¹ Of 139,000 alien women residing in Britain in 1922, an estimated 30,000, more than 20 percent, were native born: “Census of Aliens in the UK, 1915–1924,” Public Record Office (PRO), Home Office Aliens Department HO45/11522/287235.

² A fuller discussion of naturalized men will appear in my “‘Having Lived Close Beside Them All the Time’: Negotiating National Identities through Personal Networks,” in “Kith and Kin: Essays on the Personal Relationships of Community,” ed. Richard I. Jobs and Patrick F. McDevitt, special issue, Journal of Social History (forthcoming).

³ Eley, Geoff and Suny, Grigor, “Introduction: From the Moment of Social History to the Work of Cultural Representation,” in Becoming National: A Reader (Oxford, 1996), 4–9, 11Google Scholar; Cesarini, David and Fulbrook, Mary, eds., Citizenship, Nationality and Migration in Europe (London, 1996), 1Google Scholar.

⁴ Brubaker, Rogers, Citizenship and Nationhood in France and Germany (Cambridge, MA, 1992), 50, 52, 72, 114Google Scholar.

⁵ Hansen, Randall, Citizenship and Immigration in Post-war Britain: The Institutional Origins of a Multicultural Nation (Oxford, 2000), 38–39, 195Google Scholar; Feldman, David, Englishmen and Jews: Social Relations and Political Culture, 1840–1914 (New Haven, CT, 1994), 381Google Scholar.

⁶ Parliamentary Debates (Commons), 3rd ser., vol. 199 (3 March 1870), col. 1118.

⁷ Hansen, Citizenship and Immigration, 39. M. Paige Baldwin has shown that concerns about the complexity and ambiguity of descent and nationality in British colonies constrained lawmakers from strict application of jus sanguinis in “Subject to Empire: Married Women and the British Nationality and Status of Aliens Act,” Journal of British Studies 40 (October 2000): 522–56Google ScholarPubMed.

⁸ In practice, definitions of nationality “oscillated uncertainly between a statist and an ethnocultural pole,” informed by a “diffuse set of habits of thought and feeling.” Brubaker, Citizenship and Nationhood, 117. Also see Randall Hansen, Citizenship and Immigration, 195; Cesarini and Fulbrook, Citizenship, Nationality and Migration, 5.

⁹ Caron, Vicki, “The Task of Becoming Citizens,” in Between France and Germany: The Jews of Alsace-Lorraine, 1871–1918 (Stanford, CA, 1988), 1–26Google Scholar; Marion Kaplan shows Jewish women's agency and their stake in constructing a “Jew-friendly” version of German cultural identity that was bourgeois, cosmopolitan, and inclusive, while simultaneously documenting the everyday forms of violence that “top-down” interpretations elide, such as the Putznarrinnen (cleaning-madwomen) who “scrubbed and polished away their Jewishness” or the sacrifice of Eastern European and working-class Jews, in The Making of the Jewish Middle Class: Women, Family, and Identity in Imperial Germany (Oxford, 1991)Google Scholar.

¹⁰ For a cogent elaboration of this argument, see Yuval-Davis, Nira, “Nationalism and Racism,” Cahiers de recherche sociologique 20 (1993): 183–202Google Scholar, specifically 187 and 191–92; also Burton, Antoinette, “Who Needs the Nation? Interrogating ‘British’ History,” Journal of Historical Sociology 10, no. 3 (September 1997): 231–22, 236, 239Google Scholar; Doty, Roxanne Lynn, “Sovereignty and the Nation: Constructing the Boundaries of National Identity,” in State Sovereignty as Social Construct, ed. Biersteker, Thomas J. and Weber, Cynthia (Cambridge, 1996), 123Google Scholar; Cesarini and Fulbrook, Citizenship, Nationality and Migration, 7.

