Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T14:12:04.606Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

World Power or Tragic Fate? The Kriegsschuldfrage as Historical Neurosis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 December 2008

Konrad H. Jarausch
Konrad H. Jarausch
Affiliation:
University of Missouri, Columbia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The question Wer ist schuld am Krieg?, the focus of a propaganda battle already during the Great War, has obsessed German historians unlike any other issue in their recent history. In America the publishing success of Barbara Tuchman's Guns of August, the acclaim of Solzhenitsyn's August 1914, and the continual appearance of paperback introductions testify to an abiding interest in the outbreak of the First World War. But with the exception of the memorable debate between Sindey Fay and Bernadotte Schmidt, there have been no major American contributions because the issue of causes and responsibilities has been seen primarily as an academic problem.

Type
Review Article
Information
Central European History , Volume 5 , Issue 1 , March 1972 , pp. 72 - 92
Copyright
Copyright © Conference Group for Central European History of the American Historical Association 1972

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Wer ist schuld am Krieg? Rede des Deutschen Reichskanzlers im Hauptausschuss des Deutschen Reichstags am 9. November 1916 (Berlin, 1916).Google ScholarCf.Headlam, J. W., The German Chancellor and Outbreak of War (London, 1917).Google Scholar For the older literature see Herzfeld, H. and Loock, H.-D., “Der Weltkrieg und Versailles 1914–1919,” in the new edition of Dahlmann-Waitz, , Quellenkunde der Deutschen Geschichte (Stuttgart, 1965).Google Scholar

2. Lafore, Laurence, The Long Fuse: An Interpretation of the Origins of World War I (Philadelphia, 1965);Google ScholarAlbrecht-Carrié, René, The Meaning of the First World War (Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1965);Google ScholarRoth, Jack J., ed., World War I: A Turning Point in Modern History (New York, 1967);Google ScholarRemak, Joachim, The Origins of World War I, 1871–1914 (New York, 1967);Google ScholarTurner, L. F. C., Origins of the First World War (New York, 1970);Google ScholarKurtz, Harold, The Second Reich: Kaiser Wilhelm II and his Germany (London, 1970);Google Scholar and again Remak, Joachim, ed., The First World War: Causes, Conduct, Consequences (New York, 1971).Google Scholar

3. Zechlin, E., “Bethmann Hollweg, Kriegsrisiko und SPD 1914,” Der Monat, No. 208 (1966), 17ff., and “Motive und Taktik der Reichsleitung 1914,”Google Scholaribid., No. 209, 91ff., and my own “The Illusion of Limited War: Chancellor Bethmann Hollweg's Calculated Risk, 1914,” Central European History, II (1969), 48ff.

4. Quoted from the editorial preface of Der Krieg: Politische Monatsschrift, I (1928), No. 1, edited by Heinrich Kanner with occasional contributions from such noted pacifists as Hellmut von Gerlach.Google Scholar Cf. also Gerth, H. H. and Mills, C. Wright, eds., From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology (New York, 1958).Google ScholarRöhl, John C. G., Zwei Deutsche Fürsten zur Kriegsschuldfrage. Lichnowsky und Eulenburg und der Ausbruch des Ersten Weltkriegs (Düsseldorf, 1972).Google Scholar

5. For the Freudian metaphor cf. his early papers on neurosis, Collected Papers (New York, 1924), vol. 1;Google Scholarcf. Wehler, Hans-Ulrich, “Zum Verhältnis von Geschichtswissenschaft und Psychoanalyse,” Historische Zeitschrift, CCVIII, (1969), 529–54.Google Scholar

6. Erdmann, Karl Dietrich, “Die Zeit der Weltkriege,” in Grundmann, H., ed., Gebhardt, Bruno, Handbuch der deutschen Geschichte (8th ed., Stuttgart, 1959), IV, 6ff.Google Scholar

7. Hubatsch, Walther, Germany and the Central Powers in the World War 1914–1918 (Lawrence, Kan., 1963),Google Scholar basically a translation of his “Der Weltkrieg 1914/1918,” in the Just, LeoHandbuch der deutschen Geschichte (Constance, 1955). For the continuity of his views, cf. also the lack of substantial changes in the 1966 edition.Google Scholar

