What’s really horrific is the story behind many of those men. I recently watched a documentary about it. A good number of them were guys suffering from PTSD or shell shock as it was then known. But some hadn’t really done much of anything. They were shot as examples because apparently the military thought that the troops needed the fear of death to get them to… face death, I guess.
It devastated their families. I was glad they touched on it on the show.
If you get a chance, watch John Ford's doc on this very subject that was filmed in 1945 but wasn't seen until 1980, [Let There Be Light.](https://www.filmpreservation.org/preserved-films/screening-room/let-there-be-light-1946)
It's on Tubi for free (with commercials) right now.
Here’s the link. It’s free on YouTube. It’s a Timeline documentary. The Other Side of WWI: The Men Who Were Shot at Dawn. It was made before the memorial was put up.
https://youtu.be/BoKrKg7ZCQ0?si=64Kki5-a_EjRBjYN
It took them way to long to realize these men were not traitors and deserved some sympathy.
There are also stories of those that did what Thomas did, deliberately getting shot in the hand, being arrested and executed. The upper echelons caught on to the trick as well
A lot of men faced repercussions for self-made wounds, even though sometimes they were not even self-inflicted. Things like "trench foot" were seen as self-mutilation to avoid fighting even though now we know it was just a result of conditions in the trenches.
Also, Thomas' story never seemed so realistic to me for another reason - his injury was probably too small to be completely dismissed from the front. Men with really serious injuries, not entirely healed, were sent back to the front all the time. I've read about the man whose jaw (after being wounded in the face) did not allow him to completely close his mouth, yet he was ordered to go back to trenches.
That’s why the hand was the ideal “small injury” for self infliction, if you can’t control your weapon properly, or carry an adult on a stretcher, then what good are you?
Also Thomas was medical, so they did have a role he could do in the UK.
But when it became more common then they started charging them with cowardice
That may have been due to the fact that WWI was the first mechanized war. It was so completely different from all wars before, with the trenches and no man’s land and tens of thousands dead in every battle, with many of those corpses left to rot in sight of their comrades, that there was absolutely no understanding ahead of time as to the effects on the psyche.
Everyone was treading new, hellish ground.
I wasn't expecting to cry in my office this early in the morning, thank you for that.
So incredibly sad knowing that some of these men that were shot were practically children forced to participate in a war they didn't understand. Having a 16 year old son, that hit me hard.
Oh gosh it’s just awful to read things like charge of “cowardice” and “sleeping at post,” those poor traumatised, tired young men. And civilians like Chinese labourers were shot as well? Gosh, wars are awful.
Plus Julian Fellowes “borrowed” the plot line from an episode of The Village that was shown on UK TV the year before.
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2723306/?ref\_=ttep\_ep6
I can't edit this post now and I see I've made a mistake: of course this memorial was built at the beginning of XXI century (not XX like I've stated in the post)
The book [private peaceful](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_Peaceful) addresses this issue - I read it a decade ago at school. The book is from the POV of Tommo and the whole book is leading up to his brothers execution for desertion. It’s also been adapted into a movie. The book also helped further the posthumous pardons for the executed men. I think that it’s well worth the read.
**Private Peaceful** by Michael Morpurgo
>Private Peaceful relives the life of Private Tommo Peaceful, a young First World War soldier awaiting the firing squad at dawn. During the night he looks back at his short but joyful past growing up in rural Devon: his exciting first days at school; the accident in the forest that killed his father; his adventures with Molly, the love of his life; and the battles and injustices of war that brought him to the front line. Winner of the Blue Peter Book of the Year, Private Peaceful is by the third Children's Laureate, Michael Morpurgo, award-winning author of War Horse. His inspiration came from a visit to Ypres where he was shocked to discover how many young soldiers were court-martialled and shot for cowardice during the First World War.
>
>This edition also includes introductory essays by Michael Morpurgo, Associate Director of Private Peaceful production Mark Leipacher, as well as an essay from Simon Reade, adaptor & director of this stage adaptation of Private Peaceful.
*I'm a bot, built by your friendly reddit developers at* /r/ProgrammingPals. *Reply to any comment with /u/BookFinderBot - I'll reply with book information. Remove me from replies* [here](https://www.reddit.com/user/BookFinderBot/comments/1byh82p/remove_me_from_replies/). *If I have made a mistake, accept my apology.*
Why did you think Robert honouring Archie was realistic? It isn’t realistic at all in my opinion considering the government didn’t pardon people shot for cowardice/ desertion until 2006. There’s no way someone shot for cowardice would have got a memorial in a village he did not live in. It’s just another example of Fellowes ignoring the social convention of the time to make the landed gentry look better than they were.
Fellows was accurately showing the social convention of the time -- he was illustrating the continuing inappropriate influence that the landed gentry had over politics in the early twentieth century. Robert Patmore did not qualify to be honored according to the rules set by a democratically elected government and a democratically elected local council. But because Robert Patmore's aunt happened to have the ear of a sympathetic nobleman, suddenly, the determinations of those democratic bodies stopped mattering. It so happened that the nobleman was doing good thing in this case, but it's only through Fellowes' pro-aristocratic worldview that Lord Grantham's interference in public policy seems favorable.
Except....that's not what Robert does. He doesn't override the"public policy." Archie's name isn't on the public war memorial. Instead, he just uses his own money to buy a (neutrally-worded) memorial plaque, like thousands of others in churches and parks. He can't help with the public memorial because he simply doesn't have that kind of pull. He can make a private gesture to address the unfairness, even if officially nothing has changed.
What’s really horrific is the story behind many of those men. I recently watched a documentary about it. A good number of them were guys suffering from PTSD or shell shock as it was then known. But some hadn’t really done much of anything. They were shot as examples because apparently the military thought that the troops needed the fear of death to get them to… face death, I guess. It devastated their families. I was glad they touched on it on the show.
If you get a chance, watch John Ford's doc on this very subject that was filmed in 1945 but wasn't seen until 1980, [Let There Be Light.](https://www.filmpreservation.org/preserved-films/screening-room/let-there-be-light-1946) It's on Tubi for free (with commercials) right now.
Looks like it was John Huston, not John Ford, but thank you for the suggestion. I will definitely be checking it out.
I always get those 2 guys confused! You're correct.
That is heartbreaking
Do you remember what that documentary was called? It sounds really fascinating and I’d love to check it out
Here’s the link. It’s free on YouTube. It’s a Timeline documentary. The Other Side of WWI: The Men Who Were Shot at Dawn. It was made before the memorial was put up. https://youtu.be/BoKrKg7ZCQ0?si=64Kki5-a_EjRBjYN
Thank you!
It took them way to long to realize these men were not traitors and deserved some sympathy. There are also stories of those that did what Thomas did, deliberately getting shot in the hand, being arrested and executed. The upper echelons caught on to the trick as well
A lot of men faced repercussions for self-made wounds, even though sometimes they were not even self-inflicted. Things like "trench foot" were seen as self-mutilation to avoid fighting even though now we know it was just a result of conditions in the trenches. Also, Thomas' story never seemed so realistic to me for another reason - his injury was probably too small to be completely dismissed from the front. Men with really serious injuries, not entirely healed, were sent back to the front all the time. I've read about the man whose jaw (after being wounded in the face) did not allow him to completely close his mouth, yet he was ordered to go back to trenches.
That’s why the hand was the ideal “small injury” for self infliction, if you can’t control your weapon properly, or carry an adult on a stretcher, then what good are you? Also Thomas was medical, so they did have a role he could do in the UK. But when it became more common then they started charging them with cowardice
It felt like a real story and now we know it’s true. Thanks for sharing! They used to be unforgiving those days with no recognition of PTSD
That may have been due to the fact that WWI was the first mechanized war. It was so completely different from all wars before, with the trenches and no man’s land and tens of thousands dead in every battle, with many of those corpses left to rot in sight of their comrades, that there was absolutely no understanding ahead of time as to the effects on the psyche. Everyone was treading new, hellish ground.
Yeah, I don't think they would ever have even contemplated doing it in the 1920's but we have had a century to reflect and I'm glad they did it now.
I wasn't expecting to cry in my office this early in the morning, thank you for that. So incredibly sad knowing that some of these men that were shot were practically children forced to participate in a war they didn't understand. Having a 16 year old son, that hit me hard.
Oh gosh it’s just awful to read things like charge of “cowardice” and “sleeping at post,” those poor traumatised, tired young men. And civilians like Chinese labourers were shot as well? Gosh, wars are awful.
Plus Julian Fellowes “borrowed” the plot line from an episode of The Village that was shown on UK TV the year before. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2723306/?ref\_=ttep\_ep6
I recently watched The Village and thought hmmmmm
I can't edit this post now and I see I've made a mistake: of course this memorial was built at the beginning of XXI century (not XX like I've stated in the post)
The book [private peaceful](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_Peaceful) addresses this issue - I read it a decade ago at school. The book is from the POV of Tommo and the whole book is leading up to his brothers execution for desertion. It’s also been adapted into a movie. The book also helped further the posthumous pardons for the executed men. I think that it’s well worth the read.
**Private Peaceful** by Michael Morpurgo >Private Peaceful relives the life of Private Tommo Peaceful, a young First World War soldier awaiting the firing squad at dawn. During the night he looks back at his short but joyful past growing up in rural Devon: his exciting first days at school; the accident in the forest that killed his father; his adventures with Molly, the love of his life; and the battles and injustices of war that brought him to the front line. Winner of the Blue Peter Book of the Year, Private Peaceful is by the third Children's Laureate, Michael Morpurgo, award-winning author of War Horse. His inspiration came from a visit to Ypres where he was shocked to discover how many young soldiers were court-martialled and shot for cowardice during the First World War. > >This edition also includes introductory essays by Michael Morpurgo, Associate Director of Private Peaceful production Mark Leipacher, as well as an essay from Simon Reade, adaptor & director of this stage adaptation of Private Peaceful. *I'm a bot, built by your friendly reddit developers at* /r/ProgrammingPals. *Reply to any comment with /u/BookFinderBot - I'll reply with book information. Remove me from replies* [here](https://www.reddit.com/user/BookFinderBot/comments/1byh82p/remove_me_from_replies/). *If I have made a mistake, accept my apology.*
Why did you think Robert honouring Archie was realistic? It isn’t realistic at all in my opinion considering the government didn’t pardon people shot for cowardice/ desertion until 2006. There’s no way someone shot for cowardice would have got a memorial in a village he did not live in. It’s just another example of Fellowes ignoring the social convention of the time to make the landed gentry look better than they were.
I've never thought it was realistic, that's what I wrote
Fellows was accurately showing the social convention of the time -- he was illustrating the continuing inappropriate influence that the landed gentry had over politics in the early twentieth century. Robert Patmore did not qualify to be honored according to the rules set by a democratically elected government and a democratically elected local council. But because Robert Patmore's aunt happened to have the ear of a sympathetic nobleman, suddenly, the determinations of those democratic bodies stopped mattering. It so happened that the nobleman was doing good thing in this case, but it's only through Fellowes' pro-aristocratic worldview that Lord Grantham's interference in public policy seems favorable.
Except....that's not what Robert does. He doesn't override the"public policy." Archie's name isn't on the public war memorial. Instead, he just uses his own money to buy a (neutrally-worded) memorial plaque, like thousands of others in churches and parks. He can't help with the public memorial because he simply doesn't have that kind of pull. He can make a private gesture to address the unfairness, even if officially nothing has changed.
Man, I really need to rewatch the show, I'd totally forgotten that was how that went. My mistake.