Words and women II: writing gender and identity in early 1915

women porter
Woman Porter on Neasden Underground station.© IWM (Q 72569). http://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/205184101

A marked feature of war (and comment on war) in early 1915 was, as Clark observes in the Words in War-Time archive, the labour shortage which arose following the departure of some two million men to the Front. Historically, this would be resolved, at least in part, by a range of changing opportunities for women to enter the workforce. In terms of language, as the Words in War-Time archive documents, this would, however, bring opportunities of a different kind – generating constructions which, in various ways, reflected women’s increasingly visibility outside the home. By March 1915, there were some ’10,000 Women War Workers’, the Daily Express recorded. Language and the women war worker, as Clark realised, offered yet another fertile domain of enquiry in his attempt to fuse historical principles with the documentation of on-going change.

War worker, as the modern OED confirms, is itself an interesting creation of WWI. Given as a coinage of 1915, war worker remains deeply expressive of the ways in which combatants and non-combatants were yoked together in the enterprise of war. War effort could be expended at home, while effort (and endeavour) of a different kind were demanded on the battle field. While women war worker, alongside other related coinages, did not appear in the OED, the Words in War-Time archive yields some very interesting results in this respect. Even in December 1914, Clark was, for example, carefully noting down airwomen, here in relation to the Russian Military. The Princess Shakovsky ‘has been permitted to join General Ruzsky’s staff as a military airwoman’, as the Scotsman recorded on December 2nd 1914.**

The novelty of such transferred roles under the exigencies of war would, in fact, generate plentiful evidence of relevant words. Agent nouns such as porter were, for example, formally unmarked in terms of gender – but their use, and meaning, had  traditionally been constrained by underlying assumptions of male as norm. For the Star, for example, change in this respect was, in another telling combination, made to constitute a war phenonomen in its own right. Here the move from  from porter to woman porter is described in ways which extol female willingness to ‘do their bit’ even as a certain surprise is  evoked at women’s successful adaptation to the roles now being extended to them.

Another war phenomenon has appeared in the person of the women who understands time-tables. She does not speak of ten minutes past twelve, but of 12.10 with all the glibness of an accustomed traveller. She does not come panting on to the platform one minute after the train has gone, nor stand helpless amid a pile of luggage. If she is surrounded by luggage it is not her own, and she is far from helpless, for she is the new woman porter who has sprung into existence at Marylebone.

Traditional gender stereotyping – and its discriminatory overtones — could, as this suggests, both be challenged, and reinforced, in this respect. Woman porter, as other evidence in the archive proves, would by no means be an isolated example of this form. A similar article in the Daily Express, also from April 1915, celebrates the endeavours of the porters in petticoats for whom changed social roles – and sustained femininity – are made to unite.

As other news articles in the archive confirm, such shifts, and the overt gender marking which relevant forms acquired, formed a significant part of what was seen as war change – the transformative effects of war on ordinary life. Women carriage cleaners are recorded in the Daily Express in April 1915, railway women in the Evening Standard on April 7th 1915, and women air mechanics in the Scotsman (even if these are, in reality, French rather than English)

Women mechanics have proved very successful. A great number of them, having been employed in motor or engineering shops practically from girlhood, have become quite clever as turners or in the manipulation of machinery. They are found to be regular at their work and persevering and do not waste time. (Scotsman, 15th April 1915)

The Evening News even began its own collection of these changing images of identity:

Within the last few weeks we have had the girl district messenger, the lift-girl at Harrod’s, the girl ticket collector at Paddington, the girl in the newspaper stall on the Piccadilly Tube …’. (Evening News, 28th April 1915)

Evidence in the modern OED, we might note, can remain distinctly at odds – lift-boy, for example, is the sole form it records. Lift-girls do not appear. ‘Lift-boys always have aged mothers’, and ‘Chauffeurs, waiters, lift-boys…they are the operators’ states the accompanying evidence, in citations from 1904 and 1967. The Words in War-Time archive will therefore often tell a somewhat different story  – tracking the changes by which gender and identity were represented and recorded in response to the social and economic pressures of the war years.

