Mud: A Military History

by C.E. Wood

Napoleon delayed his attack at Waterloo to allow the mud to dry. Had he attacked earlier, he might have defeated Wellington before Blücher arrived. In November 1942, Russian mud stopped the Germans, who could not advance again until the temperature dropped low enough to freeze the mud. During the Vietnam War, “Project Popeye” was an American attempt to lengthen the monsoon and cause delays on the Ho Chi Minh Trail. Soldiers have always known just how significant mud can be in war. But historians have not fully recognized its importance, and few have discussed the phenomenon in more than a passing manner. Only three books— Military Geography (by John Collins), Battling the Elements (by Harold Winters et al.), and Battlegrounds ) (edited by Michael Stephenson)— have addressed it at any length and then only as part of the entire environment’s effect on the battlefield. None of these books analyzed mud’s influence on the individual combatant. A Military History first defines the substance’s very different types. Then it examines their specific effects on mobility and on soldiers and their equipment over the centuries and throughout the world. From the Russian rasputiza to the Southeast Asian monsoon, C. E. Wood demonstrates mud’s profound impact on the course of military history. Citing numerous veterans’ memoirs, archival sources, personal interviews, and historical sources, soldier-scholar Wood pays particular attention to mud’s effect on combatants’ morale, health, and fatigue. His book is for all infantrymen—past, present, or the clean, dry, comfortable armchair variety.

Genres: Military Fiction, Nonfiction, War, History

206 pages, Hardcover

First published August 1, 2006

Reviews

[Petter · Rating 2 out of 5]

Lest stykkvis og delt. En del interessante anekdoter fra historien.
For spesielt interesserte? Jepp

[Justus · Rating 3 out of 5]

Sort of interesting but not exactly compulsively readable. Other reviews have compared it to an extended encyclopedia entry and that comparison feels apt. It has lots of interesting anecdotes about the impact of mud on the battlefield -- such as the soldier who was run over by a tank...but because the mud was so deep, the weight of the tank didn't kill him, it just pressed him into the mud and he survived.

But because there's no overarching narrative or thesis, it is really just a collection of facts & stories about mud. It is easy to pick up and read a few pages and then put it down for a while. It is harder to read the entire book in a few sittings.

The focus -- due to the understandable reliance on sources showing the impact on infantrymen -- is almost exclusively on the modern era, WW1 and onwards.

I think that even most grognards will find this a bit too niche for their tastes.

[William · Rating 3 out of 5]

"Mud--A military History" by C.E. Wood, at first seems more off-beat than profound. Deceptively thin, "Mud" is a good reminder that the best laid plans of generals can often be undone by the weather. Rain plus dirt equals a morass that can slow any army trying to "get there fastest with the mostest."

As Wood explains it, mud falls in one of two categories. Type 1 is "bottomless mud", the thick stuff that tanks and trucks sink into and don't get out of easily. Type 2 is anything that is not type 1, basically 2a--very watery mud, or 2b, very thick mud that sticks to everything.

Wood offers many examples on how armies coped--or failed to cope--with mud. In WWII, Russians took mud into account when crafting the T-34 tank, with its wide treads and near-centrally mounted engine. It never bogged down, unlike German panzers which had to fight it during mud season--spring thaw or fall rains. Wood offers the example of Guderian in Russia, eager to capture his objective to avoid getting bogged down in fall mud. And then he made damn sure his army was paving a road to his rear to maintain his line of supply.

Mud made it impossible for infantry to advance across "No man's Land" during the Battle of Pascehndale, a fact that generals in the rear failed to appreciate in their planning.

It was also the scourge of the doctor and the engineer. Packed with bacteria, mud could complicate bullet and shrapnel wounds with some nasty infections. Engineers had to find a way to lay down runways and roads on the muck.

Common infantry could love it or hate it. Type 1 mud is easy to dig, so getting a foxhole or a trench in can be a snap. But it could also sap morale, making troops wet, cold and filthy. Mud could also be the mark of a veteran, as his filthy uniform tells all newcomers that the guy had "been there, done that." Newbies always have clean uniforms.

Wood's little book makes a useful adjunct for the casual history reader. It rounds out the understanding of battle by analyzing that which is mentioned briefly in all too many accounts and histories. Mud is a factor in battle, stifling the offense and aiding the defense if one knows how to use it to one's advantage.

Wood examines what we take for granted, and does so in a very readable prose. The book seems trivial, but in truth looks at its subject as a serious factor affecting battle. It is definitely a useful adjunct for the serious reader of military history.

[Mark Luongo · Rating 3 out of 5]

An interesting but dreary little book about the impact of "wet dirt" (there are a number of types) on military operations, morale, and logistics. Did you know the U.S. hoped to increase the amount of mud in SE Asia by purposing to seed clouds and produce more rainfall? This was an idea to impede the flow of traffic on the Ho Chi Minh Trail. The project was turned down. The author uses a number of primary sources, including Bill Mauldin, to convey how mud produces a reduction in morale and efficiency of troops in the field. An old Wall Street colleague of mine, and Vietnam vet, used the expression "Die in mud" as a jab at someone. Now I know why he used it.
One note that disturbed me was the death of Lord Ponsonby at the Battle of Waterloo in 1815. The wet grounds were churned up so by the repeated charges and produced a mud so thick that movement of men and horses was prohibited. Lord Ponsonby's horse could not negotiate the mud which left the rider helpless and unable to flee. Ponsonby was skewered to death by Napoleon's lancers as he attempted to escape.
Good place to start if you're interested in the influence of environment on warfare.

[Steve · Rating 4 out of 5]

During and after the Gulf War (aka, Operation Desert Storm, and the first war I watched unfold in close to real time) I remember all of the stories from soldiers and in the media about the sand, how it impacted military operations and affected the individual soldier’s daily life. This book, written by Gulf War veteran and history professor C.E. Wood, takes a focused look at another battlefield phenomenon, Mud. Covering wars from the American Civil War to Operation Iraqi Freedom ("modern" warfare being more impacted by mud), this book was a quick read and full of great first person accounts of battlefield mud, particularly its effect on the health and morale of the troops. With plenty of citations to the source materials and a large bibliography this book had an academic feel about it but it is written in such a way that it is still an informative and interesting read about something that seems mundane, but has played a major part in military history.

[Tito Quiling, Jr. · Rating 2 out of 5]

From the introduction, one could tell that this was a thesis or a dissertation from the way it was written and reminded me a lot of the systematic writing process and categorization which includes the statement of the problem, the significance, the scope and the limitations.

However, it is quite interesting to read how something that seems quite insignificant can bear so much on warfare. Looking at the various states of mud, there are some notable information given such as how to tread this terrain using different natural components such as logs and banana trunks, as well as trying out military shoes. The tone could be overhauled in terms of reeling in the reader, since it projects a rather cold narration, which does not help in the entirety of the book.

[Tomi · Rating 1 out of 5]

I believe this may have been a doctoral thesis (and if so, why do people complain about how hard it is to get a doctorate degree?). Basically, mud causes problems on the battlefield. Well, duh. Simplistic, repetitive, and a waste of my reading time...