Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

One for the historians..Lions and donkeys: 10 big myths about World War One debunked

A great article here from Dan Snow
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-25776836

''Much of what we think we know about the 1914-18 conflict is wrong, writes historian Dan Snow.

No war in history attracts more controversy and myth than World War One.

For the soldiers who fought it was in some ways better than previous conflicts, and in some ways worse.

By setting it apart as uniquely awful we are blinding ourselves to the reality of not just WW1 but war in general. We are also in danger of belittling the experience of soldiers and civilians caught up in countless other appalling conflicts throughout history and the present day.'' [Article continues]



Also the links are worth following
Find out more from Dan Snow on how so many soldiers survived the WW1 trenches
http://www.bbc.co.uk/guides/z3kgjxs
and Michael Mosley on the plastic surgery techniques pioneered in WW1. http://www.bbc.co.uk/guides/zxw42hv
«13456

Comments

  • The hospital for plastic surgery is now Queen Mary's Sidcup.

  • Cheers Arthur , some shocking pictures, makes you realise what people had to deal with.
  • Some fair enough points in there but also some stuff that he says could be contested. Interesting read and one or two bits I might stick in some lessons, so cheers.
  • https://www.amazon.co.uk/The-First-World-War-Illustrated/dp/0140024816

    AJP Taylor has an excellent account. The waste of life as Lincs says is truly shocking.
  • The late Robin Neillands wrote an interesting book defending British Generals in WW1 called "The Great War Generals 1914-1918". I found it quite instructive. Certainly gave me a more balanced view of what happened at the front line. Not sure Dan Snow is being all that original.
  • The Lions are donkeys aren't they?
  • edited January 2014

    The late Robin Neillands wrote an interesting book defending British Generals in WW1 called "The Great War Generals 1914-1918". I found it quite instructive. Certainly gave me a more balanced view of what happened at the front line. Not sure Dan Snow is being all that original.

    Jeremy Paxman has also written along similar lines to Snow .. could it be that this is the BBC intelligentsia attempting to rewrite or at least to rationalise history which is as always written by the victors .. perhaps this is to make us all more receptive to and less critical of the bombardment of media output that we are sure to receive in this the 100th anniversary year of the start of WW1
  • edited January 2014
    "M"

    I read this with interest. Much of it is a panegyric excusing the 'upper classes' who have long been blamed for the messes made during this dreadful conflict. Snow makes some good points and debunks many misconceptions. On the other hand he uses some dubious 'statistics' while attempting to justify his conclusions.
    However, the fact is that well over 700,000 young British men and hundreds of thousands more German, French, Italian, Russian and other young men of various nationalities perished due to the uncaring incompetence and greed of their respective ruling classes.
    Snow makes the mistake of talking of German 'defeat' .. Germany was not defeated until 1945. WW1 was father to the bastard child that was WWll

    Did you read the article?

    Germany was clearly defeated. It was Hitler and others who invented the "never defeated, stabbed in the back" excuse as Snow clearly says. Their navy had mutinied, there were revolutions on the streets, the army had been on the run for 100 days, their people were starving and all their allies had already surrendered.
  • Sponsored links:


  • Excellent stuff as ever Clive.

    "Mud Blood and Poppycock" is an easy to read but very serious and funny book debunking some of these myths and others.

    Does anyone know if there will be a day by day "live" twitter feed for WWI? I follow one for WWII @RealTimeWWII which is fascinating and informative and hope someone has the time and knowledge to do the same for the Great War
  • It's a good year to have an interest in all matters WW1.
  • http://gilliesarchives.org.uk/

    For those interested, the archives from Queen Mary's on the plastic surgery from WWI
  • edited January 2014
    ^^^^ You are in blood dripping form Dracula (a k a Hank Irving) .. a pity that you are still incapable of accepting or at least contemplating the opinions of others .. that Germany was never 'defeated' is MY interpretation, I am disagreeing with Snow whose arguments you seem to have swallowed hook line and sinker .. if Germany was 'defeated' how come within twenty years it had raised huge armies, state of the (then) art military hardware and - most importantly - the desire of its people to re-start a war .. the mere signing of an armistice by a few 'generals' and 'politicians' does not necessarily constitute defeat .. similarly the Taliban has not been 'defeated' in Afghanistan .. defeat means crushed, cleansed of all enmity, acceptance that perhaps the reasons why you and your country fought were wrong, that your ideology was corrupt .. this assuredly was not the case in Germany in 1918
  • edited January 2014

    ^^^^ You are in blood dripping form Dracula .. a pity that you are still incapable of accepting or at least contemplating the opinions of others .. that Germany was never 'defeated' is MY interpretation, I am disagreeing with Snow whose arguments you seem to have swallowed hook line and sinker .. if Germany was 'defeated' how come within twenty years it had raised huge armies, state of the (then) art military hardware and - most importantly - the desire of its people to re-start a war .. the mere signing of an armistice by a few 'generals' and 'politicians' does not necessarily constitute defeat .. similarly the Taliban has not been 'defeated' in Afghanistan .. defeat means crushed, cleansed of all enmity, acceptance that perhaps the reasons why you and your country fought were wrong, that your ideology was corrupt .. this assuredly was not the case in Germany in 1918

    Personal insults again I see.

    Did you even read what I said this time? I doubt it.

    Not swallowed what Snow said but I have done a lot of reading about WWI and discussed it at length with others with the same passion.

    German lost the war, it was not a draw so it was defeated. End of. Does a defeat mean a country is crushed and cleansed of all enmity?. That is your very strange definition but plenty of wars have been lost without that being the case.

    German lost huge amounts of territory to the east and west, other parts were demilitarized and occupied by Allied armies. Germany then suffered the huge inflation of the early 20s. So they did not get off lightly. It was a crushing defeat.

    That Germany was able to recover and fight and lose another war does not alter the fact that it was defeated in 1918. The desire of some of the German people to start another war was, in part, to wipe clean what they saw as the stain of defeat in 1918. The bigger the defeat the greater the desire to revenge it.
  • mart77 said:

    Some fair enough points in there but also some stuff that he says could be contested. Interesting read and one or two bits I might stick in some lessons, so cheers.

    Cheers Mart.
  • http://gilliesarchives.org.uk/

    For those interested, the archives from Queen Mary's on the plastic surgery from WWI

    Don't know whether you enjoy novels, but plastic surgery at Queen Mary's is a central part of Pat Barker's (author of the Regeneration Trilogy)Toby's Room.
  • ^^^ yes I read what you wrote (not said) and I disagree with you .. as I disagree with much of the last post .. end of ..
  • I am meeting Gordon Corrigan for lunch next week so will mention your support for Mud Blood and Poppycock

    I would also recommend Forgotten Victory by
    Gary Sheffield, Tommy by the late Richard Holmes and anything by my mentor and influence John Terrains.

    I will look for a daily twitter feed,

    We have a countywide initiative here Herts as War that is going develop in real time as the war developed over the next four years.

    As well as an online presence it is based in a shop in Letchworth kitted out as if it was August 14 and evolving with local stories and exhibitions through to November 2018.

    We have lots of school and youth involvement I am asisting with some media work and providing the tours that accompany the project, it has secured major HLF funding all very exciting.

    Another thing to keep your eye on is the National Trench Museum that is being developed just outside Cambridge. Called the Lestweforget project it will cover the size of a couple of football pitches, be very authentically constructed and act as a major educational resource.

    Ben it would be worth subscribing to centenary news online it's a free email newsletter with the latest exhibition/projects locally and nationally.

    Lastly and for photography people have a look at www.westernfrontphotography.com it is part of the Fields of Battle exhibition that is touring the globe from August. My company Battle Honours are sponsors and Mike Sheil the photographer is one our guides. There is some really amazing stuff on there.
  • Sponsored links:


  • edited January 2014
    am reading Catastrophe 1914 at present - great read which dispels many of the myths surrounding the valour of the French (& Belgian army) - and also exposes how disorganised & ineffective the British were at the early stages of the war.

    I live very close to the Smith-Dorrien trail - a highway through the mountains within the Kananaskis area of Alberta. Many of the mountains and glaciers are named after leading personalities of the Great War -as well as a whole range named after Battleships that fought at Jutland. Canada was a great contributor to the war & as a young country had a huge inventory of land and features that leant itself to the names of those who participated with varying degrees of honour during that conflict.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Sir_Douglas
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Joffre
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Foch

    Nothing named after Sir John French though...even though many mountains are named after quite obscure & more junior commanders.

    There is a range named after Victoria Cross Winners, including this chap http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_George_Pattison who was born in Woolwich & emigrated to Canada at around the same time CAFC were founded. Very interesting stories (for me anyway)
  • SE7toSG3 said:

    I am meeting Gordon Corrigan for lunch next week so will mention your support for Mud Blood and Poppycock

    I would also recommend Forgotten Victory by
    Gary Sheffield, Tommy by the late Richard Holmes and anything by my mentor and influence John Terrains.

    I will look for a daily twitter feed,

    We have a countywide initiative here Herts as War that is going develop in real time as the war developed over the next four years.

    As well as an online presence it is based in a shop in Letchworth kitted out as if it was August 14 and evolving with local stories and exhibitions through to November 2018.

    We have lots of school and youth involvement I am asisting with some media work and providing the tours that accompany the project, it has secured major HLF funding all very exciting.

    Another thing to keep your eye on is the National Trench Museum that is being developed just outside Cambridge. Called the Lestweforget project it will cover the size of a couple of football pitches, be very authentically constructed and act as a major educational resource.

    Ben it would be worth subscribing to centenary news online it's a free email newsletter with the latest exhibition/projects locally and nationally.

    Lastly and for photography people have a look at www.westernfrontphotography.com it is part of the Fields of Battle exhibition that is touring the globe from August. My company Battle Honours are sponsors and Mike Sheil the photographer is one our guides. There is some really amazing stuff on there.


    Tell Gordon the pics have fallen out of my copy. Shoddy work : - )

    Forgotten Victory by Gary Sheffield is also very good and to my mind dispels the myth that we didn't win the war, hence the title.

    Don't know John Terrains but will look him up now.

  • "M"


    Did you read the article?

    Germany was clearly defeated. It was Hitler and others who invented the "never defeated, stabbed in the back" excuse as Snow clearly says. Their navy had mutinied, there were revolutions on the streets, the army had been on the run for 100 days, their people were starving and all their allies had already surrendered.

    While thsi is largely true (I don't think you can really say the navy had mutinied - only a section of sailors at Kiev - or that there was really revolutions on the street, there was some unrest but the revolution wasn't until 1919), I think the stab in the back theory was plausible because it all happened so quickly. In the Spring of 1918, many Germans thought they were about to win. The collapse happended very quickly between September and November.
  • Jints said:

    "M"


    Did you read the article?

    Germany was clearly defeated. It was Hitler and others who invented the "never defeated, stabbed in the back" excuse as Snow clearly says. Their navy had mutinied, there were revolutions on the streets, the army had been on the run for 100 days, their people were starving and all their allies had already surrendered.

    While thsi is largely true (I don't think you can really say the navy had mutinied - only a section of sailors at Kiev - or that there was really revolutions on the street, there was some unrest but the revolution wasn't until 1919), I think the stab in the back theory was plausible because it all happened so quickly. In the Spring of 1918, many Germans thought they were about to win. The collapse happended very quickly between September and November.
    True but collapse they did. After years of no movement in the West the Allies advanced for continuously for three months. In the context of that war that was incredible.

    The Kaiser has abdicated and fled and the leaders of the army realised that they had no chance of preventing the full scale invasion across the Rhine.

    The German, and Allied, losses were some of the highest of the whole war in the last three months but while the Germans had no more reserves the Allies had the US armies landing every day.

    The asked for a armistice to prevent a total annihilation. Were they completely overrun as they would be in 1945? No, but it was a clear defeat. They lost large areas of what became Poland, the Saarland, Alsace, Lorraine and the Rhineland was occupied (the French, in a racist way, deliberately put black african troops there to further humiliate the Germans) and then de-militarized. All of Germany's overseas empire was lost as well and the Navy and army reduced to tiny numbers.

    The argument over the peace treaty has been going on ever since. The British wanted a strong economic German as, as ever, the UKs main interest was trade. The French wanted a much harsher treaty and Wilson wanted a just peace.
  • Don't get me wrong. I entirely agree, Germany was defeated. Utterly. There were not ioverrun but woudl have been within a few months had they stayed in. In addition to what you say, they had no fuel left and no way of getting any and a division of American soldiers was arriving every day.

