Explain Turkey's entrance into the war on the side of the Central Powers. Has Turkey any claim for existence as an European power? What has preserved her existence thus far! Have we misjudged the Turk? In what light do we judge the American Indian? Does the Turk give sufficient promise of eventually becoming a useful citizen of the world? b. The problem of Constantinople. (1) The strategic position of Constantinople. (a) Dominance of all the Near East. (b) Its historic significance. (c) The strategic center of the world. (d) Natural military strength. (2) Commercial significance of the location. (a) The gateway to the Black Sea region. i. Size and nature of the territory dominated. (b) Potential rival of the world's greatest cities. (3) Its importance in the war. (a) The Gallipoli campaign. (b) Its relation to the final terms of peace. References: *Powers, chap. 5, p. 349, map p. 119. *National Geographic Magazine, vol. 27, “Gates to the Black Sea." Hazen, pp. 172, 603. War Cyclopedia, "Gallipoli," etc. Problems: What importance did Napoleon attach to Constantinople, and why? Note the territory controlled by Constantinople in agricultural and commercial respects. What further strategic value has the city? What appears to be the inevitable future of the location? II. CONDITIONS RESULTING IN THE WAR. 1. Review of Conflicting Interests. a. Aims of Austria. (1) Nature of the Dual Monarchy. (a) Historical sketch. (b) The present constitution. (2) The question of races. (a) The racial kaleidoscope in Hungary. (b) National aspirations. (c) Connection with the Balkan problems. (3) Question of the state's continued existence. (a) Austrian vs. Balkan government. (b) Plans for a Balkan federation. i. Austria's desire for a "free hand" in the Balkans. ii. The idea of "Pan-Slavism." (c) Need for larger integration in Europe. References: Davis, chap. XIV. *Powers, chaps. 4, 9; maps, pp. 61, 177. Hazen, chap. 24. West, chap. 60. National Geographic Magazine, vol. 26, pp. 311-393, "Hungary." War Cyclopedia, "Austria and Serbia," etc. Robinson and Beard, Readings, II, Nos. 262-266. Problems: Is a union of distinct races or peoples under one artificial government justifiable? Which are the only permanent boundaries? To what extent should racial boundaries be considered in map changes? What appears to be the best solution of the problem of races and nationalities in Austria-Hungary and the Balkan states? Note the instances where national aspirations have been modified or extinguished by continued enforced union with foreign governments. b. The situation of Russia. (1) Geographical conditions of Russia. (a) Relative size. (b) The question of outlets. i. Problem of the Pacific. ii. Problem of the Baltic. iii. Problem of the Mediterranean. (2) Conflicting foreign interests. (a) Territorial interests. (b) Problem of races and population. (3) Inevitable future of Russia. (a) Necessity for expansion. (b) Pressure on the Central Powers. (c) Russia's relation to the War. References: Why did the Germans say, as war was declared, that it Did the Russo-Japanese War settle the conflict between What are some of the gravest problems future Russia What Russian problems depend on the war's outcome? c. The Case of Germany. (1) German national policies after 1871. (a) The policy of Bismarck. (b) Policy of peaceful commercial expansion. (c) Pan-German expansionist policy. (2) Obstacle to these policies. (a) Russian growth and expansion. d. The Case of Britain. (1) Nature of the British Empire. (a) Unconscious growth of the Empire. (b) Indispensability to British life. (c) Outstanding benefits of British rule. (2) British dependence on sea power. (a) Necessity for constant food supply. (b) Sole means of protection for the Empire. (c) Natural danger of foreign expansionist policies. (3) Conflict of British and German interests. (a) The question of national existence. (b) Danger of Germany's foreign policy. (c) The natural question of naval supremacy. References: Davis, chap. XVIII. *Powers, chap. 13. Hazen, review of chap. 27, noting maps. West, chaps. 