The World Crisis, Volume I: 1911 - 1914

The World Crisis #Vol. I

by Winston S. Churchill

Winston Churchill's superlative account of the prelude to and events of the First World War is a defining work of 20th-century history. With dramatic narrative power, Churchill reconstructs the action on the Western and Eastern Fronts, the wars at sea and in the air, and the advent of tanks and U-boats.

Rich with personal insights, the first part of Churchill's magisterial book covers the years 1911-1914 and includes Ireland and the European balance, the mobilization of the Navy, the invasion of France, and Turkey and the Balkans.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, World War I, Politics, War, Biography, Audiobook

536 pages, Hardcover

First published April 1, 1923

About the author

Sir Winston Leonard Spencer Churchill, politician and writer, as prime minister from 1940 to 1945 and from 1951 to 1955 led Great Britain, published several works, including The Second World War from 1948 to 1953, and then won the Nobel Prize for literature.

William Maxwell Aitken, first baron Beaverbrook, held many cabinet positions during the 1940s as a confidant of Churchill.

Sir Winston Leonard Spencer-Churchill, KG, OM, CH, TD, FRS, PC (Can), served the United Kingdom again. A noted statesman, orator and strategist, Churchill also served as an officer in the Army. This prolific author "for his mastery of historical and biographical description as well as for brilliant oratory in defending exalted human values."

Out of respect for Winston_Churchill, the well-known American author, Winston S. Churchill offered to use his middle initial as an author.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winston...

Reviews

[Timothy James · Rating 3 out of 5]

Winston Churchill is a gifted writer and there is no doubt that he thoroughly knows his material. Not only has he evidently researched in great depth, he was a key player in many of the events recorded in this volume. The reason I could not give 4 or 5 stars to the book is that there is, unusually in such a book, too much detail. Unless you are very interested in ship tonnages, the size of their guns, and the location of individual ships, you will find large passages that you will want to skip over. If this is your "cup of tea", then you will love it, but on this occasion I would recommend the average reader like me to perhaps consider one of the abridged versions, for the first volume at least.

[Abhi · Rating 3 out of 5]

The grand title of the book can be misleading. Yes, it was a crisis affecting the entire planet, and the book does go into some detail of the war on land, mainly the German flank attack through Belgium based on the original Schlieffen Plan, the significant Battle of the Marne, the taking of Antwerp and the race to the channel ports. But this book is mostly about the Admiralty's plans and preparedness for war at sea, as well as the events that subsequently unfolded in various theatres, from midsummer of 1914, leading up to, as the author calls it, the "first Christmas of the war". It is also mostly posturing, the First Lord of the Admiralty telling us how he had foreseen this event or that, and how he was right all along. It is still Volume 1 of a set of six books, so maybe it is too early to judge.

Some of my notes from the reading:

1. There were several eye-roll moments:

"England was left an isolated defender of the sanctity of Treaties and the law of nations."

"... of Britain, peace-loving, unthinking, little prepared, of her power and virtue, and of her mission of good sense and fair play."

"... the whole fortunes of our race and Empire, the whole treasure accumulated during so many centuries of sacrifice and achievement."

Some were so pompously self-righteous as to be hilarious:

"... our claim to be left in the unmolested enjoyment of vast and splendid possessions, often seems less reasonable to others than to us."

2. Maybe war was inevitable, and Germany had ambitions that would eventually tread on the imperialistic dreams of other European nations, but I could not help but wonder how much the act of preparation for war itself was responsible for the actual war.

3. There is no denying the tactical and strategic brilliance of this man, his level of preparation and attention to detail, his powers of persuasion. And his flair for writing, illustrated over several spellbinding passages, such as those describing the siege of Antwerp.

4. It was also interesting to learn about other important figures of the time: Fisher ("No man knew better than he how to put war thought into a ship."), Kitchener, Edward Grey, Arthur Wilson, von Tirpitz, Joseph Joffre, Enver Pasha.

5. The first war saw the advent and development of new methods and instruments of warfare: trenches, rifles and shells, armoured cars and tanks, and the submarine.

