WWI DBQ
To what extent did the
ideologies of the 19th
century contribute
to the outbreak of World
War I in the 20th century?
A Document Based Question (DBQ)
HH World Studies
1
WWI DBQ
STUDENT GUIDE SHEET
Analyze how ideologies of the 19th century contributed to
the outbreak of World War I in the 20th century.
Directions: Over a four-year period from 1914 to 1918 Europe was beset by one of the most
terrible wars in human history. This DBQ asks why such a catastrophe took place, and how the
events of the preceding century can be understood (in retrospect) as potential causes.
It is suggested that you follow these steps:
1. Read the Background Essay.
2. Skim through the 15 documents to get a sense of what they are about.
3. Read the documents slowly. In the margin or on a separate sheet of paper record
the main idea of each document. Consider the origin, purpose, and value of each
document
4. Organize the documents by category. Given the question, it would make sense for
documents to be organized into cause categories.
5. Drawing from the documents, clearly state how each cause candidate contributed to
the war.
6. Prioritize the causes and draft you’re your thesis. Outline.
The Documents:
Document 1:
Document 2:
Document 3:
Document 4:
Document 5:
Document 6:
Document 7:
Document 8:
Document 9:
Document 10:
Document 11:
Document 12:
Document 13:
Document 14:
Document 15:
Emile Zola and the Reason for War, 1891
Growth in Armaments, 1890-1914 (chart)
“the hammer or the anvil,” 1899
European Alliance, 1914 (map)
Bismarck Explains Foreign Policy, 1890s
Struggle for European Mastery
The British Octopus and Imperialism in China (cartoons)
Does Germany Need Colonies, 1878
Kaiser Wilhelm II Speech at Hamburg, 1901
Fichte’s Address to the German Nation, 1808
The Black Hand supports War Between Serbia and Austria, 1912
Overview of Nationalism
Austria received a Blank Check from the Kaiser, 1914
The Chain of Friendship (cartoon)
Austrian Ultimatum and Serbian Response, 1914
2
WWI DBQ
Background Essay
Introduction
At the turn of the 20th century Europe
was feeling pretty darned good! True, it was the
smallest continent in the world, but it
controlled vast empires that circled the globe.
The standard of living for the average person
was high. European technology was
unsurpassed. Even its culture of art and music
were the envy of the rest of the world. In 1900
Europeans believed the world was their oyster.
But this feeling was not to last. By the
end of 1918, after four long years of war,
European confidence was badly shaken. Ten
million soldiers had died on the battle fields
and in the military hospitals; another twenty
million soldiers had been wounded. Empires
that had lasted for centuries lay in tatters.
Writers wrote of broken dreams. Europe had
entered the Great War riding on a song. Now,
in November of 1918, no one was singing.
What had gone wrong?
Creating a Balance of Power
In the late 19th century European
leaders believed that by creating a balance of
power they could prevent large-scale war. The
idea was that if the major powers of Europe –
countries like England, France, Russia, and
Germany – were balanced in strength, no one
country would dominate the rest.
Otto von Bismarck, the Chancellor of
Prussia who led the unification of the German
states, had a special stake in peace because
Germany was sandwiched between Russia and
France. The last thing Bismarck wanted was to
fight a war on two fronts. His solution was to
make an alliance with at least one of these
nations. This proved to be difficult to do. When
negotiations failed, he developed an alliance
with Austria-Hungary and Italy, which became
known as the Triple Alliance. In response,
France and Russia and Great Britain formed an
alliance known as the Triple Entente.
Tensions Build
On the surface, these alliances could be
seen as a way to maintain the balance of power
and thereby preserve peace. But suspicions ran
high. Political and military leaders spent
countless hours developing plans in case a war
might break out. Countries built up their arms
adding ships, guns, and men to their arsenals.
The tension between countries was
matched by tension within countries.
Especially in south-eastern Europe, in an area
known as the Balkans, the spirit of nationalism
and independence ran high. Some ethnic groups
revolted. Two large powers, Austria-Hungary
and Russia, stood by to collect the pieces. The
region was a powder keg. All it lacked was a
spark to set it off.
The Spark
Otto von Bismarck had predicted in the
late 1800s that “some damned foolish thing in
the Balkans” would ignite the next big war. In
June, 1914, the Archduke Francis Ferdinand,
the heir to the Austro-Hungarian throne, visited
Sarajevo. At the time, Sarajevo belonged to
Austria-Hungary. Seven assassins had been
sent to Sarajevo to kill the Archduke by the
Serbian nationalist group, the Black Hand. The
Black Hand wanted all the Serb people to be in
one nation. And it wanted Austria-Hungary out.
3
WWI DBQ
On the morning of June 28, the
Archduke’s car was instructed to take an
unannounced route, but the driver of the car
got confused and drove down a main road

On July 28 with no further response
from the Serbian leaders, AustriaHungary declared war on Serbia.

In the next several days:
Russia declared war on
Austria Hungary,

Germany declared war on Russia,

France declared war on Germany
and Austria-Hungary,

Britain joined France and Russia,

Europe was at war!
where Gavrilo Princip, one of the Serbian
assassins, happened to be walking. Princip was
unmarried, unemployed and afflicted with
tuberculosis; he expected to die in a year or
two. As the car stopped to turn around, Gavrilo
Princip shot and killed the Archduke and his
wife.
Chain Reaction
The Black Hand assassins hoped to use
the killing to trigger a rebellion that would lead
to a larger Serbian nation. But they triggered a
lot more than that. The Austrian government
was furious at the assassination. They blamed
the Serbian government for not controlling
groups like the Black Hand. Pm July 5, an
Austrian ambassador met with the Kaiser of
Germany. The ambassador got what he hoped
for - a promise of full support.
One thing quickly led to another.

On July 23 Austrian leaders demanded
apologies from Serbia.

On July 24 an angry Serbia sought help
from Russia, and received a promise of
support if Austria were to attack.
Four long years and ten million lives
later, Europe looked for answers. What should
be blamed? Who should be punished? What had
been the cause of this catastrophe?
About Causes and the Question
A useful way to think about causes in
history is to see the difference between
immediate and underlying causes. Take, for
example, the causes of the American Civil War.
Historians generally agree that the immediate
cause of the Civil War was the decision by
South Carolina soldiers to start firing on federal
troops at Fort Sumter. However, historians do
not believe that Fort Sumter explains way the
Civil War was fought. For that one has to look
for deeper, underlying causes like slavery, or
the South’s right to secede from the Union.
This DBQ is concerned with identifying
deeper causes. Examine the fifteen documents
that follow and answer the analytical prompt
before us: Analyze how ideologies of the 19th
century contributed to the outbreak of World
War I in the 20th century.
4
WWI DBQ
Document 1
Source: Emile Zola, French writer, 1891, in James Joll, The Origins of the First World War,
New York: Addison Wesley Longman, 1992.
Would not the end of war be the end of humanity? War is life itself. Nothing exists in
nature, is born, grows or multiplies except by combat. We must eat and be eaten so
that the world my live. It is only warlike nations which have prospered; a nation dies
as soon as it disarms. War is the school of discipline, sacrifice and courage.
Document 2
Source: Adapted from The London Times History of the World, new edition edited by Richard
Overy, 1999.
Note: By 1914 the Entente Powers could field 2.23 million men, Germany and AustriaHungary 1.2 million.
