The Pity of War: Explaining World War I

Grey not Black

This is the very best sort of history book in that it forces you to think, or rather, re-think. Pursuasive though he is, I cannot quite accept Niall Ferguson's harsh treatment of Sir Edward Grey and the 'interventionists' in the British government of the day. Today we all know the exact size of the 'butcher's bill' but Grey and his compatriots did not - although Grey's famous remark concerning the 'lamps going out over Europe' indicate that he never believed 'it would all be over by Christmas'. Ferguson urges us to believe that with Russia utterly defeated and with Germany and its military establishment flushed with success and ruling the roost in a subservient Europe some sort of deal might have been struck between Berlin and London thus allowing the British to escape the squandering of their blood and treasure. Some hopes! The navy-mad Kaiser under the influence of Mahan and Tirpitz had already mounted one challenge to Britain's naval supremacy - which they lost - but with the whole industrial might of Europe at their disposal how long would it have been before they tried again, and could Britain have won a second naval race? Grey's assessment that it was better for Britain to keep the French fighting as the best means of 'bleeding' the Germans to weakness was surely right compared to the possibility of Britain standing alone. Ferguson implies that Grey misled the country and the French in allowing the military staff talks to continue. But Grey (and others) made it clear over and over again to the French that the British government and parliament were not, and could not be, committed. Indeed, the truth of this, was made clear in the actual event when the British government refused to be drawn in until the very last minute of the last hour when the Germans made the huge mistake of invading Belgium. Ferguson is right (in retrospect and with the 20/20 vision of hindsight) to say that Britain forfeited its pre-eminence by the reslting outlay in blood and treasure but to paraphrase a famous American saying, 'Sometimes a country has to do what a country has to do!' Not, I hasten to add, out of honour but because the alternative might well have been even more perilous. Mr Wallace F. Smith's review contained some fine socialist humbug but very few facts. Yes, the British did intervene in an effort to oppose the Bolshevik revolution in Russia and perhaps Mr Smith would apply some 20/20 vision of his own to the ghastly history of the Soviet Union that ensued and join me in wishing that they had succeeded! The notion that Britain went to war in order to crush socialism in Germany is laughable. Fifteen or so years before WWI Lord Salisbury's high Tory government had already copied the Germans by introducing the first nascent socialist legislation into Parliament and I would politely remind him that in 1914 it was a LIBERAL government that declared war! No-one who seeks to understand the momentous events of WWI can afford to miss Niall Ferguson's terrific book.

2 out of 2 people found this review helpful.

An Excellent Book on a Horrible War

While you might not agree with all of the author's arguments, his coverage is so authoritative and complete that anyone interested in The Great War should read this book. And although the prose sometimes bogs down with details and charts (esp. when relating economic details), I think that this is necessary in a book of this type. And slogging through the rough parts is well-worth it. The book is informative, well-written, and scholarly. The bibliography itself is worth the price of the book. Required reading for anyone interested in World War I, the causes of the same, the behavior of men in battle, and the economic ramifications of large, protracted conflicts.

1 out of 1 people found this review helpful.

No text was provided for this review.

No text was provided for this review.