Back in January, I discussed my growing fascination with the Vietnam War. Last week I officially changed my doctoral concentration from the First World War to the Vietnam War. While this required changing committee chairs and some paperwork, the process removed a great deal of stress from my shoulders. There is no doubt in my mind that my academic career led me to the Vietnam War. The only reason why it took me so long to concentrate on Vietnam is because of the strong political and personal bonds many people have to the war. Now that I have realized that such political allegiance can be dealt with, I am excited to be involved in such an active field. With many topics poorly covered in the literature, or simply overlooked, the possibilities for fresh research are far too tantalizing for me to ignore.
more →
For the past few years I have been fascinated with the First World War, particularly American military involvement. As stated elsewhere on this site, my proposed dissertation topic would have me analyzing the history and role of the Coast Artillery Corps on the Western Front in battles such as the Meuse-Argonne. Considering the level of scholarship already present, my research would explore a neglected branch of the Army while better understanding the contributions of the Corps as a land force. Although a brief summary, obviously the topic requires further development, that is the starting point for my research. Discussing my interest in that subject, however, is not the focus of this post. Instead I would like to express my other interest and how it may, or may not, affect my academic future.
more →
The exceedingly long gaps between updates can be attributed to the overwhelming power of my first semester back in grad school. Fortunately as of this past Friday I completed my first semester as a PhD student. Overall, I am happy with how the semester went. Nevertheless, there is always room for improvement. After twenty-fours hours of celebration and recovery, it seems appropriate to divulge some advice on how to make next semester less stressful and more productive. Thus the following three points are the main lessons and changes I intend to implement for classes next spring.
more →
Throughout the semester I have been re-introduced to some intriguing topics in First World War history. While already familiar with the fundamentals of the war, including the histories of most of the participants, I have been drawn towards the experiences of the Dominion forces from Australia and Canada. Having lived in both Australia and Canada, I wrongly assumed that I had been exposed to all aspects of their Great War history. After attending lectures and reading various tomes, the realization that much remained to be learned has compelled me to take a closer look at those aforementioned participants. Because of Masters experience in Ontario a collection of Canadian works proved rather easy to gather. Australian literature, however, is proving to be illusive. Apparently living in Australia in the 1990′s, and being in middle school at the time, does not help me locate good synthetic works to being my studies on the Australia experience. Thus, if anyone is aware of any important books please leave me a message.
Some important works that have laid a solid foundation for the development of American Expeditionary Forces (AEF) literature include those by Dr. Mark Groteleuschen. My masters thesis, on the role of the Coast Artillery Corps during the First World War, drew heavily on Grotelueschen’s research on AEF field artillery (AEF Way of War The American Army and Combat in World War I and Doctrine under trial: American Artillery Employment in World War I). His focus on the field artillery aspects of the war caught my attention because it was the first original argument I had encountered. Grotelueschen argued that there was a wealth of new information waiting to be found in the areas of small unit/brigade level assessments. Earlier research by Edward Coffman had established the basis for AEF historiography by being the first scholar to write a comprehensive history of the American contribution. Later historians John S. D. Eisenhower, Garry Mead and David Trask based much of their work on the conclusions of Coffman, by focusing on General John Pershing and highlighting Pershing’s doctrinal shortcomings. The emphasis on individual AEF officers, however, limited the use of Eishenhower, Mead and Trask’s findings. It is important to note that many people too readily assume that because of America’s short involvement in the Great War, there are not a lot of issues to explore. On the contrary, the intricacies of many AEF battles have yet to be thoroughly discussed. Of note, there has been only a single, yet narrow, publication on the Battle of Soissons. Historians Douglas V. Johnson and Rolfe L. Hillman wrote Soissons, 1918 in the 1920s, and to date there has not been a definitive account of the battle. Historian Paul Briam wrote on the Meuse-Argonne Offensive of 1917. In this work, Braim does what many AEF historians often neglect; he discussed an actual battle. Nevertheless, Braim’s work is limited in detail as he failed to discuss the impact of key units in the battle.
more →
Synopsis
The purpose of Thompson Werk is to present the musings of a US War and Society doctoral student. Discussion topics principally center around the World Wars and Vietnam.
The opinions expressed on this site are not be confused with those of my colleagues, employers, friends, family, and/or anyone else associated with me.
Contact me with any comments, complaints, and/or questions.
Responses
- Robert: Everyone needs to see Vietnam,
- Ross Mahoney: Sounds like it is another
- Robert: My original post omitted the
- Robert: Hey Ross, Vietnam is a
- Ross Mahoney: Robert it looks like a
