[Sigaba]

Originally Posted by CSB

You would think that a historian would do a better job of writing at least plausible fiction.

Unfortunately, there are other examples of military historians exaggerating wildly their autobiographies and their works. The most notorious example remains Basil Liddell Hart but there was also S.L.A. Marshall, and, recently, Stephen Ambrose.*

In Col. Jessup's case, I am hoping that, somehow, the facts substantiate the sea stories. (These events cast into doubt the reliability of scholarship on important topics.) It is possible that the man used his knowledge of other men's achievements to embellish his own personal history. It is worth noting that in a 1978 article for Military Affairs (now The Journal of Military History), Jessup's biography, attached, was much less complicated.

I find it interesting how Mr. Corallo frequently expresses ambivalence in his article. At times, it seems that a part of him is grappling with his understanding of his mentor's past. In his piece, Corallo demonstrates four patterns.

1. He refers to examples of others being in disbelief of Jessup's achievements or others perhaps looking the other way.
2. He refers to a secret knowledge of Jessup's experiences in the field.
3. His discussion of Jessup's academic career is surprisingly vague: we learn nothing of the ideas Jessup contributed to the practice of history or the people whom he influenced.
4. He juxtaposes Jessup's career with the exploits of fictional characters.

[1.] Jessup's achievements as a member of the American armed services.

Jack Jessup lied about his age when he enlisted in the Navy. He was 15 or 16 years old, and he decided to go off to war to defend freedom and liberate the world from tyranny. Well, he was a big kid, and the recruiters weren’t too worried about birth certificates — especially when it came to a street tough from Queens who had already had a few run-ins with the law.

That’s still not an unusual story; plenty of guys lied about their ages to get into WWII and then made a career out of the armed services. The bit about SF, however, is a clue.

Fifteen years ago, when one of my buddies from Officer Candidate School saw my wedding picture, the one where Jack is standing next to me in his dress blues, he was temporarily speechless.....Officers don’t wear the badges earned for rating “expert” on a weapon, but if they did, Jack’s would have formed a ladder from his chest to his knees.

I asked him to tell me the story behind that medal....He was truly reluctant, but I pressed. I wanted to hear it from him. He began slowly and seemed pained by the memory.

[2.] Secret knowledge of COL. Jessup's career.

I had to go through a series of pre-selection interviews. The last round was held at Fort Meade — the home of the National Security Agency [one can only wonder what this reference is meant to imply] .... As they questioned me, they began to peruse my dossier. As the young captain came to Jack’s letter of recommendation, his eyes opened wide and his jaw dropped. He quickly handed it to the first major, who had the same reaction. By the time it reached the colonel, the rest were just staring at me, saying nothing....The colonel asked me to step outside the room. After about five minutes, the captain came out, pulled me into another room and asked, “How well do you know Colonel Jessup? Do you know what he does?” I said that I knew him well enough, considered him my mentor, and was sure that whatever Jack had ever told me about his career was unclassified. The captain just looked at me, got this enormous grin and said, “This is SO-O-O COOL!” I was brought back into the room to find all of the officers standing, waiting to shake my hand and thank me for wanting to serve America as an Army officer. Interview over.

When I reported to Fort Stewart, the battalion adjutant told me that it was unlikely I would be accepted into the battalion: “The Old Man doesn’t want any broke [expletive] lieutenants.” He told me to go home for the weekend and report on Monday morning. I called Jack and told him what had happened....Then he told me to relax and report on Monday morning as ordered. When I walked into the personnel office at 0700, the officer said, “I don’t know who you are, where you came from or who you know, but the Commanding General called and ordered us to accept you into the Battalion. Apparently, the Army Chief of Staff called him. Who are you?” I just smiled and knew that Jack had picked up the phone. I have even better stories that I’ll keep to myself.

None of us in the younger generation who had been befriended and mentored by Jack knew a fraction of the details of his life. His life was classified.

And while he was heavily decorated for his valor in battle, he received no medals for being in places like Budapest in 1956 or Tehran in 1980.

[3.] Corallo's discussion of Jessup's scholarship is remarkably vague.

IMHO, it is unlikely that the following event took place.

....[H]e pursued a Ph.D. in Russian history....When he went for his dissertation board exam, the examiners had to admit that no one was qualified to test him.

In the 1970s, academic history was a profession in turmoil. For example, debates over the Cold War--its causes and consequences-- were exceedingly contentious. The only places where historians did not go after each other were in the parking structures of hotels hosting academic conferences. Are we to believe that Jessup was not exposed to this dynamic when he defended his dissertation?

While dissertations in history are supposed to represent the cutting edge of knowledge in a field, they are situated in a broader historiographical debate that has been framed by existing works. At the very least, his examiners could have vetted his understanding of that debate and how his dissertation advanced the discussion of that issue.* *

His manual on military history was long used in all officer training; as far as I know, it is still in use.

In fact, as stated in the forward for A Guide to the Study and Use of Military History, COL Jessup played a more limited role in getting that project to press than Corallo suggests. That role--centering around the conception and organization of the guide and enlisting the help of its contributors--was in and of itself a substantial achievement, it is not his guide.

Of all of the titles he earned, he was most proud of the Ph.D. He grinned like the cat that ate the canary every time someone called him “Doctor Jessup.”

The metaphor is revealing.

FWIW, my cursory search on COL. Jessup's published works indicates that he focused on reviewing scholarly works in several languages, encyclopedias, bibliographies, and a chronology. In his review of The Encyclopedia of the American Military, (1994) ed. John E. Jessup, LTC David Mets (USAF), retired, bends over backwards to say good things about the difficulties of putting together such a project, the merits of some of the essays, but then offers a conclusion that speaks poorly of the editor.***

But too many of the essays are not competent, the organization is poor, the coverage is not encyclopedic, [and] the treatment of both seapower and airpower is inadequate....[W]hat you get is a $320 camel which cannot be recommended either to scholars or university libraries.

[4.] Jessup as a larger than life figure compared to icons in mass popular culture.

He did things, faced danger, made sacrifices, and stormed the gates of Hell on more occasions than any of us could imagine. In hot wars from WWII at age 16 to Desert Storm at age 64, and a very long cold war in between, Jack Jessup was the living definition of selfless service.

What we did know, we loved and wanted to emulate, though we knew we could only fall short. He was the last of a rare breed. He was a hard-drinking, hard-living, tough-as-nails, loyal-to-the-end American hero that Hollywood couldn’t dream up....James Bond, Jack Bauer, and Rambo combined couldn’t measure up to the real-life Jack Jessup. His exploits as a Ranger in Korea, as a Green Beret in Vietnam, as one of the founding leaders of Special Detachment Delta (more commonly known as Delta Force), and as a Cold Warrior are legendary with soldiers of a certain age.

If the American people knew the full story, I believe they truly would be grateful.

Unfortunately, it seems that COL Jessup did not share this confidence in the American people.
________________________________________________
* References available upon request.
** I know of an accomplished historian who will listen thoughtfully to presentations and then phrase a devastatingly simple question: "So what?" Another historian lays a cunning trap that frequently leaves scholars snared: "Where are the women?" (Political and methodological differences aside, these questions are great gauges of one's intellectual--if not situational--awareness.)
**David R. Mets, review of Encyclopedia of the American Military, 3 vols, ed. John E. Jessup, The Journal of Military History, 58:4 (Oct., 1994), 736-739. In an exceptionally subtle way, Mets basically questions the editor's professional competence. Mets softens the blow by pointing some of the criticisms towards the editorial staff of the work's publisher.