LEARNING
ACTIVITY
Student worksheet
Understanding academic interpretations
of the outbreak of war in Europe in 1914
Task 1: Understanding the interpretations
Read the summaries of the two academic interpretations below. They are both
interpretations from historians as to why the First World War started in 1914.

Underneath each interpretation, complete the sentence to summarise what is said.
Professor Marc Ferro‘La Grand Guerre’ (The Great War) published in 1969
His interpretation of who was to blame was that long-standing tension between the
countries of Europe caused the First World War. He argued that each country in
Europe had a “hereditary enemy” and that, “in all countries schoolmasters propagated
these myths”…. That is, people in different countries were taught that they had
enemies in other countries and that they were victims. Other countries wanted their
country’s goods, its growth, even its existence. For example, Germany was jealous of
Great Britain’s status in the world, Britain felt threatened by Germany’s economic
aggressiveness, France sought revenge over the Franco-Prussian War of 1870-71 and
the loss of Alsace-Lorraine; Russia felt militarily and economically threatened by
Germany. Although the assassination of Franz Ferdinand triggered the conflict, Ferro
argued that this should have been “at most an Austro-Serb conflict, not a European
war”. However, the deep-seated fear and rivalries between the nations had become
“part of their collective consciousness” and this caused nations to go to war.
This interpretation is saying that…_________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
Professor Christopher Clark ‘The Sleepwalkers’ published in 2013
His interpretation is that Europe went to war in 1914 because the decision makers at the
time did not appreciate the consequences of what they were doing. He argues that one
should ask ‘how’ as well as ‘why’ when trying to understand the causes of war in 1914.
“The question of how invites us to look closely at the sequences of interactions that
produced certain outcomes. By contrast the question of why invites us to go in search of
remote and categorical causes: imperialism, nationalism, armaments, alliances, high
finance, ideas of national honour, the mechanics of mobilisation.” He argues that
looking at ‘why’ gives the impression that there was a build-up of causes until war was
inevitable. This would suggest that forces such as nationalism, armaments, alliances,
and finance were all out of control of the decision makers at the time. Clark argues
instead that decision-makers made choices that in combination made war break out.
He does not seek to blame a particular state or individual, but aims to identify the
decisions that brought war about and to understand the reasoning or emotions behind
them. He starts with ‘how’ to explain ‘why’. For example he says that “In the minds of
many statesmen [pre-1914] the hope for a short war and the fear of a long one seem,
as it were, to have cancelled each other out, holding at bay a fuller appreciation of the
risks.” That’s why his title is ‘Sleepwalkers’. “The (decision-makers) of 1914 were
How does propaganda work? | Helen Snelson | Friday 28 February 2014 | Page 1 of 3
LEARNING
ACTIVITY
sleepwalkers, watchful but unseeing, haunted by dreams, yet blind to the reality of the
horror they were about to bring into the world.”
This interpretation is saying that…_________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
Task 2 – contrasting the interpretations
Both of these historians’ have examined the source material as evidence and arrived at
different interpretations as to why war started in 1914.
Find three differences between the sources and write them here:
1. ____________________________________________________________________
2. ____________________________________________________________________
3. ____________________________________________________________________
Task 3 – why do historians arrive at different interpretations?
Historians work with source material and use it as evidence to put together their
interpretations. A good historian is someone who is always attempting to uncover the
truth, and who shows clearly how their interpretations are based upon use of source
material as evidence. However, source material can often be interpreted in different
ways and debate is the life-blood of the discipline of history.
Below are a series of statements. Put a tick by the one(s) that you think is most likely to
be true in this case:
o These interpretations are so different because:
o They are written at different times.
o The historians come from different countries.
o The historians have different views about how change happens.
o One of the historians is bad at his job.
o The historians have asked different questions of the source material.
Discuss your thoughts with a partner.
Task 4 – How can a knowledge of the historians’ backgrounds help us to
explain their contrasting interpretations?

Read the information about the backgrounds to these two historians and discuss
with a partner how the historians’ backgrounds may have shaped the interpretations
of the causes of war in 1914 that they have written.
Marc Ferro is a member of the Annales School of historians
This way of thinking about history was developed in the second quarter of the 20th
century and has impacted upon the study of history today. It was pioneering because it
How does propaganda work? | Helen Snelson | Friday 28 February 2014 | Page 2 of 3
LEARNING
ACTIVITY
insisted upon the study of history using approaches from subjects such as geography
and sociology. History was not just to be about politics and high diplomacy, but was to
consider long-term changes in all levels of society.
Supporters of the Annales
approach see events as less important than the mental frameworks (the world of ideas
and assumptions) that shaped decisions and practices. Little attention is paid by the
Annales historians to political, diplomatic, or military history, or to biographies of famous
men. Instead the Annales focuses upon historical patterns in social, economic, and
cultural history, statistics, medical reports, family studies, and even psychoanalysis.
Christopher Clark is a historian at the University of Cambridge
Clark was born in Australia, where he did his first history degree. He then lived in West
Berlin just before the reunification of Germany and studied at the Freie Universität
Berlin. He did his PHd at Cambridge University and became Professor of Modern
European History there. His research interests are centred on the history of nineteenthcentury Germany and continental Europe. In the London Review of Books (5 December
2013) the reviewer describes ‘Sleepwalkers as “ a history for its – that is, our – times, “
starting, as it does with an act of terrorism. Clark does not subscribe to a particular
school of history, though he works at the centre of academic work into the history of
modern Europe.
Task 5 – drawing your thoughts together
Now write a short paragraph to show what you have learnt today. Write this paragraph
to explain to someone who has not done the work:




Which two academic historians’ work you have studied and what they have written
about.
How their interpretations of the reasons for war in 1914 are different.
Reasons why their interpretations are different.
How you could become better informed so that you could make your own evidencebased judgement about which interpretation you prefer.
How does propaganda work? | Helen Snelson | Friday 28 February 2014 | Page 3 of 3