Pub Date : 2022-11-25DOI: 10.1080/07292473.2023.2150475
D. Graff
Asia, the largest of the continents, is not only vast in physical extent but also amazingly diverse, embracing cultures as different as those of China, India, Japan, and Iran, as well as the nations of Southeast Asia and (in part) the Arab world. As large as it looms for geographers, however, Asia has long been a sort of terra incognita for military historians writing in English and other Western languages. Most of what has been written focuses on just a few episodes defined primarily as conflicts between European or American protagonists and Asiatic opponents, from the Persian invasion of Greece, the Crusades, and the Mongol forays into eastern Europe to the building of the British Raj in India, the Boxer Rebellion in China, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, and the recent interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan. The focus is usually on the Western side in the conflict, with Asians appearing most often in the role of the exotic Oriental ‘other’. The violence of Asians against other Asians, which accounts for the overwhelming majority of the continent’s martial past, has received much less attention. Apart from the obvious difficulty of mastering the languages and understanding the cultures, the relative neglect of Asian warfare may also be attributed to the persistence of impressions formed during the nineteenth century and the first half of the twentieth century, when western militaries, endowed with all the advantages flowing from the industrial revolution and the social and political dynamism that accompanied it, ran roughshod over the forces of Asian states and empires. One of the legacies of the colonial era was that most Asian peoples were perceived as weak and militarily ineffectual, and their ways of war, consequently, were not considered worthy of serious study. This contemptuous attitude permeates the older literature touching on Asian military history. It can be seen, for example, in the 1924 edition of Sir Charles Oman’s classic survey of medieval warfare, in which that eminent British military historian casually dismissed the notion that the Chinese could possibly have been the inventors of gunpowder, and in Barbara Tuchman’s willingness to repeat – in her influential bestseller Stilwell and the American Experience in China – the old chestnut that Chinese warlord armies of the early twentieth century had the habit of suspending their battles to put up umbr-
亚洲是世界上最大的大洲，它不仅幅员辽阔，而且多样性惊人，包括中国、印度、日本和伊朗，以及东南亚国家和(部分)阿拉伯世界的不同文化。然而，尽管亚洲对地理学家来说是一个巨大的隐现，但对于用英语和其他西方语言写作的军事历史学家来说，亚洲长期以来一直是一块未知的领域。所写的大部分内容主要集中在欧洲或美国主角与亚洲对手之间的冲突，从波斯人入侵希腊、十字军东征、蒙古人入侵东欧到英国在印度建立统治、中国的义和团运动、朝鲜战争、越南战争，以及最近对伊拉克和阿富汗的干预。在这场冲突中，焦点通常集中在西方方面，而亚洲人最常扮演的角色是充满异国情调的东方“他者”。亚洲人对其他亚洲人的暴力，在过去的军事冲突中占了绝大多数，却很少受到关注。除了掌握语言和了解文化的明显困难之外，对亚洲战争的相对忽视也可能归因于19世纪和20世纪上半叶形成的持续印象，当时西方军队拥有工业革命带来的所有优势以及随之而来的社会和政治活力，对亚洲国家和帝国的军队粗暴对待。殖民时代的遗产之一是，大多数亚洲人民被认为是软弱的，军事上无能为力，因此，他们的战争方式被认为不值得认真研究。这种轻蔑的态度弥漫在有关亚洲军事史的旧文献中。例如，在1924年版的查尔斯·阿曼爵士(Sir Charles Oman)关于中世纪战争的经典综述中，我们可以看到，这位著名的英国军事历史学家随意驳斥了中国人可能是火药发明者的说法，芭芭拉·塔奇曼愿意在她颇具影响力的畅销书《史迪威与美国在中国的经历》中重复一个老生常谈:20世纪初的中国军阀军队习惯于暂停战斗，以备不时之需要
{"title":"Metanarratives in Asian Military History","authors":"D. Graff","doi":"10.1080/07292473.2023.2150475","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07292473.2023.2150475","url":null,"abstract":"Asia, the largest of the continents, is not only vast in physical extent but also amazingly diverse, embracing cultures as different as those of China, India, Japan, and Iran, as well as the nations of Southeast Asia and (in part) the Arab world. As large as it looms for geographers, however, Asia has long been a sort of terra incognita for military historians writing in English and other Western languages. Most of what has been written focuses on just a few episodes defined primarily as conflicts between European or American protagonists and Asiatic opponents, from the Persian invasion of Greece, the Crusades, and the Mongol forays into eastern Europe to the building of the British Raj in India, the Boxer Rebellion in China, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, and the recent interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan. The focus is usually on the Western side in the conflict, with Asians appearing most often in the role of the exotic Oriental ‘other’. The violence of Asians against other Asians, which accounts for the overwhelming majority of the continent’s martial past, has received much less attention. Apart from the obvious difficulty of mastering the languages and understanding the cultures, the relative neglect of Asian warfare may also be attributed to the persistence of impressions formed during the nineteenth century and the first half of the twentieth century, when western militaries, endowed with all the advantages flowing from the industrial revolution and the social and political dynamism that accompanied it, ran roughshod over the forces of Asian states and empires. One of the legacies of the colonial era was that most Asian peoples were perceived as weak and militarily ineffectual, and their ways of war, consequently, were not considered worthy of serious study. This contemptuous attitude permeates the older literature touching on Asian military history. It can be seen, for