The Maternité Anglaise: A Lasting Legacy of the Friends’ War Victims’ Relief Committee to the People of France during the First World War (1914–1918)
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This article sets out to outline the medical assistance provided under Hilda Clark's leadership in Châlons-sur-Marne and it successfully provides a chronological overview of that assistance. There are a wide range of relevant sources drawn upon and the knowledge of the author is clearly in evidence. Where this article could make a stronger contribution to knowledge, however, is if it recognised the potential to move beyond providing this clear overview and offered greater consideration of the significance of some of the underlying themes, such as the relationships created and fostered between the FWVRC and the French/locals (dignitories and refugees and patients). This particular choice doesn't necessarily need to be your chosen focus, but it struck me as implicit throughout the article, and presumably was one of the greatest challenges when foreigners - even if allies - sought to provide local support. And yet the recognition through awards, let alone the longevity of the building, would suggest that this issue was clearly tackled, and tackled effectively - and it appears as a theme in the sources (such as in the full letter which I've read as cited here Great bliss | #whitefeather diaries). Other possible themes could be Quaker attitudes towards maternalism (and the dignity and support of the mother in the context of war); the qualities required of the staff, the biographical significance of this period to e.g. Clark; or the significance of these particular projects to ...to what? organisational experience gained? long-term Anglo-French or interpersonal relationships? successful (Quaker) support abroad? What should the reader take from your chosen focus on this particular medical provision in France? This is not to argue against the chronological overview, but to suggest it could be used to make a more significant contribution to our understandings of Quaker involvement in the war, and further to speak to readers with more diverse interests (I thought the gender dimensions here were really interesting, for example!).
The key individuals under discussion are given no contextual identities - but where do these activities fit in their biographies and what could we usefully know of them to contextualise their work here, or to understand their motivations in relation to their faith? (Even a basic biography as provided here ' World War I and its aftermath: cataloguing the papers of Hilda Clark (1881-1955) | Quaker Strongrooms' would be helpful given that not all readers of the journal will be familiar with the individuals discussed).
There is a brief but useful secondary literature review which could contribute more to the article if the discussion went beyond the existence of these publications, and considered the thrust of the arguments contained - and their relevance to the themes of the article was noted.
The overview of sources could also provide of a greater sense of their nature and how they will be used in the article - there isn't really a methodology outlined in this section but which sources were selected on what basis (eg if for their local relevance?); where do these sit in the wider collections (scale, type); etc.? When you integrate the sources in your text, what could you tell the reader about the author or context that would allow you to develop your argument? For example, take Elliott's quotation (ref 6) which reads like propaganda but is taken at face value. I'm not doubting its validity, but you could reflect more on the identity of author and audience - what could be said about the nature of these annual reports, for example?
Finally, some proof reading elements: this may be journal layout but the quotations can be difficult to see as such(eg L384); tenses slide between present and past (e.g. L143/L573-574; "may" in L691 should read "might" comma should fall after not before the brackets in L724 etc.); there are some sentence structures which could be more clear (e.g. L330 L354, L484 ref 67 is missing a word) and watch out in particular when you introduce individuals (e.g. L484/485). Material that could usefully be included in the article is relegated to footnotes (e.g. 17, 18, 31 etc.). Do you really mean tubercle (L489). French terms should be translated for non-French readers.
Line 86: The work - unclear whether by the Whitefeather diaries or the wartime organisation?
The point about the Quaker Star still being visible is repeated in a footnote (ref 86) and the conclusion.
Author Response
Firstly, thank you for the detailed and helpful observations - to each of which I have endeavoured to respond in the revised text. In particular:
'Where this article could make a stronger contribution to knowledge ... is if it ... offered greater consideration of the significance of some of the underlying themes, such as the relationships created and fostered between the FWVRC and the French/locals (dignitories and refugees and patients).'
...the significance of this particular project in relation to organisational experience gained and later implemented in post-war international relief work
Though I hoped these points were clear in the original article, I have tried to underline their importance further.
The key individuals under discussion are given no contextual identities - their motivations in relation to their faith?
An important issue (and equally important oversight!) now addressed.
There is a brief but useful secondary literature review which could contribute more to the article if the discussion went beyond the existence of these publications
I have attempted to incorporate this suggestion in the revised text.
The overview of sources could also provide of a greater sense of their nature and how they will be used in the article - there isn't really a methodology outlined in this section but which sources were selected on what basis (eg if for their local relevance?); where do these sit in the wider collections (scale, type); etc.?
Much more attention has been paid to this particular weakness in the original text.
When you integrate the sources in your text, what could you tell the reader about the author or context that would allow you to develop your argument? For example, take Elliott's quotation (ref 6) which reads like propaganda but is taken at face value. I'm not doubting its validity, but you could reflect more on the identity of author and audience
Yes, you are quite right, of course. When distancing oneself from the text this statement stands out as glaring propaganda. I have addressed this issue, albeit in the footnote.
Finally, some proof reading elements: this may be journal layout but the quotations can be difficult to see as such(eg L384); tenses slide between present and past (e.g. L143/L573-574; "may" in L691 should read "might" comma should fall after not before the brackets in L724 etc.); there are some sentence structures which could be more clear (e.g. L330 L354, L484 ref 67 is missing a word) and watch out in particular when you introduce individuals (e.g. L484/485). Material that could usefully be included in the article is relegated to footnotes (e.g. 17, 18, 31 etc.). Do you really mean tubercle (L489). French terms should be translated for non-French readers.
Line 86: The work - unclear whether by the Whitefeather diaries or the wartime organisation?
I think I have dealt with each of these issues, though the discrepancy between line references makes it a little difficult.
Reviewer 2 Report
This is a very well researched paper on the humanitarian role of the Religious Society Friends' War Victims' Relief Committee during the First World War.
Why did they gain access to war zones in France and why was this same access married to other voluntary organizations ?
It would be interest to discuss the relationship between FWVRC and the Red Cross. Is there any material on that ? The American Red Cross was a very significant institution during the war as as the author mentions it "paid for the installation of electric light" in the maternity. On the other hand, the paper would benefit also from an analysis on the relation of FWVRC with other American organizations operating in France, so instance the initiatives carried out by Herbert Hoover.
Author Response
Many thanks for your observations.
Why did they gain access to war zones in France and why was this same access married to other voluntary organizations ?
There was a proliferation of voluntary (amateur) agencies vying for access to the war zones. This could not be alowed for various reasons including, primarily, national safety/physical safety of volunteers and interference with military operations. The Friends' outstanding reputation (in the delivery of humanitarian aid during previous wars) preceded them. This is largely what helped them gain access denied to other agencies. I hope this is a little clearer in the revised text.
It would be interest to discuss the relationship between FWVRC and the Red Cross. Is there any material on that ?
No. The Friends' Ambulance Unit (focus of my previous work) collaborated closely with the Red Cross in their remit to assist both civilians and military victims of the war. This earned them the scorn of those members of the Religious Society of Friends who were against any such intervention. The fact that the FWVRC was totally independent and would be dedicated strictly to the aid of civilian victims gained the full support of the Society. (This was the theory. In reality, collaboration with the military authorities was utterly inevitable!)
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
I hope the author feels that the article is improved by the revisions: as a reader I certainly appreciated them. The two outstanding issues would be first: the methodological section: you outline the sources very clearly but I would still like to know whether the article is based on a thorough immersion in all of them or based on some form of selective process. Are you, for example, bringing together all sources which reference the hospital, and what is the nature - the emphases and omissions - in these; what story can't you tell? You could also reflect on what the emphasis on one particular project contributes to knowledge (turning the specificity overtly into the article's strength, which would not be hard to do). (Scale of the request - a couple of sentences.)
The second is the conclusion, which doesn't reflect on the significance to the protagonists (though this is shown in the text itself), or where it fits within Quaker activities which is where the introduction began (and would hence support symmetry). This latter issue would seem particularly apposite for this publication. (Scale of the request: one more paragraph).
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
'I hope the author feels that the article is improved by the revisions...' Yes, indeed I do - and very grateful! Your suggestions have (in my humble opinion) contributed enormously to the finished article. Now, I only hope my recent changes do not let you down.
With very best wishes,
