S c o t l a n d , or a b o u t m e n at war. It m a y not be p o s s i b l e to d i s c e r n the n a t u r e of man, b e c a u s e e a c h g u e s s e s at that f r o m his o w n s t a n d p o i n t , and i n d e s c r i b i n g o t h e r s m a k e s a p u p p e t of himself, and d a n c e s to his o w n i n v e n t i o n . Yet if these m e n do no t a n s w e r g r e a t q u e s t i o n s , they m i g h t be s e e n to r aise them, fo r they too h ad to a s k w h e t h e r their a c t i o n s p r o s p e r e d m a n k i n d or c o r r u p t e d it, w h e t h e r m a n k i n d i t s e l f is g r e a t or d e praved, and w h e t h e r m e n s erve e v e n t s or m a s t e r them.
Clearly, the war affected women in complex ways that both challenged and reinforced existing roles. Yet the exceptional nature of the event and the even greater change in men’s roles (with mass military service) framed the larger context within which women responded. The relevant contributions in this volume rightly draw our attention to the need for much more research on the varieties of that response, which went well beyond munitions work and nursing, before we can safely generalise. It seems reasonable to suggest that when women entered traditionally male sectors of the engineering industry or when middle-class women volunteered en masse for nursing, they were conscious of forging new roles, however temporary, which also gave them opportunities for new experiences. Other women, about whom we know much less, did what they had long done but largely in the absence of men. This was the case with peasant women in France, Germany, Italy and elsewhere, and also of women in occupied areas of France and Poland, all of whom shouldered the economic burden of the family. Yet wives, mothers and daughters remained the custodians of the family as an emotional unit in the face of unprecedented separation, all too often confronting permanent loss or the return of a handicapped man.
World War and how Indian soldiers changed the tide of the War in favour of the British. The book begins with a detail description of the army’s mobilisation for war. Two infantry divisions from India were dispatched to the Western Front (Europe). The Indian units fought bravely, but suffered severely. The two divisions that fought in France and Flanders for under a year comprised nearly 24,000 men. They suffered high casualties in compare to other British forces. The book also explain about the Indian soldiers’ role in other theatres of the GreatWar like East Africa, Mesopotamia (Iraq), Gallipoli, Egypt, Palestine and Syria etc. On that theatres of War, the Indian soldiers too fought under unfamiliar and difficult conditions. But they won many gallantry awards. The author mainly concentrates on the battles and campaigns in this work and does not give any importance to other social and economic implications of the War. The work claims to be based on archival and regimental sources, but does not give evidence.
T re n c h w a rfa re h a d e x is te d p rio r to th e G r e a t W ar. th e m o s t re c e n t e x a m p le b e in g th e B o er W ar in S o u th A frica a t th e tu r n of th e c e n tu r y . Prior to t h a t, tre n c h e s h a d e x iste d in th e A m e ric a n C ivil W ar th o u g h th e y w ere n o t a s c o m p le x a s th o s e o n th e W e s te r n F ro n t. M o reo v er, th e m ilita ry m in d s e t w a s t h a t i n s t a n c e s lik e t h e s e w e re a ty p ic a l a n d u n lik e ly to r e c u r . " N e v e rth e le ss, tr e n c h w a rfa re w a s a re a lity in F r a n c e a n d F la n d e rs a n d b o th s id e s w ere swift to e s ta b lis h a n e tw o rk o f w in d in g fu rro w s from th e N orth S e a to th e S w iss b o rd e r. T y p ical o f t h e B ritis h lin e w a s th e th r e e - tie r e d tr e n c h s y s te m : fro n t, s u p p o r t a n d r e s e r v e . At th e fo re w a s th e fro n t t r e n c h th a t w a s m a d e u p o f a fire a n d c o m m a n d lin e. T h e fire tr e n c h fro n te d n o m a n 's la n d , p ro te c te d b y b e lts o f b a r b e d w ire . C o n tin u o u s in le n g th , it zig-zagge d a lo n g th e fro n t a t in te rv a ls b e tw e e n 18 a n d 3 0 fe e t. 8 W ithin e a c h s trip , o r tra v e rs e , h u d d le d a g ro u p o f s o ld ie r s a v e ra g in g a d o z e n . B uilt fro m s a n d a g s . c o rru g a te d iro n a n d a n y o th e r d e b r is t h a t c o u ld b e fo u n d , th e fo rw a rd tre n c h 6--------------; “Rifles of the GreatWar". War M achine, no.86, n.d. p .1704-1705.
Everyone here believes that prisoners of war- in Germany are deliberately ill treated. No- one believes prisoners of war in England are anything but luxuriously treated. Yet I hear from my husband in Knockaloe that the poorest of the poor men in his compound have been driven by hunger to killing a stray cat and eating it. in Germany, I take it, the papers extol the excellencies of their camps and the villainies of the English camps. My husband was struck on the head by a bayonet by a drunken soldier, and the commandant refused to hold an inquiry...I do not see what can be done? no paper would publish an account of a camp from an insider's point of view.^,
Though central and allied powers vied for victory during WWI, and undertook what was perceived to be strategic battle plans, the involved parties made few gains. In fact, WWI was initially intended to be a short war, but the failure of certain military strategies and trench warfare led to a deadlock that would only come to an end in 1918. In this lesson, students will examine this stalemate and the failed efforts to break it.