By May 1915, the Daily Express was even extolling the advent of the ‘the First Call Girl’ – a form which is, however, perhaps likely to be read with raised eye-brows when read outside the immediate context of war – and the register of the theatre on which it depends. As the OED confirms, a call-boy, is ‘a youth employed (in a theatre) to attend upon the prompter, and call the actors when required on the stage’.  Call-girl in the OED has very different resonances (call-girl (orig. U.S.), ‘a prostitute who makes appointments by telephone’, being dated to 1940 with the evidence ‘Call Girls Die Young’). The call-girl of 1915 instead epitomises other aspects of war change. ‘Innovation at Shaftesbury Theatre’, as the Daily Express proclaimed.

 Tovey, the call-boy at the Shaftesbury Theatre, has joined the Army as a trumpeter, and Mary Powell, who is only fourteen, has taken his place. She has the distinction of being the first call-girl in the world. (Daily Express, Fri 28th May 1915)

Some apparently transgressive forms can nevertheless be produced by the combination of changing social role and overt gender marking, as in the girl page-boy which the Daily Express records on May 11 1915:

The girl “page-boy” is the latest outcome of the shortage of labour owing to the war. She has made her appearance, neatly uniformed, in the service of a leading Harrogate hotel, and meets guest on their arrival at the railway station

Perhaps especially interesting in early 1915 is, however, the diction of the war woman. ‘The manner in which war is affecting the character of woman is a matter of vast importance’, the Daily Express commented. The war woman who appeared, for example, in the title of a series by Miss Lorette Aldous, linked what was described as ‘real history’ (located in the female experience of war, on both Home and Western Front) with  ‘a modern woman’s ambition and revolt’. Like her antecedent the new women, the war woman is thereby rendered interestingly transgressive; if she emblematises modernity by means of her confidence  in taking on new activities in the public realm, she is potentially dangerous too, offering dissent, discontent, as well as ambition. As later posts will explore, such conflicted images can remain in evidence across the remaining years of war, as well as in its aftermath when women, no longer required to ‘do their bit’, were expected to retreat, invisibly, into the life of the home.

** Revision of the OED in March 2008 traced usage of airwoman to 1910. No evidence for the war years is provided, however, and a gap of 30 years intervenes in evidence after 1911. See airwoman, n.”. OED Online. December 2014. Oxford University Press. (accessed January 29, 2015).

Words, weapons, and WWI No.2: Woolly bears and whizz-bangs

By January 1915, Andrew Clark was by no means alone in his sense that language and war were intersecting in particularly fruitful ways. As an article in the Evening News, which Clark carefully extracted for the Words in War-Time archive, comments:

woolly bear
A woolly bear ? Explosion over a trench. Bibliothèque nationale de France @Public Domain marked.

The ingenuity of the British soldier in inventing picturesque names for the various engines of destruction brought to bear against him is well known, and with the development of new weapons the number of nicknames in use has been extended until they form a language which is most bewildering to a stranger.

The article was headed ‘Tommy’s Slanguage’ in ways which drew attention to the lexical creativity which already seemed particularly in evidence on the Western Front. Slanguage, a blend or portmanteau of slang and language, was — perhaps predictably — another form which drew Clark’s own attention, not least since, as he quickly established, it represented yet another absence in the relevant section of the OED (which had been published three years earlier, in September 1911). Slanguage was thus doubly valuable for the Words in War-Time project – as a word about words it had an obvious thematic pertinence. Moreover, as in Clark’s early emphasis on the kind of word-pictures which would be vital in reporting and recording war, slanguage was described in terms which drew attention to the visual and picturesque quality of the coinages which had, within the first months of war, already come into being.
Some elements of this changing discourse of war have already been discussed in earlier posts. In terms of weapons, Jack Johnsons and coal boxes, as the Evening News likewise observed, presented striking metaphors for what were, in other respects, terrifying ‘engines of destruction’. Continue reading

