A BOOK OF THE MOMENT

THE GUARDS DIVISION

[COPYRIGHT IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BY THE New York Times.] History of the Guards Division in the Great War, 1915-1918. By Cuthbert Meadlam., D.S.O. (late - Lieut.--COlonel, General Staff, B.E.F.). Foreword by H.R.H. the Prince of Wales. (John Murray. 36s. net.) THE Guards throughout their history have been an extra- ordinarily self-contained, self-regarding body. They have

cared immensely about what they have thought of themselves, and of each other, but very little about what the larger public, and even what the rest of the ArmY, have thought of them. As to the opinions of the Governinent, and the War Office, and the authorities generally, they have been usually quite _ indifferent, though at the same time perfectly " regular " and well-behaved. They have had their own very strict standards of conduct, duty and discipline ; standards from which any falling .away is looked upon as nothing less than a tragedy, but as long as these have not been violated they have been content to carry on in a kind of Olympian isolation.

But, after all, isolation is not the right word. It seems to suggest a kind of chilly aloofness from the rest of mankind which is by no means the Guards' attitude. They may at heart think themselves superior to other people. We all do that ; but they have not the bad taste to make any claim

of this kind. All they claim is that they are different from the rest of the military world—different both in kind and in degree. This attitude of difference has. been and is most sedulously and ingeniously cultivated by everybody con- nected with the Brigade, and often in a way which is not a little amusing to the student of social behaviour. There is a special and peculiar nuance in their salute, in their vocal tones on parade, in their training system (videlicet Caterham), and in their clothes. The Guards Field Service dress in several particulars, so I am informed, approaches to civilian

wear, and so would have made a splendid text for Carlyle's " Clothes philosopher." Their technical language, again, is strange and apart. They do not know what "mufti " means, though they have heard that such a word is used by the Line.

No one must suppose from this that they despise the Line.

They admire them and* their great deeds just as does the rest of the nation -; but it is more of a civilian's admiration than of a professional's. Here comes in a curious reflection. The Guards, officer; and men, are much more in touch with the civil life of Britain than the rest of the Army. They are not Palace troops and never have been ; but they are essentially London troops and share the great city's admirable insouciance. They are

Poco-eurantes to a man. The Guards • have always been popular among all classes in the metropolis. They never

take or give unnecessary offence. But that is the Cockney spirit all over. The Guards officers, when they arc subalterns, live for the most part with their families and are scattered over London. When they marry they have town houses of their own,. and live when off duty not a military but a non-military life, mixing freely with all sorts and conditions of people. The Guardsman may be in Parliament, and often is, without resigning. For these reasons the Guards officer does not take the professional,, messroom, barrack-square view of men

and 'things. He prides himself on being a man of the world, and with' him it is .distinctly good fqrnt., if -he can manage to be a bit of a Radical. When Labour views penetrate the Army on a big scale this will, one may feel sure; first appear among Guards officers and last in the Territorials.- These,

indeed, may even beat the Marines in unbending Conservatism. But they know that they can only indulge in this attitude

if they are able to show that they have all the soldierly quali- ties developed in the highest degree. Their quasi-isolation from the rest of- the Army must be justified by doing their military duties as well as, and if possible just a little better than, the very best units of the Line. Therefore there has -always been an 'intense, if well-controlled, or even concealed,

use of competition in the Guards. The effect of this spirit may in peace time have occasionally give rise to charges of " side" and military foppery, but in the field the result has been excellent. On that all the world is agreed.

The Guards feel that in the War their Division did as well as every well-informed person expected it to do—and better than that no one could do. But that being so they naturally wanted it to be put on permanent record. At the same time they wanted the record done in Guards style. There must be no " frills," no rhetoric, no patting themselves on the% back, and generally, no " damned nonsense." There must, in fact, be nothing which could make the newly-joined and super-supercilious subaltern feel hot, as he feels vicariously when he is forced, as he may be at manoeuvres, or if he is aide- de-camp to a General, to attend " infantry functions," and hear garrulous Generals and rhetorical Colonels cover their nnits with " dreadful butter." From a Guards record all such things must be strictly banished. In fact, the Guards like their history told in the spirit of the log-book of the ' Shannon' : " Saw Chesepeake ; engaged Chesepeake ; took Chesepeake." That was all the ' Shannon's' commander thought it necessary to record. When he was asked to decorate his vessel in honour of her triumph he utterly refused to countenance any such proceedings. The ' Shannon,' he said, had always been " a very unassuming ship," and would so continue.

In Colonel Headlam's History of the Guards Division the Guards have got exactly what I feel sure the majority of them wanted. It is true that the result cannot by any subtlety of language be said to be a readable book. Indeed, the general reader will probably regard it as among the most unreadable works of prose that he has ever beheld. All the same, this superb indifference to providing anything in the shape of

" fat " gives it a distinction all its own. It is absolutely " rot "-proof. I defy even the most ingenious and secret. master of the art of crabbing to find any passage of which he can say with a show of reason : " Isn't that awful ? How

could anyone write such utter rot ? Isn't that squalid, senti-. mental rubbish ? " It may be dreary, but it is never silly or. open to these particular taunts.

But though I have been obliged to describe the spirit in which these two volumes are written, and also to make it clear that they could have been written in no other spirit if they were to satisfy the Guards' feelings and Guards' traditions, I

have already tried to show that the Guards arc not inhuman. I know by experience that they are nothing of the kind in peace or in war. I have seen them, in London, on manoeuvres, at Caterham, and in France, and always they were the easiest, most friendly and most delightful of hosts ; and this not because I happened to " know them at home," as the schoolboys say, but because it was natural to them to be informally and sincerely pleasant to a guest.

I saw them in November, 1915, in the trenches in front of the Aubers Ridge—trenches which were as messy and as hopelessly water-logged as it is possible to imagine. I saw them also in their billets, and heard excellent war talk of the best kind at breakfast and lunch and dinner and in various

walks and rides, and nothing could have been better than the tone- they displayed. The spirit at La Gorgue, the Guards headquarters, was exactly right, and I look back to my visit

as throwing a light never to be forgotten on the famous regiments there represented.

• Yet, when I turn to the pages in Vol. L. devoted to the time spent in front of the Aubers Ridge, I find it difficult to realize that I am reading about the appalling conditions at this part of the line—conditions endured with the utmost

patience and good temper. This is what is said about it by Colonel Headlam •

" The front line defences in the new sector occupied by the Guards owing to the marshy ground in which they were situated, consisted of breastworks and not trenches. These breastworks had been much neglected during the summer months 'and, although of groat thickness at their base, were by no means bullet-proof at the top. In many-places along the line the parapets were tumbling to pieces and the revetments were in a state of complete dilapidation throughout the entire area. It was at once realized that unless inunediate steps were taken to improve the defences tho bad weather of the winter would bring about a total collapse of the front line. The conditions in rear were if anything -NVOrSC. The communication trenches, which wore of especial importance in a region where there was so little cover and in which the enemy had :nick excellent observation, were already full of water, and the dcwelwd posts and defended localities, which formed the rear defences along the Rue de Baequerot and farther west, had been much neglected and were crumbling to pieces.".

Never were mud, dirty water, cold and damp, yellow mists, dim light, thrashing rain, and physical squalor raised to the nth degree more cheerfully and sanely encountered., Never did the Guards acquit themselves with more prowess than in this dreary region of eternal mud.

I have tried to put as fairly as I can that quintessence of a certain side of the many-sided English character which is the speciality of the Guards, but I feel that where I wanted to draw a portrait I have made a caricature. Such is often one's fate in literature—which, on the whole, is not unlike war. You get involved in a battle or a review without knowing exactly what you are in for, and ten to one it ends up quite differently from what you or anyone else expected !

But the Guards are too good as well as too gallant to be abandoned in an exhibition of literary spleen. They find a sounder critic of their war record than me in one of themselves —the Prince of Wales. lie writes a wise and pleasant little preface to Colonel Headlam's History which says the right thing and the true thing about the Guards with perfect simplicity and without any touch of the caricature to which.

I have confessed in my own criticism. Here are his words ;

I gladly adopt them for my peroration :— " There was, I should imagine, no division in the British Army in which there existed so strong a family feeling, or one in which the moral was sounder, resting as it did upon a mutual confidence between officers and men. There was; of course, a wholesome rivalry between the various units in the division, but it was, as a keen and unprejudiced observer has remarked, ' a rivalry towards a common ideal.' The struggle against a skilful and courageous foe had to be won and all ranks in the Guards Division, from its commanders to the most recently joined recruits, were firmly eonvinced that victory could not be achieved without good disci- pline and hard work. On many a stricken field they proved the value of their training and gave an example of steadfastness and constancy to the whole Army. The record of the Guaxds Division is very fully described by Colonel Headlam in the following pages. He has told his story dispassionately and without making any. attempt to give undue prominence to the part played by the Guards in the Great War. He has thus succeeded, I think, in giving to those who may read hiS book a true picture of the life and work of the Guards Division, and has handled down to future generations of Guardsmen a record of military achievement which should be a guide and inspiration to them for all time."

J. ST. Lox STRACHEY.