Monthly Archives: August 2011

My work at the Spinnaker Tower, Portsmouth

Around six months ago I was comissioned by Continuum, the operators of the Spinnaker Tower in Portsmouth, to provide some historical research about the Tower, Portsmouth and the surrounding area. The aim was twofold – one, to enhance the visitor experience, and two, to increase visitor numbers.

My work focused on two aspects. I researched as many interesting and enlightening statistics as I could about Portsmouth, the Harbour, the Solent and everything you could see from the viewing platforms. And on the viewing platforms itself, I worked on interpreting what exactly you can see and where, and putting the history of it all into some kind of context.

In all, from comission to hand-in the project took two weeks, working in my spare time, and included one site visit.

Some of the results can be seen below:

As you can see, the Tower’s designers have come up with some eye-catching triangle shaped graphics panels around the base of the tower, which are aimed at ‘pulling-in’ passing trade with facts and figures and pictures of sites you can see from the top of the tower.

It’s a great example of what can be done quickly and on a sensible budget, but professionally. I hope it helps increase visitor numbers for the Tower.

12 Comments

Filed under Local History, site news

Memorial plaques to Portsmouth’s Blitz dead stolen

I’ve just read something pretty disappointing on the Portsmouth News website. Apparently thieves have stolen plaques from a memorial in Kingston Cemetery, remembering victims of the Blitz in Portsmouth.

http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/local/east-hampshire/i_hope_and_pray_the_thieves_see_the_error_of_their_ways_1_3005015

The memorial is granite, and around 1.5 metres high, with four plaques listing over 120 names, including many whose bodies could not be identified. The inscription reads:

“Erected to the memory of those men, women and children both known and unknown who died as a result of enemy bombing on this city and whose last resting place is near this spot.”

What really makes me sad about this is that either the thieves managed to prize the metal from the memorial in broad daylight (you can drive around the cemetery, so perhaps they took a van right up to it), or they did it at night when the Cemetery is closed. It is locked at dusk, because I have almost been locked in before (my Grandad was once years ago). I doubt very much whether people who are willing to go to those lengths will be too bothered about defacing a war memorial, sadly. Many of my family were in Portsmouth during the blitz, they could very easily have been killed and their names ended up on these plaques. A memorial is the same as a grave, and to steal a memorial is like grave-robbing.

It’s by no means the first time that metal has been robbed from a war memorial – perhaps the most high profile case is that of the Naval Memorial in Portsmouth, where one large bronze plaque was taken from the memorial on Plymouth Hoe. We are told that the price of scap metal is at an all-time high at the moment, and certainly there have been a lot of thefts of lead from School, museum and church roofs in the last couple of years. And then theres the theft of copper railway signal cabling.

One has to look at scrap metal dealers in this kind of situation. Someone, somewhere, will be no doubt receiving some big lumps of metal that are quite obviously from a war memorial. If scrap metal dealers had more scruples about what they accepted from dodgy characters out the back of vans, then people wouldn’t bother going out and nicking it in the first place. For me, it is time legislation got tough with the scrap metal industry.

7 Comments

Filed under Remembrance, Uncategorized

Hitler: Dictator or Puppet? by Andrew Norman

Plenty of theories have been advanced about Adolf Hitler – his background, his inspirations and his mental state. But to my knowledge this book by Andrew Norman is one of the first to assert that he was suffering from Schizophrenia.

Norman begins by taking a detailed look at Hitler’s childhood, his family and his upbringing. One assertion is that Hitler knew plenty of Jews early in life and was certainly no anti-semite until later in life. Indeed, anti-semitism had existed in Europe long before 1933, and certainly long before Hitler. Add to this mix his attitudes to Marxism, the impact of World War One, the crisis in Germany between 1918 and 1933 and we have what we could describe as either a toxic mix of causes, or an extremely unfortunate set of circumstances coming together to create a monster.

One of the most striking things in this book is the examination of Hitler’s early influences. One is particularly distubring, namely Lanz van Liebenfels. Liebenfels was a former monk, no less, who edited and produced a rather cheap, base anti-semite magazine entitled Ostara. Hitler never seems to have acknowledged his sources, particularly once he hit the ‘big stage’. Perhaps, as Norman suggests, Hitler did not want to lessen his own image. One influence I was not aware of is that of Houston Stewart Chaimberlain. I’m even more surprised, given that Chaimberlain was born in Southsea in 1855! Chaimberlain left Britain at the age of 14 to undergo treatment for poor health, and while visiting health resorts in Germany was accompanied by a Prussian tutor. Chaimberlain was influenced towards German history and culture. Chaimberlain was later a great supporter of Hitler.

