Meuse-Argonne Offensive (Military History)

Introduction

The Meuse-Argonne Offensive, lasting from 26 September 1918 to 11 November 1918, constituted the largest and bloodiest engagement of American forces in World War I. Part of a series of concentric attacks devised by Marshal Ferdinand Foch against German positions on the Western Front in the autumn of 1918, it aimed at the capture of the important railway junction at Mézières, which supplied a large portion of the German forces in France. German forces in this area did not enjoy the luxury of trading space for time, and they were under orders to defend to the last. The offensive is usually said to have resulted in 120,000 American casualties, including 26,000 dead, most of them having fallen in the offensive’s first three weeks. Combat in the Meuse-Argonne was extremely intensive, and had a profound effect on all who participated in it, but whether it impacted the development of American military doctrine is debatable. The Meuse-Argonne is controversial in the sense that American historians have tended to emphasize its importance in overall operations on the Western Front in 1918, while many European historians have dismissed it as insignificant. Comparatively little has been published about the offensive in either article or book form. Only four general studies have been published—in 1919, 1987, 2007, and 2008—but none of these works are comprehensive in scope. Scattered writings exist on various aspects of the offensive, from celebrated heroes, such as Alvin C. York, to individual episodes, such as the saga of the Lost Battalion or the attack on Montfaucon. Numerous articles have been published, mostly in the 1930s and 1960s, about the role of artillery and gas warfare units in the offensive; however, aside from a single-volume collection of essays to be published in 2014, not much has been written about infantry combat, tanks and aircraft, or the problems of logistics and command. Next to nothing has appeared in any language on German or French participation in the Meuse-Argonne. Published American personal accounts exist in abundance, however, and vast archival sources remain untapped in the National Archives and at the US Army Heritage and Education Center in Carlisle, PA.

General Overviews

Only four substantive studies of the Meuse-Argonne have been published, although these may be supplemented by other texts. Palmer 1919 was for many decades the only full study of the offensive, and it provides some useful contemporary perspective despite its journalistic tone. US Army General Staff College 1919 is likewise of interest as a contemporary description from the professional military perspective. American Battle Monuments Commission 1992 remains indispensable for any study of American military participation in World War I, particularly with regard to its in-depth consideration of local topography and maps. Braim 1987, the first academic monograph solely concerned with the Meuse-Argonne, is sparse and written solely from the top-down perspective. Ferrell 2007 covers the same ground as Braim but corrects a number of errors and presents new insights into how Pershing and his staff conducted the battle. Lengel 2008 is the only thorough tactical study of the Meuse-Argonne, and this work merges perspectives from both staff and from the soldiers. Lengel 2014 presents a collection of twenty-nine essays that reflect current scholarship on the offensive, including studies of French and German participation.

American Battle Monuments Commission. American Armies and Battlefields in Europe. Washington, DC: US Army Center of Military History, 1992.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A single-volume official history of American military participation in World War I. Compiled by a team of officers including then-Major Dwight D. Eisenhower, it provided a guide to all American battlefields including the Meuse-Argonne, accompanied by detailed maps, photographs, and text descriptions of the course of events. The study remains immensely valuable. Originally published 1938.
Find this resource:
Braim, Paul F. The Test of Battle: The American Expeditionary Forces in the Meuse-Argonne Campaign. Newark: University of Delaware Press, 1987.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Originally a PhD dissertation, Braim’s study provides the first critical, albeit imperfect, study of American operations in the Meuse-Argonne. Only about half of the text deals with the battle itself, with the other half providing background information. The first edition of this book was highly critical of Pershing and his staff; a revised edition published by White Mane Publishers in 1998 somewhat toned down this criticism.
Find this resource:
Coffman, Edward M. The War to End All Wars: The American Military Experience in World War I. New York: Oxford University Press, 1968.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Coffman’s work has long been the standard scholarly account of American military participation in World War I. It provides essential contextual information about the formation of the American Expeditionary Forces, the contest over amalgamation, and the development of strategic priorities in the autumn of 1918 that led to the Meuse-Argonne. Includes a brief but solid survey of the course of the offensive and its consequences.
Find this resource:
Ferrell, Robert H. America’s Deadliest Battle: Meuse-Argonne, 1918. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 2007.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
This work covers much of the same ground as Braim 1987, and it is also sparse. Ferrell’s copious archival research nevertheless allows him to present an accurate and well-contextualized portrait of the campaign from the staff point of view. More sympathetic to Pershing and his officers than either Braim 1987 or Lengel 2008.
Find this resource:
Lengel, Edward G. To Conquer Hell: The Meuse-Argonne, 1918. New York: Henry Holt, 2008.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Thorough narrative account of the battle that emphasizes the soldiers’ point of view, quoting extensively from accounts of veterans. As such, it reflects the bitterness with which many doughboys perceived the alleged mismanagement of the offensive.
Find this resource:
Lengel, Edward G., ed. A Companion to the Meuse-Argonne. Chichester, UK: Wiley-Blackwell, 2014.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A collection of twenty-nine essays by as many scholars on various aspects of the offensive, including command, logistics, equipment, tactics, French and German perspectives, commemoration, and memory.
Find this resource:
Palmer, Frederick. Our Greatest Battle: The Meuse-Argonne. New York: Dodd, Mead, 1919.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Journalistic account, heavily colored by wartime propaganda. Palmer helped to publicize heroes and episodes such as Alvin C. York and the Lost Battalion.
Find this resource:
US Army General Staff College. Staff Ride: Meuse-Argonne Operations. US Army, 1919.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The US Army attempted to incorporate lessons learned from the offensive as evinced in this staff ride, which informed American Battle Monuments Commission 1992 and other subsequent official studies.
Find this resource:
Personal Accounts

Of the hundreds of published American firsthand accounts of combat in World War I, dozens include some depictions of fighting in the Meuse-Argonne. Items included here under Combatants and Generals and Staff are the most significant and revealing books in their genres, but see Sources for more information.

Combatants

Berry 1978 and Hallas 2000 are compilations of several accounts but provide useful starting points for research. Barkley 2012 and Thomas 1929 depict the experiences of two Medal of Honor recipients. Duffy 1919 provides a celebrated chaplain’s perspective of the 42nd Division. Baker 2007, Lawrence 1985, and Triplet 2000 are three of the best American war memoirs and probably the most realistic published accounts of combat in the Meuse-Argonne.

