Peter Duckers

I had expected more from this slim volume and, at first browsing, it does not seem to be of the standard that I expect from Shire Books. For example, the page about the one medal that I was awarded - the South Atlantic Medal (1982) - has too much blank space (a quarter of the page) and that means there was room for a lot more information than that afforded. Half the text is about medals that are sought after by collectors and the essential information denied readers of this book is the number of medals awarded to the 27,500 serving personnel Down South and some 2,000 who served on Ascension Island in 1982 - medals awarded to the Royal Navy, Royal Marines, Royal Fleet Auxiliary, Royal Maritime Auxiliary Service, Queen Alexandra's Royal Naval Nursing Service (QARNNS), Merchant Navy, British Army and the Royal Air Force; this information is surely of interest to medal collectors and would help inform the value of medals. Later edition(s) of this book may mention that, on 3 Nov 2017, the qualifying dates for the medal were changed and a further 3,626 medals (without rosette) were issued for service Down South between the day after the formal surrender by Argentine Forces to 21 Oct 1982.

It is interesting that the author states that awards to the Parachute Regiment and Welsh Guards are highly sought after, given that the war was led by the Royal Navy and Royal Marines, a war principally fought by seafarers and 3 Commando Brigade Royal Marines ashore (of which 2 Para was part for the duration of hostilities). He mentions that medals awarded to the ship's company of the nuclear submarine HMS Conqueror are "highly collectable" and that is certainly understandable. However, I'd have thought that medals awarded to Merchant Seafarers, this being one of the few occasions since the Second World War where medals were awarded to those in requisitioned ships of the Merchant Navy, as well as those serving in the Royal Fleet Auxiliary, would be of special interest to collectors (about 2,000 medals were awarded to each group of merchant seafarers). I estimate that only about 90 women were awarded the medal and that's a 'group' surely of interest, albeit not mentioned, as might be the medals of medics at sea and ashore and, not least, the medals of those such as the seven naval personnel of Naval Party 2090 (NP2090), embarked in mv British Enterprise III, requisitioned as a diving tender.

The author commits a cardinal sin in that he describes 'The Few' of the Battle of Britain as RAF pilots (The 1939-1945 Star - page 24). Most of the nearly 3,000 of 'The Few' were RAF pilots, but 56 of them were naval aviators, officers of the Royal Navy and Royal Marines. Most were serving in 804 Naval Air Squadron and 808 Naval Air Squadron and a few were serving with RAF Squadrons; one might think that one of these naval aviators' medals was rather more a collector's item than many of the RAF medals. Some 500 of the 'The Few' were, of course, pilots from the British Empire, the Dominions and foreign powers.

It's a pity that the author also refers to a number of medals by their colloquial name, rather than by their actual name. For example, the heading on page 24 "The 1939-45 Star" is incorrect, and is right next to a photograph which clearly shows the name is properly "The 1939-1945 Star". This sort of detail matters particularly when one is searching online, of course.

Later edition(s) of this book may mention that, on 19 Dec 2012, the Arctic Star was issued, retrospectively (and some 67 years after the war's end), complementing the Antarctic Star. It was mainly for those who served in ships on Arctic Convoys but, of course, others who served north of the Arctic Circle.

With no index, it's hard to be sure, but I think there is no mention of the Army Medal Office (now the MoD Medal Office), the issuing authority, no mention of miniature medals and no mention of replica medals. Last year, for example, I met a full colonel still serving in the Army, and he had a number of unusually shiny medals; he admitted they were all replicas, purchased after learning that a friend of his had had his original medals stolen (the colonel now keeps his original medals under lock and key, and never wears them!). I am told by a medal collector that such medals will be considered as fakes. Miniature medals were not issued by the Medal Office but had to be purchased by the holder, so there is no true original in the way that there is for the full-size medals.

I would also have liked to know how many of each and every medal were issued - numbers for some are stated - and when they were issued. For example, when were each of the Stars for the Second World War issued?

