World War I: A Short History, by Michael J. Lyons, is the author’s second work. The first, World War II: A Short History was a successful book, which made it easy for Lyons to follow its lead with another “short history” book. Lyons got his BA in 1954, his MA in 1963, and his Ph.D in 1969, all from the University of Minnesota. He later taught at North Dakota State University in the history department, retiring in 1993. He served as History Department Chair there from 1972-1989, and was named Professor Emeritus after his retirement. (4) Since retirement he has worked on writing subsequent editions of his two books, while traveling with his wife. His additional reading list for World War I is about 310 books, which suggests that he is an expert on World War I. He even goes so far as to say that this list is far from exhaustive, implying that he has read more than just these suggested books.
World War I: A Short History deals with the War To End All Wars, beginning with its causes and ending with post-war follow-ups on all the countries involved. Along the way, it takes the reader back to the Great War and gives them an omniscient view of Europe during the conflict. With respect to the large task that is relaying an entire war more than 80 years after the fact, the book really is “a short history.” I’m sure it could’ve been a thousand pages long if he wanted it to be. It moves well between the grand scale of things and local theaters; between one front line and another, as well as moving forward chronologically in an easy-to-follow fashion. Essentially, the book deals with all aspects of the war, from start to finish.
The theme that Lyons tries to convey is that “World War I was the real turning point of the twentieth century” (Lyons, xiii). In general, he views it as a turn for the worse, saying in the preface that it was a “… ghastly orgy of death and destruction…” which “paved the way for [World War II] and all the new problems that it spawned.” Support for the claim that WWI was the turning point of the twentieth century is found in the facts that it introduced modern warfare (and it’s accompanying atrocities), it changed the face of both European and global power structures, and it left only a foreboding question mark on the future.
In the sense of scope, WWI was a war on the largest scale in history. Millions of men fought using the most powerful weapons of deaths yet devised. The reliance on machines to make men fight more effectively also increased, as soldiers now had machine guns, artillery, airplanes and tanks at their disposal. For each battle Lyons covers (and he covers most, if not all, of the major ones), he lists casualties at the end of the coverage. With numbers in the many tens of thousands of casualties for individual battles, these listings are depressingly real. He also notes outstanding acts of violence, such as the German shelling of Verdun, which reduced one hill by 25 feet in elevation, the deaths of 30,000 British “Tommies” in 30 minutes on the Western Front, and the genocide of 800,000 deported Armenians by the Turks as the left Turkey. Just to name a few. Lyons’ somewhat dry style of story-telling is understandable, but it is also effective. When he tells you about the horrors of gas warfare during the 2nd Battle of Ypres, he does it in a completely serious manner – without resorting to hyperbole or detailed descriptions of how the gas kills a man. The reader can then trust his every word because they know he’s not stretching the truth. Lyons uses the cold, hard facts of mass destruction to display the dreadfulness of modern warfare.
Taking the big picture of the war and using its appalling statistics is effective in getting his point about the brutality of modern warfare across, but so is the individual attention he gives to a number of military commanders throughout the book. He tends to emphasize the negative aspects of their leadership, such as how officers were appointed to command on the basis of politics or seniority rather than on ability, or how the war took a sizeable toll on commanders. Many of them were dismissed from duty due to military blunders or political maneuvering (French and Churchill of Britain), some had nervous breakdown’s (Germany’s von Moltke), and one man even shot himself after a defeat at the hands of the Germans (Russia’s Samsonov). The sheer number of futile offensives, communication follies, and a general blatant ignorance on the part of the high commands of nearly every country should have brought the leaders to believe that their way of war was over. No more glorious charges by regiments lined up across grassy battlefields. No more short wars that were decided by swift, crushing offensives. No more cavalry units. Most of all, no more thinking about battles strictly in terms of numbers and fighting spirit. Warfare had become much more complicated and capable of mass destruction. Most generals of the time, Lyons says, had failed to observe from the US Civil War that the line-up-and-charge technique had become obsolete, but by the end of the WWI they had learned.
When the war ended, everyone was happy for a time, but the task of getting all the “belligerents”, as he called the warring nations, to sign a treaty was still ahead. Lyons sets up President Wilson of the US and Clemenceau of France as two different sides of the negotiations – one wanting amiable resolve and the other wanting revenge, while Lloyd George of Britain was the mediator between “Jesus Christ and Napoleon Bonaparte.” They made the Treaty into a compromise, but France failed to get the security from Germany that it sought, while the idealist Wilson had had to give in to being part of a European power struggle. The side that got the biggest shaft, though, was Germany. Not even allowed to participate in the drafting of the treaty, the had all their colonies taken away, as well as large tracts of their homeland. They also had their army shaved down to bare bones, and $33 billion reparation fee slapped on them. This war and the ensuing treaty brought the US to the forefront as a world power, while a ravaged Europe lost its long-held position of prominence in global affairs. It also left the French feeling insecure, while it stirred up a hatred of the Allies in the German people. This led to an uncertain and not-to-bright looking future in the new world.
I thought this book was pretty boring at the start, but became very interesting at about 1915, which is also the same time I had to start reading it for long stretches of time. Lyons’ ability to put you in the setting of Europe from 1914-1918 was the best aspect of his writing. Though it was dry, it was very informative, concise, and effective at getting his points across. I wish he would have put mileage scales on his maps, and also defined terms like “double-envelope” and “salient”, but I guess that’s what a dictionary’s for. His descriptive language and voice throughout the book taught me a lot about WWI while keeping me wanting to read more.
Bibliography
Writing Page
Home Page
