In the midst of the progressive era, American nursing and medical education witnessed tremendous reform. The increase in the number of hospitals during the early twentieth century brought a growing demand for nurses and led to varying standards in admissions and education within hospital training schools. In addition, the rise of the field of public health led to a campaign by a number of American nurse leaders to reform nursing education. This campaign included: the formation of several national professional organizations; gaining the support of prominent medical officials, including those close to the Rockefeller Foundation, an influential philanthropic organization; and successfully arguing against the sending of public health nurses overseas during the First World War. Although these steps were taken prior to the end of the war, the period immediately following the war, and the 1918 pandemic spread of influenza, provided fertile ground for reopening discussions regarding nursing education both nationally and internationally. Following the war, the involvement of numerous American-backed organizations, including the Rockefeller Foundation (RF), the League of Red Cross Societies (LRCS), and the American Red Cross (ARC), in the training of nurses in Europe highlighted the numerous and conflicting ideals of American nurses in regards to nursing education during this period. In particular, those who had campaigned for the training of public health nurses in the USA — led primarily by the formidable nurse Annie Goodrich — voiced differing ideals for the training of nurses than those American nurses who led the work of the RF, the LRCS and the ARC in Europe following the war. It will be argued here that, contrary to earlier theses that have suggested the spread of a singular “American gospel” of public health nursing education, in fact there were several hotly contested ideas being conveyed in Europe by several different American individuals and organizations at this time. In particular, the RF’s support of two opposing ideals — that of their own nursing representative, Elisabeth Crowell in Europe, and that of Goodrich in the USA — heightened this conflict. The eventual success of one set of these ideas depended on the alignment of congruent ideals in the training of health care professionals with influential individuals and organizations. Furthermore, this dissertation suggests that the outcome of this debate influenced the future direction of nursing education in both Europe and North America.

Current historiography on French empire building in the early modern period rests on a host of unexamined terms, including colony, empire, monopoly, company, and trading privileges. Yet, these terms were anything but fixed, certain or uncomplicated to contemporaries. This dissertation takes as its subject the exercise of authority in New France through proprietorships and companies to get to the political, legal, and ideological heart of French empire building. Organized chronologically, each chapter corresponds to a different constellation of authority, ranging from a proprietorship in which the titleholder subdelegated his trading privileges and administrative authority to two separate parties to a commercial company that managed both jurisdictions. Engaging with cutting-edge international literature on sovereignty, empire formation, and early modern state building, this thesis resituates the story of the colonization of French North America in an Atlantic framework. It relies partly on civil suits that arose in France during the first three decades of the seventeenth century over powers and privileges in New France. This frequent litigation has traditionally been ignored by historians of New France; however, my research suggests that it was an integral part of the process of colonization. On the ground, claimants fought for ascendancy using instruments of legal authority and personal power. These contests in New France often had a second act in the courts of France, where parties’ actions exposed preoccupations quite removed from the colonial enterprise, particularly jurisdictional rivalries, both personal and institutional. New France became part of the admiral’s efforts to consolidate and extend his authority, thereby incorporating the colony into an existing French institution. Royal ambitions to control maritime commerce and navigation conflicted with the admiral’s growing jurisdiction, leading to plays for power in New France. Domestic challenges to exclusive trading privileges overseas were intimately connected to concerns over royal encroachment on provincial jurisdiction. Such examples highlight both the intimate connections between the construction of sovereignty in the colonial realm and the process of state formation in France and the contingency and contestation associated with these processes in the early seventeenth-century Atlantic.

Current historiography on French empire building in the early modern period rests on a host of unexamined terms, including colony, empire, monopoly, company, and trading privileges. Yet, these terms were anything but fixed, certain or uncomplicated to contemporaries. This dissertation takes as its subject the exercise of authority in New France through proprietorships and companies to get to the political, legal, and ideological heart of French empire building. Organized chronologically, each chapter corresponds to a different constellation of authority, ranging from a proprietorship in which the titleholder subdelegated his trading privileges and administrative authority to two separate parties to a commercial company that managed both jurisdictions. Engaging with cutting-edge international literature on sovereignty, empire formation, and early modern state building, this thesis resituates the story of the colonization of French North America in an Atlantic framework. It relies partly on civil suits that arose in France during the first three decades of the seventeenth century over powers and privileges in New France. This frequent litigation has traditionally been ignored by historians of New France; however, my research suggests that it was an integral part of the process of colonization. On the ground, claimants fought for ascendancy using instruments of legal authority and personal power. These contests in New France often had a second act in the courts of France, where parties’ actions exposed preoccupations quite removed from the colonial enterprise, particularly jurisdictional rivalries, both personal and institutional. New France became part of the admiral’s efforts to consolidate and extend his authority, thereby incorporating the colony into an existing French institution. Royal ambitions to control maritime commerce and navigation conflicted with the admiral’s growing jurisdiction, leading to plays for power in New France. Domestic challenges to exclusive trading privileges overseas were intimately connected to concerns over royal encroachment on provincial jurisdiction. Such examples highlight both the intimate connections between the construction of sovereignty in the colonial realm and the process of state formation in France and the contingency and contestation associated with these processes in the early seventeenth-century Atlantic.

