The did not win the ‘’ But we need a holistic view of Britain’s defences in 1940

Christina Goulter, Andrew Gordon and Gary Sheffield

Dr. Christina Goulter is Senior Lecturer In August 2006, the British media struggle for Britain’s survival, before in Defence Studies, King’s College seized on an article published in it came to be associated solely with London, and Air Warfare Historian on History Today that argued that ‘it was the air battle. We are three the Higher Command and Staff the navy, not the RAF, that prevented independent scholars and do not Course, Joint Services Command and a German invasion [of the UK] in have a ‘party line’ on the subject, but Staff College (JSCSC), Defence 1940.’1 On the front cover of the we all believe, as did Churchill, in the Academy of the UK. Dr Andrew magazine this was simplified to ‘Who necessity of adopting a holistic view Gordon is Reader in Defence Studies, Won the Battle of Britain’? This of Britain’s defences in 1940. This King’s College London, and Maritime proved to be a silly season story par must include consideration of the Warfare Historian on the Higher excellence. Articles and leader role of the RAF’s Bomber and Coastal Command and Staff Course, JSCSC. columns appeared in the national Commands, the Royal Navy, and land Professor Gary Sheffield holds the press; letters to editors hotly debated forces, as well as Fighter Command. Chair of War Studies at the University the merits of the case; and there This is a rather different, and of Birmingham. He was formerly were items on television and radio. certainly more subtle argument from Professor of Modern History at King’s The original History Today article, by the self-evidently ridiculous notion College London, and Land Warfare a journalist, Brian James, had leaned that a fleet ‘won’ an air battle. Historian on the Higher Command very heavily on verbatim quotations and Staff Course, JSCSC. from interviews with the three of us, and we were duly denounced as the In truth, the notion that villains of the piece, as stirring up controversy for its own sake, to gain in John Keegan’s words publicity, or to sell books. ‘some 2,500 young pilots In fact, none of us argued that the Royal Navy and not Fighter had alone [emphasis Command ‘won the Battle of Britain’. added] been responsible All three of us recognize that defeat of the by the Royal Air for preserving Britain Force’s Fighter Command was a critical factor in preventing the from invasion’ has long German armed forces from been disputed by attempting an invasion. Moreover, this victory was of enormous historians strategic, political, and psychological importance, for which Fighter Command deserves full credit. Andrew Gordon received a couple of However, this was not the subject of days’ warning of the appearance of our interviews. We understood that the article, but Christina Goulter and we were being interviewed about the Gary Sheffield (on holiday in Greece prospects of Operation Sealion, the and the UK respectively) only found putative German invasion of England out about the story through the in 1940; in other words, the Battle of national press. Sheffield had spoken Britain in the sense it was first used to Brian James some years previously, by Winston Churchill on 4 June 1940, possibly in 2001. Subsequently, James when he was referring to the coming had interviewed Andrew Gordon.

RUSI JOURNAL OCTOBER 2006 MilitaryDefence History and International Security

Goulter had never spoken to James [German] instruments of sea power’ Channel, condemning the invasion to but had been interviewed by a and the knowledge of their use in the failure.5 In 2003, a scholarly work on female research assistant. The article thwarting of Operation Sealion.3 A the Royal Navy contended that ‘from is entirely Brian James’s. The three of few years later Telford Taylor June 1940 to June 1941, the Home us had no part in writing it and we produced what is still probably the Fleet was the last line of defence in were not given, ahead of publication, most thorough study of the question, British strategy’.6 As recently as the opportunity to comment on the in which he integrated the air and 2005, the novelist Derek Robinson use that was made of the interviews maritime dimensions. Wing published a popular history, complete with us. None of us have a book on Commander H.R. Allen, himself a with an endorsement from Andrew the subject to plug. Suffice it to say Spitfire pilot, published in 1974 a Lambert, Laughton Professor of Naval that if we had been consulted about controversial book on the subject.4 History at King’s College London, that the article we would have asked for argued that in the context of numerous changes. These would have Operation Sealion, ‘the only relevant included: altering the catchpenny force was the Royal Navy’.7 Thus, far title, ‘Pie in the Sky?’; contextualizing from being a novel idea, the defence the quotations from the interviews; of Britain in 1940 has been a live exercising some basic editorial work topic of debate for at least fifty on the quotations, one of which is so years. garbled as to appear nonsensical; and, above all, refocusing the article so as to remove the false dichotomy In response to the History Today implied in the statement that the RN controversy, the three authors of this not the RAF ‘saved Britain in 1940’, short article have each written for we believe that the contribution separate papers – from the Land, Air of both the services were vital. For and Maritime perspectives – on the this, some discussion of the full Battle of Britain, which are published significance of the Battle of Britain for the first time on RUSI’s website. would have been necessary. Read To read please visit carefully, James’s article gave some www.rusi.org/journal/history indication of the subtleties of the arguments, but they were largely lost in the furore that occurred once the national press picked up on the story. The September issue of History Today. NOTES We were reminded of the truth of 1 Brian James, ‘Pie in the Sky?’ History Today, the saying that one should not Allen defined the Battle of Britain September 2006, p.38. believe everything one reads in the widely, to encompass more than just press. the air battle, and concluded that the 2 John Keegan, The Second World War (London, Arrow Books, 1990) p.102. importance of the air and maritime dimensions had been respectively 3 Duncan Grinnell-Milne, The Silent Victory None of us argued that exaggerated and underestimated. (London, Bodley Head, 1958); S.W. Roskill, The Navy at War 1939-1945 (Ware: the Royal Navy and not A particularly interesting take on Wordsworth, 1998, first published in 1960), the topic was a 1974 Kriegspiel held p. 88. Fighter Command ‘won at the Staff College, Camberley. With 4 Hubert Raymond Allen, Who Won the Battle British and German officers as of Britain? (London, Arthur Barker, 1974). the Battle of Britain’ participants, and an impressive panel 5 See Richard Cox, Sea Lion (London, Futura, of umpires including 1940 veterans 1974). This is a novelization of the In truth, the notion that in John Adolf Galland, and Friedrich Ruge, the wargame, with some interesting factual Keegan’s words ‘some 2,500 young game supposes that the invasion is background articles reprinted from the Daily pilots had alone [emphasis added] launched before the Luftwaffe gain Telegraph magazine. been responsible for preserving air supremacy. The umpires’ 6 James Levy, The Royal Navy’s Home Fleet in Britain from invasion’2 has long been unanimous decision was that the World War II (Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2003) p.68. disputed by historians. As far back as Germans would get some troops 1958 Duncan Grinnell-Milne made ashore, but a combination of RAF 7 Derek Robinson, Invasion, 1940 (London: the case for the principal role of the attacks and stubborn defensive Constable, 2005). RN in preventing invasion, and two actions and local counterattacks by years later Captain Stephen Roskill, ground forces delay their advance. the British Official Historian, argued Eventually, the Royal Navy destroys for the primacy of ‘lack of adequate the German second echelon in the

67