French Army

[Steven Broomfield]

Anybody help, please? I saw a paperback in W H Smith yesterday, on the French Army in the Great War, by a chap named (I think) Clayton. I have serached the forum but not found anything (maybe my search technique!). Does anybody know this book, and, if so (and more importantly), is it any cop?

[roger]

I haven't got the book myself but is this it?

Book

Hope this helps,

Roger.

[truthergw]

Anybody help, please? I saw a paperback in W H Smith yesterday, on the French Army in the Great War, by a chap named (I think) Clayton. I have serached the forum but not found anything (maybe my search technique!). Does anybody know this book, and, if so (and more importantly), is it any cop?

I have read this one and I thought it was very good. Of course, I have not got a wide background of reading to compare it with but I would definitely reccommend it.

[gericht 1914]

It's a pretty good account and is quite a novelty to be able to read something detailed on the French Army without relying on my English-French dictionary every couple of pages!!!

If you have an interest, I'd recommend that you get it, Steven.

Dave.

[Paul Reed]

Personally I was disappointed with it; the author's sources are largely very recent, and he relies heavily on the French '14-18' magazine, which while good, is not a primary source but the author seems to treat it as such. There is a wealth of material on the French Army, but few seem keen to use it, sadly. The fact that it is one of only a few such studies in English is about its only merit.

[Robert Dunlop]

FWIIW, I would agree with Paul. It is certainly better than nothing - as has already been mentioned, there is little else in English. The book gives a reasonable overview but I would suggest it should be seen as a taster. Do not regard it as a definitive work. For example, Clayton describes what happened to Lanrezac's Fifth Army in the Battle of Charleroi. It is useful to be aware, in general terms, of what was happening to the Fifth Army around the time that the British were moving up to, fighting in and then withdrawing from Mons. Clayton's review of the battle is very superficial and somewhat inaccurate. Another example. Clayton summarises the 'tactical offensive strategy' that he perceives involved 'rigid adherence to [the] general deployment plan, and a neglect of intelligence that warned of its dangers'. This is not a very accurate summary IMHO. He goes on to describe the inadequacies of the French uniforms and equipment. With respect to the cavalry, he trots out (pardon the pun) the usual - the colours of the uniforms, the brass helmets with plumes, and the 'gleaming front and back cuirass for the cuirassiers - were all again nineteenth rather than twentieth century, pre-industrial rather than modern'. Clayton does not balance this view with information about the the cavalry's use of radios for example, which enabled Sordet's Cavalry Corps to receive the vital order to move down, behind and then guard the exposed left of Smith-Dorrien's Corps at le Cateau. Nor does he talk about the tremendous work done by the cavalry, covering enormous distances, mounting deep penetrating raids, one of which nearly captured von Kluck, defending alongside the infantry, etc.

These examples are important, not to put you off buying the book, but to make sure you adopt a sceptical view when reading it. The book is very readable and if it does nothing else but give a better impression of the enormity of the French Army's contribution, then it is worth it.

Robert

[Steven Broomfield]

Thanks all. I think I'll risk the wrath of she who must be obeyed and her daughters and invest a few quid.