Arthur F. Loveday
Spain 1923-1948: Civil War + World War
Allentown, Penn.: Antelope Hill Publishing, 2022
(originally published in the United Kingdom in 1948)
Of all the nations that make up Western Civilization, Spain was the first that faced and overcame the challenges that eventually troubled all the others. In the 1400s, Spain threw off the Jewish yoke and freed its government and society. A century later, they also expelled the Muslim settler-colonists. Then, in the 1930s, the Spanish defeated a Soviet-led effort to carry out a Communist revolution in their country.
In 1948, when the Spanish Civil War was still fresh in the minds of the British public, Arthur F. Loveday wrote a book about the war. It was the right book at the right time for the right audience. The British public and establishment had remained on the sidelines during the Spanish Civil War but leaned toward the Spanish Left, which included many Soviet-controlled Communists. In 1948 it was absolutely vital to British interests that a British patriot should explain the truth of what had happened. Spain 1923-1948 is now in the public domain and was republished in 2022 by Antelope Hill Publishing.
The British public’s leftward lean was due to the bias of the British media and clergy, which was underpinned by the metapolitical work of organizations such as the Fabian Society and the Labour Party. During the 1930s, liberals were bedazzled by Soviet propaganda and were unable to see the cruelty of Communism. Liberals rationalized the deliberately engineered terror-famines, gulags, and secret police. They also romanticized the dysfunctional Spanish Republican government. The siren song of Communism even beguiled otherwise well-meaning old-stock Americans.
By 1948, it was clear that Western Europe needed to unite to counter the Soviet threat. NATO would not be formed until April of the following year. Spain at the time was a pariah state due to the victory of Francisco Franco’s “fascist,” anti-Communist regime in the war, but also had a large, battle-hardened army. Spain is difficult to invade, and historically it is where small armies are destroyed and large armies starve. It makes up most of the Iberian Peninsula, and apart from its border with Portugal, it is surrounded by protective seas, while its northern border is secured by the Pyrenees mountains.
As John Beaty wrote in his excellent book, The Iron Curtain Over America:
With the Atlantic Ocean, the Mediterranean, and the lofty Pyrenees Mountains as barriers; under the sheltering arm of distance; and above all with no visible internal Communists or Marxists to sabotage our efforts, [the Americans] can — if our national defense so requires — safely equip Spain’s eighteen well-disciplined divisions, develop airfields unapproachable by hostile ground troops, and in the deep inlets and harbors of Spain can secure safe ports for our navy and our merchant fleet. Our strengthening of Spain, second only to our keeping financially solvent and curbing Communists in this country, would undoubtedly be a very great factor in preventing the Soviet leaders from launching an all-out war. Knowing that with distant Pyrenees-guarded and American-armed Spain against them, they could not finally win, they almost certainly would not begin. Our strengthening of Spain’s army, potentially the best in Europe outside of Communist lands, would not only have per se a powerful military value; it would also give an electric feeling of safety to the really anti-Communist elements in other Western European countries.
The British had — and still have — an important naval base at Gibraltar from which they control passage to and from the Mediterranean Sea. Spain had been isolated from the rest of Western Europe by the late 1940s, and there was a justified fear that, if the Spanish felt that they had nothing left to lose, they might attempt to seize Gibraltar. It was therefore critical after the Second World War to change the public’s attitude toward Spain.
The defeated Leftists, the Spanish Republicans, maintained a government-in-exile. This pretender government had first fled to France following their defeat in 1939, and then finally to Mexico. This government was sympathetic to international Communism and continued to put pressure on Spain on the international scene in the late 1940s.