8. Rheinbaben, Werner von,Kaiser—Kanzler—Präsidenten: Erinnerungen (Mainz, 1968).Google Scholar

9. Kantorowicz, Hermann, Gutachten zur Kriegsschuldfrage 1914, ed. Geiss, Immanuel (Frankfurt, 1967).Google Scholar

10. Janssen, Karl Heinz, ed., Die graue Exzellenz: Zwischen Staatsräson und Vasallentreue—Aus den Papieren des kaiserlichen Gesandten Karl Georg von Treutler (Frankfurt, 1971).Google Scholar

11. Deuerlein, Ernst, Deutsche Kanzler von Bismarck bis Hitler (Munich, 1968).Google Scholar

12. Fischer, Fritz, “Deutsche Kriegsziele. Revolutionierung und Separatfrieden im Osten 1914–1918,” Historische Zeitschrift, CLXXXVIII (1959), 249–310;Google ScholarGriff nach der Weltmacht (Düsseldorf, 1961; 3rd rev. ed., 1964).Google Scholar The quotation is from the translation, Germany's Aims in the First World War (New York, 1967), p. 88.Google Scholar Fischer's historical philosophy is set forth in a lecture on “Aufgaben und Methoden der Geschichtswissenschaft,” in Scheschkewitz, J., ed., Geschichtsschreibung (Düsseldorf, 1968), pp. 7ff.Google Scholar

13. For the escalation of Fischer's position see his “Kontinuität des Irrtums,” Historische Zeitschrift, CXCI (1960), 83ff.; “Der erste Weltkrieg—ein historisches Tabu.” Die Welt, July 2, 1963; “Weltpolitik, Weltmachtstreben und deutsche Kriegsziele,” Historische Zeitschrift, CXCIX (1964), 265ff.; “Die deutschen Kriegsziele im ersten Weltkrieg,” Bericht über die 26. Versammlung deutscher Historiker in Berlin, 7.-11. Oktober 1964, Beiheft, to Geschichte in Wissenschaft und Unterricht (Stuttgart, 1965); “Deutschlands Schuld am Ausbruch des Ersten Weltkriegs,” Die Zeit, 09 3, 1965;Google Scholar and Weltmacht oder Niedergang (Hamburg, 1965).Google Scholar

14. Mommsen, Wolfgang J., “The Debate on German War Aims,”Google Scholar and Geiss, Immanuel, “The Outbreak of the First World War and German War Aims,” in 1914: The Coming of the First World War (Harper Torchbook edition of the Journal of Contemporary History, 1 [1966], No. 3; New York, 1966).Google Scholar For some of the key texts cf. also Lynar, E. W., Deutsche Kriegsziele 1914–1918 (Berlin, 1964).Google ScholarJoll, James, “The Debate Continues: Fritz Fischer and His Critics,” Past and Present, XXXIV (1966), 101ff.Google Scholar Cf. also Moses, John A., The War Aims of Imperial Germany: Professor Fritz Fischer and His Critics (St. Lucia, Queensland, Australia, 1968).Google Scholar

15. The English edition of Geiss's, collection, July 1914: The Outbreak of the First World War: Selected Documents (London, 1967), is a revised and condensed version which contains a new introduction, first chapter, and conclusion.Google Scholar

16. Gasser, Adolf, “Deutschlands Entschluss zum Präventivkrieg 1913/14,” in Discordia Concors: Festschrift für E. Bonjour (Basel, 1968).Google Scholar

17. Stolberg-Wernigerode, Otto Count, Die unentschiedene Generation: Deutschlands konservative Führungsschichten am Vorabend des Ersten Weltkrieges (Munich, 1968).Google Scholar

18. In his Der Erste Weltkrieg (Munich, 1968), part of the dtv Weltgeschichte, Hans Herzfeld presented the first post-Fischer synthesis of the moderate camp, distancing himself in many instances from the conclusions of the late Gerhard Ritter, the fourth volume of whose Staatskunst und Kriegshandwerk appeared posthumously in 1968.Google Scholar

19. Cited from Schieder's, Wolfgang introduction to the volume Erster Weltkrieg: Ursachen, Entstehung und Kriegsziele (Cologne, 1969), presenting an état présent and the principal texts of the controversy to West German students.Google Scholar

20. The concept originated with Egmont Zechlin in his dispersed articles, some of which are printed in the Schieder volume. “Friedensbestrebungen und Revolutionierungsversuche,” Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte, supplement to Das Parlament, 1961, Nos. 20, 24, 25; 1963, Nos. 20 and 23; “Deutschland zwischen Kabinettskrieg und Wirtschaftskrieg,” Historische Zeitschrift, CXCIX (1964), 347ff.; and “Probleme des Kriegskalküls und der Kriegsbeendigung im ersten Weltkrieg,” Geschichte in Wissenschaft und Unterricht, XVI (1965), 69ff.Google Scholar His latest contribution is Die deutsche Politik und die Juden im Ersten Weltkrieg (Göttingen, 1969).Google Scholar

21. Hillgruber, Andreas, Deutschlands Rolle in der Vorgeschichte der beiden Weltkriege (Göttingen, 1967), and “Zwischen Hegemonie und Weltpolitik—Das Problem der Kontinuität von Bismarck bis Bethmann Hollweg,” in Stürmer, Michael, ed., Das kaiserliche Deutschland. Politik und Gesellschaft 1870–1918 (Düsseldorf, 1970).Google Scholar

22. Kielmansegg, Peter Count, Deutschland und der Erste Weltkrieg (Frankfurt, 1968).Google Scholar

23. A translation is currently being prepared by Norton and should be released shortly. Cf. also Hallgarten, George W. F., Das Schicksal des Imperialismus im 20. Jahrhundert: Drei Abhandlungen über Kriegsursachen (Frankfurt, 1969).Google Scholar

24. The title of Janssen's, K. H. survey of the controversy in Die Zeit, Mar. 21, 1969.Google Scholar

25. Fischer's attention seems to have been drawn to the war scare of December 1912 by Röhl, J. C. G., who in “Admiral von Müller and the Approach of War, 1911–1914” Historical Journal, XII (1969). 661ff.,Google Scholar exposed the inaccuracy of Görlitz's, W. edition of Der Kaiser … Aufzeichnungen des Chefs des Marinekabinetts Admiral Georg Alexander von Müller über die Ära Wilhelms II. (Göttingen, 1965).Google Scholar

26. Augstein, R., “Deutschlands Fahne auf dem Bosporus,” Der Spiegel (1969), No. 48, pp. 87–105;Google ScholarJanssen, K. H., “Das Spiel mit dem Krieg,“ Die Zeit, Oct. 17, 1969;Google Scholarand Martin, Paul C., “Fritz Fischer und sein Leisten; Führte eine Rezession in dem Ersten Weltkrieg?” Christ und Welt, Jan. 23, 1970.Google Scholar Cf. also Meyer, Henry Cord in the American Historical Review, LXXVI (1971), 791ff.;CrossRefGoogle ScholarFeldman, Gerald in the Journal of Modern History, XLIII, (1971), 333ff.; andCrossRefGoogle ScholarHillgruber, Andreas in Militärgeschichtliche Mitteilungen, 1970, No. 2, 206ff.Google Scholar

27. Some of the influence of economic pressure groups is substantiated by one of his students' re-edition of the Rathenau diary. Pogge-von Strandmann, Hartmut, ed., Rathenau, Walther, Tagebuch 1907–1922 (Düsseldorf, 1967).Google Scholar See also Dehio's concepts Gleichgewicht oder Hegemonie: Betrachtungen über ein Grundproblem der neueren Staatsgeschichte (Krefeld, 1948), although the latter refused to accept the full consequences of his ideas in a biting critique of Fischer's first book inGoogle ScholarDer Monat, No. 161 (Feb. 1962), 65ff.Google Scholar

28. For the socioeconomic origins of German imperialism cf. Wehler's, H.-U. less dogmatic Bismarck und der Imperialismus (Cologne, 1969).Google Scholar

29. Cf. also his other works, “Der Kriegsausbruch 1914 im Lichte der neuesten Forschung,” Geschichte in Wissenschaft und Unterricht, XV (1964), 472–86;Google ScholarWilhelm Solf: Botschafter zwischen den Zeiten (Tübingen, 1961)Google Scholar; and Gegen die Unvernunft: Der Briefwechsel zwischen Paul Graf Wolff Metternich und Wilhelm Solf 1915–1918 mit zwei Briefen Albert Ballins (Bremen, 1964).Google Scholar

30. Cited from Hildebrand's perceptive essay, Bethmann Hollweg: Der Kanzler ohne Eigenschaften? Urteile der Geschichtsschreibung. Eine kritische Bibliographie (Düsseldorf, 1970).Google Scholar

31. Klein, Fritz has written a textbook, Deutschland 1897/98 bis 1917 (2nd ed., Berlin, 1962),Google Scholar and edited Politik im Krieg 1914–1918: Studien zur Politik der deutschen herrschenden Klassen im ersten Weltkrieg (Berlin, 1964).Google Scholar

32. Both published 1968. Gutsche, has written his Habilitationsschrift on “Die Beziehungen zwischen der Regierung Bethmann Hollwegs und dem Monopolkapital in den ersten Monaten des Weltkriegs” (East Berlin, 1967), and a spate of articles on Bethmann Hollweg. He is presently working on a short biography of the fifth chancellor.Google ScholarPetzold, has written Die Dolchstosslegende (Berlin, 1963).Google Scholar

33. Vinogradov, K. B., Burzhuaznaia Istoriographiia Pervoi Mirovoi Voinyi (Moscow, 1962).Google Scholar

34. Deutschland im ersten Weltkrieg, II (ed. Gutsche, ), 60–61.Google Scholar

35. For an East German review of the continuing controversy cf. Gutsche, W., Klein, F., Kral, H., and Petzold, J., “Neue Forschungen zur Geschichte Deutschlands im ersten Weltkrieg,” Jahrbuch für Geschichte (Berlin, 1967), I, 282–306.Google Scholar

36. For his views beyond 1914, cf. “Die italienische Frage in der Politik des Reichskanzlers von Bethmann Hollweg, 1914–1915,” in Quellen und Forschungen aus italienischen Archiven und Bibliotheken, XLVIII (1968), 282–308;Google Scholar‘Die Regierung Bethmann Hollweg und die öffentliche Meinung, 1914–1917,” Vierteljahrshefte für Zeitgeschichte, XVII (1969), 117–59;Google Scholar“L'Opinion allemande et la chute du gouvernment Bethmann-Hollweg en juillet 1917,” Revue d'histoire moderne et contemporaine, 1969, pp. 39–53. Professor Mommsen is also preparing a summary of his views which should appear in print shortly.Google Scholar

37. That is the advice of Sheehan, James J., “Germany, 1890–1918: A Survey of Recent Research,” Central European History, I (1968), 345ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

38. Berghahn, Volker R., “Zu den Zielen des deutschen Flottenbaus unter Wilhelm II.” Historische Zeitschrift, CCX (1970), 34ff.Google Scholar His Habilitationsschrift, which has just appeared, has not yet been available to me. Cf. also Langhorne, Richard, “The Naval Question in Anglo-German Relations, 1912–1914,” Historical Journal, XIV (1971), 359ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

39. Berghahn, Volker R. and Deist, Wilhelm, “Kaiserliche Marine und Kriegsausbruch 1914: Neue Dokumente zur Juli-Krise,”Google ScholarMilitärgeschichtliche Mitteilungen, 1970, No. 1, 37ff. Cf. also Deist's massive documentation,Google ScholarMilitär und Innenpolitik im Weltkrieg (2 vols., Düsseldorf, 1970), which even without including East German documents breaks new ground.Google Scholar

40. Stegmann, Dirk, Die Erben Bismarcks, Parteien und Verbände in der Spätphase des Wilhelminischen Deutschlands: Sammlungspolitik 1897–1918 (Cologne, 1970),Google Scholar and Witt, Peter Christian, Die Finanzpolitik des Deutschen Reiches von 1903 bis 1913. Eine Studie zur Innenpolitik des Wilhelminischen Deutschland (Lübeck, 1970). These studies provide much of the new material in Fischer's Krieg der Illusionen.Google Scholar

41. Wernecke, Klaus-Dieter, Der Wille zur Weltgeltung: Aussenpolitik und Öffentlichkeit in Deustschland am Vorabend des Ersten Weltkriegs (Düsseldorf, 1970).Google Scholar Cf. also the study by the present director of the Institut für Zeitungsforschung, Koszyk, KurtDeutsche Pressenpolitik im Ersten Weltkrieg (Düsseldrof, 1968).Google Scholar

42. Burchardt, Lothar, Friedenswirtschaft und Kriegsvorsorge. Deutschlands wirtschaftliche Rüstungsbestrebungen vor 1914 (Boppard, 1968).Google Scholar Cf. also Williamson, John G., Karl Helfferich 1872–1924: Economist, Financier, Politician (Princeton, 1971).Google Scholar

43. Groh, Dieter, “The ‘Unpatriotic Socialists’ and the State,” Journal of Contemporary History, I (1966), 151ff., to be elaborated in his forthcoming Die “vaterlandslosen Gesellen”und das Vaterland.CrossRefGoogle Scholar Cf. also Buse, D. K., “Ebert and the Coming of World War I: A Month from his Diary,” International Review of Social History, XIII (1968), 430ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

44. Remak, Joachim, “1914—The Third Balkan War: Origins Reconsidered,“ Journal of Modern History, XLIII (1971), 353ff.Google Scholar See also the conventional narrative of Zeman, Z. A. B., The Gentleman Negotiators: A Diplomatic History of the First World War (New York, 1971), dealing not with the outbreak proper, but with the entry of other belligerents and the peace attempts.Google Scholar

45. Joll, James, 1914: The Unspoken Assumptions (London, 1968).Google Scholar For a popular documentation conveying the critical feeling about World War I of present research cf. also Johann, Ernst, Innenansicht eines Krieges: Bilder—Briefe—Dokumente 1914–1918 (Frankfurt, 1968).Google Scholar

46. Mayer, Arno J., “Domestic Causes of the First World War,” in Stern, F. and Krieger, L., eds., The Responsibility of Power (Garden City, N.Y., 1967), pp. 286ff.; and “Internal Causes and Purposes of War in Europe, 1870–1956: A Research Assignment,”CrossRefGoogle ScholarJournal of Modern History, XLI (1969), 291–303. Cf. the further elaboration of this theme in his Dynamics of Counterrevolution in Europe. 1870–1956: An Analytic Framework (New York, 1971).Google Scholar

47. Loewenberg's, Peter challenge is in his “Arno Mayer's ‘Internal Causes and Purposes of War in Europe, 1870–1956’—an Inadequate Model of Human Behavior, National Conflict and Historical Change,” Journal of Modern History, XLII (1970), 628ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar See also his “The Psychohistorical Origins of the Nazi Youth Cohort,” American Historical Review, LXXVI (1971), 1457ff.

48. Zinnes, Dina A., North, Robert C., and Koch, Howard E., “Capability, Threat and the Outbreak of War,” in Rosenau, James N., ed., International Politics and Foreign Policy (New York, 1961), pp. 469ff.Google Scholar

49. A step in this direction is such work as Lamar Cecil's “The Creation of Nobles in Prussia, 1871–1918,” American Historical Review, LXXV (1970), 757ff.Google Scholar

50. Freud, Sigmund to Romain Rolland, 03 4, 1923, in Ernest L. Freud, Letters of Sigmund Freud (London, 1960) pp. 341–44.Google Scholar