Europe's Last Summer: Who Started the Great War in 1914?

Outstanding and insightful review of how WW1 started. Covers the entire cast of characters and their varied contributions to this momentous event!

This is the first comprehensive study of the period leading to WWI that I have read, and it follows my having read two personal accounts of the devastation of trench warfare. So while I can't provide scholarly/comparison thoughts on the tide of opinions and books that this war has generated, I can say that I have described this book to my friends as being most pervertedly hilarious. Fromkin begins by setting the stage that was Europe (including the Balkans and the withering of the Ottoman Empire) in the years prior to the war and then steps through, day by day and country by country, the machinations that abounded during the period from June 28, 1914 - the assassination - through to Britain's ultimatum to Germany and Vienna's declaration of war against Russia some five weeks later. Thankfully, he then rounds up all that has been laid out in presenting his argument as to 'who started the great war.' Why pervertedly hilarious? Because no one could have written a stage play to match the game-playing between the heads of state, the confusions, the misleading, the lies, etc., etc., that sought to provide a "justifiable" reason for "war now" vs any other time. This book was fascinating from the first to the last and will require rereading for me to fully appreciate the players and the stage that was then. Awesome. And horrifying.

For the reader who wants to just one book to add to their personal library on World War One, David Fromkin's "Europe's Last Summer, Who Started the Great War in 1914?" is the book to purchase. This condensed, yet comprehensive review of the key players and seminal events to the Great War in 1914 gives an excellent overview of the activities of the six major players leading to the war. The author has a long track record of excellence as the Professor of History for International Relations and Law at Boston University and as the Director of the Fredrick S. Pardee Center for the Study of the Long Range Future, to name a few of his activities. This book sets out to dispel the belief that the war was unavoidable and a shock to the unsuspecting leaders in Europe in 1914. He builds the case that WWI was actually two wars in one, which were deliberately started by Germany and Austro-Hungary who manipulated events to achieve their goals. The two nations had different "goals," but the outcome was the same; world war. Fromkin doesn't mince words about who he believes was the culprit in starting the war almost right from the start, but he does his homework in analyzing the many theories about the causes of WWI. This homework is broken down into 53 chapters which cover events leading into the 37 days from the murder of Franz Ferdinand in Sarajevo and moving on to the multiple declarations of war. This repetition allows the reader to see each event from multiple perspectives and helps to drive home key facts and events leading to the war. These comments may create the impression that this book is another dry academic history book; on the contrary, he writes in such a way that engages the reader much in the same way that popular historians entertain their readers. The books' prologue warns the reader that the results of July & August of 1914 were not a surprise to the alert individual. There were warning signs that indicated something ominous was brewing in Europe that summer. Fromkin's lead-in helps to build a sense of suspense that compels the reader to drive on to learn about those warning signs, because they could be an indicator to future dangers. The second part of this prologue gives an explanation to the reader on just how influential the Great War was on our current world. Part ii of the prologue, pages 5-12, list some of the major impacts WWI had on the post war world. He outlines how as many as 61 million lives were lost from 1914-1919 resulting in the "redrawing of the world map" following the war. When considering the subject matter, it was a bit surprising to find that the book is based primarily on secondary sources, many of which he references periodically in his narrative. The small map, the 16 pages of photos and the "Who Was Who" listing on page 317 were very helpful in maintaining an overall understanding of the chain of events and all the key people discussed in the book. A map depicting the two sides at the beginning of the actual fighting would have helped visualize how Germany's actions resulted in the self fulfilling prophesy of being encircled by her enemies. Fromkin argues convincingly that the Great War was started by the willful designs of two nations, Austria and Germany. Fromkin lays out significant evidence to establish the guilt of the German Chief of Staff, Helmuth von Moltke, as the key antagonist in starting WWI. The analysis provides a strong argument in defense of his claims that Moltke manipulated conditions and people's fears and pride to start the war, regardless of how events unfolded. He ultimately fails to demonstrate how one man could possess sufficient influence and power to impose his will on all the key decision-makers in his capital and on nations outside of Germany. He outlines in his assessment that WWI was two wars, not one. "What seems to have mystified historians for decades, in attempting to answer all sorts of questions about war origins in 1914, is that there were two wars being proposed that summer, not one" . He describes Austria's war against Serbia, and Germany's war against Russia. His portrayal of key decision-makers in each of the great powers illustrates the often overlooked reality that the Europeans governments did not each act in one accord, but had many conflicting positions and had competing priorities within their own administrations as well as within the alliances. "Europe's Last Summer" is a good book that presents a condensed yet comprehensive review of the key facts leading to the start of WWI. Fromkin's reversal of the accepted belief that WWI was an accident or undesired war and was actually a deliberate act resulting in two wars in one will generate new research in the field. It is well worth the purchase price to add this work to the library of any aspiring historian. Bryan Brokate

This is a great book. Not only is it well written in an engaging, sometimes humorous manner, but it opens the door to an entirely new and fresh look at the origins of the mother of all wars in the 20th century. Everybody knows about the assasination of the Austrian Archduke. People with little knowledge of history know that this "triggered" the outbreak of the First World War, but cannot explain why. Barbara Tuchman's famous work "The Guns of August" was for me the foremost work on the subject and a great read as well. However, using newly discovered material, Fromkin surpasses Tuchman in providing the most compelling analysis of the true origins of the war. It is as if he has put the final piece in the jig saw puzzle that Barbara Tuchman almost finished. In her day, without the most recently discovered historical materials, her version of events was the best. Now we have come full circle. The leaders of Versailles were not as badly informed in blaming Germany above all for starting the war as was fashionable to think. This does not excuse the rather bad peace they imposed which played such a large role in triggering the next world war, which was in large part a continuation of the first after a two decade pause. Nevertheless, lessons abound for todays leaders about how a military elite can influence and even compel a country to self destructive wars without strong and competent leadership. Kaiser Wilhelm was too discredited and Kaiser Franz Josef too old and weak to stand in the way of their military chiefs who wrongly thought that to delay war would lead to inevitable doom for their respective countries. In manipulating their monarchical masters, they wrought the very destruction on these two central european empires that they thought they were avoiding. I have a great interest in this subject, and felt that a revolutionary light had been turned on this very old issue the implications of which will take quite some time to sort out in historical and literary circles. A must read for any historian interested in this era and these issues.

I studied the causes of WWI in University in the 1980s. During this time the standard interpretations were based upon work done in the 50s and the 60s -- Fischer, Geist, AJP Taylor, Tuchmann and others were still the required reading for the time. They still are, so I asked myself throughout this book --- what sets it apart from that which it follows? Fromkin did not dissapoint, but he did not supplant any of the previous historians either. Although the work of all the actors in this tragedy have been discussed, the real villians boil down to two people: Moltke and the Austrian Foreign Minister -- with supporting roles by the commander of the Austrian Army and the Geman Foreign Ministry. The difference of this book and many others is that this small cabal actively propelled events forward at times when inertia would have held the powers in abeyance and a solution found (in much the same way that solutions were found in almost all of the crises that preceded the coming of WWI). Therefore it was not a problem or "war by timetable" or an inane Kaiser and infantile Tsar. Nor was it that fault of that severely unbalanced race in the Balkans -- the Serbs --- that brought events rushing headlong into chaos (the Serbs actually were willing to cut a deal with Austria, when faced with overwhelming military might). And it had nothing to do with a Naval race between Britain and Germany Tirpitz knew he could not win so the German High Seas Fleet was always cautioning against war, until some time in the (yet unseen) future when Germany could really rival Britain. No the real cause was Moltke in hand with the Austrian Foreign Ministry shaping events, withholding information, telling outright lies and giving pushes to individuals when necessary. Moreover we find out how incidental Britain and France were to the whole process, only being forced to take action, when all other choices were clearly not options. Again the German propensity to glibly play with the lives of Europe for some higher metaphysical purpose, emerges as a major cause of problems. Overall I liked the book but the beginning has the feel of some worked over history notes -- short chapters and a text that does not flow so well. But the narrative roughly increases in detail and length the closer one gets to the actual declaration of war buy both sides. Fromkin writes well, clearly, articulately and (Thank God!) succinctly; the text is a nice 300 pages without leaving anything out. I would reccommend this book now as one of the best recent introductions to the causes of WWI (Forget Niall Ferguson!).But it does not detract from those greats that came 40 years before.

This is one of the best books I have read about the events, circumstances, and political environment that all contributed and lead to the start of the Great War. Fromkin provides a chronological but also contextual analysis about who started the Great War. Although there was one aggressor largely responsible for the catastrophe that was to follow the declarations of war in 1914, the other major players did little to prevent the spread of the war ... some perhaps welcomed the war. However, Fromkin's contextual analysis tells the story in an evenhanded way while not absolving the principal aggressor. What we learn is that the assassination of the heir to the Hapsburg throne and the alliances that more or less divided Europe is too simplistic an explanation for why European conflicts erupted into a world war. There were many simmering tensions, such as nationalism (not just the Balkans and ethnic groups within Austria-Hungary), imperialism (want of world status and expansion), and countless missteps, misunderstandings, and sometimes mischief. If you are interested in the start of the Great War, this book will not disappoint.

I think the power of Fromkin's book is not necessarily the subject matter, but in it's style. It is divided into dozens of chapters, some as short as 1 or 2 pages. It was in this manner that Fromkin is able to give you "thoughts" or "ponderances", for lack of a better term. Keeping ideas short and to the point. Some hardcore history readers may be turned off this, but I thought it was different and fresh. One might say that it is one of those classic "gateway" books that brings up so many different subjects and ideas, that you find yourself wanting to know more. So keep a pad of paper handy, to write down everything you want to know more about. I'm not going to argue if it is grounbreaking, or even if I agree with the point-of-view. I'll leave that to others. But if you are a casual reader, or an armchair WWI historian, you will love this book.

There are many recently released,well written books on the events leading up to and causing WW I. It is a human tendency to look for someone to blame and there seems to be no shortage of targets. I've read a handful of what I consider the best of these books and each author seems to have a favored whipping boy. Barbara Tuchman singled out Germany, the next author Serbia, Russia, and France in that order, a book in my pile awaiting reading says Britain was to blame, in Europe's Last Summer Fromkin again singles out Germany with the addition of Austria-Hungary as a coconspirator. Poor Italy, it so wanted to be one of the major players at that time and no one has even done them the honor of blaming the war on them. While all the books I've read made good arguments,Fromkin's analysis is perhaps the most sharply reasoned and lucid of the lot. At 384 pages Europe's Last Summer is around half the length of most of the others. Its interesting that while I missed the detail of the other books its lack allowed Fromkin to make a clearer, sharper, and more succinct argument than the others. I admired his presentation of facts arranged in a tight timeline but could not quite bring myself to agree with all of his conclusions. That,of course is pretty much a personal choice. One of the points I did agree with was that the war was not fought for any of the many highly moral sounding reasons that were put forth at the time(mainly as unabashed propaganda). Fromkin is refreshing in his frank conclusion that it was fought for status-who was top dog and all the parties involved including England seemed to be guilty of that. But underneath that he spent more time developing fear as the primary reason/cause. Fear has certainly been the driving force in many of my less than useful behaviors. Countries tend to have individual world views, in Germany at the time it was that they were surrounded by enemies bent on their downfall, paranoia in other words. It was not an accurate judgement of the facts on the ground but it was a commonly held view among Germany's ruling elite. This fear caused them to spend massive amounts developing a level of military might that in turn increased the fear of their neighbors who ramped up their military preparations causing even more fear and further spending in Germany on and on in an increasing spiral. In the long run Germans could not out spend their far more numerous neighbors and seeing they were in danger of falling further and further behind in the arms race which they had initiated high ranking members of the military opted for a preventative war. I'm not sure if I agree, what I did appreciate was how Fromkin did not paint the various participants of this as evil but instead marshaled arguments to show that they were misguided-mistaken in their interpretation of the facts but just normal humans with understandable reactions to the world around them. Reassuring, the shared humanity bit even if the outcome seemed so disastrous. I remind myself that one of, if not the driving factor shared by the French and German founders of the European Union was that never again should they have to suffer from terrible wars between them. Cooperation as opposed to competition does seem a superior way to soak up excess national ambition/energy. So far it seems to be achieving that goal, watching the French and German leaders scramble to keep their common creation afloat certainly seems an improvement over the battlefields of Verdun. What is not in doubt is that this was a fascinating era with no lack of intelligent, well written commentaries on it, David Fromkin's Europe's Last Summer is a welcome addition to the genre.

One of the best summaries of the July 1914 ‘crisis’ that I have read. It is factual and straight to the point. It explains well how many of the main actors in Germany (Moltke, Jagow, Bethmann Hollweg, Falkenhayn…) and in Austria-Hungary (Conrad, Berchtold…) actively plotted for their own war, Germany versus Russia and the Dual Monarchy versus Serbia.

The author proposes that the key to understanding what happened is to keep in mind there were to wars in the summer of 1914: the Austrian-Serbian war and the German-Russian war. Von Moltke used the first to get the unreliable Austrian's into the battlefield then switched to his real objective which was a European war. In the world of 1914 the power to make war was concentrated in view individuals - head's of state, heads of government, minister in charge of foreign policy. The author asks if countries could stumble in to wasteful and pointless wars again. He thought it too early to tell. My view is that we have already seen the Bush's take US and Britain into war in Iraq and Afghanistan. So this excellent account of the origin's of First world war is relevant to the world we live in today. Germany felt threatened by the rising industrial power of Russia. Does the US feel sufficiently threatened by the rise of China to launch a pre-emptive strike somewhere when a window of opportunity arises as it did for von Moltke in July 1914?

EXCELLENT WRITER AND BOOK. THANKS

Loved this book. Beautifully written and eminently readable. David Fromkin's arguments are hard to disagree with. Its a must read for anyone interested in the era.

Despite the initial chapters on well know history, the author then gives compelling reasons to read on. We are rewarded. Again, notwithstanding the author’s comments about destroyed or reworked documents and diaries, he is able to put forth believable correspondence by the major powers and their foremost leaders. For history buffs, it is a compelling read. Very enjoyable.