What do you think?
Rate this book
A History of the Great War #1
The Western Front: A History of the First World War
In the annals of military history, the Western Front stands as an enduring symbol of the folly and futility of war.
However, The Western Front, by bestselling military historian Nick Lloyd, reveals that the story is not, as so many assume, one of pointlessness and stupidity. Rather, it is an epic triumph against the odds. With a cast of hundreds and a huge canvas of places and events, Lloyd tells the whole tale, revealing what happened in France and Belgium between August 1914 and November 1918 from the perspective of all the main combatants - including French, British, Belgian, US and, most importantly, German forces.
Drawing upon the latest scholarship on the war, wrongly overlooked first-person accounts, and archival material from every angle, Lloyd examines the most decisive campaigns of the Great War and explains the achievements that have been too long obscured by legends of mud, blood and futility. Far from being an arena of static, stale attrition - and despite mistakes and wrong turns along the way - the Western Front was a 'cauldron of war' that saw unprecedented innovation, adaptation and tactical development.
Lloyd conveys the visceral assault of the battlefield, and skilfully moves the focus in and out, giving both the bigger picture and telling detail. He recreates the decision-making and experiences of the war as it was at the time as well as with hindsight, and in doing so redefines our understanding of this crucial theatre in this monumental tragedy.
However, The Western Front, by bestselling military historian Nick Lloyd, reveals that the story is not, as so many assume, one of pointlessness and stupidity. Rather, it is an epic triumph against the odds. With a cast of hundreds and a huge canvas of places and events, Lloyd tells the whole tale, revealing what happened in France and Belgium between August 1914 and November 1918 from the perspective of all the main combatants - including French, British, Belgian, US and, most importantly, German forces.
Drawing upon the latest scholarship on the war, wrongly overlooked first-person accounts, and archival material from every angle, Lloyd examines the most decisive campaigns of the Great War and explains the achievements that have been too long obscured by legends of mud, blood and futility. Far from being an arena of static, stale attrition - and despite mistakes and wrong turns along the way - the Western Front was a 'cauldron of war' that saw unprecedented innovation, adaptation and tactical development.
Lloyd conveys the visceral assault of the battlefield, and skilfully moves the focus in and out, giving both the bigger picture and telling detail. He recreates the decision-making and experiences of the war as it was at the time as well as with hindsight, and in doing so redefines our understanding of this crucial theatre in this monumental tragedy.
688 pages, Hardcover
First published March 9, 2021
356 people are currently reading
4510 people want to read
About the author
Nick Lloyd
14 books94 followersOne of Britain’s new generation of military historians, Nick Lloyd is a Professor of Modern Warfare at King’s College London and the author of four books on World War I, including The Western Front, Hundred Days, and Passchendaele. He lives in Cheltenham, England.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 102 reviews
July 12, 2024
“The war may have originated in the Balkans, but a sense of unfinished business hung over the main participants in the west. Germany would use the war as an opportunity to knock out a dangerous and implacable rival, while France was committed to avenging the humiliation of 1870, when Prussian forces had defeated the armies of Napoleon III’s Second Empire in a series of bloody set-piece battles. When the German Empire was proclaimed in the Hall of Mirrors in the Palace of Versailles in January 1871, uniting the German states under Prussian leadership, it marked a sea change in the European balance of power. France, now the Third Republic, lost the eastern province of Alsace and most of Lorraine and was forced to pay a vast indemnity…But France never forgot her ‘lost provinces,’ and the call to recover them was a persistent refrain in the years leading up to 1914…”
- Nick Lloyd, The Western Front: A History of the Great War, 1914-1918
Nick Lloyd’s The Western Front is the opening volume of a planned trilogy on the First World War. Unlike most multivolume histories, however, Lloyd is not executing his vision chronologically, but geographically, dividing the sprawling war into various “fronts.” It is an interesting way to go about things, and comes with its own advantages and disadvantages.
On the plus side, you get a completed story arc, following the western war from beginning to end.
The disadvantage – which I think outweighs the positive – is that you get only a fleeting sense of the interconnectedness of the war. Indeed, I’d go so far as to say that Lloyd’s method is emblematic of this book’s failure to really hit its mark. I don’t want to be mistaken: I liked The Western Front. Alas, going into this, I was looking for something to love. Instead, a vague sense of disappointment trailed me throughout.
The trouble, in my opinion, starts with Lloyd’s decision to thrust us almost instantly into the war. He uses only four-and-a-half pages to describe both the vast, immensely convoluted context that created the conditions for the First World War, and the fascinatingly intricate political maneuverings of the July Crisis, which assured that the assassination of a royal heir in a European backwater would explode in a worldwide conflagration.
At a certain level, I get it. Lloyd is presenting a military history. Nevertheless, as Lloyd himself acknowledges, you cannot separate politics from war. They are two limbs of the same tree. Knowing that, he gives you just enough of the politics to remind you that you’re missing out on a lot more. Furthermore, on a pure storytelling level, the abrupt opening is jarring. Before any time is spent giving the lay of the land, introducing the characters, or dealing with preliminaries, we are already at the siege of Liège.
The Western Front presents the war mainly from a strategic and operational level. When Lloyd talks about troop movements, he is generally discussing either armies, corps, or divisions. Even at the corps or divisional level, though, he writes in broad strokes and focuses on large objectives. This is generally helpful if you are a newcomer to the war, since it avoids the tangled alphabet soup of units moving hither and yon, capturing tiny villages or locally prominent hills. Unlike your typical narrative of the Battle of the Marne, for instance, which can make you go cross-eyed with all the marching, countermarching, and shifting lines, Lloyd lays things out with an emphasis on the bottom line. Still, by maintaining a high-level point-of-view, you lose any visceral sense of what the ordinary soldiers had to endure.
Though this is not Lloyd’s fault, I feel it necessary to add a sidenote about the maps. In short, they do not do enough to support the text. They are all static, showing only the positions of the front lines, and the armies, without ever demonstrating the movements taken in a particular battle. This made it hard to follow Lloyd when he sketched out the flow of particular clashes, such as Verdun or the Somme.
For the most part, I appreciated the scale at which Lloyd observes the war. He focuses on the big picture, and occasionally spices it up with a description of the conditions faced by the common soldier. Lloyd also does a nice job of highlighting the shift in tactics as the conflict progressed. One of his theses – which did not entirely convince me – was that the commanding generals of the First World War were more flexible and adaptable than given credit. Rather than donkeys leading lions, Lloyd suggests that the generals did a solid job of perfecting bloody butchery. Artillery, for example, improved throughout the four years in the west, moving from smaller calibers and widespread shell shortages to “hurricane bombardments,” creeping barrages, and increasingly accurate counterbattery fire. Lloyd also discusses Germany’s rather devious use of two-pronged gas attacks. First, the Germans would fire a “mask breaker” gas, something that would cause soldiers to vomit or sneeze, and thus tear off their masks. Once the soldiers were unmasked, they’d send over the lethal stuff, the phosgene or the chlorine.
In keeping with the top-down theme, Lloyd spends all his time with the generals. There are strikingly few first-person accounts from the soldiers themselves. Like a loyal aide, Lloyd sticks close to Generals French, Haig, Joffre, Foch, Petain, Hindenburg, and Ludendorff. While Lloyd makes some attempts to personalize them, he never really makes them individuals. It’s unfair to compare Lloyd to Barbara Tuchman, but when I read Lloyd’s description of General Joffre, and remembered Tuchman’s sparkling characterization of him in The Guns of August, it struck me that there is quite a big gap. The one thing that will stay with me is the enormous stress these men were under. Almost all of the major commanders – the confusingly-named French, Haig, Petain, von Moltke, and Ludendorff – had moments when they broke down, psychologically ravaged. Some recovered, others did not.
A single volume, even one focused on a single portion of a war, is going to have gaps. Here, certain events – such as the “Race to the Sea” after the halting of the German invasion on the Marne – are barely mentioned. Meanwhile, the war at sea is given only the most cursory glance.
According to the back flap of The Western Front, Lloyd is “one of Britain’s new generation of military historians.” I’m not sure exactly what this means, except that it seems to require one to wear a suit without a tie. Still, despite the complaints I’ve mentioned, I would be remiss if I did not mention Lloyd’s easy readability. If not memorable, the prose is clear, the flow is smooth. This is not nothing. I don’t mean to single out John Keegan, who seems to hold a special place in a lot of hearts, but reading a Keegan sentence is often like walking through barbed wire, constantly snagging on multiple clauses and commas. The Western Front – leaving aside the grim subject matter – was a pleasant reading experience. The five-hundred pages of text flew by quite speedily for me.
