Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Officers in WWI.
 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
  Share Topic Share Topic  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Officers in WWI.
    Posted: 04-Aug-2008 at 18:02
The one thing that always strikes me whenever I read about WWI fatalities, is the sheer number of junior officers killed. It was the single most dangerous occupation in the field. Simply put, if you were an officer up til Lt Col and below, you had a very slim chance it out alive.

I know the general reason why this occured, officers are targeted specifically; were often easy to determine etc. What interests me is how this loss affected morale and effectiveness both amongst the officers themselves and more importantly their units. Junior leadership is the backbone of an army, can't be good to have such losses.
Back to Top
Al Jassas View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 07-Aug-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1810 		  Quote Al Jassas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04-Aug-2008 at 18:47
Generals didn't fare so well either, Britain lost almost 80 generals and Germany 73 I think. the war was just a slaughterhouse nothing more.
 
Al-Jassas
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04-Aug-2008 at 19:09
Yes despite the myth and sterotype of officers and generals living in comfort at the rear, they faced the dangers too.
Back to Top
Peteratwar View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel


Joined: 17-Apr-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 591 		  Quote Peteratwar Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05-Aug-2008 at 08:25
Yes, my school has an Archway across one of the roads into it. It is full of the names of the pupils who were killed in WWI. Very sad, all in the 18-25 year range.
Back to Top
Cryptic View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke

Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 05-Jul-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1962 		  Quote Cryptic Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05-Aug-2008 at 23:55
Originally posted by Sparten

What interests me is how this loss affected morale and effectiveness both amongst the officers themselves and more importantly their units.
The accounts I read all indicate that a combination of genuine patriotism, peer pressure and very public shaming of hesitant officers kept morale for collapsing.  Poetry form the era suggests than many junior officers developed a Kamikaze sense of fatalism and sacrifice.
 
As a side note, most WWI officers were drawn form the upper classes.  The casualty rates from elite schools such as Eton or La Sorbornne were actually higher than those from working class trade schools. WWI was probably the only war where social elites were statistically more likely to get killed than men from the working classes. 


Edited by Cryptic - 05-Aug-2008 at 23:56
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Aug-2008 at 04:38

Yet ironically its the upper class which is supposed to have had a cushy war.

Losses amogst officer were higher in WWII as well, but in WWI it killed a generation of young middle and upper class men.
Back to Top
Al Jassas View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 07-Aug-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1810 		  Quote Al Jassas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Aug-2008 at 14:44
Entire familied becaume extinct because of WWI. As for the upper classes losing so much, the upper classes always lost more during war because war was the upper and middle classes game, nobody ever expected not asked working class and country people to go to either war but those who were amongst the upper classes were.
 
Al-Jassas
Back to Top
Challenger2 View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel
Avatar
Suspended

Joined: 28-Apr-2007
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 508 		  Quote Challenger2 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Aug-2008 at 15:34
Originally posted by Cryptic

The accounts I read all indicate that a combination of genuine patriotism, peer pressure and very public shaming of hesitant officers kept morale for collapsing.  Poetry form the era suggests than many junior officers developed a Kamikaze sense of fatalism and sacrifice.
 
As a side note, most WWI officers were drawn form the upper classes.  The casualty rates from elite schools such as Eton or La Sorbornne were actually higher than those from working class trade schools. WWI was probably the only war where social elites were statistically more likely to get killed than men from the working classes. 
 
This may have ben true in 1914, but taking the example of the british Army, the expansion of the peacetime army [K Divisions, etc.] meant that most of the "junior" officers came from middle class or working class backgrounds. ANZACs were less class-ridden throughout, as were the Americans, later on. The German Army relied more on NCOs in the junior leader role, with a much lower Officer/Enlisted ratio.
 
It's also dangerous to set too much store on the War Poets like Sassoon, et al. as indicators of prevailing atitudes. Poetry and literature that has not achieved as much prominence paints a differnt picture. 


Edited by Challenger2 - 08-Aug-2008 at 15:37
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7035 		  Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Aug-2008 at 15:50
Some people might well be interested in the War Poets Association (website http://www.warpoets.org/ )
 
I was invited to the launch reception in Paris is 2004, and I know that the chief organiser, Paul O'Prey, Vice-Chancellor at Roehampton, would be particularly interested in any information anyone might have about war poets in the 20th century who were involved in other conflicts than the 'obvious' ones: WW1, WW2, the Spanish Civil War, and Ireland.
 
