Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ

To commemorate the 100th anniversary of 1917 the October 2017 Theme Read is on two subjects; you can read and comment on any book or books that covers a battle on the Western Front in 1917 or you can read and comment on any book or books covering the Russian Revolution of 1917, or you can cover both subjects.

I'm heading off for a few days holiday in rural New South Wales so I figured I would open this thread up in case I don't have Internet access when I need it. I will be joining the theme read early or mid week next week with this book:

The Russian Revolution: A New History by Sean McMeekin

And then later with this book:

Passchendaele: A New History by Nick Lloyd

Enjoy the rural delights, AR !
I join you on both books and add
1917: War, Peace, and RevolutionbyDavid Stevenson.
Centennial obligations, all.

I've just ordered a copy of Stevenson's new book at my local bookshop, should have a copy in a week or two. Hopefully I can squeeze it in by the end of the month :)

Sounds like a great theme. I will join you with McMeekin's book. :)

My book is PILLARS OF FIRE: The Battle of Messines Ridge June 1917 by Ian Passingham.

Betsy wrote: "My book is PILLARS OF FIRE: The Battle of Messines Ridge June 1917 by Ian Passingham."

Fantastic choice Betsy, hope you enjoy it.

Haaze wrote: "Sounds like a great theme. I will join you with McMeekin's book. :)"

Excellent :)

Betsy wrote: "My book is PILLARS OF FIRE: The Battle of Messines Ridge June 1917 by Ian Passingham."

Great choice Betsy!

Think i'll join in.

I just started reading /book/show/2... which looks at the rarely talked about British intervention in Norther Russia and the support of the Red Finns and Karelians both against the Soviets and the White Finns.

After that, my wife bought me for our anniversary, /book/show/2... , which leads up to the collapse of the Russian military due to the Revolution.

Laurance wrote: "Think i'll join in.

I just started reading /book/show/2... which looks at the rarely talked about British intervention in Norther Russia and the su..."

Two excellent books, I hope to join you with my book when I get back home from my trip in a few days.

One chapter down in 1917: War, Peace, and Revolution. It's a thematic book, modeled after Fateful Choices: Ten Decisions That Changed the World, 1940-1941. The first chapter deals with the decision to unleash unrestricted U-boat warfare in early '17.

Basically, the Chancellor's position, backed by a growing peace fraction of the SDP, weakened steadily in the face of the Hindenburg-Ludendorff team, who were adverse to a just peace, compared to a peace settlement from a position of strength. On top of that, the population's attitude - expressed through numerous interest groups - hardened during the turnip winter. The whole process took almost a year, from the sinking of the Sussex in March '16 (another Lousitania moment in German-American relations) over the Somme, when the Navy suggested helpfully attacking cross-channel troop transports.

Familiar story, but Stevenson adds numerous little new bits. For example, tough submarines became the 'war-winning weapon', neval construction orders were still mostly for surface ships. Projected numbers of U-boats on patrol at all times were always too high.

Most importantly, Stevenson sees a chance for Germany to win through submarine warfare!

Cruiser rules, as practiced by many U-boat captains even during previous periods of unrestriction. Coupled with the repulse of Allied offensives on land and the collapse of Russia, a peace of exhaustion was not impossible.

I'm back home from my short holiday and intend to start my theme book when I go for my morning coffee at my local café.

I hope the book you are reading Dimitri is good as I placed an order for a copy :)

This is from the Introduction to the book "The Russian Revolution" by Sean McMeekin:

"Fortunately for historians of the revolution, the years since 1991 have seen an explosion of research into Russia's military performance in World War 1 from 1914 to 1917 - a subject that, owing to Lenin's ties to Germany and his controversial decisions to solicit a separate peace from Berlin in November 1917, had been taboo in Soviet times. It turns out that the Russian armies were not as hopelessly outclassed by the Germans on the eastern front as we have been told. Military censor's reports, only now rediscovered, show that the idea of creeping dissatisfaction in the ranks in winter 1916-1917, which one encounters in nearly all histories of the revolution, are erroneous: morale was trending up, not least because Russian peasant soldiers were much better fed than their German opponents."

