David B Posted 22 March , 2009 Share Posted 22 March , 2009 This is quite an old book first published 1894 and 1989 and reprinted 2003. I picked it up from the local library and the orig price was 19.95 pounds. The author, Terry Norman, went about the book in a professional was, easy to read although it is mainly a bit like an expanded battalion war diary, but oh the casualties, it wants to make you cry, didnt the generals in charge of the various divisions care? For example the 6th Londons came out of the 15th Sept fighting with only 38 troops still unwounded. (Ancestry war dead files seems to indicate that there were about 150 KIA on this day (one of my relatives being among them). No wonder the Maj Gen in charge was sacked for 'wanton waste of men' (he was later exonerated). All in all though I couldnt put this book down. David Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moriaty Posted 22 March , 2009 Share Posted 22 March , 2009 1894 ????? possibly 1984 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seadog Posted 22 March , 2009 Share Posted 22 March , 2009 Agree with you entirely, a very good book and highly recommended. Norman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nigelcave Posted 22 March , 2009 Share Posted 22 March , 2009 Agree with you entirely, a very good book and highly recommended. Norman He also wrote the excellent biography of Billy Congreve. It is a great loss that Terry died so tragically young. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlesmessenger Posted 22 March , 2009 Share Posted 22 March , 2009 Nigel I thoroughly agree with you. I got to know Terry well and he was a delightful character. No one was more delighted than he widown when The Hell They Called High Wood was republished. Charles M Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dycer Posted 22 March , 2009 Share Posted 22 March , 2009 The Book,is an excellent one,and tries give an overview,of the objectives that were trying to be achieved,plus an insight into the conditions that the men on,the ground,had to endure. Anyone,who had a Relative,involved,and relies,on the particular Battalion War Diary, for its take on High Wood,would wish that the Battalion received greater mention in Mr Norman's Book,but the War Diary of the Battalion,I have,that was there,only gives an indication,of the realities of the conditions,whilst Mr Norman draws upon personal reminiscences,of survivors of High Wood,to paint a graphic picture. Both the War Diaries,of Battalions involved in High Wood,plus the additional material Mr Norman found,reveals that his Book will stand the test of time. George Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David B Posted 23 March , 2009 Author Share Posted 23 March , 2009 Sorry Moriarty, my touch typing skills must be disappearing with age, of course 1984 David Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbrauerei Posted 22 May , 2012 Share Posted 22 May , 2012 Just finished Mr. Norman's book - and overall I agree with the previous reviews. I will say however, while the first 100 pages were a good overview of the objectives, they were a bit of a slog to read. The standard narrative of "this" Corps and "that" Division and the heavily re-hashed impressions of Haig, Rawlinson, Congreve et al almost made me give up before finishing 100 pages. Thankfully, once the chapters moved down to regiment, battalion, company, platoon, section, and individual soldiers in the repeated attempts to take High Wood, the book became difficult to put down. The second 100 pages graphically painted the "The Hell They Called High Wood" and the reader is rewarded for pushing through the first laborious100 pages. All in all, I recommend this book as a worthwhile read. This would make an excellent staff study just prior to visiting the battlefield itself - which hopefully I'll be able to do one day soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Fair Posted 23 May , 2012 Share Posted 23 May , 2012 No wonder the Maj Gen in charge was sacked for 'wanton waste of men' (he was later exonerated). Barter was deservedly exonerated. The plan of attack - putting the tanks through the wood - was Pultney's. Barter and his brigade commanders had protested against the plan. Pultney should have been sacked instead, but Barter was made the scapegoat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David B Posted 23 May , 2012 Author Share Posted 23 May , 2012 Charles, It would seem that all is NOT all fair in love and war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rksimpson Posted 23 May , 2012 Share Posted 23 May , 2012 I agree a good book, shocking to read of the way they treated them. My Step-Grandfather's brother was with the A&SH and died somewhere there. What a waste regards Robert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now