MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1990769717 · doi:10.1353/jmh.0.0164

1917: Tactics, Training and Technology (review)

2009· article· en· W1990769717 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Peter Simkins

Notice bibliographique

RevueThe Journal of Military History · 2009
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueAustralian History and Society
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésVictoryGermanHistoryInfantryTheme (computing)OfficerFront (military)Order (exchange)LawClassicsManagementPolitical sciencePoliticsEngineeringComputer scienceArchaeology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Reviewed by: 1917: Tactics, Training and Technology Peter Simkins 1917: Tactics, Training and Technology. Edited by Peter Dennis and Jeffrey Grey. Loftus, NSW: Australian Military History Publications, 2008. ISBN-13 978-0-9803-7967-9. Notes. A$20 (postage included); A$40 (airmail postage included). Order from warbookshop@bigpond.com. This excellent collection of eleven essays by leading historians is based on papers presented at the Australian Chief of Army's Military History Conference in 2007. Although more than half of the essays focus upon the British Expeditionary Force (BEF) and its Dominion contingents, the volume also contains admirable papers on the American, French and German experience. The grim nature of the war on the Western Front, for Allies and enemy alike, in 1917 – particularly at Passchendaele in October and November – is rightly underlined and discussed throughout, but the positive aspects of those twelve pivotal months are similarly emphasised. As the editors remark in their Preface, the opposing armies on the Western Front continued, in 1917, to evaluate operational lessons in a search for better ways to wage the war and win it. Indeed, the 'technological, doctrinal and tactical advances made by 1917 and reinforced in many respects by the fighting that year laid the basis for the great Allied victory of the following year' (p. iv). The above theme is picked up by Gary Sheffield in his masterly overview of the performance of the BEF and its Commander-in-Chief, Sir Douglas Haig, in 1917. Sheffield's judicious essay examines the case against Haig for his conduct of the Third Battle of Ypres, especially his decision to continue the offensive after 4 October, as well as considering the validity of Haig's post-war claims regarding the attritional effects of Passchendaele on the German Army. Sheffield argues that, whatever mistakes Haig committed in 1917, and however severely the BEF's morale was tested, the transformation of Britain's war economy, and concurrent improvements in organisation, training, tactics and logistics, enabled the BEF to develop fighting methods in 1917 that were triumphantly vindicated a year later. In equally objective papers, Robert Stephenson and Tim Cook respectively review the results of such developments from the perspective of the 1st Australian Division and the Canadian Corps. Both essays refreshingly avoid the nationalistic 'colonial supermen' strands that permeated much Common-wealth writing on the conflict twenty years ago. Glyn Harper's essay on the New Zealand Division ends on a more downbeat note, contrasting the 'masterpiece' of Messines in June with the 'massacre' of 12 October 1917, when more New Zealand losses were sustained than on any other day in that nation's history. The 'combat culture' and fighting qualities of the BEF's South African contingent, and the impact of 1917 upon it, are sensitively assessed by Bill Nasson, even if he curiously omits to mention that, in 1917, the South African Brigade served with the generally successful and innovative 9th (Scottish) Division. Robin Prior's study of the British High Command at Passchendaele is, as expected, deeply critical of Haig, for persisting with the campaign, and Lloyd George, for failing [End Page 300] to stop it. The rather 'schoolmasterish' tone of Prior's essay is, however, somewhat at variance with the rest of the volume. Pershing, the commander of the American Expeditionary Force, likewise comes in for considerable criticism. In a powerfully-argued case, Andrew Wiest accuses Pershing of stubborn refusal to learn from the experience of his allies and a misguided adherence to outdated doctrine and tactics, thereby condemning the AEF to an unnecessarily painful learning process in the Meuse-Argonne in 1918. Two other American scholars, Robert Doughty and Michael Neiberg, investigate the nature and extent of the French crisis of morale in 1917, separately high-lighting the key role played by Pétain in the recovery of the French Army, while Neiberg justifiably suggests that, of late, the French part in the victory of 1918 has been inadequately recognised by many historians. Robert Foley's outstanding paper on the German Army not only includes one of the clearest explanations yet of the major changes in German defensive doctrine and tactics in 1917 but also discusses the growing competition...

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: Synthèse
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,430
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,241

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,042
Tête enseignante GPT0,287
Écart entre enseignants0,245 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreSynthèse

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2009
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueThe Journal of Military HistoryMême sujetAustralian History and SocietyTravaux en français237 207