¹¹ For other examples, see Sahlins, Peter, Boundaries: The Making of France and Spain in the Pyrenees (Berkeley, 1989), 8, 22Google Scholar; Feldman, David, Englishmen and Jews: Social Relations and Political Culture, 1840–1914 (New Haven, CT, 1994), 11Google Scholar; Noiriel, Gerard, The French Melting Pot: Immigration, Citizenship, and National Identity (1988; Minneapolis, 1996), 46, 59, 61, 63, 215–16Google Scholar.

¹² On “qualifying conditions,” see Brubaker, Citizenship and Nationhood, 34.

¹³ Eley and Suny, “From the Moment of Social History,” 26; see also Klug, Francesca, “‘Oh, to be in England’: The British Case Study,” in Woman-Nation-State, ed. Yuval-Davis, Nira and Anthius, Floya (London, 1989), 16Google Scholar; Vogel, Ursula, “Is Citizenship Gender-Specific?” in The Frontiers of Citizenship, ed. Vogel, Ursula and Moran, Michael (London, 1991), 58–85Google Scholar. Pioneering works on this question were of course Pateman, Carole, The Disorder of Women: Democracy, Feminism, and Political Theory (Cambridge, 1989), esp. 11Google Scholar, and The Sexual Contract (Cambridge, 1988)Google Scholar.

¹⁴ Davin, Anna, “Imperialism and Motherhood,” History Workshop Journal 5 (Spring 1978): 9–66Google Scholar; Fuchs, Rachel G., Poor and Pregnant in Paris: Strategies for Survival in the Nineteenth Century (New Brunswick, NJ, 1992), esp. 56–76Google Scholar; Camiscioli, Elisa, “Producing Citizens, Reproducing the ‘French Race’: Immigration, Demography, and Pronatalism in Early Twentieth-Century France,” Gender and History 13, no. 3 (November 2001): 593–621Google Scholar.

¹⁵ Pateman, Disorder of Women, 11.

¹⁶ Kerber, Linda, No Constitutional Right to Be Ladies: Women and the Obligations of Citizenship (New York, 1998), xxiiiGoogle Scholar. Kerber follows a series of similar questions through U.S. case law. See especially her distinction between political rights expressed in nationality and civil rights constrained by coverture, 35–46.

¹⁷ Moraga, Cherre, “From a Long Line of Vendidas: Chicanas and Feminism” in Feminist Studies/Critical Studies, ed. de Lauretis, Teresa (Bloomington, IN, 1986), 172–90Google Scholar; Yuval-Davis, “Nationalism and Racism,” 189.

¹⁸ Parker, Andrew, Russo, Mary, Sommer, Doris, and Yaeger, Patricia, introduction to their Nationalisms and Sexualities (London, 1992), 1–18Google Scholar; Burton, “Who Needs the Nation?”; Yuval-Davis, “Nationalism and Racism,” esp. 196, 198–99, 234; Hall, Catherine, “In the Name of Which Father?” International Labor and Working Class History 41 (Spring 1992): 24Google Scholar. Brubaker identified exclusion as equally important to inclusion in defining citizenship. See Citizenship and Nationhood, 72.

¹⁹ Price, Richard, An Imperial War and the British Working Class: Working-Class Attitudes and Reactions to the Boer War, 1899–1902 (London, 1972)Google Scholar remains the most analytical work. Also see Colley, Linda, Britons: Forging the Nation, 1707–1837 (New Haven, CT, 1992)Google Scholar.

²⁰ Exceptions include Drakulic, Slavenka, The Balkan Express: Fragments from the Other Side of War (New York, 1993)Google Scholar; Clark, Christopher, “The Limits of the Confessional State: Conversions to Judaism in Prussia, 1914–1843,” Past and Present, no. 147 (1995): 159–79Google Scholar; Nirenberg, David, Communities of Violence: Persecution of Minorities in the Middle Ages (Princeton, NJ, 1996), 13–14, 166–99Google Scholar; Bynum, Victoria E., Unruly Women: The Politics of Social and Sexual Control in the Old South (Chapel Hill, NC, 1992)Google Scholar; Hall, Jacquelyn Dowd, “The Mind That Burns in Each Body: Women, Rape, and Racial Violence,” in Powers of Desire: The Politics of Sexuality, ed. Snitow, Anne, Stansell, Christine, and Thompson, Sharon (New York, 1986), 328–49Google Scholar; Moraga, “From a Long Line of Vendidas.”

²¹ The fullest account to date of these campaigns is Baldwin, “Subject to Empire.” Also see Klug, “`Oh, to be in England.'” For roughly parallel developments in the United States, see Bredbrenner, Candace Lewis, A Nationality of Her Own: Women, Marriage, and the Law of Citizenship (Berkeley, 1998)Google Scholar.

²² Moch, Leslie Page, Moving Europeans: Migration in Western Europe since 1650 (Bloomington, IN, 1992)Google Scholar; Redford, Arthur, Labour Migration in England, 1900–1850 (1964; Manchester, 1976)Google Scholar.

²³ Feldman, David, “The Importance of Being English: Jewish Immigration and the Decay of Liberal England,” in Metropolis London: Histories and Representations since 1800, ed. Feldman, David and Jones, Gareth Stedman (London, 1989), 58, 69–70, 76Google Scholar; Gainer, Bernard, The Alien Invasion: The Origins of the Aliens Act of 1905 (London, 1972)Google Scholar; Garrard, John, The English and Immigration, 1880–1910 (Oxford, 1971)Google Scholar; Klug, “‘Oh, to Be in England,’” 18. The quotation is from Cesarini and Fulbrook, Citizenship, 61–62.

²⁴ See Sacks, David Harris, The Widening Gate: Bristol and the Atlantic Economy (Berkeley, 1991)Google Scholar; American Historical Association, “Seascapes Conference Generates Interest,” Perspectives (April 2003): 17; Rediker, Marcus, Between the Devil and the Deep Blue Sea: Merchant Seamen, Pirates, and the Anglo-American Maritime World, 1700–1750 (Cambridge, 1987)Google Scholar. On “contact zones” generally, see Sahlins, Boundaries, 4–5; Pratt, Mary Louise, Imperial Eyes: Studies in Travel Writing and Transculturation (London, 1992), 4, 6Google Scholar.

²⁵ Moch distinguished three types of urban labor markets, each generating a different demographic profile. Tyneside and South Shields were typical of heavy industrial towns in attracting a preponderance of men. See Moving Europeans, 129–39; also Noiriel, French Melting Pot, 152.

²⁶ This estimate is based on my ongoing tabulations. In France, too, the most common form of “mixed marriage” was that between a male migrant and a native woman. Noiriel, French Melting Pot, 152.

²⁷ Baldwin, “Subject to Empire,” 525–26; Parliamentary Debates (Commons), vol. 200 (1 April 1870), col. 1130, and vol. 200 (25 April 1870), col. 1741.

²⁸ Parliamentary Debates (Commons), 3rd ser., vol. 199 (3 March 1870), col. 1124.

²⁹ Baldwin, “Subject to Empire,” 525–26.

³⁰ Parliamentary Debates (Commons), vol. 200 (25 April 1870), cols. 1741–42.

³¹ Between 1608 and 1870 British subjects derived their status from the crown and not the state. Expatriation, naturalization, or marriage could not deprive a British-born man or woman of his or her nationality; see Baldwin, “Subject to Empire,” 525–26. But “under an 1870 statute any British woman who married an alien would lose her British subject status, while men who married aliens retained this status and extended it to their wives”; see Hansen, Randall, Citizenship and Immigration in Post-war Britain (Oxford, 2000), 52Google Scholar. Also see Klug, “`Oh, to be in England,'” 22. The continuing exclusion of exogamous widows ran counter to late nineteenth-century trends, including the gradual lifting of coverture and the obsession with population manifested in eugenics; Bredbrenner, A Nationality of Her Own, 19. Baldwin shows it was specifically kept in place to maximize the extent of British nationality, thus loyalty, in the colonies; see “Subject to Empire.”

