Did the experience of the Second World War radicalise the British public?

It is not true that the British public become supportive of extreme political and social movements as a result of the cultural impact of the experience of the Second World War. Whilst it is evident that the experience of the Second World War radicalised the British public to a certain extent, it would certainly be more true to say that the change to the British public and sociopolitical circumstances that succeeded World War Two was more of a slow process that was in part a continuation of the alteration in mind set that accompanied the end of the First World War.

Arguably, the implementation of a form of total war in Britain during the Second World War is the greatest extent to which the British public were radicalised since as well as being conscripted to military activities, the home front played a large part in the effort to win the war. Historian Mark Duffield argues that to force a country into a state of total war is to instigate a state of environmental terror, which in turn revolutionises the participants by forcing them to fully experience the emotional state of war from the home front. Such as in the French Revolution of 1789, entering a mass of untrained, unprepared citizens – at worst, women and children – is likely to spark a newfound support for radical politics, often in resistance to whichever regime caused the trouble.

However, it appears that in the case of the Second World War the British public did not vote for the opposition in a radical resistance to the current government. Conversely, it appears that Labour’s 1945 landslide victory was a result of a long-approaching swing to the left which may have happened as early as 1942 with the publication of the Beveridge report according to historian John Barnes. In addition to this, the swing to the left, whenever it took place, cannot be considered a radicalisation of the entire British public. This is because at the time of the election, only 66% of the electorate actually registered to vote and an even smaller number of people turned out to vote. This obvious act of apathy towards the existing democratic system refutes any claims that the British public was radicalised in any political sense.

Furthermore, the Beveridge report of 1942 was a document that came out of the war experience that outlined improvements to the current socio-economic situation in areas such as the education, health and facilities of Britain. The report influenced the public in a less extreme manner than total warfare; it was deemed at the time ‘evolutionary rather than revolutionary’ by contemporary writer Eveline Burns since it simply suggested advancements for the entire country to take part in rather than suggesting any move towards political extremism as a means of producing a more efficient and effective Britain. Despite its huge popularity, with an estimated 92% of the population aware of it the day after its publication, the report’s impact cannot be considered radical or a radicalisation of the British public. In this, the experience of the Second World War did not radicalise the British public.

To conclude, the experience of World War Two radicalised the British public in the short term since the implementation of a state of total war was definitely an attempt to radicalise and militarise the entire British public. Otherwise, the slow gain in popularity accumulated by the Labour party, starting in the First World War and culminating in their landslide victory in 1945, proved to be anti-radical in that it was a definitive move towards peace government. Furthermore, the impact of the Beveridge report proved to be a major effect of the experience of the Second World War, though this too was both politically inoffensive and also longstanding.


The period 1851 – 1914 was an important time in the transition of leisure and cultural practices in Britain.

It is certain that the period 1851 – 1914 was an important time in the transition of leisure and cultural practices in Britain. These changes were led by a combination of the upper classes placing an emphasis on leisure time being used to create a sense of morality and rightness and a revolution in leisure technology taking place across the Atlantic at this time.

One of the most revolutionary and staying factors of the changing leisure practices of the period 1851 to 1914 is the birth of the weekend culture; between 1850 and 1913 the pattern of the working week relented from sixty five hours per week to fifty six. This may likely be a result of the introduction of the concept of rational recreation into Britain at this time. This concept encourages the lower classes to utilise their time away from a working environment to morally improve themselves by partaking in activities which may be deemed traditionally acceptable or educational as a means of preserving their respectability, such as attending museums and art galleries. This was an attempt by the upper classes to lure lower classes away from non-respectable activities such as attending cock fights and public houses. It is therefore evident that this period was an important time in the transition of leisure and cultural practices in Britain as it was a time which emphasised the importance of free time to better oneself.

