The Damietta Crusade, 1217–1221: A Military History, by Laurence W. Marvin

Military History at the Operational Level: An Interview with Robert M. Citino Donald A. Yerxa ROBERT CITINO, WHOSE ESSAY ON THE GERMAN WAY OF war appeared in the November 2010 issue of Historically Speaking, is one of the most perceptive military historians writing today. In the last decade he has a written a number of important books on modern military history, particularly the German military experience. These include: Quest for Decisive Victory: From Stalemate to Blitzkrieg in Europe, 1899–1940 (University Press of Kansas, 2002); Blitzkrieg to Desert Storm: The Evolution of Operational Warfare (University Press of Kansas, 2004), winner of both the American Historical Association’s Paul Birdsall Prize in European Military and Strategic History and the Society for Military History’s Distinguished Book Award; The German Way of War: From the Thirty Years’ War to the Third Reich (University Press of Kansas, 2005); and Death of the Wehrmacht: The German Campaigns of 1942 (University Press of Kansas, 2007). In 2007 Citino was named the best university teacher in the U.S. in a RateMyProfessors.com poll. After reading all the books listed above, senior editor Donald Yerxa interviewed Citino in March 2011. Donald A. Yerxa : What prompted you to become a military historian? Robert M. Citino : I always like to answer this question by saying that my father fought in World War II. Of course, that’s no answer at all, because in the time and place I grew up (born on the West Side of Cleveland in 1958), everybody’s father had fought in World War II. When we played in the neighborhood, we played “army,” and the war we fought out was World War II. I guess I just took it a little farther than most of my friends—and for that I blame my parents, who gave all of their children a love of reading. I started reading books on World War II as a child and I have never stopped. So parents, if your child is reading too much, beware! Yerxa : Why did you focus on German military history? Citino : I didn’t go to college to be a military historian. I wanted to be a historian of the Weimar Republic, and was especially enthralled by its culture—Brecht and Zuckmayer and the great filmmakers and musicians. That’s why I decided to learn German. As my scholarly interest in military questions grew, I found myself turning more and more toward German military history, and realized that there was a vast literature auf deutsch that most military historians were not using at all. It seemed like a natural fit. Yerxa : Would it be fair to say that the single most important theme common to all your recent books is the value of appreciating military history at the operational level? And if so, how is operational military history distinguished from other genres of analysis? Citino : Yes, that’s a fair statement. The middle ground between low-level tactics and high-level strategy, what we call the operational level of war, is what my books emphasize. If “tactics” discusses battles, and “strategy” analyzes the war, “operations” refers to the campaign, a series of maneuvers and battles involving big units: divisions, corps, and armies. Click for larger view View full resolution From Friedrich August Dressler, Moltke in his Home (John Murray, 1907). Yerxa : What insights emerge when you look at military history at the operational level? Citino : I don’t make any special claim for operational-level analysis. It isn’t a magic key to understanding warfare, but it has traditionally been underserved in the literature, especially the English-language literature. The Wehrmacht’s signal victory in France in 1940, Case Yellow, for example, is pretty hard to understand if you just look at tactics. French tanks and British aircraft were for the most part superior to the German machines they were facing. Strategically, Germany was in a nearly hopeless situation; without a fleet, Germany had embarked on a long war against the world’s great naval powers. In that middle “operational” ground, however, the Germans came up with a daring campaign plan (sending their panzers though the Ardennes forest) that completely flustered their enemies, a victory...

The purpose of the article is to analyze the activities of memory institutions in the Slavic countries of Central and Eastern Europe in contexts of the revision of the history of the Second World War in the Czech Republic and Slovakia. The author analyzes the role of memory institutions in the formation of a new memorial canons about the history of the war in national versions of historical memories. Methodologically, the article is based on the principles proposed in the memorial turn and the analysis of the politics of memory, belonging to the paradigm of intellectual history and the history of ideas. The novelty of the study lies in a comparative analysis of the activities of institutions that determine the main vectors and trajectories of historical politics as a politics of memory about the history of war. The article analyzes: 1) the activity of the Institute of National Memory (stav pamti nroda) in Slovakia as a participant in the revision of the history of the Second World War; 2) the role of the Institute for the Study of Authoritarian Regimes (stav pro studium totalitnch režimů) in the Czech Republic in the perception of the war in Czech historical memory; 3) strategies for the development and functioning of war memory models in the historical memories of Slovakia and the Czech Republic in a comparative perspective. The article shows the contribution of the institutes of memory to the revision and formation of new memorial canons about the Second World War. The results of the study suggest that the institutions of memory are an important factor in the development of contemporary perceptions of war and its place in modern national identities.

Exploring how the history of the Fifteen-year War was dealt with in pre-1982 mainland China is an essential step towards understanding the currently explosive Sino-Japanese History Problem; furthermore, this might shed light on various issues in the post-war history of China and Sino-Japanese relations. However, available research on the pre-1982 period is scarce and problematic. Earlier political scientists argue that the history of the war was ruthlessly manipulated by the Chinese Communist Party regime, while some recent studies believe that the war was conveniently ‘forgotten’ as Sino-Japanese friendship was vital for the government of the People's Republic of China. This article aims at providing an accurate and thorough picture of how the history of the Fifteen-year War was positioned in the diplomatic practice of the Chinese Communist Party regime in relation to Japan during the period.

Beyond the Quagmire: New Interpretations of the Vietnam War

The proposed article deals with controversial problems such as the falsification of the Great Patriotic War, the preservation of modern youth historical memory and resistance with attempts to falsify the history of the war.
 The article presents the results of a study among modern young people about the knowledge of the history of the Great Patriotic War and the main directions of history falsification of the war. The purpose of the study is to identify the features of the historical memory of modern youth about the Great Patriotic War. The study was carried out among students in grades 5-11 and students of the Faculty of History. As a consequence, we came to the conclusion that young people know the history of the Great Patriotic War at a low level, and the most susceptible to the influence of falsifiers of the history of the war.
 The main result of the study is methodological recommendations developed for lessons, ex-tracurricular activities, and optional courses for history teachers in order to increase the level of knowledge of the history of the Great Patriotic War and directions of falsification. The work also contains recommendations for the patriotic education of youth.

Curating a Nation’s Past: The Role of the Public Intellectual in Australia’s History Wars

Reviewed by: What is Military History? Ronald L. Spiller What is Military History?. By Stephen Morillo with Michael F. Pavkovic . Malden, Mass.: Polity Press, 2006. ISBN 0-7456-3391-9. Notes. Index. Pp. vi, 150. $19.95. The simple title and the plastic action figure on the cover of this small book belie its contents. This is more than a student reader; it is an exceptional introduction to the study and craft of military history for any reader. In little more than one hundred pages of text Morillo and Pavkovic provide a set of definitions for "Military History," and discuss historiography, conceptual frameworks, current controversies, "doing" military history, and the future of this aspect of the broader study of History. The authors define military history broadly as "any historical study in which military personnel of all sorts, warfare, . . . military institutions, and their various intersections with politics, economics, society, nature, and culture form the focus or topic of the work" (p. 4). They also discuss the military historian's multiple audiences: popular, academic, and professional military. This holistic definition is particularly refreshing and useful. As the authors write, "military history, like all history, is a dialogue between past and present" (p. 7). Stitch-counting buffs and History Channel aficionados, professors and students looking for the next book or dissertation topic, and service personnel looking for new lessons and models do not fragment the craft. The synergy produced by the interaction of these multiple interests strengthens the craft. Not only are these different interests and interpretations not mutually exclusive, "most, in fact, are complementary and the more we have the more nuanced is our understanding of the past" (p. 9). The discussion of historiography is as refreshing as the discussion of subject and audience. Combined with their twelve pages of suggestions for further reading, the authors provide an excellent, broad, and basic historiographical foundation for both students and general readers. They also provide the academic professional an opportunity to surface and reconnect with a broader military history perspective. The authors conclude that the lines separating popular, professional, and academic military history are, in fact, fading, "recreating in some ways the dynamics of the less specialized military literature of ancient and medieval [End Page 543] times, but reconstructed around the standards and methods of professional academic historians" (p. 43). Subsequent discussions of conceptual frameworks, controversies, "doing" military history, and the future of military history live up to the high standard of the first two chapters. Although the authors acknowledge that military historians have often been resistant to new concepts and methodologies, "The influence of social and cultural history and the expansion of the field . . . through war and society studies have added significantly to the military historian's methodological toolkit" (p. 61). On-going controversies—from the debate on revolutions in military affairs to the question of Western exceptionalism—strengthen the study of military history, and "show military history to be a vital and changing piece of the larger historical profession" (p. 96). Although aimed at a student audience, this is not just a book for undergraduate or graduate students. Well-written and clear without being simplistic, it is a worthwhile book for any person with an interest in the study and craft of military history. Ronald L. Spiller Edinboro University of Pennsylvania Edinboro, Pennsylvania Copyright © 2008 Society for Military History

