Official history

Last updated

An official history is a work of history which is sponsored, authorised or endorsed by its subject. The term is most commonly used for histories which are produced for a government. [1] The term also applies to commissions from non-state bodies including histories of commercial companies. An official biography (one written with the permission, cooperation and sometimes the participation of its subject or heirs) is an authorised biography.

Contents

Official histories frequently have the advantage that the author has had access to archives, been allowed to interview subjects and use other primary sources closed to independent historians. Because of the close relationship between author and subject, such works may be (or be perceived to be) partisan in tone and to lack historical objectivity. Such bias varies and some official histories have been called exercises in propaganda; in other cases the authors have retained a measure of independence.

Early official histories

There is a tradition of history written or published under official patronage; Polydore Vergil wrote the Anglica Historia (drafted by 1513 and published in 1534), a history of England, at the request of King Henry VII (r.1485–1509); William Camden's Annales Rerum Gestarum Angliae et Hiberniae Regnate Elizabetha (1615–1627), recounts the history of the reign of Elizabeth I of England (1558–1603). In early-modern Europe, royal courts appointed official historians, including the Kongelig historiograf (Historiographer Royal) in the kingdom of Denmark–Norway from 1594, the Rikshistoriograf in Sweden from 1618, the Historiographer Royal in England from 1660 and the Historiographer Royal in Scotland from 1681. [2]

Each book in the Twenty-Four Histories records the official history of a Chinese dynasty. Sixteen of the histories were written between the 7th and 15th centuries. The first is Records of the Grand Historian , authored by Sima Qian (c.145c.86 BCE) in the Han dynasty and the last is History of Ming (completed in the 1730s). From the Tang dynasty (618–907) a government office for historiography compiled official histories. They were revised and expanded by the compilers during the dynasty and the succeeding dynasty published a final edition. [2]

Modern official histories

The modern form of official history began in the mid-nineteenth century in reports written as military guides for later officers. The histories were detailed descriptions of events, not easy reading for a lay audience and left judgements to the discretion of a mainly professional readership. After the First World War, the New Zealand government decided that after a total war, its official histories should be written for a public who had fought in the war or supported the war effort. After the Second World War, the low academic standard of military education, especially in historical analysis, led to a view that professionally trained historians should write official histories, applying their academic training to explain why as well as describe what. Since many of the academics had participated in the war, they could be expected to have experience of military service and knowledge of the war to inform their writing. A contemporary view is that official history should incorporate the three points of view, containing the detailed description needed for works of military instruction but also to be suitable for a general readership and to show how participants tried to solve problems, drawing lessons from their successes and failures. None of the points of view to be served by the production of official history is immune to error, because work by a military historian might be fraudulent for personal or political reasons, distorting the record. Populist history can dilute the story to the point of worthlessness and civilian academics can be prone to select facts and interpretations according to ideals, ideology and preconceived ideas. [3]

Military histories written as textbooks might be thought to have a basis in truth, necessary to teach useful lessons to students. The British Report of the Committee on the Lessons of the Great War (Kirk Report, 1931) drew on the published volumes of the British official history and the conclusions were incorporated into a new edition of Field Service Regulations. That operations might be conducted in Iraq and Iran, led to official history volumes being produced against the objections of the Foreign Office. Military histories concentrated on the doings of national contingents, with only rare references to those of allied and opposing armies, since they had their own histories. Comparative analysis can be absent and national bias from ulterior motives, like mythologising and apologetics can also be found. The Australian Official History of Australia in the War of 1914–1918 edited by Charles Bean contains exaggerations of the significance of the Australian contribution, the prowess of Australian soldiers and disparagement of soldiers from Britain and its allies. Australian failures and casualties are sometimes blamed on British higher commanders, when high-ranking Australian officers could justly be criticised. The post-war Royal Air Force (RAF) was at risk of abolition and to justify its existence needed a function that could not be replicated by the army or navy. The parts of The War in the Air (six text volumes and an appendix volume, 1922–1937) written by Walter Raleigh and Henry Jones, gave undue emphasis to strategic bombing, which unbalanced the work. [3]

Embarrassing events can be disguised by underwriting as happened in Histoire de La Grande Guerre, where the French Army Mutinies of 1917 occurred in 43 percent of the French Army, yet were passed over in a few paragraphs in Les Armées Françaises dans la Grande Guerre. Many of the historians, editors and contributors to the History of the Great War (1915–1949) had been senior officers during the war, which had the advantage first-hand knowledge of events and experience of military art for the work but this risked allowing a desire to protect reputations to intrude, leading to unfair blame, particularly on outsiders. Volume III of the Royal Navy history Naval Operations (1923) had the narrative of the Battle of Jutland (1916) and the draft text was revised at the request of some serving officers present at the battle, to remove critical remarks about them. When a revised edition was published in 1940, many of the officers were retired or dead but the excised passages were not restored. [4] The British Army Military Operations.... volumes have been criticised for dishonesty in not blaming General Headquarters (GHQ) for the extent of British casualties and for exculpating Sir Douglas Haig (commander of the British Expeditionary Force (BEF) from December 1915 to the Armistice). That the history is a description of events, rather than an analytical work with criticism and conclusions, means that Haig and other commanders may escape blame, yet it leaves the reader free to form conclusions. [5]

Military official histories

Austria-Hungary

Australia

Belgium

Britain

Canada

France

Germany

Italy

India

Netherlands

New Zealand

United States

South Africa

Footnotes

  1. MacIntyre 2001, pp. 37–38.
  2. 1 2 Hartman & DeBlasi 2012, p. 18.
  3. 1 2 Wells 2011, pp. 9–10.
  4. Wells 2011, pp. 10–11.
  5. Wells 2011, pp. 11–12.
  6. Wells 2011, pp. 41–45.
  7. Wells 2011, pp. 37–40.
  8. Wells 2011, pp. 46–47.
  9. Wells 2011, pp. 49–79.
  10. Wells 2011, pp. 83–85.
  11. Wells 2011, pp. 89–104.
  12. Wells 2011, pp. 112−116.
  13. Wells 2011, pp. 106–111.
  14. Wells 2011, p. 116.
  15. Wells 2011, pp. 138–148.
  16. Wells 2011, pp. 137–138.
  17. Wells 2011, pp. 156–157.
  18. Wells 2011, pp. 25–36.
  19. Wells 2011, pp. 180–181.

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">World War I casualties</span> Counts of dead and wounded in WWI

The total number of military and civilian casualties in World War I was about 40 million: estimates range from around 15 to 22 million deaths and about 23 million wounded military personnel, ranking it among the deadliest conflicts in human history.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Schlieffen Plan</span> German deployment plan against France

The Schlieffen Plan is a name given after the First World War to German war plans, due to the influence of Field Marshal Alfred von Schlieffen and his thinking on an invasion of France and Belgium, which began on 4 August 1914. Schlieffen was Chief of the General Staff of the German Army from 1891 to 1906. In 1905 and 1906, Schlieffen devised an army deployment plan for a decisive (war-winning) offensive against the French Third Republic. German forces were to invade France through the Netherlands and Belgium rather than across the common border.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Erich Ludendorff</span> German Army officer (1865–1937)

Erich Friedrich Wilhelm Ludendorff was a German general, politician and military theorist. He achieved fame during World War I for his central role in the German victories at Liège and Tannenberg in 1914. Following his appointment as First Quartermaster-general of the Imperial German Army's Great General Staff in 1916, he became the chief policymaker in a de facto military dictatorship that dominated Germany for the rest of the war. After Germany's defeat, he contributed significantly to the Nazis' rise to power.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">South West Africa campaign</span> Military campaign

The South West Africa campaign was the conquest and occupation of German South West Africa by forces from the Union of South Africa acting on behalf of the British imperial government at the beginning of the First World War.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">First Battle of Ypres</span> 1914 battle of the First World War

The First Battle of Ypres was a battle of the First World War, fought on the Western Front around Ypres, in West Flanders, Belgium. The battle was part of the First Battle of Flanders, in which German, French, Belgian armies and the British Expeditionary Force (BEF) fought from Arras in France to Nieuwpoort (Nieuport) on the Belgian coast, from 10 October to mid-November. The battles at Ypres began at the end of the Race to the Sea, reciprocal attempts by the German and Franco-British armies to advance past the northern flank of their opponents. North of Ypres, the fighting continued in the Battle of the Yser (16–31 October), between the German 4th Army, the Belgian army and French marines.

<i>History of the Great War</i> Official record of the British war effort during the First World War

The History of the Great War Based on Official Documents by Direction of the Committee of Imperial Defence is a series of 109 volumes, concerning the war effort of the British state during the First World War. It was produced by the Historical Section of the Committee of Imperial Defence from 1915 to 1949; after 1919 Brigadier-General Sir James Edmonds was Director. Edmonds wrote many of the army volumes and influenced the choice of historians for the navy, air force, medical and veterinary volumes. Work had begun on the series in 1915 and in 1920, the first volumes of Naval Operations and Seaborne Trade, were published. The first "army" publication, Military Operations: France and Belgium 1914 Part I and a separate map case were published in 1922 and the final volume, The Occupation of Constantinople was published in 2010.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Hundred Days Offensive</span> Allied offensive during World War One

The Hundred Days Offensive was a series of massive Allied offensives that ended the First World War. Beginning with the Battle of Amiens on the Western Front, the Allies pushed the Imperial German Army back, undoing its gains from the German spring offensive.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Allies of World War I</span> Opposing side to the Central Powers

The Allies, or the Entente Powers, were an international military coalition of countries led by France, the United Kingdom, Russia, the United States, Italy, and Japan against the Central Powers of Germany, Austria-Hungary, the Ottoman Empire, and Bulgaria in World War I (1914–1918).

The Egyptian Expeditionary Force (EEF) was a British Empire military formation, formed on 10 March 1916 under the command of General Archibald Murray from the Mediterranean Expeditionary Force and the Force in Egypt (1914–15), at the beginning of the Sinai and Palestine Campaign of the First World War.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Battle of Festubert</span> Western Front battle of 1915 in World War I

The Battle of Festubert was an attack by the British army in the Artois region of France on the western front during World War I. The offensive formed part of a series of attacks by the French Tenth Army and the British First Army in the Second Battle of Artois (3 May – 18 June 1915). After the failure of the breakthrough attempt by the First Army in the attack at Aubers Ridge tactics of a short hurricane bombardment and an infantry advance with unlimited objectives, were replaced by the French practice of slow and deliberate artillery-fire intended to prepare the way for an infantry attack.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Serbian campaign</span> 1914–1915 invasion of Serbia during WWI

The Serbian campaign was a series of military expeditions launched in 1914 and 1915 by the Central Powers against the Kingdom of Serbia during the First World War.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Bibliography of World War I</span>

This list contains a selection of books on World War I, using APA style citations.

This is the history of South Africa from 1910 to 1948.

Gerd Schultze-Rhonhof is a German author and former Generalmajor in the German Army of the Bundeswehr, who, like Udo Walendy, also disputes Germany's sole guilt for the Second World War.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Fifth Battle of Ypres</span> 1918 battle on the Western Front of World War I

The Fifth Battle of Ypres, also called the Advance in Flanders and the Battle of the Peaks of Flanders is an informal name used to identify a series of World War I battles in northern France and southern Belgium (Flanders) from late September to October 1918.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Battle of Hartmannswillerkopf</span> Battle in 1915 during the First World War

The Battle of Hartmannswillerkopf was a series of engagements during the First World War fought for the control of the Hartmannswillerkopf peak in Alsace in 1914 and 1915. The peak is a pyramidal rocky spur in the Vosges mountains, about 5 km (3.1 mi) north of Thann, standing at 956 m (3,136 ft) and overlooking the Alsace Plain, Rhine valley and the Black Forest in Germany. Hartmanswillerkopf was captured by the French army during the Battle of Mulhouse (7–10, 14–26 August 1914). From the vantage point, Mulhouse and the Mulhouse–Colmar railway could be seen and the French railway from Thann to Cernay and Belfort shielded from German observation.

<i>14 - Diaries of the Great War</i>  TV series or program

14 - Diaries of the Great War is a 2014 international documentary drama series about World War I. It uses a mix of acted scenes, archive footage, and animation. All episodes were directed by Jan Peter, series authors were Jan Peter and Yury Winterberg. In a dramatic advisory capacity, Dutch producer and screenwriter Maarten van der Duin and BBC-author Andrew Bampfield worked on the film's development. The series is based on an idea by Gunnar Dedio, producer at the film company LOOKSfilm and Ulrike Dotzer, the Head of Department ARTE at Norddeutscher Rundfunk.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Gerhard Hirschfeld</span> German historian and author

Gerhard Hirschfeld is a German historian and author. From 1989 to 2011, he was director of the Stuttgart-based Bibliothek für Zeitgeschichte / Library of Contemporary History, and has been a professor at the Institute of History of the University of Stuttgart since 1997. In 2016 he also became a visiting professor at the Institute for International Studies, University of Wuhan/China.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Bayerisches Armeemuseum</span> Military history museum in Munich, Germany

The Bayerisches Armeemuseum is the Military History Museum of Bavaria. It was founded in 1879 in Munich and is located in Ingolstadt since 1972. The main collection is housed in the New Castle, the permanent exhibition about the First World War in Reduit Tilly opened in 1994 and the Armeemuseum incorporated the Bayerisches Polizeimuseum in the Turm Triva in 2012. Today, part of the former Munich Museum building is the central building of the new Bayerische Staatskanzlei.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">War guilt question</span>

The war guilt question is the public debate that took place in Germany for the most part during the Weimar Republic, to establish Germany's share of responsibility in the causes of the First World War. Structured in several phases, and largely determined by the impact of the Treaty of Versailles and the attitude of the victorious Allies, this debate also took place in other countries involved in the conflict, such as in the French Third Republic and the United Kingdom.

References

Further reading