- Author
- Letter Writer
- Subjects
- Biographies and personal histories, WWII operations, History - WW2, Letter to the Editor
- Tags
- None noted.
- RAN Ships
- None noted.
- Publication
- June 2006 edition of the Naval Historical Review (all rights reserved)
My recollection is that I sent the NHS about six other NEOC essays for consideration and that Doenitz was chosen for publication by the NHS because he was the person most likely to interest the readership. Some of the other essays would, I think, have been better examples of what we are trying to achieve at the RANC, but not as interesting as subjects for the Naval Historical Review. That is likely to remain a problem as I cannot guarantee that our best writers will choose the most interesting subjects on offer.
On re-reading his essay I am inclined to agree that young Mr. Hume probably was too forgiving and not thorough enough in his research into Doenitz. On the other hand given the restrictions under which he, and I, are working in this non-academic training establishment, I feel that he made a creditable effort to learn a little about an important figure in naval history of whom he would have otherwise have remained in total ignorance for the rest of his naval career.
I content myself that this is a not unworthy outcome for the limited history and leadership programme we are developing here, while readily acknowledging that from a rigorous academic standpoint the criticisms levelled by Dr Cooper are probably valid.
Desmond Woods