Baker, Horace L. Argonne Days in World War I. Edited by Robert H. Ferrell. Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 2007.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Originally published in 1927. Revised version of a rough but engaging memoir by a private of the 128th Regiment, 32nd Division. Baker saw combat in the crucial assault on the Heights of Cunel and Romagne in October, and he offers a compelling vision of combat.
Find this resource:
Barkley, John Lewis. Scarlet Fields: The Combat Memoir of a World War I Medal of Honor Hero. Edited by Steven Trout. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 2012.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Originally published in 1930 under the title No Hard Feelings! Barkley, a private in the 4th Regiment, 3rd Division, received the Medal of Honor for an action near Cunel on 7 October when he occupied an abandoned French tank and broke up a German attack with a machine gun. Although Barkley probably exaggerated elements of this memoir, it remains one of the best American accounts of combat in World War I.
Find this resource:
Berry, Henry. Make the Kaiser Dance. New York: Doubleday, 1978.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A compilation of several firsthand accounts transcribed from interviews that the author conducted with World War I veterans. Includes several useful accounts of fighting in the Meuse-Argonne.
Find this resource:
Duffy, Francis P. Father Duffy’s Story: A Tale of Humor and Heroism, of Life and Death with the Fighting Sixty-Ninth. New York: George H. Doran, 1919.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Insightful and opinionated memoir by the famous chaplain of the 165th Regiment, 42nd Division. Duffy is highly critical of poor American leadership and of pointless assaults made against German defenses in mid-October.
Find this resource:
Hallas, James H. Doughboy War: The American Expeditionary Force in World War I. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 2000.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A compilation of dozens of firsthand accounts taken from a variety of printed sources. A valuable introductory resource and guide to further research.
Find this resource:
Lawrence, Joseph Douglas. Fighting Soldier: The AEF in 1918. Edited by Robert H. Ferrell. Boulder: Colorado Associated University Press, 1985.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Lawrence served as a second lieutenant with the 113th Regiment, 29th Division. One of the best American accounts, with exceptionally vivid accounts of the fighting east of the Meuse River in October.
Find this resource:
Thomas, Lowell. Woodfill of the Regulars: A True Story of Adventure from the Arctic to the Argonne. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, Doran, 1929.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Woodfill, a lieutenant with the 60th Regiment, 5th Division, was one of the most prominent American Medal of Honor recipients of World War I. He received the medal for his conduct in eliminating several German machine gun nests near Cunel in mid-October. Thomas probably enhanced the account just as Tom Skeyhill did for Alvin C. York, but it remains a compelling book.
Find this resource:
Triplet, William S. A Youth in the Meuse-Argonne: A Memoir, 1917–1918. Edited by Robert H. Ferrell. Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 2000.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Triplet was a sergeant in the 140th Regiment, 35th Division, which collapsed in fighting in late September in the Meuse-Argonne. This exceptionally readable memoir provides realistic depictions of combat.
Find this resource:
Generals and Staff

All personal accounts are biased, but perhaps none more so than those written by generals and staff officers who participated in the Meuse-Argonne. Bullard 1925 provides perspectives on the overall campaign as well as on the Montfaucon affair and the experiences of African American troops. Harbord 1936 and Marshall 1976 are vital sources on logistics. Dickman 1927 showcases the activities of the 3rd Division and I Corps in the Meuse-Argonne. Liggett 1925 provides disappointingly sparse recollections by the commander of I Corps in the initial Argonne Forest fighting and of First Army in the final offensive in November. Wright 2004 presents the remembrances of the commander of the 89th Division, which played a peripheral role in the final stages of the offensive. Mitchell 1975 justifies at length the role of the air service throughout the war, including the Meuse-Argonne. Pershing 1931 leaves out as much as it includes, but remains indispensable for any study of the offensive.

Bullard, Robert Lee. Personalities and Reminiscences of the War. Garden City, NY: Doubleday Page, 1925.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Bullard, former commander of the 1st Division, commanded III Corps in the Meuse-Argonne. His memoirs provide some insight into the affair at Montfaucon in September and the 1st Division’s drive toward Sedan in November. Includes observations on the alleged incompetence of African American troops of the 92nd Division.
Find this resource:
Dickman, Joseph T. The Great Crusade: A Narrative of the World War. New York: D. Appleton, 1927.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
An unusually honest and realistic memoir depicting the activities of the 3rd Division in the offensive’s initial stages, and of I Corps after the capture of the Argonne Forest in mid-October.
Find this resource:
Harbord, James G. The American Army in France, 1917–1919. Boston: Little, Brown, 1936.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Harbord, who commanded the 4th Marine Brigade and the 2nd Division in the spring and summer of 1918, commanded the Service of Supplies by the time of the Meuse-Argonne. A detailed and intimate memoir that provides valuable observations on logistics in the Meuse-Argonne.
Find this resource:
Liggett, Hunter. Commanding an American Army: Recollections of the World War. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1925.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
See also Hunter Liggett, A.E.F.: Ten Years Ago in France (New York: Dodd, Mead, 1928). These complementary memoirs unfortunately skim over many details of command and combat during Liggett’s tenure at the head of I Corps and First Army. Probably most useful for Liggett’s candid observations on his methods of administration and command.
Find this resource:
Marshall, George C. Memoirs of My Services in the World War, 1917–1918. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1976.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
An important work on the logistical preparations for the offensive, in which Marshall played a critical role, and for Marshall’s creative approach to logistical and communications problems during the rapid American advance in November.
Find this resource:
Mitchell, William. Memoirs of World War I: “From Start to Finish of Our Greatest War.” Westport, CT: Greenwood, 1975.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Mitchell’s memoirs are harshly critical of American infantry, artillery, and overall command during the Meuse-Argonne, arguing that the entire offensive might have ended in failure had it not been for the heroic efforts of Mitchell’s air service.
Find this resource:
Pershing, John J. My Experiences in the World War. 2 vols. New York: Frederick A. Stokes, 1931.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Pershing’s memoirs of the war are a starting point for future study. While reasonably honest in his presentation of the offensive and the problems it encountered, Pershing left out many controversial points and avoided subjects that might have reflected badly on his former comrades. Worthy for Pershing’s perspective on US-French relations, administrative and political problems, and war aims during the offensive’s final phase.
Find this resource:
Wright, William L. Meuse-Argonne Diary: A Division Commander in World War I. Edited by Robert H. Ferrell. Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 2004.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Wright commanded the 89th Division, which played a relatively minor role toward the end of the offensive, and later took command of III Corps. Useful more for what it reveals about a division commander’s administrative responsibilities than for any particular insights on the Meuse-Argonne.
Find this resource:
Sources

Published primary source records for the Meuse-Argonne can be exceptionally difficult to locate. Unit histories, for example, exist in abundance from divisional to company level, but no comprehensive published guides exist to aid in their location. Published personal accounts also exist in quantity, although they are quite uneven in quality. Lengel 2004 aids in the easy identification of those accounts that deal at length with the Meuse-Argonne.

Lengel, Edward G. World War I Memories: An Annotated Bibliography of Personal Accounts Published in English since 1919. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow, 2004.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A guide to the hundreds of published American accounts of the war, with an index pointing to those with content on the Meuse-Argonne.
Find this resource:
African Americans

One of the more significant if little-known dramas of the Meuse-Argonne involved the travails of the African American 368th Regiment, 92nd Division. Stationed on the west flank between the US 77th Division (I Corps) and the French Fourth Army, the regiment was tasked with advancing toward Binarville while maintaining liaison between the Americans and French. Unfortunately the regiment broke down under fire, thanks in large part to the incompetence of its white officers. Instead of apportioning blame where it was due, the army scapegoated junior black officers and soldiers, and used the 368th Regiment’s failure as a justification for resisting integration in World War II. Scott 1919 and Sweeney 1919 discuss the travails and successes of black troops of the 92nd and 93rd Divisions from the African American point of view. Army War College 1923 records the US Army’s first faltering attempts to understand what went wrong at Binarville. American Battle Monuments Commission 1944 chronicles the day-by-day activities of the 368th and other components of the 92nd Division. Barbeau and Henri 1974 is a standard survey of African American participation in World War I, but it has been largely supplanted by the fine analysis of the same subject presented in Williams 2010. Ferrell 2011 briefly surveys some salient issues related to the struggles of the 368th and subsequent repercussions. Roberts 2004 supplies valuable comparative analysis of the striking successes of the African American 93rd Division in the Champagne.

American Battle Monuments Commission. 92nd Division Summary of Operations in the World War. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 1944.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
One of a series of official booklets (see Unit Studies), providing a detailed, dispassionate account of the 368th Regiment in the Meuse-Argonne.
Find this resource:
Army War College, Historical Section. The Ninety-Second Division, 1917–1918: An Analytical Study. Washington, DC: Army War College, 1923.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Includes extensive primary documents, including testimony from white officers, compiled in the course of the army’s postwar investigation of the 368th Regiment.
Find this resource:
Barbeau, Arthur E., and Florette Henri. The Unknown Soldiers: African-American Troops in World War I. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1974.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
This was the first modern survey treatment of the experiences of African American troops in World War I, from recruitment and training to deployment overseas. Includes discussion of the 368th in the Meuse-Argonne and remains a useful introduction to the subject despite the publication of Williams 2010.
Find this resource:
Ferrell, Robert H. Unjustly Dishonored: An African American Division in World War I. Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 2011.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Although it is the only modern monographic study to focus solely on the 368th, this work amounts to little more than a brief survey of the topic.
Find this resource:
Roberts, Frank E. The American Foreign Legion: Black Soldiers of the 93d in World War I. Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute, 2004.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Model study of the African American 93rd Division, which performed very effectively under French command in the Champagne even as the 92nd struggled in the Meuse-Argonne. A useful comparative study that points toward the type of thorough analysis that remains lacking for the 92nd.
Find this resource:
Scott, Emmett J. Scott’s Official History of the American Negro in the World War. Chicago: Homewood, 1919.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Though not scholarly by any means, Scott’s book, along with Sweeney 1919, gave a voice to black veterans and highlighted positive aspects of their contribution to victory that would otherwise have been ignored.
Find this resource:
Sweeney, William Allison. History of the American Negro in the Great World War. Chicago: G.G. Sapp, 1919.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Like Scott 1919, this patriotic work highlights the achievements of African American troops in World War I, including those of the 368th, and points to the racism and unjust treatment that the troops endured.
Find this resource:
Williams, Chad L. Torchbearers of Democracy: African American Soldiers and the Era of the First World War. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2010.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The most definitive scholarly study of African American participation in World War I. Williams devotes substantial attention to the 368th and the army’s unjust treatment of its black officers. The author points out how African American veterans and civilian leaders struggled to develop a narrative of success rather than failure for black soldiers in the war.
Find this resource:
Alvin C. York

York was probably the best-known American hero of World War I. Almost from the moment of his exploits in the Argonne Forest in 1918, the media attempted to build York into a larger-than-life figure who typified the American doughboy. Since then, York has become a more controversial subject, especially in the realm of battlefield archaeology. York 1928 presents York’s own account filtered through the sensationalizing voice of editor Tom Skeyhill. Lee 1985 and Perry 1997 are standard modern biographies. Cooke 1999 places York’s exploits within the larger context of the 82nd Division in the Meuse-Argonne. Birdwell 2004 studies York’s impact on American contemporary culture, while Mastriano 2006 presents a brief portrait of the Medal of Honor exploit as it is currently understood. The authors of Beattie and Bowman 2000 issued the clarion call to identify and memorialize the site of York’s drama in the Argonne Forest.

Beattie, Taylor, and Ronald Bowman. “In Search of York: Man, Myth, and Legend.” Army History 50 (Summer–Fall 2000): 2–14.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A significant article not just for its content, but also for its consequences. Following its publication, competing teams of battlefield archaeologists entered the Argonne to identify the site of York’s action. Each team settled on a different site, and their debate continues to roil York studies today.
Find this resource:
Birdwell, Michael E. “Gobble Like a Turkey: Alvin C. York and American Popular Culture.” In Rural Life and Culture of the Upper Cumberland. Edited by Michael E. Birdwell and W. Calvin Dickinson, 159–177. Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 2004.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Birdwell describes York’s impact on the local culture of his homeland in the Upper Cumberland of Kentucky and Tennessee and on American culture at large. York’s influence persisted well into World War II and beyond, helping to define how American soldiers fought, how they readjusted to civilian life, and how they were memorialized.
Find this resource:
Cooke, James J. The All-Americans at War: The 82nd Division in the Great War, 1917–1918. Westport, CT: Praeger, 1999.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
This valuable survey history studies the joint offensive of the 82nd and 28th Divisions into the Argonne Forest in early October that resulted not only in York’s capture of dozens of German soldiers, but also in the relief of the Lost Battalion.
Find this resource:
Lee, David D. Sergeant York: An American Hero. Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 1985.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
In this, the first full scholarly study of York’s life and career, Lee argues that York’s image countered the slaughter and despair associated with World War I by reassuring Americans that individual integrity and personal bravery still mattered. Lee extends his biography to a thorough treatment of York’s postwar life and popular image.
Find this resource:
Mastriano, Douglas. “Alvin York and the Meuse-Argonne Offensive.” Military History 23.6 (September 2006): 23–29.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Popular account of York by the leader of one of the competing archaeological teams searching for the site of his action in the Argonne Forest. Demonstrates that the heroic image of York remains alive and well.
Find this resource:
Perry, John. Sgt. York: His Life, Legend and Legacy. Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1997.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Popular, exhaustively detailed biography that places emphasis on York’s personality, postwar life, and Christianity.
Find this resource:
York, Alvin C. Sergeant York: His Own Life Story and War Diary. Edited by Tom Skeyhill. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, Doran, 1928.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
This problematical book introduced York to the American public, ostensibly in his own words. However, aside from translating York’s account into a faux Tennessee vernacular, Skeyhill undoubtedly introduced dubious material and possibly outright fabrications to York’s story. Indispensable, but best used with caution.
Find this resource:
Blanc Mont

The simultaneous offensive launched by the French Fourth Army into the Champagne region from September to November 1918 is not properly considered part of the Meuse-Argonne offensive. The French Fourth Army and American First Army were nevertheless to a great extent mutually dependent. The conduct of American forces in the Champagne, particularly the 2nd Division at Blanc Mont, are best considered in conjunction with those of their neighbors in the Meuse-Argonne; and after 1 November, the 2nd Division, including its Marine Brigade, shifted operations from the Champagne to the Meuse-Argonne. US War Department General Staff 1921 provides the official story of the assault on Blanc Mont. Germany, Heer 3, Armee (1914–1918) 1918 and Otto 1930 describe the same events from the German point of view. McClellan 1922 and Lejeune 1930 set forth Blanc Mont particularly as a victory for the US Marines, and Clark 1994 reflects this view. Owen 2007 provides a useful case study for how a Marine battalion progressed and improved in the course of experiences at Blanc Mont, the Meuse-Argonne, and elsewhere. Mackin 1993, one of the finest American personal accounts of combat in World War I, vividly describes events from the perspective of an individual marine.

Clark, George B. The Marine Brigade at Blanc Mont. Rev. ed. Pike, NH: Brass Hat, 1994.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A vivid study of US Marines in World War I, providing a readable narrative of the battle at Blanc Mont. This is the best modern single-volume treatment of the topic.
Find this resource:
Germany, Heer 3, Armee (1914–1918). “The Defensive Operations in the Champagne Mont Blanc Operations: September 26, 1918 to October 9, 1918: from German Point of View.” Translated from original German document by General Staff, Second Section, American Forces in Germany. Typescript, US Army Military History Institute, Carlisle Barracks, PA, 1918.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A valuable quick reference to German operations in this sector, compiled from translations of official German documents.
Find this resource:
Lejeune, John A. Reminiscences of a Marine. Philadelphia: Dorrance, 1930.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Lejeune commanded the Marine Brigade and subsequently the entire 2nd Division during operations at Blanc Mont and in the Meuse-Argonne. His memoir presents a heroic narrative in accordance with wartime marine publicity, but he presents some worthwhile observations on events from the command perspective.
Find this resource:
Mackin, Elton. Suddenly, We Didn’t Want to Die: Memoirs of a World War I Marine. Novato, CA: Presidio, 1993.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Mackin served as a private in the 5th Marine Regiment. He saw combat at Blanc Mont and the Meuse-Argonne, was wounded and suffered from shell shock. One of the best American World War I memoirs and certainly the finest by a marine.
Find this resource:
McClellan, Major Edwin N. “The Battle of Blanc Mont Ridge.” Marine Corps Gazette 7.1 (March 1922).
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Standard popular account of Blanc Mont from the marine point of view. As with Belleau Wood, the marine interpretation of events would dominate the accepted narrative into the current era.
Find this resource:
Otto, Ernst. The Battle at Blanc Mont. Translated by Martin Lichtenberg. Annapolis, MD: US Naval Institute, 1930.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
German lieutenant colonel Ernst Otto had seen action at the Blanc Mont region earlier in the war. In this work, he severely criticized American operations in the battle (providing a stark contrast to the marine narrative presented in other works) and emphasized the heroism of the German defenders.
Find this resource:
Owen, Peter F. To the Limit of Endurance: A Battalion of Marines in the Great War. College Station: Texas A & M University Press, 2007.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Chapters on Blanc Mont and the Meuse-Argonne complete this work on how the 2nd Battalion of the 6th Marines grew as a unit thanks in particular to the battlefield efforts of junior officers and individual marines. Reflecting the work of Grotelueschen 2007 (cited under Military Studies), Owen devotes significant attention to issues of leadership, discipline, tactics, and morale.
Find this resource:
US War Department General Staff. Blanc Mont (Meuse-Argonne-Champagne). Monograph 9. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 1921.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Step-by-step official history of the battle at Blanc Mont, based on archival files that are thoroughly referenced in marginal notations. Prepared in the Historical Branch, War Plans Division.
Find this resource:
Chemical Warfare Studies

