Just Finished Reading: Munich – The 1938 Appeasement Crisis by David Faber (FP: 2008) [437pp]

The Munich Crisis of September 1938 was a long time coming. With Hitler taking his place as Chancellor in 1933 a new spirit was growing in Germany and the rest of Europe was struggling to accommodate it. Some, of course, saw the German demands as quite reasonable. Others saw danger coming and pledged a hard-line to any demands for a degrading of Versailles or giving in to Germany’s growing territorial demands. But Germany wasn’t going to wait around for other countries to give her what she knew was already hers. Emboldened by a lack of response to repeated breaches of the Versailles Treaty the new German government publically, if metaphorically, ripped it up and proceeded to ignore it. The re-occupation of the Rhineland by German military forces followed – protests rang out, most especially in France, but again nothing was done. As Germany got more of its demands handed to it without any significant cost it was time for a bigger push – the unification of Germany with Austria denied them after the armistice in 1918. The German military in particular knew of the risks. They had been undermining any democratic forces inside Austria for some years but still, if France and Britain strongly objected and threatened war what could be done. Combined they could, it was believed, overwhelm the existing German forces who were still in the process of modernisation. But Hitler was adamant and the Anschluss went ahead – and STILL the French and British did nothing but protest. Now only two more territorial advances remained to play for – the German Sudetenland on the borders with Czechoslovakia and the Eastern border with Poland. But first things first – the Czechs.

Here things were more complex and more dangerous for the Germans than the recently completed Anschluss. Czechoslovakia had a treaty with France which obligated them to come to the Czech’s aid if attacked. Likewise Britain had a treaty with France to come to *her* aid if attacked. So, if Germany attacked Czechoslovakia and France attacked Germany in response then Britain would be obligated to come to France’s aid. This would mean a European war – only 20 years after the catastrophic Great War had ended. Both France and Britain were VERY keen to avoid this. Despite both increased military spending by both France and Britain (against much opposition in both countries) it was considered by both governments that neither of them were ready – alone or together – to face war with Germany (and most probably her Italian ally). Oddly of course at this point – 1938 – the German military command thought that they could not face a war with France on her own never mind in combination with Great Britain. In reality it’s probably arguable that ONLY Germany was in a position to wage modern war in 1938. Such thoughts were at the heart of the decisions about the Sudetenland in the cabinets of Paris and London. There was only one thing to do – negotiate. But how? The standard way, for centuries, was to hold an International Conference. This would have taken place under the League of Nations but Germany had withdrawn from it 5 years earlier. It was time for something new, something dramatic and direct – it was time for a face-to-face meeting with Hitler in the first example of what would later be called ‘Shuttle diplomacy’.

Of course the Munich Crisis of 1938 is remembered for what it failed to do – prevent a world war which erupted onto the world stage a mere 12 months later. Others see it as a real attempt to avert war despite the ultimate outcome. That extra year allowed Britain (at least) to ready itself for war with Germany and place itself in a much better position to fight a prolonged conflict in Europe and, inevitably, the rest of the world. It also showed the world that no matter what Hitler was given he would always demand more and that the only way to stop him was at gunpoint. By the time Czechoslovakia had been sacrificed to (hopefully) satisfy the German behemoth there was no longer another option available so, when the panzers rolled into Poland in September 1939 there was no attempt at further diplomacy and Britain declared war on 3^rd September – World War 2 had officially started.

After just reading ‘Munich’ by Robert Harris previously I was immensely impressed by how much of the real events made it into the novel. This detailed and honestly gripping narrative of (essentially) one man’s efforts to avert another European war quite often read like a political thriller. Most of the ‘action’ took place in smoke filled room (unless Hitler was there who HATED cigarette smoke) where government ministers and officials argued the toss and hammered out various ‘agreements’ between the 3 Powers (Czechoslovakia was barely involved in the negotiations and was hardly consulted at all). Interesting all those involved on the British and especially the French side knew exactly how odious their treatment of the Czechs was. They were fully aware that they were basically throwing a whole country to the wolves (no one really believed that Hitler would simply stop after assimilating the Sudeten Germans into the Reich) in the hope that Germany would finally be satisfied and leave them alone. The French could barely contain their shame at reneging on their treaty with the Czechs and largely left Chamberlain the run things – which more than suited the British Prime Minister who insisted throughout that he should be at the centre of things.