The conclusion is that Hitler was unhinged by his disfunctional family background, under the influence of some particularly nasty influences from an early age, and particularly susceptible given his possible schizophrenia. The former condition would certainly explain his undoubted delusions, be it his faith in astrology, or his ‘command delusions, which led him to follow the advice of a mysterious ‘voice’ rather than his generals sound reasoning. Clearly not a decision making policy that one would vote for in the next general election, thats for sure.

Anyone who has even flicked through Mein Kampf will be well aware that it is full of ranting and raving, and is a disparate collection of diatribes on various subjects, from Judaism, Bolshevism and even sexually transmitted diseases and poverty. It certainly adds to the feeling that Hitler was not a person capable of rational thought processes. I guess this is where the title of the book comes from – rather than being a Dictator in control, Hitler was in fact a puppet of his influences and his illness.

Hitler’s relationships with women also come under scrutiny. Namely, that he had an improper relationship with his young niece, who died in suspicious circumstances, and also that his relationship with Eva Braun was unusual to say the least. This all adds to a picture of a person who, clearly, was not quite right in the head in any sense. Even his own close family seem to have had very little time for him.

But does all of this really matter? Firstly, we can chew over the causes of Hitler’s behaviour all we like, but it doesn’t change the fact that he and his regime commited some of the most heinous crimes in history. Contrary to popular opinion, men such as Stalin may have killed more people, but it is the horrific, industrial and hateful manner of the Nazi regime that still shocks today. And surely understanding how such a person came into being, is crucial to recognising evil today. Thankfully, I doubt very much whether someone in Hitler’s condition would reach prominence in the modern world, and for that we must be very grateful.

Hitler: Dictator or Puppet? is published by Pen and Sword

24 Comments

Filed under Book of the Week, politics, Uncategorized, World War One, World War Two

Historian for hire!

Just a little reminder that I’m available for helping out with any of the following:

  • Family history research – Ordering and interpreting birth, marriage and death certificates; drawing up family trees; overcoming those little snags in your family history!
  • Military history research – researching and interpreting individuals service records; war diary look ups; medal winners; casualties; Prisoners of War
  • Archive and library research – particularly in the Portsmouth/Hampshire/West Sussex area; also London, such as the National Archives, Imperial War Museum, British Library etc.
  • Talks and lectures, workshops, etc. – I can give talks to any local history group, which can be tailored to the audience. Also workshops etc.
  • Researching and writing articles and other publications – I have previously written articles for Britain at War Magazine
  • Researching and writing text for Exhibitions – I have previously written text for display at the Spinnaker Tower in Portsmouth

And absolutely anything else that you can think of, to do with history! Contact me to discuss what I can do, rates etc.

13 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Shoreham Airshow – the pictures

Here’s some pictures from Shoreham Airshow last weekend:

And last but by no means least, an archive pic of the Red Arrows in a slightly happier time – at the Trafalgar Fleet Review in 2005. This great pic was taken by my sister Nicola:

 

6 Comments

Filed under airshow, event

The Battle of the North Cape by Angus Konstam

Angus Konstam is a consumate naval historian, and in the past I have made much use of his work on pirates and motor torpedo boats. Here, he turns his attention to one of the least-known naval battles of the Second World War, that of the North Cape, which resulted in the sinking of the German Battlecruiser Scharnhorst.

In 1943 the Western Allies were reinforcing the Soviet Union via the treacherous Arctic Convoys, in the main from Scotland to the ports of Archangel and Murmansk. By supplying large amounts of lend-lease material, the Western Allies were helping the Soviets to fight the Germans on the Eastern Front. Hence the Arctic Convoy route became a vital point for the allies to defend, and the Germans to attack.

Although the German Navy was nowhere near the size of the Royal Navy, it was still feared that surface raiders such as the Scharnhorst might slip out of their Fjords in Norway and wreak havoc on the convoys. That is to say nothing either of the threat of U-Boats. As a result of these threats of the importance of their cargoes, convoys were shephered by naval escorts, and significant convoys were shadowed by larger units of the Home Fleet.

