Download Summer/Autumn Edition 2014

Wilson‘s
Retrospective
Summer/Autumn Edition 2014
THINK YOU‘RE A HISTORY
GENIUS?
THINK YOU‘RE BRITAIN‘S YOUNG
HISTORIAN OF THE YEAR 2015?
Prove it! Enter the History Department‘s essay writing competitions.
You can choose one of the following topics:
1) Any aspect of British involvement in the Second World
War (KS3 & GCSE/A Level categories)
2) Any aspect of the First World War (KS3 only)
3)
Work on any local history theme (KS3 and A Level)
What Should My Question Be?
Formulate a question which begins with one of the following
stems:
How important was .... ?
To what extent did .... ?
How significant was …. ?
How successful was …. ?
CLOSING DATE: MONDAY 16TH JULY
2015.
CONTENTS
Foreword from the Editors
Page 4
The History of the AK-47— A German Story
Page 5
The Battle of Mons
Page 6
What is History?
Page 9
Che Guevara: A Divisive Revolutionary
Page 10
The Ming Dynasty
Page 12
The Emperor Nerva
Page 13
Lessons From Auschwitz
Page 14
The Columbian Exchange
Page 18
Historical Factfile: Lord Kitchener
Page 19
Escaping to Israel
Page 20
Wilson‘s History: Harold Auten VC
Page 21
The Birth of the NHS
Page 22
The July Crisis of 1914
Page 24
Notable Anniversaries of 2014
Page 26
Can you help?
If you‘d like to help Wilson‘s Retrospective by writing articles, please contact us at:
[email protected] OR
[email protected]
Hello and Welcome
The year 2014 has been a thoroughly interesting one. Not only is Wilson‘s on the cusp of celebrating its quatercentennary, but Britain as a
whole has experienced a very historic twelve months. From commemorating the 70th anniversary of the D-Day landings and the centenary of
the outbreak of the First World War in the Summer, to being on the
brink of separation with the Scottish Independence Referendum in the
Autumn, this country has witnessed many important events.
Thus this edition of Retrospective takes a look at arguably one of the
most significant periods in both Wilson‘s and Britain‘s recent history:
the first few months of the First World War. The causes of the conflict
still divide Military Historians to this day, and Andrew explores this debate at the end of this edition. But before that, we take a look at the Battle of Mons, the first engagement of the war fought by British troops; our
Historical Factfile looks at a man who was instrumental in encouraging
millions of British men to join up, Lord Kitchener; and our Wilson‘s
History section charts the life of old Wilsonian, and Victoria Crosswinner, Harold Auten.
We also bring you Phil, Alastair, Kieran and Jack‘s experiences of the
‗Lessons From Auschwitz Project‘, as well as fascinating pieces on the
origin of pizza, the AK-47, the Ming Dynasty of China and Che Guevara.
We hope you enjoy your read.
Jack Nicholls and Andrew McDonald
Editors of Wilson’s Retrospective
4
The History of the AK47- A German Story by Patrick Kirby
The inspiration for this Russian assault rifle was actually
a Nazi German assault rifle called the Sturmgewehr 44.
This was considered to be the first true assault rifle and
was developed by the Nazis during the Second World
War. The designer Hugo Schmisser highlighted a gap in
the gun market where most guns were being designed for
either long range or very short, close quarter firing. The
problem of having no gun to satisfy battles that took place
at
medium
range
was
highlighted
by
the
Gewehrprüfungskommission (German, Small Arms
Proofing Committee). They concluded that many battles
The Sturmgewehr
took place at less than 2km so a new rifle was needed to
conquer this firing range. This would give German soldiers three main advantages: they could carry
more ammunition, gain the physical benefit of using a lighter weapon and importantly increased firepower.
Hitler was very much opposed to the new project because he felt it added extra strain to an
already complicated plan. He did not want a
new weapon to be launched to the front line in
such little numbers and there were not
enough suppliers to produce the volume that
the German Army required.
The AK-47, one of the most iconic weapons of the last 100 years.
However the real story of the AK47 only begins once the Germans were retreating through Poland
and into their own homeland as a result of the resurgence of the Red Army towards the end of WW2.
The Russians became increasingly in contact with German soldiers and their equipment- particularly the STG44. A man,
called Mikhail Kalashnikov, was part of the Red Army during
the war but was sadly injured while on patrol in a tank. He was
sent to hospital and it is during his time spent on his bed that
he began designing the gun which would go on to be the most
iconic weapon of the 20th and 21st century. He understood the
need for a light and powerful weapon but he also added his
own touch of making the gun very robust. The first designs
were tested in 1946, known at the time as the AK46 but was
Mikhail Kalashnikov (1919-2013)
later tested in 1947 following the results of the experiments conducted the previous year. The gun went into full scale production in 1947 and the name of AK47 has
stayed ever since. (A family gun tree from the AK47 has been created subsequently, with the latest
gun being the AK200).
The AK47 has survived for over 60 years as one of the most recognisable guns in the world and has
been manufactured more times than any other assault rifle on the planet. The gun has been used
across Africa, Asia and in the last ten years, the Middle East. The gun is even on the flag of Mozambique, where the gun was a sign of the liberalisation struggle.
Unfortunately due to the features of the gun it is now widely used by ‘child soldiers’ due to its small
number of moving parts (8) and high power to weight ratio. Mr Kalashnikov said, in response to the
increased use of the AK47 across the world, ‘this a weapon of defence, not a weapon of offence.
And that I intended it to be used a defence of the motherland (Russia)’.
5
The Battle of Mons by Jack Nicholls
This year has been full of many significant anniversaries, from the seventieth anniversary of the D-Day
landings and Operation Market Garden to the bimillenial of the death of Augustus Caesar, the first Emperor of Rome. But perhaps the most significant event for Britain has been the centenary of the start of
one of the bloodiest conflicts of her history, the First World War.
Beginning with the assassination of the AustroHungarian Archduke Franz Ferdinand in Sarajevo on
28th June 1914, the war would escalate into fierce
fighting on numerous continents. Such names as
Ypres, the Somme, Passchendaele and Gallipoli
would become synonymous with the carnage that followed. However the first major engagement between
British and German forces on the Western front is
clouded in obscurity. Unlike the industrial maelstroms
produced by later battles, this relatively unknown clash
Advancing German infantry 1914.
saw the old ‗Contemptibles‘ of the British Expeditionary Force (B.E.F.) engage the Germans in open country. It saw some of the last cavalry charges and it was
the first time that British troops had fought on European soil for ninety-nine years.
The Early Stages
The German Schlieffen Plan, which aimed to cut through Belgium, capture Paris and defeat the French
within 6 weeks, was slowing down. Although the French had suffered appalling casualties in the Battles of
the Ardennes - losing 27,000 men killed on 22nd August alone - the Belgians had put up unexpectedly
stiff resistance, with their fortress city of Liege in particular proving to be very tough going.
Nevertheless the Germans were advancing fast, and in
front of them was the inadequately small British Expeditionary Force, which consisted of about 120,000 regular soldiers, only 70,000 of whom were to be involved
at Mons. The Germans had committed nearly 1.5 million men to the fight on the Western Front however,
and the Kaiser himself had remarked upon the
―contemptuous‖ size of the force that Britain had put
into the field.
But the ‗old Contemptibles‘ was not a new force. Its
"A" Company of the 4th Battalion, Royal Fusiliers, resting in the
size was appropriate for its role of policing the Empire,
town square at Mons before entering the line prior to the Battle of
which it had done for decades theretofore. NevertheMons.
less it was highly out of sorts for the scale of the fighting
of the huge continental war in which it now found itself. Bismarck too had observed that if the British Army landed and attacked Germany he would send a patrol of Berlin policemen to arrest it. It was thus
clear that in order to be taken seriously in this new conflict Britain would need to mobilise
fast. But right now her pre-war regular Army was all she had ready for combat.