55, 56. Harding, chap. 33. National Geographic Magazine, vol. 29, pp. 217-273, "Great Britain's Bread Upon the Waters," W. H. Taft. Robinson and Beard, Readings, II, Nos. 312-326. Problems: Explain Britain's interest in Bagdad, Morocco and Belgium. Does every nation have a right to adopt a policy of expansion of national interests? Is this always expedient? In any event, how will the war affect the British Empire? e. The Case of France. (1) Influence of geography on French history. (a) Unique and enviable position. (b) Sketch of French territorial history. (2) Forces making for permanent peace. (a) Decline in the population. (b) Peculiar commercial and financial relations. (c) Growing reconciliation over Alsace-Lorraine. (3) Causes leading to conflict of interests. (a) Desire for national expansion. (b) Growing hostility of Germany. (c) Nature of colonial holdings. i. Forces producing the entente cordiale. (4) Future position of France. References: *Powers, chap. 14. Hazen, review of chap. 22. Has France made the most of her fortunate position in Compare the German victories in 1870-71 with the Note the advantages of an entente cordiale over an f. The circumstances of Italy. (1) Review of Italian history. (a) Geographical position. (b) Effect of environment on Italy's career. (2) Reasons for joining the Entente. (a) Lack of sympathy with Central Powers. (b) Fear of French and British sea power. (c) Opportunity to pursue national interests. (3) Italian prospects of gain. (a) Italia Irredenta. (b) Territory on Albanian coast. (c) Portions of Turkish territory. (4) Prospect of the future. (a) Present colonial possessions. (b) Further imperial ambitions. (c) Bad financial condition. (d) Probable foreign conflicts. References: Davis, chap. VIII. *Powers, chap. 15 and map. Hazen, review of chap. 23. West, chap. 59. Harding, pp. 617-618. War Cyclopedia, "Italia Irredenta," etc. National Geographic Magazine, vol. 27, Italian Frontier; " vol. 30, "Italy." "The Austro (2) The Balkan States. (a) Review of their relation to the war. (3) Spain and Portugal. (a) Forces for consolidation and separation. (b) Relation to the present struggle. (4) The Scandinavian countries. (a) Precarious geographical positions. (b) Reasons for their present independence. (c) Vital importance of the war's outcome. (5) The Low Countries. (a) Strategic positions. (b) Basis of their guaranteed neutrality. (c) Fate determined by the war. References: Have these Minor Powers followed the wisest courses under the circumstances? Note each case separately. Also note that the state of political equilibrium in Europe is largely determined by the status of these groups of minor powers. 2. Late Diplomatic History. a. The Triple Entente and the Triple Alliance. (1) The Triple Alliance. (a) Purpose of the Alliance. (b) Reasons for the attachment of Italy. i. Internal discords. ii. Its dominance in European affairs. (2) Formation of the Triple Entente. (a) The Dual Alliance. i. Reasons for its formation. (b) Creation of the Triple Entente. i. Removal of previous causes of discord. ii. Establishment of the "entente cordiale." (3) The alignment of the Minor Powers. References: Davis, chap. XV. Hazen, pp. 374-376. Harding, pp. 676-677. Powers, preface, sketch of chap. 18. Robinson, The Last Decade and the Great War, xxvii XXX. Rose, pt. II, chap. 1. War Cyclopedia, "Triple Alliance," "Triple Entente," "Willy and Nicky Correspondence," "Encirclement," etc. Problems: Note where the proposal for the Triple Alliance originated. It was founded in the interests of what policy? What were the definite objects of this alliance? In what respects was Italy inconsistent in joining Austria and Germany? What is the nature of the Triple Entente? Was this alliance the result of choice or necessity? b. The Hague Peace Conferences. (1) History of the Hague Conferences. (a) Agency of the United States and Russia for arbitration. (b) Positive services rendered at the Hague. (2) Plans