The Guns of August: The Pulitzer Prize-Winning Classic About the Outbreak of World War I

We just recently remembered the 100th anniversary of the 1918 Armistice. Wars fought a century ago tend to be somewhat difficult to recall in their key features. Four elements need to be seared into our conscience after a reading of Mrs. Tuchman's excellent 1962 offering:First, how close the first month of the war came to being a total Allied debacle. The Germans were essentially a few armies and a couple of days away from sweeping away the French outside of Paris. The Battle of the Marne revealed itself to be a pivotal point in the war, but only insofar as it allowed for the war to go on. The Germans were a few miles away from Paris, bombed it profusely and could almost see it in their dreams. The French losses and the poor cooperation with the British really almost cost the Allies the War. Had the Russians not essentially accepted to enter the war weeks before they could conceivably be ready, and accepted to lose completely against East Prussian armies, the story might/would have been different. It was really close.Second, the idea that decisive battles would make or break victory has been put to rest. The first month and the Battle of the Marne where Paris was defended, gave way to the horror of trench warfare, which we are currently experiencing again in Ukraine. Weapons, even in 1914, gave the defense of territory a huge advantage. That WW1 became a war of defense of hard fought territory defined how war between belligerents could now be viewed.Third, while this is not Tuchman's strength, she attempts to address some of the Zeitgeist of the age that might have led to the war: the sense of jealousy that Germans may have felt of French and British colonial power, their belief in their superior science and weaponry, their disdain for treaties and certain alliances, etc. All of these ideas are part of the fiction that political figures give the people that support them in an attempt to justify their geopolitical ambitions. It has been true throughout history, as it was true in the beginning of the 20th century in the unfinished war of 1914-18, in the terrible follow-up war a mere 21 years later and in the manner in which it is reflected in all manners of genocide and wars since then. There is something about the fallacy of how we view ourselves and others that somehow justifies war. Tuchman does not do this point justice. For a more thorough treatment of this idea as it pertains to WW1, read MacMillan's "The War That Ended Peace".Finally, the issues that were at the heart of WW1 were not resolved, they led to a century of horrible conflict and political domination by some over others. There has always been the idea that wars can bring us in better directions from a social and political perspective. In retrospect, I fail to see anything good emanating from WW1. All I observe is a profound human tendency to aggression, even in the context of progress and hope, a penchant for violence even when everything else points towards peace. All of the Stephen Pinkers of this world cannot replace the 20 million deaths of WW1 and the horrible century that was the 20th. All of the apostles of human improvement cannot account for the horror we so glibly enter into. There is a gaping wound that will not heal.

Como todas las obras de Barbara, extraordinariamente bien documentado. Tal vez su mejor libro. Al menos de los que he leído.