Loveday writes:
The powerful, intelligent, and active campaign of Soviet Russia and communism to revenge themselves on Spain for the defeat of 1936-39 bore its magnificent harvest in the debates and motions of the [United Nations Organization]. At the San Francisco conference, on June 20th, 1945, the Mexican delegate proposed that Francoist Spain should be excluded from membership . . . this was a strange and alarming example of lack of principle and resort to camouflage [by Soviet led international communism]. (p. 198)
The Road to Civil War
The roots of the Spanish Civil War lie in longstanding tensions within Spanish society that their Constitution of 1876 had failed to alleviate. Of this, Loveday writes:
In the 55 years under that constitution (1876-1931) there were 56 governments, a seven-year civil war (Carlist), various local revolutions, four prime ministers assassinated, three attempts on the life of the king and finally a revolution, which led to the terror and civil war of 1936-39. (p. 217)
Besides their constitutional problems, Spain also had two ethnic groups that were uncomfortably united under a system where Castilians were politically dominant. Most of the people in Spain speak Castilian, which is what English-speakers call Spanish. In the eastern region of Spain, Catalan is spoken, and in the north, the unique non-Indo-European Basque language predominates. The Roman Catholic Church attempted to ease tensions by emphasizing their common religion, but this led an ethnically-fueled anti-clerical movement which the Communists exploited.
These ethnic tensions, combined with Communism and other forms of Leftism, led to considerable problems for the Spanish government in the early twentieth century. Events abroad likewise poisoned Spain’s domestic scene. In 1919, for example, the Spanish army was mired in a quagmire in Morocco. Terrorist gunmen ran rampant through Barcelona. These problems only ended when an aristocrat, Miguel Antonio Primo de Rivera (1870-1930), took over the country and established himself as a dictator under King Alfonso XIII in 1923.
De Rivera only ruled Spain for six years, during which order was restored and the war in Morocco successfully won. But de Rivera was undermined by the Leftist factions, including the Masonic Order of the Grand Orient as well as the Communist International. Both organizations included large contingents of Jews. The value of the national currency, the peseta, fell during this time, although the economy was stable and the nation’s credit was improving. (It is possible that Jewish bankers involved in currency exchange manipulated the value of the currency in the Zurich and Amsterdam exchanges.)
The biggest problem for de Rivera was the army. Artillery was a branch unto itself; it was independent of the Ministry of War and had its own regulations. When de Rivera attempted to address this, the garrison at Ciudad Real mutinied in January 1929. They were put down, but their leader was acquitted in the subsequent trial. Other military garrisons rebelled for their own reasons. The military’s instability finally caused de Rivera to resign in 1930. He went into exile in Paris and died shortly thereafter.
Spain’s destabilization only increased thereafter. Elections were held in 1931 and the anti-monarchists prevailed. King Alfonso XVIII went into exile, but did not abdicate. Spain then became an unstable republic with a large segment of monarchists. On one side of the political divide was the Right, which included conservative monarchists and the clergy, as well as the Falange, led by José Antonio Primo de Rivera, the son of the former dictator. The Falange were the Left side of the Right. Their political platform consisted of 26 points which called for national unity, supported high wages for workers, encouraged the growth of industry, and so on. On the other side, the Left was a collection of anarchists and Communists, some of whom took their orders from Moscow, as well as misguided anti-clerical ethnonationalists in Catalonia.
The fuse for civil war was lit in February 1936. An election was held which resulted in an unexpected victory for the Left under the umbrella of the Popular Front. Loveday writes:
The official figures of votes, as given at the time by the Spanish Government itself, are: Popular Front, 4,356,000, Parties of the Right 4,570,000, Center 240,000, or a majority of Right and Center over Popular Front of 454,000. This was the result, notwithstanding the fact that election irregularities in favor of Popular Front candidates, such as the destruction of the urns and voting papers by the mob, and the falsification of election figures took place in many centers. (p. 41)
While more Spaniards had voted for the Right, the number of Popular Front deputies elected to the Cortes, the Spanish Parliament, was greater due to the arrangement of the various political districts. Once in power, the Leftists reorganized the legislature to increase their majority by annulling the votes for the Rightist deputies and then expelling them altogether.
