I thought the thesis was particularly valuable because of its fairly detailed investigation of an area which is very under-researched and on which hardly anything is published, that is, who these soldiers were really. Military historians usually concentrate on what soldiers did while they were in the field - they are treated as chess pieces in the grand game. While that is understandable, there are other aspects that are of interest. Where they came from, who they were, what their experience was, what they thought of life, war, the army - insofar as these have been looked at, it's usually in terms of quoting without critique or background the numerous memoirs.

However, even the recent Forum discussion shows that these comments, while authentic in themselves, must be modified in view of the character and background of the writer. It might be expected that the view of the same incident would vary widely between the well-educated professional class officer and the oik in the ranks - but the said oik's view would presumably differ enormously if he was aged 18 or 40, a veteran or a greenhorn, if he was an Irish farm labourer or an unemployed Leeds weaver, a Catholic or a Methodist, a young tearaway or a staid married man with family. I for one would like to know a lot more about the men who made up the finest machine in Europe. As it is, we don't even know, eg, what percentage of the men were married.

One day perhaps someone will do a survey of the material which is currently fragmented across regimental histories and collections of attestation documents, which I confidently predict will provide many surprises. In the mean time, I'm grateful for what there is.

Cheers

C