The book discussed here shows how access to archives shapes the boundaries of a naval history. British records supplied substantial evidence about Canadian and Australian operations during the Second World War, but did not support equally deep treatment of their postwar service. Original archival research is distinguished from legitimate synthesis based on other historians, since large surveys necessarily depend on earlier scholarship. That dependence creates a risk of carrying forward another author's mistake or misreading. Direct archival work remains open to human error as well.
Notable Point · 22:22-25:29
How archival limits shape Commonwealth naval history
A discussion of research practice explains why a British-archive-based study could cover Canadian and Australian wartime service more fully than their postwar experience.