Paid Advertisement
Historynet/feed historynet feedback facebook link Weider History Group RSS feed Weider Subscriptions Historynet Home page

What is Lost When Veterans Pass?

By Rick Atkinson 
Originally published by World War II magazine. Published Online: September 21, 2009 
Print Friendly
6 comments FONT +  FONT -

Germany, 1945 (National Archives).
Germany, 1945 (National Archives).

What does it mean for a nation to lose what has been deemed its greatest generation?

Over the next 10 years, some 2 million veterans of World War II will die. With them will disappear their unique ability to bear witness, to remind us of the awful toll of all-out war—in this case, the deadliest war in modern history. But what, more precisely, will be lost once this generation of first-person witnesses is gone? In a special report in the November 2009 issue of World War II, a historian, a photographer, and several veterans themselves pose answers to that question. In the following essay, Rick Atkinson explores what happens to history when those who lived it can no longer tell their stories.

Subscribe Today

Subscribe to World War II magazine

The statistics are as stark as mortality itself: Of the 16,112,566 American veterans of the Second World War, fewer than 2.5 million remain alive. With another 311,000 projected to die this year, they are passing at the rate of 852 a day, or 35 an hour, or about one every two minutes. Sometime around Christmas 2014, the number will dip below one million, according to demographic tables compiled by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, and a decade later, in 2024, fewer than 100,000 will remain. In 2036, the latest year for which figures have been calculated, the cohort that fought and won the most destructive war in human history will be reduced to 370 survivors, less than half the size of an infantry battalion.

What is lost, in this slow march to the grave? What is lost to history, to historians, to our culture? If the private deprivation seems obvious—fathers and grandfathers gone, widows bereft of companionship—the public depletion is harder to assess. As we move toward the day when not a single participant remains alive to tell his tale, what does it mean for a nation to lose what has been deemed its greatest generation?

Historians surely will soldier on without them. World War II may be mankind's most documented event. The U.S. Army records alone—a mere slice of the global archive—weigh 17,120 tons, enough to fill 188 miles of filing cabinets set side by side. Vast caches of oral histories and personal reminiscences abound, including hundreds of nearly contemporaneous combat interviews at the U.S. National Archives, thousands of detailed veteran questionnaires collected by the U.S. Army Military History Institute, and tens of thousands of accounts accumulated in the Library of Congress, various university repositories, and the National World War II Museum in New Orleans.

Enduring military histories are often written without direct assistance from battlefield participants, such as James M. McPherson's Battle Cry of Freedom and Hew Strachan's monumental chronicle of World War I (not to mention Donald Kagan's The Peloponnesian War). "Our understanding of any era continues to become richer and more complex over time because historians build upon the work of one another, allowing a fuller and more nuanced accounting with each decade that passes," says Tami Davis Biddle, a professor at the U.S. Army War College.

Future World War II historians may find themselves unshackled from sentiment, vainglory, and the war's "Higher Disneyfication," in the trenchant phrase of Paul Fussell, an army lieutenant in Europe in 1944 and 1945. Fussell, who recovered from grievous battle wounds to become an author and English professor at the University of Pennsylvania, complained that "the Allied war has been sanitized and romanticized almost beyond recognition by the sentimental, the loony patriotic, the ignorant, and the bloodthirsty." In a similar vein, the historian Sir Michael Howard, who also saw action as a young officer in Europe, observed that "the Second World War is ransacked to provide material for the glorification of our past."

Flinty-eyed assessment may be easier without the emotional tangle inevitable in writing about parents and grandparents who have been anointed virtual demigods. "Historians will be less influenced by the passions and prejudices of the people living through those events," predicts Col. Lance Betros, head of West Point's history department. "There will be less sentimentalism and pandering to particular audiences."

The passing of veterans from earlier wars offers clues about how this cultural transition will unfold. For one thing, it will be a protracted farewell: the last Revolutionary War vet lingered until after the Civil War, dying in 1869 at the age of 109, while some War of 1812 veterans lived to see the 20th century, and Civil War veterans lived into the 1950s. The last Spanish-American War survivor died in 1992, at 106. Of the two million Americans who fought in France in World War I, the last survivor, Frank W. Buckles, turned 108 on February 1.

Yet as the generations inexorably rise and fall, so do remembrance and ritual evolve. "No longer do Americans drink ritualistic toasts on Independence Day to military leaders such as Generals Warren and Montgomery and Commanders Decatur and Perry," G. Kurt Piehler wrote in Remembering War the American Way. "Few Americans remember the U.S.S. Maine." Edward M. Coffman, the dean of American military historians, recalled that as a boy in Kentucky in the 1930s "there was the minute of silence on the eleventh hour of the eleventh day of the eleventh month that we school children observed." Such observances of the Great War are rare today in America, Coffman added, in part because "the coming of World War II pushed aside memories of the earlier war."