The Popular Front enacted Communist-style economic forms. Industrial firms, for example, were not allowed to cease operations even if they were unprofitable. The owners had to maintain them or else hand their assets over to the workers. The result of this law was that the workers could strike until a firm was bankrupt and then take ownership of the company. The way in which the workers would break down the actual ownership of a firm was vague, however, and the company might have lost its market value during the preceding strike, leaving such a firm was effectively bankrupt. The Popular Front also attacked Catholics: priests were imprisoned, schools were shut down, and churches were destroyed.
In May-June 1936, a document was discovered which outlined a plan to turn Spain into a Soviet-style state under the dictatorship of Largo Caballero. The Leftists in government then released genuine criminals from prisons and refilled the cells with members of the Falange. Primo de Rivera was arrested and executed by firing squad on November 20, 1936.
The trigger which finally led to the outbreak of civil war was when Calvo Sotelo, a highly respected conservative parliamentarian, was arrested by the police and executed in a police van on July 15, 1936. Loveday writes:
At the core of the conflict was the struggle between those who held the doctrines of Karl Marx and those who held the doctrines of Christ; the latter based on universal brotherhood and obedience to authority and the other on class warfare and the revolution. There could be no reconciliation between these two ideologies, either in Spain or elsewhere, and the murder of Calvo Sotelo set the light to the civil war between them, which broke out on July 18th with the revolt of the Spanish army in Morocco. (p. 44)
The revolt was led by Francisco Franco. The best troops in the Spanish army were Moroccan mercenaries, and Franco airlifted them, along with his best officers, across the Strait of Gibraltar to end the chaos. It is possible that Franco could have ended the Spanish Republic already at that time, but not all of the military supported him; the Spanish Navy remained loyal to the Republic, for example. Nonetheless:
. . . [T]he populace of the country though which [Franco’s Nationalist Spanish Forces] advanced was entirely on their side; the advance could not have been made under any other circumstances. That this was so, was further borne out by every visitor who went to Spain during the subsequent months and witnessed the fact that General Franco did not have to guard his lines of communication. They also witnessed the traces of the reign of terror and destruction, which had been left in the towns and villages of Andalusia and Estremadura by the retreating government forces; the inhabitants related to visitors how the communist and socialist elements, a minority but an armed one, had massacred the civil guards, priests, and often all members of right party organizations and destroyed and pillaged the churches, the condition of which for a long time continued to be standing proof of the truth of their statements. (p. 52)
Loveday writes:
The contrast between the Spanish Civil War and the First World War was signalized by the French General Duval in the Journal des Devats, in which he showed how, on the basis of an army of 750,000 men, General Franco was fighting on a front of 1,100 miles, whereas the allied western front during the First World War was 400 miles and was held by an army of 2,500,00. In Spain there was no consecutive line of trench defenses as in France, for the mountainous character of the country forbade it, apart from the comparison of length to man force. Thus, large stretches of the lines were very sparsely defended, though the division between the opposing sides was everywhere clearly defined. (p. 62)
The war ground on for nearly three years, resulting in nearly a half-million combat deaths as well as further deaths from starvation and disease. With the benefit of hindsight, the whole of Western Civilization should have rallied to Franco’s side, but the poison of Communist propaganda was everywhere. The British dithered, restricting their involvement to their shipping concerns and matters of trade and economics. The Americans were likewise split, albeit in in unusual ways. Ironically, anti-Communist American isolationists supported policies which would have benefited the Leftist Spanish Republic by default, while the Left-leaning Roosevelt administration gave substantive support to Franco through shipments of oil and other supplies.
Propaganda
In the 1930s and ‘40s the Anglophone media was far more restricted and controlled than today. The British Broadcasting Corporation was the central information clearing house for the British Empire and its coverage of the war in Spain. Its coverage was so biased that it was basically propaganda. Loveday writes:
BBC broadcasts made most people believe throughout the war that Franco’s army consisted chiefly of foreigners and Moors, whereas English military experts, who visited the fronts, put the proportion of foreigners, including Moors, in his army at the end of 1937 at a minimum of 10 percent and a maximum of 12 percent. Sensational reports of mass landings of Italian or German troops in Spain on various occasions in 1938, of Italian invasion and occupation of Mallorca in 1937 and of German invasion and occupation of Morocco in 1936 were launched from time to time from the same source and were in every case proved to be false . . . (p. 123)
The bombing of civilians by Franco’s air force was also highly exaggerated. The targets were always military ones, and Barcelona was only struck by air attack because it was the Leftist Republic’s industrial base. Ironically, within a few years the British would deliberately organize their own bombing campaigns deliberately targeting German civilians. The Americans claimed that they were not targeting civilians since they were only bombing during daylight, when more accurate targeting was possible, but this was only a fig leaf covering what was a genuine war crime. The Americans would go on to bomb Japan’s civilians with little global outcry and very little self-reflection.
Spain after the Civil War
When Franco’s army marched into Madrid at the end of the war, it consisted of a column stretching 16 miles. German and Italian forces also marched in this column but returned to their respective homelands shortly thereafter. Following the departure of the foreign troops, accusations that Spain would allow Germany or Italy to take Spanish territory were finally put to rest.
The end of the Spanish Civil War created a refugee crisis in France. Many Republicans, especially those from Catalonia, fled. They were herded into refugee camps, but not until the criminal element among the fleeing masses sacked French villages and committed the usual outrages. The French sought to get rid of them by sending them to Mexico. The first refugees sent there turned out to be hardened Communists, and the Mexican government soon stopped taking them in as a result, although they nonetheless later hosted the Spanish Republic’s government-in-exile. Franco offered an amnesty for most of the refugees except for the murderers. Eventually, the ordinary Spaniards returned.
Meanwhile, the rest of Europe collapsed into war. Franco carefully kept out of it, although he supported Germany’s campaign against the Soviet Union. The Spanish fielded the Blue Division against the Soviets and sent supplies of tungsten to Germany. But the Spanish carefully heeded British concerns and safely returned downed pilots who made it to Spain.
Franco’s forces won in part because they made preserving and protecting Spain’s traditional identity a war aim. Catholicism was to be restored, unity was to be maintained, and slap-dash Communist economics was to be ignored. By the end of the 1940s, Franco’s Spain had begun to build a genuinely prosperous society. Even in 1948, Franco was looking ahead to what would follow after he died. He put plans in place for the return of the Spanish King as well as the reorganization of the government.
The political problems and social tensions that led to the Spanish Civil War also exist in the Spanish areas of the Americas. Chile nearly had a civil war in the 1970s, but it was truncated by swift action by Augusto Pinochet. He was undoubtedly aided by advisors from Franco’s government. In the 1980s, Central America, especially Nicaragua and El Salvador, suffered from Communist incursions but fought them off. In Cuba, however, the Communists prevailed and remain in power.
Loveday’s Spain 1923-1948 is a great example of a book that cuts through the Leftist narrative that predominates across the West. Its structure is effective, its words are calm and measured, and it is focused on changing the minds of its British target audience. The Infante Don Juan, the son of King Alphonso XVIII and the father of the first King following the restoration of the Spanish monarchy, wrote the book’s Afterword and describes how he is connected by blood to the British while still being a proud Spaniard through and through. He then makes a clear and convincing case for why the Right side won in the Spanish Civil War.
Enjoyed this article?
Be the first to leave a tip in the jar!
* * *
Counter-Currents has extended special privileges to those who donate at least $10/month or $120/year.
- Donors will have immediate access to all Counter-Currents posts. Everyone else will find that one post a day, five posts a week will be behind a “paywall” and will be available to the general public after 30 days. Naturally, we do not grant permission to other websites to repost paywall content before 30 days have passed.
