 joining you for Erica's talk on Wednesday as well, which sounds fascinating. So yeah, thank you, everyone. It's a real pleasure to be able to talk to you today. I'm just sorry that I can't be there in person. So what I want to do with this paper today is basically to keep it quite informal. I don't want to try and read out a nicely well written, detailed, close study paper. I want to kind of talk through some of the key trends and developments that I'm seeing and the material that I'm working with. I also want to make a quick warning that we may at some point be zoom-bombed by my cats. We like to make an appearance on these things, so apologies if a tail suddenly goes in front of my face at any point. It's almost bound to happen. So yeah, thank you very much for having me on today. So let's get started. Right, okay. So what I want to do with this paper today is basically I want to propose what I'm calling an age-initial and a generationalised analysis of conflict focusing today on colonial insurgencies. Now children were very much some of the key victims of colonial counterinsurgency tactics and the liberation struggles that have merged in the decolonisation era. They were displaced, they were beaten, they were maimed, they were killed. However, not all children were victims in these conflicts. Some of them were fully agential, some of them were partially agential, and many of them joined in liberation struggles. Now we see that we have a quote here from George Grievous where he says, I know of no other movement, organisation or army, which is so actively important boys and girls of school age in the front line, and yet there is every reason to do so. Young people love danger, they must take risks to prove their worth. And indeed, youth were very much to the fore of the struggle and cyprus and when that broke out, colonial authorities were shocked to find that they were children on the front line doing everything from leafletting, to throwing stones, to protesting, to being involved in bombings and shootings. So the question is why were these youths there? Colonial authorities, as you can see from the second quote, you know, they very much saw these children as being coerced, as co-opted, as corrupted by these kind of liberation groups. However, we could contest that. We wouldn't think about the reasons why children become involved in conflict, why youths join these liberation struggles. So that's really what I want to do with this paper today to explore some of these ideas. Now, as Marcus mentioned, this is sort of based on some work that's been published in Capacities for Society and History. And that article came out of a series of the Labour Human Research Network that we had with Professor Martin Thomas at Exeter that was discussing colonial insurgencies and counterinsurgencies. And basically, I've been reading Kilcullen and looking at this kind of maxim that he has of modern counterinsurgency being very much based on core principles of engaging the women but be wearing the children. I was thinking to myself, okay, but when do security forces decide they need to be aware of children? And this coincided with Patricia Owens giving me a paper where she was talking about her analysis of the household as being a key unit of colonial counterinsurgency. And so I was thinking, okay, households, you know, we talk about the kind of gender dynamics of that, but actually households are very much generational units as well. So where's the generational analysis in this? Because if we look at a lot of literature around conflict and insurgency in particular, we can look at the way that it analyzes class, religion, race, ethnicity, ideology. And more recently, we've seen a turn towards looking at gender, particularly driven by kind of feminist IR scholarship. But what seems to me to be an odd gap in the literature is age. So the argument that I want to make today is that children and youth play a significant roles in colonial insurgency, anti-colonial insurgencies and colonial counterinsurgency. So what I'm arguing for is this kind of age-ensual analysis as I'm calling it. It's a bit between, but you know, can find a better way of describing it. Where I want to focus on the role of age and the significance of children and youth in these conflicts and also to focus very much on trying to understand the relative agency of youth within these struggles. And I make the point that, you know, there is this gap in the literature because we look at the way that patriarchal structures of power have shaped colonial archives. And if we look at the way that youth rebellions have been co-opted and then abandoned by successful liberation governments, subsequently, we see that their contributions have very much been underestimated in the existing historiography. I want to make a wider point as well to suggest that perhaps we could think about more about the way that age and generation can be very powerful as lenses for analyses of conflict. So that's why I want to make this point about the need for trying to generationalize insurgency and counterinsurgency. I've written elsewhere about a need to actually genderationalize and to particularly look at the intersections between gender and generation and conflict, but I'll leave that to the side for now. So within this argument about the significance of children and youth and colonial counterinsurgency and anti-colonial liberation struggles, there are a few key points that I really want to make. So one is that youth insurgency is not something that is anticipated by colonial forces, but it does tend to emerge actually quite early on in most liberation struggles. When we find the emergence of this kind of what's called juvenile insurgency or juvenile terrorism, it tends to be responded to through the lenses of delinquency rather than just securitization. So it means that often what we're looking at is not just military responses, but actually wealth heuristic responses as well. I don't find any coordinated trans or imperial response to any kind of comparative discussion and the work that I'm doing looking at British, French and a little bit of Portuguese case studies on this. But even though there's no coordinated response to general discussion, you do see commonalities emerge in the way that colonial states respond to the presence of youth and insurgencies. And that's because they tend to focus on ideas of rehabilitation, which are based on pre-existing juvenile reform technologies. So there are kind of commonalities that make it really interesting to do some comparative analysis. I would also say that children and youth are very much key targets of hearts and minds, the kind of classic population centric counterinsurgency. But there is a failure to really understand insurgent youth and their grievances that inhibits colonial responses. And a final point that I'd like to make is that youth liminality is really key to understanding child and youth soldiering in this period. As Mark mentioned, what I'm talking about today is really coming out of this broader work that I'm doing on the history of child soldiering in Africa from the late 19th up to the 21st century, which looks at both kind of histories of conflict, but also histories of humanitarian responses, and a kind of social history of kind of histories of childhood approaches as well. So what it works really bringing was three kind of schools of thought together in terms of military history, social history, and humanitarian history there. So that sort of inflects the way that I'm approaching this project. In terms of the methodology and the evidence base for this project, I'm very much doing kind of qualitative analysis here, mainly due to the fact that of the weakness of the quantitative data is actually really hard to try and put numbers on the number of children and youth who are involved. I'll talk a bit more about that, but it's very difficult to get any kind of concrete figures. In terms of evidence, I'm drawing from across military, police, legal, welfare, administrative, and humanitarian archives, and combining that with youth coverage, memoirs, photographs, and interviews to kind of build the analysis here. I've done a broad comparative analysis between 1945 and kind of 1965 there about across British French and a bit of Portuguese empires as well, I'm drawing a few other examples. But today I'm going to talk primarily about Cyprus and Kenya, because they do actually offer some interesting points of comparison. They're both happening at a very similar time, late fifties, they've both lived in urban rural dynamics, but they allow us to kind of explore the impact of race and different ideas of childhood and youth which can shape responses. I'm also very much talking about adult perceptions of children today. There are very few kind of direct youth voices that we can find in the archive, and I haven't been able to do as much interviews as I'd like. So it's very much looking at kind of adult perceptions. Another point to note