An integral part of our military history is the remembrance of those who lost their lives and gave their service to defending others. Towns and villages more often than not have a traditional war memorial from World War I or II taking centre stage in churchyards and cenotaphs. The names of local men carved on each Commonwealth or private grave remind us of their sacrifice. Yet how many women’s names have you seen? There are lots of important women in global services, however, men still greatly prevail when one thinks of the Army, Navy, or Royal Air Force.
As someone with a very minor role in the armed services, in this article I aim to showcase the roles and dedication of women in World War I & II using their (lack of) memorials around the UK, specifically focusing on the British Army.
A Woman’s Role:
Women in front line combat is still statistically flat-lined despite it being legal to join all the Armed services in the UK. Recruitment targeting women for front line roles arguably falls short of standards. Only 12% of the British Army specifically, is female, with aims of increasing it to 25% in the next 10 years. Within this statistic; 9% are in non-combat positions (e.g. HR, logistics, catering, medical, and other auxiliary roles). These roles are the backbone of the military in any country no question. Without the men and women in these jobs, front line soldiers in combat simply would not function! It’s a small statistic, but women hold positions in support more than anywhere else in the army.
It was only as recently as 2018, when the British MOD (Ministry of Defense) allowed women to serve openly in all branches of the army, with a previous law being overturned in 2014 stating women were only allowed in ‘supporting roles’, i.e. auxiliary roles, as they had been for centuries beforehand. In my opinion, this overturning of law is shockingly late considering the demanding and dangerous jobs women did during WW I & II.
Prior to WW I & II there have been monuments, art, and literature dedicated to women about warfare and achievements. Often only individual achievements. We can see Roman and Greek praise and dedications to wives, sisters, or mothers, in funerary items, or to statues or plaques to Empresses, Queens, or Pharaohs. Cleopatra’s needle, Hatshepsut’s mortuary temple and hieroglyphics, Nefertiti’s tomb, and more are all types of monuments to women. However, women’s successes have been dismissed, buried, and overlooked by the men who ruled afterwards. This can mirror society today in part; War memorials tend to be male centric, forgetting the often unseen work of women which I explore more as the article progresses.
Way back when, we were doing similar jobs to today’s 9% during in WW I & II. During both conflicts, you could be a nurse in the Queen Alexandra Imperial Nursing service, or join FANY (First Aid Nursing Yeomanry). In 1917 the Women’s Army Auxiliary Corps was formed to solve the manpower decline, or join the ATS (Auxiliary Territory service).
In 1941, women were then legally conscripted into supporting roles. Those who were physically able to work (even if they were married) were employed in munitions, the Land Army, nurses for the Red Cross or other, textile factories, and the auxiliary. By the end of WW II, 450,000 were employed by the armed forces (excluding Infantry roles). Over 74,000 British women were serving in anti-aircraft units near the front lines in the ATS. However, close combat roles remained off-limits. Members of the ATS were known as ‘Ack Ack girls’ who supported reconnaissance, finding and locating enemy pilots and camps, getting bearings, and observing enemy aircraft, but were barred from pulling the trigger on weaponry. This is demonstrated by the 93rd Searchlight Regiment: an all-female unit part of the Royal Artillery conducting anti-aircraft operations, based in Southern England.
Unbelievably, the ATS was not recognized as a military regiment until 1941. A trial run of 54 ATS members was conducted in order to test a woman’s ability in dealing with the same physical and emotional conditions male soldiers suffered in wartime. This was the ‘Newark Experiment’ orchestrated by General Pile (General Officer Anti-Aircraft Commander-in-Chief). Sent to Wales, the experiment was a great success; ‘they showed themselves more effective, more horror inspiring and more blood-thirsty with their pick-helves than many a male sentry with his gun’ and ‘the girls lived like men, fought their fights like men and, alas, some died like men’ wrote Pile on the work of the ATS and subsequent formation of the 93rd Regiment. They were given uniforms after 1941, and a higher rate of pay was to be in order if women were doing the same job as male soldiers.
However, they were not personally armed, and originally did not have the authorization to pull the trigger or give the fire control order on weaponry as mentioned. Each unit had a male soldier integrated who could actually fire the mortar based off the woman’s calculation. Units were based around the South West and East of England, with some in Western Europe. Around 389 of these women were killed in bombings. This is a staggering figure for women who were essentially considered as supporting non-combat roles in the law’s eyes.
