| Summary/Abstract |
The accusation frequently levelled at official history is that it is beholden to government and this relationship limits its honesty and impartiality. One example of this is the depiction of the introduction of the convoy system in the official British history of the First World War. According to one popular narrative, this came about only because determined, far-seeing politicians overrode reactionary senior admirals. The official history offered an account more favorable to the navy and, therefore, it has been characterized as a whitewash. This article shows that while individual naval officers and the Admiralty had a voice in the production of the text, their input led to a better, more balanced product, with fewer errors and a greater sense of the complexity of the issues. This furthers the argument that official history that incorporates such voices is generally better for it.
|