Spying (in)spires: The dwindling likelihood of an Oxford spy ring to rival the Cambridge Five

IF 0.6 2区 历史学 Q1 HISTORY Contemporary British History Pub Date : 2023-09-22 DOI:10.1080/13619462.2023.2259319
Berenice Burnett, Erica Forktus, David V. Gioe
{"title":"Spying (in)spires: The dwindling likelihood of an Oxford spy ring to rival the Cambridge Five","authors":"Berenice Burnett, Erica Forktus, David V. Gioe","doi":"10.1080/13619462.2023.2259319","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article asks why no comparable spy ring to the Cambridge Five developed concurrently at Oxford University and argues that, based on an updated and comprehensive review of primary and secondary sources, holding out hope for a new revelation of one may be waiting for Godot. We argue that whilst structural and institutional factors played a significant role in the creation of a mid-20th century Cambridge spy ring, the role and agency of individuals was paramount, and Oxford was missing comparable personalities. Specifically, the galvanising effect of an intellectual authority figure in the person of Cambridge Don Maurice Dobb, the greater attention, talent, and strategy by Soviet intelligence recruiter Arnold Deutsch, and the higher level of ideological commitment and social reinforcement on the part of the Cambridge Five themselves—as a ring—were of greater significance. Not all these factors were present in Oxford and casts increasing doubt on whether an equivalent Oxford spy ring ever existed. Recently declassified files reveal that Oxford did produce Soviet era spies, but never a collective akin to that of the infamous Cambridge spies, who remain a unique historical and cultural touchstone to the present day.","PeriodicalId":45519,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary British History","volume":"29 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Contemporary British History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13619462.2023.2259319","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article asks why no comparable spy ring to the Cambridge Five developed concurrently at Oxford University and argues that, based on an updated and comprehensive review of primary and secondary sources, holding out hope for a new revelation of one may be waiting for Godot. We argue that whilst structural and institutional factors played a significant role in the creation of a mid-20th century Cambridge spy ring, the role and agency of individuals was paramount, and Oxford was missing comparable personalities. Specifically, the galvanising effect of an intellectual authority figure in the person of Cambridge Don Maurice Dobb, the greater attention, talent, and strategy by Soviet intelligence recruiter Arnold Deutsch, and the higher level of ideological commitment and social reinforcement on the part of the Cambridge Five themselves—as a ring—were of greater significance. Not all these factors were present in Oxford and casts increasing doubt on whether an equivalent Oxford spy ring ever existed. Recently declassified files reveal that Oxford did produce Soviet era spies, but never a collective akin to that of the infamous Cambridge spies, who remain a unique historical and cultural touchstone to the present day.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
间谍(在)塔尖:牛津间谍圈与剑桥五人组竞争的可能性越来越小
这篇文章提出了一个问题,为什么牛津大学没有与剑桥五人组相媲美的间谍网同时发展起来,并认为,基于对一手和二手资料的更新和全面审查,我们对戈多的新发现抱有希望。我们认为,虽然结构和制度因素在20世纪中期剑桥间谍圈的形成中发挥了重要作用,但个人的作用和代理是至关重要的,而牛津缺乏可与之相比的人物。具体来说,剑桥大学唐·莫里斯·多布(Don Maurice Dobb)这一知识权威人物的激励作用,苏联情报招募人员阿诺德·多伊奇(Arnold Deutsch)的更大关注、更有才能和更有策略,以及剑桥五人组(Cambridge Five)本身更高层次的意识形态承诺和社会强化——作为一个圆环——都具有更大的意义。并非所有这些因素都存在于牛津,这让人们越来越怀疑牛津是否曾经存在过类似的间谍网。最近解密的文件显示,牛津大学确实培养过苏联时期的间谍,但从来没有像臭名昭著的剑桥间谍那样的集体,直到今天,剑桥间谍仍然是一个独特的历史和文化试金石。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
14.30%
发文量
34
期刊介绍: Contemporary British History offers innovative new research on any aspect of British history - foreign, Commonwealth, political, social, cultural or economic - dealing with the period since the First World War. The editors welcome work which involves cross-disciplinary insights, as the journal seeks to reflect the work of all those interested in the recent past in Britain, whatever their subject specialism. Work which places contemporary Britain within a comparative (whether historical or international) context is also encouraged. In addition to articles, the journal regularly features interviews and profiles, archive reports, and a substantial review section.
期刊最新文献
‘No status – no census!’ The causes and consequences of the 1971 and 1981 Northern Ireland census boycotts The humanist movement in modern Britain: a history of ethicists, rationalists and humanists The Beveridge Report: Blueprint for the welfare state American management strategy in the British civil service: the post-1968 office work measurement crusade and the rise of managerialism This is the BBC: entertaining the nation, speaking for Britain? 1922-2022
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1