While admitting that Haig was no genius, revisionist historians have argued that by 1918, he was able to co-ordinate successfully all elements of military force – artillery, armour, airpower, and infantry – to achieve a decisive victory in the series of operations known collectively as ‘The Hundred Days’. Does this argument stand up to critique? Chris Bambery tests the case.
World War 1
MHM December 2018
The December issue of MHM, the British military history magazine, is now on sale. To subscribe to the magazine, click here. To subscribe to the digital archive, click here. In this issue: Crimea: the last great charge of the redcoats, 1854 Only the incompetence of the enemy prevented it from becoming a national disaster. Neil Faulkner revisits the British […]
MHM November 2018
The November issue of MHM, the British military history magazine, is now on sale. To subscribe to the magazine, click here. To subscribe to the digital archive, click here. In this issue: The legend of Roland at Roncesvalles, AD 778 Fred Chiaventone takes a closer look at the medieval Chanson de Roland and debunks the myths relating to Charlemagne’s […]
WWI: Pershing on the Western Front
No general in American history held the kind of absolute power General Pershing wielded. With complete backing from President Woodrow Wilson and Secretary of War Newton D Baker, Pershing could shape the American Expeditionary Force, due to deploy on the Western Front of the First World War, as he saw fit. But how successful was his military strategy?
Advertisement