Memorials
The vast majority of memorials are specifically for male infantry soldiers who deserve to be memorialized for their actions in warfare. Women’s achievements and dedications for their time are often forgotten – even in Remembrance services. Yet women both on the front lines or behind the lines, were equally important. This is why the ‘Women in World War II’ memorial was created.
In 2005, the towering bronze memorial was unveiled on the 60th anniversary of Victory in Europe Day by the Queen, in the center of Whitehall near Downing Street. This was the first dedicated pride-of-place monument in the UK to all women during World War II, named the ‘Women in World War II memorial’.
It commemorates the women who served and survived, or lost their lives in the war. 22 feet high and 16 feet long, it depicts the outfits and uniforms of all the services and police, munitions garments, the Land Army, welding gear, farming, Air Wardens, pilot goggles and aviator jackets. ATS uniforms are also included thanks to General Pile’s efforts in 1941. 17 total uniforms are on display on sculpted hooks – as if they were hung up ready for another working day. The monument was designed by John W. Mills, whose mother was a firefighter in WW II. It remembers the 7 million plus women UK wide who were involved in wartime efforts.
Baroness Boothroyd expertly remarked at the unveiling: “(women) hung them up and let the men take the credit”.
The Baroness’ remark encapsulates the public and general opinions. Having seen the monument in person, the dedication is imposing and bold. Black with gold lettering for the title, a huge literal block statement, of which I found to really force the public to view and understand the gravity of war and who was involved. It is not the typical memorial such as crosses and plaques, but it is successful in creating a powerful statement on the impacts of war on women.
However, this was unveiled in 2005 when women were not permitted in front line combat roles. Hypocritical much? Rather the ‘Women in World War II’ memorial commemorates the dedicated women of their time period, despite the lack of actual combat the majority saw. In hindsight, this hypocrisy crumbles. But like usual there was and still is tension over this memorial concerning its glorification of war, heightened because it is a women’s only memorial which brings its own criticisms. The memorial names no women either despite there being numerous key figures at play such as women code-breakers in Bletchley Park, or spies of the SOE (Special Operations Executive), and nurses killed in bombing raids. It displays their empty shells – their uniform. Seen to represent all women, but there are no statues or depictions of individual women unlike the majority of statues that show male soldiers; depicting faces and figures. Women are not a tangible entity, with some arguing the ‘Women in World War II’ memorial is a denial to the real women who represented our country as their bodies and faces are not visualized. On the flip side, I’m simply liking that there is a proper dedicated monument in Whitehall!
Looking further back, WW I has a few low status memorials, for example a reworked 13th century stained glass window in York minster church. A commemorative plaque titled ‘Women of the Empire’, was made and unveiled in 1925. The Bury War memorial in Lancashire also features depictions of women in Land Army uniform, commissioned in 1924. There are few and far between female names added in inscriptions on male dominated plaques and crosses, one has to dig for and peer closer to see the sparse female names at the bottom of memorials. Moreover, I like how this plaque acknowledges all women in the empire, and not solely British women. Leading for it to be pretty inclusive.
Women of all backgrounds, races, and ethnicities were expected to help the war effort, and the memorials in Whitehall and York portray this because they picture the uniforms any woman would have worn.
Bletchley Park has a Roll of Honour memorial which is constantly being added to, as new information is being discovered after society’s interests in feminine history has increased in popularity. 75% of those who worked at Bletchley were female. When VE Day hit, almost all gave up their career to marry and resume relative normality with most never revealing what their true role was. In 2011, the Queen further unveiled a memorial dedicated to Alan Turing – who worked at Bletchley as a lead code-breaker. His untimely suicide in 1954 brought attention to LGBTQ+ rights and perspectives. It was not just the women who worked behind the scenes during war. This lead to perspectives changing on equality in warfare, and the fact that both men and women should and have taken public credit for what they achieved. Yet, this usually comes well after the lifetime of the individuals involved are over.
Although in my opinion, the work of spies is to remain unseen - maintaining secrets. Therefore, no war memorial or public accreditation is to be erected. However, more individual contributions have been recently recognized such as respected British spies Pippa Latour and British-American Virginia Hall aka ‘A Woman of No Importance’. Other notable women include Winston Churchill’s youngest daughter Mary Churchill, who served in the ATS. Plus, we all know that future Queen Elizabeth II was also a member of the ATS. She worked as a mechanic and driver, making her the first female head of state to actively participate in conflict.
