"I cursed, and still do, the generals who caused us to suffer such torture, living in filth, eating filth, and then, death or injury just to boost their ego."
-- Pte. W. H. Haigh, 1/5th Yorks and Lancs

Private Haigh's statement on p. 364 of The First Day on the Somme sums up the attitude that many of the soldiers had not just about their first day of the Battle of the Somme but of the entire months-long battle (July 1-November 18, 1916). But for the British, the first horrendous day – 60,000 casualties: 40,00 wounded and 20,000 dead – was "the worst day in the history of the British army."

This was a book I couldn't put down. The Battle of the Somme was supposed to be a diversion that would relieve the Germans' pressure on the French on the Verdun battlefield. Drawing on official sources and interviews with the participants, Martin Middlebrook paints a vivid portrait of the first day of the Battle of the Somme. One thing that makes the book highly readable is that Middlebrook follows ten men through the first day. One of the men is a 68-year-old officer who was the oldest soldier in the war. Middlebrook also liberally spreads short quotes throughout the book from the men who fought – including the Germans – so you can experience their thoughts and emotions throughout the first day. Middleton puts you right there in the fighting.

But the First Day on the Somme paints a wider portrait of July 1st than of just the battle itself. In the first part of the book, Middleton talks about the lead-up to the battle. I think one of the most interesting chapters is the one about the British soldiers who fought in the battle. Most of them belonged to Field Marshal Lord Horatio Kitchener's New Army. Kitchener created the army during the first two years of the war to replace the regular army units that had been destroyed in the fighting at the beginning of the war. These battalions were called "Pals" because they were composed of men who enlisted together. The men could come from the same towns, neighborhoods, or workplaces. For example: Glasgow Tramways Battalion, Newcastle Railway Pals, Sherwood Foresters, and 1st Liverpool Pals. One problem, though, is when a Pals battalion suffered heavy losses, the town or profession they came from experienced those losses because they weren't spread around to other locations or professions.

In the second part of the book, Middlebrook describes the battle. He divides the fighting day into segments: morning, noon, afternoon, dusk, and night. What the soldiers went through is mindboggling and horrendous. Entire units were literally mowed down by machinegun fire before they hardly got beyond the trenches. Others were mowed down as they tried to get through narrow open sections of their own barbed wire. Others were mowed down in No Man's Land. And most of the rest were mowed down at the German barbed wire that the days-long artillery barrage was supposed to have destroyed. A few men – in groups of 5 to 25 or so – actually make it to the German trenches but couldn't hold on to them because they couldn't be reinforced or resupplied. Middlebrook also describes the short-lived victory where men in one part of the battlefield actually took their objective but couldn't hold on to it.

In the third part of the book, Middleton describes the aftermath of the battle and the cost in both lives and military organization, gives his own analysis of the first day's fighting, and describes the war years that follow the battle. One sad part was that the "Pals" battalions were so thoroughly destroyed that they ceased to exist. Before the battle, most members of the "Pals" who were encouraged to become officers refused because they wanted to stay in the ranks with their friends. After the battle, they became officers because most of their friends were dead.world-war-i34 s JD757 515

An absolutely great book!! Although centered around the first day on the Somme, the book is so much more. It gives great background on the British army on the Western Front and the beginnings of the New Army after the start of World War 1. The story is about the young men who volunteered in their thousands to fight the Germans and their patriotism that led them there, and for too many meant their gruesome end in the first hours on the Somme due to poor commanding by their generals that led them into the slaughter. The book focusses mainly on ten individual soldiers which is a great cross-cut from the very different men serving in the British Army in 1916, it gives many more individual eye-witness accounts to every aspect of the battle. This is in the end a sad story about too much youth lost, but bring these men's story to light and is a real tribute to them. This book has given me more interest in World War 1 and I recommend this to anyone wanting to learn more about the war.favourites ww131 s Sweetwilliam165 58

An alternative title for this book could have been, How to Raise an Army of Volunteers over a Two-Year Period and Then Destroy It in Ten Minutes. This is another disturbing story from that very disturbing and tragic war known as WWI. Martin Middlebrook’s The First Day on the Somme is written in the spirit of Lyn Macdonald’s series of very fine books on the same subject matter by incorporating multiple eye witness accounts in the words of the soldier. Middlebrook takes Macdonald’s recipe for success a step further by including several detailed maps of the battlefield and the British lines. He then divides the British line into 10 sectors, and identifies a key witness at each sector. This helps to orient the reader as the story progresses and the great carnage unfolds through the eyes of each witness. This is one of the few books that I have read where I could actually identify all points of interest mentioned in the story somewhere on the map.

The book is a very readable and fast-paced account of the battle's first day. The entire saga is told and analyzed in a mere 17 chapters and 316 pages. The short analysis in chapter 16 is also excellent. The Somme was a success in that it did provide relief to the French who were locked in another siege at Verdun. It was a success in this regard but at what cost? Middlebrook has convinced me not to pin all the blame on Haig. After selecting the location, Haig became a spectator and it was the job of the 4th Army CO, Sir Henry Rawlinson, to devise a plan of attack. Rawlinson’s plan seemed reasonable. He didn’t believe there was any possibility of exploiting a break through with cavalry on a WWI battlefield. Instead, he preferred to systematically blast the Germans out of their trenches with artillery so that his inexperienced and green 4th army could walk in and occupy them. One of the real problems for the Brits were all the duds (1 in 3 artillery rounds) and the lack of heavy artillery. However, there was a possibility to exploit a breakthrough with cavalry in the German lines nearest to the French sector thanks to the French heavy artillery. Rawlinson failed to commit the cavalry and it is unclear exactly why. He didn’t even have a contingency plan for their use. It seems he and Haig were not on the same page. Also, why did Rawlinson tell his men to walk across no man’s land and why would they have listened? Many Germans said that had the British rushed their trenches the attack would have been successful.

There are several take-aways from this book. First, do not go relic hunting on any WWI battlefield. There is too much unexploded ordnance waiting to go off. Second, if a time machine is invented and you travel back to WWI and are forced to serve on the Somme, join the cavalry. It was the safest place on the battlefield. Mechanization had turned the WWI battlefield into a tremendous siege and breakthroughs that could be exploited by cavalry were nearly impossible and the eyes and ears of the Army was now the airplane. Stay behind the line and brush out your horse while romantic men Haig dream of the dashing cavalry charges of the Napoleonic Wars. Last, be thankful you were not born in that era and that you didn’t have to serve in the meat grinder known as WWI…or WWII for that matter.

