Famous Tank Battles

Once the British attack at Cambrai lost the open shock of the first day and turned toward Bourlon Ridge, the battle changed from a fast breach into a hard struggle through the worst kind of intermediate ground. Bourlon Wood and the villages around it did not offer the clean spaces in which tanks, artillery timing, and infantry movement had worked so impressively on the twentieth of November, Nineteen Seventeen. Instead they offered trees, broken tracks, village edges, sunken lanes, confused lines of sight, and defenders who had now recovered enough to fight with greater coherence. That is why the fighting there felt so different from the opening advance. Into Bourlon Wood, the battle became closer, more disordered, and more expensive, and the promise of rapid exploitation narrowed into attritional combat measured in yards, corners, and fragments of woodland.

This podcast is accompanied by a companion book that expands the story of the Battle of Cambrai, with additional historical context, maps, and dozens of enhanced colorized photographs from the battle. Your purchase helps support our mission to keep these podcasts free. You can find the book at Military Author dot me or at track pads dot com

Woodland fighting has always had a way of breaking up military systems, and Bourlon did that to both sides. A wood interrupts observation, turns movement into guesswork, and makes it much harder for commanders to know exactly where their own men are, let alone where the enemy has re-formed. Units that begin an attack in tidy alignment often lose shape once they move under trees, across rides, and through shell-torn undergrowth. That matters even more in a battle like Cambrai, where the British had depended on careful timing and combined-arms coordination to make the opening assault work. In Bourlon Wood, the battlefield itself pushed back against that coordination. Guns could still fire, tanks could still help in places, infantry could still advance, but each of those arms now had to work in a terrain that reduced visibility, slowed communication, and made local confusion almost inevitable.

The nearby villages made the problem worse rather than better. Bourlon itself, Fontaine-notre-Dame, Anneux, and the smaller tactical points around them were not peaceful settlements waiting to be occupied once the ridge had fallen. They were fortified fragments of the battlefield, full of walls, shattered houses, cellars, road bends, and covered approaches that could shelter defenders and break up attacks. A village on this front was often a miniature fortress whether anyone had formally designed it that way or not. So when British troops came up toward Bourlon Wood and the villages beside it, they were not moving into empty space after a breakthrough. They were moving into a series of tight, defended pockets where machine guns, trench mortars, and artillery support could still exact a terrible price. The fight ceased to be about broad momentum and became instead about clearing strongpoints that kept reappearing.

The British attack on the twenty-third of November reflected that new reality. The Fifty-First Division attacked Fontaine-notre-Dame with tank support but could not force a clean entry in the morning, and even after a renewed effort from the west later in the day, the village still could not be cleared and held. At the same time, the Fortieth Division attacked Bourlon Wood itself and fought into the wood and onward toward Bourlon Village. On paper, that still sounds like a continuation of the earlier success. In practice, it was already something harsher. The attack did gain into the wood after several hours of hard fighting, and some British troops reached the village, but the moment they did so the battle ceased to resemble the opening day’s rolling surprise and became a contest of immediate counterattacks, uncertain reports, and short-range killing in terrain that gave neither side a clean grip on events.

This is one reason Bourlon produced so much confusion in the record and in memory. Reports from that ground could change within hours because a unit might enter part of a wood or village, think the place was taken, and then find itself cut off, shelled, or forced back before neighboring troops had even caught up. At one stage Bourlon Village was reported taken, but later that report proved wrong. That kind of uncertainty is not unusual in battle, but woods and villages amplify it. Distances are short, landmarks are deceptive, and command posts farther to the rear receive fragments that do not fit neatly together. For the men in the front line, that means the struggle can feel intensely local and immediate. For the commanders trying to shape the battle, it means decisions are made through a haze of incomplete knowledge, often just as the enemy is gathering strength for the next reply.

Artillery was still everywhere in this fighting, but its role changed in character as the ground changed. In the opening assault at Cambrai, artillery had been part of a broad design meant to create surprise, suppress forward defenses, and preserve movement. Around Bourlon Wood, artillery became more intimate and more oppressive. Shells burst through trees, tore splinters through troops trying to hold shallow positions, and crashed into rides, clearings, and village approaches where men were forced to bunch and pause. Heavy shelling did not always produce dramatic movement, but it constantly eroded endurance, shattered local organization, and turned any exposed route into a hazard. This is one of the cruel truths of wooded battle. A wood can feel like cover, but under sustained shellfire it can become a trap, because the same trees that hide men also burst over them and complicate escape, reinforcement, and orientation.