5
WWI DBQ
Document 3
Source: Buchners Kolleg Geschichte, Das Kaiserreich 1871 bis 1918. Translation by Richard
Hacken. Bamberg: C.C. Buchners Verlag, 1987
Prince Bernard von Bulow, German Chancellor, speech to the Reichstag
December 11, 1899
In our nineteenth century, England has increased its colonial empire -- the largest
the world has seen since the days of the Romans -- further and further; the French
have put down roots in North Africa and East Africa and created for themselves a
new empire in the Far East… The English prime minister said a long time ago that
the strong states were getting stronger and stronger and the weak ones weaker and
weaker. [...] We don't want to step on the toes of any foreign power, but at the same
time we don't want our own feet tramped by any foreign power (Bravo!) and we
don't intend to be shoved aside by any foreign power, not in political nor in economic
terms.(Lively applause.) It is time, high time, that we [...] make it clear in our own
minds what stance we have to take and how we need to prepare ourselves in the
face of the processes taking place around us which carry the seeds within them for
the restructuring of power relationships for the unforeseeable future. To stand
inactively to one side, as we have done so often in the past, either from native
modesty (Laughter) or because we were completely absorbed in our own internal
arguments or for doctrinaire reasons -- to stand dreamily to one side while other
people split up the pie, we cannot and we will not do that. (Applause.) We cannot for
the simple reason that we now have interests in all parts of the world. [...] The rapid
growth of our population, the unprecedented blossoming of our industries, the hard
work of our merchants, in short the mighty vitality of the German people have woven
us into the world economy and pulled us into international politics. If the English
speak of a 'Greater Britain;' if the French speak of a 'Nouvelle France;' if the Russians
open up Asia; then we, too, have the right to a greater Germany (Bravo! from the
right, laughter from the left), not in the sense of conquest, but indeed in the sense of
peaceful extension of our trade and its infrastructures. [...] We cannot and will not
permit that the order of the day passes over the German people …we realize that
there is no welfare for us without power, without a strong army and a strong fleet.
(Very true! from the right; objections from the left ) The means, gentlemen, for a
people of almost 60 million -- dwelling in the middle of Europe and, at the same time,
stretching its economic antennae out to all sides -- to battle its way through in the
struggle for existence without strong armaments on land and at sea, have not yet
been found. (Very true! from the right.) In the coming century the German people will
be a hammer or an anvil.
6
WWI DBQ
Document 4
Source: Map created from various sources.
European Alliances, 1914
Document 5
Source: Otto Von Bismarck,1890s, Reflections and Reminiscences, edited by Theodore S.
Hamerow, New York: Harper Torchbooks, 1968.
The triple alliance which I originally sought to conclude after the peace of Frankfurt,
and about which I had already sounded Vienna and St. Petersburg, from Meaux, in
September 1870, was an alliance of the three emperors whit the futher idea of
bringing into it monarchical Italy. It was designed for the struggle which, as I feared,
was before us; between the two European tendencies which Napoleon called
Republican and Cossack, and which I, according to our present ideas, should
designate on the one side as the system of order on a monarchical basis, and on the
other as the social republic … Since 1871 I have sought for the most certain assurance
against those struggles in the alliance of the three emperors.
7
WWI DBQ
Document 6
Source: A.J.P. Taylor, The Struggle for Mastery in Europe: 1838-1918. Oxford, England:
Clarendon Press, 1954.
The Struggle for Mastery in Europe
…. Germans did not fix on war for August 1914, but they welcomed it when the
occasion offered. They could win it now; they were more doubtful later. Hence, they
surrendered easily to the dictates of a military time-table. Austria-Hungary was
growing weaker; Germany believed herself at the height of her strength. They
decided on war from opposite motives; and the two decisions together caused a
general European war.
The Powers of the Triple Entente all entered the war to defend themselves. The
Russians fought to preserve the free passage of the Straits, on which their economic
life depended; France for the sake of the Triple Entente, which she believed, rightly,
alone guaranteed her survival as a Great Power. The British fought for the
independence of sovereign states and, more remotely, to prevent a German
domination of the Continent. It is sometimes said that the war was caused by the
system of alliances or, more vaguely, by the Balance of Power. This is a generalization
without reality. None of the Powers acted according to the letter of their
commitments, though no doubt they might have done so if they had not anticipated
them. Germany was pledged to go to war if Russia attacked Austria-Hungary.
Instead, she declared war before Russia took any action; and Austria-Hungary only
broke with Russia, grudgingly enough, a week afterwards. France was pledged to
attack Germany, if the latter attack ed Russia. Instead she was faced with a German
demand for unconditional neutrality and would have had to accept war even had
there been no Franco-Russian alliance, unless she was prepared to abdicate as a
Great Power. Great Britain had a moral obligation to stand by France and a rather
stronger one to defend her Channel coast. But she went to war for the sake of
Belgium and would have done so, even if there had been no Anglo-French entente
and no exchange of letters between Grey and Cambon in November 1912. Only then,
the British intervention would have been less effective than it was. As to the Balance
of Power, it would be truer to say that the war was caused by its breakdown rather
than by its existence.
8
WWI DBQ
Document 7
Source: German propaganda cartoon, 1917, GE104A, Poster Collection, Hoover Institution
Archives
The British Octopus
Source: Imperial powers ready to fight a sleeping China, ca. 1900
Imperialism in China
9
WWI DBQ
Document 8
Source: Friedrich Fabri, from his pamphlet “Does Germany Need Colonies?” 1879. Excerpt
from The Imperialism Reader, edited by Louis L. Snyder. New York: Van Nostrand, 1962.
Should not the German nation, so seaworthy, so industrially and commercially minded,
more than other peoples geared to agricultural colonization, and possessing a rich and
available supply of labor, all these to a greater extent than other modern culturepeoples, should not this nation successfully pave a new path on the road of
imperialism? We are convinced beyond doubt that the colonial question has become a
matter of life-or-death for the development of Germany….
The French national-economist, Leroy Beaulieu, closed his work on colonization with
these words: “That nation is the greatest in the world which colonizes most; if she
does not achieve that rank today, she will make it tomorrow.”
No one can deny that in this direction England has by far surpassed all other countries
... It has been customary in our age of military power to evaluate the strength of a state
in terms of its combat-ready troops. But anyone who looks at the globe and notes the
steadily increasing colonial possessions of Great Britain, how she extracts strength
from them, the skill with which she governs them, how the Anglo-Saxon strain
occupies a dominant position in the overseas territories, he will begin to see the
military argument as the reasoning of a philistine.
… In any case, it would be wise for us Germans to learn about colonial skills from our
Anglo-Saxon cousins and to begin a friendly competition with them. When the German
Reich centuries ago stood at the pinnacle of the states of Europe, it was the Number
One trade and sea power. If the New Germany wants to protect its newly won position
of power for a long time, it must heed its Kultur-mission and, above all, delay no longer
in the task of renewing the call for colonies.
10
WWI DBQ
Document 9
Source: C. Gauss, The German Kaiser as Shown in His Public Utterances. New York: Charles
Scribner’s Sons, 1915.
Speech at Hamburg, 1901: Imperialism
Kaiser Wilhelm II
In spite of the fact that we have no such fleet as we should have, we have conquered
for ourselves a place in the sun. It will now be my task to see to it that this place in
the sun shall remain our undisputed possession, in order that the sun's rays may fall
fruitfully upon our activity and trade in foreign parts, that our industry and
agriculture may develop within the state and our sailing sports upon the water, for
our future lies upon the water. The more Germans go out upon the waters, whether
it be in races or regattas, whether it be in journeys across the ocean, or in the service
of the battle flag, so much the better it will be for us. For when the German has once
learned to direct his glance upon what is distant and great, the pettiness which
surrounds him in daily life on all sides will disappear…. As head of the Empire I
therefore rejoice over every citizen, whether from Hamburg, Bremen, or Lübeck,
who goes forth with this large outlook and seeks new points where we can drive in
the nail on which to hang our armor.
Document 10
Source: Johann Gottleib Fichte, Addresses to the German Nation, 1807-1808. Translated by
R.F. Jones and G.H. Turnbull. Ashland, Ohio: Open Court, 1922.
