Rating: 
Summary: not the last word on the last summer
Review: Fromkin writes two books. One is a good treatment of those days in the summer of July of 1914 that precipitated the Great War. However he sums up his conclusions in several short chapters that could have been condensed in one major chapter. He harps on certain details to "prove" his thesis that that this conflict could be thought of as two wars. One was a war the Austria-Hungary desired with Serbia and the other was the was of opportunity that Germany desired with Russia and France. He admits the Kaiser did not want the war and was overuled by his Army chief of Staff Moltke. Suprisingly this key fact to the thesis of this book is not backed up with strong documentation.If one was to inspect the origins of the First World war one has this rough outline. Gavrilo Princip-a Serbian shot the Austrian Archduke. Austria believing that this was an example of Serbian sponsored terrorism gave Serbia an ultimatum that by today's standards is mild and reasonable (Fromkin agrees with this). Russia backed up Serbia and mobilized. Germany backed up their ally Austria by demanding Russia cease and desist. France backed up Russia Germany declared war on Russia and France and invaded so called neutral Belgium. Great Britain declared ar on Germany and so it was ignited. From this rough outline that Fromkin documents well he seems bent on proving the thesis that Germany caused the war . However Russia could have stopped the chain reaction by not mobilizing and Great Britian could have stayed out. What British interest were threatened Fromkin does not make clear. Instead of blaming France ,Russia and Great britain from not walking away we have blame put on Austria that the victim of Serbian terorism. Fromkin document well the relationship of Princip with Serbian government officials although he concludes they were low level. I am not so sure and think Fromkin concludes that because that is not in accord with his thesis of two wars started by Austria and Germany. The book is well done in terms of describing the events but poor in proving the central thesis. I recommend Fleming's book ,"Illusion of Victory" as a good book to balance some the theories of this book.
Rating:
Summary: Will get dated
Review: It is hard for a history book that looks back at some earlier event, to avoid including some contextual references to when the book itself was written. A little ironic. It can mean that the book gets quickly dated. So with Fromkin's text. He draws parallels between the Balkan revolutionaries of a century ago and those of bin Laden's followers now. Without disagreeing with his analogies, I point out that this can make his thesis seem so retro in a few decades.
There is also some sloppy editing. Consider these 2 consecutive sentences: "In 1890, Wilhelm asserted his authority by dismissing the Iron Chancellor. [new paragraph] In 1890, after Bismarck had been dismissed, the Kaiser's new ..." The first sentence is replicated in the first part of the second. Weak.
Rating: 
Summary: Redundant
Review: It was with eager anticipation that I pre-ordered this volume. Dr. Fromkin's Pullitzer nominated A Peace To End All Peace is one of the best history books I have ever read. Europe's Last Summer, in stark contrast, is one of the most poorly written histories of my acquaintance. Structurally, Fromkin divides his 305 pages into 53 chapters, many of which are merely two pages in length. The idea was to devote each one to a point by point presentation of the many steps and relevant considerations that led to the culminating conclusions about who was responsible for starting The Great War. What became increasingly annoying was its redundancy. Frequently the reader sees the phrases "as noted earlier" and "as quoted earlier," as Fromkin keeps saying the same handful of statements over and over and over. He tells us no fewer than eight times that German General Helmuth von Moltke (the younger) wanted Germany to confront Russia in war earlier rather than later because he perceived that Russia's French funded industrialization would gradually displace Germany as the leading military power in the world. It became maddeningly tortuous to keep reading the same statements again and again. For most of his conclusions, he refers to the analysis of other historians. By the time I finished reading, I felt that it would have been more profitable to read those historians' books instead. He does ultimately make some important observations. His delineation of the Great War as having been in reality two wars is a valuable insight. That he carefully identifies individual views among the decision makers for each of the Great Powers illuminates the often conflicting machinations within each of their governments. Too often histories of the period treat those governments as having acted with one voice and one mind. His portrayal of Kaiser Wilhelm and those of his subordinates who contravened him as crisis evolved is especially relevant to understanding how German policy arrived at war. On the other hand, his overall thesis is somewhat flawed. If Austria-Hungary had acted on Germany's advice to attack Serbia quickly, then those within the German decision makers such as Moltke who desired war with Russia would have been robbed of their pretext. Ultimately, his final conclusion misses the mark at least a little bit.