Tanks still mattered in this phase, but not in the same commanding way they had on the first day. They could assist infantry moving toward village edges, suppress some strongpoints, and help in the approaches to the wood, and on the twenty-third they again rendered valuable support during the Fortieth Division’s assault. Yet the dense and broken nature of the ground reduced some of the qualities that had made tanks so effective against wire and trench systems on open approaches. Inside or along the edge of a wood, visibility shrank, movement became channelled, and the risk of ditching, concealment, or close enemy fire increased. Tanks could still contribute, but they could no longer impose the same kind of battlefield clarity. They became part of a harder infantry battle rather than the clear opening instrument of a broad front assault. Bourlon therefore reminds us that armored warfare never escapes terrain; it only changes how terrain punishes the attacker.

German counterattacks made that lesson sharper almost at once. After the British gained into the wood on the twenty-third, German forces struck back repeatedly, and the fighting settled into a rhythm of attack, recoil, and immediate local reply. Haig’s own later account described heavy hostile attacks into the wood and noted that the north-eastern corner in particular had to be restored by immediate counterattack after the Germans pressed British troops back. Dismounted cavalry, infantry remnants, and other mixed elements were fed into the struggle because the ground no longer allowed for elegant, linear battle. That mixing of forces is one of the signs that the fight had become attritional. Units were no longer acting in the clean shapes in which they had begun the battle. They were being committed in fragments to hold corners, rides, and edges long enough to prevent the whole position from collapsing.

The villages added another layer of strain because they kept refusing to stay settled. Bourlon Village and Fontaine-notre-Dame were both fought over again and again, and that repeated changing of possession tells you almost everything you need to know about the character of the battle by this stage. A village could be entered, partially cleared, and then lost under a counterattack before supporting troops or artillery arrangements were ready to secure it. Fontaine could be reached with tanks and still not be held. Bourlon Village could be entered more than once and still remain contested. The fight was no longer about whether British methods could crack the first German defenses. They had already proven that. It was now about whether tired formations could keep enough order, under artillery fire and against repeated counterstrokes, to hold what they had just taken in ground that favored stubborn defense more than sustained forward movement.

By the twenty-fourth and twenty-fifth, the battle around the wood had become a grinding test of endurance. British troops inside the wood and on its edges had to hold against repeated German efforts to drive them out, while also trying to renew attacks toward Bourlon Village and to secure the shoulders of the ridge. The problem was not just enemy resistance. It was cumulative exhaustion. The Fortieth Division, which had borne much of the struggle, was eventually so worn by the continual fighting and by the strength of the German attacks that it had to be withdrawn. That detail matters because it reveals the true cost of this phase. Men were not simply losing ground or gaining it. They were being used up by a kind of combat in which confusion, shellfire, local assaults, and constant alertness wore units down faster than maps could easily show.

When the British made another effort on the twenty-seventh to seize Fontaine-notre-Dame and Bourlon Village and secure the whole ridge, the pattern repeated itself in a form that by then was grimly familiar. There were local gains. Guards troops temporarily regained Fontaine-notre-Dame, and British troops again entered Bourlon Village. Prisoners were taken, and for a moment it looked as though the line of tactical points needed for a secure hold on the ridge might finally fall into place. Then heavy counterattacks developed, and the gains could not be maintained. This is how attrition often works in its most exhausting form. It is not a total absence of success. It is success that arrives in fragments and is then taken away before it can be turned into stability. At Bourlon, men kept paying for the same ground because neither side could afford to let the other keep it.

This struggle reveals something essential about Cambrai as a whole. The opening days are often remembered because they look like the birth of a newer form of warfare, and in many ways they were. But Bourlon Wood shows that military change does not erase older realities. Woods, villages, and high ground still forced battle into close infantry combat, still magnified artillery, and still rewarded local defensive skill. The British could innovate their way through the trench crust, yet once they reached Bourlon the fight again depended on clearing houses, holding wood lines, surviving shelling, and organizing under confusion. In other words, the battle did not become less modern there. It became more honestly modern, because modern battle is not all speed and breakthrough. It is also the point where rapid movement runs out and exhausted men must fight for broken terrain one dangerous piece at a time.

By the end of these days in and around Bourlon Wood, the British still held parts of the ridge and wood, but not all the ground they needed to make that position secure and comfortable. Much of the southern ground remained exposed to enemy observation, parts of the high ground stayed contested, and the cost of holding on had already become severe. Into Bourlon Wood, the campaign lost the clean lines of its beginning and entered a harder phase in which confusion, artillery, and attrition ruled the field. That is why this fighting matters so much in the larger story. It shows the moment when Cambrai stopped looking like a swift answer to trench warfare and started looking like something more difficult and more real: a modern combined-arms battle still trapped, in part, by the old violence of terrain, limited visibility, and human exhaustion.