53 pages • 1 hour read
John KeeganThe First World War
Nonfiction | Reference/Text Book | Adult | Published in 1999A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
Essay Topics
Do you agree with Keegan’s opening statement that the conflict was “tragic and unnecessary” (3)? One can hardly dispute the first term, but many other historians regard it as all but unavoidable. Does Keegan give sufficient evidence for his contention that things could have gone a different way?
Many historians criticize von Moltke’s decision to transfer divisions to the Eastern Front, thereby weakening the right flank that was seen as critical to inflicting defeat upon the French. Do you agree with Keegan’s opinion that the Schlieffen Plan was unworkable under any circumstances, or do you see ways in which the Germans could have won the victory they envisioned?
At what moments during the July Crisis was it most possible to avert a continental war? Whom do you hold primarily responsible for the escalation?
Compare and contrast the strategies of the French, British, and German armies in the opening months of the war. How did their prewar plans and capabilities translate into battlefield performance?
What were some of the main differences between battles on the Western and Eastern fronts, and how did they affect the conduct of the fighting?
Keegan insists that the Allies had to stay on the offensive in order to win the war. Do you agree with this position? Is there a way they could have worn down German strength without expending so many of their own people?
Gallipoli was a disastrous attempt to open up a vulnerable strategic flank against the Central Powers. Was there even a possibility of such a strategy working, or was this merely a wish to win quick victory away from the trenches, where victory was plainly not available?
Choosing either Verdun or the Somme, explain the strategy of the attacking side, and why events failed to proceed in line with their assessments.
Choosing the French “mutinies,” the Battle of Caporetto, or the fall of the tsar, explain the causes of the event and its consequences for the war. Why did these armies break when others held together under similarly stressful conditions?
In Keegan’s estimation, the entry of the United States was the decisive factor in prompting the Germans to lay down their arms, not because of anything they did so much as because of the potential of what they could do. Others accused the Americans of simply having good timing and claiming credit for the accomplishments of others. Which perspective do you find to be more persuasive, and why?