Language as disguise in WWI: the Trojan horse of words

Disguise has a long history in war. Whether in the Trojan Horse described by Homer, or in Baden-Powell’s various military deceptions in the second Boer War, it is clear that, where conflict is concerned, things are not always what they might seem. In WWI this would, of course, lead to the new domain of camouflage, another innovatory lexical use which is recorded by the Oxford English Dictionary from 1917: ‘The act of hiding anything from your enemy is termed ‘camouflage’, as the Daily Mail informed its readers  on 25th May 1917 . Camouflage — in principle and in practice — was, however, clearly already being described three years earlier, as an extract from the Star in the Words in Wartime archive is able to confirm:

In the matter of sniping the Germans, thorough as always, are well prepared. Some of their sharpshooters are armed with rifles having telescopic sights, and are equipped with small bullet-proof shields, the latter being painted in cubist patterns in futurist colours in order to obtain concealment by confusion [Star, Wed 16 December 1914  p.6],

In such early experiments, visual patterns act to conceal — and confuse. The identity of that which  is camouflaged is not easily apparent. Disguise can bring tactical advantage and perhaps resounding success.

Language, as the Words in War-Time archive reveals, can often be made to play a similar role, skewing presentations in one direction or another. As an earlier post has explored (**), compounds such as  lie-factory and fiction-factory can assume prominent roles in emphasizing  the duplicity of German propaganda and news reports (at least when seen through British eyes). Truth and falsehood can be strategic as well as moral antonyms, mobilised to claim the moral high ground or to undermine the enemy.

An article in the Daily Express, recorded in one of the early notebooks, provides a case in point. It was presumably included in the Words in War-Time collection because of its evident play with language as part of both attack and defence. As the article confirms, conflict can be a war of words in a surprising variety of ways. ‘”VE VOS VILTS”. GERMAN RUSE SPOILED BY A WELLERISM’, the title of the article states. It refers, in essence, to a ruse de guerre – here in another term for military trickery which was well-established in English from the mid-eighteenth century. Ruse, in the heading, is used in this special sense; a ruse de guerre, as the OED explains, is ‘A stratagem; esp. one intended to deceive an enemy in war. Hence: a justifiable trick or deception’.  Legitimate – and illegitimate – uses had been further elaborated by the Geneva Convention of 1907. While ambushes and unexpected attacks were indeed  sanctioned as justifaiblet, other actions – such as the ruse by which an enemy’s clothing might be assumed as part of military disguise – were not. It is this, at least in part, which is detailed here:

One of the most illuminating stories of a German ruse is told by a wounded non-commissioned regiment who had returned to Colchester..The front ranks of a German regiment which was advancing against a British position were dressed in uniforms taken from dead and wounded of the Wiltshire Regiment (Daily Express, September 29th 1914)

Yet the article turns not just on the appropriation of items of clothing, but on manifestations of voice too. If uniforms can be assumed with apparent ease, the native language can’t. Rendered visually identical to the remaining Wiltshires, the Germans initially advance unopposed. Only when they speak does the disguise slip; in the narrative of this encounter, language proves their downfall.

The British officer who saw them approach was suspicious, and as a precaution gave the order “Fix bayonets.” From the advancing ranks came a shout:

“Leedle mistake ! Ve vos not Shermans. Ve vos der Vilts.”

Here, the account, presented as a witness statement from a soldier convalescing at home,  makes effective use of both English and German language stereotypes. On one level, ‘Ve wos der Vilts’ plays on easily recognised images  of German infelicity in speaking English, and the /v/ /w/ confusion which often results. Yet, as the reference to  Wellerism in the title suggests, the Germans are also made to evoke other — and particulary British –stereotypes of identity. If they speak ‘English’, their representation hence draws on a wide-ranging tradition of cockney speakers such as Dickens’s boot-cleaner Sam Weller (from The Posthumous Papers of the Pickwick Club (1836)) whose v/w/ confusion had long been a touchstone for comedic effect, evoking laughter as well as lack of authority. ‘Two coves in vhite aprons – touches their hats ven you walk in’; ‘A vidower he vos, and fat enough for anything’. Goes through the archvay, thinking how he should inwest the money’, as Sam variously states  (all examples from Pickwick, Chapter 10).

