The Sleepwalkers: how Europe went to War in 1914, by Christopher Clark (Harper, 2013), 697 pages
This book carefully details the diplomatic, political, and military actions and events of the decade preceding world war I. The book culminates in the summer of 1914, immediately following the assassination of Austrian Archduke Franz Joseph and his wife Sophie in Sarajevo by the young Serb terrorist Gavril Prncip, the event that triggered the declarations of war and cost the lives of millions. And of course, world war I set the stage for World War II twenty years later, and its even greater atrocities and many more millions.
In the week since I finished Sleepwalkers, what has stayed foremost for me is Clark's steady and clear thesis that Germany did not itself initiate the war and that it was not involved in a grand scheme of conquest. I know there is a consensus among British historians that Germany started the war as a war of conquest, for land and resources. Clark refutes this view. He shows the Kaiser in various lights, none particularly flattering, but not as a war mongerer. Clark emphasizes Germany's attempts at reconciliation and rapproachment with England, most of which were rejected by the English. And Germany was bordered by two increasingly hostile powers: France, which searched for an excuse to reclaim the Alsaice Lorraine, and Russia, which sought to expand its power and influence in the Balkans, at the expense of Germany's close ally Austria Hungary. Clark painstakingly shows France as goading and leading Russia to war as its ally, a war French commanders thought could be won with their Russian ally. In the end, Clark depicts Germany as having little choice but to fight.
The war was a tragedy which at its inception offered no significant, tangible benefit to any of the great powers. They were drawn into it by a web of interlocking alliances, treaties, vengeance for past wrongs and slights. The men who made the decisions and did the talking that led to war were also caught in game of machismo -- nobody wanted to appear soft. Clark's reference to "sleepwalkers" is that the men and countries of Europe permitted themselves to half-consciously walk to war despite their conscious minds' objectives to avoid war. And if WWI had not occurred as a general continental war, then we might
not have had WWII twenty years later, and its even greater carnage.
The characterizations and depictions of the diplomats, ministers, and commanders who populate Sleepwalkers are excellent. The people, and all their weaknesses, sudden changes of heart, good sides and bad sides, are well written. They all come alive, and thus are easier to understand. This is a well-written book.
If you would like a learned review of the book, read the Book review by Harold Evans in the New York Times.
As a general reader, I would have liked a couple of additions to the book: more maps, and a condensed guide to the major themes, alliances, and characters. There are some maps, but once you've passed a relevant map thirty pages ago, seeing a closer-scale map of a region would be useful. And for a general reader unfamiliar with the details of a particular history, a section at the beginning of the book summarizing the themes, alliances and characters would help our understanding of what we are reading. Clark frequently refers to a treaty or diplomat not mentioned in many pages, and so the reference is forgotten. A guide at the beginning would be a great help.
