Rating: 
Summary: Overall good but somewhat superfacial
Review: The author definitely done his research. The book is crammed with anecdotes, remembrances, drawings, soldier's songs, newspaper headlines centered around that remarkable Christmas day. All of them interesting, but reading through them is a disjointed experience due to the book's one-thing-after-another organizing style. In the last chapter author tried to introduce a little theory for the smorgasgord of facts he had so impressively assembled, speculating unconvincingly about the historical significance of the informal truce.Interested people who wish to consider/speculate how this event fit into European history could try The Rites of Spring, by Modris Ekstein, a cultural history of Europe of that period. Nonetheless, the facts of the event shines through.
So if you are interested in gaining general knowledge of the 1914 Christmas truce, it's a good book. But don't look for discussions on why this event occurred or why no truces approaching its scale ever happend again.
Rating: 
Summary: A Disappointment
Review: The author has clearly done his research homework, compiling an impressive array of contemporary accounts of a remarkable, even inspirational, event. Especially impressive was Weintraub's ability to mix German accounts in with the more customary allied ones (after all, by W's account, it was the Germans who began the truce). Still, despite the book's strengths in its core of solid primary research, I have to agree with several previous reviewers that it is poorly presented, poorly arranged, and at times methodologically challenged. IMHO, the book screams for some sort of analytical framework around which to hang the impressive data that W has collected. Instead, the reader is presented with a series of partly-chronological, partly topical chapters that contain no internal consistency. For instance, the chapter on the infamous football/soccer game(s) does not limit itself to that subject, nor does it adduce any compelling thesis or argument about the nexus of sport, warfare, the truce - or anything else, for that matter. It is a jumble of anecdotes, many of which touch on the soccer game(s?), but many of which do not. The rest of the book contains similar organizational problems: a surfeit of wonderful anecdotes without any controlling narrative or argument. Yet I would not complain as much about the book were it not for what I found to be some serious methodological flaws. Weintraub introduces into each chapter anecdotes drawn from pop culture sources (plays, literature, songs, children's books, etc) composed, by and large, many years after the fact. This is not necessarily a bad thing, and, indeed, in the hands of another scholar might well have provided the basis for an entirely distinct monograph. Yet here, they are interwoven into W's narrative in ways that make it seem as if they confirm, support and expand the more historical evidence (letters, diaries, official regimental histories) for the truce. I find this extremely disturbing. Why should RObert Graves' second-hand (he made it to the front in 1915) fictional account of the truce be considered alongside the accounts of the soldiers who participated? This is not to denigrate Graves, or even to deny that Graves may well have garnered oral histories of the truce from his fellow soldiers. But still, the simple fact is that a fictional representation of the truce written up in the 1940s (if I remember correctly) cannot be treated as primary evidence for the facts of the truce. Similarly, while I am old enough to remember and love the Snoopy and the REd Baron song, I don't find it particularly revelatory of actual events from 1914 (the same goes for the English rock band, The Farm, of whom I am unfamiliar). I am not, I should make it clear, accusing Weintraub of anything untoward - his every use of such later sources is firmly annotated and clearly identified. What I do find confusing is why Weintraub feels that such account should be placed alongside the more 'historical' accounts, and why he should allow the reader to think that they offer any insight into the real events of the truce and not simply insight into what was later _perceived_ about the truce. Finally, as others have commented upon previously, I found the final chapter, in which Weintraub speculates about what might have happened had the truce been allowed to continue, to be simply silly. We all favor peace, and to seriously (I gather?!) suggest that the truce would have a) stopped the war; b) prevented fascism; c) impeded lots of other bad stuff, strikes me as 1) bad history and 2) emotional pandering to our p.c. sensibilities. As this review suggests, I was seriously disappointed by the book. While Weintraub is to be commended for rescuing it from obscurity and for emphasizing the humanity of (some of) the common soldiers, there is a much better book still to be written on this subject. That book will take a more analytical tack and will, I hope, more clearly separate the events of the truce from the later imagining of those events.
Rating: 
Summary: Briefly: Peace on Earth
Review: The author, Stanley Weintraub, notes that records dating back to ancient Troy show "Live-and-let-live" accommodations occur in all wars with "cessations in fighting to bury the dead, to pray to the gods, to negotiate a peace..." However, the author notes, "None had ever occurred on the scale of, or with the duration, or with the potential for changing things, as when the shooting suddenly stopped on Christmas Eve, 1914." In December 1914 "both sides of the front line in Flanders, astride the borders of Belgium and France...faced off from rows of trenches..." On Christmas Eve 1914 toward midnight, firing ceased and soldiers from both sides met halfway between their positions. The text notes, "Almost always, it was the Germans who at least indirectly invited the truce" shouting the words "You no shoot, we no shoot." "The initiatives were at first rebuffed, but both sides wanted it, and a truce materialized" as up and down No Man's Land the two sides-even the French-were coming together with burial of corpses a "tacit precondition for fraternization." In most areas the truce was from Christmas Eve lasting until midnight Christmas Day with some areas extending the truce through December 26th. In other areas, bad weather discouraged resuming fighting on December 26th. The text gives several examples of Christmas 1914 truces and fraternization. Officers up to the rank of colonel were involved but kept a low profile. Both Allied and German high commands were concerned about the implications of fraternization, and opposed the Christmas truce. However, the "fraternization, dangerously unwarlike from the headquarter perspective, seemed unstoppable." The text recounts several stories about impromptu soccer games. One soldier wrote, "Everywhere you looked, the occupants of the trenches stood about talking to each other and even playing football." On page 122 the book states "although the truce seemed to end as it had begun-from the bottom up, with random acts of violence-the High commands on both sides were also demanding renewed war, and by orders and threats they made it happen", and the truce ended with a few stray bullets and shells as few in the trenches wished to return to the killing field. While the truce is basically dismissed in official histories as a minor occurrence of no inconsequence, in the last Chapter, the author asks the question what would have happened if soldiers on both sides refused to resume fighting. Several "What Ifs" are outlined and the author states, "Much of this speculation may be frivolous," but notes it "hinges upon one of the twentieth century's most potentially significant events." The book states "...Christmas 1914 reopened imaginations to the unsettling truth that at each end of the rifle, men were indeed the same..." and ends noting "However much the momentary peace of 1914 evidenced the desire of the combatants to live in amity with one another it was doomed from the start by the realities beyond the trenches." This book is an interesting account of peace slipping through mankind's figures.
Rating:
Summary: Put It Down After Page Thirty
Review: The title of this review says it all. At page thirty you have the entire story. At page 38, I recall wondering what the remainder of the book was about. The author had already described the Christmas truce at a few locations on the battle line and added that headquarters was not in favor of the temporary peace. The remainder of the book is devoted to giving more and more examples of the same. A nice magazine article, as a book it became tedious.
Rating:
Summary: Repetitious
Review: This entire book could be rewriten in only 75 pages. While the author has some wonderful anecdotal stories coming from one section of the front or another each page seems to be repetitious of the last. You will learn and hear of story upon story of soldiers singing Christmas carols and putting up Christmas trees on top of their trenches. The author tempts you into this book by ascerting the question of "what would have happened had the soldiers not resumed fighting after the truce." This idea is not thoroughly or adequately explored and I was left unsatisfied. The question is never fully addressed. If this is a topic which interests you, by all means read this book. Just skip the 100 extra pages in the middle.
Rating:
Summary: Great story, but book is hard to follow
Review: This is a great story for the holiday season and is a great anomaly in what was a horrible war of attrition. However, the book is more of a collection of thoughts rather than an oral history or an actual story. At times I couldn't tell which side I was reading about unless the names were totally obvious. Also it may be tougher to understand if you don't know the geography or the history of the WWI era and how it came to pass.
Rating:
Summary: A Fascinating Event Amid War
Review: This is an overlooked subject from the First World War and it is good that Stanley Weintraub has written about the Christmas truce. Overall, I found the book to be very readable. Mr. Weintraub writes well but I found that I was distracted by the introduction of stories, plays and television programs that deal with the truce. I think that these points of view could have been gathered in a chapter by themselves and contrasted with the real event. We are given the insights of the men on both sides and many are spoken of in several chapters. I found myself wanting more background on some of these men. Where did they come from? What did they do before the war? What became of them? Sometimes my questions were answered but infrequently. Also, I would have liked a bit more of an introduction to the events preceding the truce. Mr. Weintraub concludes with a chapter called "What If..." . Every historian enjoys considering what may have happened if events had gone differently. Mr. Weintraub indulges himself perhaps excessively in this chapter to give us a much different 20th Century if the truce had become an event that led to the end of fighting. It seems that the end of the First World War at Christmas 1914 would have removed evil in place of good, but I am bot sure. I would have appreciated a more detailed picture of the subsequent Christmas' and how the soldiers felt about a renewal of the truce. I first learned of the Christmas truce of 1914 in a television program where a letter written by one of the British officers was read describing the truce and the feelings this soldier had about the cessation of fighting. I think this book would have been better if there was more focus on individual soldiers ala Cornelius Ryan so we could follow the events of the truce a bit more consistently. This said, I still would recommend this book to anyone who finds the paradox of war and brotherhood an interesting subject.
Rating:
Summary: A good story that could be told in 4 pages
Review: This is one of the most poorly written books I have read in years. You either have to know German or the entire geography of Europe to understand what Weintraub is taking about. No German or French words (sometimes whole paragraphs) are explained in english. This book is long-winded, redundant and out of order, it may be 50 pages before Weitraub gets back to something he was in the middle of writing about. Steer clear and read the synopsis on the back cover of this one. Well-researched for the families of those who fought in that batlle, but not for me.
Rating: 
Summary: Fiction Garbled w/ Non-fiction Wrapped in a Peacenik Agenda
Review: This was a very disappointing book. The subject is a fascinating event in human history, and I felt this title promised a rich source of historical information and entertainment. However, any reader will discover there are other, better books to read on the topic. This is the first time I have been so disappointed in a book that I felt compelled to go back and write a negative review. My own worst complaint is how Mr. Weintraub chose to mix factual history liberally with fictional accounts from books and plays. It's pretty sorry scholarship and poor history. I can only suppose he did it because the fictional accounts played up the anti-war sentiment which Mr. Weintraub's transparent political agenda requires. It is at best distracting trying to keep fact separate from fiction, because Mr. Weintraub makes abrupt transitions between factual and fictional tales and story-tellers, generally without identifying them. At worst it can be discouragingly confusing and profoundly misinforming! I was also disappointed by the frequent redundancy in the presentation. It reminds the reader of a student who is trying to make sure his term paper will be long enough to meet the required minimum. The absurd, oft-repeated theme that it's a shame the Pied Piper of Christmas Truces didn't lead all the poor, common soldiers of both sides into a permanent strike against the war is irritating, sophomoric, and tiresome. To end the book with a recapitulation of this oft-repeated theme, followed by a ridiculous, conjectural "what-if" history, based on the postulation that such an anti-war strike could have brought an end to WWI in 1915, is not only a meaningless excursion into baseless fantasy, but simply and positively unscholarly. The book does contain some interesting, factual anecdotes unearthed by Mr. Weintraub from many contemporary sources, notably war diaries of the units involved and letters home from soldiers of both sides, many of which found their way into print in subsequent years. At one point, Mr. Weintraub takes a shallow stab at debunking some of the legends which have grown up about the Christmas Truce, but then quickly goes on to heap more mythology upon mythology in his confusing technique of blending historical fact with stories and characters from popular fiction. My recommendation would be to invest your study or reading entertainment time in a different book with better scholarly intent and a more readable, more historical content.
Rating:
Summary: Fiction Garbled w/ Non-fiction Wrapped in a Peacenik Agenda
Review: This was a very disappointing book. The subject is a fascinating event in human history, and I felt this title promised a rich source of historical information and entertainment. However, any reader will discover there are other, better books to read on the topic. This is the first time I have been so disappointed in a book that I felt compelled to go back and write a negative review. My own worst complaint is how Mr. Weintraub chose to mix factual history liberally with fictional accounts from books and plays. It's pretty sorry scholarship and poor history. I can only suppose he did it because the fictional accounts played up the anti-war sentiment which Mr. Weintraub's transparent political agenda requires. It is at best distracting trying to keep fact separate from fiction, because Mr. Weintraub makes abrupt transitions between factual and fictional tales and story-tellers, generally without identifying them. At worst it can be discouragingly confusing and profoundly misinforming! I was also disappointed by the frequent redundancy in the presentation. It reminds the reader of a student who is trying to make sure his term paper will be long enough to meet the required minimum. The absurd, oft-repeated theme that it's a shame the Pied Piper of Christmas Truces didn't lead all the poor, common soldiers of both sides into a permanent strike against the war is irritating, sophomoric, and tiresome. To end the book with a recapitulation of this oft-repeated theme, followed by a ridiculous, conjectural "what-if" history, based on the postulation that such an anti-war strike could have brought an end to WWI in 1915, is not only a meaningless excursion into baseless fantasy, but simply and positively unscholarly. The book does contain some interesting, factual anecdotes unearthed by Mr. Weintraub from many contemporary sources, notably war diaries of the units involved and letters home from soldiers of both sides, many of which found their way into print in subsequent years. At one point, Mr. Weintraub takes a shallow stab at debunking some of the legends which have grown up about the Christmas Truce, but then quickly goes on to heap more mythology upon mythology in his confusing technique of blending historical fact with stories and characters from popular fiction. My recommendation would be to invest your study or reading entertainment time in a different book with better scholarly intent and a more readable, more historical content.
| 
