February 2015

For this week’s source update, I thought I would discuss two books that I came across recently. I stumbled upon these secondary sources while searching through the bibliographic information of some of my other monographs such as War Dogs: Tales of Canine Heroism, History, and Love and Animals in the Military: From Hannibal’s Elephants to the Dolphins of the U.S. Navy. More specifically, I sought these sources out due to their inclusion of information concerning the fate of war dogs once World War I had ended. Indeed, this has been a tricky bit of information to pin down. It seems that the lack of evidence (i.e. the silence) relaying the fate of soldier dogs speaks volumes. Thus, I have had a difficult time unearthing such information. Nevertheless, these two books are proving to be helpful in that particular area, at least to some extent.

The first book is entitled War Dogs: A History of Loyalty and Heroism and it is by Michael G. Lemish. I received this book through the Interlibrary Loan service of our main library. Published in 1996, this monograph covers the origins of military dogs, dogs in World War I,  World War II, Korea, Vietnam, and lessons learned after each of these conflicts. Ultimately, it is chock full of useful information. However, with the number of secondary sources I am already using for my research project, I will be interested to see how much of this book’s material I actually end up using. In terms of what I was searching for in particular, this book supplies the following: “The French military, then posessing fifteen thousand dogs in its employ, destroyed the animals as its great war machine demobilized. The vast quantities of dogs used by the British, Germans, Italians, and Russians faced the same fate” (29). It goes on to argue what I had previously ascertained from the lack of material concerning this subject: “The actual number will never be known since these events were never accurately recorded. Compassion within the military–then and now–is often a precious commodity” (29). Interesting thoughts, indeed.

The other secondary source I uncovered this past week is Soldier Dogs by Maria Goodavage, published in 2012. This is yet another book that covers the history of war dogs and their experiences in a variety of wars. Similarly to Rebecca Frankel’s War Dogs: Tales of Canine Heroism, History, and Love, it also studies more current conflicts such as Afghanistan and Iraq. I have not had the opportunity to properly mine this book for potential material but I plan to do so in the next few days. As the deadline for the rough draft of my research project is fast approaching (March 1st!) I may have to wait and see what sections of my paper will need more honing and crafting before I delve extensively into more research. Regardless, I believe this book could potentially be useful and I will add it to my now large (and ever-growing) stack of primary and secondary sources.

This past week, I delved more deeply into a source I had found previously: British War Dogs, Their Training and Psychology. This training manual, published in 1920, is similar to that I reported on before by the Red Cross, it includes information on different dog breeds, the proper way to care for them, and the intricate means by which soldier dogs must be trained in order to prepare for battle. This manual is different, however, in that it was created by the pioneer of British canine use in World War I: Lieutenant Colonel E.H. Richardson. Richardson observed German success with dogs prior to the Great War (beginning as early as the 1870s) and strove to convince his compatriots of the usefulness of dogs. Eventually, he was able to convince the British military to create its own canine units and founded the British War Dog School in order to train the dogs himself. Richardson proved to be incredibly successful and other countries followed his techniques to develop their own dog units. Richardson’s manual plays a vital role in my research project and it is a particularly useful source for me.

Another source I unearthed recently is a book I requested through our library’s Inter-library Loan System. This book entitled, Colonel Richardson’s Airedales is devoted to Richardson and the work he accomplished with his wife prior to, during, and after World War I. This book provides a great deal of background information concerning dogs in war, in general, Richardson’s humble beginnings, and a more intimate look into Richardson’s life as he developed and ran his British War Dog School. I am grateful that I was able to retrieve this book from another library and that I have been able to put the university’s inter-library loan system to good use for my project thus far.

Image Sources:

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/e9/3d/bb/e93dbb0bd50f8e4d14a91e0480469d33.jpg

http://www.amazon.com/Colonel-Richardsons-Airedales-British-1900-1918/dp/1550592483

This past week, I unearthed more highly interesting and potentially useful primary sources for my research paper. For starters, I discovered an article from the well-known magazine Vanity Fair in September 1916 concerning war dogs. Here is a snapshot of the article:

This article explores the work done by dogs on the Front, dispelling the myth that dogs were only used as mascots for soldiers. I will be using this article as part of my primary research into public reactions to the use of soldier dogs during World War I.