If you’ve read and enjoyed the fictional account of the 4 days in Munich by Robert Harris and wanted to know more about what actually went on then this is most definitely the book for you. Likewise if you want to know how the world slipped into another World War this will go a long way in that direction. MUCH more to follow about this pivotal moment in world history. Highly recommended.           

 

 

Looking Backwards: Nice Place You Have (1)

I’ve loved maps for as long as I can remember. Not only do they feed the imagination for far away and, presumably, exotic places, but they’re also mysteries to be unravelled. It always intrigued me how the maps had been created, how the people had travelled there and why were so many places saddled with such strange and bizarre names. I’m sure that my mother in particular spent many moments wondering why exactly I was chuckling when scanning an Atlas. It was of course the names of towns, rivers, mountains and lakes. Why, oh why, I wondered did they name that town by THAT name. Naturally, as always, such questions lead to many, many interesting places – and not all of them on maps. But what’s my point, you may be wondering about now, and how does it apply to my Ancestry investigations?

As my father was born in Southern Ireland and my mother had a very Irish maiden name I presumed that my lineage was going to be almost exclusively Ireland based. As I learnt very early on I was wrong – dead wrong. On my mother’s side most of her ancestors were from the Midlands and then, much later, scattered across the country but mostly from the Midlands southwards. Despite having (apparently) 36% Scottish DNA I have still yet to find any Scottish ancestors – but I’m working on that. But we should start from the beginning – at least as far as I’m concerned. My mother, I and both of my siblings were born in Liverpool (home of The Beatles!) on the North-West coast of England. This is from Wiki: The name comes from the Old English lifer, meaning thick or muddy water, and pōl, meaning a pool or creek, and is first recorded around 1190 as Liuerpul. According to the Cambridge Dictionary of English Place-Names, "The original reference was to a pool or tidal creek now filled up into which two streams drained". The place appearing as Leyrpole, in a legal record of 1418, may also refer to Liverpool. Other origins of the name have been suggested, including "elverpool", a reference to the large number of eels in the Mersey.

This is, of course, one of the great things about English place names – many of them are OLD and some of them are so old that no one actually knows where the name comes from. In this case ‘Old English’ means Anglo-Saxon but there are places with modernised versions of Roman names, Celtic names, Scandinavian names and so on and, of course, place names have an influence on family names with a typical ‘X of Y’ Surname not exactly uncommon. [Side Note: It’s always funny finding someone in my lineage called ‘Fletcher’ or ‘Bowman’ or some such and ponder “I wonder what THEIR ancestors did for a living!”].

Going back a few more generations a LOT of my ancestors came from in and around Wolverhampton. From Wiki:  The city is named after Wulfrun, who founded the town in 985, from the Anglo-Saxon Wulfrūnehēantūn ("Wulfrūn's high or principal enclosure or farm"). Before the Norman Conquest, the area's name appears only as variants of Heantune or Hamtun, the prefix Wulfrun or similar appearing in 1070 and thereafter. Alternatively, the city may have earned its original name from Wulfereēantūn ("Wulfhere's high or principal enclosure or farm") after the Mercian King, who according to tradition established an abbey in 659, though no evidence of an abbey has been found. The variation Wolveren Hampton is seen in medieval records, e.g. in 1381. So, solidly Anglo-Saxon again. I had no idea that Wolverhampton’s history went back quite that far.

Interestingly, digging a little deeper, a whole bunch of my maternal ancestors hail from a place called Sheriffhales in Shropshire. From Wiki: The name derives from Halh (Anglican) and scīr-rēfa (Old English) which is a combination of Hales (a nook of land, small valley) and Sheriff (a king's executive). At the time of the Domesday Book, it was held by Roger de Balliol the Sheriff of Shropshire. I did have a feeling it was a Norman sounding name but it looks like the village, which only had around 1000 people scattered across farmland when my 4^th great-grandfather lived there, pre-dated the Norman invasion.

