Blindfold and Alone: British Military Executions in the Great War [Hardcover]

Cathryn Corns (Author), John Hughes-Wilson (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: December 31, 2001

It was one of the most controversial and still haunting aspects of World War One: the execution of 351 British soldiers for cowardice and desertion in the face of the enemy. Using new material that only now has become available from the Public Records Office and other sources, this compelling history sets out the facts of these courts-martial and shootings--and just as important, places them in the context of the military, social, and medical context of the period.

Editorial Reviews

From Library Journal

It hardly seems fair to place a man in hell and then to punish him when he shows fear. Yet this was standard procedure in the British army in World War I, when execution by firing squad was punishment for desertion in the face of the enemy and other crimes. Using recently released courts-martial records, clinical scientist Corns and retired British army intelligence Colonel Hughes-Wilson attempt to explain Britain's use of the ultimate punishment in terms of the military, medical, and social mind-sets of the time. The book begins and ends well, with essential background at the front and ruminative discussion at the back. In between, however, is a tedious bog. Here, the authors summarize case after miserable case, each reported in exactly the same numbing, repetitive fashion. The authors do not chronicle all 346 British military executions that took place at that time; it just feels as if they do. Words like heart-rending and poignant are sometimes used, but such emotions rarely emerge from the page. There's no flesh on these old bones, and, though it is clear that the authors themselves see the men who were shot as individuals, for us they remain only names. Nevertheless, this is a unique, important work and a valuable resource; recommended for both larger public and academic libraries. Michael F. Russo, Louisiana State Univ. Libs., Baton Rouge

Copyright 2002 Cahners Business Information, Inc.

Review

'Meticulous research backed by eloquent and elegant writing which accommodates the pressures and values of the time, disproving the First World War myth which had terrified conscripts forced 'over the top' by uncaring officers, and rear-echelon generals handing out death sentences to any who shied away.' -- Brian James BBC HISTORY MAGAZINE (November 2003) 'It is hard to describe a book on a subject as bleak as this as 'splendid' - but it is... This is a powerful, well-argued and clearexposition of the justice - both rough and tough - meted out. For the serious student of the Great War this book is a must because it exposes an aspect of that conflict's vast secret underbelly, which has been hidden far too long.' MILITARY MODELCRAFT June 2003 (also TOY SOLDIER)

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Hardcover: 352 pages
• Publisher: Cassell (December 31, 2001)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0304353973
• ISBN-13: 978-0304353972
• Product Dimensions: 9.2 x 6.4 x 2.1 inches
• Shipping Weight: 2.2 pounds
• Average Customer Review: 3.5 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (2 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #5,999,609 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

6 of 8 people found the following review helpful:

2.0 out of 5 stars WARNING! This book must be read critically, January 6, 2002

By 

B. J. O'Brien (Rotterdam Netherlands) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: Blindfold and Alone: British Military Executions in the Great War (Hardcover)

The book contains much interesting, moving and no doubt correct information about its subject. That is valuable in itself.

Corns and Hughes-Wilson don't just offer information. They also argue for a certain thesis: 'Spilled water cannot be replaced in a smashed jug' (Arab proverb), and so any idea of retrospective pardons should be strongly opposed.

The book's presentation of its thesis is so slovenly, that it would be a fine text for use for practice on a course in critical thinking. Suppose you want to form your own opinion on this controversy. Here are a few examples of the kind of obstacles Corns and Hughes-Wilson put in your way:

1 There are gratuitous sneers here and there about their opponents who advocate pardons. The reader has to be alert to separate sneer from substance.

2 In presenting one of the main pillars of their argument they rely mainly on Arab proverbs and poetic aphorisms such as 'The past is another country'. The thoughtful reader will hope to find a clearly reasoned statement of the authors' position on the tricky question of moral judgements about other times and places. But once you cut away the book's vague rhetoric on this point there is nothing left.

3 There are some whopping contradictions to be found if you keep your eyes open. For example.
The authors seem to be saying, albeit rather impressionistically, that the executions were basically OK by the standards of the time. However, the jacket of the book states that the executions were 'Controversial even at the time'.
On the issue whether executions were necessary because they discouraged mass desertion that might otherwise have occurred, sometimes the authors seem to be suggesting that this was indeed so, and in other places the opposite.

4 There is also scope for spotting important inferences from the facts which the authors unaccountably fail to draw. They state (p. 103) that 'the death penalty was used only in a minute percentage of cases', and they back this up with ample evidence. Do they conclude that those few who were executed were therefore treated unfairly - perhaps even so unfairly that they deserve a pardon? No, Corns and Hughes-Wilson don't seem to notice that this possible line of debate even exists. As a reader, you will have to spot it for yourself.

On a frivolous note, I can't resist recording that the acknowledgement at the beginning to 'our eagle-eyed copy-editor' contains both a spelling mistake and a punctuation mistake in the same sentence.

In short, recommended to two classes of reader: those who want a library of all the main works on this subject; and those who want something for a good workout of the critical thinking faculties.
Definitely not for someone who wants just one thoroughly reliable work on the subject.

1 of 2 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars An Excellent Read!, November 28, 2008

By 

Beezaman (Massachusetts) - See all my reviews

This review is from: BLINDFOLD AND ALONE (Cassell Military Paperbacks) (Paperback)

I found this book to be extremely well researched, well written, balanced and enlightening. It clearly dispels the notion of a brutal, insensitive high-command hell bent on inflicting capital punishment on fresh-faced young boys who caved in to the terrors of life in the trenches during the great war. After reading "Blindfold and Alone" it becomes abundantly clear that even the strict disciplinarians on the General Staff were willing to look for mitigating circumstances that would allow them to avoid inflicting the supreme penalty on those found guilty of then military capital offences such as desertion and cowardice.

The vast majority of military capital cases tried during WW1 did not result in the death penalty being recommended, and of those that did, approximately 90% were reduced to a lesser sentence on review by field commanders. The net result being that approximately 1% of those initially charged with capital offences were actually executed. Due to the excellent research carried out by the authors and presented in the text, contemporary readers can conclude that those who did suffer the supreme penalty, for the most part, were deserving of it. Yes, there were cases that by today's standards would be rejected on medical (psychiatric) grounds, just as there were cases (such as murder) that likely would have resulted in execution if brought before a civilian court of the day. However, many of those executed had lengthy military "rap sheets" and several had received a prior death sentence which had been reduced on review so they were no strangers to the military judicial system and its penalties.