Convoy JW55B had sailed from Loch Ewe in Scotland, and the Scharnhorst, along with her escorting destroyers, sailed out of Altenfjord in Norway to intercept. Thanks to Ultra intelligence decrypts the Royal Navy knew that she had sailed. The convoy was escorted by a powerful force of Cruisers, and the commander of the Home Fleet, Admiral Sir Bruce Fraser, sailed from Scapa Flow in his Flagship HMS Duke of York. Bruce Fraser is possibly one of the least well-known fighting Admirals of the Second World War.

The Scharnhorst was eventually detected by the shadowing force of Cruisers, which after engaging her briefly, reported her presence to Fraser in Duke of York. Eventually the Royal Navy’s ships circled in on the Battlecruiser as she steamed back to Norway. Superior gunnery skills from the British ships pounded the Scharnhorst into scrap metal, and a torpedo attack from British destroyers finally sent her below the waves.

What Konstam does really well here, is to demonstrate the fighting qualities of both navies. The Royal Navy was adept at sailing snd fighting anywhere – be it freezing cold seas, with mountainous waves. In fact, in Nelsonian tradition, it was expected of Captains to lay their ships alongside enemy and pound them into razorblades. The Kriegsmarine, for the most part, hid its major ships away from danger, and did not wish to risk their loss. The Admiralty devolved much responsibility to its commanders, who could fight their ships as they though fit. In contrast, Hitler, Donitz and the Fleet Command in Kiel interfered constantly with Konter Admiral Bey’s command. Konstam also emphasises the superiority of British technology, particularly the use or radars in gunnery direction.

This is a very gripping read, and one that I enjoyed immensely. The North Cape was a dramatic battle, and Angus Konstam tells its story engagingly.

The Battle of The North Cape is published by Pen and Sword

10 Comments

Filed under Book of the Week, Navy, Uncategorized, World War Two

Shoreham Airshow 2011

After giving it a miss last year, three generations of Daly’s made a return to Shoreham Airshow yesterday. There was so much to see, I do apologise if I forget anything. We missed the first couple of displays stuck in traffic on the A27 – I believe it was a glider display.

The Consolidated Catalina is a real special aircraft that I was very pleased to see. A flying boat not dis-similar to the Short Sunderland, the Catalina played a vital role during the Second World War in reconnaisance, transport, and in all manner of maritime roles. It’s not an aircraft that you see too often.

There was a very minimal representation from the RAF this year – only training aircraft in the Hawk, the Tutor and the Tucano. I’m actually quite a fan of the Hawk, a nippy little jet. The RAF also provided one of their distinctive yellow Search and Rescue Sea Kings, which marked the 70th anniversary of RAF Search and Rescue by giving a demonstration of winching, from an RNLI RIB on a trailer on the runway.

I might be biased, but the Parachute Regiment Red Devils Parachute Display team are easily the best around. In fact, I’m not sure why other Regiments are allowed to waste time and money having parachute display teams. They always land on a sixpence.

The Great War display is always very interesting, evocative of the magnificent men in their flying machines. It’s incredible that these such basic airframes fly like they do. Something that occured to me is how similar the Sopwith Camel is to the Fairey Swordfish, which was present this year. The little ‘Stringbag’ was obsolete at the start of the war in 1939, but still managed to cripple the Bismarck in 1941.

My Grandad and myself were pondering which has a more evocative sound and sight – the B17 Flying Fortress or the Avro Lancaster, both of which displayed at Shoreham this year. We came to the conclusion that the Lancaster is like a solid, dependable truck, while the B17 is like a Humvee – big and bold, but with some bling too.

Some of the most interesting aircraft are some of the lesser known jets – the Hawker Hunter and the De Havilland Vampire are fantastic aircraft, and look and sound beautiful.

The centrepiece of every Shoreham airshow is the Battle of Britain style airfield scramble. We are quite fortunate to see this, where every year a couple of Messerschmitt’s blitz the aerodrome, before the Spitfires and Hurricanes get up and chase them off. It is great to see, with the pyrotechnics, and Dads Army firing on the sidelines, but when you go every year, I can’t help wonder if I’m the only person who knows exactly what is going to happen and when. But then again, if they didn’t do it, you would feel let down!

Shoreham always has plenty of aerobatic teams. The Yakovlevs, flying Russian WW2 vintage aircraft, the SWIP team, the Blades, and the Breitling wingwalkers (young ladies who have to be seen to be believed!).

