Post by edrotondaro on Oct 13, 2016 17:28:49 GMT -6
Hi folks:
Well it's true that old battles never die, they just get re-examined by a new generation. Jutland along with Trafalgar and Midway are probably the most written about naval battles in history. And unlike the other two, Jutland still arouses controversy and debate even a century after it happened.
Those of us who love military history are fortunate that despite the rising costs of printing and the inroads of e-books and the internet, there are lots of history books being published. In fact, it is very near impossible to keep up with the avalanche of titles that come out each month. When I review the bibliography of most military history books, I am awestruck by the number of sources that the writer has listed and quoted from. Where the hell did he or she find the time to read all that? I'm retired and I can't keep up with it all. This year is the 100th anniversary of the Battle of Jutland and as a result, there have been a lot of books published on this battle. The two below are probably the most interesting.
"The Jutland Scandal" by Vice Admiral John Harper and Admiral Reginald Bacon (Skyhorse Publishing 2016) is actually two books in one. After the battle of Jutland, the British public and Parliament wanted answers regarding why the battle was not a decisive victory for the hitherto invincible Royal Navy. Then Captain John Harper was tasked with writing a record of the battle by the First Sea Lord Admiral Wemyss based solely on written logs, maps, etc without oral reporting. The Harper Report as it became known would be widely anticipated and requested no less than 22 times by Parliament. It would have the advantage of being largely unbiased as the author had not been present at the battle and was relying on the official written records. But due to both political in-fighting within the Royal Navy and the upcoming publication of "The Official History of the Great War - Naval Operations" by Sir Julian Corbett, the report never saw the light of day. This leads us to the second part of this book, the one written by Admiral Bacon who was at Jutland.
Bacon's account entitled "The Jutland Scandal" was published in 1925 in response to the book "With the Battlecruisers" by Filson Young who made it a point to attack Admiral John Jellicoe's cautiousness while extolling Vice Admiral David Beatty's bold handling of the Battlecruiser Squadron. Even Winston Churchill had gotten into the act and attacked Jellicoe. With two camps arising in the post war navy, reputations had to be maintained or defended and nobody (except perhaps Jellicoe who generally stayed above the fray) came out looking good. Harper then published his own account entitled "The Truth About Jutland" which allowed him to place blame whereas his earlier unpublished account had been unbiased. Bacon then subsequently revised his book to reflect Harper's account (which he generally supported. Confused? So am I. If anything it is a cautionary tale how egos and military establishments will go out of their way to protect themselves. In many ways, this fighting clouded objective study of Jutland for decades.
The Jutland Scandal has both accounts and gives the reader a good look at the actual battle as well as the attempts by Beatty's supporters to re-imagine history. At least one copy of Harper's report survived in the archives of the Royal Navy and it is the basis of part one of this book. bacon's revised edition of his book covers part tow of this study. All told you've got 252 pages of text, notes and appendixes to cover Jutland from the most immediate viewpoint of the battle. This book promises to offer some new insights into the greatest clash of battleships in history.
"Jutland - The Unfinished Battle" by Nicholas Jellicoe (Seaforth Publishing 2016) is both an account of the battle and a more detailed account of the bitter dispute that lasted up until Jellicoe's death in 1935. And yes, Nicholas Jellicoe is related to Admiral John Jellicoe, he is his grandson. Normally I would be a bit suspect of an author who is related to the subject and question his objectivity, but Mr. Jellicoe seems to have the advantage of distance and time in evaluating his illustrious grandsire. Most reviewers praise his even handed approach which was certainly less partisan than Admiral Bacon who served with Jellicoe. Now I was only vaguely aware of the so-called "Jutland Controversy" until I read Robert Massie's "Castles of Steel"which is the sequel to his book "Dreadnought". I generally assumed that the controversy was over why Jutland was not a decisive victory. That is only part of the dispute, the real fight was between supporters of Admiral David Beatty and those who defended Admiral John Jellicoe. Lest we think this sort of behavior is only found in the Royal Navy, the US saw a similar war of words in 1947 between Admiral William Halsey and Admiral Thomas Kincaid over the battle of Leyte Gulf (my other naval obsession). Beatty's personality which was already suspect took some well deserved hits over his version of Jutland. Sadly it does obscure to a degree the tactical doctrine reforms that he enacted when he succeeded Jellicoe as commander of the Grand Fleet. Jellicoe does come under some well deserved scrutiny for his over cautious approach to the battle, but he was in Churchill's own words, "The only man who could have lost the war in an afternoon". He merely had to avoid a decisive defeat which he did.
These two books should give the naval history buff a lot to think about and hopefully shed more light on Jutland.
Well it's true that old battles never die, they just get re-examined by a new generation. Jutland along with Trafalgar and Midway are probably the most written about naval battles in history. And unlike the other two, Jutland still arouses controversy and debate even a century after it happened.
Those of us who love military history are fortunate that despite the rising costs of printing and the inroads of e-books and the internet, there are lots of history books being published. In fact, it is very near impossible to keep up with the avalanche of titles that come out each month. When I review the bibliography of most military history books, I am awestruck by the number of sources that the writer has listed and quoted from. Where the hell did he or she find the time to read all that? I'm retired and I can't keep up with it all. This year is the 100th anniversary of the Battle of Jutland and as a result, there have been a lot of books published on this battle. The two below are probably the most interesting.
"The Jutland Scandal" by Vice Admiral John Harper and Admiral Reginald Bacon (Skyhorse Publishing 2016) is actually two books in one. After the battle of Jutland, the British public and Parliament wanted answers regarding why the battle was not a decisive victory for the hitherto invincible Royal Navy. Then Captain John Harper was tasked with writing a record of the battle by the First Sea Lord Admiral Wemyss based solely on written logs, maps, etc without oral reporting. The Harper Report as it became known would be widely anticipated and requested no less than 22 times by Parliament. It would have the advantage of being largely unbiased as the author had not been present at the battle and was relying on the official written records. But due to both political in-fighting within the Royal Navy and the upcoming publication of "The Official History of the Great War - Naval Operations" by Sir Julian Corbett, the report never saw the light of day. This leads us to the second part of this book, the one written by Admiral Bacon who was at Jutland.
Bacon's account entitled "The Jutland Scandal" was published in 1925 in response to the book "With the Battlecruisers" by Filson Young who made it a point to attack Admiral John Jellicoe's cautiousness while extolling Vice Admiral David Beatty's bold handling of the Battlecruiser Squadron. Even Winston Churchill had gotten into the act and attacked Jellicoe. With two camps arising in the post war navy, reputations had to be maintained or defended and nobody (except perhaps Jellicoe who generally stayed above the fray) came out looking good. Harper then published his own account entitled "The Truth About Jutland" which allowed him to place blame whereas his earlier unpublished account had been unbiased. Bacon then subsequently revised his book to reflect Harper's account (which he generally supported. Confused? So am I. If anything it is a cautionary tale how egos and military establishments will go out of their way to protect themselves. In many ways, this fighting clouded objective study of Jutland for decades.
The Jutland Scandal has both accounts and gives the reader a good look at the actual battle as well as the attempts by Beatty's supporters to re-imagine history. At least one copy of Harper's report survived in the archives of the Royal Navy and it is the basis of part one of this book. bacon's revised edition of his book covers part tow of this study. All told you've got 252 pages of text, notes and appendixes to cover Jutland from the most immediate viewpoint of the battle. This book promises to offer some new insights into the greatest clash of battleships in history.
"Jutland - The Unfinished Battle" by Nicholas Jellicoe (Seaforth Publishing 2016) is both an account of the battle and a more detailed account of the bitter dispute that lasted up until Jellicoe's death in 1935. And yes, Nicholas Jellicoe is related to Admiral John Jellicoe, he is his grandson. Normally I would be a bit suspect of an author who is related to the subject and question his objectivity, but Mr. Jellicoe seems to have the advantage of distance and time in evaluating his illustrious grandsire. Most reviewers praise his even handed approach which was certainly less partisan than Admiral Bacon who served with Jellicoe. Now I was only vaguely aware of the so-called "Jutland Controversy" until I read Robert Massie's "Castles of Steel"which is the sequel to his book "Dreadnought". I generally assumed that the controversy was over why Jutland was not a decisive victory. That is only part of the dispute, the real fight was between supporters of Admiral David Beatty and those who defended Admiral John Jellicoe. Lest we think this sort of behavior is only found in the Royal Navy, the US saw a similar war of words in 1947 between Admiral William Halsey and Admiral Thomas Kincaid over the battle of Leyte Gulf (my other naval obsession). Beatty's personality which was already suspect took some well deserved hits over his version of Jutland. Sadly it does obscure to a degree the tactical doctrine reforms that he enacted when he succeeded Jellicoe as commander of the Grand Fleet. Jellicoe does come under some well deserved scrutiny for his over cautious approach to the battle, but he was in Churchill's own words, "The only man who could have lost the war in an afternoon". He merely had to avoid a decisive defeat which he did.
These two books should give the naval history buff a lot to think about and hopefully shed more light on Jutland.