backwards as opposed to forwards--from the end result to the methods.

A lot has been written about using the superior Germany artillery and its concentric fire as the killing agent of the battle to "bleed the French White." This I do not believe to be true. Falkenhayn was complaining in early April about the expenditure of ammunition at Verdun. This hardly squares with the concept outlined above.

Anyhow, this is getting long. What I'm trying to say is that a military examination of the battle explains a lot of the "mysterious" elements of the battle. I think a lot of the confusion and mystery comes from our incomplete and incorrect concepts of what was actually going on with 5. AOK, and the true initial concept and goal of the battle.

Paul

[Paul Hederer]

...and I do apologize to the original poster for pulling your thread to the limits of its original context. I also agree with what was written above--Horne is the best thing on the battle in English. Robert Foley's work (mentioned above) is the best work for putting Verdun into context, and contains a lot of ground-breaking material.

There is a lot of very, very good material in German that will probably never see the light of day in English, and I suspect there may be materials in French I am not familiar with as well.

...also, I think we can be forgiven our confusion about the battle. As I mentioned above, the German professional military historians after the war were confused as well.

Paul

[Robert Dunlop]

'Les 300 Jours de Verdun' is a straight-forward narrative chronology of the battle published with assistance from the French Dept. of Defence, the Verdun Memorial and other partners.

Thanks Simon. It sounds like the two equivalent books about the British and Dominion involvement in the Somme and Third Ypres. Both books are difficult to come by now but 'The Somme: The Day by Day Account' and 'Passchendaele: The Day by Day Account' by Chris McCarthy stand out as very helpful in understanding both campaigns.

Robert