As the title suggests, Rappaport concentrates on the role of women in the Crimean War, although there is also much interesting detail about the army of the day. For example, how generally soldiers were expected not to get married, due to the length of their service (21 years after the Napoleonic Wars, changing to 10/12 years after the 'Time of Service in the Army Act 1847'), and the fact that wives were seen as an inconvenience since the soldiers could be expected to be posted abroad for years. Therefore, it was heavily discouraged, and soldiers who wished to get married had to seek the permission of their commanding officer. If this permission were not given, and soldiers still got married, this meant that the families of soldiers could expect no help from the army in terms of food, accomodation etc.
However, even if a soldier had obtained the blessing of his commanding officer, once the soldiers were called on active service, e.g. the Crimean War, all help for soldier's families ceased once they had left the country. Little or no provision was even given for soldier's to be able to send part of their wages back to help their families, so in many cases the soldier's families became completely destitute, which eventually led to such a scandal that Queen Victoria herself had to intervene to encourage charitable organisations to help these families. It seems incredible, even given the stereotypical Victorian belief in lack of social welfare, that so little should have been done to help these families, given the official lionization of the soldiers themselves as they left for the front.
The Crimea is also interesting in that it was the last war in which some women were allowed to accompany their husbands on campaign. Lots were drawn to decide who would have the 'honour', although again no provision was made to look after them, so women had to find their own food, clothing and shelter, or hope that the soldiers would take pity on them and share their (meagre) rations.
(Below - a picture of an army wife on campaign in the Crimea)
It is also interesting how, given the famous lack of organisation of the British army in the Crimea and their failure to provide adequate food/shelter/medical care for their soldiers, that they made so little use of the women who had accompanied their husbands on campaign to take over these roles. This was in contrast to the French, who employed 'Cantinieres' (usually the wives of non-commissioned officers) to provide food and drink to soldiers. They even had their own natty uniform (see below), and apparently scandalised the women in the British camp by wearing trousers!
I highly recommend Rappaport's book as an intriguing glimpse into a little known aspect of 19th century Britain.
No comments:
Post a Comment