However, the late Victorian era and beyond also saw a rise in alternate leisure activities. Spectator sports, such as football, were originally frowned upon since they could not be considered ‘rational’ activities; however, from around 1850 the popularity of these games soared and they were in fact encouraged because they started to be seen as promoting exercise, discipline and order. This promotion of moral and physical health, subtly drilled key military skills into working class citizens effectively providing Britain with a generation of ready-made soldiers – perfect for imperialist nineteenth century Britain. However, the level of spectators to such games far outnumbered the participants causing concerns amongst upper classes of football hooliganism, drinking and gambling which furthered the desire to popularise rational activities. Though, the continuing popularity of spectator sports such as football has proved that this was a revolutionary period for leisure and cultural practices in Britain.

Similarly prevalent today, the emergence of British cinema bloomed within the rapid expansion of music halls in the late nineteenth century; between 1850 and 1890, the music hall experienced a large growth in its clientele and by the 1890s roughly 45000 patrons were attending music halls every night in London alone. However, the development of cinematic technology in the United States at this time, with the first commercial motion picture exhibition in 1894 in New York City, proved to have the most revolutionary long term effect on the cultural and leisure activities in Britain with people today studying motion picture technology and film production at university level.

To conclude, it is evident that the period 1851-1914 was a very significant time for changing cultural and leisure practices in Britain. Together the impact of militaristic encouragement of football and the technological revolution of cinema had profound effects on Britain’s leisure activities that have endured more than a century.

To what extent can the anti-Semitism common in fin-de-siècle Continental Europe be regarded as a vehicle of social and political protest?

Although by the late nineteenth century most European countries had emancipated their Jews, legal equality did not convert into social equality. Despite religious anti-Judaism being prevalent since as early as the Middle Ages, the growth of anti-Semitism in fin-de-siècle Continental Europe occurred largely as a vehicle for social and political protest climaxing in the close to mid-twentieth century holocaust. The speed at which the world was changing in the nineteenth century was frightening and unnerving leading many people to seek an easy scapegoat; the obvious choice being history’s most infamous culprit, the Jewish. Anti-Semitism grew as a way to find blame for the negative impact of industrialisation and economic changes as well as liberalism and, most inexcusably, anti-Semitism was caused by the development of the ‘science’ of race and Jewish eviction from the new national groups. Coined by Wilhelm Marr in 1879, the term was used to provide a technical and more modern sound to the movement in order to attract an intellectual following and attempt to avoid allegations of medievalism.

One of the key ways that anti-Semitism took form as a vehicle for protest is economically. Historically, countries were founded in the countryside with agriculture being fundamental; basing their economy on fairly stable primary sector and occasionally secondary sector resources allowed for each person within that economy to find some sort of role in the land – these sectors being significantly labour intensive. However, the process of industrialisation meant that work was intensified and condensed with the development of factory machinery and reliance on increasingly industrialised work meaning that there was less and less work to be had. Capitalism had a great impact on traditional peasant towns and in Germany, the financial crash of 1873 launched a new era of anti-Semitism due to a latent resentment of economic commercialisation. Although the Jewish population of Germany was minute, their contribution to the German economy was significant as they tended to hold commercial roles in society such as retail traders. Many critics of modernity thrived on anti-Semitism because it gave them a focus. It has been extensively studied that the outbreak of intolerance in history against weaker groups is prominent mostly when internal problems become overwhelming requiring failing political figures to seek to place the blame elsewhere.[1] In this way, anti-Semitism is being used as a means for protest because there is an overflow of political anxiety that needs a way to demonstrate itself and break through to the surface of government address; often the only way to quickly gain media or government attention is by significant radicalisation of a cause, in this case by finding a scapegoat. Another example of such radicalisation, from a similar time, is the case of Emily Davison fighting for women’s suffrage by throwing herself beneath the King’s horse – an act which ultimately resulted in her death. Additionally, it is believed that economic anti-Semitism stems from an underlying religious intolerance. With Jews holding a stereotype of profiteering wage-earners, they are automatically seen as impure by defiling religion with trade, from a Christian viewpoint.[2] It is argued that this focus on ‘sordid trade’[3] may be the origin of European tendency to blame the Jewish community for financial depressions. Despite relaxing Christian ideologies, this continued abuse of stereotype leads us to believe that anti-Semitism is simply a means to an end, allowing medieval principles to lead the way to modern political stabilisation.

However, the use of anti-Semitism extends further than economic protest. At a much more basic level it can be seen as a way to voice social protest following the industrialisation of the economy. The process of the industrial revolution caused social conditions to deteriorate exponentially; crowded conditions exacerbated prevalent diseases and illnesses whilst poverty meant that food was scarce and working conditions were of a lesser concern, this contributed to the plummeting life expectancy significantly. Adolf Stoecker is discussed as being troubled by the ‘socially destructive impact of industrialisation in Germany’, believing that the only negative effects of the industrial revolution stem from Jewish participation.[4] In believing this, Stoecker insists that the only way to rid ourselves of such negative effects is to rid ourselves of the Jews. Evidently, here Stoecker insists that his anti-Semitism lies with the consequences of embracing the Jewish people into society as opposed to Jews as a people and in this way he is using the movement as a form of social protest. Albert Lindemann quotes Stoecker saying that ‘The social question is the Jewish question’, because he truly believed that it was the emancipation of the Jews and their new key role in society’s public and economic roles that was causing such social devastation.[5]

Furthermore, the coinciding of the emancipation of the Jewish people and the fast social dislocation of Europe led to a new type of political anti-Semitism. Increased Jewish equality meant that their complete integration into society was inevitable, creating resentment from those groups who felt alienated by the rapidly changing society of late nineteenth century Europe. Judaism became evident among the politically active, largely in liberal, radical and Marxist groups.[6] Subsequently, the inevitable reactionary groups broke out and although wholly anti-Semitic political parties did not make it into the twentieth century, by this point anti-Semitism had permeated politics. Particularly in Russia, the poverty of Jews forced them into revolutionary politics; as a result, they received the blame for political radicalism and revolutionary liberal movements from conservatives. 1881 saw the rise of Jewish pogroms in Russia following the assassination of Tsar Alexander II, for which the Jews were held responsible. This represented a turning point for Russian Jewry as they moved westward as a result of the state-implemented programme of discrimination which aimed to remove Jews from Russian society.[7] Protests against the presence of Jews in economic and public society may have been representative more of a disapproval of the changes in these areas that conservatives were increasingly uncomfortable with; this would make anti-Semitism a vehicle for protest by utilising the Jews once again as a scapegoat as opposed to addressing the fundamental issues that these concerns stem from. If this is true, then perhaps if it were not for such rapid industrialisation and societal change in the late nineteenth century, then the Russians may have been content with continuing their lives at a level of equilibrium. Disruption of this equilibrium is what caused a need for frustrations to find a direction.  Similarly, pogroms of 1917 to 1921 were connected with the disruptions of the Eastern Europe civil war. To draw connections with older revolutions would further support the cause; the internal revolts of the 1789 French revolution were, if not caused by, exacerbated by the fragile state of the national unity given the external issues and contemporary economic traumas. This is not to say that the anti-Semitic revolts were not without other cause or meaning, but that they were used largely as a catalyst to explore the deeper issues of social and political protest at the time.

Much like the internal revolts of the French revolution of the late eighteenth century, it would be foolish to suggest that anti-Semitic protest was used wholly as a means of fighting other issues; similarly, they had unique causes. Anti-Semitism was coined as a pseudoscientific term and as such led to gaining a pseudoscientific backing with the development of racial theorising and social Darwinism. The growth of biology, psychology and a greater knowledge of human genetics added to the establishing of a racial hierarchy with the ‘white’ race reigning supreme. Houston Stewart Chamberlain, in particular, viewed the history of Western civilisation as a struggle between the races in which the Jews were overwhelmingly regarded as a mongrel race – a genetic mistake best erased from human history.[8] Belief in the idea that the human race was not one but divided into many that were genetically determined to compete against each other in order to discover a master race has never been scientifically authenticated even to this day.[9] However, this belief that Jews were innately different gave meaning to anti-Semitism. With this racial theorising, came a more sinister anti-Semitic stance that had a darker tone, one that was fundamentally more destructive than using the Jewish people as scapegoats. If there was a definite confidence in a group of radical anti-Semites that Jewish blood was a pollutant, intent on ruining the purity of the Aryan bloodline, which there was, it posed a greater threat of racial annihilation rather than simple seclusion. In this way, anti-Semitism is not just a way of voicing social and political protest to the world; it is a wholly negative and destructive force that is unjustly exclusionary for the purpose of amplifying one’s vanity and self-importance. Racial anti-Semitic movements were much more threatening because they were unforgiving, not allowing Jews any chance of religious redemption via conversion because it is their blood that is the betrayal, not their faith.

To conclude then, anti-Semitism in fin-de-siècle Continental Europe truly was used as a vehicle for political and social protest due to the conditions of the time. The dramatic change in economic environment caused by the rapid onset of the industrial revolution and urbanisation process caused great distress amongst conservative parties leading them to attempt to find a scapegoat that would grant them some focus for blame. It was also the worsening of social conditions in a time of technological development that promised better living conditions and the process of immense human suffering in between times that meant many working class individuals needed a radical alignment to vent their frustrations of the ‘new’ world. Finally, it was the integration of Jews politically and socially after hundreds of years of seclusion that caused uproar and political protest against a changing world. However, it must be taken into consideration that, though the extent to which anti-Semitism was used as a voice for public protest is great, anti-Semitism also developed in a dark and sinister world of its own. The turn of the century brought pseudoscientific developments which enabled people to protest against an enlightened life and against religious and racial freedom, arguably as some form of escapism from the daunting actuality of early twentieth century politics and life. So, it must be known that whilst secular anti-Semitism has grown as a means of targeting a weaker group as a form of accepting change, some forms of religious and racial anti-Judaism dominate the movement. It is the latter that was ultimately the beginnings of Nazi anti-Semitism and the attempt to cleanse the European bloodline for good.

[1] J. Gibson and M. Howard, ‘Russian Anti-Semitism and the Scapegoating of the Jews’,  (2007), <http://www18.georgetown.edu/data/people/mmh/publication-7909.pdf&gt; [accessed 30 October 2013]

[2] M. Perry and F. Schweitzer, Anti-Semitism: Myth and Hate from Antiquity to the Present, (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2002), pp. 119-120

[3] Ibid.

[4] A. Lindemann, Anti-semitism Before the Holocaust, (Edinburgh: Pearson Education Limited, 2000) p.62

[5] Ibid.

[6] ‘Antisemitism in History: The Era of Nationalism 1800 – 1918’, United States Holocaust Memorial Museum (2013),  < http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10007173&gt; [accessed 31 October 2013]

[7] ‘Pogroms’, Jewish Virtual Library (2008), <http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/judaica/ejud_0002_0016_0_15895.html&gt; [accessed 31 October 2013]

[8] ‘Houston Stewart Chamberlain’, Encyclopaedia Britannica, <http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/104926/Houston-Stewart-Chamberlain&gt; [accessed 31 October 2013]

[9] ‘Antisemitism in History: Racial Antisemitism, 1875 – 1945’, United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, <http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10007171>  [accessed 31 October 2013]

Was the formation of the Boy Scouts primarily a matter of imperialism or citizenship?

Currently boasting a worldwide, mixed-gender membership of ‘over 31 million’[1], the Scout movement continues in its ability to create healthy, uniformed children. Perhaps it was the simple intention of Robert Baden-Powell, founder of the movement, to produce a branch of young citizens who were polite and helpful as well as being loyal to their king and country, in order to teach them discipline and obedience from a young age; however, it is the opinion of historians and critics of Baden-Powell, such as Victor Bailey[2] and Robert MacDonald[3], that there existed greater objectives for the use and creation of the Boy Scouts much relating to defence of the empire and breeding a generation of prêt-à-porter combatants. On the other hand, the imperialist slant of Boy Scout training may have proved unintentional and only as a result of coincidence of the traits of a useful citizen and a good soldier, was the scouting movement abused as a militaristic weapon purporting that Britain was inexorably ready for war in order to protect her empire.

There is no doubt that on the surface at least the Boy Scout movement held an ethos of citizenship and providing young boys with practical skills. Robert Baden-Powell, after all, did eventually become a member of the League of Nations[4], a well-known peace organisation. He often wrote of how the scouts’ priorities were to provide togetherness within the community and within the younger generation, frequently using terms such as ‘brother’ and ‘peace-scout’[5] infusing concepts of family and Christian values of respect and neighbourly attitudes into their Laws. In fact with 29% of scoutmasters being clergymen[6], often meetings of the scouts followed the same moralistic patterns of Bible study groups. Additionally, in his earlier writings on the scouts, Baden-Powell outlines key issues of citizenship similar to public school training of children such as hygiene, morality and loyalty to Britain’s social hierarchy, often resulting in staunch patriotism. This similarity to the British school system might suggest an intention to replicate traditional educational values in order to shape ideal citizens rather than to form the perfect soldier. Furthermore, historical debate on Baden-Powell’s intentions to weave issues of national identity, education and natural science takes place by academic historians such as Bjorn Sundmark, arguing that it is only recent historiographical reviews of his works, including Young Knights of Empire, which have criticised it ideologically claiming that it exclusively represents ideas of empire over citizenship. However, in further analysis it is concluded that contrary to outward intentions Baden-Powell becomes caught up with issues of Marksmanship and masculinity, claiming that ‘manliness is…and antidote to physical and ‘psychological deterioration.’[7]

Alternatively it may seem that the growth of the Boy Scouts existed wholly as an act of rebellion from middle class males who feared the loss of their masculinity, especially for young boys who existed in their early lives trapped in the heavily female environment of ‘home’. Some historians, such as Jeffrey Hantover in his analysis of the intentions of scoutmasters[8], have put forward the case that a desire to validate traditional masculinity away from warfront that was denied by their home occupations created a need for a campaign that offered such a chance. It is significant that the largest occupation groups within scoutmasters by 1912 included 29% clergymen and 10% teachers[9], typically non-masculine professions. By which it is not meant roles to be completed by males, but those that offered a chance to exude strength and complete stereotypically masculine tasks such as outdoor activities, building huts and starting fires. It is proved that ‘adult sex-role anxiety is rooted in the social structure’[10] of their environment; men in overtly feminine roles will seek to validate their own sexual identity since ‘social identities generate the need for self-confirming action’[11]. Such an uprising against the femininity that the artistry of Edwardian Britain exuded caused an attempt for the older generations to attempt to mould a stronger and more ‘masculine’ set of boys[12]. In this, the scout movement would have been created as neither exclusively an act of citizenship or imperialism but rather a combination of the two as a confirmation of the concept of self-imaging. However, it is unlikely gender role confusion would have generated such a rate of growth within scout membership. In terms of membership, perhaps again it is a similar act of self-affirming move to ameliorate one’s immediate environment. After all, it is the imperial slant of the movement, married with its ability to teach young boys practical and behavioural skills, which made it so appealing to the working classes, which were the bulk of its membership.[13] The movement would not have gained such success, arguably, had it been an obviously military movement.

On the other hand, despite belief amongst historians, such as Allen Warren, that Baden-Powell determinedly insisted that the scout movement was a peaceful civilian movement, many military references can be read in works such as his writings on Scout Law.  It is emphasised by Law 4 of the Scout Law that friendliness of the scout boys should bring international peace. Highlighting that the peace would cross nations suggests national, or international, importance of the scouts. Furthermore, whilst it is believed that Robert Baden-Powell and his writings were strongly opposed to the concept of military training in children, in favour of rigorous civic training[14], Baden-Powell’s Young Knights of Empire contradicts this theory, however, with his description of Scout Law. Beginning with a brief introduction regarding what a boy scout should aim to become, Baden-Powell uses undeniably military undertones stating that a boy scout should be ‘ready to take the place of those who have gone away to fight and who have fallen at the Front’.[15] Baden-Powell cleverly avoids promoting the scout movement as a military organisation, but delicately includes ideas regarding defence of the empire and nation. In doing this it is believed by some, such as Victor Bailey[16], that Baden-Powell was attempting to prepare the next generations for times of war and colonial life, as a means of imperial propaganda demonstrating that Britain was persistently ready and preparing for war and that in this it was ever superior. Baden-Powell was obsessed with the fall of Rome and feared the worst for the British empire, he commonly wrote of Rome’s main flaw being weakness at home; in this he compared the advancement of the civilization of the Roman and British empires in order to account for their later decline in physical fitness and in that superiority[17]. The Scout’s imperial and military aspects, therefore, must be relating to its founder’s desire to prepare the British Empire physically to defend itself against attack, as this was the fall of Rome. It was only by preserving a wealth of traditionally masculine men that Britain would ever overcome the ‘onset of moral and physical decadence’[18], which were limiting factors regarding survival of the empire, since Darwinism had taught that only the fittest would survive. At the time of the founding of the Boy Scouts, Darwin’s On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or The Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life was less than fifty years old; being a relatively new publishing of a theory whose concept can be replicated and sometimes abused to fit every path of human thought, Baden-Powell’s possible application of the process of natural selection may well have influenced his attitudes towards Britain’s need for consistent war preparation.

The threat of revolt in the air even as early as the outset of the nineteenth century with the arrival of revolutionary France caused unsettlement in the British empire, already reeling from the loss of several colonies in the years previous and the reputational damage caused by the Boer War some years later. Such a threat to the Empire possibly caused military elite, such as Baden-Powell, to imagine ways of protecting and defending Britain by preparing it for invasion or possible revolution of the colonies. Alternatively, perhaps, it was simply a final attempt to ensure that traditional values outlived the empire. With such progress of civilization, that Baden-Powell was renowned for criticising, and a spread of the concepts of liberty and equality threatening Britain’s long-running social hierarchy that a rerun of the French Revolution threatened, it is possible that enforcing ideals of nationalism and defence of the empire was a part of ensuring traditional values. Despite claiming to be such a civilized nation, Britain valued at its heart its ability to maintain an elite and a sense of superiority by governing others. Loss of physical and practical ability to maintain an empire would clearly result in a more socially unified Britain by wiping out a mass of its subjects, hence generating a youth psychologically and physically ready to become soldiers was fundamental to maintaining ‘Britain’.

Conversely, perhaps it is not the original purpose of the organisation that holds any historical importance but its effect; whether or not the intention was to set up a group for young boys that prepared them physically for the demanding nature of war and set them up ideologically to desire to defend the empire, the effect was such. The movement began in 1907 taking on children aged between ten and eighteen, which meant that by the time the Great War arrived seven years later, and the call for greater conscription came in 1915, almost all of these boys would have been of recruitment age. In 1914, the rush to volunteer for the Front upon the arrival of the First World War proved that scouting had psychologically geared a generation of young men towards fighting for defence of their nation; by January 1915 more than one million men had joined the armed forces voluntarily[19]. Despite attempting to promote peace and citizenship, the Boy Scouts revolutionised concepts of masculinity and adult sex-role anxiety causing a generation of men to grow up in a new, highly masculinised environment, effectively reconfirming the slowly evolving gender roles of the nineteenth century, a century which saw the growth of feminism and campaigning for women’s suffrage.