The Western Front is a bit of a “tweener.” As a popular history directed at readers mostly unfamiliar with the war, it gives a solid, eagle-eyed perspective. Nevertheless, by reducing the Eastern Front, the Middle East, and the Balkans to brief remarks (to be covered at more depth in later volumes), someone who is not at least somewhat familiar with Tannenberg and Gallipoli might find themselves a bit confused. Meanwhile, having read a fair share of First World War books, I sometimes found myself searching in vain for some new insight. In short, The Western Front struggles to find the balance between accessibility and sophistication.
All that being said, the First World War is such a vast and enthralling subject that even a bad book is usually pretty good. This is nowhere near a bad book. More than that, it is only the initial act of a three-part series. Hopefully, once Lloyd’s project is complete, The Western Front will work even better as part of a larger whole.
- Nick Lloyd, The Western Front: A History of the Great War, 1914-1918
Nick Lloyd’s The Western Front is the opening volume of a planned trilogy on the First World War. Unlike most multivolume histories, however, Lloyd is not executing his vision chronologically, but geographically, dividing the sprawling war into various “fronts.” It is an interesting way to go about things, and comes with its own advantages and disadvantages.
On the plus side, you get a completed story arc, following the western war from beginning to end.
The disadvantage – which I think outweighs the positive – is that you get only a fleeting sense of the interconnectedness of the war. Indeed, I’d go so far as to say that Lloyd’s method is emblematic of this book’s failure to really hit its mark. I don’t want to be mistaken: I liked The Western Front. Alas, going into this, I was looking for something to love. Instead, a vague sense of disappointment trailed me throughout.
The trouble, in my opinion, starts with Lloyd’s decision to thrust us almost instantly into the war. He uses only four-and-a-half pages to describe both the vast, immensely convoluted context that created the conditions for the First World War, and the fascinatingly intricate political maneuverings of the July Crisis, which assured that the assassination of a royal heir in a European backwater would explode in a worldwide conflagration.
At a certain level, I get it. Lloyd is presenting a military history. Nevertheless, as Lloyd himself acknowledges, you cannot separate politics from war. They are two limbs of the same tree. Knowing that, he gives you just enough of the politics to remind you that you’re missing out on a lot more. Furthermore, on a pure storytelling level, the abrupt opening is jarring. Before any time is spent giving the lay of the land, introducing the characters, or dealing with preliminaries, we are already at the siege of Liège.
The Western Front presents the war mainly from a strategic and operational level. When Lloyd talks about troop movements, he is generally discussing either armies, corps, or divisions. Even at the corps or divisional level, though, he writes in broad strokes and focuses on large objectives. This is generally helpful if you are a newcomer to the war, since it avoids the tangled alphabet soup of units moving hither and yon, capturing tiny villages or locally prominent hills. Unlike your typical narrative of the Battle of the Marne, for instance, which can make you go cross-eyed with all the marching, countermarching, and shifting lines, Lloyd lays things out with an emphasis on the bottom line. Still, by maintaining a high-level point-of-view, you lose any visceral sense of what the ordinary soldiers had to endure.
Though this is not Lloyd’s fault, I feel it necessary to add a sidenote about the maps. In short, they do not do enough to support the text. They are all static, showing only the positions of the front lines, and the armies, without ever demonstrating the movements taken in a particular battle. This made it hard to follow Lloyd when he sketched out the flow of particular clashes, such as Verdun or the Somme.
For the most part, I appreciated the scale at which Lloyd observes the war. He focuses on the big picture, and occasionally spices it up with a description of the conditions faced by the common soldier. Lloyd also does a nice job of highlighting the shift in tactics as the conflict progressed. One of his theses – which did not entirely convince me – was that the commanding generals of the First World War were more flexible and adaptable than given credit. Rather than donkeys leading lions, Lloyd suggests that the generals did a solid job of perfecting bloody butchery. Artillery, for example, improved throughout the four years in the west, moving from smaller calibers and widespread shell shortages to “hurricane bombardments,” creeping barrages, and increasingly accurate counterbattery fire. Lloyd also discusses Germany’s rather devious use of two-pronged gas attacks. First, the Germans would fire a “mask breaker” gas, something that would cause soldiers to vomit or sneeze, and thus tear off their masks. Once the soldiers were unmasked, they’d send over the lethal stuff, the phosgene or the chlorine.
In keeping with the top-down theme, Lloyd spends all his time with the generals. There are strikingly few first-person accounts from the soldiers themselves. Like a loyal aide, Lloyd sticks close to Generals French, Haig, Joffre, Foch, Petain, Hindenburg, and Ludendorff. While Lloyd makes some attempts to personalize them, he never really makes them individuals. It’s unfair to compare Lloyd to Barbara Tuchman, but when I read Lloyd’s description of General Joffre, and remembered Tuchman’s sparkling characterization of him in The Guns of August, it struck me that there is quite a big gap. The one thing that will stay with me is the enormous stress these men were under. Almost all of the major commanders – the confusingly-named French, Haig, Petain, von Moltke, and Ludendorff – had moments when they broke down, psychologically ravaged. Some recovered, others did not.
A single volume, even one focused on a single portion of a war, is going to have gaps. Here, certain events – such as the “Race to the Sea” after the halting of the German invasion on the Marne – are barely mentioned. Meanwhile, the war at sea is given only the most cursory glance.
According to the back flap of The Western Front, Lloyd is “one of Britain’s new generation of military historians.” I’m not sure exactly what this means, except that it seems to require one to wear a suit without a tie. Still, despite the complaints I’ve mentioned, I would be remiss if I did not mention Lloyd’s easy readability. If not memorable, the prose is clear, the flow is smooth. This is not nothing. I don’t mean to single out John Keegan, who seems to hold a special place in a lot of hearts, but reading a Keegan sentence is often like walking through barbed wire, constantly snagging on multiple clauses and commas. The Western Front – leaving aside the grim subject matter – was a pleasant reading experience. The five-hundred pages of text flew by quite speedily for me.
The Western Front is a bit of a “tweener.” As a popular history directed at readers mostly unfamiliar with the war, it gives a solid, eagle-eyed perspective. Nevertheless, by reducing the Eastern Front, the Middle East, and the Balkans to brief remarks (to be covered at more depth in later volumes), someone who is not at least somewhat familiar with Tannenberg and Gallipoli might find themselves a bit confused. Meanwhile, having read a fair share of First World War books, I sometimes found myself searching in vain for some new insight. In short, The Western Front struggles to find the balance between accessibility and sophistication.
All that being said, the First World War is such a vast and enthralling subject that even a bad book is usually pretty good. This is nowhere near a bad book. More than that, it is only the initial act of a three-part series. Hopefully, once Lloyd’s project is complete, The Western Front will work even better as part of a larger whole.
November 12, 2021
As I write this review, I find it ironic that it is November 12th, because yesterday was the 103rd anniversary of the armistice that ended the First World War. This year, I spent most of my time reading books on the Second World War; last month I read John Keegan’s book on the First World War, and now I think that World War Two gets too much attention, and that World War One is more fascinating to me. I was kind of reluctant to read this book because I had heard that this book was the first book of a trilogy that the author, Nick Lloyd is working on about the conflict. I thought waiting until the other two books were done, I would be able to read all three simultaneously. Eventually, after debating myself, I just decided to read it, and I was glad I did. For me, I have always been told that the Western Front was just one big front where nothing really occurred, and basically it was sold off to me as boring. After reading this book, I feel and believe that it was a war of constant fighting, different campaigns, a testing ground for new technology, and a front that was very important. I feel like Lloyd’s work has given me a clearer understanding of the Western Front, and he has produced a book that is set in a way where the reader can unravel the facts and the story. I have more books by my bedside for reading on the Great War that I cannot wait to get into next, and I cannot wait for the second book of this series to come out.
There were moments that struck me; in the middle of the book, in which he mentions Erich von Falkenhayn accompanying the Kaiser on the trip to Bulgaria. Falkenhayn was quoted as talking about the war as a war for Germanys survival, which I found interesting. Another point was when Lloyd discusses how the allies managed to beat Germany in terms of the material aspect of the war. I also found it interesting where Lloyd talks about how the German army was thoroughly weary at the end of the war, how the German army was ready to give up after its failure of the Spring offensive of 1918. Why did this interest me? Because I feel that these points of information shatter the myth that Germany was stabbed in the back, that the German army could’ve fought on, and/or that Germany could’ve fought onto the very end into German soil. All of these myths were later perpetuated by the Nazi’s to get the German people to fight a total war that led to their destruction, and also allowed them to take power and pursue their vile acts.