Women now
From 1938-45, women employed in industrial jobs increased from 19% to 27% as a percentage of total British female population. British women in the Tri-service auxiliary roles during this time were estimated to be 640,000 by 1945, compared to over 5 million British men total in all combat and non-combat roles. A further 3 million coming from Allied nations (excluding the Soviet Union). Leaving the male total to be about 8.5 million. By these figures, just 2.13% of British women involved in the war effort overall were auxiliary personnel in the Army, Navy, and RAF combined. If split equally for the purposes of this article only, we get an estimate of 0.71% of females in each service total. This is vast if we think to today where 12% of the total British army itself is female, remembering that the 2.13% in WW II is women in all three services! Women were a small percentile, but were involved in the main backbone of the war effort.
As discussed, nowadays 9% of serving females are in non-combat army roles, with the remaining 3% being combat and front line infantry. We have jumped from 0.71% to 9% in non-combat, and 0 to 3% in combat roles since the end of World War II. But what makes it more impressive is recently, the British Army has shrunk from 2.9 million soldiers in 1945, to about 82,000 infantry soldiers today. Totaling 112,000 in other roles - regular and reserve and excluding officers (a further 150,000 total if we include the Navy and RAF). A lot of numbers, but in terms of female representation; we have excelled in the ratio. The army has depleted, but female numbers have increased.
If we choose to look deeper into the breakdown of gender in each regiment in the present day, the Queen Alexandra’s Royal Army Nursing Corps has 520 women serving compared to 300 men, and the Royal Army Dental Corps of 130 women to 90 men. They are the only two regiments which have a majority of females. Statistics are taken from a 2016 survey completed on diversity and gender in the army. These figures may have changed since the survey, but provide a good insight into gender breakdowns in the army. Since both regiments are auxiliary, women are still attracted and accepted into these roles, just as they were in WW II. However, there is huge variation in figures I have found whilst researching British women involved in WW II, but the fact remains the same; millions of women worldwide were killed and injured no matter how you count.
Conclusions
Women were vital to the war effort in both World Wars, but some argue it was simply expected to serve selflessly and perform duties during a time of conflict. The Newark Experiment by General Pile proved that women were capable of operating the heavy anti-aircraft machinery, had the physicality, and emotional intelligence to consistently do so. They contributed to the war effort and earned the ATS a place in military history, causing a perspective shift in the way we view a woman’s ability in battle. By having the ‘Women in World War II’ memorial forever display their uniform, we can preserve and celebrate those women publically. The memorial is great example of showcasing women’s achievements without exaggerating them for attention, which is what the developing ‘woke’ media can so often do. In my mind, the uniforms show an accurate portrayal of women’s roles at the time, and do precede similar duties undertaken today. The ‘Women of the Empire’ memorial window was specifically reworked and rededicated to all the women of WW I, showing an appreciation of servicewomen in a time when women did not have the right to vote until just after the war ended in 1918.
The 9% of women today in non-combat, and 3% in front-line combat roles, show us the progress we have made in the army. Men are still the majority overall and are often thought of first when thinking of a war memorial, as more men did serve and die in battle. But, to have female auxiliaries commemorated during the world’s largest conflict to date, dictates how important women were and still are in war. Both in roles supporting men, or in their own right.
There are a few other war memorials dedicated to women, but none generate the same prestige as the two I have discussed in this article. Women in WW I & II were thanked for their services in small and large capacities, and I hope we can continue to show our gratitude to more servicewomen and important individuals in the future.
A Timeline of Women in the army
1899-1902: The Queen Alexandra’s Imperial Nursing Corps founded and expanded.
1907: FANY (First Aid Nursing Yeomanry) was formed. A crucial link between the front-lines and field hospitals, with ambulance drivers and Red Cross first aiders.
1915: A Women’s march in London was conducted in order to persuade the government to allow women in the workplace for the war effort. Undertaken before women had the right to vote.
1917: The Women’s Army Auxiliary Corps is used in response to the manpower crisis and supports duties in France and Belgium.
1917-18: Over 100,000 women are employed in industries which support the war effort. The number is most likely higher.
1938: ATS (Auxiliary Territorial Service) formed (originally named the Queen Mary’s Army Auxiliary Corps).
1941 July: The ATS is recognized as a military service and its members are no longer volunteers – they are now paid service personnel.
1941 December: National conscription for women aged 20-30 years of age begins. In 1943, the age limit is increased to be most women of working age (generally 18 - 50 years of age) including married women.