Your forefathers unite themselves with these addresses, and make a solemn appeal to
you. Think that in my voice there are mingled the voices of your ancestors of the
hoary past, who with their own bodies stemmed the onrush of Roman worlddomination, who with their blood won the independence of those mountains, plains,
and rivers which under you have fallen prey to the foreigner. They call to you: “Act
for us; let the memory of us which you hand on to posterity be just as honourable and
without reproach as it was when it came to you, when you took pride in it and in
your descent from us. Until now, the resistance we made has been regarded as great
and wise and noble; we seemed the consecrated and the inspired in the divide worldpurpose. If our race dies out with you, our honour will be turned to shame and our
wisdom to foolishness. For if, indeed, the German stock is to be swallowed up in
Roman civilization, it were better that it had fallen before the Rome of old than before
a Rome of to-day. The former we resisted and conquered; by the latter you have been
ground to dust. Seeing that this is so, you shall now not conquer them with temporal
weapons ; your spirit alone shall rise up against them and stand erect. To you has
fallen the greater destiny, to found the empire of the spirit and of reason, and
completely to annihilate the rule of brute physical force in the world. If you do this,
then you are worthy of your descent from us.
11
WWI DBQ
Document 11
Source: Newspaper run by Colonel Draguntin Dimitrevic, head of Serbian military
intelligence and founder of the secret society, “Union or Death” (called ‘The Black Hand’ by
its opponents), 1912, in James Joll, The Origins of the First World War, New York: Addison
Wesley Longman, 1992.
The war between Serbia and Austria…is inevitable. If Serbia wants to live in honor,
she can only do this by war. This war is determined by our obligation to our traditions
and the world of culture. This war derives from the duty of our race which will not
permit itself to be assimilated. This war must bring about the eternal freedom of
Serbia, of the South Slavs, of the Balkan peoples. Our whole race must stand together
to halt the onslaught of these aliens from the north.
Document 12
Source: Boyd C. Shafer, Nationalism: Myth and Reality. Reprinted by permission of
Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc., New York, 1955.
In the following selection, Boyd Shafer attempts to define nationalism by listing ten
characteristics it embodies.
1. A certain defined (often vaguely) unit of territory (whether possessed or coveted).
2. Some common cultural characteristics such as language (or widely understood
languages), customs, manners, and literature (folk tales and lore are a beginning). If
an individual believes he shares these, and wishes to continue sharing them, he is
usually said to be a member of the nationality.
4. A common independent or sovereign government (type does not matter) or the
desire for one. The "principle" that each nationality should be separate and
independent is involved here.
5. A belief in a common history (it can be invented) and in a common origin (often
mistakenly conceived to be racial in nature).
7. A devotion to the entity (however little comprehended) called the nation, which
embodies the common territory, culture, social and economic institutions,
government, and the fellow nationals, and which is at the same time (whether
organism or not) more than their sum.
8. A common pride in the achievements (often the military more than the cultural) of
this nation and a common sorrow in its tragedies (particularly its defeats).
9. A disregard for or hostility to other (not necessarily all) like groups, especially if
these prevent or seem to threaten the separate national existence.
10. A hope that the nation will have a great and glorious future (usually in territorial
expansion) and become supreme in some way (in world power if the nation is
already large).
12
WWI DBQ
Document 13
Source: Outbreak of the World War: German Documents Collected by Karl Kautsky, ed. by
Max Montgelas and Walther Schucking (New York: Carnegie Endowment for International
Peace, 1924), p. 76.