Oh, and one more thing...when told to mount an objective, either run as fast as you can while zig zagging or maybe low crawl instead. Why in the world would infantry walk across no man's land weighed down by accouterments of war? Why???27 s 'Aussie Rick'423 229

This book was the catalyst for my enduring fascination for books covering the Western Front. I use to despair in trying to read books about the Great War, as they were mind numbing with the numbers of dead, I was too young to appreciate what I was reading. Martin Middlebrook’s “The First Day on the Somme” changed all that and gave me a love for this period of history and a better appreciation of what these poor soldiers went through. If anyone wants to better understand the Great War or the Battle on the Somme this is the book to start off with. For those who are interested the author went on to write another account from the German perspective covering the March 1918 offensive titled “The Kaiser’s Battle”.favourites military-history ww127 s Tony168 53

Simply brilliant. Martin Middlebrook explains the build-up, first day, and aftermath of the Battle of the Somme in a clear and accessible style, using numerous first hand accounts which put you right in middle of the action. Although he focuses on the first day (the clue's in the title...) the author somehow manages to use it as a microcosm of the entire war - so this would probably be a good place to start for someone new to WW1. I especially the way he frames the story by following ten soldiers from their enlistment, through to the battle, the remainder of the war and their post war life. Analysis and opinion are left until the final chapter, so you get to make your own mind up as the battle unfolds. I read the Penguin edition which has plenty of clear & helpful maps.favourites non-fiction ww124 s Mike1,161 155

A signed copy, I read this just before taking a battlefield tour of the Somme. The book was excellent preparation to walking the battlefield. Highly recommended, book and tour.
WWI remains at the forefront of the British memory. This book illustrates why. It has many tales of personal courage, tragedy and various experiences of the battle. Standing on the battlefield, I was struck at how brave these men were in that terrifying place. The carnage was unimaginable, no protection from the machine guns and arty fire. The destruction of the New Army "Pals" battalions is especially poignant, imagine losing all your buddies from the home neighborhood at the same time and place. A very sobering book. How the leadership was able to throw away the army is baffling and maddening. history military ww118 s Jamie Smith500 79

It was a beautiful morning. At 7:30 a.m. on July 1st, 1916, after a week-long bombardment, the guns fell silent and 66,000 infantrymen in 84 battalions went over the top along an 18 mile front. By the end of the day 19,240 were dead or dying, along with 35,493 wounded. Add in the missing and the prisoners taken by the Germans and the total for the day was 57,470, two casualties for every yard of front.

This book is one of the classics of World War One history. Well written, meticulously researched, and scrupulously fair, it explains the strategy, the reasoning, and the alternatives that led to those soldiers going over the top in that place and time. The Somme was not an ideal battlefield, and even if there had been a breakthrough there was nothing behind the German lines of strategic value that would have been worth a great offensive. However, it was at the juncture of the British and French armies, and was planned as a joint operation. The French had to scale down their participation as they engaged in the titanic Battle of Verdun, and told the British government that they were so hard-pressed that if they did not start the offensive to divert German troops they were in danger of collapse.

The British plan was that an obliterating week long bombardment would destroy the first, second, and third lines of German trenches, and their soldiers would just walk forward and take the ground. There were, as always, high hopes of a breakthrough that would unleash Haig’s beloved cavalry into the enemy rear.

General Douglas Haig (not yet Field Marshall) was newly appointed as the commander in chief of the British forces in France, having helped maneuver Sir John French out of the job. As c.-in-c., his role was to decide where and when the battle would take place. After that, the implementation was left up to the army commanders. General Henry Rawlinson (the same rank as Haig) was in command of the Fourth Army and would lead the main attack. He based his plan on several key assumptions; first, that his troops were too new and untrained to carry out complicated maneuvers, so they should climb out of the trenches, form up their lines, and walk slowly across No Man’s Land. Second, since he believed that there would be no one left alive on the German side after the barrage, so the troops would take with them all that they would need until positions could be consolidated, and thus each man carried at least 70 pounds of gear, and often more.

Haig made some good suggestions to Rawlinson, which were not accepted, such as having the soldiers advance in loose order and at top speed, to get to the enemy trenches. Haig could have overruled his army commander, but he was a cavalry officer whereas Rawlinson was an infantry general, so he did not force the issue.

The result is well known: the wire was uncut in many places and the Germans, deep underground in their bunkers, were very much alive and ready for a fight. Once the shelling stopped at 7:30 a.m. they had time to man their trenches and ready their machine guns as the British soldiers left their trenches, formed up, and started moving across No Man’s Land at a walking pace. They were mowed down in ghastly numbers, and still they came on, wave after wave advancing into the maelstrom, which was quickly augmented by German artillery laying down saturation fire along the line of advance. Within the first hour the British had already lost more men than in any other battle in their history. “What had been the cost of the first hour? It is impossible to say exactly but probably half of the 66,000 British soldiers who had attacked were already casualties – 30,000 infantrymen killed or wounded in just sixty minutes!” (p. 148)

Rawlinson’s other mistakes only exacerbated the disaster. The British infantry were expected to advance at a steady pace along a prescribed timetable, and so the artillery had a fixed schedule that moved their firing farther and farther back of the German front line. There were no provisions for any delays in the attack, and changes could only be approved at the corps level. Therefore, even when the attackers gained footholds in the German line, and could have benefited greatly from local artillery support to break up German counterattacks, it was unavailable.

And yet, the troops on the far right of the attack, a combination of British and French soldiers, achieved all their first day objectives quickly, with the Germans retreated in disarray. It was a perfect opportunity to press the attack and dislodge the entire German left wing. There was even a cavalry division standing by to exploit just such an opportunity, but Rawlinson refused to allow any deviations from the plan, so the opportunities were lost, the Germans regrouped, and objectives which could have been taken at no cost had to be taken weeks later with terrible casualties.

Rawlinson was not incompetent, and would perform well in the 1918 battles, but he was inflexible, and unwilling or unable to tolerate changes in his carefully prepared battle plans.



After thinking about what else I could write about this book, I decided that I could not say anything better than Martin Middlebrook said it himself, so following are some quotations of his that describe and explain the battle.

- Even in the so-called ‘quiet’ times, a battalion could expect to lose about thirty men each month through death and wounds, and a similar number through sickness. (p. 35)

- Another novelty, only issued as late as the spring of 1916, was the steel helmet, intended to reduce the number of head wounds. Until then the men had nothing better than their soft service caps. The helmets were so effective that such wounds were reduced by seventy-five per cent, but one divisional commander, who also forbade the issue of rum, refused at first to permit the use of steel helmets. He considered that it would encourage the men to get soft. (p. 38)

- It might interest the present-day reader to know that, to serve the 19,372 men in the division, there were over 5,000 horses but only sixty-one motor vehicles, of which three only were lorries. (p. 40)

- Subject to major reorganization, a division contained the same brigades and battalions permanently, but the divisions themselves were frequently transferred from the control of one corps, or army, to another. Army and corps were merely headquarters units and formed part of the chain of command linking the c.-in-c. With the front-line troops. The ordinary soldier rarely knew or cared to which corps his division was attached at any given time. (p. 41)

- [The British sector in France:] This rectangle measured a mere sixty miles, by fifty miles and was the same size and shape as the county of Lincolnshire. (p. 44)

- Because the front line was anything but straight the total length held by the British was eighty-five miles (in mid-1916); this compared with the French front of about 300 miles and the Belgian of only fifteen. (p. 44)

- The Germans units were lower in strength than the British; the German battalions when at full strength had 750-800 men and, with only nine battalions, the total fighting strength of the division was just over half that of a British division. (p. 57)

- There was a gun, howitzer or mortar for every seventeen yards of the enemy front line to be attacked. Compared with the previous best effort, at Loos, there were twice as many guns and six times as many shells. More shells were destined to be fired in one week than in the first twelve months of the war. (p. 87)

- The news of hungry and demoralized German prisoners and empty, flattened trenches encouraged the generals to think that the bombardment was achieving its object. The worse news, of raids being bloodily repulsed and wire defences not destroyed, was discounted as being exaggerated and unreliable. (p. 92)

- A typical man from the first wave, in addition to all his packs, carried a rifle and bayonet, two gas helmets, 220 rounds of rifle ammunition, two grenades (which he was to give to the trained bombers to throw), two empty sandbags, a spade, a pair of wire-cutters, a flare and a variety of smaller items. The basic minimum load was about seventy pounds and most men had more than this. (p. 96)

- Eighty-four battalions had attacked in the first hour, a total of some 66,000 men. Roughly one-third by hard fighting, skill and some luck, had gained all their objectives. Another third had nothing to show for their losses, except small and vulnerable footholds in the German trenches. - - The final third had been completely repulsed; not a living attacker was inside the German wire, unless as a prisoner of the enemy. Five out of the nine villages due to be taken during the day should have been captured in the first hour. Not one had fallen. (p. 146)

- two brigade commanders, fifty battalion commanders and an R.A.M.C. lieutenant-colonel became casualties during the day. Of these, thirty-one, an unusually high proportion, lost their lives. (p. 165)

- the 752 Newfoundlanders advancing over the open ground less than half a mile away. Before the men could even get into No Man’s Land they had to pass through several belts of British barbed wire. As the Newfoundlanders bunched together to get through the narrow gaps in this wire, the German machine-gunners found their best killing ground. Dead and wounded men soon blocked every gap, but those still not hit struggled on, having to walk over their comrades’ bodies. (p. 189) [The battalion would take 684 casualties, 91% of those attacking.]

- An estimate of the losses at midday shows that nearly 50,000 British soldiers had been killed or wounded. Whatever the afternoon brought, it was going to be a black day for the British Army. (p. 194)

- Some 21,000 soldiers, representing the cream of the manhood of Great Britain, Ireland and the colony of Newfoundland, had been killed or would die as a result of their wounds. Over 35,000 more had been wounded and nearly 600 were prisoners of war. (p. 942)

- Only one man answered his name when the roll as called for 14 Platoon of the 1st Rifle Brigade. The platoon had been forty strong before the battle. (p. 255)

- Almost exactly half of the men in the 143 battalions who had attacked [84 initially and 59 more in subsequent waves] had become casualties. The figures for officers alone were far higher; only one in every four of those who had gone over the top remained unhurt at the end of the day – a seventy-five per cent casualty rate. (p. 263)

- The British Army’s casualties, on 1 July, were the equivalent of seventy-five battalions or of more than six full divisions of fighting infantry. For every yard of the sixteen-mile front from Gommecourt to Montauban there were two British casualties. (p. 264)

- The British Army’s loss on that one day easily exceed its battle casualties in the Crimean War, the Boer War and the Korean War combined. (p. 265)

- Eighty per cent of Britain’s casualties [for the entire war] occurred after the opening of the Battle of the Somme. Most of Britain’s losses were on the Western Front; 522,206 casualties were sustained there up to the end of June 1916; 2,183,930 afterwards. (p. 275)

- The French were lucky; they had nearly four times as many heavy guns for each mile of the front as did the British. (p. 277)

- it is reasonable to suggest that Rawlinson’s men lost the battle on 1 July by a matter of seconds – the interval between the lifting of the artillery barrage and the arrival of the first wave at the German trenches. If the British infantry could have fallen on the German front line quickly, it is possible that the day would have ended very differently. (p. 280)

- Looking back at Haig’s three original aims for the battle, all seem to have been fulfilled. The French were relieved from defeat at Verdun; the positions held by the Allies at the end of the battle were better than on 30 June; losses were inflicted on the Germans. But the Battle of Verdun was probably waning, with both sides nearing exhaustion, before the Somme started, and the final Allied positions on the Pozières Ridge were rendered valueless when the Germans retired the following spring. Only the third achievement cannot be argued against: it was on the Somme that the Germans lost the core of their battle-hardened army. (p. 290) [All of the ground gained on the Somme would be lost in a single day during the German offensive of March, 1918.]