Country A invaded country B, predicting that country B would put up no resistance because it was much weaker. This prediction turned out to be completely wrong, as the armed forces of country B bravely defended their country. When the civilians of country B also resisted, the soldiers of country A carried out mass executions and set cities to flames, all the while laying the blame on the Government of country B.Isn’t the above describing Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022?No, it is not. It depicts the invasion of Germany into neutral Belgium in August 1914, the month of the beginning of World War I. It is a tragic illustration of Mark Twain’s famous quote: “History doesn’t repeat itself, but it often rhymes.”“The Guns of August” tells the background that led to the First World War, the events and battles that occurred in the month of August 1914. The narrative stops at the conclusion of the Battle of Marne, which destroyed any hope of a short war and laid the foundation for four years of one of the most brutal conflicts in history.The background included the formation of the Triple Entente of France, Russia, and Britain, and the Triple Alliance of Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Italy. German strategy in 1914 was to first defeat France, then shift its forces to the East and knock out Russia, commonly known as the Schlieffen Plan. In France, there was Plan 17, a plan for the mobilization, concentration and deployment of the French armies and it made possible an invasion of Germany or Belgium or both before Germany completed the mobilization of its reserves and simultaneous to an allied Russian offensive.The events and battles included the escape of the German Battlecruiser Goeben, the invasion of Belgium and the Flames of Louvain, the Battle of the Frontiers, the Battle of Tannenberg, Von Klick’s turn and the Battle of Marne.One of the interesting features of the book was the brief introductions of the various players. When a personality first appeared, it was accompanied by a short but lively description. Some examples:General Joseph Joffre, French Generalissimo“Massive and paunchy in his baggy uniform, with a fleshy face adorned by a heavy, nearly white mustache and bushy eyebrows to match, with a clear youthful skin, calm blue eyes and a candid, tranquil gaze, Joffre looked like Santa Claus and gave an impression of benevolence and naivete, qualities not noticeably part of his character.”Charles Lanrezac, French General, Commander of the 5th Army“Formerly a distinguished staff college lecturer. Because of his keen intelligence, Lanresac was considered a star at the General Staff, which forgave him his caustic manner and his tendency to bad temper and impolite language for the sake of the clarity, brilliance, and logic of his lectures.”Alexander Von Kluck, German General, Commands First Army on Belgian Frontier“He was tall and majestic with a scarred, clean-shaven face, hard features and a frightening glace. In his right hand he carried a soldier’s rifle and his left rested on the butt of a revolver…No one-seemed to dare to approach him and indeed he wore a terrible air, invoking the image of Attila”Sir John French, Commander of the British Expedition Force“Untrained to study and with a mind closed to books, at least after his early successes in action, French was less renowned for mental ability than for irritability…..Like his vis-à-vis across the Channel, French was an unintellectual soldier with the fundamental difference that whereas Joffre’s outstanding qualify was solidity, French’s was a peculiar responsiveness to pressure, people, and prejudices. Joffre was imperturbable in all weathers; Sir John alternated between extremes of aggressiveness in good times and of depression in bad.”It was no surprise from these cast of main characters that conflicts were bound to happen. Thus. the first meeting between the Commander of the British Expedition Force, Sir John, and General Lanrezac, ended in each misunderstanding and despising the other. General Lanresac always had criticisms on his boss General Joffre‘s orders, which were not always promptly obeyed. Eventually, General Lanrezac was relieved of his command by General Joffre, although history judged that the views of General Lanrezac were almost always correct. In recognition of his initially unappreciated prudence in the opening month of the war that helped save France, he was made an officer of the Légion d'honneur in July 1917, awarded the Grand Cross of the Order of the Crown by Belgium in 1923, and awarded the Grand Cross of the Légion d'honneur in 1924.A somewhat similar but less fortunate episode happened in the career of Rear Admiral Ernest Troubridge. The Rear Admiral, in charge of several cruisers in pursuit of Germany’s battlecruiser Goeben in the Mediterranean, did not engage Goeben when it had the chance to do so on August 7, because he judged that his ships were no match in both speed and gun range with the Goeben and therefore, according to the order from the British Admiralty not to engage with superior force, he obliged. His decision almost certainly saved his ships and men from watery graves.Troubridge was court martialed for the decision. Although vindicated, his reputation was damaged. He remained in the Royal Navy through the remainder of World War I. He went on to serve in various staff positions but never again held a seagoing command. Ultimately promoted to full admiral, Troubridge retired from the Royal Navy in 1924 and died two years later. Sadly, despite his achievements, he is too often remembered only as “the man who let Goeben escape.”Sir John and the British Expedition Force appeared poorly in their portrays in the book. Sir John’s insistence, as well as that of the British, to retreat instead of joining France in the attack, almost resulted in their not taking part in the Battle of Marne, the Battle that halted Germany’s advance in France. Finally, after many fruitless efforts, the speech by General Joffre calling the honor of England into question apparently did the job of awakening Sir John from his folly.It has been said that The Guns of August helped save the world from nuclear conflict during the 1962 Cuban Crisis. When President Kennedy’s advisors urged him to strike the Russian missile sites in Cuba, he refrained from doing so because of what he read in The Guns of August that, once war action was initiated, it could not be stopped.The First World War was supposed to be the War to end Wars. Nothing can be further from the truth, as the number of wars since 1918 keeps on increasing. It seems that starting and continuing conflicts is part of human nature. It begs the question why such a wicked and destructive element exists in human nature. Perhaps the answer is again found in Mark Twain’s wisdom:“Man was made at the end of the week’s work, when God was tired.”

a must read for someone interested in First World War. Very interesting till last page. An authoritative account how everyone (mis)calculated other's move, how the short but decisive war which was to end by Christmas 1914 took dragged on till 1918. It's an account of that eventful month of August 1914 when both victories and defeats were missed. The books is full of conversations and discussions being held in London, Paris, and Berlin, such as this by Sir Edward Grey which 'has since epitomized the hour, ''The lamps are going out all over Europe, we shall not see them lit again in our lifetime.''

Seule une étrangère américaine, tant historienne que psychologue pouvait mettre à nue les raisons profondes de la guerre, jeux de pouvoir entre les hommes d'influence.Ainsi, Barbara Tuchman explique comment Gallieni a réussi à convaincre Joffre de lancer la bataille de la Marne.Les armées françaises battaient en retraite et la France semblait avoir déjà perdu. Joffre, improbable chef d'état-major des armées, était devenu ingérable, il refusait tant l'autorité du Président de la République Poincaré que la coopération avec les alliés Anglais dirigés par le général French. Sans vision stratégique, mais jaloux de préserver son autorité, Joffre venait de démissionner le général Castelnau qui grâce à son dévouement et sa lucidité avait sauvé les armées françaises d'un encerclement par les armées Allemandes.Joffre avait décidé de livrer Paris aux Allemands en la déclarant ville ouverte.Dans ce contexte, un seul homme, le général Gallieni, investi d'aucun pouvoir, mais doté de l'autorité morale d'ancien supérieur de Joffre pouvait le ramener à la raison et rallier français et anglais à son plan de bataille de la Marne.Autre exemple passionnant, quand Barbara Tuchman, reprend les discours politiques et les débats à l'origine de la décision d'entrée en guerre du Royaume-Uni. A chaque fois Barbara Tuchman replace le lecteur au coeur de l'histoire au centre des débats, des échanges et des grands discours politiques à l'origine des décisions majeures. Replacé au centre des lieux de décision, le lecteur revit l'histoire.