Today's Itinerary and Activities
We opened the day by examining the pivotal year of 1917 and the battle of Passchendaele (3rd Battle of Ypres). First, we introduced the state of the global war in 1917 before attacking with the Canadian Corps through the slime and mud to Passchendaele Ridge. Allison led our seminar in the reconstructed village of Passchendaele, considering how the present shapes our memory of the past.
After lunch we drove south and west crossing the 1918 ground where the final battles ended the Great War, landing in the Second World War at the tiny fishing village of Puys on the outskirts of Dieppe. Here we introduced the 1939-42 circumstances that lead to the decision to launch the 1942 Dieppe Raid.
After lunch we drove south and west crossing the 1918 ground where the final battles ended the Great War, landing in the Second World War at the tiny fishing village of Puys on the outskirts of Dieppe. Here we introduced the 1939-42 circumstances that lead to the decision to launch the 1942 Dieppe Raid.
Considering peaceWhen does it make sense to think about peace in history class when talking about war? We began our day at Langemark German cemetery, and discussed how to introduce the complexity of war in the classroom by considering who wants peace and who does not. An exercise in perspective-taking must
consider the urban/rural divide, the French/Belgian differences, different ethnicities within each country and the different experiences by region. The two main questions that our group came up with to guide an inquiry like this were:
|
The role of film in the classroomSome of our group leaders highly recommend using Passchendaele and other movies in the classroom to punch holes in it, having students use the war diaries from these battles to contrast the stories told in films.
How much power does the Hollywood version of events hold over students' understandings of history? Here is a summary of Peter Seixas' article on students' understanding of history through movies - the full article reference is included and teachers who have access to journal databases through their teachers' associations may be able to access the full article. |
Where we are |
Contact Us |
Why are the losses so high at Passchendaele?
This is a question that historians wrestle with, and it is important for students to understand that it is debated.
Often the assumption is that someone made a big mistake. What evidence supports this?
The initial stages of the Passchendaele offensive are considered to be highly successful, with the Allied bite and hold approach to eating into German-held land.
After 1916 on the Somme, Germany decided not to use trench warfare anymore, no longer forming a line but using a pillbox (British term) or bunker network instead. Passchendale poses a new challenge because of this. The Allied plan is to employ Hill 70 tactics here - we need to create the conditions where the Germans come to counterattack, and force them into our kill zone. The problem is that the weather deteriorates, rendering it difficult for our observation aircraft to see the guns.
The argument among historians is whether Passchendaele is in fact a great attritional success. However, there is a suggestion that we had achieved our attritional objective in early October and could have finished. In popular history and poetry it is a disaster, but the military objectives were achieved. Was it worth the effort it took to do so with the additional difficulty the weather added? New analysis of this battle suggests that this is a way to put Hill 70 tactics into practice again, refine them, and is one of the reasons the 100 Days Campaign is so successful. Does that make it worth it?
Often the assumption is that someone made a big mistake. What evidence supports this?
The initial stages of the Passchendaele offensive are considered to be highly successful, with the Allied bite and hold approach to eating into German-held land.
After 1916 on the Somme, Germany decided not to use trench warfare anymore, no longer forming a line but using a pillbox (British term) or bunker network instead. Passchendale poses a new challenge because of this. The Allied plan is to employ Hill 70 tactics here - we need to create the conditions where the Germans come to counterattack, and force them into our kill zone. The problem is that the weather deteriorates, rendering it difficult for our observation aircraft to see the guns.
The argument among historians is whether Passchendaele is in fact a great attritional success. However, there is a suggestion that we had achieved our attritional objective in early October and could have finished. In popular history and poetry it is a disaster, but the military objectives were achieved. Was it worth the effort it took to do so with the additional difficulty the weather added? New analysis of this battle suggests that this is a way to put Hill 70 tactics into practice again, refine them, and is one of the reasons the 100 Days Campaign is so successful. Does that make it worth it?
Photo Gallery
Classroom questions
What do students today need to know about Passchendaele, if anything?
How much sacrifice is worth it to achieve a military objective?
Is it ethically acceptable to use gas on an enemy because they used it first?
How do civilians rebuild after a war?
What do you do first when all of your infrastructure is destroyed?
Who is responsible for civilians?
How much sacrifice is worth it to achieve a military objective?
Is it ethically acceptable to use gas on an enemy because they used it first?
How do civilians rebuild after a war?
What do you do first when all of your infrastructure is destroyed?
Who is responsible for civilians?