And further:

"Economic data tell a similar story. Far from there being a generalized collapse culminating in the February Revolution, the evidence points instead to a stupendous (if inflationary) wartime boom. There was a crisis during Russia's 'Great Retreat' of 1915, when it seemed that shell shortage would doom the Russian war effort, but this was brilliantly overcome in 1916, a year that saw all war-industrial production indices shoot ahead - and the Russian armies advancing on every front. The world-famous bread shortages of Petrograd in winter 1917 likewise turn out, on closer inspection, to be mostly mythical."

'Aussie Rick' wrote: "I'm back home from my short holiday and intend to start my theme book when I go for my morning coffee at my local café.

I hope the book you are reading Dimitri is good as I placed an order for a c..."

Not being published here in the US until January.. *deep sigh*

Gives you time to save up your money Haaze :)

'Aussie Rick' wrote: "This is from the Introduction to the book "The Russian Revolution" by Sean McMeekin:

"It turns out that the Russian armies were not as hopelessly outclassed by the Germans on the eastern front as we have been told."

To change the topic slightly (but there is a parallel): I was just listening to a lecture about WWII focusing on the beginning of the war in Western Europe in May 1940. The professor stated that the idea that the French were underprepared and poorly equipped was erroneous, i.e the French and the Germans had similar forces technology at that point in time (tanks etc). This is probably familiar to all of you, but it was news to me, i.e. I had always thought that there was a major difference in military preparedness.
From a more holistic perspective I find it interesting how these perceptions arise and are propagated through time and thereby become part of history. The comparison between the Russian and the German armies on the Eastern Front during the Great War seems to follow a similar pattern (based on the excerpt from McMeekin's book).

I wonder how many other erroneous perceptions that still live in our history books and cultural memory?

Very good point Haaze in relation to your comment; "erroneous perceptions that still live in our history books and cultural memory".

It was how the Germans used their forces, their tactics in regards to armour and airpower that made the difference during the invasion of the Low Countries and France, not that the allied forces were underprepared and poorly equipped (superior tactics, not superior equipment).

'Aussie Rick' wrote: "Gives you time to save up your money Haaze :)"

Hmm, for some reason it is available on Kindle on Oct 12 (but for $27 - yikes!!). Odd..?

Saving money? Mmm, but there are so many other volumes to buy....

Haaze wrote: "'Aussie Rick' wrote: "Gives you time to save up your money Haaze :)"

Hmm, for some reason it is available on Kindle on Oct 12 (but for $27 - yikes!!). Odd..?

Saving money? Mmm, but there are so m..."

I hate it when Kindle books cost more than the physical ones. They have been doing that with new release for books by people like Rick Riordan and the like. Makes me want to go kick someone in the knee. If they don't want people buying the e-version until a bit after the release, then they should just delay it.

Every dollar you save can go towards another book :)

'Aussie Rick' wrote: "Every dollar you save can go towards another book :)"

Buy used. I've written before: it's the Golden Age for used book lovers.

Manray9 wrote: "Buy used. I've written before: it's the Golden Age for used book lovers."

Definitely! It's not only green and affordable, but there are so many OOP books to discover as well. Sometimes it is fun to get a newly published book though. Besides, some specialty books can be very hard to find in the used market.

From my book on the Russian Revolution:

"Just looking at the map was enough to induce terror in Russia's neighbors. Relentlessly, as if impelled by some unshakable law of expansion, the tsarist empire had grown by 55 square miles a day - by 20,000 a year - since the seventeenth century. True, the extension of the borders left the tsar's armies with ever ore territory to defend, but it also gave the empire strategic depth, as Napoleon had learned in 1812."

From my book on the Russian Revolution. The author talked about the demonstrations in St Petersburg that occurred in January 1905 as well as the lesser known and more bloody incidents in Baku:

"Although less well known than Bloody Sunday, the clashes in Baku were fare deadlier; at least two thousand died. 'Thousands of dead lay in the streets,' wrote one stunned eyewitness. 'The odour of corpses stifled us. Everywhere women with mad eyes sought their children, and husbands were moving heaps of rotting flesh'."

After being defeated by Japan in 1905 things got worse in Russia:

"With Russia utterly defeated in war - and by an Asiatic power, which, after all the chauvinistic boasting in St. Petersburg, compounded the humiliation - it was now open season on anyone unfortunate enough to be serving the tsarist regime. 'Terrorism,' recalled one Bolshevik with relish, 'assumed gigantic proportions. Almost every day there was a political killing or an attack on some representative of the old regime.' By the regime's own estimate, 3,600 imperial officials were killed or wounded in 1905."

