Skip Navigation

The Banality of Brutality: British Armed Forces and the Repression of the Arab Revolt in Palestine, 1936–39*

  1. Matthew Hughes
  1. Brunel University
  1. Dr Matthew Hughes, Department of Politics and History, Brunel University, Uxbridge, UB8 3PH, Matthew.hughes{at}brunel.ac.uk

    Abstract

    This article argues that the British used the legal system to legitimise brutal actions during their counter-insurgency (or colonial policing) campaign to defeat rebels during the Arab revolt in Palestine, 1936-39. The law was (re)constructed to provide a veneer of legal respectability to actions carried out by servicemen operating in the field against Arab rebels, allowing for reprisals and punitive actions against Palestinian civilians, targeted by the British in their offensive against rebels who were often hard to defeat in open battle. Lawlessness was the law. Servicemen were guided by a legal system that meant that they could accept the premises of their government that allowed for brutal actions, and they could do so with all the energy of good bureaucrats obeying orders. It shows that the British repression of the revolt was brutal and included torture and atrocities, notably at the villages of al-Bassa in 1938 and Halhul in 1939. More generally, its examination challenges the idea of British ‘exceptionalism’ in repressing imperial rebellions – the idea that there was a more benign British ‘way’ of dealing with colonial revolts. It suggests, however, that while some level of brutality became systematic and systemic, atrocious acts were exceptional and, comparatively speaking, British forces were more restrained than other colonial powers operating in similar circumstances. It also raises the issue of regimental differences in counter-insurgency methods.

      | Table of Contents

      This Article

      1. English Historical Review CXXIV (507): 313-354. doi: 10.1093/ehr/cep002
      1. All Versions of this Article:
        1. cep002v1
        2. CXXIV/507/313 most recent

      Classifications

      Responses

      1. Submit a response
      2. No responses published

      Share

      1. Email this article

      Impact Factor: 0.431

      5-Yr impact factor: 0.421

      Editors

      Professor Martin Conway
      Dr Catherine Holmes
      Professor Peter Marshall

      Assistant Editors

      Catherine Wright
      Dr Kim Reynolds

      For Authors

      Oxford Open RCUK

      Looking for your next opportunity?

      Looking for jobs...

      Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.