For the Germans, linguistic disguise is therefore made to slip in a variety of ways – dressed like men from Wiltshire and self-identifying as such (‘der Vilts’), the Germans are instead represented as sounding like outdated  Victorian cockneys, with all the low status and comic connotations which such steretypes suggest. By the same token, they also, of course, confirm their true identity — by the early twentieth century, wellerisms of this kind are no longer in use, and language (‘Shermans’, ‘leedle’, as well as v/w ) swiftly gives the game away. As the wounded soldier (who recounts this history) comments in another manifestation of laconic trench humour — and marked understatement, ‘the Germans wilted’.

Other aspects of double meaning are, however, at work too in what is, in effect, a highly nuanced use of language within the reporting of war. Wellerisms, for example, had come to be associated not with just the spoken form of Sam Weller’s speech (and his enunciation of vos (was) and ven (when)), but instead, as the OED  confirms, primarily conveyed  the idea of ludicrous comparison, in what was, in fact,  another  marked characteristic of Sam Weller’s speech**. Here, as the event proved, the comparison was ludicrous indeed. German infelicities in speaking English provoke — at least with hindsight — comedy rather than fear. The serious threat is, quite literally, removed.  The Trojan horse fails, and the enemy is swiftly despatched. As in more recent events, humour proves an interesting weapon, delegitimizing ideas of power through particular tactics of representation.

While no new words are involved here, the article remains therefore of marked interest in the archive because of its reflexive play with words, as well as its consonance with a wider set of tropes (German dishonesty and cowardice, patriotic British defence) which appear in a wide range of other contexts across the years of war. It is, of course, not a direct transcription, nor — by the same token, can it be assumed to be mimetic. But it offers acts of representation in which language use is critical, in ways which effectively divide ‘them’ and ‘us’.

**See “Wellerism, n.”. OED Online. December 2014. Oxford University Press.  (accessed January 20, 2015. It is defined as:’An expression or form of speech used by or characteristic of the Dickens character Sam Weller or his father, Tony; (usually) spec. a kind of a proverbial expression in which a statement, such as a familiar saying or proverb, is given a humorous or ironic twist by being incongruously or punningly attributed to a particular speaker, typically in a specific situation’. A typical example is given from 1839   Boston Morning Post 9 Jan. 2/2   Wellerisms.—‘It does one’s heart good to look at you,’ as the fox said to the chickens, when he found he couldn’t get over the barn-yard wall, to eat them’.

Words, weapons, and WWI, No.I: Craters, Coal boxes and Jack Johnsons

crater
The Big Crater © IWM (Art.IWM ART 3001) http://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/20830

Words, as the Scotsman explored in September 1914, played a role which, in a range of ways, often moved outside the merely representative. As other posts on this site have explored, language in WWI can, of course, easily reveal changes in material culture or the gradual extension (or restriction) of meaning in response to particular events. Yet, as the Scotsman stressed, words, not least by strategic acts of renaming, could also be used to embody a stance of defiance and undaunted resistance, of opposition and deflected power. The range of familiar epithets which the German howitzer shells were to acquire across WWI offered an eloquent example. Coined in the trenches and widely seen as representative of the ‘slanguage’ which drew comment across the war years, the names and meanings  used in this respect would, at least verbally,  deliiberately undercut the power and intimidating effects of the missiles  launched against the Allied lines. As the Scotsman explained, for example, here just a few weeks into the war:

the British soldier is a difficult person to impress, or depress even, by immense shell filled with high explosive, which detonate with terrific violence, and form craters large enough to act as graves for five horses. The German howitzer shells are 8 to 9 inches in calibre, and on impact they send up columns of greasy black smoke (‘The German “Jack Johnsons”’, Scotsman 25 Sept 1914)

