Unknown War Research Articles

Stock Exchange and Commercial Banks during the First World War

In connection with the recently published monograph on the First World War by the famous historian Irina Potkina “On the eve of the catastrophe. The state and economy of Russia in 1914–1917”, it is appropriate to evaluate a new book and the events that took place a century ago. The First World War is often referred to as “an unknown war” and “unfairly forgotten”, which is hardly true. The publication of scholarly books and articles, documents, memoirs, and fiction about the First World War prove the opposite. Over the past 100 years, the assessments, views and approaches to the study of the First World War have changed, but the interest in it has never faded. It should be acknowledged that there are still many unresearched and poorly studied topics. I. Potkina’s statements about the level of pre-war development and the importance of the Russian stock market and the banking sector cannot be fully accepted. She comes to the conclusion that during the war years, the Russian economy experienced processes similar to those in most European countries. It is hardly indisputable, especially the assertion about the positive results of the regulation of the credit and financial system. The policy of the tsarist government in relation to the exchange and banks contradicts this opinion. It is also difficult to point out the effectiveness of economic policy, especially in 1917. The authorities lost control over the political, economic and social processes in the country. Russia was going through a severe crisis that led to the overthrow of the autocracy.

Book review. Arūnas Streikus (ed.). The Unknown War. Anti-Soviet armed resistance in Lithuania and its legacies. London and New York: Routledge, 2022

EXCELLENT SUMMARY ON HISTORY, RESEARCH AND COMMEMORATION OF LITHUANIAN FOREST BROTHERS

Images of Great Britain and the British in Russian society during the First World War

The aim of the article is to analyze the general ideas about Great Britain and the British as military allies of the bloc of Entente countries, which existed in Russian society during the First World War. Methods used in the research: the method of content analysis, historical-genetic and historical-comparative. Main results: the article examines the visions of the British, common among the Russian intelligentsia on the eve of the First World War, and the influence of previous historical experience on the formation of these visions. It is analyzed in what way Russians' ideas about Britain as an allied state were transformed during the course of hostilities. Attempts to carry out state actions to promote Britain in the Russian Empire are considered, in particular, the visit of Russian journalists to the British Isles in 1916.Journalistic notes and journalistic works resulting from this visit are examined. Concise conclusions: the experience of the First World War showed that the state propaganda of the Russian Empire paid much more attention to the formation of the image of the enemy. Conversely, efforts aimed at familiarizing Russian society with allies in the bloc of Entente countries were significantly less powerful. At the beginning of the First World War, most representatives of Russian society looked skeptically at Britain as an ally, taking to the attantion the country's lack of general mobilization and its desire to fight only at sea. The experience of the war showed that although general mobilization was not introduced in Great Britain, the number of the British Expeditionary Force in continental Europe increased tenfold due to volunteers who demonstrated high fighting qualities. Britain abandoned the strategy of war exclusively at sea, fulfilling the All-Allied obligations, the country learned to overcome the resource crisis that arose as a result of raids by German submarines on the routes connecting the British Isles with the colonies. It was these messages that Russian journalists and publicists tried to convey about Britain, in particular, the participants of the 1916 visit. However, the number of materials aimed at a mass reader, dedicated to allies in Russia was much less than articles dedicated to the enemy. Even at the end of the war, Russian society looked at the Western Front as an unknown war. Over time, this gave rise to the idea among Russian veterans during the years of the Civil War that Britain and France had failed to fulfill their duty as allies and were guilty of Russia. Practical meaning: the materials of the article can be used in the teaching of the basic course for students of the Faculty of History (Oles Honchar Dnipro National University) at the bachelor's level – “History of Western Europe and North America in modern times”. Originality: for the first time, attention is focused on the fact that the sphere of ideas about the Allies by the Entente bloc during the First World War directly influenced the events at the front and determined the narratives of the USSR and Russian emigration after the world carnage. Scientific novelty: for the first time, the change in perceptions of the British as allies of the Russian Empire (within the Entente countries) during the entire period of active hostilities during the First World War was analyzed. Type of article: descriptive and analytical.

