Was it all worth it?

[knittinganddeath]

Speaking as a newcomer, I think it did make a difference, at least on a personal level. By the time that I became interested in the war, the centenary was over. However, the projects, especially document digitalisation, remained. The first primary sources that I used in my research, German newspapers from Hessen, were digitised as part of a centenary project.

The centenary also produced a children's video game, Valiant Hearts, that provided my youngest son in particular with a low-threshold entry point to a longer-term interest in the war. There was a period where I had to homeschool him because he refused to go to regular school and I built all his lessons -- reading, maths, writing, social studies -- around the war because I knew that the topic interested him and he would actually do the work.

[AOK4]

I am not completely convinced that research in the UK has evolved that much. Although I agree there is at least some mentioning of the German side and some hesitant start of research in German regimental histories and archives. I would like to see more of this so that some rusted views would be a little bit more challenged. Of course, a total absence of serious wide-range research and deep knowledge on the German side doesn't help.

I agree that increased digitalisation of German and other archival sources has been one big positive point of the centenary. However, there's still some way to go and unfortunately some projects seem to have fallen silent.

Jan

 

[Petroc]

On 22/08/2023 at 14:29, Chris_Baker said:

Well observed, Andy.

For my part, I agreed with Jan's assertion about lack of new research as I believe he was mainly speaking of the situation in Belgium, France and Germany (he will no doubt correct me if I am wrong in this). It may just be because it is not so visible to me, but I just do not see the traction that academic study of the subject has gained in the UK. It's not zero, but it's not too widespread. We can all thinks of all sorts of reasons why that may be, but I feel it is a shame, nonetheless.

As far as education of the public is concerned, and whether the money spent on the centenary had any long-lasting effect, I pick out an example. Jim Grundy runs an absolutely stellar page on Facebook, all about the Gallipoli campaign. It is in-depth, well researched, quotes the sources, etc. One of the best such examples out there in social medialand. The responses and comments that it gathers make your eyes water. The sustained level of ignorance and prejudice is simply astonishing. Jim needs a medal in keeping his cool. Now, who knows who the respondees are: you might argue that anyone responding on a social media page is not representative of all and that may well be true, but they were interested enough to find and read a Gallipoli article in the first place. 

Thank you, Chris. I admit that my understanding of current academic research into the conflict is somewhat limited to that undertaken in the UK and, within this parameter, on British and Commonwealth aspects of the war, which somewhat confirms your comments regarding the situation in other nations. I have a sense, from university data, j-stor and Academia, that things are moving positively in India, France, the island of Ireland and the United States, but have no knowledge whatsoever of the level of state of academic studies in relation to the Great War in, say, Italy, Austria or the Middle Eastern countries. Of course, in consideration of this, we always have to bear in mind that any research, be it unofficial, hobby-based or formal, is conducted by human beings, and that there may be sound economic, cultural or political influences which mean that for people in certain parts of the world the study of a century-old conflict is of very low importance.

As for your example of really quite awful general ignorance, illustrated by those planks who choose to make some quite strange comments on Jim's Gallipoli page (I've seen them....and he has quite rightly attempted to shame some of them into refraining from putting finger to keypad)...well, it seems like John Terraine's battle continues ad nauseum . I run a little WW1 Facebook page myself; nothing special, I don't pay them to "boost" posts, try not to offer any long essays but, wherever possible, do attempt to add a little perspective in my comments on the photographs and images uploaded. Most of those who follow the site tend to limit their comments to "RIP", "brave lads", etc, but I've had my fair share of those who simply use the reply button to verbally castrate a certain Scottish C-in-C. I used to delete the latter, but have now decided to let them stand....maybe ignorance is better illustrated when it is shown alongside illustrations that offer alternative views and explanations...

 

Andy

 

On 22/08/2023 at 14:29, Chris_Baker said:

Well observed, Andy.

For my part, I agreed with Jan's assertion about lack of new research as I believe he was mainly speaking of the situation in Belgium, France and Germany (he will no doubt correct me if I am wrong in this). It may just be because it is not so visible to me, but I just do not see the traction that academic study of the subject has gained in the UK. It's not zero, but it's not too widespread. We can all thinks of all sorts of reasons why that may be, but I feel it is a shame, nonetheless.

As far as education of the public is concerned, and whether the money spent on the centenary had any long-lasting effect, I pick out an example. Jim Grundy runs an absolutely stellar page on Facebook, all about the Gallipoli campaign. It is in-depth, well researched, quotes the sources, etc. One of the best such examples out there in social medialand. The responses and comments that it gathers make your eyes water. The sustained level of ignorance and prejudice is simply astonishing. Jim needs a medal in keeping his cool. Now, who knows who the respondees are: you might argue that anyone responding on a social media page is not representative of all and that may well be true, but they were interested enough to find and read a Gallipoli article in the first place. 

Thank you, Chris. I admit that my understanding of current academic research into the conflict is somewhat limited to that undertaken in the UK and, within this parameter, on British and Commonwealth aspects of the war, which somewhat confirms your comments regarding the situation in other nations. I have a sense, from university data, j-stor and Academia, that things are moving positively in India, France, the island of Ireland and the United States, but have no knowledge whatsoever of the level of state of academic studies in relation to the Great War in, say, Italy, Austria or the Middle Eastern countries. Of course, in consideration of this, we always have to bear in mind that any research, be it unofficial, hobby-based or formal, is conducted by human beings, and that there may be sound economic, cultural or political influences which mean that for people in certain parts of the world the study of a century-old conflict is of very low importance.

As for your example of really quite awful general ignorance, illustrated by those planks who choose to make some quite strange comments on Jim's Gallipoli page (I've seen them....and he has quite rightly attempted to shame some of them into refraining from putting finger to keypad)...well, it seems like John Terraine's battle continues ad nauseum . I run a little WW1 Facebook page myself; nothing special, I don't pay them to "boost" posts, try not to offer any long essays but, wherever possible, do attempt to add a little perspective in my comments on the photographs and images uploaded. Most of those who follow the site tend to limit their comments to "RIP", "brave lads", etc, but I've had my fair share of those who simply use the reply button to verbally castrate a certain Scottish C-in-C. I used to delete the latter, but have now decided to let them stand....maybe ignorance is better illustrated when it is shown alongside illustrations that offer alternative views and explanations...

 

Andy

 

On 22/08/2023 at 14:29, Chris_Baker said:

Well observed, Andy.

For my part, I agreed with Jan's assertion about lack of new research as I believe he was mainly speaking of the situation in Belgium, France and Germany (he will no doubt correct me if I am wrong in this). It may just be because it is not so visible to me, but I just do not see the traction that academic study of the subject has gained in the UK. It's not zero, but it's not too widespread. We can all thinks of all sorts of reasons why that may be, but I feel it is a shame, nonetheless.

As far as education of the public is concerned, and whether the money spent on the centenary had any long-lasting effect, I pick out an example. Jim Grundy runs an absolutely stellar page on Facebook, all about the Gallipoli campaign. It is in-depth, well researched, quotes the sources, etc. One of the best such examples out there in social medialand. The responses and comments that it gathers make your eyes water. The sustained level of ignorance and prejudice is simply astonishing. Jim needs a medal in keeping his cool. Now, who knows who the respondees are: you might argue that anyone responding on a social media page is not representative of all and that may well be true, but they were interested enough to find and read a Gallipoli article in the first place. 

Thank you, Chris. I admit that my understanding of current academic research into the conflict is somewhat limited to that undertaken in the UK and, within this parameter, on British and Commonwealth aspects of the war, which somewhat confirms your comments regarding the situation in other nations. I have a sense, from university data, j-stor and Academia, that things are moving positively in India, France, the island of Ireland and the United States, but have no knowledge whatsoever of the level of state of academic studies in relation to the Great War in, say, Italy, Austria or the Middle Eastern countries. Of course, in consideration of this, we always have to bear in mind that any research, be it unofficial, hobby-based or formal, is conducted by human beings, and that there may be sound economic, cultural or political influences which mean that for people in certain parts of the world the study of a century-old conflict is of very low importance.

