Forgotten Victory: The First World War: Myths and Realities [Paperback]

As well as the course of the war, Sheffield also seeks to re-examine the causes, with much emphasis placed on the post-Bismarck attitude of Wilhelmine Germany.

Whilst the author does not seek to deny the mistakes that were made, and the tragedies the befell the frontline soldiers, he argues that the "lions led by donkeys" mentality is one that has obscured our perceptions of the Great War even to this day.

The subject of possibly the most controversy, Field Marshal Sir Douglas Haig, is also reappraised in a single chapter depicting the relationship between Haig and the men under his command, which by 1918, could be described as very coherant. Sheffield does not attempt to lionise Haig, but his excellent revision allows for a far more objective look into a very complex character.

An essential read for all who express an interest in the British Army, and the Great War.

Well...not nearly correct according to this ambitious but stunningly sucessful revisionist account of the First World War, written by one of the able group of younger military and political historians who are beginning to look through the fog obscuring the realities of the First World War. Gary Sheffield argues that our perception of the First World War is distorted; firstly - by an (entirely understandable) emotional reaction to the massive casualty figures involving so many young men, secondly - by the subsequent portrayal in the arts and literature by the war poets, O What A Lovely War, Blackadder and many others. Sheffield argues that, for all their literary merit, the war poets (mostly officers, all very atypical soldiers) are about as relevant to what really happened as Shakespeare's plays are to English history.

Looking beyond these popular perceptions, Gary Sheffield demolishes the myths of 80 years, with devastating logic and well chosen illustrative examples. German militarism had been rising since the reunification of Germany, by the 1900s it had reached a dangerous pitch and in the hands of the frankly unbalanced Kaiser and his military clique posed a severe danger, not only to Britain and France but the stability of the world. If Britain had not gone to war in 1914 (and under treaty we were obliged to defend our allies France and Belgium), it would have happened later, perhaps when we were less prepared. The German attack on France and Belgium was a purely aggressive bid for European domination and had to be resisted. The German Army's behavior in Belgium was as atrocious (but on a smaller scale) as that in the Second World War.

Britain started war in 1914 as ill-prepared for the fury of modern industrialised warfare as all the other involved armies were, but by 1917/8 had climbed a steep learning curve, involving new technology (especially tanks and aircraft), new strategies, new training, better use of men and materials. Far from being hide-bound stuffed uniforms, British officers and generals took on the new complexities and challenges of war and gained stunning victories in the last year of the war, as complete and well accomplished as the British Army has ever achieved before or since. For example, nearly a year to the day after the tragedy of the first day of the Somme, a new approach (with exploding mines, night attack and an artillery "creeping barrage") enabled the New Zealanders to take Messines Ridge successfully with minimal casualties.

Even Field Marshal Douglas Haig is rehabilitated as a capable and determined warrior, far from the butcher and bungler he has been portrayed as (although in an aside Sheffield does admit to Haig's somewhat unusual personality, and remarks that "he might not be an ideal dinner guest").

In a postscript, Sheffield debunks the belief that the harsh conditions set down at Versailles "caused" the rise of Nazism and the Second World War.

While nowhere glorifying the war nor excusing the frequent incompetance and poor generalship, and fully acknowledging the massive tragedy of the First World War, Gary Sheffield makes a compelling case that the conflict was far from futile. The First World War needs to be rescued from simplistic perceptions fed by the media, and needs to regain its rightful place in history as a victory that Britain and its allies can be proud of.

This is the best book I have read on the First World War for years - Sheffield writes well and clearly and this is essential reading for anyone with any interest in the First World War.

What this book does offer is a reappraisal of WW1, comparing the realities of the Great War with the tired stereotypes and myths that are served up regularly (and unquestioningly) in WW1 films, books and documentaries. Dr Sheffied does not flinch from asking the hard questions, and some readers will be shocked, or possibly angered, by some of his findings. But you don't have to agree with every word of it to find this an outstanding contribution to war history.

Apart from being an outstanding historian, the author is also an excellent writer who retains the reader's attention with stylist prose and wit. Unlike some other "revisionist" authors, he also writes with great compassion for those caught up in the war and resists the trap of rubbishing anyone who has written anything contrary to his thesis, except in cases where it is truly deserved (Alan Clark's dreadful "The Donkeys" being a case in point.)

In short, I wholly recommend this book to anyone with even a passing interest in the Great War.