Expanding Interests

Robert — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 21:57:47 +0000

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.

This semester I am taking a course solely on the Vietnam War. Incidentally, this is my first true post-Second World War American history course. Needless to say my understanding of the Cold War era leaves a lot to be desired. All of that aside, my escalating interest in Vietnam might cause me to shift my Civil War to Second World War focus to one that encompasses America’s more modern conflicts. The World Wars onwards might be a better focus simply because of the amount of literature that needs to be written. That realization has started to make me wonder what would happen if my interest in the Vietnam war led to changing my dissertation topic to one that dealt with some aspect of America’s turbulent foray into Southeast Asia. At present the idea of centering on 20th Century warfare seems far less drastic and would allow for my Great War topic.

Granted I have comps to worry about first, I still find it prudent to ponder these questions before I start asking certain professors to join my committee. For instance, if I shift to a more modern topic it would help to have professors whose strengths lie in Cold War-era topics. Alternatively, perhaps I just worry too much! Any outside thoughts and suggestions are welcome.

AEF Literature Fundamentals

Robert — Sun, 23 Aug 2009 19:53:53 +0000

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.

Shortcomings in the existing literature furnish an opportunity to broaden and deepen our understanding of the Meuse-Argonne offensive as well as other engagements. While little work is being done on the AEF, other First World War fields are generating new interest. Recent assessments of First World War scholarship, for example, have underscored the need for studies on the Imperial German Army’s non-Prussian units. Certainly, such research needs to be conducted, but there is also a need for similar analysis of the AEF. Dr. Groteleuschen noted that the Field Artillery serves as an example of good American branch level doctrine and battlefield performance. Such an approach can also be applied to the study of other important branches of the AEF. This observation was supported by my research, in which I argued that the Coast Artillery Corps played a crucial role in the development of a mobile heavy artillery arm of the AEF, a conclusion reached without benefit of any major works on the subject. A thorough study on the heavy artillery arm of the AEF should be a major component of the revitalization of the field. As a result, I wish to explore the impact of AEF heavy artillery on the First World War, with possible emphasis on the Meuse-Argonne Campaign.

Thompson Werk » Coast Artillery Corps

Expanding Interests

AEF Literature Fundamentals