The Unknown War of the Eastern Front: the first American-Soviet television production and Détente’s World War II

This article details the production of the first American-Soviet television collaboration The Unknown War. The 1978 documentary series chronicled the Eastern Front of World War II, an area of the war few Americans were familiar with. Throughout the 1950s and 1960s American film and television portrayals of the war excised or minimized the Soviet Union’s role due to the Cold War rivalry leading to a knowledge gap. The success of the documentary series The World at War spurred the interest of American independent producer Air Time International for a similar series on the Soviet side of the war. For Americans it was capitalizing on a revival of interest in the war while remedying the public’s lack of knowledge on the Eastern. For the Soviet authorities it was a means of furthering relations eased by Détente and bolstering their ‘Cult of the Great Patriotic War’. The series’ creation showcases the difficulties and compromises made to craft a product that suited both sides’ needs. The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan led to the series never being rebroadcast in the United States and largely forgotten. It serves as an example of the difficulties of such ‘cross-curtain’ collaborations and the Cold War’s influence on the interpretation of World War II.

Russia's Iron General: The Life of Aleksei A. Brusilov, 1853–1926 by Jamie H. Cockfield (review)

SEER, 98, 2, APRIL 2020 378 Cockfield, Jamie H. Russia’s Iron General: The Life of Aleksei A. Brusilov, 1853–1926. Lexington Books, Lanham, MD, Boulder, CO, New York and London, 2019. xi + 375 pp. Notes. Bibliography. Index. $120.00: £80.00. Russia’s ‘iron general’, Aleksei Alekseevich Brusilov, is known abroad mainly for his unprecedentedly successful 1916 offensive which effectively knocked Austria-Hungary out of the First World War. This is probably the best book on Brusilov’s life, operations, military career and command style that we shall ever see. JamieCockfieldhasinterlacedofficialrecords,biographies,foreignobservers’ reports, media reports, memoirs and Brusilov’s personal correspondence to create a masterly, authoritative, but very readable account of Brusilov’s life and career. He recounts it from Brusilov’s birth and upbringing in the Caucasus through nearly sixty years of military service to Russia, whether under the tsar, the 1917 Provisional Kerenskii Government, or the new Bolshevik one. Those familiar with modern Russia will also sense lessons for today. Nearly a hundred years after Brusilov’s death, and thirty after the end of the Communist regime, whose end Brusilov predicted, Jamie Cockfield’s book is supremely timely. Its wider importance as a work of history is summarized in his moving dedication, ‘To the Russian soldiers of both World Wars, whose enormous sacrifices saved the West’. That is no exaggeration. Russia’s contribution to the coalition effort in the Great War has often been minimized or ignored, as summarized in the subtitle of the eastern front volume (1931) of one of the editions of Churchill’s The World Crisis, ‘The Unknown War’. The November 1917 Bolshevik Revolution and the subsequent Civil War split the former imperial army between the Whites, many of whom later emigrated, and the Reds, whose army some 50,000 former imperial officers joined. Brusilov avoided participation during the Civil War, partly, Jamie Cockfield reveals, because of frailty (in 1917 he was 64) and of a bad injury sustained when a shell fired during the November 1917 Revolution hit his Moscow apartment. Before then, and during a lengthy convalescence, his sympathies seem to have moved towards the new regime because it seemed the best guarantee of Russian security and national identity. Then, when the re-created state of Poland attacked Soviet Russia in 1920, Brusilov, who had kept aloof from politics, rallied to his country. He was initially posted to the Ministry of Agriculture, to increase the supply of horses for the Red Army, and finished as Red Army Inspector of Cavalry — his parent arm — and was helped by the leading Soviet military guru and theorist, Mikhail Vasilevich Frunze. Soviet historians were, for obvious reasons, reluctant to praise the achievements of the Imperial Russian Army. The émigrés who fled to REVIEWS 379 Czechoslovakia, France and elsewhere regarded Brusilov, who had stayed in and with ‘mother Russia’, as a traitor. Jamie Cockfield explains these dilemmas and contradictions and the soul-searching that Brusilov underwent very well. The Second World War, in turn, quickly became the Cold War and Soviet Russia’s overwhelming role in defeating Germany and then Japan in that conflict has tended to be sidelined. The account of Brusilov’s personal and professional lives is skilfully woven. He married twice. His first wife, Anna, died in 1908 but he married again quickly, this time to a much younger woman, Nadezhda — Nadia — who was, clearly, the great love of his life. He wrote to her frequently, even when under the greatest pressure during the First World War, and the letters reveal a kind and generous but somewhat extravagant woman, a socialite who revelled in her husband’s position and rank and enjoyed entertaining. She clearly loved her husband and during the war constantly sent him cigarettes, fruit and sweets. Against all Brusilov’s obviously spartan instincts, this was the only luxury he permitted himself. Brusilov’s reputation as the ‘iron general’ had been forged in his time as an instructor and later commander of the Officers’ Cavalry School in St Petersburg from 1881 to 1908. He completely remodelled cavalry officer training and wrote articles on employing cavalry in modern war. He led by example to the consummate degree, demanded maximum effort from...

Memory, Reconstruction, and Ethics in Memorialization

ABSTRACT The article examines the ethical choices that are implicit in acts of memorialization. By engaging literature on the rhetoric of memorials and pragmatist aesthetics, we argue that memorialization involves a range of important ethical choices in who is remembered, how they are remembered, and the experience the act of memorialization evokes in viewers. By using John Dewey's nascent account of memorial aesthetics, we construct an exploratory typology of the ways that memorials can use and evoke the experience of viewers. The means of experiential reconstruction are also found to involve important ethical decisions. We explore the usefulness of this typology in reference to two different memorials: Ambedkar Memorial Park in Lucknow, India, and the Memorial for the Unknown War Deserters and for the Victims of the National Socialist Military Justice System in Erfurt, Germany.

Getting to Know the Unknown War

The Russian ReviewVolume 75, Issue 4 p. 683-689 Review Essay Getting to Know the Unknown War DAVID SCHIMMELPENNINCK van der OYE, DAVID SCHIMMELPENNINCK van der OYESearch for more papers by this author DAVID SCHIMMELPENNINCK van der OYE, DAVID SCHIMMELPENNINCK van der OYESearch for more papers by this author First published: 04 September 2016 https://doi.org/10.1111/russ.12109Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat Volume75, Issue4October 2016Pages 683-689 RelatedInformation

Introduction

Introduction Suzy Kim (bio) Speaking to veterans on July 27, 2013, at the Korean War Veterans Memorial in Washington DC, President Obama declared the Korean War a victory for the United States in an effort to challenge its status in American memory as a forgotten war. It is worth quoting his remarks at length to appreciate the change in emphasis on the war’s “victory” from what had previously been a focus on the hardships of an unknown war: That July day, when the fighting finally ended, not far from where it began, some suggested this sacrifice had been for naught, and they summed it up with a phrase — “die for a tie.”… But here, today, we can say with confidence that war was no tie. Korea was a victory. When fifty million South Koreans live in freedom—a vibrant democracy, one of the world’s most dynamic economies, in stark contrast to the repression and poverty of the North—that’s a victory; that’s your legacy. When our soldiers stand firm along the DMZ; when our South Korean friends can go about their lives, knowing that the commitment of the United States to the security of the Republic of Korea will never waver—that is a victory, and that is your legacy. [End Page 1] When our allies across the Asia Pacific know—as we have proven in Korea for sixty straight years—that the United States will remain a force for peace and security and prosperity—that’s a victory; that’s your legacy. And for generations to come, when history recalls how free nations banded together in a long Cold War, and how we won that war, let it be said that Korea was the first battle—where freedom held its ground and free peoples refused to yield; that, too, is your victory, your legacy.1 The Korean War does not stand alone in this renewed effort to valorize American interventions during the Cold War. The last several years have seen milestone anniversaries of two American wars in Asia—the Korean War and the Vietnam War—that have generated a grandiose rhetoric of victory for two of the deadliest wars of the twentieth century outside the two world wars. The sixtieth anniversary of the Korean War Armistice Agreement in 2013 prompted the president to claim victory in his speech at the Korean War Veterans Memorial. In the previous year, the administration issued a presidential proclamation for an unusually long thirteen-year program to commemorate the Vietnam War, designating the period from May 28, 2012, through November 11, 2025, as the official tribute to the fiftieth anniversary of the war, at a cost of five million dollars per year.2 Observing March 8, 1965, as the date when thirty-five hundred marines were deployed to start the American ground war in Vietnam, formal events are planned throughout 2015. The year 2015 also marks the seventieth anniversary of the division of the Korean peninsula, an action proposed by the United States (and accepted by the Soviets) at the end of the Asia-Pacific War in 1945. Indeed, American involvement in Vietnam must also be traced back to 1945, when the United States threw its support behind France in its bid to recolonize Vietnam. How can we explain the turn of perspective toward such triumphalist rhetoric at this point in time? Similar to the Vietnam War, but in a much shorter span of only three years, the Korean War resulted in an estimated three million civilian deaths, and the unended Korean War continues to elicit tensions along the demilitarized zone dividing the two Koreas, and throughout the Asia-Pacific region today. But unlike Vietnam, where American veterans have engaged in projects for peace and reconciliation with Vietnamese partners, peace in Korea seems like a distant dream at best.3 [End Page 2] The purpose of this special issue is twofold: first, to engage in a critical intervention into the memorialization of the Korean War among the chief participants—the two Koreas, the United States, and China—to disrupt monolithic understandings of its origins, consequences, and experiences; and second, to do so as a necessary step toward reconciliation by placing...

Through the looking glass: Canadian identity and the War of 1812

In 2012, the Harper government launched a national celebration of the bicentennial of the War of 1812, even though few Canadians were aware of the anniversary or of the war itself. While commemorating a largely unknown war might at first seem counterintuitive, this article argues that the focus on the War of 1812 represented an opportunity to engage in the construction of a different Canadian identity. In effect, the narrative surrounding the War of 1812 celebrations permitted the Conservative government to begin to establish a new “warrior identity” in contrast to the “peacekeeping identity” that has been associated with liberal internationalism and the Liberal Party. While liberal internationalism in both the study and practice of Canadian foreign policy contributed to a national identity framed around shared internationalist values, the narratives presented during the War of 1812 celebrations suggest an alternative understanding of the “true” nature of Canadian identity.

An Unknown Australian War Novel: Miles Franklin’s Nemari ništa: Six Months with the Serbs

Miles Franklin’s sketches from the Balkan front are discussed in the context of Franklin as an Australian writer of “the soil” whose observations of the Serbian soldiers and life in the hospital camp on the Salonika front take the form of sketches of manners. The sketch of manners is announced in the literary manifestoes of the French, the English and the Russians as part of a poetics of Realism in the European literary canon. These prescribe the capturing of a moment in time as the task of the writer, who acts as a ‘local historian’ perpetuating the memory of the manners and mores of his contemporaries for posterity. Franklin’s sketches comply also with the idea of ‘circumstantial beauty’ propounded by Charles Baudelaire in his essay on Constantin Guys. It is argued that the Serbs portrayed by Franklin become a symbol of the desire of the age. The sketches transcend the modest claims of the writer of being simple testimony to the Serb as she saw him and are a chronicle of feelings of the author, her reactions to sounds, sights and the humanity she encounters. It is the personalized emotive point of view, described as “Australianism” which imparts unity to the sketches and gives grounds for calling Six Months with the Serbs an Australian war novel.

Culture of Remembrance in Late Choson Korea: Bringing an Unknown War Hero Back into History

Numerous scholarly works have been produced on projects as the culture and politics of nation-states in the modern world. Yet remaking of the past is not the monopoly of modernity. This paper investigates the problem of engineering in Chosŏn Korea (1392-1910) through the case of Kim Kyŏngsŏ, a commanding general during the Ming-Chosŏn joint war against the rising Jurchen in 1619. I examine competing memories constructed by various social political groups and the historical and cultural contexts in which such construction took place. In particular, I analyze the processes of inventing, commemorating, and enshrining public memory as a way for a disadvantaged social group of local elites from Chosŏn's northwestern region to overcome social and political discrimination against them.

