What do you think?
Rate this book
Modern War Studies
The Romanian Battlefront in World War I
Despite a strategically vulnerable position, an ill-prepared army, and questionable promises of military support from the Allied Powers, Romania intervened in World War I in August 1916. In return, it received the Allies' formal sanction for the annexation of the Romanian-inhabited regions of Austria-Hungary. As Glenn Torrey reveals in his pathbreaking study, this soon appeared to have been an impulsive and risky decision for both parties.
Torrey details how, by the end of 1916, the armies of the Central Powers, led by German generals Falkenhayn and Mackensen, had administered a crushing defeat and occupied two-thirds of Romanian territory, but at the cost of diverting substantial military forces they needed on other fronts. The Allies, especially the Russians, were forced to do likewise in order to prevent Romania from collapsing completely.
Torrey presents the most authoritative account yet of the heavy fighting during the 1916 campaign and of the renewed attempt by Austro-German forces, including the elite Alpine Corps, to subdue the Romanian Army in the summer of 1917. This latter campaign, highlighted here but ignored in non-Romanian accounts, witnessed reorganized and rearmed Romanian soldiers, with help from a disintegrating Russian Army, administer a stunning defeat of their enemies. However, as Torrey also shows, amidst the chaos of the Russian Revolution the Central Powers forced Romania to sign a separate peace early in 1918. Ultimately, this allowed the Romanian Army to reenter the war and occupy the majority of the territory promised in 1916.
Torrey's unparalleled familiarity with archival and secondary sources and his long experience with the subject give authority and balance to his account of the military, strategic, diplomatic, and political events on both sides of the battlefront. In addition, his use of personal memoirs provides vivid insights into the human side of the war. Major military leaders in the Second World War, especially Ion Antonescu and Erwin Rommel, made their careers during the First World War and play a prominent role in his book.
Torrey's study fosters a genuinely new appreciation and understanding of a long-neglected aspect of World War I that influenced not only the war itself but the peace settlement that followed and, in fact, continues today.
Torrey details how, by the end of 1916, the armies of the Central Powers, led by German generals Falkenhayn and Mackensen, had administered a crushing defeat and occupied two-thirds of Romanian territory, but at the cost of diverting substantial military forces they needed on other fronts. The Allies, especially the Russians, were forced to do likewise in order to prevent Romania from collapsing completely.
Torrey presents the most authoritative account yet of the heavy fighting during the 1916 campaign and of the renewed attempt by Austro-German forces, including the elite Alpine Corps, to subdue the Romanian Army in the summer of 1917. This latter campaign, highlighted here but ignored in non-Romanian accounts, witnessed reorganized and rearmed Romanian soldiers, with help from a disintegrating Russian Army, administer a stunning defeat of their enemies. However, as Torrey also shows, amidst the chaos of the Russian Revolution the Central Powers forced Romania to sign a separate peace early in 1918. Ultimately, this allowed the Romanian Army to reenter the war and occupy the majority of the territory promised in 1916.
Torrey's unparalleled familiarity with archival and secondary sources and his long experience with the subject give authority and balance to his account of the military, strategic, diplomatic, and political events on both sides of the battlefront. In addition, his use of personal memoirs provides vivid insights into the human side of the war. Major military leaders in the Second World War, especially Ion Antonescu and Erwin Rommel, made their careers during the First World War and play a prominent role in his book.
Torrey's study fosters a genuinely new appreciation and understanding of a long-neglected aspect of World War I that influenced not only the war itself but the peace settlement that followed and, in fact, continues today.
422 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2011
11 people are currently reading
135 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews
May 12, 2022
This is one of the very few books in English written (and probably the most important) about the Romanian Front in the First World War. Glen E Torrey is the biggest American specialist on the Romanian Front and this book is the culmination of many years of research.
Romania was not prepared by any stretch of the imagination to join the war. It claimed territory both from the Central Powers side (Transilvania from Austria-Hungary) and from the Entente side (Basarabia from Russia). It had a large army which was untrained, was very badly supplied (most of the weaponry was leftover from the 19th century), the officer corps was mostly incompetent and over-confident. To complicate matters, Romania was part of a secret treaty with Germany and Austria-Hungary despite the fact that most of the population was pro-Entante.
