The Business of War: The Peirce School in World War I

1963

Papers 2!. Henry Churchill King, wss a great timesaver in locating the relevant docu;uents. Of lesser importance in ,ascerning attitudeS "ere the class letters and the annual reports and minute'~ of various organizations. For the thought of the times. I ga~red material from nearly every source. Henry Churchill King left behind extensive material in the form of addresses and letters. Edward Increase Ilosworth's writing and his biographY by llrnest Pye provided much insight into his thought concerning the war. !2=. Review editorials. lette.rs to the ®ditor. articles in the Alumni ~1af,azine" and the ,.rritings of Devere Allen provided additional material. l>11th So much dsta available it would se.em B>'lE'}' to construct a well substantiated story. On the factual level this seems to have been the case. But on the level of motives. attitudes. and other such Bubjective considerations, the case is not so conclusive. ~ Review, though a<:curately reportin~ the events of campus life, ms.y not present a true, l~ell-rounded picture of "campus life." As!!!!:. Revielw""S. of toduy show, it is hafd to capt'lre prevailing moods, much less the diversity of opinion, in a newspaper. ITow much weigh!: can you pla~e upon testimony given by pe~ple after ne~~ly a fifty year lapse of ti.me7 What do individual comments show besides the opinions of isolated individuals? In the end, what can an historian validly say about such elusi".'e. subjective matters? In considering these questions ! have examined the data carefully and feel that there was a general conalmsus concerning the mood of the campus, 1'lilere consensus seemed evident I ventured a generality. 1;'here these opinions did not fit into a pattern, I had to leave them as individual comments. Though, to a degree, I feel I have recreated the life of a segment

Journal of American History 102 (2015): 463-499.

April 2017 will mark the one hundredth anniversary of American entrance into World War I. The centennial is an apt moment to reconsider how this global conflict affected the history of the United States and how American participation in the war impacted the world. In October 2014, nine leading historians of World War I engaged in an online discussion of the American wartime experience and its legacies down to the present day. Participants attempted to synthesize the academic literature on the war and point to promising new areas of inquiry. They also examined the perplexing question of why World War I continues to occupy a more prominent place in the scholarly rather than popular imagination—and discussed the ways academic historians can cultivate a broader public appreciation for the war’s lasting effect on American society. What follows is an edited version of the dynamic conversation that resulted.

Trinity Tripod, 2025

During the First World War, many alumni of Connecticut's Trinity College served -- in the U.S. and in France -- with the American Red Cross, the YMCA, or other service organizations. Red Cross personnel were mostly physicians, chaplains, ambulance drivers, or other medical staff. The YMCA's people provided support and "welfare" -- rest and recreation programs, overseas entertainment, troop education, canteens and exchanges, "huts," and worked with prisoners of war. The YMCA fielded many chaplains too.

Journal of Contemporary History, 1996

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact

The Economics of World War I, 2005

The process by which the US economy was mobilized during World War I was the subject of considerable criticism both at the time and since. Nevertheless, when viewed in the aggregate the degree of mobilization achieved during the short period of active US involvement was remarkable. The United States entered the war in 1917 having made only limited preparations. In 1918 the armed forces were expanded to include 2.9 million sailors, soldiers, and marines; 6 percent of the labor force in the 15 to 44 age bracket. Overall in 1918, one fifth or more of the nation's resources was devoted to the war effort. By the time the Armistice was signed in 1919 a profusion of new weapons was flowing from American factories. This essay describes how mobilization was achieved so quickly, including how it was financed, and some of the long-term consequences.

2008

Lengthy visits to the archives at the College of William and Mary and the University of Virginia yielded a wealth of information concerning the functioning of the SATC at those two schools. Documents from the National Archives provided depth and filled in many gaps concerning the program, particularly from the perspective of the War Department staff responsible for developing training across the Army.

Yearbook of German-American Studies

In contrast to the First World War and its aftermath, when everything German was maligned, if not prohibited by laws, the United States' entry into the Second World War did not provoke widespread anti-German hysteria. By 1942, however, it had become evident that the radical decrease in German language instruction after 1917 had caused a dire shortage of fluent German speakers in the United States-except for the anti-fascist refugees from Central Europe. Hence, the title "Cloaks and Gowns" refers to the fact that the exiled intelleauals' intelligence and other aaivities for the war effort eventually secured their American citizenship.' With regard to the exiled social scientists, Bradley Smith has argued that their successful intelligence aaivities smoothed their path into the American universities, since, as Jews, most of them would not have had a chance to pursue an academic career. On the contrary, it seems that most universities were even willing to overlook their leftist orientation.^ To some degree, Bradley's observation also holds true for some refugee Germanists within American academia. Prompted by the apparent lack of fluent German speakers, the War Department wrote a letter to W. Freeman Twaddell, head of the largest American German department at the University of Wisconsin to request courses which would train young soldiers to become orally proficient in German while simultaneously familiarizing them with German culture. Upon completion of these courses, which were regarded as part of their military training, soldiers were expeaed to be fluent enough to a a as interpreters. Even though the War Department did not propose a concrete curriculum, it did suggest guidelines for German departments all over the country which led Twaddell to publish the letter.' Following the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, fifty-five American colleges and universities admitted military personnel to ensure that they receive appropriate linguistic and cultural training. Thus, the "Army Specialized Training Program" (ASTP) and similar military language programs became a sheet anchor for many a language department's dwindling enrollments. Instruaors of such diverse subjea areas as geography, geology, history, political science, engineering, philosophy, and economics collaborated'-in the spirit of

History of Education Quarterly (2013)

During the First World War and the 1920s, the Junior division of the American Red Cross played a leading role in bringing international education programs into American classrooms. Beginning in 1917, Junior Red Cross (JRC) leaders forged partnerships with thousands of schools across the country. Each month during the war and its immediate aftermath, the JRC sent teachers ideas for collecting relief supplies and raising money for Europe, activities meant to teach American children that they had global responsibilities. In the early 1920s, JRC leaders redesigned their approach. Hoping to shape a generation less insular and more cosmopolitan than their parents, they eschewed relief in favor of activities intended to foster international exchange and develop better world relations. While the JRC’s international education projects won wide support in 1917 and 1918, thanks in large part to a climate of wartime obligation, its peace program encountered resistance. Skeptical of allowing outside organizations to shape the curriculum, many schools turned against JRC leaders’ attempts to make their international education program permanent. Even at its nadir, however, the JRC curriculum reached more than 4,000,000 pupils per month. Enormously influential, the JRC’s work warrants consideration for what it suggests about international education and the relationship of voluntary associations to U.S. schools in the early twentieth century.

2002

Archives and Manuscripts, 2015