is that the term child soldier actually really only emerges after 1987, so it's quite historical. So instead what I've been doing is tracing terms like child, juvenile, young person, youth, boy, girl, student, or jeunesse, or even kind of local terms like permuda or cadogo through the archive. So really what I'm primarily focusing on here are what my opinion calls this adult combatant, because teenage fighters, adolescent fighters really. And to do this I'm using what we call relational analysis and sort of sociologists of childhood, looking at the relationships between generational structures, discourses surrounding childhood and youth, and the kind of life experiences of individual themselves. Now my work in general takes this term child soldiering, but I'm not using that today and there's a reason for that. And it's partly to do with this tension between local and global and universalist and more constructivist notions of childhood, under which we understand that children is actually historical and culturally contingent. Now the current UN definition of a child soldier is anyone under the age of 18, an armed force or armed group in any capacity, so it's quite broad. But what I'm talking about today is particularly youth soldiers and insurgents, and I've expanded that category a little bit to really look at those roughly between the age of 12 and 20 who are in direct auxiliary roles and those who are formal members of these groups, but also those who are participating in anti-colonial action, anti-colonial violence, where we're not certain whether or not they are a formal member of a group. And the reason for this is just due to the limitations of the data in terms of unknown chronological biological ages, people aging out of that category during a conflict and very limited membership data. It's also linked to the way that youth acts as a shifter category and because of this notion of liminality that I want to explore is the line between child and adult combat and civilian. But primarily it's because historical actors themselves self-identify as youth rather than children, so I kind of respected the terminology that they have adopted. So there are three sections I want to kind of talk through today. So first I want to begin by talking about the emergence of a youth soldier as a category of concern. Then I want to move to talk about the logics of youth soldiering. So I'm moving from the wise to the house, how children are involved in these conflicts. And then thirdly I want to talk about colonial counter-insurgency responses to this. So three sections and we're going to run through it all in a relatively kind of general way. So let's get cracking then. So section one, the emergence of a youth and child soldier. Now when the child soldier first erupts onto the international humanitarian stages in the nearly 1990s and child soldiers at this point become these kind of key objects of humanitarian concern. They're focused on human rights abuses and they become these kind of icons of new wars, these kind of new barbarism theories. And in a way the kind of core report that really sets up is the Grass and Michelle report for the U.N. in 1996 in which she constructs child soldiering as quote, a result of the desolate moral vacuum, a space devoid of the most basic human values. And basically the kind of humanitarian constructions of child soldiering set up this contrast between the kind of new wars in which they see children being involved and the so-called traditional warfare and liberation struggles which Michelle report posits respect civilian and military boundaries and do not involve children in these conflicts. However, if you look at the development of international humanitarian law and the laws of war, slightly different story emerges. Here children use emerge and really the first time that they're tackled in IHL is around the additional protocols to Geneva conventions in the early 1970s. And if you look at the diplomatic negotiations around this, it's very clear this comes to directly from the ICRC records that they see a real emergence of children being involved and conflict at this point and they see it as a product of the use of, sorry, they see it as a product of quote, national liberation struggles with a legitimate defense or guerrilla warfare. When a child soldier first really emerges onto this kind of international humanitarian scene, it's because of these anti-colonial liberation struggles. And you can see this in the debate. So you can see the way here that there is this push towards having this kind of straight 18 position where anyone under the age of 18 should not be allowed to be involved in conflict directly or indirectly. But opposition to that comes from a lot of countries that had been either were either domestically recruited children or had recently been involved in anti-colonial liberation struggles. So we see here Greece, Britain and Vietnam putting forward the opinion that 15 to 18 year olds quote, have the mental and physical capacity to fight and will wish to serve the country in the time of need. So that's, as a sense we can see here that children are very clearly recognized as being involved in anti-colonial liberation struggles. We now have to move from the international humanitarian archive to the colonial archive to try to understand why they become involved and these anti-colonial surges and to what extent they are really involved. So in terms of the work that I've been doing, there are a couple of kind of core theories that we could look at as to why children become involved. There's like youth bush, demographic theories, patterns of child labor, the jury's still out on those. I need to do a lot more research around those kind of theories. So what I want to talk a little bit today is more about the social history side of things and looking at the way that actually children's involvement in anti-colonial surges is in a way a product, a legacy of colonial norms of childhood and of colonial state strategies of youth politicization because that's in a way very much the paradox of the colonial state that in trying to create children and youth as these modern disciplined colonial subjects, the colonial state actually creates new generation identities and historical infrastructure that actually ends up spreading nationalism, youth mobilization, and then insurgency. So if we look at the way that scout clubs, youth clubs, schools all become implicated in these kind of nationalist and insurgent movements. It's also in some cases very much a product of World War II in and of itself. You know, we actually there's evidence suggesting that colonial armed forces themselves deploy teenage boys in World War II. We see senior militia commanders like George Grievous saying that one of the reasons he recruits children into liberation struggle with Cyprus is because he worked so well with child partisans in Greece during the war. We can see sort of direct legacies from the war to mobilization and militarization of youth in conflicts in Palestine, Indonesia, Malaya, and Indochina as well. And interestingly Malaya, the colonial authorities are there very openly state that they see one of the reasons why there's so many youths becoming involved in the communist insurgency is because of the loss of education and the loss of parental authority during the Japanese occupation and the war. So in some cases there is this link between Second World War and the kind of insurgencies that emerge in the way that children are involved. Now if we look at colonial explanations for why children and youth are becoming involved in these anti-colonial struggles, they have two main theories. They think it's primarily down to what you see is a breakdown of generational authority and failed parenting. Those are the terms that come up again and again and again in the literature and they see this as creating a wave of juvenile delinquency in the close war years that almost automatically becomes terrorism, juvenile terrorism when conflicts erupts. So we see us in kind of Lewis Leakey's work in Kenya where he talks about the way that a whole generation has disintegrated, youth no longer discipline or having the discipline of respecting their elders and they just have this desire for adventure that should be finding violence and terrorism. And in Cyprus they have this whole report in 1947 around what they call the corruption of youth. You know they don't see youth as being kind of inherently criminal or anti-social but they find that it's a result of a complete lack of discipline at a difficult age and being groomed and seduced by yoga and that's the kind of terminology that they use. I should make a point, say at this point that there is a kind of distinct gender dynamic to this. So there's a lot of securitising boys and seeing them as potential threats and kind of violent actors but with girls there's much more moralising and much more sexualising of their involvement. So there's a lot of concern around the way that female youth use their sexuality to encourage other boys and men to be involved. So we see this as a kind of serious security risk in Kenya of young teenage girls encouraging their menfolk into subversive activities. Lewis Leakey thinks that teenage girls are joining mama out of port sheer boredom and there's a lot of concern about kind of prostitution, Cyprus, you see girls as giving themselves promiscuously to members of killer and combat groups. So what we see in the colonial discourse around girls' involvement is it's very much a kind of denial of girls' political agency and rational involvement in liberation struggles and their actors are instead read as a search for excitement and of sexual gratification there. So that's a kind of colonial discourse that emerges around youth involvement but if we try to understand actually why youth themselves are being involved and try to kind of understand the youth grievance as we get a slightly different picture. And here we see it's a kind of, you know, we can really see the emergence of what we might call a moral economy, a civil war that hinges on generational as well as ethnic and anti-colonial tensions. So a lot of places post-1945 we see youth struggling with access to education, with unemployment or under-appointment and being forced into what Mark Summers calls a period of weight hoot. These are youth who are unable to find a job, get money, get married and become adults in the way that they want because of what kind of colonial states and societies. So for many, joining an armed struggle actually offers new alternative forms of manhood or a womanhood where existing pathways are blocked by colonial or valid authorities. It's also stated by a number of youth who are involved in this conflict that they don't really have any other choice other than being involved. So Frantz Benon, for example, talks to a 13 and a 15 year old boy who are being tried for the murder of their French classmate and he asks them like, why did you do this? So this war is not about you, you don't have to be involved in it and they turn around and they say to Thamel that they killed children too. So we have these kind of legitimate youth grievances that are really kind of driving their involvement in these conflicts. Then we have the factor of kind of the deliberate youth recruitment as a kind of military tactic in the way that some groups try to capitalize on what they see as youth psychology of the rebelliousness of youth and to kind of really co-opt and to mobilize youth agency. Where we see us most deliberately and most visibly and strategically is actually with Ilka and Cyprus and Grievous is repeatedly keeps on saying above all I concentrated on the young here. A lot of the strategic recruitment we see it happening through scouts groups, through schools, through churches, through kin and peer networks, through age sets, through oathing and malmas. There are different ways that youth are kind of brought in through these kind of formal military structures as like a deliberate recruitment tactic. But it's not just the fact that these youth are being co-opted and brought in to these groups. They actually do genuinely in some cases join themselves. So we have to address this question of youth agency. Now it's difficult to trace through the archive. We need to kind of read against the grain of these generationalized and racialized hierarchies of power that suffuse the archival texts. But what's quite striking is the way that many youths, particularly older teens, very much narrate their experiences in terms of political resistance and agency. And it's much more, they're much more likely to use this kind of focus of kind of political action, political resistance at any other category of child soldier memoirs that I've looked at, whether it's World War II or contemporary and these decolonization ones are very expressly politicized in their accounts of the actions. So some of them make claims to being that there's a real full tactical agents, they're in charge, they make decisions, they dedicate themselves to the cause. You know, they act as radicalizing each their group of the children. That's not the case for everyone. A lot of cases what we're seeing are children youths who are being co-opted, who are being coerced into joining. We're also seeing what Humwona would call tactical and Drumble would call circumscribed agency, youths who are, who may be able to escape involvement in the conflict, but who volunteer for some roles and resist others. So we see a sliding scale of agency depending on individual experience and also life stage. It's very different from being a 12-year-old to being an 18-year-old in these struggles as well. Well, another thing that I've been looking at really is trying to understand the different sort of facets of youth identity, which really shapes the way that they become involved in looking at youth insurgents as a cohort, as a kind of group identity, as a liberation generation, the way that they see themselves as having this kind of liberational identity of understanding this kind of life stage, this kind of rebellious youth approach and understanding the way that they get involved through kinship networks as well and seeing youth very much as these beings, becomeings and having beings and trying to understand the way that their actions have been shaped by the experiences of colonialism and their desires for the future here. So this leads us on to section two, which is what we think about the logics of child soldier. So we talked about the why. Let's talk about the how. So in terms of breaking this down, I'm finding three main categories of youth involvement in anti-colonial insurgencies. Firstly, troop fortification. Secondly, teenage liminality. Thirdly, symbolic childhoods. It's important to realise that most children will actually and youth will actually move across these different categories. The logics for these overlap, and so many children may act in multiple capacities almost at the same time. So it's not that these are kind of distinct and bounded categories here. So let's start with the first one, troop fortification. So here we're looking at youth soldiering as a force multiplier with an asymmetrical warfare. And basically we're looking at the way that children and youth are mobilised as able-bodied recruits and physically capable violence workers, essentially doing the same roles as adults. We see this primarily in particularly in peasant political economies and spaces of mass mobilisation, for example, in the Malayan emergency. In some cases, we see them being integrated into units with adults. In some places, there are separate units. So we look into China, we see the kind of youth guerrillas, child pioneers use shot brigades. So of course we have peon groups like that. We see them involved in both front line and also in actually particularly in auxiliary support capacities. There does still a sense to be a little sort of informal line drawn around how old you have to be on the front line in an armed capacity. And it's normally around the age of 16 and it's primarily gendered as male. So it's teenage boys who are being sent out with guns. Some of these roles can actually replicate peacetime child labour. So if we look at the Mujerida girls in the FLN, we see them working as cooks, as washing women and as nurses. And this is still slightly anecdotal. I'm still doing the work on this, but I think that we can see in most cases an increase across conflict duration. So they become more influential in this kind of troop verification role as conflicts move on. And there's a sense in the colonial archive that they think they're seeing ever younger children being pulled into anti-colonial forces and that children are being sent front line roles earlier with less training as conflicts drag on as well. The second category is what I would call a youth liminality. And here what we're looking at are roles for a children are physically capable of violence, but where they are being coded by insurgent groups and colonial states as a civilian child rather than as combatant adults. So it's taking advantage of that kind of slippage between the child and the adult really. And it's this youth liminality that I think it feels like a tactical flexibility that is really important for insurgent success. Primarily what we're talking about here are actually covert and intelligence roles. So we're looking at leafletting, scouting, spying, couriering. Often these roles involve replicating normal childhood behaviors of playing or kind of a loitering in the street or running errands kind of thing. We also see them more directly involved in the violent attacks. Both boys and girls are involved in bomb attacks. So see for example here on the bottom picture Yasmin D'Akasem who famously lost both her legs age 14 bringing a bomb to a police station and not cheers. We also see them involved in kind of assassination squads and particularly in Cyprus at least 10 to be boys rather than girls involved in that with girls kind of running support roles for those kind of activities. And what's quite striking from a colonial archive is in both Kenya and Cyprus we see a sentiment colonial authorities that they think insurgent groups are deliberately sending out teenagers to do these kind of assassinations because they are aware that under 18s cannot be executed. So they think that insurgent groups are deliberately exploiting this gap between the youth, the kind of the violent capacities of youth and their legal accountability in order to kind of make these targeted assassinations. So with these categories the kind of troop fortification and youth liminality these are categories which we see in many other conflicts right history may know from you know kind of looking at kind of here a civil war through to the partisan activity in World War II. The third category I think is something different and I think it's a new development in relation to colonial counter insurgencies and that's what I'm calling symbolic childhoods and the way that school children are mobilized by these groups and essentially what we're seeing are school children being involved in protests and riots and the way that this becomes an effective guerrilla tactic and the way that it deliberately leverages colonial constructions of childhood against colonial regimes. We see it predominantly in urban and guerrilla conflicts and in groups with international support that have propaganda strategies so we see it particularly in Ioka bit of an FLM but not so much in Kenyans with Malma and essentially what they're doing is they're sending these children up here to raise the profile of these campaigns and also to inhibit colonial security responses because they're aware that colonial force that you know the British government doesn't want pictures or British soldiers stomping on Cypriot school kids on the front page of the Guardian or the international herald and tribune. So we see the school children acting as protestors as rioters but often also as decoys to distract and to move around security forces. It's interesting here that education really becomes a kind of key battleground of these kind of insurgent strategies looking at the way and in Cyprus we see that the way that the colonial state responds by trying to quote and de-helinize the curriculum in a way and we see sort of battle the flags and school closures going on an attempt to kind of control and defeat these insurgent children here. We see it in a slightly different dimension emerging in Indochina and Vietnam and here the yeah there's sort of kind of propaganda emphasis on the value of children and youth in as these kind of revolutionary fighters this kind next generation of revolutionary fighters but the emphasis here is rather on the the individual lionization the kind of martyrology that emerges around particular youth heroes and the way that they become central to the iconography of resistance and revolution and they just like please pardon my forget my pronunciation here Li Jutong youths who are executed for their their role in killing French and American soldiers there. So this kind of symbolic mobilization of childhood something that seems to me to be quite a bit new in these anti-colonial insurgencies. So that brings us on to section three which is about how colonial states respond to the presence of children and these kind of youth insurgents. Now it's important to remember that these these youth insurgents are still a minority of children the primary focus and colonial country insurgency on children is still very much focusing on the most children within population-centric counterinsurgency so it's still very much looking at education and their their their kind of treatment within delegization and resettlement programs in the way that the more it's fighting ours is recently written about very convincingly for Algeria and Kenya. We're still looking in the way that the children from infants to youth are victims of colonial counterinsurgent violence both in terms of the mortality rates in these camps but also in terms of military engagements but if we do turn to these youthful insurgents we try to think about the ways that military forces and security forces respond to them. This is something that I want to talk with you about because it's somewhere I needed to do a bit more research on but what I found so far is that we can see an evolution and sort of the response of security forces. We see in the kind of orders and the practice and their kind of engagements we see a shift from children and juveniles being coded as civilians and not a kind of primary target to them becoming legitimate targets throughout the conflict duration so for example we can look at Kenya by the way that by 1954 the security special branch designates children a quote serious security risk and begins allowing the you know enhanced interrogation of children from the age of 13 onwards and Algeria we see by 1957 increasing since that children are being targeted in a tax and we're seeing the emergence of all the separate central triage and transit camps specifically set up for youth detainees there. One quick point just to make here that I'm talking about the way that colonial states respond to insurgent youth in terms of trying to understand the way that youth are involved in colonial security forces there are actually far fewer archival traces for youth being involved in colonial security forces but it is a likely that they are and they're particularly in kind of loyalist paramilitary home guard forces and we do know that there are there's evidence that some are being flipped and recruited for particularly for intelligence translation or support duty so we see that particularly in Kenya that the colonial state is using some children itself response. Really in terms of creating colonial concern around the involvement of the youth in insurgencies where it primarily emerges is in response to children's appearance in court. Actually very early on in emergency you see increasing numbers of juveniles being charged with emergency offenses in the special courts and in Cyprus I counted over 1073 and David French notes that about that about third of all people tried for emergency offenses in special courts were actually high schoolers. In Kenya in 1955 there were 2,571 juveniles in that one year alone charged with emergency offenses so it's this kind of legal response that really sort of begins to give us a sense of the scale of youth involvement but the question then becomes okay so what do you do with these youth whom you have the military has captured they've been sent off sent to court to be tried they've been convicted okay what do we do with them now normally what they would do is juveniles is they would send them to prison or they would find them bind them over but you don't want to send them to prison because that just means they could be radicalized further by adults you don't want to find them or bind them over because that system relies on parental authority and parents paying fees but if the parents are the ones who are failing to parent and property in the first place that's not going to work so what do you do you also can't execute them for their involvement even if they have been involved in in assassinations and in Kenya there are 151 males and two females who have their death sentences and commuted and Cyprus they do actually try to change legislation around the death penalty to allow those 16 and over to be executed but London refuses to allow that to happen but it is notable that the nine secrets we are executed are all youth in this age of 19 to 23 and that is a deliberate and express strategy to try and dissuade youth from being involved in violent insurgency so there's that kind of mobilization of the death penalty there but if you can't do you can't lock them up you can't find them you can't execute them what do you do two things they decided to do firstly they try to use corporal punishment and this becomes distinctly racialized so in Cyprus there are 154 juveniles cain under emergency regulations and this creates a huge uproar it's seen as being antithetical to to Greek constructions of childhood parenting and it sort of ends up being discussed in like nations and everything so that creates too much of a backlash that we have to abandon that but at the same time there are over 3000 young persons being cain from mama related defences in Kenya and nobody bats my lid because cain and corporal punishment is seen as appropriate for Africans and the end of what tends to happen is that a lot of these youth who are are charged and convicted of emergency offenses they end up in detention camps so essentially what we see is that they are pulled into count this primarily originally alongside adults so in Cyprus we see that of the 1118 males were in detention 1957 about 20 percent of them were under 19 and the ICC becomes very concerned about these these youths because of the psychological moral