John F Kennedy’s Central Intelligence Agency – Trouble in Cuba and Vietnam

This is the third in a series of articles that explores the iconic CIA and its use as a tactical weapon by the US presidents of the Cold War (1947-1991). The Central Intelligence Agency – In the Beginning and The Central Intelligence Agency – Eisenhower and Asia’s Back Door are the preceding posts. 

JFK delivering a speech

A very tired John F. Kennedy, the 35th President of the United States, was sworn into office on a clear, windy, brutally cold January 20, 1961.(1) It wasn’t an easy day. Eight inches of snow had fallen the night before, causing a monumental traffic jam. The streets were littered with abandoned vehicles.  Former President Herbert Hoover missed the entire inauguration event because Washington National Airport was closed due to the weather.  An inauguration is an important national symbol that characterizes the Republic and the all-night effort to clear Pennsylvania Avenue greeted the sun with space to accommodate the large crowd that would gather to witness the duly elected president assume the helm of the ship-of-state.  

The snowfall of the previous night and the windy, frigid temperatures of inauguration day are also apt codes for the sea change that had already gathered momentum around the relationship between the new president and his intelligence agency, the CIA.  The CIA, as authorized by The National Security Act of 1947, was still fairly young, but Allen Dulles, the Director of Central Intelligence (DCI) was an old hand and seemingly enjoyed the game.  By 1961, the CIA, in its short life, had tripped the light fantastic around the globe; Col. Lansdale was merrily fighting rebels in The Philippines following which he ported his obsession with asymmetric guerilla warfare to Vietnam where he spent two-years as a houseguest and confidant of President Diem. Other CIA operatives overthrew governments in Iran and Guatemala, and raised general hell with Cuba and Chile. 

During the latter Truman and the Eisenhower administrations there was a trend to combine the Cold War objective of fighting the creep of Communism with business interests. Iran, for example, nationalized British oil interests and Iranian Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh refused to budge in spite of punishing sanctions. According to the University of Virginia’s Miller Center, “Eisenhower worried about Mossadegh's willingness to cooperate with Iranian Communists; he also feared that Mossadegh would eventually undermine the power of Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, a staunch anti-Communist partner. In August 1953, the CIA helped overthrow Mossadegh's government and restored the Shah's power. In the aftermath of this covert action, new arrangements gave U.S. corporations an equal share with the British in the Iranian oil industry.”(2)

In Guatemala, Jacobo Arbenz Guzman initiated land reforms that seriously impacted the holdings of the anti-Communist, New Orleans-based United Fruit Company who controlled over forty percent of Guatemala’s arable land.  The Truman administration came to the support of American business interests by arming the anti-Arbenz rebels.  Under Eisenhower, the CIA finished the job by overthrowing the Arbenz regime and installing Carlos Castillo Armas.  Codenamed PBSUCCESS, the coup d'état was the first-ever clandestine military action in Latin America but it was certainly not the last.(3)

Kennedy and the CIA

After fifty years the controversy surrounding Kennedy and the CIA obscures the landscape like the white-out conditions in a blizzard.   At one end of the opinion spectrum, Marquette University’s John McAdams’ The Kennedy Assassination site concludes that Kennedy and the CIA had some rough spots but got through them. (4) At the other end of the spectrum is Dr. Jerome R. Corsi, who maintains that Kennedy and the CIA locked horns and never retreated. (5) Excellent research and the documented citations for both perspectives leave the reader with many questions.  One corner of this argument does not appear to be disputed; Kennedy consistently refused to use the U.S. military to support private sector interests.  In this matter, President Kennedy was a traditionalist. The military, in his opinion, was to be used only in defense of national security interests.  If we can escape the white-out conditions of the never-ending controversy, the political landscape, once again, becomes hard and navigable.  

As Kennedy came to office, covert CIA actions initiated by the Eisenhower administration were in play in both hemispheres.  Two noteworthy examples are the storm clouds that were gathering around the Diem brothers in South Vietnam and the vexing problem of Fidel Castro in Cuba.  For discussion purposes I have separated these two significant events, but during the early days of the Kennedy administration they were unfolding concurrently linked through the CIA node.

President Kennedy and DCI Allen Dulles

South Vietnam

South Vietnam was a U.S. government construct, a nation-building exercise illuminated by the Pentagon Papers.

“The United States moved quickly to prevent the unification and to establish South Vietnam as an American sphere. It set up in Saigon as head of the government a former Vietnamese official named Ngo Dinh Diem, who had recently been living in New Jersey, and encouraged him not to hold the scheduled elections for unification. A memo in early 1954 of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said that intelligence estimates showed "a settlement based on free elections would be attended by almost certain loss of the Associated States [Laos, Cambodia, and Vietnam-the three parts of Indochina created by the Geneva Conference] to Communist control." Diem again and again blocked the elections requested by the Vietminh, and with American money and arms his government became more and more firmly established. As the Pentagon Papers put it: "South Viet Nam was essentially the creation of the United States."(6)

By 1961, Southeast Asia was rapidly becoming a tinder box.  During a discussion of an Edward Lansdale report on Vietnam with Walt Whitman Rostow, the National Security advisor, Kennedy lamented, “'This is the worst one we've got. You know, Eisenhower never mentioned it. He talked at length about Laos, but never uttered the word Vietnam.”  Lansdale’s report brought the deterioration of South Vietnam’s political stability into focus for Kennedy as he remarked to Rostow that the “Lansdale's narrative was 'an extremely vivid and well-written account of a place that was going to hell in a hack.'…” (7)

Diem and his brother persisted in implementing domestic policies based on impressing the Catholic religion and requiring personal loyalties that accelerated the destabilization of the country.  The prevailing religion in Vietnam was Buddhism at the time and the Diems were persecuting Buddhists terribly.  Making matters worse were two notable supporters of the Diem’s, neither of whom had a clue about the national culture of Vietnam.  Senate Majority Leader, Mike Mansfield, a Montana Democrat, lectured in Far Eastern and Latin American history in his previous life. Mansfield was also a practicing Catholic.  While Mansfield openly admitted he knew nothing about Vietnam, he very much liked Diem and he was generally considered to be Congress’ resident Vietnam expert.  The second big player who knew nothing about Vietnam was Col. Edward Lansdale, a CIA asset who befriended and used the Diems but was only committed to his concept of counterinsurgency warfare.  The Pentagon Papers revealed that, based on Lansdale’s advice, Kennedy approved secret operations to "dispatch of agents to North Vietnam" to engage in "sabotage and light harassment”.