Another interesting, and somewhat weird, place name is Gnosall in Staffordshire. My 4^th great-grandmother was born there at the turn of the 19^th century. From Wiki: The village was mentioned in the Domesday Book, in which it was named Geneshale. It is listed there as having a population of 12 households. According to research presented online by the University of Nottingham, the name Gnosall derives from a combination of the Old Welsh Genou meaning 'mouth' and the Mercian word halh meaning 'a nook of land' or 'a small valley' or 'dry ground in marsh.' The Gnosall Parish Council also believes that Gnosall derives from both Genou and halh, however believes that halh actually stands for 'low-lying land by a river' and states that Gnosall translates to a ‘narrow valley that suddenly opens out into a wider one’. That same site also states that there are at least 27 different spellings of the name, the oldest surviving record being for Geneshale in the Domesday Book of 1086, and that it is only by chance that Gnosall is the current spelling. How STRANGE is that one – a name so ‘odd’ that no one could agree on its spelling!

My 5^th great-grandmother was also born in Shropshire in a little place called Shifnal. From Wiki: The town, also once known as "Idsall" (relating to potential Roman links), most probably began as an Anglian settlement, established by the end of the 7th century. Shifnal is thought to be the place named "Scuffanhalch" in a 9th-century charter, as a possession of the monastery at Medeshamstede (later Peterborough Abbey). Though this seems a dubious claim, and the ancient charter is in fact a 12th-century forgery, the full picture is more complex. Sir Frank Stenton considered that "Scuffanhalch", along with "Costesford" (Cosford) and "Stretford", formed part of a list of places which had once been connected with Medeshamstede; and the charter purports to have been issued by King Æthelred of Mercia, during much of whose reign the bishop of Mercia was Sexwulf (or "Saxwulf"), founder and first abbot of Medeshamstede. The first part of the name "Shifnal" is reckoned to be a personal name, "Scuffa", while the second part, from "halh", means a valley, thus describing the town's topography. Unusually, the name of the town has alternated through the centuries between Idsall and Shifnal. Idsall is mentioned in a 9th-century charter as "Iddeshale", meaning "Idi's nook" or corner. A nook is said to be an area of land of approximately 20 acres (81,000 m2). It is often conjectured that the two names of Idsall and Shifnal were names of settlements on the east and west sides respectively of Wesley Brook, a brook which runs through the town, and is a tributary of the River Worfe. In the 19th century, J. C. Anderson, in his Shropshire its Early History and Antiquities, wrote that Idsall means "Hall of Ide", and that Shifnal is "Hall of Sceafa".

You see why I like looking at maps so much. Place names are not only important and endlessly fascinating but tell you a LOT about the history of that particular place as well as what was going on in the rest of the country. The things you can learn from an apparently simply enquiry into your ancestry continues to blow me away. MUCH more to follow…   

 

 

 

 

Just Finished Reading: Munich by Robert Harris (FP: 2017) [429pp]

September, 1938. With war clouds gathering on the horizon it looks increasingly likely the Europe will be at war for the second time in twenty years. But all hope is not lost. British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain has an idea, something that has never been attempted before – a personal appeal to Herr Hitler to come back from the brink. Chamberlain is convinced, as are some of his cabinet, that Hitler is a man they can do business with. He is, they tell themselves, above all else a pragmatist who knows that Germany, even re-armed, cannot stand against the combined forces of France and Great Britain backed up by her globe spanning Empire. Hitler, Chamberlain feels in his heart of hearts, will see sense. So begins four days of what would, in later decades, be called ‘shuttle diplomacy’ with the world’s peace in the balance. With a front row seat is Hugh Legat, attached to Number 10 from the Foreign Office, who has been pulled into the very centre of the action by his friendship with German diplomat Paul Hartmann who has information that could help stop the proposed invasion of Czechoslovakia. The British Secret Service are initially sceptical that Hartmann has much credibility but the German Secret Service are taking things very seriously indeed and could put the whole diplomatic effort in jeopardy as well as both friends very lives.

The Munich Crisis of 1938 and the whole Appeasement process has, over the years, received a lot of attention – most of it bad. The very word ‘appeasement’ has become very pejorative because, with the advantage of 20-20 hindsight it failed spectacularly in 1939 with the outbreak of World War Two (spoiler!). Here the author gives a much more nuanced and honestly sympathetic treatment of those four decisive days and the thinking behind both Chamberlain’s proposals and Hitler’s ultimate rejection of ‘peace in our time’. The overall tone of the book was that of a political thriller which was pretty impressive since most readers will go in already knowing the outcome. What was even more impressive, now knowing much more about the background to the events in September 1938 from subsequent reading, was just how close to actual events were portrayed here in fiction (or probably more accurately that horrible word ‘faction’). The only non-historical main characters were Legat (British) and Hartmann (German) which allowed the reader to be ‘in the room’ during most of action/conversations/debates around the events themselves. In effect Legat/Hartmann *was* the reader and very well handled that was too! Everything else, from the public pronouncements to the private conversations (I can only vouch for the British side on this) were pretty much accurate and taken from subsequently published diaries and letters. In other words the author’s research was spot on and he even, which I personally love, listed some of his researched books in a bibliography at the back. Not many novels would do this (unfortunately) and not many authors would bother (ditto). It just goes to show how confident the author was in the historical accuracy of his work – and he was right to be so.

Both this novel and my subsequent reading (review on Monday) actually paint a much more sympathetic picture of what Chamberlain was trying to achieve and both his motivation and doubts about doing so. His generation had lived through a cataclysmic war only 20 years previously and were willing to do almost anything to avoid a new one. In this Chamberlain and his cabinet were certainly not alone, indeed most of British public opinion was 100% behind his efforts to avoid war. But Chamberlain also was more than aware that he, the British government and the French were selling Czechoslovakia ‘down the river’ in the hope that they could avoid a wider war that could devastate the continent. They knew, as they indeed found out, that if their efforts failed they would be vilified by history but how would history have judged them if the Entente had gone to war with German over Czechoslovakia if such a thing had indeed been avoided? What a truly horrible position to be in and, in this exceptionally good novel, we ourselves are put right in the heart of things to make our own minds up about it. What would you do without the knowledge of what was coming next? It’s not anywhere near as cut and dried as you might assume. Definitely recommended for all thriller buffs and anyone interested in the last year of peace in Europe. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Just Finished Reading: Whiskey Tango Foxtrot – A Memoir by Kim Barker (FP: 2011) [300pp]

It was the opportunity of a lifetime plus, as her editor rightly said, she was expendable: no marriage and no children. But was it a step far too far? Sure, Kim was a reporter with the Chicago Tribune with years of journalistic experience under her belt but her experience as a foreign correspondent was zero. Actually she had barely been outside the US, spoke only English and knew almost nothing about Islam or Osama Bin Laden – so of course Afghanistan would be the place to cut her foreign debut teeth. After all, what could possibly go wrong? Apparently lots but if Kim was one thing she was a quick study. She only managed to offend her guide once when arguing with him about the substance of Islam after reading a book about it, she only annoyed the US military command once when she reported back exactly what the troops on the ground felt about the war and she very quickly learnt how to deal with Pakistani men who constantly tried to pinch her backside at every opportunity. Some skills came easier than others and some skills she wished she had never needed to acquire – like learning to concentrate exactly where you walked and where you put your hands after reporting on the aftermath of suicide and car bombs. But oddly, and even she found it practically inexplicable, not only did she adapt to an environment and situation completely outside her previous experience but she started to actually thrive in it and then become addicted to downtown Kabul and the day to day, hour to hour drama that was Afghanistan.

I picked this up some time ago because I’d seen trailers for the movie of the same name and because Tina Fey was on the cover. From seeing the trailer (I never saw the movie) I had assumed that this was going to be a light-hearted semi-sarcastic look at the war in Afghanistan told from the view of a reporter completely out of her depth and making mistake after mistake as she tried to get ‘good copy’ for her paper back home. There was certainly an element of this – especially early on – along with plenty of rye humour (which I always ‘heard’ in Tina Fey’s ‘voice’ throughout the book!) but there was some much more here. To say I was surprised by the quality of the writing says much more about me than the author. It was to be honest THE surprise hit of the year for me. Being largely inexperienced and not a little ignorant of foreign countries and cultures Kim managed to ‘see’ much of what was going on (and just as importantly not going on) in Afghanistan with an almost innocent eye and reported back her impressions without the sophisticated gloss we’re so used to. Reporting from ground level, both before and after the war expanded into Iraq, we see the lives of the local Afghans, political leaders in both Afghanistan and Pakistan (who’s influence in Afghanistan is far too often overlooked), how other journalists saw the conflict and the thoughts of the ‘boots on the ground’ which were all too often a mixture of ignorance, arrogance and mystification.

Author (Left) and Tina Fey (Right)

Like many people on the ground during those early years Kim saw a deep lack of understanding from the military of who exactly they were fighting and what exactly the overall mission was, she saw either unforgivable ignorance of or tacit complicity with the enormous levels of corruption at every level of the Afghan government, she saw the wasted opportunities occasioned by the sudden switch of resources to Iraq at just the wrong moment and she saw US troops confused at how exactly they were supposed to train their future Afghan replacements with inadequate resources and little support themselves. In total it was, Kim understood after her time there, a complete clusterfuck waiting to happen. She was right – Whiskey Tango Foxtrot indeed. If you want an idea of what was happening in Afghanistan and why the project ultimately failed (as many people knew it would) this will definitely give you a good idea. One of the highlights of 2021 for me and most definitely, and very unexpectedly, highly recommended. 

 SO ready for her close-up!

 

The Books & Life Book Tag (from A Book Olive on YouTube)

On a scale of 1-10 where 1 is a normal person how much are books and reading a part of your life?

I was, naturally, tempted to say 10 or at least 9 to this question. Books are and long have been an integral part of my life, but they are not ALL of my life – just a significant lump of it. So, honestly, I’d have to say 7-8 on my best days.

Where does your personal library stand in relation to the rest of your life? Do you have more books now than you’ve ever had? Fewer? How has your library changed?

I have more books now than I have ever had. In part that’s because I have my own house and full control of it so I can have book shelves in multiple rooms rather than, in my teen years, ‘only’ three tall bookshelves along one wall of my bedroom in my parents’ house. I’ve also a lot more disposable income after 30+ years of working so no longer really think about the costs of books these days.  

What is the most likely first bookish impression a newcomer would have in your home?

I’m sure people who have never met me before would think that I’ve just moved in to this house with books in piles on the floor or in cardboard boxes under the stairs. Their second thought(s) would probably be: “My, you have a LOT of books”, followed by “Have you READ all of these?”  

How often, if ever, do you clean or reorganise your books?

I dust my books from time to time. It’s rare they get reorganised on the shelves though. Mostly they’re clumped by author or subject so don’t need reorganising very much, in fact I still have two entire shelf units containing books I purchased for my Masters degrees still pretty much as they were from years ago. I am thinking of reorganising my 'Belief' unit though to something a bit more 'current'. I do periodically reorganise the piles of books though into subject areas so I don’t need to go looking for particular books too often. The last few mini-reorganisations have, mostly, followed additional Blog labels and reflect future reading plans.

On average how many books do you acquire in any given week?

It does vary a bit. Some weeks could be as low as 2 and, very occasionally, none at all. If I’m heading into ‘town’ and hitting my favourite independent bookshop I’d anticipate around 10-15. Similarly I get books for my birthday both from friends and on my own. So, pure guesswork, I’d say that *average* weekly purchases is around 4. Which is of course a slight problem as I only read around 2 each week….

What percentage of your self-control do you retain in a well-stocked bookshop?

Erm, none! OK, there are *some* caveats – I need time to shop properly and I need some way to carry my purchases home. Money probably wouldn’t come into it and I’d figure out where to put them later….

Do you ever feel the need to take a break from books and, if so, what form does it take?

I take breaks from books all the time. I don’t like to ‘chain-read’ so if I finish a book at 3pm I wouldn’t start another one until the next day. A reading break longer than a few hours is a rare event and not actively wanting to read is a very rare occurrence. If I’m not ‘feeling it’ I either game or watch YouTube documentaries, or maybe play in the garden or even, weather permitting go for a walk.

When you meet a new person how long does it take to bring up books?

Depends on the person and depends on what we’re doing. If they’re around me for very long they’ll see me with a book in my hand and we’d be off from there.

Have you given any thought or made any provision for your personal library after you croak?

Yes, I intend to hand over the entire ‘library’ to my sister to distribute among her kids. They’re all readers of various intensity and I’m sure that the youngest especially would like access to so many books for free.

Are you known among your friends and loved ones for your weird and probably unhealthy relationship with books?

What do you think? My Mum and brother are both fairly big readers (although they do tend to concentrate on crime fiction almost exclusively) but my ‘friends’ think I’m bat-shit crazy for being so book-obsessed. The people I worked with, especially the non-readers among them, honestly thought I was from another planet. Even those who read a bit couldn’t really understand how I managed to ‘read so many books’ (around 60-70 at the time) or why I was interested in so many different subjects. I lost count of the times that people @ work said a variation of: “Jeeze, what are you reading NOW?” This amused me GREATLY and, to be honest, I did sometimes read moderately ‘odd’ books at work just to get a reaction from people. Bad me…..