- Paywall member comments will appear immediately instead of waiting in a moderation queue. (People who abuse this privilege will lose it.)
- Paywall members have the option of editing their comments.
- Paywall members get an Badge badge on their comments.
- Paywall members can “like” comments.
- Paywall members can “commission” a yearly article from Counter-Currents. Just send a question that you’d like to have discussed to [email protected]. (Obviously, the topics must be suitable to Counter-Currents and its broader project, as well as the interests and expertise of our writers.)
To get full access to all content behind the paywall, please visit our redesigned Paywall page.
Related
-
A Farewell to Reason: Houellebecq’s Annihilation
-
The Great Lawfare Event of 1944
-
Tony Martin, Pan-African Hero
-
NAXALT is a Meaningless Tautology
-
Rediscovering a Politics of Limits
-
George H.W. Bush and His Tangle with the Genuine Far-Right
-
Renaissance and Reformation: The Verge by Patrick Wyman
-
Sand Seed in the Works
13 comments
A fascinating article – thank you. The right side may have won the war but the left have never let this go. Wasn’t so long ago that the socialists exhumed Franco’s body.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-46048514
Some of the barbarity dished out to priests and nuns and sacred sites was awful to read about in other sources. Disagreeing ideologically or religiously is bad enough if it leads to war but desecrating graves and exhuming nuns bodies to be put on show is horrific. As was some of the torture applied to adherents to religious study.
I’m fascinated by the Spanish civil war. I haven’t read this book but this article was a great precis. I read Orwells Homage to Catalonia, and it’s kind of interesting, but Orwell is just another Lefty at the end of the day and I left his book with a bitter taste in my mouth.
I want to visit that large cross monument to the dead the Francoists erected – I forget its name or location, its a few miles outside Madrid. It is the largest ‘cross’ as in Christian Cross of any kind in the world.
What you say here is really interesting, that the Left lost this war but don’t let it go. And what they then do is kind of rewrite the history and – they don’t make out as if they won – what they do is kind of try and ‘win the peace’ and badger on and on and on and eventually, it looks like the Left won.
This is spain now. It now resembles as if Franco never happened, so complete is the Leftist social victory.
The left’s laserlike focus on victory, at all costs – victory even in defeat, even! – is astounding, formidable, and we can learn from this. Imagine Fascist actors as uncompromising and as set on victory at Leftists are. Imagine fascists even in defeat never conceding, and using any and all means, academic, TV, music, anything, to push their message and assert victory.
Imagine!
The left are driven by the conviction that they are on the “right side of history” and that progress = Leftism. So the very act of time going by itself is seen by leftists as being a good omen for them. This is where the “it’s 2015!” ‘Current Year’ mindset comes from.
Because time goes ever on, the Left feel compelled to introduce new things, do away with old things, and in some cases ‘make up for lost time’. The Right, broadly, are about conservation, about reacting. As time goes by this approach leads to the Left progressing and progressing and the Right retreating more and more.
What we need is a change in the Rightist mindset. The Right must become ‘progressive’ in a sense – perhaps its more right to say ‘transgressive’ – the Right needs to be futuristic, taboo, artistic, grand, and spiritual.
It is possible to be these things and not submit to Leftist filth and obscenity.
I believe that Hitler had a good grasp of these ideas I am referring to, however, he was far too militaristic. I see Hitler as a kind of general indicator, not as a desirable outcome. I think the kinds of things Hitler was doing in peacetime are what the Right should be about. Art, sport, new and radical economic thinking, and mainly, grand infrastructure projects. And all with a completely unyielding resistance to ugliness and other Leftist outcomes like egalitarianism, universalism, and so on. This, in my view, is Right wing progressivsm.
Just some thoughts.
Thanks for those additional comments. Following on from “This is Spain now”. A right wing politician was shot in the face a couple of months ago and it barely got a mention – was it his right wing leanings that condemnation was so scarce…..
