The Question Everyone Wants Answered
“What battles did he fight in?”
At some point in almost every First World War research journey, the focus shifts. You move beyond names, dates, and records and start asking a more human question — what did he actually experience?
Battles are the obvious way into that story. Names like the Somme, Ypres, and Passchendaele carry weight. They feel like anchors — moments where a soldier’s story becomes real. The challenge is that most records do not list battles clearly. Instead, they leave you with fragments: a battalion, a regiment, sometimes just a service number. Turning that into a list of battles is not straightforward.
Why the Answer Is Rarely Written Down
Unlike modern military records, First World War documentation was not designed to give a neat summary of a soldier’s experience. You will not usually find a document stating:
“Fought at the Somme, Arras, and Ypres.”
Instead, the information sits indirectly within unit movements. To understand what battles a soldier may have fought in, you have to understand where his unit was — and when.
The Key Link — Battalion to Battle
Why Battalion Matters More Than Regiment
One of the most common mistakes is to stop at the regiment level. Regiments are useful administrative groupings, but they do not fight as a single unit. Battalions do.
A soldier in 9th battalion of the East Lancashire Regiment fighting in Salonika would have had a completely different wartime experience to someone in the 4th battalion fighting at Passchendaele. One battalion could be fighting on the Somme could be in the thick of the action while another is in a quieter sector — or even in a different theatre altogether.
If you want to understand battles, you need to get as close to battalion level as possible.
Battalions Moved, Not Individuals
Battalions followed defined movements — from training, to deployment, to active operations. If a battalion was involved in a particular campaign, then the men within it were there too. This is the link that allows you to reconstruct a soldier’s likely experience.
For example, if 7th battalion of the East Surrey Regiment was part of a division that took part in the Somme offensive in 1916, there is a strong likelihood that a soldier serving with that battalion at that time was involved in that campaign.
The Problem — It’s Not Always That Simple
Soldiers Did Not Stay in One Battalion
It is tempting to assume that once you have identified a battalion, the rest falls into place. In reality, soldiers were frequently moved. Reinforcements were sent where needed. Wounded men returned to different units. Administrative decisions reshuffled manpower constantly.
A soldier might begin his service in 13th battalion of the Essex Regiment, only to be transferred later to another battalion entirely — meaning his experience could span multiple campaigns and locations.
Timing Is Everything
Even if you have the correct battalion, timing matters. A battalion that fought at the Somme in July 1916 might have been elsewhere by early 1917. If your ancestor joined later, he may have missed that battle entirely. This is why understanding when a soldier was with a unit is just as important as identifying the unit itself.
Not Every Battalion Fought in Every Battle
Another common assumption is that all battalions were involved in the major offensives. This is not the case.
Some battalions rotated in and out of the front line. Others were held in reserve. Some spent long periods in quieter sectors where large-scale battles did not occur. A soldier in the King's Own (Royal Lancaster Regiment) may have spent time preparing for an offensive, only to be moved before it began — missing that battle entirely.
Trench map of the Somme sector, showing front-line positions, communication trenches, and key strongpoints. Maps like these were used to track unit movements and plan operations during major campaigns.
Where Soldiers Were Actually Stationed
Divisions and Brigades Tell the Bigger Story
Battalions rarely operated in isolation. They were part of brigades and divisions, which in turn were assigned to larger formations. It is often at this level that battles are recorded. By identifying the division that a battalion belonged to, you can begin to trace its involvement in major campaigns — whether that is the Somme, Arras, or the Hundred Days Offensive.
War Diaries and Campaign Histories
War diaries are one of the most valuable sources for understanding unit movements. They record where a battalion was, what it was doing, and when. They do not always name battles directly, but they provide the detail needed to connect a unit to known operations. For a battalion, these records can reveal whether it was in the line during key moments or operating elsewhere.
Recognising “Signature Battles”
Certain units become closely associated with particular campaigns. This does not mean every soldier in that unit fought in that battle — but it does provide a strong indicator of the type of experience they may have had. If a battalion is repeatedly linked to a specific campaign, it becomes part of the likely story — something to be considered alongside other evidence.
The Army Service Explorer Tool concentrates on these certain battles and campaigns as they were the largest on the Western Front:
- Battle of the Somme (1st Jul 1916 – 18th Nov 1916)
- Battle of Mons (23rd Aug 1914)
- Battle of Loos (25th Sep – 8th Oct 1915)
- Battle of Passchendaele (31st Jul – 10th Nov 1917)
- German Spring Offensive (21st Mar – 18th Jul 1918)
- The Advance to Victory (20th Jul – 11th Nov 1918)
- The Battle of Arras (9th Apr – 16th May 1917)
The tool will also identify whether a certain unit spent the war "at home", in India or serving in the "Eastern Theatre" in places such as Gallipoli, Mesopotamia or Salonika.
Where Researchers Often Go Wrong
Building a Story Too Quickly
Once a well-known battle is identified, it is tempting to attach it firmly to a soldier’s story. This is understandable — battles give shape and meaning to the past. But without confirming that the soldier was with the unit at that specific time, it remains a possibility rather than a certainty.
Ignoring Evidence That Doesn’t Fit
Sometimes records suggest a different timeline than expected. A medal roll, a service record, or a casualty list might indicate service dates that do not align with a particular battle. It is important not to ignore this. These discrepancies often reveal transfers, delays in deployment, or periods away from the front.
Assuming One Battle Defines the War
Even when a soldier can be linked to a major battle, it is only part of the story. Most soldiers experienced long periods of routine — trench duty, movement between sectors, and preparation for operations that never came. Focusing only on major battles can give a distorted view of their experience.
What You Can Realistically Work Out
Likely Campaigns, Not Exact Battle Lists
In most cases, what you are building is not a precise list of battles, but a probable set of campaigns. If a soldiers from 1st battalion of the Argyll & Sutherland Highlanders was active on the Western Front between 1916 and 1918, then the Somme, Arras, and later offensives all become part of the likely context.
The Nature of a Soldier’s Experience
Even without naming every battle, you can begin to understand what kind of war a soldier experienced. Was he part of the early professional army? A later volunteer force? A reinforcement drafted into an existing battalion? Each of these paths leads to a different wartime experience.
Turning Unit Movements into a Narrative
By combining unit history with timing, a broader picture begins to emerge. Movements, deployments, and known campaigns can be used to build a realistic narrative — not a perfect one, but one grounded in how the army actually operated.