I think about how so many men died on this front, fighting for a few kilometers of ground, and how so many lives were lost to gain nothing, but then again, I am not a general, and so it is very hard for me to judge men like Douglas Haig, Ferdinand Foch, or Falkenhayn.
What interested me was how I noticed from chapter to chapter, the war changed, with the introduction of tanks, aircraft, tactics, and economic mobilization. It struck me how the nations at war began to conscript millions of younger and older people to fight, especially Germany. As the book came to its end, we eventually see the use of tactics that would become reminiscent of the Second World War.
There were moments that struck me; in the middle of the book, in which he mentions Erich von Falkenhayn accompanying the Kaiser on the trip to Bulgaria. Falkenhayn was quoted as talking about the war as a war for Germanys survival, which I found interesting. Another point was when Lloyd discusses how the allies managed to beat Germany in terms of the material aspect of the war. I also found it interesting where Lloyd talks about how the German army was thoroughly weary at the end of the war, how the German army was ready to give up after its failure of the Spring offensive of 1918. Why did this interest me? Because I feel that these points of information shatter the myth that Germany was stabbed in the back, that the German army could’ve fought on, and/or that Germany could’ve fought onto the very end into German soil. All of these myths were later perpetuated by the Nazi’s to get the German people to fight a total war that led to their destruction, and also allowed them to take power and pursue their vile acts.
I think about how so many men died on this front, fighting for a few kilometers of ground, and how so many lives were lost to gain nothing, but then again, I am not a general, and so it is very hard for me to judge men like Douglas Haig, Ferdinand Foch, or Falkenhayn.
What interested me was how I noticed from chapter to chapter, the war changed, with the introduction of tanks, aircraft, tactics, and economic mobilization. It struck me how the nations at war began to conscript millions of younger and older people to fight, especially Germany. As the book came to its end, we eventually see the use of tactics that would become reminiscent of the Second World War.
February 19, 2023
Where the War was Won and Lost.
The Western Front is the archetype of the First World War. Trenches, mud, stalemate and slaughter. It was where the war was won and lost and so it is only natural that Nick Lloyd starts his trilogy on WWI here. It is a great book. Pitched perfectly as a political and military history of the war, avoiding being bogged down in fine grain detail and too many sweeping overviews. He tells the tale of what happened in France and Belgium from
August 1914 until November 1918. The men, the death and destruction, but also the innovation and tactical developments. As the war came away from a 19th century conflict and became a 20th century one.
The book shows that it was no so easy to overcome the often criticised tactics of ‘going over the top’ following a bombardment. Progress was slow as the war favoured the defender and technology took time to catch up. Tactics did however change and with the introduction of planes and tanks, alongside creeping barrages, stormtrooper tactics and the ability to bring artillery forward, advances could finally be made. Lloyds manifesto for this book was to show the war ‘through a lens of senior commanders’ and show how these officers faced the reality of modern warfare. I honestly think he has delivered this. The reader uncovers their thoughts and anxieties, their hopes, plans and disappointments.
Lloyd covers the most decisive campaigns of the war, Mons to Ypres, to Verdun, the Somme and Passchendaele and provides a narrative from both sides, giving a rounded view of events. In revisiting previously overlooked source material, I was able to really appreciate these challenges faced and how the war developed. Lloyd’s main sim is to challenge the old narrative of ‘lions lead by donkeys’. Was Douglas Haig a butcher or victorious general? Lloyd argues the latter as he worked hard with innovation to change old habits. Unfortunately I feel these old habits took too long to disintegrate.
The book is an outstanding achievement and takes military history back to its basics. He tells of its brutality, it’s operational logics and the technology available. There is no bias or political undertone, just good fair history, written very well. Can’t wait for his next instalment on the Eastern Front.
The Western Front is the archetype of the First World War. Trenches, mud, stalemate and slaughter. It was where the war was won and lost and so it is only natural that Nick Lloyd starts his trilogy on WWI here. It is a great book. Pitched perfectly as a political and military history of the war, avoiding being bogged down in fine grain detail and too many sweeping overviews. He tells the tale of what happened in France and Belgium from
August 1914 until November 1918. The men, the death and destruction, but also the innovation and tactical developments. As the war came away from a 19th century conflict and became a 20th century one.
The book shows that it was no so easy to overcome the often criticised tactics of ‘going over the top’ following a bombardment. Progress was slow as the war favoured the defender and technology took time to catch up. Tactics did however change and with the introduction of planes and tanks, alongside creeping barrages, stormtrooper tactics and the ability to bring artillery forward, advances could finally be made. Lloyds manifesto for this book was to show the war ‘through a lens of senior commanders’ and show how these officers faced the reality of modern warfare. I honestly think he has delivered this. The reader uncovers their thoughts and anxieties, their hopes, plans and disappointments.
Lloyd covers the most decisive campaigns of the war, Mons to Ypres, to Verdun, the Somme and Passchendaele and provides a narrative from both sides, giving a rounded view of events. In revisiting previously overlooked source material, I was able to really appreciate these challenges faced and how the war developed. Lloyd’s main sim is to challenge the old narrative of ‘lions lead by donkeys’. Was Douglas Haig a butcher or victorious general? Lloyd argues the latter as he worked hard with innovation to change old habits. Unfortunately I feel these old habits took too long to disintegrate.
The book is an outstanding achievement and takes military history back to its basics. He tells of its brutality, it’s operational logics and the technology available. There is no bias or political undertone, just good fair history, written very well. Can’t wait for his next instalment on the Eastern Front.
Read
October 1, 2025Unfortunately, this book is overdue at the library and can't be re-upped since someone else is on the list for it. I will have to put it aside until that person has turned it back in. It is really an interesting and well written book and I can't wait to pick up where I left 0ff.
November 7, 2021
An intelligent and well-researched military history of the war on the western front. The book is the first in a trilogy. Another volume will certainly cover the eastern front, Italy, and the Balkans, apparently in 2024, and the other will cover the Middle Eastern and African theaters, apparently in 2027.
The book is a straightforward military history. Much of it deals with strategy, and Lloyd does a good job explaining these with care. He does a good job explaining military doctrines and how they affected the battlefield.He ably covers the impact of air power, infantry and artillery, as well as the role of Entente and German generals. His coverage of Haig is mostly positive, though Lloyd doesn’t ignore his shortcomings. Generals on this front are often caricatured as idiots or heartless butchers. Lloyd argues that some of them were, but most of them weren’t. In this version they’re more like professionals on a steep learning curve in an unprecedented kind of warfare.
The narrative is clear, readable and engaging.If you’ve read up on the Great War you probably won’t find much new material. Some readers may also wish for more maps, especially since Lloyd gets into a lot of tactical detail. If you’re looking for a discussion of why the war broke out or what the soldiers thought or were motivated by, you’ll be disappointed. The coverage of the political context is good enough, but, again, this is mostly a military history.
A rich and well-written work.
The book is a straightforward military history. Much of it deals with strategy, and Lloyd does a good job explaining these with care. He does a good job explaining military doctrines and how they affected the battlefield.He ably covers the impact of air power, infantry and artillery, as well as the role of Entente and German generals. His coverage of Haig is mostly positive, though Lloyd doesn’t ignore his shortcomings. Generals on this front are often caricatured as idiots or heartless butchers. Lloyd argues that some of them were, but most of them weren’t. In this version they’re more like professionals on a steep learning curve in an unprecedented kind of warfare.
The narrative is clear, readable and engaging.If you’ve read up on the Great War you probably won’t find much new material. Some readers may also wish for more maps, especially since Lloyd gets into a lot of tactical detail. If you’re looking for a discussion of why the war broke out or what the soldiers thought or were motivated by, you’ll be disappointed. The coverage of the political context is good enough, but, again, this is mostly a military history.
A rich and well-written work.
December 8, 2025
Pros:
1.) The French Army gets its due recognition.
2.) A competent survey of the Western Front from the perspective (mostly) of the decision makers.
Cons:
1.) Anti-German bias in the prologue and epilogue (which any bias in historical writing in this day and age is really unforgivable).
2.) The overall approach to the subject is too brief and simplified. This style is better suited to a shorter time frame (like 'The Guns of August'), or to a single battle or campaign (his book on Passchendaele for example is good). I think a volume in this style for each year of the war would also be preferable.
1.) The French Army gets its due recognition.
2.) A competent survey of the Western Front from the perspective (mostly) of the decision makers.
Cons:
1.) Anti-German bias in the prologue and epilogue (which any bias in historical writing in this day and age is really unforgivable).
2.) The overall approach to the subject is too brief and simplified. This style is better suited to a shorter time frame (like 'The Guns of August'), or to a single battle or campaign (his book on Passchendaele for example is good). I think a volume in this style for each year of the war would also be preferable.
August 18, 2025
Highly accurate and detailed description of World War 1's military strategy. Excells in the historical context, but lacks in readablility. Sentences of 4-5 lines, with a high degree of komma-usage, are on almost every page. However, I loved learning more about this topic. If you are looking for a university-level 'summary' of the Great War's battles and both Allied and German general's intrigues, then this is for you.
March 29, 2021
A well-written, concise history of the war in the west. The author is apparently planning two further volumes, on the Eastern Front and wider international war respectively; I'm looking forward to those very much.
I particularly liked the coverage of the French campaigns, as I think (Verdun aside) this is an aspect rarely covered in English books on the war. I found lots of information here that I didn't know I didn't know, as it were.
Some parts of the narrative perhaps felt a little rushed, for example the coverage of 1918. However, this was no doubt necessary to keep the book within its required length. Also, as I'm sure the author would point out, he has written more detailed books on the last 100 days, Passchendaele, and other battles.
The book provides a good view of the narrative, and is certainly a good place to start.
I particularly liked the coverage of the French campaigns, as I think (Verdun aside) this is an aspect rarely covered in English books on the war. I found lots of information here that I didn't know I didn't know, as it were.
Some parts of the narrative perhaps felt a little rushed, for example the coverage of 1918. However, this was no doubt necessary to keep the book within its required length. Also, as I'm sure the author would point out, he has written more detailed books on the last 100 days, Passchendaele, and other battles.
The book provides a good view of the narrative, and is certainly a good place to start.
November 29, 2021
It's probably not fair to rate this so low but it was too much for me. It was just a lot of information thrown out at once and everything got jumbled in my head. Too many commanders and leaders that just passed into my brain and out.
June 19, 2022
4,5 stars rounded down.
As I'm not very familiar with the First World War, it's hard to be very critical in terms of how good the arguments are. I'm still very much in the zone of getting myself familiar with the battles and people and this sure helped a lot. I've only read one general assessment of the war, and that was David Stevenson's 1914-1918: The History of the First World War.
This book is very much on from the top of the military. It avoids going too deep into the politics unless it has something to do specifically with the Western front. On occasion Lloyd ventures to other theaters, but mostly they're there just to explain where men and material also went. The book is very easy to read and somewhat easy to follow, although the characters are numerous and villages plenty. Luckily Lloyd doesn't go much below corps level, so this helps keeping up with the armies. His focus is strict and it works for the books advantage.
There are plenty of maps in various scales, although they're also all in Army level. It's nitpicking but there could've been a couple of ways to enrich the experience. Come to think that this book isn't necessary for WW1 enthusiast but to those wanting to know a bit more, easy to use maps should be essential. Also the lack of any statistical comparison in terms of tables hurt the clarity of comparison. In terms of casualties, batteries, and tanks, the numbers were there but weren't in a coherent form for ease of access nor for easy comparison.
There's going to be two books more and most likely I will buy them to understand better the Eastern front and the fighting in Balkans&Mediterranean area.
As I'm not very familiar with the First World War, it's hard to be very critical in terms of how good the arguments are. I'm still very much in the zone of getting myself familiar with the battles and people and this sure helped a lot. I've only read one general assessment of the war, and that was David Stevenson's 1914-1918: The History of the First World War.
This book is very much on from the top of the military. It avoids going too deep into the politics unless it has something to do specifically with the Western front. On occasion Lloyd ventures to other theaters, but mostly they're there just to explain where men and material also went. The book is very easy to read and somewhat easy to follow, although the characters are numerous and villages plenty. Luckily Lloyd doesn't go much below corps level, so this helps keeping up with the armies. His focus is strict and it works for the books advantage.
There are plenty of maps in various scales, although they're also all in Army level. It's nitpicking but there could've been a couple of ways to enrich the experience. Come to think that this book isn't necessary for WW1 enthusiast but to those wanting to know a bit more, easy to use maps should be essential. Also the lack of any statistical comparison in terms of tables hurt the clarity of comparison. In terms of casualties, batteries, and tanks, the numbers were there but weren't in a coherent form for ease of access nor for easy comparison.
There's going to be two books more and most likely I will buy them to understand better the Eastern front and the fighting in Balkans&Mediterranean area.
April 29, 2021
For me, this book offered a superb overview of the long series of campaigns that were waged on the Western Front. I had heard/read/seen coverage of individual campaigns and battles: but this volume has put them in context and (whisper it quietly) in time sequence (we non-experts get confused). For the first time I feel I have a clear grasp of the ebb and flow of the struggle. I also gained a fuller appreciation of the scale of the chemical warfare.
Nick Lloyd's style is extremely readable, which helps a lot.
My one complaint: the maps! The key to the maps is separated from the list of maps; and the text does not refer to them, so often I had read more than half of the section on a campaign before I fell across the appropriate map. This could so easily have been better done.
I know even less about the Eastern Front, so am looking forward to the next volume.
Nick Lloyd's style is extremely readable, which helps a lot.
My one complaint: the maps! The key to the maps is separated from the list of maps; and the text does not refer to them, so often I had read more than half of the section on a campaign before I fell across the appropriate map. This could so easily have been better done.
I know even less about the Eastern Front, so am looking forward to the next volume.
January 10, 2026
I don’t want to sound cocky, but I’ve read and watched quite a lot about World War II. Maybe it’s because of communist-era propaganda, or simply because it’s more recent, but I felt I had a decent grasp of it.
World War I, on the other hand, was mostly a blank spot for me beyond the very basics. Nick Lloyd’s book filled that gap perfectly—at least when it comes to the Western Front. Although it’s a deeply researched and detailed history, it never feels dry. In fact, it reads almost like a novel.
A few things really stood out to me:
• It’s fascinating how wars are often fought with the weapons and ideas of the previous one, with real change coming only slowly during and after the conflict. Sadly, this feels very relevant when looking at Ukraine today.
• Military strategy often seems like an endless game of rock–paper–scissors.
• It also made me wonder: can we really talk about two separate world wars, or was it essentially one long conflict with a pause in between?
All in all, a great read—and I’m already looking forward to learning more about the Eastern Front
World War I, on the other hand, was mostly a blank spot for me beyond the very basics. Nick Lloyd’s book filled that gap perfectly—at least when it comes to the Western Front. Although it’s a deeply researched and detailed history, it never feels dry. In fact, it reads almost like a novel.
A few things really stood out to me:
• It’s fascinating how wars are often fought with the weapons and ideas of the previous one, with real change coming only slowly during and after the conflict. Sadly, this feels very relevant when looking at Ukraine today.
• Military strategy often seems like an endless game of rock–paper–scissors.
• It also made me wonder: can we really talk about two separate world wars, or was it essentially one long conflict with a pause in between?
All in all, a great read—and I’m already looking forward to learning more about the Eastern Front
September 15, 2021
This book was a remarkable history of that tragedy. The death toll on all sides was astounding, around 1.4 million from both France and Germany. As the title suggests, this is mainly about the Western front of the War, but had to reference the far blown entrants in the middle east and Russia, who faced the startling future while trying to keep it enemies at bay.
The introduction of technology simply made the deaths and maimed more efficient, e.g. use of gases as offensive weapons, aircraft and tanks. The old technique of trench warfare seemed more attuned to the late rounds of a heavy weight boxing match. The result was a pulsating swing back and forth which in the end was nothing if not an exercise in stationery positioning, action - reaction, resulting in only slaughtered remains. Neither side of the original beligerants had a long standing win nor did they provide a knockout punch. The incredible persistence of the French and the entry of the Americans (AEF) plus the exhaustion of the German army and its leaders finally took it toll. As always the documented decision making and politics played a very significant role. But the biggest in my view were the ability of the on the ground military leaders of both sides to engineer and re-engineer battlefield strategy and tactics to fit the contemporaneous changing battle results and goals of the political and military leaders.
In the end, there are still the millions of men, very young men, to do hardest work and face the gravest risks. The reaping of the sown angers on both sides resulted in the horrors that followed in the subsequent 25 years.
This is a very detailed restatement of the events and worth the commitment of the time necessary to complete it. Nick Lloyd authored an outstanding work. Highly recommed.