The war for Korea, 1950-1951: they came from the north

for 1950-1951: They Came from the North by Allan R. Millett Lawrence: University of Kansas Press, 2010 644 pages $45.00 [ILLUSTRATION OMITTED] To military historian and one-time US Marine officer Allan R. Millett, the Korean not so much the forgotten war the neglected He opens by chastising his fellow historians for their Eurocentric studies of the Cold War, noting that one devoted eight pages to the Korean War, another a page and a half, and a third skipped over the Korean conflict from 1948 to 1953. Millett, to the contrary, asserts that strategic thinkers and serving officers could learn much from the Korean that applicable today. author, a professor at the University of New Orleans, asserts: I propose that the Korean an example of the one great lesson of twentieth-century warfare: that no conflict should be categorized simply an interstate war or civil war or even a limited insurgency. While such definitions may advance statistical analysis, they are not much help for field diplomats and soldiers. He adds: Understanding the Korean will provide even more relevant examples of a war that embodies almost every aspect of contemporary Particularly pertinent: The Korean conflict remains a major window on the Chinese way of war. most appropriate way to view it, Millett writes, would be as a Maoist people's war, the global socialist template for wars of national liberation and postcolonial succession. Phase One began in 1945 with the end of World II and the division of in which the Soviets took the Japanese surrender north of the 38th parallel and put Kim II Sung in power while the US took the surrender in the south--and then went home. Phase Two started in 1948 when North sent a column of 1,800 partisans into the south to take advantage of a rebellion there. But South Miller asserts, won the unknown war before the forgotten war. That brought on the North Korean invasion of June 1950, which had the backing of Joseph Stalin in Moscow and Mao Zedong in Beijing. Millett labels that Phase Three of the conflict in but contends that Stalin and Mao guessed wrong on the North Korean army's ability to conquer South which led to the intervention of the Chinese People's Volunteer Force (CPVF) in November of 1950. That, Millett says, is the subject of this book, the second in a trilogy on the Korean conflict. author, whose writing a model of clarity, doesn't say it outright but he might well have renamed the Korean the Sino-American War. Note the book's title, The for Korea, not the War in Korea or The between the Koreans. Both the South Korean and North Korean armies turned in spotty performances, to the dismay of their respective American and Chinese allies, leaving the brunt of the battle to the two foreign armies. Mao's motive, having come to power in Beijing just a year before, was to drive the United States off the Asian mainland. …

"I'm Not Here, If This Doesn't Happen": The Korean War and Cold War Epistemologies in Susan Choi's The Foreign Student and Heinz Insu Fenkl's Memories of My Ghost Brother

"I'm Not Here, If This Doesn't Happen"The Korean War and Cold War Epistemologies in Susan Choi's The Foreign Student and Heinz Insu Fenkl's Memories of My Ghost Brother Jodi Kim (bio) What most Americans know about Korea has been told from the point of view of a U.S. military member or a missionary, about prostitutes, beggars, and orphans, many of them mixed race children, never speaking but always spoken for and about, souls being saved by the civilizing missions of neocolonialism and evangelism. No doubt they would have found it difficult to imagine that one day the voice of the native, having returned to the imperial center, might speak back—in English—from its very different positionality. Elaine H. Kim1 Post-1945 Korean migration has been shaped by the division and militarization of the Korean peninsula. The Korean War in particular has had a dramatic and profound impact. Most, if not all, of Korean migration since 1950 can be traced to the war and its consequences. Ji-Yeon Yuh2 In her poem, "fragments of the forgotten war," Korean American poet Suji Kwock Kim "speak[s] back—in English—" to American empire from a "very different positionality." The positionality expressed by the poem encompasses multiple generations of a Korean family divided and scattered by the Korean War: a Korean American daughter who dedicates the poem to her father and writes in his voice, and the father who in turn addresses in the poem the parent(s) he had to leave behind when fleeing [End Page 279] south during the war. Indeed, the poem opens with his address: "You whom I could not protect/ . . . when will I forget the NKPA soldiers who took you away for questioning,/so we never saw you again?/We three sons fled south in January 1951/without you. . . ."3 As one "note" in a collection entitled Notes from the Divided Country (2003), this poem captures the ironic disjuncture of remembering in graphic detail a war that, as the very title of the poem suggests, has been "forgotten." While the Korean War (1950–1953) has been dubbed the "Forgotten War" or the "Unknown War" by Americans, it remains for Koreans and the global Korean diaspora it engendered a defining moment of family and national history. The interrogative, "when will I forget," which opens Kim's poem transforms itself later into a declarative, "I'll never forget." The subject of the poem declares that he will "never forget" the horrors of war: the smells of burning and still living yet rotting flesh, the sight of a boy biting his arm in order to take his mind off the wound in his stomach. . . .4 Yet this first-hand witnessing, experiencing, and knowledge of such suffering exist in sharp contrast to and cannot fill in for that which he does not know: how the parents he was forced to leave behind must have suffered. In the poem, the recollected horrors produce a simultaneous knowing and unknowing: "I know you suffered, but I'll never know how."5 Similarly "speak[ing] back—in English—from [a] very different positionality," in an "Untitled" multimedia work by artist Ji-Young Yoo, one hundred shallow-relief faces, made of white clay and juxtaposed like tiles, act as a screen for the projection of digitized archival footage of the Korean War as well as textual excerpts from an oral history of Korean American memories of the war. One such remembrance, by second-generation Korean American Orson Moon, reads: "Why hold on to the past? For me, it is not the past. The fear and terror of this time period have carried forward into my dad's life. . . . It's carried forward to my sisters' lives, my life, as a hole, a silence." This piece is part of a unique interactive multimedia exhibit entitled "Still Present Pasts: Korean Americans and the 'Forgotten War.'" Ramsay Liem, the exhibit's Project Director, sees the exhibit as "a space of Korean American memory" that "lifts the silence shrouding the Korean War."6 Orson Moon speaks to how the silent memories of the Korean War are carried transgenerationally, passed from father to children...