effect of detention and they basically think that the tension is almost equivalent to military service in terms of the trauma and radicalization that it can produce there are similar concerns that are raised in Kenya about the kind of containment and detention there where you have about 2000 boys and about a thousand girls being detained alongside adults and there's particular concern there around sort of overcrowding fear of contagion by hardcore mama and a kind of moral panic around what's called improper sexual relations where they feel the boys are being basically being raped and abused in the camps but there's also this in the sense that they think the youth are kind of stagnating or just being radicalized in these camps they decide to start establishing rehabilitation programs for youth and setting up separate segregated camps for youth and these camps they very much are based on a combination of colonial understandings of local age relations, wealth heuristic responses and global technologies of juvenile reform so we basically tend to kind of mash together a kind of English notions of borstles public schools and kind of security responses to insurgency and Cyprus they don't do a lot of this basically there's a sense that they don't think they can really change the minds of these youths and they don't have the resources to be able to actually do it properly but in Kenya they go all in on it and there's this real sense of colonial paternalism and the sense that African youth are more malleable and more in more need of rehabilitation and reform so we talk about the way that these boys are reclaimable through school and discipline um one officials in charge for ours is he describes a way that hard discipline meted out with sound and flawless justice and best medicine like any African these boys react very favorably and in Kenya they set up one camp in particular which is called Wamumu and this becomes the kind of the crown jewel of the pipeline in many ways and it's the one aspect of rehabilitation and the mama emergency that the state actually thinks works to the extent that any boy that goes through Wamumu comes out with a pardon from governing bearing at the other end and here what's very striking is the way that these youth and so insurgents these were juvenile terrorists are so branded are reconstructed as delinquent disobedient but reclaimable children and what we do at Wamumu is they basically they combine Gakuyu rights of adulthood and circumcision they combine it with a very kind of hard carceral disciplinary authority these are not kind of soft spaces they're still a violence in them but they combine it with actually providing education providing a pathway to adulthood through finding the boys jobs through mentoring they have this kind of combination of generational authority and youth core identity which works very effectively so Wamumu actually becomes this weird sub success story of the mama emergency and the way that it takes these these juvenile terrorists and turns them into respectable and successful proto adults and a way for many of them to go on to successful careers and some of them actually end up working for a special grant as well during the emergency so they go from that terrorist to security worker in the space of of the emergency again this is all gender so there's a lot of investment in in Wamumu and the boys and I'll kind of construct them as as economically productive citizens girls rehabilitation very much our moralization on domesticating these girls of taking these kind of sexualized insurgents and turning them into good mothers and basically teaching them how to wash their babies properly and teaching them domestic skills and the quote that always stands out to me from the archive here is the way that one worker welfare worker Mrs Warren gash talks about the way that rehabilitation transforms girls from being sour unpleasant and downright ugly to being quote really pretty so currently rehabilitation can change your looks as well but there's still the sense that girls are somehow inherently immoral and the colonial authorities still believe that they they can't really be trusted to solve their problems in a happy and honest way so to conclude this gives us a kind of overview of the key trends that we're really looking at in terms of children's involvement in anti-colonial insurgencies and colonial responses the key points I really want to get across to this talk are the way that youth were a significant force in anti-colonial insurgency their involvement is driven by kinship by cohort identities by life experience and by their own political agency rather than just adult manipulation in a way youth insurgencies have been a part of response to colonial states own constructions of childhood and their attempts to control youth we see youth insurgents being involved in multiple roles strip fortifiers to provide sustained manpower we see the tactical exploitation of youth feminality and we see the symbolic mobilization of children of children and discourses of childhood innocence against colonial states we see a number of differences in the way that children are and youth are deployed as well are just shaped by the recruitment networks that are used the nature of the conflict and colonial responses so in Cyprus we see this very kind of urbanized very deliberate very good tactical recruitment driven by Iyoka working through the church working through school groups to kind of pool in all different ages of children and Mama we see it much more decentralized much more a response to kind of local peer networks to all things strategies there's a much more kind of fluid involvement what we see in this sort of youth involvement in anti-colonial insurgencies in a way and colonial responses in many ways this sets a model for the way that child soldering emerges and post-colonial era I would argue that it's colonial their involvement anti-colonial insurgencies it lacks the dehumanization and it lacks the deliberate generational inversion that we see in places like Mozambique or Northern Uganda and the post-colonial era but I do think it very much establishes the logic and the models of recruitment and we see the same combination of voluntary and core and coerced recruitment of direct indirect participation that we see in many post-colonial conflicts and some places I think this is kind of very direct link between anti-colonial insurgencies and post-colonial developments if we look at Palestine if we look at Cambodia, Angola, Ireland places like that we see these kind of real kind of legacies anti-colonial insurgencies for the way that contemporary child soldiering operates now there are these kind of common responses as well we see juveniles being beaten being detained being flagged but also being re-educated and trained to be economically productive and politically acquiescent colonial subjects we see them being reconstructed as delinquents rather than terrorists to facilitate their subsequent rehabilitation but overall the point that I want to make is this is very much preliminary research this is very much a sketch of these trends and what I would like to argue for is the need for more research around children and youth more comparative research more research once such things become possible again and local district archives more kind of intensive oral history investigations in former colonies to really recover and analyze the experience of these youth who are willing to risk life and limb to fight for the future of their countries and to fight for their own future as well so I'll stop there and I hope you found that interesting and I'm very much looking forward to your feedback and your help with some of these questions around sort of military dimensions of what I'm talking about so thank you very much all right wonderful thank you Stacey for that I guess I'll get us started and give a few sort of questions or maybe reflections and and hopefully that'll give the audience a chance to to gather some questions up for those of you in the audience if you do have a question please put it in the Q&A or raise your hand and we'll call upon you so first of all Stacey what I'd say is for preliminary research that was incredibly rich and enlightening so I can't imagine what the project's going to look like when you feel like you're you're at the end I just I'm just really impressed with the the range of of what you're doing and these questions you're you're looking at and I was struck too by you know a lot of what you're talking about sort of has resonances with earlier historical periods as well in the anti-colonial struggle and it made me think a lot about early Indian revolutionary nationalist violence in the 1910s and 20s and you know like these young youthful assassins like Kudirambos who's you know one of the youngest if not the most young youngest person ever executed in British India and you know you look at their sort of explanations for what they're doing as you said they're not like