‘Other than stone and mortar’
War memorials, memory and imperial knowledge
in Female imperialism and national identity
Open Access (free)

This chapter examines the innovative work of the IODE in memorialisation and considers war memorials as producers of identity, tracing the shifts from colonial British space to national Canadian space. Through its war memorials, the IODE has used memory to produce identity, instilling a shared sense of the past and defining aspirations for the future. It has also demonstrated its capacity for insight, initiative and innovation, exerting efforts well beyond the erecting of stone memorials, and was involved in memorialising Canada's part in war through gendered feminine activities concerned with the care and nurture of the national family. Memorialisation was also achieved through the process of naming. Many IODE chapters were named after war heroes or military contingents, while others took the names of battalions to which they were attached. The IODE has known how to utilise education and encourage young minds to perpetuate imperial and national ideology based upon memorialisation.

Through its war memorials, the IODE has used memory to produce identity, instilling a shared sense of the past and defining aspirations for the future.1 In recent years historians have placed renewed emphasis on the role of memory in the making and re-making of history. Raphael Samuel’s innovative work has destabilized memory as fixed or singular, and has brought into question the structure of history as a discipline.2 For my particular purposes, how war is remembered is important as it can reveal much about imperial and national identity, patriotism and citizenship.3 Whereas early work on war and memory, in particular Paul Fussell’s 1975 The Great War and Modern Memory, argued for the disruptive effects of war and the dawning of new eras, recent interpretations emphasize the conservative effects of war, and its forcing, to borrow Jay Winter’s phrase, of a ‘walking backwards into the future’.4 The IODE, as a conservative organization, was ever careful to emphasize continuity with past traditions, and its ideology emphasized service and sacrifice in order to preserve freedom and democracy. Yet, in memorializing war, the IODE has also repeatedly demonstrated its capacity for insight, initiative and innovation, exerting efforts well beyond the erecting of stone memorials. From the changing design of the memorials through the twentieth century can be gained a clear view of a shift away from constructing Britain as Canada’s imperial centre to a focus on Canada itself. This was mirrored in the considerable transformation of memorialization, which, through a powerful combination of practicality and emotion, the IODE used to introduce innovations in Canadian education and welfare.

# Gendering the memorialization process

The IODE was involved in memorializing Canada’s part in war through gendered feminine activities concerned with the care and nurture of the national family. To follow Anne McClintock, ‘nations are frequently figured through the iconography of familial and domestic space’.5 As the South Africa War ended, one of the first projects of the IODE was to establish the South Africa Graves Committee which worked with the Guild of Loyal Women of South Africa (GLWSA) to locate and mark the graves of fallen Canadians. The IODE was concerned that the Canadian Government was showing insufficient respect for the Canadian war-dead; those ‘sons of the British Empire’ whose heroic sacrifice must not be forgotten and whose dependants must be cared for with dignity.6

The problem was not confined to the Canadian war-dead. Soldiers from all parts of the Empire lay unidentified in South Africa. It was not long before the newly formed Victoria League attempted to take control of the project – from London. However, because the IODE and the GLWSA were older than the Victoria League, with the project well under-way as the League formed, on this issue the League had no choice but to cooperate. The IODE continued to correspond with the GLWSA, and sent money for it to set about finding, recording and, eventually, marking all of the Canadian graves – and nearly all of the other imperial forces’ graves. It was the GLWSA which put in the hard work, and the women of the IODE and the Victoria League who provided lists of the fallen and helped with essential funds. The exercise was probably the most truly collaborative venture that these dispersed female imperialists would ever attempt. By 1910, the League was amalgamating the various branches of the GLWSA, and, given the opportunity, would have done the same in Canada.

To perpetuate the memory of the war-dead, the IODE contributed to a variety of stone memorials. The total number of war memorials throughout Canada is estimated at 1,300.7 Jonathan Vance suggests that women’s organizations, including the IODE, were responsible for as much as one-third of Canada’s civic war memorials.8 Of commanding physical presence, these monuments were positioned in diverse landscapes, from public squares to quiet cemeteries. As in other ventures, the IODE collaborated with different interest groups, local, national and international. Figure 6.1 shows the IODE assembled, in May 1939, on the eve of the Second World War at the Cenotaph outside of City Hall in Toronto. Paying homage to Canada’s war-dead at stone memorials has always been an important part of the IODE’s official ceremonies. Laying wreaths at war memorials, for example, was performed on Remembrance Day and as a part of its National Meeting held annually in the spring.