66
The Battle
Despite her small size the B.E.F. was a superbly-trained, well-armed force of professionals; it would be
able to put in a good account of itself against a modern, mechanised European army, which would provide a very different test from that of the Boers or the Zulus.
On 22nd August the B.E.F. began its advance towards the battlefront, aligning itself on the left flank of
the French Fifth Army and thence into its first fighting on the continent of Europe since 1815. The force
was headed by Field Marshal Sir John French
and consisted of 4 infantry divisions, 1 cavalry
division, 70,000 men and 300 guns. However it
was thinly spread over 30 miles of front. Heading towards it was the German First Army,
which numbered 160,000 men in 8 infantry divisions and 3 cavalry divisions. The Germans
had also brought with them 600 guns.
Agreeing to hold the line for 24 hours along the
Mons-Condé Canal south-east of the small
French town of Mons, in order to allow the
French Fifth Army on their right to take up defensive positions, the B.E.F. hastily drew up defensive perimeters along the northern bank.
The B.E.F. faced an entire German Army.
On 23rd August the Germans launched their attacks on the British positions. The rapid rate of the British fire convinced many Germans that they were attacking machine guns. But they were not. Nonetheless the Germans were repelled again and again, suffering hundreds of casualties to superb fire from the
British rifle and artillery positions along the bank
of the canal; the artillery were often firing over
open sights. However the British positions gradually became untenable and soon the Germans
were gaining ground.
Just east of the British positions, at Havre, the
German 17th Division crossed the canal and
turned westwards. The next day, the 24th August,
the Germans attacked across an area of artificial
water courses, ditches and oyster beds, which lay
to the left of the British positions. Meanwhile the
"L" Battery, Royal Horse Artillery
British continued to resist heavy pressure along
the bank of the canal. French‘s force was in danger of being surrounded, if not overwhelmed. He thus
ordered a general withdrawal.
The B.E.F. was not the only Allied force that was now retreating; the French Fifth Army was moving
back from the line of the River Sambre. At Mons a successful rearguard action was fought around the
town of Elouges and the B.E.F. and French Armies began what was to be one of the biggest retreats in
history. They would not stop and fight until the River Marne, around 136 miles south-west of the initial
battlefront; British forces would not re-enter Mons until the last few weeks of the war in 1918.
7
Aftermath
The battle of Mons may have been a tactical German victory, but the British had successfully checked the
German advance for a day, and had managed to allow the French Fifth Army, under the command of General Charles Lanrezac, to first form defensive positions, and then retreat safely in order to block the Germans from successfully enveloping Paris.
At the battle of Mons the British suffered 1,600 casualties and their German counterparts an estimated
2,000 men. Compared to later battles of the war, such as the battles of the Somme, Passchendaele and Verdun, this was a minor engagement. However it was of huge strategic significance as it helped to slow the
German advance down, thereby preventing them from successfully implementing the Schlieffen Plan and
defeating France.
The First Victoria Cross
Such was the ferocity of the fighting at Mons that five Victoria
Crosses were won during the fighting, all on 23rd August. The
first recipient of these was Lieutenant Maurice Dease, who successfully maintained rapid and effective fire at his machine-gun position after the first gunner was killed - despite being wounded several times. He
died shortly after being carried to safety. His gun was then manned by Private Sidney Godley, who continued to fire until he ran out of ammunition.
It is believed that he then dismantled the gun and threw the pieces into the
canal before being captured. Godley also received the Victoria Cross; he
survived the war.
Lieutenant Maurice Dease of the 4th Battalion, Royal Fusiliers. For his actions at Mons,
he became one of the first two recipients of
the Victoria Cross in the First World War.
The Angels of Mons
Journalist Arthur Machen reported in the London Evening News
that British troops had seen the apparition of St. George in the sky
over the battlefield, summoning the spirits of the dead men of Agincourt to repel the advancing Germans. Another version of this
story claims that the troops actually saw guardian angels. Despite
this variation the story was swallowed by a British public only too
willing to believe in spiritual tales, as the scale of British losses
were gradually becoming clear to them. Machen later tried to disprove the story, but the legend had been born; he was too late.
Recommended Reading:
The Great Retreat of 1914: From Mons to the Marne by Spencer
Jones
Mons: The Retreat to Victory by John Terraine
8
What is History? by Charlie Francombe
To write history one must first be able to comprehend it‘s very nature: it is not the study of the past but a deciphering of ambitions and intentions.
All information has a purpose; for that is why it is written. However for the information to be of use this purpose must be known
and it is therefore the historians‘ role to disentail the aims of the
author to discover the fact. This sounds simplistic in theory but
examine the case of St Augustine‘s confessions: what was intended to be a truthful account of his life transpires into a elaborate
labyrinth of exaggeration and understatement, far from the honesty of the saint he is proclaimed to be. If the fact is isolated from
the purpose we are left with a history of number not a history of
the people, the history has ceased to exist and has become a science. This ―Cut and paste‖ as Carr labels it fails to educate but
instead reports, removing the skills of history.
The Confessions of St. Augustine
The notion of history is to tell of the past without influence and bias, however this is a task which remains impossible as a result of human nature; everyone has allegiances and beliefs which impacts their perception of events. A
notable example from modern history is the involvement of ground
troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. Despite this comprehension of the
human condition, the notion of set roles and ideas emerges, for it is
seen as wrong to hold the view or an account of the past which runs
counterintuitive to the prepaid narrative. This form of academic restriction has had a detrimental impact on the discussion of the holocaust and other recent genocides, preventing true understanding and
meaning to emerge. It is therefore viewed that history is used as a tool
to voice the concerns and ideas of
Do we really have a clear picture of the wars in today through the events of the past,
Iraq and Afghanistan?
for he who controls the past controls
the future. A prime example of this comes through the emancipation proclamation of 1863. It is often stated the USA underwent a transgenic shift in race perception when the Act was passed, however this is simply a fallacy since the ideas
which contributed to the freeing of the slaves derived from the founding fathers
―all men are created equal‖, not all races are equal. The greatest threat to the
notion of history however is underlined by its very nature, it must be made.
Winston Churchill once proclaimed ―History is written by the victors‖ and this
is true, we don't hear the side of those who lose for they do not hold the power.
If we did our understanding would be much different; Wat Tyler would have
been the voice of the people and not the thorn of the throne.
It is therefore imperative that when writing history your terms of stance are deThe Emancipation Proclamation,
fined as well as your circumstance, this will allow for a comprehensive decoding
process of the events. Only by understanding the nature of history can history be written to it‘s greatest and fullest.
However history has become tainted and has assumed the position of the propaganda tool, thus if you truly value
history you must brake the mould and challenge the established conditions. Then and only then will you come
close to understanding, what is history?
9
Che Guevara: A Divisive Revolutionary by Muhammad Malhi
Che Guevara is a truly rare figure in history; he is revered as a
quintessential icon of leftist movements but he is also reviled as
a ruthless fanatic whose gentry is a hyperbolic myth. He is seen
as a revolutionary fighter as well as a spokesman for a failing
ideology; the people who took inspiration from him regard
him as a noble martyr while his detractors deride him as a man
with ―Robespierre‖ mentality. What cannot be disputed is that
his life was revolutionary and his face is now crystallised as a
symbol of rebellion.
Guevara was a Marxist idealist and a prolific writer who
sought to unite Latin America and the rest of the developing
world through violent struggle, and to disintegrate the nationalism, poverty and disparity that had bled it for centuries. As a
young medical student, he travelled throughout South America
and he witnessed a continent ravaged by inequality; this experiChe Guevara (1928—1967)
ence radicalised Guevara and gave birth to an aggressive endeavour to overthrow the Capitalist system which he perceived was decaying Latin America. The enlightening experience amalgamated with his deep interest in Marxism to convince him that the only
solution to Southern and Central America‘s problems was combative revolution; he proclaimed the
famous words of Marx as he strived to ―let the ruling classes tremble at a Communistic Revolution‖.
He would go onto join Fidel Castro‘s ―26th July
Movement‖ with the intention of removing the
American-backed Fulgenico Batista from power in
Cuba. His tactical success is epitomised by his rise
to power as he, an Argentine among a plethora of
Cubans, became the second-in-command and his
strategic ability played a critical role in ousting Batista.
The military ingenuity of Guevara came to the fore
when he led the seven week march towards Havana. In the final days of 1958 Guevara decisively
Havana March, 5th May, 1960
led his ―suicide squad‖ in the attack on Santa
Clara; within twelve hours the defeated Batista left Cuba and Castro took full command. The victory is
rightfully regarded as a ―remarkable tour de force in modern warfare‖ as Guevara‘s forces eventually
won despite being outnumbered ten soldiers to one. It was this virtuoso skill in securing the fall of a
corrupt dictator that announced to the world that this was a resolute man who was willing to throw
down the gauntlet to the bourgeoisie. His bravery seemed to project itself so strongly that it even
earned the respect of the enemies he fought in the war.
10
This can be seen through Iglesias‘s recount of the time when he was wounded in battle: "Che ran out
to me, defying the bullets, threw me over his shoulder. The guards didn't dare fire at him ... later they
told me he made a great impression on them when they saw him run out… ignoring the danger, they
didn't dare shoot." In one sense Guevara was an anti-imperialist idealist, the empathetic practitioner of
medicine who was able to employ the pen and machine gun with strikingly equal skill; he was the revolutionary who rejected the comfort of middle class splendour to pursue a life where he would challenge the imperialism and capitalism which he believed was responsible for the Third World‘s underdevelopment. Guevara was and continues to be a hero for many with Nelson Mandela lauding him as
"an inspiration for every human being who loves freedom".
Guevara is also loathed as a brutal individual whose martyrdom is a myth.
His reputation as a harsh disciplinarian has long been scrutinised. The period from 1958 to 1959 saw the executions of hundreds of people nationwide as Guevara gave the orders to punish Batista‘s officials; he had now
become a ―hardened man‖ who was not fazed by the humanitarian implications of the death penalty. This has led many, such as Armando Valladares,
to claim that he did not afford others a systematic legal process. Yet, this
does not suggest that he was a callous executioner; Jon Lee Anderson has
emphasised that "I have yet to find a single credible source pointing to a
case where Che executed an innocent‖. Notions that he was a violent killer
are unsupported. Guevara‘s main ambition was to bring revolution across
Brave freedom fighter or brutal
Latin America and it must be argued that he failed in achieving his ultimate murderer?
aim. The attempted revolution in Congo was deemed to be a disaster with
Guevara himself describing his recount of it as ―a history of failure‖. He then embarked on fomenting
a revolution in Bolivia and this would prove to be his last endeavour as he was executed by Bolivian
troops. Guevara was unable to sow the seeds of revolution across his beloved Latin America and
hence, by failing to achieve his major ambition, he can be described as a revolutionary who failed. It
must be acknowledged that Guevara advocated Communism, an ideology that would go onto suffer an
abrupt collapse. Under the banner of Marxism-Leninism regimes across the world, whether they be in
China, Russia or Cambodia, claimed the lives of millions of people; the Revolutions of 1989 signified
that Communism fell amidst universal denunciation.
Che Guevara is one of history‘s most idiosyncratic personalities. He is not the gracious saint that
some people worship nor is he the murderer that others despise. He was an ideologue who was courageous when fighting with his comrades and a guerrilla whose coldly analytical mind encouraged him to
be merciless when confronted with his enemies. As he was surrounded by Bolivian soldiers in the Yuro ravine and facing death, his final words echoed what he truly was: ―"Shoot me, you coward! You are
only going to kill a man!" Guevara was a man who lived a revolutionary life and he was prepared to die
for what he believed in; he was the idealistic romantic who was willing to use violence to create an impossible utopia. His voracious tenacity led him to his romantic death.
Recommended reading:
Che Guevara: A Revolutionary Life by Jon Lee Anderson
Companero: The Life and Death of Che Guevara by Jorge Castaneda
The Motorcycle Diaries by Che Guevara
11
The Ming Dynasty by Douglas Ledgerwood
The Ming dynasty ruled China from 1368 to 1644, succeeding the Mongol-led Yuan Dynasty which had ruled since
1271. It was a period of impressive Chinese economic and military advances, which also boasted a refined culture and
an efficient political system, especially during that time period.
The dynasty was founded and named by Zhu Yuanzhang who is also known by
his ‗era name‘ Hongwu.
Zhu began his reign by sending his 26 sons each to a province to control the
court in that province. In doing this, he was able to command a more complete
control over China. Being from a humble background, Zhu recognised the
hardship that the peasants in China faced and was keen to ensure that they were
not mistreated as he had been in his childhood. He therefore introduced the
Yellow Records and the Fish Scale Records which each made sure that the government received all the land tax they were owed and to affirm that peasants
would not lose their land.
Following Zhu Yuanzhang‘s death and a coup to overthrow his grandson, Zhu
Di came into power as the Yongle Emperor and a ―second founding‖ - a prosperous period for China - followed.
The middle of the Ming reign saw a reversal in trade policy. Foreign trade was
now permitted and the private merchant trade that resulted led to prosperity for
everyone in China. The merchants who were originally at the bottom of China‘s
social hierarchy enjoyed education in culture and literacy from their involvement in the trading industry. The empire effectively became a free market during this time – a huge step away from no foreign trade at all. It allowed the poor
Zhu Yuanzhang
to experience a wealthier lifestyle which would have never before been possible, despite Zhu Yuanzhang‘s sympathy for peasants and those at the bottom of the social
ladder.
During this period, capitalism and urbanisation developed through the
growth of the handicraft industry. This growth was largely down to the
exports of various commodities such as silk, tobacco, alcohol, porcelain, crops and others to mostly Middle-Eastern countries. Later on, a
return to a ban on shipping goods and the policy of restraining commerce hindered the expansion of the economy and the progress of capitalism.
China developed a wonderful culture during the period of Ming rule. It
was the most literate society at the time and produced great works of
literacy and philosophy through Wang Yangming‘s work on
‗philosophy of the mind‘ and 3
Chinese Red Seal Trading Ship
masterpieces of Chinese literature in Journey to the West, Outlaws of the Marsh and Romance of Three
Kingdoms. In the arts, China put on grand displays of its wonderful porcelain
and calligraphy. Some of the works from this period are considered the most
precious in the world. The Chinese would often offer its porcelain to countries
abroad when on trade expeditions.
Despite being seemingly comfortable to be a citizen in the Ming dynasty, its fall
was ultimately due to the rebellions which were a result of people not being
able to pay for food. Their fear of the court and respect for the court marshals
had waned towards the end of the Ming era which contributed to people‘s willingness to revolt in various places across China.
The Ming dynasty paved the way for China as we know it today,
especially in the cultural sense with their porcelain and other works of art which have survived the test of
time. It was an intriguing and innovative time for China and one in which they cemented themselves as a
world power.
12
The Emperor Nerva by Tom Coates
One of the more controversial opinions which I hold, and
one which I have ardently defended on multiple occasions,
is that Nerva was in fact the second most successful Emperor of the First Fourteen Emperors of Ancient Rome –
that is: the Julio-Claudian dynasty; the three less related
emperors from the Year of the Four Emperors (69A.D.)
and the Flavian dynasty; as well as Nerva, Trajan and Hadrian. The most successful emperor of these 14 and indeed of all time is indisputably Augustus – his reforms survived intact and unamended for over 400 years and aspects
of the system which he founded survive, albeit modified to
the point of unrecognisability, in the Catholic Church of
the modern day.
Augustus, who ruled from 27 BC to 14 AD,
The second most successful emperor, however, is strictly was perhaps the most successful Emperor.
up for debate, with the obvious candidates being characters
such as Trajan, Vespasian and even Claudius. The less obvious candidate here, and the
one which I feel was most successful, even if unintentionally,
was the short-lived emperor Nerva. Whilst emperors such as
Trajan made military gains, Vespasian brought short-term
peace and Claudius introduced the Imperial bureaucracy
proper, Nerva guaranteed something more important: by
adopting Trajan, who was completely unrelated to him, as a
successor, he set a precedent which would lead to peace for
the next hundred years of the empire: the example of adopting
a successor based on their competence and skills rather than
familial relations, and as a result led to a very prodigious 100
years of relative tranquillity which would only end with the
Year of the Five Emperors in 193 AD. This precedent, even if
Nerva ruled for only two years, from it was set only as a result of Nerva‘s hand being forced due to
96 to 98 AD.
Trajan‘s military predominance, is still one of the most important examples set in the history of the empire and one which was used by Nerva himself to prevent his overthrow by the pre-eminent antagonist to his rule at the time: that is to
say, Trajan himself. Nerva is not an emperor a lot of people have heard of or place any real value upon, but he was directly responsible for one of the longest periods of internal
peace in the Roman Empire.
13
The ‗Lessons From Auschwitz Project‘
On Wednesday 5th February 2014, Phil, Alastair, Kieran and Jack Nicholls
I accompanied the Lessons From Auschwitz Project—which is run by
the Holocaust Educational Trust— on a trip to Poland, during which we visited
Oswiecim, Auschwitz 1 and Auschwitz 2 (the latter of which is more commonly known
as Auschwitz-Birkenau). It was a very moving and thought-provoking visit, and one that
we were all very glad to have attended.
We went from Krakow airport initially to the town of Oswiecim - once a town with a thriving
Jewish community before the war with a population of 8000. It was a sobering experience to Alastair Prince
discover that the great synagogue had been destroyed and the Jewish population was now completely gone because of
the Holocaust. It demonstrated how easily an authoritarian state could destroy an entire culture and emphasised the
importance of stopping prejudice in the modern age as genocide still exists, for example in Rwanda and Bosnia.
We paid a brief visit to Oswiecim.
From there we went to the Auschwitz 1. Entering the concentration
camp, you pass under the famous ‗Arbeit macht frei‘ sign and you
realise that many prisoners never saw the reverse side of it. We first
moved into a barrack which showed pictures of Auschwitz during the
war and a particular image – a satellite image of the camp - struck me
particularly. We were told by the guide how the pictures were taken
by allied bombers, and that they were told not to bomb the rail lines
because they were not military objectives- leading to the deaths of
many thousands of people. It showed to me how bystanders had a
great effect on the Holocaust as many just turned a blind eye to the
murder in order to achieve their own aims.
We then went into a second building that had areas where various brutal punishments occurred. We passed a cubicle
where prisoners would be forced to stand for hours on end, and we realised that the Holocaust was not just about gas
chambers, but other injustices as well, injustices that attempted to strip people‘s dignity away. Outside, we walked into
the yard to the ‗wall of death‘. The silence here seemed eerie in a place where so many people had been executed, and
you could realise the human cost of the Holocaust, not just the statistics, as although the events occurred long in the past, you could empathise with the victims, as you could see the place where they died. We
moved to outside the fence and we saw the gallows where the camp
commandant, Rudolf Hoess was executed. We were told that often
the perpetrators of the Holocaust were just normal people – Hoess
himself had 5 children and a wife. This showed to us clearly the ease
of how such a tragedy could occur, and again highlighted the importance of stopping prejudice. We then viewed the gas chamber,
which evoked similar emotions to the wall of death – I personally was
shocked to be standing in the place where so many people had died, Thousands of ordinary items taken by the Germans
and was humbled to have seen the last sight of so many victims of the
were on display.
Holocaust.
Finally, in another barrack, there were on display the belongings of the victims taken from them at ‗Kanada‘. Many of
the belongings were akin to those of today: glasses, dolls, shoes. In such a way, it showed that the victims
were not just a statistic but were just like us. The vast array of shoes in a room belonged to thousands was
the result of just a few days worth of hunting on the part of the Germans. This made it all the more poignant, as you could imagine that so many people that you know now would have been in a similar situation...
14
...After this we visited Auschwitz- Birkenau, the site of the largest death camp maintained by the
Nazis during WW2. Initially we climbed the tower of the infamous guardhouse, which made it Phil Knott
clear just how large the camp was; huts stretched as far as the eye could see, and we were told that an extension had
been planned for the camp (although this had never been built.) We then walked around the site of the camp (led by
our able guide Pasha), viewing the atrocious conditions experienced by all inmates; from the cold wooden huts in which they
slept 4 to a bed to the toilet hut, where a job as a
‗scheisskommando‘ (toilet cleaner) was valued by inmates simply
because they could talk to people. Following this we walked
alongside the long rail tracks deeper into the camp, passing the
ruins of the camp on both sides and an iconic rail cart which
would have transported thousands of Jews inside. The atmosphere was difficult to describe; the sun was shining but it was eerily quiet, with everyone in silence and no birds to be heard. Our
tour of Auschwitz-Birkenau continued as we visited the ruins of
the destroyed gas chambers, and then Kanada 1 – where the
properties of prisoners were confiscated and sorted. Where this
stood there was now an exhibition which contained one particuThe trip finished with a candle-lit ceremony.
larly powerful section – walls plastered with the life stories and
family photos of people who were killed in Auschwitz. This had such an impact because it really humanised the victims
– figures such as 6 million casualties do not really mean much but these stories of lives which were so tragically cut short
was yet another reminder of the horror which took place.
The trip ended with a ceremony which took place at the end of the rail tracks in the trees of Auschwitz, in the shadow
of the Jewish memorial and not far from the ruins of the crematoria. By this point the sun had gone down; it was cold
and dark which only added to the atmosphere. We had been accompanied on the trip by Rabbi Barry Marcus, who led
a memorial service which included some of his own Jewish prayer. The service also included numerous readings by
participants in the course, including two Wilson‘s students who read ‗A dream‘ by Abraham Kopolovitz – a young Jewish boy who wrote a poem of hope and dreams whilst living in the terrible conditions of the ghetto. Following this, every
person lit a candle they had been given and placed it in the surrounding area – on the tracks or the memorial. The contrast of the flickering flames against the cold darkness was truly a sight to behold and left everyone in a quiet, reflective
mood.
Lessons...
Over the following weeks we were able to reflect on our trip to Poland and some of the lessons that could be taken
from Auschwitz. When regarding the Holocaust it is important to personalise everyone involved – from the victims to
the perpetrators, as this gives us a greater understanding of the events and how it really affected people. The question
of how such an atrocity could occur – a purge which spread right across Europe and required the involvement of millions, from Greek officials to French train drivers and the SS guards themselves – is one which is still difficult to answer,
and will forever be thus. But it is nonetheless a stark reminder of exactly what can happen when the worst of human
nature manifests itself; when people allow themselves to be consumed by fear, and anger, and hatred, when regimes
which thrive on conflict and racism are allowed to come into power. The slippery slope which began when Hitler rose
to power in 1933 and descended into the removal of Jewish rights and eventually the persecution and mass genocides
of the early 1940s shows just how quickly hatred and discrimination can become the norm, and people will do what the
regime says simply because it has been normalised to them. It is our duty in the modern world to ensure that we continue to maintain standards of equality and do not permit the rise of far right movements which thrive on hatred – whilst
the Holocaust is extreme, it is nonetheless an example of what can happen when prejudice is left unchecked.