these co-opted sort of hapless victims that they're very deeply political and politically engaged so I think that's a it's a really important thing to emphasize you know this this notion that youth can be very like they can't have a political agenda very much like adults so I guess in terms of question I had I guess this is the question you get when you do any sort of like global history project and it's it's always this fine balancing act between you know drawing these these really important connections and parallels while also maintaining sort of the particularity specific context or conflicts and you know throughout your talk you sort of alluded in some cases to you know different measures in colonial counter-insurgency targeting the youth and I was just wondering if you could maybe speak a little bit more about this and how specifically racial difference and imperial racial hierarchies perhaps conditioned and determined specific responses you know are the responses you use against people in Cyprus going to be very different from Kenya for instance or you know in Ireland for instance to what extent does the culture of the of the colonized country determine sort of the response to the to the youth when their the colonial authorities are clamping down on this and I suppose actually the other the other question that came to my mind as well if you let me pose too is it seems to me that a lot of the issues you're talking about are extremely timely today when we talk about youth radicalization and youth going and joining you know armies around the world or armed organizations fighting and I was just wondering you know to what extent are because you talked about some of these gurus of counter-insurgency like Kilkullen and others and I was wondering like how how aware are people engaged in contemporary deradicalization programs these sorts of things aware of these historical precedents and and looking to them either for inspiration as to what to do or what not to do are they trying to just reinvent the wheel without even you know knowing the wheels have been invented because I find that's one interesting thing about contemporary counter-insurgency is it replicates so many tropes from colonial counter-insurgency mid and 20th century and even into the 19th century without consciously being aware of it in a lot of ways so I was just wondering if you could maybe speak to a bit to that but so I'll leave it there Stacy and look forward to hearing your thoughts thank you Mark to very large and very important questions to kick us off um so I'm sure one of us here so in in terms of your your first question um yes racial hierarchies do condition particular responses um but it varies depending on what aspect um of colonial counter-insurgency we're looking at basically what actors are are involved basically um what I would argue is that we see um the greatest differences in terms of the violence that can be deliberately inflicted on youth insurgents bodies without any concern being expressed um officially about this so we see it particularly uh around as I mentioned briefly that kind of corporal punishment and who can and cannot be flawed um because it was appropriate it was entirely appropriate for for Kenyan youth there was no concern whatsoever about that being used um despite the fact that they are there are more people being flogged and they're being fought more heavily that occurs in Cyprus where there was a huge uproar um about this it's also this is where things get a bit tricky it also seems um that there was sort of more embedded violence in the rehabilitation response in Kenyan and there was uh and Cyprus and there although a lot of the youth um in Cyprus actually ended up in you know Tramecia which we know is a particularly you know harsh camp sometimes called Britain's Belzin even that compared to Tuawumu which has this kind of aura of being this wonderful reformist place even that is that's still incredibly violent in many respects so there there is still this kind of um a difference in the way that that particularly black body youth bodies can be controlled can be punished can be uh have violence inflicted upon them but that is conditioned and contained by the way that um colonial states engage with these broader international um juvenile reform technologies um and the way that actually there are their limits on what can be done to to youth um which are not the same as you can do to adults I think youth are always more more protected they're as I say these youth they come under the um the authority of development and welfare officials or probation officials rather than the kind of military or prison run camps that we see in other aspects of of the pipeline in places like Kenya so there is this kind of there is this scale so the racial hierarchies are are very important um and certainly you can you can sort of trace the um the the depth and the extent of violence and the way that there are more youth sentenced to punishment there there are kind of more floggings there are more death sentences imposed on on black youth in uh Kenya they're more uh severe and more you know capital sentences imposed on arabic roblin jewish youth uh in palestine um and you know compare that to what's happening in ireland again there's this definitely slightly scale so race is a very important dimension um of this and it's how I kind of fit this in with how you fit in race with generation with gender with identity at least as we do really need much more of a kind of intersectional analysis to understand both youth and both involvement but also um cleaner responses as well well your second question of whether kind of contemporary counter-insurgent theorists scholars are aware of these um colonial um legacies or inheritances I really don't think very much to extent you know aside from the poor ones who have been caught by me in a bar at some point and lectured had extensively on this point um there really is this sort of kind of almost a historicism this kind of loss this this idea that they're basically all the contemporary stuff and child soldiering it starts because of mid 1980s and there's not a lot of kind of discussion of anything that happens um before this I think this is a real area where there is this potential really to engage uh to get these kind of new contemporary fears to really think about the legacies as I said with things like momo actually there you have very productive examples of how youth reform rehabilitation do you rather place it actually can genuinely work um and momo today it has a legacy it's now steady it's now one of Kenya's top public schools because it was so successful so it can it can be done there are these these spaces for doing this kind of thing and and sort of looking at at kind of juvenile terrorists as reclaimable delinquents is actually quite a productive way of all thinking about things um compared to some of the policies that are put in place today so thanks for that Stacy that was really interesting and yeah I I kind of I got the impression that yeah there was this sort of amnesia because the the more I I'm I'm still very new to this this idea of colonial origins of contemporary capitalism but the more I read it the more it's it's striking how there's such an ignorance of what was done before and you know like someone like Patreus for instance is reading David Galula about Algeria but is totally unaware of how Galula is reading other earlier French thinkers about the same thing and that there's this almost like unconscious transmission of of knowledge but without actually a conscious sort of transference of that um but let's uh does the audience have any questions um for for Dr. Hind um you guys can put them in the chat or raise your hands if you like all right well maybe while we're waiting for them to collect their thoughts a bit I mean I was wondering Stacy like so with with this project it seems so huge are you are you planning on developing it into a book um or is it you think it's going to be a sort of series of articles instead I mean I have a book on this look like basically yeah so um there's like two chances to that one is that I am developing I mean I am the middle of writing two grant applications hence my slightly frazzled appearance um on the African dimensions of that and basically looking um in a comparative analysis of Anglophone, Francophone and Lusophone territories in Africa between 1940 and 2000 um probably going to use Uganda, Angola and Rwanda slash the DRC as our case studies um so that's going to be a book um and that will kind of do the sort of um military history slash humanitarian histories angle of this with this particular project that um I'm talking about today and it's kind of comparative focus on colonial anti-colonial insurgencies actually I think what I want to do with this is to do it much more broadly and do it much more comparatively and actually I would love to be able to do um something like a special issue um engaging scholars from these different