As demonstrated by these five historians, the theories on the primary cause of WWI are extremely varied. While both Schmitt and Taylor

Authors Avatar

The Origins of the First World War

        The study of diplomatic history has led to many different theories on the origins of the First World War. Each historian focuses on different aspects of the events preceding the war. In viewing them from a different time periods, many come to radically different conclusions. For example, the theory of German responsibility proposed directly after the war was soon revised with the release of various diplomatic documents. Many historians then went so far as to place primary responsibility on France and Russia. However, following the Second World War many historians again stressed German responsibility. The complexity of the events surrounding WWI allows for much interpretation and speculation, making a definitive theory virtually impossible. However, the study of contradicting theories allows for some insight into the causes of WWI.

Barnes

The concept of war guilt was formulated directly after the First World War as justification for indemnities demanded primarily from Germany. However, Barnes believed that the initial provocation for the war was created by the secret alliance between Russia, France, and Serbia, surmised that the majority of the war guilt could be assigned to them.

Since 1870, European politics had been characterized by secret alliances and rivalling military and imperial expansion. These elements combined created an environment inclined to war, but do not justify its outbreak in 1914. Previously, all the military alliances in Europe had been passive, defensive agreements. However, in 1912, the Franco-Russian alliance was altered to become an offensive treaty, through which the Russian and French diplomats, Izvolski and Poincare respectively, hoped to achieve the repossession of Alsace-Lorraine, and control of the Straits. They understood that it would require a general European War to achieve these aims, and therefore planned their provocation in such a way that as many countries as possible would be drawn in, with the majority on their side. Archduke Franz Ferdinand’s tour of Serbia proved the perfect opportunity, and with the Serbian governments knowledge, they arranged for the Archduke’s assassination. As predicted, Emperor Franz Joseph of Austria took action against Serbia, sending an ultimatum intended to provoke a local conflict. As yet unprepared for conflict, Russia and France advised Serbia to temporarily agree to the ultimatum. For the next month, France and Russia openly counselled diplomacy, while secretly continuing military preparations. One month after the assassination of the Archduke, and after securing the support of Germany, Austria declared war on Serbia. As Austria and Germany did not intend for a general European war, Germany attempted to have the Russian mobilization stopped. When it became apparent that it was not to be stopped, Germany declared war on Russia. English involvement was dictated by her unwillingness to interfere with French and Russian tactics. England was intent on entering the war if France did, and simply utilised the Belgian issue as a guise for this intent.

Join now!

Fay

Fay’s perspective on the origins of the first war became the most accepted and durable of the revisionist arguments. Serbia felt strong nationalism at the time and felt the need to bring all of Serbia together, under one national government. This brought upon the assassination of Archduke of Austria because at the time, Austria controlled Bosnia, which contained a largely Serbian population. Serbia nationalism was supported by Russia. When Russia mobilized to help Serbia after the Austrians declared war, Germany declared war and ultimately dragged the rest of Europe into war. Fay disagrees with most historians in that ...

This is a preview of the whole essay