Customer Reviews

The First World War: A Complete History

5 star:		(17)
4 star:		(17)
3 star:		(12)
2 star:		(12)
1 star:		(5)

 

 

An interesting, but far from "complete" history of the Great War. Gilbert's focus is on the human side , primarily British, of the war, something lacking in many other military books. However this is almost Gilbert's entire focus. The reader doesn't get a clear grasp of the larger events and their meaning. Gilbert gives the reader an almost day by day chronology of events, but doesn't focus on the total picture. It is a regurgitation of facts but with no clear meaning. The fact that Gilbert is the official biographer of Winston Churchill, has allowed him to accumulate a vast storehouse of facts and information on the 20th century. It appears that Gilbert now wants to pump out books at an ever increasing rate just to get every bit of the information out to the public. Instead of jumping from event to event, I would have preferred that he look at an event (battle, diplomatic initiative, etc.) completely and place it in the proper context of the war, and then go onto the next issue. An event of this size with so many simultaneous goings on needs to be presented in a clear order. Unfortunately he provides less order than he should have.

Having said that, the fact that Gilbert is one of the foremost historians of the 20th century would suggest that this book should be read by those interested in World War 1. If only to get the human side of the soldiers fighting, this book is worthwhile. It should be read, however as a companion book to Keegan's excellent book on WW1, Tuchman's "The Guns of August" (the immediate causes of the war, Robert Massie's "Dreadnought" (for the long term causes of the war) among other books.

Sir Martin Gilbert is Winston Churchill's official biographer and is one of Britain's best historians. He has been prolific in his writing. He has 72 books to his name, and fully deserves the knighthood he received in 1995.

A trademark of Gilbert's history is his use of narrative. Generally, I prefer this approach in what I like to read and what I try to write. Biography, for which Sir Martin is best known, really demands this approach.

This book is well-written. His coverage is broad. He moves easily from the pounding of artillery on the western front, to the high seas where deadly u-boats patrolled. He looks at both sides and covers the social and political impact of this conflict on the various homefronts.

Despite those strengths, I would not recommend this book to the casual reader. Gilbert goes wrong with his use of narrative. It is so overwhelming in this book that it verges on being the literary equivalent of chronology. The problem is that when Gilbert might be discussing an event, say a battle, that transpired over a long period of time, he will spend two paragraphs on that topic and then move to another issue that might be on the other side of the planet. Then two paragraphs later he has moved on to a third topic, and three paragraphs later he brings up a fourth issue. He often will not return to the first event for 10 or 20 pages. The result is that it becomes quite difficult to keep track of what is happening. With his hop, skip and jump approach, readers do get an idea of the relentless crush of the war, but at the expense of comprehension.

While not a "Complete History" (I dare say that the publisher describes the book as such and not the author), I would recommend this book to specific audiences. This would be an excellent text for high school students and other interested, but not necessarily obsessively so, general readers wanting a competant and humanistic look at the First World War.

Although the book is anglo-centric, Gilbert does manage a reasonable job on the Eastern Front. He does not, however go into to too much detail about the French, beyond the Marne, Verdun and the Mutinies. Similiarly, the role of non-British Dominion forces, such as the Australians, tends to be downplayed (for example, numerous British Corps commanders are mentioned, yet Sir John Monash, commander of the Australian Corps after it was established in 1918, does not rate a mention).

However, he does manage to cover most theatres of war (particularly where the British were fighting), in a sensible amount of detail. He includes a decent series of maps which are sensibly located at the back of the book.

Where Gilbert succeeds best is in his ability to humanize the events taking place. He does this by drawing on the narratives of individuals caught up in events greater than themselves. Many of these surface later in history, including Hitler, De Gaulle, Rommell, etc. He also draws on the war poets to help illustrate the psychology and spirit of the men in the field.

Gilbert also draws on the diaries of British war nurses and Austrian painter Oskar Kokoshka which, again, give differing perspectives which inceases the depth of the narrative.

In summary, I would heartily recommend this book to the general reader or someone needing a general reference to the Great War.