[Jack · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is an immeasurably more detailed account of a period of Churchill’s life than “My Early Life”, one with much less humour and much more bombastic imperial rhetoric and yet it’s still excellent.

I have to admit, I was not expecting the level of detail that would be found in this book but I was pleasantly surprised. I knew of course that his viewpoint of these early months of the war would be shaped by his tenure at the admiralty but I was not expecting such an in-depth discussion of naval matters. This probably isn’t a great book to read for a general overview of 1914 but it’s a truly excellent source for all things navy, interdepartmental relations and an overview of how the pre-war years affected policy. I didn’t realise I’d find all of this as interesting as I did.

As I say, this book is much more bombastic in its rhetoric, it demonstrates Churchill’s masterful manipulation of the English language to the extreme and there is certainly an argument to be made that Churchill is much more self-congratulatory and perhaps even arrogant than in “My Early Life”. The reason I’m okay with this though is not because I’m a generic apologist for all his faults but rather because he absolutely comes with the receipts. Does he say that he predicted quite a lot of things that would happen? Yes. Is it annoying? no because he actually provides the memoranda and documents to prove he actually said and believed these things at the time.

Another interesting thing about this book is that, in my view, it dispels (or at least seriously questions the legitimacy of) claims that Churchill was some sort of power hungry menace. Undoubtedly Churchill seems to have dipped his fingers in quite a few pies which probably did not fall under the remit of the admiralty however some of the criticism of him seems incredibly harsh after reading this book. One such example would be Max Hasting’s claim that Churchill’s involvement in the Antwerp fiasco

“represented shocking folly by a minister who abused his powers and betrayed his responsibilities. It is astonishing that the First Lords’s cabinet colleagues so readily forgave him for a lapse of judgment that would have destroyed most men’s careers”

I am well aware that Churchill is presenting a positive image of himself, this is only natural for a personal history of an event however like I said previously, he brings the receipts to back his claims up. The evidence he provides regarding his own involvement in the Antwerp event and other similar events provides a compelling case in his favour.

The ability of Churchill to tackle head on criticism against him in this book is genuinely impressive and, In my view, massively increases its credibility and utility as a source of WWI history.


As well as the incredible levels of detail and Churchill’s impressive reproduction of historical documents, this book continues a Churchillian tradition of exceptional kindness about colleagues, subordinates etc and this just generally makes things pleasant to read. Furthermore, as I have already mentioned, Churchill’s prose and command of the English language is on full display here meaning that this book didn’t feel like a chore to read at all.

I was planning to take this series of books slowly, interspersing with other books however I may have to reconsider this idea as I am genuinely looking forward to reading the next volume!

4/5*

[Erik · Rating 4 out of 5]

I forgot that I had listened to this book a few years ago from Audible. This time around I read it on a kindle, and I feel like I got some different things out of it.

I have read several things written by Churchill, and his style is always engaging. In this volume he narrates the progress of the lead up to and the first several months of World War I from his vantage as first Lord of the Admiralty. Many written communications between himself and others are reproduced in the book as part of the narration to give the reader a sense of immediacy surrounding the events he narrates.

He narrates in some detail about various engagements on the seas, and there is technical talk about types of ships and their armoring, speed, and number and size of guns. Churchill has a great sense of when to stop with the details to avoid boring the audience. So, I always felt the detail added to the excitement and never felt overdone.

I really admire Churchill's use of language and highlighted many quotes that I felt encapsulated vividly and powerfully what he was saying. Here are a couple of examples

"I . . . [was] fully convinced of Lord Kitchener's commanding foresight and wisdom in resisting the temptation to meet the famine of the moment by devouring the seed-corn of the future."

"Having gone to war it is vain to shrink from facing the hazards inseparable from it."

"But why is it that men are so constituted that they can only lay aside their own domestic quarrels under the impulse of what I will call a higher principle of hatred?"

[Marty Mangold · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book was written in the 1920s, with WSC discussing his work during what we now call World War I, when he was in charge of the British Navy. In a sense, the text comes from two points in time: during the 1920s, when he wrote in hindsight, and copious documents from a decade before.

There's a fair amount of answering his critics and explaining what was going on behind the headlines when he was under public disapproval, but for the most part it was eye-opening for me to learn about the international scene during these early years.

The content of the original wartime correspondence goes beyond apologetics and shows us smart people dealing with international conflict. I found it helpful how often these leaders knew what they did not know: they could only make preparations and then "rest content and await events."

I'll try to get this on the correct version: I read the audio version on Hoopla, read by Stefan Rudnicki.

[Fil Krynicki · Rating 5 out of 5]

I have for years now found Churchill fascinating. His mean influence on the two World Wars is likely unmatched, and his added personage as a historian and man of letters is irresistible seasoning. It was inevitable that I eventually move on from observing him around the corners of history to reading his own perspective.

There are a thousand things to love about Churchill's perspective here, but I will focus on only two for this review.

First, Churchill's World Crisis is begun and completed between the two conflicts. Thus, his perspective is often *deliciously* accented by the dramatic irony of the reader's foresight. For example, in regard to the early success in bombing the outer forts of the Dardanelles, Churchill quotes Walt Whitman:

"Now mark me well-it is provided in the essence of things, from any fruition of success, no matter what, shall come forth something to make a greater struggle necessary."

It resonates with prophetic thunder.

The second point I will note also has to do with the Dardanelles. The campaign that would result in his expulsion from first the Admiralty and then the War Council hangs over this entire narrative. Churchill is a writer who tries to maintain the utmost professionalism. Even when his telegrams read of carefully concealed frustration and antagonism, he reiterates his devotion towards friendship and the smooth work of government. The one place this breaks down is the Dardanelles. In the most unexpected places mention of this campaign crops up, and Churchill defends himself months prematurely. Unfortunately I cannot find the quote, but when discussing the development of 15" guns for the new battleships, Churchill states that the potential loss were these to prove untenable would be severe, compromising the margin of superiority of the Grand Fleet. This risk paid off. Why, he claims, should he be criticized for advocating the relatively small risk of a purely naval campaign in the Dardanelles? This much greater risk paid off, and only for that reason is it forgiven.

These two positives in no way encompass the whole. As I write this I have just finished the second volume, and hope to have many more reflections as I continue.

[Ruth · Rating 4 out of 5]

Although much of this book was devoted to information about the capabilities, locations, and strategies of British ships and many other naval details, which is often tedious to those of us who are not naval scholars, this is overall a compelling rendering of how the world slid into war from 1911-1914. How can descriptions of events about which we already now, and the outcomes of which we already know, be compelling? Only Churchill's unsurpassed writing and language skills can account for that. I recommend this volume to any reader interested in world history. I fully intend to read the remaining four volumes of this Churchill masterpiece.

[Logan · Rating 3 out of 5]

The first third started off with a very good summary and background of the political situation, the ideologies of the people involved, and the various stages that led to the Great War. The last half of the book was primarily tabulations and memos about moving ships around, which I understand was important to the war effort but was very impersonal and hardly made for engaging reading in my mind.

[Emily · Rating 5 out of 5]

I listened to this on audiobook. I admit ahead of time that I love Winston Churchill. I feel like I understand how his mind works.

This book opened my mind to understanding why the first world war happened. We all know the history taught in schools, written well after the second world war and tainted with foreshadowing. This book was written in the 1920's, when Winston wasn't yet the war hero. He was still a formidable politician, but not universally liked by any means.

What makes this volume particularly good though is that he explains what was going on in government in the years leading up to war including the first few months of war in 1914 when he was in charge of the admiralty. There's a sense looking back from a hundred plus years that the first world war was unnecessary. This book gives another perspective. He tries to write what it was like in the months leading up to the war without the hindsight of the trenches and the thousands upon thousands of dead soldiers buried in mass graves in Europe. It's important to understand this because otherwise we just assume that it was another senseless war. Yes, all war is senseless, but do we tell the Ukrainians that it is senseless to defend themselves from Putin's Russia? Or the Belgians that they should have just let Germany march through to invade France? The world is a complicated place. Would Russia had invaded Ukraine with the knowledge that they would be bogged down in the process? Or the Germans, would they have tried to invade France if they had known the outcome? It's impossible to say. We can only go based on the facts at hand and our own prejudices. This book gives us insight into the facts at hand and the prejudices of the British government and some keen insight into the thinking of the Germans, the French, the Russians, the Ottomans, the Austrians and tangentially, the Irish. Churchill was adept at making connections and good at trying to understand the point of view of those around him. Especially revealing are the insights offered on the German perspective leading up to war.

Another point that is well covered is the Irish question. Home Rule was being debated and Irish Republicanism was a big distraction for the British government. There was no big antagonism against the Germans, but there was wariness at their mobilisations. Hence why Churchill was concerned to keep the navy in good condition as a balance against the Germans trying to grow their navy. There might not have been "mutually assured destruction" that came with nuclear weapons, but there was a corrective check based on the size of the armies and navies of the relative "superpowers". Germany was seeking to overpower it's neighbours, especially France and Russia. Those years leading up to war were not as clear cut as the modern history books would like to tell.

The other reason I really liked listening to this book is that it sounded so modern. Yes, it was written when my own paternal grandfather and maternal great grandparents were just children, but it was like I was a fly on the wall, seeing it as only yesterday. There were a few things I noticed, like the lack of radar meant that tracking enemy ships and submarines was difficult. But I could imagine those ships as they tried to track down the German fleet in the Pacific around the Cape to the Atlantic.

In conclusion, I found this book a revelation, changing the way I see the first world war and I look forward to listening to the rest of the series.

[Martin · Rating 4 out of 5]

This would not be a good book for anyone without a good understanding of the events of WWI. It was published in 1923, just after the war, for a British audience who survived what was the most important event in most of their lives. If you're looking for a good history of the lead up and early days of WWI, read The Guns of August.

That said, I've read a lot of WWI history, and I enjoyed this book. It's 10% the run up to and events of 1914 and 90% what Winston Churchill was doing in 1910-14 as the civilian leader of The Admiralty. Honestly, reading this book you might wonder if WWI was really a naval war given the scope and perspective of this tome.

As with any war, not everything goes well or according to plan. Churchill goes to great lengths to explain why the cock ups of the British navy at the start of WWI were not his fault. Viz., the loss of three cruisers to German ships in the Pacific and the bombardment of non-military British population centers from the North Sea when in both areas of operations the British enjoyed massive naval superiority.

Churchill goes out of his way to share that he had predicted the flow of the first 90 days of the war on the Western Front with some accuracy...3 or 4 years before war broke out. I chalk this up to Churchill writing a lot about everything. People who like to prognosticate, and I am one as was Churchill, are going to score some bull's-eyes.

Among Churchill's most interesting observations:
In response to critics who claimed "If France had only done X" or "If England had only done Y" there would not have been a war, he says that from the inside X, Y, and A and B and C and J are all connected. One could not have adjusted X or Y without everything else changing, therefore such Monday morning quarterbacking was rubbish.

It was clear to Churchill in 1910 or 11 that Germany wanted war, based on separate manufactured crises with Russia and France leading up to the War. I found his explanation of these events new (to me) and enlightening.

Churchill takes a lot of credit for Britain's naval modernization in the three years leading up to WWI. Any improvement in arms that wasn't his idea was the idea of someone he had put into place. Completely true?

Churchill was at the Belgian front for a week or so, leading naval platoons that had been thrown into the effort to slow the German's push to Antwerp. I didn't know that before. According to Churchill, Lord Kitchener wanted to make him an admiral so that Churchill could continue as a military, rather than civilian, leader. The Prime Minister wouldn't allow it.

Churchill heaps praise on those he finds worthy, especially those who perished in the War. He doesn't grind axes. Disagreements in the cabinet are not brought forth, only the majority's decision, whether or not Churchill personally agreed. There are a couple of naval errors in judgment in battle that could not be ignored. Churchill never writes with scorn in describing these lapses.

Britain didn't have enough rifles at the start of WWI for every man in the military to have his own. Yikes!

Terrific narrator/reader.

Recommended!

[John Poulain · Rating 3 out of 5]

Having enjoyed Churchill's the History of the English Speaking People I thought this book would be an interesting overview of the first world war, an area I really don't know much about, having purchased on Audible the "Part One" was nowhere to be found in the title and I was slightly dissappointed to realised part way through that this wasn't the collection of four volumes (promised in the introduction) but only a part of the whole.

The focus in the book seems quite narrow, as I understand form Churchill's references there were a lot of books written after WW1 recounting the events and as such the war is covered from his perspective as a minister and the admiralty, events that he wasn't directly involved in are described but not in as much detail as others which I feel may have given me a warped perspective of the importance of the naval battles between a vastly superior British force and a smaller German navy. There are also some issues with how closely the book was written to the event as perspective hasn't come into play, some events are written casusally as the audience is expected to remember them.

Despite some issues there are some interesting looks into the thoughts of Churchill, his maxims for war and even his understanding of keeping codebreaking and intelligence a secret from the enemy. "The British Naval Principle of the first line of defence being the enemy's ports" or "Modern Armies cannot close a gap by sideways motion, only by advance or retreat", I'm not sure if these are true but they are an interesting look at the theories of war.

I'd not heard of the battle of La Marne and that the German Generals allegedly thought the war was lost from that point. Full of ancedotes and interesting information about the war even if it's not a general overview.

Choice Notes
" In war repetition is perilous and you can do many things as long as you do not keep on doing them. "
" It was a terrible order [to make a suicidal attack on a German vessel] I gave you the other day" Adm Keyes "It was terrible not to recieve it until i was nearly home. I waited three hours for such an order and very nearly did it on my own responsibility" "
" La marne ended german hopes of winning and all that was left was four years of pojntless slaughter. We don't know if Moltke actually said "Majesty we have lost the war" but a note to his wife stated "the fighting has not gone well and we will have to pay for the damage we have done." "
" Navies are always ready to fight and do not require mobilisations like an army. "
" Nothing less than a 15" gun can be looked at for the new battleships. Supplying this gun would be equivalent of a great battle at sea, to shrink from it would be treason. It was the big punch that showed Jack Johnson to knock out his opponents... "
" Wars arise out of small things but are not caused by them. A war delayed by suppressing the small things may be a war averted as new combinations form. "

[Craig · Rating 5 out of 5]

A unique and totally absorbing history of the outbreak of World War I, from an insider who's main goal it seems is to justify his bungling of Britain's naval affairs during the war. The rhythm of Churchill's language is unsurpassed. One can read it just to savor the meter and beauty of the prose.

From a historical perspective, Churchill's detailed description of the internal politics of the British government during the war, documented by thousands and thousands of internal letters and memos has no other precedent in world history. The dysfunctional relationship between Churchill and Lord Kitchener which led to the disastrous Gallipoli campaign in 1915 is the highlight of the book and is documented in minute and fascinating detail.


This is the most readable and compelling of Churchill's historical work in my opinion. Churchill's refined, aristocratic language seems appropriate for the war which ended the age of kings and queens and empires. By the time he wrote his 6 volume history of WW2 many years later, this type aristocratic language seemed almost quaint and outdated.

[Andrew · Rating 3 out of 5]

More a memoir than a history, Churchill details his involvement at the highest levels of government while giving an overarching history of the was at large. His style is engaging, and throughly detailed.

Unfortunately, this two volume set ommits volumes IV and V of the first editions, and so we gain no idea of The Aftermath, or the Eastern Front.

[Adam K · Rating 3 out of 5]

The World Crisis is a special primary source material for the first world war because few other people in a position such as Churchill's actually wrote and published extensive materials about it.

Churchill demonstrates here that he is a gifted writer. His account of the lead-up to the outbreak of war is filled with dramatic and grandiose prose conjuring up the dark clouds of inevitable conflict looming ominously on the horizon. However, at its core (and this is something Churchill himself admits within the introduction) this is the story of the war from the perspective of the Office of the Admiralty within the British government--namely, Churchill's perspective. He spends a great deal of time explaining the complicated political, geographic and military situations that cropped up and explains/justifies his (and the government's) decisions. Therefore, I do not recommend this as an introduction to any particular part of the war.

While he certainly provides some context, the broader picture of the war is omitted in order to focus on the logistics of war (troop movements, ship building, weapon development, strategic planning, etc.). Sometimes he provides us with a brief history lesson, other times he is telling us about being given news in the bath and jumping out to put clothes on without drying himself off. As others have noted, there are also long lists of ships detailing their armaments and locations. (The reason for this is so that he can set up the situation and explain why certain ships are in certain locations based on availability and need.) It does get tedious, but it also highlights the incredible number of considerations that need to be taken into account to run a war. In the end, this book is both not detailed enough and way too detailed at the same time.

Certainly, this is an extremely important historical document for scholarly study, and in that respect, I highly recommend it. Hearing Churchill's explanation for the war as he saw it can be enlightening (for better or worse) in many ways. But maybe if you're looking for a more comprehensive view of the war, start somewhere else.

[Erik · Rating 3 out of 5]

"There is always a strong case for doing nothing, especially for doing nothing yourself."

Churchill uses the above phrase as part of a defense for the actions that were taken by the British Admiralty during the early phases of WWI. This was in response to the tendency people have of looking back at events and telling all that should have been done. I don't want to wax too philosophical, but I think there is some great wisdom here; doing nothing can often be the best choice.

Churchill at a different point in the book shares another important truth for life.

"Eaten bread is soon forgotten. Dangers which are warded off by effective
precautions and foresight are never even remembered. Thus it happened
that the Admiralty was inconsiderately judged in this opening phase."

This is so often true. The person who helps fix a crisis is often lauded, but a person who avoids the crisis gets little recognition . . . understandably because most people never recognize the crisis that didn't happen.

I enjoy reading the writings of Winston Churchill. This volume, however, had much more play-by-play information on naval movements than I was interested in hearing. So, I found my mind wandering in parts. There is a lot of information on different types of ships, the number and size of their guns, ship speed, armor thickness, etc. This is all interspersed within discussions of the relationships between the countries involved. There is a lot here, and I believe anyone really interested in war history will enjoy this book.

[Erik Wilson · Rating 3 out of 5]

Was looking to read something pretty dense and this definitely did the job. Honestly so much of the book is reading correspondence between various government people

Crazy to see how much they had planned for the war years and years before it actually began. I think my favorite 3 chapters were like 9,10,11 just as the war starts ramping up and all the dominoes are falling, stayed up late one night reading this part, couldn’t put it down. Really appreciated the inside perspective and throughout the book Churchill’s vocabulary is vast too, the writing is consistently impressive

Tbh this whole volume is basically Churchill retroactively justifying his prewar decisions by presenting the information he had available at the time. So, assuming he’s being entirely truthful, he basically has the benefit of seeing how things worked out before taking his position on them… He’s very thorough and unapologetic about most of his stances here. He’s writing his own legacy, putting himself in the middle of it all, often claiming his actions were the best choices.

Some parts 5/5, some parts were pretty technical and I just skimmed, I’ll land somewhere in the middle on the rating. I think I would’ve taken away more from the book if I knew more about the specifics of World War One, but for the most part I really enjoyed reading it. Recommend to anyone into Churchill, WWI, or Naval history. Learned way more about the navy than I anticipated but I guess I should’ve seen that coming. Would like to read some more volumes at some point but I think we’ll space them out

[Mbuye · Rating 4 out of 5]

Of the many and many histories of World War I about the issues in the conflict, behind the scenes and on front lines, of the innumerable studies of the political and military decisions affecting the war, Winston Churchill’s is possibly the best: he was not just an insider, but a powerful (even then) mover of events. In this volume, of course, as Lord of the Admiralty, he details at length the preparations for building up the Navy. And the preparations are phenomenal, for warfare never before understood or even imagined. Churchill predicts the use of an airforce, but distrusts German Zeppelins, that cannot be controlled from the base, and which are nothing but combustible bags of gas. Likewise, he foresees an urgent need to change the fuel for all manner of shipping from coal to liquid fuel. As for naval battles, the need for bases, for torpedoes, for submarines and mines and minesweepers - the old men at the War Office had no concept of such matters.