example, in the 1924 edition of Sir Charles Oman’s classic survey of medieval warfare, in which that eminent British military historian casually dismissed the notion that the Chinese could possibly have been the inventors of gunpowder, and in Barbara Tuchman’s willingness to repeat – in her influential bestseller Stilwell and the American Experience in China – the old chestnut that Chinese warlord armies of the early twentieth century had the habit of suspending their battles to put up umbr-","PeriodicalId":43656,"journal":{"name":"War & Society","volume":"42 1","pages":"20 - 25"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2022-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"59413177","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-11-25DOI: 10.1080/07292473.2023.2150476
Brian McAllister Linn
In the last four decades many of the scholarly norms in American military history have changed beyond recognition. Much of this is due to the contributions of what was then termed the ‘new military history’ and is today referred to as ‘war and society’. Military history is the study of war and the institutions that wage it. Its traditional approach has been narrative and its focus on operations, political-military relations, technology, strategy, the armed forces, and leadership. The new military history/war and society, influenced by interdisciplinary theory, explored such diverse topics as race and gender, the social impact of war, the environment, and culture. Although some believed, and continue to maintain the fields constitute separate, even hostile sub-disciplines, the broad tent of the Society for Military History, the major professional organisation, reflects the consensus and cooperation among most practitioners. Within the community the labels have become largely self-identifiers, providing insight into areas of interest, methodology, and audience rather than the academic version of the Crips and Bloods. My own career reflects this, for in the process of detailing the history of the US Army I would end up writing two books that might be classified as traditional operational history, two that could be termed war and society, and a fifth that is a hybrid. Given my conviction that conflict between military history and war and society, if there ever was one, is moot, this essay will not be yet another attempt to parse out their commonalities and divergencies. Rather, my intention is to examine the evolution of three master narratives: the American Way of War, Huntington’s military professionalism, and counterinsurgency (COIN). They were chosen because each meets three criteria. The first is that they have continued to generate both academic and military interest. Second, all were appropriated, redefined, and politicised by American military intellectuals. Finally, and more idiosyncratic, I was introduced to these particular topics over forty years ago – almost concurrently
{"title":"Forty Years On: Master Narratives and US Military History","authors":"Brian McAllister Linn","doi":"10.1080/07292473.2023.2150476","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07292473.2023.2150476","url":null,"abstract":"In the last four decades many of the scholarly norms in American military history have changed beyond recognition. Much of this is due to the contributions of what was then termed the ‘new military history’ and is today referred to as ‘war and society’. Military history is the study of war and the institutions that wage it. Its traditional approach has been narrative and its focus on operations, political-military relations, technology, strategy, the armed forces, and leadership. The new military history/war and society, influenced by interdisciplinary theory, explored such diverse topics as race and gender, the social impact of war, the environment, and culture. Although some believed, and continue to maintain the fields constitute separate, even hostile sub-disciplines, the broad tent of the Society for Military History, the major professional organisation, reflects the consensus and cooperation among most practitioners. Within the community the labels have become largely self-identifiers, providing insight into areas of interest, methodology, and audience rather than the academic version of the Crips and Bloods. My own career reflects this, for in the process of detailing the history of the US Army I would end up writing two books that might be classified as traditional operational history, two that could be termed war and society, and a fifth that is a hybrid. Given my conviction that conflict between military history and war and society, if there ever was one, is moot, this essay will not be yet another attempt to parse out their commonalities and divergencies. Rather, my intention is to examine the evolution of three master narratives: the American Way of War, Huntington’s military professionalism, and counterinsurgency (COIN). They were chosen because each meets three criteria. The first is that they have continued to generate both academic and military interest. Second, all were appropriated, redefined, and politicised by American military intellectuals. Finally, and more idiosyncratic, I was introduced to these particular topics over forty years ago – almost concurrently","PeriodicalId":43656,"journal":{"name":"War & Society","volume":"42 1","pages":"26 - 33"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2022-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41796857","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-02DOI: 10.1080/07292473.2022.2117907