The absence of historical education in the history of the Anti-Japanese War reflects the lack of historical identity to the War. Based on empirical analysis, the status quo of vocational college students' historical identity with the War is even more worrying. Historical identity of the Anti-Japanese War is an important national consciousness, and the key to its cultivation lies in the strengthening of education in the history of the War. Education on the history of the Anti-Japanese War is essentially ideological & political education, with the ultimate goal of strengthening the political values of the younger.

UP to the beginning of the nineteenth century the medical history of wars was very incomplete, and is to be found in memoirs or commentaries written by individual military surgeons. To this category belong the works of Percy, M'Grigor, and particularly Barron Larrey, the great military surgeon of the Napoleonic period. A great change, however, took place with the publication by the Americans of the splendid and exhaustive “Medical and Surgical History of the War of Rebellion (1861–1865),” which has remained a model for all later works on military medicine. After the greatest of all wars it was to be expected that the medical histories which were bound to make their appearance would be voluminous and detailed, and that this country would not be behind others in this respect. The volume before us does not lead one to anticipate a standard work of permanent value in medical literature. From the brief preface, occupying a page and a half, it is not clear what the object of the work is. It is stated that the contributors had at their disposal the material contained in official documents, while later on it is said that “there has been little opportunity for further analysis and study of accumulated records of medical cases,” and an apology is made that the contributors have been handicapped by the fact that papers published during the war were comparatively few. To any one conversant with the volume of medical literature which poured out in every country, this must seem an extraordinary statement. The “Index Medicus War Supplement,” dealing with 1914–17, occupies alone 260 pages of titles, which at a conservative estimate represents at least 10,000 papers which were published on some aspect of military medicine during these three years. History of the Great War, based on Official Documents. Medical Services: Diseases of the War. Vol. I. Edited by Major-General Sir W. G. MacPherson Sir W. P. Herringham Col. T. R. Elliott Lt.-Col. A. Balfour. Pp. viii + 550. (London: H.M.S.O., 1922.) 21s. net.

Military History

N. F. Dubrovin’s research occupies one of the fundamental places in the formation of Russian military-historical Caucasian studies. It is on the works of N. F. Dubrovin that the official, “civilizing” history of the Caucasian War will be formed and spread. As one of his contemporaries will correctly write about him, “he, one might say, was the first, through the scientific development of archival documents that became available only to him (my italics), systematically described the wars: the Patriotic, Caucasian and Crimean, leaving at the same time a very noticeable trace in the description of the wars of Catherine’s reign” [49, p. 543]. Indeed, the thematic scope of Dubrovin’s works is extensive, and the corpus of documents from various depositories introduced by him into scientific circulation confirms the extensive opportunities provided to him as an official historian to work with the most important closed documents. Undoubtedly, N. Dubrovin holds a special place in the development of not only Caucasian studies, but also Russian history and archeography. An extensive list of his works can only cause respect and surprise to the creative potential of the author, who masterfully paid his debt to the Fatherland not with a bayonet, but with a pen. “The History of the war and the Rule of the Russians in the Caucasus” and “The Caucasian War” [35; 36]. N. F. Dubrovina are among the first official works in pre-revolutionary historical science with a systematic review of the annexation of the Caucasus to Russia. The publication of these publications was preceded by two monographs — “Transcaucasia from 1803 to 1806” and “George” [14; 15] and numerous articles by the author on Caucasian subjects. The first two “Georgian studies” monographs of Dubrovin are not considered at all as components of the above-mentioned “History of the War...”. Despite the fact that the publication of Dubrovin’s first work “Transcaucasia from 1803 to 1806” caused a great resonance in society and high ratings. In a brilliant review by E. Feoktistov, this work emphasized its importance for the history of coverage of “Russian domination in the Caucasus ...”. A high-ranking reviewer pointed to this work as the first result of the work being prepared by Mr. Dubrovin on the history of the Caucasus. [50, p. 354].

Major Arthur P. Wade, Artillery, USA, graduated from West Point in 1943 and served in Europe during World War II. After an assignment as Assistant Professor of History of Military Art at West Point, he is now on duty with the 1st Infantry Division. Civil War at West Point ARTHUR P. WADE WITH THE APPROACHING CENTENNIAL OF THE OUTBREAK of the Civil War, interestin that greatAmerican conflict increases steadily and quite perceptibly . Hardly a week goes by in which the book review sections of the great metropolition newspapers fail to record the appearance of a new work on some facet of that war; the quality of the productions may vary, but interest in the general subject is unflagging. From best-selling novel to privately-printed pamphlet, each of these works reflects the unique position in our history of the war of 1861-65. After some years in which the emphasis in Civil War writing was almost entirelyon the political, economic, or sociological aspects of the period, the purely military or operational history of the war is coming back into its own with the publication of such fine works as those by Bruce Catton and Kennetii P. Williams. Surely a high point in the resurgence of interest in the operational history of the war was reached with the recent reprinting of Century's famous Battles and Leaders of the Civil War. To date, however, it must be noted that the revival of the military history of the Civil War has not spread to the schools and colleges of die country, even in the South. Whereas fifty years ago college history students could toss off such names as Gordon, Mahone, Reynolds, Ewell, and Granger with facility, and recite chapter-and-verse the reasoning behind Lee's reinforcement of Bragg in September of 1863, the interposition of two world wars has dulled the appreciation of such men and such strategy, so that it is a rare college student today who can identify with certainty any of the great Civil War commanders beyond Grant, Lee, Sherman, Sheridan, and perhaps Jackson. Every college offers courses in its history curriculum which deal with economic, political, and—lately—sociological treatments of the war period, and while this is not to say that no mention is made of 6 ARTHUR P. WADE military operations, such mention usually is only to set the stage, to frame the chronology for other discussion. This condition is not particularly surprising, nor is this author "viewing with alarm." It is simply pointed out that, were a student interested in taking a course in the purely military history of the Civil War, he would in most cases be out of luck. He would be told with some justice that no university could afford to underwrite so specialized a subject, that the undergraduates inparticular are so busy with the required hours leading to their chosen degrees that they have no time for such a restricted course. It may then be of interest to Civil War students to know that there is one school at which every undergraduate takes such a course—the United States Military Academy. The West Point course in military history, or more properly History of Military Art, is not confined to the Civil War, but covers the art of war from the earliest recorded engagements through the recent fighting in Korea. At one time the study of the Civil War filled one-third of the course, but with the additional content posed by two world wars and a police action, the fraction is now nearer one-fifth. Nevertheless the concentration of the Civil War into a much shorter span of teaching has not had a corresponding decrease in interest, either on the part of the cadets or the instructors ; the study of die military operations of 1861-1865 remains probably the high spot of the course on both sides of the lectern. The aim of this article, then, is to describe and discuss the West Point course in the History of Military Art, show briefly how it fits into the overall cadet curriculum, and then focus on the Civil War subcourse. Shortly after World War II there was instituted at West Point...

