WHAT IS THE TRUTH ABOUT PASSCHENDAELE

[SOMMESOLDIER]

Hi There,

I was always under the impression that Passchendaele was a complete slaughter where for no gain and what became no point we sacrificed hundreds of thousands of lives. Then in recent years that has been watered down some wot and then finally I have just read Mud, Blood , And Poppycock where Gordon Corrigan states that when historians in the past have quoted British casualties for the period of Third Ypres to justify their belief of huge casualties they have quoted casualty figures for all fronts on the Western Front. His belief is that although terrible they were no greater maybe even less than the Germans. His evidence seemed compelling. I then had a guided trip recently to the salient and a well known guide refuted that entirely. What is the truth. Please help a confused man !!!

Cheers

Tim.

[Arnie]

Corrigans version is way off the mark and is simply trying to rewrite history

In march 1922 the British War Office published its 'Statistics of the Military Efforts of the British Empire during the Great war' released as soon as possible after the event, it flatly states British casualties between July and December 1917 ( the Flanders Campaign and Cambrai) at 448,614. If the French loses for the same battle are included (50,000) the total for Passchendaele is very nearly half a million. Approx 30% would have been killed; therefore, 150,000 approx would have been killed

The same report the German loses are listed as being 270,000.

If as Corrigan asserts that this is the loses for the whole of the British and German Armies in France the losses are two to one in Germanys favour.

Arnie

[andigger]

I would suggest reading Passchendaele - Sacrafical Ground. I think it breaks the phases of the battle out very clearly explaining the tactics and results (both in ground gained and lives lost) very well. You might also do a search on the book title, there are a couple of threads out there. Andy

[Clive Maier]

According to The World War I Databook (Ellis and Cox, Aurum Press, 1993), the casualties for 3rd Ypres were:

BEF 396,800 (of whom 60,300 were killed)

France 112,000

Germany 348,300

[John_Hartley]

Tim

If you use the search facility, you'll see we had an extensive debate on the "senseless slaughter" at Third Ypres only a few weeks back.

[Mat McLachlan]

I'm always a bit confused when the issue of casualty figures for Passchendaele is discussed. Often figures for the entire battle of Third Ypres are quoted but, since the opening stages of this battle (Menin Road, Polygon Wood, Broodseinde Ridge, etc) were quite successful for the Allies, it seems a bit misleading to include these in the whole 'senseless slaughter' argument. Shouldn't figures for Passchendaele only include the period from Oct 9, 1917 to December 1917?

[Guest DNH]

I sometimes wonder whether the Battle for Passchendaele will ever actually end...

[Guest bonza]

G'day Mat

We may soon have the answers. The State Library of Victoria has granted a Fellowship for the preparation of a Manuscript covering a "statistical & historiographical investigation" on "The Flanders Campaign of 1917 (otherwise known as the Third Battle of Ypres or Passchendaele).

Although Menin Rd was the 1st AIF involvement in 3rd Ypres, I strongly suspect that some of the preceeding battles are designated 3rd Ypres. There is a basis for some of the confusion from reading Dr Bean.

These extracts are from his "Anzac to Amiens"

"Third Ypres ... was far better planned & conducted than the First Battle of The Somme. ... the British loss-400,000- was considerably less than on the Somme. The German loss perhaps equalled the British."

"For the two Anzac corps the 3 battles of Menin Rd, Polygon Wood & Broodseinde were the cleanest and most decisive victories they had yet fought, even more so than Messines. The later fighting in wet weather doubled the casualties, which mounted to 38,000 in the five Australian divisions in eight weeks.