2014
DOI: 10.1093/dh/dhu028
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The War as History: Writing the Economic and Social History of the First World War

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The 'Economic and Social History of the War' was published and funded by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. 85 The funding of Jenkinson's manual also signifies another, albeit smaller, area of overlap between Jenkinson and Schomburg. As noted earlier, the purchase of Schomburg's collection was facilitated through the Carnegie Corporation.…”
Section: Publicationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The 'Economic and Social History of the War' was published and funded by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. 85 The funding of Jenkinson's manual also signifies another, albeit smaller, area of overlap between Jenkinson and Schomburg. As noted earlier, the purchase of Schomburg's collection was facilitated through the Carnegie Corporation.…”
Section: Publicationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…U.S. work in this vein has included comparisons of civilians' and soldiers' morbidity, mortality, and employment status, finding that being a veteran could be detrimental to health but beneficial to social and economic standing (Doetsch 2012;Laschever 2013;Smith et al 2015). These studies were not the first to quantitatively address World War I's demographic and socioeconomic effects (Rietzler 2017); however, twentieth-century research was arguably hindered by scholarly disinterest in these topics and methods after World War II, as well as by data limitations so severe as to call some studies' conclusions into question (Offer 1989;Harris 1993;Voth 1995). In contrast, the cited twenty-first-century studies show that using ample sets of located, longitudinal, individual data helps scholars avoid apples-to-oranges comparisons between different cohorts (who might have lived in very different historical and geographical contexts) and obviates the need to rely solely on preaggregated data that might obscure variations of interest.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%