I'm not privy to the specific tchniques that Gilbert used in compiling this volume, but one suspects that he compiled a large computer database with each entry carefully dated. He ignored any large scale accounts such as analyses of campaigns and battles and, instead, concentrated on personal accounts, letters, and poems. (He apparently discarded none of the latter). Finally, he sorted by date, edited this chronological assortment of personal accounts, and called it a "complete history."

The result is a disjointed, small scale view of the battlefield with little insight into the large events that made up World War I. One is left with a sense of the incredible stupidity of the political and military leaders that led to the senseless slaughter of millions of men. If you didn't already know that, then buy the book. If you already knew this essential fact about WWI, there may be better (and more complete) histories out there.

I've read a ton of books on WWI, including many on specific topics in the war, but it had been a long time since I'd read a general overall history of the war, so I picked this one up and just finished reading it.

I think it is an excellent introduction to the subject for those who haven't gone deeply into the history of the conflict, but who are interested in getting some knowledge of it.

However, it is written from a VERY British viewpoint. This doesn't mean it neglects the fronts in the war in which the British were not involved. However even covering the Eastern or Serbian fronts, or the Armenian tragedies, the view is British and the emphasis is on how events in these theatres of the war effected the British war effort. (Oddly, the one area that seems a little short in the book is the coverage of the French fighting. The book, f'rinstance, is somewhat skimpy on the battle of Verdun.)

Also, if you are American (like me), you'll wonder if we did anything in the war besides blunder around and die of Spanish Flu. Granted, the main effect of the American war effort was moral rather than military, convincing the Germans that they couldn't win, and that, because we were in it, we would moderate the demands of the British and French when it came time to make peace, making them (the Germans) more willing to give up before being completely beaten in the field; and also that the full weight of the American military was never felt, due to the quick ending of the war in late 1918. But I wonder if we were as incompetent as is portrayed in this book.

Two complaints. First, too much poetry, and too much emphasis on the poets and artists and writers in the trenches. That's my personal taste. I just don't like poetry.

Second, because the writer is British, he reveals a great deal of moral outrage at German atrocities committed in Belgium and occupied France, portraying Britain as the great defender of the rights of small nations. Of course, at the same time, the British were themselves occupying a small nation (Ireland), where they had committed untold atrocities, where they had starved millions to death and driven further millions from their home country in the short span of a lifetime of years before WWI. The British crimes in Ireland were no less atrocious than those of the Turks in Armenia, and the British moral hypocrisy in these matters is infuriating.

I would recommend this book to the general reader with these reservations. My favorite short, one-volume history of the war is Liddell Hart's "the Real War 1914-1918", but that is more of a military history with its emphasis on actual operations. This is more of a "cultural" history, and the general reader might like it better. Also, if you are interested in either the French or American war efforts, you'll have to look elsewhere.

I was extremely disappointed with Martin Gilbert's The First World War: A Complete History. Gilbert gives very short shrift to the Central Power's perspective. Gilbert painstakingly documents every instance of German excess in Belgium while ignoring the effect of the Allied Blockade, resulting in the "Turnip Winter" of 1917. While it is important to document the savage brutality of trench warfare, the British war poets quoted by Gilbert cannot claim to speak for the majority of combatants on either side. This work falls quite short of being the complete history of WWI.

No one has been more acclaimed or prolific in writing about the total scope of twentieth century history than British author and historian Sir Martin Gilbert, who sometimes seems to represent a kind of one-man revival in British historical publication. Here he focuses impressively on the total scope of World War One, from the initiating atmosphere in the various capitals and the precipitating event in Sarajevo, Yugoslavia to the momentous and ill-fated peace negotiations. Indeed, he brings impressive credentials to the task; as the foremost biographer and authority on Winston Churchill, the author of a recent three-volume work on the entire scope of the 20th century, and probably the most noted British academic on the subject. In this one volume work Gilbert displays how comprehensive his knowledge of the all the theaters of the First World War is as well.

It is a commonplace that the chief characteristic of the First World War was its numbing futility; indeed, it is sometimes described as a war that settled nothing but transformed everything. Moreover, it momentously ushered out the age of monarchy and introduced the modern era, a time since characterized by startling contrasts, on one hand more popular and democratic, yet on the other hand more frightening and totalitarian. The lives of untold millions were affected by the social, economic, and political changes it forced onto the landscape of the times. The "Great War" all fatefully presaged the 20th century's subsequent taste for both sweet reason and well as maddening violence. This Great War slowly ground down everything, from four monarchies to countless millions of lives.

Gilbert engages here in a painstaking effort to present the facts both exhaustively and comprehensibly, and does so masterfully. While Gilbert's approach cannot be described in what can be referred to as a stirring narrative, it is both entertaining and endlessly informative in aiding the reader in understanding the specifics of how this first great tragedy of our century occurred. In fact, he sometimes is surprisingly brief in describing a particular battle, yet manages to connect all the dots in way that is instrumental in making sense of what otherwise seems to be insane proceedings. One reviewer describes the narrative as a "painstaking compilation of fact...that prose advances like the rolling artillery barrages it describes". This captures the tone of the writing style and the reading experience perfectly.

Yet at the same time he masterfully weaves together a meaningful context in which the political, military, and diplomatic aspects of the conflict are connected in a perspective that always pays compassionate heed to the overall civilian impact of the bloody struggle. As one of the foremost authorities on the 20th century, Gilbert blends the particulars of the war into history as part of the ongoing narrative, placing it in context and making it that much more meaningful. Of particular interest is the way Gilbert uses personal recollections and anecdotal details by individuals to humanize the epic struggle and to bring home the horrific and monstrous scale on which this war brought terror, death and destruction to much of the civilized world. He reminds us with compelling evidence and stirring narratives that people died horribly and needlessly every day during the disastrous, painful, and epic struggle. If you want to better understand what happened during WWI and why it did, this wonderful and admirably comprehensive overview will serve you quite well. Enjoy

I have perused a good many of the reviews here, and there is, to me, a surprising amount of disdain for the book and its famous author. This is a competently written account of a wildly confusing jumble of five chaotic years, battled on a dozen or so fronts on 4 continents, with North and South America barely missing out. No one book can capture the whole story; if in doubt look at the splendid, lengthy narratives about one battle or one month or one participant. A survey of The Great War is a daunting task, and Gilbert handles it competently, if not brilliantly. His prejudices are on display, as are those of the various reviewers here. Is it the single one best book describing the whole war? I don't think so. But does he do a good job of telling the story? He certainly does.

Its strengths begin with Gilbert's ability to maintain chronology in such a shambles of action and inaction. We bounce from Poland to Mesopotamia to London to Belgium, and he keeps the reader along for this confusing ride. I had no trouble following where we were, or how we got there. Another strength is how he maintains a fairly objective look. What does he think about Pershing's persistence at not rescuing the Allies before he thought the troops were ready? I'm not sure. I have my opinions, but they are mine. The emphasis on poetry is well-done, making many of those mangled corpses into beings we can identify with. The prose flowed well.

On the downside, I found his omnipresent, if not openly stated, damning of the whole enterprise as futile and stupid as unfair. John Keegan believes the First World War, while resulting in a horrific loss of life, did indeed accomplish something worthwhile, and I'm with him. Lives were not sacrificed in vain. Good men challenged bad men. And they won. Aggression in Europe was thwarted. Were these victorious nations, or their leaders, perfect? As we understand morality today, no they were not. Was there much foolishness and carelessness on both sides. Indeed. But was one side clearly better than the other? To that I wholeheartedly agree. The totalitarian states were crushed and, in many cases, replaced with nations that were an improvement. Perfect? How could it be? Certainly the establishment of the Soviet Union was a dismal, bitter, horrific disaster. (though Nicholas was so inept it is quite possible he would have tumbled without the war.) And true, it took another war to completely thwart Germany's quest for European hegemony, but after two crushing losses, the land grab has stopped. Is Europe more stable today? Certainly. Will it ever be Peace and Harmony everywhere? Only in the fantasies of the moral absolutists.

My other critique is the ending. While lengthy, I too was baffled by Germany's collapse in the 1917-18 offensive. They got tired? The losses were staggering. Yet many among the brass, and, to judge by the favor Hitler received, the common soldier, felt they could fight one. I never really got from Gilbert just what it was that caused the German retreat.

Ultimately, no book trying to tell this complex tale can be more than a gloss of the specifics. This is a shiny gloss. Read it to get the background, delve into the many books that discuss the specifics.

Sir Martin Gilbert, a British historian who rose to fame and fortune as the official biographer of Winston Churchill, outdoes himself with "The First World War: A Complete History". Although some posters on this board have complained that Gilbert hasn't really written a "complete" history of that great conflict, I believe that Gilbert's meaning needs to be put into perspective. It IS true that Gilbert has not written an in-depth, "complete" MILITARY history of the war. Those who are seeking an in-depth analysis of the battles, strategies and tactics used by First World War commanders should look to other works, such as those of John Keegan, for fuller insights. However, Gilbert does offer a "complete" view of the war in ALL of its terrible aspects, not only the military scene, but also how the war changed the politics, national boundaries, culture and society, technology, and economies of the nations involved in the struggle. For a general reader or history buff who hasn't read much about the First World War, then Gilbert's book is simply the best that's been done. As Gilbert points out, the First World War had a greater impact on Europe and the world than the Second World War in many ways. So many of our current methods and machines of warfare - submarines, fighter planes, tanks, flamethrowers, poison gas and the rapid-fire machine gun - were all invented during the war. The First World War also witnessed warfare against innocent civilians on a then-unimagined scale. The Germans sank passenger ships (such as the Lusitania) with submarines - killing innocent men, women and children with little or no warning. Both sides carried out aerial bombardment of cities and towns, with little or no regard to the safety of the civilians below. Where this book especially shines is in Gilbert's ability to show the tremendous suffering of the soldiers in the trenches, men who often lived like (and with) rats in miserable manmade caves while under constant enemy bombardment and machine-gun (and poison gas) fire. Gilbert really brings home the senseless slaughter (there is no other way to describe it) of an entire generation of young European men. And, of course, the war changed Europe forever. Three great royal families were overthrown - the Romanovs in Russia, which led to the Communist takeover and the rise of the Soviet Union, with all that foretold for future world events (such as the Cold War between the Soviets and the USA); the arrogant Hohenzollern family in Germany, which led to chaos in the German government that didn't truly end until a hate-filled Austrian who had fought as a corporal in the German Army - Adolf Hitler - became dictator in 1932; and the Hapsburg family in Austria, who had been players in European politics since the Middle Ages, but whose empire broke up after the war, creating the Eastern European nations we have today. Franklin D. Roosevelt gained invaluable military and government experience during the First World War as Assistant Secretary of the Navy to President Woodrow Wilson, and Winston Churchill nearly saw his political career destroyed when he was forced to take the blame for the disastrous invasion of Turkey (a German ally) in 1915. The invasion was his idea, but its failure wasn't - but Churchill was nevertheless forced to resign as the head of the British Navy, and not until after the war ended did he begin his long political comeback.If this book has any flaw it is that Gilbert clearly favors the British and French against the Germans, who are seen as the "villains" of the book. Historians tend to disagree about Germany's actions during the First World War - some believe the Germans were the "villains" of the war, others believe that every major European nation shares some of the blame for the conflict. However, the bias is not so strong that it seriously affects the book, and for anyone who is interested in getting a "complete" and wide-ranging overview of the "War to end all Wars" - militarily, politically, socially, culturally, and economically - then Martin Gilbert has written the best one-volume book to date.

Over the past several years, and in no particular order, I have read (and re-read) certain parts of this book a half-dozen times or so. Written as a chronologically-ordered reference, "A Complete History..." is one of those titles that may or may not ever be read cover-to-cover, but will be pulled off the shelf time & time again.