Ian's World of History

The Battle of the Somme is seen as the bloodiest conflict in history, and is also seen as a total failure and a waste of life. The immediate image one gets when asked about the battle is the figures. 60000 British casualties on the first day alone. 620000 allied casualties in total. There is, however, a danger of generalising the battle to the events of the 1^st of July 1916. The battle of the Somme went on until November 1916 and the tactics used throughout that time were different to those used in July. In this essay I will attempt to redeem Field Marshall Haig’s reputation and bring to light some of the technicalities that were out of his control.

Firstly, a little background information about Haig and the Battle of the Somme.

Field Marshall Douglas Haig was a veteran soldier of the second Boer war and an esteemed general of the First World War. His military resume was top notch having been a commander of the 17^th lancers from 1901-03 and an aide-de-camp to king Edward VII prior to his appointment as one of the head generals in the Great War.During the early stages of the war he founded the British Expeditionary Force which was to become a fixture in the British army.

It is often said that Field Marshal Haig was the “Butcher of the Somme” and that he caused the war to grind into a bloody battle of attrition in 1916.The fact is that the war had pretty much ground to a halt on the western front in 1915 and it was actually the German army who dug in first. After the 1st Battle of Ypres and The Battle of the Marne in 1914 it was Germany that was on the defensive. They retreated in the face of the failure of their all important Schlieffen plan and dug in on the high grounds, the ridges which caused considerable problems for the allies. These ridges would feature heavily in the Battle of the Somme as well as other battles throughout the war. There were frequent attempts to take back these ridges, several attempts were made on Vimy Ridge in 1915 but it would take until 1917 to finally take it. There were also several offensives on the western front in 1915 in an attempt to break the line. The most famous is probably the Battle of Loos in November. This campaign came very close to breaking the German line even taking Loos itself before having to dig in there in the face of not being able to break through.

Another key point is that this was a WORLD WAR. There were alternative plans drawn up to attempt to break the deadlock in 1915, all of which had failed. Of course, there was the eastern front on which Russia was fighting (with limited success) against the German army and those of Austria-Hungary and Turkey. There were campaigns carried out in Gallipoli and the Dardenelles (all be them poorly planned and dreadfully administered). There had also been a massive campaign in Mesopotamia to capture Baghdad and Damascus in an attempt to find a back door into Germany. There was an ongoing campaign in Africa in an attempt to win over the German colonies there. Japan had considerable success against the German colonies in the Pacific. The Western front was by no means the only front of this war.

By 1916, however, it seemed that the war would be won or lost on the western front. Desperate times call for desperate measures and it seemed that a huge, decisive battle would be the best way.

In February 1916 a plan was drawn up for a general offensive consisting of a co-ordinated attack by France, Britain, Italy and Russia on the German lines. This offensive was to take place along the river Somme and was to be timed to perfection. This general offensive would not come to fruition due to a surprise attack by the German army on the French Stronghold of Verdun. The French line here was taking a massive pounding and was barely holding on by May. It was clear than something now had to be done to relieve them. A quick plan was drawn up to attack, where previously planned in February, along the river Somme just south of Verdun. The chosen location caused much controversy amongst the war office in the British government and the French leadership. The location chosen was faced by some of the most heavily fortified strongholds on the German line. These were the objectives for the upcoming battle. These strongholds included Hawthorn Ridge (near Baumont Hamel), Pozieres, Thiepval ridge and the Ancre heights.

It is commonly accepted that Haig chose to attack at the Somme river. This is not true at all, Haig actually preferred an attack in Flanders where his BEF were assembled close to the vital supply ports of Ypres and Callais. He felt the Somme battlefield to be mad, as indeed he had felt about several battlefields before this including Loos. His decision was, however, overridden and he had no choice but to commit his inexperienced and poorly trained new army to the Somme.

There was also a lot of controversy about the date. Haig felt that his army would be no-where near ready by the 29^th June (the original date for attack). He was indeed right as we shall see. He was again overridden and the attack commenced whether he liked it or not. This meant a massive logistical operation to move the army from Flanders to the Somme. Haig used his unscrupulous efficiency to pull off this feat and the army (for all intents and purposes) was ready to go.

It was to be a joint effort between the French and British armies using an enormous amount of manpower on a scale never seen before. It was designed to push back the German army away from Verdun and allow the French there to break the German line and join them on the other side. The French would attack the southern sector where the German line was weaker and the, by now, huge BEF would take the north.

It was to be a huge offensive of epic proportions, the likes of which the British (and German) army had never seen. Haig was a veteran of the Boer war. His military knowledge which had gotten him so far was all based around this period. During earlier wars Britain’s professional army was up against usually inexperienced and or inferior armies in Africa. The British were still fighting in red coats and using swords. A cavalry charge and an infantry regiment to mop up the remaining troops was usually enough to see off any enemy. The situation in 1916 was very different. Haig now had at his disposal an army of volunteers with very little (not enough according to Haig) professional training. This army was massive but woefully unprepared and out of touch with modern tactics. Many had been trained using Brooms as guns due to a shortage. The artillery corps were using unfamiliar and new equipment which they had been hastily trained in using. It is believed they could aim in the general direction of the enemy trenches but little else. The battle plan for the Somme was to test their skill to the limit. The plan was to use a “creeping bombardment” where the troops would follow closely an accurate shield of artillery shells falling in front of them. This was a brilliant and innovative idea, it would be used many more times throughout the 20^th century. The line which was to be attacked was divided up into sectors and each unit was assigned a zone or an itinerary to attack. This was planned well in advance and each unit received it’s objectives during the week long bombardment that preceded the assault. This gave them time to prepare. This bombardment was earthshaking. Some 1.3 million shells were fired on the German lines. This was surely enough to destroy any defences. Unfortunately, due to a lack of heavy guns this was not the case. The guns used were mostly light, field artillery intended to take out troops with shrapnel. The didn’t have the desired effect but the artillery shield would provide cover. This was not the only plan. The Hawthorn ridge was considered to be a real danger. The British army had managed to plant an 18 ton mine underneath it and on the 1^st of July this was exploded blowing the German fort and the ridge to smithereens. The offensive then began with several units charging towards the massive crater left by the blast. Unfortunately the Germans had also advanced there. The British struggled to dig in on the crater and managed to secure very little of it. This was a massive blow.

 

  Image: The Hawthorn Ridge mine, 1st July 1916

The military offensives would begin as well with the British units going over the top into no mans land. The plan was clear cut, the British troops were to follow to a close schedule behind the artillery curtain. This plan was a disaster and by the end of day one 60000 troops were either injured, dead or taken prisoner.

This was, and still is, seen as a disaster on Haig’s part. In reality, the resources Haig had to work with were not up to the task and the decision was taken reluctantly. The poorly trained artillery units took so long to set up and fire that there was at least a 5 minute delay between the troops advancing and the artillery shield. This was 5 minutes too late. By now the German gunners had manned their posts and began to fire on the exposed BEF.

The first day is seen as a total failure but there was some success in the south where the French had surpassed their expectations. This is a plus in Haig’s defence but his failure to capitalise on this success only serves to further damage his reputation. In defence of the accusation that Haig persisted in sending troops to their deaths, the attacks were called off in the north by the 11^th of July. The British would now support the French in the south while a plan B was drawn up.

Another huge early success of the Somme was that on the 12^th of July the German troops withdrew from Verdun and the French troops were now firmly in control of the town and surrounding area. This was one of the main objectives of the Somme and it was achieved in 12 days. A resounding success.

However the significant list of casualties is said to outweigh the success of this operation. From a humanitarian view this is true but Haig was more interested in the long term objective of winning the battle and the war. Haig had at his disposal hundreds of thousands of men and his theory was that if they attacked in bulk they would have more chance of achieving their objective. This is true but a more accurate interpretation of peoples’ frustration is that he used all of this manpower ineffectively. Again, this isn’t true. He called off the attacks in 11 days. There would be many more offensives and the “butcher” image may come from these. The battle turned to attrition between July and September while Haig planned his next move.

The autumn offensive produced some resounding successes. In August Pozierres ridge was taken. October saw Thiepval ridge fall. Finally in November Beaumont also fell to the British empire/ French. By the conclusion of the battle in November 1916 all of the primary objectives had been achieved. The battle was a success in strategic terms.

The other common accusation aimed at Haig is that his tactics were monogamous and ineffective. This simply is not true. All of those ridges fell, not just due to sheer perseverance, but also due to the increasingly effective use of tactics. The creeping bombardment that had failed spectacularly on the opening day was now his army’s most deadly weapon. It was co-ordinated, accurate and effective.

This tactic was a success but the major advance was the debut of the tank in September 1916. This huge bulletproof monster struck fear into the enemy troops. The trouble was that the early tanks were very inefficient and heavy. They couldn’t cope with the uneven landscape and many ended up bogged down in the mud or broken down in the middle of no mans land. None the less alternatives to infantry were being used.

In conclusion I feel that Field Marshall Haig is too hastily condemned as a butcher and an inept commander. The battle of the Somme is still seen as a failure due to the casualty list. If the battle is judged on the achievements and innovations between July and December 1916 then it can only be seen as a success. All the targets were completed. Haig’s tactics were by no means completely useless. Similar tactics were used on the beaches of Normandy on D-Day, a bombardment followed by a mass offensive against fixed machine gun posts and trenches. These tactics were also used during the victorious Battle of Amiens in 1918. The only difference is that D-Day and Amiens were a resounding success on the road to concluding the war. Maybe if the allies had broke the German line in 1916 the Somme would be viewed in the same way and Douglas Haig would be the Hero of the Somme instead of the Butcher.

The image which overshadows all others about the first world war is the perceived horror faced by soldiers in the trenches of the western front. Over 470 miles of mud, barbed wire and corpses. We have all seen the so called "authentic" footage of the carnage taking place on the battlefields and sensationalist movies such as "All Quiet on the Western Front". Some may recall the BBC television series "Blackadder Goes Forth" in which we see all of the common stereotypes of the first world war, the over-optimistic soldiers, the horrid living conditions, the insane and blusterous general brought to life. The question here is: are all of these things true? Or, more precisely, to what extent do they represent a typical trench experience?

A Portrait of a Trench

As I said before, by 1915 the trench system was over 470 miles long stretching from the English channel ports of Ypres and Dover all the way to the Swiss border. The system transected roads, rivers, towns, villages and farms. These trenches were by no means structurally the same all along the line. The trenches were not, as often perceived, one single straight line. They were an elaborate system of several trenches and they were all different. There would be the more shallow frontline trench, usually about 6 feet deep, with a step on which the soldiers could stand to shoot at invaders. These trenches were usually very narrow, perhaps just wide enough for 2 people to pass each other. This made them more easily defensible. There were machine gun posts in the more heavily defended trenches but the norm by 1916-17 was to use lighter, mobile, Lewis guns which fired circular magazines. Further back there would be the support trench to which infantry could fall back into if the front line was taken. This would have spots where soldiers could cover themselves and hold off the enemy. Further back still would be the auxiliary trench which would normally be deeper than the front line. Here there would be ammunition stores and living quarters. In some cases there would be bunkers for officers and visiting generals (yes it did happen on occasion!). These trenches would be interlocked with linking trenches and bridges over which Tanks etc could be driven. Another misconception is that trenches were all in straight lines. This would be highly impractical so trenches were built in zig-zags which would offer cover from enemy fire and grenades if the trench was to be raided. The trenches would usually be build up with sandbags and corrugated iron (if there was time)  and guarded with heavy duty razor wire. There would also be doors separating different sections so that if one section was taken by the enemy they would be slowed down before they could take more.
What I just described was a typical allied trench. The German trenches were not designed, as the allies were, to be mobile and temporary residences. They were dug in and were staying for good! German trenches were mostly on the high ground of the French countryside. Their trench systems were centered on their fortresses on the rocky ridges such as Vimy Ridge, Chipilli Ridge and Theipval Ridge. Here the trench systems were very durable and elaborate. Vimy ridge is a case in point. This massive stronghold took until 1917 to be overthrown at the cost of over 90000 casualties. This doesn't count those lost in the previous campaigns in 1914 and 1915. Here the trenches are over 40 feet deep and are supported by an elaborate tunnel system and a system of concrete bunkers burrowed into solid rock.

Image: The entrance to a German tunnel under Vimy Ridge
This made for a very solid defence system which was practically invincible until the heroic Canadian army took Vimy Ridge in 1917 with the assistance of several tanks (and they were needed!). Concrete bunkers were a rarity in the allied trench system as they were not deemed to be necessary. The allies were on the attack and had no desire to dig in defensively. This would waste valuable time.

Trench Conditions

Another matter is the conditions inside the trenches.
The common image is of the perennially flooded, muddy, rat infested hole in the ground. The latter is certainly a big problem in the trenches all across France and Belgium. The image of the wet and muddy hole in the ground is somewhat misguided.
This was not true across the whole of France and it certainly wasn't true all year round. The images we see of mud, water and blood were taken in the north, usually they are photographs of the Third Battle of Ypres more commonly known as Passchendaele (image left) in 1917. This was an offensive in the very damp lowlands of Belgium. This was a notorious problem in this area, but usually only for the allies. The Germans were sat in well drained bunkers on the high ground, usually the rainwater from their position was washed down into the allied trenches. Another problem this caused was the flooding of shell holes. Many soldiers would fall into them and drown in heavy rain. The later stages of the Battle of the Somme were also marred by heavy rain and sleet. It is true that winters in Flanders and Northern France were harsh, there were several thousand cases of frostbite in winters throughout the war. Another problem in the muddy areas was trenchfoot, a particularly nasty form of gangrene. Soldiers would often not notice they had caught it until it was too late.

