Laura

About Laura

Posts by Laura Keith:

Myself as a Historian

/ /

Discuss the methodologies or theories you are likely to use in your research? Put another way, how do you position yourself as a historian? Where along the fault lines of historical methods do you see yourself as an author? Why is this methodology the one suited to your research question? How does this methodology/theory shape the question you want to address in your research?

I see myself perhaps first as a cultural historian because I am studying civilian morale during the First World War. I also believe myself to be an animal historian, as I am tracing the use of animals during World War I. I also view myself as situated at the intersections of animal history and discussions of agency, the niche that I am attempting to fill, at least to a limited extent with my research project. My primary focus on cultural history, allows for my central question and thesis to also focus on cultural aspects instead of say, social aspects or military aspects, for example.

Methodology Discussion

/ /

I will admit that despite studying history as an undergraduate and now a graduate student, I am still not entirely sure what “methodology” is. I believe it is one of those concepts within the field of history that many pretend to understand but when it gets down to brass tacks, there is still a great deal of confusion. Nevertheless, I will take a stab at it for this week’s methodology/theory discussion.

The article I chose to analyze for methodology and/or theory is Erica Fudge’s “Milking Other Men’s Beasts,” published in an issue of History and Theory in 2013. In this particular essay, Fudge, a preeminent scholar in the field of animal agency, argues for animal agency by illustrating animals as historical actors instead of passive objects. Fudge recognizes that her article sits at the intersection of various fields of study: anthropology, social history, animal history, sensory history, and even animal science. Thus, Fudge utilizes arguments from a variety of fields in order to craft her own argument concerning animal agency.

Indeed, Fudge begins her article by explaining the title of her work is pulled from a “a single-line entry in a seventeenth-century Essex Sessions Roll,” a seemingly obscure source but a source that allows her to begin her discussion concerning animal agents (13). She then goes on to cite historians focusing on the senses, Temple Grandin, the famous animal scientist, and animal historians such as Virginia DeJohn Anderson. What results is fascinating insight into animal agency and a much more impressive argument due to its reaches into various fields. She ends by arguing: “And if we take seriously that there are other human ways of being in the world, as Grandin does, and if we acknowledge that that thing called being human itself might also contain multiple others, and that we—the readers of History and Theory—are just one manifestation of that, what we are opening up are new ways of addressing and assessing the world. And they, I am sure, knew this back in the seventeenth century too” (28).

Reading this article by Fudge and others like it (she has cropped up a few times in my research), I am left wondering: is it necessary for historians to merge various fields together when arguing something as complex as agency? I have debated including science or psychology in my own research project but I fear the scope of my paper is simply not great enough. Nevertheless, it is useful to see how a historian can successfully integrate various fields of thought in order to create a more robust argument.

Spring Break Update + This Week’s Sources

/ , /

Spring Break: a time of spring cleaning, sunshine, and relaxation. And research, research, research. Well, sort of. I am now anxiously awaiting feedback on the rough draft of research project. Thus, my research has taken a bit of a back seat. Nevertheless, I am still keeping my eyes open and I am remaining committed to exploring all available sources in my fields of study. Alongside this continued research is work on my own conference presentation. In less than two weeks, I will be traveling to Kentucky with Dr. Nelson to present my research on dogs in World War I. I am now in the harried phase of deciding precisely what I want to include in my presentation and that which I wish to exclude. Wish me luck!

For this week’s source update, I thought I would touch on an interesting source I recently discovered: a children’s book, something I mentioned a few posts ago as a potential resource. This book entitled, contentWar Dog Heroes: True Stories of Dog Courage in Wartime is a collection of stories about war dogs, including the infamous Stubby, World War I canine hero. It also has stories from other wars as well such as World War II and Vietnam. Published in 1997, certainly removed from the time period I am studying, I still believe it is a highly interesting source. In fact if nothing else, it made me wonder: why are these dogs being presented to children as war heroes? Are we still seeking to boost civilian morale even in a seemingly peaceful time? Are we preparing for future use of dogs in wartime? Or am I over-analyzing this book and it is merely entertainment for children?

Focus Statement turned Argument Revised

/ /

After our discussion in class last week, I have taken another stab at my focus statement and have attempted to turn it into an argument:

Dogs boosted civilian morale during WWI because they were portrayed to the public as heroes. This can be surmised from the widely available published reports of dogs that saved soldiers’ lives, served as mascots, and risked their lives to deliver messages on the war front. 

Or a bit more developed:

By examining contemporary training manuals, photographs, and newspaper and magazine articles between 1914 and 1920, this paper will uncover the means by which dogs boosted civilian morale and represented a less terrifying depiction of the fighting front. This paper will argue that dogs played a critical role in World War I, both as partners of humans on the battlefield and as symbols of the heroism and sacrifice the war demanded. Indeed, dogs not only transformed the war experience for individual soldiers but also contributed greatly to the overall war effort. Furthermore, dogs served as a reminder for those on the home front that every contribution helped, no matter how small or seemingly trivial and that soldiers were not alone in the trenches. What will result is insight into one type of war hero that has been all but forgotten in modern times and whose contributions during World War I should no longer be overlooked.

Secondary Source Reporting Week of 3.2

/ /

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. download (1)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 downloadRebecca 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.