for arbitration and disarmament. (a) Hostile attitude of Austria and Germany alone. (3) Policy of Germany concerning arbitration. (a) Negative attitude toward permanent peace. (b) Refusal to enter into arbitration treaties. (4) Conflicting views on the freedom of the seas. (a) British view. (b) Unusual German view. (5) Failure of conciliatory movements. (a) Final attempts to adjust international differences. (b) Refusal of Germany to make negotiations. (a) Race unity. i. Blood relationship. ii. Unity of language. (b) Religion. (c) Nationality. i. Complex elements of nationality. ii. Cf. German "Kultur." (d) Struggles for national existence. i. Dangers of peaceful growth of peoples. ii. Possibilities of biological defeat. (3) Objects of the present struggle. (a) Many forms of each problem. (b) Review of chief objects of each Power. References: Davis, chap. XXII. *Powers, chaps. 1, 2, p. 358. *Conquest and Kultur, sections I, VI, X, XI, XVII. A War of Self-Defense, War Information Series. National Geographic Magazine, vol. 31, pp. 287-382, articles by President Wilson, Asquith, Viviani, Balfour. Problems: Which causes of war are the more potent; the tangible or the intangible? How do you account for the growth of militarism in Explain the necessity of England's naval policy. c. Austro-German war preparations. (1) Change in German plans for expansion. (a) Announcement after the Morocco incidents. (2) Indications of plans for aggression. (a) Crises in 1912. (b) Other incidents prior to June, 1914. i. Austrian proposals to Italy, 1913. ii. Strengthening of German army, 1913. iii. German propaganda at home and abroad. iv. Variety of other military plans. (3) Changed attitude of the Kaiser. (4) Change in German public opinion. (a) German philosophy. (b) Parties in Germany. (c) Forces for peace and for war. (5) Extraordinary German military measures. (a) New inclusive military laws. (b) Canals and railways. (c) Increase in munitions. (d) Recall of reservists. (e) Intensive preparations of all kinds. (6) Conclusions. References: Hazen, pp. 608-609. Powers, chaps. 10, 12. Kahn, Otto H., The Poison Growth of Prussianism. Conquest and Kultur, sections II, III, XVI. *Collected Diplomatic Documents, pp. 131, 132, 133, 32, 142-143. 66 66 *War Cyclopedia, "Kultur," "Pan-Germanism," "Neutralized State," "Netherlands, German View," "Kiel Canal," "Sinn Fein," Egypt," South Africa," German Intrigue," "Mobilization Controversy," etc. Robinson and Beard, Readings, II, Nos. 381, 382, 405. Problems: Are there definite proofs that this war was intended before July, 1914? Why did it not come sooner? Explain the changed attitude of the Kaiser after 1912. What has been the nature of German propaganda? Why has the war been well supported by the German people? What is the only possible interpretation of Germany's unusual military measures prior to 1914? d. The German idea of war. (1) Summary of German reasons for entering the war. (a) Profit derived from war. i. Increase of rich territory. ii. Indemnities. ii. War as a requirement for national health. iii. Nature of German philosophy. (d) Estimation of German "Kultur." i. Belief in the superiority of the German race. (2) German conduct of the war. i. Justification of any means in war. (b) Examples of German ruthlessness. i. Violations of international law. ii. Treatment of civilian populations. iii. Unheard-of methods in actual warfare. (3) Summary of German policy: conclusions. References: *Conquest and Kultur, Red, White and Blue Series. *German War Practices, Red, White and Blue Series. The Great War, from Spectator to Participant, War Information Series. 66 99 66 A War of Self-Defense, War Information Series. *War Cyclopedia, "War, German View," "Bernhardi," "Treitschke," "Notwendigkeit," Kriegs-Raison," "War-Ruthlessness," "Frightfulness," 66 Pillages," "Family Rights and Honor," "Hostages," "Noncombatants," "Deportations," "Destruction," Louvain," "Rheims," "Forbidden Weapons," "Gas Warfare," "Prisoners of War," "Spurlos versenkt," "Armenian Massacres," "Der Tag," 39 66 Kultur," etc., etc. Problems: What part does morality play in German plans? What is the German standard of morals? Have the German leaders any religious convictions? C. THE WAR. I. OPENING EVENTS. 1. The Austro-Serbian Controversy. a. Review of Austro-Serbian relations. (1) Previous history of Serbia. (2) Russian interest in Serbia. b. The assassination at Serajevo. (1) Murder of the Austrian Crown Prince. (2) Convenience of the crime for Austrian purposes. c. Austrian note to Serbia. (1) Secret investigation of the crime by Austria. (2) Conference at Potsdam. (3) Character of the note to Serbia. (4) Continued hostile attitude of Austria. (5) Anxiety of the other Powers. d. Serbian reply to the Austrian note. (3) Attitude of the Prussian War Party. References: Davis, chap. XXIII. *Powers, pp. 152-163. Rose, pt. II, chap. 12. Atlantic Monthly, February, 1915, p. 234. *Collected Diplomatic Documents, pp. 4, 5-12, 31-37, 70, 406, 452, 469-471, 506-514. Gerard, chaps. VI, VIII, XI. War Cyclopedia, "Kingdom of the Serbs," "Serajevo," "Potsdam Conference," 66 Serbia, Austrian Ultimatum," etc. Problems: What are the conclusions as to the guilt of Serbia for the assassination? Explain the nature and object of Austria's ultimatum? Why was it delayed so long after the assassination? Where does Serbia's reply place the burden of guilt? Why? 2. Failure of Diplomacy. a. Attempts to adjust the Austro-Serbian situation. (1) Diplomatic attitude of Serbia. (2) Attempts by the Powers to adjust differences. (a) Serbia's concessions. (b) Austria's hesitation. (c) German ultimatum to Russia. b. Efforts to avoid a general conflict. (1) Proposals by the English ministry. (a) Suggestions for a London Conference. (2) German demands. (a) For localization of the conflict. (b) For direct Austro-Russian negotiations. (c) Results and logical inferences. (3) Russian proposals. (a) For Hague Conferences. (b) For mutual cessation of war preparations. (c) For a conference of the Powers. (4) German ultimata. (a) Mobilization of armies. (b) Declarations of war. (5) Responsibility for the war. How must we explain the failure of Austria and Ger- After Austria's declaration of war on Serbia, why was 3. Violation of Belgian Neutrality. a. Circumstances favoring British neutrality. (1) Party differences in England. (2) Threatened rebellion in Ireland. (3) Labor troubles. (4) Unrest in India. (5) Lack of military preparedness. (6) Peaceful character of the British people. b. British war diplomacy. (1) Conferences between English and German statesmen. (a) German bids for British neutrality. (b) Clear statement of the British position. c. Invasion of Belgium and Luxemburg. (1) Belgian appeals for support. (2) English ultimatum to Germany. (3) German attempts at justification of action. (a) Plea of necssity. (b) Military expediency. (c) Charge of Belgian treachery. d. Entry of Great Britain. (1) German wrath at England's declaration. (2) Britain's announced war policies. (3) Review of the basis of British entrance. Davis, chap. XXIV. Hazen, pp. 616-617. National Geographic Magazine, vol. 26, pp. 223-265, 4. Spread of the War. a. Entrance of other states into the war. (1) Entrance of Montenegro. (2) Reasons for the participation of Japan. (a) Alliance with Great Britain. (b) Resentment of German holding in the Far East. (c) Further reasons (?). (3) The war operations of Turkey. (a) Actions producing allied declarations of war. (4) Italy's action against Austria. (a) Italia Irredenta. (b) The problem of the Adriatic. (c) Austrian violation of the Triple Alliance. (5) Entrance of Bulgaria. (a) Alliance with Germany and Austria. (b) Hostility to aims of Serbia and Romania. (6) Portugal's declaration of war. (7) The war interests of Romania. (8) Declarations of war by other minor states. (9) Entrance of the United States. b. Universal character of the war. (1) Great amount of life and wealth involved. (2) Disorganization of industry. (3) Importance of the issues involved. |