There exist a number of misconceptions about World War I. This article discusses seven some of the most common as well as the truth about them...
Like many historical events, there exist a number of misconceptions about World War I. Some of these misconceptions are relatively unimportant or debatable while others interfere seriously with an understanding of some of the most important events of the 20th century. This article discusses seven some of the most common mistaken beliefs about World War I as well as the truth about them.
It was the first World War
Although most people realize that World War I was not called World War I until after the Second World War, many do not realize that World War I may not have actually been the first world war. It depends largely on how you define world war. If you say that world wars are those that involve fighting on multiple continents or involve the leading superpowers of the world, then you might be forced to classify several other wars as world wars. Indeed, historian Thomas Bailey says that there were at least nine world wars in history of which World War I was actually the eighth.
The other wars that one might consider world wars are the War of the League of Augsburg, the War of Spanish Succession, the War of Austrian Succession, the Seven Year's War, the American Revolution, the French Revolution, and the Napoleonic Wars. Perhaps the only way to define a "world war" that would not include some of those previous conflicts would be to say that a world war is one that involves at least one country from every inhabited continent. As we well know, however, the involvement of South American countries in both World Wars was negligible.
It was the first war in which airplanes were used
It is popularly believed that World War I was the first war in which airplanes were used, but that it not accurate. The first airplane to be flown during a war was used by the rebels for bombing missions during the Mexican Revolution in 1912. WWI may have marked the first widespread use of airplanes in warfare, but it was was not the first time they had been used.
It was the first war in which chemical weapons were used
Similarly, many believe that WWI was the first time that chemical weapons were used in warfare. This misconception is probably fueled by the prominence of gas masks in many WWI photographs. WWI was not the first time that chemical weapons were used in war, however. The Spanish were using smoke bombs in the 1600s and the Macedonian armies of Alexander the Great used lime to make their enemies itch and burn as early as 4th century BC. Like the airplane, however, the First World War did see the first widespread use of chemical weapons along with a sharp increase in their technological sophistication and deadliness.
Conflict between Germany and England was inevitable
Conflict between Germany and England was far from inevitable. In fact, Germany and England were natural allies for many years. They had a mutual dislike for the French and the royal families of the two countries were blood related. After all, Queen Victoria was the grandmother of Kaiser Wilhelm II. Indeed, it was not until Kaiser Wilhelm II began pushing his British allies away with talk of building a naval fleet to rival them, that the British drew closer to the French. Obviously, this was one of the great foreign policy blunders of the 20th century and contributed both to the outbreak of World War I and Germany's eventual defeat in it.
Reparation payments were the cause of Germany's post-war economic problems
Many historians no longer debate the fact that the reparation payments that Germany faced as a result of the Versailles Treaty were responsible for its post-war economic problems and eventually ushering Hitler into power. While it is true that the reparation payments did significant damage to the German economy, especially during the Ruhr crisis which virtually shut down the Germany economy. Indeed, there may be a great deal of truth to this belief. At the very least, the Versailles treaty and the reparations had a significant psychological impact on the German people.
Their economic impact, however, is debatable because the Germans took i more money from American loans than they ever paid out in reparation payments during the interwar years. Although paying 16.8 billion gold marks, the Germans received 44.7 billion gold marks in loans from Allied Countries. While these loans may have contributed to Germany's economic collapse after the stock market crash, at least until that time Germany was taking in more money in loans than it was paying out. Because of this, it is debatable whether the loans had the effect that is normally attributed to them.
Germany was virtually destroyed by the war
Because of the economic collapse that Germany experienced in the 1920s, many have assumed that Germany was virtually destroyed by the First World War. This is not true, however. Actually, France and Belgium suffered much more lasting damage from the war than Germany did. Germany was never occupied by enemy forces, but France and Belgium were provided the battlefields for the war along the Western Front. To this day, vast sections of France are uninhabitable because of the lasting damage done to the French countryside. France had the highest casualty rate of any combatant and Germany came out of the war with a population twice as large as France had. This inequity was responsible for the harshness of the Versailles Treaty and in the promulgation of the "stab in the back" theory that Hitler and the Nazis made so much of in the buildup to World War Two.
Germany was responsible for the war
While Germany was given official culpability for the war with the Versailles Treaty, it is impossible to assign blame for the war to any one country. No single country started the war just as no single country fought in it. The blame for the war rests on all of the combatants. Germany may deserve a larger share of the blame than France or Russia, but all of those countries contributed to the war.