In the 1950s and 1960s Rexmond C. Cochrane prepared numerous case studies of aspects of American combat in World War I. Conducted at the behest of the historical office of the US Army Chemical Corps, these studies emphasized aspects of gas warfare in the Meuse-Argonne and elsewhere, describing the impact of German gas on American units and the often feeble attempts of American forces to retaliate in kind. These studies, based on extensive research in official files and other original sources, provide detailed accounts of the individual actions they describe, not just for the artillery but the infantry as well. The title of each study is self-explanatory, and although the circumstances vary somewhat for each unit studied, the conclusions respecting gas warfare are largely similar: poor chemical warfare training resulted in disproportionately large numbers of avoidable casualties for American infantry in the Meuse-Argonne and limited the effectiveness both of defensive and of retaliatory measures. American gas warfare against German units was comparatively ineffective. Cochrane 1959a discusses the critical and comparatively successful drive of the 1st Division past Exermont. Cochrane 1960c, Cochrane 1959b, and Cochrane 1958a chronicle the attacks of the 29th and 33rd Divisions toward the German-held Heights of the Meuse in October and the 26th Division’s supporting role later that month. Cochrane 1960b focuses on the struggle for the Heights of Cunel and Romagne and the 42nd Division’s role in that affair. Cochrane 1957 brings into focus the efforts of the 78th Division in crossing the Aire River north of the Argonne Forest. Cochrane 1960a provides a postscript account of the involvement of the 89th Division in the late stages of the campaign, illustrating how much had been learned by that point. Cochrane 1958b provides an overview of gas operations in the Meuse-Argonne. See also Montfaucon.

Cochrane, Rexmond C. The 78th Division at the Kriemhilde Stellung, October 1918. Edgewood, MD: US Army Chemical Corps Historical Office, 1957.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The efforts of the 78th Division to cross the Aire River above the Argonne Forest witnessed some of the most significant instances of gas warfare used in an offensive capacity by US and French forces, although to uneven effect.
Find this resource:
Cochrane, Rexmond C. The 33rd Division along the Meuse: October 1918. Edgewood, MD: US Army Chemical Corps Historical Office, 1958a.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Addresses the supporting but nevertheless important role of the 33rd Illinois National Guard Division in the struggle for the Heights of the Meuse, and the difficulties it encountered in liaison and supply.
Find this resource:
Cochrane, Rexmond C. The Use of Gas in the Meuse-Argonne Campaign: September–November 1918. Edgewood, MD: US Army Chemical Corps Historical Office, 1958b.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Provides an overview of the effect of gas warfare on the Meuse-Argonne campaign. Although American forces implemented gas in an offensive capacity to a limited degree, it was German gas—particularly mustard—that most profoundly impacted the offensive. Cochrane uses official records to provide detailed data on the subject.
Find this resource:
Cochrane, Rexmond C. The 1st Division in the Meuse-Argonne, 1–12 October 1918. Edgewood, MD: US Army Chemical Corps Historical Office, 1959a.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The 1st Division took over from the ruins of the 35th Division in the vicinity of Exermont and managed a startling advance in the first weeks of October that ultimately made possible the clearing attack on the Argonne Forest on 7–8 October. This study acquires additional value given General Summerall’s avowed interest in artillery and chemical warfare.
Find this resource:
Cochrane, Rexmond C. The 29th Division in the Côtes de Meuse: October 1918. Edgewood, MD: US Army Chemical Corps Historical Office, 1959b.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The 29th Division was heavily involved in fighting to clear the Heights of the Meuse in October and was embroiled in a brutal struggle for the control of Molleville Farm and the high ground beyond it. As the division adjoined French units and served under French command, this account addresses issues of artillery liaison.
Find this resource:
Cochrane, Rexmond C. The 89th Division in the Bois de Bantheville, October 1918. Edgewood, MD: US Army Chemical Corps Historical Office, 1960a.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Chronicles the effect of enemy gas warfare on the largely green 89th “Middle West” Division as it attempted to clear the German-held Bois de Bantheville from 20–23 October, suffering disproportionately high casualties while also benefiting from lessons learned earlier in the campaign.
Find this resource:
Cochrane, Rexmond C. The 42nd Division before Landres-et-St. Georges: October 1918. Edgewood, MD: US Army Chemical Corps Historical Office, 1960b.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The 42nd Division played a central role in the mid-October assault on the German strongpoints on the Heights of Cunel and Romagne. Gas achieved a concentration here rarely seen on other portions of the battlefield and profoundly influenced the course of the fighting.
Find this resource:
Cochrane, Rexmond C. The 26th Division East of the Meuse: October 1918. Edgewood, MD: US Army Chemical Corps Historical Office, 1960c.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Although only entering the latter stages of the campaign to clear the German-held heights east of the Meuse River, the battle-weary 26th developed a serious straggler problem induced in part by German gas warfare efforts.
Find this resource:
German and French Perspectives

While American studies of the Meuse-Argonne are hard to come by, French and German accounts are practically nonexistent despite the valuable role that French forces played in the offensive and the importance of the Meuse-Argonne to Germany’s overall defensive strategy in the final months of the war. In the absence of significant modern works, readers must make do with older general studies and compiled primary sources. Viereck 1929 includes a translated account by General Max von Gallwitz, commanding his own army group in the region and, for a time, the German 5th Army. Gallwitz 1932 presents a fuller account in German. Einem 1938 provides observations from the commander of the German 3rd Army. Tschischwitz 1940 gives the perspective of General Georg von der Marwitz, commanding the German 5th Army. Ministère de la guerre, État-Major de l’Armée, Service historique 1938 and Oberkommando des Heeres 1944 provide important primary source materials for French and German activities in the Meuse-Argonne. Foch 1931, while not focusing largely on the Meuse-Argonne, includes important background and contextual French perspectives on the American effort. Degrande 2010, in Dutch, broadly treats German activities in the Argonne Forest throughout the war.

