Breve Historia De La Primera Guerra Mundial Norman Stone Pdf

La primera guerra mundial resulto un conflicto desconcertante para sus protagonistas y lo sigue siendo en buena medida para los historiadores. Lo que debia ser un guerra con botines imperiales y enfrentamientos relampago se convirtio en una carniceria sin sentido con millones de hombres exterminados mediante una atroz mecanizacion belica. La mayoria de los estados La primera guerra mundial resulto un conflicto desconcertante para sus protagonistas y lo sigue siendo en buena medida para los historiadores. Lo que debia ser un guerra con botines imperiales y enfrentamientos relampago se convirtio en una carniceria sin sentido con millones de hombres exterminados mediante una atroz mecanizacion belica.

• Causas De La Primera Guerra Mundial

La mayoria de los estados implicados acabaron arruinados e incluso los nominalmente ganadores se vieron irreparablemente afectados. El botin se demostro infame y el recuento final de victimas terrible aun en comparacion con las cifras de veinte anos despues. Este magnifico libro propone una concisa clara y audaz aproximacion a un acontecimiento historico esencial para entender el siglo XX. This book raises some important questions, i.e., (a) what were they smoking when they published it?, and (2) where can I get some?Although reading is my favorite activity, the process which leads to publication is a mystery to me. Why did Basic Books publish this book?

Who did they think was going to read it? Call me crazy if you want, but I thought that the overwhelming majority of sales might to university undergraduates taking a survey course of twentieth-century history, with a minority of This book raises some important questions, i.e., (a) what were they smoking when they published it?, and (2) where can I get some?Although reading is my favorite activity, the process which leads to publication is a mystery to me. Why did Basic Books publish this book? Who did they think was going to read it? Call me crazy if you want, but I thought that the overwhelming majority of sales might to university undergraduates taking a survey course of twentieth-century history, with a minority of aspiring armchair-history geeks, especially in the run-up to the 100th anniversary of the start of the war.

Instead, it seems to be written for people who already know a lot about WWI but want to read about the whole violent soggy mess one more time, perhaps for the sheer joy of reading about the senseless suffering of others. Is that a important demographic that I am unaware of?This book has two of the things in history books which give me the vapors: (1) names of people, places, and ideas introduced without adequate explanation, and (ii) untranslated French. Pardon me while I lie on a divan in a darkened room to recover.There are also occasional “Wha?” moments, where the author shows that he has the editorial freedom to introduce odd, disputable, and slightly irrelevant facts, just 'cause he can, and apparently his editor will not object. For example, at Kindle location 682 (the ebook is unburdened with traditional page numbers), the author contends (without footnote or supporting evidence) that a German government official named Riezler was “responsible” for the development of the first nuclear bomb by the United States, because he passed on “the secret” that he allegedly received from German Jewish exiles. You mean that the first nuclear weapon was developed on the basis of a secret recipe from a German diplomat?

What about the Manhattan project? The University of Chicago? I mean, that can't be right. I distinctly remember that there were other people involved.Similarly, at Kindle location 1736, the author says that, in July 1918, German troops were reporting sick in higher numbers, and says that it was a symptom of approaching defeatism in the ranks.

Hmm, didn't I hear something about the deadliest influenza epidemic in history taking place at that time? Couldn't that be some kind of confounding variable? I mean, it's possible that Stone is correct, but he needs to supply more evidence and at least mention the Spanish Flu.While I'm giving this book a sound thrashing, I'd like to point out that, contrary to Stone's assertion at location 1976, historian, author of a about WWI, was not the daughter of Henry Morgenthau Sr., US Ambassador in WWI Istanbul. She was his granddaughter.

(If you don't believe, how about her obituary in the New York Times?) Did anyone fact-check, or even read, this book before publication?Occasionally, the author will suddenly snap to attention with an entertaining fact (e.g, one of the first orders issued by the Romanian army during WWI forbid junior officers to use eye shadow (l. 1138)) or a crisp, concise description of an obscure military term (“counter-battery fire” (l. 1710)), at which time it is clear how much better this book could have been if mindful attention had been given to its preparation.The book also has maps, which refer to many of the places mentioned in the book. The maps are hidden at the end of the book, and not referred to in the table of contents or the narrative. Of course, if you have a paper copy of the book, you might stumble upon it by accident, while riffling through the book, wondering how such a thing achieved the dignity of print. But the maps are completely hidden from people reading on Kindle ebook until it's too late. This is a skimpy account of World War I, narrowly-focused on the military dimensions of that conflict.

For some reason, I expected this book to include brief but essential discussions of the social history and diplomacy of the war; I should have been tipped off by the illustration on the front cover, which shows a gas-masked soldier on horseback. In this case, it's definitely a matter of 'what you see is what you get'.It turns out that what you 'get' is a flood of information about WWI combat, This is a skimpy account of World War I, narrowly-focused on the military dimensions of that conflict. For some reason, I expected this book to include brief but essential discussions of the social history and diplomacy of the war; I should have been tipped off by the illustration on the front cover, which shows a gas-masked soldier on horseback.

In this case, it's definitely a matter of 'what you see is what you get'.It turns out that what you 'get' is a flood of information about WWI combat, with names of military officers and locations hastily introduced and then quickly tossed aside. The text chapters are organized by year ('1914', '1915', etc.) rather than by topic, so there is no notable development of significant themes that might interest or stimulate the general reader. These chronological chapters are relatively short, but seem unusually unfocused and long-winded.

They're also poorly-formatted, with several paragraphs exceeding well over one text page in size. Overall I got the impression that the editor of this book recorded a rambllng off-the-cuff lecture by Norman Stone, and then assigned someone to transcribe it and prepare it for publication.The cheer lines in the dustjacket blurbs ('one of the world's great historians', 'scintillating', 'exhilirating', 'Dayum!' ) remind us that Stone is a highly-regarded scholar, but nevertheless this book appears to have been phoned-in.(OK, OK.I made up the part about 'Dayum!'

A very good short narrative of the main currents of the First World War, though I hesitate to say that it's a good 'introduction.' Stone is a master of the material and crafts an effective 190-page version of the war, one that covers all the major campaigns and battles and plenty of the war's political, social, and economic effects.

It's an accomplishment, and I don't hesitate to recommend it.An historian writing a narrative this short must be choosy about what he covers, and Stone does A very good short narrative of the main currents of the First World War, though I hesitate to say that it's a good 'introduction.' Stone is a master of the material and crafts an effective 190-page version of the war, one that covers all the major campaigns and battles and plenty of the war's political, social, and economic effects. It's an accomplishment, and I don't hesitate to recommend it.An historian writing a narrative this short must be choosy about what he covers, and Stone does extraordinarily well. The book predominantly focuses on the European theater of the war—Eastern Front, Western Front, and Italian Front—with very brief asides on things like the Salonica or Gallipoli campaigns or worldwide naval warfare. The war in Africa is mentioned not at all, though the fighting there was small-scale and ultimately irrelevant to the war's outcome, where is probably why Stone excluded it—an indication of the good judgment that went into organizing such a difficult task.However, there are two traits—I don't really want to call them flaws—that keep me from rating Stone's book at five stars:First, the opening chapter, on the context and political trends that led to war in 1914, is muddled and occasionally hard to follow.

Stone's enviable ability to construct tight, concise narrative of complicated chains of events is not evident here, at the beginning. The book only really comes into its own in the chapters on 1915 and 1916, the latter—the year of Verdun and the Somme—being especially good. If you read this and find the opening tough going, persevere.Second, Stone, probably in the interest of concision and space, seldom introduces figures with any kind of indication of who, exactly, they are. This is especially the case early on. Consider this passage from 1914:Further to the north Lanrezac's army also did badly, and began to retreat away from Namur.

It lost touch with the British, whose commander, Sir John French, waxed irascible. On 23 August the right-hand German army, Kluck's First, ran into the British on the Mons-Conde canal, and British regulars, firing one round every four seconds, held off considerably superior numbers, inflicting three times the 1,850 losses they themselves suffered.

In the afternoon, German howitzers arrived to deal with the difficult situation and the British retreated, parallel with Lanrezac's army.This is almost the best paragraph-length treatment of these events possible, but the leaders here are name-dropped with little indication of who they are. Even the bit of characterization for Sir John French will make little sense to someone without an already fairly good knowledge of the events. This paragraph also marks the first time in the entire book that French and Alexander von Kluck are mentioned, and Lanrezac had only been mentioned on the facing page before this point. It may have been better, rather than introducing a scattering of army commanders' names in an otherwise brisk and succinct narrative, to leave them out and discuss simply the movements of 'the British' or 'the German right wing' or 'the French.'

A quickly introduced series of unexplained names can, I have seen, scare off readers or students who feel like they are being swamped with people to remember. Fortunately, this problem is restricted primarily to the first few chapters of the book, and is relatively minor.Those two minor problems out of the way, this is, again, an excellent short summary of the war, with a good final chapter on the war's catastrophic aftermath and the way its results fed the rise of National Socialism in Weimar Germany.Recommended. Liam BoydIndie Reads II, Assignment 3I am not a fan of World War One, A Short History, by Norman Stone. My feeling about this book is that it was like reading a dictionary; always correct, but dry fact after dry fact, etcetera!

There is not enough personal information about any of the key politicians, generals or soldiers to make them interesting. Kaiser Wilhelm, Churchill and others were very interesting men who have had much written about them, but in this book, they are just names. For Liam BoydIndie Reads II, Assignment 3I am not a fan of World War One, A Short History, by Norman Stone. My feeling about this book is that it was like reading a dictionary; always correct, but dry fact after dry fact, etcetera! There is not enough personal information about any of the key politicians, generals or soldiers to make them interesting. Kaiser Wilhelm, Churchill and others were very interesting men who have had much written about them, but in this book, they are just names. For example, all the book says about Kaiser Wilhelm II was that “he wanted to model England, achieve vast riches and an overseas empire like England.” He caused others to view Germany as “a-the- European problem.”The book, although well written, is difficult to follow.

I had to re-read many passages in order to keep track of what was happening. The author jumps back and forth between armies and generals too quickly. I believe if Stone presented each army or navy perspective of a battle without jumping around, it would have been easier for the reader to follow events and battles with a clear picture of what was really happening. One of the ways that would make the book easier to follow would be to include maps and front lines in the chapters instead of as appendices at the end of the book. Also, it would be easier to follow troop movement by showing the army and general on each map.

It would be helpful if these were in color instead of black and white. For example, the Russian Army could have red lines, the French blue, the English green, etc.Unlike The Rise of Theodore Roosevelt, by Edmond Morris, this was not a story that made me want to stay up reading late into the night. World War One: A Short History by Norman Stone was a book I definately would reccomend to someone that wants to learn some backround information on World War I. In this book Norman Stone elaborates and presents the collapses of the four empires: Hapsburg, German,Tsarist, and The Ottoman Empire collapsed. He also challenges the current understandings of treaties that were created after the war by expanding and introducing them as failures.

He also introduces the conflicts and European countries World War One: A Short History by Norman Stone was a book I definately would reccomend to someone that wants to learn some backround information on World War I. In this book Norman Stone elaborates and presents the collapses of the four empires: Hapsburg, German,Tsarist, and The Ottoman Empire collapsed. He also challenges the current understandings of treaties that were created after the war by expanding and introducing them as failures. He also introduces the conflicts and European countries preperation for a main European War.After reading this book I feel like I can comprehend World War I and the events that occured during the war a lot better than before I started to read this book. World War One: A Short History, by Norman Stone was really a great book and I reccomend it to those that want to learn more of a backround about World War I and are intersted in the first World War. Brisk and efficient, unlike the war itself. I have a great interest in this time period and in learning more about the war and this book was a good way to dip a toe in without feeling overwhelmed.

The author lists some longer works in the back as recommendations, which I will look into at another time. Stone knows a great deal - that's obvious - and often drops in names and places without much reference or as though the reader will already be aware of who's who and what's what. However, I still Brisk and efficient, unlike the war itself. I have a great interest in this time period and in learning more about the war and this book was a good way to dip a toe in without feeling overwhelmed. The author lists some longer works in the back as recommendations, which I will look into at another time. Stone knows a great deal - that's obvious - and often drops in names and places without much reference or as though the reader will already be aware of who's who and what's what. However, I still found this to be a very engaging read.

Somewhat frightening, too, as the nationalism strain seems to be rearing its head once again in many places.Favorite quotes: 'No war has ever begun with such a fundamental misunderstanding of its nature.' 'Great wars develop a momentum of their own. The statesmen of 1914 had thought in terms of a 'cabinet war,' that is, one that could be turned on and off at the will of a few leaders. But with mass conscription, and the enormous loss of life and limb, sheer hatred of the enemy, and the emergence of a monster of public opinion that no politician could ignore, the war could not simply be ended with some recognition that it had all been a gigantic mistake.'

'There is a mysterious process in the defeat of any army - the point at which the men give up hope.' After reading Guns of August, which only covered the first month of the war, I wanted more. I read about this book and thought it would give a good overview of the war, and I liked the year-by-year analysis. However, the author's too-frequent use of parentheticals chopped the story up, and often the little asides did not add much or assumed the reader knew more.

Also, his too-frequent use of pronouns made me backtrack through paragraphs to figure out who Stone was talking about. As an example, After reading Guns of August, which only covered the first month of the war, I wanted more. I read about this book and thought it would give a good overview of the war, and I liked the year-by-year analysis. However, the author's too-frequent use of parentheticals chopped the story up, and often the little asides did not add much or assumed the reader knew more.

Causas De La Primera Guerra Mundial

Also, his too-frequent use of pronouns made me backtrack through paragraphs to figure out who Stone was talking about. As an example, on page 164, Stone is discussing the British Fifth Army and its bad luck commander, Gough, who midway through this page (and battle), loses control. More than a page passes with no mention of Gough; in fact we read about Ludendorff and Porsche for a bit. I assume Stone is referring again to Gough on page 166 (top) when he says 'the British infantry were at last well-served by their commander, who. Accepted a French commander.' Was this Gough? I had to go back two pages to double-check.For a book that is targeted as an overview, the audience must be assumed to NOT be experts on WWI.

Good but it really is short - less than 200 pages - one substantial chapter per year roughly. It does look at all the fronts too so there is a tremendous amount compressed into this slim volume and if you want anything more than an overview it needs to be followed up with more detailed works - of which there is a good list of recommendations. It is inevitably given its size an opinionated read and leans to the lions led by donkeys cliche of the the great war but it is sprinkled with odd facts Good but it really is short - less than 200 pages - one substantial chapter per year roughly. It does look at all the fronts too so there is a tremendous amount compressed into this slim volume and if you want anything more than an overview it needs to be followed up with more detailed works - of which there is a good list of recommendations. It is inevitably given its size an opinionated read and leans to the lions led by donkeys cliche of the the great war but it is sprinkled with odd facts too - one of the first orders given to the Romanian Officer was one that forbade them from wearing eye-shadow in battle!Worth it but its an intro not a comprehensive look. I wish I could write like this. Stone manages to extract the key themes of the war without becoming bogged down in a somme of detail.

This isn't for tactical military historians, but is full of insights and theories about strategy. Inevitably some bits and pieces aren't there - the East African War for example, but then as side shows they are rightly ignored. Stone adds just enough personalia and dry wit to keep the whole thing entertaining as well as informative and thought-provoking. A grand I wish I could write like this. Stone manages to extract the key themes of the war without becoming bogged down in a somme of detail.

This isn't for tactical military historians, but is full of insights and theories about strategy. Inevitably some bits and pieces aren't there - the East African War for example, but then as side shows they are rightly ignored. Stone adds just enough personalia and dry wit to keep the whole thing entertaining as well as informative and thought-provoking. A grand book. Well frankly this book was a waste of time. The author seems so intent on amusing us with his epigrams that the war comes off as a jolly laugh.

Also, some of them border on anti-Catholic. This may be the fault of the author's writing. At one point I thought English was his second language but on researching his background, I found out he was born and raised in Scotland.

His overuse of the coma is criminal. So is his fondness for parenthesis. Not for the novice. Only someone who is well read in Well frankly this book was a waste of time. The author seems so intent on amusing us with his epigrams that the war comes off as a jolly laugh.

Also, some of them border on anti-Catholic. This may be the fault of the author's writing. At one point I thought English was his second language but on researching his background, I found out he was born and raised in Scotland.

His overuse of the coma is criminal. So is his fondness for parenthesis. Not for the novice.

Only someone who is well read in WW1 could understand what the author was writing about. I wanted to solve a big doubt I had: why the First World War began? And the book solves this problem brilliantly.

The world before the war was in a delicate equilibrium, colonies were looked as a source of power and economic strength. A huge empire, the Ottoman was on the brink of dismembering, and like scavengers, European countries were sniffing the prey.Germany was a powerful country but they were worried by the huge white country, Russia.

If Russia developed infrastructures, allowing them to I wanted to solve a big doubt I had: why the First World War began? And the book solves this problem brilliantly. The world before the war was in a delicate equilibrium, colonies were looked as a source of power and economic strength. A huge empire, the Ottoman was on the brink of dismembering, and like scavengers, European countries were sniffing the prey.Germany was a powerful country but they were worried by the huge white country, Russia. If Russia developed infrastructures, allowing them to mobilize his enormous army this could break equilibrium in the old continent.

Germany decided it was the moment to force the situation.This and others explanations help you understand why war began, and even why every country in Europe seemed to think it was inevitable. What everyone seemed to fail about was the duration and consequences of the big war. The author explains masterly how the war evolved and ended letting a frail equilibrium behind it. So frail that in a few years a new war began, again, sparkled by the same country.It´s a bit confusing to follow the battles and main events in the war. Betting for briefness the author gives a few strokes of the main combats but it´s not easy to understand them without a previous knowledge.I strongly will encourage anyone to read the book, especially the first part where outbreak of war is explained, and also the final part where it explains how an unfinished business were the seeds of a more bloody and callous war.

World War One A Short History by Norman Stone is a book over the summary of World War One. There aren't many main characters because everyone had played a key role in this war.

The big conflict in this book was the war over the Axis trying to take more power than the need and the Allies trying to control even amounts of power for every country. This war takes place in Some parts of Russia, Asia and most of Europe.Even though this war took place over a 100 years ago it gives great description, World War One A Short History by Norman Stone is a book over the summary of World War One. There aren't many main characters because everyone had played a key role in this war. The big conflict in this book was the war over the Axis trying to take more power than the need and the Allies trying to control even amounts of power for every country. This war takes place in Some parts of Russia, Asia and most of Europe.Even though this war took place over a 100 years ago it gives great description, so I’m able to relate to the soldiers, and I feel like I was right there next to them; taking part in the fight. This book has lots of great detail and some some interesting parts that you just can't wait to find out how it turns out.Once you start to read it you will definitely pick a side in the war for who should win, either the Axis, or the Allies. One of my favorite parts in the book was the ending when you could really tell it was going to be over and you know who was going to win.

A part I would like to change is maybe if I could change it from nonfiction and make it realistic fiction, so it has a lot more interesting parts to keep you interested in this story. Someone who would like to read this book is historic fans especially the ones who specializes in war history.

This truly short history of World War I—about forty thousand words—is a clever and eminently accessible account by a respected scholar who reads all the necessary languages, including Russian, Italian, and Turkish. Stone’s scholarly colleagues will probably grumble about his emphasis on the East and, even more likely, will be disturbed by his ability to attract readers with his lapidary prose. There are few footnotes, but they too are worth reading. It is unfortunate that the seven small-scale This truly short history of World War I—about forty thousand words—is a clever and eminently accessible account by a respected scholar who reads all the necessary languages, including Russian, Italian, and Turkish. Stone’s scholarly colleagues will probably grumble about his emphasis on the East and, even more likely, will be disturbed by his ability to attract readers with his lapidary prose. There are few footnotes, but they too are worth reading.

It is unfortunate that the seven small-scale maps are placed at the rear of the book. A short book and a decent introduction to WW1 (certainly a better read than the turgid doorstopper I read last year about the origins of the conflict).That being said I do have reservations, there were a few times where Stone got off the fence and said that certain courses of action were ‘wrong’. I’m not entirely sure it’s a historian’s role to do that.

Certainly explain why things happened and even give alternatives to what did happen, but life is complicated, decisions are taken and nothing is A short book and a decent introduction to WW1 (certainly a better read than the turgid doorstopper I read last year about the origins of the conflict).That being said I do have reservations, there were a few times where Stone got off the fence and said that certain courses of action were ‘wrong’. I’m not entirely sure it’s a historian’s role to do that. Certainly explain why things happened and even give alternatives to what did happen, but life is complicated, decisions are taken and nothing is right or wrong, there are just things you agree with or don’t agree with. A couple of weeks ago whilst watching some programme about the first world war I realised that I don't actually know much about it. So I thought I'd remedy the situation. I will probably read a more in-depth book at some point in the future but I thought it would be useful to read a quick summary first - so I picked up this book at my local library.Once you've discounted photographs, blank pages, maps, the index etc. The page count is more like 120 pages.

So it's called a 'Short History' and A couple of weeks ago whilst watching some programme about the first world war I realised that I don't actually know much about it. So I thought I'd remedy the situation. I will probably read a more in-depth book at some point in the future but I thought it would be useful to read a quick summary first - so I picked up this book at my local library.Once you've discounted photographs, blank pages, maps, the index etc. The page count is more like 120 pages.

So it's called a 'Short History' and that's exactly what it is. So the author has to cover a lot of ground in a short space and make generalisations that will probably make those who know more about the subject wince. He doesn't try anything spectacular - he just tells the story in a straight forward manner and separated into short punchy chapters.BUTI got the feeling that the book was written in a rush and with little, if any, editing.

As an example, some of the sentences have so many asides, colons, semi-colons and commas that at times it's quite difficult to read. My 'favourite' appears on page 57:But there was a further precedent (and this was an age when men were very taken with historical precedents): 'the soft under-belly' - in Napoleon's time, Spain; now, Turkey?Surely this sentence could be cleaned up. It's the sort of near-gibberish that I often write myself, but one can usually make it a bit clearer.

There was another section where he was writing about events near the end of the war but in the present tense - it was confusing at first as I thought maybe he was quoting someone but I'd missed the quotation marks, but no, as I checked back he'd just changed from past tense to present tense. Again, this is the sort of thing that I do all the time, but surely an editor should clear up all these inconsistencies.Also, apparently Hemingway wrote a book called Goodbye to Arms. 123.Anyway, if you're after a quick chronological introduction to the first world war don't let all my minor criticisms put you off reading it. There are several useful maps at the back and some suggestions for further reading. On the whole, it's quite a good book and with a little editing/proof reading it could be even better.

In 1914, a massive war that lasted for four years that has included the countries of the United States, Ottoman Empire, Belgium, Germany, Russia, Japan, Italy, France, Greece, and many more, all took place in this terror. This war was known as World War I. The main reason, why World War I started was because of an assassination of a man called Archduke Franz Ferdinand reason being that people didn't like that Hungary and Austria had to be stuck to each other.

Another reason is because everyone In 1914, a massive war that lasted for four years that has included the countries of the United States, Ottoman Empire, Belgium, Germany, Russia, Japan, Italy, France, Greece, and many more, all took place in this terror. This war was known as World War I. The main reason, why World War I started was because of an assassination of a man called Archduke Franz Ferdinand reason being that people didn't like that Hungary and Austria had to be stuck to each other. Another reason is because everyone thought they were better than each other. So, Austria-Hungary started attacking Serbia which led Russia to attack Austria-Hungary. Which led to Germany attacking Russia.

Germany knowing France would attack quickly, they have quickly moved to invade Belgium before France could do anything. Before the invasion of Belgium, England came in and stopped Germany's plan. In conclusion, one attack on one country led to have many attacks on many countries.When Germany meet France in the borders of France, they have both built trenches fortifying their base. Each time they would have made their trenches bigger and bigger but no side would have had any impact in months. One event of a very strange action which is when Christmas came along in 1914, both sides ignored the fact that they were enemies, and went out of their trenches and started celebrating. The following day everyone came back and they had to be enemies again.

In 1916, France has started to push into the Germans to kill them off but Germans killed a lot of French men using gas weapons. In conclusion, Germany and France's battle lasted from July 1914 to November 1915.I would recommend this book to a history teacher so this person could get more details from the war.

I would also recommend this book to a person interested in wars and action. There are many events that happened in this war but thats up to you if you want to read the book or not.