I also mined a photo archive from The Atlantic that I had discovered previously.This archive is chock full of animal photos, many of them dogs. I plan to use some of these in my research paper, though I have not entirely decided if I will be analyzing each photograph or if I will simply include them as a supplement to my research. I have included some of my favorites here:

[German Messenger Dog]

[Dog Ready to Search for Wounded Soldiers]

Sources:

http://www.oldmagazinearticles.com/WW1_dogs_pdf

http://www.theatlantic.com/static/infocus/wwi/wwianimals/

Immersed in my research last week, I all but forgot to report on the secondary (and primary) sources I have discovered recently for my research paper. Last week, I unearthed War Dogs: Tales of Canine Heroism, History, and Love by Rebecca Frankel (more details can be found in a previous post). I also discovered Animal Reveille, a book published in 1944 that could arguably be seen as a primary source due to its relative proximity to World War I. This particular book is chock full of animal stories, a few specifically focused on dogs. The story of Stubby, a well-known war dog hero, is also included in this book. It reads as follows:

Then one night Stubby made dog history. It was an unusually quiet night in the trenches. Some of the boys were catching cat naps in muddy dugouts, and Stubby was stretched out beside Conroy. Suddenly his big blunt head snapped up and his ears pricked alert. The movement woke Conroy, who looked at the dog sleepily just in time to see him sniff the air tentatively, utter a low growl, spring to his feet, and go bounding from the dugout, around the corner out of sight. A few seconds later there was a sharp cry of pain and the sound of a great scuffle outside. Conroy grabbed his rifle and went tearing in the direction of the noise. A ludicrous sight met his eyes. Single-pawed, in a vigorous offensive from the rear, Stubby had captured a German spy who’d been prowling through the trenches. The man was whirling desperately in an effort to shake off the snarling bundle of canine tooth and muscle that had attached itself to his differential. But Stubby was there to stay. It took only a moment to capture the Hun and disarm him, but it required considerably more time to convince Stubby that his mission had been successfully carried out and that he should release the beautiful hold he had on that nice, soft German bottom.

This week, I came across too many primary source newspaper articles to count. I was shocked to discover that there were so many reports on dogs in American newspapers during World War I, particularly due to our limited involvement. One particular article found in the Chicago Tribune in 1918, states, “Train Dogs for Red Cross” and tells of an effort by the American Red Cross to train homeless dogs to be useful for the war effort:

I also found a United States Red Cross manual that is chock full of stories, first-hand accounts, and tips for training dogs for warfare. Published in 1925, I particularly enjoy the dedication: “May it aid us to learn the proper use of dogs in prepardeness for war, so that they, like the dogs of Attila, the King of Huns, may guard our camps and preserve our liberties and our rights, our lives and our honor.” What a powerful statement concerning dogs! Now, onto more British newspapers and more primary sources for the coming week.

Sources:

http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.lib.vt.edu/docview/100137537?pq-origsite=summon

http://www.theatlantic.com/static/infocus/wwi/wwianimals/

http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=nyp.33433067343735;view=1up;seq=9

Dempewolff, Richard F. 1944. Animal reveille. Garden City, New York: Doubleday, Doran & Company, Inc.

Frankel, Rebecca. War Dogs: Tales of Canine Heroism, History, and Love. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan Trade, 2014.

Rebecca Frankel’s War Dogs: Tales of Canine Heroism, History, and Love is a book dedicated to those dogs serving in the military, both presently and in the past. Frankel intertwines historical accounts of dogs utilized during various American wars (including World War I) with modern day militarized dogs being used in Iraq and Afghanistan. Indeed, through her own experiences speaking with current dog handlers, Frankel explores themes of heroism, love, human war experiences and animal war experiences. Her primary questions include: how have militarized dogs been used in the past? What about the present? What relationships develop between man and dog during wartime? How? What do dogs contribute to man’s wartime experiences? Frankel, herself, has admitted that while she set out to write a book about dogs, what resulted was a book about people and the bonds that develop between handlers and their canines during a manmade experience that has historically not been wholly limited to human beings.