This dissertation explores Christian-Jewish relations in the decades prior to the watershed of 1391, when Christian mobs throughout Castile and the Crown of Aragon killed or, more often, forcibly converted many Jews. My research indicates that the explosive violence of 1391 was not the predictable, inevitable result of growing interfaith animosity in the Crown of Aragon but was sparked by developments in Castile. Because of the resultant converso problem many historians consider 1391 to be a turning point in Iberian history. Yet historians have not closely explored Jewish-Christian interaction in the crucial later fourteenth century, particularly not in the Crown of Aragon, and have assumed, wrongly I believe, that the period following the Black Death (1348) saw a steady deterioration in the Jews’ relations with Christians. The first three chapters of the dissertation deal with the “crises” that marked late fourteenth-century Catalonia and Aragon. In the first chapter I outline the long-term precedents - the Black Death and successive wars – of the economic crisis that would follow. The second chapter focuses on economic matters – the Jewish contribution to the economy as well as the impact of growing debt and the development of new credit mechanisms. Chapter three, in turn, focuses on the impact of increasing taxation on Jewish communities. The final three chapters explore ways in which Jews and Christians coped with crises: chapter four deals with sources of conflict within Jewish communities, chapter five with conflict between Jews and Christians, while the last chapter looks at conversion as a way of coping with the crises of the fourteenth century. Throughout, my research shows how Jews and their Christian neighbours and rulers developed strategies and means of coping with the effects of epidemic disease, famine, and frequent warfare. I pay particular attention at how the law became a mechanism for coping with the worsening of economic conditions.

This dissertation explores Christian-Jewish relations in the decades prior to the watershed of 1391, when Christian mobs throughout Castile and the Crown of Aragon killed or, more often, forcibly converted many Jews. My research indicates that the explosive violence of 1391 was not the predictable, inevitable result of growing interfaith animosity in the Crown of Aragon but was sparked by developments in Castile. Because of the resultant converso problem many historians consider 1391 to be a turning point in Iberian history. Yet historians have not closely explored Jewish-Christian interaction in the crucial later fourteenth century, particularly not in the Crown of Aragon, and have assumed, wrongly I believe, that the period following the Black Death (1348) saw a steady deterioration in the Jews’ relations with Christians. The first three chapters of the dissertation deal with the “crises” that marked late fourteenth-century Catalonia and Aragon. In the first chapter I outline the long-term precedents - the Black Death and successive wars – of the economic crisis that would follow. The second chapter focuses on economic matters – the Jewish contribution to the economy as well as the impact of growing debt and the development of new credit mechanisms. Chapter three, in turn, focuses on the impact of increasing taxation on Jewish communities. The final three chapters explore ways in which Jews and Christians coped with crises: chapter four deals with sources of conflict within Jewish communities, chapter five with conflict between Jews and Christians, while the last chapter looks at conversion as a way of coping with the crises of the fourteenth century. Throughout, my research shows how Jews and their Christian neighbours and rulers developed strategies and means of coping with the effects of epidemic disease, famine, and frequent warfare. I pay particular attention at how the law became a mechanism for coping with the worsening of economic conditions.