Growing involvement

The Diem brothers’ refusal to cease and desist acting on their paranoia, resulted in thousands of Buddhists and dissenters being imprisoned, tortured, and murdered.  The Geneva Accords permitted the U.S. to have 685 military advisers in South Vietnam. Eisenhower sent several thousand and, under Kennedy, the figure rose to sixteen thousand with some of them taking part in combat operations. Diem was losing. Most of the South Vietnam countryside was now controlled by local villagers organized by the NLF.(See Footnote 6)  It became clear that a new government was necessary if the U.S. was to be effective in keeping Vietnam out of Communist hands.  Kennedy authorized the overthrow with the provision that the Diem brothers would be extracted to live in exile. 

Henry Cabot Lodge, Ambassador to South Vietnam, received a cable (Cable 243) outlining the issues and actions that were the next steps in changing regimes or bringing the Diem regime into line with American interests, following the midnight raids on the Buddhist Pagodas on August 21, 1963.(8)  The Diem brothers would not or could not change direction and South Vietnam’s Diem government was overthrown in a military coup d'état according to play book.  What did not go ‘according to plan’ was the murder of the Diem brothers whose desperate calls for rescue went unheeded by the U.S. government that had put them in power.  The brutal assassinations of the Diems on November 2, 1963 haunted Kennedy.  By November 22, 1963, less than three weeks later, Kennedy himself would die from an assassin’s bullet(s).

“Kennedy learned of the deaths on the following morning when National Security Council staffer Michael Forrestal rushed into the cabinet room with a telegram reporting the Ngô brothers' alleged suicides. According to General Maxwell Taylor, "Kennedy leaped to his feet and rushed from the room with a look of shock and dismay on his face which I had never seen before." Kennedy had planned that Ngô Đình Diệm would be safely exiled and Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr. recalled that the U.S. president was "somber and shaken". Kennedy later penned a memo, lamenting that the assassination was "particularly abhorrent" and blaming himself for approving Cable 243, which had authorised Lodge to explore coup options in the wake of Nhu's attacks on the Buddhist pagodas.  Forrestal said that "It shook him personally ... bothered him as a moral and religious matter. It shook his confidence, I think, in the kind of advice he was getting about South Vietnam."   When Kennedy was consoled by a friend who told him he need not feel sorry for the Ngô brothers on the grounds of despotism, Kennedy replied "No. They were in a difficult position. They did the best they could for their country." 

Cuba

While the South Vietnam pot was coming to a boil in the Eastern Hemisphere, the Cuban kettle had boiled dry with the Bay of Pigs and was heating up a second time with Operation Mongoose in the Western Hemisphere.  Without getting into the ‘why’ of it, presidential candidate John F. Kennedy left the door open to depose Cuba’s new dictator Fidel Castro during the fourth presidential debate.(9)  The New York Times the next day ran the story as the lead item on the front page with the headline: "Kennedy Asks Aid for Cuban Rebels to Defeat Castro, Urges Support of Exiles and Fighters for Freedom." James Reston wrote in the Times that "Senator Kennedy (has) made what is probably his worst blunder of the campaign.”(10)  After Kennedy was inaugurated, DCI Allen Dulles came calling to cash the Bay of Pigs check and Kennedy approved the invasion as had been planned under the Eisenhower administration except that he refused to commit the U.S. military support. 

George Washington University’s National Security Archives Bay of Pigs Chronology provides a wonderfully detailed account of the invasion and reads like a spy thriller.  Prior to the invasion factories and cane fields were fire bombed using white phosphorus and other incendiaries, E. Howard Hunt and others made covert trips into Cuba to check the lay of the land, small aircraft overflew Cuba taking pictures and reporting back to the CIA (at least one was shot down by Castro’s forces), communication stations on remote islands were constructed in preparation for command and control of the prospective invasion, and exiled Cubans were trained.  The exiles wanted to return home to the country they remembered and American business interests wanted the island playground back in their domain.

The pressure was on to execute the invasion and, in April, about three months after Kennedy’s inauguration the green light was given. “On April 15, 1961, C.I.A. pilots knocked out part of Castro's air force, and were set to finish the job. At the last minute, on April 16, President Kennedy called off the air strikes, but the message did not reach the 1,511 commandos headed for the Bay of Pigs. Three days of fighting destroyed the invading force. A brigade commander sent his final messages: ''We are out of ammo and fighting on the beach. Please send help,'' and: ''In water. Out of ammo. Enemy closing in. Help must arrive in next hour.''(11) The help never came and 1500 Cuban exiles fighters did not come back.

To his credit, President Kennedy assumed full public responsibility for the debacle although he allowed the blame to spread through leaks and rumors.  Kennedy fired Allen Dulles and threatened to break the CIA apart.  The fiasco that was the Bay of Pigs, however, did not deter the effort to rid the Western Hemisphere of Castro.  In November 1961, Operation Mongoose was born with a primary objective to identify mechanisms to get rid of the Cuban leader and the CIA was not the lead player.  Robert Kennedy and General Maxwell Taylor were the operation’s overseers.  Col. Edward Lansdale was recruited to coordinate activities between the CIA, Defense Department, and State Department. 

