Poilu: a French term meaning “the hairy ones.” It became a common term for French troops during WWI.
I’ve read a handful of first-person accounts of the Great War lately, but this one was different. It wasn’t published until the 1970s, so unlike accounts published during the war, it wasn’t trying to boost patriotism or garner support from neutral nations, and it wasn’t affected by censorship. Another nice change was that this one didn’t end with the author disappearing or getting shot and dying in a hospital or dying in a plane crash. By some miracle, Louis Barthas survived the war. After the war, he felt it his duty to tell, for all those who hadn’t survived, what it was really like.
The general picture of the outbreak of WWI is that the nations involved were excited to go to war, eager to right real or perceived wrongs. They were all planning on a quick victory. If parts of Europe was excited to go to war, Barthas was not. At all. He had a wife and two children and an established job. He was also recovering from a serious illness, but even illness couldn’t stall the call-up.
When WWI broke out, France had a universal conscription system. Men served three years of active duty, then eleven years in the reserves. Even then, they weren’t done. Two additional levels of reserve status came next, each lasting seven years. Barthas was in his thirties during the war, in the third group of men. Before the war began, the plan was for members of these two older groups to maintain garrisons, guard prisoners, and dig graves, freeing up younger men for duty at the front. Unfortunately, France suffered so many casualties that by the end of 1914, Barthas’s initial assignment guarding German POWs ended and he was sent to the trenches. He stayed on front-line duty, either in the trenches or nearby in reserve, with only brief furloughs home, until 1918.
Life in the trenches was awful. Barthas spent several winters there, with wet feet and no shelter for long stretches of time. Even when they were given “rest” duty, their shelters were usually infested with lice, or crowded with too many men, or in barns with damaged roofs, or on floors softened only by manure-soaked hay. In describing the alternation between rest duty and trench duty, Barthas says “We were going from Purgatory to Hell and from Hell back to Purgatory.” When it wasn’t freezing, it was usually dusty, hot, and smelly. The water and food situation was often poor, so going a few days without a meal was common.
Later in the war, Barthas was assigned to lead a squad of young men given the chance to get out of prison if they joined the army. He says, “It was a strange deal: to pardon them for stealing, they sent them out to kill.” Barthas became a father figure to many of these boys, but most of them didn’t survive the war.
Eventually Barthas moved to a 37mm mortar crew. By 1918, he was so worn out that his physical strength was gone. A kind officer (more on officers later—but kind ones were rare) finally realized he needed some serious rest. Barthas spent time in a few hospitals, then ended the war as an instructor.
Barthas saw action in many different fronts, so this book offers insight into multiple campaigns and battles. His unit was reorganized during the 1917 mutinies, so the book offers insight into those events as well. His book shows how soldiers were treated during the war, on the front and when they interacted with civilians. Early in the war, some local farmers padlocked their well so the soldiers wouldn’t drink it dry. They were also stingy with sharing their hay for bedding material. In contrast, in Paris late in the war, anyone in uniform was allowed to skip to the front of the line, and tram conductors told them to keep their money when it was time to collect fares.
One thing that surprised me was information on French medical care. I’m used to reading about US Navy Corpsmen serving with Marines in WWII’s Pacific theater. They generally went into danger without hesitation and were generally willing to risk their lives for those they tried to help. That’s not the experience Barthas had. French stretcher-bearers might go to the front line trenches, if it was dark, and if a high-ranking officer was injured. For the average soldier, if he was wounded, he better hope he had some friends to take him to the field station, or that his injury was minor enough that he could make it there under his own power. And if he was wounded in no-man’s land? Well, he better not get his hopes up. No stretcher-bearers would come to his aid. The doctors themselves were usually cold and uninterested in their patients. Barthas did interact with better medical personnel as the war progressed, but his initial experiences left me hoping that he just had really bad luck, that not all the doctors were as horrible as the ones he met.
Another shock was the overall mindset of French officers. I’ve grown up in a country founded on liberal ideals (note: when I say liberal ideals, I am referring not to left-wing politics, but to classical liberalism, such as John Locke’s theories on contract government). For the French soldier, his life was not his own. When called up, he became the property of the state, usually treated no better than an animal. Barthas summarized his opinion best in his own words: “The best leader wasn’t the cleverest tactician, but rather the one who knew best how to keep his men alive.” and “Real courage, for a leader, isn’t blindly executing every order that’s given to him. It’s refusing to execute that order when his conscience tells him to, to save human lives from being sacrificed uselessly.” Barthas did have a few decent officers, but most of them were despicable. I read someone once describe how in the US Army, there were officers and men. In the British Army, there were gods and slaves. The French Army was similar to that—Barthas and the other soldiers were slaves until the war was over.
Barthas was a critic of the Kaiser, but not of the German soldier. He realized they were just like him—stuck under a militaristic government and forced into a war. There were times when his squad, at the front trench, reached reciprocal agreements with the opposing troops not to fire at each other, to keep a calm section quiet.
Barthas was at war for a long time. There were a few times when I found myself thinking “I’m only on 1916? I feel like I’ve been reading this for a long time to only be halfway through the war.” But my only real complaint is that sometimes I don’t think Barthas gave his officers the benefit of a doubt. True, most of the officers he served under didn’t deserve much respect, but it’s also true that they were in difficult situations. At one point, he condemns Petain for gaining glory at Verdun on the backs of dead poilus, but he doesn’t suggest what Petain should have done instead. Would he have preferred the French Armies retreat from Verdun? Had Petain allowed that, he would have been relieved, and the new commander might have made things even worse. At other times too, I felt Barthas assumed those over him were trying to be vindictive. In reality, I think the French Army was often overwhelmed and under-prepared. Problems, yes, but not usually the result of an intentional desire to make life miserable for the average soldier. Then there is that phenomenon called “the fog of war.” Sometimes the officers were just as confused and in the dark as the men they command.
If you only read one book on the Great War, you may want to pick something that will provide a bigger picture from the top rather than this detailed account from the bottom. But for readers interested in the common soldier’s experience, I very much recommend this one. 4.5+ stars, rounding up to 5 for goodreads.