Haaze wrote: "'Not being published here in the US until January.. *deep sigh* ."

Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ has often pleasantly disappointed me that way, with titles for sale months before the site's listed publication date... *totally (not) surpressing a long wheee! here*

The opening of chapter 3 of 1917: War, Peace, and Revolution (p.66) connects the unrestricted U-boat warfare of Feb '17, the U.S. entry of April '17 and the resurgence of the Royal Navy's convoy system:

"With unrestricted submarine warfare, Germany took a break-the-bank gamble. Its leaders had not foreseen the Russian revolution [or the failure of the concerted Allied offensives], at any rate not at this time. Had they done so, they might've shown more caution. But they had foreseen American intervention and reconciled themselves by assuming if Britain were defeated, the war was won. Whether American entry offset the impact of the Russian revolution would depend on whether Britain survived the U-boat onslaught.

The year 1917 was the year in which the British Empire's relative contribution to the Allied cause was at its height and if it had indeed been starved into submission, France, Italy and Russia would've had to follow suit and America would've been rendered powerless to intervene"

The difference with early 1916, when Von Falkenhayn still identified the French mass army as the main threat is there. The German downplaying of the USA is sometimes incredible. It's standing army was admittedly tiny but to equally neglect the impact of the world's second largest navy...

Apparently my copy of the book; " 1917: War, Peace, and Revolution" has arrived and I am picking it up tomorrow after coffee. Hopefully I can squeeze it in to read towards the end of this month, lets see how I go.

A footnote in my book on the Russian Revolution:

"In one last flourish of revolutionary spirit, the Potemkin mutineers opened the ship's valves before disembarking, although engineers later refloated the ship. Renamed the Panteleimon to erase memory of the mutiny, the battleship saw action against Turkey in World War I, carrying out numerous raids on the Bosphorus. Captured by the Germans in May 1918, after the armistice she was taken by the British, who later wrecked her engines to prevent her falling into the hands of the Bolsheviks. The Potemkin was finally stricken from the Russian naval list in November 1925 - just days before Eisenstein's film Battleship Potemkin was released, immortalizing her."

The Mutiny on the Potemkin:

'Aussie Rick' wrote: "A footnote in my book on the Russian Revolution:

"In one last flourish of revolutionary spirit, the Potemkin mutineers opened the ship's valves before disembarking, although engineers later refloa..."

It's a great movie.

From the book I'm reading on the Russian Revolution:

"Perhaps the best evidence of this 'short war illusion' was the decree issued by Nicholas II on September 5,1914, forbidding the sale of alcohol for the duration of the conflict. In the early flush of patriotic sacrifice, the generals at Stavka had gone the tsar one better by foregoing not only drink but female company, banning women from the staff compound and conducting daily religious services. By December 1914, reality had set in: women were seen at Stavka, and wine and vodka were being served, in ever increasing quantities."

'Aussie Rick' wrote: "From the book I'm reading on the Russian Revolution:

"Perhaps the best evidence of this 'short war illusion' was the decree issued by Nicholas II on September 5,1914, forbidding the sale of alcoho..."

The dim-witted tsar banned vodka sales, when the vodka tax was a major source of revenue for the state.

'Aussie Rick' wrote: "From the book I'm reading on the Russian Revolution:

"Perhaps the best evidence of this 'short war illusion' was the decree issued by Nicholas II on September 5,1914, forbidding the sale of alcoho..."

I looked it up. In 1914, the vodka tax was 28 per cent of Russian government revenue.

A worthy sacrifice for the war effort! Maybe production picked up in the factories due to no drunk workmen?

'Aussie Rick' wrote: "A worthy sacrifice for the war effort! Maybe production picked up in the factories due to no drunk workmen?"

It probably just spurred the making (and consumption) of samogon or home-made vodka.

From the book on the Russian Revolution that I'm currently reading:

"The Habsburg armies had suffered terribly, but so, too, had the Russians, who had endured an average casualty rate of nearly 40 percent from August to December, while losing nearly a million prisoners of war. The “burn rate� for the Russian army so far, according to some estimates, was something like 300,000 losses of all kinds per month. No matter how many millions of peasants could still be mobilized, no country, no army, could maintain such a pace forever."

Manray9 wrote: "'Aussie Rick' wrote: "From the book I'm reading on the Russian Revolution:

"Perhaps the best evidence of this 'short war illusion' was the decree issued by Nicholas II on September 5,1914, forbidd..."

I've been reading of the European peace movements pre-1914 in ; Nicholas succeeded in temporarily uniting Wilhelm and Edward when he supports the peace movements - in contempt for such an idiotic move (seen through almost immediately as a ploy to allow the Russian military to recover from the disaster of 1905).

Half way through the King of Karelia and it only helps reinforce the idea that part of the issues with the White forces was their inability to rally support amongst the minorities.
The continuous 'attacks' upon the Karelian Regiment,the forcing of it to be removed from British control, as well as the deliberate spread of rumours against its British OC, just help to prove how pigheaded and out of touch Imperial Russian supporters were.

I'm joining in with Nick Lloyd's --

Passchendaele: A New History.

I hope to start that myself in a week or two, keen to hear your comments MR9.

From Nick Lloyd's Passchendaele: The Lost Victory of World War I.

Passchendaele is the popular name for the battle on the Western Front from July to November of 1917. Officially in Britain it is the Third Battle of Ypres. The Germans call it Flandernschlacht for Battle of Flanders. I like the sound of Flandernschlacht.

Manray9 wrote: "From Nick Lloyd's Passchendaele: The Lost Victory of World War I.

Passchendaele is the popular name for the battle on the Western Front from July to November of 1917. Officially in..."

It does sound catchy.

From; "The Russian Revolution" by Sean McMeekin:

"The mood among frontline troops was no less robust. On the northern front - closest to Petrograd, where Russians faced Germans exclusively - there was little sign of defeatism. Among letters sent home by soldiers in the Fifth Army in the first two weeks of January 1917, military censors noted a 'substantial rise in cheerful spirits' over the previous year. Although there was some grumbling about boredom and rising prices, the soldiers were well fed and clothed. Only 19 out of 151,963 letters from ordinary soldiers expressed dissatisfaction with food rations, and only 22 complained about the winter clothing they were issued. The most common sentiment over the New Year's holiday was that Russia would finally settle accounts with the Germans in 1917."

Again from my book on the Russian Revolution:

"The most visible signs of defeatism in early 1917 were found on the Austro-German side of the lines. During the now-traditional Christmas lull in the fighting, Russian soldiers were struck by how many Germans came across, begging for food. Germans who deserted outright spoke almost unanimously of hunger as the reason they had left. On the Habsburg fronts, it was a common sight for Austrian soldiers to 'emerge from their trenches, shouting, "Russian, don't shoot! Soon there will be peace!" Although some Russian soldiers traded their bread for cigarettes, the prevailing sentiment was less accommodating. On Christmas eve, a group of Germans on the northern front, waving a white flag as it entered no-man's-land, was mown down by Russian machine-gun fire. As one muzhik in the Fifth Army gloated, 'now our roles are reversed. Last year we were running retreating, but now the Germans are preparing to run away'."

'Aussie Rick' wrote: "Again from my book on the Russian Revolution:

"The most visible signs of defeatism in early 1917 were found on the Austro-German side of the lines. During the now-traditional Christmas lull in the..."

McMeekin exploding some myths.

He seems to have so far....

From Nick Lloyd's Passchendaele: The Lost Victory of World War I.

It seems so much of success in war comes down to reliable command and control. It doesn't matter where or when. Colonel Fritz von Lossberg joined von Armin's Fourth Army in Flanders as Chief of Staff. Von Lossberg established a telephone network through his HQ that linked all field commanders, divisions, artillery brigades, and airfields. He could, in effect, stage conference calls by plugging the lines together. The staffs could listen in and act on orders as overheard. Pretty sophisticated for 1917.

I heard in a lecture the other day that the French still used runners for messages during WW2 (1940 - just before the German invasion). Is that true? Especially after reading this post focused in Colonel von Lossberg's communication network in 1917.

Manray9 wrote: "From Nick Lloyd's Passchendaele: The Lost Victory of World War I.

It seems so much of success in war comes down to reliable command and control. It doesn't matter where or when. Co..."

I've just finished reading that same passage MR9!

"With every day that passed, Lossberg - a man who buzzed with urgency and energy - was given more time to complete his arrangements: like a chess player lining up his pieces for the perfect defence."