It is dificult to start, and for that matter, stop "commenting" on a sample ofRussian poems about Soviet women and the Second World War Twenty million people were killed They were mostly soldiers Most[.]
In fact, the struggle over the literary representation of the GreatWar pre-dates the 1960s, with a group of British ex-combatants arguing against interpretations of the war that they saw as being unduly pessimistic, or, in some cases, overly enthusiastic. At the heart of this inter-war literary struggle were a number of ex- combatants who all had ties to Oxford University. Oxford’s most famous literary veterans are Edmund Blunden, T.E. Lawrence, and Robert Graves, along with the non-combatant, but important, figure of Vera Brittain. But Oxford produced more literary veterans than these four. And, together, Oxford’s literary veterans made a significant contribution to the cultural history of the GreatWar, and one that represented a complex understanding of the nature and meaning of the war. Yet that understanding has been absorbed into an undifferentiated myth of disillusion with which most people are familiar today.
However, in at least one case the profitable presenting of ‘exotic people’ to the curious German public produced a cautiously formulated criticism from the side of ‘the object’. The articulations of Somali-speaker Mohammed Nur were published in an article on Somali grammar, and surfaced in preserved acoustic documents of the Lautarchiv. Nur had come to Germany with a group of performers, but left them after refusing to perform on the stage, only to find himself stranded in a foreign country. His attempt to join the German army to fight against the British, the colonial power that occupied his home country, Somalia, resulted in his internment in a camp for British civilians, where his voice was recorded. On Carl Meinhof’s request he was released to become a ‘language assistant’ at the institute for colonial languages in Hamburg (Institut für Kolonialsprachen), under Meinhof’s tutelage. A short account of his experience in Germany appears in Maria von Tiling’s Somali-Lautlehre (1925). Mediated by practices of colonial knowledge extraction, in which captured soldiers presented an opportunity, Nur’s experiences of war and captivity entered the grammar of Somali.
These sentences, if properly read seem to say that we steered England towards peace, not towards war and in order to maintain peace the word should not have given to France and Russia immediately, but the opposite should have been done, they should have been warned in time about the consequences of their decisions. For many days France, Russia and Germany faced the hope of the enigma of English neutrality and intervention. Grey tries to justify himself by saying that the path that Great Britain took was indisputably the rightest path taken towards Germany. In fact, based on the other researchers and on the recollections of the German ambassadors, they blame Berlin about the imprudent steps it took towards Britain. Since 1901 when the possibility of making an alliance with England failed, Germany went on making mistakes over and over. In his memoirs Grey goes on saying that Germany would prefer they wouldn’t get involved in war. Everything the Germans counted on were the days, weeks, months and perhaps years that the war would last for and not on their capacity to be neutral. If they would have thought it that way, they would have been frightened and wouldn’t declare war to France or Russia.
A political opportunity that opened up as a consequence of the retreat from Gallipoli in 1915 was that the British government passed compulsory conscription through legislation. This was a tremendous breach with tradition, and the Liberal party was expected to split over the question, but the Military Services Bill was passed in January 1916 with opposition limited to parliamentarians affiliated to the Union of Democratic Control, Independent Labour Party or Quaker members (p. 114). The Bill made conscription compulsory, initially for single men, later extended to married men and to men aged up to 51 years in 1918. Ironically, the act also established a fundamental legal basis for conscientious objection. It fell to 1,800 local tribunals across Britain to decide the precise workings of the act. Objections were based as significantly on the belief that conscription was a breach of civil liberties as it was on personal opposition to war (p. 118). Yet,
was converted into cloth in Lancashire and then sold in one of the British colonies. British capital sponsored railway lines that carried Australian sheep to harbours where they were slaughtered and packed to be sent off to London. Ships carried guano from Chile to Denmark, where it was used to fertilise crops that were fed to cows whose milk was used to produce the butter for Manchester workmen. Great Britain was the centre of all that trade. Its leading position was attained before the arrival of the world economy in the mid-nineteenth century. The high point of industrial growth in England actually lies around 1830 when steam transport was still in its infancy and trade liberalisation had not yet taken place. 36 The dominance of
For those candidates without a military record, evidence of service in aid of the war effort was usually sufficient for any officially endorsed Coalition candidate to win a seat, given the political cachet that already attached to them from their attachment with Lloyd George. Neville Chamberlain’s experiences as Director of National Service may have been a relative failure, but they were still cited in his campaign materials. 95 And in Lichfield, the Coalition Liberal candidate, Sir Courtenay Warner, comfortably defeated his Labour rival with the local press stressing that he had given up his home in Suffolk to be used as a VAD hospital during the war. 96 Failing that, a local industrialist’s financial contribution was a third means of demonstrating patriotic commitment. That of Hallewell Rogers in Moseley has already been noted, and he was matched by the custard magnate, Alfred Bird, at Wolverhampton West, who personally subscribed £100,000 to the War Loan campaign and £15,000 to the Wolverhampton ‘Feed the Guns’ campaign in the last month of the war. 97
From these sculptures one can again observe religious connotations of the sacrifice and justifications of the war reflecting the original reasons presented by the Canadian authorities to contribute to the British war effort. The wall of defence could also refer to the defence of civilization against German barbarism or more simply the conquest of the Canadian soldiers over a supposedly unbreachable position. In addition one can deduce from the individual shields of the three countries, Britain, France and Canada, in combination with the many other symbols of Canada, the importance placed on this battle in creating its separate national identity. A souvenir booklet of the Canadian Battlefield Memorial Committee stated that Vimy may not have been the greatest achievement of the war for the Canadian Corps but it was there ‘that the Canadian Corps first fought as a unit and, as its components were drawn from all parts of the country, Vimy may be considered as the first appearance of our young nation in arms.’ 202 As previously mentioned Granatstein and Morton referred to the First World War as Canada’s war of independence; the Vimy Memorial’s shields and pylons depict Canada on an equal standing to Britain and France, two colonial powers who had previously fought over the Dominion. John Pierce, who has written about the Vimy Memorial’s ability to help constructing social memories, poses several good questions when contemplating the Vimy Memorial and its vast unveiling ceremony; he asks ‘Was it a celebration of the achievement of the Canadian Corps or a ceremony mourning the dead? Was it an imperial event solidifying Canada's relationship with its new King or a statement about an independent Canadian nation?’ 203 The answer is that it was all of these and therefore it showed the continuing memorialisation of the war from a Canadian perspective as a morally correct and righteous event that had helped to push the nation along the path to independence.
As the author of maritime equivalents to Henri Barbusse’s war novel Le Feu, Fauxbras is a writer of note. An apprentice sailor in February 1915, he served between the ages of 16 and 21 in the French navy. His war was one of battleship tours in the Mediterranean punctuated by the terror of Austrian U-boat attacks and a period in 1918 as a newly licensed airship pilot patrolling the sea lanes between Algiers and Marseilles. In his novels, Fauxbras speaks up for Jean Le Gouin or ‘Jack Tar’, the title denoting the archetypal mariner. From the preface to the novel, reproduced by Perry in an appendix, we see that Fauxbras is driven by rage at the official history of the war at sea as perpetrated by Paul Chack, Chief of the Historical Service of the Navy from 1923 to 1935. Disdained by Fauxbras in his press columns as ‘Chack-connerie’ (a pun implying deception), Chack’s beatific account stressed phlegmatic self-sacrifice on the part of officers who went down with their ships and their patriotic men, noblesse oblige. Instead of sacred union of the high seas, Fauxbras depicts French warships as sites of muted class warfare, which boils over on the Black Sea in 1919. Perry correctly sees in this account of navy life a ‘claustrophobic contestation of space quite unlike the hundreds of miles of trenches on the front’ (p. 48). The mutiny of part of the fleet at Sevastopol in April 1919 was a key founding myth of the French Communist Party (1920) even if, from the first, Fauxbras kept a studious middle distance from the regimented ‘Muscovites’.
undistinguished’ because of a lack of previous experience in areas besides conscription agitation (p. 63). For Hendley, the NSL’s pre-war political partisanship, reluctance to embrace or encourage women’s activism, and singular focus made it redundant and unable to revive itself. Essentially, the NSL serves as Hendley’s example of how not to react to the ‘crucible’ of the First World War. At times, the discussion arguably casts the NSL as a pantomime villain, conspicuously failing in its schemes thanks to flaws evident to everyone but itself.
The central event of the decade from 1937 to 1947 was World War II. Linked to it are preparations for war in the preceding years and a food crisis that followed the end of the war. Under war preparations, we include both large-scale rearmament against the foreign enemy and the Great Terror of 1937/38, in which Stalin waged preemptive war against his “potential enemies” at home. 49 The world war itself added more than 26 million excess deaths in combat, and from disease, famine, and repression on both sides of the front line. With the German invasion, Soviet-controlled territory shrank, but Stalin’s policies successfully managed the war economy. The loss of agricultural land and the intense mobilization of resources into defense put living standards into a deadly squeeze, however. Coming on top of a prewar decline induced by rearmament pressures, consumption per head fell by up to one-half. At the end of the war, a regional food crisis struck the Ukraine, southwestern Russia, and Soviet Moldavia and carried off more lives. Finally, the collapse of the Soviet Union led to economic and demographic upheaval for post-Soviet Russia. The transition from socialism is the only crisis in which mass violence did not take the lead. In fact, it was associated with economic losses on the scale of a major war, but with only minor wars taking place. Official figures suggest that up to 1998 average incomes and consumption fell by around two fifths. Such figures overstate the decline in welfare, however, because they neglect the contemporaneous gain to consumers as the retail market evolved from severe shortage to equilibrium; this gain may have been substantial. 50