The Russian Campaign, April to August, 1915 Being the Second Volume of "Field Notes from the Russian Front" — Edition Insights

A Correspondent's Vindication

Washburn's introduction reveals a defensive posture: friends urged him not to publish because Russia's fortunes were on the wane. He rejects this, arguing that the army's conduct during retreats proves its mettle. The text repeatedly emphasizes that the loss of Warsaw and other positions 'has not shaken their morale.' This is not a detached report but a partisan account, written by a correspondent embedded with the Russian armies for nearly a year. Washburn's language—'unflinching character,' 'matchless courage'—is deliberately emphatic, aiming to counter prevailing pessimism. The dedication to Lord Northcliffe, proprietor of The Times, underscores the book's origin in journalistic dispatches, and the photographs by Mewes, credited to the Daily Mirror, reinforce the documentary intent.

The Mechanics of Gas Defense

A substantial portion of the excerpt details the Russian response to German poison gas attacks. Washburn describes specific countermeasures: respirators in air-tight packets, open ditches filled with water to absorb gas, and straw strewn before positions and sprinkled with water. He notes that the first attack failed despite no preparations, and expresses confidence that subsequent attacks will be met effectively. The account includes precise distances—gases noticeable 25 miles from the line, a sentry overcome 10 miles away—and cites a general whose headquarters was affected 1½ hours after the gas passed positions 5-6 versts distant. These details ground the narrative in observed phenomena, though Washburn acknowledges he is not aware of the gas's nature or potency in the West.

Hatred as a Military Asset

Washburn argues that the German use of poison gas has backfired, creating a 'personal hatred and detestation' that spreads 'like wildfire' through the Russian army. He claims this fury makes Russian troops 'infinitely fiercer both in attack and in defence' than before. The language is visceral: soldiers pray for vengeance, and Washburn predicts retribution 'with cold steel and the butt end of their muskets.' He distinguishes between the 'cold-blooded wretches' who planned the attacks and the 'unfortunate German soldier' who will pay the price. This section reveals Washburn's willingness to interpret psychological effects, but he grounds it in reported conversations: 'Not a soldier or officer with whom I have talked has shown the smallest sign of fear.'

Readers should approach this volume as a contemporary document shaped by its author's explicit commitment to bolstering Allied morale. Washburn's observations are filtered through his role as a correspondent for The Times, and his narrative choices—emphasizing resilience, detailing defensive innovations, and interpreting enemy actions as moral failures—reflect a wartime purpose. The photographs by George H. Mewes offer a parallel visual record, though they are not reproduced in this e-text. For a fuller picture, consider consulting other accounts of the Eastern Front from 1915.

The rain drummed on the windowsill as I closed Washburn’s account, his soldiers’ grim retreats lingering like wet wool. Their doggedness made me think of other men holding ground against odds—cavalry this time, not infantry. I pulled down The Comanches: A History of White's Battalion, Virginia Cavalry — Text and Context almost without deciding to, and the afternoon turned on a different kind of stubbornness.