The Darkest Year: The British Army on the Western Front, 1917

Spencer Jones, Editor

Helion & Company, 2022

Peter L. Belmonte, Reviewer

1st Battalion North Staffordshire (Prince of Wales's)
Regiment Near Cassel, 12 September 1917

This book is the fourth in a five-volume series of books in the Wolverhampton Military Studies Series. Each of the five volumes covers the British Expeditionary Force (BEF) in one year of the Great War. The Darkest Year covers the momentous events of 1917. Because of the scope of the topic, each volume can cover only certain aspects of Britain’s war effort; series editor Spencer Jones, an accomplished author and historian, has done a fine job of selecting topics for each year. Sixteen scholars each wrote one chapter covering a different topic. Together, these give us a picture of the BEF in 1917.

In Jones’s Introduction he identifies three themes that emerge from the selections. First, the difficulties encountered by the Allies during 1917. The second theme is “the complexity of operations which the British Army undertook in 1917” (p. xxvii). Third, the chapters convey something of the learning process for the BEF. This last theme, the learning process for the BEF, comes forth in most of these essays and is indicative of all Great War armies, to one degree or another.

British Army at Hamel, January 1917

Jones leads off with a helpful essay about how David Lloyd George, British prime minister, struggled with forming British strategy in 1917. This ties in nicely with the subsequent selection by John Spencer covering General Sir William Robertson, the chief of the Imperial General Staff, and his fraught relationship with Lloyd George and other civilian and military leaders. Subsequent chapters cover such topics as junior officer training, intelligence analysis, military group cohesion, and tanks.

Some chapters also address more specific combat operations. Michael LoCicero analyzes in detail a German trench raid near Loos on 5 January 1917. While acknowledging British failures during the raid, LoCicero argues against postwar accusations that the British press and military hierarchy intentionally downplayed the poor performance of the British forces involved. Other essays examine the role of the Royal Engineers at Arras and the Royal Artillery at Third Ypres.

Royal Engineers at Work During the Battle of Arras,
November 1917

A couple of chapters address the shift from position, or trench, warfare to more mobile warfare that began with the German withdrawal to the Hindenburg Line in early 1917. Nigel Dorrington’s essay looks at the III Corps and their pursuit of the Germans during this time. His careful analysis shows that while there was some cause for criticism of the conduct of the pursuit, there was also a growing awareness of the need to alter tactics to suit this relatively new mobility. In a nice piece on I Anzac Corps during the battles of Bullecourt, April–May 1917, Meleah Hampton argues that General Sir Hubert Gough, British commander, was too impetuous and incautious, thus contributing to Anzac heavy losses. Simon Innes-Robbins’s essay on General Sir Henry Horne and the First Army gives an interesting lesson on the development of operational art during the year. Innes-Robbins also provides a helpful look at the pros and cons of so-called bite and hold tactics versus tactics encompassing breakthrough tactics.

In all these essays, the authors use a variety of sources to give us a fair evaluation of the topics. Their scholarship is sound and their writing is clear. Taken as a whole, the essays do indeed support Jones’s three themes. Especially interesting are the examinations of how the BEF adapted to changing strategic and operational conditions to shift, sometimes painfully, to a more mobile form of warfare. This agrees with recent historiography that takes a more nuanced view of the BEF, recognizing the pressures of the battlefield and of coalition warfare.

Dozens of photographs enhance the text, and many maps, some in color, help the reader to understand the action. The book is obviously well researched; if the other volumes in the series are similarly written, the series will serve to be an example of what can be accomplished with new research into all the armies in the Great War. This book is a fine addition to British World War I historiography and is highly recommended for those who are interested in the latest research on the BEF.

Peter L. Belmonte