History of the World War, Volume 2 (of 7) — Key Ideas to Explore

Naval Combat as Technical Report

The book’s treatment of naval engagements relies heavily on official reports and signal logs, producing a style that is at once clinical and dramatic. In the account of the Battle of Coronel, the German commander Vice-Admiral Spee’s own narrative is quoted at length, noting precise distances, firing rates, and the effects of weather: “the heavy sea made more trouble for them than it did for us.” The text records that the Scharnhorst hit the Good Hope about thirty-five times, while the British reply was ineffective. Such detail gives the reader a sense of tactical immediacy.

Yet the same passage includes a pointed editorial comment: “Little criticism can be made of the tactics used by Vice-Admiral Spee.” This is immediately followed by a defense of the British commander, Admiral Cradock, who “was much criticised for joining battle … but he followed the glorious traditions of the English navy.” The juxtaposition reveals the authors’ effort to balance factual reporting with patriotic framing—a tension that runs throughout the volume.

The Submarine and the Rules of War

Chapter headings such as “The Submarine Murderers at Work” and “Germany’s Blackhand Warning” signal the book’s moral condemnation of unrestricted submarine warfare. The sinking of the Lusitania is presented as a deliberate atrocity, with the ship described as “unarmed and without munitions.” Yet the earlier chapter on the torpedoing of the Aboukir treats submarine attack as a legitimate tactical development, noting that “U-9 Sinks Three British Cruisers” without moral commentary.

This inconsistency suggests the authors were navigating contemporary propaganda and evolving public opinion. The text does not discuss the legal debates over blockade and contraband, but the reader can infer that the submarine’s role was contested even among the Allies. The volume’s reliance on official sources—including German reports—allows for a layered reading of how each side framed its actions.

Photography as Evidence and Persuasion

The volume credits two “world-famed war photographers,” James H. Hare and Donald Thompson, whose images are reproduced alongside the text. The captions often carry interpretive weight: a sketch of the torpedoed Aboukir is labeled “after a German torpedo had found its mark in her hull,” emphasizing vulnerability. The photographs are not merely illustrative but function as evidence of destruction and heroism.

In the chapter on Belgian relief, the text describes “The Great Cardinal’s Famous Challenge” and “The Soul of Belgium,” suggesting that images of starving civilians were meant to galvanize American sympathy. The book’s visual rhetoric thus complements its textual arguments, reinforcing the dichotomy between German ruthlessness and Allied humanitarianism. Readers should consider how these photographs—and the absence of German perspectives in the visual record—shape the narrative’s emotional impact.

This volume offers a contemporary account of the war’s middle years, filtered through the lens of Allied officialdom and journalistic enterprise. Readers interested in the construction of wartime narratives will find rich material in the interplay between quoted German sources and editorial commentary. The book is best approached not as a definitive history but as a primary source in its own right—a document of how the war was presented to the American public in 1918, complete with its silences and strategic emphases.

Reading about the Belgian relief and the war’s vast machinery, I recalled my grandfather’s quiet stories from the Home Front. He never spoke of battles, only the flags and the waiting. Then I found another volume, History of the American Negro in the Great World War His Splendid Record in the Battle Zones of Europe; Including a Resume of His Past Services to his Country in the Wars — Text and Context, and felt that same hush—ordinary courage, recorded faithfully, almost forgotten.