# Were any WWI generals well liked by their men? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [August 14, 2016, 11:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/were-any-wwi-generals-well-liked-by-their-men/762851 "2016-08-14T23:05:38Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 14\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2016, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/were-any-wwi-generals-well-liked-by-their-men/762851/21 "2016-08-15T19:54:59Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > I suppose they did, for a certain value of “with.” They certainly were not on the front lines, and Grant in particular was totally disinclined to give speeches or take any steps regarding his image among the men. > > Once the fighting became static in Virginia, in fact Grant and Lee did settle into headquarters arrangements. Grant’s HQ remained at City Point for so long his wife came to stay with him. > I am unconvinced the position of the generals had much to do with it. What is undoubtedly true is that the horror of the war itself had a great deal to due with such morale problems as arose (and to be honest, there were shockingly few, given the meat grinder the Western Front was.) > > I don’t think the average soldier gives a huge amount of thought to what kind of bed General Smith is sleeping in; he cares if he is being taken of, being treated fairly, and feels as if his life is not likely to be wasted pointlessly. Of course a soldier cares about all those things. However, the impression given by contemporary accounts is that he also cares about the perception that his leaders are “on his side”, that they share (to a reasonable extent) his risks and discomforts. This is part of the psychology of leadership: that the lead not begin to believe that their leaders fundamentally do not care about them, or are even aware of them as people. Why else would the notion of “chateau generals” be such a big deal in WW1? On this question, I recommend Keegan’s “The Mask of Command”, which goes into detail about the psychology of military leadership. ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2016, 8:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/were-any-wwi-generals-well-liked-by-their-men/762851/22 "2016-08-15T20:11:03Z")
> [@Malthus](#): > > Grant and Lee were in the field, if not on the front lines. They marched with their men… More often rode. I can’t recall any time when Grant, once appointed lieutenant general, came under enemy fire, but Lee famously did once as top Confederate commander: [http://www.civilwar.org/battlefields/wilderness/wilderness-history-articles/lee-to-the-rear.html](http://www.civilwar.org/battlefields/wilderness/wilderness-history-articles/lee-to-the-rear.html) ---
**Author:** ![bump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7c8e57/32.png) [@bump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bump)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2016, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/were-any-wwi-generals-well-liked-by-their-men/762851/23 "2016-08-15T20:27:07Z")
> [@Corry\_El](#): > > I agree with the general point though, and the bomber offensives were actually a better example of the pure effect of technology and tactics on casualties than the Western front in WWI is. I don’t know… machine guns and quick-firing artillery (the famous French 75, for example) were quite the game-changer for infantry/cavalry combat. At any rate, they’re 100% of why the war on the Western Front seized up into trench warfare, when no prior war had done so quite to that extent. Most of that credit goes to the machine gun as well. And… from what I’ve read, the 8th AF suffered some 26,000 KIA, out of like 290,000 casualties- 9% instead of 10%. But yes, until the USAAF higher-ups figured out the way to fight the war properly, there were grievous losses among aircrews, and even then, it was still a fairly high casualty form of combat. ---
**Author:** ![drewder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/57b2e6/32.png) [@drewder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drewder)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2016, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/were-any-wwi-generals-well-liked-by-their-men/762851/24 "2016-08-15T20:50:39Z")
> [@Malthus](#): > > Part of the problem was one of perception. If a general is to maintain whatever control he can over a large battlefield, which by the time of WW1 could be tens of miles across, it makes sense for that general to stay well back from the front, located in a place he can take in all of the relevant communications and issue orders. > > However, if the troops never see him at the front, the perception grows that they are being used as cannon fodder in the generals’ experiments in tactics. > > Now, if a general is to live and work well behind the front, it only makes sense that he live in relative comfort - but again, while the troops at the front are living in rat-infested trenches … > > The difficulty is that the generals are not seen as sharing in the risks and discomforts, which had a bad effect on morale. This is why Gen Patton required his underlings to make regular trips to the front and considered a dead general as likely causing a moral boost. (in the sense that their death might inspire the men to try for revenge for their fallen gen) ---
**Author:** ![drewder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/57b2e6/32.png) [@drewder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drewder)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2016, 8:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/were-any-wwi-generals-well-liked-by-their-men/762851/25 "2016-08-15T20:54:07Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > I suppose they did, for a certain value of “with.” They certainly were not on the front lines, and Grant in particular was totally disinclined to give speeches or take any steps regarding his image among the men. > > Once the fighting became static in Virginia, in fact Grant and Lee did settle into headquarters arrangements. Grant’s HQ remained at City Point for so long his wife came to stay with him. > I am unconvinced the position of the generals had much to do with it. What is undoubtedly true is that the horror of the war itself had a great deal to due with such morale problems as arose (and to be honest, there were shockingly few, given the meat grinder the Western Front was.) > > I don’t think the average soldier gives a huge amount of thought to what kind of bed General Smith is sleeping in; he cares if he is being taken of, being treated fairly, and feels as if his life is not likely to be wasted pointlessly. I know I’ve read several reports of Lincoln showing up on the front line and this being much appreciated by the soldiers. ---
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2016, 10:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/were-any-wwi-generals-well-liked-by-their-men/762851/26 "2016-08-15T22:44:54Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > I suppose they did, for a certain value of “with.” They certainly were not on the front lines, and Grant in particular was totally disinclined to give speeches or take any steps regarding his image among the men. Grant and Lee may not have fought on the front lines, but their corps and division commanders certainly did. More than a few were killed or wounded in battle. ---
**Author:** ![Backwater\_Under\_Duck](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/ba8739/32.png) [@Backwater\_Under\_Duck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Backwater_Under_Duck)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2016, 12:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/were-any-wwi-generals-well-liked-by-their-men/762851/27 "2016-08-16T00:11:51Z")
> [@Alessan](#): > > Grant and Lee may not have fought on the front lines, but their corps and division commanders certainly did. More than a few were killed or wounded in battle. Killed or mortally wounded: One Army Commander on each side, three Corps Commanders on each side and, as for Division Commanders, fourteen for the Federals and seven for Confederates. [Cite](https://www.phil.muni.cz/~vndrzl/amstudies/civilwar_stats.htm). ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2016, 4:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/were-any-wwi-generals-well-liked-by-their-men/762851/28 "2016-08-16T04:09:11Z")
Including, most tragicomically, this guy: [John Sedgwick - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Sedgwick) ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2016, 10:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/were-any-wwi-generals-well-liked-by-their-men/762851/29 "2016-08-16T10:42:54Z")
> [@Alessan](#): > > Grant and Lee may not have fought on the front lines, but their corps and division commanders certainly did. More than a few were killed or wounded in battle. The same was true of Generals in WWI. The book “Bloody Red Tabs”, by Frank Davies and Graham Maddocks, which just looks at the British army in WWI, lists 78 British generals killed and 146 wounded or captured. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2016, 1:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/were-any-wwi-generals-well-liked-by-their-men/762851/30 "2016-08-16T13:00:33Z")
> [@Captain\_Amazing](#): > > The same was true of Generals in WWI. The book “Bloody Red Tabs”, by Frank Davies and Graham Maddocks, which just looks at the British army in WWI, lists 78 British generals killed and 146 wounded or captured. Yes, and it is certainly fair to ask whether the stereotype of the “chateau general”, dining on silverware in a nice mansion miles from the front lines while his men rot in the trenches, is a realistic or fair one. However, once that stereotype was established, it is easy to see how it could be bad for morale; and why generals would do a lot to avoid allowing that stereotype to be established (as **drewder** mentioned concerning Patton). Nor was that stereotype limited to WW1. In WW2, there was the “Dugout Doug” reputation of MacArthur. [http://www.rpadden.com/bonus/dugoutdoug.htm](http://www.rpadden.com/bonus/dugoutdoug.htm) ---
**Author:** ![bump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7c8e57/32.png) [@bump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bump)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2016, 1:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/were-any-wwi-generals-well-liked-by-their-men/762851/31 "2016-08-16T13:50:25Z")
> [@Malthus](#): > > Yes, and it is certainly fair to ask whether the stereotype of the “chateau general”, dining on silverware in a nice mansion miles from the front lines while his men rot in the trenches, is a realistic or fair one. > > However, once that stereotype was established, it is easy to see how it could be bad for morale; and why generals would do a lot to avoid allowing that stereotype to be established (as **drewder** mentioned concerning Patton). > > Nor was that stereotype limited to WW1. In WW2, there was the “Dugout Doug” reputation of MacArthur. > > [New Page 1](http://www.rpadden.com/bonus/dugoutdoug.htm) I suspect WWI was different in that the front was static for years at a time, making it much easier for higher officers to settle in, so to speak. I’d suspect anyone commanding anything higher than a regiment or brigade was probably not “at the front” in terms of being exposed to direct fire, and could get relatively comfortable. This doesn’t mean that they were far away, or not at the front fairly often- I suspect that considering the extreme close quarters of Western Front fighting, the generals were likely up toward the front often looking around with telescopes and binoculars themselves. In WWII, anyone corps level or below was probably on the move pretty much constantly, and wouldn’t be quite so comfortable as their fathers would have been, even if they weren’t quite as uncomfortable as the infantry, nor as reviled as a result. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2016, 1:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/were-any-wwi-generals-well-liked-by-their-men/762851/32 "2016-08-16T13:54:47Z")
> [@bump](#): > > I suspect WWI was different in that the front was static for years at a time, making it much easier for higher officers to settle in, so to speak. I’d suspect anyone commanding anything higher than a regiment or brigade was probably not “at the front” in terms of being exposed to direct fire, and could get relatively comfortable. This doesn’t mean that they were far away, or not at the front fairly often- I suspect that considering the extreme close quarters of Western Front fighting, the generals were likely up toward the front often looking around with telescopes and binoculars themselves. > > In WWII, anyone corps level or below was probably on the move pretty much constantly, and wouldn’t be quite so comfortable as their fathers would have been, even if they weren’t quite as uncomfortable as the infantry, nor as reviled as a result. I agree. I also think that the source for the stereotype was the relative stasis on the Western Front in WW1. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2016, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/were-any-wwi-generals-well-liked-by-their-men/762851/33 "2016-08-16T17:09:51Z")
Pershing was quite popular. ---
**Author:** ![Mk\_VII](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/5f9b8f/32.png) [@Mk\_VII](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mk_VII)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2016, 7:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/were-any-wwi-generals-well-liked-by-their-men/762851/34 "2016-08-16T19:50:31Z")
So was Plumer. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/were-any-wwi-generals-well-liked-by-their-men/762851.md?page=1)