The Death of Glory: The Western Front 1915

by Robin Neillands

To this day, World War I remains a source of misunderstanding; the bitter reality of the conflict is often clouded by various myths and falsehoods. Many of these misconceptions suggest that the ineptitude of the generals on both sides of the trenches led to the gruesome stalemates and battles. This well-researched and highly readable account reveals the truth behind this fallacy and other events by setting them in a wider context. In 1915 the burden of fighting was shifting from the British Army to the Territorial Forces who were enthusiastic amateurs at best. The battles were either disasters or inconclusive, but the real reason for the failures was that the war—which originally began in the name of liberation for Belgium—had lost its moral argument and was now just another bloody, senseless slaughter. Millions died on the Western Front in 1915 on muddy battlefields, and as this study reveals, there was no glory attached to their deaths.

Genres: History, World War I, Military History, Nonfiction

320 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 2006

About the author

Robin Hunter Neillands was a British writer known for his works on travel and military history. A former Royal Marine who served in Cyprus and the Middle East, he later became a prolific author, publishing under multiple pen names. His military histories, often featuring firsthand accounts from veterans, challenged revisionist narratives, particularly regarding Bernard Montgomery, the Dieppe Raid, and the Allied bombing campaign in World War II. Neillands also authored numerous travel books inspired by his extensive journeys across Europe. His works, both popular and scholarly, earned him a nomination for the Royal United Services Institute’s Military Literature Award.

Reviews

[A.L. Sowards]

Not a bad overview of the battles the British fought during 1915. Neillands states early on that he’s trying to disprove the saying that the British soldiers were lions led by donkeys. He argues that the generals weren’t donkeys, they were just facing difficult circumstances. As Neillands points out, “the British commanders were pitchforked into a large-scale continental war for which they lacked the manpower, the kit and the experience. The only thing they had in quantity was French pressure to do more.”

I definitely learned a few things. Like how early British gas masks were not only gas-proof, but also air-proof, so they “had to be lifted from time to time so that the wearer could breathe.” I’m not sure what the purpose of such a shoddy gas mask was . . .

I was repeatedly struck with how poor communications were on multiple levels. In earlier wars, generals could be close enough to the battle to see what was going on. In later wars, advances in technology (like portable radios) would make communication possible even from far behind the front line. But in WWI, artillery pushed commanders farther from the front line, and the only way to communicate was telephone or runner. Neither telephone wires nor runners lasted long on ground blasted by artillery shells and machine guns. There were also significant communication problems among the various British leaders and with their French Allies. And while the generals couldn't speed up technology, they could have worried more about their men and less about personal rivalries and what the French were requesting.

The kindle version had enough typos that it was distracting (BEE instead of BEF, Laos instead of Loos). Overall, though Neillands was trying to give the British generals a little credit, I wasn’t that impressed with any of them. Donkeys, no, but even without hindsight to aid them, I think they could have done better.

[Dana Rudko · Rating 3 out of 5]

Horribly edited... for three chapters and including a chapter heading they call the village of Loos, Laos which is a country in Southeast Asia. So annoying that the writer never proofread the kindle edition. I hope it’s just the Kindle edition. Inexcusable. Many other mistakes hinder this book . I would not waste money on this .

[gargamelscat · Rating 4 out of 5]

Nicely judged.

[John · Rating 4 out of 5]

Alan Clark's The Donkeys is one of the most famous British books written on the First World War. Taking it's title from a conversation between two German officers in which the British army was described as "Lions led by donkeys", Clark's book did much to cement the popular reputation of the British generals on the Western Front as ignorant, callous, and incompetent.

In this excellent book, the late Robin Neillands takes aim at Clark's thesis and destroys it (even the famous conversation probably didn't take place). Focusing, like Clark, on 1915, the forgotten year on the Western Front, Neillands shows that the British generals were actually, for the most part, reasonably quick learners seeking innovative solutions for dreadful strategic and tactical problems which were not of their making. The exception, a bona fide donkey according to Neillands, is Sir John French, Commander in Chief of the BEF until his sacking in the aftermath of Loos.

The last few years have seen a deluge of real scholarship on the First World War which has left few of the old myths intact. Not only is this book an excellent addition to that field, it is also a fascinating look at an often overlooked part of the war.

[Betsy · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book has some printing faults due its Kindle format, but on the whole I learned a great deal about the tragic year of 1915. The trouble with WWI is that every year was tragic with rising death tolls and unbelievable carnage. This book concentrates on the battles of Neuve Chapelle, Aubers Ridge, Festubert, 2nd Ypres and Loos. I had read about the first two battles before so I knew what to expect, but in particular the last two battles were mind-boggling in their intensity and lack of success, despite the use of poison gas by the British.

The author describes many of the problems faced by the British, not the least of which was the tension between them and the French high command since the British were very much the junior partner. In addition, artillery and shell supplies were limited, and the communications between the front line and headquarters was abysmal. I think the author might have been too kind to Haig, but he sized up French's character adequately. Eventually, he decides that the British generals were not 'donkeys', but many had little to recommend them as leaders of men.. As a result, 1916 would be another step into the abyss.

[Vikas Datta · Rating 4 out of 5]

Key work clearing up several misconceptions about this tragic conflict..