And yet the Holocaust provides us, or me at least, with another feeling as well. It was in the sunshine that beat down
upon the green fields alongside the wooden huts. It was in the gentle breeze rustling through the trees and the flickering
of the candlelight in the darkness, illuminating the rail tracks down to that famous gatehouse. And that‘s the sense of
hope that pervades amongst humanity, even when there is no reason to hope. On the site of Auschwitz-Birkenau an
excavation found a diary which had been buried by a Sonderkommando – one of the Jews charged with burning the
bodies of his comrades. In it he tells of the horrors he has witnessed in the faith that eventually they would be found by
liberators, and so even in such a bleak and desperate time he still believed that someday the Nazi regime – which would
have seemed all-powerful – would have been defeated. And whilst we cannot always guarantee that the righteous will
triumph over evil – indeed, it is impossible to ever class anyone under either adjective – that faith is what makes us human and means that when we remember the Holocaust, remember all those that died and the lessons we must take
from it, we also remember that hope remains within each of us and it is never too late to dream and believe in what we
hold dear to us.
15
The True Horror of the Holocaust
When you are taught of the Holocaust you hear of the 11 million deaths, 6 mil- Kieran Redmond
lion of which were of Jewish heritance; the horrendous conditions of the concentration camps and of Auschwitz. However these are not the truly horrific aspect of the Holocaust. True 11
million is an unimaginable number, however it is too generalised. Every one of this 11 million was a separate
person, an individual with a family, a life and a story, millions of which are lost forever. Therefore the true
horror of the Holocaust is told in the stories of survivors, and they tell the tale of the Sonderkommandos.
The Sonderkommandos, or ‗special detail‘, were groups of prisoners, all of
whom were Jewish, forced by the Nazi commanders of the various camps to
carry out abominable tasks in and around the gas chambers. The worst of these was the persuading of fellow inmates to ‗shower‘ within the gas chambers.
With towels and bars of soap the Sonderkommandos deceived their fellow
inmates into wilfully walking into the chambers created for one reason: the
mass execution of the Jewish race, and other ‗undesirables‘. However once the
Sonderkommandos had finished shutting the gas chambers their job was not
done; ten minutes later, after the lives of 1,500 people had been extinguished,
the more gruesome task of the Sonderkommando began. The Nazi commanders used these special details as slave labour in removing the bodies from
the gas chambers and feeding the ever-burning furnaces so that no evidence of
the Nazi crimes would remain.
Sonderkommando in AuschwitzBirkenau, August 1944.
Here are some more images of our trip to Auschwitz:
‗Work sets you free‘ - the sinister sign at entrance to
Auschwitz 1.
Auschwitz 1—before the war this was a Polish Army barracks, hence the firm, brick construction.
Inside one of the refurbished barracks of Auschwitz 1.
16
The path to the Gas Chamber at Auschwitz 1, along which
many children walked to their deaths.
The Gas Chamber in Auschwitz 1. This was a very moving
part of our trip, as we discovered that over 700 people were
gassed at any one time in a building the size of a bungalow.
A view of the track of Auschwitz-Birkenau from the tower.
Over 1 million people arrived on these tracks and died at the
death camp, which was the largest camp built to fulfil the
‗Final Solution to the Jewish Question‘.
The toilets, which provided the lucky inmates with much-needed contact with one
another.
The remains of one of the Gas Chambers at Auschwitz-Birkenau,
in which the Sonderkommando were forced to work, inveigling
the victims into the building, and subsequently burning their bodies.
Kanada 1—the site in which all the stolen possessions
were stored.
17
The Columbian Exchange by James Nash
Despite popular opinion, pizza as we know it (i.e. bread
The introduction of
base with tomato sauce and cheese topping) didn‘t actually
livestock also revoluexist until the late 18th century. While there were various
tionised the new
foods labelled as pizza, the modern pizza didn‘t appear for
world – before the
so long precisely because it was impossible for it to be crearrival of Columbus,
ated until that point. This is because tomatoes, the core
the largest livestock
ingredient that lends the sweetness to a slice of pie, weren‘t
used by the Native
The Horse has had a huge cultural impact
found within Europe until the early 16th century, when upon Native America.
Americans was the
they were brought back by explorers who had been to the
Alpaca, which could
newly discovered land mass of America.
carry a maximum of around 100 pounds. The introduction of cows and oxen therefore saw an increase in
Thus, tomatoes are part
agricultural production. The largest cultural impact,
of a process termed ‗the
however, came from the introduction of the Horse.
Columbian Exchange‘ –
These animals saw the rebirth of large parts of Native
the trading of various
American culture, as people
materials between the
moved away from agriculture
Americas and Europe
and towards a nomadic lifeDespite its almost universal popularity, pizza is upon Columbus‘ disstyle hunting buffalo on horsea relatively new addition to the European palcovery, all of which
ate.
back – a shift that influenced
changed the world.
the culture of the Native
There are three main items of exchange; disease, livestock
Americans, who would be
and plants.
seen during the era of the
Tomatoes arrived from America.
Diseases from the Old world
cowboy several hundred years
that travelled to the New were
later.
those such as smallpox and meaThe most important change for the Old World howevsles, and they devastated the
er came from the introduction of new plants. These
people there. Smallpox in particincluded potatoes, tomatoes, chilli peppers, cocoa
ular far surpassed any wars of
beans, bananas and maize. Several of these crops were
the period, and even the Black
able to be grown in otherwise unusable soil in the Old
Death in its relative death toll,
World, aiding in the massive population boom across
and, coupled with the various
the world. In Ireland the average worker by 1840 ate
other diseases brought from the
50 potatoes a day – paving the way for the devastation
Old World is thought to have Smallpox has been very influential.
caused by the potato famine. Most important to our
wiped out 95% of Native Americans in the first 100 years
story, however were the introduction of tomatoes,
after Columbus‘ discovery. In many cases, it‘s even thought
which at first were unpopular due to people believing
that this exchange even aided the conquest of the Native
that they were poisonous, eventually leading to the creAmericans by the Old World powers – the Incans had
ation of the pizza.
been thrown into civil war by the death by smallpox of
their emperor, allowing the Spaniard, Pizarro, to conquer So that was the Columbian exchange – on the one
various Incan lands. On the reverse side, it is now thought hand, hundreds of species and thousands of people
that syphilis was actually given to the old world by the New, were wiped out, on the other, the new food and liveand since the chief contractors of the disease were sailors, stock created population booms across the world, and
who visited many ports around the world, the started us towards the globalisation we see today.
disease quickly spread across the entire globe. Whether or not this was worth the cost is debatable –
the only solid fact we can ascertain is that pizza would
not have been possible without it.
18
HISTORICAL FACT FILE
Name: Lord Horatio Kitchener
Nationality: British
Birth: 24 June 1850
Ballylongford, County Kerry, Ireland
Death: 5 June 1916
West of the Orkney Islands, Scotland
Occupation: Military Commander/
Colonial Administrator/Statesman
Historical scene: 1871—1916 British
Empire conquests and the First World
War
Historical Importance:
Most famous for his First World War recruitment
poster, Kitchener held a variety of commands throughout his illustrious military career.
In 1871, Kitchener joined the Royal Engineers. The early years of his time in the
Army were full of numerous engagements and skirmishes, the most notable of
which were the failure to relieve General Gordon at Khartoum in 1884-1885, and
the successful Battle of Omdurman in the Sudan against the forces of the extremist
al-Mahdi in 1898. Afterwards he was made governor of the re-conquered Sudan,
and became a national hero.
In 1900, Kitchener was appointed chief of staff to Lord Roberts, the British commander in the Boer War. Kitchener‘s reaction to Boer resistance has been heavily
criticised. His measures included the use of camps to imprison civilians, which is
seen as the origin of the concentration camp.
He was made Viscount Kitchener and Commander in Chief India in 1902; Proconsul of Egypt in 1911; and an Earl in 1914. At the outbreak of World War One he
became Secretary of State for War. Unlike many of his colleagues, he believed that
the war would last for years, and so enlisted volunteer ‗Kitchener‘ armies, which
were to be made up of the infamous ‗Pals‘ battalions. But his support for the disastrous Dardanelles campaign in 1915, combined with the ‗shell crisis‘ the same year,
eroded his reputation.
Sent on a mission to Russia in June 1916, Kitchener drowned on 5th June when his
ship, HMS Hampshire, was sunk by a German mine.
19
Escaping to Israel by Matthew Waterfield
Located in the Middle East and surrounded by Arab
countries, Israel‘s population was only 32% Jewish in
1948, numbering just over 600,000 people. But in
2014, the population of Israel is 8.1 million, 6.1 million of whom are Jews. So where did all these people
come from?
The answer is rather complex. During the Holocaust, Hitler had six million Jews exterminated in
concentration camps. During and after World War
II, millions of Jews fled Europe to escape persecution and opposition back home and they and their
descendants make up the majority of Jews in Israel
nowadays. This is all common knowledge. But what
many people do not know of is the vast exodus of
Jews from Arab countries in the aftermath of World
War II.
In 1948, there were roughly 1.4 million Jews living in
the Maghreb (North Africa) and Arab lands. Today
there are less than 8000.
A good example is Iraq. In 1948, there were 135,000
Jews living in Iraq, but the community faced heavy
persecution. On top of the Baghdad riots of 1941, a
new law had been passed that year forbidding Jews
from engaging in banking, discharging them from all
government positions and dismissing them from their
jobs working for the railways, post offices and more.
Although emigration to Israel was forbidden, it kept
occurring, illegally, and by 1950, the Iraqi authorities
The predominantly-Jewish nation of Israel is surrounded by hostile,
Arab neighbours.
permitted the airlift of 120,000 Jews to Israel, in Operation Ezra and Nehemiah. By 1968, there were only
2,000 Jews left and today, there are estimated to be
only seven Jews left living in Iraq.
Many Jews were forced out of Arab countries in the first few years
after World War Two.
Anti-Semitism has always been a problem in the Arab world. In June 1941, anti-Jewish riots took place
in Baghdad in which at least 180 Jews were killed.
Similar events took place in Libya in November
1945 where 130 Jews were killed and in December
1947, when 97 Jews were massacred in Yemen. These are just a select few of the atrocities that happened
and, when Israel opened its doors, the
majority of Jews living in Muslim majority
countries seized the opportunity and fled.
Iraq is not unique in any way. There are no Jews at all
left in Libya, where there were once 40,000, in Algeria the number has dwindled from 120,000 to less
than 50 and in war-torn Syria, with a Jewish population numbering 30,000 in 1948, there are now 17 left,
all over the age of 60.
Large swathes of Iraq are ruled by a group whose viciousness is comparable to the Nazis, Syria is in
flames, Yemen is still in abject poverty and Libya is a
failed state, with an ongoing insurgency. On top of
this, many people in these countries still harbour the
same anti-Semitic attitudes that led to the exodus in
the first place. Taking all this into consideration, it‘s
highly unlikely that Jews will be willing to swap the
―land of milk and honey‖ for the lands of unrest and
dictatorships.
20
Wilson‘s History
Andrew McDonald explores the life of Old-Wilsonian and VC winner Harold Auten
1,354 men have been awarded the Victoria Cross since its establishment in 1856, and all must be commended for the immense
bravery which they have displayed. One recipient, deceased since 1964, was Harold Auten—Old Wilsonian who served in the Royal Naval Reserve for the duration of the First World War.
Harold Auten
Born on 22nd August in 1891 in Leatherhead, Surrey, Auten was a pupil at Wilson‘s during the inaugural decade of the twentieth century, at which time the school was still located at its original site in Camberwell. After
finishing his education there in 1909, he joined the Royal Navy Reserves the following year in 1910, beginning
his service in Q-ships. These were merchant ships equipped with a large amount of defensive arms, whose primary purpose was to lure enemy submarines into making surface attacks, given that ostensibly they posed no
threat to them. However, having surfaced, these submarines became easy targets for Q ships, as upon revealing
their arms they were able to dispatch them quickly and efficiently. Greatly used by the Royal Navy during the
First World War, these ships formed an integral part of British countermeasures against the notorious German
U-boats, which preyed on British vessels to devastating effect. Auten continued his service in them once the war
broke out in 1914, and by 1917 he had been promoted to Lieutenant after three successful years of combat.
However, it was in 1918 that his already prestigious career- he was
awarded the Distinguished Service Cross in 1917- culminated in his
becoming a recipient of the Victoria Cross. On 30th July at 5:00 pm,
a German U-boat torpedoed Auten‘s Q-ship, wrecking the fore part
of the ship such that it was disabled and quickly began to flood at the
front. After initial impact the crew calmly mobilised itself in response
to what was clearly a terrifying threat to their lives, removing the
wounded to the lower deck where they could be treated and dispatching a ‗panic party.‘ This was a small group of sailors who cautiously rode away from the Q-ship, giving the impression that it had
been abandoned which in turn induced the enemy U-boat to approach it, thereby bringing it within range of Auten‘s hidden guns.
H.M.S. Stock Force, the Q-Ship captained by Harold Auten.
However, Auten daringly waited even longer, until the U-boat was
completely perpendicular to his ship‘s length, which placed all of his guns in a position to fire at it. Now primed, Auten‘s ship
opened fire, its first shots striking the U-boat at its water-line, rupturing its side and blowing out a number of its crew. Now completely emasculated, the U-boat subsided several feet into the water with her bows risen, presenting an immovable target to Auten‘s
ship, which itself was gradually sinking. Auten pounded the U-boat with shells accordingly, until it eventually sank with just a small
amount of debris left in its place. His willingness to risk the lives of the entirety of his crew in order to maximise his chance of destroying the U-boat marked his enormous bravery and capacity for initiative and composure, wholly justifying the Victoria Cross as
a reward for and recognition of his actions against a ruthless enemy. Him and his crew were rescued four hours later that evening,
and thus one of the finest examples of organisation and deceit in the history of the Q-ships was brought to a close.
‗Q-Boat Adventures‘,
Auten‘s novel.
After the War, Auten wrote the first book on Q-ships in 1919, which was entitled Q Boat Adventures. In
the Inter-war period he had a successful career working in New York in the entertainment industry, as
executive vice-president of The Rank Organisation, a British film company which became the largest of its
kind in Britain. Yet he continued his service in the Royal Navy up until the end of the Second World
War, during which he was one of the senior staff organising trans-Atlantic convoys which provided Britain
and the Allies with essential supplies and munitions. As well as being awarded the Victoria Cross in 1918,
he was made an Officer of the United States Legion of Merit and a Commander of the Dutch Order of
Orange-Nassau, both in recognition of his laudable services to the Allied cause during the Second World
War. He spent the remaining 19 years of his life living peacefully in America, where he died in 1964 in
Bushkill, Pennsylvania. He left behind him a quiet legacy of honour and exemplary leadership, as one of
the many unsung heroes of military conflict of whom both the school and anyone looking to respect the
past achievements of these great people should be immensely proud.