After the Vulcan had to pull out at the last minute with fuel tank problems, the organisers obviously had to find something unique to close the show. Step forward Christian Moullec. This frenchman’s act really is unique. A conservationist, Moullec raises birds (Geese or Cranes) from hatching, and trains them to fly along with him, in his microlight. It is a fantastic spectacle.

It did feel like there wasn’t quite as much at this years show as there has been in the past. The Red Arrows have never been allowed to make a ful display at Shoreham, apparently due to aviation rules and the proximity of air routes out of Gatwick. It is sad that the British Armed Forces could not provide more display aircraft, but then again they are probably all busy in Afghanistan or Libya. It is a shame, because seeing a Typhoon or an Apache at an airshow could be the thing that recruits a pilot of the future.

It is wonderful that the Shoreham Airshow takes place every year, and raises money for the RAF Associations appeal. Remember, unlike many free airshows, Shoreham is a charity event raising for a good cause. It would be nice to see something different sometimes – about 75% of the prgramme is the same most years, which obviously if you go each year, is a bit repetitive. But then again, I’ve never organised an airshow, and it can’t be an easy thing to do, so hats off to the guys at Shoreham!

(whisper it quietly, but lets just say I believe there might be an airshow a lot closer to Portsmouth sometime soon… I can’t reveal my sources, but fingers crossed eh!)

20 Comments

Filed under airshow, event, Royal Air Force, Vulcan Bomber, World War One, World War Two

Flight Lieutenant Jon Egging

I’ve just got back from a nice day at Shoreham Airshow. But rather than write a report right now, I would like to pay tribute to Flight Lieutenant Jon Egging RAF.

Flt Lt Egging, 33, was killed when his Hawk crashed on the way back to Bournemouth Airport after the Red Arrows display at the Bournemouth Airshow earlier today. I’m sure I don’t need to say anything too much about how awesome the Red Arrows are – in many people’s minds the best military air display team in the world.

Footage suggests that Flt Lt Egging, a Harrier pilot who had served in Afghanistan, crashed after attempting to steer his plane away from houses. The MOD have not confirmed but it is believed that his Hawk jet suffered a malfunction.

13 Comments

Filed under airshow, Royal Air Force

Portsmouth’s World War Two Heroes: the ‘tour’

If you look in my ‘talks’ page, you will notice that I have a couple of provisional bookings to give talks on my forthcoming book, ‘Portsmouth’s World War Two Heroes’.

Just a reminder that I am available to give talks to local history groups, at museums, or other institutions. All talks are fully illustrated, with either OHP’s or Powerpoint. For a list of my previous talks see my ‘talks’ page above: I have given many in the past few years.

Talks based on ‘Portsmouth’s World War Two Heroes’ are bookable any time from February 2012 onwards, but I can still give any of my other talks listed on my profile any time. I’m happy to do book signings, workshops, anything. Contact me to discuss!

7 Comments

Filed under portsmouth heroes, site news, World War Two

Horsemen in No Mans Land: British Cavalry in Trench Warfare 1914-1918 by David Kenyon

Cavalry actually proved rather useful on a tactical level, in particular where troops and squadrons were attached to infantry in small-scale, combined arms attacks. Larger bodies of horsemen, however, seem to have been less effective, as the command structures were too rigid and required approval from too many officers before the cavalry could be committed. More often than not, by the time a decision had been made, the window of opportunity had long gone. Trench Warfare was far from ideal for the use of cavalry, horses being a weapon best used in mobile warfare. After years of fighting no-mans land was heavily cratered in most places, and the logistics of not only getting horses across shell holes, but then the enemy trench lines, was problematic.

The existence of a Cavalry Corps HQ was also controversial. This HQ had a dual role, in that not only did it act as an administrative focus, but its General also hankered after commanding the whole corps in action. Parallels could be drawn between the Cavalry Corps HQ on the Western Front and Browning’s Airborne Corps HQ in Market Garden. There was, arguably, no need for an operationak Corps level command for Cavalry, as more than one Division were never likely to take to the field in a co-ordinated manner. The presence of such a HQ was not only superfluous, but also muddied a complicated command and communication situation.

Horses are often compared unfavourably to the tank in the context of 1914-1918. The usual contention is that by 1916 the horse had had its day, the tank was the future, and that the cavalry was only retained thanks to the patronage of men such as Haig. In fact that tank was still very much in its infancy. Technology and tactics were still in their infancy, and the tank was no way in a position to completely replace the horse on the battlefield.

