New York Times Current History: The European War from the Beginning to March 1915, Vol 1, No. 2: Who Began the War, and Why?

In Short

This book functions as a documentary time capsule, capturing the rhetoric of 1914 as the Great War erupted across Europe. It compiles speeches from Kaiser Wilhelm II, British ministers like Sir Edward Grey, and parliamentary leaders from across the political spectrum, alongside chilling official accounts of the invasion of Belgium. By juxtaposing the German claim of a "defensive" struggle against the Entente’s portrayal of a fight against German "Napoleonism," the volume provides an unfiltered look at how nations constructed their moral arguments. It remains an essential artifact for understanding the volatile mix of nationalism, treaty obligations, and propaganda that fueled the conflict.

The Story

The narrative arc begins in the tense, final days of July 1914, when the diplomatic machinery of Europe shifts from negotiation to mobilization. The book opens with the German perspective, framing the conflict as a "purely defensive" war forced upon a peaceful nation. Chancellor Theobald von Bethmann-Hollweg and Kaiser Wilhelm II argue that Germany is a victim of a "tightening ring" of hostile neighbors. They contend that Russia’s "treacherous" mobilization and the aggressive encirclement by France and Great Britain left them no choice but to strike first to ensure national survival. The German government insists that the war was not of their making, but rather a tragic necessity imposed by a world that envied German industry and success.

Contrasting this, the British and French accounts characterize the war as a moral crusade against an aggressive, militaristic bully. Sir Edward Grey’s addresses to the House of Commons pivot from a desperate search for peace to the grim recognition that British support for Belgium is an unavoidable, honorable commitment. The story reaches a flashpoint with the violation of Belgian neutrality, which British leaders frame as a definitive test of international law. As the conflict escalates, the narrative expands to include the mobilization of the British Empire and the recruitment of massive volunteer armies. The tone shifts from diplomatic maneuvering to the recruitment speech, with Earl Kitchener and Prime Minister H.H. Asquith calling upon the nation to defend "the liberties of Europe" against a modern, ruthless force they identify with the historical "scourge of God."

The middle sections of the book descend into the dark, conflicting realities of the front lines. The German authorities justify their harsh treatment of the Belgian population—including the destruction of cities like Leuven—by alleging a "treacherous" franc-tireur war conducted by civilians. They maintain that these "severest measures" were forced upon them for self-preservation. Conversely, the Allied perspective highlights these actions as evidence of German barbarism, asserting that treaties have become nothing more than "scraps of paper."

The book concludes by examining the internal political fractures within the belligerent nations, notably the struggle of the German Socialists to reconcile their anti-war ideology with the reality of national defense. Similarly, it tracks British dissenters like Ramsay MacDonald, who begin as vocal critics of the government’s interventionist policy but eventually shift to supporting the national war effort. The arc ends not with a resolution, but with the grim, resolute acceptance that this is a "mighty conflict" that will be long, bloody, and decisive.

How It Unfolds

The diplomatic failure The book opens with the frantic, unsuccessful efforts of European leaders to localize the Austro-Serbian crisis. It highlights the conflicting telegrams and formal warnings that preceded the collapse of peace.

The call to arms Germany and Britain both appeal to their citizens through speeches that emphasize national honor and destiny. Leaders frame the conflict as a struggle for survival against external forces that have long plotted their downfall.

The Belgian crisis The narrative shifts to the violation of Belgian neutrality, which becomes the central moral pivot for the British case. Official reports detail the German ultimatum and the subsequent military penetration of the territory.

The shift to total war The focus turns to the human and logistical cost of the conflict, including the recruitment of hundreds of thousands of men. The speeches transition from defensive justifications to long-term calls for total victory.

The moral battlefield The text moves into the allegations of atrocities and the counter-arguments regarding the laws of war. Both sides exchange accusations of barbarism, framing their enemies as transgressors against the standards of civilization.

The internal opposition The final chapters explore how radical socialist and pacifist voices are absorbed into the war effort. The book closes on the grim realization that the war is an existential necessity that transcends political ideology.

The People

Kaiser Wilhelm II appears as the central, mercurial figure of the German cause. He is portrayed as a man who desired peace but was ultimately compelled by "mighty fate" to wield the sword to protect his nation's independence. Beside him, Chancellor Theobald von Bethmann-Hollweg acts as the intellectual architect of the German defense, consistently reframing the invasion of Belgium as a tactical necessity and arguing that the Triple Entente is fueled by envy and hypocrisy.

In the British camp, Sir Edward Grey represents the reluctant diplomat. He is shown struggling to keep the peace until the very last hour, eventually accepting that the moral obligation to Belgium and the balance of power in Europe leave him no other choice. Prime Minister H.H. Asquith serves as the voice of national resolve, traveling the country to rally the Welsh, Irish, and Scots, framing the war as a battle for the very principle of nationality and the rights of smaller states.

Earl Kitchener embodies the military imperative of the British state. His speeches are pragmatic and grim, focused on the immediate, colossal task of transforming a volunteer force into a modern army. Contrasting these establishment figures is Ramsay MacDonald, who begins as a critic of the government's foreign policy. His transformation—from an opponent of the war to one who urges men to fight for "victory"—highlights the intense pressure placed on political dissenters as the reality of the war solidifies. Finally, the Belgian people appear as the tragic, suffering victims, caught between the military machinery of the major powers and the brutal realities of an occupation that treats them as combatants in a "treacherous" insurrection.

In Its Own Voice

"Should all his efforts prove vain and should the sword be forced into our hands we will take the field with a clear conscience in the knowledge that we did not seek war."

(Theobald von Bethmann-Hollweg, in a speech to the German people at the outset of the war, justifies the necessity of the conflict.)

"Just for a word, NEUTRALITY, a word which in war times has been so often disregarded; just for A SCRAP OF PAPER, Great Britain is going to make war on a kindred nation."

(The German Chancellor’s response, as cited in British documents, captures the stark divergence between the two nations' views on treaty obligations.)

What It's Really About

The book explores the philosophical and political disintegration of the European order, centering on the question of whether a state’s "necessity" can ever override its moral and legal obligations. It pits the German conception of the State as a self-contained, supreme entity against the British and French assertion that there exists a common humanity and a set of international laws to which all powers must adhere. Underlying the political drama is a profound anxiety about the nature of power: is justice merely the advantage of the stronger, or are there fundamental rights that even the greatest empires must respect? The argument forces the reader to confront how easily domestic political dissent is silenced by the drumbeat of patriotism and how readily the language of "honor" is deployed to justify unprecedented levels of violence.

Why Read It Today

This volume is essential for anyone interested in the raw, unpolished origins of the 20th century’s most defining conflict. Reading it today feels like peering directly into the collective consciousness of a world on the brink. There is a haunting quality to the prose; you are witnessing the moment when the "old world" finally burns, and the participants are still trying to explain why the fire started. It is not an objective history, and that is precisely its value. It offers no hindsight, only the immediate, desperate, and often contradictory rationalizations of men who had no idea how long or how destructive the conflict would become.

Readers should be prepared for the dense, Victorian-era rhetoric and the unabashedly nationalistic tone that permeates every page. The text is thick with the period-specific attitudes of 1914, including blatant propaganda and the rigid, often exclusionary concepts of "civilization" and "honor" that defined the era. Because it was written in the heat of the first months, it lacks the broader perspective provided by later historians, but it compensates with a visceral urgency. If you want to understand how a civilization can convince itself that total war is a defensive necessity, this collection is an unmatched record. It stays with you, not because of its accuracy, but because it captures the chilling clarity with which the leadership of the world led its people into a catastrophic, century-defining abyss.