21
The Birth of the NHS: in a crisis, be revolutionary by James
Gunnell
In a recent article in the Daily Telegraph, our adoration of the National Health Service was accurately summarised with ‗The NHS – Britain‘s national religion‘. The idea of free and comprehensive ‗cradle to grave‘ social security has resonated profoundly with us and the principle of
compassion underlying the Beveridge report is a hallmark of our society. Understandably, solutions to the challenges faced by the NHS such as a small budget and an ageing population has
created controversy, but where has our commitment to the NHS come from? Furthermore,
could the historical context of the foundation of the NHS help politicians decide how we can
confront future problems?
Lloyd George set a precedent for the future
NHS.
In 1911, the National Health Insurance Act passed by David
Lloyd George set a precedent for collective contribution for
community health care. It was a scheme whereby a proportion
of a worker‘s wages were taken, topped up by the Government
and used to subsidise healthcare costs. However, this was limited
only to workers. The unemployed and those on extortionately
low wages were left to rely on voluntary hospitals or local authorities to provide them with free care. Arguments for a nationally funded health service were first propagated by Dr Benjamin
Moore in 1910, then in 1930 the Socialist Medical Association
championed this radical concept. The Second World War provided the real catalyst for change. The influx of wounded soldiers and air-raid casualties forced the government to establish
the Emergency Medical Service in 1939, in which the government took control of voluntary and local hospitals.
As the tide of war began to swing in the allies‘ favour, the government realised that the voluntary hospitals had become economically dependent on the Emergency Medical Service. Furthermore,
the ideological aspect behind the war created a widespread appetite for social and health support for those who were suffering.
During the war, communities across Britain were forced to make
sacrifices for the greater good of defeating the evil of Nazism. Civilians suffered from the trauma of bombing, workers committed
more hours in hazardous factories, food was rationed and soldiers
suffered from the fierce fighting of many huge battles. The total
death toll reached 495,000 in Britain. This notion of a collective
effort was reflected by the 1942 Beveridge report. Whilst war was
being waged against Hitler, Beveridge defined Britain‘s conflict
In 1942 William Beveridge published his
with the ‗five giant evils‘: disease, squalor, want, idleness and ignohugely influential report.
rance. Beveridge wanted everyone to provide a contribution to fight these evils and argued for justice and equality in the provision of social
security.
22
Beveridge famously declared that ‗a revolutionary
moment in the world‘s history is a time for revolutions, not for patching‘. This has huge relevance
for the current problems faced by the NHS. The
regulator ‗Monitor‘ estimates that 64 of 145 Hospital trusts in England will be in deficit by the end
of the year. David Cameron has promised to protect the NHS budget in the next parliament, but
this is insufficient as new technology is more exCurrent Prime Minister David Cameron may not be doing
enough to reform the NHS.
pensive to use and an ageing population is more
costly to treat. The NHS is undoubtedly in a financial crisis, yet the government would do well to
reflect on how a similar crisis was met in 1948. Radical reform is needed and it is not just increased privatisation that will solve the budget ‗black hole‘. Amalgamating social care of the elderly with NHS hospital trusts would decrease hospital admission costs, as treatment could be provided whilst avoiding a hospital visit. Britain‘s worsening health propagated by drinking, smoking
and obesity is placing a burden on the NHS which outweighs arguments of freedom of choice
and liberalism. Taxing cigarettes and alcohol could make up the cost these have on society as
well as restoring the concept that we are all responsible and accountable for maintaining the social health system.
The creation of the NHS was orchestrated
mainly by Aneurin Bevan. He proposed a
system that was nationally funded and nationally run. He largely excluded local authorities as 80% of the cost of the NHS fell
on central government‘s funds. Arguably,
by bypassing local authorities he restricted
the ability for the local community to have
a say in how problems relevant to that area
should be dealt with. Furthermore, opportunities for the use of local initiative was
reduced. This principle of central control
was challenged in the 1990s as reform,
Aneurin Bevan helped to create the National Health Service after the Second
spearheaded by Tony Blair, made hospiWorld War.
tals ‗providers‘ and GPs ‗purchasers‘. The
GP fundholders represented the patient yet also invested in the hospital that was charging the
lowest price for treatment. This resulted in a more efficient system and one that was more focused on patient care. This change demonstrates that fundamental reform of a key principle can
strengthen the NHS.
Politicians should take heed: the NHS is a national religion we all value hugely, but they should
not fear making efforts to improve it.
23
The July Crisis of 1914: who was responsible for the outbreak of
the First World War? by Andrew McDonald
Understanding the outbreak of the First World War is notoriously difficult, as it requires one to wrestle with the many different
and conflicting interpretations as to which nation caused it, or,
perhaps more accurately, which nation bears the most responsibility for it. The principle actors on one side were the German
and Austro-Hungarian Empires, who together with Italy formed
the Triple Alliance, a coalition which bound all three of them to
support one another in the event of one being attacked. On the
other side were France, Britain and Russia, who had their own
counter-part to the Triple Alliance - the Triple Entente - which
obliged them to support one another in the same manner as the
Triple Alliance did its members. However, it was in Serbia where
the first short-term event that triggered the war took place-the
assassination of Archduke Ferdinand
of Austria, who was killed by a Serbian nationalist named Gavrilo Princip
as an overt act of protest against Austria-Hungary‘s annexation of south
Slavic Balkan territories, of which
Serbia was one. What ensued was a
number of weeks of misguided warmongering mixed with inadequate and
often lacklustre attempts at diplomacy,
Gavrilo Princip
a combination in which the former
eventually quashed the latter and so led these five principal actors
into a war which would ravish Europe and brutally dispel the
anachronistic beliefs that war was still tame and winnable with
ease. These few weeks are collectively referred to as the ‗July
Crisis‘ or the ‘37 days‘, as a prelude to the official beginning of
the First World War on 28th July, on which the first official declaration of was made by Austria-Hungary on Serbia. Why war
could not be averted during this time is one of the most controversial and painful questions of the past century.
July and bombarding Belgrade the following day, killing off the
possibility of any final attempts at mediation. This first declaration of war brought all of the remaining principal actors into the
war, through invoking the two rival Alliance systems which precipitated a domino-like chain of declarations which converted
Austria-Hungary‘s war into a European one. Thus the argument
that Austria-Hungary bears the majority of responsibility for the
war is derived from the fact that it was its irresponsible and bellicose warmongering with Serbia which began the chain of events
that led to the war‘s outbreak.
Germany
However, these other principle actors - Russia, Germany,
France and Britain - all to a certain extent failed to neutralise
Austria-Hungary‘s warmongering, such that it would be simplistic to place all of the war-guilt on Austria-Hungary. As for Germany, it was instrumental in encouraging Austria-Hungary‘s
warmongering, primarily because it provided it with what has
been called a ‗blank cheque‘-unconditional support even if its
war with Serbia escalated into a European one, such was the
enthusiasm in Berlin for European war. Berlin wanted European war a means to test the strength of the Triple Entente, which
sandwiched Germany in an unnerving position in the centre of
Europe. However, Germany did try to restrain a steadfast Austria-Hungary by proposing mediation, but this came too late at
the end of July when all hope that Austria-Hungary would seek
peace with Serbia had evaporated. Furthermore, when Russia
declared war on Germany on 1st August, Germany immediately
commenced it‘s Schlieffen Plan by invading neutral Luxembourg, Belgium and finally France, which secured Britain and
France‘s entry into the war. Hence Germany demonstrated a
destructive desire for war in the face of the opportunity it had to
prevent it by supporting the warmongering of its ally AustriaHungary, and even once war began between it and Russia its
Austria-Hungary
military plans further escalated the growing conflict to a great
Beginning with Austria-Hungary, as the principal actor involved extent.
in the first short-term cause of the war, it is logical and tempting
Russia
to attribute the majority of the blame to it. This is because upon
learning of the assassination of its imperial representative, Austria Russia‘s involvement in the July crisis can also be viewed as
-Hungary sought to capitalise on the situation by provoking a war miscalculated, although this time for its antagonism of Austriawith Serbia which they would win. This would allow Vienna to Hungary which helped induce it to declare war on Serbia. This
emasculate Serbia and so restore considerable order to its crum- was because Russia, in alliance with its south Slavic brothers,
bling Empire, given that dissident Serbia was the greatest threat reassured Serbia that it would support it in the event of an Ausout of all of the nations it had annexed. Thus Austria-Hungary tro-Hungarian invasion. This support gave Serbia the confilooked to cause war, by presenting Serbia with an ultimatum on dence to reject certain requirements of the ultimatum, which in
23rd July which was specifically designed to be unacceptable to turn helped preclude a peaceful settlement being achieved bethem, thereby forcing them to go to war. For example, the ultima- tween it and Austria-Hungary. What‘s more, Russian troops
tum stipulated a total purge of officials who were found to be were ordered to mobilise on 25th July, which helped raise the
nationalists by the Serbian government, and censorship of all anti- diplomatic temperature to a level conducive to the Triple AlliAustria-Hungary propaganda. However, Serbia actually accepted ance turning on Russia as well as Serbia in declaring war, therethe majority of the ultimatum, to the surprise and consternation by escalating a localised war into a European one. However,
of Vienna. Yet still they pursued their policy of provoking war, by these Russian actions were reactions to German and Austrohurrying all of their diplomats out of Belgrade to Hungarian provocation, rather than calculated attempts at inprevent the Serbians from securing a peaceful set- ducing European War, and so Russia is not the most responsitlement even if they had accepted the ultimatum in ble for the outbreak of the war.
its entirety. Thus Austria-Hungary proceeded with
its warmongering, declaring war on Serbia on 28th
24
France
France too can be seen as in part responsible for the outbreak of
the war, chiefly because of its policy toward Russia. Whilst visiting Russia on a state visit which lasted from 21st to 23rd July, the
French President - Poincaré - reassure Russia that it had a supportive ally in France. This reassurance to an extent encouraged
St Petersburg to enter into the European conflict by supporting
Serbia against Austria-Hungary and Germany, as it felt confident
that should either of those two powers turn on it then it could
rely on France as an ally. Thus rather than restrain Russia,
France‘s support to a certain extent ignited within it the conviction to challenge the Triple Alliance, which was a major factor in
widening the war into a European conflict. However, these actions of the French lie sufficiently far away from the root cause of
the war –the warmongering of the Triple Alliance- for it to be
implicated as the most responsible for its outbreak.
Great Britain
Finally, Britain‘s actions are unique in that it was the only principle actor which initially sought full neutrality within the Triple
Alliance/Triple Entente system, rather than immediately establishing its firm support for either of the two as all the other principle actors did. Edward Grey, the British Foreign Secretary since
1905, instead proposed mediation at the conference table in order to diffuse the strained situation on the continent and restore
the broken mess of European diplomacy. However, call for such
mediation was rejected by Austria-Hungary and Germany, which
strengthens the case that they were warmongers seeking European war by obstructing the diplomacy which would prevent it.
However, another interpretation is that it was Britain‘s initial neutrality which ensured that its calls for mediation were rejected, as
had it immediately declared its support for France it may have
intimidated Berlin into accepting mediation. Grey was a staunch
proponent of declaring such support for France, but the British
Cabinet was too divided on the issue for it to reach a consensus
which backed Grey‘s proposal, even when he threatened to resign if it continued its ambivalence. Grey was only able to secure
such a consensus when Germany invaded Belgium on 4th August
as part of the Schlieffen Plan, as Britain was pledged to guarantee
Belgian independence which this invasion compromised. By this
time Germany was already at war with Russia and France, meaning that Britain was far too late in its attempt to join the conflict at
a stage which would intimidate Germany into diplomacy before it
resorted to declaring war on Triple Alliance powers. Thus Britain
failed to show its hand at an early enough stage in the July Crisis
to force mediation on the Triple Alliance, although ultimately
were Germany not warmongering in the first instance there would
not have been a crisis in which Britain had to involve itself.
Britain. The former were actively and wholeheartedly committed to inciting European war, as demonstrated by their active
attempts to stifle diplomacy and willingness to escalate a localised conflict into a European one. The Triple Entente powers,
whilst failing to challenge the Triple Alliance‘s flagrant warmongering with a coordinated and sufficiently-intimidating response,
were dragged into the conflict by such warmongering, and so
their responsibility is diminished by the fact that they did not
actively provoke war to the same extent that Austria-Hungary
and Germany did. Yet even here the question of who is responsible for the outbreak of the war is not fully-answered, as it remains to be settled the issue of whether it was Austria-Hungary
or Germany within the Triple Alliance which bore the most
responsibility. Although Austria-Hungary was the first of the two
to provoke war, their actions were principally concerned with a
localised conflict against Serbia; Germany was the power which
brought that warmongering to the European staunch, encouraging Austria-Hungary to not fear a war with Russian which reflects its agenda of starting a European war—a ‗World‘ war, rather than a localised one between two nations. This greater military ambition and much more destructive vision brings a greater
amount of responsibility within the Triple Alliance to Germany‘s rather than Austria-Hungary‘s position, and so it was Germany which was the most responsible for the outbreak of the
First World War.
Recommended Reading
The War That Ended Peace: How
Europe Abandoned Peace for the
First World War by Margaret
MacMillan
The Sleepwalkers: How Europe
went to war in 1914 by Christopher
Clark
Catastrophe: Europe goes to War
1914 by Max Hastings
The Pity of War: 1914—1918 by
Niall Ferguson
In Conclusion
It is abundantly clear that all of the principal actors in the July
crisis exercised poor judgment, as they failed to anticipate that
their actions were riskily increasing the likelihood of a European
war. However, a clear contrast can be drawn between the principle actors of the Triple Alliance, namely Austria-Hungary and
Germany, and those of the Triple Entente - Russia, France and
Take a look at our ‗Notable Anniversaries of 2014‘
page (26) to see some of the dates pertaining to the
chronology of the outbreak of the First World War!
25
Notable Anniversaries of 2014
25th January = 90 years since the first Winter Olympics, held in Chamonix, France, starts.
1st February = 1964 The Beatles make their first Number 1 in the United States.
31st March = 125 years since the inauguration of the Eiffel Tower.
15th April = 25 years since the Hillsborough disaster.
20th April = 200 years since Napoleon was exiled to the island of Elba.
4th June = 25 years since the Tiananmen Square massacre.
6th June = 70 years since the D-Day landings on the beaches of Normandy (the ‗longest day‘).
23rd/24th June = 700 years since the battle of Bannockburn.
28th June = 100 years since the assassination of the Archduke Franz Ferdinand in Sarajevo, which started the First World War.
28th July = 100 years since the start of the First World War.
4th August = 100 years since Britain joined the First World War.
19th August = 2,000 years since the death of Augustus Caesar, the first
Emperor of Rome.
1st September = 75 years since the German invasion of Poland.
20th October = 300 years since the coronation of King George I in
Westminster Abbey.
9th November = 25 years since the fall of the Berlin Wall.
1st December = 75 years since Rudolf the Red-Nosed Reindeer is supposed to have made his first appearance.
26
Give us your feedback
Getting feedback from readers helps us to do a better job. Please
take a couple of minutes to answer the questions below, and
email us your answers to:
[email protected]
OR
[email protected]
How informative did you find this magazine?
Did you like the design of the magazine?
How could we improve this magazine?
Published and promoted by Maxi Kyriakides on behalf of Wilson‘s Retrospective.
We hope you have enjoyed your read.
27
2014 Wilson’s Retrospective.
Printed and promoted by Wilson’s Retrospective, on behalf of Wilson’s
School, all of Mollison Drive, Sutton, Surrey, SM6 9JW.