World War One: A Short History

by Norman Stone

Hardcover in unclipped dust jacket. Very good condition. First Edition, First Printing. Signed and dated by author on title page. Minor foxing and marks to page block and light wear to jacket's upper edges and spine ends. Pages are sound and clear. TA

Genres: History, Nonfiction, War, World War I, Military Fiction, Historical, World History

187 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 2007

About the author

Norman Stone was a Scottish historian and author, who was a Professor in the Department of International Relations at Bilkent University, Ankara. He is a former Professor at the University of Oxford, Lecturer at the University of Cambridge, and adviser to Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher.

Reviews

[David · Rating 2 out of 5]

This book raises some important questions, i.e., (a) what were they smoking when they published it?, and (2) where can I get some?

Although reading is my favorite activity, the process which leads to publication is a mystery to me. Why did Basic Books publish this book? Who did they think was going to read it? Call me crazy if you want, but I thought that the overwhelming majority of sales might to university undergraduates taking a survey course of twentieth-century history, with a minority of aspiring armchair-history geeks, especially in the run-up to the 100th anniversary of the start of the war. Instead, it seems to be written for people who already know a lot about WWI but want to read about the whole violent soggy mess one more time, perhaps for the sheer joy of reading about the senseless suffering of others. Is that a important demographic that I am unaware of?

This book has two of the things in history books which give me the vapors: (1) names of people, places, and ideas introduced without adequate explanation, and (ii) untranslated French. Pardon me while I lie on a divan in a darkened room to recover.

There are also occasional “Wha?” moments, where the author shows that he has the editorial freedom to introduce odd, disputable, and slightly irrelevant facts, just 'cause he can, and apparently his editor will not object. For example, at Kindle location 682 (the ebook is unburdened with traditional page numbers), the author contends (without footnote or supporting evidence) that a German government official named Riezler was “responsible” for the development of the first nuclear bomb by the United States, because he passed on “the secret” that he allegedly received from German Jewish exiles. Huh? You mean that the first nuclear weapon was developed on the basis of a secret recipe from a German diplomat? What about the Manhattan project? The University of Chicago? Oak Ridge? Los Alamos? I mean, that can't be right. I distinctly remember that there were other people involved.

Similarly, at Kindle location 1736, the author says that, in July 1918, German troops were reporting sick in higher numbers, and says that it was a symptom of approaching defeatism in the ranks. Hmm, didn't I hear something about the deadliest influenza epidemic in history taking place at that time? Couldn't that be some kind of confounding variable? I mean, it's possible that Stone is correct, but he needs to supply more evidence and at least mention the Spanish Flu.

While I'm giving this book a sound thrashing, I'd like to point out that, contrary to Stone's assertion at location 1976, historian Barbara Tuchman, author of a well-known book about WWI, was not the daughter of Henry Morgenthau Sr., US Ambassador in WWI Istanbul. She was his granddaughter. (If you don't believe Wikipedia, how about her obituary in the New York Times here?) Did anyone fact-check, or even read, this book before publication?

Occasionally, the author will suddenly snap to attention with an entertaining fact (e.g, one of the first orders issued by the Romanian army during WWI forbid junior officers to use eye shadow (l. 1138)) or a crisp, concise description of an obscure military term (“counter-battery fire” (l. 1710)), at which time it is clear how much better this book could have been if mindful attention had been given to its preparation.

The book also has maps, which refer to many of the places mentioned in the book. The maps are hidden at the end of the book, and not referred to in the table of contents or the narrative. Of course, if you have a paper copy of the book, you might stumble upon it by accident, while riffling through the book, wondering how such a thing achieved the dignity of print. But the maps are completely hidden from people reading on Kindle ebook until it's too late.

[Carla · Rating 4 out of 5]

“A oeste nada de novo” assombrou-me a tal ponto que senti a necessidade de procurar respostas para a loucura ali descrita, mas apenas encontrei mais assombro com esta História Concisa da Primeira Guerra Mundial.
Apesar da incompreensão que me avassala, tenho que continuar a procurar estas respostas parcelares que apenas contribuem para o aumento do meu pasmo.

Para já, chega de guerra. Chega de realidade.

[ladydusk · Rating 3 out of 5]

I finished this as part of my Schole Sisters 5x5 challenge topic of World War I.

There are absolutely flashes of brilliance in this book, including the entire final chapter "Aftermath."

I think part of my problem with this book is that I'm less intrigued by the battles and military specifics than I am by the thinking and thematic trends that lead to the war and the decision making and how it affects the battles. Stone tries to give us that, but I often found myself mired in artillery numbers and passages that probably well explicated specific maneuvers and derring-do, without greater military understanding, went over my head - and his writing style, here, didn't help me find firm footing.

Following individuals in such a mire was tricky at best and remembering which commander did what became more convoluted. I think next WWI book, I'll have to make myself a chart.

That said, I have a much greater understanding of just what went on from this short (190 pgs!) book covering the before, beginning, war, and after. I think I can move on to something with greater depth after this particular reading. I see he also has a World War Two book, a topic which I'm significantly more conversant in and I wonder if I would like it better simply because I have better background. I suspect that is the case. I'm tempted to have a matched pair.

Stone does a good job showing the transition from a 19th Century war into a 20th Century one and the growing pains that both sides went through as they struggled to figure out how to use the technology and mechanization. Not just utilize, but develop and manufacture such.

He also does a good job of showing the disenchantment both sides began to feel - along all of the fronts - for the war and glories of war itself. The disillusionment of all parties is mentioned from time to time but really developed in the Aftermath chapter when dealing with Armistice, Retributions, the German people, and Hitler's reflections thereon.

I enjoyed his writing style, the occasional sly remark, except when it left me confused. This is really worth 3.5 stars, but I'm not sure I could give it 4, so 3 it is in the GoodReads economy.

[Lumi D. · Rating 2 out of 5]

Unfortunately, this book didn’t leave a strong impression. While it aims to provide a concise overview of the First World War, I found it overly basic, almost to the point of dullness. The writing lacked clarity and engagement, making it a struggle to stay interested. There are many books on WWI, and sadly, this one doesn’t stand out in either depth or quality. Just another history title, but not a particularly good one.

[Lobstergirl · Rating 3 out of 5]

Short and unsatisfying.

I picked this off the library shelf to read in accompaniment with a World War I novel I'm reading as a group read. This book was not on my radar; I don't think I've heard of the author; but the books on WWI that actually are on my to-read list are fairly massive, and I wanted something that I would finish at about the same time as the novel. My knowledge of WWI at this point is pretty much The Guns of August.

Is everyone else excited for the WWI centennial???

[Jordan · Rating 4 out of 5]

A very good short narrative of the main currents of the First World War, though I hesitate to say that it's a good "introduction." Stone is a master of the material and crafts an effective 190-page version of the war, one that covers all the major campaigns and battles and plenty of the war's political, social, and economic effects. It's an accomplishment, and I don't hesitate to recommend it.

An historian writing a narrative this short must be choosy about what he covers, and Stone does extraordinarily well. The book predominantly focuses on the European theater of the war—Eastern Front, Western Front, and Italian Front—with very brief asides on things like the Salonica or Gallipoli campaigns or worldwide naval warfare. The war in Africa is mentioned not at all, though the fighting there was small-scale and ultimately irrelevant to the war's outcome, where is probably why Stone excluded it—an indication of the good judgment that went into organizing such a difficult task.

However, there are two traits—I don't really want to call them flaws—that keep me from rating Stone's book at five stars:

First, the opening chapter, on the context and political trends that led to war in 1914, is muddled and occasionally hard to follow. Stone's enviable ability to construct tight, concise narrative of complicated chains of events is not evident here, at the beginning. The book only really comes into its own in the chapters on 1915 and 1916, the latter—the year of Verdun and the Somme—being especially good. If you read this and find the opening tough going, persevere.

Second, Stone, probably in the interest of concision and space, seldom introduces figures with any kind of indication of who, exactly, they are. This is especially the case early on. Consider this passage from 1914:

Further to the north Lanrezac's army also did badly, and began to retreat away from Namur. It lost touch with the British, whose commander, Sir John French, waxed irascible. On 23 August the right-hand German army, Kluck's First, ran into the British on the Mons-Conde canal, and British regulars, firing one round every four seconds, held off considerably superior numbers, inflicting three times the 1,850 losses they themselves suffered. In the afternoon, German howitzers arrived to deal with the difficult situation and the British retreated, parallel with Lanrezac's army.

This is almost the best paragraph-length treatment of these events possible, but the leaders here are name-dropped with little indication of who they are. Even the bit of characterization for Sir John French will make little sense to someone without an already fairly good knowledge of the events. This paragraph also marks the first time in the entire book that French and Alexander von Kluck are mentioned, and Lanrezac had only been mentioned on the facing page before this point. It may have been better, rather than introducing a scattering of army commanders' names in an otherwise brisk and succinct narrative, to leave them out and discuss simply the movements of "the British" or "the German right wing" or "the French."

A quickly introduced series of unexplained names can, I have seen, scare off readers or students who feel like they are being swamped with people to remember. Fortunately, this problem is restricted primarily to the first few chapters of the book, and is relatively minor.

Those two minor problems out of the way, this is, again, an excellent short summary of the war, with a good final chapter on the war's catastrophic aftermath and the way its results fed the rise of National Socialism in Weimar Germany.

Recommended.

[Daniel · Rating 4 out of 5]

A useful introduction to the history of World War One. It also contains a brief bibliographical essay on suggested further reading.

[Lboyd · Rating 2 out of 5]

Liam Boyd
Indie Reads II, Assignment 3


I am not a fan of World War One, A Short History, by Norman Stone. My feeling about this book is that it was like reading a dictionary; always correct, but dry fact after dry fact, etcetera! There is not enough personal information about any of the key politicians, generals or soldiers to make them interesting. Kaiser Wilhelm, Churchill and others were very interesting men who have had much written about them, but in this book, they are just names. For example, all the book says about Kaiser Wilhelm II was that “he wanted to model England, achieve vast riches and an overseas empire like England.” He caused others to view Germany as “a-the- European problem.”
The book, although well written, is difficult to follow. I had to re-read many passages in order to keep track of what was happening. The author jumps back and forth between armies and generals too quickly. I believe if Stone presented each army or navy perspective of a battle without jumping around, it would have been easier for the reader to follow events and battles with a clear picture of what was really happening. One of the ways that would make the book easier to follow would be to include maps and front lines in the chapters instead of as appendices at the end of the book. Also, it would be easier to follow troop movement by showing the army and general on each map. It would be helpful if these were in color instead of black and white. For example, the Russian Army could have red lines, the French blue, the English green, etc.
Unlike The Rise of Theodore Roosevelt, by Edmond Morris, this was not a story that made me want to stay up reading late into the night.

[Valentin Derevlean · Rating 2 out of 5]

Pentru o recapitulare, cartea aceasta pică foarte bine. Dacă vrei mai mult, e cam greu să te descurci. Ceea ce îi reușește lui Stone, și e marele său merit, ține de capacitatea sa de a îngrămădi 4 ani de război și detalii din contextul antebelic în 200 de pagini. Nu e deloc simplu. Și ai descrieri de lupte, ai evoluția frontului, contextul politic, tot ce vrei.

Pe de altă parte, de aici și minusurile mari ale cărții. Totul e notat în viteză crescândă, așa că fiind obligat să treacă deseori în aceeași pagină de la frontul de est la cel vestic, apoi pe frontul italian, pentru cititor lectura poate deveni haotică și neclară. Sunt câteva hărți la final, dar nefolosite de trimiteri adecvate în text, așa cum ar trebui. Multe nume de ofițeri sau de localități, iarăși, dacă acestea sunt secundare, te pierzi în detalii pe care nu le stăpânești. Însă e bună ca punct de pornire și o recomand. La fel, probabil că dacă deja ești familiarizat, atunci lectura merge ușor și reconfortant.

[T.J. · Rating 4 out of 5]

World War One : A Short History by Norman Stone was a book I definately would reccomend to someone that wants to learn some backround information on World War I. In this book Norman Stone elaborates and presents the collapses of the four empires: Hapsburg, German,Tsarist, and The Ottoman Empire collapsed. He also challenges the current understandings of treaties that were created after the war by expanding and introducing them as failures. He also introduces the conflicts and European countries preperation for a main European War.
After reading this book I feel like I can comprehend World War I and the events that occured during the war a lot better than before I started to read this book. World War One: A Short History, by Norman Stone was really a great book and I reccomend it to those that want to learn more of a backround about World War I and are intersted in the first World War.

[Neale Rigg · Rating 3 out of 5]

Didn't see the ending coming at all LOL

[Mallory · Rating 3 out of 5]

Brisk and efficient, unlike the war itself. I have a great interest in this time period and in learning more about the war and this book was a good way to dip a toe in without feeling overwhelmed. The author lists some longer works in the back as recommendations, which I will look into at another time. Stone knows a great deal - that's obvious - and often drops in names and places without much reference or as though the reader will already be aware of who's who and what's what. However, I still found this to be a very engaging read. Somewhat frightening, too, as the nationalism strain seems to be rearing its head once again in many places.

Favorite quotes: "No war has ever begun with such a fundamental misunderstanding of its nature."

"Great wars develop a momentum of their own... the statesmen of 1914 had thought in terms of a 'cabinet war,' that is, one that could be turned on and off at the will of a few leaders. But with mass conscription, and the enormous loss of life and limb, sheer hatred of the enemy, and the emergence of a monster of public opinion that no politician could ignore, the war could not simply be ended with some recognition that it had all been a gigantic mistake."

"There is a mysterious process in the defeat of any army - the point at which the men give up hope."

[Lucy · Rating 3 out of 5]

Mostly did what it said on the tin. Its good for an overview. However, even as a History teacher i struggled to follow some of the thoughts and ideas. It also completely ignores the fighting in Africa and use of Empire troops etc. I have come to expect that with books about WW1, but always a little disappointing. That being said - many cool facts for school!

[Logan Zwerneman · Rating 3 out of 5]

Very broad. I know that was the purpose of the book… but it was just too broad to merit a higher rating. I haven’t verified, but this author was almost definitely a Briton, because he writes less cynically about the British than any other nation, though their actions (definitely in 1914) merit as least as much cynicism as do the other nations.

Well-written and informative. I would probably have liked it better had I not already read in-depth WWI books. ⭐️⭐️⭐️

[Will Cafferky · Rating 3 out of 5]

bit on the russian revolution is fairy laughable but good for an overview of battles, shame he seems to have been a bit of a tool

[Evelyn Shepphird]

GOD LET ME PASS THIS TEST TOMORROW.

[Lghamilton · Rating 3 out of 5]

After reading Guns of August, which only covered the first month of the war, I wanted more. I read about this book and thought it would give a good overview of the war, and I liked the year-by-year analysis. However, the author's too-frequent use of parentheticals chopped the story up, and often the little asides did not add much or assumed the reader knew more. Also, his too-frequent use of pronouns made me backtrack through paragraphs to figure out who Stone was talking about. As an example, on page 164, Stone is discussing the British Fifth Army and its bad luck commander, Gough, who midway through this page (and battle), loses control. More than a page passes with no mention of Gough; in fact we read about Ludendorff and Porsche for a bit. I assume Stone is referring again to Gough on page 166 (top) when he says "the British infantry were at last well-served by their commander, who... accepted a French commander." Was this Gough? I had to go back two pages to double-check.

For a book that is targeted as an overview, the audience must be assumed to NOT be experts on WWI.

[Johanne · Rating 3 out of 5]

Good but it really is short - less than 200 pages - one substantial chapter per year roughly. It does look at all the fronts too so there is a tremendous amount compressed into this slim volume and if you want anything more than an overview it needs to be followed up with more detailed works - of which there is a good list of recommendations. It is inevitably given its size an opinionated read and leans to the lions led by donkeys cliche of the the great war but it is sprinkled with odd facts too - one of the first orders given to the Romanian Officer was one that forbade them from wearing eye-shadow in battle!
Worth it but its an intro not a comprehensive look.

[Maryellen · Rating 1 out of 5]

Well frankly this book was a waste of time. The author seems so intent on amusing us with his epigrams that the war comes off as a jolly laugh. Also, some of them border on anti-Catholic. This may be the fault of the author's writing. At one point I thought English was his second language but on researching his background, I found out he was born and raised in Scotland. His overuse of the coma is criminal. So is his fondness for parenthesis. Not for the novice. Only someone who is well read in WW1 could understand what the author was writing about.

[Andrew Fear · Rating 5 out of 5]

I wish I could write like this. Stone manages to extract the key themes of the war without becoming bogged down in a somme of detail. This isn't for tactical military historians, but is full of insights and theories about strategy. Inevitably some bits and pieces aren't there - the East African War for example, but then as side shows they are rightly ignored. Stone adds just enough personalia and dry wit to keep the whole thing entertaining as well as informative and thought-provoking. A grand book.

[John · Rating 3 out of 5]

A good short introduction to WW1. However, it lacked detail and jumps back and forth to much. I did learn about facts I never knew such as the importance of railways. Also England and France did not have a monopoly on stupid Generals. Russia and Italy and that side of the war was also interesting.

[Max Barber · Rating 2 out of 5]

As someone who regrettably did not pay enough attention in history class, I was excited to read a short history of World War 1. Some of Stone's insights were interesting to me, but I can imagine there are plenty of works that do a much better job of telling of this time period.

[Anthony Stephenson · Rating 2 out of 5]

Poorly written

[Kostas Stigkas · Rating 2 out of 5]

didnt like the type of writing.
Narrations was going from one subject to another

[Esculapio Poblete · Rating 4 out of 5]

I wanted to solve a big doubt I had: why the First World War began? And the book solves this problem brilliantly. The world before the war was in a delicate equilibrium, colonies were looked as a source of power and economic strength. A huge empire, the Ottoman was on the brink of dismembering, and like scavengers, European countries were sniffing the prey.

Germany was a powerful country but they were worried by the huge white country, Russia. If Russia developed infrastructures, allowing them to mobilize his enormous army this could break equilibrium in the old continent. Germany decided it was the moment to force the situation.

This and others explanations help you understand why war began, and even why every country in Europe seemed to think it was inevitable. What everyone seemed to fail about was the duration and consequences of the big war. The author explains masterly how the war evolved and ended letting a frail equilibrium behind it. So frail that in a few years a new war began, again, sparkled by the same country.

It´s a bit confusing to follow the battles and main events in the war. Betting for briefness the author gives a few strokes of the main combats but it´s not easy to understand them without a previous knowledge.

I strongly will encourage anyone to read the book, especially the first part where outbreak of war is explained, and also the final part where it explains how an unfinished business were the seeds of a more bloody and callous war.

[Kaden Cole · Rating 3 out of 5]

World War One A Short History by Norman Stone is a book over the summary of World War One. There aren't many main characters because everyone had played a key role in this war. The big conflict in this book was the war over the Axis trying to take more power than the need and the Allies trying to control even amounts of power for every country. This war takes place in Some parts of Russia, Asia and most of Europe.
Even though this war took place over a 100 years ago it gives great description, so I’m able to relate to the soldiers, and I feel like I was right there next to them; taking part in the fight. This book has lots of great detail and some some interesting parts that you just can't wait to find out how it turns out.
Once you start to read it you will definitely pick a side in the war for who should win, either the Axis, or the Allies. One of my favorite parts in the book was the ending when you could really tell it was going to be over and you know who was going to win. A part I would like to change is maybe if I could change it from nonfiction and make it realistic fiction, so it has a lot more interesting parts to keep you interested in this story. Someone who would like to read this book is historic fans especially the ones who specializes in war history.

[G · Rating 2 out of 5]

Además de este librito, Norman Stone escribió varios discursos de Maggie Thatcher. Asesor oficial. Semejante prontuario destruye la credibilidad de sus textos. Mentir allá, mentir acá, política, historia, es más o menos lo mismo. Lo bueno es que se lee rápido, es breve, y la distorsión del relato se vuelve evidente en cada página. Entre hipos patrióticos dice que era admirable la alegría de los soldados ingleses. Que el error fue no saber cuándo parar. Es grotesco y asume la falta de juicio crítico del lector. Se siente la violencia rústica en cada frase. El estilo es idiota. Trata de camuflar la mentira con una estrategia militar Blitzkrieg. Vomita estadísticas intercaladas con espasmos de distorsión interpretativa. Cuando parece que los ingleses ganaron alguna de las batallas que comenta, menciona en voz baja y cortito que los alemanes tenían el triunfo asegurado hasta que llegaron los norteamericanos. Es decir, no ganaron los ingleses, ganaron los norteamericanos. Pero la maniobra narrativa deja una visión sesgada. Es sorprendente que estrategias de tan baja calidad y tan poca elaboración tengan éxito. Un enigma de la propaganda. A favor del este libro, sigue quedando claro que la gran guerra fue compleja, sucia, monstruosa, incomprensible en muchos aspectos y de efectos ubicuos que llegan hasta hoy y seguirán su curso por siglos.

[Ross · Rating 3 out of 5]

Picked it up by chance, however upon returning home I realised I had already bought this book back in 2015. It sat there, staring back at me from the bookshelf. But of course I re-read it.

Norman has a brilliant way of staying above the waves, so many historians just get lost in the ever deep and enticing details of the Great War.

Separated into annual chapters, Norman takes us over the main events of the lead up to, start, duration, end and then the fatal consequences of the Treaty of Versailles.

Succinct, enough technical knowledge of battlefield tactics without getting dragged into the numbers of units, bombs, locations etc the reader is left with an areal view of the war, West, East and the “soft underbelly” of it.

A great book to brush up on key events and leaders from that time. If you’re looking to get some starters knowledge it is the book for you.

For me, it reminds me of 2015 and being sat on a bus being taken to some of the very spots he writes about.

[Marikiya · Rating 1 out of 5]

Eee.. básicamente todo lo que no hay que hacer cuando explicas historia. Introducir datos a cholón, no dar apenas explicaciones, seguir sumando hechos y cifras mientras se mantiene la omnipresente narración academicista, y peor aún, soltar frases pedantes y presuntuosas. Mi propósito con esta lectura era repasar el trasfondo político, económico y social de este momento histórico, pero no ha podido ser, porque la mayoría de las páginas se pierden en lo puramente militar. Pues a eso no lo titules Breve historia de la Primera Guerra Mundial, llámalo Breve recopilación de las decisiones militares que tomaban los mandos del ejército de cada país un año detrás de otro en la Primera Guerra Mundial. Di de que va el libro, haz el favor. El capítulo de las repercusiones internacionales tiene 5 páginas. De pena.

[Charlotte (Buried in Books) · Rating 4 out of 5]

I’m ashamed to say that i know very little about the first world war. I knew the trigger (the assassination of archduke franz ferdinand) and I’d heard of some of the battles (verdun, the somme etc), other than that my knowledge was based on Blackadder Goes Fourth.

This very compact book covers all areas of the conflict. From the powder keg that was looking for any excuse to ignite. The reliance on infrastructure (trains mainly). The strategic mistakes made on both sides (if Germany had known when to stop advancing they probably would have won). The huge leaps in technology made during the war.

It was fascinating and heartbreaking to read.