    My point is only that many Germans could not quite believe they had been defeated so swiftly. The fact that they were not overrun and had looked like possible victors only a a few months earlier simply gave plausibility to the stab-in-the-back myth.
  • I am glad the books a rewarding read Oakster it took some time with MH on the ground to establish how junior a partner we were to the French in the opening few months of the war.

    Many of our battles were delaying actions that saved a regiment a cross roads or a colour where as the French at Guise or the Marne were engaged in huge history changing actions we often overlook.

    Sir John French (buried just outside Dover) is considered fairly unfavourably by many historians today and was certainly on his back foot after Greason died on his way up to Mons, he was French's chosen man. His replacement Smith Dorrien had a strained relationship with French and that's being kind.

    Anyway you know all this as you have read the book!

    Don't you have a Chip Kerr mountain near you, his VC was at Courcelette in September 1916 and I once took a family member to France to visit the site.

    Will definitely look into the Woolwich VC thanks for mentioning him.
  • Jints said:

    Don't get me wrong. I entirely agree, Germany was defeated. Utterly. There were not ioverrun but woudl have been within a few months had they stayed in. In addition to what you say, they had no fuel left and no way of getting any and a division of American soldiers was arriving every day.

    My point is only that many Germans could not quite believe they had been defeated so swiftly. The fact that they were not overrun and had looked like possible victors only a a few months earlier simply gave plausibility to the stab-in-the-back myth.

    I agree but it might be closer to say that some Germans did not WANT to believe that the suffering and death had been in vain or that their glorious army could be defeated. The evidence was there before them but as always it is easier to blame the scapegoat (communists/jews in this case) than accept that they just got beaten.
  • Recently read Hew Strachan's brilliant book 'The first world war'.
    In his introduction he say,-
    "The notion that British soldiers were Lions led by donkeys continues to provoke debate that has not lost its passion; even if it is now devoid of originality. For a war that was global, it is a massively restricted vision; a conflict measured in yards of mud along a narrow corridor of Flanders and northern France. It knows nothing of the Italian Alps or of the Masurian Lakes ; it bypasses the continent of Africa and Asia; and it forgets the war's other participants - diplomats and sailors, politicians and laborers, women and children".

    Compelling reading.
  • Good quote JohnfromNorfolk (& Hew Strachan) and very relevant to we view the war one dimensionally in the UK thanks for sharing it,
  • SE7toSG3 said:

    I am glad the books a rewarding read Oakster it took some time with MH on the ground to establish how junior a partner we were to the French in the opening few months of the war.

    Many of our battles were delaying actions that saved a regiment a cross roads or a colour where as the French at Guise or the Marne were engaged in huge history changing actions we often overlook.

    Sir John French (buried just outside Dover) is considered fairly unfavourably by many historians today and was certainly on his back foot after Greason died on his way up to Mons, he was French's chosen man. His replacement Smith Dorrien had a strained relationship with French and that's being kind.

    Anyway you know all this as you have read the book!

    Don't you have a Chip Kerr mountain near you, his VC was at Courcelette in September 1916 and I once took a family member to France to visit the site.

    Will definitely look into the Woolwich VC thanks for mentioning him.

    SE7toSG3 said:

    I am glad the books a rewarding read Oakster it took some time with MH on the ground to establish how junior a partner we were to the French in the opening few months of the war.

    Many of our battles were delaying actions that saved a regiment a cross roads or a colour where as the French at Guise or the Marne were engaged in huge history changing actions we often overlook.

    Sir John French (buried just outside Dover) is considered fairly unfavourably by many historians today and was certainly on his back foot after Greason died on his way up to Mons, he was French's chosen man. His replacement Smith Dorrien had a strained relationship with French and that's being kind.

    Anyway you know all this as you have read the book!

    Don't you have a Chip Kerr mountain near you, his VC was at Courcelette in September 1916 and I once took a family member to France to visit the site.

    Will definitely look into the Woolwich VC thanks for mentioning him.

    more than rewarding SE7toSSG3 - engrossing, fascinating, well written - its a great book. Keep getting sidetracked to look up places, people & events mentioned as the story progresses. Am just onto the 1st Battle of Ypres in the timeline of the book.

    We do indeed have Mount Kerr, the highest prominent peak in Alberta is Mount Edith Cavell - the whole place around here echoes of the 1st World War. I wonder though how many people who take the outstandingly beautiful Smith-Dorrien trail, realise anything about the man for whom it is named.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!