Paid Advertisement
Historynet/feed historynet feedback facebook link World History Group RSS feed World History Group Subscriptions Historynet Home page

Letter from Military History - October 2008

Originally published by Military History magazine. Published Online: August 26, 2008 
Print Friendly
0 comments FONT +  FONT -

Shadow Facts

What did he know? And when did he know it? That famous pair of questions posed by Senator Howard Baker of Tennessee during the Watergate era referred to President Richard Nixon and is now commonly applied to high officials suspected of misdeeds. But those questions are equally valid when applied to military leaders, not as a matter of nosing after malfeasance, but as a historical matter of understanding their tactics, decisions and actions.

If a particular decision by a field commander seems baffling in retrospect, consider what he knew and when he knew it. Then consider the possibility that he knew something we (and the enemy he was facing) could not know, that he was in possession of superior clandestine intelligence. Or, from the opposite side, consider that an opponent may have planted false information to elicit the commander's baffling decision. A classic example of the latter is Adolf Hitler's hesitation to counterattack at Normandy because he believed it was only a ruse and that the major Allied invasion would hit farther up the French coast at Calais. Why did Hitler believe that? Because an elaborate British intelligence scheme had snookered him into that false belief. It worked beautifully, saving countless lives and contributing to the battlefield success at Normandy. Only later, when secret documents were declassified, was it possible to understand Hitler's delayed reaction in the spring of 1944.

It may be true that battles and wars are won or lost by better weapons, better training, superior generalship, greater courage and determination, and other overt factors. But it may also be true that victory may turn on covert information—call them shadow facts—that one side knew or did not know at the time, that one side believed to be true or false. It is a hidden dimension of warfare that is not always given much consideration at the time or later by historians. But it can prove decisive.

Leave a Reply

Human Verification: In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.

Related Articles

History Net Images Spacer
Paid Advertisement
Paid Advertisement
History Net Daily Activities
History net Spacer
History net Spacer
Historynet Spacer

Which of these wars resulted in the most surprising underdog upset?

View Results | See previous polls

Loading ... Loading ...
History net Spacer
RSS Feed Daily Email Update
History net Spacer
Paid Advertisement

Paid Advertisement
What is HistoryNet? is brought to you by World History Group, the world's largest publisher of history magazines. contains daily features, photo galleries and over 5,000 articles originally published in our various magazines.

If you are interested in a specific history subject, try searching our archives, you are bound to find something to pique your interest.

From Our Magazines
World History Group

World History Group Network:  HistoryNet | Armchair General | Achtung Panzer!
Today in History | Ask Mr. History | Picture of the Day | Daily History Quiz | Contact Us

Copyright © 2015 World History Group. All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.
Advertise With Us | Subscription Help | Privacy Policy