Rating:
Summary: Not Bad, But No Great Revelations
Review: It's always been my opinion that the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand was the excuse or "spark" that precipitated the Great War and that Germany was largely responsible for the coming conflagration. Obviously, there were more complexities involved, but that view was none-the-less validated by this book. I must say, though, I was somewhat surprised with the German high command's overwhelming desire to wage war - at any cost. Talk about paranoia. The one thing I felt was missing was a better sense of the public's reaction to the outbreak in each of the principal countries. While it is alluded to a few times, a more detailed analysis would have been interesting. Although the machinations leading to the war were largely conducted behind closed doors, I can't believe there weren't signs aplenty in the wind that your average Joe would have discerned and reacted to. At any rate, if you're interested in a blow by blow description of what happened and why, this book makes a fairly interesting read, although no real new ground is broken here, in my opinion.
Rating: 
Summary: Perhaps not the Last Reading , but on of the Best
Review: Mr Fromkin book about WWI present some atractive features I have never seen before in books of similar content. It is not a very huge one, less than 400 pages and chapters are sometimes uncredible short, but this is not one of the good things I refer, but a result of
a) A synthetic vision that makes posssible to say much with not too many pages
b) A sharpness of pen capable of expressing that synthetic vision not only in few pages, but also in clear sentences. What's better, Fromkin has more that one new vision about events and pesonalities. Many points where currently the history reader tends to get once and again more or less the same interpretations -that, then, by the same token, seems to be decisive, final judgements about them- Fromkin offers a different angle, sometimes 180 degrees in reverse and so enriching and challenging.
At the end, because of those but also by some other reasons any reader must find by himself, with his relatively short, very clear and very well ordered sequence of facts and reasonnings, Fromkin offer the most clear reading to date about such a confuse and complicated thing as that war was. I recomend it heartily.
Rating: 
Summary: Path to Despair....
Review: Put simply, World War I is by far the most idiotic and damaging war ever fought. We are reminded right away of the conflicts far reaching conflict in the introductory chapter of David Fromkin's effective new history of the years leading up to the First World War. The overwhelmingly violent tenor and nature of the 20th century almost uniformly stems from the fissures and ripples of this most ludicrous war. WWII, the Cold War, and the conflicts in the third world all have their bloody descendents in the horrific battlefields of western Europe. Matching the war in its world wide impact is they continuing mystery and argument concerning its origin. As Fromkin questions early on, why would a continent enjoying a time of peace and unprecedented prosperity thrown itself into an apocalyptic bloodbath, unparalleled by anything seen before? It is a tale of fools and tragic figures, that would combine to send Europe into a battle it would never fully recover from. Fromkin is quick to point out that the world of just a century past is almost totally unrecognizable to modern observers. Monarchs and emperors still ruled absolutely, with democracy still struggling to take root. People like Kaiser Wilhem II, ruler of Germany, held sway in matters of war and peace, a very dangerous thing. In prior days, the compatibility of the European royalty, often solidified by their family ties, were a driving force in the decades of peace that had preceded 1914. These relationships began to break as nationalism and other social forces strained age old diplomatic practices. Fromkin does a masterful job of attempting to better describe the European social scene of pre-World War I. It is a difficult task, but I gained a much better understanding of that facet of Europe's history from reading Fromkin's treatment. The crumbling nature of the Austrian-Hungarian Empire, the continuing and maddening bleeding wound of the Balkans, and the declining state of German politics are all portrayed with Fromkin's discerning eyes for cause and effect. The first half of the book is a joy to read. Of course, the most recognizable cause of the Great War is the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand in Sarajevo. Fromkin does a good job of describing how this event was, originally, of little obvious importance. It was a slow buildup that brought the event to the attention of everyone involved, as certain players began to recognize how the death of one man could mean so much. Fromkin's thesis is that it really did not matter that Ferdinand was shot, that a large scale European war was all but inevitable. Concerning blame, Fromkin delivers a more complete picture of the outbreak, moving past the old fashioned idea that it was all the Kaiser's fault (although much of it was). Still, the story of how Europe went to war is an extremely complex one, and Fromkin's lucid writing does a great job of gliding through the astonishing intricacies of this most critical of ages. Europe's Last Summer is written in almost thriller fashion, with short and precise chapters that flow very well. The benefits of this include making the book an easy and fast paced read, and also giving the reader a change to better understand the pace at which history developed. The one detriment of the book is that sometimes Fromkin believes his readers to be experts on European politics, while in other instances he believes them to be 5th graders. Still, this book is an amazing read and should definitely be picked up by anyone with an interest in our most violent of centuries.
Rating:
Summary: Interesting but flawed
Review: The origins of World War I are difficult for modern students to fully comprehend. David Fromkin is to be commended for writing a complete investigation of such a difficult topic that is both scholarly and accessible. Unfortunately, I think his conclusion - that Germany and Austria intentionally provoked the war - is highly dubious.
Fromkin succeeds in building a case that the militarism of the German general staff created a situation ripe for war, and demonstrates that the assassination in Sarajevo was an excuse rather than a reason for war. Nevertheless, his conclusion seems to absolve the allied powers of any guilt. Interested parties should read Niall Ferguson's The Pity of War for another angle - Ferguson argues (far more convincingly, in my opinion) that it is the British and not the Germans who bear the greatest responsibility for the great war.
Rating:
Summary: Lacking in original ideas
Review: This is a fairly good assessment of the steps leading to war, but it is openly relient on other authors'. Read their more original books instead. Still, if you can tolerate the seemingly endless little chapters and the way they break up any developing story you'll find this book accurate. Thats important of course.
Rating:
Summary: a great book
Review: This is a great book. It reverses decades of liberal and
marxist lies about the first world war. By showing clearly
the total responsibility of Germany for the war, he restores
the war to its proper role as a moral crusade against evil.
After the war, in the 1920's, liberals used lies about the
war to convince people that wars were somehow wrong and
immoral rather than being a natural part of national and
international life. Liberals and their false ideas of peace
infected intellectual life for the next 80 years.
Fromkin shows that the first world war was totally the creation
of the germans. It was no accident. It was an expression of
evil from an evil culture.
The defender nations of freedom in the world, then as now, the
US and Britian had to eventually stand up to that evil and
fight it in a war.
This book tells us that there is nothing evil about war. Wars
are fought against evil for the sake of freedom and they are
a necessary part of the lives of countries. The only thing
that saying war itself is evil accomplishes is to empower the
enemies of freedom to attack without fear of retribution.
Rating:
Summary: Fresh Look at Old Subject
Review: This is a great book. Not only is it well written in an engaging, sometimes humorous manner, but it opens the door to an entirely new and fresh look at the origins of the mother of all wars in the 20th century. Everybody knows about the assasination of the Austrian Archduke. People with little knowledge of history know that this "triggered" the outbreak of the First World War, but cannot explain why. Barbara Tuchman's famous work "The Guns of August" was for me the foremost work on the subject and a great read as well. However, using newly discovered material, Fromkin surpasses Tuchman in providing the most compelling analysis of the true origins of the war. It is as if he has put the final piece in the jig saw puzzle that Barbara Tuchman almost finished. In her day, without the most recently discovered historical materials, her version of events was the best. Now we have come full circle. The leaders of Versailles were not as badly informed in blaming Germany above all for starting the war as was fashionable to think. This does not excuse the rather bad peace they imposed which played such a large role in triggering the next world war, which was in large part a continuation of the first after a two decade pause. Nevertheless, lessons abound for todays leaders about how a military elite can influence and even compel a country to self destructive wars without strong and competent leadership. Kaiser Wilhelm was too discredited and Kaiser Franz Josef too old and weak to stand in the way of their military chiefs who wrongly thought that to delay war would lead to inevitable doom for their respective countries. In manipulating their monarchical masters, they wrought the very destruction on these two central european empires that they thought they were avoiding. I have a great interest in this subject, and felt that a revolutionary light had been turned on this very old issue the implications of which will take quite some time to sort out in historical and literary circles. A must read for any historian interested in this era and these issues.
| 