As veterans die off, their progeny tend to scrutinize the wars they fought more critically. The Civil War for decades was viewed as a struggle to preserve the Union, "with slavery as a political and social issue being minimized," cultural historian Michael Kammen recently wrote. "Not until well after the Civil War centennial did most historians and the public begin to acknowledge the centrality of slavery and its potential expansion as primary issues that triggered hostilities." In the 64 years since World War II ended, the doughty triumphalism that long characterized the conflict in American popular culture—evinced in films like The Longest Day and Patton—has been partly eclipsed by deeper reflection on the Holocaust, as well as the role of women, blacks, Hispanics, and the nuanced influence of domestic politics on American foreign policy. "In virtually every decade since 1945," says Mark A. Stoler, professor emeritus of history at the University of Vermont, "there's been a shift in focus, both in historians' attention and in popular views of the war."

Controversies that kindled passions for years will no doubt get a cooler, more dispassionate assessment as the war and its warriors fade into the past, from the consequences of the Yalta summit to the use of the atomic bomb. Various overworked analogies—such as comparing every tinhorn megalomaniac to Adolf Hitler—should lose some of their vibrancy. "The myths of World War II include the assertion that 'appeasement' is a dirty word, when in fact it often works," Stoler adds. Moreover, as Michael Howard has observed, "Each upcoming generation asks a different set of questions from the same body of material. When we get a generation that not only has no personal memory of the war, but whose parents have no personal memory either, then all kinds of questions and problems arise which never occurred to those among us who went through that experience."

That generation is now of age.

Yet who can doubt that the loss is profound? As the generation dies, so dies the living memory of a calamity that extinguished 60 million lives.

"We'll lose much of the emotional connection, because living witnesses, no matter how aged, generally compel us more than a passed generation," says Paul H. Herbert, executive director of the Cantigny First Division Foundation. "We'll also lose the veterans' check on our own romantic tendencies. There will be no one to throw the b.s. flag." So too will fade the organic recollection of a singular epoch in American history. "We never fought a war where the entire country was so much a part of the war effort," says Dr. James B. Peake, who served as secretary of veterans affairs under George W. Bush. "That's what we may lose: the sense of community, of commitment, the sense of what it takes."

For all the stories told and retold, countless others will go untold. No one bears witness to the most elemental emotions of war, including fear and despair, better than those who were there. "I was scared for twenty-three months," a soldier in the 36th Infantry Division once confessed. "I saw the best troops in the world cut down and replaced three or four times." No one can convey the vivid immediacy of combat better than the eyewitness, whether the antiaircraft fire at Ploesti—"it came like a mighty shout, a malediction hurling up at us through four miles of twisting wind. They were everywhere; the dark flowers of flak were everywhere"—or the sight of a doomed bomber over Bremen: "The plane lost speed, slipped back and spiralled gently down. I saw a piece of wing shatter and fly off like a target in skeet shooting. The broken wing was jagged and flaming."

Who but the veteran can better convey the stain that war leaves on the young, as in J. Glenn Gray's confession to his wartime diary: "My conscience seems to become little by little sooted." Who but the veteran can explain both the love among battlefield comrades and the small, dense pellet of remorse carried by those who survive when others do not? "I must pursue the shadows to some middle ground," pilot John Muirhead wrote, "for I am strangely bound to all that happened to them."

Who but the old man looking back can testify to what no young man should ever have to witness, like the veteran from the 157th Infantry Regiment who in April 1945 arrived by jeep at the Dachau rail siding? "The cars were right up to the gate, crammed with bodies, bodies fallen out and laying on the ties and the rails, stark naked. They hadn't begun to bloat and decompose, and it was a warm day, the smell just starting…. Right then I knew the whole two years overseas wasn't wasted." One of his buddies added, "You'd never been quite all that sure why you were fighting, but by God when you saw that, you knew."

There's the nub: the ability to attest, with authenticity and authority, why they fought, suffered, and died. "There is something that is born deep inside us," a medic who landed at Salerno wrote his wife, "when we come to know why we are here, when we have learned how very important it was that we did leave you and all we love."

Samuel Hynes, a marine fighter pilot in World War II, wrote, "If we would understand humankind's most violent episodes, we must understand them humanly, in the lives of individuals." It is the individuals who are leaving us, one by one by one.

Yesterday another battalion went to its reward, followed by another today. Another will follow tomorrow. "The Civil War defined who we are as a people and a nation," says Mark Stoler. "World War II on the other hand defines not who we are internally, but what we are in the rest of the world." That definition remains a work in progress, to be carried forward by generations yet unborn, overwatched by ghosts.

Leave the last word to a veteran, Charles R. Cawthon, a newspaperman from Tennessee who eventually commanded the 2nd Battalion of the 116th Infantry Regiment. "Each man's war is separate and personal unto himself and not exactly like that of any other," Cawthon wrote. "It is fought first within his own heart and soul, and the outcome is buried with his bones."

This article originally appeared in the November 2009 issue of World War II magazine.


6 Responses to “What is Lost When Veterans Pass?”


  1. 1
    B. Kosmider says:

    Each participant's experience's of WW II were unique, and significant in their own way: that has to be the first principle.
    If the veteran does not wish to talk about them, even to his own family, this is a tragedy: his experiences will go to the grave with him, all that personal history will be lost.
    This happened to me. My father was Polish officer, who spent the duration of the war as a German POW in various camps. In my entire life, I recall being able to goad him into talking (superficially) about this time, only once. Adult children move away, life goes on, but that time stands still in a way, unless there is an active, conscious effort to find out, as much as possible, before it is to late.
    Family difficulty, personal reticence should not prevent a full attempt to be made to have these stories come to light, because they are history.
    All that remains after these men die, if their stories went untold, is a blank page, a void, which can never really be filled.

  2. 2
    raz says:

    As a 33-year old who had the pleasure of knowing war veterans from World War 2, Vietnam and 1st Desert Storm.. I completely agree. I have fired shots in anger, but never in battle.. and the feelings I had then as I pulled the trigger, knowing that this bullet will either kill or maim another like me.. is impossible to share with others who were not there, but automatically known by those who were.

    I remember as a child hearing from my grandfathers and their friends the ferocity of combat with the Japanese Imperial Guard in the Malayan theater.. I remember these same old men recounting their experiences in the Malayan communist insurgency.. I even got to unite these old men (for the first and last time) with my American friends who served in Vietnam and 1st Desert Storm. And what stories they told!

    I know that as I grow older, more of the truth will come out, and these men that I knew as a child will turn out to have human traits.. and had to do inhuman things in order to serve their country. But that will not change how I adore them.. and even we the young have a duty to pass this on to the next generation, in order to remind them that the price of freedom and liberty can be very high indeed.. payable by everyone to swears allegiance to their flag.

    "Will you be able to pay that price.. when the time comes?"

  3. 3
    Donald E. Casey, Sr. JD/DFC says:

    I say: yes, Americans will step and pay the price should that become necessary. They're already doing it in Iraq, Afghanistan and other hot but non-shooting zones such as Korea, Europe among others.

    However, I see no possibility for a World War III on the scale of WWII. The Muslim world lacks the unanimity, Communist China has already realized the advantages of exploiting free enterprise and is unable to return to the brutal days of its dictatorship andRussia cannot afford to continue to make the kinds of mistakes its centralized planners have made in the last 80 years particularly in the event the West succeeds in throwing off the chains of addiction to foreign oil and adapts to nuclear power. (The hysteria about nuclear waste surely will succumb to technology's victory over this problem at long last. The real problem with acceptance of nuclear power is that it works too well and solves all the problems of global warming leaving nothing for the aficionados of "Chicken Little" to cry about.)

  4. 4
    Robert Walker, WW2 Veteran says:

    I am a WW2 Veteran, 2806 Army Engineers, went to Japan in Mid 1945 until Dec. 10. 1946. I am looking for other Veterans that served during this same time. I am 85 years and is desparately looking for information.

    I can be reached either by by above email or please feel free to call:

    678-369-6235 Home Phone

    Hope to hear from Veteran or family member(s).
    Thank you,
    Robert Walker

  5. 5
    Bryan Sndyer says:

    The question is what can the younger generations do to help history survive? I am 38 years old am both grandparents are long since passed who did serve in WWII. I am a veteran that is interested in gathering stories with a digital voice recorder and help preserve these blocks of history. Would the local VFW be a good place to start?

  6. 6
    Bill Starvler says:

    I hope that future generations understand WWII the same way anyone living today, or during the war understood it. The past wars like the Civil War seem so impersonal without veterans. WWII shouldn't become impersonal.



Leave a Reply

Human Verification: In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.


Related Articles


History Net Images Spacer
Paid Advertisement
Paid Advertisement
History Net Daily Activities
History net Spacer
History net Spacer
Historynet Spacer
HISTORYNET READERS' POLL

Which of these wars resulted in the most surprising underdog upset?

View Results | See previous polls

Loading ... Loading ...
History net Spacer
STAY CONNECTED WITH US
RSS Feed Daily Email Update
History net Spacer History net Spacer
Paid Advertisement

Paid Advertisement
What is HistoryNet?

The HistoryNet.com is brought to you by the Weider History Group, the world's largest publisher of history magazines. HistoryNet.com contains daily features, photo galleries and over 5,000 articles originally published in our various magazines.

If you are interested in a specific history subject, try searching our archives, you are bound to find something to pique your interest.

From Our Magazines
Weider History Group

Weider History Network:  HistoryNet | Armchair General | Achtung Panzer! | StreamHistory.com
Today in History | Ask Mr. History | Picture of the Day | Daily History Quiz | Contact Us

Copyright © 2013 Weider History Group. All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.
Advertise With Us | Subscription Help | Privacy Policy