1945 February: Future Queen Elizabeth II joins the ATS as a driver and mechanic.
8 May 1945: VE Day (Victory in Europe Day). Over 190,000 women are part of the ATS.
1949: The ATS was disbanded, and the WRAC (Women’s Royal Army Corps) is formed as its successor. In 1952 they are aligned with the British army ranks and standards.
1975: The Sex Discrimination Act is introduced – which continues the upholding of women in auxiliary and supporting roles only, despite petitions to change the law allowing women to serve in combat roles.
1991-92: Private Ellie Walton becomes the first female soldier to patrol with an arms and explosive dog in Northern Ireland.
1992: WRAC is disbanded and members join other regiments such as the Adjutant General Corps.
1999: Another petition is unsuccessfully launched against the Sex Discrimination Act, 1975.
2002: The Ministry of Defence (MOD) conclude that women are not fit for active service in close combat roles and women can affect ‘unit cohesion’ between men.
2009: The MOD states there was no statistical evidence for their earlier claims but continue to exclude women from close combat roles.
2014: The Women in Close Combat review lifted the ban on women employed only in supporting roles, with it coming into force in 2015.
In 2018: Women are allowed in all branches of the military, including Special Forces and the Infantry.
2020 - 2023: Private Addy Carter, Captain Rosie Wild, and Lieutenant Hannah Knapton become the first females to pass P Company (Parachute Regiment), regarded as one of the toughest selections within the British army.
Bibliography
Women and War: A Historical Encyclopedia From Antiquity to the Present Vol. 2 [ONLINE] available at:
[Accessed 21 September 2023]
93rd Searchlight Regiment. 2022. [ONLINE] available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/93rd_Searchlight_Regiment
[Accessed 10 October 2023]
Brigstock. K., 2007. Royal Artillery Searchlights. Royal Artillery Society Winter Meeting. Minutes from. [ONLINE] available at: https://web.archive.org/web/20160304090443/http://www.army.mod.uk/images/images-microsites/RA/RASearchlights-Text-Final.doc
[Accessed 10 October 2023]
Tammy. P., 2003. Female Intelligence: Women and Espionage in the First World War. [ONLINE] available at: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-british-studies/article/tammy-m-proctor-female-intelligence-women-and-espionage-in-the-first-world-war-new-york-new-york-university-press-2003-pp-205-3500-cloth/CAF221B1955E538224D836759D2150DE
[Accessed 28 September 2023]
Shaw. G., 2021. World’s oldest war memorial may have been identified in Syria. The Art Newspaper. [ONLINE] available at: https://www.theartnewspaper.com/2021/05/28/worlds-oldest-war-memorial-may-have-been-identified-in-syria
[Accessed 1 September 2023]
Imperial War Museum. 2023. Women of the Empire – WW1 Window. [ONLINE] available at: https://www.iwm.org.uk/memorials/item/memorial/30648
[Accessed 2 September 2023]
Named Non-Royal Women. 2023. Public Statues and Sculpture Association. [ONLINE] available at: https://pssauk.org/women/categories/named-non-royal-women/page/3/ [Accessed 2 September 2023]
Pruitt. S., 2023. Women in WWII Took on These Dangerous Military Jobs. History Channel. [ONLINE] available at: https://www.history.com/news/women-wwii-military-combat-front-lines
[Accessed 1 September 2023]
Atlas Obscura. 2019. Memorial to the Women of World War II. [ONLINE] available at: https://www.atlasobscura.com/places/memorial-to-the-women-of-world-war-ii
[Accessed 4 September 2023]
National Army Museum. 2023. A timeline of women in the Army. [ONLINE] available at: https://www.nam.ac.uk/explore/timeline-women-army#:~:text=Women%20play%20a%20crucial%20role,even%20further%20back%20in%20time.
[Accessed 2 September 2023]
Nowaki. R., 2014. Nachthexen: Soviet Female Pilots in WW2. University of Hawaii. [ONLINE] available at: https://hilo.hawaii.edu/campuscenter/hohonu/volumes/documents/Nachthexen-SovietFemalePilotsinWWIIRochelleNowaki.pdf
[Accessed 9 October 2023]
Acknowledgments
SUOTC for inspiration.
Archaeology department University of Southampton.
Well written, loads of detail and a really thoughtful, compelling argument 😊 I like the comparisons to today - lots to think about!
Love the timeline addition! A beautiful article and very poignant this time of year x