Books : Sword and the Scepter: The Problem of Militarism in Germany-The Tradegy of Statesmanship : Bethmann Hollweg As War Chancellor, 1914-1917
In association with Amazon.com
Type of bind: Hardcover
Dewey Decimal Number: 943
EAN num: 9780870241826
ISBN number: 0870241826
Label: Univ of Miami Pr
Manufacturer: Univ of Miami Pr
Printing Date: 1972-06
Publishing house: Univ of Miami Pr
Sale Popularity Level: 2864603
Studio: Univ of Miami Pr
User popularity level:
Rated by buyers -
This volume of Ritter's Sword and Scepter series is his endeavor to challenge the conclusions of Fritz Fischer's groundbreaking study "Germany's Aims in the First World War." Unlike traditional historians like Ritter, Fischer did not paint the Great War as self defense on the part of Germany. Fischer concluded that Germany pushed for war to satisfy her need for world power.
Ritter lived in Imperial Germany and served in the Great War. After the war, Ritter lived in the Weimar Republic that was in great need of preserving her self esteem. Although there was a new government, officials still had to defend the German Empires actions before and during the war in order to demonstrate the illegitimacy of the vindictive Versailles treaty. Considering such an upbringing, it is easy to see why Ritter was quick to discredit Fischer's work.
Ritter's rebuttal is rather weak, however. He concentrates on Chancellour Bethmann-Hollweg, painting him as a moderate of highly ethical intentions who saw WWI as a defensive war. Ritter, however, does not look closely enough at the forces that were influencing German leadership (i.e. economic need for more land). Ritter sees militarism as almost solely political and ignores its influence on German society. Finally, Ritter fails to discredit Fischer's most damaging piece of evidence: the September Memorandum. This document spelled out the minimum war aims of the German civilian leadership (to overrun France and spread German power eastward by weakening Russia). Ritter played it down stating it was a very first draft and more reflection than decision. Ritter defended Germany's stubborn claim to Alsace-Lorraine because it was a national "emblem" for Germany's proudest moment. Ritter downplays the greedy Brest-Litovsk treaty as purely out of economic and defensive necessity on the part of Germany that would be revised in later peace negotiations. Ritter makes a lot of assumptions as to the state of mind of the German leaders. Although this volume is an essential source in the debate, if Ritter's goal was to discredit Fischer's exhaustive study, in my view, he failed.
Find other books like this one:
