The Guns of August by Barbara W. Tuchman condensed the opening drama of The Great War into 440 pages. “Europe as a powder keg” is easily described and articulated through analysis of the belligerents’ pre-war operations and alliances. Barbara Tuchman is a Pulitzer Prize winning historian and journalist, her main focus centers around geopolitical affairs. Tuchman’s analysis of the first thirty days of the war demonstrates how inadequate each nation’s military was at the wars onset. The Guns of August present the reader with the primary factors of the disposition, political, and initial combat operations that shaped the First World War. However, the Author’s writing style was the forefront in conveying to the reader that Europe was foolishly …show more content…
The alliances of Europe were what ultimately led each nation into declarations of war amongst one another. The modern era was quickly approaching and the monarchies of old would …show more content…
Chronologically, Tuchman stayed to the general timeline of the events that proceeded, and subsequent situations that revealed themselves through the initial momentum of the war, however, she would refer to the past frequently when attempting give better insight. This is used, to give the reader a better understanding on the decisions these certain individuals came to. As far as perspective and biased; the beginning seemed to be a neutral standpoint, but progressing through the book it seemed to fall under the same concentration of German analysis with slight focuses on the Triple Entente. Though I enjoyed the backstory additions to the Guns of August, but I don’t think the average reader would appreciate the somewhat previous synopsis of individuals introduced to the reader at certain points in the book. In the prelude to the arrival of initial combat, is where I enjoyed the book best. This is where it highlighted the feeling of tension around Europe rather than the depicting treaties and alliances as the pure cause of the war. While Tuchman doesn’t discount the alliance of pre-war Europe, she illustrates the internal strife which mostly centered on Germany’s Wilhelm II and his administrators. While Tuchman notes multiple issues of the past between the nations at war, her skill as a writer is what primarily assist the reader piece together the situation.
Another key cause was Nationalism. Nationalism is “an ideology that arose in the nineteenth century and that holds that all peoples derive their identities from their nations, which are defined by common language, shared cultural traditions, and sometimes religion” (Hunt, G-4). Nationalism can also be described as the attitude that people of a nation have when they care about their national identity as well as the actions these people might take when seeking to achieve self determination. Everyone in the European countries had a lot of pride and joy for their country. This led to these countries trying to prove their dominance and power. Every country had to show that they were the best to all the other countries. Since this was happening, everyone wanted to show their best by helping an alliance in war.
Zieger, Robert H. (2000). America’s Great War: World War I and the American Experience. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers Inc.
Mark Danner, an editor for the New York Times magazine, recounts in The Massacre at El Mozote a horrific crime against humanity committed by a branch of the Salvadorian army. He gives multiple points of views and cites numerous eye witnesses to try and piece together something that has been tucked away by the government at the time. In December, of 1981, news reports were leaked to major newspapers in the united states about an atrocity committed and a total massacre of a hamlet in El Salvador, known as El Mozote, or the Thicket. At first, the account was of over a thousand civilians, women men and children with no guerrilla affiliation were massacred. Danner pieces together the testimonies of the survivors, and interviews with officers in the Salvadorian army.
that he had earned the position as the ruler of Europe the entire and would soon take
Adams, Michael C. C. The "Best War Ever: America and World War II" Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD 1994. Bailey, Ronald H. The Home Front, U.S.A. Time-Life Publishing, Chicago, IL. 1978 Bard, Mitchell G.
In 1914, Europe was diving into two separate powers. One was Triple Entente composed of France, Russia and Britain. Other one was Triple Alliance, consists of Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Italy. (Pope 2) Each of the countries was connected with different treaties. The caused of European countries’ unstable political situation and threat of war was present. By arranging alliances with other governments, most countries found ways to protect themselves from assault. While Germany was becoming the center of the struggle, Europe made a spider web of tangled alliance that led most countries into two opposing powers. (Hamilton 16) In the late nineteenth century, the most surprising event in Europe was the birth of united state of Germany. Under the leadership of the Chancellor of Germany, Otto von Bismarck, system of alliances was established to achieve peace in Europe. By 1890, Bismarck succeeded in having every major power into his alliance system...
To write this book the author, John Toland, had to devote 15 years researching different stories from all sides of the war. He studied war memoirs, interviewed war veterans, and read military documents. While doing this he focused on both the allied and axis forces to truly understand both sides of the story and be able to write such a descriptive and accurate piece of work. This research was used in the book to describe the unlikely victory of the Americans over the Germans during the “Battle of the Bulge”.
However, when confronted with a strict policy of appeasement, by both the French and the English, the stage was set for a second World War. Taylor constructs a powerful and effective argument by expelling certain dogmas that painted Hitler as a madman, and by evaluating historical events as a body of actions and reactions, disagreeing with the common idea that the Axis had a specific program from the start. The book begins with the conclusion of the First World War, by exploring the idea that critical mistakes made then made a second war likely, yet not inevitable. Taylor points out that although Germany was defeated on the Western front, “Russia fell out of Europe and ceased to exist, for the time being, as a Great Power. The constellation of Europe was profoundly changed—and to Germany’s advantage.”
This set a belligerent mood in Europe as each nation was prepared to fight a war. A German officer once said "in time of peace, prepare for war," and that is exactly what European nations did, eventually leading to the Great War. Without a doubt, the one underlying cause of the three described above that was most responsible for World War I was the system of alliances.
O’Neill, William L. World War II A Student Companion. 1 ed. William H. Chafe. New York, New York: Oxford University Press, 1999.
Within Europe, imperialism occurred at the height of industrialization. As European countries were discovering more about the sciences and mass production benefits via industrialization, a demand and competition for more land and produce was developing, and this would create the tension needed to begin the First World War. Germany and Great Britain were two powerful European countries that had been trying to establish control in Africa and Asia, two countries that were not as strong as them, and relatively vulnerable. Due to rebellions of the native people and interferences by each other and other countries, they were not entirely successful. This lack of cooperation between European countries in the attempt to govern and control weaker states so as to use their products for trade caused tension, and finally after it built up to a certain point, war was the only option left.
Grayzel, Susan R. The First World War: A Brief History with Documents. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's, 2013. Print.
Alliances played a hefty role in the inevitability of World War One. Countries were constantly at each other’s necks and needed power in order to protect themselves from each other. This is where alliances came in; countries could seek shelter from others by developing truces with close friends. Having a truce was beneficial in most ways because it provided the illusion of being a bigger power, and offered one extra support in case of a crippling event. Then again they did also create tensions between the countries that could only escalate further. For example, in the year 1879 there was a dual alliance created between Germany and Austria-Hungry. This alliance was created to protect them from Russia, who ...
Although the alliance system was a main cause of the First World War, it arose because of several other factors, and did not cause the war single handedly. Nationalism, the love and support of one's country, has always existed. In this era, however, it was to take part in the creation of one of the most famous wars in history. Since so much pride was devoted to countries, it made the possibilities of peace between past rivals less probable. It also meant that most nations, especially the great powers, would rather fight a war than back down from a rival's diplomatic provocation.
The Alliances not only contributed to war breaking out; it made the war last longer and become on a much larger scale; major political disputes would inevitably cause a large conflict. The alliances caused suspicion, fear, and tension among nations. The two camps were the Triple Entente (Britain, France and Russia) and the Triple Alliance (Germany, Italy and Austria-Hungary). When countries formed alliances with each other it gave them protection, if a country was threatened or under attack then the alliance would come to that country’s aid. Countries made an alliance when they both needed protection from a stronger country. When Austria-Hungary had heard about the assassination of Franz Ferdinand they went to war with Serbia which resulted in a chain reaction of countries going to war with one another, and when countries teamed up to support their attacked friends when war came, it meant that a number of nations would fight, not only the two involved in a dispute. The division of...