- Of the army commanders, Rawlinson emerges very badly. His Fourth Army had taken only a quarter of its objectives and had suffered 50,000 casualties in one day. He had been responsible for three major errors, one each for the artillery, the infantry and the cavalry. (p. 290)

- On 14 November the battle ended. No one could ever agree on the final casualty figures, but it is certain that in the 140 days that the battle lasted Britain’s share was over 400,000. For this loss, Haig’s troops had advanced exactly six miles and were still four miles short of Baupaume, which the cavalry had hoped to take in the opening attack. (p. 295)

- Most men stood by their duty; a few did not. Self-inflicted wounds, almost unheard of in the early days, became a great problem. Men tried all the old dodges such as chewing cordite or sleeping in wet towels to induce sickness, and being gassed almost became a court-marital offense. Successful desertion was difficult to achieve: the penalty for being caught could be death by firing squad. (Of all death sentences, only about ten per cent were carried out. In the B.E.F. an average of one soldier was executed every five days, mostly for cowardice or desertion. The Australian Government refused to allow execution in their divisions.) (p. 300)

-The heavy casualties of 1917 had left the B.E.F. in France considerably under strength. Although there were large numbers of men under arms in England, the government refused to send these out to replenish the depleted battalions. No one had the courage to dismiss Haig; instead, the War Cabinet sought to prevent him launching new offensives in 1918 by keeping him short of men. (p. 301)

- Casualties 1 July 1916:
Killed or died of wounds: 19,240
Wounded: 35,493
Missing: 2,152
Prisoners: 585
Total 57,470

Casualties by attacking unit type:
Fighting Battalions (54,335), Machine Gun Companies (1,080), Pioneer Battalions (1,020), Light Trench Mortar Batteries (350). All of these were manned by the infantry, total: 56,785 (99.8%);
Royal Engineers (450), Artillery (170), Royal Army Medical Corps (60), Royal Flying Corps (6): total 686history-military history-military-ww115 s Jonny130 80

This was, I think, the first "serious" book I read about the First World War, way back in 1991. And it's still, probably, the best I've ever read.

Mr Middlebrook takes a "just the facts" approach to the events of 1st July 1916, presenting the events of the day through the experiences of ten of the participants, with some emphasis on other major actions taking place throughout the day. The lead in to the attack is well covered, and a background to the formation of the New Army, the location of the attack and the defences and defenders are also well covered.

I left the book feeling that the events of the terrible day had been well covered, without hyperbole and with the actual analysis left to the end of the book, you are able to make your own judgements based solely on events.

While inevitably there will be newer books, this will always for me be the definitive best read on the First Day on the Somme. With its easy style it is recommended to anyone with even a passing interest in the First World War. 2016-books european-history history ...more14 s carl theaker917 43

‘The First Day on the Somme’ should be on any Great War top ten reading list. Author Middlebrook takes the micro history approach to detailing the bloodiest day in British history, July 1, 1916. He uses letters, diaries, official military histories, and the testimony of over 500 British soldiers to re-create the feeling of ‘going over the top’.

Originally published in 1971, many of the survivors of the battle and the war were still alive to be interviewed. This now adds a certain ghostly ambience to the tale. Fortunately, the book was reprinted in 2003. I saw the updated review and put it on my ‘look-for-at-the-used-bookstore' list. Well for years I never found it, so maybe it was so good, no one turns them in? I finally purchased a used one online, regretting I waited so long !

Though Middlebrook relates many points of view in the history, including some from the German side, there are 10 officers and infantry men who form the core of the tale. The author uses quaint phrases, such as ‘the reader may be interesting to know….” Which adds a certain comradely charm, as if the soldiers, author and you are all having a chat.

Some British units had the name ‘Pals’ in their titles, as in ‘Manchester Pals’. I’m certain it lended a comradeliness to the unit, but oh so somber when all the Pals were dead.

There are a variety of fuzzy photos that add to the tale and helpful maps as well as several interesting appendix including ‘A Tour of the Somme Battlefield’, how interesting would that be to follow? A 21st century look at a 1971 look at 1916 ? history war9 s Stan Pedzick202 2

Wow...

Simply mind blowing at the level hubris and gall on the part of the British General staff, to murder so many of your own men solely to relieve the French, and then to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory because of your unwillingness to change your strategy when presented with information that does not conform to what your preconceived notions said should happen is just adding more insult to injury. Well, that would be the case if you then did not blame the troops for failing to do their jobs, based on your insane plans to begin with.

This book has good maps (in the Kindle Fire addition and Paper addition at least), and follows various troops and units to their fates.
3 s Michael Dolan19

I love Martin Middlebrooke's method of getting at the detail. In The First Day on the Somme he follows twelve individuals and their military careers before the battle as well as an overview of the day itself. The only drawback to this is that some might think that what was actually a four month long battle only lasted a single day. Other Middlebrooke books worth reading are three or four he did on RAF raids in WW2 on Hamburg, Berlin and Schweinfurt-Regensburg.3 s Anthony RyanAuthor 79 books8,928

Based on hundreds of interviews with survivors, Martin Middlebrook's seminal work stands as a valuable oral history of one of the worst days of the First World War. A harrowing and fitting tribute to a now mostly vanished generation. 3 s HeikkiAuthor 8 books25

The First Day on the Somme, Martin Middlebrook, 1971, Penguin Books, ISBN 0-14-139071-9

The Great War of 1914-1918 included many battles that have become legendary, perhaps none more so than that of Verdun. A separate effort, aimed at alleviating the pressure the French were experiencing at Verdun, became known as the Battle of the Somme, July 1, 1916. The story of this bloodiest of all British battles has been admirably told by Martin Middlebrook.

This book is the tale of human courage of the men in the trenches, dimwitted thinking of generals, unfounded belief in the power of the artillery, and above all, the honor and devotion to duty of the single infantry private. It was believed that a week of artillery bombardment would pulverize the German defences, and allow the British to advance to their targets in parade formations.

This was not to be. The Germans had dug deep, and the amount of barbed wire was staggering. Moreover, the British expected their artillery to cut the German wires and create lanes along which to advance; they also sent out parties to cut holes in the perimeters and marked them with white strips. The artillery didn't manage to cut the wire nearly as well as was expected, and the infantry met huge tangled obstacles along the way.

The biggest blunders were General Rawlinson's decision to delay the onset of the attack after the artillery bombardment was over; the Germans had time to man their machine gun positions, which had survived the bombardment much better than expected, and this enabled them to scythe down thousands of men who walked towards their positions. The Germans couldn't believe it when they saw the British advance methodically and slowly, and the murderous cross-fire slaughtered the British.

Another unbelievable error was not to use the only breakthrough on the right flank to attack the Germans from the side and behind - as well as the decision not to use cavalry. It was the end of the era of the cavalry to be sure, but in this battle, the large cavalry contingent could have made a huge difference, had it been let to advance through a breach and cause havoc in the rear of the Germans. They could only wonder at this decision when their lines became thin and tenuously jeld, but the British never released the cavalry and thus lost the only chance of success at the Somme.

In a way this battle reminds me of Tarawa and the US Marines. There, too, the belief in the intense naval bombardment caused casualties when the Japanese re-manned their positions right after the bombardment lifted. Hundreds of Marines were killed as they waded ashore in the direct sight of Japanese with their machine guns and artillery.

The US did not lose 57,470 men in casualties as the British did, however. This single day cost the British more than any other day in any war, or indeed, months of other wars. The heartbreaking tale of innocence lost is a key part of this book as Middlebrook confidently relates the fates of men who joined up with their friends to form units such as the "Manchester Pals" and "Grimsby Chums". These men fought and died with their friends, and in the process, those who survived ceased to believe in their country which had sacrificed them.

This book is an excellent starting point if you want to read quality books on war. Middlebrook's series on the Bomber Command of WW2 is unrivalled, as is his book "Convoy" which tells the story of the bitter sea battles of the Atlantic through the eyes of men on one such journey.favorites2 s Martin211 6

Martin Middlebrook's narrative and analysis of the worst day in British military history was published in 1972. Thus, it may be outdated by the past four decades of scholarship on the folly of the First World War. Still, this book has some strengths, even if Middlebrook's prose fails to fully convey the human drama of what happened on July 1st, 1916. In one day the British 3rd and 4th Armies lost more than 50,000 casualties -- dead, wounded, captured and missing.

At times his narrative was gripping. Row after row of men from Kitchener's 'New Army' remorselessly mowed down by German machine guns, men tangled in enemy barbed wire and riddled with bullets, the sheer hopelessness of the infantry assault; it all put my mind in a trench at zero hour, wondering what it would be to face Death, how the men summoned the courage to "go over the top." Of course, the ferocious German resistance was a surprise to many soldiers who had been told that the previous week's artillery bombardment would render the German trenches defenseless.

Scholars have long debated who was to blame for the disastrous losses that wiped out the cream of British society in a few hours. Middlebrook is not harsh on Haig.

Adam Hochschild's "To End All Wars" and Keegan's works of genius, "The First World War" and "Face of Battle," are better books on these subjects. books-read-in-20132 s Jack Buechner31 3

The truth is that I enjoy reading history. Military history in particular. But the death-strategies (manslaughter on an epic scale) of WW I leave me cold. Middlebrook's "Somme" is page after page of carnage without any military or even political achievement. Rather it was a template for both sides to fight the last war with waves and waves of humans trying to ignore rapid fire weapons and the ever increasing technology in killing without a clue as to how to gain victory. Line after line of numbers, regiments, armaments, casualties, deaths and the missing start to lose their shock value and begin to look as though it is a very bright and industrious term paper rather than a chronicle of a campaign. Statistics play an important part in understanding history and, for that matter, the essence of human folly, but I felt as though I had eaten too much of a unseasoned dish.....full, but unsatisfied.2 s AskHistorians918 3,293 Read

A very in-depth analysis of the first day of the Somme from a British perspective. This book goes into detail about most battalions who fought on the First Day of the Somme and who took part in that famous initial charge at zero hour. It's a very informative book that includes everything an amateur historian needs to know.military-history world-war-i2 s Adele22

Fascinating stories of the utmost heroism and also the worst military decision making ever in the history of the British army. I couldn't put it down.2 s Christiaan1 review

Must read for WW1 fanatics2 s Oliver Shrouder355 9

Brilliant study on the front, not sure if you’d really need anything else2 s Ian99

I've never been much of a First World War history buff, but this was a natural next read in the genre after John Keegan's "The Face of Battle." A paper copy is recommended over an e-reader solely for the ease of accessibility of maps that help to visualize the movements and battlefield as you read.

While this is THE book on the horrifying mistakes, heroism, and horror of the opening of the Battle of the Somme, it is the history of the men who formed the Pals Brigades in Kitchener's Army that are the centerpiece of this book. What starts out as seemingly unconnected anecdotes from diaries and letters gradually merges into a tale of emotions and history that span the Somme front on the British side. This humanizes a truly inhuman conflict, and br 8k nas the emotion of frustration and anger at the commanders who oversaw the operation with glaring blindness and unwillingness to improvise. A great book.1 Geraldine527 44

An outstanding book, all the more so for being under-stated and lacking grandstanding.

Very simple premise, some 50 years after the Battle of the Somme, an amateur sets out to research how the first day was experienced by and affected the soldiers that took part. He did this by interviewing the - by then ageing - survivors and by trawling the archives, and then by writing an immensely readable book. Of course, given the subject matter, I can't call it enjoyable, but it was fulfilling and ticked just about every possible box.

He started with the assumption that the reader might not know much about the First World War or the Army, and provided a succinct background that did not patronise those that know a bit more. He didn't dwell on the causes but briefly outlined why and how so many men volunteered in the summer and autumn of 1914. He explained Army organisation far better than anyone else ever has, again without going into tedious detail.

He selected 10 individuals to follow through, men of different ages, socio-economic backgrounds and military experience - Regulars, Territorials and Kitchener's 'New Army'. From different parts of the country and whose Battle, and War, ended differently.

And then he describes the first day of the Battle of the Somme. He uses the stories of these 10 men, and the diaries and memories of many others to tell a story. He never gets bogged down in the tedium of the minutiae of manoeuvres, but provides enough background to explain. He explains who the various generals were and there various responsibilities, and above all he tells an intensely human story of real ordinary men who fought on the Somme.

I have no criticisms except that the typesetting for the Kindle version contained numerous errors. Not the author's fault, but regrettable. Throughout the body of the text 'Yorks and Lancs' was rendered as 'Yorks and Lanes', somewhat of an insult to the red rose that sacrificed so much.

Some observations. I looked through the list at the end of survivors, more than 50 years after the battle. Men who were old men when I was in nappies. I looked at their places of residence and was shocked how comprehensively it covered everywhere I had lived - although a lot were labelled just as 'Nottingham', I saw Westcliff-on-Sea and Leigh-on-Sea, not just Southend. I saw Sale, Altrincham and Urmston, not just 'Manchester'. Brixton Hill, Herne Hill, Tulse Hill as well as 'Brixton'. And these were just the men who had a) survived the first day of the Somme b) survived further months of action there c) survived the rest of the War d) survived the random vicissitudes of civilian life e) survived WWII and f) lived beyond retirement age (well beyond, in most cases). Obviously many will have relocated from their home towns (but many not) but it gives a chilling indication of just how much of the country was affected by this one day of this one battle.

It's worth noting that this book is just about all about men. Of course it is, it's the story of those who fought on the front line. Worthwhile books about women in the war are Testament of Youth by Vera Brittain and The Roses of No Man's Land by Lyn Macdonald. This is absolutely not a criticism.

Also, and again, I don't fault the author, I get very frustrated at the presentation of casualty figures. Dead/died of wounds/missing eventually declared dead I can process. But the figures on wounded are misleading.
To me, there's at least three kinds of 'wounded' -

a) body-shattering/life-disrupting injuries that destroy a man;
b) injuries that take a long time to heal - often months of hospitalisation and discharge from the army but allow a return to something that resembles normality; and
c) short-term injuries and illnesses similar to those that they might suffer in training, sport or civilian life, such as bone breaks, joint dislocations and illnesses (mumps, chicken pox etc and surely D&V must have been rife).

In another book I read of a soldier who missed the first day of the Somme because he twisted his ankle and was retired to light duties for a few days. But he counts as a 'casualty'.

And of course, what is entirely unquantified is the extent and depth of psychological injury.

I would recommend this book to just about everybody. People in their mid-teens just embarking on GCSE study of WW1 (I wish I had read it at 15); people who are only vaguely aware of the reality of Trench Warfare; people who read 20th Century history and want to know before the centenary celebrations; and academics, who might learn how to tell a story in a way that all these people can learn and understand. 2016 5-star history ...more1 Simon Alford72 Read

Daily Telegraph 29.6.16

Battle of the Somme centenary: the best new history books
By
Saul David
29 June 2016 • 1:07pm
Zero Hour by Jolyon Fenwick (Profile, £25) describes the first day of the Somme alongside photographs of the modern landscape, annotated in the manner of First World War battlefield panoramas
Zero Hour by Jolyon Fenwick (Profile, £25) describes the first day of the Somme alongside photographs of the modern landscape, annotated in the manner of First World War battlefield panoramas (exhibited at Sladmore Contemporary, London, until 15th July) CREDIT: Jolyon Fenwick
One hundred years ago this week, the British Army endured its bloodiest day – and the Battle of the Somme began. Was it worth it? Saul David weighs up the evidence

At 7.30am on July 1 1916, whistles blew and the first waves of 120,000 British and empire assault troops climbed out of their trenches, or rose from prone positions in no-man’s-land, to attack 16 miles of multilayered German defences.

Burdened with 70lb of kit, the soldiers had been ordered to walk until they were 20 yards from the enemy trench, for fear they would exhaust themselves and lose formation. Ahead of them lay belts of German barbed wire, many of them still intact despite an unprecedented seven-day bombardment of 1.5?million shells. The race was on. Would the slow-moving attackers reach the German front line before the defenders had emerged from deep dugouts and manned their machine-guns? In most cases, the answer was no.

Men were mown down corn. By nightfall, British gains were restricted to three miles of the German front line in the southern sector. The neighbouring French advanced to a similar depth. But at no place had the German second line of trenches – part of the original objective – been captured, let alone the third. The cost was 57,470 casualties (including 19,240 men killed), just under half the total engaged. It was, and still is, the bloodiest day in British Army history. The attacks would continue for four-and-a-half months, advancing the Allied line just seven miles. Total casualties were more than 600,000 for both sides. The battle, not surprisingly, is Exhibit A for the “Lions led by Donkeys” school of historians – led by the late Alan Clark – who claim that courageous and inexperienced British soldiers were needlessly sacrificed by incompetent generals.

Lost Tommies by Ross Coulthart (William Collins, £40) concerns the discovery in 2007 of over 4,000 negatives taken by a village photographer in Vignancourt of British troops on leave, such as these unknown young soldiers in winter, 1916
Lost Tommies by Ross Coulthart (William Collins, £40) concerns the discovery in 2007 of over 4,000 negatives taken by a village photographer in Vignancourt of British troops on leave, such as these unknown young soldiers in winter, 1916 CREDIT: Kerry Stokes Collection/Louis and Antoinette Thuillier Collection
More recently the thesis has been challenged by the “learning curve” scholars – John Terraine, Gary Sheffield and Simon Robbins among them – who argue that the Somme and subsequent battles were a necessary, though bloody and regrettable, rite of passage for an Edwardian army learning to fight an industrial war. William Philpott has gone even further, describing the Somme as the “military turning point of the war” and a “genuine moral victory in adversity over circumstances, the elements and the enemy”.

So, do the latest batch of histories, published to coincide with the centenary of the battle on Friday, add anything to the debate? And after hundreds of previous books, is there any new material to reveal? The answer to both questions is a resounding yes.

Hugh Sebag-Montefiore’s magisterial Somme: Into the Breach (Viking, £20) is the fruit of eight years’ labour and it shows. He draws on previously unpublished sources from Britain, Australia, New Zealand and Germany to reconstruct the story of the tragic battle in almost forensic detail. So original is the material, and so inventive is Sebag-Montefiore’s approach – telling each stage of the fight from the perspective of both the combatants and their families back home – that this well-known tale is rendered strange again.

Troops at the Somme in July 1916
Troops at the Somme in July 1916 CREDIT: National Army Museum/PA
Some heartbreaking chapters cover the legendary Australian capture of the village of Pozières in late July, at a cost of 5,200 casualties. As the shell-shocked survivors withdrew, they were ned to “men who had been in hell. Almost without exception, each man looked drawn and haggard, and so dazed they appeared to be walking in a dream”. Many of the dead simply disappeared, and it took the family of one Australian officer more than 16 months to establish that he had been blown to pieces in a follow-up attack on July 28, thus enabling them to wind up his estate and move on with their lives. His brother blamed his death on “the incompetence, callousness and personal vanity of those high in authority”.

But if Sebag-Montefiore’s use of first-hand accounts is exemplary, so too is his historical judgment. Many historians insist the British plan was an “unhappy compromise” between Sir Douglas Haig, the commander-in-chief, who hoped for big leaps forward and even a major breakthrough, and Sir Henry Rawlinson, the commander of the Fourth Army, who preferred limited gains of one trench system at a time, followed by a pause while artillery was moved forward (a tactic known as “bite and hold”). In fact, says Sebag-Montefiore, Haig’s tactics predominated because Rawlinson owed him for saving his job a year earlier. “Haig was able to use his hold over Rawlinson to dominate him, and to require him to fight the Somme battle in the way he desired.”

A recruiting poster published by His Majesty's Stationery Office
A recruiting poster published by His Majesty's Stationery Office CREDIT: National Army Museum/PA
The author condemns both Haig and Rawlinson – rightly in my view – for failing “to give sufficient weight to what they were told by their artillery experts, and neither applied common sense when planning their original attacks”. But on occasions, he writes, Haig was “able to make the British Army perform efficiently”, as with the second Australian attack on Pozières Heights. The battle was punctuated by a number of other successful assaults that were never properly exploited.

These limited gains, writes Sebag-Montefiore, were largely thanks to the “indomitable spirit of the British, Canadian and Australasian infantry”. Though unable to break through the German lines “other than superficially”, the “Big Push” wore out the Germany army and forced it to abandon its offensive at Verdun. If not a British victory, it was “the beginning of the German slide towards defeat”. Written with great style and sensitivity, superbly illustrated with many original plates and beautifully drawn maps, Sebag-Montefiore’s brilliant new study will set the benchmark for a generation.

British soldiers negotiate the shelled landscape of the Somme valley in the winter of 1916, near the end of the offensive
British soldiers negotiate the shelled landscape of the Somme valley in the winter of 1916, near the end of the offensive CREDIT: PA
Taylor Downing’s Breakdown: The Crisis of Shell Shock on the Somme, 1916 (Little, Brown, £25) concentrates on the official response to the epidemic of shell shock, or combat stress, that occurred during the 140-day battle, the most intense and long-running fight in the British Army’s history. It was because of this “prolonged fighting and heavy bombardment” that so many men succumbed to nervous disorders. Officially there were 16,000 shell shock victims during this period; Downing puts the true figure closer to 60,000, or the equivalent of three whole infantry divisions.

Faced with such a severe drain on their manpower, the authorities responded by massaging the figures and refusing to allow most of the sufferers to return home for treatment. Some were among the 309 British and Commonwealth soldiers executed for military offences. “Instead of receiving sympathy and understanding for the terrible mental injuries they suffered,” writes Downing, “they were put up against a wall and shot.”

Yet the advances made in the treatment of shell shock in Britain had two positive outcomes: they showed that anyone could suffer from mental ill health and that, contrary to the opinion of the Victorians, it was possible to be cured of mental disease. “Out of the immense suffering of the wartime years,” argues Downing, in this humane and intensely moving book, “came at least some progress.”

A horse-drawn limber takes ammunition along the Lesbeoufs Road to the front, November 1916, pictured in
The Somme:
A Visual History by Anthony Richards
(IWM, £14.99)
A horse-drawn limber takes ammunition along the Lesbeoufs Road to the front, November 1916, pictured in The Somme: A Visual History by Anthony Richards (IWM, £14.99) CREDIT: IWM Q2980
Richard van Emden’s The Somme (Pen & Sword, £25) is essentially an oral and visual history, and so largely avoids the historical debate about what went wrong and who was to blame. But it includes much new material, particularly in the form of photos taken by British soldiers on their own illegally held cameras, and sets the battle in its proper context by covering the entire 20-month period that the British Expeditionary Force spent on the Somme. It deserves to be read.

Martin Middlebrook before him, Robert Kershaw concentrates on the first day of the battle in his visceral and atmospheric 24 Hours at the Somme: 1 July 1916 (WH Allen, £20). Quoting from a varied cast of characters from both sides of the battlefield, Kershaw agrees that the Somme offensive was the beginning of the end for the Germany army. The British debacle on the first day, on the other hand, was caused by “the inability to feed timely informa­tion to senior decision-makers, conducting operations with inexperienced troops on an unprecedented scale for the first time”.

Field Marshall Douglas Haig in February 1916
Field Marshall Douglas Haig in February 1916 CREDIT: REUTERS
Since the publication of John Terraine’s revisionist biography in 1963, the reputation of the British commander on the Somme has enjoyed something of a renaissance. Gary Sheffield provides the most even-handed and insightful assessment yet in Douglas Haig (Aurum, £25), a revised edition of his excellent 2011 biography. In Sheffield’s opinion it was Rawlinson who threw away the chance of victory on July 1 by subverting his chief’s plan of attack, and not the other way round.

The scale of Haig’s achievement in transforming the brave but inexperienced British Army that fought on the Somme into the supremely efficient all-arms force of 1918 is hard to quantify. But the latest reprint of Sir Frank Fox’s GHQ (sirfrankfox.com, £25), a classic insider’s account of life at Haig’s headquarters, gives a sense of the heavy responsibility borne by the commander and his 300-strong staff. Each month they had to coordinate the arrival at French ports of 800,000 tons of supplies and ammunition which were then transported to the Front by half a million horses and mules, 20,000 motor lorries and 250 trains. Most worked 14-hour days, seven days a week, with little prospect of leave. In spite of this, they were fiercely loyal to their chief and proud of their achievements. “There was,” writes Fox, “no more loyal band of brothers than the Grand Staff of the British Army”.

One of three photographs discovered in 1977 taken by George Hackney during the advance of the 36th Ulster Division on 1 July 1916
One of three photographs discovered in 1977 taken by George Hackney during the advance of the 36th Ulster Division on 1 July 1916 CREDIT: George Hackney / Ulster Museum
Only a part of Randall Nicol’s superb two-volume Till the Trumpet Sounds Again: The Scots Guards 1914-19 (Helion, £37.50 each) is devoted to the Somme, but that part alone is worth the hefty cover price. The author draws on a host of original voices to tell the story of the Guards Division during the famous tank attack – the first in history – on September 15. Heroes abound, in particular Capt Bayley, the medical officer, who dodged from one shell hole to another, treating casualties as he went, until he was shot in the knee just yards from a German trench. He sent a note to his colonel “saying that I hoped soon to return to Battalion HQ when I could attend to wounded if brought to me although I should be unable to go to wounded myself”.

Each of these books is proof that history constantly evolves; that there’s always something new to say. They remind us that the Somme was not the pointless slaughter of popular myth, and that many of the participants thought the sacrifice worthwhile.

“Whether I am to emerge from this show I do not know,” wrote a young British officer killed in the final attack. “Surely it is a life fulfilled if one dies young and healthy fighting for one’s country.”

To order any of these books from the Telegraph at discounted prices, call 0844 871 1515 or visit books.telegraph.co.uk

Saul David’s most recent book is Operation Thunderbolt (Hodder)

KB213 11

This book was such a pleasure to read. From start to finish, it's an excellent account of the battle.

I actually didn't realize that this book was published in the 1970s until after I ordered it. Despite all the great it has, that made me a little nervous because sometimes these older histories aren't the most readable. However, Middlebrook actually has a very readable, accessible style to his writing.

The book is organized chronologically, but it doesn't throw readers right into zero hour on July 1st. Instead, Middlebrook gives plenty of background, including the creation of the volunteer army and the situation on the Western Front prior to July 1, 1916. This whole section is very well done because it helps to situate readers, and Middlebrook is able to contextualize this information in terms of the battle.

He follows this up with the plan for the battle and last preparations. Here was a battle planned by generals who had no personal experience in trench warfare. Infantrymen were to advance in waves, following a week-long artillery barrage, "and move forward at a steady pace of no more than 100 yards every two minutes (less than two miles per hour)..." Men were assured that the German trenches and wire would be destroyed from the artillery and that they could walk over No Man's Land and take their objectives. 10% of a battalion was ordered to be left behind to rebuild in case things went badly. And badly they did go.

We know that along the front, the German trench systems and wiring were not destroyed. Nor were their machine guns knocked out. This made the slow advance over NML disastrous for the British: "We were soon obliged to fall flat in the grass to escape the hail of machine-gun fire... It was about this time that my confidence was replaced by an acceptance of the fact that I had been sent here to die." For the Germans, "they were presented with targets that exceeded their wildest expectations as the waves of British infantry plodded stupidly into their machine-gun and rifle sights."

Middlebrook breaks down the battle by chapter making it easy to follow the events and different battalions. He also focuses on 10 soldiers of varying ranks to give us first-hand insight. Although some of these battalions did achieve their objectives, the battle was certainly not a success. The immense loss of life and failure along much of the front resulted from poor planning and inability to act on brief moments of success. Middlebrook concludes that "...the British assault had been on such a scale that success, in this limited sense, had been inevitable. The terrible losses made it a success hardly worth having."

The book is wrapped up with an analysis, and a look at life after the battle and after the war. I think Middlebrook is quite fair in his judgement of the generals. He also shows readers that the hardships for the men who survived were not over after the war. Many faced long periods of unemployment and felt their country wasn't doing enough to help them.

Middlebrook excellently guides readers through the battle in a way that is very clear. There are also a few maps throughout to help readers with visualization. And we do get some information from the German perspective, as well as first-hand accounts. Without this, I think the book would've been lacking an integral part.

The publication date really works in the book's favour. Written between 1969 and 1971, Middlebrook was able to speak with some of the men who had served on the Somme - something historians today can obviously no longer do. Following the 10 soldiers was another great touch. (And I believe Paddy Kennedy is the same one featured as a character in BBC's 'Our World War' (2014) - also worth checking out.)

This is easily one of the best books I've read related to the First World War. Highly recommended!1 Jerry Smith782 15

I rarely give 5 stars to books here on Goodreads and I debated doing so here. The fact that I did so is probably more to do with my particular interests in this conflict, and the awful day of July 1st 1916 than any particular outstanding merits of the book itself in terms of writing or particular literary style (although I found that style to be somber, informative but also very readable).

Any Brit with any level of interest in WW1 will be familiar with the awful events of July 1st 1916 and that 50-60000 casualties taken by the Army on that day. However this book does an excellent job of telling the whole story of that day, the successes (and there were some) as well as the carnage and the losses. To those with only a passing awareness of the battle, it may seem that it only lasted one day when in fact, it dragged on until November and the winter finally brought the tremendous struggle to an end.

The full battle is beyond the scope of the book although Middlebrook covers the remainder of the battle in summary at the end. It is amazing that it took the allied armies 3 months to reach objectives that were goals of that first day's "big push".

Studying the battles of WW1, and the Somme in particular, makes one realize that it is all too easy to resort to platitudes such as "Lions led by Donkeys" and to blame "The Generals" for the appalling war of attrition into which the Western Front descended. There is no doubt some truth in this but it is a lot more complex that that and much of that history seems to be more developed today than in 1972 when this book was written. However, 50 years after the events is still long enough to gain perspective and, it seems to me, Middlebrook is very fair in his analysis of the performance of the generals. It is clear that the Chiefs of Staff were holed up in luxury several miles behind the line, and they do come in for criticism, but WW1 saw a large number of officers and commanders killed and this is mentioned here too in some detail.

What I about this book is the structure and the approach. MM sets the scene and explains the lead up to the conflict itself and the battle in particular. This is obviously important - one can't see such major fighting in isolation as we need to know why it happened and why it happened there and how it related to the rest of the war. For example, the conversations between the allies are well covered, in particular the desperation of the French to have the Brits relieve the pressure they were under in trying to hold Verdun against a sustained German offensive.

However this is not simply a book about the tactics of the battle and the war (although those are well covered) but we get to hear about the common soldiers; how they died, how they l
Autor del comentario:
=================================