Alistair Horne's 'The Price Of Glory'

The Price of Glory Response Paper

One may argue that in order to fully understand the horrific realities of the First World War, then attention must be paid to the bloodiest battle of the bloodiest war, the Battle of Verdun. In his skillful narration of the battle, The Price of Glory: Verdun 1916, Alistair Horne describes Verdun to be the First World War in microcosm, “an intensification of all its horrors and glories, courage and futility” (Horne 327). Naturally, the death toll at Verdun was astounding, with 700,000 total casualties and 300,000 dead, the vast numbers undoubtedly triggered the questioning as to how a single battle, which notably only lasted for ten months, caused such carnage? In analyzing the significance of the battle,

However, a notable difference that Horne establishes while describing the German General Erich von Falkenhayn as “ruthless [he] lacked the tenacious purpose” (32) will reflect heavily on the German’s tactical doctrine. An agreeable assumption as to Horne’s lack of detail in Germany’s tactical doctrine, as compared to the French, is in fact the lack of purpose, because there is not much to be said about an army fighting for the sake of fighting. In the third chapter, Horne is in no way reserved in his portrayal of Germany’s General Falkenhayn. Horne paints General Falkenhayn as a commander with a weak vision for strategic warfare and a man crippled by an indecisive demeanor. Naturally, the third chapter gives a great deal of attention to Falkenhayn’s infamous memorandum to his Kaiser. The point taken from Falkenhayn’s lengthy memorandum is of course his proposal of an attack on Verdun, in order to “bleed them to death” (36). However, the memorandum does more than simply voice an objective, the context of the letter can be read as a demonstration of Falkenhayn’s senseless vision for strategy. Falkenhayn had some elusive scenarios for what he wished to achieve, yet no clear strategic objective, which would come back to haunt the German

Still, the number of casualties calls for a much greater understanding for the Battle of Verdun and those who fought in it. Lieutenant Georges Gaudy described what he witnessed when his regiment returned from their fighting near the Fort Douaumont in May and the description of his regiment is disturbing in every sense of the word. Lieutenant Gaudy writes that although his men had stone-cold expressions on their faces, “they wept in silence, like women” (188). Horne’s intimate portrayal of the soldiers who experienced the horrors of Verdun first-hand raises the question as to why the French continued to defend and why the German’s continued to attack because by the late spring, the gap between the level of anguish on each side was becoming increasingly narrow and soon that gap would not even be distinguishable. As for the motivations for both armies, prestige and morale played a large role in the sustained endurance and this can be linked back to the ideals of nationalism. In the first three months, the French had lost important fortresses surrounding Verdun, namely Malancourt on March 31st, Haucourt on April 5th, and then Bethincourt on April 8th (165). With these early defeats, it is thought provoking as to why the French continued to fight.