Personally I've been surprised at the lack of war poetry from Russia/the Soviet Union (as opposed to poetry about the Revolution).
Back to Top
Cryptic View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke

Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 05-Jul-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1962 		  Quote Cryptic Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Aug-2008 at 16:47
Originally posted by Challenger2

 
This may have ben true in 1914, but taking the example of the british Army, the expansion of the peacetime army [K Divisions, etc.] meant that most of the "junior" officers came from middle class or working class backgrounds. ANZACs were less class-ridden throughout, as were the Americans, later on.
I can see that as casualties mounted, more British officers were drawn from the middle class.  Even with the casualties, I can't Britain commisioning very many, if any working class officers in WWI. True, the Americans were less class concious, but the college education (rare in 1917) requirement for officers limited the number of working class commissions. 
 
One certainty is that the social elites pulled their weight in WWI.  Even with America's limited invovlement, a Princeton graduate was as likely to get killed as the son of a share cropper. The equal sacrifice (and arguably more than equal) by the social elites helped to prevent large scale Communist inspired social unrest in post war France and Britain
Back to Top
Challenger2 View Drop Down
Colonel
Colonel
Avatar
Suspended

Joined: 28-Apr-2007
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 508 		  Quote Challenger2 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09-Aug-2008 at 07:58
Originally posted by Cryptic

I can see that as casualties mounted, more British officers were drawn from the middle class.  Even with the casualties, I can't Britain commisioning very many, if any working class officers in WWI.


You'd be surprised, as I was.  P.E. Razzell's book on the social origins of officers in the home and Indian armies 1758-1962 states that in the "technical" branches [engineers, artillery, etc], the middle class predominated. The upper classes and aristocracy tended to gravitate into the Cavalry and more fashionable Infantry Regiments, like the Guards. Furthermore most if not all universities had an Officer Training Corps by 1914. By 1917 the Army was widely promoting veteran NCOs into officers, regardless of social origin. Experience counted more than social status.    
Back to Top
Cryptic View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke

Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 05-Jul-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1962 		  Quote Cryptic Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09-Aug-2008 at 14:59
Originally posted by Challenger2

 By 1917 the Army was widely promoting veteran NCOs into officers, regardless of social origin. Experience counted more than social status.    
Yes, tyhat is very surprising and definetly goes against the stereotypical British attitude. Germany seems to have responded the same way to the casualty crisis, but instead of commisioning NCOS (which they might have done as well), they routinely placed experienced NCOS in command of platoons and companies.
 
Strangely, the USA did neither in WWII.  If the official organization table called for an officer, a new officer (of varied social origins) was obsessively assigned to the position ASAP, even if vastly more experienced NCOS were readily available to fill it.  This practice really impacted infantry platoons and companies.  Likewise, battlefield  commissions from NCO to officer were very rare.  
 


Edited by Cryptic - 09-Aug-2008 at 15:00
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09-Aug-2008 at 16:26
suming this up it seems that jounior officer were genrally of upper or middle class backgrounds.
 
however due to the massive casualties amoungst this group SNCOs were often comissioned
 
these casualties were caused for a number of reasons
 
1. the tactics of time time caused casualties amoughts all i.e. up and over the top. technology had grown fater than militarty tactics
 
2. officers were expected to lead from the front putting them in even more danger
 
3. poorly armed usually pistol and sorwd, not exactly equiped for battle
 
4. other ranks were taught to aim for officers to render the masses leaderless this targeting combined with increased use of snipers further added to officer casualties and probably links to the high level of genrals killed 153 according to another post on this tread
 
5. However despite this causalties morale remained stable as it was what was expected i.e. hugh pressure on those recutent to go to war in upper classes
 
6. far reaching effects i.e. whole generations of middle and upper class men whiped out and indead whole families
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09-Aug-2008 at 16:43

Although the British did commission lots of experienced NCOs as officers it should be remembered that the great mass of the men  who became officers joined up in the mobilisations of 1914-15. If you were upper class you pretty much had to join. Very few artistocratic familys were untouched by the war.

 
The losses amongst officers reverberated as many good combat leaders got killed instead of promoted, meaning a lot of deadwood survived to make it to higher ranks.
 
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.078 seconds.