I suspect that the author embarked on this book with the intention of rehabilitating the Cavalry in the historiography of the BEF. This is quite understandable, given his background as a horseman, and the manner in which the Cavalry has been mistreated by history. It is a more than admirable effort, and sheds new light on the wider issues, beyond general misconceptions. I think it would be inaccurare to state that the Cavalry could have won the war, nor did it play a decisive part in the fighting. But it did, perhaps, play a more important role – at least on a tactical level – than historians have led us to believe.

Horsemen in No Mans Land is published by Pen and Sword

20 Comments

Filed under Army, Book of the Week, Uncategorized, western front, World War One

Counter-insurgency by Ian Beckett and John Pimlott

In the past I have heard all kind of funny things said about counter-insurgency warfare. It’s not ‘real war’, or that it causes armies to ‘go soft’. Both of which are, in my opinion, horse shit. But I guess on the other hand it is also symptomatic that military historians have not really studied COIN as much as they should have. This is a very useful book, therefore. And it is extremely relevant, in that both of the authors have lectured at Sandhurst and other Defence institutions.

The British Army has perhaps the most experience of fighting counter-insurgency. Not only does the Army have a history of fighting small, foreign wars against populations and having to make do and improvise, but in the long drawn-out withdrawl from Empire British Forces were time and time again called in to provide a bulwark against unsavoury insurgents. This happened in Malaya, Borneo, Aden, Oman, and in numerous places in Africa. And not to mention Northern Ireland. And the British Army has an enviable record of success. One of the key lessons learnt from the insurgency in Malaya is the importance of uniting civilian and military leadership – in Malaya the land forces commander was also the Governor-General, not only providing unity in leadership but also eliminating a possible area for rifts. In Oman, every effort was made to win ‘hearts and minds’ of the locals, and to take care of economic and social factors so the insurgency did not seem a viable alternative.

The French Army, on the other hand, did not fare too well in Vietnam or Algeria. The author of this chapter even feels that at times the French Army studied COIN so much that some officers began to sympathise far too much with revolutionary ideals. Certainly, the French failure in Vietnam led to the debacle that the US waded into not long after. And failure in Algeria led to all manner of instability at home, including leading the Generals to machine for a change of Government.

It would be difficult to argue that the US Army has a good reputation when it comes to COIN. Clearly, the flexible, unconventional and tactful approach that it calls for does not lend itself well to forces based on overwhelming firepower and materiel. Listening to quotes from US Generals over Vietnam, you get the feeling that it was not the kind of war that they wanted to fight. Well, you’re lucky if you get to pick your wars, otherwise you fight the ones your masters want you to. And when you do, you should fight to win. Or at the very least, not lose. Lines of command were hopelessly complicated – one observer found it hard to work out who was actually running the Vietnam War, with so many headquarters and Departments involved.

In contrast, the Portuguese Army actually had a pretty good track record at dealing with COIN in countries such as Guinea, Angola and Mozambique. This is even more remarkable when we consider Portugal’s size, it’s economy, and the fact that its forces were routed in Goa not long before. Their success in fielding such forces in their colonial possessions and their subsequent success would suggest that size is not an issue in dealing with COIN. A military coup led to Portugal’s withdrawal from Empire in 1974, rather than any kind of military reverse.

It’s a similar picture with the Rhodesian Army, which fought a COIN campaign against the pre-cursors to Robert Mugabe in the African bush. As well as the Selou Scouts and forming a Rhodesian SAS, part of the Rhodesian’s tactics for countering the terrorists included erecting game fences and minefields along frontiers. The amount of haven states along Rhodesia’s borders, however, made things more problematic. Rhodesia might have become Zimbabwe eventally, but the Rhodesian security forces were by no means defeated, and in the opinion of the author could have continued the campaign indefinitely.

So, looking at these various COIN campaigns, do any lessons emerge? Firstly, that civil and military leaderships needs to be as one – either united, or merged. Officers need to forget about ideas of set piece battles and focus on the campaign at hand, and how to win it. The US General who said that he would not let Vietnam ‘destroy everything that the US Army stands for’ was ironically showing the kind of inflexibility that loses COIN campaigns in any case. And far from making security forces ‘go soft’, the flexibility and agility required in COIN campaigns can actually be very useful – witness the experience gained by the British Army in Northern Ireland, and how it engendered excellent leadership at junior NCO level.

