MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2080572913 · doi:10.1353/his.2014.0069

The origins of the First World War: Diplomatic and military documents by Anika Mombauer (review)

2014· article· en· W2080572913 sur OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Andrew Iarocci

Notice bibliographique

RevueHistoire sociale · 2014
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEarth and Planetary Sciences
ThématiqueArchaeological Research and Protection
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésScholarshipFirst world warWorld War IIHistorySpanish Civil WarDiplomatic historyClassicsLawPolitical sciencePoliticsAncient historyInternational relations

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Reviewed by: The origins of the First World War: Diplomatic and military documents by Anika Mombauer Andrew Iarocci Mombauer, Anika – The origins of the First World War: Diplomatic and military documents. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2013, Pp. 660. Anika Mombauer is an authority on the origins and opening phases of the First World War. She has authored Helmuth von Moltke and the Origins of the First World War (Cambridge University Press, 2001); The Origins of the First World War: Controversies and Consensus (Longman, 2002); and Die Julikrise. Europas Weg in den Ersten Weltkrieg (C.H. Beck Verlag, Munich, 2014). The origins of the First World War: Diplomatic and military documents complements Mombauer’s earlier scholarship on the path to war and the conflict’s outbreak. The collection is arranged in two sections. Part I includes source material from 1911-1914, the period of “avoided wars.” Part II covers the July Crisis of 1914 and the onset of war. In both parts, the documents are organized [End Page 829] chronologically into chapters. Each of the four chapters in Part I covers one calendar year (1911 through 1914), while the documents in Part II are organized in seven chapters that follow the complex decision-making threads leading from the first moments after Franz Ferdinand’s death to the first shots of the war. While there may have been other ways to organize the documents—by nation or region for example—Mombauer’s arrangement is most suitable, as it underscores the cumulative impact of decisions and reactions as the crisis evolved from the diplomatic realm to the battlefield. Mombauer’s selections come from official or archival collections, as well as published memoirs, diaries, and letters. Some of the documents in the selection are familiar, while others have only recently been rediscovered since the collapse of the Soviet Union. The documents give voice to a broad range of speakers. Many of them were prominent political or military leaders from the major powers; others came from smaller states, and will be lesser known to most English-speaking readers. Beyond her editing and translation work, Mombauer has added considerable value to the documents with a general introduction on the historiography of the First World War’s origins, as well as shorter introductory remarks at the beginning of Parts I and II. She opens each chapter with a brief contextual statement. And at the top of each document, Mombauer names the relevant historical actors (speaker, recipient, or audience, as applicable), and summarizes the essential content of the document in a few words. Understandably, in the interests of brevity, Mombauer does not attach biographical information to historical actors in each document. Instead, she has included a glossary of names that includes key information such as nationality, rank, appointment, and term of service. Readers will need to look elsewhere for further contextual information on the historical actors however. In sum this selection of documents illuminates a series of significant controversial issues. Among the most important of these, we see how decision-makers in Berlin and Vienna came to view Franz Ferdinand’s assassination as a timely pretext for war (178, 185, 192-193). Some of the documents help to clarify France’s ambiguous role in the July crisis. We find clear evidence, for example, that the French were determined to stand firm behind Russia as Nicholas II ordered general mobilization (pp. 463-465). From a transnational perspective, it also emerges that military staffs across Europe tended to push their civilian leaders toward mobilization, despite misgivings that it would provoke war (pp. 458-459, 483). This collection of documents will be useful to specialists in diplomatic and military history of the First World War period, as well as instructors and students who seek convenient access to a cross-section of primary material on the origins of First World War. [End Page 830] Andrew Iarocci University of Western Ontario Copyright © 2014 Histoire sociale / Social History

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,801
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,900

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,009
Tête enseignante GPT0,223
Écart entre enseignants0,215 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2014
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueHistoire socialeMême sujetArchaeological Research and ProtectionTravaux en français237 207