This passage contains a number of elements which were already highly resonant of time and place. Both crater and detonate, as Andrew Clark commented, drew on meanings which, if familiar across the autumn of 1914, had by no means been so before. A crater was an ‘excavation or cavity formed by the explosion of a mine; the funnel’ as the contemporary OED (in a section published in 1893) had explained, providing evidence from the Penny Cyclopaedia in 1839 (‘The dimensions of the crater or funnel formed by the explosion depend on the amount of the charge’; ‘The ratio between the diameter of the crater and the length of the line of least resistance’).** Yet, as in the extract from the Scotsman above, crater in WW1 would primarily signify the immense holes which shells made as they exploded. Meaning had moved on; encountering a convalescent sergeant on a train coming from Oxford in November 1914, Clark had been reliably informed that the larger shells created craters large enough to swallow a small cottage. The OED definition could seem particularly inadequate.
Detonate, as the Words in War-Time archive also confirms, presented other departures. In the OED as it then existed, detonate was a transitive verb meaning ‘To cause to explode with sudden loud report, in the act of chemical decomposition or combination’. This could seem equally out of place. ‘On Tuesday the enemy’s guns were active in the afternoon. It is believed that the bombardment was due to anger because two of our howitzer shells had detonated right in the enemy’s trenches, which was full of men’, as the Scotsman noted on Monday 12th October 1914. Surely detonate now meant ‘to explode’, Andrew Clark suggested alongside the range of extracts which he gathered up as relevant evidence of change.
Most significant, however, as the Scotsman article continued, was the disjunction which, in terms of language, came to be apparent between the ‘terrific violence’ of the howitzer shells – and the various verbal strategies which soldiers deployed in order to refer to them. They are, as it noted:

irreverently dubbed “coal boxes”, “Black Marias,” or “Jack Johnsons” by the soldiers. Men who take things in this spirit are, it seems, likely to throw out the calculations based on loss of moral so carefully framed by the German military philosophers.

Words, the Scotsman argued, could in such ways be seen as reflective of the wider psychology of war. Irreverence – and the deliberate mismatch of form and thing – could be precisely the point. As in the reassignment of howitzer shells to the diction of coal-boxes, a deliberate reductiveness (and diminution) was often at work. As the OED explained, a coal-box had hitherto been part of domestic diction, being used, as in Jonathan Swift’s Directions to Servants, to refer to a receptacle for coal as used within the home: ‘Leave a Payl of dirty Water, a Coal-box…and such other unsightly Things’, Swift had written in 1745. Relocated to WW1, the coal-boxes which assailed the Allies were deemed equally ‘unsightly’, not least in terms of their ‘greasy black smoke’ which shells of this kind emit upon impact. As another extract in the Words in War-Time archive confirms:

These German shells are 90lbs., and on account of their dense black smoke they have been christened “Coal Boxes.” Everyone says, “Mind the coal-box.” They do dreadful damage’’ (Evening News, 9 October 1914)

Such uses relied, in effect, on a form of metaphorical transfer; the soot emitted by domestic coal-boxes when the latter were placed roughly upon the ground is made comically analogous to the shells and their intentionally devastating effects. As in other aspects of trench slang, appellations of this kind are deliberately transgressive — confirming, too, a refusal to submit (quite literally) to German terms.
Jack Johnsons were similar. As the Evening News explained in January 1915, they denoted, in essence, larger types of the same weapon (‘The shells of the 8.27 in. and 11.2 in. howitzers are indiscriminately termed “Jack Johnsons,” “Black Marias,” and “Portmanteaux”’). In this instance, however, renaming drew on the American boxer who was the world heavyweight champion in 1914 – and whose punch was legendary. Here, too, however, visual analogy played a part; Johnson’s nickname was ‘The Big Smoke’ (the fact that Johnson was black was, as the Daily Express explained in a later extract in the archive, not entirely immaterial). As Adrian Gregory explains in a comment below, the fact that Johnson was scheduled in 1914 to fight a French opponent had an obvious pertinence too.

As a number of news articles note, however,  the real significance of verbal play of this kind lay in its evocative symbiosis of word, meaning, and attitude. As the Evening News commented, for example, while Kaiser Wilhelm II had characterised  the British Expeditionary Force as a ‘contemptible little army’, contempt could easily be reappropriated — and redirected:

The strong point of our “contemptible little Army” has all along been its refusal to be terrified either by the weight of numbers or the use of the most terrible engines of destruction that have ever been employed in warfare. The shells of the new large calibre Krupp howitzer were to strike terror into the hearts of the “treacherous” British. Instead the “Jack Johnsons” of the Fatherland have been treated by our troops with regrettable levity, and though they have done their work effectively enough in a material sense, our moral has remained unaffected (Evening News Thurs 1 October 1914)

Here, if the ‘regrettable levity’ of the Allies receives comment, it is, of course, entirely ironic. Instead levity is commended while the resulting expressions symbolise the undaunted spirit with which conflict was faced. Words – and the power to name – can, the Evening News argued, importantly  deflect and destabilize the kind of terror which had been intended. Moral (MnE morale) remained intact.