Hollywood goes to Korea: Biopic politics and douglas sirk's Battle Hymn (1957)

Despite the lofty status of its director in American film history and genre study, Douglas Sirk's Battle Hymn (1957) has received remarkably little critical attention—a fact that reinforces the mar...

UNKNOWN GERMAN WORLD WAR II CIPHER DEVICE

Seeeking help from readers to identify an unknown World War II German cipher device captured at the end of the war. The device is reminiscent of a large Jefferson-Bazeries cylinder.

Indonesia's Unknown War and the Lineages of Violence in West Kalimantan

The preeminent feature of the post-Suharto Indonesian state is its extensive and intensive regional violence. Few observers have been surprised by the locations in which the worst of this violence has erupted. Three of these were home to longstanding rebellions against Indonesian rule. Aceh, the last territory subdued by the Dutch and home to a long-term, albeit low-intensity, independence movement, is now site of daily arson attacks and armed clashes between the Indonesian military and the Free Aceh Movement. East Timor, brutally invaded and annexed by Indonesia in 1975, was the site of massive violence both before and after the August 1999 referendum, through which it achieved independence. Irian Jaya, invaded by the Indonesian military in 1962 and integrated into the republic via a sham UN-sponsored act of free choice in 1969, is now experiencing ceremonial raisings of the independence movement's Morning Star flag, demonstrations, and riots. Although the Maluku islands' history of separatism pre-dating the Suharto era differs from the histories of the other territories noted here, the Maluku islands have also been rocked by serious inter-ethnic /religious violence that has left thousands dead and many more displaced. In each of these regions political violence erupted where local aspirations for independence have been quashed by the harsh combination of military rule and economic developmentalism.

New Studies Disputing Allegations of Bacteriological Warfare during the Korean War

In the television series Korea the Unknown War produced jointly by Thames Television (London) and WGBH (Boston) in 1990, General Matthew Ridgway, Commander in Chief of United Nations forces during the Korean War, called the accusations that the United States waged bacteriological warfare "black propaganda." The charges discredited the United States and, despite denials and many international discussions, have not been completely refuted until new. Following studies in archives previously not available for research and after uncovering new sources, many specific examples of black propaganda were discovered that contained false information and lies discrediting the United States. The mechanism of lies, which convinced the Korean population that bacteriological warfare was going on and that the only way not to become victims of the United States' inhuman cruelty was to fight, are shown in this paper.

Rediscovering history—new light on the Unknown War; Korea: The peninsular origins of the war; The origins of The Korean War: Volume 2, the roaring of the cataract; A substitute for victory: The politics of peacemaking at The Korean Armistice talks

Rediscovering history—new light on the Unknown War; Korea: The peninsular origins of the war; The origins of The Korean War: Volume 2, the roaring of the cataract; A substitute for victory: The politics of peacemaking at The Korean Armistice talks

Kingdom and Colony at War: Sixteen Studies on the Anglo-Zulu War of 1879

The Anglo-Zulu War of 1879 might seem familiar ground to many readers with an interest in the colonial wars of the nineteenth century. Yet there are many aspects of this conflict which historians have previously neglected. These sixteen studies, all based on extensive original research in Britain and South Africa, open up unexpected vistas by investigating entirely new aspects of the war, or by viewing those already known from a fresh perspective. Among the studies are investigations of the Zulu political and diplomatic responses to the British invasion. Also included are re-examinations of their strategy and tactics in the battles of Rorke's Drift and Khambula. Other studies throw the spotlight on the fascinating, but generally unknown low-intensity war along the borders of Zululand, and on the equally absorbing but sometimes amusing efforts in colonial Natal to prepare against a Zulu invasion.

Korea: The Unknown War.

Korea: The Unknown War.