The introduction of technology simply made the deaths and maimed more efficient, e.g. use of gases as offensive weapons, aircraft and tanks. The old technique of trench warfare seemed more attuned to the late rounds of a heavy weight boxing match. The result was a pulsating swing back and forth which in the end was nothing if not an exercise in stationery positioning, action - reaction, resulting in only slaughtered remains. Neither side of the original beligerants had a long standing win nor did they provide a knockout punch. The incredible persistence of the French and the entry of the Americans (AEF) plus the exhaustion of the German army and its leaders finally took it toll. As always the documented decision making and politics played a very significant role. But the biggest in my view were the ability of the on the ground military leaders of both sides to engineer and re-engineer battlefield strategy and tactics to fit the contemporaneous changing battle results and goals of the political and military leaders.
In the end, there are still the millions of men, very young men, to do hardest work and face the gravest risks. The reaping of the sown angers on both sides resulted in the horrors that followed in the subsequent 25 years.
This is a very detailed restatement of the events and worth the commitment of the time necessary to complete it. Nick Lloyd authored an outstanding work. Highly recommed.
April 9, 2021
One of the best and most accessible books on the subject I’ve yet read. Lloyd’s breadth is impressive, but he is true to his mission in addressing the war elsewhere only to the extent necessary to inform what was happening in this theater. He does an admirable job of giving British and American readers and appreciation for how much of the burden was borne by the French. He is perhaps too negative toward the British, but not glaringly so. His look at personages and relationships, and the changes to both over the course of the conflict, was particularly edifying. The heroes of early battles sometimes found it hard to grow into new role and in some cases less successful commanders in early conflicts redeemed themselves later, something too many narratives on the subject reduce to lions and villains. If the book has a fault, it is that he cuts through topic of vigorous debate in a few sentences, making necessary judgments and not enlightening the reader to the existence of some of these disputes, but he did tell the reader in advance that he was doing so. That’s the requirement of distilling subjects on which tens of millions of pages have been written to just 500 or so. There are better and more insightful works on specific facets of the war in the west but I’ve found few equals in tackling it comprehensively. I eagerly anticipate his next installment.
September 16, 2025
3.5
This volume stands as a substantial contribution to the literature on the First World War, offering a rich repository of information concerning the Western Front. For the professional historian, it will doubtless serve as a valuable reference; for the amateur enthusiast—such as myself—it proves rather demanding, albeit rewarding in its own right.
For those unfamiliar with the conflict, this work represents a commendable starting point—accessible, informative, and structured with clarity. In that regard, it merits a high place among introductory texts. Yet, for readers already well-versed in the historiography of the Western Front, its offerings may seem somewhat superficial. It presents few original interpretations and adheres closely to the prevailing scholarly consensus shaped by figures such as Robin Prior and Trevor Wilson. Though I broadly align with this school of thought, one is nonetheless left to ponder the necessity of this particular volume.
At times, the book gestures toward deeper analysis without quite delivering it. For instance, while the introduction of tanks is duly noted as a pivotal development, the underlying mechanics and strategic implications of armored warfare are treated only cursorily. This pattern recurs throughout: events are described competently but seldom interrogated with critical depth.
Despite its breadth—spanning nearly 500 pages—the work feels introductory in scope. Lloyd wisely avoids becoming mired in the intricate technicalities of military machinery or the geopolitical entanglements preceding the war’s outbreak. This makes the book especially suitable for general readers or those newly embarking on the study of the conflict. For more seasoned scholars, it may not offer substantial new insights, yet its narrative is engaging enough to sustain long sittings; I found myself reading well over 150 pages in one stretch with ease.
As with any such work, limitations are evident. This is the first installment in a planned trilogy, which will go on to address the Eastern Front and the broader dimensions of the land war. Accordingly, references to these theatres are brief and often ancillary. Notably, the naval blockade—arguably a decisive factor in Germany’s eventual defeat—receives only fleeting mention, which strikes me as a missed opportunity for broader strategic analysis.
Interpretative nuance is limited, though subtle judgments do emerge. Lloyd appears critical of Haig’s leadership during the war’s middle years, though his assessment softens toward the end. I found an understated irony in the suggestion that Germany’s downfall stemmed, in part, from an overemphasis on military solutions—a poignant paradox in a work so centrally concerned with military history.
Despite these critiques, I find myself drawn to the text in ways I cannot fully articulate. While I hesitate to award it the highest praise, it is with genuine anticipation that I await the next volumes in this ambitious trilogy.
This volume stands as a substantial contribution to the literature on the First World War, offering a rich repository of information concerning the Western Front. For the professional historian, it will doubtless serve as a valuable reference; for the amateur enthusiast—such as myself—it proves rather demanding, albeit rewarding in its own right.
For those unfamiliar with the conflict, this work represents a commendable starting point—accessible, informative, and structured with clarity. In that regard, it merits a high place among introductory texts. Yet, for readers already well-versed in the historiography of the Western Front, its offerings may seem somewhat superficial. It presents few original interpretations and adheres closely to the prevailing scholarly consensus shaped by figures such as Robin Prior and Trevor Wilson. Though I broadly align with this school of thought, one is nonetheless left to ponder the necessity of this particular volume.
At times, the book gestures toward deeper analysis without quite delivering it. For instance, while the introduction of tanks is duly noted as a pivotal development, the underlying mechanics and strategic implications of armored warfare are treated only cursorily. This pattern recurs throughout: events are described competently but seldom interrogated with critical depth.
Despite its breadth—spanning nearly 500 pages—the work feels introductory in scope. Lloyd wisely avoids becoming mired in the intricate technicalities of military machinery or the geopolitical entanglements preceding the war’s outbreak. This makes the book especially suitable for general readers or those newly embarking on the study of the conflict. For more seasoned scholars, it may not offer substantial new insights, yet its narrative is engaging enough to sustain long sittings; I found myself reading well over 150 pages in one stretch with ease.
As with any such work, limitations are evident. This is the first installment in a planned trilogy, which will go on to address the Eastern Front and the broader dimensions of the land war. Accordingly, references to these theatres are brief and often ancillary. Notably, the naval blockade—arguably a decisive factor in Germany’s eventual defeat—receives only fleeting mention, which strikes me as a missed opportunity for broader strategic analysis.
Interpretative nuance is limited, though subtle judgments do emerge. Lloyd appears critical of Haig’s leadership during the war’s middle years, though his assessment softens toward the end. I found an understated irony in the suggestion that Germany’s downfall stemmed, in part, from an overemphasis on military solutions—a poignant paradox in a work so centrally concerned with military history.
Despite these critiques, I find myself drawn to the text in ways I cannot fully articulate. While I hesitate to award it the highest praise, it is with genuine anticipation that I await the next volumes in this ambitious trilogy.
July 31, 2023
Thoroughly enjoyed this book. Provides a very broad but also detailed understanding of the Western Front of the First World War and does not deviate from the goal of the book of telling the story of the War from a strategic standpoint and doesn’t get caught up in over explaining any certain battle.
This book is very well researched, and very well written using language that does not baffle or look to impress the reader with eloquent language, but looks to tell the story of the Western Front so that everyone can understand.
This book is ideal for readers looking to increase their knowledge of the First World War and discover areas of the War that they would like to read and learn about in more detail.
While at times I wished that this book would go into more detail in certain battles and events of the war, I understand that as soon as the author starts elaborating on one battle, then the same treatment must be given to all of them, and it would be easy to get carried away and end up with a book 3000 pages long. However that isn’t the aim of this book and the author does an excellent job of providing broad but also detailed descriptions of events which peak the interest of the war in certain battles. For example as a result of this book I am looking to read about the battle of Verdun in greater detail.
I think that the author has done a good job of providing the reader with enough personalities to understand the conflict (from both sides) but also not included too many of the Brigade and Regimental Commanders that the conflict becomes too hard to understand. This helps to not overwhelm the reader with too many personalities to remember. Furthermore there is a “Key Personalities List” at the back of the book to flick to and help if the reader does forget who someone is, which is understandable to some as there are a lot of different names and individuals, but overall I think the author does a good job of limiting this so as. It to confuse the reader.
As a result of this book I am very much looking forward to the second in the trilogy on the Eastern Front, which is due to be released in March 2024.
BLUF: Very well researched and written book that provides a broad knowledge of the events of the First World War on the Western Front, while not favouring any battle or even side, providing all the facts of the war and enabling the reader to interpret those facts and also discover parts of the War that they would like to read about more.
This book is very well researched, and very well written using language that does not baffle or look to impress the reader with eloquent language, but looks to tell the story of the Western Front so that everyone can understand.
This book is ideal for readers looking to increase their knowledge of the First World War and discover areas of the War that they would like to read and learn about in more detail.