In conclusion, whilst Baden-Powell’s intentions for the scout movement are commonly debated, it is evident that the Boy Scouts’ founding had a highly imperial leaning. Issues of adult sex-role anxiety and feminine occupations may have conceivably caused need for a self-confirming act of validating one’s masculinity within the role of the scoutmaster, however, this is unlikely the reason for such a rate of growth of the organisation in terms of membership or for Baden-Powell’s founding of the group, being from the traditionally masculine role of leading a ‘distinguished army career’[20]. Overall, it is probable that Baden-Powell founded the organisation as a way to generate a cohort of children prepared to be thrown into high level combat at a moment’s notice in order to provide an image of Britain that appeared constantly ready for war, however to be able to complete this undercover training for the inevitable Darwinist events, Baden-Powell had to present a façade of citizenship, Christianity and morality to achieve such a great membership. In spite of everything, in description of his Scout Laws, Baden-Powell emphasises one key aspect of almost every law that suggests he feared Britain was ill-equipped for invasion – that a scout should always ‘be prepared’[21].

[1] ‘World Scouting’, Scouts <https://members.scouts.org.uk/supportresources/search/?cat=52,209&gt; [accessed 10 March 2014].

[2] V. Bailey, ‘Scouting for Empire’, History Today, 32.7 (1982), pp.5-9.

[3] R. H. MacDonald, Sons of Empire: The Frontier and the Boy Scout Movement, 1890-1918 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1993), pp.3-30.

[4] V. Bailey, ‘Scouting for Empire’, History Today, 32.7 (1982), pp.5-9.

[5] R. Baden-Powell, Young Knights of the Empire Their Code and Further Scout Yarns (Project Gutenburg, 2003), p.4.

[6] ‘BSA and Girls in Scouting’, BSA Discrimination <http://www.bsa-discrimination.org/html/girls-top.html&gt; [accessed 19th March 2014].

[7] B. Sundmark, ‘Citizenship and Children’s Identity in The Wonderful Adventures of Nils and Scouting for Boys’, Children’s Literature in Education, 40 (2009), pp.109-119.

[8] J. Hantover, ‘The Boy Scouts and the Validation of Masculinity’, Journal of Social Issues, 34.1 (1978), pp.184-195.

[9] ‘BSA and Girls in Scouting’, BSA Discrimination <http://www.bsa-discrimination.org/html/girls-top.html&gt; [accessed 19th March 2014].

[10] J. Hantover, ‘The Boy Scouts and the Validation of Masculinity’, Journal of Social Issues, 34.1 (1978), p.193.

[11] Ibid.

[12] F. G. Chalmers and A. A., Dancer, ‘Art, Boys and the Boy Scout Movement: Lord Baden-Powell’, Studies in Art Education A Journal of Issues and Research, 48.3 (2007), pp.265-281.

[13] V. Bailey, ‘Scouting for Empire’, History Today, 32.7 (1982), pp.5-9.

[14] A. Warren, ‘Sir Robert Baden-Powell, the Scout Movement and Citizen Training in Great Britain, 1900- 1920’, The English Historical Review, 101.399 (1986), pp.376-398.

[15] R. Baden-Powell, Young Knights of the Empire Their Code and Further Scout Yarns (Project Gutenburg, 2003), pp. 2-59.

[16] V. Bailey, ‘Scouting for Empire’, History Today, 32.7 (1982), pp.5-9.

[17] S. Pryke, ‘The Popularity of Nationalism in the Early British Boy Scout Movement’, Social History, 23.3 (1998), pp.309-324.

[18] Ibid.

[19] ‘Conscription’, WW1 Facts <http://ww1facts.net/people/conscription/&gt; [accessed 20th March 2014].

[20] ‘Lord Baden-Powell’, Scouts < http://scouts.org.uk/about-us/history/lord-baden-powell/&gt; [accessed] 20th March 2014.

[21] R. Baden-Powell, Young Knights of the Empire Their Code and Further Scout Yarns (Project Gutenburg, 2003), pp.1-59.