British Great War Butchering Generals

[Hoss]

For the WW1 buffs among us I recommend this read by Dr John Laffin.
Its not a hindsight attack study more of a series of essays on the complete disregard for the mass slaughter and sacrifice of the troops by the British General Staff during their 'Engagements' as they liked to call them. Most were cavalry officers who had,nt a clue what they were doing. Their assessment of the machine gun being a 'novelty weapon' and nothing can replace cold steel and the dash of the horse followed by perfect lines of attacking Infantry is ludicrous.
The postwar rewards were great: Field Marshals French (now there,s a clown for you who virtually destroyed the original professional army in 1915), Haig (the greatest butcher including many of the superb Canadian and Australian forces) were created Earls. French,s title was Earl of Ypres which is ironic because thats where most of his troops lay in the mud. Both received a thank you from the British Parliament!! The Haig,s ancestral home in Scotland was purchased by national subscription in 1921 as a thank you!!
Horne, Rawlinson got Baronhoods. Gough, Hunter-Weston, Hamilton, Kiggel, Haking, Harper, Stopford and Townshend all received Knighthoods. I left this Townshend jeck till last because he, when surrounded in Mesopotamia (Iraq) after trying to fight and march his way to Baghdad, arranged for himself and some favorite staff to live out the rest of the War as honored guests of the Turkish Commander-in-Chief Mustafa Kemal in Constantinople. A story he would love to talk about at the drop of a hat with dinner guests after the War. His men were slaughtered or worked to death by the Turks or left to be butchered by tribesmen.
My Grandfather could not mention any of the above names without spitting. Earl Haig,s equestrian statue stands in Whitehall London opposite the Cenotaph, maybe he,s asking for forgiveness?

[Robert Shoaf]

I don't believe this book is viewed very favorably by serious historians of the First World War.

Bob Shoaf

[Hoss]

Who?
What an amazing statement.
You mean historians of the pro-Haig school or the more antithetical ones who just want the truth?

Eric

[Robert Shoaf]

I'm glad you were amazed. I stand by my statement. Laffin was a tour guide, not a serious historian.
Believe me, I'm not here to defend Haig, Townshend, Rawlinson, etc., but this book goes overboard in ridiculing British generalship, while praising all things Australian to high heaven. The ANZACS well deserved the praise given them, but this book is unbalanced, and way too subjective, IMHO.

Bob Shoaf

[Hoss]

I'm glad you were amazed. I stand by my statement. Laffin was a tour guide, not a serious historian.
Believe me, I'm not here to defend Haig, Townshend, Rawlinson, etc., but this book goes overboard in ridiculing British generalship, while praising all things Australian to high heaven. The ANZACS well deserved the praise given them, but this book is unbalanced, and way too subjective, IMHO.

Bob Shoaf

Bob
Thanks for the comments but I beg to differ. Laffin was a serious historian. He spent the better part of his life reseaching the Great War. He was also fortunate to be able to interview many vets of upper and lower ranks while they were still relatively young men. He did the leg work long before computers and read though countless documents and biographies at public record offices most of which are at institutions in the UK. He did spend time in France trying to understand the mass slaughter by looking at the various terrians before coming to his conclusions.
I dont find him favouring "all things Australian" (Haig himself considered the Australians and Canadians some of his finest troops, high praise indeed from him!) far from it I like the way he writes instead of the "that,s war style" of Terraine, Tuchman, Toland.....or people like Lyn Macdonald with her hard facts with a touch of sentimentality not wanting to be too hard on the Generals because "it was the times you know".
When I was young I had the honour of talking to many of the old "Tommies". On this subject they were all in agreement. "It was murder, pure and simple they should of been hung not given fancy medals".

Regards
Eric

[Robert Shoaf]

I read the book, but it was some years ago. I consider myself fairly well read on WWI, but far from
any kind of expert, and I realize that British generalship was, on the whole, mediocre. However, there were some able general officers; Byng, Plumer, Allenby, even Smith-Dorrien, before the awful John French forced him out.
Haig will always be controversial, given the Somme, Passchendaele, etc., but I am not on the butcher side, or on the great general side either. He had many faults, but the British Army under his command defeated the still mighty German Army in open combat from August to November, 1918. The French Army was a hollow shell by then, and the Americans were just getting into major action, which indeed proved crucial.
If you haven't ,I suggest reading "Bloody Red Tabs", by Frank Davies and Graham Maddocks. It details British general officer casualties of the war. Over 200 officers of the rank brigadier and above were killed or wounded during WWI.
A quote from John Terraine's "The Smoke and the Fire" : " It is a simple historical fact that the British Generals of the First World War, whatever their faults, did not fail in their duty.
"It was not a British delegation that crossed the lines with a white flag in November,1918"
"No German Army of Occupation was stationed on the Thames, the Humber, or the Tees."
"No British Government was forced to sign a humiliating peace treaty."
"The British Generals had done their duty. Their Army and their country were on the winning side. That is the only proper, the only sensible starting point for the examination of their quality."
We can agree to disagree, at least re: Laffin. Thanks for your insight.

Bob Shoaf

[JamesUS]

Churchill touched on the butchery of some generals in his WW1 memoirs ,,, Bemoaning the near complete lack of tactics in many battles - And not so subtly suggested that tactics other than sending masses of men into a meat grinder could have, and should have, been found.

Such was his conception of the Gallipoli operation, which fell apart largely through the lack of nerve of admirals on the spot ,,, And such was the reason why he promoted tank development so much.

[Hoss]

Bob
We are not far apart my friend you just named three of the best Generals of the entire War.
Allenby once he was away from the shackles of the Western Front finally showed his brilliance in open warfare in Palistine and while Gough was planning another massacre, Third Ypres (Passchendaele) Plumber showed his genius with the attack of Messines Ridge.
But for me it was Smith-Dorrien who kept checking and blocking Von Kluck that had a major influence in stopping the Germans win the war in the first month.

Cheers Bob

Eric