When the decision was made to join the Entente in 1916 Romania faced Germany, Austria-Hungary, Bulgaria and the Ottoman Empire with only Russia as an unreliable ally on a frontline which was almost as long as the whole of the Western front. In fact, the Romanian front was the only front in World War I where all of the Central Powers fought together.
Torrey does a very good job in describing the tragedy that was the 1916 campaign. He describes in detail the battles in the Carpathians and Transilvania, the battles along the Danube and in Dobrudja and the battle for Wallachia. He then talks about the reorganisation of the Romanian army in 1917 with French help and the great battles of Marasti, Marasesti and Oituz (known as the Romanian Verdun). These 3 battles are described in great detail with a lot of explanations, discussion of the plans and with useful maps. This is followed by the armistice, the 1918 occupation, the remobilisation and then the author even touches on the 1919 Romanian-Hungarian war.
The great German leaders Erich von Falkenhayn and August von Mackensen were the local commanders of the Central Powers but what is more interesting is that many of the leaders and commanders from World War II fought on the Romanian front. Erwin Rommell, the future Desert Fox, commanded German troops in the battles in the Carpathians of 1916-1917 and wrote his famous book Infantry Attacks based on this experience. The future Finnish general Carl Gustav Mannerheim was a commander in the Russian army and future dictator of Romania in World War II, Ion Antonescu distinguished himself as a war hero in World War I.
The battle descriptions can be a bit dry due to the fact that the author identifies every division by its number. Being a popular history book the maps leave a bit to be desired.
There are over a hundred pages of bibliography and the author goes so far to even discuss each of the main sources for the Romanian front.
For everyone interested in World War I this book is a must read as it provides valuable information about a lesser known front.
PS. Versiunea in limba romana de le editura Meteor este foarte prost tiparita. Hartia este de o calitate foarte proasta, hartile abia pot fi citite si scrisul este destul de sters.
Romania was not prepared by any stretch of the imagination to join the war. It claimed territory both from the Central Powers side (Transilvania from Austria-Hungary) and from the Entente side (Basarabia from Russia). It had a large army which was untrained, was very badly supplied (most of the weaponry was leftover from the 19th century), the officer corps was mostly incompetent and over-confident. To complicate matters, Romania was part of a secret treaty with Germany and Austria-Hungary despite the fact that most of the population was pro-Entante.
When the decision was made to join the Entente in 1916 Romania faced Germany, Austria-Hungary, Bulgaria and the Ottoman Empire with only Russia as an unreliable ally on a frontline which was almost as long as the whole of the Western front. In fact, the Romanian front was the only front in World War I where all of the Central Powers fought together.
Torrey does a very good job in describing the tragedy that was the 1916 campaign. He describes in detail the battles in the Carpathians and Transilvania, the battles along the Danube and in Dobrudja and the battle for Wallachia. He then talks about the reorganisation of the Romanian army in 1917 with French help and the great battles of Marasti, Marasesti and Oituz (known as the Romanian Verdun). These 3 battles are described in great detail with a lot of explanations, discussion of the plans and with useful maps. This is followed by the armistice, the 1918 occupation, the remobilisation and then the author even touches on the 1919 Romanian-Hungarian war.
The great German leaders Erich von Falkenhayn and August von Mackensen were the local commanders of the Central Powers but what is more interesting is that many of the leaders and commanders from World War II fought on the Romanian front. Erwin Rommell, the future Desert Fox, commanded German troops in the battles in the Carpathians of 1916-1917 and wrote his famous book Infantry Attacks based on this experience. The future Finnish general Carl Gustav Mannerheim was a commander in the Russian army and future dictator of Romania in World War II, Ion Antonescu distinguished himself as a war hero in World War I.
The battle descriptions can be a bit dry due to the fact that the author identifies every division by its number. Being a popular history book the maps leave a bit to be desired.
There are over a hundred pages of bibliography and the author goes so far to even discuss each of the main sources for the Romanian front.
For everyone interested in World War I this book is a must read as it provides valuable information about a lesser known front.
PS. Versiunea in limba romana de le editura Meteor este foarte prost tiparita. Hartia este de o calitate foarte proasta, hartile abia pot fi citite si scrisul este destul de sters.
