The Long Fuse: An Interpretation of the Origins of World War I

by Laurence Lafore

In analyzing the causes of World War I without concern for the question of guilt, the author places emphasis on two central first, that when statesmen and peoples took actions they knew might lead to war, they were not envisaging the catastrophe that the war became but rather a quick and limited war; and, second, that among the many conflicts that might have led to war, the one that did was the threat to the integrity of Austria-Hungary posed by Serbia and Serb nationalism. Title of related interest also available from Waveland Williamson-Van Wyk, July 1914: Soldiers, Statesmen, and the Coming of the Great War—A Documentary History (ISBN 9781478622864).

Genres: History, Nonfiction, World War I, Politics, European History, War, Military Fiction

284 pages, Paperback

First published June 1, 1965

Reviews

[Jules Billings · Rating 3 out of 5]

If I ever see Laurence Lafore, it's on sight.

[Kenneth · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is a great introduction to the history of the years leading up to the outbreak of World War I. It gives one a great feel for the times - over a century ago now. The Great War, as it used to be called, is really the great watershed of modern history. The world has never been the same since. Several of the traditional European monarchies were swept away - the Hohenzollerns and other dynasties who ruled in Germany, the Habsburgs who ruled Austria-Hungary, the Romanovs who ruled Russia, and the Ottomans who ruled the Turkish empire. It caused the center of world finance to shift to New York, from London. The Communist Bolsheviks came to power in Russia to create the Soviet Union.

Reading the day-by-day course of events, it appears the war happened because too many men in high places (there weren't any women in those places in those days), really wanted a war, for what seemed to them as rational reasons. But nobody - I repeat, nobody - had any idea of what a war between the major powers would bring, although some had misgivings. Their paradigm was the Franco-Prussian War of 1870 which lasted a very short time. The true paradigm would have been the bloody American Civil War which saw the first use of a primitive machine gun (the gatling gun) and a form of trench warfare in Virginia in 1864. Because the politicians failed to keep the peace in 1914, millions died in the 20th century.

[Ryan Henderson · Rating 3 out of 5]

This was a well-researched book on the political events that led up to the First World War. My only issues were that, at times, the author can be incredibly dry; Lafore also succumbs to "thesaurusitis" at points. Overall, this was an interesting read.

[Andreas · Rating 4 out of 5]

Overall this is a good book for the information it provided. The problem is with the usual bias, though Lahore at least tries to convey a certain degree of neutrality (but fails in my opinion). It never ceases to amaze me how any action from the German side is portrayed as tactless, bellicose, bullying, arrogant to name a few.
At the end of the book Lafore writes the following sentence: "By now Serbia, Austria, Russia, France and even Great Britain hat begun military measures of one sort or another; Germany alone among the Powers concerned had not yet done so". The country blamed for the war was the only country holding back till the situation escalated to a point where it had to act. That doesn't sound like the aggressive militaristic state seeking world domination in my opinion.
That said, the only thing Germany could have done in the eyes of authors like Lafore would have been nothing. Remak used something along the lines of "to simply roll over" whenever there was a chance for disagreement. Anything else is proof of the militaristic nature of the German Empire!? One example for what I mean can be found on pages 119 to 120: "The bullying character of German diplomacy in the twenty years before 1914 played a role in deciding the terms on which the war was to be fought. (...). There was a general embitterment of international relations that resulted from German activities". Like what? England fighting the Boer War? Russia getting beaten by Japan in 1905? France breaking the Treaty of Madrid assimilating Morocco into its colonies violating German trade rights? Germany disturbing French, Russian, or British interests, decided on in secret treaties, without Germany having any knowledge of them? It seems Lahore, like many other authors, simply takes over a certain set of assumptions that were established shortly after the war. Then he views every action of the German Empire under these assumptions, rather than critically analyzing the correctness of them in the first place. Russia's, France's, England's, and Serbia's conduct in the last twenty years before the war can be easily viewed as bellicose, arrogant, bullying from the point of view of The Ottoman Empire, Austria-Hungary, Germany, Transvaal, China, Persia, and countless other subdued countries around the world. But then again that might be using the wrong set of assumptions.
Still, the book contains valuable information and I liked especially the comparison of the nation states of England, France, Germany and others to the special situation of Austria-Hungary Empire not fitting into this new model of what constitutes a country.

[Klaus Schindler · Rating 3 out of 5]

The Long Fuse by Lawrence Lafore is an academic historical analysis of the origins of World War I. This work covers the breakdown of the European monarchial order and the peace and order which had been maintained from the conclusion of the Franco Prussian War, to the onset of the First World War. The author highlights and addresses all of the major conflicts that affected the European powers leading up to the war, and does a deep probe of the many subjugated minority peoples and their aspirations for self rule or independence while living within the then bloated borders of Austria-Hungary and Turkey.

I found the overall body of work interesting and informative and appreciate all the research that the author collected, collated, analyzed, and interpreted. However, I found a fair amount of the book rambling in its writing style. I prefer a clear and concise explanatory point or conclusion of what was being stated from one paragraph to the next, and found myself attaching summarizing notes to the edge of the pages again and again. I would rate this book at a 3.5 out of 5 stars.

[Jason Siegendorf · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very readable history of the events since the Franco-Prussian war that led to the eventual First World War. This book is not comprehensive, but that was part of the appeal. There is depth of detail but not too much to make this a dense read. Understanding the framework of alliances and interests is useful in providing context not just for World War 1 but also the aftermath and the mindset of the great powers in the interwar period.

[Mrs Alison Brown · Rating 5 out of 5]

Great book

Was a great interpretation of the cause of the First World War. Used this for my 4000 word A-level paper.

[Rick · Rating 4 out of 5]

a great history.

[Alek · Rating 4 out of 5]

I'm not sure what it is about this book (or maybe about WW1 books) that makes it so easy to finish. Can't comment on where it fits in the historiography or anything.

[Georgia Scott · Rating 4 out of 5]

The First World War bears a burden which weighs upon even its name. The "Great War," as it had been called, did not end all wars. It led to more as we know to this day.

Lafore's book is important for this reason. It makes you think what might have been. It highlights the problems and missed solutions over years. There are many and keeping track of names and places is a task. Reading it can be confusing as the times that they inspect. Yet, I came away understanding more than before I began it.

Two maps in particular gripped me as I read. My grandmother's home was there. A woman whose tears shed easily for joy, she wasted none on politics, preferring lace crochet to talk. Those years before the First World War could have done with some of her wisdom. She could have said: Avoiding knots is always easier than trying to undo them. This "Tragedy of Errors" is proof.

[Randy Wilson · Rating 4 out of 5]

When an expert in a field, here it is a professional historian of this period, distills their learning into a summary, it doesn't necessarily work. They can be too reductive because of their vast knowledge so that the reader misses too much context to make the summary coherent.

There are elements of that here. While there is a brief nod to colonialism it isn't considered that relevant to the subject yet I would argue now that we have another forty plus years since the author's effort that what make it the Great War, a war that took place in such a concentrated location, northern France, is that nearly all of the so-called 'Great Powers' had extensive global holdings. What happened in Europe reverberated internationally. Colonialism was the context for this monumental conflict. Perhaps Colonialism didn't have that impact forty or fifty years ago but it does now.

The other part of the book that opened my eyes was the Balkans. Mr. Lafore makes it clear that the difficulty the Ottoman empire had holding onto this territory destabilized the region. The vacuum wasn't filled by another great power paternalistically but by the cry for nationhood. For the Balkans, the nearly dozen nationalistic groups were clamoring for independent sovereignty. This clamoring caused friction, chaos and uncertainty which raised the odds that this unstable arrangement would spread to the great powers. The irony is it did just that but none of the great powers had any ideas about how to handle such conflicts. It took millions of dead soldiers and civilians, two gigantic wars before the European Common market became the nucleus of the EU which, cross our collective fingers, will keep holding the growing European factionalism from getting out of hand.

[Basileus · Rating 5 out of 5]

Although written a long time ago, this book is definitely a gem. It traces back all the major crisis and events from the second half of the 19th century up to the final spark that lit the powder keg on fire, the assassination of Franz Ferdinand in Sarajevo and the subsequent outbreak of the bloodiest conflict in the history of mankind at a time.
What is definitely interesting is that all the major powers who clashed and eyed eachother before the fateful Austrian declaration of war, were "guilty" for the general war which they all tried to avoid as much as possible.
It was a weird mix of lack of trust, overlapping interests, fear and paranoia which pushed Europe and the world into what would become the World War.

[Mark · Rating 4 out of 5]

A thoroughly researched investigation into the chain of events and the geo-political rational that lead Germany, France, Russia, the Austro-Hungarian Empire, Turkey, and the United Kingdom into the Great War. Although this book was written after the "Guns of August" it is very telling that President Kennedy studied the causes of the Great War to help navigate the complexities of the Cold War. A good solid introduction for all interested in the topic.

Also checkout the fabulous 1964 BBC miniseries "The Great War" on YOUTUBE:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U22lC...

[Elijah · Rating 4 out of 5]

Excellent analysis of the events that culminated into the catastrophic great war of the Twentieth century. Laurence Lafore wields a powerful pen throughout this book; his narrative is precise and keeps one intrigued throughout the entire process. I highly recommend this classic to anyone who wishes to study about WWI, as well as European history throughout the late nineteenth and early twentieth century.

[Craig · Rating 3 out of 5]

Contains the funniest sentence I've ever read in a scholarly work: "Theodore Roosevelt spoke for a whole generation of men in many countries who found a mystical link between national glory, mental health, and deep sea navigation." Explains all when read in concert with Robert K. Massie's "Castles of Steel."

[Laura · Rating 4 out of 5]

Rather interesting. A bit long and involved, yes, and a chorse to get through in just three days, but I don't consider it a waste. I know it's been terribly influential, and I think the analysis is just spot-on. If you've got to read it for a class, don't waste time moaning. This is a fine thing to educate yourself with.

[Dan Mccormack · Rating 5 out of 5]

The best short summary of the origins of World War 1 that I have read. Excellent tracing of the myriad of unfortunate circumstances and bad decisions that unleashed a conflict that no force could stop.

[Armen · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is the best book on the origins of WWI - and that includes The Guns of August which is the second best.

[Mark Singer · Rating 3 out of 5]

Informative, chatty, and somewhat rambling take on the years leading up to beginning of the Great War in 1914. This was meant for the general reader.

[The Hofs]

So far, it feels like a history text but given the fact that it was on a paperbackswap list, I will persevere for a few more days.

[Jerusalem Demsas · Rating 3 out of 5]

Good. But it just got so tedious by the last few chapters!

[Anthony Zupancic · Rating 2 out of 5]

Lefore reasserts the power of nationalism.

[Michael · Rating 5 out of 5]

Man, is this book SLOW but still insanely fascinating. It absolutely changed my perspective on WW1 and provided compelling details on a historic war.