MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2064562669 · doi:10.1353/jmh.0.0305

Cinderella Army: The Canadians in Northwest Europe, 1944-1945 (review)

2009· article· en· W2064562669 sur OpenAlex
Russell A. Hart

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

aboutLe titre ou le résumé porte un signal canadien du lexique géographique.
no affAucune affiliation canadienne : ce travail est invisible pour une base fondée sur la seule affiliation.
Aucune affiliation canadienne. Une base fondée sur la seule affiliation (le devis habituel) n'aurait jamais vu ce travail. C'est l'un des travaux qui justifient l'inversion de la base.

Notice bibliographique

RevueThe Journal of Military History · 2009
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueCanadian Identity and History
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésVictoryCOPPCalaisHistoryArgument (complex analysis)NarrativeWorld War IISociologyPolitical scienceLawPoliticsArchaeologyArt

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Cinderella Army: The Canadians in Northwest Europe, 1944-1945 Russell A. Hart Cinderella Army: The Canadians in Northwest Europe, 1944-1945. By Terry Copp. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2006. ISBN 0-8020-3925-1. Maps. Photographs. Notes. Bibliography. Index. Pp. xi, 407. CAN $45.00. In this sequel to his award-winning 2003 study, Fields of Fire, Terry Copp continues his efforts to expand awareness regarding the effectiveness and contribution of Canadian forces to Allied victory in Northwest Europe via a narrative of Canadian ground combat operations. He largely succeeds in demonstrating that the challenges that confronted the Canadians have been underemphasized; that criticisms leveled at them are exaggerated or unfounded; and that Canadians made a greater contribution to Allied victory than is often recognized. The author contends that the Canadian capture of the Channel ports of Le Havre, Boulogne, and Calais were significant accomplishments that were not appropriately recognized at the time or subsequently. Copp illustrates that the challenges that confronted the Canadians have been unappreciated and thus the criticisms leveled against them for the time it took to clear the ports are unwarranted. Equally, the challenges the Canadians faced clearing the Breskens Pocket were also substantial, yet his claim that the struggle "must surely rank with the most difficult fight by any Allied formation in the Second World War" (p. 117) over reaches. The argument that the Canadians never received the resources necessary to rapidly clear the Scheldt – thereby opening up the port of Antwerp - is true, but hardly novel. Copp rightly emphasizes the enormous pressure and strain placed on the front line Canadian [End Page 1010] infantry during the fall 1944 battles (p. 177). Also compelling is his argument that "senior Canadian officers…were flexible as well as open to innovation" (p. 196). His emphasis on the scale and tremendous cost of the spring 1945 operations is likewise spot on, as is his claim that "…military historians have generally paid slight attention to the operations carried out by First Canadian Army in April 1945" (p. 261). His exploration of the Canadian clearing of Arnhem, Leer, Groningen, and the Delfzijl Pocket provide much needed study of these neglected late war battles. Among the study's most original conclusions are that improvements in artillery effectiveness "were less satisfactory than usually supposed" and that "casualties from friendly fire were much higher than is generally supposed" (pp. 290-91). The greatest strength of the work is its synthetic value, bringing together conclusions that the author and other scholars have articulated over the last decade. The work naturally has limitations. As a narrative of Canadian ground combat operations, only intermittently does the author engage some of the specific criticisms other historians have leveled at Canadian performance in Northwest Europe. Moreover, Copp overrates German capability. In reality, German deficiencies and weaknesses invariably exceeded Canadian, sometimes significantly so. The most striking case is the author's description of the Breskens Pocket, where Copp conveys the impression that the Canadians faced a regular, experienced, powerful German 64th Infantry Division. In actuality, the formation was recently activated, hastily assembled, second rate, not very mobile, and inexperienced. Moreover, that the under-resourced Canadians innovated is neither novel nor surprising. Insufficient resources to accomplish assigned missions invariably compel militaries to adapt on the battlefield and innovation was characteristic of all the combatants in Northwest Europe. An important historical question has been not whether the Canadians innovated, but how rapidly and successfully they did it relative to their British and American allies, and their German opponents. These minor criticisms notwithstanding, Copp has produced a well-researched, well-presented, largely compelling, and much needed corrective that emphasizes the tremendous challenges, the very substantial human cost, and the significant contribution Canadian forces made to Allied victory in Northwest Europe, 1944-1945. It should be on the shelf of anyone interested in the Second World War. Russell A. Hart Hawai'i Pacific University Honolulu, Hawai'i Copyright © 2009 Society for Military History

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: Synthèse
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,157
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,819

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,013
Tête enseignante GPT0,219
Écart entre enseignants0,206 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle