BBC2 'The Somme 1916: From Both Sides of the Wire'

[J Banning]

1 hour ago, BIFFO said:

have watched 1-2 and am waiting for 3,I cannot understand why PB hasn't made/fronted a programme on the glory hole as he appears to have been one of the main people driving on the project

Biffo  

 

Someone put this on to YouTube a while back. Somme: Secret Tunnel Wars

 

 

[David Filsell]

"Simon Schama, David Starkey and Niall Ferguson have all been on parade"

 

Yes and with very little justification. Two are well off their firm ground and the other hardly an important historian of the Great War, more a simple self publicist.  

 

[MikeMeech]

Hi

While I am finding the series interesting (although nothing really new to those that have studied the subject, but probably new information to the general viewing public) I could not help feeling that the second episode may have given the impression that only the German army engaged in compiling 'after action' or 'lessons learned' documents, which we know is not the case even during the Battle of the Somme.  British ones are in the National Archives of course.  The last page of a XV Corps one, dated 11 July 1916 is below:

 

Mike 

[David Ridgus]

Only just catching up with the thread this afternoon, so can I have my two penn'orth on a few of the points raised?

 

When it comes to presenters I've said before Peter Barton is a non pareil at the moment. However, had he lived, I have no doubt  Richard Holmes would have produced something notable. His 'War Walks' on Mons and the Somme coupled with his series 'The Western Front' still set the standard for concise and evocative television about the Great War. One name not mentioned so far is Richard van Emden who over the years has been involved in a string of excellent programmes. It was nice to see him upfront and centre on the recent Thiepval commemorations so perhaps more to come from Richard.

 

The 'Secret Tunnel Wars is also available on DVD.

 

I think there is little chance of the 50th anniversary programme being repeated. As we have gathered from Jeremy on this thread the powers that be are increasingly prescriptive on style and content. The McKern fronted documentary is too far off the mark for these days - particularly with its languorous pace.

 

Not quite sure why Dan Snow is getting his traditional GWF kicking here. 'Barton 2 Snow 0' - I didn't realise there was a competition! As far as I can see Snow did a fairly workmanlike doc for the History channel last year on the second half of the battle and has recorded a few short films for the BBC website aimed at students. 

 

David

 

PS Should have said at the start, thoroughly enjoyed Part 2, looking forward to Part 3, and the DVD is already on order

 

 

[MikeMeech]

Hi

The RFC was also involved in the 'lessons learned' process as is indicated in their report 'Notes on Contact Patrol Work' published and distributed at the end of July 1916.  It is a six page document, page 2 below, containing information on what happened and problems that arose as well as 'improvements' being introduced during the battle.

Mike

[IanA]

7 hours ago, Chris_Baker said:

 

Is it not a pity, though, that we do not see a few more of the many talented military/war historians that are out there

Many talented military/war historians would fall flat on their faces if stuck in front of a camera. That doesn't diminish them in any way - it's just different skills. Peter Barton (and others like Richard Holmes) are able to function well in both arenas.

[BRONNO]

11 hours ago, Trev2386 said:

 

TEW,

 

according to my records, my man was born and lived in Hucknall, Notts. Married and died in Basford, Notts. There doesn't appear to be any links to Yorks. Census records state that the name might be double-barrelled, but not hyphenated, as Chell Jewsbury.

Apologies for being off topic,

 

Trev

Your man is most likely (CQMS) John William Chell Jewsbury....early number was 4095 and 12528 later 4961839, served with the 1st Battalion then 17th Btn then 9th Btn.....may also have served with the 16th Btn too....discharged 14th August 1930. He lived on Watnall Road, Hucknall, Nottinghamshire and later 31, Washdyke Lane, in Hucknall. BRONNO.

[Trev2386]

38 minutes ago, BRONNO said:

Your man is most likely (CQMS) John William Chell Jewsbury....early number was 4095 and 12528 later 4961839, served with the 1st Battalion then 17th Btn then 9th Btn.....may also have served with the 16th Btn too....discharged 14th August 1930. He lived on Watnall Road, Hucknall, Nottinghamshire and later 31, Washdyke Lane, in Hucknall. BRONNO.

 

Bronno,

 

thats news to me. I only have him as 12528 Pte Jewsbury. I'll dig a bit more, many thanks,

 

Trev

[Martin Feledziak]

Just caught up on the Iplayer - for me it is a great production and I like the way it has been presented. The only one criticism was the account from a German soldier where the voice over was so "Herr Flick, from Allo Allo, that I had a little chuckle, which is rather bad of me knowing how intolerable this was for all of the souls who had to endure this senseless slaughter.

The drone footage was excellent and clearly shows the lay of the land.

The primitive nature of the Livens projector was also a new one for me.

I am going to guess that the next episode will feature some "booby trapping" as the Germans give territory.

But good work team.

 

I have just watched "Secret Tunnel Wars" from the link at the top of this page. 

What a great recording. There is no way I could have gone down to the first level, that would have scared the **** out of me. I think i am a little claustrophobic ( do not like to be trapped in a tight space ) epic what our soldiers did 100 years ago.

 

But those brave men went down another level always knowing that death was waiting.

 

 

[Bernard_Lewis]

7 hours ago, David Filsell said:

"Simon Schama, David Starkey and Niall Ferguson have all been on parade"

 

Yes and with very little justification. Two are well of their firm ground and the other hardly an important historian of the Great War, more a simple self publicist.  

 

 

Just trying to work out which is which... :o)

 

Bernard

[AOK4]

6 hours ago, Martin Feledziak said:

Just caught up on the Iplayer - for me it is a great production and I like the way it has been presented. The only one criticism was the account from a German soldier where the voice over was so "Herr Flick, from Allo Allo, that I had a little chuckle, which is rather bad of me knowing how intolerable this was for all of the souls who had to endure this senseless slaughter.

 

I agree and noticed that as well. Why on earth do they use this ridiculous German accent for those voice-overs? It did remind me of Allo Allo as well.

 

Jan

[SiegeGunner]

The answer, once again, is that it was the decision of the programme makers.  The first piece from a German source in episode 1 was spoken in person by Stephan Westmann, the WW1 German medic who came to Britain in the 30s and took part in the BBC 1964 'Great War' series, and subsequent spoken quotations from German sources seem to have followed Westmann's distinctive accent.  As I translated many of those passages, I have to admit that I cringe when I hear some of them  ...  especially as I went to considerable lengths to render the personal testimony of individuals into 'lightly colloquial' English to bring out the similarities with personal testimony from British and Dominion soldiers, and the 'cod' accents seem to me to be calculated to emphasise the alien character of the German witnesses.

 

Mick

[Bart150]

Would anyone connected to the programme care to tell how the blunder of calling von Falkenhayn a field-marshal crept in?

[AOK4]

13 minutes ago, Bart150 said:

Would anyone connected to the programme care to tell how the blunder of calling von Falkenhayn a field-marshal crept in?

 

I have mentioned this earlier, but got no response either.

[PhilB]

Maybe because he was later a Field Marshal in the Ottoman Army?

[AOK4]

16 minutes ago, PhilB said:

Maybe because he was later a Field Marshal in the Ottoman Army?

 

1. He only made it to General der Infanterie in the German army.

2. He was made a Field marshall in the Turkish army only in July 1917.

3. He is mentioned in the documentary in his function as Chief of Staff of the German army in 1916 at which point he was only a General der Infanterie.

 

He should therefore only be called General der Infanterie or "General".

 

Jan

[JaneEH]

I'm not a military historian but have been broadening my meagre knowledge via research into my GF's experiences in the RFA. I guess I count as 'target audience' for this series which I've really enjoyed (perhaps not the right word) so far. I'm looking forward to the rest and the book will definitely be on my Christmas present list - especially if it includes some of the edited out stuff. I want to visit the battlefields as a birthday treat next year & I'm sure the programmes will help inform my understanding. Huge thanks & congratulations to all concerned.

 

[seb phillips]

Thoroughly enjoying this series.I would echo an earlier comment that its the first popular series to really focus on the German response rather than British mistakes. You only need to compare it with 'Somme - Defeat to Victory' which was made a few years ago. 

 

As a teacher, I have to cover this topic in the classroom. The students are always a little alarmed to hear my suggestion that the British took so many casualties because the Germans were actually very good soldiers!

 

 

[Seadog]

Seb it could of course be because the "British" plus various others were in fact attacking whereas the Germans were defending which I would suggest is the easier of the two options. Worth considering as well is that the Germans has invaded and subjugated nearly all of little Belgium and vast tracts of France so perhaps someone can come up what they think the allies should do to drive the aggressor from the land or should we have just stood there facing each other for the next 20 years or so. Perhaps an "historian" could share his or her thoughts with us. We can have many programmes such as this one which we think are either  good or not but they all deal with the mechanics of the conflict and none including this one addresses the central tenet of just what were the allies supposed to do to repel the aggression of the Germans. There is in my opinion a fruitful discussion to be had on this core subject but whether this will ever happen is debatable.

 

Cheers

Norman

[MartH]

I watched episode 2 on the BBC iPlayer and was impressed, it was better than the first. You began to understand the German's relentless search on how to defend, and that the Somme Battle, was as actually the Somme Campaign with many German counteract. One could complain about the non mention of the French, the referral to the Bavarian archives (Bayerisches Hauptstaatsarchiv) as the German archives, the comical German accents, and things anoraks would pick up on but all in all it's wonderfully done, and sometimes gives vividly the feeling of claustrophobia and anticipation of impending attack. I recall a conversation with my late mother earlier this year when we discussed being shelled heavily before the Soviet attacks , which had happened to her in 1944, the roar and sound like drums as it rained/rolled over, as the earth was beaten, and how in the dugouts or open one lay on the floor hanging on for dear life as you bounced around, and the shear beauty of silence when it stopped, but then the wounded started rolling in. She had been subjected to barrages more severe than the Somme, one really got the impression that sustained shellfire was terrifying. Later in life she survived a series of explosions in a laboratory, the first one sent her instinctively under the stoutest table, other people took their time and suffered as a result.

 

Anyway back to the program, one of the best of the centenary, and that is not damning it with faint praise. 

[SiegeGunner]

1 hour ago, MartH said:

... the referral to the Bavarian archives (Bayerisches Hauptstaatsarchiv) as the German archives ...

 

Mart,

 

Peter's research extended to several other German archives in addition to Munich.

 

Mick

[squirrel]

On 26/07/2016 at 10:34, PhilB said:

PB hammered home the point that the Germans were extremely self critical and that tactics changed markedly as a result. This contrasted strongly with the British attitude shown in a recent thread where criticism was positively discouraged. Is there anything to account for this difference in the attitudes of the commands towards criticism?

One point that seems not to have been stressed as much as it might have been. At the start of the Somme offensive, the German units had been in place for some time, knew the ground and their role in the event of an attack and had trained for the eventuality.

The British units were in the main inexperienced and were not that familiar with the ground in the same way as the Germans were. Training specific to the attack had been minimal.

Once the majority of Officers and NCO's had become casualties there were few men capable and trained to take over and fewer still in a position to supply constructive criticism.

 

The German command structure was such that "the man on the spot", at Company level and above made the decisions during the fighting.              The British inexperience, at all levels, made this impractical and so detailed plans were used which left little room for initiative to be used had any one been capable of applying it.

 

 

[MartH]

34 minutes ago, SiegeGunner said:

 

Mart,

 

Peter's research extended to several other German archives in addition to Munich.

 

Mick

 

Mick

 

See the anorak here sees him in front of one name plate on the building and assumes that's the only place he went, and because he did not refer to the Budesarchiv. 

 

Mart

[J Banning]

Mart - to elaborate on what Mick said, Peter has been working in the Stuttgart Haupstaatsarchiv, the Munich Kriegsarchiv, the Bundesarchiv in Freiburg and the Landesarchiv Baden-Würtemmberg in Karlsruhe. But, as ever, the TV programme only mentioned the one archive...

 

I should address the other queries raised on this thread later if I have a chance.

JB

[Hedley Malloch]

On 7/26/2016 at 12:25, EastSurrey said:

I thought it was very good. My only quibble was the apparent suggestion that British PoWs were all well treated. I would suggest that even if treated well near the front and by intelligence officers, they did not fare well on the journey to Germany and were often badly treated in the camps and on work details, quite apart from being poorly fed ( although I recognise the shortage of food for the Germans.)

Michael

I agree with this.  The evidence suggests that the PoWs of the Germans received the worst deal.  Heather Jones' book 'Violence against Prisoners of War: Britain, France and Germany, 1914-1920' concludes that the violence shown by the Germans to their captives was the worst of the combatant nations.  The British suffered in particular because of German anglophobia, and because their volunteer status (be it regular army or Kitchener volunteer) made it easy for the Germans to see them as mercenaries.  On the other hand the Germans and the French were all conscripts or reservists - they were compelled to be there.  The Germans seem to have reserved the worst treatment for their Russian PoWs.

Against this the programme's description of the PoWs treatment was very specific - what happened in Cambrai in the summer of 1916. There were huge local variations in how PoWs were treated.  Much of it was luck of the draw.