Transnational networks:German migrants in the British Empire 1670-1914

Non-British migrants and their communities were an integral part of the multifaceted and multicultural nature of the British Empire. Their history, however, goes beyond a clearly delineated narrative of the Empire and includes transnational and truly global dimensions. German migrants and their transnational network creation within the structures of the British Empire, pursued over more than two centuries in a multitude of geographical settings, is the constitutive framework of the present volume. Eight contributions cover economic, cultural, scientific and political themes. The book questions traditional nation-centred narratives of the Empire as an exclusively British undertaking.

Promoting the German navy in the British Empire:the Central League for German Navy Clubs Abroad 1898-1918

German unification in 1871 not only changed the political, economic and geographical landscape of the country, it also had a significant impact on those Germans who found themselves living outside, or migrating across, the borders of the newly founded Empire. It also focuses on the activities of the Central League in Britain and its Empire. For comparative reasons, some areas outside the Empire also included. Within Britain, five local branches can be identified during the period 1898 to 1914: London, Birmingham, Newcastle, Glasgow, and Edinburgh-Leith. For London, membership numbers obtained, but judging by annual contributions this branch appears strongest in Britain. The article has shown that researching the activities of the Central League in Britain and its Empire can add valuable insights to the mechanics of transnational ethnic network creation, as well as to the nature of potentially frictional contact zones between German migrants and British colonial rule.

Interned in Scotland. The Stobs Camp during the First World War

After the outbreak of war, civilians of Central Power nationality were declared ‘enemy aliens’ throughout the British Empire. Scotland serves as a representative case history to analyse patterns of public Germanophobia, ethnic minority displacement, internment, and repatriation. The Stobs camp in the Scottish Borders region was one of the biggest camps in the Empire. Internees were affected by the depressive ‘barbed wire disease’ and organised a plethora of activities. Those who were repatriated faced destitution in Germany. Neither in Britain nor in Germany have they been included in remembrance cultures. Within wider debates about the totalisation of warfare during World War I, the article takes on a global perspective to argue in favour of a stronger emphasis on civilian suffering.

‘Enemy aliens’ in wartime:civilian internment in South Africa during World War I

This article explores the previously neglected history of civilian internment in South Africa during World War I. German, Austro-Hungarian and Turkish nationals were classified as ‘enemy aliens’. They included mostly male immigrants, but also several hundred women and children deported from Sub-Saharan colonial contact zones. The main camp was Fort Napier in Pietermaritzburg, holding around 2,500. Based on sources in South African, German and British archives, this multi-perspectival enquiry highlights the salience of the South African case and integrates it into wider theoretical questions and arguments. The policy of civilian internment was rolled out comprehensively throughout the British Empire. Not least lessons learnt from the South African War (1900-1902), when Britain had been widely criticised for harsh conditions in its camps, led to relatively humane prisoner treatment. Another mitigating factor were the pro-German sympathies of the Afrikaner population. Nevertheless, suffering occurred through isolation and deportation. Remembering the First World War mainly as a ‘’soldiers’ war’ on the Western Front generates too narrow a picture. Widening the lens on civilians of both sexes in overseas territories supports notions of war totalisation.

Brain and mind in the 'long' eighteenth century

How should the 'long' eighteenth century be defined? January 1, 1700 and December 31, 1799 are quite arbitrary dates. Why should they be chosen to segment our history rather than more significant periods of time, periods which have a coherent content, or are marked, perhaps, by the working out of a theme? Students of English literature sometimes take the long eighteenth century to extend from John Milton (Paradise Lost, 1667) to the passing of the first generation of Romantics (Keats (d. 1821), Shelley (d. 1822), Byron (d. 1824), Coleridge (d. 1834)). Students of British political history often take it to start with the accession of Charles II (the Restoration) in 1660 or, alternatively, the so-called Glorious Revolution of 1688 and to end with the great Reform Act of 1832. Others might choose different book ends. In the history of science and philosophy the terminus a quo is sometimes taken as the publication of Descartes' scientific philosophy or, in more Anglophone zones, the 1687 publication of Newton's Principia with its vision of a 'clockwork universe'. 'Nature and Nature's laws' as Alexander Pope enthused, 'lay hid in Night: God said, Let Newton be! and all was light!'.