What do you think?
Rate this book
Memoirs of My Services in the World War, 1917-1918
The author recounts his experiences as an Army officer on the staff of General John "Black Jack" Pershing in France during the First World War. Marshall was a key planner of American operations. He was also instrumental in the design and coordination of the Meuse-Argonne offensive, which contributed to the defeat of the German Army on the Western Front.
268 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1976
2 people are currently reading
94 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
April 11, 2020
Written between 1919 and 1923, the book is George Cattlett Marshall’s record of World War I as he experienced the events. His narrative begins with the entrance of the USA into the war, which had already been going for almost three years.
After the battle of Jutland (1916) that halted the surface battles between Germany and Great Britain, Germany announced unrestricted warfare on January 31, 1917; on February 3 the USA severed its relations with Germany.
Marshall’s memoirs are a remarkable first-person account; with the sinking of many American vessels, the Zimmerman Telegram, and the Combat Division, the WWI history after the joining of the States is complex, and the narrative of any insider contributes to its understanding.
Marshall is more praised for his diplomatic and military skills than for writing abilities. Nevertheless, his account of the First Infantry Division and of the General preparation for war is interesting; for example, the impressive transportation of 2 million US soldiers to France was an unknown fact to me before I read this book. (Same goes for the preparedness of the US navy VS unpreparedness of the US army and the Punitive Expedition to the border Mexico.)
Valuable appendix to the book is the account of the three trips to Europe Marshall and General Pershing undertook during the Armistice.
On September 11, 1951, after serving in both the WWI and WWII, Marschall was proclaimed the “first soldier of the USA” by President Truman. His memoirs are recommendable for a more in-depth understanding of how a WWI participant saw the “war to end all wars”.
After the battle of Jutland (1916) that halted the surface battles between Germany and Great Britain, Germany announced unrestricted warfare on January 31, 1917; on February 3 the USA severed its relations with Germany.
Marshall’s memoirs are a remarkable first-person account; with the sinking of many American vessels, the Zimmerman Telegram, and the Combat Division, the WWI history after the joining of the States is complex, and the narrative of any insider contributes to its understanding.
Marshall is more praised for his diplomatic and military skills than for writing abilities. Nevertheless, his account of the First Infantry Division and of the General preparation for war is interesting; for example, the impressive transportation of 2 million US soldiers to France was an unknown fact to me before I read this book. (Same goes for the preparedness of the US navy VS unpreparedness of the US army and the Punitive Expedition to the border Mexico.)
Valuable appendix to the book is the account of the three trips to Europe Marshall and General Pershing undertook during the Armistice.
On September 11, 1951, after serving in both the WWI and WWII, Marschall was proclaimed the “first soldier of the USA” by President Truman. His memoirs are recommendable for a more in-depth understanding of how a WWI participant saw the “war to end all wars”.
February 2, 2015
This was an absolute gem of a find, tucked away in the top corner of the clearance shelf at Half Price Books for $2.00. Reading this rounds out a solid sampling of American command memoirs from the Great War, as I've already read Pershing's two-volume work and Billy Mitchell's short memoir as well. It's interesting to see the similarity of the style between the three books, all of which could have easily been written by the same author. Coming from three high-ranking military officers in the same period provides a consistent window into the language and behavior of the first World War, an era that seems to us not so far away but at the same time exceptionally remote.
Marshall's book was never meant for publication; he wrote it in the 20s and left instructions to have the manuscript destroyed after his death. Thankfully, his wishes weren't adhered to. Marshall was mid-ranking officer during the Great War, which gives his recollections a different flavor from those of a senior general or a private soldier. After reading his role in the events of 1917 and 1918, it's easy to see how he would rise to become the "Organizer of Victory" in the Second World War, as Forrest Pogue would refer to him in the third volume of his definitive biography of the General. A fitting sobriquet for the man who was arguably the finest staff officer ever produced by the United States military.
For anyone looking for a comprehensive study of American involvement in World War I, this isn't the book for you. It's a short read at just over 200 pages, and is focused on Marshall's memories and personal involvement, not intensive study of strategy, tactics and events. That said, however, he compellingly recounts the stories of those he encountered to paint a picture of live in the AEF at a number of different levels.
One of my favorite topics to study is leadership, probably why I'm such a devotee of military and presidential history. Marshall's memoirs provided some immediate fodder for the whiteboard in my office. One quote in particular sums up Marshall's character, even though he was referring to others at the time:
"The hurly-burly of the conflict does not permit commanders to draw fine distinctions; to succeed, they must demand results, close their ears to excuses, and drive subordinates beyond what would ordinarily be considered the limit of human capacity."
Marshall's book was never meant for publication; he wrote it in the 20s and left instructions to have the manuscript destroyed after his death. Thankfully, his wishes weren't adhered to. Marshall was mid-ranking officer during the Great War, which gives his recollections a different flavor from those of a senior general or a private soldier. After reading his role in the events of 1917 and 1918, it's easy to see how he would rise to become the "Organizer of Victory" in the Second World War, as Forrest Pogue would refer to him in the third volume of his definitive biography of the General. A fitting sobriquet for the man who was arguably the finest staff officer ever produced by the United States military.
For anyone looking for a comprehensive study of American involvement in World War I, this isn't the book for you. It's a short read at just over 200 pages, and is focused on Marshall's memories and personal involvement, not intensive study of strategy, tactics and events. That said, however, he compellingly recounts the stories of those he encountered to paint a picture of live in the AEF at a number of different levels.
One of my favorite topics to study is leadership, probably why I'm such a devotee of military and presidential history. Marshall's memoirs provided some immediate fodder for the whiteboard in my office. One quote in particular sums up Marshall's character, even though he was referring to others at the time:
"The hurly-burly of the conflict does not permit commanders to draw fine distinctions; to succeed, they must demand results, close their ears to excuses, and drive subordinates beyond what would ordinarily be considered the limit of human capacity."
May 18, 2022
George C. Marshall was one of the top five most important personalities in the United States' successful involvement in WWII. This text lists his memories of World War 1 when he was a young officer on John J. Pershing's staff.
The opening and closing chapters are must-reads for a general audience, though unless you have a specific interest in warfare or World War I, you may find the middle chapters a bit dry.
Some of the passages that stuck with me reminded me of Clausewitz' maxim (and I paraphrase): "War is simple, but in war even simple things are hard." Concerning the qualities that make a decent officer, Marshall simply suggested "rugged fitness and an ample supply of common sense." And this passage from p. 172 implies there's no single best personality for warfare, but different phases require different strengths:
"The First Army at this time required men in the key positions, of the dashing, optimistic and resourceful type, quick to estimate, with relentless determination, and who possessed in addition a fund of sound common sense, which operated to prevent gross errors due to rapidity of decision and action. The man of the conservative type, who laboriously builds up a machine until it functions perfectly, who does not instantly impress strange subordinates with his powers of leadership, had little opportunity to demonstrate his ability; the issue had passed before he could master the situation. Men of this type were the victims of our policy of unpreparedness. They usually prove to be the soundest and greatest leaders, like Kitchener for example, in a methodically developed organization or system, but the budding reputations were sacrificed with distressing frequency in the hurly-burly of unprepared America at war."
I think that passage reveals the beginning of a personal philosophy which, in full bloom, greatly benefited American preparation for WWII from '39 to '41. While US Army Chief of Staff in '39, Marshall instituted policies which picked the best leaders for particular missions. He was famous (or notorious) for appointing some colonels and generals leadership over training missions in the states and then other generals leadership in the field. Prior to Marshall's tenure, continuity of divisional leadership was considered paramount. During his term, the "best man" for the current situation was put in place. I was fascinated to see this passage from WWI foreshadow that policy in WWII.
And there's a great description of John J. Pershing on page 176: "Throughout this crisis General Pershing carried himself with an air of relentless determination to push the operation to a decisive victory. His presence inspired confidence and his bearing convinced those with whom he came in contact that the weak-hearted would be eliminated and half measures would not be tolerated." I guess don't mess with General Pershing.
All in all, I greatly enjoyed the first few chapters and the last two chapters (including the final one about the arrangements around the November 11th armistice.) The middle chapters were interesting, but not as thrilling. Interspersed in the text are vignettes which reveal tiny bits of the man who was to become America's orchestrator of WWII.
Well worth the time to read.
The opening and closing chapters are must-reads for a general audience, though unless you have a specific interest in warfare or World War I, you may find the middle chapters a bit dry.
Some of the passages that stuck with me reminded me of Clausewitz' maxim (and I paraphrase): "War is simple, but in war even simple things are hard." Concerning the qualities that make a decent officer, Marshall simply suggested "rugged fitness and an ample supply of common sense." And this passage from p. 172 implies there's no single best personality for warfare, but different phases require different strengths:
"The First Army at this time required men in the key positions, of the dashing, optimistic and resourceful type, quick to estimate, with relentless determination, and who possessed in addition a fund of sound common sense, which operated to prevent gross errors due to rapidity of decision and action. The man of the conservative type, who laboriously builds up a machine until it functions perfectly, who does not instantly impress strange subordinates with his powers of leadership, had little opportunity to demonstrate his ability; the issue had passed before he could master the situation. Men of this type were the victims of our policy of unpreparedness. They usually prove to be the soundest and greatest leaders, like Kitchener for example, in a methodically developed organization or system, but the budding reputations were sacrificed with distressing frequency in the hurly-burly of unprepared America at war."
I think that passage reveals the beginning of a personal philosophy which, in full bloom, greatly benefited American preparation for WWII from '39 to '41. While US Army Chief of Staff in '39, Marshall instituted policies which picked the best leaders for particular missions. He was famous (or notorious) for appointing some colonels and generals leadership over training missions in the states and then other generals leadership in the field. Prior to Marshall's tenure, continuity of divisional leadership was considered paramount. During his term, the "best man" for the current situation was put in place. I was fascinated to see this passage from WWI foreshadow that policy in WWII.
And there's a great description of John J. Pershing on page 176: "Throughout this crisis General Pershing carried himself with an air of relentless determination to push the operation to a decisive victory. His presence inspired confidence and his bearing convinced those with whom he came in contact that the weak-hearted would be eliminated and half measures would not be tolerated." I guess don't mess with General Pershing.
All in all, I greatly enjoyed the first few chapters and the last two chapters (including the final one about the arrangements around the November 11th armistice.) The middle chapters were interesting, but not as thrilling. Interspersed in the text are vignettes which reveal tiny bits of the man who was to become America's orchestrator of WWII.
Well worth the time to read.
March 13, 2019
A very impressive insight into the rigors of planning massive operations. Not unexpected, given the author’s place in history; it is a wonderful surprise at how witty, charming, and insightful Marshall writes his memoir.
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews