Cet ouvrage a été publié avec le concours et le ... - Cour de France.fr

limited attack; and, above all, the failure of the Germans to
maintain the momentum of their own offensives. Moreover, while
they may disagree over the capability of the tank 23 , all parties to
the debate accept the overwhelming weight of allied materiel and
that British success owed most to German failure.
Prior and Wilson produced a further examination of the pivotal
and neglected year of 1917, Passchendaele: The Untold Story, in
1996, and Peter Liddle edited a somewhat unsatisfactory study of
the same campaign, Passchendaele in Perspective, in 1997, which
has at least served to highlight the continuing debate. However,
there are also increasing number of tactical studies appearing which
can throw light on the lower levels of the command structure.
Stephen Badsey, who earlier contributed a defence of the only arm
of exploitation available - the cavalry - has also published an
intriguing tactical study of a single trench raid, while Donald Richter
has dealt with the British use of gas, also reprised in a conference
paper. There has been a study by Martin Samuels contrasting
British and German infantry doctrine, while Paddy Griffith has
followed up an interesting survey of light machine guns with British
Tactics on the Western Front, arguing for the tactical excellence of
the army by 1917. Griffith has also edited an interesting series of
essays upon tactical development - British Fighting Methods in the
Great War. One of the contributors, Paul Harris, has also added
materially to the understanding of the limitations of tank warfare in
Men, Ideas and Tanks, published in 1995. A recent thesis by David
Jordan has illuminated the evolution of ground in air co-operation
between army and RFC 24 .
The discussion of tactics raises the matter of a debate, which
appears to exist as to whether corps or divisions represent the true
level of tactical command.
In fact, the focus is rapidly moving down the chain of
command. Andy Simpson is currently undertaking doctoral research
on corps commanders, while John Bourne is coordinating a research
project at Birmingham to construct a computer-based multi -
biography of the 222 individuals who exercised permanent divisional
command, now to be extended further to include brigade
23 Tim Travers, Could the Tanks of 1918 have been War-winners for the British Expeditionary Force?
dans „Journal of Contemporary History“, vol. 27, 1992, p. 389-406; Robin Prior and Trevor Wilson,
What Manner of Victory? Reflections on the Termination of the First World War, dans la «Revue
Internationale D’Histoire Militaire», vol. 72, 1990, p. 80-96.
24 Robin Prior and Trevor Wilson, Passchendaele: The Untold Story, New Haven, 1996; Peter Liddle
(ed.), Passchendaele in Perspective, London, 1997; Stephen Badsey, The Trench Raid at Cerisy, 15
September 1917, dans «Imperial War Museum Review», N° 4/1989, p. 87-95; Donald Richter,
Chemical Soldiers, Barnsley, 1994; Martin Samuels, Doctrine and Dogma: German and British
Infantry Tactics in the First World War, Westport, 1992; Paddy Griffith, The Lewis Gun Made Easy:
The Development of Automatic Rifles in the Great War, N° 3/1991, p. 108-115; Idem, British tactics on
the Western Front, New Haven, 1994; Idem (ed.), British Fighting Methods in the Great War, London,
1996; Paul Harris, Men, Ideas and Tanks, Manchester, 1995; David Jordan, The Army Co-operation
Missions of the RFC/RAF, 1914-1918, Unpub. Ph.D., Birmingham, 1997.
142