It is a surprise to learn that many campaign medals were struck in silver. My South Atlantic Medal is cupro-nickel, sadly.… (altro)

The main focus of the Crimean war was, obviously, the assault on Sevastopol in the Crimea; however, there was naval action all along the fringes of the Russian Empire, including Alaska, Kamchatka, the White Sea, the Baltic Sea, the Sea of Azov, and, of course, the Black Sea. Peter Duckers’ The Crimean War at Sea covers all these in encyclopedic detail; unfortunately, this is at the expense of exploring the political situation (it’s never explained exactly why the Britain, France and Sardinia went to war with Russia to defend Turkey (for that, see Alexis Troubetzkoy’s A Brief History of the Crimean War)) or the overall military strategy (to some extent, that’s excusable, as it doesn’t seem that there really was an overall military strategy).

The British public expected great things of the Royal Navy; unfortunately, the Russians prudently decided to keep their Baltic fleet behind impregnable harbor defenses at Sveaborg (modern Suomenlinna) and Cronstadt (modern Kronstadt); to scuttle most of the Black Sea fleet as blockships at Sevastopol and withdraw the rest to the Dneiper estuary; and to withdraw their Pacific squadron up the Amur river. Thus, the Royal Navy was reduced to sending shore parties to assist with the siege of Sevastopol, cruising around the Russian coasts picking up coastal trading vessels, sending small batches of sailors and marines ashore to burn Russian government property, and shelling coastal fortifications. Although Russian naval vessels poked out of Cronstadt now and then, they always retreated before they could be brought to action. British newspapers grew restive in the absence of the glorious ship-to-ship actions of previous wars and there was some criticism, especially of actions in the Baltic and the White Sea. Most of the merchant craft in the Baltic were Finnish, rather than Russian proper, and it seemed like the giant Royal Navy was picking on small Finnish merchants (Duckers notes Finland was a major trading partner with Britain, especially in naval stores; thus, these seizures and burnings might well have been counterproductive). The actions in the White Sea seem particularly egregious; the famous Solovetski Monastery was shelled (the monastery had a military garrison and fought back, so the action was technically correct under the rules of war) and the town of Kola was obliterated (Duckers notes the damage to Kola – again, technically justified because the town was defended – was so great that it never regained its status as the major regional port and was replaced by Murmansk – with some significance for a future war).

The main problem with the book is its obsessive listing of every naval action, shore party, and fortress shelling, at the expense of much discussion of other aspects. The war saw the first use of ironclad military vessels (French “floating batteries” took part in the siege of Fort Kinburn in the Dneiper estruary); the replacement of sailing ships by steam vessels (the first Baltic expedition, sent out in 1854, was a mix of sail and steam; the second, in 1855, was entirely steam); the first remote interference by a head of state in a military campaign (a telegraph line was laid from Varna to Balaclava; French emperor Napoleon III used it to cancel French participation in the capture of Kertch (modern spelling, Kerch) at the entrance to the Sea of Azov, when the expedition was already underway. Napoleon III later indignantly claimed he didn’t realize preparations were so far advance and the French admirals and generals on the scene should have used their own judgement and overruled his orders); and the first extensive use of rifled cannon (the British used the 68-pounder Lancaster gun, which had what Duckers calls an “oval” bore, without further explanation. The Lancaster bore was actually a twisted elliptical cylinder, somewhat similar to the Whitworth twisted hexagonal bore; it was applauded for its high accuracy at the same time it was condemned for a propensity for having the shells jam).

There is an extensive illustration section, showing ships, battles, and personalities. There are maps for the major campaigns and for the actions at Sevastopol, Sveaborg, and Fort Kinburn. Numerous appendices, including every ship deployed in the war by the British, French and Russian navies. Lots of endnotes; sometimes including material that would have been more useful if included in the main text. Extensive bibliography, mostly primary sources. Recommended if you want a reference work, not if you’re looking for exciting war stories.… (altro)