Mickelson 1

Matthew J. Mickelson
HIST 338: Europe After 1914
Dr. Alexander Vazansky
7 November 2014
Volker Berghahns Europe in the Era of Two World Wars
Volker Berghahns Europe in the Era of Two World Wars is a historic monogram which
focuses on the politics and men behind both World Wars which occurred in the twentieth century
and was first published in German in 2002. Volker Berghahn was born in February 1938 in
Berlin, Germany. He has taught at several institutions throughout Europe and the US and
received his PhD in 1964. He currently teaches Germany history at Columbia History. He has
written several historical monograms including The Americanization of West German Industry,
19451973, Imperial Germany: 18711914 Economy, Society, Culture, and Politics, and
America and the Intellectual Cold Wars in Europe, as well as Europe in the Era of Two World
Wars. In Europe in the Era of Two World Wars, Berghahn argues that Germany is to blame for
causing both World War I and II and goes on to give his opinion as to why so many European
dictators were able to take control in Europe with such ease.
This is one of his main arguments throughout the book and as such, is able to include some
claims to back this up. The first point Berghahn hoped to examine was the violence which took
place within Europe and to analyze the men behind this destructive violence which killed
millions of soldiers and citizens and left Europe in shambles for decades to come. He continues
with this argument by saying he would like to capture the mentalities of the men of violence
who were responsible for millions of deaths (Berghahn, 3). Another point he wishes to examine
is what could have happened in Europe had it not been for the violence which engulfed the world

Mickelson 2
in two World Wars. He speaks of alternatives in which Europe would have undergone a period
of peace and prosperity which did not occur until after the end of World War II. Although
Berghahn makes some valid claims, I must admit that I was not a fan of this book. I felt that the
book was not very interesting in the sense that it was not able to capture my attention. I had
several issues with the book including the amount of statistics used by Berghahn, the wordiness
of the text, and the amount of time Berghahn spent analyzing Germany.
While Berghahn does a great job of presenting the facts, I feel like he presents way too many
statistics which made to book much harder to read. I felt at times that the statistics detracted from
the main arguments of the monogram. I found myself constantly having to reread several
sentences because of these statistics and because I had forgotten what the sentence was even
saying. One example would be between pages forty four and forty five when he is discussing the
losses incurred by the Austro-Hungarians and the Russians. Although it is important to know the
losses because they help one to understand just how brutal war actually is, in my opinion, he
could have summed up this information in a couple of sentences instead of in two pages. Also,
while I am a fan of using some statistics, I feel like Berghahn used to many for me to really get
into the book.
I also found the wording dry and found it difficult to resist the urge to fall asleep while
reading. While I feel like the wordiness could be partly blamed on the translator of the text,
which happened to be the Princeton University Press, I feel like Berghahn could have used more
colorful language to get his points across. I think this is a problem which a lot of historians face
when writing a book. On one hand, you want to present the facts in a clear and concise manner.
On the other hand, you should attempt to use vivid language to keep the reader interested. I have
found myself putting down many history books, and just books in general, because of this

Mickelson 3
problem. If you want to interest an audience, then you should use creative language to keep them
stimulated.
I was also a little disappointed with the amount of time Berghahn spent discussing German
politics. Even though one of his main arguments was to prove that Germany was almost solely to
blame for both wars, I think he should have spent a little more time looking at the politics of the
other European countries and should have found a way to balance it out. In my opinion, in order
to understand what caused this German aggression, one must look at the politics of the other
European countries and how their policies affected German society. I think I would have enjoyed
reading the book a bit more had he spoken more about the other countries. Also, I feel that the
book was a little one-sided and agree with what Douglas Smith of the U.S Naval War College
wrote in a review,
Europe in the Era of Two World Wars is highly myopic and one-sided. It was
obviously written for those inclined towards a particular political agenda. The onesided presentation of material lacks even a hint of balance and in fact, borders on
propaganda. Compared to [other] works on the same general topic [it] pales in
comparison.
Another problem I had issues with was the sources which Berghahn utilized. Out of fifty four
sources, nine make some reference to Hitler, the Nazis, or Germany in the title. Comparatively,
Russia, or the Soviet Union, was mentioned in only three titles while Italy was only mentioned in
one book title. Great Britain and France have no sources dedicated to them whatsoever, but
rather, are just grouped in with the other European countries. This concerned me because when
you are discussing Europe as a whole, I think a historian should have a least one to two books
dedicated to some of the larger countries, in terms of political importance. While I understand

Mickelson 4
that Berghahn was choosing to focus on Germany, the title of the book clearly states Europe in
the Era of Two World Wars, not Germany in the Era of Two World Wars.
One positive thing about Berghahns book would be the target audience. I feel like when it
comes to finding a target audience, Berghahn does a good job of directing the book towards
professors, historians, and researchers. The book is very informative and would definitely be a
useful book to read when writing a research paper or maybe even a book. I even think that the
book would be good for college students interested in learning more about the politics of Europe
before, during, and after World Wars I and II. At the same time, I think a college student would
struggle with the book because of the wordiness and thus would not want to use the book as a
source. In this regard, I feel like he failed in connecting with the younger audiences.
In the end, one thing to take away from Berghahns book would be that when powerful men
want to push their own terroristic views on the people they govern, chaos will inevitably
follow. This was definitely shown by both Hitler and Stalin and the millions of lives that were
lost in order for them to further their causes. One question I always ask myself when thinking
about World War I and II is what would have happened if those responsible had never had a
chance to gain power. How different would Europe be right now had it not been for the wars? I
am glad that Berghahn chose to focus on this as one of his main points. Truthfully, I feel that we
will never know. It is a game of speculation which will continue to baffle the world for years to
come.

Mickelson 5
Works Cited
Berghahn, Volker R. Europe in the Era of Two World Wars: From Militarism and Genocide to
Civil Society, 1900-1950. Princeton, NJ: Princeton UP, 2006. Print.
Smith, Douglas. "Europe in the Era of Two World Wars: From Militarism and Genocide to Civil
Society, 1900-1950, Review." Taylor & Francis. N.p., 25 July 2012. Web. 02 Nov. 2014.
<http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/03612759.2006.10526949>.