March 31, 2017
A comprehensive look at Romania in the Great War. Traditionally, the focus lies first on the diplomatic manipulations by both the Allied & Central Powers to attach the Kingdom of Romania to their coalition, in the belief that the armies of smaller powers could exert influence disproportionate to their numerical weaknessupon the course of the war as a whole, based upon their geostrategic position. Next, a brief survey of the undeniably skillfully executed 1916 Austro-German 'blitzkrieg' offensive under the auspices of Erich Von Falkenhayn, redeployed after the faillure of Operation Gericht, follows*.
Torrey goes beyond this eclectic view. A sturdy frame constructed from the political situation in the Kingdom, the state of its armed forces and its territorial aspirations allows a Romanian point of view up to the declaration of war in August 1916. After the initial success of the Romanian offensive, the part played by the Ottoman & Bulgarian armies is not overlooked before continuing the story to the grappling offensive of 1917 and the re-entry of Romania into the war on its penultimate day in order to annex lands in Habsburg Transilvania in pursuit of its Romania Mare ambitions.
*Most recently Prelude to Blitzkrieg: The 1916 Austro-German Campaign in Romaniaby Michael B. Barrett (2013)
Torrey goes beyond this eclectic view. A sturdy frame constructed from the political situation in the Kingdom, the state of its armed forces and its territorial aspirations allows a Romanian point of view up to the declaration of war in August 1916. After the initial success of the Romanian offensive, the part played by the Ottoman & Bulgarian armies is not overlooked before continuing the story to the grappling offensive of 1917 and the re-entry of Romania into the war on its penultimate day in order to annex lands in Habsburg Transilvania in pursuit of its Romania Mare ambitions.
*Most recently Prelude to Blitzkrieg: The 1916 Austro-German Campaign in Romaniaby Michael B. Barrett (2013)
January 14, 2018
When most people think of World War I, the Western Front is what usually looms largest. Trenches, British and German soldiers battling horribly in No Man's Land, an epochal stalemate: that's the clutch of images and themes. All too often we forget that WWI raged globally, and in many different ways. Italy, Africa, the Middle East, the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans all served as battlegrounds.
Eastern Europe is one of those neglected areas, even though that it precisely where the First World War began. For example, Russians today are struggling with how to process just one story from that time - the October Revolution - and are loathe to address the epic tsarist war against multiple empires (Ottoman, German, Austro-Hungarian). People outside the Slavic world are even less interested... although these events profoundly changed the world, with echoes reverberating into the 21st century.
Glenn Torrey's Romanian Battlefront is a welcome contribution to bringing that forgotten world into our memory. It focuses on the experience of one small country that entered the war in mid-course, suffered terribly, then ultimately triumphed. The Romanian story keys into many, many stories and developments that built WWII, then shaped Europe for generations to come.
To summarize: when WWI began Romania stayed out of the fray, even as its neighbors leaped into war and sought Bucharest's aid. In 1916 the Romanian government decided to join the Allies (then called the Entente: Russia, Britain, and France), hoping to gain a great deal of territory and prestige. Instead the Central Powers crushed the Romanian army rapidly, driving it and its government out of the majority of its lands. In 1917 the army rebuilt and reorganized itself and managed to stave off further attacks, but was forced to sign a humiliating peace. Yet the extraordinary developments of 1918 - the collapse of Germany, the disintegration of Vienna's old, multinational empire - drastically reversed Romanian fortunes. Romania regained its prewar lands, then as much land again from Transylvania, creating roughly the nation we know today.
Obviously this sequence of events is important for Romania, but why else should it matter? To begin with, Romania's entrance into WWI changed up Eastern European history. Russia extended its armies along the Black Sea, battling German, Bulgarian, and Turkish forces. Austria-Hungary weakened still further, becoming even more dependent on its German ally. Torrey offers the fascinating suggestion that Germany's decision to keep some divisions in Romania, rather than sending them to France for the great battles of early 1918 might have tipped the tide towards the Allies (298). He also implies that Allied handling of Romania's claims on Hungary helped set the state for Bela Kun's revolution (323).
For students of World War I, the Romanian campaigns offer a very different story than that of the western front. Movements in this country were swift, battles mobile, and maneuver frequent. Tanks never appear, gas barely matters, air power is scant, and there are fewer machine guns and artillery pieces (except for the German advantage in the latter, which was usually decisive). We can see many connections between Romania and other theaters, as when August von Mackensen, veteran of France and Serbia, leads the German armies very well.