As for your example of really quite awful general ignorance, illustrated by those planks who choose to make some quite strange comments on Jim's Gallipoli page (I've seen them....and he has quite rightly attempted to shame some of them into refraining from putting finger to keypad)...well, it seems like John Terraine's battle continues ad nauseum . I run a little WW1 Facebook page myself; nothing special, I don't pay them to "boost" posts, try not to offer any long essays but, wherever possible, do attempt to add a little perspective in my comments on the photographs and images uploaded. Most of those who follow the site tend to limit their comments to "RIP", "brave lads", etc, but I've had my fair share of those who simply use the reply button to verbally castrate a certain Scottish C-in-C. I used to delete the latter, but have now decided to let them stand....maybe ignorance is better illustrated when it is shown alongside illustrations that offer alternative views and explanations...

 

Andy

 

[Dave1346]

On 09/05/2023 at 11:34, Chris_Baker said:

In your view, did these things make any difference in the long run to people's knowledge or appreciation of our history?

I'm American. Although the United States has a WW1 Commission that established a memorial, I don't recall seeing anything in the news to commemorate the centennial of the war. For us that would have been 2017 since the US didn't enter the war until April 6, 1917 after Congress declared war on Germany. Although I was taught during the 1960's that the U.S. entered the war after the sinking of the Lusitania, I have since learned that this was factually inaccurate since the Lusitania was sunk in 1915. The U.S. entered the war after communications between the German Foreign Minister, Aruthr Zimmerman and a German minister in Mexico was intercepted and decoded by British intelligence. The Germans were trying to get Mexico to declare war on the United States.  If they had been successful, the United States would likely have prioritized fighting the Mexicans instead of sending troops to Europe.

Here is a translated copy of the telegram that Zimmerman sent:

FROM 2nd from London # 5747.

"We intend to begin on the first of February unrestricted submarine warfare. We shall endeavor in spite of this to keep the United States of America neutral. In the event of this not succeeding, we make Mexico a proposal or alliance on the following basis: make war together, make peace together, generous financial support and an understanding on our part that Mexico is to reconquer the lost territory in Texas, New Mexico, and Arizona. The settlement in detail is left to you. You will inform the President of the above most secretly as soon as the outbreak of war with the United States of America is certain and add the suggestion that he should, on his own initiative, invite Japan to immediate adherence and at the same time mediate between Japan and ourselves. Please call the President's attention to the fact that the ruthless employment of our submarines now offers the prospect of compelling England in a few months to make peace." Signed, ZIMMERMAN

Four million Americans ultimately served in the U.S. Army with an additional 800,000 serving in other military service branches (Navy and Marines). 

In terms of whether or not the efforts of the WW1 Commission helped in the long run to add to people's knowledge or to build upon their appreciation of our shared history, I would think these efforts were largely inconsequential outside of a handful of academics or anyone interested in military history. 

[Kimberley John Lindsay]

Dear All, and Andy,

Yes, I sympathise.

Admittedly, my Great War research efforts are purely personal:-

My Grandfather (Capt & Coy Cdr 53 Bn AIF; Wounded Peronne, 1 Sep 1918. MC), and his brothers (one ALH KiA Palestine).

Latterly, the mainly IARO who had Great War Service and whose medals I possess. I also have Grandfather's medals.

Kindest regards,

Kim.

[Alisonmallen62]

I think for a short time surrounding the centenary we got involved and interested and it was a bit like how everyday folks came together for the war effort.  Tv programmes were factual and fascinating and I personally would like more so hopefully there are some budding makers out there.  It is maybe cheaper or easier way to reach the masses - our younger generations too.  Local projects were often thought provoking.  Seeing soldiers in town or on station platforms conjured up imaginations.  I experienced an insight into what it might have been like for our relative going to war by train from New Street Birmingham alongside his comrades.  Can’t we do it again ten years on from the centenary efforts?

I realise it could well be down to funding but sad if it was all a one off. 

On a personal level I have now visited places my grandfather fought in ww2 but haven’t seen where his stepfather and my husbands grandfather fought in ww1.  How many are like that? Battlefield tours are available but in today’s world are not always affordable to families and some wouldn’t know where to start. 
 My own history education at school was boring, the teacher uninspired and lacking knowledge as I still see today.  There were staff who taught me and others I worked with who had war service.  How I wish I had been confident enough to approach them and ask.  Although I did become keen and have never stopped learning and remembering when I walked round former military buildings and war graves.  I started to research the names on graves and wanted to know who perhaps had lived in my house and served. It was also incredible to have a grandfather willing to tell me no less fascinating stories but those that didn’t make the history books and were not part of famous battles.  Whilst he was heavily part of well known battles he also told the stories of the butcher and his wife who carried a trench mortar and ammo for him and his friends who were all drunk but had to move on.  The Italian mama who they helped feed her family with stolen chickens. Not just my generation but my parents generation could have used such opportunities to bring to life their own family histories. Too many were brought up with ‘don’t mention the war’ and whilst poignantly understandable what a loss of information too.

I think a lot of interest and knowledge was put out there with the activities ten years ago.  Let’s continue to make history more personal and keep the memory going. There is a place for some inspired programme makers to get a new series on tv. I hear too often ‘history is boring’ it shouldn’t be! How about ‘who lived in a house like this?’ As a more light hearted example but it is up to us with an interest to keep the ball rolling. 

It sometimes takes one family member to go back and look at ancestors and discover their part in our lives.  The bog standard Joe bloggs who stopped making car parts and made armaments instead, the mother who dug fields and planted veg to feed not just her own but others, the mine managers wife who became a VAD.  So much to still find out! Remembrance isn’t always about a parade or poppies whilst my own belief is that should continue.  When you read a name on a memorial go research it and discover the life.

  I have a friend on the memorial at the Arboretum in Alrewas.  Those visiting will see it perhaps while going up and down the columns.  He lost his life in a campaign when we had not long left school. Just like the first and second war memorials though how many will really see more than an initial and surname, will they wonder enough to ask more?  
 

whilst I agree with many points posted before mine  I think we can do more or at least have a rerun of some worthwhile events.  Would governments support it I wonder? 

[Keith_history_buff]

On 09/05/2023 at 19:34, Chris_Baker said:

In your view, did these things make any difference in the long run to people's knowledge or appreciation of our history?

I think the most telling comment on this thread is the idiocy that gets posted as comments on the "Gallipoli, 1915" group on Facebook, notwithstanding the fact it is probably the best WW1 themed group, given the high quality source-based content posted by Jim Grundy et al.

The "WW1 Buffs" group on Facebook, which has had an increased membership since COVID, to its detriment, can take the crown for comments of which the 'sustained level of ignorance and prejudice is simply astonishing.' 

• "Everyone in this photo would have died in 1916, everybody died"
• "This man was executed by firing squad because he deserted his post"
• "Every Australian/New Zealander/Canadian was an elite soldier" according to the bogan or hoser that posted their nationalistic nonsense, and has based their historiography upon the generic plot of an episode of The A-Team
• "The above is because they lived the life of Crocodile Dundee / Paul Bunyan, alone in the wilderness, so they were natural soldiers"
• "It was mainly Australians and Irish that died at Gallipoli, as they sang Waltzing Matilda whilst they were dying" - the French participation in the campaign is ignored
• "Nothing was learned, and the tactics of 1914 continued unabated"
• "Butcher Haig"
• "My video game tells me that the AEF won the war because they made widespread use of combat shotguns in the trenches"

 Repeat ad-nauseum.

The "lions led by donkeys" narrative does seem to be well-entrenched, and shows little sign of being challenged by the mainstream.

On 09/05/2023 at 19:34, Chris_Baker said:

what do GWF members think about the lasting legacy, or lack of, from the money that was spent on commemoration and the effort that went into it? All those local projects, as well as the higher-profile events... All those websites that received funding.

On 14/08/2023 at 19:58, Borden Battery said:

Separate from government reporting on itself, and with a far longer history, are the thousands of webmasters and Great War researchers (professional and amateur) and often networked through discussion forums  - which collectively - have created an immense wealth of information in an “Open Source” format of cooperative sharing and on a minuscule budget.  More in a second posting.