Operation Mongoose employed intelligence collection, sabotage operations, and identifying and recruiting leaders within Cuba who could overthrow Castro. But there were other methods used. With Lansdale’s obsession on asymmetrical warfare, a subset operation known as the Northwoods operation was developed. This considered using faked and real terrorist activities which could be blamed on Castro and used as a provocation for invasion.  It has never been decisively determined whether or not assassination plots were a component of Operation Mongoose.(12)  The Church Committee did, however, uncover a 1962 memo from Lansdale to Robert Kennedy claiming that "we might uncork the touchdown play independently of the institutional program we are spurring."  Operation Mongoose was ‘officially’ ended in October 1962 with the advent of the Cuban Missile Crisis.

The ‘official’ efforts to ‘get Castro’ fade from the presidential office in October 1962 and go deep underground.  The next blip on the ‘get Castro’ radar appears in New Orleans in the rabid anti-Communist, anti-Castro corporate culture at the United Fruit Company upon whose trustee board the fired DCI Allen Dulles sat.  The United Fruit Company story must be told at another time, however.

The CIA and Kennedy in perspective

President Kennedy’s fractured relationship with the CIA meant, for his term in office, a reduced CIA influence on foreign policy and affairs.  Kennedy, however, did recognize the usefulness of covert operators and plausible deniability’s lack of presidential fingerprints.  Publicly Kennedy was shamed twice by CIA failures and fired the powerful Allen Dulles.  Did Kennedy really forget and forgive as some analysts portray or would his ego have driven him to keep his promise to break up the CIA?  Certainly, Kennedy attempted to dilute the CIA influence during Operation Mongoose.  Kennedy’s assassination ended all of the speculation of the CIA’s relative political standing as the status quo quickly returned under the Johnson administration.

The Kennedy administration lasted just 1036 stormy days. His last day, like his first, was preceded by a storm in Dallas, Texas.  As on Kennedy’s inauguration day, the storm cleared and Kennedy elected to have his convertible open to the people; the better to relate to the people.  That, of course, worked well for the assassin(s).  I find it interesting where the ubiquitous Allen Dulles shows up; on the United Fruit Company Board of Trustees and on the Warren Commission investigating the death of the man who fired him.  The Diem brothers may have been assassinated but Fidel Castro, the object of so much time and effort, outlived them all.

By Barbara Johnson

Barbara is the owner of www.coldwarwarrior.com, a site about the men and women from all the cold wars who worked so hard for something they believed in and played so hard they forgot the pain.

This article has been published as we approach the 50th anniversary of the assassination of John F Kennedy. We shall be posting about JFK on Twitter and Facebook this week.

To find out more about John F Kennedy’s life, listen to our podcast on him. Click here.

References

1.       NOAA’s National Weather Service Forecast Office; Presidential Inaugural Weather; http://www.erh.noaa.gov/lwx/Historic_Events/Inauguration/Inauguration.html

2.       University of Virginia; Miller Center; American President: Eisenhower Foreign Policy A Reference Resource; http://millercenter.org/president/eisenhower/essays/biography/5

3.       The Cold War Museum; Guatemala 1954; Article 1 of 2; http://www.coldwar.org/articles/50s/guatemala.asp

4.       Marquette University; Craig Frizzell and Magen Knuth; Mortal Enemies? Did President Kennedy Plan on Splintering the CIA?; http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/jfk_cia.htm

5.       Dr. Jerome R. Corsi; Who Really Killed Kennedy?: 50 Years Later: Stunning New Revelations About the JFK Assassination; http://www.amazon.com/Really-Killed-Kennedy-Assassination-ebook/dp/B00EMFH0M0/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1379766666&sr=8-1&keywords=who+killed+president+kennedy+corsi 

6.       A People's History Of The United States; Howard Zinn; Chapter 18: The Impossible Victory: Vietnam; http://www.historyisaweapon.com/defcon1/zinnimvivi18.html

7.       George Washington University National Security Archives; The Wall; Episode 9; INTERVIEW WITH WALT ROSTOW; http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/coldwar/interviews/episode-9/rostow1.html

8.       George Washington University National Security Archives; Cable 243; http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB101/vn02.pdf

9.       Commission on Presidential Debates; October 21, 1960 Debate Transcript; The Fourth Kennedy-Nixon Presidential Debate; October 21, 1960; http://www.debates.org/index.php?page=october-21-1960-debate-transcript

10.   George Washington University National Security Archives; Chapter 3; Into Politics With Kennedy and Johnson; http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB116/cia/Chapter%203%20--%20Into%20Politics%20With%20Kennedy%20and%20Johnson.htm   

11.   New York Times; TIM WEINER; February 22, 1998; C.I.A. Bares Its Bungling in Report on Bay of Pigs Invasion; http://www.nytimes.com/1998/02/22/world/cia-bares-its-bungling-in-report-on-bay-of-pigs-invasion.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm

12.   George Washington University National Security Archives; July 25, 1962; Brig. Gen. Lansdale; Review of Operation Mongoose; http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nsa/cuba_mis_cri/620725%20Review%20of%20Op.%20Mongoose.pdf  

Slavery in Brazil – A family scene… Our image of the week

This week’s image of the week shows family life for slaves in 19th century Brazil.

The Atlantic slave trade is part of a very dark past. Many died while being transported thousands of miles from Africa to the Americas. And those that survived faced a terrible life. Brazil was one of the principal countries to which slaves were exported – some four million arrived there. What’s more, it was the last country in the Americas to abolish slavery - in 1888.

However, slaves had to live. And in the picture we see the life of a Brazilian slave family, as depicted by German painter Johann Moritz Rugendas. In the painting there is a small house with slaves going about their daily business. The daily routines of the people in the picture make the scene a lot more real and lifelike. We can but wonder what was going through their heads.

We have an article about what happened to slaves after they were liberated in the USA in issue 2 of our magazine, History is Now. Its out next week…

Click here for more information on the magazine.

George Levrier-Jones 

The downfall of the Kingmaker and Prince George’s treachery – The Wars of the Roses 1469-1471

In the next in our series on the Wars of the Roses, this article looks at the terrible Prince George and his role in the downfall of the Kingmaker, The Earl of Warwick.

It follows our introduction to the Wars of the Roses available here and our article on Edward III’s descendants and the causes of the Wars of the Roses available here. Later were the battles of the war from 1455-1464 and most recently the Kingmaker.

Prince George – the Duke of Clarence – was the worst type of man. Born the third son, he was never happy with his lot in life. Unlike his younger brother, Richard, who was loyal to the Plantagenets through thick and thin, George supported his family only when it suited him best. After years of watching his lecherous brother, King Edward IV, run England’s monarchy and nobility into the ground, George began to get rather restless.

Prince George, Duke of Clarence

Queen Elizabeth Woodville had still not given the King a son despite being pregnant every year of marriage. This made Prince George heir to his brother’s throne. But it was a shaky arrangement as Elizabeth was almost supernaturally fertile and it was only a matter of time before she bore a boy and bumped George further down the line. This the turncoat Prince could not allow. When the Earl of Warwick began sniffing around for a new ally against the King, George jumped at the chance. In a secret wedding in Calais, the Duke of Clarence married Isabelle Neville – Warwick’s eldest daughter. This went against the King’s wishes. The plan was to kill the King and put George and Isabelle on the throne. Had George been a smarter, less egotistical man he would have understood that Warwick was using him, plain and simple. But George honestly believed that he deserved to be King and Warwick was simply helping him along. And so, on July 26 1469 at the Battle of Edgecote Moor, George captured his brother and took him prisoner. It took King Edward IV eight months to escape and rally an army to counter-attack his treacherous brother and Warwick. Edward’s army defeated his enemy so thoroughly that the rebels shed their coats as they retreated. Hence the name of the battle – Losecote Field.

After Warwick’s humiliation, he and George fled to Calais, leaving Edward back in charge. The rebels planned to make an alliance with their former enemy, Margaret of Anjou – the wife of mad King Henry VI and mother to the Lancastrian heir. In order to achieve this new alliance, Warwick had to literally beg on his knees. Margaret was not convinced, but she was in a precarious position as she was living on the charity of the French court and her household was becoming a drain on the French King. The French King is also believed to have encouraged the alliance. But Margaret wanted more than promises and apologies from a kneeling man. She wanted an emblem. Warwick suggested the marriage of Margaret’s son, Prince Edward, to Warwick’s youngest daughter, Anne Neville. Margaret accepted, although some historians believe that she was only using Warwick for his army and planned to put Anne aside as soon as Prince Edward was King.

This is where Warwick made his final mistake - he backed the wrong horse.  He simply put his plans with George aside and married his youngest daughter to Henry VI’s son. His new plan was to put Henry back on the throne, wait until he died (or kill him) and rule through the new King.

Although Warwick was a brilliant soldier, he was lacking in common sense. Simple truths were lost on him; most notably the truth that if George betrayed his brother, he would surely betray the kingmaker too.

The return of Warwick

Armed with his new ally, Warwick returned to England and led an army against Edward. But he forgot one vital little piece in this jigsaw puzzle of deceit … He had trained Edward. The King was a great fighter just like him. We can, of course, never know what Warwick was expecting from his adversaries, but we do know that he severely under-estimated Edward and Richard. Edward and Richard’s Yorkists crept up slowly and silently in the night, hidden by mist and darkness. On the morning of April 14 1471, while the Lancasters were rising from slumber, the Yorkists attacked. In the confusion and fog, some of Warwick’s soldiers actually stabbed each other. When the word, “treachery” ricocheted across the battle, even more Lancastrians killed one another. And as for Warwick himself, the mighty Earl was pulled off his horse, had his armor pried open and was stabbed in the neck. Warwick was so influential that without him the Lancasters were simply lost. Those that weren’t mauled on the battlefield retreated and ran for their lives. The body of the kingmaker was hanged for four days to quell rumors of his survival and to further break the Lancastrian spirit. This battle, the Battle of Barnet, marks the downfall of the House of Lancaster.

It took three weeks for Margaret of Anjou and her son to get to England. They had been held back by winds across the channel. The news of the defeat and death of Warwick was such a blow that Margaret ordered the tired army to march to Wales in order to recruit more men. And where was George in all of this? He had gone back to his brother, begging forgiveness. Edward was said to have known that his brother would return with his tail between his legs. The three brothers then marched to Wales, hoping to intercept the Lancastrian army before they made it over the River Severn and joined the angry Welshmen on the other side.

Margaret of Anjou, her son, his new bride and all the Lancastrians they could summon, made it as far as Tewkesbury before England herself decided to end the pointless war. The River Severn was flooded; no one could get across. The army was trapped between drowning and the Yorkists. The Lancastrians were choice-less; they had to do battle in their starving and fatigued state. The Yorkists weren’t any better off; they had had to march at a run, recruiting soldiers as they passed through villages. May 4 1471 saw two exhausted armies make one more stand for the crown. Henry VI’s son, Prince Edward, was no stranger to battlefields despite being only 18, but he was no leader; he could not rally his troops nor control them. The Yorkists, being led by the Plantagenet brothers, had better command. Richard, also aged 18, had led the army at the Battle of Barnet. He was well respected, well trained and very clever. And under him the Yorkists walked away from Tewkesbury victorious. Prince Edward died in battle and his mother was taken as prisoner. Prince Edward’s new widow should have been taken hostage with Margaret but she was taken to the house of the Duke of Clarence, where she was kept as prisoner in everything but name by her sister and brother-in-law. That is, until Prince Richard snuck her away and married her.

The battle of Tewkesbury saw the end of the Lancastrian claim to the crown. Henry VI “mysteriously” died some weeks later in the tower. Was he murdered? And if so, by whom? History’s lips are sealed.

And so the Yorkists returned to a somewhat peaceful reign knowing that the Lancastrians had no heir to fight for ... Except for that distant relative called Henry Tudor who lived in France. But the Plantagenets didn’t seem too bothered about him.

Edward once again returned to his throne which he would pass on to his baby son once he was old enough. If only Edward had lived long enough for that to happen.

By M.L King, a history enthusiast and part-time blogger. You can connect with her on Facebook here.

The next article in The Wars of the Roses series is about a love story during the war - available here.

Do you want to try your hand at some history writing? If so, click here for more information and then get in touch!

References 

• www.thewarsoftheroses.com
• British History by Miles Kelly
• www.britannica.com
• www.battlefieldstrust.com

The man who lived to 126? Our image of the week is from Japan

We’re off to see an Ancient Japanese Emperor for this week’s image of the week… 

The image is of Emperor Jimmu. He was the First Emperor of Japan, and apparently reigned from 660 BC, until he died at the age of 126 in 585BC. The truth is though, that it is not clear whether Jimmu really existed as there’s a lack of real proof. Indeed, he is shrouded in legend!

This picture from Tsukioka Yoshitoshi from around 1880 is fascinating. It shows the sun beaming down on a powerful looking Jimmu, with a bird atop his stick and a man kneeling beside him.

Is there a history image that you love? Or a history image from your local area that you would like to share with us? If so, let us know! Click here to find out how to get in touch.

George Levrier-Jones

A Redcoat in the American Revolution - Benjamin Reynard, 37th Regiment of Foot

In this article, as our part of our American Revolution season, we look at the life of a British soldier during the American Revolutionary War. 

British army redcoats through the ages.

Source: Regimental Nicknames and Traditions of the British Army, London: Gale & Polden, 1916.

Army muster rolls in general provide an overview of each soldier's career, allowing each man to be traced from the time that he joined his regiment to the time he left it. Occasionally, however, a soldier enigmatically appears on the rolls without any indication of where he came from, and sometimes men disappear from the rolls with no explanation of where they went. Benjamin Reynard, a grenadier in the 37th Regiment of Foot, provides an example of both of these nuances.

Reynard served in America, but it is not clear when he joined the army or arrived on the west side of the Atlantic Ocean. He first appears on the roll of the grenadier company covering the period 25 December 1777 through 24 June 1778. Most men who joined grenadier or light infantry companies had served for at least a year in other companies of the regiment (there were occasional exceptions, particularly for men who had prior military experience). There is no annotation on this roll that he joined the company during that muster period, and no trace of him on the rolls of other companies during preceding periods. Admittedly, more detailed analysis might resolve this mystery; sometimes there are significant changes in the ways that names are spelled from one roll to another, and sometimes even the man's first name changes (for example, there's a chance that Benjamin Reynard is the 'Thomas Raynor' who appears on the prior roll of the same company), but determining this requires careful tracing of all of the names on the rolls, a long and tedious process.

Reynard continues on the rolls of the grenadier company of the 37th Regiment through August of 1783. At that time, the regiment was reorganized due to force reductions at the end of the war; the strength was reduced from ten companies to eight, and many men were discharged. Reynard appears on a set of rolls covering the period 24 June through 24 August (an unusual muster period), but is absent from the subsequent roll covering 25 August through 24 December. Again, it is possible that his name is not obvious because of spelling permutations, but the spelling is very consistent on all of the interim rolls.
Although we lack career details on Reynard that we have for most soldiers, there survives a record of a personal vignette during Reynard's American service, something we lack for most soldiers. At the beginning of June 1779 the grenadier battalion that included his company was part of an expedition that fortified posts on the Hudson River north of New York city including Stony Point on the west shore and Verplanck's Point on the east shore. They camped in wigwams made of brush, a typical practice for the British army in America. On 4 June they fired a salute in honor of the King's birthday.

At about 10 AM on 5 June, Reynard asked his sergeant for leave to go outside of the camp to gather greens, which was granted. He took a haversack with him, and after about an hour returned to camp with the haversack full of dock greens and other wild greens. At noon he fell in for a formation.

Later that day or the next day, a local inhabitant named Mary Baker claimed that some soldiers had come to her house about two miles from the camp at around 11 in the morning of 5 June. She had an inventory of things that they had plundered which included "shirts, and a quantity of wearing Apparel." She identified Reynard as one of the perpetrators, and claimed that he had also killed a pig of hers and made off with it.

Reynard was put on trial for this crime on 7 June. Mary Baker was the only witness supporting the charge. Reynard claimed that he was away from the camp with leave but had not gone far and had only gathered greens. His sergeant and another grenadier both testified in his support, corroborating his story. Both testified that they were in the same mess as Reynard, that is, they prepared their food and dined together; this explained their explicit interest in having seen the greens that Reynard gathered, and both said that Reynard had nothing else with him when he returned to camp. As an aside, typically a mess consisted of 5 men; military authors of the era recommended that sergeants and soldiers mess separately, so the testimony in this trial indicates either that this company of the 37th did not heed these recommendations or that the size and composition of messes varied while the army was on campaign.

In a striking verdict, which is perhaps yet another mystery about Reynard, the military court found him guilty of the crime. Apparently they gave greater significance to the testimony of the injured party than to Reynard and his two comrades. There is no mention in the trial proceedings of how Mary Barker singled out Reynard, but there are other accounts of soldiers being paraded so that wronged inhabitants could recognize an offender in the ranks. It is possible that the officers who sat on the court were privy to information that was not explicitly presented at the trial. It also may be that the court wanted to set an example to stave off plundering by other soldiers.

Benjamin Reynard was sentenced to receive 1000 lashes. We have no information on the extent to which this punishment was inflicted. Sometimes soldiers who were severely punished, particularly on dubious evidence, deserted, but not this one. As described above, Reynard continued to serve through to the end of the war. 

By Don N Hagist

Don is the owner of redcoat76.blogspot.com, a place for information about British soldiers who served during the American Revolution, 1775-1783. Take a look!

And our American Revolution podcast page is available by clicking here.

Women on the Frontline – The essential role of females in World War I

We hear a lot about the male heroes of the frontline in World War I, but less has been written about the women who also served during that war. Women were involved in a wide number of organizations that were essential to the war effort. And in this article, we tell the story of organizations and people from Britain who played essential roles both on and near the frontline. 

World War I heroine Edith Cavell

It emerged within the first few weeks of the outbreak of war that there was a great shortage of qualified nurses and others who could support with medical assistance in places such as field hospitals. Voluntary Aid Detachment (VAD) nurses were then sent from Britain to France but had to be over the age of 23. Many lied about their age so they could set out on an ‘adventure’ which proved to be a naïve mistake. Often, many women who ventured across the English Channel returned home as injured and broken as the men who were fighting at the Front.

When the nurses arrived in France life was far from enjoyable. After a long and grueling journey, they found old dwellings, a shortage of food, and uncomfortable surroundings.

Meanwhile, back in Britain many hospitals were set up in country estates; the most famous of these was probably the estate of the Duchess of Rutland and her daughter, socialite Lady Diana Cooper. Lady Cooper was a VAD nurse - when it suited her - if you believe reports from the time. However, this was not a unique case as many privileged and wealthy girls would volunteer for these services and many accounts have been told about how they would spend the day serving tea to the wounded and recuperating soldiers only to return home and have their own tea poured out by the parlor maid!

This was an experience that gave these privileged women a new outlook on life; it brought a whole new meaning to life as they realized that there was a freedom beyond the restrictions of an aristocratic existence. For many this sparked a turnaround in their lives and gave them a new found ambition to do something with their lives – one of the many turning points for the aristocracy during this period in time.

The same would be applied to the less privileged as they realized that they could play roles other than working in factories.

Alongside the VADs, there was another important organization called the First Aid Nursing Yeomanry (FANY). Members of the FANY would go to the Front and set up soup kitchens, drive ambulances, and work in field hospitals. Like the VADs, members of the FANY had to be at least 23. There were no formal regulations that they had to follow but they would salute an officer of rank just out of respect, although this was an optional formality.

Meanwhile, VADs were only human and made mistakes like the rest of us. Many unused to household chores didn’t know how to mop a floor properly, let alone make tea; however, they did more than act as nurses. Some went beyond the call of duty by composing letters home for the injured men. Many soldiers could not read or write so this provided a valuable service on what could always be their final contact with home.

Somebody who went even further beyond the call of duty was Edith Cavell. An experienced British nurse, she travelled to Belgium and whilst tending to the wounded, she also helped Allied servicemen escape to freedom from German-occupied Belgium. She was eventually caught doing this and was court martialed for her actions. Fondly remembered as a patriotic, brave woman, she famously said ‘I can’t stop while there are lives to be saved.’ Edith Cavell never received any formal decoration for her efforts before she was executed by a firing squad.

She was just one of the many brave heroines who strived to change lives in whatever small way they could.

By Ruth Roberts

You can read another article on World War I by clicking here. It’s about the secret underground battle of tunnel warfare.

The First Transcontinental Railroad – An image you wouldn’t expect?

Our image of the week…

The final section of the First Transcontinental Railroad was built between 1863 and 1869, and allowed the whole of the continental USA to be crossed by rail. It connected San Francisco with the rest of the US rail network via the town of Council Bluffs, Iowa. Today we look at a few images of this amazing feat of construction. Firstly is a blurry image of Chinese workers constructing the railroad in the snow in the Sierra Nevada, California. In fact, Chinese workers played a major role in building many tunnels for the railroad.

After years of hard work, and with the Civil War over, the railroad was finally complete by 1869. In this bright painting, we can see Leland Stanford, one of the owners of the Central Pacific Railroad, hammering the ‘Golden Spike’ in to the ground at Promontory Summit, Utah in May 1869. This painting is from the late 19th century.

Is there a history image that you love? Or a history image from your local area that you would like to share with us? If so, let us know! Click here.

George Levrier-Jones 

A brief history of Halloween! Celts, Romans and the Irish - The tradition behind trick or treating

As the days grow darker and winter descends, Halloween ushers in the change in season, as a sweet and spooky community celebration. While candy and costumes are all the rage on Halloween, there's more to this tradition than just belly aches, naughty nurses and Frankenstein. In this article, we veer off modern history and explain the history behind the tradition. 

A witch as drawn in a 15th century book by Martin Le France

Ancient Origins 

The history of Halloween dates back over 2,000 years and is believed to have originated with the Celtic festival of Samhain, where in an attempt to ward off evil and ghosts, villagers would wear costumes and light bonfires. Samhain was not the most rational of festivals though. Indeed, as in many festivals of the ancient world, it was steeped in strong superstitious beliefs that were perpetuated over the years; this tradition trickled into church practices. For example, in the eighth century, Pope Gregory III proclaimed November 1st as All Saints Day in order to honor the souls of saints and martyrs, and so incorporated some Samhain traditions. The evening before All Saints Day was known as All Hallows Eve or Halloween as we know it today. 

Originating in what we know today as modern Ireland, England and northern France, the Celts would usher in their new year on November 1st with fear and foreboding, as the cold winter marked the end of the grain harvest and the beginning of the reaping season. According to Celtic history on the night before their New Year (October 31st), death was palpable as the Celts believed that the lines between life and death were blurred, allowing the dead to roam free and plague the living. The effects of this were felt by humans too. On this night, Celtic priests (Druids) were believed to be able to predict the future.

In this period, the Celts would extinguish their hearth fires and gather to build a sacred community pyre where they would make crop and animal sacrifices to their deities for protection during the coming cold. When their celebration was over they would use the sacred fire to reignite their hearths. In the early years of the first millennia AD, the Romans descended on Celtic lands, seizing some Celtic territory and ruling for many years. During this time two Roman festivals influenced the Celtic Samhain festival, notably Feralia, another festival in October that celebrated the souls of the dead, and Pomona, which celebrated the Roman Goddess of trees and fruits. Interestingly the symbol of Pomona was an apple, which is probably why people go "bobbing" for apples - so in our Halloween celebration we are commemorating the Goddess Pomona. 

When Christianity later spread throughout Celtic lands, it is believed that the Christians tried to replace Samhain with a Church sanctioned day to honor the dead, what we know today as November 2nd or All Soul's Day.

Halloween in America

The history of Halloween in America evolved very differently from the European tradition, as it meshed with Native American practices and the different customs of the various European groups that had emigrated to America. By the 19th century Halloween was practiced in some but not all parts of America, with people telling ghost stories, playing tricks, dancing, singing, and fortune telling. 

American Halloween was changed forever with the influx of Irish immigrants fleeing the potato famine of 1846, who helped to popularize the tradition of costumes. From this, the American Halloween "trick or treat" tradition was born with people dressing up to go house to house to ask for food or money, which later evolved into candy. 

When the Irish came to America they also brought with them the tradition of the Jack-o-lantern. According to Irish Halloween tradition it was believed that a cruel man named Jack captured the Devil and trapped him in a tree. Jack swore to let the Devil go if he promised that Jack would never go to Hell. When Jack died he found the gates of Heaven barred because of his cruelty on Earth. And following his deal with the Devil nor could he go to Hell; however, the Devil did gave Jack a burning ember from the fires of Hell which Jack placed within vegetable shells to navigate the dark recesses of the Earth.

As time wore on, the American Halloween tradition was molded further into a day of celebration as opposed to one of witchcraft. Newspapers encouraged parents to remove anything grotesque and frightening from the celebration to put an end to the religious and superstitious beliefs behind the festival. 

The history of American Halloween hasn't always been all chocolates and fairies though. By the 1920s and 1930s, even though Halloween was largely a community celebration, the festival was becoming associated with vandalism, but by the 1950s, Halloween was more fully developed into a children's tradition. Today Americans spend a whopping $6 billion dollars on Halloween candy and costumes, making it America's second largest commercial festival.

Unknown Facts

Before you leave here are some interesting facts about Halloween:

• What do you call the fear of Halloween? - Samhainophobia
• Black and orange are the two most common colors associated with Halloween which is indicative of its origins. Orange is reminiscent of the change in season or autumn while black is a reminder of the boundary lines between life and death
• The largest Halloween parade is in New York City
• It is illegal to dress up as a Priest for Halloween in Alabama

While Halloween for us today is about parties, games and sweet treats, we should remember that it was a major part of Celtic life. After all, they attributed their survival during winter to the practice of Samhain. Furthermore it was this combination of Irish and Roman superstition and belief that led Christianity to develop two days dedicated to the remembrance and honor of the dead. In other words, Halloween is a surviving relic of the past that once combined religion and superstition. Even in celebrations today, Halloween has preserved some of its eeriness, relying on the goodwill of "spirits" by appeasing them with candy treats.

By Shrinivas

Do you agree with the theories in this article? Tell us below…

Now, why not listen to a podcast? Click here!

The new magazine! History is Now - Issue 1 - The USA, China, the USSR and the nearly-nuclear Taiwan Straits Crisis

Have you heard?

Our interactive digital magazine for the iPad and iPhone, History is Now, has arrived! We love it and we're sure you will too.

Click here for more information! 

So what is the magazine about? Here is what our editor says…

History continues to define and transform our world. Events in 1940s China continue to causes tensions between China an America. The legacy of Communism and Colonialism continue to cause stability and instability, problems and agreements the world over. In short, history is so very important. The lessons you can learn from it, the events that happened, the differences between different ages and countries. Understanding where we as human beings have come from.

So that’s why we’ve decided to start History is Now, the global modern history magazine. Much like our other productions, the focus of the magazine will be on the 19th century, 20th century, Communism, civil war, and Colonialism. That said, from time-to-time we may be tempted to veer slightly off that course. Our articles will come from a variety of sources. We will be providing you with articles from some of our favorite history writers, while at other times we shall be trawling the archives of some of the best sites online to hand-pick the very best pieces just for you. You see, very often the best history has already been written – it’s just finding it that’s almost impossible. And as some of you will know, before our horizons expanded, we were making history podcasts - so in each magazine we will be telling you a bit more about one of our podcasts and inserting it in the magazine.

Click here for more information

The USA, China, the USSR and the nearly-nuclear Taiwan Straits Crisis is the main article! But what else is there in issue 1?

The first edition features articles on:

• How the US, China and the USSR nearly became involved in a nuclear war over Taiwan
• The story of the early stages of the brutal Italian colonization of Libya
• Death in the Eastern Bloc - The harrowing tale of a freedom fighter in Communist Czechoslovakia
• A number of bizarre tales involving lions in Western Europe
• The life and times of the 'log cabin President' William Henry Harrison
• Our first ever podcast!

With all that and more, come and join us inside…

Just click here for more information! Alternatively search for History is Now  on the app store.

George Levrier-Jones

Of Skaters and Sweaters – A Brief History of East Germany’s Stasi

Near the center of the town of Neuruppin, not far from Berlin, sits a large if unassuming house that once belonged to the local newspaper publisher. After the Second World War, it became the local Stasi headquarters. They adorned the brick façade and red tile roof with a myriad of surveillance equipment, antennas and satellite dishes.

The better to hear you with. Even today, some locals make a wide circle to avoid passing directly in front of it.

The Stasi, short for Ministerium für Staatssicherheit (Ministry for State Security) was the East German’s secret police, charged with protecting the state from enemies both foreign and domestic, real or imagined. Lesser known than their Soviet counterparts in the KGB, they were no less feared. It is not a coincidence that Stasi rhymes with Nazi. 

Erich Meilke, the man who led the Stasi for over 30 years, in 1958. He worked for DDR leader Walter Ulbricht for much of his tenure.

Source: Bundesarchiv, Bild 183-60945-0005 / Ulmer, Rudi / CC-BY-SA

The Stasi began operating in 1950. Its international exploits during the Cold War included training Castro’s secret police, running brothels in West Germany for the purpose of blackmailing West German politicians and businessmen, and funding Neo-Nazi groups in West Germany in order to discredit democracy. In the early 1970s, they even succeeded in having an agent appointed as an aide to the then West German Chancellor Willie Brandt.

But it was their work as an internal secret police that kept East Germans looking over their shoulders. Their network was extensive. Most apartment buildings, neighborhoods, factories and government agencies had at least one informant, spying on their neighbors and informing on them regarding the slightest infractions, which were then documented to the minutest detail. By the time the Berlin Wall fell in 1989, the Stasi employed some 91,000 agents and operatives, and had another 173,000 informal informers from whom they gathered information. As a point of comparison, Canada today has about 2,500 security agents for twice the population.

The Stasi compiled extensive files on much of the East German population. Olympian Katerina Witt had information collected on her going back to the age of six or seven, when she first began to show promise as a figure skater. The DDR was terrified she might defect to the West and that they would lose one of their crown jewels, so the Stasi kept track of almost everything she did and said. Friends, relatives and team-mates were either convinced or coerced into keeping tabs on her. Her home contained hidden microphones to record her conversations.

Surveillance wasn’t just done on the famous or important. Everyday people were spied on with regularity. Seemingly mundane transgressions were often considered crimes against the state. One woman had a file started on her because she bought a sweater from the West. She laughs about it now, but such activities, could have dire consequences. A neighbor and informant went through one man’s cupboards to find that he had some pudding from West Germany. Shortly after, he lost his job and was unable to find another. He and his family ended up destitute.

As the Cold War came to a close, the Stasi tried to destroy these files. But when people saw smoke rising up above the Stasi Headquarters in Berlin, they stormed the buildings and put an end to the destruction. While about 5 percent of the files were destroyed, most of them remained intact. Today, they take up over 100,000 kilometers of shelf space in the Stasi Museum, located in that former Berlin Headquarters. Under German law, former citizens of the DDR can request to see their files. Some 2.75 million people have done so since the law was passed in 1991. 

Protests in Leipzig, East Germany, May 1990, demanding the opening up of the Stasi files

Source: Bundesarchiv, Bild 183-1990-0522-033 / Gahlbeck, Friedrich / CC-BY-SA 

The Stasi did more than just watch and listen and record. As with the man who was guilty of nothing more than having a taste for West German pudding, they acted against those they felt were a threat to the state. They had learned early on that the traditional methods of most secret police, torture and imprisonment, had a limited effect. The victims often became martyrs or heroes and it did little to discourage others. Nelson Mandela is but one prominent example of this. Instead, they employed much subtler methods, known as Zersetung (corrosion or undermining). They conducted smear campaigns to discredit people along with threats and intimidation to get what they wanted. Wiretapping and bugging were commonplace. Sometimes, they would move a person’s furniture or take a picture down from their walls - all to send the message that they were always there, always watching. Their victims were forever on edge, waiting for the next shoe to drop. Some even went insane.

Zersetung had the added advantage of deniability. With no one in prison, no one physically hurt, the Stasi could deny any involvement. This worked so well that by the year 2000, only 33 Stasi officers had been sentenced by German courts for their crimes, and of these, 28 were suspended.

When revelations about NSA surveillance surfaced earlier this year in the US, most Americans did not seem overly concerned. Germans, however, have been much more vocal in protesting what they see as an invasion of their privacy. There have been public protests, and it came up as an issue in the general election there. Learning how the East German people were intimidated into obedience by an ever watchful and secretive organization like the Stasi, it is easy to understand their reaction to what many see as an unfettered invasion of privacy. After all, the NSA data center is estimated to be able to save 5 billion terabytes of data - 1 billion times more than the Stasi kept in their notorious paper files.

That’s a lot of sweaters being bought from the West.

By Manfred Gabriel

Enjoy this article? Well, another East Germany related article from Manfred is here. It is about the story of how a Trabant car defined a nation.