In part, this is a justification as well as a defence for many of Churchill's decisions, most particularly against the criticism that followed the debacle of Gallipolli. Told with flair and elegance, it shows just what a great master of the language he was, even in his notes and minutes: I found a footnote that seems to sum up Churchill's opinion of his Cabinet colleagues:

“Appendix C. I hope it may be read. WSC.”

This is, of course, just one part of a six-part history, and only covers 1914. But the tragedies and disasters of that one year were only the ominous tokens of what was to follow.

[John Stults · Rating 5 out of 5]

History as literature

It is easy to see how WAS won the Nobel prize in literature for this and his six vol history of WWII
He begins his story several years before the war and continues in this vol to the end of 1914. Yes WAX is the Prime character in the story and he obviously concentrates on the admirably the most. Interesting, in spite of political differences, he in this vol has only generally nice things to say about his political opponents. It is also easy to see how he was unpopular with ranking navy officers. To some extent due to his much more intense work ethic.
In the years leading up to the war a great deal of the political infighting in the size of the royal navy and the building of specific ships and classes of ship becomes reality. I am reminded of some of the infighting during the Reagan build up.
Should the reader desire extensive appendices of mostly naval documents covering everything to professional education, creation of a naval staff, and fleet sizing are available. Within the body of the text enormous amounts of official documents mostly written by WAX are include. If you are interested in the start up of WWI and how a democracy prepares for war,this is a great and worthy read. It also provides the views and many speeches and correspondence of one of the 20th centuries great men. I highly recommend this book and personally look forward to reading the second vol.

[Michael Brown · Rating 4 out of 5]

My only problem with anything by Winston Churchill is his command of the English language. With my history degrees and education background I have suffered through many authors who either had a poor command of the language or attempted to be so correct and wordy that their presentations just failed to impress and led to confusion.
Sir Winston on the other hand writes so completely that often he uses a few hundred words to describe something that most historians would present with a shorter sentence. It just takes awhile to adjust to this format and fully appreciate his detail to history. I guess by volume 5 I will be fully reacclimated and then have problems with by mysteries / westerns / sci-fi reading.
This first volume present so much info that it is best to read in short phases. A few related chapters, consultation to either the maps in the volume or online research and a bit of comparison to previous sources or just one's memory of events will clear up some points that are often glossed over or open totally new understanding because more detailed background data is now presented.
In contrast his WWII series is a much easier read as he mentioned several times, he was writing for a broader audience as opposed to previous works aimed at military historians or academic readers.

[Mary Pat · Rating 3 out of 5]

I hope you really want to know what the British Navy was up to in the first few months of World War I. Because that's the bulk of this book. Especially the portions about how some of Churchill's decisions (which had been called into question by contemporaries) were made and were completely reasonable. I am a Churchill partisan, but it got a bit tiresome after a while.

Pluses: Churchill is really good at summarizing, and picking out the most salient facts to illustrate what was going on. For anything regarding armies & army movements, because he wasn't directly engaged in that decision-making, you get less exhaustive detail. Unfortunately, there are important things missing. There are also some original documents (mostly written by Churchill himself, as first Lord of the Admiralty.

Minuses: Too much boring detail about naval actions, especially the movement and placement of ships. Obviously, Churchill was really into this stuff, but it doesn't really fit with the other items, where Churchill was a distant observer as opposed to directly involved. More stuff could have been moved into the appendices.

[Rik Brooymans · Rating 4 out of 5]

The first volume of this set is typically wonderful Churchill fare. While most people looking back at the start of WWI would spend more time on the underlying system of alliances and European events, Churchill spends a significant time comfortably ensconced in his wheelhouse - the action and events within the Admiralty, as he worked diligently to put the great British fleet onto a war footing. The details may be tiresome to some, but they were clearly important to Churchill and he communicates them with his typical panache.

When the action starts and the bullets and naval artillery start flying, he gets into his prime story telling mode. His narrative and anecdotes right from the front lines in France, Belgium, the Mediterranean, Indian Ocean and South Atlantic are peppered with telegrams, orders and letters that drop you right in on the action.

A good start to the series. Looking forward to Volume II.

[Pei-jean Lu · Rating 5 out of 5]

A unique and personalised account of the events that would bring the world into a first global conflict. Much of my knowledge of the First World War has mostly been from the Australian perspective and the forging of the Australian identity so I enjoyed reading more about the events prior to and during the early years of the war.

Admittedly Churchill’s Victorian upper class upbringing is evident in his language and tone which can often come across as stuffy to the modern reader, but he proves to be a masterful historian

[Rafael Lino · Rating 3 out of 5]

Winston Churchill talks about himself. He goes on about stuff he did and how it really helped the war. There's a huge section on how he go the British ships to get larger cannons that then helped turned the tide in the Battle of Jutland (?). Of course most of the action was on the ground. But Winston spends dozens if not a hundred pages on how amazing his shipbuilding and cannon improving policies helped save the world from German tyranny. It's unfortunate and I hope his WW2 histories are better.

[Brian Manville · Rating 3 out of 5]

While the book is a glimpse behind the inner workings of the British government up to and through the first months of World War I, Churchill's writing style and desire to dive into the minutia of ships can make for a very dry read. It is only once the war starts that the narrative picks up and becomes more of a first person account of the war. I would skip the pre-war discussions of ships, guns and armor unless you are a navy geek.

BOTTOM LINE: First person account of WWI that can be dry reading.

[Josiah R · Rating 4 out of 5]

Things I found interesting:
- the simple ratio method for maintaining Naval superiority over Germany
- the problem of increasing the size of deck guns leading to exponentially heavier weight
- the indispensability of Naval craft speed
- the faster the ship needs to be, the exponentially more powerful the engine needs to be
- the gamble on switching to oil powered ships prior to the war, even though Britain only had coal
- defensive tactics like mines backfired
- how much of war is just supply chain logistics and planning

[Bryan · Rating 3 out of 5]

I assume this is a good book, *IF* you're in the market for a very specific deep dive into the era preceding World War I.

Prerequisites for enjoying it:
- A prior understanding, on a fairly deep level, of British politicians and issues in the era;
- An inner need to do a very deep dive into the roots of WWI in minute detail;
- Ability to tolerate Winston Churchill making himself the star of the show, and probably not portraying everything objectively.

This book is not for most people. It could be for you, if you have a very specific background and curiosity.

[Penrod · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent introduction to the causes of The First World War (the English perspective) from someone who had political power before it and during it. Also notable for the book's appearance so soon after the war, thus relatively uncolored by what other historians wrote. One of the best things about the book is Churchill's voice. Big warning: this work represents more a memoir than a detailed consideration of all aspects of the run up to the war.

[Lawrence Tremmel · Rating 4 out of 5]

A masterful writer and analyst. His writing style excellent but not as mature as his WW2 volumes. The highly referenced book rebuts much of the WW1 criticism Churchill received from contemporaries. The man is certainly a genius at war, politics, writing and painting.

[Jeremy · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book presents fascinating history regarding the events preceding WW1, but you have to wade through seemingly every minute, telegram, and memorandum that Churchill ever wrote during this period to get there. Certainly worthwhile, but more for the professional historian or scholar.

[Duane L. and Ava E. Marmon · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good read.

This is a good read. Kind of a hard slog but lots of interesting information. Not as well written as some of his other books. I believe this is because of all the correspondence lain out in the book. Still interesting.