** crater. A definition ‘the cavity formed by the explosion of a shell’ was added in the Supplement to the Oxford English Dictionary which was published in 1933. It tracked usage back to 1855 and the conflict of the Sebastopol campaign, as well as adding later examples from WWI, dating from December 1914 onwards. Evidence from October 1914 was added later, though Clark’s evidence on crater from September 1914 still remains of interest. See “crater, n.” OED Online. Oxford University Press, December 2014. Web. 12 January 2015.

Definitely not over by Christmas

snow at the front
Snow at the Front. Soldiers leaving Reserve Trench (National Library of Scotland). Free Access – Rights Reserved.

One of the most enduring myths of WWI centres on the conviction, widely attributed to the early months of the war, that conflict would all  ‘be over by Christmas’ and peace would have resumed. Given the range of intersections between language and history at this time, it is perhaps unsurprising that the Words in War-Time archive can also offer interesting evidence in this respect. The range of forms which appear through the autumn of 1914 present, however, an early  corrective for the popular narrative of a short war. Instead, as the archive confirms, WWI generated a  range of combinatory forms and constructions in which expectations that a war winter would succeed a summer and autumn of conflict were, in reality, unambiguous.

Even in September 1914, the certainty of a war which would continue beyond Christmas seemed clear. ‘Every one is preparing for a war winter‘, readers of the Daily Express were informed on September 11th, for example. Those who assumed otherwise — including those at the Front — were distinctly rash, as an article in the Scotsman also warned: Continue reading

Scouts, surveillance, and war in the air

 

Scouting, as a way of finding out facts about the enemy’s position and defences, has a long history in war. The relevant entry in the first edition of the OED had been completed in 1911; to scout, it confirmed, was ‘to act as a scout; to play the spy’, as well as (under sense 4) ‘To reconnoitre, to examine with a view to obtaining information’. ‘Besides, they must skoute, discouer, with all dueties that belongs vnto an Armie’, as RogerWilliams had stated in his Briefe Discourse of Warre in 1590 (the quote appeared in the OED in illustration of the first sense given above). Jonathan Swift’s mock-battle in his Tale of a Tub provided the first illustrative citation of scout sense 4: ‘One surveys the Region round, while t’other scouts the Plain’. Nineteenth-century news discourse usefully provided evidence for its later use, as in an OED quotation taken from the Daily News in 1871 (‘Bazaine has been condemned by every military authority in Europe for not scouting the ravine of Gorze’). The same newspaper provided the OED’s concluding quotation too, dated to 1900: ‘Major Karri Davies, with eight men of the Light Horse, were ordered to scout the country’.

Newspaper citations of this kind also provided, of course, the kind of precedent which Andrew Clark widely adopted for his own project in tracking words in use, and the changes in form and meaning that they could reveal, here within the time-frame of a specific historical event. The three years since the OED entry of 1911 brought, as Clark argued, a range of new developments in these terms. Scouting offered a range of interesting changes, closely linked with the emergent technologies of modern warfare. ‘Scouts beneath the Waves’, as the Daily Express stated in September 1914 – a statement which it glossed by the explanatory ‘Hidden Watchers in Submarines’. ’Scouts in the Air’, it affirmed, if to rather different ends. ‘Scouting missions’, as Clark noted, could be realised in entirely new ways in WWI, involving aviators and daredevils** rather than the advance parties on horse or foot who people the relevant entries in the OED.

air scout
‘OFFICIAL PHOTOGRAPH TAKEN ON THE BRITISH WESTERN FRONT IN FRANCE. “Homeward Bound”: a scout returning to her aerodrome. National Library of Scotland http://www.europeana1914-1918.eu/en/europeana/record/9200316/BibliographicResource: _3000092751860