Summer was a completely different matter. Summers in France, particularly towards the south were very warm and dry. In some cases they were too warm and soldiers fainted in the heat. In the hot weather corpses would rot and attract swarms of flies, mosquitoes and other insects to the trenches. Not to mention millions of rats. The rats were particularly resented as they ate food rations and even fingers and toes if they got the chance. These rats were very large and fearsome creatures. Soldiers were encouraged to go on rat hunts on occasion. Gas attacks came to be welcomed by many as, while they had gas masks, the rats didn't! This was about the only thing that would kill them en mass but it was not enough to wipe them out.
Summer also increased the potency of diseases such as TB.

A constant problem throughout the year was lice. These were everywhere and they were an inevitability for 9/10 soldiers. There are accounts from soldiers saying that they have taken their socks off to find their feet covered with lice. Whenever a soldier was given leave from the front line the first thing they would do is to "chat" their clothes. That is to burn out the louse eggs from the seams of his clothes. This, more often than not, was completely pointless but it gave relief for a few hours. Lice were a pain to all soldiers on the front line and thrived in the dirty conditions.

As for general trench etiquette, soldiers of the British army were still required to shave daily. Personal hygiene was a massive part of arm training and it was expected that they practise it at all times. Another big responsibility, if not an envied one, was to empty the latrines (toilets) regularly. This would prevent the spread of disease. The soldiers of the French army were less disciplined in these procedures and their trenches were far less hygienic.

The Average Trench Experience

The impression often given about soldiers on the western front is that they were sent there, stood around in mud and water for months or years until they were ordered to attack. This is typified in the Blackadder Goes Forth comedy series. In the final episode fittingly titled "Goodbyeee" we learn that Blackadder and his friends have been stuck in the same trench since they volunteered in 1914 (odd seeing as volunteers first saw action in 1915). They are to be sent over the top at the end of the episode (believed to be the Battle of Passchendaele). They reminisce about how they joined the army and how everyone else in George's battalion is dead except him. Finally, they go over the top (George armed with his trusty stick) and it assumed they are all killed. The situation they are in is very unrealistic. Yes a soldier could be in the army for a long time but many were in the army since 1914 and didn't see action until 1917 or even 18. The system in the British army was vastly different to the French and German armies. The British army had a solid rotation policy based on the premise that the average soldier could realistically survive 10 days in the conditions of the front line trenches (providing they weren't killed in action). The system in place was that no soldier would be in a front line trench for more than seven days at a time unless in exceptional circumstances (such as a major offensive). After their service they would be pulled back to the rear and allowed to rest and be reassigned. This is completely contradictory to the popular image. Soldiers often did not even fire a shot while they were on the front line. To give the soldiers activity between offensives the British war office ordered trench raids, usually at night, on the enemy positions. They were told to take food and weapons from the enemy and take prisoners. Either this or they were assigned to retrieve the dead or wounded in no-mans land.
The German soldiers could often be stationed on the front line for months at a time. The idea was that they would be more effective in combat if they knew the terrain. Their living conditions allowed for this as they were no where near as awful as the allied positions.
One platoon would usually be assigned to defend a specific portion of a trench. They would usually, in the case of volunteers, be groups of friends or groups who had trained together. This boosted morale and made the experience less of a chore.
There was often banter between the British and German trenches at points where the lines were close together. Some even had friendly conversations and, astonishingly, some even had unofficial truces at certain times!

I hope I have been able to give a good account of the difficulties faced by the soldiers on the western front but also that I have highlighted some of the stereotypes and myths that have clouded the opinions of contemporaries. The individual experiences of the soldiers varied and not all were subjected to the terrible conditions of Flanders, at least not for long periods of time. Some even felt that the trenches were a better situation than they were in back home. Many soldiers were unemployed workers who could hardly afford to feed themselves. Now they had food, clothing and a weekly income. Life in the trenches was not all bad but it certainly wasn't pleasant. It was extremely dangerous at times and exceedingly boring at others. Positions were often exposed to the elements in winter and open to direct, burning sun in summer. Disease was rife with soldiers catching TB, colds and the massive killer that was influenza. At some stages the risk of dying from disease was perhaps greater than being KIA.