THE AUSTRIAN AMBASSADOR GETS A “BLANK CHECK” FROM THE KAISER
Potsdam, July 5, 1914
After lunch, when I [the Austro-Hungarian Ambassador] again called attention to the
seriousness of the situation, the Kaiser authorized me to inform our gracious Majesty
that we might in this case, as in all others, rely upon Germany’s full support. He must,
as he said before, first hear what the Imperial Chancellor has to say, but he did not
doubt in the least that Herr von Bethmann Hollweg would agree with him. Especially
as far as our action against Serbia was concerned. But it was his (Kaiser Wilhelm’s)
opinion that this action must not be delayed. Russia’s attitude will no doubt be
hostile, but for this he has been for years prepared, and should a war between
Austria-Hungary and Russia be unavoidable, we might be convinced that Germany,
our old faithful ally, would stand at our side. Russia at the present time was in no way
prepared for war, and would think twice before it appealed to arms. But it will
certainly set other power on to the Triple Alliance and add fuel to the fire in the
Balkans. He understands perfectly well that His Apostolic Majesty [Francis Joseph]
in his well-known love of peace would be reluctant to march into Serbia; but if we
had really recognised the necessity of warlike action against Serbia, he (Kaiser
Wilhelm) would regret if we did not make use of the present moment, which is all in
our favour.
Document 14
Source: The Chain of Friendship", an American cartoon from 1914 depicting the web of
alliances, captioned, "If Austria attacks Serbia, Russia will fall upon Austria, Germany upon
Russia, and France and England upon Germany.
13
WWI DBQ
Document 15
Source: “The Austrian Ultimatum” in Outbreak of the World War, German documents
collected by Karl Kautsky and edited by Max Montgelas and Walther Schucking, New York:
Oxford University Press, 1924.
The Austrian Ultimatum
On the afternoon of July 23, after an investigation of the assassination of the Archduke
Franz Ferdinand at Sarajevo, the Austrians presented a list of demands to Serbia, and the
Serbs were given forty-eight hours to reply.
…the Imperial and Royal Government finds itself compelled to demand that the Serbian
Government give official assurance that it will condemn the propaganda directed
against Austria-Hungary… and that it will obligate itself to suppress with all the means
at its command this criminal and terroristic propaganda….
1. To suppress every publication which shall incite to hatred and contempt
3. To eliminate without delay from public instruction in Serbia, everything… that serves
or may serve to nourish the propaganda against Austria-Hungary
5. To agree to the cooperation in Serbian of the organs of the Imperial Royal Government
in the suppression of the subversive movement directed against the integrity of the
monarchy;
6. to institute a judicial inquiry against every participant in the conspiracy of the twentyeighth of June who may be found in Serbian territory…
10. to inform the Imperial and Royal Government without delay of the execution of the
measures comprised in the foregoing points.
Source: “Serbia’s Answer to Ultimatum,” from British Diplomatic Correspondance in
Collected Diplomatic Documents Relating to the Outbreak of the European War, No. 39.
London: H.M. Stationary Office, 1915.
The Serbian Response
The reply of the Serbians was remarkably reasonable, but it was not unconditional
acceptance of the ultimatum.
…The Royal Government of Servia condemn all propaganda which may be directed
against Austria Hungary, that is to say, all such tendencies as aim at ultimately
detaching from the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy territories which form part thereof
and they sincerely deplore the baneful consequences of these criminal movements.
… The Royal Servian Government further undertake to remove without delay from
their public educational establishments in Servia all that serves or could serve to
foment propaganda against Austria-Hungary… The Royal Government must confess
that they do not clearly grasp the meaning or the scope of the demand made by the
Imperial and Royal Government that Servia shall undertake to accept the collaboration
of the organs of the Imperial and Royal Government upon their territory, but they
14
WWI DBQ
declare that they will admit such collaboration as agrees with the principle of
international law, with criminal procedure, and with good neighborly relations.
The German Kaiser’s First Reaction to the Serbian Response:
“After reading over the Serbian reply, which I received this morning, I am convinced
that on the whole the wishes of the Danube Monarchy have been acceded to. The few
reservations that Serbia makes in regard to individual points could, according to my
opinion, be settled by negotiation. But it contains the announcement orbi et urbi of a
capitulations of the most humiliating kind, and as a result, every cause for war falls to
the ground.
15