In other popular locutions, scouts could even be realised in non-human form entirely: ‘The air scouts of an army in action start from a landing-ground … that is obviously some distance behind the actual scene of action. The aeroplanes start from that point, make their reconnaissances, and return thereto, either to make their reports or to land for supplies of petrol and oil’, as the Daily Express explained to its readers in late August 1914′. ‘Soon, however, another machine hove into view, which turned out to be a German Otto biplane, a type of machine which is not nearly so fast as our scouts’, the Evening News stated to similar effect in October 1914. As Clark pointed out, scouts  in this respect signified the planes rather than their occupants.As another early entry in the Words in War-Time archive notes,  scouting monoplanes of this kind (‘One of our aviators on a fast scouting monoplane sighted a hostile machine’, Evening News 15 October 1914) formed, of necessity, another absence in the contemporary OED.

As Clark realised, air scouts and aerial scouting (the latter recorded in the Evening News  in September 1914)**  served to realise and express the new enterprise of air reconnaissance  — another form which came into historical prominence in the early days of WWI (even if this, too, remained and, indeed, still remains absent from the OED):

From their [the German] rate of fire they seemed to be nearly automatic, but so far they have not had much effect in reducing the air reconnaissance carried out by us (Evening News Oct 15 1914).

As Clark noted, evidence on reconnaissance in the contemporary OED had ended in 1875; it was moreover Wellington’s military missions which had been deemed to provide appropriate illustration in ways which evoked a far earlier period of history (‘A body of troops sent to reconnoitre’: 1811 Wellington, ‘The enemy sent a reconnaissance of cavalry…consisting of about fourteen squadrons…of the Imperial Guard’).Flight, and the wide-ranging role of air scouts instead bought results which, as the Scotsman contended, surely rendered older forms of reconnaissance  obsolete:

even with a limited flying service, if it is efficiently handled, secrecy in the concentration of large bodies of troops has been rendered almost impossible. The air scouts receive their orders, and whirl aloft.  Each sweeps upon an individual route, and each returns with observations, that are blended to form a whole. Where is the enemy in greatest strength? what troops are in motion, and in what direction are they moving ?

As it added, ‘Instead of groping clumsily in a twilight, as was the case in former times, a Commander-in-Chief in this war, thanks to his aircraft, finds himself provides with an all-seeing eye’. Patriotic pride centred, as here, on these new scouts of the air in a diction which is densely emblematic of time and place. The ‘splendid work of the Flying Corps’ is praised  for its strategic importance in what was depicted as acts of of information rather than attack. ‘The main object of military aviation is the collection of information’, as the Scotsman announced on 15th September 1914, providing useful evidence on reconnaissance flight as another newly familiar formation.  ‘The constant object of our aviators has been to effect the accurate location of the enemy’s forces’, it added.

Here and elsewhere, the Words in War-Time archive emblematises the historical moment, presenting, as in the quotations above, eloquent evidence of the changes which took place in contemporary perception, not least in terms of the diverse role of flight in modern war, and its vital significance.

** daredevil was another word which took on an interesting alignment with the enterprise of war in the air. Clark located early evidence in October 1914 which suggested a new meaning restricted specifically to airmen, and those who ventured on dangerous missions as part of the Flying Corps:

that is why the work in the air will always demands the daredevil. That is why the world will thrill to the deeds of the airmen, to the wild swoop through the shrapnel upon the mark for the bomb, to the vaunting swoop above the trenches that belch forth searching bullets’ (17th October 1914)

Dare-devil had been recorded in the relevant section of the OED (printed in 1894, and provided with evidence 1794-1874), but Clark, rightly, suggested yet another change was at work, embedded in the ways in which one could, in a time of war and via flight, find new ways in which being ‘recklessly daring’ might be manifest. The OED1 entry remains unrevised in OED Online. See dare-devil, n. and adj.” OED Online. Oxford University Press, December 2014. Web. 22 December 2014.

** aerial scouting (Evening News, 4 Sept 1914): ‘ThTheir usual plan is to send out aeroplanes, which are followed by a Zeppelin with explosives’