³² One scholar has suggested that women's status has historically approximated that of “resident aliens” anyway, enjoined, like Athenian “metics” to bear the burdens of citizenship without its prerogatives; Vogel, “Is Citizenship Gender-Specific?” 60, 64. Burton termed women in this respect “anti-citizens”; “Who Needs the Nation?” 231–32; while Phizacklea et al. considered women “exile[s] from citizenship,” in Gender and International Migration in Europe: Employment, Welfare, Politics, ed. Kofman, Eleanor, Phizacklea, Annie, Raghuram, Parvati, and Sales, Rosemary (London, 2000), 83–86Google Scholar. Ruth Lister writes that citizenship rested on women's exclusion, in “Citizenship Engendered,” in Critical Social Policy: A Reader, ed. Taylor, David (New York, 1996), 168–69Google Scholar.

³³ Feldman, “The Importance of Being English,” 67; Baldwin, “Subject to Empire,” 534; Klug, “`Oh, to be in England,'” 32 n 1. Aliens voted in some U.S. elections as well. See Anderson, Margo, “The History of Women and the History of Statistics,” Journal of Women's History 4, no. 1 (Spring 1992): 19CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

³⁴ Baldwin, “Subject to Empire,” 533; Klug, “`Oh, to be in England,'” 23. Analogously, French citizenship only became valuable when the Third Republic began making entitlements contingent on it. Noiriel, French Melting Pot, xix, 50, 78–79. T. H. Marshall made a similar argument for the implications of twentieth-century social citizenship in Britain in Class, Citizenship and Social Development: Essays by T. H. Marshall, ed. Lipset, Seymour Martin (Garden City, NY, 1964), 111–19Google Scholar.

³⁵ Hodgson, George, The Borough of South Shields: From the Earliest Period to the Close of the Nineteenth Century (1903; South Shields, 1996), 22Google Scholar.

³⁶ Carr, Barry, “Black Geordies,” in Geordies: Roots of Regionalism, ed. Colls, Robert and Lancaster, Bill (Edinburgh, 1992), 132, 134, 146–47Google Scholar.

³⁷ Ravenstein, E. G., “The Laws of Migration,” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society 48 (1885): 167–227, esp. 218, 220Google Scholar. Yet the apparent surfeit of women may have been no greater than in other British locales: in 1881, men outnumbered women in South Shields by 100 to 95, although among British natives the ratio was reversed, with 102.5 women to 100 men, while nationally the ratio was 105 women to 100 men.

³⁸ Ruth Lister, after Nancy Fraser, divided the public sphere into three realms; the state, the economy of paid employment, and public discourse. Because the local economy depended on noncitizens, public discourse in South Shields may perhaps have been more inclusive of nonlocals than the state. Lister, “Citizenship Engendered,” 169.

³⁹ Memorial, 1 May 1917, PRO, HO144/1473/329558, also HO334/81.

⁴⁰ Memorial, 29 October 1918, PRO, HO144/1504/371562, also HO334/83.

⁴¹ Memorial, 16 October 1918, PRO, HO3341503/370770, also HO334/83. Annie's name appears spelled consistently with an n while Christian's appears with a u, suggesting she may have anglicized her name.

⁴² Baldwin, “Subject to Empire,” 525–26; Vogel argues that marriage not only effectively erases women's civil personhood, but that citizenship itself is premised on the citizen's domination of “his” wife. “Is Citizenship Gender-Specific?” 62–63.

⁴³ Brubaker acknowledged that while “naturalization may be open to … all persons meeting certain conditions … the opportunity to satisfy these conditions is itself closed.” See Citizenship and Nationhood, 34.

⁴⁴ This example is found in the memorial of Andrew Anderson, 1897, PRO, HO144/407/B23795. On men's claim to citizenship through work and women's consequent exclusion, see Lister, “Citizenship Engendered,” 172–73.

⁴⁵ “Nationalist discourse silences and marginalizes women from public roles” including “property, education, profession and politics—all those opportunities that qualified men for roles in the public sphere.” Eley and Suny, “From the Moment of Social History,” 26.

⁴⁶ The existence of his wife prompted Home Office personnel to make an exception in favor of Peter Julius Jensen's 1912 naturalization petition, for example, for they reasoned, “it is very likely the applicant who is married keeps a house permanently and is therefore established in the UK.” PRO, HO144/1181/217650.

⁴⁷ Naturalization of Mary Sargant-Florence, 1903, PRO, HO144/1035/178724. An earlier applicant was apparently equally affluent: Mrs. Agnes Elise Henriette Richter “ha[d] gone abroad for the winter” and had a son, Johannes Eduard Siegfried, at Winchester, a public school. Her referees included the dean of New College, Oxford, the chaplain of Magdalen, two MDs, and a former controller general of the Government of India. K. H. Molony, solicitor, to Home Office, 22 October 1901, PRO, HO144/971/B36892.

⁴⁸ Sir Edward Troup, memorandum on “Treatment of Alien Enemies,” n.d. (ca. June 1918), War Cabinet document CAB24/55 (GT4931), fols. 129–32. The fullest treatment of this episode is Panayi, Panikos, The Enemy in Our Midst: Germans in Britain during the First World War (New York, 1991)Google Scholar; also see Davies, Norman, “The Poles of Great Britain, 1914–1919,” Slavonic and East European Review 50 (1972): 66Google Scholar, “Germans in British History,” and “The Destruction of the German Communities in Britain during the First World War,” in his Germans in Britain, 1500 to the Present (London, 1996), 8–9, 116–22Google Scholar, and Immigration, Ethnicity and Racism in Britain, 1815–1845 (Manchester, 1994), 106–7, 124Google Scholar.

⁴⁹ These were accompanied by ad hominem attacks on Home Office officials such as John Pedder and George Cave. Troup, “Treatment of Alien Enemies,” fol. 132; Panayi, Enemy in Our Midst, esp. 193. Panayi labels First World War–era anti-Germanism the worst outbreak of xenophobia since the thirteenth-century expulsion of British Jewry in “The Destruction of the German Communities,” 113, 121–23, 125, 129, and Immigration, Ethnicity and Racism, 124.

⁵⁰ British-born children were British by jus soli.

⁵¹ Mr. W. J. McCullough, Eleanor Otto's agent, to the Home Office, 11 May 1915, PRO, HO144/1409/275200; Panayi, Enemy in Our Midst, 50–56, 261.

⁵² Panayi, Enemy in Our Midst, 59, 61, 64–65; Baldwin, “Subject to Empire,” esp. 527–29, 555–56.

⁵³ Memorial, 16 October 1918, PRO, HO144/1503/370770; also PRO, HO334/83.

⁵⁴ Sommer, PRO, HO334/80 and HO144/1462/318859; Kopke, PRO, HO334/81 and HO144/1265/237438; and Homan, PRO, HO334/81 and HO144/1427/287004.

⁵⁵ Nordvall, PRO, HO334/77 and HO144/1391/269662; Heylen, PRO, HO334/81 and HO1441484/349607; Hoie, PRO, HO334/83 and HO144/1509/374858; Berg, PRO, HO334/81 and HO144/1485351342; and Bengston, PRO, HO334/83 and HO144/1504/371562.

⁵⁶ Wassnig, PRO, HO334/81 and HO144/1472/326801; and Meyer, PRO, HO334/81 and HO144/1473/330619.

⁵⁷ PRO, HO334/81 and HO144/1473/329550.

⁵⁸ Elsie Heylen to the Home Office, enclosing memorial, 30 October 1917, PRO, HO144/1484/349607.

⁵⁹ Chief Constable of South Shields to the Home Office, 3 May 1915, PRO, HO144/1391/269662.