Borden Battery (Observations from Canada)

Back in 1986, there was the 900 year commemoration of the Domesday Book, resulting in the BBC Domesday project. The efforts of this undertaking were temporarily annulled when the legacy technology became obsolescent, and the data was inaccessible fifteen years later.

The same fate appears to have befallen the Operation War Diary project in 2019, as I understand it.

To their credit, the British Library acknowledged there would be centenary websites, and that funding would see these sites created and accessible for the centenary. They also foresaw that lottery funding would see those websites available for a finite time, and they set about collecting scrapes of centenary websites when informed, so this effort could be preserved.

In an all-too-common scenario for IT projects, the IWM launched its Lives of the First World War project. It is understood that the instigator launched the project in the same manner that a French president would commence a large architectural structure, a vanity project if you like, like a latter-day Pharaoh with their pyramid. "Build, and they will come". Without supportive sponsors and associated resources, it hobbled along. It was a success insofar as an individual wishing to build upon a profile for a family member could gain assistance from the unpaid volunteer support team, akin to guerrilla gardeners. (There are some excellent items of content uploaded by the general public, provided in a manner not too different to the manner in which items were first given to the IWM in its early days.) The fact that it contained a lot of poor quality data as provided by The National Archives UK, and many duplicates, does mean that in many instances, it won't tell you anything different to what is recorded by The National Archives UK and their dated OCR index of the medal index cards. Paradoxically, the centenary will have resulted in some corrections being made to those poor quality transcriptions, be they in the Lives of the First World War database, or within the Discovery catalogue maintained by The National Archives UK. It is always worth using Lives of the First World War to see if someone had added any content, and thereafter to cross-check against sources, as should be done with any content of a crowdsourced nature.

The National Library of Scotland has done a great job in making available digitised Army, Navy and Air Force Lists, War Office Casualty lists, as well as trench maps and ww1 photography. Similarly, the National Library of Wales's free access to its digitised newspapers was very useful for genealogical research on WW1 soldiers. 

One positive aspect was to see how Australian, New Zealand and Canadian army service records were digitised, and freely available online. Similarly, albeit fragmented, has been the patchwork efforts of local history archives of various French départements to digitise the statement of service sheets for French Army conscripts. Also, the digitisation of the ICRC records has helped. 

During lockdown, there was chagrin that the Lives of the First World War project was closed, and that those persons on furlough or otherwise could not contribute. Not so for Discovering Anzacs. I spent time adding information to profiles on this platform. Australia seemed to be leading the way; they have oodles of resourcing, so it seemed. It was a rude slap in the face when it was decided to pull the plug at the start of 2023, and I regret having taken the time to have added content which is now effectively lost. Credit where it is due, IWM did see this as something to deter users of the Lives of the First World War project. They did make the commitment to keep the data as a permanent digital memorial. This is good, even if the current setup does hide all the "story" content, and the excellent API cannot be used by mere mortals for advanced database interrogation.

Just one passing comment on UK Government apparatus. They have been happy for both the War Office Medal Index Cards and for the Ministry of Pensions records to end up in landfill. It has been in spite of them, and thanks to the WFA, that these key historic records have been retained. I have not entertained the idea of reading a narrative by a government body on the centenary, as it would be a waste of valuable time.

 

 

 

[Keith_history_buff]

On 10/05/2023 at 12:17, Dragon said:

I have no way of knowing. In my town, such interest as there was seemed to move to a realisation that the generation who recalled the Second World War was rapidly diminishing. A project was conceived, dithered about, Covided, discussed, started and then it was found that almost everyone who might have been interviewed had died. So much for learning that personal testimonies have to be recorded now, not sometime on the future 'to do' list.

There was the usual book about the dead "lads", who may well not have been lads but skilled professionals or craftspeople or very experienced adults. How patronising. It seems to me that people and aspiring authors didn't learn that actually some of those engaged in the war lived, came home and did things, and some were women.

There are the usual anecdotes on local pages, usually without any triangulation whatsoever and often distorted by repetition. While we were never going to be a nation of archivists, especially as we have to pay a small fortune to access records, there don't seem to have been many attempts to help people learn how to use resources to develop the background to a tale. Such as exist seem to be on how to trace your family history, which is understandable and valuable, but perhaps people could have been encouraged to learn how to transfer their new skills to develop local history projects linked to the centenary.

Regarding the first paragraph, there would appear to be a project similar to Europeana, albeit with a WW2 orientation, that the University of Oxford is involved with.
https://theirfinesthour.english.ox.ac.uk/home

[Borden Battery]

To add to the comments of Keith_history_buff it is important to understand personnel in any military unit tend to exhibit the nature of the society they came from.  Special Forces in modern times may be something of an exception.  In an ongoing study of all aspects of the Borden Motor Machine Gun Battery within the overarching 1st Canadian Motor Machine Gun Brigade, I have extracted numerous biographical vignettes to better understand the spectrum of humanity in this group.  Borden Battery.

"The 59 original members of the Borden Battery, all volunteers, covered the full spectrum of humanity. By war's end, the composition of the original draft had changed dramatically with one original member being lost in the final week of the war. Only four original Nominal Roll members remained with the Borden Battery; one sergeant and three privates. Only two of this group were physically unscathed by their wartime service.

As is often the case in the rapid assemblage of men from a wide range of backgrounds during the excited recruitment for war; the spectrum of skills and character can vary widely.  Some men of great promise fail to perform while others thought of perhaps average potential rise to the occasion and earn mentions-in-dispatches including being awarded gallantry medals by Field Marshal Haig.  Many of the men perform their volunteer duties and leave little record other than they volunteered, did their duty and somehow survived.  These biographic vignettes are a modest attempt to inject some character into their terse personnel records and to foster a Remembrance a century after the Great War. 

Almost 20 percent of the rank and file will earn officer commissions by the Armistice.  Some men will revert back in rank at their own request.  A total of thirteen (13) gallantry medals were awarded amongst the 56-man battery including the Military Medal, the Military Cross, the Distinguished Conduct Medal, the Croix de Guerre and the Distinguished Service Order – some medals were earned and some not. 

Many officers and Other Ranks exhibit exceptional courage and fortitude but are not recognized for their efforts – such is the nature of recognition on the chaotic battleground and within the normal politics of an organization.  Conversely, and as is typical in any organization, others will cultivate honours and recognition well beyond their true stature.  Only the now dead rank and file know who was a “Base Rat” with a case of “Dug-out Disease” and who was an “A-1” chap whom you could count on in a tight spot.

Conversely, character flaws and base behaviour was also exhibited. At least two of the original members of the Borden Battery were charged with desertion, several others were court-marshalled and/or charged with “28-day field-punishments” with one being promoted to an officer shortly thereafter. One of these characters, the last of the Original recruits of the Battery will also have his Field Court Marshal General sentence reviewed by the then General Officer Commanding (G.O.C.) Lt.-Gen. Julian Byng G.O.C. Canadian Corps. Several of these rough and ready men from the mining camps remained unpolished by military discipline but also carry with them a strong fighting character – this quality does not appear to have been overlooked by several of their officers.  Others are clearly not military material and should not have been enlisted during the flurry of activity in the latter part of 1914 and early 1915."

[FROGSMILE]

20 minutes ago, Borden Battery said:

To add to the comments of Keith_history_buff it is important to understand personnel in any military unit tend to exhibit the nature of the society they came from.  Special Forces in modern times may be something of an exception.  In an ongoing study of all aspects of the Borden Motor Machine Gun Battery within the overarching 1st Canadian Motor Machine Gun Brigade, I have extracted numerous biographical vignettes to better understand the spectrum of humanity in this group.  Borden Battery.

"The 59 original members of the Borden Battery, all volunteers, covered the full spectrum of humanity. By war's end, the composition of the original draft had changed dramatically with one original member being lost in the final week of the war. Only four original Nominal Roll members remained with the Borden Battery; one sergeant and three privates. Only two of this group were physically unscathed by their wartime service.

As is often the case in the rapid assemblage of men from a wide range of backgrounds during the excited recruitment for war; the spectrum of skills and character can vary widely.  Some men of great promise fail to perform while others thought of perhaps average potential rise to the occasion and earn mentions-in-dispatches including being awarded gallantry medals by Field Marshal Haig.  Many of the men perform their volunteer duties and leave little record other than they volunteered, did their duty and somehow survived.  These biographic vignettes are a modest attempt to inject some character into their terse personnel records and to foster a Remembrance a century after the Great War. 

Almost 20 percent of the rank and file will earn officer commissions by the Armistice.  Some men will revert back in rank at their own request.  A total of thirteen (13) gallantry medals were awarded amongst the 56-man battery including the Military Medal, the Military Cross, the Distinguished Conduct Medal, the Croix de Guerre and the Distinguished Service Order – some medals were earned and some not. 

Many officers and Other Ranks exhibit exceptional courage and fortitude but are not recognized for their efforts – such is the nature of recognition on the chaotic battleground and within the normal politics of an organization.  Conversely, and as is typical in any organization, others will cultivate honours and recognition well beyond their true stature.  Only the now dead rank and file know who was a “Base Rat” with a case of “Dug-out Disease” and who was an “A-1” chap whom you could count on in a tight spot.

Conversely, character flaws and base behaviour was also exhibited. At least two of the original members of the Borden Battery were charged with desertion, several others were court-marshalled and/or charged with “28-day field-punishments” with one being promoted to an officer shortly thereafter. One of these characters, the last of the Original recruits of the Battery will also have his Field Court Marshal General sentence reviewed by the then General Officer Commanding (G.O.C.) Lt.-Gen. Julian Byng G.O.C. Canadian Corps. Several of these rough and ready men from the mining camps remained unpolished by military discipline but also carry with them a strong fighting character – this quality does not appear to have been overlooked by several of their officers.  Others are clearly not military material and should not have been enlisted during the flurry of activity in the latter part of 1914 and early 1915."

 

Is this in the right thread?  It doesn’t seem to relate to the context. 

Edited 30 September , 2023 by FROGSMILE

[Borden Battery]

Just follows one of the tangents of Keith's WWI Buffs observations - the more truthful humanity of the participants as opposed to general stereotypes which tend to creep into historical representations.  Was it all worth it? Borden Battery

[Dragon]

4 hours ago, Keith_history_buff said:

Regarding the first paragraph, there would appear to be a project similar to Europeana, albeit with a WW2 orientation, that the University of Oxford is involved with.
https://theirfinesthour.english.ox.ac.uk/home

That looks interesting and I will take a closer look. Thank you for the link. I did share personal Great War material with another town connected with my Welsh family members. My own town heritage people sought my suggestions for how to commemorate the Great War and I composed a four page document of ideas which they then entirely ignored. One of my thoughts was that it was imperative to find some ways of engaging young people, even if the means of doing so might be thought rather "modern" to older townsfolk, but it was rejected in favour of the "traditional" ways.

They asked me to write a text-heavy panel on "The Origins of the First World War". I haven't done an essay on that since O level History and I was pretty certain few visitors would read it anyway. So I didn't oblige. I hadn't got time to do it in a way which would pass my criteria as academically rigorous, let alone interesting. 

I trained (as a volunteer, in my own time) to take oral histories about the 1939-45 war in my town. Nothing was done until almost everyone had died or was too frail to be interviewed.

 

The absolutely maddening thing is that I have a paper trail of correspondences going back several years saying that the centenary was coming up and something needed to be done, and offering to be proactive, and it all got mired in more important things, and the local paper which was going to run a monthly piece (written by me drawing on their archives) along the lines of 'this month in [town] in 1914' etc lost the journalist who was working with me and thus the material, and the centenary was eclipsed by the results of the local gooseberry competitions.  

There is only so much an interested and enthusiastic citizen can do before she drowns in cynicism, gives up and turns her attention to something else. 

 

Gwyn

 

 

 

 

 

[FROGSMILE]

33 minutes ago, Borden Battery said:

Just follows one of the tangents of Keith's WWI Buffs observations - the more truthful humanity of the participants as opposed to general stereotypes which tend to creep into historical representations.  Was it all worth it? Borden Battery

I see.  Sorry, I misunderstood, no offence intended.  I thought that the intended context was in relation to the bringing of the centenary of WW1 into public consciousness and whether that was successful or not.

Edited 30 September , 2023 by FROGSMILE

[Interested]

7 hours ago, Keith_history_buff said:

Back in 1986, there was the 900 year commemoration of the Domesday Book, resulting in the BBC Domesday project.

Not really relevant to this thread, but as I understand it, the contents of the Project will become available 100 years from 1986.

[Keith_history_buff]

11 hours ago, Keith_history_buff said:

The "WW1 Buffs" group on Facebook, which has had an increased membership since COVID, to its detriment, can take the crown for comments of which the 'sustained level of ignorance and prejudice is simply astonishing.' 

• "Everyone in this photo would have died in 1916, everybody died"
• "This man was executed by firing squad because he deserted his post"
• "Every Australian/New Zealander/Canadian was an elite soldier" according to the bogan or hoser that posted their nationalistic nonsense, and has based their historiography upon the generic plot of an episode of The A-Team
• "The above is because they lived the life of Crocodile Dundee / Paul Bunyan, alone in the wilderness, so they were natural soldiers"
• "It was mainly Australians and Irish that died at Gallipoli, as they sang Waltzing Matilda whilst they were dying" - the French participation in the campaign is ignored
• "Nothing was learned, and the tactics of 1914 continued unabated"
• "Butcher Haig"
• "My video game tells me that the AEF won the war because they made widespread use of combat shotguns in the trenches"

 Repeat ad-nauseum.

The "lions led by donkeys" narrative does seem to be well-entrenched, and shows little sign of being challenged by the mainstream.

A quote from 2008, reproduced on "WW1 Buffs" in May 2021

'The Allies launched into a 100-day advance to victory that still beggars belief and which was duly acclaimed throughout the 1920s. But many later commentators blinkered by their hatred - not a lightly chosen word - of Field Marshall Sir Douglas Haig, originating in his command record in 1916 and 1917, seek to brush over this ultimate triumph.

[Particularly pertinent to comments on the "WW1 Buffs" FB group, in the opinion of K_H_B:]

For them it was self-evident that the Germans were beaten by the naval blockade, beaten by the 'real men' (Australians or Canadians), beaten by anybody and everybody but the combined efforts of the British and French Armies that had actually battered down the iron door to Germany. They blame Haig for the tragedies of Somme & Passchendaele, and refuse to admit that he could ever have triumphed.

These are the real revisionists, tearing away at the prevailing orthodoxy of the post-war years, building their case on the quicksand of politicians' memoirs, stirred with heart rending personal accounts that naturally reflect the very real horror of any war, and all underpinned by the "evidence" of a few gifted poets howling their despair at the moon. This heady brew has become the new "orthodoxy", but says far more about our own era than it does about the reality of 1918'

Source of above quote:
1918: A Very British Victory 
Peter Hart (2008)
 

[aconnolly]

Thanks Keith

Timely post.  Vital to ensure in this age of "instant information" that the facts do indeed get in the way of an easy and perhaps "popular story".  The extraordinary sacrifice of the BEF must never be forgotten, nor should of course the Empire's contribution, but always in perspective.  And those who denigrate Haig simply choose to ignore the job he was tasked to do.

Andrew

[Dragon]

On 01/10/2023 at 01:41, Keith_history_buff said:

...heart rending personal accounts that naturally reflect the very real horror of any war, and all underpinned by the "evidence" of a few gifted poets howling their despair at the moon. This heady brew has become the new "orthodoxy"...

Carefully thought through by subject specialists in schools, ideally in a collaboration using the different expertises of English and History departments, the Great War is a period which has tremendous capacity to engage young people’s empathy and to which some of them may return in adulthood. It's important that students who encounter war poetry must be aware that when, say Owen or Sassoon describes a particular episode, the fragmentary truth of that episode is particular to the writer and that it should not be extrapolated to make a wider point about all the experiences of all the soldiers who participated in the War. But I would hope that when those young people are forced as citizens to think about war, they may do so from a slightly more circumspect standpoint from having encountered something of some people’s experiences.