Memorialization was also achieved through the process of naming. Many IODE chapters were named after war heroes or military contingents, while others took the names of battalions to which they were attached. Special ‘memorial chapters’ were formed, such as the Silver Cross Chapter in Ottawa, membership of which was restricted to those women to whom the Silver Cross had been awarded in memory of husbands, sons or daughters who had made ‘the supreme sacrifice’ during the First World War.9 Members of chapters have unfailingly placed wreaths on memorials, cared for the families of dead (and returned) women and men, donated money, food and toys to soldiers’ families, and visited veterans’ hospitals.

Such benevolent feminine care saw the IODE acting as replacement breadwinners and fathers, and making up for the lack of state intervention. The ethic of care and responsibility was particularly innovative in the area of education. The Elizabeth Tudor Chapter, for example, comprised largely of ‘new’ professional women, focused its effort on educational work among the children of ex-soldiers, so that they were ‘assisted in placing their feet upon what is hoped will be the pathway of success’.10 After the First World War the IODE offered bursaries to children whose fathers and mothers were killed or totally disabled in the war. The IODE bursaries started off valued at $250 for four years, and 249 were given out in total.11 An architect of this work in the interwar years was Wilhelmina Gordon, one of the first women lecturers (she taught English) at Queen’s University in Ontario. In 1920, Gordon wrote that ‘veteran’s sons and daughters who were mentally fit and eager to go to college had almost nowhere to turn for help now that their fathers were no longer able to provide for them’.12 Her words exemplified the political connections between the IODE and federal government, as her thinking was closely in line with that of her brother-in-law W. F. Nickel, a prominent member of Parliament who was also outspoken on opportunities for children of the war-dead. Nickel is on record as having said that ‘if there is one thing more than another that a child is entitled to whose bread-winner is taken away it is a fair chance in life’.13 # Memorializing education The IODE’s national bursary scheme for children who had lost a father was part of a grander and more ambitious project, the IODE’s First War Memorial. Towards the end of the First World War, the IODE started planning for a memorial in ‘other than stone and mortar that should be … [a] tribute to those who had sacrificed their lives’14 (emphasis added). By this time a governmental agency, the Imperial War Graves Commission (IWGC), had taken over the responsibility for marking graves.15 What had been a women’s voluntary work initiative during the South Africa War was now taken up by government. As a result, the IODE embarked on new kinds of commemorative projects which would give a sense of the past and define Canadian aspirations for the future. The First War Memorial involved three educational ventures: bursaries, to make sure that dependants of the war-dead would not be disadvantaged; the distribution of patriotic educational material; and postgraduate scholarships. In an open letter to members from the IODE national press and publicity committee in 1919 the plan was sweepingly set out as ‘a most extensive and varied scheme of Patriotic Educational Propaganda, designed to cover every phase of education, and from which Canada nationally should, as the years go on, reap a rich harvest in sound patriotic citizenship’.16 Looking to the future through investing in children was a strong postwar concern across Canada, as it was in other countries whose soldiers had fought in the war and which were keen to rebuild and mould their sense of nationhood. The educational memorial was ‘undertaken with a view to instilling an intelligent patriotism into the minds of the young people of Canada and the building up of a sound Canadian citizenship’.17 Such patriotism was to be achieved through placing in 1,000 schools a series of war memorial pictures, reproduced from the war artists’ record of the part played by Canada, as executed under the direction of the Canadian War Records Office in London.18 Jonathan Vance considers the pictures ‘entirely traditional’, as well as illustrating a ‘view of the war that was already deeply ingrained in the education system’.19 His argument is that Canada remembered the First World War by emphasizing traditional values, continuity and the positive results of the war experience. The rhetoric of the IODE lends support to this argument. The IODE’s ambition was that the pictures would constantly remind Canadian children of ‘the heroic deeds of the men and women, whose sacrifices saved the Empire and its cherished institutions’.20 Individual chapters raised money to purchase the pictures, which were centrally ordered through the IODE’s national education secretary. These pictures from the First World War were part of a broader vision that the IODE held for the Canadian nation, in which the experience and culture of Anglo-Celtic Canada would triumphantly dominate, blocking out other narratives and universalizing the experience and culture of Anglo-Celtic Canada. In that sense the pictures enforced the dominant culture, along the lines examined by Iris Marion Young – the denial of difference – and by Edward Said – the workings of imperialism.21 In addition to the First World War scenes, the collection of suitable representations included heroes and heroic deaths, such as The Death of Wolfe in the British conquest of Quebec by American artist Benjamin West. Writing on Canadian national dreams, Daniel Francis calls this picture ‘a monument to historical fabrication’.22 Indeed, in such collections French Canadian and aboriginal figures appeared only in support of myths of mainstream Anglo-Canadian identity. Nor was the construction of memory limited to visual representations. Books were purchased as part of the educational memorial, and the IODE intended to provide every school in Canada attended by children of foreign-born citizens with a full set of the ‘Daughters of the Empire Historical Library’, in the conviction that the foreign-born, unless appropriately educated, would threaten