Degrande, Wim. Feldgrau in de Argonne, 1914–1918: Vier Jaar Strijd vanuit Duits Perspectief. Assebroek, The Netherlands: DeGrande, 2010.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Although primarily focused on German operations in the Argonne in 1914–1915, this work includes descriptions (as well as maps and illustrations) of fighting in the same region in 1918 and thus provides important insights into the nature of combat there during the Meuse-Argonne offensive from the German perspective.
Find this resource:
Einem, Karl von. Ein Armeeführer erlebt den Weltkrieg. Leipzig: Hase & Koehler, 1938.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Einem commanded 3rd Army, responsible for a portion of the Meuse-Argonne sector, and he took command of Army Group Crown Prince after 9 November. This work includes quotations from private letters Einem wrote during the offensive and observations on German troops’ declining powers of resistance.
Find this resource:
Foch, Ferdinand. The Memoirs of Marshal Foch. Translated by T. Bentley Mott. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, Doran, 1931.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The Meuse-Argonne offensive was conceived in discussions between Pershing and Foch on strategy in the autumn of 1918. Foch and other leaders criticized Pershing’s conduct of the campaign. Foch’s memoir says little about the Meuse-Argonne or the role of French forces there but places the offensive in the context of Franco-American military operations in 1918.
Find this resource:
Gallwitz, Max von. Erleben im Westen, 1916–1918. Berlin: Ernst Siegfried Mittler & Sohn, 1932.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Memoir of the primary German commander of units opposing American forces in the Meuse-Argonne and an important supplement to Viereck 1929. Gallwitz comments on the decreasing (though still substantial) combat effectiveness of individual German formations and the growing ineffectiveness of Ludendorff and his staff in the course of the offensive.
Find this resource:
Ministère de la guerre, État-Major de l’Armée, Service historique. Les armées françaises dans la Grande Guerre. 103 vols. Paris: Imprimerie nationale, 1922–1938.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Standard printed primary source for French military operations in World War I. It includes material on French units operating in the Meuse-Argonne and the Champagne, September to November 1918.
Find this resource:
Oberkommando des Heeres. Der Weltkrieg, 1914–1918, die militärischen Operationen zu Lande. Vol. 14. Berlin: Ernst Siegfried Mittler & Sohn, 1944.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
In the absence of many German archival materials lost during World War II, this work provides valuable material on German staff operations in 1918.
Find this resource:
Tschischwitz, Erich von. General von der Marwitz: Weltkriegsbriefe. Berlin: Steiniger, 1940.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Includes field communiqués and diary excerpts for General Marwitz, commanding the German 5th Army, whose responsibilities overlapped with those of Gallwitz.
Find this resource:
Viereck, George S., ed. As They Saw Us: Foch, Ludendorff and Other War Leaders Write Our War History. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, Doran, 1929.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Excerpts from German memoirs and other works translated into English, selected for references to American forces and battles, including the Meuse-Argonne. In the absence of other English-language material, the translated selection by Gallwitz has become a standard reference for the German perspective on the Meuse-Argonne.
Find this resource:
Lost Battalion

The saga of the so-called Lost Battalion of the 77th Division under Major Charles Whittlesey in the Argonne Forest in early October provided perhaps the most publicly identifiable moment of the entire Meuse-Argonne campaign. Americans tired of the grim story of attrition in other sectors zeroed in on the noble heroism of a small band of streetwise New York toughs and western farm boys trapped together for several days in a pocket, fighting off a series of determined German attacks. Reporters—among them a young Damon Runyan—exploited the tale to buoy patriotism and sell newspapers. Wartime legends built up around the Lost Battalion persist today despite the efforts of some historians to dispel them. McKeogh 1919 offers a summary history of the 77th Division in the Argonne that helps to put the Lost Battalion affair into context. Johnson and Pratt 1938 provides the first book-length chronicle of these events, but the work helped to perpetuate numerous myths. Nell 2001 is a rare first-person perspective on the Lost Battalion. Ferrell 2005 and Clodfelter 2006 are minor summary studies and are short on detail. Slotkin 2005 is a popular account that portrays the Lost Battalion saga and its aftermath—along with problems of African American wartime participation—as a cultural phenomenon. Gaff 2005 provides the fullest academic account of the Lost Battalion, successfully dispelling misconceptions through extensive archival research and placing the events in military and cultural context. Laplander 2006, though self-published, is a significant and iconoclastic study based on many years of archival and battlefield research.

Clodfelter, Michael. The Lost Battalion and the Meuse-Argonne, 1918: America’s Deadliest Battle. Jefferson, NC: McFarland, 2006.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Broad history of the Meuse-Argonne that focuses on the saga of the Lost Battalion as its central event. Although providing summary material, this work provides relatively few insights into the events.
Find this resource:
Ferrell, Robert H. Five Days in October: The Lost Battalion of World War I. Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 2005.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Summary account of the Lost Battalion saga, incorporating some archival research into events at the staff level.
Find this resource:
Gaff, Alan D. Blood in the Argonne: The “Lost Battalion” of World War I. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 2005.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
The most complete account available, Gaff’s work traces the course of events at all levels—from staff decisions to day-to-day developments in the pocket—and explores the action’s wider ramifications and aftermath.
Find this resource:
Johnson, Thomas M., and Fletcher Pratt. The Lost Battalion. Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill, 1938.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
This work was the standard study of the Lost Battalion for many decades although it relied heavily on legends perpetuated by word of mouth and poorly cited primary sources. Subsequent studies have exposed numerous errors in this book.
Find this resource:
Laplander, Robert J. Finding the Lost Battalion: Beyond the Rumors, Myths and Legends of America’s Famous WW1 Epic. Waterford, WI: Lulu, 2006.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Probably the most incisive study available of the day-to-day events in the Argonne pocket, based on the author’s extensive research in archival sources and study of the battlefield. Lacks content respecting context, cultural aspects, and aftermath.
Find this resource:
McKeogh, Arthur. The Victorious 77th Division (New York’s Own) in the Argonne Fight. New York: John H. Eggers, 1919.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Unit history that provides details on the 77th Division’s entire (and unique) campaign in the Argonne Forest, placing the Lost Battalion drama in proper context albeit still within the fog of wartime propaganda.
Find this resource:
Nell, John W. The Lost Battalion: A Private’s Story. Edited by Ron Lammert. San Antonio, TX: Historical Publishing Network, 2001.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Memoir by an enlisted man in the 77th Division’s 308th Regiment, focusing on his experiences as a Lost Battalion survivor. The manuscript was originally written in the 1930s and heavily revised by Lammert. An account that is strongly antiwar.
Find this resource:
Slotkin, Richard. Lost Battalions: The Great War and the Crisis of American Nationality. New York: Henry Holt, 2005.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Popular, comparative study of the Lost Battalion and the experiences of African American troops of the 93rd Division. Slotkin looks at these troops in terms of their social contract with the American people and society and the long-term consequences of their experiences on their personal lives.
Find this resource:
Military Studies

Many important aspects of the Meuse-Argonne campaign have received spotty coverage in only one or two articles or monographs. The following are some of the more significant works on these subjects, and they should receive consideration in any integrated study of the campaign. Lanza 1933a, Lanza 1933b, and Lanza 1933c provide careful analysis of the operations of US and French artillery during particular moments of the offensive. Mitchell 1919 presents a naturally biased record of the performance of US air units in the Meuse-Argonne. Rarey 1928 gives further specialized treatment to the role of tank forces in combat. Smythe 1973 explores an understudied—some say scandalous—moment toward the end of the campaign that threatened to derail Franco-American relations. Grotelueschen 2007 is an exceptionally important monograph, covering multiple episodes in American military engagements in 1917–1918, including the Meuse-Argonne, and examining the development of tactics. Ferrell 2008 is the only single work examining the critically important assault on the central portion of the German defenses in mid-October, although it focuses primarily on General Douglas MacArthur’s controversial role in the events. Faulkner 2012 is a valuable study of the problem of American morale in the Meuse-Argonne and points to the necessity for extensive further research on this subject.

Faulkner, Richard S. “Disappearing Doughboys: The American Expeditionary Forces’ Straggler Crisis in the Meuse-Argonne.” Army History 83 (Spring 2012): 6–25.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
An important beginning exploration of the problem of straggling, which threatened to become a crippling issue in the final few weeks of the offensive.
Find this resource:
Ferrell, Robert H. The Question of MacArthur’s Reputation: Côte de Châtillon, October 14–16, 1918. Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 2008.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Ferrell attacks MacArthur’s dubious claim to have personally discovered a gap in the German barbed wire that allowed American infantry to penetrate the central stronghold of the Kriemhilde Stellung. Cogent analysis of a subject that remains controversial.
Find this resource:
Grotelueschen, Mark Ethan. The AEF Way of War: The American Army and Combat in World War I. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2007.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Although only partly dealing with the Meuse-Argonne, Grotelueschen’s book is probably the best scholarly study of American military operations in World War I. The author’s claim that American enlisted troops and junior officers adapted battlefield tactics on the ground and improved as the war progressed is of particular importance for the Meuse-Argonne.
Find this resource:
Lanza, Conrad H. “The First Battle of Romagne.” Field Artillery Journal 23.6 (November–December 1933a): 493–507.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
An analysis of the planning and execution of artillery support for the second stage of the offensive that began on 4 October. Also includes analysis of the German perspective. Lanza argues that the relatively light artillery preparations, which it was hoped would contribute to the element of surprise, resulted in intact German defenses and much higher American infantry casualties.
Find this resource:
Lanza, Conrad H. “The Start of the Meuse-Argonne Campaign.” Field Artillery Journal 23.1 (January–February 1933b): 57–71.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
An examination of the logistical preparations and planning for artillery support in the Meuse-Argonne, stopping just before the offensive began on 26 September.
Find this resource:
Lanza, Conrad H. “Supporting an Infantry Division.” Field Artillery Journal 23.5 (September–October 1933c): 405–425.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A study of artillery support of the beleaguered 35th Division on 28–29 September, arguing that the incompetence of the infantry seriously hindered the effectiveness of the artillery.
Find this resource:
Mitchell, William. “The Air Service in the Argonne-Meuse: The Action in the Air over the Argonne Forest.” World’s Work 38.5 (September 1919): 552–560.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Naturally biased apologia for Mitchell’s decision to focus his efforts on bombing positions far behind the German lines instead of providing tactical air-ground support for the infantry.
Find this resource:
Rarey, George H. “American Tank Units in the Foret d’Argonne Attack.” Infantry Journal 32.2 (March–April 1928): 389–395.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Very brief survey of the role of American tank units in the first days of the offensive; French tank units, which were active throughout the offensive, are not discussed at length.
Find this resource:
Smythe, Donald. “A.E.F. Snafu at Sedan.” Prologue 5.3 (1973): 135–149.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Important study of the American attempt in November to reroute the US 1st Division across the lines of march of two other US divisions and take Sedan before the French arrived there. This move caused a minor crisis in US-French relations and created chaos in the American advance.
Find this resource:
Montfaucon

One of the decisive moments of the entire Meuse-Argonne campaign took place at its outset, when the green 79th Division initially failed to capture the German strongpoint on the butte of Montfaucon. This failure—whether or not it could fairly be blamed on the 79th, as some have claimed and others denied–derailed Pershing’s timetable for the offensive and arguably contributed to future stalemate and heavy casualties by giving the Germans time to bring up reserves. Recriminations flew during and after the war; as such, this incident has received substantial attention in Meuse-Argonne studies. Clark 1918, Malcolm and Cain 1919, and Muller 1919 are unit studies particularly relevant to this episode. Lanza 1933a and Lanza 1933b are studies of the problem of artillery support at Montfaucon, while Cochrane 1960 examines German gas attacks in the area. Colby 1940 is the earliest published professional study of the affair at Montfaucon. Cain 1981 provides a vivid personal account of the action. Mitchell 2011 is a thorough, but in some ways tentative, scholarly study.

Cain, James M. “The Taking of Montfaucon.” In The Baby in the Icebox and Other Short Fiction. Edited by Roy Hoopes, 104–119. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1981.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Cain, the future bestselling novelist, was a 79th Division runner at Montfaucon. In this slightly fictionalized account of his experiences, he provides a valuable perspective on activities at division and brigade headquarters during the attack.
Find this resource:
Clark, William Bell. War History of the 79th Division, National Army. Williamsport, PA: privately printed, 1918.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Short divisional history useful for background on the training, command, and combat record of the 79th, all of which help to explain its failure at Montfaucon.
Find this resource:
Cochrane, Rexmond C. The 79th Division at Montfaucon, October 1918. Edgewood, MD: U.S. Army Chemical Corps Historical Office, 1960.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
One of Cochrane’s several studies of chemical warfare in the Meuse-Argonne, this one focusing on the severe gas casualties that the 79th experienced during and after the attack on Montfaucon.
Find this resource:
Colby, Elbridge. “The Taking of Montfaucon.” Infantry Journal 47.2 (March–April 1940): 128–140.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Incisive, professional military study of the attack, laying bare the inadequacies of American training and the failure of the adjoining US 4th Division to support the attack. Also provides detailed exposition of German defensive measures.
Find this resource:
Lanza, Conrad H. “The Battle of Montfaucon, 26 September 1918: An Artilleryman’s View.” Field Artillery Journal 23.3 (May–June 1933a): 226–248.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Lanza summarizes the plan of attack and then focuses, practically minute by minute, on the problems of artillery support for the infantry at Montfaucon. Emphasizes how the deficiencies of American infantry and air units limited the effectiveness of the artillery in the latter stages of the attack on 26 September.
Find this resource:
Lanza, Conrad H. “The End of the Battle of Montfaucon.” Field Artillery Journal 23.4 (July–August 1933b): 347–367.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A continuation of Lanza 1933a on the subject, carrying the action to the second day at Montfaucon on 27 September and discussing the subsequent stalemate north of the butte. Once again, Lanza emphasizes the breakdown of infantry-artillery liaison and the vigor of German defenses.
Find this resource:
Malcolm, Gilbert, and James M. Cain. 79th Division Headquarters Troop: A Record. Privately printed, 1919.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Somewhat sanitized account of the activities of divisional headquarters at Montfaucon and in other actions, best read in conjunction with Cain 1981.
Find this resource:
Mitchell III, Paul B. “What Were the Causes of the Delay of the 79th Division Capturing Montfaucon during the Meuse-Argonne Offensive in World War I?” MA thesis, US Army Command and General Staff College, 2011.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Survey study based on secondary and some primary literature on Montfaucon. Muller argues that the division’s failure at Montfaucon, and the lack of support from adjoining units, resulted in large part from vaguely worded and consequently misunderstood orders.
Find this resource:
Muller, E. Lester. The 313th of the 79th in the World War. Baltimore: Meyer & Thalheimer, 1919.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
One of the best of numerous unit histories of formations involved in the action at Montfaucon and in subsequent fighting in the Meuse-Argonne.
Find this resource:
Unit Studies

Unit histories of formations that participated in the Meuse-Argonne are too numerous to list here. Many were published at the end, or shortly after, the war, and they include observations based not just on official records, but also on the memories of officers and soldiers. As such, they provide useful supplemental information for research based in archival and printed source materials. American Battle Monuments Commission 1944 is the closest thing to an American official history of World War I, consisting of a series of booklets chronicling the movements of divisions in the Meuse-Argonne and elsewhere. Bach and Hall 1920, Clement 1921, Cutchins 1921, Huidekoper 1921, and Stevenson 1919 are among the most comprehensive divisional histories to have been published for units that played important roles in the Meuse-Argonne. Bach and Hall 1920 is relevant to the Montfaucon debate. Clement 1921 is a particularly comprehensive and well-illustrated divisional history of one of the most important formations in the first phase of the fighting. Cutchins 1921 and Huidekoper 1921 provide useful detail on the campaign east of the Meuse, with Huidekoper 1921 also describing aspects of preparations for the initial offensive and its first day. Stevenson 1919 is of central importance for the assault on the Heights of Cunel and Romagne. Cooke 1994 is a more recent summary history of the 42nd Division. Ferrell is a seminal account of the collapse of the 35th Division and examination of why it took place.

American Battle Monuments Commission. [Various Divisions]. Summary of Operations in the World War. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 1944.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
A series of booklets, each chronicling the day-by-day activities of US divisions that saw combat service in France. Though relatively brief, they are based on close study of official manuscript sources now residing in the US National Archives and other repositories. Particularly useful are the detailed battle maps included with each booklet.
Find this resource:
Bach, Christian A., and Henry Noble Hall. The Fourth Division: Its Services and Achievements in the World War Gathered from the Records of the Division. Garden City, NY: Christian A. Bach, 1920.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Includes treatment of the 4th Division, a regular army formation, at Montfaucon and in subsequent fighting.
Find this resource:
Clement, Charles M., ed. Pennsylvania in the World War: An Illustrated History of the Twenty-Eighth Division. 2 vols. Pittsburgh, PA: State Publications Society, 1921.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Very detailed treatment of the 28th Division’s activities in the Argonne Forest and bordering territory to the east in late September and early October, including in the operations that led to the relief of the Lost Battalion in October.
Find this resource:
Cooke, James J. The Rainbow Division in the Great War. Westport, CT: Praeger, 1994.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Summary study of the 42nd Division’s combat record, valuable for its careful treatment of the division’s role in the assault on the Heights of Cunel and Romagne in October.
Find this resource:
Cutchins, John A. History of the Twenty-Ninth Division, “Blue and Gray,” 1917–1919. Philadelphia: MacCalla, 1921.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Includes material related to the 29th Division’s combat east of the Meuse River in October.
Find this resource:
Ferrell, Robert H. Collapse at Meuse-Argonne: The Failure of the Missouri-Kansas Division. Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 2004.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
This case study—one of the most important monographs published on any aspect of the Meuse-Argonne—describes the collapse of the 35th Division in late September, and analyzes its causes. Based on extensive archival research.
Find this resource:
Huidekoper, Frederic Louis. The History of the 33rd Division A.E.F. Vols. 1–4, Illinois in the World War. Edited by T. C. Pease. Springfield: Illinois State Historical Library, 1921.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
This most comprehensive of all unit histories of formations that fought in the Meuse-Argonne includes numerous firsthand observations and detailed depictions of combat east of the Meuse River in October alongside the 29th Division.
Find this resource:
Stevenson, Kenyon. The Official History of the Fifth Division, USA. Washington, DC: Society of the Fifth Division, 1919.
Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »
Thorough study of the activities of the 5th Division, including at the important Heights of Cunel and Romagne in October.