Poelcappelle 9 Oct 17
Re: Poelcappelle 9 Oct 17
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orders_of ... 1_May_1916
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convoy_PQ_18
Expanded and revised to B class
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convoy_PQ_18
Expanded and revised to B class
Re: Poelcappelle 9 Oct 17
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Maubeuge
http://www.chtimiste.com/
I've been revising Siege of Maubeuge by rather reluctantly relying rather heavily on a French online source.
http://www.chtimiste.com/
I've been revising Siege of Maubeuge by rather reluctantly relying rather heavily on a French online source.
Re: Poelcappelle 9 Oct 17
Oh dear, I've been barred for 36 hours by an Australian chauvinist for editing a mistake on Siege of Tobruk. Ouanqueur. I'll have to edit the Maubeuge section I'm on via Word instead.
Re: Poelcappelle 9 Oct 17
I'm back, the block lifted on grounds of conflict of interest. Well, fancy that! A generic manager humbled.
Re: Poelcappelle 9 Oct 17
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Maubeuge
Managed to plod through a French source but it's been knackering, I fear its full of typos. We'll see.
Managed to plod through a French source but it's been knackering, I fear its full of typos. We'll see.
Re: Poelcappelle 9 Oct 17
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_at_Fromelles
Renamed Battle of... to Attack at.... as per James 1924/1990.
Renamed Battle of... to Attack at.... as per James 1924/1990.
Re: Poelcappelle 9 Oct 17
Haig's Enemy: Crown Prince Rupprecht and Germany's War on the Western Front, Boff J. (2018) OUP 978-0-19-967046-8
Just arrived so I read chapters 16 and 17, pp. 168-189 on the 3rd Ypres campaign. The narrative cleaves too close to secondary sources and is marred by uncritical repetition of what Zuber called "common knowledge" in Ten Days in August: The Siege of Liege 1914 (2014). Boff makes the usual mistake of criticising Gough and the Fifth Army for failures in August but uses a false criterion, the red line on 31 July rather than the green line as the objective and also fails to acknowledge that XIV Corps exceeded its objectives, same as the French by edging towards the red line, as they were supposed to if the conditions were right. Boff uses a simplistic definition of attrition, by comparing losses rather than analysing explicitly the ability of the contenders to replace them but does give a pretty good exposition of the difficulties inflicted on the 4th Army when the British came close to the operational tempo their plans were based on. Boff's account is vastly superior on the difficulties imposed on the Germans during their defeats of September and early October but doesn't see that the 4th Army was in a similar boat to the Fifth Army in August. The weather determined the fortunes of both armies to a far greater degree than is commonly understood (in my opinion). As a synthesis of secondary sources, with welcome detail from German ones, the book is to be recommended but is not the last word by far.
Just arrived so I read chapters 16 and 17, pp. 168-189 on the 3rd Ypres campaign. The narrative cleaves too close to secondary sources and is marred by uncritical repetition of what Zuber called "common knowledge" in Ten Days in August: The Siege of Liege 1914 (2014). Boff makes the usual mistake of criticising Gough and the Fifth Army for failures in August but uses a false criterion, the red line on 31 July rather than the green line as the objective and also fails to acknowledge that XIV Corps exceeded its objectives, same as the French by edging towards the red line, as they were supposed to if the conditions were right. Boff uses a simplistic definition of attrition, by comparing losses rather than analysing explicitly the ability of the contenders to replace them but does give a pretty good exposition of the difficulties inflicted on the 4th Army when the British came close to the operational tempo their plans were based on. Boff's account is vastly superior on the difficulties imposed on the Germans during their defeats of September and early October but doesn't see that the 4th Army was in a similar boat to the Fifth Army in August. The weather determined the fortunes of both armies to a far greater degree than is commonly understood (in my opinion). As a synthesis of secondary sources, with welcome detail from German ones, the book is to be recommended but is not the last word by far.
Re: Poelcappelle 9 Oct 17
I've read more of Boff and think that it's a reasonable synthesis of mainstream opinion but rather lacking in reference (except in passing) to the scholarship of the last couple of decades. He's really rather good on the unbearable asininity of institutions and those who inhabit them which is to be expected since we get a lot from Rupprecht's original unpolished diary but I can't tell if he's colonised his subject somewhat or is reluctant to stick his neck out too far contra the mud, blood and poetry school of the Great War. He should lay off the hindsight a bit too. A missed opportunity or as much as can be expected from a commercial publication?
Re: Poelcappelle 9 Oct 17
Fascinating aspect of the war. Thanks. I suppose there wasn't a lot of beach weather on those islands!
"The secret of managing is to keep the guys who hate you away from the guys who are undecided." - Casey Stengel
Re: Poelcappelle 9 Oct 17
I'm rather surprised that I could glean as much as I did but I enjoyed illuminating a dusty corner of the war. If anyone can suggest sources I'd be grateful, especially about the Germans and Norwegians.