Canadian beliefs.23 Along with the pictures and books, the IODE offered illustrated lectures to the children of Canada on the history and geography of the Empire.24 Towards the end of the Second World War the IODE mapped out its Second War Memorial, by expanding activities in relation to the bursaries, the scholarships and the educational materials. To IODE members ‘there seemed no finer or more fitting way to honour the memory of those who gave their lives in the Second World War than in making possible a richer, more abundant way of life for their children’.25 Due to increased governmental intervention in areas of previous IODE initiative, such as grave marking and assistance with education for dependants of the war-dead, more importance was placed on general nation building and in the creation of collective memory. Among the Canadian public there was an even greater dissatisfaction with stone and mortar commemorations, and a call for useful memorials such as parks, hospitals, homes for the elderly and the wounded.26 In this same vein – the combining of innovations of the Second War Memorial with useful and nation-building memorials – was the extension of the IODE’s postgraduate scholarships. In Canada in general, the postwar years were a time of growth both in the universities and in the civil service, and well-qualified people were in demand. With the State offering basic educational assistance, such as allowances for dependants of the war-dead, the IODE focused on useful projects that aimed to ensure that postwar Canada would have a supply of highly educated citizens able to serve Canada both locally and on the world stage. The War Memorial Scholarships were supported by a Canada-wide endowment fund. A large fundraising campaign was undertaken by chapters throughout the provinces. As distinct from the bursaries, which were based largely upon need, scholarships were awarded for academic excellence, and the primary concern was to select the most able and promising available graduates of Canadian universities. They were offered ‘with quiet pride’ as ‘a tribute to those who envisioned a better world, a peaceful homeland and [who] were willing to take up the struggle to ensure its future’.27 The scholarships were distributed evenly among the provinces for postgraduate study in the ‘mother country’.28 Table 6.1 shows the distribution by sex and province. The IODE sought individuals who could be further trained in the ways of useful citizenship, and it considered that British universities could provide an education superior to that available in Canada. This is not to say that Canada was not proud of its own universities. Indeed, during the 1928 Schoolgirl Tour, McGill, Queen’s and Toronto Universities had been showcased. Yet, along with other countries in the British Commonwealth, Anglo-Canada looked up to educational opportunities offered in Britain. The committee of selection for the War Memorial Scholarships was instructed by the IODE National Chapter to prefer, other things being equal, a ‘returned man’ or an immediate relative of a man who served in the war,29 and this was apparent in the large share of scholarships awarded to individuals with relatives who were killed or permanently disabled on overseas service: of the 115 First War Memorial Scholars, 28 had fathers who served, 14 had brothers who served and 45 themselves served in either the First or the Second World War – those serving during the Second World War had their First War Memorial awards deferred until after the war in order for them to join the war effort.30 Scholarships designated for returned soldiers potentially discriminated against women. The IODE, however, actively supported education for women, as well as the presence of women in politics and non-traditional occupations. As table 6.1 shows, in the First War Memorial, 23.5 per cent of the recipients were women. Considering the lower participation rates of females pursuing graduate degrees at the time, this was quite an achievement, and it can be asserted that the IODE effectively contributed to getting women into positions traditionally associated with masculine power and influence. The acceptance of diversity in the selection of War Memorial Scholars was more contentious. Focusing on educational forms of memorial allowed the officially non-denominational IODE to instigate a project that allowed for religious differences. This explains in part why the IODE was a leader in the trend towards practical expressions of memorial during the early part of the century. But as the IODE was in fact an overwhelmingly Protestant organization, its claim to non-denominational status masked real biases. Trouble arose in 1925 in Prince Edward Island when the religion of a candidate came up for discussion. One member complained that it was not fair that IODE money should go to educate nuns and priests, whereupon National Education Secretary Wilhelmina Gordon warned the Island members to settle their differences swiftly, or risk having their local control over selection taken away.31 In practice, the selection process allowed ample scope for the screening out of candidates of difference, since it involved subjective judgements about the character and good citizenship of applicants. Local committees were comprised of IODE members and university professors. The selection process reflected the Anglo-Celtic membership of the committees as well as the Anglo-Celtic make-up of Canadian university students. The majority of names that appear in the record of War Memorial Scholars are Anglo-Celtic, which is hardly surprising; but the ethnicity of recipients changed over the years and, little by little, more Canadians of non-Anglo-Celtic backgrounds were awarded scholarships. There was a perception here that such students had assimilated the values of Canadian citizenship, meeting the requirements of the Anglo-mainstream educational narrative. # Imperial knowledge and colonial identity By modelling the War Memorial Scholarship on the Rhodes Scholarship, and by sending Canadian graduates to British universities, the IODE expressed a firm colonial agenda.32 Consistent with a sense of Canada that was derived from Britain, the IODE First War Memorial Scholarships encouraged study at the centre of the Empire so that students would return to the periphery imbued with imperial ways. The topics studied reflected the IODE’s agenda.33 Scholars were to study topics of history and economy of relevance to the British Empire. The First War Memorial Scholars were concentrated in four institutions. As table 6.2 shows, 92 per cent went to London, Oxford or Cambridge University, and the London School of Economics, 5 per cent going to Edinburgh. In 1925, War Memorial Scholar James Stuart Martell responded to Gordon’s question about the value of studying in Britain: The IODE student in Britain should, and I think does, return to Canada with a truer understanding of the British people, a wider conception of the World Empire, and a clearer vision of Canada as a nation rather than a particular province. Absence from one’s country is usually conducive to patriotism and the Canadian who returns to Canada after a year or so abroad is often a truer Canadian than when he left.34 This was what the IODE wanted to hear. Martell went on to complete a PhD at London University, and then returned to Halifax, Nova Scotia, where he worked in the public archives and gave occasional lectures in schools. Unfortunately, he died in 1946, only a decade after his return.35 There was much working-through to be done in the early years of the War Memorial Scholarships. Until 1926, due to a lack of money, the funding for scholars was awarded to provinces in alternate years. The inferior status accorded by British universities to Canadian degrees created problems, because Canadian students in Britain were often required to complete a gruelling qualifying year and IODE support was only for one year. Many returned to Canada not with a postgraduate degree but with a diploma or a second Bachelor’s degree. As Alberta’s first War Memorial Scholar (in 1924) recalled, seventy years later: London University didn’t recognize an Alberta BA, so I had to take the last year of their BA course, which meant British history from year one, and I had to write the finals, all of the finals – except that they excused me the language ones, Latin and Anglo-Saxon – [but I had to do] all the rest of them, and that meant hours and hours and hours of lectures in addition to working on a thesis. And I chose the thesis of [The] Evolution of Indian-Native Policy. So I had lectures at Bedford College, and I was registered at King’s College in the Strand, and I was at University College; and I did the postgraduate work at Bedford. I was doing research in the British Museum and taking lectures in the Mallot Building … Well, it was just for one [year] and you couldn’t re-apply for it. So I didn’t finish. I stayed on for a while because I still had family. I was born in Britain.36 The problem of scholars returning to Canada without a postgraduate degree was resolved in 1928, by making scholarships more easily renewable and recognizing that the students were victims of an imperial prestige that the IODE sought to perpetuate.37 The Alberta scholar’s choice of topic, native Indian policy, was an engagement with the study of Canada. This was a hope of the IODE, that scholars would apply British ideas to Canadian topics. The Memorial Scholarship programme continues to the present. It is often in connection with this programme that students looking to fund their postgraduate studies first come to hear about the IODE. Although the scholarships still exist as a memorial to past wars, the military service of the applicants themselves is now of less importance. This obviously makes demographic sense. Out of over 400 Second War Memorial Scholars to 1990, 18 men and 1 woman had been on active service during the Second World War, three men had served in peacetime, and a considerable number had been involved with war administration through work in government departments.38 IODE members repeatedly expressed concern that the selection criteria should not be structured to favour male relatives. In the 1950s they challenged the initial priority accorded to men,39 fearing that deserving women students would be overlooked in favour of male relatives who were also eligible for government rehabilitation programmes.40 By 1990 the share of scholarships awarded to women had risen to one-third (118 women out of a total of 40641), well above women’s national postgraduate participation rates. The IODE’s position on educating women is fascinating. During the 1920s prominent members who were themselves highly educated had been involved in the instigation of the War Memorial Scholarship. Mary Bollert, who was dean of women at the University of British Columbia and president of the CFUW from 1926 to 1928, Charlotte Whitton and Wilhelmina Gordon were all instrumental. The presence of educated women among the IODE’s membership meant that ideas about the education of women which were real concerns of the CFUW during the 1920s were influential in the IODE’s work.42 Yet, overall, for the IODE patriotism came first, and the scholarships were memorials that favoured returned servicemen and topics in line with an ‘imperial curriculum’43 of a kind with the narratives present in the IODE’s war memorial pictures and with traditional history, politics, science and medicine. This is to say that the IODE believed in equality between men and women in education, but at the same time had greater faith in the establishment of the educational system than it did in a group such as the CFUW. CFUW was dedicated to improving the position of women in all areas of the university, from students to academics. Geneva Misener, professor of classics at the University of Alberta, considered gifts and loans a practical way of helping women students into postgraduate education.44 In 1919 CFUW established a Women’s Travelling Scholarship, with a yearly value of$1,000, to be tenable in a British university.45 Interestingly, although CFUW had the feminist rhetoric, in action it was the IODE that quietly went about awarding War Memorial Scholarships to women. Although the IODE’s overarching justification was patriotic, and supportive of dominant constructions of Anglo-Canada, underneath there was a gutsy pro-woman element. By the 1950s, with an imperial curriculum that was losing its rigidity, members of the IODE were able to make stronger demands that men were not to be officially favoured over women.

As the British Empire was transformed into the Commonwealth,46 the postgraduate scholarship programme adjusted its vision. Whereas the scholarships were initially for topics on Empire history and economy, in 1972 the terms of reference were broadened to include ‘any subject vital to the interest of the Commonwealth’.47 The opportunity ceased to be a pilgrimage to Britain, and the scholarships became tenable in any Commonwealth country, to be used wherever the educational opportunities were of greatest utility to Canada. For the Second War Memorial Scholarships, the same four institutions, London, Cambridge and Oxford Universities, and the London School of Economics, still dominated, receiving over 60 per cent of the scholars, but there was an increasing diversity in the institutions attended by the scholars, with over fifty-five universities in Britain attended up to 1990. The increasing number of scholarships used within Canada signalled a more positive appraisal of the Canadian education system. The University of Toronto received 6 per cent (twenty-three) of the Second War Memorial Scholars. Queen’s and McGill Universities, along with the University of Toronto, arguably the more ‘established’ of the Canada’s universities, received the next highest numbers.48 Through the 1960s, the number of Canadian universities attended by recipients increased. This process mirrored the diversification in the British universities that scholars attended during the 1950s. Such diversification was a further sign of the rejection of a narrow colonial knowledge.

It was the unabashed hope of the IODE that its scholars should become the ‘makers of Canada’.49 It was hoped that they would return home after their studies to become active Canadian citizens. Where possible, the IODE formed networks to find employment suitable for these scholars. Such networks also served to warn against those scholars who did not live up to expectations. Wilhelmina Gordon was not slow to send letters if she thought that unfavourable information about scholars should be made known. In 1931 she wrote to the principal of Manitoba College in Winnipeg, warning him that a candidate for a post at the college was known to have been in debt during his time in Edinburgh, a debt which the IODE had covered for him, and that he had a problem with drink.50

Overall, however, praise was heaped upon the IODE War Memorial Scholars, and they have indeed assumed posts of responsibility and leadership in all parts of Canada. Their number includes cabinet ministers, a former speaker of the House, ambassadors to Spain, Morocco and New Zealand, a Canadian trade commissioner in Hong Kong, doctors, psychiatrists, clergymen, lawyers, chief reporters and war correspondents with the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, and newspaper editors, geographers, historians, archivists, chemists, and others in many facets of industry.51 The largest number (approximately one-third), have, however, followed careers in higher education. On the surface, these scholars can be perceived as having beautifully fulfilled the ambitions of the IODE. By educating yet other generations in the ways of citizenship, they represent the ultimate in perpetuating the memory and ideal of Canada which the IODE feels it has had a hand in creating. Of course, the IODE has no control over the beliefs of recipients or the direction of their thoughts after receiving a scholarship. Interestingly, some scholars have produced work that critiques the very values espoused by the IODE. This has not become an issue for the IODE, which appears happy to claim some of the credit for scholars in prominent positions, and to leave their politics alone.

The IODE was founded during times of war, and we have seen how the IODE has remembered and enshrined the virtues of Canadian identity through its initiatives during the twentieth century in the memorialization of war. The IODE’s War Memorials attempted to ensure a sense of the past and to influence the future people and place of Canada. While emphasizing continuity and tradition in ideology, in practice initiative and innovation have been the order of the day. The IODE has been a step, or even a war, ahead of both the British and the Canadian government in its grave-marking scheme and its bursaries for dependants of the war-dead/veterans and its postgraduate scholarships. It has been skilfully effective in its undertakings, from its gendered position in caring for children through to knowing how to make the most of privileged connections. The subjects, the places of study and the recipients of War Memorial Scholarships all represent the changing production of Canadian identity, demonstrating the transition from mimicking an imperial centre to its standing alone as a nation centered in Canadian space. The IODE has known how to utilize education and encourage young minds to perpetuate imperial and national ideology based upon memorialization.

Notes

1 James Fentress and Chris Wickham, Social Memory (Oxford and Cambridge, MA: Blackwell, 1992), 25.
2 See Raphael Samuel, Theatres of Memory, vol. 1: Past and Present in Contemporary Culture (London and New York: Verso, 1994).
3 See Katie Pickles, ‘Edith Cavell – heroine. No hatred or bitterness for anyone?’, History Now, 3: 2 (1997), 1–8.
4 See Paul Fussell, The Great War and Modern Memory (Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 1975); and Jay Winter, Sites of Memory, Sites of Mourning: The Great War in European Cultural History (Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 1995).
5 McClintock, Imperial Leather, 357. See also Marina Warner, Monuments and Maidens: The Allegory of the Female Form (New York: Atheneum, 1985).
6 For a treatment of memorials in Canada, see Brian S. Osborne, ‘Canadian nation building: a monumental approach to landscapes of power’, Paper presented at the 9th International Conference of Historical Geographers’ pre-conference symposium, ‘Landscape and identity’, 28–30 June 1995, Garden Hotel, Singapore.
7 Robert Shipley, To Mark Our Place: A History of Canadian War Memorials (Toronto: NC Press Limited, 1987).
8 Jonathan Vance, Death So Noble: Memory, Meaning, and the First World War (Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 1997), 208.
9 LPSC, F5012 1934 I34 booklet, The Imperial Order Daughters of the Empire: Chapters of the Order (Ottawa, 1934), 47.
10 Ibid., 51.
11 Queen’s University Archives (hereafter QUA), Wilhelmina Gordon Collection, Box 4/13 IODE correspondence; NAC RG38, 358. In its 1919 Pension Act the Government of Canada allowed for the continuation to the age of 21 for a child taking a course of instruction.
12 QUA, Wilhelmina Gordon Collection, Box 4/13, IODE correspondence. Dr W. Gordon, ‘The First War Memorial: a brief account of its early history’ (1954), 1.
13 Desmond Morton and Glenn Wright, Winning the Second Battle: Canadian Veterans and the Return to Civilian Life 1915–1930 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1987), 53.
14 IODE, Record of the Post Graduate Scholarship Holders for the Years 1945–1990 of the First and Second War Memorials Instituted by the National Chapter of Canada IODE (1990), Foreword.
15 See Michael Heffernan, ‘For ever England: the Western Front and the politics of remembrance in Britain’, Ecumene, 2: 3 (1995), 293–323.
16 NAC MG28 I 17, 23, IODE, Open letter to the Regent, officers and members, Toronto 15 September 1919. Signed Annie Bethany McDougald, Laura J. Thompson, Constance J. Laing, all of the national press and publicity committee.
17 LPSC, LP F5012 1945 I34, ‘The Imperial Order Daughters of the Empire – what it is and what it does’, 10.
18 QUA, Wilhelmina Gordon Collection, Box 4/13, Misc. 1919–1950s.
