scholarly journals The Hunterian Oration ON BRITISH MILITARY SURGERY IN THE TIME OF HUNTER AND IN THE GREAT WAR: Delivered before the Royal College of Surgeons of England on February 14th, the Anniversary of Hunter's Birth

BMJ ◽  
1919 ◽  
Vol 1 (3034) ◽  
pp. 205-212 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Bowlby
2001 ◽  
Vol 44 (2) ◽  
pp. 497-515 ◽  
Author(s):  
DAVID FRENCH

It is widely assumed that after 1918 the British general staff ignored the experience it had gained from fighting a first-class European enemy and that it was not until the establishment of the Kirke committee in 1932 that it began to garner the lessons of the Great War and incorporate them into its doctrine. This article demonstrates that in fact British military doctrine underwent a continuous process of development in the 1920s. Far from turning its back on new military technologies, the general staff rejected the manpower-intensive doctrine that had sustained the army in 1914 in favour of one that placed modernity and machinery at the very core of its thinking. Between 1919 and 1931 the general staff did assimilate the lessons of the First World War into the army's written doctrine. But what it failed to do was to impose a common understanding of the meaning of that doctrine throughout the army.


2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 6-31
Author(s):  
Andrekos Varnava

In summer 1916 the British Salonica Army and the Cypriot colonial government established the Cypriot Mule Corps (also known as the Macedonian Mule Corps). It was a staggering success in terms of recruitment, with over 12,000 men serving at one time or another in Salonica during the war and in Constantinople after the armistice, consisting of about 25% of the Cypriot male population aged 18–35. This article engages with three historiographical fields: British military history, British imperial history and Cypriot colonial and peasant and labouring history. All three are connected by the scope, the Great War and its immediate aftermath, and more specifically by the Cypriot Mule Corps. It brings Cyprus into the broader debate on the participation of the British non-settler empire in World War I. The main focus of the article is on the experiences of the men and their dependants. At the heart of this story is the power-imbalance in the relationship between the British coloniser, who desperately needed mule drivers, and the colonised Cypriots, mostly peasants and unskilled rural and urban labourers who enlisted because of the wages. The Cypriots had little control over the terms of their service, as the British progressively reduced their responsibilities to the men and their families, but because the British were desperate for their service they attempted to accommodate their grievances. Therefore, the article proposes to envisage the experience of Cypriot muleteers and their families through a theoretical framework borrowed from the Subaltern Studies Group. Homi Bhabha's ‘liminal space’, in which ‘negotiation’ can take place between colonised and coloniser, seems applicable here, even if dominated by the coloniser. When it suited them, such as when recruitment was at risk, the British not only listened but attempted to rectify the injustices, even showing flexibility; but when it did not they proved inflexible.


2009 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 139-143 ◽  
Author(s):  
Neeraj K Malhan ◽  
Tessa Greenslade ◽  
Piers D Mitchell

Summary George James Guthrie (1785–1856) was a British military surgeon who came to prominence during the Napoleonic Wars (1803–15). He wrote several books on military surgery and was President of the Royal College of Surgeons of England three times. However, his most innovative and important achievement has largely gone unrecognised by modern historians. In 1814, at the battle of Toulouse in the Peninsular Campaign, he performed a landmark early trial of the treatment of musket wounds to the thigh. Here we not only discuss this clinical trial and place it in its social context, but also present the pathological skeletal specimens of two wounded British soldiers who took part in it.


Author(s):  
Linda J. Quiney

Teaching and nursing were frequent career choices for unmarried, middle-class women in the Great War era, but only nurses were eligible for active service in Canadian military hospitals overseas. Teachers were expected to remain at home, volunteering for patriotic projects like other women. This role proved too passive for some, who relinquished their careers to become, temporarily, Voluntary Aid Detachment nurses (VADs); many served in British military hospitals overseas. The history of this unique group offers new insights into societal expectations for Canadian women’s professional work in the early twentieth century. The transformation of teachers into nurses during the crisis of war was legitimized by the substitution of gender and class attributes for specialized training, allowing women teachers the otherwise unattainable opportunity for active service abroad. Their experience raises important issues regarding the meaning of “professional identity” in traditional women’s occupations, and professional development later in the century.


2021 ◽  
pp. 135-142
Author(s):  
Agnes Strickland-Pajtok

The aim of this article is to examine the ambivalent attitudes of the British-Hungarian popular writer Baroness Emma Orczy towards involvement in the Great War. In the 1910s Orczy participated in British military recruitment drives, whilst also maintaining cultural ties with her homeland of Hungary. The questions this study attempts to answer are: what kind of strategies of identification did Orczy employ in order to come to terms with supporting both the Allies and the Central Powers? And: whether through her contrasting stances the operation of a hybrid identity can be captured.


Res Medica ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 96-102
Author(s):  
Tom Scotland

Between 1914 and 1918, the British Expeditionary Force fighting in France and Flanders sustained 2.7 million battle casualties. Just over one quarter (26.1%) were never seen by the medical services. These were men who had been killed (14.2%), were missing (5.4%), or were prisoners of war (6.5%). Most of those who were missing had been killed and their bodies never recovered. Just under three-quarters of the wounded (73.9% or 1 988 969) were seen and treated by the medical services and 151 356 died.[i] The worst single day in British military history was Saturday 1 July 1916, the first day of the Battle of the Somme, when there were 57 470 casualties, of whom 20 000 were killed or died from their wounds. In nearly a quarter of a million admissions dealt with by the medical services, 58.5% of wounds were caused by high-explosive shellfire, 39% by bullets (mostly from machine guns), 2% were caused by grenades, and 0.5% from bayonets.  


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document