The Diary of Two Red Cross Dogs

/ /

For next week’s primary source presentation, I chose “The Diary of Two Red Cross Dogs,” a fanciful story found within the pages of an issue of The Red Cross Magazine from 1918. I chose this particular primary source due to its representation of the other evidence that will ultimately support my argument in my final research project. Indeed, a large part of my project involves examining the ways by which dogs were presented to the civilian public in order to boost morale on the home front during World War I. This article, published most likely in several allied nations during the Great War, tells the story of two small dogs named Rags and Tags. Though not the traditional war dogs that were used during the war, these dogs instead were tasked with collecting money for the Red Cross with the little boxes attached to their collars. As mentioned above, this is an entirely fanciful depiction of these dogs, jotting down their thoughts as they fulfill their wartime duties. And yet, its significance cannot be overlooked.

One depiction of dogs during World War I included those dogs that became mythical creatures. That is, those dogs whose stories were so exaggerated and at times unbelievable that it is difficult to separate fact from fiction. Nevertheless, these kinds of stories were critical to civilian morale. These heroic dogs made the horrors of wartime more palatable and made the muddling through of everyday life a bit easier. It also allowed for civilians to learn the successes of their own dogs they sent to the front, to perhaps understand a bit better that every little contribution can help, and to give a more humane element to the nightmare of new technologies and new, cruel wartime innovations.

How are dogs depicted in this particular primary source? In “The Diary of Two Red Cross Dogs,” Rags and Tags are presented as two spirited canines devoted to doing their duty. The diary is composed of what is supposed to be their thoughts as they become official Red Cross dogs and as they collect money alongside their owners. Certainly, this is not to be taken entirely seriously as we as humans can have no idea what these dogs are feeling or thinking. Nevertheless, this widely available article most likely put a few smiles on some otherwise dreary faces and brightened up an otherwise dismal time. Thus, though it is difficult to measure precise reactions to articles such as “The Diary of Two Red Cross Dogs,” it can be surmised that dogs like Rags and Tags aided in continued perseverance on the home front.

ww1_magazine

Sources: https://books.google.com/books?id=w6NFAQAAMAAJ&pg=RA2-PA25&lpg=RA2-PA25&dq=Sloane,+Julia+M.+%E2%80%9CThe+Diary+of+Two+Red+Cross+Dogs,%E2%80%9D&source=bl&ots=b54IqZsTJC&sig=g-2UBaPKt63gtn_trQ9dk_-aNKE&hl=en&sa=X&ei=80HRVPfvLK6wsAS7rIDABA&ved=0CCIQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=Sloane%2C%20Julia%20M.%20%E2%80%9CThe%20Diary%20of%20Two%20Red%20Cross%20Dogs%2C%E2%80%9D&f=false

http://www.aef.com/on_campus/classroom/case_histories/3002/:pf_printable

Focus Statement + Agency Debate

/ , /

After reading a chapter from Single’s Demystifying the Dissertation entitled, “The Focus Statement,” I took a stab at creating my own focus statement out of the research project I have developed thus far:

My research focuses on war dogs, their relationships with their human companions, and the ways in which said dogs were presented to the civilian public during World War I in order to boost morale.

A current debate that resonates most readily with my research is that of animal agency. Indeed, discussions of agency developed in the 1980s and at first focused on groups of people who have been marginalized in the past such as women and slaves. Recently, however, the debates have shifted to include animals as well. Some questions that have been raised: do animals have agency? Can animals be said to be similar to humans in their ability to have agency? Do other non-human entities have agency?

Although not the primary concern of my work, agency is still highly relevant to my discussion of dogs in wartime: did dogs willingly go into battle, serving alongside their human counterparts? Did dogs choose to be brave and courageous under times of immense duress? This then leads one to perhaps wonder: why does this issue matter? Why are discussions of agency important? This is difficult to pin down and the answer could potentially be different for a variety of historians and scholars, alike. For this historian, it is a crucial question because it makes dogs a much more complex aspect of warfare rather than another mere means of technology, put to work purely for man’s own purposes.

Source Reporting Week of 2.23

/ /

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.

richardsonandairedale

 

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.

61jzGnzQueL

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

New Questions, Archives, and Finding Aids

/ , /

This past week has found me reworking my research questions and changing the core argument of my paper. Indeed, instead of focusing on agency as a major aspect of my paper, instead agency will come into play in only one section. I am also researching newspapers and advertising and the means by which dogs were used to boost civilian morale. Thus, some of my new research questions are: how were dogs presented to civilians during World War I? Why were dogs used to boost civilian morale? 

While conducting research over the past few weeks, I have discovered a couple of newspaper archives that have been particularly useful for me. One is the online archive for  the United Kingdom’s The Times. I found a plethora of World War I newspaper articles pertinent to my research paper in this particular archive. I have also stumbled upon America’s Historical Newspapers, an archive with historical newspapers from Chicago, New York, and Los Angeles, to name but a few. I have unearthed many successful newspaper articles in this archive as well. Fortunately, we live in a day and age when we can access such useful sources online and historians are no longer forced to painstakingly sift through old newspapers for hours at the local library. The convenience of these online newspapers is not lost on this historian. I am very grateful for such ease of access.

Prior to last week, I had never heard of a “finding aid.” Fortunately, I was able to quickly discover a finding aid that could be potentially useful to me. This finding aid accompanies a military collection of World War I papers and posters at the North Carolina Department of Cultural Resources. It is quite detailed and I believe many of  the artifacts it describes and contains will prove helpful in my research and the crafting of my research project.

 

 

Primary Source Report Week of 2.16

/ /

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:

Untitled

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

[German Messenger Dog]

Searching for Wounded Soldiers

[Dog Ready to Search for Wounded Soldiers]

Sources:

http://www.oldmagazinearticles.com/WW1_dogs_pdf

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

1 2 3 4