19 Vance, Death So Noble, 240 and 241.
20 NAC MG28 I 17, 23, 8, ‘War Memorial Fund 1919’.
21 See Iris Marion Young, Justice and the Politics of Difference (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1990); and Said, Culture and Imperialism.
22 Daniel Francis, National Dreams: Myth, Memory, and Canadian History (Vancouver: Arsenal Press, 1997), 20.
23 QUA, Wilhelmina Gordon Collection, Box 5/13, pamphlet concerning canadianization.
24 Details of this part of the War Memorial were introduced in chapter three.
25 May Kertland, IODE. The Third Twenty-Five Years (Toronto: G. Best Publishing, 1975), 62. Over the years 1950–65, 293 bursaries were awarded to the value of about $0.5 million. 26 Arnold Whittick, War Memorials (London: Country Life Ltd, 1946), 1. 27 Foreword, by Cecilia Furness, national officer and War Memorial secretary, to IODE, Record of the Post-Graduate Scholarship Holders for the Years 1945–1990. 28 IODE, Record of the Post-Graduate Scholarship Holders for the First Twenty Years of the First War Memorial Instituted by the National Chapter of Canada (1945). 29 QUA, Wilhelmina Gordon Collection, Box 4/13, 21.7.20, 2, letter from Gordon to Miss Laing. 30 Record of the Post-Graduate Scholarship Holders for the First Twenty Years of the First War Memorial. 31 QUA, Wilhelmina Gordon Collection, Box 4/13, File M, 1924–26, 18 April 1925, letter to Gordon from Hazel MacMillan, convener of the Prince Edward Island War Memorial committee, 9 May 1925. Correspondence from Gordon to MacMillan. 32 Ibid., IODE, 10 August 1920, Prospect and retrospect, Toronto: IODE national educational committee, 5. 33 For a contemporary general discussion, see J. A. Mangan (ed.), The Imperial Curriculum: Racial Images and Education in the British Colonial Experience (London and New York: Routledge, 1993). 34 QUA, Wilhelmina Gordon Collection, Box 4/13, 26 March 1935, letter from James Stuart Martell in response to questions that Gordon had put to students concerning the benefits of overseas study. 35 IODE, Record of the Post-Graduate Scholarship Holders (1990). 36 Interview, 27 April 1994: Edmonton, Alberta. The interviewee was an IODE Memorial Scholar in 1924. 37 QUA, Wilhelmina Gordon Collection, Box 4/13, File on bursary holders 1924–27, 18 May 1926. The Provincial Chapter of British Columbia passed a resolution that scholars in Britain needed two years to attain a degree, and the nine annual postgraduate Scholarships would be made biennial and of$2,800 in value.
38 IODE, Record of the Post-Graduate Scholarship Holders (1990).
39 NAC MG28 I 17, 11, 30 May 1952, Minutes of a meeting of the War Memorial committee to deal with First War Memorial business at Niagara Falls. ‘The question was raised as to whether there was a tendency to award the Post-Graduate Scholarship to the candidate who had seen military service in World War II, on the grounds of sentiment, rather than to the candidate who scholastically showed the most promise.’
40 Morton and Wright, Winning the Second Battle.
41 IODE, Record of the Post-Graduate Scholarship Holders (1990).
42 See Katie Pickles, ‘Colonial counterparts’.
43 See Mangan, The Imperial Curriculum, chapter five, for discussion of the imperial curriculum.
44 NAC MG28 I 196, vol. 31, Chronicle, 1931–34.
45 NAC MG28 I 196, Minutes of CFUW 1919 meeting.
46 See W. David McIntyre, The Commonwealth of Nations: Origins and Impact, 1869–1971 (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1977).
47 Kertland, IODE. The Third Twenty-Five Years, 62.
48 IODE, Record of the Post-Graduate Scholarship Holders (1990).
49 Mrs Detwiler in Foreword to IODE, Record of the Post-Graduate Scholarship Holders for the First Twenty Years of the First War Memorial (1945), 2.
50 QUA, Wilhelmina Gordon Collection, Box 4/13, Correspondence 1930–31, 6 March 1931, letter to Principal MacKay, Manitoba College.
51 Kertland, IODE. The Third Twenty-Five Years, 63.

# Female imperialism and national identity

## Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 527 40 3