There are some that say that we have created a mythology around Vimy and the notion that Canada became an independent country as a result of that battle is a myth. I tend to agree and disagree with that. I would describe it as being a big part of a process during the entire first WW of Canada going from having a "colonial attitude" which is defined as being manipulated by forces beyond our control to creation of the sense of having our own self reliance and independence and accomplishment.

The battle of Vimy Ridge does deserve to be appreciated in it's own right as a key victory of the Great War though.

Here is Tim Cook on some of the tactics used:

Quote: The artillery, too, honed its tactics and employed scientific principles to better locate hidden enemy guns. A specialized Canadian Corps Counter Battery Office was established in early 1917 under command of a former professor of engineering at McGill, Andrew McNaughton, who would rise to command the Canadian army during the Second World War. The Office employed sophisticated methods of tracking the sound of hidden enemy guns firing shells and then triangulating back to the gun position. It also used flash-spotting, which was based on a similar method of multiple observation sites locating the gun-muzzle flash and triangulating its location. These tactics allowed the Canadian artillery to find and then smother enemy positions in high explosives and poison gas.

The creeping barrage was also refined since it was first used on the Somme. This new tactic involved hundreds of guns laying down a slow-moving wall of shellfire to tear through the enemy trench system, either killing defenders or forcing them into their dugouts. On the Somme, artillery bombardments had often stopped at zero hour (the moment the infantry began to leave the trenches) thereby signalling the start of the Allied attack. In the winter of 1916-17, the infantry instead rehearsed following closely behind the rolling artillery barrage. This tactic would keep the enemy pinned down and prevent the attackers from being caught in the open before reaching the German lines. The Canadian and British forces expected to lose soldiers to friendly fire as they “leaned into the barrage,” but it was better than the wholesale slaughter of forces caught in no man’s land. There were other innovations as well:

• constant indirect fire was used for the first time
• the use of models of the ridge which were constantly practiced with
• the derailed use of aerial photos for recognisance
• the flexibility of junior officers to make decisions at the sharp end.

The time table of achieving four different coloured lines on the map was laughed at by British Generals before the battle, but it was adhered to.

The bite and hold tactics used at Vimy was a demonstrable success and became to be espoused through the BEF contributing to the victories that were to come in 1918.

And Vimy Ridge (7 miles long) became the anchor for the Entente defence during the German Spring Offences in 1918. This is often overlooked but the Germans attacked North of Vimy, and South but didn't dare attack Vimy itself. For one thing it dropped off sharply on the German side while the Canadian side was a slow incline. Much harder to get from the German side. Had the Germans retained Vimy then the Spring Offensives might have had an easier time reaching the coast and breaking the link between the French and the British

Also the casualties were about twice as high on the German side as they were on the Canadian side - about 11,000 versus more than 20,000 and that was even more true of the solely Canadian battle of Hill 70 at Lens which followed it. Canada had found a way to take a tough position and hold it with 1/2 the casualties, twice in a few months, in 1917, when there were no other similar victories. This was game winning stuff.

Finally, April 9th , 1917 stands as the most loss of life in War in Canada's history, many more than D-Day or Dieppe or any other day in Canadian military history.

April 9th, 1917 is an important date to mark in Canadian history, indeed.

In no way should the battle be used to strut that Canada was better than anyone else. The Canadian Corps was led by a very popular and good British General Byng, who later became a very popular Governor General of Canada and many of the General Staff were British.The British were also there in large numbers in support, mostly artillery. Due credit is deserved by the British as much as the Canadians. The Corps did have the advantage of homogeneity and familiarity with each other to try innovative new tactics. And it had the great advantage of having Currie, who studied past battles, for example how the creeping barrage was used by French General Robert Nivelle at Verdun.

I only submit that the importance of the battle to Canada and to the War is not a myth.