2. See Turner, Frank M., “The Victorian Crisis of Faith and the Faith That was Lost,” Victorian Faith in Crisis, ed. Helmstadter, Richard J. and Bernard, Lightman (Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 1990)Google Scholar, Jeffrey, Cox, The English Churches in a Secular Society: Lambeth, 1870–1930 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1982)Google Scholar, Herbert, Schlossberg, The Silent Revolution and the Making of Victorian England (Columbus: Ohio State University, 2000)Google Scholar, Hugh, Mcleod, Religion and Irreligion in Victorian England: How Secular was the Working Class? (Bangor: Headstart History, 1993), 28–32Google Scholar, and Mark, Smith, Religion in Industrial Society: Oldham and Saddleworth, 1740–1865 (Oxford: Clarendon, 1994).Google Scholar

3. Deborah Elaine, Wiggins, The Burial Acts: Cemetery Reform in Great Britain (Ph.D. diss., Texas Tech University, 1991), abstract in Dissertation Abstracts International 52/05A (1991): 1867.Google Scholar

4. Albert, Marrin, The Last Crusade: The Church of England in the First World War (Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press, 1974), 10–11.Google Scholar

5. Robert, Colls “Englisimess and the Political Culture” in Robert, Coils and Philip, Dodd, eds. Englishness: Politics and Culture: 1880–1920 (London: Croom Helm, 1986), 50.Google Scholar

6. Ibid. This Soft View, as opposed to the “Hard View,” which tried to maintain and extend nineteenth-century British colonialism abroad, sought to guarantee “the freedom, diversity, and continuity” of nineteenth-century English Imperialism in the United Kingdom. The Hard View and the Soft View worked together to guarantee English dominance over others.

7. Ibid., 7.

8. Albert, Marrin, “The Coming of the Great War,” The Last CrusadeGoogle Scholar. See Hynes, Samuel, “Homefront Wars,” A War Imagined: The First World War and English Culture (New York: Atheneum, 1991)Google Scholar and Thomas Jefferson, Jackson Lears, No Place of Grace (New York: Pantheon Books, 1981.Google Scholar

9. Graham, Dawson, Soldier Heroes: British Adventure, Empire and the Imagining of Masculinities (London: Routledge, 1994).Google Scholar

10. Preben, Kaarsholm, “Kipling and Masculinity,” in Patriotism: The Making and Unmaking of British National Identity vol. 3, ed. by Raphael, Samuel. (London: Routledge, 1989). Kaarsholm wrote, “No figure epitomises the impact of imperialism on British culture like Rudyard Kipling. And no writer was probably ever more the prisoner and victim of his period than he.” 225.Google Scholar

11. See Graham, Dawson, Soldier HeroesGoogle Scholar. See also Anne, Summers, “Edwardian Militarism,” in Patriotism: The Making and Unmaking of British National Identity, vol. 3, ed. by Raphael, Samuel (London: Routledge, 1989). According to Summers, popular British militarism was developed in the nineteenth century and Protestantism fueled the flames through messages of masculinity and the so-called “White Man's Burden,” which also became manifest in World War I. One of the main organizations was the National Service League, which was promilitarism even in youth culture.Google Scholar

12. Mosse, George L., Fallen Soldiers: Reshaping the Memory of the World Wars (New York: Oxford University Press, 1990)Google Scholar. See also Mosse, George L., The Nationalization of the Masses: Political Symbolism and Mass Movements in Germany from the Napoleonic Wars through the Third Reich (New York: Howard Fertig, 1973)Google Scholar and Mosse, George L., Nationalism and Sexuality: Respectability and Abnormal Sexuality in Modern Europe (New York: Howard Fertig, 1985)Google Scholar. See also Paul, Fussell, “Myth, Ritual, and Romance,” The Great War and Modern Memory (New York: Oxford University Press, 1975). Fussell looks at the Great War to examine how the war generated new myths through literature and memory. This literature placed a new importance on myth and romance that contributed to British national culture.Google Scholar

13. Mosse, George L., Fallen Soldier, 61.Google Scholar

14. Susan, Grayzel, Women's Identities at War: Gender, Motherhood, and Politics in Britain and France during the First World War (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1999), 189Google Scholar. Also see Angela, Woollacott, On Her Their Lives Depend: Munitions Workers in the Great War (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1994).Google Scholar

15. See Albert, Marrin, The Last Crusade.Google Scholar

16. Oakeley, Hilda D., “German Thought: The Real Conflict,” Church Quarterly Review 79 (10 1914–01 1915): 96–7.Google Scholar

17. Ibid.

18. See Samuel, Hynes, A War Imagined: The First World War and English Culture (New York: Atheneum, 1991).Google Scholar

19. Ibid.

20. Samuel, Hynes, A War Imagined, 65.Google Scholar

21. Oakeley, Hilda D., “German Thought,” 99.Google Scholar

22. Ibid., 114.

23. Friedrich von, Hugel, “Christianity in the Face of War: Its Strength and Difficulty,” Church Quarterly Review 79 (10 1914–01 1915): 275.Google Scholar

24. Ibid., 278.

25. Ibid., 283.

26. Hensley, Henson, “Christianity and War,” Church Quarterly Review 79 (10 1914–01 1915): 120Google Scholar. For a biography of Henson see Owen, Chadwick'sHensley Henson (Oxford: Clarendon, 1983). Henson was a maverick in the Church of England, a modernist who cherished reason. Extremely talented as a preacher, viewed with suspicion by Archbishop Davidson, later cherished by Prime Minister David Lloyd George, Henson proved a conundrum. He was an intense militarist who chastised Archbishop Davidson for gaining exemption from conscription for Anglican clerics yet preached about the greatness of Germany while criticizing the government's treatment of conscientious objectors. He disliked the initial increase in church attendance brought on by the war because he believed such circumstances produced fanaticism, cultism, and mysticism while limiting reason, yet grew depressed when his Durham congregation later dwindled. Chadwick argues Henson also vehemently supported the Church of England as the State Church of the nation and fought to keep the church's status in the postwar period.Google Scholar

27. Ibid., 121.

28. Albert, Marrin, The Last Crusade, 147.Google Scholar

29. Elizabeth, Wordsworth, “The English Church and the English Character,” Church Quarterly Review 80 (04 1915–07 1915): 159–7.Google Scholar

30. Ibid., 162.

31. Ibid., 179.

32. Ibid., 165.

33. Elizabeth, Wordsworth, “Woman and the War,” Church Quarterly Review 80 (04 1915 and 07 1915): 73.Google Scholar

34. Ibid., 170

35. Ibid., 33–34.

36. See Graham, Dawson, Soldier HeroesGoogle Scholar and Bet-El, Ilana R., “Men and Soldiers: British Conscripts, Concepts of Masculinity, and the Great War,” Borderlines: Gender and Identities in War and Peace, 1870–1930, ed. by Billie, Melman. (New York: Routledge, 1998).Google Scholar

37. Arthur, Marwick, The Deluge: British Society and the First World War (Cambridge: Polity, 1985), 77Google Scholar. Trevor, Wilson, The Myriad Faces of War: Britain and the Great War, 1914–1918 (London: Edward Arnold, 1989), 180–82Google Scholar. The Derby Scheme allowed the government to identify eligible men for fighting from the National Register. Once men were identified, authorities approached them and asked each to “affirm his willingness to accept military service when called upon to do so.” Only men involved in “essential work” were excluded. The hope behind this strategy was that government would not have to expend valuable time recruiting volunteers from its population. In turn this would help men postpone enlistment as it guaranteed that people in the scheme would not immediately be called up for service. See also John, Bourne, Britain and the Great War, 1914–1918 (London: Edward Arnold, 1989).Google Scholar

38. Samuel, Hynes, A War Imagined, 101.Google Scholar

39. Arthur, Marwick, The Deluge, 80.Google Scholar

40. See John, Williams, The Other Battleground: Home Fronts, Britain, France, and Germany, 1914–1918 (Chicago: Henry Regnery, 1972).Google Scholar

41. Lichfield, J. A., “National Mission of Repentance and Hope,” Church Quarterly Review 82 (04 1916–07 1916): 37.Google Scholar

42. Ibid., 39.

43. Ibid., 42.

44. Headlam, Arthur C., “The National Mission: Where does the Defect of the Church Lie?” Church Quarterly Review 83 (10 1916–01 1917): 5.Google Scholar

45. Ibid., 6.

46. Ibid.

47. Denis, Crane, “Can the Church Bring England Back to God?” The Quiver 51 (09 1916): 967–71, quote on 968.Google Scholar

48. Ibid.

49. Ibid., 971. Media such as the cinema could extend the church's influence to those who read little or not at all.

50. Albert, Marrin, The Last Crusade, 210.Google Scholar

51. Devries, Jacqueline R., “Challenging Traditions: Denominational Feminism in Britain, 1910–1920,” Borderlines: Gender and Identities in War and Peace, 1870–1930 ed. by Billie, Melman (New York: Routledge, 1998)Google Scholar. DeVries argues the National Mission of Repentance and Hope gave women more status in official ecclesiastical affairs.

52. Graham, Dawson, Soldier Heroes.Google Scholar

53. Bet-El, Ilana R., “Men and Soldiers: British Conscripts, Concepts of Masculinity, and the Great War,” 73.Google Scholar

54. Bruce, LincolnDiscourse and the Construction of Society (New York: Oxford University Press, 1989), 25–26Google Scholar. See also Roy, Porter, ed., Myths of the English (Cambridge, England: Polity, 1992).Google Scholar

55. For an example of authenticity and authority in the historical process see Breen, T. H. and Timothy, Hall, “Structuring Provincial Imagination: The Rhetoric and Experience in Eighteenth-Century New England,” American Historical Review 103 (12 1998): 1411–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

56. See Mark, Girouard, “The Great War,“ The Return to Camelot: Chivalry and the English Gentleman (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1981). Girouard argues mythology became meaningful in many arenas of British society during the war.Google Scholar

57. Wendy, Doniger, “Minimyths and Maximyths and Political Points of View,” in Patton, Laurie L. and Wendy, Doniger, eds., Myth and Method (Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 1996), 119.Google Scholar

58. Charles, Brown, “The Modern Call to Knighthood,” Quiver 51 (05 1916): 653–54.Google Scholar

59. Jones, J. D., “Sir Galahad,” Quiver 51 (05 1916): 661–63.Google Scholar

60. Benson, A. C., “St. George,” The Quiver 51 (05 1916): 611–12Google Scholar. St. George ventured to Africa to spread the Gospel of Jesus Christ. While in Africa, he came across a tribe that perpetually offered young maidens as a sacrifice to a fire-breathing dragon. If the tribe could not produce a sacrifice to the dragon, it would destroy the tribe's village. St. George volunteered to fight the dragon and succeeded in slaying it. A. C. Benson was part of the “‘Edwardian’ literary establishment” as Samuel Hynes described him. Benson was summoned to the Department of Information, a government sanctioned propaganda office, by its head C. F. G. Masterman early in the war. Interestingly, this bit of information identifies Benson as part of the official British propaganda machine and his article in The Quiver should be seen as both church literature and government propaganda. Samuel, Hynes, A War Imagined, 26.Google Scholar

61. Ibid., 614. This message also included women. Mythological feminine figures further highlighted the moral righteousness of Britain. Men dominated as symbols of chivalric British soldiers, but women in mythology also symbolized a sense of chivalry, Christianity, and British nationalism. Numerous depictions of the “Angels of Mons” show apparitions of female angels guiding and defending Britain's finest in time of battle. There were several variations on this theme. Women carried the moral righteousness to the soldiers from God and were responsible to maintain and distribute that integrity. The male roles were to defend the nation against evil, but they gained that right to fight from divine intervention, which was delivered through virtuous women. Women in mythology typified anti-modernism; a spirit of purity and virtue, based in faith not science, that delivered to men the moral legitimacy to fight against immorality. But the image also commented on domestic immorality, as John Williams's The Other Battleground points out, large numbers of civilians trying to escape the spirit of war indulged in sex, alcohol, and gambling. As a response, the Church relied on Victorian feminine morality through mythological symbols to promote traditional gender identities rather than modern ones.

62. Advertisement, “Monkey Brand,” The Quiver 51 (July 1916): xxiii.Google Scholar

63. Anne, McClintock, “Soft-Soaping Empire: Commodity Racism and Imperial Advertising,” Imperial Leather: Race, Gender, and Sexuality in the Colonial Contest (New York: Routledge, 1995), 211.Google Scholar

65. “Our Young People's Pages,” The Quiver 51 (August 1916): 928.Google Scholar

66. Ibid.

67. John, Williams, The Other BattlegroundGoogle Scholar; Boume, John M., Britain, 230, 202, 231.Google Scholar

68. Anne, Summer, “Edwardian Militarism,” in Raphael, Samuel ed. Patriotism: The Making and Unmaking of British National Identity (London: Routledge, 1989), 1: 254.Google Scholar