uh working on these different spaces and working on Palestine working on Ireland working in Indochina actually really getting their proper analyses of these rather than my um you know very um surface skating um ignorant assumptions that I may be making about these conflicts so I think to do that kind of properly global history it needs to be done as a team effort and it needs to be done involving uh as many kind of global south scholars as we can pull in to this so I'm hoping that maybe um my work can kind of spark up a few more conversations and kind of pull a few more people so if anyone's interested do let me know um Sri Lanka as well yeah that would be a fantastic um example uh there is something I'm really interested in learning more about that I just I don't have the connections or the experience myself so if I don't want to say just people I should talk to yeah and um I know like at the Samarkar Howard Center we're really keen on on fostering sort of new collaborative projects as well so maybe we should we should get you Stacey and and get a bunch of people together for a workshop or conference on this sometime like it would be brilliant uh we've got a question here from uh I hope I'm pronouncing the name correctly Jan Nicolas Gervais I'm not sure if you can read this Stacey in the in the Q&A but I'll just I'll just read it out um so that everyone can see um so they're wondering um one thing in the history of child soldering there is this truism and a quote uh they believe from the Lord of War where they point out that the origin of the term infantry is infant um I do not know if it is true but there seems to be a parallel with what you said about youth being more prone to violent action is a really historic trend of having youth fighting in a regular manner um it would make sense if you look at the question of age of of conscription so I guess a sort of general question about the the longer ure history of youth fighting in in wars yeah um so this is something that there there is a sort of a debate on within kind of uh the the literature is on on histories of child soldering so there's there's one school that says okay children and youth are involved in most conflicts throughout history that we can see where you look at them you always will will end up finding them and you can go back to the kind of children's crusade you go through the kind of um medieval early modern pages you go through um the British navy and the kind of powder monkeys you go through um these kind of classic um early late modern god I'm such a 20 centuryist kind of European infantry where you see this kind of large numbers of of children being recruited in um from orphanages all this kind of thing um so there is this kind of long history there um where children are involved um and we can see them evolve both in these kind of support capacities but then also particularly once war breaks out you see them increasingly being pulled into these kind of actual combatant roles um as well we see them particularly and that's sort of split between the sort of the poorer youth were pulled into the rank and file and then the kind of you know young teenage officers uh we may be there uh made for 14 15 16 um high units so that's one side of the debate that there is always been child uh involvement in conflicts the flip side of this debate I was going to say well okay yeah there may have been some children involved in some capacity but it's not the same as the way that we're seeing it today it doesn't have it's not being done to the same extent it doesn't have the same logistics the same dynamics and what we're increasingly being seeing is not children being used as as soldiers as you infantry um what we're seeing are children being deliberately deployed as children in our forces so it's a split between what kind of what I was talking about with this distinction between the troop fortifiers and the symbolic mobilization of childhood assumption that what we're seeing in this kind of um particularly kind of post 1945 warfare is the increasing deployment and use of children as children rather than just as physically capable violence workers um so that's going to debate that's going on in the scholarship um at the moment so I hope to answer your question let me um other people please um collect thoughts and typing questions if you had them I mean one of the thought that I had that was very interesting is what you're talking about sort of the evolving sort of um corporates of international law about the issue of child soldier and a youth soldiering and um you mentioned sort of um interventions made by um formally colonized nations in these debates and I was wondering if you can maybe expand on that a bit more and I was very intrigued when you you mentioned I think it was in 1976 Canada was one of the nations that argued for a more expansive category of of of of not considering them illegal combatants and if there are over 16 and saying that you can have autonomy you can have sort of um political agency and and therefore you you shouldn't be considered just a victim but as a an active you know agent within this um I just wonder if you know in the Canadian example why why that was and and some of maybe the other ways um these these formally colonized nations sort of tried to shape international law based on their own experiences of decolonization and anti-colonial resistance yeah so it's a really interesting area and if you look at the evolution of international humanitarian law on child soldiering as I mentioned it's the first time it really becomes an issue it's in these additional protocols to the Geneva Convention 1977 um it then crops up again uh in the kind of the Eurydination Convention for its child in 1989 to try to expand things that's not successful so it then gets pulled up into the kind of optional protocols you even mentioned 2000 which is where they kind of expand it more to this kind of category of anyone under 18 but back in these for the 1970s and earlier discussions around this um it's really interesting in the way sometimes I'm racking my brain I can't remember exactly why Canada has evolved after I've did but I'll have to go back and check and unfold that that up with you but what we see is a split between a number of nations who wish to expand protections and basically say well elsewhere um in IHL and the Geneva Protocols we um define child who does anyone under 18 so we should take that for this article as well and say anyway under 18 should not be involved but this um contradicts a lot of domestic military recruitment policies for nations like Canada and Britain so there's a lot of resistance to this so essentially what you get is a split between one hand you have nations who are adopting this kind of 18 as a limit this kind of much more humanitarian emerging humanitarian discourse that sees youth as innocent as they've been protected and youth as having no place on the battlefield and this actually involves a number of Latin American countries uh you know and today we see child soldiers being actually quite a Latin American problem so this is kind of a weird dimension there um and then a few sort of global north nations and sort of uh Eastern European nations as well I'll say no there should be broad protection for youth here on the other side you have these nations who are arguing that no actually 14 15 seems more appropriate precisely because we have this you know recent experience of children and youth being able and wanting to be involved um in these these conflicts um the three nations that that make that point most clearly and most most forcibly are are Greece Vietnam um and Algeria actually um Nigeria also makes that point as well based on experience of the the biafra war but it's the anti-colonial it's Algeria uh Vietnam and Greece and they all sort of talk about the the desire for youth to be patriotically active that they will naturally um it is like a product of their good citizenship that youth will want to be involved in these companies and will want to have the capacity and you cannot deny youth their right and their capacity to protect their family to protect their nation and that's the rhetoric that comes up and it's Algeria in particular that picks up this this this rhetoric again and again and kind of you know up and you see it kind of emerging once again in the 1980s and 90s and sort of saying that this that youth involvement that youth involvement in these anti-colonial liberation struggles is qualitatively different from the type of involvement we see in later new wars and that this youth involvement in anti-colonial liberation should be lauded that it is patriotic that it is right that it is part of their duty and it is a reflection on their their citizenship that they and their their sort of their their agency and their um their strength that they want to do this so there is this kind of distinct sort of legacy um legally discursively um for a number of of you know formerly colonized nations that were involved in these struggles where they do see that there is value and they repeatedly argue for the right of teenagers to be involved in these kind of struggles yeah it seemed to me that would tie into sort of um sort of older arguments and debates about how the the cynical view of international law is that it is simply serves the powerful and and uh in limiting the resources and the weapons available to the weak and that you know the nations have just gone through this don't want to tie their hands even more in asymmetric conflicts but against vastly more superior forces so you know that that makes total sense there is a flip side of that is and that the one nation that holds up a lot of the development of international law is actually on this area is the U.S. oh really the holders yeah and they're the one i think one of only two nations now that has not signed the young convention of the rights of the child so the sticking point is always the americans interesting uh we have another question from uh ian nikola um i'll just read it out quote i i also found an interesting parallel in what you said about youth heroes and anti-colonial conflicts um and for instance heroic figures of the french revolution such as gavrash or viala um to my knowledge it's much discussed um uh if these figures even really existed but perhaps the glorification of children heroes in the exemplary revolutions the 18th century inspired some movements to use young people to create their own symbols uh later on yeah so actually um david rosen has written about this quite extensively and he kind of explores this kind of you know cultural memories around these these child heroes in the 18th and 19th century um yeah it's it's interesting i think um but for me it's a case of okay can i kind of tie a a direct linkage between what's happening and those kind of um discursive constructions um of of childhood there and later um recruitment by anti-colonial groups or by colonial militaries themselves so i've never seen sort of any direct evidence um of you know gavrash or any figures like that being being quoted in any anything but i think you're right i think there is this kind of um cultural memory that that emerges um which could be involved i mean another thing that i haven't really spoken about today but i think is quite um important if you look at the 1950s and 60s it's actually also a period where the very category adolescent and teenager is actually emerging so there is this kind of new form of identity um that has been brought to the fore of this kind of teenage identity and that is very much linked discursively with um this idea of you know a new age a new birth for the nation struggling for independence as well as these new kind of teenagers adolescents who are struggling for their independence and those two things become much more linked so in a way i think almost a kind of closer connection there um is between this kind of very concept of about adolescence um and this kind of use of involvement as well there is a kind of weird overlap that by the time you get to the 1960s and 70s there obviously it's the time of use revolution in europe as well so you have in france you have 1968 you have kind of use revolution in germany places like that um there there isn't any connection drawn between that and what's happening in the colonies this is kind of weird disconnection um and even though there is this kind of recognition of the power of youth revolution in europe and that's very present in historical memory and present in historiography there is this kind of you know corresponding gap and the kind of colonial literature is there so it's an interesting one and gaffrush is a great figure but it's it's not something i've been able to kind of definitively say there is a linkage there yet okay looking uh if i might probably with another just question um i i i remember what you mentioned um fano um briefly um and his sort of interview with um a youth soldier and you know fano you know famously he saw the the freedom struggle as a way of you know creating a new national subject right and it is through violence and the violence of the liberation that you're going to create the Algerian nation and i was just wondering you know imperialism colonialism itself is this paternalistic endeavor where the colonized themselves are infantilized i mean did you do you know like i can't i can't remember if he if he does mention this specifically in the text but does he talk about perhaps in a way you know the freedom struggle is a way of sort of uh the the infantilized youth asserting their their manhood their adulthood in a way and more specifically do do you know like did fano have deeper sort of thoughts and reflections on the involvement of Algerian youth um in the uh in the Algerian war of independence yeah um again i mean i have to do a bit more research on in the final life we read for this recently i haven't come across any kind of great detail of this um actually Derrida is the one who picks it up in a bit more detail and talks about the kind of the figure of the youth and how it's linked with with um future futures and independence um i think it's maybe 65 so yeah so so Derrida actually does more than than fano on this as far as i've read thus far i say i haven't kind of gone through all of fano's work so i would like to be quoted definitively on that but it was just that kind of it's just that passing discussion um that really kind of which one which lufa's works is now that really just stood out to me and that that quotation that but they kill children too that that really struck me um from his experience of working with these uh on the kind of front lines in the clinics um it's like a what example um any other questions from the audience if there aren't then i think um stacey has definitely earned a break after that uh wonderful talk and and all all the questioning um so i'd like just everyone to i guess we can't really see you but let's all just you know in spirit and i'll do it physically thanks stacey for a wonderful talk oh we do have something in the q and a we have uh they're asking whether it could be the terrorism as a consequence of foreign policy yes countless evidence that mass miller of civilians to basically uh i guess does the west reap what it sows and particularly in the ways it it targets children i'm going to say that i'm a historian and um so to answer this one i i suspect i would need um more knowledge of the more recent developments um and charles virgin particularly around its use in um Islamic insurgencies like as i suspect that's what this this question is really getting at and developments in afghanistan and syria and iraq and those other places like that um there is there's work by some scholars like mia bloom and uh a really good recent u n reports by uh that has explored this that are that issue that question in more detail so it's it's not something that i'm an expert on um but yeah and i don't know what to the west does reap what it sows looking long term as a as a colonial and global historian i think there is definitely um a point to be made about the way that that global structures global inequalities have set up conflicts um have shaped youth experiences and in particular the way that globalization shapes youth identities in the sense of youth in more recent years being able to see and compare their lot much more widely than perhaps these these youth that i'm talking about the 1940s and 50s were able to do that is i was often driving um a lot of more more recent developments um as well yeah so i can't really answer that question with a lot of authority um or skill i'm afraid um but i would say look if you're interested in that look mia blooms work on on child development terrorism i think we'll give some of the answers that you're looking for there yeah and just it seems to me that the category of you know generational analysis um is of course very apt when we think of contemporary counterinsurgency i mean just the idea of the the enemy combatant where it's so long as you're an adult you're automatically a legitimate target right and um thinking about how categories of youth and and play into that but um i think again uh we've made stacy do enough hard work this evening so thank you again stacy for brilliant talk um i just uh like to flag up for everyone who's still with us um the so this is the final talk um for the new directions program um if 2021 for this term but hopefully you'll all join us um next term and next year um our first talk is going to take place on the 26th of january uh and it will be delivered by professor julie gotlieb who's a professor of modern history at sheffield university and she's going to be talking her paper is going to be entitled an epidemic of nervous breakdowns the psychological fallout of the late uh antebellum britain so please do join us for that um and thank you again stacy for a wonderful talk thank you um Merry Christmas everyone have a good evening everyone take care