Whether we like it or not, insurgencies are a fact of life in the modern world, and if we want to defeat them we would do better to work out how best to make their success impossible, rather than bemoaning that they do not fit into our fixed ideas of what war is, or should be.

This is a very credible book, and I enjoyed reading it immensely.

Counter-insurgency is published by Pen and Sword

9 Comments

Filed under Army, Book of the Week, Uncategorized

Commonwealth War Graves horticulture survey

Gravestones in Ypres Town Commonwealth War Gra...

The kind of scenery that makes the CWGC famous (Image via Wikipedia)

The Commonwealth War Graves Commission are once again asking for the public’s views on the horticulture of their Cemeteries.

Despite stating that there are no pre-conceived agendas, the questions in the survey are very leading. Namely, how would you feel about their being less flowers and shrubs, grass that isn’t green or isn’t mown so regularly, or no grass at all?

It points in two directions for me – one, a desire to cut costs. This is kind of understandable in the current economic climate, but surely there are better ways of cutting deficits than cheapening war cemeteries? Secondly, the CWGC has in recent years had a climate change agenda that it can’t seem to let go of. Try as they might – and they have – gravel in war cemeteries looks bloody awful. It’s a cemetery, not a car park.

If you want to protect that traditional CWGC cemetery – commonly regarded as the most moving and well-kept war cemeteries in the world – follow the link below:

88 Comments

Filed under Remembrance, Uncategorized, World War One, World War Two

Mud, Blood and Poppycock by Gordon Corrigan

This sure is a book that divides opinions among historians. Hence, I like it. I believe that Corrigan is quite right to take on the ‘mythbuster’ mantle. There are a trememdous amount of fallacies in history, and many surround the Great War. Not helped, it has to be said by cultural influences such as Blackadder, or ‘Oh what a lovely war!’.

Corrigan’s quote about the myth that Tommy marched up to the front in 1914 singing Tipperary, smoking a pipe, sat in a trench for four years, and went over the top and saw all his mates killed is one of my favourite passages in any history book. The original BEF in 1914, the old contemptibles, were a tiny force of 4 then 5 Divisions. The British Army expanded slowly, with Kitcheners volunteers largely entering the fray in 1916 on the Somme. Also, very few units spent very long in the front-line. My research suggests that a five day stretch in the front line would have been a long stint. Often, Battalions might spend up to a month away from the front training and resting. By no means did ever Tommy spend all of the war sat in a wet, muddy hole.

The conduct of the war also comes in for examination. Corrigan feels, perhaps with some value, that Haig could not really have done much better than he did. And, actually, I am rather inclined to agree. It goes against the perceived wisdom of an aloof cavalryman unconcerned with losses, but I have yet to hear, read or see of anyone suggesting HOW the ‘Donkeys’ could have fought the war differently. How the war was fought was a product of its time, with the mass armies of the nineteenth century, massive technological and industrial change but leaders and institutions that had not yet fully grasped these changes.

Corrigan’s argument on casualties is more difficult to support, I feel. Supported by statistical analysis, including percentages, Corrigan argues that the losses in the Great War were not as frightful as is generally thought. True, Britain did not lose as many men as France or Germany, but we need to remember that the vast majority of those killed were conscripts, whereas Germany and France had large standing armies. My research has shown that TWICE as many people from Portsmouth died between 1914 and 1921 as did between 1939 and 1945. Having researched thousands of casualties in Twentieth Century conflicts, I am cautious to add that losses are not just about numbers, but the social impact.

But whether we agree or disagree with certain points is, I think, besides the point. When a historiography is riddled with assumptions and becomes as stale as that of the Great War, anything that gives it a good kick up in the air cannot be a bad thing. Even if they’re not strong arguments, it makes us go back and re-evaluate our thinking again.

25 Comments

Filed under Book of the Week

Ian Daglish

I was very saddened to hear of the tragic passing of Ian Daglish yesterday.

Ian was the author of the Over the Battlefield series of books looking at the Normandy battles of Operations Epsom, Goodwood and Bluecoat. These took a very refreshing view of the battlefields and helped me a great deal in my understanding of the battle of Normandy. Ian was also very helpful to me personally when it came to researching Portsmouth’s World War Two dead, in particular a couple of men killed in those battles that he had written about himself.

The Second World War military history field is a lesser place for his passing. I’m sure the military history community will join me in offering my condolences to his family.

4 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized