Full Text
Britain, post-World War I army mutinies and revolutionary threats
Gerard Oram
Subject
History
»
Military History
Social Movements
»
Collective Behaviour
Place
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
»
England
Period
1000 - 1999
»
1900-1999
Key-Topics
Britain and Britishness, national defense, rebellion, revolution, war
DOI: 10.1111/b.9781405184649.2009.00258.x
Extract
Following the Bolshevik revolution that overthrew its Russian allies, the British government – increasingly fearful of similar threats – placed responsibility for monitoring and managing “industrial and revolutionary unrest in the United Kingdom” in the hands of the army, a role it would fulfill from the end of 1917 to 1920. As well as civilian unrest, the army's Intelligence Branch (A2) concerned itself with the growth of trade unionism in the army and with the attitude of troops toward labor unrest and strikes ( Englander 1987 : 24–32). Unlike his wartime equivalent, the postwar soldier was less concerned with his immediate survival and instead looked more to the future – a future in which few envisaged continuing military service – and many were prepared to use collective bargaining to this end. But a great fear developed within the government and A2 surrounding a potentially politicized or revolutionary soldier. In Britain, the end of the war precipitated a wave of mutinies in the army, navy, and airforce. Army units at Shoreham mutinied merely two days after the armistice, but January 1919 saw a rash of mutinies all across the country involving many thousands of men. At RAF Biggin Hill in Kent, the Internationale was sung. Elsewhere, soldiers' and sailors' councils were set up or (as in the case of a naval mutiny at Milford Haven) the red flag was raised. However, the demands ... log in or subscribe to read full text
Log In
You are not currently logged-in to Blackwell Reference Online
If your institution has a subscription, you can log in here: