Book Review: The Road to Dien Bien Phu: A History of the First War for Vietnam by Christopher Goscha

IF 0.2 4区 社会学 Q2 HISTORY War in History Pub Date : 2023-07-01 DOI:10.1177/09683445231183773g
Nathaniel L. Moir
{"title":"Book Review: The Road to Dien Bien Phu: A History of the First War for Vietnam by Christopher Goscha","authors":"Nathaniel L. Moir","doi":"10.1177/09683445231183773g","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"the insularity of Irish revisionist debates, citing Ian McBride’s recent criticism of some historians of Irish history for failing to place their work within wider theoretical or comparative frameworks (p.169). However, a weakness of Morrison’s book is that it too suffers from insularity. The extensive reflections in the last two chapters on the entrenched, sometimes personalised, disputes between historians of Ireland risk losing the interest of the military historian or general reader (especially those coming to the topic for the first time). A promising discussion of Alistair Thomson’s work on the ANZAC myth is not developed, neither is a brief reference to the killing of prisoners during the First World War (pp.170, 127). The reader does not learn how the killing at Kilmichael resembles or deviates from other guerrilla campaigns or close combat experiences. The scholarship of Erella Grassiani and Anthony King on combat motivation, cohesion and close combat would have been a good starting point. Retrospective accounts of false surrenders have also characterised controversial killings during the NATO-led campaign in Afghanistan (and many other conflicts). Nonetheless, Morrison has provided an outstanding excavation of one of the most contested days in Ireland’s war for independence.","PeriodicalId":44606,"journal":{"name":"War in History","volume":"30 1","pages":"349 - 351"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"War in History","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09683445231183773g","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

the insularity of Irish revisionist debates, citing Ian McBride’s recent criticism of some historians of Irish history for failing to place their work within wider theoretical or comparative frameworks (p.169). However, a weakness of Morrison’s book is that it too suffers from insularity. The extensive reflections in the last two chapters on the entrenched, sometimes personalised, disputes between historians of Ireland risk losing the interest of the military historian or general reader (especially those coming to the topic for the first time). A promising discussion of Alistair Thomson’s work on the ANZAC myth is not developed, neither is a brief reference to the killing of prisoners during the First World War (pp.170, 127). The reader does not learn how the killing at Kilmichael resembles or deviates from other guerrilla campaigns or close combat experiences. The scholarship of Erella Grassiani and Anthony King on combat motivation, cohesion and close combat would have been a good starting point. Retrospective accounts of false surrenders have also characterised controversial killings during the NATO-led campaign in Afghanistan (and many other conflicts). Nonetheless, Morrison has provided an outstanding excavation of one of the most contested days in Ireland’s war for independence.
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
书评:Christopher Goscha的《通往奠边府之路:越南第一次战争史》
爱尔兰修正主义辩论的狭隘性,引用伊恩·麦克布莱德(Ian McBride)最近对一些爱尔兰历史学家的批评,称他们未能将自己的工作置于更广泛的理论或比较框架中(第169页)。然而,莫里森的书也有一个缺点,那就是过于偏狭。最后两章对爱尔兰历史学家之间根深蒂固的、有时是个人化的争论的广泛反思,可能会让军事历史学家或普通读者(尤其是那些第一次接触这个话题的读者)失去兴趣。书中没有对阿利斯泰尔•汤姆森关于澳新军团神话的著作进行有希望的讨论,也没有简要提及第一次世界大战期间对囚犯的杀戮(第170页,127页)。读者不了解基尔迈克尔的杀戮与其他游击运动或近身战斗有何相似或不同。Erella Grassiani和Anthony King关于战斗动机、凝聚力和近距离战斗的研究是一个很好的起点。在北约领导的阿富汗战争(以及其他许多冲突)中,对虚假投降的回顾性报道也成为了有争议的杀戮的特征。尽管如此,莫里森对爱尔兰独立战争中最具争议的日子之一进行了出色的挖掘。
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
War in History
War in History Multiple-
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
53
期刊介绍: War in History journal takes the view that military history should be integrated into a broader definition of history, and benefits from the insights provided by other approaches to history. Recognising that the study of war is more than simply the study of conflict, War in History embraces war in all its aspects: > Economic > Social > Political > Military Articles include the study of naval forces, maritime power and air forces, as well as more narrowly defined military matters. There is no restriction as to period: the journal is as receptive to the study of classical or feudal warfare as to Napoleonic. This journal provides you with a continuous update on war in history over many historical periods.
期刊最新文献
Book Review: Building the Army’s Backbone: Canadian Non-Commissioned Officers in the Second World War by Andrew L. Brown Book Review: Out of Line, Out of Place. A Global and Local History of World War I Internments by Rotem Kowner and Iris Rachamimov Book Review: A Question of Standing: The History of the CIA by Rhodri Jeffreys-Jones Book Review: Secession and Separatist Conflicts in Postcolonial Africa by Charles G. Thomas and Toyin Falola Book Review: Winning and Losing the Nuclear Peace: The Rise, Demise, and Revival of Arms Control by Michael Krepon
×
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