Surname

Instructor

Course

Date

Introduction

Giving an explanation and a recommendation to a historic war is very tricky. The author of the book ‘the price of glory’ writes about the events that occurred from day to day on the battlefield and the stories of soldiers. The Battle of Verdun which took place from February to December 1916 is worth to be considered as the greatest battle that took place between Germany and France. Based on the subject of the author from a perspective of both the French and the Germans, he succeeds in recreation of battle’s totality. He illustrates the calamities experienced by both armies and even the victories at some point. There are plagues that hit the soldiers in the battlefield regardless of their side and the Verdun Battlefield gets filled with corpses of dead soldiers.

Early on the introduction of the book, the author expresses his own feelings and perspective on the battle when he indicates the battles to be a small affair. There is an indication of how the battle was carried out from the beginning to the last days of the war. Verdun was the one of the worst war battles and the home zeros in on it since it had so much significance in the entire war and the quantity of loses that were experienced at that war. He claims that just before the war began, Germans were the most likely winners of the battle, but as the soldiers hit the ground, their chances of emerging victorious got narrower. Horne indicates that the Battle of Verdun had much significance in the war, that is why it is very vital to be more attentive to the battle. He further indicates that Verdun has so much influence in France even in the current generation. Besides, it had great influence in the on how the French engaged in battle with the Germans in the second world war. That is the reason why it was possible for the Germans to defeat the French easily (Home 2). Horne tries to provide a graphical imagery of the whole occurrence of the bloody battle. The author writes of the Germans capture of the French village, “pioneers arrived with charged flamethrowers ready to fire and the few remaining defenders were burned alive in a catastrophic fire (Horne 86).

When inspecting the events that took place in the Battle of Verdun, it is clear that the battle took place in conquest for superiority between Germany and France. This is because, from a wide perspective of world war I, there is an indication that Germany had gained very little while they attacked France while at the same time, France lost very little. In addition, the area of the battle was not situated at a location that could give Germans an allowance of going further into the land of French. On the other hand, the area did not allow for the French to block the supply routes for the Germany. That indicates that the two armies were prepared to fight till they prove the superior country. From the accounts given by Horne, it is distinctive that Verdun was all about pride to find out the better or the superior of the two nations. Looking back at the factors that contributed to irritations that triggered the two countries to go war, it seems to be a small piece of land. This is an awkward reason for going to war especially when using other factors such as nationalism to justify an evil deed. The interesting part of this particular account of the war as compared to other historical accounts in existence of human history, there is a direct existence of pride supported by nationalism.

The author uses excerpts to show the motive and the outcome of anything that happened at any particular point. Horne, accounts that despite the loss of thousands of lives, the two battling nations did not gain anything at the end of the battle. Generally, the French won the battle when viewing it from a military perspective although they had nothing to brag of as the benefit from the battlefield. Based on the perception of benefiting factor, the entire battle could be deemed a futile and useless from the beginning to the end, since both nations managed to advance, they suffered numerous causalities which weakened them for future defense. Also, the battle was brought to an end after realization of how much loss each of the countries was encountering.

Horne maintains on the careers, the looks of the men at war and the qualities thus giving them more attention than the events themselves. However, he uses his skills to make the reader empathize with the horrid conditions and the distasteful experiences undergone by the soldiers in the battlefield. This is one thing that get clear as the war nears the end.  It seems horrible and unforgivable for Kaiser for being the root cause of the world war I that largely affected the entire world. A reader or an historian of whatever type has the feeling that the bloodshed that was shed during this period cannot be compensated. A reader hopes to read the end of the war when they realize the much bloodshed that is shed within the first few days. However, there is more focus on the French’s story side because the Germans are always associated with the first world war.

As Horne dwells on the qualities and the careers of the soldiers, it gets to be understood that the thoughts of a single person cannot fill the gaps of the entire book or understand all the events that took place in the battlefield. Therefore, there much sense in incorporating the egos and the personalities of people who were eager to see the battle continue. An example of such is a French General Nivelle who succeeds in creating a tactic that delivers Fort Douaumont giving him victory and credit for the same. Nivelle’s ego pushed him to think that he would achieve the same results in the later months. He tries doing it in different places to be more victorious and the results end up being the loss of 120,000 soldiers. This break and destabilizes the army of France. It is not clear to define how big the battalion was, but with one’s own inadequacies, it can be assumed to have been quite big but smaller than division. From a personal understanding, it is not clear or logical how the movements of such several groups worked.

The writing of this book is very convenient for historical readers, writers and researchers. It has been broken down into smaller chapters that are clear to understand and give the reader a visualization of the actual situation. The author tries to make the reader emotional so that they can perceive how the situation was on the battlefield. He compares that battle with the battle of Some and writes, “not even on the Some battlefields was a situation so pathetic and miserable as this”. By writing this, the author wants the reader to gauge the magnitude of the battle of Verdun.

Conclusion

The Battle of Verdun can be considered as the worst battle that ever happened in the written history. It had so many causalities from the two sides that were engaged. No one won the battle eventually although in the military sense, French would be considered to have taken the victory. The plan of the German to cause bloodshed on the French soil resulted in a long-lasting misery and destruction. With regard to Horne’s account of the battle and the opinions that he gives shows the entire battle of Verdun was for no gains but rather superiority of the nations. It a mere waste of human life as so many lives were lost and portrays nationalism and high-level pride which led to the useless actions describable as insanely imprudent. The battle left people with permanent physical and mental injuries that endured their entire life. The author has tried to engage the reader with the actual events by using various styles and techniques of writing. He has more focus on the soldiers than on the actual place or the events which brings emotional touch to the reader rather than the battle field which would probably bring the desire to tours the place. Verdun has ever since remained to be a symbol to the French people. The most unfortunate thing about Verdun is that its symbolism is a tragic legacy.