While at times I wished that this book would go into more detail in certain battles and events of the war, I understand that as soon as the author starts elaborating on one battle, then the same treatment must be given to all of them, and it would be easy to get carried away and end up with a book 3000 pages long. However that isn’t the aim of this book and the author does an excellent job of providing broad but also detailed descriptions of events which peak the interest of the war in certain battles. For example as a result of this book I am looking to read about the battle of Verdun in greater detail.
I think that the author has done a good job of providing the reader with enough personalities to understand the conflict (from both sides) but also not included too many of the Brigade and Regimental Commanders that the conflict becomes too hard to understand. This helps to not overwhelm the reader with too many personalities to remember. Furthermore there is a “Key Personalities List” at the back of the book to flick to and help if the reader does forget who someone is, which is understandable to some as there are a lot of different names and individuals, but overall I think the author does a good job of limiting this so as. It to confuse the reader.
As a result of this book I am very much looking forward to the second in the trilogy on the Eastern Front, which is due to be released in March 2024.
BLUF: Very well researched and written book that provides a broad knowledge of the events of the First World War on the Western Front, while not favouring any battle or even side, providing all the facts of the war and enabling the reader to interpret those facts and also discover parts of the War that they would like to read about more.
February 18, 2025
It’s hard to write a review for a book of this magnitude. I am a beginner on the subject and this was actually my first historical book. As someone who has always been morbidly fascinated with the scope, stakes, and human tragedy of war, Lloyd’s study of WWI’s Western Front (maybe unfortunately) did not disappoint. It is a harrowing read, at times.
April 28, 2025
A narrative history focusing not only on the big picture but on the people in the trenches and behind the big decisions. I think I'm giving it a 3 star on audio but only because the narrator seemed too happy reading it (if that's a thing). But overall a good addition to all the many works on World War I.
March 13, 2025
A great retelling of the most famous front in ww1, as told through the lens of the senior commanders who sent millions of kids to their death.
abandoned
July 14, 2025The book is well-written, but I'm just not interested in the topic enough to finish it.
DNF 50%.
DNF 50%.
January 8, 2025
An excellent and very readable history. I'm looking forward to reading the author's book about the Eastern Front
July 21, 2021
A complete work on the battles and personalities directing the armies and governments during World War One. The senseless killing of millions of German, French, and English soldiers over the four years of fighting due to modern weapons being applied to 19th century tactics was depressing to read.
The author does a thorough job of describing the many battles throughout the war. He points out the flawed tactics and assumptions made over the years that cost thousands off lives in battles that resulted in one or two mile advances or retreats.
Being a history "buff" I enjoyed reading the book ; however, I came away depressed when learning of all the casualties accumulated throughout the four years
April 18, 2022
This is the best narrative history that I’ve read of the main part of the First World War from start to finish. Pandora’s Box was an excellent history of the entire war, but took a thematic rather than narrative approach. Other histories have usually been too British-centric and so felt incomplete. Lloyd deliberately brings the French to the fore, having noted they tend to be neglected in British accounts (and WWI history is dominated by British writers), and the history is so much better for it. He does not neglect German, British or American perspectives either.
The main focus is on the generals and operations, but he brings in wider parts of the war for strategic context, and adds many diverse quotes of the fighting to bring in some tactical flavour, and indeed the reality of the war. I’m usually sensitive to histories being uneven in their sources or coverage, but Lloyd did really well. I thought he meshed it all together very effectively, and at no point did I find it dry or boring, despite Lloyd not skimping on any part of the war on the Western Front. I came away with a good sense of how the war progressed, which surprisingly I’ve never had before.
What did I take away?
The French army did most of the heavy lifting for the allies and was extremely capable.
Early 1918, the war still felt like a close-run thing, with all the participants except the US close to total exhaustion. Perhaps surprisingly the German Spring Offensive in 1918 probably lost Germany the war: despite the stunning success of the offensive, there was nothing they could capture that would bring them victory, so it proved pointless.
None of the generals come out well. They all seemed dysfunctional (launching an offensive just to get the upper hand in an upcoming conference with allies) and slow to learn. On the allied side, from 1915 through to to 1917, it seemed like there was offensive after offensive, each time genuinely expected to bring the desired breakthrough and end to the war, despite nothing substantively changing with each offensive (except perhaps more artillery). Therefore each ended in tremendous bloodshed, and the generals seemed surprised at the outcome. The delusion seemed incredible, also on the German side. And new technology never seemed to be decisive in its implementation. It was the new tactics that changed things in 1918.
Because of this, and the war aims and how the war came about, and the tremendous instability that the war ended with, setting the conditions for a terribly bloody century - all of that left me thinking what an incredibly stupid war it was. The only positive outcome (not covered in the book) seems to have been that more people got the vote. It led me to wonder which wars weren’t idiotic wars - there are a few, but not as easy to think of as I perhaps initially assumed. Certainly the First World War is not one of them.
I look forward to the subsequent volumes of this anticipated trilogy - though surely none will be as important as this, about the decisive theatre of the war.
The main focus is on the generals and operations, but he brings in wider parts of the war for strategic context, and adds many diverse quotes of the fighting to bring in some tactical flavour, and indeed the reality of the war. I’m usually sensitive to histories being uneven in their sources or coverage, but Lloyd did really well. I thought he meshed it all together very effectively, and at no point did I find it dry or boring, despite Lloyd not skimping on any part of the war on the Western Front. I came away with a good sense of how the war progressed, which surprisingly I’ve never had before.
What did I take away?
The French army did most of the heavy lifting for the allies and was extremely capable.
Early 1918, the war still felt like a close-run thing, with all the participants except the US close to total exhaustion. Perhaps surprisingly the German Spring Offensive in 1918 probably lost Germany the war: despite the stunning success of the offensive, there was nothing they could capture that would bring them victory, so it proved pointless.
None of the generals come out well. They all seemed dysfunctional (launching an offensive just to get the upper hand in an upcoming conference with allies) and slow to learn. On the allied side, from 1915 through to to 1917, it seemed like there was offensive after offensive, each time genuinely expected to bring the desired breakthrough and end to the war, despite nothing substantively changing with each offensive (except perhaps more artillery). Therefore each ended in tremendous bloodshed, and the generals seemed surprised at the outcome. The delusion seemed incredible, also on the German side. And new technology never seemed to be decisive in its implementation. It was the new tactics that changed things in 1918.
Because of this, and the war aims and how the war came about, and the tremendous instability that the war ended with, setting the conditions for a terribly bloody century - all of that left me thinking what an incredibly stupid war it was. The only positive outcome (not covered in the book) seems to have been that more people got the vote. It led me to wonder which wars weren’t idiotic wars - there are a few, but not as easy to think of as I perhaps initially assumed. Certainly the First World War is not one of them.
I look forward to the subsequent volumes of this anticipated trilogy - though surely none will be as important as this, about the decisive theatre of the war.
September 17, 2021
This is a very well written book. It is written in a way to compel your interest. I could hardly put it down, even though it is a book about history, not a novel. I thought the book was very strong on giving the motivations, problems, uncertainties, political posturing and other aspects of what was going on in each of the governments, primarily those of Germany, France and the United Kingdom, although the United States as well when they became more involved. If you are looking for the minute particulars of each battle, this is probably not the book for you, although it does give a good description of the battles and the forces at play. Of course, whole books have been written about particular battles. This is more a birds eye view of the battles on the Western Front, with a thorough and thought provoking examination of what was going on behind the scenes on all sides.
We tend to view history as something that is inevitable. Because the result turns out a certain way, it must have been going to turn out that way from the first. However, this book makes it clear that things could just as well have turned out much differently. Towards the end of the war, France was clearly at the end of the rope. A major German success or breakthrough could well have done them in. And how long would England remain in the battle if France was out of it, as they were also questioning why they were in the war given the irretrievable loses they had sustained and were sustaining. In my view, it was the United States that turned the tide and made Germany realize they could not prevail. Maybe it was evident earlier if they only had eyes to see, but the German generals in the west, whenever things went just a little their way, led them to have completely unrealistic expectations. For some reason, they at least initially thought they could just call a truce, retreat to their own borders, and then restart the war when they felt stronger. Completely unrealistic. Then, after spending years trying to determine what concessions they could achieve from their enemies that would end the war, they thought well, we can just call it even and go our separate ways. That they would not obtain concessions from the West, and that in fact they would end up having to pay reparations never seemed to enter their minds at least until the end was almost upon them.
Anyway, very well written and readable account of the fighting on the Western Front in the First World War. It also gave me a higher opinion of General Pershing, who with a fervent and unbending determination, established the Untied States Army as an effective fighting forces not reliant on the French or English. I look forward to the promised second and third volumes on the fighting going on elsewhere in the world during the war. Five stars, without question.