⁶⁰ PRO, HO334/81 and HO144/1473/329555.

⁶¹ PRO, HO334/85 and HO144/1371/264716.

⁶² Case of Otto, 23 April 1915, PRO, HO144/1409/275200; Alice Homan, July 1917, PRO, HO144/1427/287004; Elsie Heylen, 30 October 1917, PRO, HO144/1484/349607; Home Office to Elizabeth Rutkowsky, 8 August 1919, citing British Nationality and Status of Aliens Act, 1914, PRO, HO144/1371/264716.

⁶³ Klug, “`Oh, to be in England,'” 16, 22; Baldwin, “Subject to Empire,” 541.

⁶⁴ This was reflected in the injured tone with which officials repeatedly described “a British woman who voluntarily throws her lot in with an alien by marrying him,” quoted in Baldwin, “Subject to Empire,” 541.

⁶⁵ See, e.g., Chief Constable of South Shields to the Home Office, 4 December 1917, PRO, HO144/1485/351342.

⁶⁶ For an example, see Chief Constable of South Shields to the Home Office, 4 December 1917, PRO, HO144/1485/351342, regarding Mary Isabella Berg, “to whom a certificate may be safely granted.”

⁶⁷ Chief Constable of South Shields to the Home Office, 17 May 1917, PRO, HO144/1472/326801.

⁶⁸ Chief Constable William Scott to the Home Office in the case of Catherine Barker, 12 February 1917, PRO, HO144/1473/329551.

⁶⁹ Elsie Heylen, Belgian; Mary Hoie, Norwegian; Annie Thorins, Danish; and Mary Isabella Berg and Andrea Olefine Bengston, Swedish.

⁷⁰ Town Clerk of South Shields, List of Claims under Riot Damages Act, 1886, 14 July 1915, Tyne and Wear Archives Service T95/172.

⁷¹ Nordvall also paid the substantial one pound fee by postal order on 23 October 1914. PRO, HO144/1391/269662 and HO334/77.

⁷² J. J. Bell, c/o Readhead and Sons Ltd., West Dock, South Shields, ca. February 1919, to Home Office, PRO, HO144/1504/371562.

⁷³ Ironically, Frederick and Charles Otto, as well as Theodor Sommer, locally born like their mothers, remained British subjects by right of jus soli. The Otto household can be found in the 1891 Census Enumerators’ Books (CEB), RG12/4159, fol. 122v, residing at 122 and 124 John Williamson Street in Westoe District #34. Paul and Bessie Summers and their two young children were found residing at 2 Dockwray Bank in Westoe District #30, CEB, RG12/4159 fol. 10v.

⁷⁴ Instructions, 12 September 1917, PRO, HO45/10882/343995.

⁷⁵ Memorial of Eleanor Hunter Otto, 2 March 1915, PRO, HO144/1409/215200.

⁷⁶ Memorial of Elizabeth Sommer, PRO, HO144/1462/318859, with referees Dr. Blair, in practice twenty-five years, and Mr. White, a ship's plater, who had known her for eighteen years.

⁷⁷ Memorial, 16 October 1918, PRO, HO144/1503/370770.

⁷⁸ This corroborates the observation that women's claims making often adopted hegemonic, thus androcentric, “discourses and rhetorics of citizenship,” disregarding or rejecting their gendered disqualification. Canning, Kathleen and Rose, Sonya O., “Introduction: Gender, Citizenship, and Subjectivity: Some Historical and Theoretical Considerations,” Gender and History 13, no. 3 (November 2001): 431CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁷⁹ Geordie identity has proven elastic: originally referring only to Novocastrians born in “spitting distance” of the Tyne, the term now implies a broader northeastern identity. Colls, Robert and Lancaster, Bill, eds., Geordies: Roots of Regionalism (Edinburgh, 1992), ixGoogle Scholar.