M. Cabrera
The First World War brought a propaganda battle of enormous proportions to Spain. The conflict mobilised a popular debate in the country, and the belligerent powers deployed persuasive campaigns that included films as an instrument of control. Cinema put aside its traditional role of entertainment and turned war material into an ideological weapon. Despite the French monopoly of the Spanish film industry and the limitations imposed by the Spanish Government, Great Britain unleashed film campaigns that spread throughout Spain through private and diplomatic showings. This article examines the British film industry in Spain, analysing its operation and progressive improvement during the First World War.
{"title":"The British Film Campaign in Spain During the First World War (1914–1918)","authors":"M. Cabrera","doi":"10.1080/07292473.2022.2117907","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07292473.2022.2117907","url":null,"abstract":"The First World War brought a propaganda battle of enormous proportions to Spain. The conflict mobilised a popular debate in the country, and the belligerent powers deployed persuasive campaigns that included films as an instrument of control. Cinema put aside its traditional role of entertainment and turned war material into an ideological weapon. Despite the French monopoly of the Spanish film industry and the limitations imposed by the Spanish Government, Great Britain unleashed film campaigns that spread throughout Spain through private and diplomatic showings. This article examines the British film industry in Spain, analysing its operation and progressive improvement during the First World War.","PeriodicalId":43656,"journal":{"name":"War & Society","volume":"41 1","pages":"308 - 322"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2022-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43026027","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-09-22DOI: 10.1080/07292473.2022.2117908
R. Nachtigal
Since the centenary of the beginning of the First World War, many historical studies on Eastern Europe during the war and its aftermath have been published, by eastern European authors as well as in the west. This article provides an overview of recent Russian, Polish, Ukrainian, German and English contributions and sets out trends and various approaches. It generally covers publications between 2014 and early 2022 and takes a closer look at material in German and Slavic languages. It includes descriptive historiography as well as documentary material. Collections of articles are touched upon, but single articles from collections or journals are mentioned only occasionally. Given the abundance of contributions and the restricted space to present them here, this review only examines the war years until the October Revolution in Russia, up to the end of 1917.
{"title":"Current Historiography on Eastern Europe during the First World War: A Review*","authors":"R. Nachtigal","doi":"10.1080/07292473.2022.2117908","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07292473.2022.2117908","url":null,"abstract":"Since the centenary of the beginning of the First World War, many historical studies on Eastern Europe during the war and its aftermath have been published, by eastern European authors as well as in the west. This article provides an overview of recent Russian, Polish, Ukrainian, German and English contributions and sets out trends and various approaches. It generally covers publications between 2014 and early 2022 and takes a closer look at material in German and Slavic languages. It includes descriptive historiography as well as documentary material. Collections of articles are touched upon, but single articles from collections or journals are mentioned only occasionally. Given the abundance of contributions and the restricted space to present them here, this review only examines the war years until the October Revolution in Russia, up to the end of 1917.","PeriodicalId":43656,"journal":{"name":"War & Society","volume":"41 1","pages":"323 - 339"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2022-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43286622","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-09-05DOI: 10.1080/07292473.2022.2117900
S. Isaac
In 1141, Queen Matilda III of England and the Empress Matilda were active military commanders in the field against one another, often facing the same risks as their armies. Besides being worthy of attention as one of the rare moments when two women campaigned directly against each another, the conflict also has the advantage of having left enough documents from the women themselves to allow their voices to be heard alongside the gendered narrative of medieval chroniclers. What emerges here is a campaign history that confirms how both medieval men and women accepted the generalship of women, that shows how each woman was prepared by prior experience to manage complex administrations, and how, in the crisis moments of war, they navigated the pressures of medieval warfare.