Recently published (in late 2014), I had a difficult time unearthing a good number of reviews of this particular book. Upon searching for book reviews, many times I came across Frankel’s own articles, webinars, or other endeavors involving Frankel promoting her new book. Nevertheless, I did discover a Washington Post review in which the reviewer states that, “It would be nice to think that this fine book will cause the military to keep the MWD program active, if necessarily smaller, and to continue research into the ways in which dogs can help us, but history — the history of the American military especially — leaves little reason to believe that will happen.”  Thus, while this particular reviewer can appreciate what a “fine” book this is, he does not believe that dogs will continue to be used during wartime despite research such as Frankel’s that prove their usefulness for man.

Furthermore, according to Google Scholar, this book has not yet been cited by any other academics. This is most likely due to its very recent publication and not due to its content, presumably.

Ultimately, I was unable to find any negative reactions to Frankel’s work. Interestingly, Frankel is not a historian, however. Rather, she is an editor for Foreign Policy (a self-purported global magazine) and has a weekly article dedicated to war dogs. Indeed, it seems Frankel took her primary interests and expanded her research in order to create a book about the militarized dogs of past and present. Frankel’s own experiences (as mentioned above) with present day handlers add an element of authenticity to her story as she experienced first-hand the intimate relationship between handlers and their dogs.

The intended audience for this book is a bit tricky to pin down. As Frankel is not a historian (as mentioned previously), the book is certainly intended for a more popular audience, perhaps those who are dedicated readers of her weekly article. It reads easily and is highly accessible. This is not to say it will not be useful for historians (including myself), however. Upon searching through the book’s sources, it becomes quite obvious that Frankel did her homework and thoroughly. She includes a variety of primary and secondary sources, many of which are academic. Thus, her work appears to be a mixture of popular reporting and academic researching.

In fact, many of the primary sources Frankel uses will prove useful for me as well. One source, Animal Heroes of the Great War, is a book published in 1925 after the conclusion of the war and is chock full of pertinent information related to my research paper. I surprisingly had not come across this highly useful source until reading War Dogs. Furthermore, Frankel’s discussion of Lieutenant Col. Richardson, one of the pioneers in the British war dog training movement, also is extremely pertinent to my paper. Indeed, Richardson himself wrote a training manual concerning the training of war dogs and I plan to use his book as one of my primary sources as well. Lastly, Frankel also includes some interesting insight into the psychology of dogs with thoughts from Charles Darwin in The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals. I never would have thought of looking more closely into the intricacies of animal psychology (and dogs more specifically) but I am finding Darwin’s thoughts highly interesting and potentially useful.

Ultimately, Rebecca Frankel’s War Dogs has and will continue to be an indispensable resource for me. I am grateful that I did not allow its journalistic slant or popular audience basis deter me from exploring what it has to offer.

Sources

Yardley, Jonathan. “‘War Dogs’ by Rebecca Frankel.” The Washington Post. Last modified October 17, 2014. Accessed February 6, 2015. http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/war-dogs-by-rebecca-frankel/2014/10/17/76594a86-4d54-11e4-8c24-487e92bc997b_story.html.

As I begin crafting the final research paper of my graduate career, I have been grappling with the questions I intend to answer through my research. So far, I have come up with a few possible questions that I will attempt to answer, at least to some extent:

How did militarized dogs contribute to the war effort of the opposing sides involved in World War I? (I may focus on Britain and the United States more readily due to the availability of sources but at this time this is not entirely decided).

How did dogs perform tasks which man proved unable to do as well as or as efficiently during World War I? 

How did relationships develop between man and canine during wartime? What did they mean for human and animal war experiences?

Why is it important to discuss dogs’ agency during this particular time period? 

These questions then lend themselves to the significance of my paper. Who cares about dogs in war? Few animals (if any) are as inextricably linked to human beings like canines. However, their contributions to World War I cannot be overlooked as a mere means to placate man. Rather, dogs chose to cooperate of their own accord and this is precisely where discussions of agency come into play: are dogs agents in a vein similar to humans? This is not an easy question to answer and it is this question that calls for more prodding into the subject of animal agency. Furthermore, a nostalgia for animals in warfare has emerged in the past few years with films such as War Horse and books such as Rebecca Frankel’s War Dogs (see next post). Certainly, the time appears to be ripe for more study into the human-animal war experience. Lastly, animals (including dogs) are proving that war is not simply a human affair. Instead, the historic use of animals during wartime proves that oftentimes, men were unable to battle one another alone.

Photo Source: http://www.theatlantic.com/static/infocus/wwi/wwianimals/