The Spanish-Cuban-American war of 1898 was one of the first wars in history to be filmed. Yet despite its participation in the birth of American cinema, the war disappeared as a subject from the later archives of filmmaking. No major films chronicle the three-month war in Cuba or the subsequent three-year war in the Philippines, although films have been made about virtually every other war in American history. My paper is about that duality, about the formative presence and telling absence of this pivotal war in the history of American film.

BackgroundThree decades after US and Australian forces withdrew from Vietnam, there has been much public interest in the health consequences of service in Vietnam. One controversial question is whether the risk of prostate cancer amongst Vietnam veterans is increased. This paper examines relationships between military history, family history and risk of prostate cancer in a population-based case control study.MethodsCases were selected from the Cancer Registry of Western Australia as incident cases of histologically-confirmed prostate cancer, and controls were age-matched and selected from the Western Australian electoral roll. Study participants were asked to report any military service history and details about that service.ResultsBetween January 2001 and September 2002, 606 cases and 471 controls aged between 40–75 years were recruited. An increased prostate cancer risk was observed in men reporting they were deployed in Vietnam although this was not statistically significant (OR = 2.12; 95% CI 0.88–5.06). An increased risk was also observed in men reporting prostate cancer in fathers (OR = 1.90; 95% CI 1.20–3.00) or brothers (OR = 2.05; 95% CI 1.20–3.50) diagnosed with prostate cancer.ConclusionThese findings support a positive association between prostate cancer and military service history in the Vietnam war and a first degree relative family history of prostate cancer.

Air War College (Montgomery, AL) Жаклин Е. Уитт Военно-воздушный колледж (Монтгомери, шт. Алабама) ИЗУЧАЯ ПРИЧИНЫ, ХОД И ПОСЛЕДСТВИЯ ВОЙН: ОБЩЕСТВО ВОЕННОЙ ИСТОРИИ The Society for Military History (SMH) is an international scholarly society dedicated to advancing the study of military history. It was founded in 1933 and today boasts more than 2600 members, including academics, soldiers, and independent researchers who are interested in military histo-ry. While most of the Society‘s members are based in the United States, there is a growing contingent of international scholars, and increasing the presence of international scholars has been a consistent focus in the past few years. Importantly, the Society defines its mission broadly, and this broad mission is reflected in both its membership and the topics on which members conduct research. Bound by neither chronology nor geography, the Society is linked by its topical devotion to the study of wars, warfare, militaries, and societies. The 2013 Annual Meeting was held in New Orleans, Louisiana, from March 14 -17, 2013, on the theme of ―War, Society, and Remembrance‖ and was hosted by the Center for the Study of War & Society at the Uni-versity of Southern Mississippi with the National World War II Museum and Southeastern Louisiana University. The conference program included more than 64 panels, with more than 250 individual presenters and com-menters. Professor Joseph Glatthaar of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC) delivered the Society‘s presidential and keynote address. In recent years, the SMH has worked actively to engage a range of historical fields related to the study of war by highlighting presidential panels and roundtables that are cosponsored by other academic societies. The 2013 conference lineup included four such panels: ―The Convergence of Military and Environmental History‖ with the American Society for Envi-ronmental History; ―Perspectives on the Cold War in Europe and the Pacif-ic‖ with the US Commission on Military History; ―Revolutionary War and Diplomacy in the Third World‖ with the Society for Historians of American Foreign Relations; and ―War and Medicine‖ with the American Association forthe History of Medicine. Each of these panels offered attendees the