Spencer Jones, From Boer War to World War (2012)

[bodie31]

Here is my review I recently posted on Amazon:

Jones aims to determine the extent to which the lessons of the Boer War contributed to the tactical proficiency of and "elitism" in the BEF during the first months of the First World War. He argues that the Boer War played a major role in shaping the British tactics and that although some lessons went unlearned or were neglected between 1902-1914, on the whole the conflict gave British units a tactical edge against their continental opponents in 1914.

The book is organized thematically. The first chapter summarizes the Boer War and its main features and provides much of the necessary background for subsequent analysis. The second chapter addresses the British approach to the study of war and argues that the absence of a General Staff similar to that of the French or German armies inhibited the BEF (along with its ambiguous role as both an imperial police force and an army meant for intervention in a continental war) from adopting a concrete military doctrine. The subsequent three chapters explore the effects of the Boer War on artillery, infantry, and cavalry tactics. Jones begins each chapter by discussing how each arm adapted to the conditions of the war in South Africa and then proceeds to determine what lessons were learned and the extent to which the necessary changes were made before 1914. Finally, Jones assesses how each arm performed in August and early September 1914 and concludes that BEF tactical effectiveness in the opening phase of the First World War was largely the consequence of the British experience in the Boer War. In other words, the lessons of the Boer War gave the BEF a tactical advantage over its French and German counterparts.

Jones's narrative is fluid and the thematic organization suits the study well. His thorough mining of the National Archives records is impressive and his research is complete. His analysis of the period between the Boer and First World Wars is the strongest, particularly with regard to how the Boer War sparked tactical debate within the British Army after the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-5. Generally speaking, Jones suceeds in proving his underlying thesis that the BEF of 1914 was elite due to the lessons of the Boer War. However, his analysis of BEF tactics in 1914 is oftentimes brief and incomplete. For instance, in his discussion on the infantry and entrenchment Jones argues that the Boer War imparted on the British Army an appreciation for entrenchments and field defences and argues that British infantry were well aware of the importance of deep trenches to protect soldiers from enemy artillery fire. However, Jones does not analyze how the BEF reacted to the first inception of trench warfare north of the Aisne River between 13-15 September 1914. Here, British infantry and senior British officers dug in according to pre-war guidlines but quickly learned that some lessons of the Boer War, namely that trenches should be sited at the bottom of a forward slope, were highly unsuited to war against a continental adversary. Jones does admit that the First World War changed British conceptions of entrenchment, but the example of the Aisne suggests that the Boer War did not prepare the BEF for war in 1914 to the degree that Jones believes.

Overall, this book is an important contribution to the historiography of the pre-war BEF and the literature surrounding the tactical debates of 1905-14. In most cases Jones makes a clear connection between the British tactical prowess relative to the French and German artmies in 1914 and the experience of the Boer War in 1899-1902. Most significantly, Jones demonstrates that the Boer War was a catalyst to reform and that reform itself was more thorough and had a greater impact that historians have hitherto recognized. This volume's historiographical significance, thematic organization, and fluid narrative make it appealing to academic military historians and non-academic history buffs alike.

Anyone else read this book? I quite enjoyed it, especially how Jones draws a connection between the two wars and adds a new layer of analysis to the firepower vs manpower debate.

[David Filsell]

I have ordered into the bAsis of your review, for which many thanks

David