We tend to view history as something that is inevitable. Because the result turns out a certain way, it must have been going to turn out that way from the first. However, this book makes it clear that things could just as well have turned out much differently. Towards the end of the war, France was clearly at the end of the rope. A major German success or breakthrough could well have done them in. And how long would England remain in the battle if France was out of it, as they were also questioning why they were in the war given the irretrievable loses they had sustained and were sustaining. In my view, it was the United States that turned the tide and made Germany realize they could not prevail. Maybe it was evident earlier if they only had eyes to see, but the German generals in the west, whenever things went just a little their way, led them to have completely unrealistic expectations. For some reason, they at least initially thought they could just call a truce, retreat to their own borders, and then restart the war when they felt stronger. Completely unrealistic. Then, after spending years trying to determine what concessions they could achieve from their enemies that would end the war, they thought well, we can just call it even and go our separate ways. That they would not obtain concessions from the West, and that in fact they would end up having to pay reparations never seemed to enter their minds at least until the end was almost upon them.
Anyway, very well written and readable account of the fighting on the Western Front in the First World War. It also gave me a higher opinion of General Pershing, who with a fervent and unbending determination, established the Untied States Army as an effective fighting forces not reliant on the French or English. I look forward to the promised second and third volumes on the fighting going on elsewhere in the world during the war. Five stars, without question.
May 1, 2024
The Western Front of the First World War instantly conjures images of mud, muck, and awful drudgery through gas, barbed wire, and machine guns. Barbara Tuchman has forever elucidated the first months of the war in "Guns of August," and countless authors and poets have added to the collective imagination of a war fought for wrong ends by ordinary men seeking simply to live to the end of the day. Nick Lloyd adds to the impressive shelf of literature with the "Western Front," the most brilliant military history of the front currently available.
Lloyd offers a strategic and tactical assessment of the battles and campaigns fought by the French, British, Belgians and Americans of the Entente, as well as the Germans of the Central Powers. Lloyd does much to expand the aperture of the war, presenting the enormous efforts and blood expended by French forces, first under Joffre, then Nivelle, Petain, and finally Foch, in defending their homeland from the German invasion via Belgium. British contributions remain small until 1915 and the later assaults on the Somme River in 1916, but it is clear from Lloyd's telling that the French, despite suffering a contemporary reputation hit for their surrender in the Second World War, bore the brunt of the struggles of the First and performed every bit as solidly as the marches of Napoleon and Louis XIV.
For the Germans, the War remains a race against time. The longer the war devolves into stalemated trench warfare, the more it becomes a competition of men and materiel, which Germany, together with Austria-Hungary, the Ottoman Empire, and Bulgaria, is doomed to lose. Moltke and Falkenhayn fail to crack the nut of Western forces, though the Germans come close at Verdun and in the operations of early 1918. Lloyd also does a commendable service in showing how Ludendorff and Hindenburg, the quasi-dictators of 1917-18, realized the futility of fighting past November 1918 and that the "stab in the back" myth was simply military mythologizing and scapegoating.
For the commanders, the tactics obviously were far backwards of the technology, with frontal marches and spirited attacks meeting bloody ends with machine guns, artillery, and trench defenses. Amid the grime, there are leaders that recognize that new tactics are needed - Petain; Nivelle; Prince Rupprecht. Moreover, the commanders took the losses personally, with many losing sons, friends, and relatives to the slaughter of battles that only achieved meager ends.
To understand the entirety of the war from a military perspective, the English language offers no better book than Mr. Lloyd's.
Lloyd offers a strategic and tactical assessment of the battles and campaigns fought by the French, British, Belgians and Americans of the Entente, as well as the Germans of the Central Powers. Lloyd does much to expand the aperture of the war, presenting the enormous efforts and blood expended by French forces, first under Joffre, then Nivelle, Petain, and finally Foch, in defending their homeland from the German invasion via Belgium. British contributions remain small until 1915 and the later assaults on the Somme River in 1916, but it is clear from Lloyd's telling that the French, despite suffering a contemporary reputation hit for their surrender in the Second World War, bore the brunt of the struggles of the First and performed every bit as solidly as the marches of Napoleon and Louis XIV.
For the Germans, the War remains a race against time. The longer the war devolves into stalemated trench warfare, the more it becomes a competition of men and materiel, which Germany, together with Austria-Hungary, the Ottoman Empire, and Bulgaria, is doomed to lose. Moltke and Falkenhayn fail to crack the nut of Western forces, though the Germans come close at Verdun and in the operations of early 1918. Lloyd also does a commendable service in showing how Ludendorff and Hindenburg, the quasi-dictators of 1917-18, realized the futility of fighting past November 1918 and that the "stab in the back" myth was simply military mythologizing and scapegoating.
For the commanders, the tactics obviously were far backwards of the technology, with frontal marches and spirited attacks meeting bloody ends with machine guns, artillery, and trench defenses. Amid the grime, there are leaders that recognize that new tactics are needed - Petain; Nivelle; Prince Rupprecht. Moreover, the commanders took the losses personally, with many losing sons, friends, and relatives to the slaughter of battles that only achieved meager ends.
To understand the entirety of the war from a military perspective, the English language offers no better book than Mr. Lloyd's.
May 24, 2023
Recent World War 1 films such as “1917” and “All Quiet on the Western Front” seem to have piqued the public’s interest in The Great War again. It seems like the Battlefield tour folks in France and Belgium are back in business, and I’m happy about that. World War I is one of my favorite subjects, so maybe soon I’ll have some more folks to discuss it with.
Of course, when most people think of the Great War, they think about the Western Front with its trenches, barbed wire, daring air duels, and poison gas attacks. These thoughts and images are iconic in our culture still today. Nick Lloyd’s book “The Western Front,” is both a great starting point for someone who is just getting into the subject, but also a fresh enough narrative for old history buffs like me to enjoy as well.
Unlike a lot of books about The Great War, Lloyd doesn’t spend a ton of time on the context of why the war happened in the first place. Some books get so into the analysis of the political state of affairs in July 1914, that they can lose some folks before the actual war narrative starts. Lloyd provides a basic five or six page prologue explaining the causes and diplomatic maneuvers, but by the next page he picks up with the Germans marching on Belgium.
Another thing that often happens with Great War books, and military history in general, is that the author can sometimes get bogged down in the minutiae of of the movements of even the smallest formation and before long you can sometimes lose track of who is who and who went where and did what. For the most part Lloyd keeps his narrative at the operations level, telling the story of the Western Front through the eyes and minds of its commanding generals: Joffre, Foch, French, Haig, Petain, Pershing, von Moltke, Falkenhayn, Hindenburg, and Ludendorff, among others.
The result is a scholarly, yet immensely readable and extremely accessible account of the fight for the Western Front, with spot on (in my opinion) analysis of what happened when, and why. I learned quite a bit too, despite being decently acquainted with the subject. For instance, I knew that German Stormtroopers staggered the Entente quite severely with their infiltration tactics in 1918, but I didn’t really grasp exactly how close they came to achieving their big breakthrough before being reversed once again near the Marne.
All in all it was a great book and a pleasure to read. It would be a welcome addition to anyone’s Great War library!
Of course, when most people think of the Great War, they think about the Western Front with its trenches, barbed wire, daring air duels, and poison gas attacks. These thoughts and images are iconic in our culture still today. Nick Lloyd’s book “The Western Front,” is both a great starting point for someone who is just getting into the subject, but also a fresh enough narrative for old history buffs like me to enjoy as well.
Unlike a lot of books about The Great War, Lloyd doesn’t spend a ton of time on the context of why the war happened in the first place. Some books get so into the analysis of the political state of affairs in July 1914, that they can lose some folks before the actual war narrative starts. Lloyd provides a basic five or six page prologue explaining the causes and diplomatic maneuvers, but by the next page he picks up with the Germans marching on Belgium.
Another thing that often happens with Great War books, and military history in general, is that the author can sometimes get bogged down in the minutiae of of the movements of even the smallest formation and before long you can sometimes lose track of who is who and who went where and did what. For the most part Lloyd keeps his narrative at the operations level, telling the story of the Western Front through the eyes and minds of its commanding generals: Joffre, Foch, French, Haig, Petain, Pershing, von Moltke, Falkenhayn, Hindenburg, and Ludendorff, among others.
The result is a scholarly, yet immensely readable and extremely accessible account of the fight for the Western Front, with spot on (in my opinion) analysis of what happened when, and why. I learned quite a bit too, despite being decently acquainted with the subject. For instance, I knew that German Stormtroopers staggered the Entente quite severely with their infiltration tactics in 1918, but I didn’t really grasp exactly how close they came to achieving their big breakthrough before being reversed once again near the Marne.
All in all it was a great book and a pleasure to read. It would be a welcome addition to anyone’s Great War library!
August 31, 2023
I started this book on a whim, not appreciating how dense it would be, 500 pages of names, numbers, and maps. And much like the generals who started WWI in 1914, I quickly became bogged down in an attritional warfare, only able to make small dents into the book. But past a certain point, I got into my groove and once it got going, I couldn’t stop.
This book gave me a thorough understanding of how the war on the Western Front progressed, as well as helpful interludes of what was happening on other fronts and how that actually effected the course of war in France and Belgium. There’s no mistake, the was was incredibly bloody and costly all throughout, but this book also helped me understand that there was real progression. I often ask myself, “why didn’t they try it that way? Why didn’t they ever learn?” But they did learn, and the general tried to adapt their tactics to kill more of the enemy and save more of their men’s lives. This book also helped me realize how close the Allies came to collapse during the Michael Offensive in Spring 1918, and how late the Americans joined the conflict, a distinct American army only entering the line in June and July that same year. But their entry was decisive. I never realized how much territory the Allies recaptured in the final three months of the war, rolling the Germans back halfway across Belgium. I also now realize how much a lie the “Stab-in-the-back” conspiracy was. The German army in November 1918 was nothing like the German army of 1914, or even of in the spring of 1918. It was a hollow, defeated, demoralized, starving, mutinous army, only able to act defensively. And if the war had gone on for another week past November 11th, the whole army may have collapsed. Germany was well and truly defeated.
I really enjoyed this book once I got going into it, however it is not for the faint of heart. It is dense military history, focusing primarily on Generals in map rooms around conference tables. Which is useful for getting the big picture, but may not be interesting for someone interested in the mud, blood, terror, and tedium of the trenches.
This book gave me a thorough understanding of how the war on the Western Front progressed, as well as helpful interludes of what was happening on other fronts and how that actually effected the course of war in France and Belgium. There’s no mistake, the was was incredibly bloody and costly all throughout, but this book also helped me understand that there was real progression. I often ask myself, “why didn’t they try it that way? Why didn’t they ever learn?” But they did learn, and the general tried to adapt their tactics to kill more of the enemy and save more of their men’s lives. This book also helped me realize how close the Allies came to collapse during the Michael Offensive in Spring 1918, and how late the Americans joined the conflict, a distinct American army only entering the line in June and July that same year. But their entry was decisive. I never realized how much territory the Allies recaptured in the final three months of the war, rolling the Germans back halfway across Belgium. I also now realize how much a lie the “Stab-in-the-back” conspiracy was. The German army in November 1918 was nothing like the German army of 1914, or even of in the spring of 1918. It was a hollow, defeated, demoralized, starving, mutinous army, only able to act defensively. And if the war had gone on for another week past November 11th, the whole army may have collapsed. Germany was well and truly defeated.
I really enjoyed this book once I got going into it, however it is not for the faint of heart. It is dense military history, focusing primarily on Generals in map rooms around conference tables. Which is useful for getting the big picture, but may not be interesting for someone interested in the mud, blood, terror, and tedium of the trenches.
June 22, 2024
This is the first of a planned trilogy on WWI, which looks at the war geographically. So, this deals with the war as most people think of it, within the trenches of Europe, while the second volume deals with The Eastern Front: A History of the First World War and has recently been released.
For those who are looking for a social history of WWI, they may be disappointed. Lloyd takes the view that he will concentrate on the war from the view of those in charge of running it and, in doing so, he does humanise the men who are so often seen as unable to change tactics at best and, at worst, simply wasteful of human life. It is clear that many of those in charge suffered loss and often breakdowns, unable to climb out of the morass of fighting that is literally bogged down in the mud of the trenches.
The book begins, but does not linger over, the outbreak of war, introducing the reader to those in charge. Almost before fighting begins, the troops are struggling through mud and rain. This then is the history of Mons, Ypres, U-boats, the use of gas, the Somme and the other terrible, seemingly unending battles of WWI. The loss is terrible to contemplate and the author helps to make the reasons why more understandable. I look forward to reading on and learning more about a war that I am less familiar with than the second. However, as is clear, the reasons for WWII lie in the ending of WWI and the retribution demanded by the Allies, mainly France. An excellent read and I recommend it highly.
For those who are looking for a social history of WWI, they may be disappointed. Lloyd takes the view that he will concentrate on the war from the view of those in charge of running it and, in doing so, he does humanise the men who are so often seen as unable to change tactics at best and, at worst, simply wasteful of human life. It is clear that many of those in charge suffered loss and often breakdowns, unable to climb out of the morass of fighting that is literally bogged down in the mud of the trenches.
The book begins, but does not linger over, the outbreak of war, introducing the reader to those in charge. Almost before fighting begins, the troops are struggling through mud and rain. This then is the history of Mons, Ypres, U-boats, the use of gas, the Somme and the other terrible, seemingly unending battles of WWI. The loss is terrible to contemplate and the author helps to make the reasons why more understandable. I look forward to reading on and learning more about a war that I am less familiar with than the second. However, as is clear, the reasons for WWII lie in the ending of WWI and the retribution demanded by the Allies, mainly France. An excellent read and I recommend it highly.
November 26, 2022
This is an excellent narrative history of the First World War on the Western Front. It manages to tell the story of the wars development and stalemate. It covers all the key sides - there's a lot here about the French in particular that I wasn't aware of - and it isn't just an Allied story. I recommend it highly.
You could quite easily read it as your first book on the Western Front - and I understand he has other volumes coming covering other part of the war - but even if you've read a decent amount of World War One history there's a lot of new information and perspectives here.
The way armies were smashed again and again against unbreakable obstacles still seems like a crime, but even though it took them too long to learn in the latter half of 1918 the Allies had it cracked. Helped by an enormous material advantage - something the Germans failed to learn from in 1939 - and the development of co-ordinated forces they had the Germans on the run. The one thing the book makes you wonder is whether the allies should have pushed on for longer to demonstrate the total collapse of the German Army. The Armistice allowed the military to create a myth that they weren't defeated by the Allies and that they were betrayed: 'stabbed in the back.' Add the punitive Versailles Treaty on top of that and you've got the perfect recipe for a defeated nation to make itself the victim and provide a platform for someone like Hitler to launch himself from.
But this book shows pretty definitively that the German Army was defeated. It was falling apart. To pretend otherwise seems silly.
Recommended.
You could quite easily read it as your first book on the Western Front - and I understand he has other volumes coming covering other part of the war - but even if you've read a decent amount of World War One history there's a lot of new information and perspectives here.
The way armies were smashed again and again against unbreakable obstacles still seems like a crime, but even though it took them too long to learn in the latter half of 1918 the Allies had it cracked. Helped by an enormous material advantage - something the Germans failed to learn from in 1939 - and the development of co-ordinated forces they had the Germans on the run. The one thing the book makes you wonder is whether the allies should have pushed on for longer to demonstrate the total collapse of the German Army. The Armistice allowed the military to create a myth that they weren't defeated by the Allies and that they were betrayed: 'stabbed in the back.' Add the punitive Versailles Treaty on top of that and you've got the perfect recipe for a defeated nation to make itself the victim and provide a platform for someone like Hitler to launch himself from.
But this book shows pretty definitively that the German Army was defeated. It was falling apart. To pretend otherwise seems silly.
Recommended.
September 14, 2022
'The Great War'. 'The War to End All Wars'. We have all heard about the ferocity and the sickening amount of casualties on many battlefields before November 11, 1918. All those who could truthfully tell what they saw and did on the Western Front are gone now, hoping no one would ever have to experience such hell again. Unfortunately, twenty years on the world was thrust into an even greater debacle. Many people, military and civilian, blamed WWI as the root cause of that catastrophe.
This book concentrates on probably the most well-known facet of WWI--the Western Front. The political and military leaders spent four years trying to get it right. Millions died on battlefields or from disease, and yet what lesson was learned? Technology was spurred on, empires fell, and the world learned new ways to hate.
The author does a good job on this part of the war, but in limiting it to the Western Front, he also 'hides' aspects that led to that later catastrophe. Only one war was over; another was just over the horizon.
This book concentrates on probably the most well-known facet of WWI--the Western Front. The political and military leaders spent four years trying to get it right. Millions died on battlefields or from disease, and yet what lesson was learned? Technology was spurred on, empires fell, and the world learned new ways to hate.
The author does a good job on this part of the war, but in limiting it to the Western Front, he also 'hides' aspects that led to that later catastrophe. Only one war was over; another was just over the horizon.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 102 reviews