Between 1914 and 1919, Germans and Austrians experienced previously unimaginable sociopolitical transformations: four years of war, military defeat, the collapse of the Hohenzollern and Habsburg monarchies, the creation of democratic republics, and the redrawing of the map of Central Europe. Through an analysis of new state symbols and the staging of political and cultural celebrations, this dissertation explores the multiple and conflicting ways in which Germans and Austrians sought to reconceptualize the relationships between nation, state and politics in the wake of the First World War. Whereas the political right argued that democracy was a foreign imposition, supporters of democracy in both countries went to great lengths to refute these claims. In particular, German and Austrian republicans endeavored to link their fledgling democracies to the established tradition of großdeutsch nationalism – the idea that a German nation-state should include Austria – in an attempt to legitimize their embattled republics. By using nineteenth-century großdeutsch symbols and showing continued support for an Anschluss (political union) even after the Entente forbade it, republicans hoped to create a transborder German national community that would be compatible with a democratic body politic. As a project that investigates the entangled and comparative histories of Germany and Austria, this dissertation makes three contributions to the study of German nationalism and modern Central European history. First, in revealing the pervasiveness of großdeutsch ideas and symbols at this time, I point to the necessity of looking at both Germany and Austria when considering topics such as the redefinition of national identity and the creation of democracy in post-World War I Central Europe. Second, it highlights the need to move beyond the binary categorizations of civic and ethnic nationalisms, which place German nationalism in the latter category. As the republicans’ use of großdeutsch nationalism demonstrates, the creation of a transborder German community was not simply the work of the extreme political right. Third, it contributes to recent scholarship which seeks to move past the entrenched question of why interwar German and Austrian democracies failed. Instead of simply viewing the two republics as failures, it investigates the ways in which citizens engaged with the new form of government, as well as the prospects for the success of democracy in the wake of military defeat. In drawing attention to the differences between the German and Austrian experiments with democracy, this dissertation points to the relative strengths of the Weimar Republic when compared to the First Austrian Republic.

National historical memory in France has often given rise to violent polemic. Controversial episodes of national history, such as the Second World War and Algerian conflict, have attracted considerable attention. Yet despite its obvious importance as a particularly violent war of decolonization and precursor to the Vietnam War, the First Indochina War (1946-54) has largely been ignored. In the context of decolonization and the beginning of the Cold War, however, Indochina offers a unique example of the complex relationship between event, commemoration, and memory. This dissertation examines state commemorations, official and unofficial sites of memory, film and other media representations of the war, and several “flashpoint” events that have elicited particularly heated debates over the legacies of the war. The thematic structure allows me to bring together various vehicles and artefacts of memory, from monuments to commemorative ceremonies to veterans’ associations, along with less tangible expressions of memory expressed through public debates and film. I also analyze the tangible legacy of colonialism in the metropole: the ‘repatriate’ camps that housed primarily French citizens of Vietnamese, Lao and Cambodian origin after 1956. This chapter makes an important contribution to the history of immigration to France, which is critical to understanding issues currently facing this multicultural society. Two dominant narratives emerge from my analysis. The first is maintained by a majority of veterans and elements of the political right and extreme right, and is characterized by themes of heroic soldiers combating communism and a belief in their abandonment by the metropolitan government and public. In some cases, a sense of duty to protect ‘Greater France’ is invoked, and in others, the duty to fight with the independent Vietnamese against their communist oppressors. The second narrative casts the conflict as a ‘dirty’ war of colonial reconquest. Though the primary goal of the dissertation is to elucidate the construction of particular narratives of war, I argue that this memorial process is inherently intertwined with the re-evaluation of the colonial project. The fundamental disagreement over the nature of the war, as either a battle against communism or a war of colonial reconquest, has prompted extensive debates over the relative merits of the colonial project and its putative resurrection in 1945.

This study traces the development of violoncello bowing technique in France, Austria and Germany between the years 1785-1839. Using evidence obtained from contemporary violoncello methods, periodical reviews, iconographic materials, diaries, letters, musical manuscripts, first-edition performance repertoire, and first-hand research at the Library of Congress, Smithsonian Institute and University of California at Berkeley, the technical methodology of each school is examined. By this process, diverse qualities in the playing manner of J. P. Duport, J. L. Duport, Janson, Tricklir, Breval, J. H. Levasseur, Lamare, Hus-Desforges, Baudiot, Norblin, Vaslin and Franchomme, and that of A. Kraft, Ritter, Romberg, N. Kraft, Dotzauer, Lincke, Bohrer, Merk and Kummer are discernible. Such divergences in bowing technique form the basis of dissimilarities present in French and Austro-German violoncello performance of 1785-1839, a circumstance occasioned by a variety of contributing factors. These issues are segregated for investigation. Following the Introduction, Chapters 1 and 2 provide background information regarding the development of the instrument, bow, and bowing techniques before 1785. Chapter 3 discusses design modifications that occurred to the instrument and bow between 1785 and 1839. Chapters 4 and 5 present the biographies of each of the violoncellists examined, while Chapter 6 discusses the influence of performers from the French violin school and the musician interaction brought about by the French Revolution and subsequent wars. Analysis of the varying performance characteristics of the French and Austro-German schools begins with Chapter 7, this chapter and Chapter 8 surveying the performance methodology of each of the violoncellists included in this study. Chapters 9 and 10 assess the consequential relationship of performance technique to performance repertoire and Chapter 11 summarizes the findings of the accomplished research. These findings detail differences in the performance methodology of the French, Austrian and German violoncello schools in the period 1785-1839. The variants evinced include the manner in which the bow and instrument were held, the type of bowing techniques incorporated into the performance repertoire of each nationality and the method of their execution, the way in which the violoncello's varying sonorities were exploited, and the regard for sound quality and volume by performers of each school. / Subscription resource available via Digital Dissertations only.