After November 1918, when most people consider WWI to have finished, events in and connected to Romania continue to race along. A Soviet-allied government took over a newly independent Hungary; Romania's attack on Bela Kun's state is largely responsible for taking it down. That empowered a right-wing movement in Hungary, helping set the state for fascism. Bucharest also campaigned against Budapest without following orders from the victories Allied powers, helping sap that fumbling coalition's strength.
Many seeds of WWII appear in Torrey's book, including a range of people. The Friedrich Paulus who will surrender at Stalingrad served in the German campaign in Romania. Erwin Rommel, who became notorious as North Africa's "Desert Fox", first made his reputation by mountain fighting feats in the Carpathians.
Torrey's account is also interesting for general political considerations. Entering WWI, the Romanian government miscalculated its strength and the Central Powers' response, even though it had at least decent intelligence and a good amount of time for reflection. Prime minister Ion Brătianu seems to have realized this was a desperate gamble, but didn't see a way to avoid it. By 1917 the outcome was clearly disaster, yet a triumph just a year later.
Torrey's style is clear and direct, focused on relating events and not much on historiography; it's more narrative than analysis. He offers many intriguing details, like the old Cernavoda bridge being so lovely that no army wanted to demolish it (114). There is the Turnu Rosu, the red tower, supposedly named for the amount of Turkish blood spilled there (56).
I was puzzled by what seemed to me, not a scholar of Romanian history, to be unnecessarily downplayed details. Anti-communism appears as a key theme at the end of the book, but isn't set up as a topic, nor articulated in detail. Communist leader Christian Rakovsky barely appears in the text, but seems to have some serious influence on Romanian politics; is this a figure so well known that it wasn't worth saying more about his career? Several passages refer to outside powers pressuring Romania to improve the status of Jewish people within its borders (299, for example); was Romania worse than others in antisemitism?
Overall, I recommend this book to those interested in WWI and/or Eastern European history.
Eastern Europe is one of those neglected areas, even though that it precisely where the First World War began. For example, Russians today are struggling with how to process just one story from that time - the October Revolution - and are loathe to address the epic tsarist war against multiple empires (Ottoman, German, Austro-Hungarian). People outside the Slavic world are even less interested... although these events profoundly changed the world, with echoes reverberating into the 21st century.
Glenn Torrey's Romanian Battlefront is a welcome contribution to bringing that forgotten world into our memory. It focuses on the experience of one small country that entered the war in mid-course, suffered terribly, then ultimately triumphed. The Romanian story keys into many, many stories and developments that built WWII, then shaped Europe for generations to come.
To summarize: when WWI began Romania stayed out of the fray, even as its neighbors leaped into war and sought Bucharest's aid. In 1916 the Romanian government decided to join the Allies (then called the Entente: Russia, Britain, and France), hoping to gain a great deal of territory and prestige. Instead the Central Powers crushed the Romanian army rapidly, driving it and its government out of the majority of its lands. In 1917 the army rebuilt and reorganized itself and managed to stave off further attacks, but was forced to sign a humiliating peace. Yet the extraordinary developments of 1918 - the collapse of Germany, the disintegration of Vienna's old, multinational empire - drastically reversed Romanian fortunes. Romania regained its prewar lands, then as much land again from Transylvania, creating roughly the nation we know today.
Obviously this sequence of events is important for Romania, but why else should it matter? To begin with, Romania's entrance into WWI changed up Eastern European history. Russia extended its armies along the Black Sea, battling German, Bulgarian, and Turkish forces. Austria-Hungary weakened still further, becoming even more dependent on its German ally. Torrey offers the fascinating suggestion that Germany's decision to keep some divisions in Romania, rather than sending them to France for the great battles of early 1918 might have tipped the tide towards the Allies (298). He also implies that Allied handling of Romania's claims on Hungary helped set the state for Bela Kun's revolution (323).
For students of World War I, the Romanian campaigns offer a very different story than that of the western front. Movements in this country were swift, battles mobile, and maneuver frequent. Tanks never appear, gas barely matters, air power is scant, and there are fewer machine guns and artillery pieces (except for the German advantage in the latter, which was usually decisive). We can see many connections between Romania and other theaters, as when August von Mackensen, veteran of France and Serbia, leads the German armies very well.
After November 1918, when most people consider WWI to have finished, events in and connected to Romania continue to race along. A Soviet-allied government took over a newly independent Hungary; Romania's attack on Bela Kun's state is largely responsible for taking it down. That empowered a right-wing movement in Hungary, helping set the state for fascism. Bucharest also campaigned against Budapest without following orders from the victories Allied powers, helping sap that fumbling coalition's strength.
Many seeds of WWII appear in Torrey's book, including a range of people. The Friedrich Paulus who will surrender at Stalingrad served in the German campaign in Romania. Erwin Rommel, who became notorious as North Africa's "Desert Fox", first made his reputation by mountain fighting feats in the Carpathians.
Torrey's account is also interesting for general political considerations. Entering WWI, the Romanian government miscalculated its strength and the Central Powers' response, even though it had at least decent intelligence and a good amount of time for reflection. Prime minister Ion Brătianu seems to have realized this was a desperate gamble, but didn't see a way to avoid it. By 1917 the outcome was clearly disaster, yet a triumph just a year later.
Torrey's style is clear and direct, focused on relating events and not much on historiography; it's more narrative than analysis. He offers many intriguing details, like the old Cernavoda bridge being so lovely that no army wanted to demolish it (114). There is the Turnu Rosu, the red tower, supposedly named for the amount of Turkish blood spilled there (56).
I was puzzled by what seemed to me, not a scholar of Romanian history, to be unnecessarily downplayed details. Anti-communism appears as a key theme at the end of the book, but isn't set up as a topic, nor articulated in detail. Communist leader Christian Rakovsky barely appears in the text, but seems to have some serious influence on Romanian politics; is this a figure so well known that it wasn't worth saying more about his career? Several passages refer to outside powers pressuring Romania to improve the status of Jewish people within its borders (299, for example); was Romania worse than others in antisemitism?
Overall, I recommend this book to those interested in WWI and/or Eastern European history.
November 19, 2022
A thorough, well-written study of Romania’s war effort.
Torrey’s book focuses mainly on military operations; his treatment of Romania’s interesting political situation at the beginning of the war is brief, if useful and balanced. He gives us great portraits of the country’s political and military leaders, which is useful given their obscurity. Although most historians have cited the Russians’ new offensive by Brusilov as a deciding factor in Romania’s entry, Torrey discounts this idea.
Torrey does a good job laying out the history of Romania’s war and her predictable defeat due to a poorly equipped, poorly trained, and unprepared peasant army with little experience in modern war, along with incompetent commanders, uncooperative allies and basic geography. It didn’t help that she was surrounded by enemies on all sides. The author details Romania’s remarkable chain of bad decisions, as well as the mistaken assessments of the Entente regarding Romania’s viability as an ally and the Central Powers’ regarding the likelihood of their entry into the war.
Torrey also does a good job laying out the 1916 campaign’s consequences. Falkenhayn, like everybody else, expected Romania to intervene, and his miscalculation of the timing had little significance militarily. He was still blamed for it and was replaced by Hindenburg and Ludendorff as a result, leading to wartime policies that exhausted Germany to the point of defeat. The victory in Romania also allowed the Central Powers to feed their people and fuel their war effort until their downfall. It also hardened Entente attitudes toward peace, leading to Germany’s fateful decision to resume submarine warfare.
Torrey thoroughly covers the action on all of the fronts and provides realistic assessments regarding the successes and failures of both sides. The author’s insight into the Romanian high command is quite interesting, as is the role of the French advisers dispatched to Bucharest, as well as the number of German troops dispatched to the theater, among them Erwin Rommel and Rudolf Hess.
The book can be pretty dry at times, though. Oddly, at one point Torrey calls Charles I of Austria “kaiser.” Other than that, this is a comprehensive, well-written, and well-organized work.
Torrey’s book focuses mainly on military operations; his treatment of Romania’s interesting political situation at the beginning of the war is brief, if useful and balanced. He gives us great portraits of the country’s political and military leaders, which is useful given their obscurity. Although most historians have cited the Russians’ new offensive by Brusilov as a deciding factor in Romania’s entry, Torrey discounts this idea.
Torrey does a good job laying out the history of Romania’s war and her predictable defeat due to a poorly equipped, poorly trained, and unprepared peasant army with little experience in modern war, along with incompetent commanders, uncooperative allies and basic geography. It didn’t help that she was surrounded by enemies on all sides. The author details Romania’s remarkable chain of bad decisions, as well as the mistaken assessments of the Entente regarding Romania’s viability as an ally and the Central Powers’ regarding the likelihood of their entry into the war.
Torrey also does a good job laying out the 1916 campaign’s consequences. Falkenhayn, like everybody else, expected Romania to intervene, and his miscalculation of the timing had little significance militarily. He was still blamed for it and was replaced by Hindenburg and Ludendorff as a result, leading to wartime policies that exhausted Germany to the point of defeat. The victory in Romania also allowed the Central Powers to feed their people and fuel their war effort until their downfall. It also hardened Entente attitudes toward peace, leading to Germany’s fateful decision to resume submarine warfare.
Torrey thoroughly covers the action on all of the fronts and provides realistic assessments regarding the successes and failures of both sides. The author’s insight into the Romanian high command is quite interesting, as is the role of the French advisers dispatched to Bucharest, as well as the number of German troops dispatched to the theater, among them Erwin Rommel and Rudolf Hess.
The book can be pretty dry at times, though. Oddly, at one point Torrey calls Charles I of Austria “kaiser.” Other than that, this is a comprehensive, well-written, and well-organized work.
February 17, 2015
Scrisa intr-o maniera accesibilă, lucrarea lui Glenn E. Torrey depasește granițele unei (insipide) lucrări convenționale de artă și strategie militară. Problematica abordată nu este una nouă, însă bogăția de amănunte și detaliile tulburătoare referitoare la atmosfera antebelică, eforturile de război și voința de a ține piept inamicilor fac din această carte o valoroasă mărturie în favoarea eroismului României în Primul Război Mondial.
Revenind la informațiile pur militare, autorul tratează cu lux de amănunte fiecare desfășurare de forțe de pe front, fiecare încleștare la care a luat parte armata română. Fie că discutăm despre manevrele nefericite din Transilvania, Turtucaia sau Flămânda (1916), despre regruparea și reorganizarea armatei în vederea respingerii ofensivelor inamice (1917), Torrey conturează profilul unei nații care deși demoralizată, nu-și pierde hotărârea de a rezista Puterilor Centrale cu orice costuri.
Nu trebuie ignorat rolul misiunii franceze conduse de generalul BErthelot, un înzestrat om de arme care a suflat în pânzele armatei noastre de nenumărate ori, îndrumând-o, în cel din urmă ceas, spre vitoria finală.
Revenind la informațiile pur militare, autorul tratează cu lux de amănunte fiecare desfășurare de forțe de pe front, fiecare încleștare la care a luat parte armata română. Fie că discutăm despre manevrele nefericite din Transilvania, Turtucaia sau Flămânda (1916), despre regruparea și reorganizarea armatei în vederea respingerii ofensivelor inamice (1917), Torrey conturează profilul unei nații care deși demoralizată, nu-și pierde hotărârea de a rezista Puterilor Centrale cu orice costuri.
Nu trebuie ignorat rolul misiunii franceze conduse de generalul BErthelot, un înzestrat om de arme care a suflat în pânzele armatei noastre de nenumărate ori, îndrumând-o, în cel din urmă ceas, spre vitoria finală.
August 20, 2023
A Bit of Neglected History
Great book on a largely forgotten corner of WW1. Romania, wedged amongst the Central Powers, with a German king and visions of a greater Romania entered the war late and found themselves embroiled in an efficient response from Germany, a half hearted effort by Austro-Hungary, and chained to their collapsing Russian ally. The Romanians performed rather well and ultimately drew large numbers of German troops from the Western front (probably their most important contribution). Ultimately, they were forced to surrender, only to reenter the war right before the armistice in the West.
The Romanian front is distinct from much of the rest of the European battlefield being dominated by mountains and rivers. For various reasons this led to a much more active front , given that the mountains facilitated active flanking as opposed to positional trench warfare elsewhere.
The author does a good job in putting the Romanian entry into a larger context. Its entry accelerated Germany's decision to execute on unrestricted submarine warfare, and simultaneously pulled much-needed German troops off the line elsewhere, speeding the end of the war. The surrender of Romanian forces allowed the German occupation of part of Ukraine and opened Romanian oilfields to the Central Powers, likely increasing the wars duration.
Alk in all, a well researched and interesting book.
Great book on a largely forgotten corner of WW1. Romania, wedged amongst the Central Powers, with a German king and visions of a greater Romania entered the war late and found themselves embroiled in an efficient response from Germany, a half hearted effort by Austro-Hungary, and chained to their collapsing Russian ally. The Romanians performed rather well and ultimately drew large numbers of German troops from the Western front (probably their most important contribution). Ultimately, they were forced to surrender, only to reenter the war right before the armistice in the West.
The Romanian front is distinct from much of the rest of the European battlefield being dominated by mountains and rivers. For various reasons this led to a much more active front , given that the mountains facilitated active flanking as opposed to positional trench warfare elsewhere.
The author does a good job in putting the Romanian entry into a larger context. Its entry accelerated Germany's decision to execute on unrestricted submarine warfare, and simultaneously pulled much-needed German troops off the line elsewhere, speeding the end of the war. The surrender of Romanian forces allowed the German occupation of part of Ukraine and opened Romanian oilfields to the Central Powers, likely increasing the wars duration.
Alk in all, a well researched and interesting book.
August 6, 2021
P e 27 august 1916, la ora 9 seara, Edgar Mavrocordat, ministrul român de la Viena, a transmis Ministerului Austro-Ungar de Externe o declaraţie de război. În acelaşi timp, unităţile din avangardă a trei armate române au invadat Ungaria în mai multe locuri situate de-a lungul frontierei carpatice. Acţiunea românilor era susţinută de o alianţă cu Franţa, Rusia, Anglia şi Italia, care au promis ajutor militar şi diplomatic pentru anexarea regiunilor locuite de români din Dubla
Monarhie. Hotărârea luată la Bucureşti de a interveni în conflict, ceea ce însemna război cu Germania, Bulgaria şi Turcia deopotrivă, a însemnat asumarea unui risc politic şi militar. Cu toate acestea, ea s-a dovedit a fi un pas crucial în crearea României modeme. La sfârşitul războiului, toate regiunile sau o parte a regiunilor în discuţie stăpânite de Habsburgi, împreună cu Basarabia de la imperiul rus care se fărâmiţa, au fost alipite Vechiului Regat al României. Astfel, se împlinea, cel puţin pentru o generaţie, visul românilor de a avea o Românie Mare, unirea tuturor teritoriilor lor istorice.
Monarhie. Hotărârea luată la Bucureşti de a interveni în conflict, ceea ce însemna război cu Germania, Bulgaria şi Turcia deopotrivă, a însemnat asumarea unui risc politic şi militar. Cu toate acestea, ea s-a dovedit a fi un pas crucial în crearea României modeme. La sfârşitul războiului, toate regiunile sau o parte a regiunilor în discuţie stăpânite de Habsburgi, împreună cu Basarabia de la imperiul rus care se fărâmiţa, au fost alipite Vechiului Regat al României. Astfel, se împlinea, cel puţin pentru o generaţie, visul românilor de a avea o Românie Mare, unirea tuturor teritoriilor lor istorice.
August 3, 2020
O altă referire interesantă este la „legiunea transilvăneană” folosită contra Puterilor Centrale. Diviziile „Tudor Vladimirescu” și „Horia, Cloșca și Crișan” nu au fost invenții ale sovieticilor. Astfel, în Primul Război Mondial, potrivit lui Torrey, în lagărele de prizonieri din Rusia țaristă erau „peste 100.000 de români transilvăneni”. În toamna lui 1918, unii dintre aceștia deja sosiseră în Moldova de unde puteau lupta împotriva Germaniei și Imperiului Habsburgic (pag. 279). Nu e de ignorat în acest context tradiția cooperării militare ruso-române; la Mărășești, „probabil cea mai semnificativă victorie din istoria armatei române”, aliații români și ruși și-au împărțit pierderile de 51.800 de soldați și 1260 de ofițeri în mod aproape perfect egal.
Mai multe citiți în recenzia de pe blogul meu „Cărți și idei”: https://cronicadecarte.blogspot.com/2...
Mai multe citiți în recenzia de pe blogul meu „Cărți și idei”: https://cronicadecarte.blogspot.com/2...
October 4, 2018
Highly readable account of a relatively unknown front of WW1.
I particularly enjoyed the account of the Battle for Transylvania which I was able to relate to our recent visit to Sibiu and Brasov and the passes.
I particularly enjoyed the account of the Battle for Transylvania which I was able to relate to our recent visit to Sibiu and Brasov and the passes.
June 10, 2017
Great book albeit a bit short. I think it could have used more quoting from memoirs and journals but that's just personal preference.
September 6, 2017
Foarte multe detalii despre fiecare luptă în parte dar utilă pentru un strateg militar. Puține experiențe personale, carte foarte teoretică care descrie tehnic fiecare luptă.
March 11, 2019
This book will reveal you the truth about Romania and the politicians of the time. But you will discover, also wonderful things and wonderful people. It's a great reading.
May 23, 2025
Pentru început, un sfat: cei ce caută în special valențe literare ar face bine să-și economisească energiile. Cartea de față este mai degrabă un referat, EXTREM de bine documentat, ca dovadă cele mai bine de 90 de pagini!!! cu anexe.
În schimb, pentru pasionații de istorie, așa cum a avut ea loc, fără înflorituri, cu prea puține supoziții și doar fapte și evenimente clare, cartea este exact ceea ce se cere pentru a închide (definitiv, aș spune) varianta eroico-romantică a participării României în primul război mondial. Am intrat târziu în luptă, am pierdut, am suferit, am schimbat taberele, am avut noroc ieșind cu un însemnat câștig teritorial. Iar în afară de Mărăști, Mărășești, Oituz, nu există nimic notabil (pozitiv, evident) de menționat.
Și cei pasionați de statistici sau vorbe de duh vor găsi lucruri interesante, care fac farmecul unei lucrări altminteri strict documentare: crezul politic al lui I. C. Brătianu "încerc să las pe mâine greșelile pe care oamenii îmi spun că ar trebui să le fac azi", slaba dotare a armatei române, cu puști fabricate la 1879 și doar câte o mitralieră la un batalion, cele doar 150 de camioane pentru toată armata, faptul că aproape jumătate de milion de români erau înregimentați în armata austro-ungară. Adăugați permanentele frecușuri și neînțelegeri dintre generali, în special conflictul Prezan-Averescu (zugrăvit aici în culori total nefavorabile) iar concluzia este una singură.
Evident, o astfel de lucrare nu avea cum să debordeze de umor. Și totuși, există un pasaj tragi-comic, o declarație a unui ofițer neamț, despre colaboratorii săi bulgari "pentru ei, o vacă furată este ceea ce reprezintă pentru noi un steag".
Ceva îmi spune că s-ar fi exprimat la fel și-n privința altor aliați vremelnici...
În schimb, pentru pasionații de istorie, așa cum a avut ea loc, fără înflorituri, cu prea puține supoziții și doar fapte și evenimente clare, cartea este exact ceea ce se cere pentru a închide (definitiv, aș spune) varianta eroico-romantică a participării României în primul război mondial. Am intrat târziu în luptă, am pierdut, am suferit, am schimbat taberele, am avut noroc ieșind cu un însemnat câștig teritorial. Iar în afară de Mărăști, Mărășești, Oituz, nu există nimic notabil (pozitiv, evident) de menționat.
Și cei pasionați de statistici sau vorbe de duh vor găsi lucruri interesante, care fac farmecul unei lucrări altminteri strict documentare: crezul politic al lui I. C. Brătianu "încerc să las pe mâine greșelile pe care oamenii îmi spun că ar trebui să le fac azi", slaba dotare a armatei române, cu puști fabricate la 1879 și doar câte o mitralieră la un batalion, cele doar 150 de camioane pentru toată armata, faptul că aproape jumătate de milion de români erau înregimentați în armata austro-ungară. Adăugați permanentele frecușuri și neînțelegeri dintre generali, în special conflictul Prezan-Averescu (zugrăvit aici în culori total nefavorabile) iar concluzia este una singură.
Evident, o astfel de lucrare nu avea cum să debordeze de umor. Și totuși, există un pasaj tragi-comic, o declarație a unui ofițer neamț, despre colaboratorii săi bulgari "pentru ei, o vacă furată este ceea ce reprezintă pentru noi un steag".
Ceva îmi spune că s-ar fi exprimat la fel și-n privința altor aliați vremelnici...
April 18, 2016
A good thorough account of Romania's role in World War I. All the maps were republished from other books, it was a little difficult to match what the map was showing with the text at times.
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews