What do you think?
Rate this book
The First World War: Volume I: To Arms
This is the first truly definitive history of World War I, the war that has had the greatest impact on the course of the twentieth century. The first generation of its historians had access to a limited range of sources, and they focused primarily on military events. More recent approaches have embraced cultural, diplomatic, economic, and social history. In this authoritative and readable history, Hew Strachan combines these perspectives with a military and strategic narrative. The result is an account that breaks the bounds of national preoccupations to become both global and comparative.
The first of three volumes in this magisterial study, To Arms examines not only the causes of the war and its opening clashes on land and sea, but also the ideas that underpinned it, and the motivations of the people who supported it. It provides pioneering accounts of the war's finances, the war in Africa, and the Central Powers' bid to widen the war outside Europe.
The first of three volumes in this magisterial study, To Arms examines not only the causes of the war and its opening clashes on land and sea, but also the ideas that underpinned it, and the motivations of the people who supported it. It provides pioneering accounts of the war's finances, the war in Africa, and the Central Powers' bid to widen the war outside Europe.
1248 pages, Paperback
First published April 26, 2001
48 people are currently reading
418 people want to read
About the author
Hew Strachan
78 books73 followersHew Strachan was born and brought up in Edinburgh, and was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society of Edinburgh 2003 and awarded an Hon. D.Univ., (Paisley) 2005. He is also Life Fellow of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, where he was successively Research Fellow, Admissions Tutor and Senior Tutor, 1975-92. From 1992 to 2001 he was Professor of Modern History at the University of Glasgow, and from 1996 to 2001 Director of the Scottish Centre for War Studies.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 18 of 18 reviews
April 27, 2016
World War I is the runty little sibling of a cooler, better-known big brother, World War II. The perception of World War I's sheer meaningless, along with World War II's historical impact, has continued for long these many years, despite constant reappraisals, including Niall Ferguson's recent theory that it was all one big war, with a little break in the middle. For whatever reason, movies, books (aside from some great novels, such as "All Quiet on the Western Front"), and the History Channel are in love with World War II, while World War I gets the shaft.
This is too bad, because I think WWI has the preeminent place in 20th C. history. Not only did it lead to the rise of the Soviet Union, the fall of the French and British empires, and the global dominance of the United States, but the breakup of the Ottoman Empire, to punish Turkey, created the modern Middle East. And we all know how well that turned out.
I've nibbled at the edges of World War I. I read John Keegan's slim one-volume history, "The First World War." I read "Dreadnought" and "Castles at Sea" by Robert Massey, detailing the naval arms race leading to WWI and the naval battles of WWI respectively. I read Tuchman's "The Guns of August" and Ferguson's "The Pity of War." Once I had the basic chronology, I started looking for a multi-volume work to let it all cohere in my mind.
Strachan's "To Arms," the first in a proposed trilogy (which will never be finished, unless he lives forever), came highly recommended. I hate it. In the memorable words of "The Critic": it stinks.
Apparently, in order to be a serious historian, you have to be boring. For this book is boring. I mean, really boring. It's not that I didn't understand the entire chapter devoted to the loan structures of every beligerent nation, it's that I didn't care. Funnily enough, Strachan writes at one point that he feels the cause of the war had a great deal to do with the personalities involves. He then goes on to say absolutely nothing about any of the personaliies. Indeed, all humanity is drained from this book, as a thief (such as myself) might siphon the gasoline from your automobile late at night, while you are watching "Let's Make a Deal." I don't think there's a single person mentioned in the whole book. I didn't know that. I didn't know that WWI started, was fought, and ended, without human participation.
The descriptions of battles are frustrating. Fine, I get it, you're not a narrative historian, so you aren't going to use anecdotes from the people who fought it, or even the people who were in command. You're just going to explain the troop movements. I'm okay with that. JUST PUT IN SOME FRACKING MAPS! Honestly, you telling me that the 25th Battalion went East while the 142nd Regiment marched Southwest and Company A of the 18th Regiment of Lancers played pinochle on an alluvial plain 45 miles south by southeast of Paris really doesn't help me without a battle map. Oh, he has these wonderfully helpful topographical maps, but there are no troop movements. In order to make even the slightest sense of Strachen's incoherent and dry-as-old-toast retelling of von Moltke's execution of the Schlieffen Plan, I had to look up maps on the Internet. That was fun. Reading a book that is the size of a fat baby while simultaneously scrolling through battle maps online.
I finished it, though. If millions of men could live and die in the trenches, I figure the least I could do is read an incredibly boring and un-insightful account of their sacrifice.
This is too bad, because I think WWI has the preeminent place in 20th C. history. Not only did it lead to the rise of the Soviet Union, the fall of the French and British empires, and the global dominance of the United States, but the breakup of the Ottoman Empire, to punish Turkey, created the modern Middle East. And we all know how well that turned out.
I've nibbled at the edges of World War I. I read John Keegan's slim one-volume history, "The First World War." I read "Dreadnought" and "Castles at Sea" by Robert Massey, detailing the naval arms race leading to WWI and the naval battles of WWI respectively. I read Tuchman's "The Guns of August" and Ferguson's "The Pity of War." Once I had the basic chronology, I started looking for a multi-volume work to let it all cohere in my mind.
Strachan's "To Arms," the first in a proposed trilogy (which will never be finished, unless he lives forever), came highly recommended. I hate it. In the memorable words of "The Critic": it stinks.
Apparently, in order to be a serious historian, you have to be boring. For this book is boring. I mean, really boring. It's not that I didn't understand the entire chapter devoted to the loan structures of every beligerent nation, it's that I didn't care. Funnily enough, Strachan writes at one point that he feels the cause of the war had a great deal to do with the personalities involves. He then goes on to say absolutely nothing about any of the personaliies. Indeed, all humanity is drained from this book, as a thief (such as myself) might siphon the gasoline from your automobile late at night, while you are watching "Let's Make a Deal." I don't think there's a single person mentioned in the whole book. I didn't know that. I didn't know that WWI started, was fought, and ended, without human participation.
The descriptions of battles are frustrating. Fine, I get it, you're not a narrative historian, so you aren't going to use anecdotes from the people who fought it, or even the people who were in command. You're just going to explain the troop movements. I'm okay with that. JUST PUT IN SOME FRACKING MAPS! Honestly, you telling me that the 25th Battalion went East while the 142nd Regiment marched Southwest and Company A of the 18th Regiment of Lancers played pinochle on an alluvial plain 45 miles south by southeast of Paris really doesn't help me without a battle map. Oh, he has these wonderfully helpful topographical maps, but there are no troop movements. In order to make even the slightest sense of Strachen's incoherent and dry-as-old-toast retelling of von Moltke's execution of the Schlieffen Plan, I had to look up maps on the Internet. That was fun. Reading a book that is the size of a fat baby while simultaneously scrolling through battle maps online.
I finished it, though. If millions of men could live and die in the trenches, I figure the least I could do is read an incredibly boring and un-insightful account of their sacrifice.
October 18, 2010
A mammoth book that gives you a prelude and introduction to the First world war as if you were in Harvard. After all, all of this for just the first two years.
But it's not written for your enjoyment: either you have the required focus to go over (and, more importantly, appreciate) hundreds of pages of economics, politics, and war, or you'll get overwhelmed and/or turned off quickly. Even I couldn't get through it fully with the mind-frame of a casual reader, the first time around.
The one thing they could have done better is added more maps. Disappointing. Visual aids are a must.
But it's not written for your enjoyment: either you have the required focus to go over (and, more importantly, appreciate) hundreds of pages of economics, politics, and war, or you'll get overwhelmed and/or turned off quickly. Even I couldn't get through it fully with the mind-frame of a casual reader, the first time around.
The one thing they could have done better is added more maps. Disappointing. Visual aids are a must.
August 19, 2019
Just when it came out, the Zuber Controversy on the Schlieffen Plan began.
April 13, 2021
3.5 rounding down.
Very detailed and very well researched but I can’t say I really enjoyed it. The chapters on prewar and July Crisis were ok but nothing special. The chapters on the Western and Eastern Fronts in 1914 were very top-down with a lack of personal views on the ground. It takes nearly 400 pages to get to more interesting parts such as the naval war in the North Sea and the Pacific. The chapters on the war in Africa, Germany’s plans to inspire revolts in Entente territories were actually pretty good. The chapter on the financial aspects of the war is good because it is something most other books on the war don’t really go into but I wasn’t that interested. Finally the industry chapter on resources and shell shortages was pretty good.
The writing style was fine but not spectacular. I’m really interested in WWI, it’s one of my most read subjects, but I wouldn’t say I enjoyed the book that much. I ended up forcing myself through it just so I could move onto something else. I wouldn’t recommend it unless you’re really interested in the war but even then I’m not sure.
Very detailed and very well researched but I can’t say I really enjoyed it. The chapters on prewar and July Crisis were ok but nothing special. The chapters on the Western and Eastern Fronts in 1914 were very top-down with a lack of personal views on the ground. It takes nearly 400 pages to get to more interesting parts such as the naval war in the North Sea and the Pacific. The chapters on the war in Africa, Germany’s plans to inspire revolts in Entente territories were actually pretty good. The chapter on the financial aspects of the war is good because it is something most other books on the war don’t really go into but I wasn’t that interested. Finally the industry chapter on resources and shell shortages was pretty good.
The writing style was fine but not spectacular. I’m really interested in WWI, it’s one of my most read subjects, but I wouldn’t say I enjoyed the book that much. I ended up forcing myself through it just so I could move onto something else. I wouldn’t recommend it unless you’re really interested in the war but even then I’m not sure.
January 5, 2008
Comprehensive.
March 22, 2025
The kindle edition consists of 12 chapters, or just over 1220 pages. It also includes the usual bibliography, which is extensive, an index, an Introduction and a list of maps. The book is a tour de force of immense details and of the most readable and engaging history. The Great War is of little interest today and most courses of any serious detail are reserved for 1st or 2nd year Military Science or Political Science students.
Most Americans are mostly familiar with the Great War through its ant-war literature, or today, video. All Quiet on the Western Front comes to mind. Only the serious student of war and politics does not treat the subject with any sense of adventure or romance' the war was unequivocally a tragedy of grand scale. It was not until the end of the Cold War, circa 1991, that the political elements of 1914 - 1918 gained relevance for study. Why? because the Soviet Union was not just a child of the revolution, but a product of the Great war itself.
Somehow, the alleged "end of history" gave notion to the idea of a "short" twentieth century, making this event even more relevant. The major histories of the Great war have primarily focused on the military aspects and are narrowly defined. This book covers extensively the non-military aspects of the war and the period leading up to the "Guns of August." The major premise of this book is that the First World war was global from the outset.
The chronological structure of the book follows a narrative for each of the major theaters of war. The western front and the eastern front are considered in turn year by year. but connected to this spine of the chronology are a series of themes developed as independent chapters where chronology makes their consideration pressing. For example, chapter 10 is an in-depth discussion of war finance because in 1914 this was a very pressing issue. Conversely, the theme of Industrial mobilization only goes as far as 1916 on the grounds that a second re-mobilization took place that must be set in the context of Verdun and the Somme. The issues of atrocities, propaganda, soldier experience and morale all feed into the mutinies of 1917 and that is where the entry of their discussion begins.
This book places national events in context and is a comparative history that also highlights gaps in our knowledge. Lastly this book relies extensively on primary source documents from the reopened archives of Russia and the former east Bloc.
I highly recommend this book. I would also suggest that the reader of this review also purchase the following books by the historian, the late Barbara Tuchman. and i also suggest that they be read in the order I have listed.
1. The Proud Tower,
2. The Guns of August
3. The Zimmerman Telegram
Most Americans are mostly familiar with the Great War through its ant-war literature, or today, video. All Quiet on the Western Front comes to mind. Only the serious student of war and politics does not treat the subject with any sense of adventure or romance' the war was unequivocally a tragedy of grand scale. It was not until the end of the Cold War, circa 1991, that the political elements of 1914 - 1918 gained relevance for study. Why? because the Soviet Union was not just a child of the revolution, but a product of the Great war itself.
Somehow, the alleged "end of history" gave notion to the idea of a "short" twentieth century, making this event even more relevant. The major histories of the Great war have primarily focused on the military aspects and are narrowly defined. This book covers extensively the non-military aspects of the war and the period leading up to the "Guns of August." The major premise of this book is that the First World war was global from the outset.
The chronological structure of the book follows a narrative for each of the major theaters of war. The western front and the eastern front are considered in turn year by year. but connected to this spine of the chronology are a series of themes developed as independent chapters where chronology makes their consideration pressing. For example, chapter 10 is an in-depth discussion of war finance because in 1914 this was a very pressing issue. Conversely, the theme of Industrial mobilization only goes as far as 1916 on the grounds that a second re-mobilization took place that must be set in the context of Verdun and the Somme. The issues of atrocities, propaganda, soldier experience and morale all feed into the mutinies of 1917 and that is where the entry of their discussion begins.
This book places national events in context and is a comparative history that also highlights gaps in our knowledge. Lastly this book relies extensively on primary source documents from the reopened archives of Russia and the former east Bloc.
I highly recommend this book. I would also suggest that the reader of this review also purchase the following books by the historian, the late Barbara Tuchman. and i also suggest that they be read in the order I have listed.
1. The Proud Tower,
2. The Guns of August
3. The Zimmerman Telegram
January 16, 2021
Hew Strachan's "To Arms" is an encyclopedic doorstop of a book on the first year of the First World War. Unfortunately the appellation encyclopedic carries all of the pejorative baggage of that word: lacking in intimate detail; absence of thematic continuity; and a reading experience that feels like a slog through the trenchworks of the Western Front.
There is no doubt that Strachan has put in a tremendous amount of research and work into his book. However, the utility of the facts and knowledge relayed are swamped by quantity and unleavened by any quality of storytelling or engrossment in the lives of the leaders, followers, men and women who endured the awful triumphs and tragedies of 1914.
This may indeed be a nice addition to a reading list of professional or highly-read amateur historians of the First World War. It fails, though, to deliver any sort of lasting impression for ordinary readers.
The faults of the book are captured in a passing line at the end of the first chapter. "But it remains a reminder that the most banal and maudlin emotions, as well as the most deeply felt, interacted with the wider context." Strachan heaps up plenty of context; what is missing is the emotion, the raw feelings of 1914 that drove men from making guns and threats to letting loose bullets and poison gas on supposed enemies.
There is no doubt that Strachan has put in a tremendous amount of research and work into his book. However, the utility of the facts and knowledge relayed are swamped by quantity and unleavened by any quality of storytelling or engrossment in the lives of the leaders, followers, men and women who endured the awful triumphs and tragedies of 1914.
This may indeed be a nice addition to a reading list of professional or highly-read amateur historians of the First World War. It fails, though, to deliver any sort of lasting impression for ordinary readers.
The faults of the book are captured in a passing line at the end of the first chapter. "But it remains a reminder that the most banal and maudlin emotions, as well as the most deeply felt, interacted with the wider context." Strachan heaps up plenty of context; what is missing is the emotion, the raw feelings of 1914 that drove men from making guns and threats to letting loose bullets and poison gas on supposed enemies.
January 22, 2021
I've put this one down. Got to page 374, the chapter that starts on the war in the northern waters. I've enjoyed the realism of the book; I mean, it's got so much dull detail that it feels like I'm reading things that actually happened (vs something more prosaic and, therefore, feeling like the author has inserted a part themselves into the history). Still, it's such a difficult read for me. I tend to get bogged down in the details and so take way too long to read even one paragraph. I think skimming is my best tool here; the paragraphs that bookend each section are usually the best for summary statements. In the middle, you'll find battles and troop movements in detail. Even with maps I've found online, it's hard to stay in the story.
That being said, one of my favorite things about the book is that it includes the German perspective. This is a strength. It doesn't come across as being one-sided in the least. I remember reading the Very Short Introduction version of the story and feeling a bit dissatisfied with what seemed like Entente interpretations of Central Powers' moves and intentions.
I do not suggest this book for most people. It's best for those wishing detailed research, not a casual read.
That being said, one of my favorite things about the book is that it includes the German perspective. This is a strength. It doesn't come across as being one-sided in the least. I remember reading the Very Short Introduction version of the story and feeling a bit dissatisfied with what seemed like Entente interpretations of Central Powers' moves and intentions.
I do not suggest this book for most people. It's best for those wishing detailed research, not a casual read.
August 22, 2023
Although Goodreads lists this book as the first volume, it isn't. It's both volumes combined into one book. It is a massive read (almost 600 pages) that covers pre-war, the actual war, and the results. The book is really thorough. The author does an excellent job of explaining important people, places, war participants, and etc. I've read several books on the first World War, and this one is my favorite. I think it ranks ahead of The Guns of August by Tuchman (which won the Pulitzer), and The First World War by Keegan. But if you are not familiar with the events of the first World War, I wouldn't recommend reading Strachan's book first. It is a long read, and first time readers of the first World War may become bored and possibly give up on the book. If you are used to reading books that have hard to pronounce names and cities, and that are many pages, then Strachan's book shouldn't give you any problems. But if you do struggle with long reads, and with names and words that are hard to pronounce, build up to this book if the first World War interests you.
February 4, 2024
This is an astonishingly well researched book of great if limited value. It was supposed to be the first volume of a multi-volume history of the war, but Strachan dropped out of what must have seemed an impossible project, and we are all worse for that fact. However, although I pine for the completed project we will never see, it is possible that no one person can write the history of that war. And we may still be too close to it. More recent scholars have shown how complex the July Crisis was, yet the deep-seated need to dump all the blame on Germany persists. We are also in the later stages of a huge, concerted effort to not only revive Douglas Haig's reputation, but also to attribute the victory in 1918 to the BEF. Emotions still run high when it comes to WWI, and national sentiment (and chauvinism) still makes a more objective assessment close to impossible. Nevertheless, Strachan did a fine job here, and deserves to be read by any serious student of the war.
December 8, 2021
My head hurts in a good way.
Strachan's magnificent work is comprehensive it's a wonderful scholarly work of the first year of the great war. I found it very readable. But you have to be prepared for a slog at over 1100 pages 😳
I am just disappointed that I see no signs of Strachan publishing volume 2
Strachan's magnificent work is comprehensive it's a wonderful scholarly work of the first year of the great war. I found it very readable. But you have to be prepared for a slog at over 1100 pages 😳
I am just disappointed that I see no signs of Strachan publishing volume 2
April 6, 2021
A must read book but man it took me a while. The chapter on financing the war was new for me and found myself rereading paragraphs to follow Strachan. An important book for your library for any WW1 history enthusiast.
September 5, 2012
I liked it. First off, this was probably a bit more book than I can normally handle. It was dense. That being said, it really gave a complete picture of a variety of aspects of the early years of the war. I liked that it spent time going through how each of the issues affected each of the major powers instead of just looking at one nation in particular. I felt that the book's main weakness was in describing the battles in that I had trouble figuring out spatially where everybody was moving and how each move and counter-move effected the other. Where the author talks about big picture concepts is where I learned and enjoyed the most from this book. I don't think I would recommend this book to someone on the whole, but there are definitely chapters that deserve to be read.
October 24, 2014
As definitive an account as one is likely to get on the first portion of the first of our World Wars. If Sir Hew is able to buck the actuarial odds (he is, as of this writing, 65 years old) and finish the final two volumes of his proposed trilogy with anything resembling the same rigor, wit, and insight demonstrated in this first one, the question of Most Indispensable Work on this subject will be settled for quite some time to come.
Highly recommended.
Highly recommended.
December 28, 2014
If you are a historian, I give it 5 stars. A very thorough, well-researched, and definitive account of the opening of the war. If you are not historian who is not so familiar with WWI, I would read Keegan first.
August 27, 2011
Far more detailed, exhaustively so, than I needed or wanted to read, but an awesome achievement. When oh when, or even if, will Strachan conclude his massive and authoritative trilogy
April 26, 2013
good survey for the beginning of the war .. i recommend it
April 12, 2017
This is a huge book about the background to the First World War. I believe it is the first of a trilogy. It is very detailed and written in quite a dry academic style - I found it hard going.
Displaying 1 - 18 of 18 reviews