⁸⁰ In contrast, in France before 1927 legislation permitting French women to retain their citizenship in spite of marriage, fully 20 percent of naturalizations were actually “reintegrations” of French-born women who had lost their nationality through marrying a foreign national. Noiriel, French Melting Pot, 64, 158–59.

⁸¹ Baldwin, “Subject to Empire,” 553–54. Also see, for an abortive effort by New Zealand and Australia to allow women to opt out of acquiring their husbands’ nationality at marriage, Colonial Office Circular Despatch D#71, “Nationality of Married Women,” 18 October 1935, PRO, CO232/1322/18.

⁸² Paul, Kathleen, Whitewashing Britain: Race and Citizenship in the Postwar Era (Ithaca, NY, 1997), 14–15Google Scholar.

⁸³ Gordon, Paul, Policing Immigration: Britain's Internal Controls (London, 1985), 39Google Scholar. When the position was equalized in the 1980s, it was by depriving New Commonwealth–born men of spousal rights, not by extending them to women. Hansen, Citizenship and Immigration, 230–31.

⁸⁴ Rose and Canning, “Gender, Citizenship and Subjectivity,” 427–43, esp. 428–31; Lister, Ruth, “Citizenship: Towards a Feminist Synthesis,” Feminist Review 57 (Autumn 1997): 28–48, esp. 29CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁸⁵ The reference is of course to Anderson, Benedict's landmark work Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism (1983; London, 1991)Google Scholar. For a critique of Anderson's gender-blind analysis, see Pierson, Ruth Roach, “Nations: Gendered, Racialized, Crossed with Empire,” in Gendered Nations: Nationalism and Gender Order in the Long Nineteenth Century, ed. Blom, Ida, Hagemann, Karen, and Hall, Catherine (Oxford, 2000), 41–43Google Scholar. Prasenjit Duara questioned whether states and subjects conceived of nationality in the same way, suggesting the existence of “multiple and overlapping” imagined communities, in Eley and Suny, Becoming National, 151–53.

⁸⁶ On deportations, see Panayi, Immigration, Ethnicity and Racism, 106; also minutes of the Joint Standing Aliens and Nationality Committee for 1919 and 1920, memoranda nos. 10, 25, 82, 111, 119, PRO, HO45/19966/374304; and “Closing disorderly premises under provisions of the Aliens Order 1920,” PRO, HO45/11014/324204. In fairness, records of failed naturalization applications remain unavailable.

⁸⁷ Memorial, July/December 1919; Home Office minutes 26 July 1920, PRO, HO144/1591/382304.

⁸⁸ South Shields Chief Constable to the Home Office, 28 May 1921, PRO, HO144/1704/418430.

⁸⁹ Vogel, “Is Citizenship Gender-Specific?,” 65; Yuval-Davis, “Nationalism and Racism,” 197.

⁹⁰ E. P. Thompson repudiated the notion of cultures as unproblematically “shared meanings”; see Customs in Common: Studies in Traditional Popular Culture (New York, 1991), 6Google Scholar.

⁹¹ Ross, Ellen, “Fierce Questions and Taunts: Married Life in Working-Class London, 1870–1914,” Feminist Studies 8 (Fall 1982): 575–602Google Scholar, “Survival Networks: Women's Neighborhood Sharing in London before World War I,” History Workshop Journal 15 (Spring 1983): 4–27Google Scholar, and “‘Not the Sort That Would Sit on the Doorstep’: Respectability in Pre–World War I Neighborhoods,” International Labor and Working Class History 27 (Spring 1985): 39–59Google Scholar.

⁹² This point is made effectively by Yuval-Davis in “Nationalism and Racism,” 186 and passim, and was of course the argument in Hobsbawm, Eric and Ranger, Terence, eds., The Invention of Tradition (Cambridge, 1980)Google Scholar; also see Noiriel, French Melting Pot, 215–16; Doty, “Sovereignty and the Nation,” 122.

⁹³ The formulation “border guards” is that of Yuval-Davis, “Nationalism and Racism,” 191.