This study traces the development of violoncello bowing technique in France, Austria and Germany between the years 1785-1839. Using evidence obtained from contemporary violoncello methods, periodical reviews, iconographic materials, diaries, letters, musical manuscripts, first-edition performance repertoire, and first-hand research at the Library of Congress, Smithsonian Institute and University of California at Berkeley, the technical methodology of each school is examined. By this process, diverse qualities in the playing manner of J. P. Duport, J. L. Duport, Janson, Tricklir, Breval, J. H. Levasseur, Lamare, Hus-Desforges, Baudiot, Norblin, Vaslin and Franchomme, and that of A. Kraft, Ritter, Romberg, N. Kraft, Dotzauer, Lincke, Bohrer, Merk and Kummer are discernible. Such divergences in bowing technique form the basis of dissimilarities present in French and Austro-German violoncello performance of 1785-1839, a circumstance occasioned by a variety of contributing factors. These issues are segregated for investigation. Following the Introduction, Chapters 1 and 2 provide background information regarding the development of the instrument, bow, and bowing techniques before 1785. Chapter 3 discusses design modifications that occurred to the instrument and bow between 1785 and 1839. Chapters 4 and 5 present the biographies of each of the violoncellists examined, while Chapter 6 discusses the influence of performers from the French violin school and the musician interaction brought about by the French Revolution and subsequent wars. Analysis of the varying performance characteristics of the French and Austro-German schools begins with Chapter 7, this chapter and Chapter 8 surveying the performance methodology of each of the violoncellists included in this study. Chapters 9 and 10 assess the consequential relationship of performance technique to performance repertoire and Chapter 11 summarizes the findings of the accomplished research. These findings detail differences in the performance methodology of the French, Austrian and German violoncello schools in the period 1785-1839. The variants evinced include the manner in which the bow and instrument were held, the type of bowing techniques incorporated into the performance repertoire of each nationality and the method of their execution, the way in which the violoncello's varying sonorities were exploited, and the regard for sound quality and volume by performers of each school. / Subscription resource available via Digital Dissertations only.

This study traces the development of violoncello bowing technique in France, Austria and Germany between the years 1785-1839. Using evidence obtained from contemporary violoncello methods, periodical reviews, iconographic materials, diaries, letters, musical manuscripts, first-edition performance repertoire, and first-hand research at the Library of Congress, Smithsonian Institute and University of California at Berkeley, the technical methodology of each school is examined. By this process, diverse qualities in the playing manner of J. P. Duport, J. L. Duport, Janson, Tricklir, Breval, J. H. Levasseur, Lamare, Hus-Desforges, Baudiot, Norblin, Vaslin and Franchomme, and that of A. Kraft, Ritter, Romberg, N. Kraft, Dotzauer, Lincke, Bohrer, Merk and Kummer are discernible. Such divergences in bowing technique form the basis of dissimilarities present in French and Austro-German violoncello performance of 1785-1839, a circumstance occasioned by a variety of contributing factors. These issues are segregated for investigation. Following the Introduction, Chapters 1 and 2 provide background information regarding the development of the instrument, bow, and bowing techniques before 1785. Chapter 3 discusses design modifications that occurred to the instrument and bow between 1785 and 1839. Chapters 4 and 5 present the biographies of each of the violoncellists examined, while Chapter 6 discusses the influence of performers from the French violin school and the musician interaction brought about by the French Revolution and subsequent wars. Analysis of the varying performance characteristics of the French and Austro-German schools begins with Chapter 7, this chapter and Chapter 8 surveying the performance methodology of each of the violoncellists included in this study. Chapters 9 and 10 assess the consequential relationship of performance technique to performance repertoire and Chapter 11 summarizes the findings of the accomplished research. These findings detail differences in the performance methodology of the French, Austrian and German violoncello schools in the period 1785-1839. The variants evinced include the manner in which the bow and instrument were held, the type of bowing techniques incorporated into the performance repertoire of each nationality and the method of their execution, the way in which the violoncello's varying sonorities were exploited, and the regard for sound quality and volume by performers of each school. / Subscription resource available via Digital Dissertations only.