Abstract
During the First World War, many soldiers in the Belgian Army were endowed with a decoration, in order to inspire, motivate, and reward desirable conduct. The relationship between decorations and the soldier’s self-consciousness, his behaviour and his emotions, is present in every aspect of decorating, as it emphasized his self-esteem, pride, and character. By analysing the material aspects of decorations, the ceremonies surrounding their bestowal, and the textual motivation for doing so, this article explores the functions and effects of decorating, the evaluation of behaviour and self-conscious emotions by both Army Command and soldiers.
Introduction
In the Royal Orders of February 1917, the Belgian Minister of War Charles de Broqueville announced in name of King Albert I that second lieutenant Dufosset received the Croix de Guerre because of his heroic behaviour several months earlier. 1 ‘Impassioned with the utmost dedication and willingness to sacrifice himself’, he had conducted himself very desirably during a bombardment. He had been wounded twice during the battle of the Yser, but only after the second injury had he agreed to be taken from the battlefield. Dufosset ‘proved his patriotism’ when he, not yet entirely rehabilitated, insisted upon returning to the front after an absence of six months. However, the Croix de Guerre was not the last decoration he received. Only one month later, he was decorated as Knight of the Order of Leopold. The ‘very brave and very courageous’ lieutenant had distinguished himself again during heavy shelling in front of Dixmuide, when he was in charge of protecting two observatories. He had remained at his post and managed to keep his men there as well, and thus gave a ‘good example of calmness, sang-froid and courage’, qualities the Army Command highly valued. 2
Dufosset was one of thousands of Belgian soldiers who were decorated during the First World War. The exact number of decorated soldiers is difficult to retrieve, as there exist no official quantitative documents, but it is clear that it was an important phenomenon within the army. 3 Decorations were awarded after specific deeds or to commemorate participation in various battles, but were also intended to reward the troops and to motivate them to keep on fighting, especially when, after months of war, the morale of the troops decreased. Decorations could also stimulate desirable military behaviour among soldiers, which was convenient because the Belgian army consisted primarily of civilians who were not used to army discipline. The army was most effective and disciplined when soldiers felt obliged to conform to the standards of appropriate behaviour but also when they saw that their sacrifices were valued and sanctified. As a consequence, bestowing military decorations was an effective way to inspire, motivate, and reward desirable conduct.
Many studies on the First World War try to explain why the majority of soldiers persisted in fighting for four years. 4 Although a decoration was not the main reason to persevere, it could give meaning and value to their actions. Furthermore, the relationship between decorations and the soldier’s self-consciousness is present in every aspect of decorating, as it emphasized his self-esteem, pride, and character. These feelings were necessary for the soldier to endure living and fighting with thousands of other men in difficult circumstances, and consequently equally important for the Army Command. But what were exactly the considerations of the Army Command in bestowing decorations, and how did the soldier perceive this practice? This article explores the emotional, mental and behavioural processes which followed the bestowing of a decoration. This is undertaken by analysing the evaluation of behaviour, the functions and practices of decorating by the Army Command, and the effect it had on the soldier’s character, morale and self-conscious emotions such as honour and shame.
Research on military decorations is mainly undertaken within the field of phaleristics, which studies, classifies, and catalogues orders, medals, and decorations. Although historically oriented, this research is primarily devoted to facts, appearance, and regulations. 5 Historical studies on the First World War address the role decorations played with regard to the morale of soldiers, and in some cases even mention the notion of honour. 6 However, how the soldier’s self-awareness, his feelings and behaviour affected his morale is little examined. Most historians do not reflect on the psychological effects of decorating – that is the emotional, mental and behavioural processes of an individual or a group upon receiving a decoration. Yet, these processes are fundamental elements in order to comprehend the psychological state that can be defined as morale. Psychological research indeed has considered rewarding in relation to emotions and self-consciousness, for example with regard to identity, self-esteem, reputation, and their incentivizing effects on motivation, morale, and productivity. However, military decorations are not specifically addressed. 7 Although historical research acknowledges the importance of decorations, and psychological research points at the effects of rewarding, the connection between history and psychology has never been made.
Historical research that considers emotions as a key explanatory factor for human practices, behaviour, and ideas is relatively new. Moreover, although the study of emotions in history has expanded over the last decade, 8 the analysis of self-conscious emotions such as honour, pride, and shame remains largely inconclusive, as historians have tended to focus on these emotions in earlier centuries rather than in the twentieth century. 9 Self-conscious emotions relate to one’s own consciousness and the awareness of the reactions of others. These emotions are shaped by social relationships and by the interactions within these relationships through mutual evaluation and judgements. They arise from both positive and negative evaluations of others, as well as the self, which corresponds to appropriate behaviour and characteristics. 10
The self-conscious aspect of these emotions is strongly connected to the personality and identity of an individual. 11 The association between self-conscious emotions and identity certainly applies to an institutionalized context such as the army. Although people are unlikely to entirely submit their personalities and identities to an institutional regime, an army can influence identities by imposing its norms and standards, praising or rejecting certain personal characteristics – especially when war constrains soldiers within this specific context. 12
To analyse the evaluation of behaviour and self-conscious emotions such as honour and shame with regard to military decorations in the Belgian army during the First World War, I propose to approach decorations first from a material perspective, second as emotional practices, and finally through textual analysis. These three approaches overlap each other in some respects, and consequently I consider their appearance and the different functions of decorations as a layered phenomenon. The material aspects of decorations are found in their specific function – both in their appearance and in the requirements and conditions for receiving a decoration. The ceremonies in which decorations were given by the Army Command can be regarded as emotional practices. Emotional practices are rituals, acts, and performances that initiate feelings and constitute participation within the norms and behaviour of a particular social field – in this case the army and its ceremonies. 13 The emotional terminology that was used to characterize the combatant and his heroic deed, included in the orders of the day of the army, exemplifies the textual analysis.
In the following, I first give an introduction on the decorations and their function within the Belgian army. Subsequently I examine the requirements and conditions for decorations, using official documents and correspondence by the Army Command. The second part of the article analyses emotional practices: that is the ceremonial rituals in which decorations were given. The accounts of soldiers from different ranks, those with a Flemish or French-speaking background, professional combatants and war volunteers, physicians and chaplains, are used to illustrate their perception of the practice of decorating. The last part discusses the emotional terminology and the different themes that emerge in the orders of the day, for example, specific behavioural characteristics such as courage and self-control. The main sources in this case are the appendices of the orders of the day, with descriptions of the heroic acts and characteristics of soldiers who received a mark of honour. Throughout the article I address the considerations and perception of both the Army Command and soldiers with regard to the phenomenon of decorations and their influence on the self-consciousness.
The First World War in Belgium
When the German army attacked Belgium in August 1914, the Belgian army retreated after several fights through the country into the fortresses of Liège, Namur, and Antwerp. These were defended for several weeks but finally overwhelmed by the artillery shelling of the Germans. In October, the army had to withdraw at high cost in infantry losses behind the River Yser in West Flanders, where they remained for the next four years. 14 The marshy plain that was the Belgian front was fairly quiet, apart from several dangerous places near the enemy lines. Except for the heavy fighting in the first months and during the liberating offensive, the army mainly secured their position these four years. Therefore, the conditions at the front proved to be one of the main causes of death and injuries. 15 Although the situation was perhaps less dangerous, the war of position often caused le cafard, a downhearted feeling among soldiers, who often preferred fighting because it meant action and the possibility of liberation. 16
The Belgian situation differed from the other allied countries. Since the Belgian army was stationed in the only non-occupied part of the country, a major reason for fighting was to liberate their fatherland. In addition, the army fought a war in exile. French or English soldiers occasionally could go home when they were on leave, but the majority of Belgian soldiers did not see their family for four years. Other forms of contact were difficult; letters had to be sent by detour, for example via Holland and Great Britain. Trench journals were a welcome addition to news from their villages and comrades fighting in other divisions. In addition, the journals often encouraged soldiers from towns or regions across Belgium to report their received decorations because ‘We have to show that our boys from the Kempen are also present [at the front]!’ 17
Pride of one’s hometown or region was felt among all Belgian soldiers. For many Flemish soldiers, however, this had an additional connotation. In 1913, under pressure of Flamingants who strived for a bilingual (French and Dutch) army, a law that restrained the predominance of the French language within the army was installed. 18 However, the outbreak of the war hindered the consistent implementation of a bilingual system. This resulted in discontent among many Flemish soldiers, who complained that even if they did not understand French, officers held on to this language. Moreover, they claimed to be disadvantaged compared to the often higher-placed French-speaking soldiers, while there were more Flemish soldiers in service. 19 An example of the dissatisfaction was the formation of the Front Movement that pursued a more activist protest, which brought turmoil in an already difficult situation. 20
Orders, medals, and palms: material recognition
At the outbreak of the First World War, the Belgian orders system consisted of five orders: the Order of Leopold (constituted in 1832), the Order of the African Star (1888), the Royal Order of the Lion (1891), the Order of the Crown (1897), and the Order of Leopold II (1900). These orders were subdivided into several classes, which related to different qualities and conditions, such as Grand Cordon, Grand Officer, Commander, Officer, Knight, Palm, and Medal. In addition to these orders, there existed other decorations, such as the Military Decoration for Exceptional Service or Acts of Courage and Self-Sacrifice (Décoration Militaire, article 4) (1873). During the war, 16 new decorations, including the Croix de Guerre (1915) and the Yser Medal (1918) were created. 21 The Croix de Guerre was by far the most rewarded decoration during the war, followed by the Décoration Militaire. 22 There existed a complex system of regulations and conditions in which different decorations were given, depending on the length of time the soldier had served in the army, his rank, and the act itself. The kind of decoration was of importance, not only as recognition for specific honourable behaviour but also considering the revenues that were attached. 23
The only statistical study of decorations in the Belgian army is undertaken by Aurélie Lorent. She took a sample of 34,991 soldiers who were decorated between December 1914 and March 1919. Because of different estimations concerning the total number of combatants and the fluctuations in their number throughout the war, 24 she remarks that her sample needs to be interpreted with prudence. However, this sample gives useful insights. Beside the fact that she is very thorough in her examination, her study comprises nearly 10 per cent of the entire army. 25 Laurent’s sample shows that 95.5 per cent of the decorations were received by the Belgian army, and the remaining 4.5 per cent by combatants from allied countries. Within the Belgian army, 76 per cent were given to soldiers since they were the most exposed to danger. Sub-officers followed with 13 per cent and 8 per cent of the decorations were granted to higher officers. 26
These numbers accord with the five most common motifs for bestowing a decoration. Heroic actions – actions d’éclat – were rewarded the most, followed by injuries and offered services. Granting decorations due to death and salvage completed the list. Lorent bases these numbers on the same or similar words that were frequently cited in the motifs for a decoration. With regard to actions d’éclat these were for example bravery, devotion, and sangfroid. Why the focus mainly lied on these characteristics will be discussed later in this article. 27
Token of honour
Visibility was essential, as can be seen in several Royal Decrees that address not only the different features of a decoration but also when, why, and by whom a decoration was obtained. These kinds of measures were taken on both individual and collective levels. The palm-branches that were created during the war are an example of the purposes of this visibility on a personal level. At first there was no visible distinction between decorations received during the war and those obtained in peacetime. This was resolved in November 1915 by the creation of the special palm-insignia to be attached to the ribbon of the order: silver for Chevaliers and gold for the higher ranks. 28 A collective example is the fourragère, created in October 1918. The braided cord was assigned to a whole unit that was at least four times ‘honourably mentioned’ in the orders of the day. However, only soldiers who had participated in four actions, each of which had led to a reference in the orders of the day, could wear the cord, and only after permission from the commander. Again there was a distinction between ranks. Sub-officers and soldiers wore a cotton fourragère, whereas higher officers wore silk. 29
That this rather complicated system of rewarding was actually regarded as an honour, and a token of recognition and appreciation by the Army Command may be seen in the fact that soldiers were keen on wearing their decorations. Before the war, decorations had been worn on daily working uniforms, but this proved to be too dangerous on the frontline. Without official instructions to do so, the actual medals were replaced by medal ribbons. 30
Connecting honour and shame
The importance of a token of honour is also noticeable in the badge for injured Belgian soldiers, in which the sentiments of both honour and shame can be perceived. In granting this badge, Belgium preceded other countries who provided similar tokens such as Great Britain. 31 Soldiers who were declared unfit for military service for the duration of the war could in this way be identified as injured and therefore did not have to be ashamed of not fighting, risk being mistaken for a deserter, or regarded as unwilling to fight. In order to obtain the badge, soldiers had to send a request to the Ministry of War. When the request was granted, they received the badge, on which a number was engraved that referred to a register with their names. The badge anticipated feelings of shame; men could wear the badge on their civilian clothes so their status would be visible for all around them. 32
The badge was a defence against shame, but soldiers were not portrayed as pitiable. Although the image on the badge, as well as the representation of these men in newspapers did not neglect their physical condition, their heroism and sense of duty were particularly addressed. The official army newspaper De Legerbode/Le Courrier de l’Armée reported that at a ceremony in London, the badge was given to ‘our brave soldiers who are disabled because of the cruelties of war’. The image on the badge represented a ‘seated naked hero’ with a broken sword in his right hand, encircled by a laurel of oak leaves with the inscription: Soldat Belge hors combat (Belgian soldier out of fight). His left hand rested on his heart, ‘a token of hope and loyalty’, and his head, ‘reclined in a provocative gesture’, was wrapped in a bandage. The newspaper described an ‘evident expression on his face: the sense of duty shines through’. 33
That the badge actually triggered feelings of honour, as well as its connection to identity, can be seen in the following. The fact that both the inscription Soldat Belge hors combat on the badge and the speech during the ceremony were in French was highly disagreeable for Flemish soldiers. Upon receiving the badge, one Flemish soldier commented on this matter and was subsequently scolded with the insulting Flamin. The event led to the feeling among Flemish-minded officials that Flemish soldiers should be honoured for their sacrifices on their own terms: ‘Honour for our heroes!’ 34 Interestingly, although the badge itself was gladly accepted by soldiers, they nevertheless felt insulted by the fact that their Flemish identity was neglected; the explicit statement that their honour was assaulted, illustrates their self-consciousness with regard to their own identity and self-esteem.
As mentioned before, the language issue was such a sensitive matter that it resulted in a rather uncompromising situation. Only after the war, the newly created Victory Medal 1914–1918 and the Commemorative Medal of the War 1914–1918 were indeed bilingual. 35 The certificate with the motivation for the decoration was often already bilingual during the war. However, even in 1921 the Flemish-minded war volunteer Joris Lannoo wrote a furious letter to the Minister of War because he received a Croix de Guerre accompanied with a French certificate. He found that the Ministry taunted Flemish soldiers and sent the certificate back. 36
Token of shame
Decorations could not only resolve feelings of shame but impose them as well. Negative behaviour such as insubordination or desertion could be punished with the retraction of a decoration. The Penal Code has included three articles with regard to decorations, with a clear reference to the honour and dignity of the decorated person. The Code states very clearly that culpable facts which affect ‘l’honneur et la dignité’ result in the confiscation of the decoration. 37 When a soldier was prosecuted by military law, his behaviour, military dignity, and attitude were of great importance in the judgement of the prosecutor. His decorations were taken into account during the judicial procedure as well. The prosecutor in some cases did research into the motive for the decoration, which could lead him to reduce the severity of the punishment. After one suspect declared that he was decorated, the prosecutor indeed wrote in crayon on his inquiry the citation with the heroic act of the soldier. 38 After improper behaviour, a soldier could be prevented by the commander of his division from wearing his decoration. The seizing of a decoration was in this respect a disciplinary measure, as can be read in the Règlement de discipline of the Belgian Army. In addition, its withdrawal resulted in losing financial benefits that were part of the decoration, and furthermore deprived the soldier of his military dignity. 39
The withdrawal of an honorific distinction was not only a ‘material’ act, in terms of actually handing in the decoration and the financial consequences. The public shaming occurred in several documents that were dispersed by the Army Command, such as the orders of the day and Le Moniteur Belge, so everybody was informed of this measure. In the orders of the day, the combatant, his rank, and the reason for retraction were announced, just before the appendix that listed soldiers who received a distinction honorifique, which made the contrast even more clear. See, for example, the soldier whose Décoration Militaire and Croix de Guerre were retracted, with ‘d’indignité’ given as reason. 40 It seems that none of the ranks were spared when they behaved in a dishonourable manner. After a royal decision, Le Moniteur Belge publicly announced that two captain-commandants and a major lost all three of their decorations, with the Order of Leopold being the most important. 41
Requirements and conditions
Various guidelines and official documents that were dispersed by the Army Command, as well as the correspondence with King Albert I, demonstrate the demands and qualities that were expected from the soldiers. An example is the Croix de Guerre, which was installed after the first year of heavy combat when the feeling arose that the acts of soldiers had to be rewarded. Following the example of the French Croix that was created as a ‘stimulant moral de premier ordre’, a Belgian variant was made in October 1915. 42
The letter of de Broqueville to Albert I about the Croix de Guerre, filled with elevated terminology on military virtues, is a fine illustration of the requirements and conditions for a decoration. The Minister of War addressed both the qualities of the King and the Belgian army, depending on each other in defending the honour of the country, in which the country would be proud and honoured in return. Subsequently, he wrote that ‘the individual and collective military virtues’ had to be ‘publicly confirmed by an extraordinary and significant testimony of valour’. Consequently, an injury caused on the battlefield, a reference in the orders of the day, and military service for at least one year justified the Croix de Guerre. 43
In a letter to several commanders and chiefs, dating from February 1917, the Army Command acknowledged that many soldiers had courageously fought during the campaign. However, too many proposals for decorations had been made, leading the Army Command to decree that from now on stricter requirements were in order, and only the direct commanders could recommend a soldier. The Army Command stated that proposals often could not be accepted because the reported act could not be regarded as an outstanding action. A combatant who remained at his post during a heavy bombardment, a stretcher-bearer who rescued a wounded soldier or an officer who encouraged his men in difficult times – they were just doing their duty. The Army Command indicated that a decoration was meant only for soldiers who distinguished themselves through brave conduct and qualities that set an example. They underlined that only an extremely courageous act that exceeded the normal requirements could be rewarded. 44
It is possible that the Army Command was strict on the conditions for a granting a decoration out of fear of devaluing the effect of awarding too many decorations, which could have a negative effect on the motivation and behaviour of soldiers. 45 At the same time, it could also be a way of stressing their norms since the conduct that was rewarded by the authority represented the desired qualities and behaviour of a combatant. Simultaneously, these examples indirectly illustrated what was thought of as less honourable or even dishonourable conduct. An example of gratifying honourable behaviour is lieutenant Weyenberg, who sent a note to the responsible captain-commandant of the unit after an attack in January 1915. Weyenberg wrote that he considered it his duty to draw the attention of his superior to ‘la belle conduite de ma troupe’. Without distinction, all his men had demonstrated ‘an admirable courage that was beyond all praise, despite the deplorable state in which they found themselves’. 46
As lower officers often reported the behaviour of their men to the higher ranks, it is noticeable that they were more prone to positively evaluate the behaviour of their men than was the Army Command. Probably because they actually experienced the same situations, knew the soldiers, and witnessed their acts. Besides, honourable or courageous behaviour of their men could also reflect well on the officers themselves. The role of the officers was a difficult one; they had to set an example, maintain the morale, gain the confidence of their men, and last but not least prepare them to endanger or even sacrifice themselves. 47 The discrepancy between the Army Command and the lower officers not only illustrates the differences in position, activities, and interests between the army ranks but also the subjectivity of appraisal.
Morale and motivation
The aforementioned requirements focused mainly on honourable conduct, which is evident since the granting of decorations was foremost related to actions on the battlefield. However, since the Belgian front was generally fairly quiet, other factors could also explain the motives for a decoration, such as the strengthening of morale, and the incentive for the perseverance and combativeness of soldiers. 48 Not for nothing was the Croix de Guerre called a stimulant for morale. Furthermore, the Army Command felt the urge to bestow decorations already during the war, and not only afterwards when there was more time, calmness and material – there was often a shortage on decorations since the manufacturers were all located in occupied Brussels. 49
In the first months of the war, only a moderate amount of decorations was bestowed since the Belgian army was hardly prepared for the war. Besides, as the doctor Albert De Moor disappointedly wrote when his proposal to reward his men in October 1914 was not considered, ‘I suppose that, given the dangerous and difficult circumstances in this period, our General Staff had to handle other things than the matter of decorations!’ 50 After the stabilization of the front, the Army Command began to reward the services of soldiers. There is an upward trend of bestowals during the course of the war, with 1918 being the ultimate apogee. 51
Aside from honouring actions d’éclat, decorations also served motivational purposes. This proved to be necessary when it became clear that the war would not end quickly. According to Bruno Benvindo, who drew upon reports about the morale of soldiers by the Army Command, the war enthusiasm of 1914 disappeared after half a year of fighting. Benvindo argued that soldiers continued fighting because of the ‘strength to persist’, instigated by the notion of duty. This notion included different forms of duty: soldiers felt obliged to liberate their family in the occupied land, had a sense of duty towards their comrades, and felt the need to conform to social norms. While the strength to persist remained stable, the morale fluctuated from year to year. 52
The morale of soldiers was regarded as very important, as can be seen in a note by major general Jacquet on the strategy for a military offensive in 1915. He emphasized that the addressed commanders had to take all necessary measures to ensure the stability of the troops’ morale under their command. If they achieved a superior morale, victory would be near. In order to do so, both soldiers and officers had to be aware of their earlier heroic conduct, their value, sense of duty, patriotism and the spirit of sacrifice. 53 Rewarding their men was thought of as an option to encourage this kind of attitude amongst soldiers. As the soldier Jozef van den Veyver wrote when his battalion prepared for an attack, ‘the officers said the King wished our battalion good luck and that we are decorated […] and then we went to the trenches’. 54
Rituals and ceremonies as emotional practices
The ceremonies in which decorations were bestowed were emotional events. Both the ritual of bestowing a decoration and the reaction of combatants who were part of this ritual can be regarded as an emotional practice. Rituals, as an encouragement in achieving an emotional state, are, in the words of historical anthropologist Monique Scheer, ‘emotional practices [that are] manipulations of body and mind to evoke feelings’. This approach considers the use of rituals ‘as a means of achieving, training, articulating, and modulating emotions for personal as well as social purposes’. 55 Scheer bases her definitions on, amongst others, Bourdieu’s The Logic of Practice, in which he underlines that staging in great collective ceremonies intents to suggest feelings ‘through the rigorous marshalling of practices and the orderly disposition of bodies, in particular the bodily expression of emotion’. 56 The reciprocal relationship between the bodily or facial expression of emotion and the elicitation of emotional states is also addressed by psychologists. The expression of emotions by others can lead to the experience or imitation of these emotions by the person who perceives them. 57
Not only the decoration ceremonies were part of the ritual, but also the entire practice of proposing a decoration, the sanctioning of the proposal by the head of the state – in this case the King – and the publication in the orders of the day, De Legerbode and Le Moniteur Belge. The fact that all ranks of the army participated in the different phases of the ritual, which were publicly visible and led to the expression of different feelings, contributes to the idea that decorating was an emotional practice. 58 It was a symbolic acknowledgement that confirmed behavioural norms, strengthened the morale, and created a bond among the participants. At the same time, the ritual stimulated the self-consciousness and pride of the soldiers. Through the eliciting of emotions, the importance of the event was emphasized, and in this way the Army Command showed their respect towards the soldiers. 59
Proposing a decoration
The reporting of honourable behaviour, often followed by a recommendation for a decoration, can be regarded as the first stage of the ritual. This was not yet a guarantee that a decoration was actually awarded. 60 The proposal was often undertaken by lower officers, who could report their evaluation of soldiers to higher officers, who in turn could sanctify these reports. For example doctor De Backer, who mentioned that ‘Major Reding wrote an evaluation of me in order to have me decorated in the Order of Leopold.’ 61 However, proposals could also come directly from higher officers. Another physician, Maurice Lievens, wrote after he went on a mission to obtain information at a heavily shelled military post, ‘As a result of this, colonel Gracia sent the head of the division a glowing report about me.’ 62 Although combatants often already knew they were considered for a decoration, this was not always the case. Luc Hertoghe wrote on the National Day of Belgium: ‘Grande Surprise: je reçois la Croix de Guerre!’ 63
The proposal for a decoration was sometimes an informal matter between officers and their subordinates, and contributes to the idea of the personal relationship and the reciprocal dependency between them. Naturally, in the best case scenario, the relationship between these men had to be built on a mutual positive evaluation of their character and comportment. A soldier was more likely to act heroically and endanger himself when he valued and trusted his superior, after which an officer could show his esteem for a soldier in return. This can be exemplified by Robert de Wilde, who was already lieutenant before the war and was promoted to captain in 1915. In his journal, De Wilde recalled that the major of his unit made him read the reports he wrote after the fights in September 1914. Subsequently, De Wilde wrote that a proposal for a distinction honorifique was especially reserved for him in which the major, ‘in a much too laudatory manner, praises the spontaneity when I offered to undertake dangerous reconnaissance patrols, and the value he has withdrawn from it’. 64
The appraisal of courageous behaviour was not only a private matter; it was also publicly acknowledged. This could reinforce the self-esteem of the soldier and at the same time had an exemplary function for fellow soldiers. The aforementioned Maurice Lievens, who recounted the ‘glowing report’ of his colonel praising his behaviour, wrote a couple of days later that his act was mentioned in the orders of the day of the regiment, with the congratulations of the colonel and ‘the promise to repeat these in public in front of the regiment at the first inspection of the troops’. 65 Indeed, ten days later, Lievens wrote that the colonel kept his promise and congratulated him in the presence of the entire regiment. 66
De Wilde also recounted an event in which a decoration was proposed within a personal arrangement, after which his behaviour was publicly praised. The arrangement demonstrates the value De Wilde associated with a decoration, the pride he expressed upon hearing the news, and his determination to obtain more decorations in the future. In his case, receiving a decoration was truly an honour and an incentive. One evening in October 1914, colonel Jacques had called him and thanked him in front of everyone because of his sight, which had been of much assistance. Subsequently, Jacques’s successor gave De Wilde such a complimentary appraisal about their mission that he did not know how to comport himself. Then his assistant took De Wilde aside and showed him a letter in which the division pleaded the assistant to be discrete when probing to know whether he preferred a decoration or a grade:
The Cross, naturally – ‘That is what I thought’, he said. I was always told that the Cross, in wartime, was the most wonderful thing in the world. I think I have gained it much too easily. Ah! But she will see many others, my Cross, if I have her. Always forward, and long live Belgium!
67
De Wilde’s description furthermore displays the public and visual acknowledging of honourable behaviour, as a whole group of fellow soldiers was gathered around the colonel when he praised De Wilde. In this manner, feelings of pride were aroused, and De Wilde’s self-esteem was strengthened. Only when asked what he favoured as a reward was he taken aside. The possibility to choose his reward and the subsequent decision he made – in other words, what was the most valuable to him – illustrates the self-conscious emotions of honour and pride that De Wilde experienced. The fact that he was taken aside was perhaps also an act of protection, since he was able to make his decision in private. In this way, his integrity was maintained.
Evaluation by fellow soldiers
While De Wilde was positively evaluated by the Army Command, the audience that consisted of his fellow soldiers could also be addressed. The positive appraisal of one of their own comrades could function as an example and create among them the ambition to achieve the same. If they were willing to grant him the honour, it could invigorate their camaraderie as well. At the same time, it could lead to disintegrative emotions. The social function of appraisal thus had various outcomes: they could form and maintain social relationships, establish or maintain a social position with regard to others, or could damage the relationships between individuals and groups. 68
Solidarity with the achievements of others is displayed in the diary of sergeant Jean-Louis Laerens. When a fellow soldier named Volvert received a decoration in 1916, Laerens recounted the motive for the distinction exactly as the Army Command portrayed the decorated in the orders of the day, and he finished with ‘Bravo! Pour Volvert’. 69 In another note he wrote that ‘notre camarade’ Mathieu received the Croix de Guerre, which he did for several other soldiers. 70 Other soldiers’ accounts also make explicit mention of the decorations comrades received. 71 The journal of the aforementioned Paul De Backer not only illustrates the occurrence of solidarity, but also blandishment within the army. He paid the wounded general Bernheim a visit, who ‘congratulates me by saying that my reputation is excellent, which obviously flatters me […] Another day we offer our congratulations to colonel Mahieu of the 3rd, who is decorated and becomes an officer of the Legion of Honour.’ 72
Singling out soldiers because of their conduct could also lead to disintegrative feelings such as jealousy and envy, especially when the bestowal of a decoration was regarded as unfair. These feelings were due to different reasons, as can be seen in the following examples. The war volunteer René Deckers expressed his discontent when he reacted on soldiers who ‘easily’ received a decoration when they were injured: ‘What is even more doubtful is the enumeration of honorific distinctions; two or three injured soldiers of our company were decorated because they were just like the others, but here it is, they were injured.’ The same happened to the cooks of Deckers’s company, who were far away from the front when they were injured by a shell. ‘While we experience much greater danger than they do, they are decorated.’ 73
The trench journal Ons Sinjorenblad also commented on this matter, in which different aspects of injustice – with regard to rank and background – were discussed. ‘Every soldier is proud and delighted when he receives an honorary cross […] it’s a sign that he has fulfilled his duty to the Fatherland. However, there are many who wear a cross and did not earn it!’ The journal continued by stating that many others that ought to be honoured did not. A couple of examples followed: a corporal and seven soldiers were killed – the corporal and six soldiers were Flemish, the seventh was Walloon – and only the latter was decorated. ‘He deserved it, but why not the others? Is that fair?’ the journal asked. A similar story concerned two sentinels who remained at their post in a dangerous situation. When they were proposed for a decoration, the Army Command stated that they only did their duty. Whereupon it was aggrievedly exclaimed that a physician who treated wounded soldiers after a shelling just did his duty as well, but he was granted ‘the most beautiful decoration, the Order of Leopold’. 74
Paul De Backer discussed rank and status as well, but advocated the role of his subordinates when he described ‘the courage of stretcher-bearers, who unfortunately are criticized by everyone’. He praised their ‘self-sacrifice’ and noted they were regularly sent into the enemy lines to rescue injured soldiers, often shelled when mistaken for a patrol. ‘The job of a stretcher-bearer is often particularly dangerous. I often think that in our division, at least one has to be decorated in the Order of Leopold.’ 75 Doctor Albert Liessens denounced men who were rewarded because they uncritically agreed with everything their superiors said and did. In 1917, the French president Poincaré visited King Albert, and ‘as always with these kinds of visits, a certain number of Croix de la Légion d’Honneur and Croix de Guerre were given to those with the most flexible spine’. He cynically remarked that these men would not fail in emphasizing that they received the distinction for their bravery and added that this degraded the value of decorations. 76
The decoration ceremony
The ultimate stage in the ritual was the decoration ceremony. The whole performance during these ceremonies can be regarded as an emotional practice, as the soldiers’ descriptions indeed illustrate the arousing of emotions through ‘the rigorous marshalling of practices and the orderly disposition of bodies’, as Bourdieu described. 77 The ceremonies affected soldiers in different ways: with regard to their emotions as well as their action readiness. According to psychological studies emotions often unconsciously lead to action, but they can also motivate in a cognitive way, generated by the appraisal of the relevance of an (emotional) event. 78 The stretcher-bearer René Lefèvre gave a vivid account of a ceremony in which forty soldiers were decorated. He appraised the event as important, which elicited his emotions. 79 The military performances, which consisted of playing music, saluting the division banners, the positioning of the different units, and a military parade to honour the decorated soldiers, created a special atmosphere, one filled with ostentation and rites.
Lefèvre wrote that as they marched in the twilight to the location of the ceremony, music was played, ‘recalling the beautiful days when we were crossing Brussels from one side to the other’. Meanwhile, the sun rose, and upon arriving, the third division was already in place in columns of different units. His company aligned themselves, when the colonel of the third division arrived with their banner. Subsequently, general Bernheim was announced, with the banner of the first division, followed by six constables on horse and high officers. Lefèvre recounted the agitation amongst the men when he passed, while the music of two regiments was playing. Bernheim saluted the banners and decorated the combatants while the soldiers reposed and stacked their arms. Lefèvre regretted that there was not complete solemnity during this event. Afterwards, the decorated soldiers took up their stand at the left of the general for the parade. Column by column the units paraded, ‘the immaculateness is difficult to obtain on the slippery ground, but it will do’. Lefèvre mentioned he felt warm because of the marching, but possibly also because of the ceremony, when they returned to their basis after ‘a beautiful day’. 80
Although the impressiveness of these large ceremonies was often described, accounts of smaller and simpler ceremonies can also be found, with a more sceptical view of the generals who decorated the soldiers. Arthur L. Pasquier, for example, began as courier but was promoted throughout the war to an officer of artillery. 81 His descriptions are factual and rather critical, which is displayed in his portrayal of a – in his words – ‘plain ceremony’ in December 1917. General Michel decorated the fourth division behind a demolished farm, and ‘While the general attaches the decoration, he speaks to us and congratulates us. You would think that he knows us better than anyone, however he has several ordonnances [batman-officers] in his company who whisper each time several words to him’. 82
The presence of a general could make the event special, at least for some soldiers. However, when King Albert I attended the ceremony, the occasion was even more important and generally regarded as such. After the German attack, Albert I took personal charge of his forces and as commander-in-chief continued to live amongst his troops. The King’s concern for his troops and his attempts to increase the morale of the army contributed to the mythical status he obtained during the war. 83 From the beginning of the campaign until the first half of 1915, Albert I ordered that all reports on valorous deeds by unit commanders should be read to him, after which he personally decided which decoration would be given.
After the stabilization of the frontline behind the Yser position in October 1914, it became possible to organize decoration ceremonies and parades. These were held at regular occasions, many of them at De Panne in front of the royal villa, occasionally attended by the Queen and other distinguished guests. 84 Many soldiers’ narratives illustrate the ceremonies the royal family attended, in which the importance of the event and their pride in being there are highly visible. For example Albert De Moor, who wrote to his mother and sisters about the ‘impressive spectacle’ when his division was inspected by the King and Queen, after which they received the Croix de Guerre: ‘a precious and beautiful gem’. 85 Chaplain Emiel De Wyels paid special attention in his diary to the role of the Queen. After being decorated by King Albert, he recounted that he was sent to another chamber at the royal villa, where Queen Elisabeth spoke some flattering words and gave him a present. 86
The rather patriotic and royalistic account of such a ceremony by lieutenant De Wilde addresses many aspects that have been mentioned before. The ritualized manner in which the ceremony was arranged, but also the emotional impact on the soldiers, is manifested. De Wilde wrote that they met at the royal villa in De Panne, in front of the sea. When the King arrived with his entourage, ‘we stiffen ourselves. It is beautiful, this alignment of officers and soldiers.’ The King himself attached the decoration on the breast of each recipient, read the motive for the decoration to them, and added a few kind words. While addressing De Wilde, Albert praised the services of the artillery during the campaign and said it made him proud, as his staying in an observatory under bombardment took courage. De Wilde replied that anybody would have done the same but that he had had the chance to return safely. Subsequently, Albert I delivered ‘a vibrant and emotional speech’ that illustrates remarkably well the mutual appraisal and application of honourable behaviour and feelings between the King and the soldier, and the effect it had on De Wilde’s self-esteem:
He congratulated us in general, and thanked us on behalf of the country, of which he is the living and glorious incarnation, and even told us how proud he was of his soldiers. As for us, everything is in our attitude, the confidence and the love that we have for him. Ah! If he is proud of us, we are even more proud of being commanded by a King like him.
Then De Wilde expressed with full ardour their feelings of pride to have a hero as their King, for whom they would sacrifice their blood and accept death with a smile. 87
Even the sceptical Arthur Pasquier described a visit of the King and its effect on fellow soldiers and himself. He specifically mentioned the simplicity of the ceremony, exemplifying the normal course of events, which in his eyes made the event even more special: ‘Just now I saw the king […] in a ceremony of unusual simplicity and true greatness. On the unpaved village square of Vinkem all heroes stand in a long line. There are no other soldiers, no clarions, not the normal fuss of military ceremonies.’ When the King appeared in the company of general Michel, ‘A deep shudder goes through the soldiers, transfixed by the “Attention”. Tall, lean and elegant he greets every decorated soldier and talks with him. He is the symbol of our fatherland, for which many have given significant sacrifices or have been killed’. 88
When considering the above, one must notice that the general feeling towards decorations was favourable. Naturally, there existed discontent, flattery, and jealousy within the army, but, statements such as ‘We are obviously very honoured to receive this decoration, but still a bit dazed because of all the honour that they have been brought to us’, were much more common. 89 More negative reactions were expressed after the war, but overall the perception remained fairly positive. 90 Undoubtedly there exist more opposing views, but they are hard to find. Doctor Liessens is the only one who reacted unmoved upon hearing of a proposition for a knighthood in the Order of Leopold in 1916: ‘Basically, it leaves me indifferent. I have the satisfaction of having done my duty, and that is enough.’ 91 When he actually was honoured the year after, he acknowledged that he felt ‘a moment of emotion’ when he realized that his wife and daughter did not know of ‘all the honour’ that was bestowed upon him. 92
Expressions of honour: emotional terminology
A part of the ritual that has not been described above is the textual account of both the behaviour of the soldier and the decoration he received, and it is worthwhile to analyse this textual evaluation more thoroughly. As explained before, every recipient of a decoration would be mentioned in several official documents that the Army Command dispersed. The name and rank, an account of the heroic act that elicited the decoration, and a character sketch of the combatant were published in the orders of the day, where generally once a month an appendix with this kind of information was included. The Belgian government published the accounts in Le Moniteur Belge/Het Belgisch Staatsblad and they appeared in the Royal Decrees. Le Courrier de l’Armée/De Legerbode frequently mentioned them as well. Although this happened for official reasons, it was possible for every soldier within the army to read the publications.
The public affirmation of desirable conduct suggests both its collective normative function and the confirmative appraisal related to the self-consciousness of the individual combatant. In other words, when the Army Command thus sanctioned the honour of individual soldiers on a ‘personal level’, it occurred in a visible, public, and exemplary manner. To explore the style, terminology, and functions of these honorific accounts, each appendix of November of every year of the war was analysed, containing a total of 254 soldiers. Although a small sample, it provided the opportunity to closely study specific forms of expression and the qualities that were rewarded, and thus indicated what was valued as important by the Army Command. 93
Terminology and stylistic features
The genre of these accounts already existed before the outbreak of the war. Lists of decorated soldiers were included in publications by the Belgian army such as the Annuaire de l’État Militaire de Belgique and La Belgique Militaire, both of which had existed since the nineteenth century. The earlier discourse was to some extent the same as during the First World War, with respect to mentioning the qualities of the decorated soldier and describing the courageous act or injury. 94 However, the accounts published from 1914 onwards proved to be more extensive; the use of adjectives extended and focused much more on the characteristics and qualities of the soldier.
A closer look at the specific terminology in the selected appendices reveals that several words can be distinguished and categorized. 95 The first category consists of qualities that illustrate the ability to meet dangers or a difficult situation without fear: courage is most often mentioned and synonyms include brave, bravery, disregard of danger, audacity, and valour. The loyalty and care for the army are characterized with words like devotion, sacrifice, and self-denial. Qualities that describe appropriate behaviour are proper or good conduct, competence, duty, and dutiful. References to the ability to remain calm in a dangerous situation are sangfroid and composure, whereas enthusiastic or lively comportment is defined with words such as energy, spirit, active, passion, and zeal. Soldiers who were worth following as an example and who encouraged others are characterized with terms like exemplary, stimulation, inspiration, and high morale. Qualities that differentiated the soldier from others, or that determined certain acts, are voluntary, contribution, spontaneously, decision, initiative, and distinction. The most notable observations with regard to characteristics that were often mentioned, and virtues that acquired greater or less importance during the course of war, are shown in Table 1.
Frequency of characteristics used for soldiers deserving a decoration. 96
Some characteristics, such as devotion and courage remained stable over the years, apart from 1915, when courage was inexplicably very little used. Others changed, in 1914 more than half of the soldiers were praised for their belle conduite (proper or good conduct), but this gradually decreased until it was hardly used in 1918. The rather general description that was used at the turbulent beginning of the war was perhaps replaced by more specific soldierly virtues when the men were better known. Disregard for danger and sangfroid were mainly used in 1918. The accounts indeed narrated several dangerous actions in which the soldiers had acted fearlessly during the liberating offensive. However, as will be argued, specific characteristics could also be intended as an encouragement, which could be the reason for the frequent use of these qualities during the final months of war. The same can be said about the increasing use of distinction and voluntary in the last years. Also noticeable is that while both officers and soldiers are mentioned for their exemplary behaviour, almost exclusively higher officers are praised because of their stimulation and inspiration. The specific terminology that was used relates to certain stylistic features, which reappear often in the accounts. These features are the designation of the hero, the enumeration of the circumstances, the achievement, the formulation of a distinction with regard to others and the exemplary role of the soldier. According to the linguist Marie-Anne Paveau, this routine is part of the epideictic genre, also known as ceremonial oratory, which was used to praise or blame during ceremonies. She considers the citations in the orders as resembling this genre. Epideictic rhetoric tries to place its audience into a certain emotional state, which leads to a mental disposition that provokes a willingness to act without consideration, since it is perceived as obvious. The Army Command’s emphasis on the importance of obtaining a decoration and on certain behavioural characteristics was thus a way to make soldiers believe that these were indeed essential elements. 97 This is confirmed by the sample of Lorent, since she mentions that actions d’éclat – that were motivated with characteristics such as courage, bravery and sangfroid – were the most rewarded. 98
Behavioural characteristics
Although many documents by the Army Command are full of references to patriotism and the King, the appendices rarely mention these notions. Why did the Army Command stress specific characteristics such as courage (103 times; 243 when including synonyms such as brave and audacity) instead of more abstract notions? The military philosopher Peter Olsthoorn argues that the notion of honour is an effective way to make soldiers fight and be courageous. In this context Olsthoorn addresses the idea of creating ‘artificial courage’ among combatants, in which honour, self-esteem, and courage are connected and influence each other. Soldiers need to hold themselves in high esteem, and by receiving praise for their courage they feel valued and proud. More generally speaking, they feel the importance of (their own) honour. This principle is twofold: honour is a necessary incentive for courageous behaviour, but at the same time these feelings of honour are achieved by praising courage. 99 This relates to the recurrence of specific terminology in the accounts of the orders of the day and the epideictic genre. Through the repetitive stressing of specific characteristics by the Army Command, soldiers would be more likely to act in such a manner.
Moreover, courage refers to actual action. Several studies have proven that abstract ideals are not a motivating factor in combat. 100 These characterizations were attributed to the person of the soldier, and therefore probably more of an incentive to the feeling of honour than are abstract notions. This is illustrated by René Deckers, who described patriotism as a new-born sentiment. Although a motivation during the deprivations the army encountered, he considered it a latent sentiment that never caused a feeling of exaltation. He continued his reflections by saying that the prospect of a difficult mission enlivened the soldiers, not only because of the dangers themselves but also for the honour that would redound to them. 101
The aforementioned virtues were not always praised, as can be seen in the case of the soldier Gaston Le Roy. He was reported for endangering his fellow soldiers because of his risky behaviour during a patrol. Le Roy had already been punished several times for being disrespectful, and this time the Army Command sent him to prison for eight days. He reflected upon the events with the following: ‘With regard to this report I have showed unprecedented boldness (no decoration?!).’ 102 Subsequently, he called the army ‘a mysterious sect’, which was also the case for the training camps, ‘where the qualities of a good soldier were constantly taught. Sangfroid – boldness, self-sacrifice … everything that is now a reason to accuse me for being a bad soldier.’ 103
Personal accounts
Despite the stylistic recurrences, the emphasis on certain words, and the discourse on honourable behaviour, it is important to mention that many of the texts appear to be specifically written for the decorated soldier. However, this was not always the case, especially when a soldier received a decoration for his devotion during his long presence at the front, such as the volunteer René Deckers. When he was mentioned in the orders of the day and received a Croix de Guerre with – indeed – a standardized text, he wrote, ‘whoever wrote that did not make any effort with regard to the formulation of the honourable mention’. 104
However, when a decoration was given after a specific heroic deed, the text applied much more to the individual soldier. The act or injury was of course a personalized narrative, but the qualities accredited to the soldier seemed to be specifically assigned to him. There existed a clear division between the qualities, which were generally mentioned in the first part of the account, and the actions themselves. An example is captain Maurice-Cornelis Delva, who became a Knight in the Order of the Crown. He was praised as an excellent commander, ‘full of audacity, initiative and courage, possessing a high degree of sense of duty. Always prepared to be an example in exposing himself as first to danger; has acquired the confidence and esteem of his men by his valiant conduct during the campaign.’ In the second part, his deed was described, in which the aforementioned qualities are indeed noticeable. 105
The accounts and the terminology used could influence the soldier in different ways. First of all, the accounts gave a specific motive for a decoration. Praise for certain conduct was in this respect a clear message that underlined the behavioural norms of the Army Command. Furthermore, individual soldiers were acclaimed in a public manner. In this way, the textual variant served the same purposes as the public praising of a soldier in front of his comrades as mentioned before. Every soldier was able to read the accounts, and probably did so. The fact alone that it provided information about acquaintances or family could be a reason. 106 At the same time, the accounts reinforced the soldier’s self-esteem. Soldiers indeed often proudly recalled the account of their own act and that of fellow comrades, using the exact same terminology expressed by the Army Command. This indicates that these characterizations actually instigated feelings of honour and a strengthened morale, for themselves as well as for their comrades. As lieutenant Clement de Waele wrote, ‘I always try to set a good example for my comrades, by my sangfroid and my courage. May God grant me many opportunities to prove myself. With His grace I will try to do my duty, anytime and anywhere.’ 107
Conclusion
The bestowing of military decorations served many purposes in which the soldier’s self-consciousness, his self-esteem and his feelings were of great importance. The granting of decorations was a reciprocal ritual, since it influenced the considerations and actions of both the Army Command and soldier. Decorations were granted after brave actions on the battlefield, but at the same time gave meaning and value to these actions, strengthened the morale, inspired and motivated soldiers. This proved to be a necessary measure for Belgian soldiers and their specific situation during the war.
From the perspective of the Army Command, I argue that the bestowal of a decoration related to the expectations, norms, and beliefs of the Army Command. Decorations served to encourage and sanctify desirable behaviour, and instigate feelings of pride. In return, the retraction of a decoration and the public shaming that followed dictated what was thought of as dishonourable behaviour. Specific characteristics such as courage, duty, and sangfroid were emphasized and praised, so that soldiers would be permeated of the essential importance of these virtues, and thus were more prone to act in this way. At the same time, it was a way to strengthen the soldier’s self-consciousness. The appraisal of courageous behaviour was always publicly acknowledged, for example by praising the soldier in front of his comrades or through a personalized citation in the orders of the day, which could reinforce his self-esteem and pride. Fellow soldiers were addressed as well, since the praising had an exemplary function and could create the ambition to achieve the same. However, singling out soldiers could also lead to disintegrative feelings such as jealousy and envy.
When examining the perception of the soldiers themselves, it is quite surprising that the writings from a diverse group of combatants indicate that the bestowal of decorations was mainly perceived as impressive and emotional. For example, the descriptions of decoration ceremonies indeed illustrate the special atmosphere of the ritual which elicited different emotional states. Scepticism or discontent were primarily expressed when injustice – often with regard to the rank and background of the decorated soldier – was experienced. The expression of discontent also demonstrates the soldier’s self-consciousness, since it reveals an awareness of his own value, honour, and identity in relation to fellow soldiers. Furthermore, several soldiers clearly expressed what they regarded as honourable behaviour – often in the same manner the Army Command emphasized certain qualities. In this respect, a decoration indeed served its purposes: a soldier became conscious of how he should behave according to the Army Command, but more importantly, realized that he could be proud of himself.
Footnotes
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank the editors of War in History and the reviewers of this article. Furthermore, I am grateful to Peter Roets, Antoon Vrints and Olivier Luminet for their suggestions, historical and psychological comments on the article.
Funding
This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
1
The title quote comes from Robert de Wilde, De Liège à l’Yser: Mon Journal de Campagne (Paris, 1918), pp. 121–2. Note of 3–10–1914.
2
Royal Decrees 1916, Charles the Broqueville in the name of King Albert, Decree 18/24–2–1917 (orders of the day 2–7–1916) and Decree 18/24–3–1917 (orders of the day 20–8–1916).
3
It is very difficult to give a precise figure of the number of soldiers decorated during and after the war, since there are no official documents with these numbers. Furthermore, many soldiers received a decoration after the war, often obtained more than one decoration, and various ministries granted them. Pat van Hoorebeke provides some figures, although not a complete overview: ‘De Impact van de Eerste Wereldoorlog op het Belgische Beloningssysteem (deel 1)’, Bulletin van het Koninklijk Museum van het Leger en de Krijgsgeschiedenis, Bijdragen tot de studie van het Militaire Erfgoed 2 (2008), pp. 84–93.
4
See for example John Horne, ed., State, Society and Mobilization in Europe during the First World War (Cambridge, 1997), Leonard Smith, The Embattled Self: French Soldiers Testimony of the Great War (London, 2007), and Bruno Benvindo for the Belgian case: Des Hommes en Guerre. Les Soldats Belges entre Ténacité et Désillusion 1914–1918 (Brussels, 2005).
5
See for a recent international study on phaleristics Humberto Nuno de Oliveira, José Vicente de Bragança, and Paulo Jorge Estrela, eds, The Great War in Phaleristics. International Colloquium – Proceedings (Lisbon, 2014).
6
Alexander Watson, Enduring the Great War. Combat, Morale and Collapse in the German and British Armies 1914–1918 (Cambridge, 2008), pp. 57, 61–2; Marie-Anne Paveau, ‘Citations à l’Ordre et Croix de Guerre. Fonctions des Sanctions Positives dans la Guerre de 1914–1918’, in Rémy Cazals, Emmanuelle Picard, and Denis Rolland, eds, Pratiques et Expériences (Actes du Colloque International tenu à Craonne et Soissons les 12 et 13 Novembre 2004) (Toulouse, 2005), pp. 247–58; Ralph Winckle, Der Dank des Vaterlandes. Eine Symbolgeschichte des Eisernen Kreuzes 1914 bis 1936 (Essen, 2007).
7
Bruno Frey, ‘Giving and Receiving Awards’, Perspectives on Psychological Science 4, 1 (2006), pp. 377–88.
8
For an overview of the current research on the history of emotions and its connections with other fields such as psychology, neurosciences and anthropology, see: Jan Plamper, The History of Emotions. An Introduction (Oxford, 2015). The historian Barbara Rosenwein has been a great influence on my research. In ‘Worrying about Emotions in History’, American Historical Review 72, 1 (2002), pp. 821–45, she synthesized historical research on emotion and introduced her idea about the social foundation of emotion: emotional communities, which she further developed in Emotional Communities in the Early Middle Ages (Ithaca/London, 2006).
9
Interesting studies on honour are: Pieter Spierenburg, ed., Men and Violence. Gender, Honor and Rituals in Modern Europe and America (Columbus, OH, 1998); Ute Frevert, Men of Honor. A Social and Cultural History of the Duel (Cambridge, 1995). Although Frevert pays attention to honour as an emotion, both historians do not fully investigate the workings of emotions within wars and armies.
10
June Price Tangney and Kurt W. Fisher, ‘Self-conscious Emotions and the Affect Revolution: Framework and Overview’, in Tangney and Fischer, eds, Self-conscious Emotions. The Psychology of Shame, Guilt, Embarrassment, and Pride (New York/London, 1995), pp. 3–8.
11
Helen Merrell Lynd, On Shame and the Search for Identity (New York, 1961), pp. 24, 183.
12
Anthony P. Cohen, Self-Consciousness: An Alternative Anthropology of Identity (London, 1994), pp. 68–71. Cohen bases his ideas in this respect on the work of the sociologist Erving Goffman.
13
Monique Scheer, ‘Are Emotions a Kind of Practice (And is That What Makes Them Have a History)? A Bourdieuian Approach to Understanding Emotion’, History and Theory 51 (2012), pp. 193–220, 202.
14
Sophie de Schaepdrijver, De Groote Oorlog. Het Koninkrijk België tijdens de Eerste Wereldoorlog (Amsterdam, 2013), pp. 67–102.
15
Benoît Amez, Dans les Tranchées: les Écrits Non Publiés des Combattants Belges de la Première Guerre Mondiale. Analyse de leurs Expériences de Guerre et des Facteurs de Résistance (Paris, 2009), pp. 58–60.
16
Benvindo, Des Hommes en Guerre, p. 47.
17
Ibidem, p. 22. Quote from ‘Mededeelingen’, Turnhout en Omstreken: Kosteloos Oorlogsblad voor de Soldaten der Kantons Arendonck, Moll, Turnhout, Westerloo, nr. 8, juni 1918, p. 2. De Kempen is a region situated in north-eastern Belgium.
18
Luc de Vos, Het Effectief van de Belgische Krijgsmacht en de Militiewetgeving 1830–1914 (Brussels, 1985), pp. 336–41.
19
Daniël Vanacker, De Frontbeweging. De Vlaamse strijd aan de IJzer (Koksijde, 2000), pp. 14–16, 61–3.
20
Within this article it is not possible to discuss the situation concerning Flemish and French-speaking/Walloon soldiers (and the Belgian case in general) in depth. For more information: Bruno De Wever, ‘The Flemish Movement and Flemish Nationalism: Instruments, Historiography and Debates’, Studies on National Movements 1 (2013), pp. 50–80, and De Schaepdrijver, De Groote Oorlog, for example pp. 201–4.
21
André-Charles Borné, Distinctions Honorifiques de la Belgique, 1830–1985 (Brussels, 1985), passim.
22
Aurélie Lorent, Des Actes et des Faits Récompensés à l’Occasion de la Grande Guerre: le Sentiment de Reconnaissance Envers la Patrie des Combattants Belges Francophones à travers l’Octroi de Distinctions Honorifiques Officielles (1914–1939), MA Dissertation (Louvain-la-Neuve, 2012), pp. 116–18.
23
Henri Quinot, Recueil Illustré des Décorations Belges et Congolaises (Brussels n.d., 5th edition), passim.
24
Luc de Vos and Richard Holmes estimate that the army consisted of 200,000 soldiers at the beginning of the war, and of 167,000 men during the final offensives in 1918: Langs Velden van Eer. Belangrijke Plaatsen in de Eerste en Tweede Wereldoorlog (Leuven, 2006), pp. 42–50. Another estimation consist of 117,000 combatants in 1914 and 165,000 in 1918, with a total of 378,000 men throughout war: Paul Philippe et al., La Belgique et la Première Guerre Mondiale: Bibliographie (Brussels, 1987), p. 118. De Schaepdrijver mentions a total of 350,000 soldiers: De Groote Oorlog, p. 174.
25
Lorent based her sample on the orders of the day of several months during 1914–1919 and the number of combatants (in different ranks) that participated during the war. Although the title is a bit misleading, she examined both Flemish and French-speaking soldiers. Another remark on the accuracy of her sample is the fact that some soldiers received more than one decoration and the months she used for her sample (1 month in 1914, 3 months from 1915 until 1919). Although she chose months in which important actions occurred, it is possible that the examination of other months contributes to a higher or lower number of decorations.
26
Lorent, Des Actes et des Faits, pp. 107–15. In the case of the allied countries the officers were the most rewarded, followed by the sub-officers, respectively representing 3 per cent and 2 per cent of the total amount of rewards. Only 1 per cent was given to soldiers. She stresses that her percentages are slightly rounded.
27
Lorent, pp. 115–16. Heroic actions: 27,256 times, injuries: 6162, offered services: 1087, death: 456, salvage: 384. The reason why the total sum of these five motives is slightly higher than her sample of 34,991 soldiers is because some soldiers fit in different categories.
28
This first only concerned the Order of Leopold, Order of the Crown, and Order of Leopold II (Royal Decree 15–11–1915). The Royal Decree of 4–6–1916 decided that also the Order of the African Star and Royal Order of the Lion could attach a palm: René Cornet, Verzameling van de Wettelijke en Reglementaire Bepalingen inzake de Belgische Nationale Orden en Beschouwingen aangaande de Eervolle Onderscheidingen in ’t Algemeen (Brussels, 1963), pp. 54–6.
29
Peter Roets, Belgische Eretekens Uitgereikt Tijdens en Na de Eerste Wereldoorlog (Passendale, 2008), p. 16.
30
Pat Van Hoorebeeke, ‘The Impact of WWI on Belgian Orders’, in Nuno de Oliveira, De Bragança, and Estrela, eds, The Great War in Phaleristics, p. 116.
31
The badge was not an actual decoration, but a token to prove that soldiers had actually fought during the war, and did not cowardly avoid military service. Similar badges were installed in other countries, such as Italy (1916) and Romania (1918). According to Peter Doyle, The Silver War Badge (1916) was indeed installed against shameful accusations and ‘intended to protect its wearer from the white feather’: First World War Britain (Oxford, 2012), p. 50.
32
Roets, Belgische Eretekens, p. 17.
33
Legerbode, ‘Een kenteken voor de Belgische Gereformeerde soldaten’, nr. 151, 24–8–1915, and ‘Het kenteken van de Gereformeerden’, nr. 181, 2–11–1915.
34
Vanacker, De Frontbeweging, pp. 62–3. Quote from the politican Alfons van de Perre.
35
Roets, Belgische Eretekens, p. 13.
36
Romain Vanlandschoot, Een Vlaamse Viking aan het Front. Het Verhaal van Joris Lannoo en zijn Vrienden tijdens WOI (Tielt, 2011), pp. 152–7.
37
‘Coupables faits portant atteinte à l’honneur et à la dignité’: Quinot, Recueil Illustré, p. 17. The Military Penal Code also stated that as a consequence of acts such as desertion, mutiny, and insubordination, it was forbidden to wear a decoration.
38
Stanislas Horvat, De vervolging van militairrechtelijke delicten tijdens wereldoorlog I. De werking van het Belgisch krijgsgerecht (Brussels, 2009), pp. 242–3. First sentenced to death, the accused soldier was afterwards condemned to six years prison and was forbidden to wear his decoration for ten years.
39
Armée Belge, Règlement de Discipline. Mis à Jour le 1er Juin 1919/ Tuchtreglement. Bijgewerkt tot den 1e Juni 1919 (Imprimerie du Grand Quartier Général Armée Belge, 1919), pp. 125–6. According to Tom Simoens, these were substantial measures that could be undertaken by the company commander, the ‘lowest’ authority within the hierarchical chain: ‘Van Arrangeren tot Renseigneren. Smaad en Geweld van Militairen tegen hun Oversten tijdens de Eerste Wereldoorlog’, Bijdragen tot de Eigentijdse Geschiedenis 23 (2011), pp. 15–53, 35–6.
40
Royal Army Museum (RAM) (Brussels), Moscow Archives, Fifth Army Division, 29, 2725–2727, O.J.A. 28–9–1918.
41
RAM, Le Moniteur Belge. Journal officiel, 6/10–6–1915.
42
Paveau, ‘Citations à l’Ordre et Croix de Guerre’, p. 248.
43
Royal Decrees 1915, Decree 28/31–10–1915 and 1/2–11–915 and report to King Albert I by Charles de Broqueville on the instalment of the Croix de Guerre, 20–10–1915.
44
RAM, Archive of the First Army Division, 810/3, Chef d’Etat-Major Général aux Commandants de Brigade et aux Chefs de Corps de la 1e Division d’Armée, 18–2–1917.
45
Watson, Enduring the Great War, p. 62.
46
RAM, Archive of the First Army Division, 52, Rapport Spécial – lieutenant Weyenberg au capitaine commandant le détachement chargé d’attaquer la Ferme Violette, 12–1–1915.
47
André Lambelet, ‘Consentement Fabriqué? Le Rôle Moral de l’Officier Pendant la Grande Guerre’, in Cazals, Picard, and Rolland, Pratiques et Expériences, pp. 291–9.
48
Although the Belgian army mainly secured its position, it was certainly involved in several battles and raids during the war.
49
Van Hoorebeeke, ‘The Impact of WWI on Belgian Orders’, pp. 114–15.
50
Jack De Moor, Dokter Albert De Moor: Spoedarts in de Eerste Wereldoorlog (Lichtervelde, 2012), p. 67.
51
See for the exact numbers Lorent, Des Actes et des Faits, pp. 120–2. In her study, the number of decorations in 1916 is higher than the number in 1917. However, this is probably related to the instalment of the Croix the Guerre at the end of 1915. All soldiers who were cited in the orders of the day, from 1914 until that moment, received the Croix.
52
Benvindo, Des Hommes en Guerre, pp. 44–6.
53
RAM, Archive of the First Army Division, 161–4, Guidelines for a military offensive, 4–6–1915.
54
In Flanders Fields Museum (IFF), 3218, Journal Jozef van den Veyver, 6–5–1916.
55
Scheer, ‘Are Emotions a Kind of Practice?’, pp. 209–10.
56
Ibidem, p. 205. Scheer cites Pierre Bourdieu, The Logic of Practice (Stanford, 1990), p. 69.
57
Paula M. Niedenthal, ‘Embodying Emotion’, Science 316 (2007), 1002–5.
58
Borné, Dinstinctions Honorifiques, pp. 6–12.
59
Nico H. Frijda, ‘Commemorating’, in James W. Pennebaker, Dario Paez, and Bernard Rimé, eds, Collective Memory of Political Events: Social Psychological Perspectives (Mahwah, NJ, 1997), pp. 103–27, 111, 121.
60
IFF, 6915, Impressions Personnelles 1914–1919 – Albert Liessens, Note of 19–11–1916, p. 114. Transcription by Jack De Moor.
61
Roger Lampaert, ed., Arts in de Grote Oorlog: het Oorlogsdagboek van Dokter Paul De Backer (Brugge, 2009), p. 120. Notes 7–21 April 1915.
62
André Gysel, ed., Dokter Lievens: Dagboek van een Arts in de Loopgraven van WO I (Tielt, 2011), p. 51. Note of 6–9–1915.
63
IFF, 5795, Diaries 1914–191 – Luc Hertoghe, 21–7–1918, p. 211. Transcription by Jack De Moor.
64
De Wilde, De Liège à l’Yser, pp. 93–4. Note of 15–9–1914.
65
Gysel, Dokter Lievens, p. 51. Note of 8–9–1915.
66
De Wilde, De Liège à l’Yser, p. 52. Note of 18–9–1915.
67
Ibidem, pp. 121–2. Note of 3–10–1914.
68
Agneta H. Fisher and Antony S.R. Manstead, ‘Social Functions of Emotion’, in Michael Lewis, Jeannette M. Haviland-Jones, and Lisa Feldman Barrett, eds, Handbook of Emotions (New York/London, 2008, 3rd edition), pp. 456–68.
69
RAM, Personalia 14–18, boîte 12, dossier no. 42, Carnets de Guerre de Jean-Louis Laerens, carnet VI, notes written between 17–8 and 31–10–1916.
70
Ibidem, notes written between 1/31–11–1916; 29–10–1915; 26–9–1918.
71
For instance in the diary of chaplain Emiel de Wyels (notes on 22–3–1915 and 25–3–1915): Wilfried Verleyen and André Gysel, eds, Aalmoezenier de Wyels: Dagboek van een Vlaamse Benedictijn tijdens WO I (Tielt, 2012), p. 41
72
Lampaert, Arts in de Grote Oorlog, p. 148. Notes 1/25–9–1915.
73
RAM, Personalia 14–18, boîte 3, dossier no. 16, Carnets de Guerre de René Deckers, tranchée 21, Note 5–10–1915, p. 178.
74
‘Eerekruisen’, Ons Sinjorenblad: Kosteloos Oorlogsblad voor de Soldaten van Antwerpen en Omliggende, nr. 2, 21–8–1919. Some journals continued to appear after the war, as is the case with Ons Sinjorenblad.
75
Lampaert, Arts in de Grote Oorlog, p. 85. Note of 16–12–1914.
76
IFF, Impressions Personnelles 1914–1919 – Albert Liessens, 4–1–1917, p. 119.
77
Bourdieu, The Logic of Practice, p. 69.
78
Nico H. Frijda, ‘Impulsive Action and Motivation’, Biological Psychology 84 (2010), pp. 570–9.
79
RAM, Personalia 14–18, boîte 13, dossier no. 43, Carnets de Guerre de René Lefèvre, Carnet 3. For example the note of 18–5–1918.
80
Ibidem, note of 29–1–1918.
81
André Gysel, ed., Arthur L. Pasquier. De Grote Oorlog. Veldtochtnotities 1914–1919 van een Waal in de Westhoek (Gent, 1999), pp. 9–11.
82
Ibidem, p. 201. Note of 7–12–1917.
83
Laurence van Ypersele, Le Roi Albert, Histoire d’un Mythe (Brussels, 2006).
84
Van Hoorebeeke, ‘The Impact of WWI on Belgian Orders’, pp. 112–13.
85
De Moor, Albert De Moor, p. 233. Note of 6–3–1916.
86
Verleyen and Gysel, Aalmoezenier de Wyels, p. 72. Note of 29–12–1915.
87
De Wilde, De Liège à l’Yser, p. 245. Note of 16–1–1915.
88
Gysel, Arthur L. Pasquier, p. 102. Note of 12–12–1914.
89
De Moor, Albert De Moor, p. 102. Note of 17–11–1914.
90
Within the reach of this article, it is not possible to discuss the perception of decorations after the war. However, Lorent does study the period between the two world wars: Des Actes et des Faits, pp. 160–89.
91
IFF, 6915, Impressions Personnelles 1914–1919 – Albert Liessens, 19–4–1916, p. 83. Liessens’s feelings with regard to decorations fluctuate regularly throughout his journals.
92
Ibidem, p. 134.
93
I selected November because the war was ongoing in this month every year of the war. The specific date of publication varied year to year: 4–11–1914 – 23 soldiers; 10–11–1915 – 28 soldiers; 21–11–1916 – 15 soldiers; 23–11–1917 – 39 soldiers; 1–11–1918 – 151.
94
Joost Vaesen, ‘Het Ministerie van Defensie en de krijgsmacht’, in Patricia Van Den Eeckhout and Guy Vanthemsche, eds, Bronnen voor de Studie van het Hedendaags België, 19de–20ste eeuw (Brussels, 1999), pp. 404–7.
95
96
In sum, in 254 citations, Courage is mentioned 103 times, Brave: 52, Bravery: 39, Disregard of danger: 23, Audacity: 14, Valour: 12, Devotion: 61, Sacrifice: 9, Self-denial: 5, Proper/good conduct: 37, Duty: 20, Competence: 12, Conscientious: 8, Sangfroid: 27, Composure: 12, Energetic: 14, Spirit: 14, Active: 13, Passion: 9, Zeal: 8, Exemplary: 36, Distinction: 22, Stimulation/Inspiration: 14, High morale: 6, Voluntary: 21, Contribution: 14, Spontaneously: 10, Decision: 5, Initiative: 5. The percentages in the table represent the amount of citations in which that word was used, with regard to the total citations that are studied for that specific year.
97
Paveau, ‘Citations à l’Ordre et Croix de Guerre’, pp. 252–3. Paveau cites in this context E. Danblon, ‘La Rationalité du Discours Épidictique’, in M. Dominicy and M. Frédéric, eds, La Mise en Scène des Valeurs. La Rhétorique de l’Éloge et du Blâme (Lausanne/Paris, 2001), p. 40. Epideictic rhetoric was first defined by Aristotle in Rhetoric, his treatise on the art of persuasion.
98
Lorent, Des Actes et des Faits, pp. xv, 115.
99
Peter Olsthoorn, ‘Honor as a Motive for Making Sacrifices’, Journal of Military Ethics 4, 3 (2005), pp. 183–197, 183–8. He foremost mentions Bernard Mandeville’s thoughts on this matter.
100
Olsthoorn, ‘Honor as a Motive’, pp. 190–1.
101
RAM, Personalia 14–18, boîte 3, dossier no. 16, Carnets de Guerre de René Deckers, La Panne, Villa Brise de Mer, vendredi 23–4–1915, p. 53.
102
Gaston Le Roy, Piot Worden … en Zijn. Dagboek 1915–1918 (Wetteren, 1930), p. 155.
103
Ibidem, pp. 157–8.
104
André Gysel, Roger V. Verbeke, and Gino Malfait, eds, Deckers’ Dagboek 1914–1919, Notities van een Oorlogsvrijwilliger (Gent, 1999), p. 301.
105
RAM, Archive of the First Army Division 1452/21, Annexe à l’O.J.A. 1–11–1918, p. 4.
106
RAM, Personalia 14–18, boîte 12, dossier no. 42, Carnets de Guerre de Jean-Louis Laerens, carnet V, note written on 29–10–1915. Laerens mentions consulting the annexes to find out what happened to an acquaintance.
107
IFF, 3048, Diary of Clement de Waele, 17–4–1915.