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/nov/09/spanish-politician-alejo-vidal-quadras-shot-in-face-in-madrid
I think the land mark you are referring to is the Benedictine Abbey of the Holy Cross of the Valley of the Fallen near Madrid. It’s near San Lorenzo, about an hour north of Madrid. I hope you make a visit one day. Have a look at Peter Kemp’s book. On my list of things to read.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Mine-Were-Trouble-Nationalist-Account/dp/B08673MBF1/ref=sr_1_1?adgrpid=1185274457209404&hvadid=74079860856750&hvbmt=be&hvdev=c&hvlocphy=4944&hvnetw=o&hvqmt=e&hvtargid=kwd-74079813527952%3Aloc-188&hydadcr=24459_2219459&keywords=mine+were+of+trouble+peter+kemp&qid=1706177576&sr=8-1
What is really needed is a White Right that is at once reactionary and revolutionary, one which seeks to preserve the “permanent things” of our people and civilization (which, sorry Hitlerites and Asatruars, will include classical Western Christianity in its various denominations) even as it advances into the future with confidence and aggressive planning for racial security, and genetic and cultural betterment.
Let me add: the Left to me seems to have a permanent advantage along two lines. First, it is overwhelmingly atheist, which means that it places its eschatological hope in ‘improvement’ (as they see it) in this world, whereas many on the Right remain Christians for whom this material world is only a place of moral trials across which they are sojourners merely traveling to their real home (Heaven). Second, and following from the first point, leftists lack any fear of divine wrath for misconduct, and thus the Left collectively is ALWAYS less ethically constrained than the Right, which, incidentally, is why they all still quake at the very name of “Hitler”: he demonstrated what the Right could be and do if it, too, unbound itself from the moral law and its Author.
The second advantage the Left enjoys is its universalism and egalitarianism, whereas the (real) Right is particularist and inegalitarian. The Left seeks to obliterate all of the true diversity of mankind, ultimately levelling and homogenizing the whole world into a giant humanoid anthill or termite colony. The Right are the true ‘diversitists’, seeking to preserve the discrete cultures and folkways that comprise the mosaic of mankind (even as we are, of course, mainly concerned with preserving ourselves, our genetic kind as well as our cultural inheritance{s}). The Left therefore is unscrupulous about using race replacement as a political weapon, both to destroy the ethnocultural bases of, especially, the Western peoples, and to increase their democratic power via importing more favorable and manipulable electorates. And their ability to do so is astronomically increased by the two largest demographico-social trends of the postwar world: the explosion of feminism, most pronouncedly in the developed world, which has created a race-enervating War Between the Sexes, and the concurrent, Western-enabled Third World population explosion, which has given the Left a limitless pool of “demographic footsoldiers” through which to de-ethnicize and destabilize white nations.
Add into this mix the technological revolutions in communications, transportation, and capital flows, and preventing the homogenization of mankind becomes a nearly impossible task.
“The British had — and still have — an important naval base at Gibraltar from which they control passage to and from the Mediterranean Sea.”
Hence, another reason why Mussolini would want a friendly face in charge in Spain – as insurance against the Brits ever deciding to throttle Italy’s trade access. Even without Franco threatening Gibraltar, Spain’s Atlantic ports could have been a lifeline.
Similarly, the British also controlled the alternative access to the Med: the Suez Canal. Mussolini’s invasion of Abyssinia may have been partly motivated by a wish to be able to bypass that route also.
Yes, a good article. Thank you.
Excellent précis of what looks like an outstanding book. I’m glad you got to before I did, for I would have lingered over it forever.
Available on kindle for $6.
Click. So easy.
Some historians claim that Hitler asked Franco to allow German troops to come into Spanish territory, fight the British, take control of Gibraltar. But the Catholic Church in Spain said no..! Just as General George Patton said …” our enemy wasn’t Germany, it was Russia!” Now what of occident..?
Here’s what Hitler had to say about Franco, from Albert Speer’s diary:
“You know my opinion of Franco… We ought to keep these Red Spaniards on the back burner… They’re lost to democracy, and to that reactionary crew round Franco too… I believe you to the letter, Speer, that they were impressive people. I must say, in general, that during the civil war the idealism was not on Franco’s side; it was to be found among the Reds … one of these days we’ll be able to make use of them… The whole thing will start all over again. But with us on the opposite side.”
“Spain is difficult to invade, and historically it is where small armies are destroyed and large armies starve.”
“The Infante Don Juan, the son of King Alphonso XVIII and the father of the first King following the restoration of the Spanish monarchy, wrote[…] how he is connected by blood to the British while still being a proud Spaniard”
I am not even remotely persuaded of Franco being the great Iberian Hope, while at the same time having no Red sympathies whatsoever..
Spain was typical of a nation that had been long under the rule of its Royal Family, and in its absence, decline or failure, the contenders emerge to fill that vacuum in a society that has no natural alternative – i.e. the option of a sort of polite confederation – that would need to exist to avoid such an outcome.
It is almost never noted in any of the historical works that I have read concerning the Siege of Vienna or the Hapsburg struggle with the Ottoman Empire, however before the Ottomans were able to close off the city of Vienna militarily, the Spanish branch of the Hapsburgs/Habsburgs sent a detachment of 750 Spaniard ‘Arqubusiers’ (crossbowmen) to their cousins, the Austrian Hapsburgs. This force of 750 Spanish fighting men make it inside of Vienna, after which it was cut off entirely, as a besieged fortress city until the Poles and Germans eventually arrive and fight off the massive Ottoman army.
The Hapsburg records still extant from this force of Spaniards who defended the walls of Vienna – and starved while facing constant attack and bombardment – show that the Hapsburgs commissioned an assessment of what military forces they had remaining available in their own inventory (not counting the Poles and Various German states that were not their own forces).
Out of the 750 Spaniards who had defended the walls of Hapsburg Vienna at a time when they were outnumbered on a scale that would compare to the final battle for Constantinople, 75% of these 750 Spaniards were found, immediately after the Siege was lifted, to either have been Killed in Action during the Siege of Vienna, or injured to a degree that they were no longer physically able to function.
It is entirely likely that without the sacrifice of this force of 750 Spanish soldiers, who would likely have been the largest (regular) military force manning the walls of Vienna inside of the city, the outcome WOULD have been the same as that of the Siege of Constantinople, and the history of Europe, Christendom and the world would have been entirely altered.
The city would not have held out long enough to allow the organization and arrival of the German states or Sobieski’s Hussars, without the Spaniards holding off the human wave attacks and bombardment. To lose 3/4 of the force gives one an idea of the scale and intensity of the Aerial projectile screen that the Turks were able to project onto the walls of the city.
While these men went to their deaths in most cases, they changed world history in their aftermath. This response was entirely structured around the Hapsburg dynasty, and continues into the Bourbons, but when any guiding tradition passes away, what is going to follow it is most likely to be chaotic, opportunistic and ruthless, without the traditions of the past to serve as an example – and this is the real lesson of the Spanish Civil War in my own assessment.
Thank you for this excellent review of a book I had not heard of, and, as always, for the much appreciated embedded links to the wealth of analysis this site offers. I wonder if there is anyone besides Greg Johnson who has read every CC article … by this point, that’s a hell of an achievement! (Once I can finally retire, I intend to “deep dive” into the CC archives; for now, it’s enough just to try to keep up with current content.)
One suggestion for future CC book reviews: if possible, some biographical tidbit about the book’s author should be included. Who, exactly, was “Arthur Loveday”? Scholar, journalist, traveler, public servant?
Comments are closed.
If you have Paywall access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.
Paywall Access
Lost your password?Edit your comment