{"title":"Women in Command: The Matildine War of 1141","authors":"S. Isaac","doi":"10.1080/07292473.2022.2117900","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07292473.2022.2117900","url":null,"abstract":"In 1141, Queen Matilda III of England and the Empress Matilda were active military commanders in the field against one another, often facing the same risks as their armies. Besides being worthy of attention as one of the rare moments when two women campaigned directly against each another, the conflict also has the advantage of having left enough documents from the women themselves to allow their voices to be heard alongside the gendered narrative of medieval chroniclers. What emerges here is a campaign history that confirms how both medieval men and women accepted the generalship of women, that shows how each woman was prepared by prior experience to manage complex administrations, and how, in the crisis moments of war, they navigated the pressures of medieval warfare.","PeriodicalId":43656,"journal":{"name":"War & Society","volume":"41 1","pages":"247 - 263"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2022-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47730174","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-31DOI: 10.1080/07292473.2022.2117903
K. Roy
This article examines the rise and fall of the Pindaris in India between the mid eighteenth and early nineteenth century. The Pindaris started their career as military mercenaries of the Maratha chiefs. In the first decade of the nineteenth century, they became semi-autonomous non-state powers and threatened both their employers as well as the expanding British Empire in India. The Pindari threat became intense in Central and West India. As this article shows, in the first half of the nineteenth century, an amalgam of kinetic and non-kinetic measures helped the East India Company to suppress and pacify the Pindaris.
{"title":"Pacifying the Pindaris: Warfare and state building by the British in India, 1750–1830","authors":"K. Roy","doi":"10.1080/07292473.2022.2117903","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07292473.2022.2117903","url":null,"abstract":"This article examines the rise and fall of the Pindaris in India between the mid eighteenth and early nineteenth century. The Pindaris started their career as military mercenaries of the Maratha chiefs. In the first decade of the nineteenth century, they became semi-autonomous non-state powers and threatened both their employers as well as the expanding British Empire in India. The Pindari threat became intense in Central and West India. As this article shows, in the first half of the nineteenth century, an amalgam of kinetic and non-kinetic measures helped the East India Company to suppress and pacify the Pindaris.","PeriodicalId":43656,"journal":{"name":"War & Society","volume":"41 1","pages":"264 - 284"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2022-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48903572","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-31DOI: 10.1080/07292473.2022.2117906
F. Pretorius
This study investigates the role played by General Louis Botha in the South African War of 1899 to 1902 and assesses his military skills in his encounters with the British forces in both the set-piece battle phase in the first months of the war and the guerrilla phase in the last two years of the war. It also analyses his attitude to peace and his participation in the peace process since the successive British commanders-in-chief Lord Roberts and Lord Kitchener had in this respect both direct and indirect contact with him as commandant-general of the South African Republic (the Transvaal) in the last two years of the war.
{"title":"General Louis Botha’s Role in the South African War, 1899–1902","authors":"F. Pretorius","doi":"10.1080/07292473.2022.2117906","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07292473.2022.2117906","url":null,"abstract":"This study investigates the role played by General Louis Botha in the South African War of 1899 to 1902 and assesses his military skills in his encounters with the British forces in both the set-piece battle phase in the first months of the war and the guerrilla phase in the last two years of the war. It also analyses his attitude to peace and his participation in the peace process since the successive British commanders-in-chief Lord Roberts and Lord Kitchener had in this respect both direct and indirect contact with him as commandant-general of the South African Republic (the Transvaal) in the last two years of the war.","PeriodicalId":43656,"journal":{"name":"War & Society","volume":"67 3","pages":"285 - 307"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2022-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41284237","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-01DOI: 10.1080/07292473.2022.2087398
Jing Liu
This article examines the agency of local societies of the Sino-Korean maritime frontier in the circulation, utilisation, and management of intelligence that was intertwined with Chosŏn Korea’s subtle central-local relations in the international environment of northeast Asia during the Ming-Manchu conflict. It argues that the enhanced mobility of coastal populations in a highly pivotal sea space contributed to their multilateral espionage activity, within which their individual influence developed and deviated from state interests. This is exemplified by the wartime career of Ch'oe Hyoil, a Korean military man and intelligence agent residing on the Ŭiju coast, who shifted political identities and connected with multiple powers to acquire and transmit intelligence within the Ming-Manchu confrontation. His premediated escape to the sea in 1639 particularly illuminates the connectivity of coastal communities and the various roles of administrations at different levels in handing border espionage.
{"title":"Sea routes, intelligence agents, and the social dynamics of the Sino-Korean maritime frontier during the Ming-Manchu conflict","authors":"Jing Liu","doi":"10.1080/07292473.2022.2087398","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07292473.2022.2087398","url":null,"abstract":"This article examines the agency of local societies of the Sino-Korean maritime frontier in the circulation, utilisation, and management of intelligence that was intertwined with Chosŏn Korea’s subtle central-local relations in the international environment of northeast Asia during the Ming-Manchu conflict. It argues that the enhanced mobility of coastal populations in a highly pivotal sea space contributed to their multilateral espionage activity, within which their individual influence developed and deviated from state interests. This is exemplified by the wartime career of Ch'oe Hyoil, a Korean military man and intelligence agent residing on the Ŭiju coast, who shifted political identities and connected with multiple powers to acquire and transmit intelligence within the Ming-Manchu confrontation. His premediated escape to the sea in 1639 particularly illuminates the connectivity of coastal communities and the various roles of administrations at different levels in handing border espionage.","PeriodicalId":43656,"journal":{"name":"War & Society","volume":"41 1","pages":"163 - 181"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2022-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45666474","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-21DOI: 10.1080/07292473.2022.2087399
Mark Bennett
Following the startling Prussian victory in the Austro-Prussian War of 1866, European observers sought to understand the war’s lessons and to apply them to future conflict. This article traces the way in which commentators in Britain, France, Prussia, Austria, and the various secondary states of Germany evaluated tactical developments resulting from the war. It highlights the transnational community of interest in military affairs, and how some imperfections in military learning from the war were nationally specific while others transcended borders. Understandings of the war’s battlefield implications were often slow to develop, and imperfectly anticipated conditions in the subsequent Franco-Prussian War.
{"title":"International analysis of battlefield performance in the Austro-Prussian War, 1866–1870","authors":"Mark Bennett","doi":"10.1080/07292473.2022.2087399","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07292473.2022.2087399","url":null,"abstract":"Following the startling Prussian victory in the Austro-Prussian War of 1866, European observers sought to understand the war’s lessons and to apply them to future conflict. This article traces the way in which commentators in Britain, France, Prussia, Austria, and the various secondary states of Germany evaluated tactical developments resulting from the war. It highlights the transnational community of interest in military affairs, and how some imperfections in military learning from the war were nationally specific while others transcended borders. Understandings of the war’s battlefield implications were often slow to develop, and imperfectly anticipated conditions in the subsequent Franco-Prussian War.","PeriodicalId":43656,"journal":{"name":"War & Society","volume":"41 1","pages":"182 - 200"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2022-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47586382","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-20DOI: 10.1080/07292473.2022.2087401
A. Seipp
This article explores the reception of the American-made board game Fulda Gap: The First Battle of the Next War in the Federal Republic of Germany in the early 1980s. The German peace movement used the game, which depicted conventional, chemical, and nuclear war on German territory, as a potent symbol of what they believed to be American and NATO disregard for German lives and sovereignty. The controversy over the game reflected the changing character of German-American relations during the ‘Second Cold War’ and increasing concerns among Germans about the possible consequences of superpower conflict in Central Europe.
{"title":"Fulda Gap: A board game, West German society, and a battle that never happened, 1975–85","authors":"A. Seipp","doi":"10.1080/07292473.2022.2087401","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07292473.2022.2087401","url":null,"abstract":"This article explores the reception of the American-made board game Fulda Gap: The First Battle of the Next War in the Federal Republic of Germany in the early 1980s. The German peace movement used the game, which depicted conventional, chemical, and nuclear war on German territory, as a potent symbol of what they believed to be American and NATO disregard for German lives and sovereignty. The controversy over the game reflected the changing character of German-American relations during the ‘Second Cold War’ and increasing concerns among Germans about the possible consequences of superpower conflict in Central Europe.","PeriodicalId":43656,"journal":{"name":"War & Society","volume":"41 1","pages":"201 - 219"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2022-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44726174","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：