War and Remembrance: The Story of the American Battle Monuments Commission by Thomas H. Conner (review) Keith D. Dickson Marine Corps History, Volume 6, Number 1, Summer 2020, pp. 89-90 (Review) Published by Marine Corps University Press For additional information about this article https://muse.jhu.edu/article/796450/summary [ Access provided at 24 Sep 2021 21:46 GMT with no institutional affiliation ] This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. SUMMER 2020 89 Keith D. Dickson, PhD War and Remembrance: The Story of the American Battle Monuments Commission. By Thomas H. Conner (Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 2018. Pp. 376. $50.00 cloth, e-book.) The American Battle Monuments Commission from 1921–23 until the ABMC took over its duties. (ABMC) is a federal agency established by Congress The establishment of American cemeteries on far in 1923. The president of the United States appoints distant battlegrounds, as well as their location, ar- the members of the board, who serve voluntarily and rangement, purpose, and design was largely the work without pay. The ABMC supervises the overseas cem- of one person, the first commissioner of the ABMC: eteries of American war dead for the First and Second John J. Pershing, former commander of the American World Wars and battlefield monuments. These impec- Expeditionary Forces. He recognized the significant cably maintained cemeteries capture the essence of symbolic importance of the American dead and the American values, serving “as living reminders of the monuments that commemorated their service and role Americans have played in the defense of freedom sacrifice. Conner describes Pershing particularly well far from their own shores” (p. 7), which have served as “a man with a uniquely profound connection to over the generations to create a spiritual bond be- the soldiers who, in his view, had won a great victory tween the fallen and the people who live nearby. for a noble cause, and animated by a strong desire to Thomas H. Conner has written a well-crafted portray and preserve the memory of that victory in and thorough history of this little-known agency. It is shrines that would outlast time itself” (p. 51). good history because it carefully and judiciously pulls Everything that makes American war cemeter- from primary source material as well as a broad range ies so strikingly beautiful—the Italian marble Latin of secondary works to tell a compelling story. Immedi- crosses and Stars of David and their precise geometric ately after the First World War, questions were raised arrangement, the size and design of the chapels, the about the American soldiers buried overseas: Should inscriptions, and memorial statuary—was established they remain or be returned home? Amid much de- by the ABMC. Pershing’s desires held great influence, bate, the War Department gave American families the and no detail was too small for his oversight. Eventu- choice of having the remains of loved ones returned ally, the ABMC approved 11 monuments to commem- home or having them stay in Europe. An enormous orate American involvement in the war. The largest logistical effort took place for several years after the were located on the battlefields Pershing selected as war to repatriate more than 46,000 bodies back to the most important and were positioned where they the United States, leaving about 30,000 American can be seen for miles. By 1937, the commission had war dead to be consolidated in permanent cemeter- completed its work, but continued maintaining and ies located on ground that was a significant portion preserving the monuments and cemeteries. With the of a battlefield Americans had fought on. The War onset of the Second World War, these sites again be- Department also created a Battle Monuments Board came battlefields and were overrun with the defeat of within the War Department to supervise the mark- France in 1940. Conner recounts the deep sorrow the ing of American battlefields in Europe. It operated American employees of the ABMC experienced hav- ing to abandon their posts and their dogged efforts to Dr. Keith D. Dickson is a professor of military studies at the Joint and return to their duties. Few sites suffered damage, but Advanced Warfighting School, Joint Forces Staff College, National De- American caretakers would have to leave again with fense University, Norfolk, VA. His most recent book is No Surrender: Asymmetric Warfare in the Reconstruction South (2017). America’s entry into the war. The ABMC would not 90 MARINE CORPS HISTORY VOL. 6, NO. 1 return until 1944 and again found little damage, due, the remains at private expense. The ABMC rejected a as Conner notes, to the “countless instances of cour- memorial over the sunken battleship USS Arizona (BB age, resourcefulness, devotion, and loyalty on the part 39) in Pearl Harbor, and battled the Department of of scores of citizens from both sides of the Atlantic” the Army to establish the cemetery in Hawaii along (p. 175). the pattern of all of its other cemeteries. Eventually, After the war, the ABMC essentially contin- the ABMC was able to build a chapel, but could not ued to follow the path Pershing had so ardently es- get the Army to allow the marble crosses that mark tablished, including the design and construction for American cemeteries overseas. the 14 new cemeteries and associated buildings that The ABMC has been involved in building war were to be created in Europe, Africa, and Asia. About memorials for the American Expeditionary Forces, the 90,000 American dead were reburied, headstones pre- Korean War Veterans Memorial, and the World War pared, chapels designed and constructed, and art work II Memorial, all of which are located in Washington, and designs for sculptures reviewed and approved be- DC, and administered by the National Park Service. tween 1947 and 1950. Information on individual grave In recent years, the commission has been working to markers was the same as for the World War I graves, add interpretive facilities to assist in passing on the with one exception. World War II unknowns would stories of those who fought and died to generations be identified as “comrade in arms” replacing the in- now no longer connected to a living memory of the scription “an American soldier” found on the World events that unfolded on the ground the graves occupy. War I headstones, which was deemed more represen- Conner has written a very readable and fervent tative of all U.S. military Services (p. 201). George C. tribute to the work of the most invisible yet arguably Marshall (a World War I veteran and the architect most important of federal agencies, but seems content of victory in World War II) succeeded Pershing after simply to tell the story of the ABMC. He repeats a his death in 1948 and supervised the establishment theme that the cemeteries and memorials are “distant of American memorials until his own death in 1959. outposts of honor and memory” (p. 8), but does not Marshall founded the new American cemeteries in explore how or why the spiritual appeal of American France, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, and Belgium national identity came into these physical manifesta- as particularly important symbols in the context of tions. A further exploration of the role of collective the Cold War to emphasize the commitment of the memory in sustaining and deepening bonds—espe- United States to a free Europe. cially in expressing the unity of a community through Conner covers two anomalous burial situations sacred rituals of remembrance—would have been very that gained wide attention and consumed the com- valuable, reflecting, in essence, what the ABMC has mission’s time. The most difficult was the location and done throughout its existence. The history of the relocation of the remains of General George S. Pat- ABMC is in itself an exploration of cultural memory, ton Jr. in the Luxembourg cemetery. Patton’s widow especially in terms of its singular characteristics of and the secretary of defense struggled with Marshall concretion of identity, capacity to reconstruct, and to make an exception for the location of the general’s obligation.10 Conner’s presentation, while informative grave and finally won out. Patton’s grave is the only and evocative, falls somewhat short in going further one in an overseas American military cemetery not to address the essence of the larger meaning of the aligned in harmony with all other headstones. The ABMC’s work. ABMC also acceded to the Roosevelt family’s request • 1775 • to bury a World War I casualty, Quentin Roosevelt, next to his brother, Theodore Roosevelt Jr., who was 10 See Jan Assmann and John Czaplicka, “Collective Memory and Cul- buried at the Normandy American cemetery. After tural Identity,” New German Critique, no. 65 (Summer 1995): 125–33, years of lobbying, the family was allowed to transfer https://doi.org/10.2307/488538..