The Times, 2 January 1941, 4

The Mediterranean theatre of war has seen a lot of action in recent days, as these headlines from The Times (4) show. While the Italian outpost at Bardia is besieged from land, sea and air, British armoured units are approaching Tobruk, 70 miles to the west. On Monday night, Italian warships at Taranto were bombed by the RAF: '11 bombs were seen to burst around the target' (though without such striking success as attended the Royal Navy's raid last November). The Greek army is continuing its slow and stubborn advance, though 'the present line of Italian defence shows no clear sign of cracking'.
...continue reading

3 Comments

The Manchester Guardian might have allowed itself a moment for self-congratulation here, as its previous call for compulsory fire-watchers appears to have been heeded (5). (Though it was not alone, as an article on page 10 quotes similar commentary from The Times, the Daily Telegraph, the Daily Express and the Daily Mail.) The decision was broadcast last night by Herbert Morrison, the Minister for Home Security; on the reading of The Times it was 'as a result of the fires in the City of London caused by incendiary bombs' (6). Morrison himself said (4):

I must say this plainly to each one of you: it is your duty to yourself, to your neighbours and friends, to your City and your country, to guard your own home, business, or factory, from fire bombs. You cannot stop a high-explosive bomb from bursting: but you can stop a fire bomb from starting a fire.

The fire services are too few to do this everywhere, and are anyway needed to fight big fires. But while Morrison invokes the volunteer spirit of the Home Guard, he also invokes the principle of compulsion:

Compulsion will apply to every one, of every grade -- managers and office workers, as well as manual workers -- as the needs of the situation may require. Factories and businesses of all kinds, large and small, will be subject to severe penalties for any neglect of their obligations.

Even households 'must, if possible, provide at least one member, man or woman, for its party'. The war is increasingly forcing the British people to subordinate their own will to that of the state.
...continue reading

3 Comments

The Times, 31 December 1940, 4

The true extent of the destruction caused by Sunday night's air raid on London has now become clear (the story has now moved to first place on page 4 of The Times, though in the Guardian the 'Second Great Fire of London' shares that honour with news of RAF raids on Germany and Italy). The human cost is actually surprisingly low (more on that later) but severe, irreparable damage has been done to many of the City's historic buildings. The Times's leading article sums it up (5), making no attempt at dispassion:

From the military point of view the damage caused was negligible. But if the enemy's purpose was the destruction or damage of historic buildings, he may well claim a substantial addition to his record of senseless destruction of the noblest works of man. Guildhall has been severely damaged, and thus a modern tyrant has had his passing revenge on the source and home of resistance to despotism and lawlessness in the past. The Central Criminal Court was another very suitable target for HITLER's airmen. St. Bride's with its spire, which HENLEY called a "madrigal in stone," is a charred shell, and St. Lawrence Jewry, the LORD MAYOR's official church, is also burned out. Five other churches are seriously damaged. St. Paul's itself was saved by heroic efforts, but WREN's Chapter House -- a lovely building -- was gutted. Many lesser-known buildings are scarred by the flames; but the destruction of so many of WREN's churches, all signal expressions of a great age of English thought and feeling, is irreparable.

...continue reading

Xmas wins!

Gus Officer. Six O'Clock Diamond: The Story of a Desert Harrasser. Northcote: Woolhouse Press, 2008. The memoir of a Second World War RAAF Kittyhawk pilot, who in 1942 was shot down over the Western Desert and spent the rest of the war as a POW.

Roland Perry. The Australian Light Horse: The Magnificent Australian Force and its Decisive Victories in Arabia in World War I. Sydney: Hachette Australia, 2009. A bit of a family connection here, as a couple of great-great-uncles were in the Light Horse. The subtitle gives me pause, however; but one probably shouldn't expect any better from the author of Monash: The Outsider Who Won a War.

4 Comments

Manchester Guardian, 30 December 1940, 5

President Roosevelt had one of his famous 'fireside chats' (i.e. over the radio) with the American people last night. This one would seem to deserve its lead-story status in the Manchester Guardian, as he firmly committed the United States to Britain's side in the war, even if not as a non-combatant but as the 'arsenal of democracy' (5), producing the weapons needed to beat Hitler. 'There can be no reasoning with incendiary bombs', Roosevelt said. If Britain fell, America would have to face the Nazis alone, and 'to survive in such a world of "brute force" the United States would have to become permanently a militaristic Power'. Early signs are that this is a popular policy; the isolationists are becoming, well, isolated.
...continue reading

4 Comments

Observer, 29 December 1940, 7

Today seems to be a slow news day, if such a thing can exist in the middle of a world war. The Observer leads today with a non-story (7). Free French radio reports that Hitler has demanded the handover to Germany of the Vichy fleet. Petain's response to this is unknown; for that matter, so is the veracity of this story. The only evidence given is that Admiral Darlan was called to Paris after three days of Cabinet talks, and the British government reportedly does not believe that a 'crisis is imminent'. Yet the question of whether Vichy France will 'collaborate with Hitler' or challenge him by 'renewing the fight for her Mediterranean and African Empire' is described as the 'issue of the moment'.
...continue reading

1 Comment

airminded,1920-2000

Following Ross' suggestion I've plugged airminded itself into the Google Ngram Viewer (for British English over 1920-2000 with a smoothing of 3). The word wasn't used until c. 1925 and grew in popularity until the end of the Second World War. It then began its long descent. Around 1960 its heyday was definitely over and by the late 1990s it was less popular than almost ever before. There's a noticeable dip in the years around 1940, which makes me wonder if the menace of aviation had temporarily overwhelmed its promise. But that's probably reading too much into it.

Ian Castle. London 1914-17: The Zeppelin Menace. Oxford and New York: Osprey Publishing, 2008. Illustrated by Christa Hook.

Ian Castle. London 1917-18: The Bomber Blitz. Oxford and Long Island City: Osprey Publishing, 2010. Illustrated by Christa Hook.

As the titles suggest, these two entries in Osprey's long-running Campaign series dovetail nicely. One takes as its subject the Zeppelin raids on London during the First World War, the other the Gotha and Giant raids on London. Together they provide a concise overview of London's first encounters with aerial bombardment.

'Concise' is key. Each book is just 96 pages long and amply illustrated (more on which later). That doesn't leave a lot of room for discussion, so the text can't always be as detailed as one would like. (For example, in the 1917-18 volume, Castle is incredulous that in March 1917, Britain's anti-aircraft guns were ordered not to fire on aircraft even if identified as German, unless expressly ordered. There must have been a reason for this, misguided or not, but Castle doesn't say what it was.) The focus on London helps: the Zeppelin raids on the Midlands and Hull can be covered in just a sentence or two, as can the Gotha raids on the south-east coast of England. But conversely, after having gone to the trouble of explaining the who, what, when and why of the bombing campaigns it's a shame that Castle has to skimp on the where. Still, London was undoubtedly the major object of the German raiders and so choosing it as the subject here is not unwarranted.

The books follow a common format: after an introduction setting out the origins of the campaigns, there's a chronology, notes on the leaders of each side and the strategies they employed. At the end come a brief bibliography, an order of battle and an index. There's also a page on London's few remaining scars of and memorials to the air raids.

In between are narrative accounts of the air raids themselves. By comparison with the Second World War, these were smaller and fewer and so each one can be described in some detail. It's not quite true to say the reader learns about the fall and effect of each and every bomb, but if you look at the accompanying maps it's not quite untrue either. These show the flightpaths (where known) of the various airships and bombers and where they dropped their bombs. Insets (more common in the Zeppelin book than the bomber one) are sometimes added to allow individual street-level detail. The death and destruction caused by the German raiders, of course, is not neglected; nor are the losses they themselves suffered (increasingly at the hands of the British defenders as time went on, but also thanks to a devastatingly high accident rate). Shifts in strategy and organisation on both sides come through clearly; advances in technology less so. I could wish for more detail on the popular response to the air raids, but then I always do.

It's no discredit to Castle's clear and succinct text (or to Hook's detailed illustrations of particular scenes and incidents) to say that the best thing about these books are the photographs. Nearly all are contemporary, the vast majority of which I haven't seen before, and all are well chosen. They portray such things as bomb-wrecked houses, sinking Zeppelins, and police warnings. Some are really quite remarkable, such as one taken from an airborne Gotha showing plumes of smoke rising over central London. Most interesting to me were the large number of British propaganda postcards depicting Zeppelins, a topic I've examined before. Again, many were new to me. My only criticism is that the captions no more than hint that the images are very likely fake (though I think one or two might be genuine).

If you're after concise, interesting and accurate books on the Blitz before the Blitz, London 1914-17 and London 1917-18 are probably what you're looking for.

14 Comments

Finally, something to justify the existence of the Internet. The Google Ngram Viewer takes the corpus of words formed by the Google Books dataset (i.e. books, journals, magazines, but not newspapers) and lets you plot the changes in frequency of selected ones over time. There are all sorts of interesting questions you could (in principle) answer with this tool, so let's give it a whirl.

aeroplane, airplane, 1890-2000

Here's a pretty basic one. Blue is aeroplane, red is airplane, the period is 1890-2000. (The smoothing in all these plots is 3 years.) Aeroplane was initially the more popular term, but airplane has predominated since about 1925. Note the peaks during the world wars -- airplane was 5 times more likely to be used in the Second World War than in the 1990s.

But we don't have to use the English corpus: there's also American English and British English. Here's the American version.
...continue reading

1 Comment

J. M. Spaight. Volcano Island. London: Geoffrey Bles, 1943. Although Spaight is one of my guys, I didn't know from the title alone if it was even about aviation. Turns out that it is; here's the blurb from the front dustjacket:

IN 1939, our Island was peaceful and innocuous; now in 1943, with its volcanic battlestations of Bomber Command, it has the most terrific capacity for far-reaching destruction the world has ever known.

My copy came with a bonus: a clipping from the Daily Telegraph date 12 February 1960 about a lecture given by P. M. S. Blackett about the Tizard-Lindemann clashes before the war and other matters relating to air defence and offence: Tizard 'related that at one meeting [of the Air Council] the main business was the inspection of an exhibition of different designs of W.A.A.F. underwear.'