# data[].attributes.body
This journal article discusses PTSD in modern film depictions.

# data[].attributes.body
What role does PTSD play in economic conditions post war?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Study: economic burden of PTSD ‘staggering’

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A new study finds that the national economic burden of PTSD exceeds the financial cost of other common mental health conditions, such as anxiety and depression.

# data[].attributes.body
This article talks about how many of the soldiers admitted into the war during world war 1 had neurological symptoms which posed challenges on the army and government

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Abstract

World War I witnessed the admission of large numbers of German soldiers with neurological symptoms for which there was no obvious organic cause. This posed a considerable challenge for the military and medical authorities and resulted in an active discussion on the etiology and treatment of these disorders. Current historiography is reliant on published physician accounts, and this represents the first study of treatment approaches based on original case notes. We analyzed patient records from two leading departments of academic psychiatry in Germany, those at Berlin and Jena, in conjunction with the contemporaneous medical literature. Treatment, which can be broadly classified into reward and punishment, suggestion, affective shock, cognitive learning, and physiological methods, was developed in the context of the emerging fields of animal learning and neurophysiology. A further innovative feature was the use of quantitative methods to assess outcomes. These measures showed good response rates, though most cured patients were not sent back to battle because of their presumed psychopathic constitution. While some treatments appear unnecessarily harsh from today's perspective and were also criticized by leading psychiatrists of the time, the concentration of effort and involvement of so many senior doctors led to the development of psychotherapeutic methods that were to influence the field of psychiatric therapy for decades to come.

Keywords: World War I, military psychiatry, treatment, trauma, functional disorders, etiology, case records, hysteria, war neurosis

THE PROBLEM OF WAR TRAUMA

ETIOLOGICAL MODELS AND TREATMENT

The war rekindled the debate over the concept of "traumatic neurosis," a term that had been introduced by the Berlin-based neurologist Hermann Oppenheim (1858-1919) in 1889 to indicate the organic origin of the neurological and psychological consequences of catastrophes such as railway accidents. Most German psychiatrists and neurologists moved away from this concept very early in the war. Oppenheim himself moved from a focus on a somatic origin of the traumatic neuroses to a mixed model that allowed for mutual influences of psychological and somatic factors. In 1917, he stated that psychological shock could influence physical processes through the "vasomotor-secretory-trophic nervous system" (a term he used to describe the autonomic nervous system).

The vast majority of German psychiatrists believed that hysteria could only develop in individuals with a "psychopathic predisposition." The impact of the traumatic event was regarded as secondary to constitutional weaknesses and moral inferiority. A much smaller number argued that "the immense accumulation of psychological and physical traumata brought along by the war" was sufficient to cause mental disturbance in any person. This question was not only relevant from the perspective of psychological theory and nature-nurture debates, but also related to the very practical consequences of compensation and pensions.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE AND CLINICAL RECORDS

However, treatment methods and their implications for causal models of war trauma have not been reviewed in relation to the case records of German soldiers diagnosed with functional disorders. Unlike most previous scholarship in this field, this paper is not only based on the publications of the treating psychiatrists but also on original patient notes from the Universities of Berlin and Jena. These were selected because both departments were led by prominent psychiatrists, Karl Bonhoeffer (1868-1948) and Otto Binswanger (1852-1929), who also actively published about war neuroses and their treatment.

During World War I, 1,043 servicemen were admitted to the "Psychiatrische und Nervenklinik" (department for psychiatric and nervous disorders) of the Charité, the Medical School of Berlin University (1914: 217, 1915: 357, 1916: 212, 1917: 152, 1918: 105). We randomly selected one hundred servicemen (9.6 percent of the whole sample; twenty-five cases each from 1915, 1916, 1917, and 1918). A random number sequence was generated for all admission numbers by year and twenty-five subjects selected for each of the four years. The case records provide a detailed account of the soldiers' war experience, their biographies, presenting symptoms, and responses to treatment. The department comprised a neurological and a psychiatric wing and had the status of a military hospital where training was provided for army doctors. Soldiers and civilian patients were treated in the same building. During World War I, the psychiatric department of the Berlin Charité was a center of excellence focusing on the precise diagnostic assessment and evaluation of pension claims-often providing a second opinion for seemingly treatment-resistant cases. Treatment had to be limited to a short period of time and could not make great demands on resources.

Seventy-two of the one hundred soldiers were assessed regarding their fitness for military service. The largest group ( n = 33) was classified as unfit for any military service. Twenty-nine soldiers were assigned to duty at home camps, four to garrison service, and only six to front-line duties. This accords with other accounts of return rates of German soldiers with functional disorders to active military service. However, only seven (out of one hundred) servicemen with functional disorders were granted compensation, which was again in line with the low rate of approved pension claims.

We also surveyed the psychiatric records of the Jena Military Hospital ("Kriegsarchiv I. Weltkrieg") held at the university archives ("Universitätsarchiv der Thüringer Universitäts- und Landesbibliothek") and randomly selected one hundred cases (every twentieth case), twenty-five each from 1915, 1916, 1917, and 1918. Whereas the Berlin case records offered an exceptionally detailed assessment of psychopathology and cognitive status, the Jena patient records provided more information regarding treatment methods and responses. During the war years, the psychiatric department in Jena was headed by Otto Binswanger who had already published textbooks on neurasthenia, epilepsy, hysteria, and general psychiatry. Before Binswanger was appointed head of the psychiatric department in Jena in 1882 (a position he held for thirty-seven years), he had worked as consultant at the department for psychiatric and nervous disorders of the Charité in Berlin where he had also completed his postgraduate training. Out of the 2,275 soldiers treated at the Jena institution during the war years (and also in the months after the armistice), 1,945 (86 percent) case records have survived.

Because wartime medical publications are not fully catalogued in online databases, we had to hand search the leading psychiatric and neurological journals for papers about war neuroses and treatment methods. The following German language publications were searched for the years 1914-20: Zeitschrift für die gesamte Neurologie und Psychiatrie, Archiv für Psychiatrie und Nervenkrankheiten, Psychiatrisch-Neurologische Wochenschrift, Monatsschrift für Psychiatrie und Neurologie, Deutsche Medizinische Wochenschrift, Wiener Medizinische Wochenschrift, Münchner Medizinische Wochenschrift, and Berliner Medizinische Wochenschrift.

THEMES OF THE THERAPEUTIC LITERATURE

During World War I, psychiatrists adopted a range of treatment programs for functional disorders, often those associated with the names of Fritz Kaufmann, Otto Binswanger, Max Nonne, and Ferdinand Kehrer. Many of these treatments derived from interventions that were available before the war. The Austrian neurologist Fritz Kaufmann, who practiced in Mannheim and whose electro-suggestive therapy would become the most widely used treatment method for functional disorders in Germany during the war, had already treated a patient with electricity and suggestion at Erb's department in Heidelberg in 1903. Likewise, Binswanger's deprivation therapy, where patients were isolated and deprived of human contacts and distraction (which he applied to a large number of servicemen), was derived from a treatment concept developed by the American Silas Weir Mitchell, who had used this therapy for neurasthenic women in the late nineteenth century. Weir Mitchell's holistic treatment program-combining physical and psychological rest, special diet, massages, hydro- and electrotherapy-was introduced to Germany in the 1880s and was still an essential part of Binswanger's treatment regime in Jena during World War I. In his textbook on "Hysterie" and his lectures on "The pathology and therapy of neurasthenia," Binswanger had described the use of isolation therapy for severe cases of hysteria and neurasthenia with the aim of achieving "complete mental and intellectual relaxation." Nonne hypnotized soldiers in the Hamburg barracks as early as 1889 and found that "the atmosphere of military discipline and the associated attitude" made them receptive to hypnotic suggestion.

Although the doctor-patient relationship was far from symmetrical during peacetime, the nature of military hierarchy and the imperative demands of a nation at war eroded the soldier-patient's autonomy. The psychiatrist adopted a dominant authoritarian role, being both a doctor and a military superior. The therapeutic process was often described as a "battle of will" between physicians and soldiers, where military discipline and the duty to endure any treatment were considered to be essential therapeutic factors. Very rarely was the relationship between the doctor and physician seen in a different way. Johannes Bresler, the founding editor of the Psychiatrisch-Neurologische Wochenschrift, was unusual in emphasizing that mutual trust contributed significantly to the outcome of treatment.

EARLY INTERVENTION AT THE FRONT LINE

RECOVERY AND AFTERCARE

TREATMENT SCHOOLS AND CONCEPTS

While commonly used treatments had their conceptual origins in the prewar period, the conflict itself was crucial in providing large numbers of patients with similar symptom profiles so that they could be studied in a systematic manner. The exchange of ideas on treatment approaches in the medical press and during conferences as well as the monitoring of outcomes also reached a completely different dimension in comparison to the prewar years.

"BEHAVIORAL THERAPY"

REWARD-BASED APPROACHES

Most physicians tried to consolidate progressive treatment successes with rewards such as baths, massages, and garden walks. Repeated praise and reassurance accompanied most therapies, and some programs even included performance-related pay. Some physicians granted their patients home leave when a certain treatment goal had been achieved. In the latter stages of the war, some successfully treated soldiers were even rewarded by discharge from military service; probably the most potent reinforcement for the traumatized serviceman. Nonne told the soldiers who were discharged from his wards as "unfit for military service" that they would not have to return to active duty if they worked efficiently; alternatively, they would have to undergo more therapy in a military treatment unit, and he claimed that the war ministry had agreed to this procedure. A similar situation arose in the UK where a number of soldiers with apparently chronic disorders recovered in 1918 when the regulations changed to allow their discharge from the armed forces, provided their symptoms had remitted. The treatment in Jena was also characterized by the interplay of punishment and reward. One patient with a functional gait disorder was told that if his symptoms did not improve "a big operation, a body transsection, was needed, as he then would be likely to suffer from a severe organic disease." At the same time, every little treatment success was instantaneously followed by a reward such as walks in the garden, granting of home leave, or visitors.

PUNISHMENT WITH ELECTRICITY

The case of JM, a twenty-two-year-old from Berlin Charlottenburg who was treated at the Charité for two months, is typical of this electrotherapeutic approach. JM read medicine from Easter 1914 until the summer of 1916 when he passed his first medical exam ("Physikum"). He was a vegetarian, fluent in several languages, played different musical instruments, and liked drawing. In the summer of 1916, he was sent to the Western front as an infantry soldier. After a shell explosion, he experienced a sharp pain in his right ear and was unable to speak. At a military hospital, JM was treated with hypnosis and electric currents. As his speech did not recover, he was sent to a base hospital where he was treated with speech therapy and breathing exercises without any success. He was then admitted to various other military hospitals where he received physical therapy, massages, more speech therapy, and a form of shock therapy which involved inserting a ball-shaped metal probe into his larynx, causing him to choke. There was, however, no lasting treatment success.

When JM was finally admitted to the Charité in January 1918, he attempted to speak but could only "manage to make sibilant and aspirate sounds, once also an 'a' and an 'o.' When asked to say 'e' he open[ed] his mouth widely as if wanting to say 'a.' He grimace[d] and trie[d] to indicate with gestures that he [could not] speak." His hearing was intact. Although there was no physical injury, he dragged his right leg when walking. Because no abnormality of the vocal cords was found at an ENT consultation, psychiatric treatment was initiated. Under the influence of suggestion and with the help of a mirror through which he could observe his facial expression, JM was asked to say "Fahne" (flag) and "fahren" (drive). Although he finally managed to say "Fa," the lack of further progress caused the therapist to end the session.

To accelerate treatment, painful electric currents were applied to the patient's neck. JM actively tried to resist the treatment by lashing about, but was restrained by two male nurses. At first, he only managed to make sibilant sounds, at the same time "wildly gesticulating with his hands and theatrically moving his head." JM was repeatedly told not to worry and that he would be able to speak very soon. After five minutes, he was able to say an open "a" with loud voice; after ten minutes, he was able to repeat whole words with loud voice and good articulation. After this treatment, he talked fluently with loud well-articulated speech. Following this treatment success, he was referred to the silent ward (before he had been on the "loud ward for the severely mentally ill patients"). As he was still dragging his right leg behind, electric shocks were applied to his leg, while he was repeatedly cheered on by the physician. After only five minutes of treatment, the patient was able to walk "in parade pace."

On the ward, the patient was reported as behaving appropriately; he was very polite and not pretentious. He read newspapers and medical books, transcribed patient files, and examined other patients' urine. Pain in his arms was treated by electric therapy. After this, he did not report any further pain. On discharge from the Charité, JM was diagnosed with hysterical gait disorder and aphonia as well as "psychopathic constitution" when it was recorded that he had made a complete recovery. He was not granted any compensation and was declared "fit for garrison service."

Out of our sample of one hundred soldiers with functional disorders admitted to the Charité during the war years, eighteen-mainly with functional motor disorders (such as paralysis of a limb or tremor)-received treatment in form of electric shocks combined with suggestive methods. The electric currents were commonly applied to the affected body part using a faradic brush. Response rates to electric shock therapy were reported as being very high, with most patients recovering after a single treatment session, but it is unclear whether symptoms were cured or whether patients reported improvement to avoid further unpleasant treatment. Furthermore, there is no account of the long-term effect of the treatment because no follow-up studies were conducted. No adverse effects from electric treatment were reported.

In Berlin, electrotherapy and suggestion (as well as medication) were used over the whole period of the war. The records do not suggest that treatment strategies changed during this time, except that early in the war, patients were frequently sent to rehabilitation centers in or around Berlin (such as Haus Schoenow in Berlin Zehlendorf) for electrotherapy, whereas in 1918, they received the same treatment in the Charité.

The Kaufmann method also used electric currents in combination with suggestion. Before electric stimuli were applied, the patient was told that the treatment would be painful, but that he would be completely cured after only one therapy session ("suggestive preparation"). Painful electric currents were then applied to different body parts-in gait disorders to the legs, in aphonia to the neck or tongue-for about two to five minutes, followed by exercises, which were again followed by electric stimulation. The physician joined in the strict exercise regime and continued his verbal suggestions. Nonne treated about 130 patients-mainly with motor disorders-with the Kaufmann method in his own Hamburg unit and reported a recovery rate of about 74 percent. However, as Nonne was convinced that treatment success did not depend on the strength of the electric current, he applied only brief and weak electric stimuli. Nonne also threatened soldiers who were about to be discharged from active service with reenlistment if they had a relapse of symptoms. This use of negative reinforcement may have explained Nonne's high success rates. Another physician who used electric currents was Gustav Oppenheim who invented a special device for the treatment of servicemen with functional tremor. During treatment, the patient was attached to an electrode and an interrupter. Whenever his tremor set in, he received an electric shock. The goal of the procedure was that over time, the patient would learn to control his tremor. The treatment was continued over a few days to prevent a relapse of symptoms. Through this continuous feedback, behavior was supposed to be altered permanently which was reflected in the high success rates reported.

Even in Jena, where only weak faradic currents were used, patients were threatened with the application of strong electric currents. This was in stark contrast to Binswanger's statement in his 1904 textbook that, "Every psychologically minded physician will object to these methods of punishment and threat, because the emotional shock could cause unforeseen damage even in a healthy individual."

OTHER FORMS OF PUNISHMENT

Treatments with an element of punishment could take a wide range of forms beyond this application of electric currents. A draconian way of managing servicemen suffering from severe vomiting was described by the Charlottenburg doctor Richard Hirschfeld. The physician was present at mealtimes and compelled the patient to eat until he vomited. The patient was then forced to swallow the vomit rather than being allowed to expectorate it. In Jena, patients with tremor or hysterical contractures underwent perhaps the most drastic of the punishing interventions. The affected limb-in two cases even the neck and head-was put in plaster for several days. This intervention had mixed results, but immediate recurrence of symptoms was not unusual. In treating refractory cases, the Jena psychiatrists even threatened to put a fully functioning limb in plaster. In Jena and Berlin, patients with severe hysterical symptoms were confined to the locked psychiatric ward, where otherwise mainly aggressive, agitated, loud, and confused patients were treated. The only way to escape imprisonment on the locked ward was to demonstrate a recovery from symptoms. Such cures could occur within a very short period of time, often within hours of admission. This practice was not reported in the wartime psychiatric literature, although at least two major university departments, those of Jena and Berlin, practiced it.

Isolation was another option for punishing patients who did not respond to or comply with other therapies. Soldiers were confined to their bed in a single room and not allowed to read, write, smoke, talk to the nurses, or receive visitors. Binswanger, who based this mental deprivation treatment ("psychische Abstinenzkur") on his observation that attention or compassion resulted in an exacerbation of hysterical symptoms, claimed high success rates with this approach. Another reason for using isolation therapy was that the removal of all stimuli was supposed to allow the patient to recover without distraction. In Jena, however, where twenty-two out of our one hundred cases were isolated in this manner, this treatment was explicitly used to "punish" the patient.

The following vignette of patient AB, taken from the Jena records, illustrates the use of punishment in the treatment of traumatized soldiers. Before the war, twenty-six-year-old AB worked as a forester in Gerstungen, a small town in Thuringia. He had undertaken military service from 1909 to 1911. Immediately after the outbreak of the war, AB was conscripted into the infantry and served with a unit that invaded Belgium on August 9, 1914. Afterwards, he was sent to Eastern Prussia and Galicia where he endured all stresses and strains without any major complaints. On November 19, 1914, he suffered from a shell injury to his left lateral malleolus. Treatment in a military hospital in Blankenburg led to a quick and complete recovery. In January and April 1915, he had to undergo an operative removal of two lipomas (benign tumors of fatty tissue) on his right elbow, resulting in iatrogenic damage to his radial nerve and transient loss of sensation in the fingers of his right hand. From May 1915, he experienced pain and tremor in his right forearm as well as persistent headaches. In June, he had a bout of tonsillitis and was granted furlough. As the tremor of his right arm and hand did not improve, he was admitted to the Jena Military Hospital on February 1, 1916.

On admission, he showed a coarse tremor in his right arm, most prominent in his wrist joint, with the amplitude increasing toward his hand. He was diagnosed with "emotional shaking tremor of the right arm" ("emotioneller Schuetteltremor"). For four weeks, he was-unsuccessfully-treated with bed rest and wet packs of his right arm. He was then confined to a single room, not allowed to leave his bed, receive visitors, read, or write. The psychiatrists also tried positive suggestion telling him of the quick recovery of a close friend. However, three weeks of isolation therapy did not achieve any improvement: AB appeared hopeless and depressed, consistently pointing out that he was not able consciously to control the shaking in his arm.

On March 24, 1916, his right arm and hand were completely immobilized by putting them into plaster. At the same time, "a simple torticollis following a cold [made] him believe that the disease [had] now moved into his head; this [showed] how suggestible the man is." A brief psychotherapeutic intervention used persuasion in order to convince him that this was not the case. Meanwhile, the right arm and hand appeared to be motionless within the plaster. Occasionally, a slight vibration of the fingers could be observed. After twelve days of immobilization, the plaster was removed, but the tremor immediately reappeared. AB was ordered out of bed and instructed to do light work in the garden. Although the treatment had not resolved his tremor, AB's mood lifted when the plaster came off. On May 2, after three months of treatment, AB was discharged as being "temporarily unfit for military service" and sent home in order to return into his civil occupation. Reexamination after six months was recommended and AB was granted 30 percent disability.

The man is told that his lack of progress and his nervous character ... could only be overcome through absolute rest, he had to be patient. If necessary he would have to rest in isolation for a year or longer. At the beginning he is very upset about the isolation. Cries and sobs, retches and gasps for breath, as if trying to say something, indicating that he wanted to write something down. He is told that every written communication had to be prohibited. Only when he regained his voice he would be allowed to unburden himself about his illness.

Two days before Christmas, the patient reacted furiously to the doctor's remark that in order to avoid any emotional excitation he was not allowed to take part in the holiday celebrations; he threw his feces about his room, threw a cup against the wall, and threatened a male nurse. He was transferred to the observation room, where he "was so upset that all the sudden he regained his voice. ... Is transferred to the dormitory, is allowed to attend the Christmas celebrations."

Not all patients responded so well Binswanger's therapy. Sometimes when soldiers did not respond to treatment, Binswanger abandoned his general practice of offering soldiers a discharge from military service as illustrated in the following case. M.R., a twenty-seven-year-old reservist developed functional mutism before he could be sent to the front line. After nineteen days of unsuccessful electrotherapy and waking suggestion in Jena, he was sent back to his regiment with the note: "The absence of speech does not prevent him from doing his service." This case showed the considerable power that psychiatrists could exercise over their soldier-patients. Clearly, the failure of cure in this case was not blamed on the doctor but on the patient.

ELECTRICITY FOR PURPOSES OTHER THAN PUNISHMENT

SHOCK/SURPRISE ATTACK ("AFFEKTSCHOCKMETHODEN")

Shock and surprise were considered powerful treatment tools and could be readily induced by electric stimulation; Kaufmann called this method "Ueberrumpelungsmethode" (surprise attack). It was believed that the soldier's active resistance to treatment could be overcome or disabled by means of an unexpected and sudden action. For example, physicians applied unheralded painful electric stimuli to patients who had been forced to remove their clothes to make them feel more vulnerable. Then the electric therapy was suddenly interrupted and the patient was told to do exercises involving the dysfunctional body part, at first synchronous with the physician and then alone. A second course of unannounced electric stimulation was followed by more exercises.

Richard Hirschfeld, who mainly treated patients with aphonia, used faradic currents in combination with verbal suggestion. Unlike Kaufmann, who delayed treatment until soldiers had recovered from acute shock, he initiated treatment as soon as patients arrived at the hospital, even if this was in the middle of the night, reducing their ability to resist the procedure. If patients with aphonia did not respond to electric currents applied to their neck, they received a general anesthesia with ether and/or chloroform after being told that they would be able to speak after the procedure. While waking, the patient received strong faradic currents to his auricle and nasal mucosa. Simultaneously, he was vigorously told that he could talk now and that he had already talked in his sleep. As soon as the patient started talking-before gaining full consciousness-he had to continuously recite poetry. When he talked too little or too quietly, he was punished with more faradic stimuli. Patients afterwards had amnesia for the intervention and they were not told what had been done to them. Hirschfeld reported a very high immediate success rate with this treatment, though he conducted no follow-up studies to establish the permanency of his cures.

LEARNING FROM A ROLE MODEL

It was also deemed important to minimize the influence of negative role models. In Jena (where the military hospital and psychiatric unit were separated), there was a strict policy of separating hysterics with acute symptoms (mainly psychogenic seizures) from their comrades in order to avoid "hysterical infection," most commonly through isolation therapy. The ostracism of individuals with hysterical symptoms found its harshest expression in Kehrer's suggestion to banish all hysterical men from public places so that no one had to bear their "unpleasant look." He also condemned any expression of pity or compassion for hysterical soldiers. Moreover, they were denied aids such as walking sticks and sunglasses.

REACHING THE SUBCONSCIOUS MIND

Nonne claimed very high success rates with his technique; he reported that by the end of the war, he and his Hamburg colleagues had treated one thousand and six hundred cases of hysteria with a response rate of 95 percent. Although the vast majority of his patients-mainly with motor disorders-were recorded as being cured after a short intervention, only a very small percentage of cases (3.5 percent) were discharged from his unit as fit for military service. In his textbook on hysteria, Binswanger mentioned three reasons why he strongly opposed treatment methods involving deep hypnotic states. First, he did not believe in its effectiveness. Second, he had seen cases where hypnosis actually triggered hysterical symptoms like seizures, and third, he believed it to be too deep an intrusion into an individual's psyche. Furthermore, he did not believe in abreaction and argued that the powers of suggestion were highly overrated.

PSYCHOANALYTIC THERAPY

OTHER PHYSICAL THERAPIES

Contemporaneous publications on the treatment of functional disorders did not discuss medication in detail. Soldiers admitted to the Charité during World War I commonly received the limited range of available drugs. Medication was primarily prescribed for sedation and analgesia. Calming medications commonly used were Valerian, bromide salts, chloral hydrate, paraldehyde, and the barbiturate veronal. Analgesic medications most commonly administered were aspirin, antipyrine, phenacetin, and pyramidone. Diet, massage, physio-, hydro-, and work therapy were also part of the whole treatment concept.

Binswanger also strongly believed in work therapy, thirty-nine out of our one hundred randomly picked patients were sent out to work in the hospital gardens, the farm, or various workshops (for example, joinery, boot-making). A characteristic note in the records reads, "The best therapy is productive labour, through which [the patient] will regain his self-confidence." Many patients also received physical therapies, such as cold wet packs (twenty-three patients), hot or cold baths (eleven patients), or had whole body massages (seven patients). Twenty-seven out of one hundred patients were prescribed a rest cure, commonly associated with a high calorie diet. Exercise was part of the treatment regime and patients were sent to the "medico-mechanical institute" in a former Jena school (nineteen patients).

TREATMENT CLASSIFICATION AND THE ISSUE OF DECEPTION

Moreover, we differ from Lerner in that we consider isolation primarily as a form of punishment rather than a separate category. Although isolation was used to promote recovery by removing all potentially exciting stimuli and distractions, the Jena case records unequivocally classify it as a punishment. Whereas Lerner categorized the different treatments mainly by procedure, we focused on the underlying therapeutic principles and implicit concepts (behavior modification, subconscious processes, cognitive structures).

Under pressure from military authorities to return as many soldiers as possible to active duty or to productive labor at home, any intervention seemed justifiable and legitimate. German psychiatrists confined their patients to locked wards, anesthetized them, used radiation and electricity and put entire limbs into plaster. Doctors and patients did not seem to question the legitimacy of these methods. After the war, Charles Myers, former consultant psychologist to the British Expeditionary Force in France, addressed the issue of "the justifiability of therapeutic lying" in a letter published in the Lancet. He strongly condemned any attempt to deceive the patient even if this were driven by a genuine desire to cure symptoms. He also considered it dangerous and unnecessary to mislead people into thinking that they suffered from an organic illness although he admitted that "the full truth is not always possible and explanations have to be couched in terms fitted to the mentality of the patient." In publications of German psychiatrists during and after World War I, these questions were not raised. During the war, German and British psychiatrists felt that the method used to cure war neuroses was not relevant as long as it proved successful.

DIFFERENT SYNDROMES: DIFFERENT OUTCOMES

The Jena case records tellingly illustrate that even if treatment resulted in a complete recovery of the patient, symptoms tended to recur with exposure to front-line service. The patient R.S., who developed a coarse shaking of his head immediately after a close shell explosion, was treated at the Jena military hospital in January/February 1915. After a rest cure and application of a strong bandage to his head and neck, the patient completely recovered. He received home leave in order to get married and was then sent back to the front line. Binswanger met the patient by chance three months after his discharge at a railway station in the South of Germany and found him to be shaking with his head. The patient told him that his disorder had reappeared after a short stay at the front line.

THE QUESTION OF SIMULATION

As Lerner states in his book Hysterical Men, "neither military nor medical authorities devoted significant amounts of attention to the simulation issue during the war." Aggravation of preexisting symptoms was considered more common. Nevertheless, some psychiatrists tried to establish guidelines for the distinction between hysteria and simulation. They concluded that a strong wish to avoid front-line service through illness was dominant both in hysterics and in malingerers. They were at a loss to distinguish these two groups on the basis of their clinical symptoms. A hysterical origin was considered likely in cases where there was a proven prewar history of hysterical symptoms, especially in childhood, or evidence of a psychopathic constitution throughout life. Conversely, malingering was suspected when symptoms did not vary with the emotional state of the patient and when no clear triggers could be identified.

The Berlin case files hardly mention simulation. The Jena psychiatrists were more interested in the detection of potential simulation or aggravation of symptoms. Any patients suspected of simulating or consciously exaggerating their symptoms were closely observed, especially at times when they believed to be unwatched or when they were distracted. However, the diagnosis of simulation was rarely confirmed at discharge from hospital (in less than 0.5 percent of all cases). Even if simulation was suspected, treatment was not different from that of a patient with "hysteria" or "psychopathic constitution." The following comment was frequently found in the Jena case records: "The award of a pension would turn him into a pension hysteric (Rentenhysteriker), whereas the enforcement to work will be educational."

It is difficult to generalize about treatment simply because there were so many doctors engaged in the war effort. Some were steeped in military tradition and sought to serve the needs of the army, while others who remained civilian at heart emphasized the needs of the individual soldier patient or veteran. The following case from Jena demonstrates that even if "pension hysteria" and deliberate simulation of symptoms were strongly suspected this did not necessarily have adverse consequences for the patient if he encountered a sympathetic doctor; not all patients were so fortunate.

E.J., a forty-five-year-old locksmith and war pensioner was admitted to the Jena Military Hospital in September 1917 with a diagnosis of "neurosis and aggravation." He had fought at the Russian front from April until July 1915 when he was buried following several shell explosions. Treated in several military hospitals for severe shaking, EJ was discharged from the army in July 1916 with a pension. He then worked in his own company. Complaining of pressure in his head and general weakness, he applied for an increase in his pension and was sent to Jena for assessment where the doctor wrote:

The whole behaviour of this man during the examination appears to be contrived and insincere. Dressing and undressing is carried out briskly. On the examination table he moves his legs aimlessly, sighs, opens his eyes widely, looks at the physician in a threatening manner, covers his eyes with his hand, clattering his teeth, trembles. ... Only answers questions slowly and vaguely. ... Refuses any treatment, changes his mind later but all the sudden leaves the hospital in the evening.

The physician concluded:

His whole behaviour is contrived and unnatural and gives the impression that this is a deliberate deception through exaggeration. Due to the lack of organic signs it is impossible to say if the subjective symptoms really exist. We cannot recommend an increase in his pension.

On re-admission, EJ was diagnosed as suffering from "pension neurasthenia" ("Rentenneurasthenie").

CRITICISM OF THE CONFLUENCE OF MILITARY AND MEDICAL GOALS

An important question remains as to whether psychiatrists treating servicemen with functional disorders acted out of genuine concern for the individual patient or saw themselves as servants of the state and the national cause (the "confluence of military and medical goals"). It is often argued that the psychiatric profession was subverted for the purpose of the war machinery and that psychiatrists were under pressure to return as many soldiers as possible back to the front line. Some modern accounts of German military psychiatry are highly critical of the treatment methods applied to traumatized soldiers during World War I. Peter Riedesser and Axel Verderber identified "violence against the patient" as the main characteristic of all treatment methods applied to hysterical soldiers during the war. Psychiatrists, they argued, aimed to make "the stay in military hospitals more terrifying than duty at the front-line" because the primary goal of the physician was to send war neurotics back to combatant duties. In their perspective, the German psychiatrists of World War I were essentially brutal henchmen of the military leadership.

Most psychiatrists seem to have behaved in a way that was compatible with their status as military officers. Yet, as demonstrated above, if they ever had the goal of sending traumatized soldiers back to the front, this was abandoned in the course of the war. Although this policy may have been driven more by the prevalent medical ideology that attributed traumatic reactions to underlying mental and moral weakness than by genuine concern for the patients' well-being, it did prevent most of their patients from being sent back to further front-line service, contrary to the allegations of Riedesser and Verderber.

Psychoanalysis seems to have been a significant exception from this rule because analytically oriented therapists such as Simmel had the express aim of rendering their patients fit for military service, an attitude Lerner calls "one of the great ironies in the history of wartime psychiatry." One reason for this difference may be that psychoanalysts, even more so than psychiatrists, felt the need to establish their field as a respected domain of medicine and thus seized the opportunity to demonstrate tangible treatment results.

The diagnosis of "hysteria" constituted a compromise between the state's desire to minimize the burden of pension claims-by not accepting the causal relationship between war trauma and symptom manifestation-on the one hand and the duty of care for the individual patient on the other. By giving the patient the label of hysteria, it was implicitly accepted that he did not consciously simulate his symptoms and thus could not be convicted by a court martial, and he would be saved from front-line hardship. As Ben Shephard stated in his account of military psychiatry, the Germans [as compared to the British and French] were "more willing to accept that men who had broken down would not be much use as soldiers again, and followed a deliberate policy, not simply of work therapy but of converting shell-shocked soldiers into farm or factory workers to fill labour shortages at home."

Having become aware of the limitations of treatment, British medical authorities adopted a similar policy only in 1918.

CONCLUSION

World War I marked a turning point in the history of psychiatric treatment in Germany. The challenge posed by thousands of traumatized soldiers awakened the creativity and pioneering spirit of a profession that had largely resigned itself to a form of therapeutic nihilism. Psychiatric and neurological journals and conferences were a forum for discussion of psychopathology, etiological concepts, treatments, and treatment outcomes, including the first systematic therapeutic trials in the history of psychiatry. Treatments developed for war neurotics were diverse and reflected a broad range of theoretical positions. Most treatments worked through the systematic reinforcement of "healthy" behavior and aimed to transform the traumatized soldier into a valuable laborer (but not necessarily to return him to active duty). It is striking how many concepts incorporated into the treatment of war neurosis seemed to anticipate what would later be known as behavioral therapy.

FUNDING

This work was supported by the Wellcome Trust (Ph.D. Studentship, Centre for the Humanities and Health, King's College London, to S.C.L.) and the British Academy (Small Grant SG090329 to S.C.L.).

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Access to the Charité records was kindly granted by Professor Volker Hess, head of the Institute for the History of Medicine of the Charité Medical School, Berlin, Germany, and access to the Jena records by Professor Heinrich Sauer, head of the Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, and by Privatdozent Joachim Bauer, head of the archive of the Friedrich Schiller University, Jena, Germany. We are grateful to the library and archives staff of both institutions.

Footnotes

See, for example, Karl Bonhoeffer, "Über die Bedeutung der Kriegserfahrungen für die allgemeine Psychopathologie und Ätiologie der Geisteskrankheiten," in Handbuch der ärztlichen Erfahrungen im Weltkriege 1914/1918, ed. Otto v. Schjerning (Leipzig: Barth, 1922), 4: 3-44; Ernst Rittershaus, "Zur Frage der Kriegshysterie," Z. Gesamte Neurol. Psychiatr., 1919, 50, 87-97; K. E. Mayer, "Elektro-suggestive Behandlung hysterischer Stupor- und Dämmerzustände," Z. Gesamte Neurol. Psychiatr., 1919, 45, 381-92.

Prominent examples include Hermann Oppenheim, "Stand der Lehre von den Kriegs-und Unfallneurosen," Berliner Klinische Wochenschrift, 1917, 49, 1169-72; Karl Bonhoeffer, "Einige Schlussfolgerungen aus der psychiatrischen Krankenbewegung während des Krieges," Arch. Psychiatr. Nervenkr., 1919, 60, 721-28; Fritz Fraenkel, "Über die psychopathische Konstitution bei Kriegsneurosen," Monatsschrift für Psychiatrie und Neurologie, 1920, 47, 287-309; Heinrich Stern, "Die hysterischen Bewegungsstörungen als Massener scheinung im Krieg, ihre Entstehung und Prognose," Z. Gesamte Neurol. Psychiatr., 1918, 39, 246-81; Richard Hirschfeld, "Zur Behandlung im Kriege erworbener hysterischer Zustände, insbesondere von Sprachstörungen," Z. Gesamte Neurol. Psychiatr., 1916, 34, 195-205.

Nonne, "Über erfolgreiche Suggestivbehandlung der hysteriformen Störungen bei Kriegsneurosen."

For details, see Linden, Hess, and Jones, "The Neurological Manifestations of Trauma."

Fritz Kaufmann, "Die planmässige Heilung komplizierter psychogener Bewegungsstörungen bei Soldaten in einer Sitzung," Münchner Medizinische Wochenschrift, 1916, 63, 802-4; Otto Binswanger, Die Hysterie (Vienna: A. Hoelder, 1904); Nonne, "Über erfolgreiche Suggestivbehandlung der hysteriformen Störungen bei Kriegsneurosen"; Ferdinand Kehrer, "Zur Frage der Behandlung der Kriegsneurosen," Z. Gesamte Neurol. Psychiatr., 1917, 36, 1-22.

Nonne, "Über erfolgreiche Suggestivbehandlung der hysteriformen Störungen bei Kriegsneurosen," 198.

Hirschfeld, "Zur Behandlung im Kriege erworbener hysterischer Zustände, insbesondere von Sprachstörungen."

Kehrer, "Zur Frage der Behandlung der Kriegsneurosen"; Nonne, "Über erfolgreiche Suggestivbehandlung der hysteriformen Störungen bei Kriegsneurosen"; Mayer, "Elektro-suggestive Behandlung hysterischer Stupor- und Dämmerzustände."

Kehrer, "Zur Frage der Behandlung der Kriegsneurosen."

Kehrer, "Zur Frage der Behandlung der Kriegsneurosen."

Nonne, "Über erfolgreiche Suggestivbehandlung der hysteriformen Störungen bei Kriegsneurosen."

Kehrer, "Zur Frage der Behandlung der Kriegsneurosen."

Nonne excluded patients with strong resistance, fear of the procedure or doubts of the efficacy of the treatment. See Nonne, "Über erfolgreiche Suggestivbehandlung der hysteriformen Störungen bei Kriegsneurosen."

Hirschfeld, "Zur Behandlung im Kriege erworbener hysterischer Zustände, insbesondere von Sprachstörungen"; Jolowicz, "Kriegsneurosen im Felde"; Julius Raecke, "Feldärztlicher Beitrag zum Kapitel "Kriegsneurosen," Archiv für Psychiatrie und Nervenkrankheiten, 1918, 59, 1-5; Kurt Schneider, "Einige psychiatrische Erfahrungen als Truppenarzt," Z. Gesamte Neurol. Psychiatr., 1918, 39, 307-14.

Bresler, "Das Kaufmann-Verfahren bei funktionellen Nervenstörungen."

Nonne, "Über erfolgreiche Suggestivbehandlung der hysteriformen Störungen bei Kriegsneurosen."

Nonne, "Über erfolgreiche Suggestivbehandlung der hysteriformen Störungen bei Kriegsneurosen"; Kehrer, "Zur Frage der Behandlung der Kriegsneurosen."

Beyer, "Die Heilung des Zitterns und anderer nervöser Bewegungsstörungen."

Kehrer, "Zur Frage der Behandlung der Kriegsneurosen."

Hirschfeld, "Zur Behandlung im Kriege erworbener hysterischer Zustände, insbesondere von Sprachstörungen"; Nonne, "Über erfolgreiche Suggestivbehandlung der hysteriformen Störungen bei Kriegsneurosen."

Beyer, "Die Heilung des Zitterns und anderer nervöser Bewegungsstörungen."

Nonne, "Über erfolgreiche Suggestivbehandlung der hysteriformen Störungen bei Kriegsneurosen."

Bestand S III, Abt. IX, Nr. 906, Universitätsarchiv der Friedrich-Schiller, Universität, Jena. (Hereafter Universitätsarchiv, Jena).

Historisches Psychiatriearchiv Charité, M8875/1918, case record translated by Stefanie Linden.

Linden, Hess, and Jones, "The Neurological Manifestations of Trauma."

Nonne, "Über erfolgreiche Suggestivbehandlung der hysteriformen Störungen bei Kriegsneurosen," 197-98.

Hirschfeld, "Zur Behandlung im Kriege erworbener hysterischer Zustände, insbesondere von Sprachstörungen."

Bestand S III, Abt. IX, Nr. 511, Universitätsarchiv, Jena.

Bestand S III, Abt. IX, Nr. 426, Universitätsarchiv, Jena (translated by Stefanie Linden).

Bestand S III, Abt. IX, Nr. 710, Universitätsarchiv, Jena.

Bestand S III, Abt. IX, Nr. 360, Universitätsarchiv, Jena.

Bresler, "Das Kaufmann-Verfahren bei funktionellen Nervenstörungen," 113.

Hirschfeld, "Zur Behandlung im Kriege erworbener hysterischer Zustände, insbesondere von Sprachstörungen."

D. Dub, "Heilung psychogener Taubheit, Stummheit (Taubstummheit)." I was not able to find the first names for M. Rothman or D. Dub.

Kehrer, "Zur Frage der Behandlung der Kriegsneurosen," 13.

Bresler, "Das Kaufmann-Verfahren bei funktionellen Nervenstörungen"; "Zur Behandlung im Kriege erworbener hysterischer Zustände, insbesondere von Sprachstörungen"; Nonne, "Über erfolgreiche Suggestivbehandlung der hysteriformen Störungen bei Kriegsneurosen."

Kehrer, "Zur Frage der Behandlung der Kriegsneurosen," 8.

Kehrer, "Zur Frage der Behandlung der Kriegsneurosen," 22.

Nonne, "Über erfolgreiche Suggestivbehandlung der hysteriformen Störungen bei Kriegsneurosen," 208.

Stern, "Die psychoanalytische Behandlung der Hysterie Im Lazarett."

Sauer, "Zur Analyse und Behandlung der Kriegsneurosen."

Bestand S III, Abt. IX, Nr. 1311, Universitaetsarchiv, Jena.

Ibid., 117-18; for Sommer's method, see Robert Sommer, "Beseitigung funktioneller Taubheit, besonders bei Soldaten, durch eine experimental-psychologische Methode."

Jones, "War Neuroses and Arthur Hurst."

Hirschfeld, "Zur Behandlung im Kriege erworbener hysterischer Zustände, insbesondere von Sprachstörungen."

A. Bostroem, "Zur Psychologie und Klinik der psychogenen Hörstörungen," Z. Gesamte Neurol. Psychiatr., 1918, 40, 308-41; Dudley William Carmalt Jones, "War-Neurasthenia, Acute and Chronic," Brain, 1919, 42, 171-213; Julius Donath, "Kriegsbeobachtungen über hysterische Stimm-, Sprach- und Hörstörungen," Monatsschrift für Psychiatrie und Neurologie, 1918, 40, 301-17; Stern, "Die hysterischen Bewegungsstörungen."

Linden, Hess, and Jones, "The Neurological Manifestations of Trauma."

Bostroem, "Zur Psychologie und Klinik der psychogenen Hörstörungen."

Bestand S III, Abt. IX, Nr. 153Universitätsarchiv, Jena.

Bestand S III, Abt. IX, Nr. 1227,Universitätsarchiv, Jena.

Bestand S III, Abt. IX, Nr. 1097, Universitätsarchiv, Jena.

Schneider, "Einige psychiatrische Erfahrungen als Truppenarzt."

Articles from Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences are provided here courtesy of Oxford University Press

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
German Battle Casualties: The Treatment of Functional Somatic Disorders during World War I

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
World War I witnessed the admission of large numbers of German soldiers with neurological symptoms for which there was no obvious organic cause. This posed a considerable challenge for the military and medical authorities and resulted in an active ...

# data[].attributes.body
This article speaks about the PTSD that the soldiers have experienced through the war. This became a challenge during and after the war as numerous soldiers had PTSD attacks.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The treatment of "shell shock" in World War 1: Early attitudes and treatments for post-traumatic stress disorder and combat stress reaction - ScienceDirect

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Combat stress reaction is a mental health disorder first documented in the latter half of the 19th century. But it was not until World War 1 when men were put through the horrific ordeals of trench warfare that the term, "shell shocked" was coined.

# data[].attributes.body
In this article it talks about the germans had developed machine guns zeppelins and sea and air borne weapons in an attempt to secure the victory in the first world war as well as chemical weapons

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
World War I was less than one year old when British writer H. G. Wells lamented the fate of humanity at the hands of "man's increasing power of destruction" (H. G. Wells, "Civilization at the Breaking Point," New York Times, May 27, 1915, 2). Although considered a father of science fiction, Wells was observing something all too real-technology had changed the face of combat in World War I and ultimately accounted for an unprecedented loss of human life.

[Detail] "Huge siege guns of the Central Powers used in the smashing of forts." War of the Nations, 110.

Infantry warfare had depended upon hand-to-hand combat. World War I popularized the use of the machine gun-capable of bringing down row after row of soldiers from a distance on the battlefield. This weapon, along with barbed wire and mines, made movement across open land both difficult and dangerous. Thus trench warfare was born. The British introduced tanks in 1916; they were used with airplanes and artillery to advance the front. The advent of chemical warfare added to the soldier's perils.

"French, British, and German Types of Battle Tanks." War of the Nations, 167.

Sea and airborne weapons made killing from a distance more effective as well. Guns mounted on ships were able to strike targets up to twenty miles inland. The stealth and speed of German submarines gave Germany a considerable advantage in its dominance of the North Sea. Although airplanes were technologically crude, they offered a psychological advantage. Fighter pilot aces such as Manfred von Richthofen, Germany's "Red Baron," became celebrities and heroes, capturing the world's imagination with their daring and thrilling mid-air maneuvers.

[Detail] "The Insidious and Deadly Gas That Creeps Noiselessly Down Toward the Foe." War of the Nations, 210.

Newspapers charted the public's reaction-horror and vengeance-to these technological advancements. A few weeks after the Germans first used poison gas in Ypres, Belgium, on April 22, 1915, a London newswire to the New York Times described the brutal details of the attack and the immediate effects on the soldiers, concluding: "It is without doubt the most awful form of scientific torture." Yet a Daily Chronicle [London] editorial urged Britain to retaliate with poison gas use of its own (quoted in New York Times, May 7, 1915, 2). In fact, Germany claimed that the Allies were already using mines charged with poison gas. So horrified were people by chemical warfare that the use of poison gases was banned for future wars, although not until 1925.

When Germany's plan for a swift military victory went unrealized, the pace of war bogged down. Both sides tried to break this stalemate through the use of force. In previous wars, victory was achieved through territorial supremacy; in World War I it was accomplished by simply outlasting the opponent-a "war of attrition." When fighting first broke out in August 1914, many hoped the war would be short-lived; few predicted a conflict that would last for more than four years and scar an entire generation with its unprecedented brutality.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Military Technology in World War I | Articles & Essays | Newspaper Pictorials: World War I Rotogravures, 1914-1919 | Digital Collections | Library of Congress

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
World War I was less than one year old when British writer H. G. Wells lamented the fate of humanity at the hands of "man's increasing power of destruction" (H. G. Wells, "Civilization at the Breaking Point," New York Times, May 27, 1915, 2).

# data[].attributes.body
This article talks about ptsd and how it can affect a person as well as some of the effects of PTSD.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.authors[].name
Stephen N. Xenakis and Matthew J. Friedman

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Stephen N. Xenakis, Matthew J. Friedman, UNDERSTANDING PTSD, The Wilson Quarterly (1976-), Vol. 36, No. 1 (WINTER 2012), pp. 8-9

# data[].attributes.body
This article talks about Germany's economic suffering during and after the war.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
JSTOR is a digital library of academic journals, books, and primary sources.

# data[].attributes.body
this website talks about the PTSD that soldiers get after seeing there friends or comrades dieing. many veterans and civilians suffering from PTDS may struggle to reintegrate into the workforce. those who do work may experience difficulties concentrating, maintaining consistent. In the study, the investigators brought to light the extent to which PTSD not only impacts Veterans, but civilians, as well. The research team found that civilians accounted for 82% of the total PTSD costs, compared with 18% for the military population. That disparity is predicated on the fact that the number of civilians far exceeds that of active-duty military and Veterans. Although PTSD is more prevalent in the military, the number of civilians with PTSD still tops the number of Veterans with that condition.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Study: economic burden of PTSD ‘staggering’

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A new study finds that the national economic burden of PTSD exceeds the financial cost of other common mental health conditions, such as anxiety and depression.

# data[].attributes.body
This article speciially talk about how they have now estimated a closer amount of deaths during WWI

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
JSTOR is a digital library of academic journals, books, and primary sources.

# data[].attributes.body
It is about The social context is the environment in which social interactions occur, encompassing the cultural, economic, political and social conditions that influence people's lives.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Social context refers to the environment of people, relationships, and culture that surrounds and influences an individual’s behavior and experiences.

# data[].attributes.body
This goes into detail about the historical aspect of the war. How it started, who was involved, and what took place.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
World War I, an international conflict that in 1914-18 embroiled most of the nations of Europe along with Russia, the United States, the Middle East, and other regions. The war pitted the Central Powers-mainly Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Turkey-against the Allies-mainly France, Great Britain, Russia, Italy, Japan, and, from 1917, the United States. It ended with the defeat of the Central Powers. The war was virtually unprecedented in the slaughter, carnage, and destruction it caused.

World War I was one of the great watersheds of 20th-century geopolitical history. It led to the fall of four great imperial dynasties (in Germany, Russia, Austria-Hungary, and Turkey), resulted in the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia, and, in its destabilization of European society, laid the groundwork for World War II.

The last surviving veterans of World War I were American serviceman Frank Buckles (died in February 2011), British-born Australian serviceman Claude Choules (died in May 2011), and British servicewoman Florence Green (died in February 2012), the last surviving veteran of the war.

The outbreak of war

With Serbia already much aggrandized by the two Balkan Wars (1912-13, 1913), Serbian nationalists turned their attention back to the idea of "liberating" the South Slavs of Austria-Hungary. Colonel Dragutin Dimitrijević, head of Serbia's military intelligence, was also, under the alias "Apis," head of the secret society Union or Death, pledged to the pursuit of this pan-Serbian ambition. Believing that the Serbs' cause would be served by the death of the Austrian archduke Franz Ferdinand, heir presumptive to the Austrian emperor Franz Joseph, and learning that the Archduke was about to visit Bosnia on a tour of military inspection, Apis plotted his assassination. Nikola Pašić, the Serbian prime minister and an enemy of Apis, heard of the plot and warned the Austrian government of it, but his message was too cautiously worded to be understood.

At 11:15 am on June 28, 1914, in the Bosnian capital, Sarajevo, Franz Ferdinand and his morganatic wife, Sophie, duchess of Hohenberg, were shot dead by a Bosnian Serb, Gavrilo Princip. The chief of the Austro-Hungarian general staff, Franz, Graf (count) Conrad von Hötzendorf, and the foreign minister, Leopold, Graf von Berchtold, saw the crime as the occasion for measures to humiliate Serbia and so to enhance Austria-Hungary's prestige in the Balkans. Conrad had already (October 1913) been assured by William II of Germany's support if Austria-Hungary should start a preventive war against Serbia. This assurance was confirmed in the week following the assassination, before William, on July 6, set off upon his annual cruise to the North Cape, off Norway.

The Austrians decided to present an unacceptable ultimatum to Serbia and then to declare war, relying on Germany to deter Russia from intervention. Though the terms of the ultimatum were finally approved on July 19, its delivery was postponed to the evening of July 23, since by that time the French president, Raymond Poincaré, and his premier, René Viviani, who had set off on a state visit to Russia on July 15, would be on their way home and therefore unable to concert an immediate reaction with their Russian allies. When the delivery was announced, on July 24, Russia declared that Austria-Hungary must not be allowed to crush Serbia.

Serbia replied to the ultimatum on July 25, accepting most of its demands but protesting against two of them-namely, that Serbian officials (unnamed) should be dismissed at Austria-Hungary's behest and that Austro-Hungarian officials should take part, on Serbian soil, in proceedings against organizations hostile to Austria-Hungary. Though Serbia offered to submit the issue to international arbitration, Austria-Hungary promptly severed diplomatic relations and ordered partial mobilization.

Home from his cruise on July 27, William learned on July 28 how Serbia had replied to the ultimatum. At once he instructed the German Foreign Office to tell Austria-Hungary that there was no longer any justification for war and that it should content itself with a temporary occupation of Belgrade. But, meanwhile, the German Foreign Office had been giving such encouragement to Berchtold that already on July 27 he had persuaded Franz Joseph to authorize war against Serbia. War was in fact declared on July 28, and Austro-Hungarian artillery began to bombard Belgrade the next day. Russia then ordered partial mobilization against Austria-Hungary, and on July 30, when Austria-Hungary was riposting conventionally with an order of mobilization on its Russian frontier, Russia ordered general mobilization. Germany, which since July 28 had still been hoping, in disregard of earlier warning hints from Great Britain, that Austria-Hungary's war against Serbia could be "localized" to the Balkans, was now disillusioned insofar as eastern Europe was concerned. On July 31 Germany sent a 24-hour ultimatum requiring Russia to halt its mobilization and an 18-hour ultimatum requiring France to promise neutrality in the event of war between Russia and Germany.

Both Russia and France predictably ignored these demands. On August 1 Germany ordered general mobilization and declared war against Russia, and France likewise ordered general mobilization. The next day Germany sent troops into Luxembourg and demanded from Belgium free passage for German troops across its neutral territory. On August 3 Germany declared war against France.

In the night of August 3-4 German forces invaded Belgium. Thereupon, Great Britain, which had no concern with Serbia and no express obligation to fight either for Russia or for France but was expressly committed to defend Belgium, on August 4 declared war against Germany.

Austria-Hungary declared war against Russia on August 5; Serbia against Germany on August 6; Montenegro against Austria-Hungary on August 7 and against Germany on August 12; France and Great Britain against Austria-Hungary on August 10 and on August 12, respectively; Japan against Germany on August 23; Austria-Hungary against Japan on August 25 and against Belgium on August 28.

Romania had renewed its secret anti-Russian alliance of 1883 with the Central Powers on February 26, 1914, but now chose to remain neutral. Italy had confirmed the Triple Alliance on December 7, 1912, but could now propound formal arguments for disregarding it: first, Italy was not obliged to support its allies in a war of aggression; second, the original treaty of 1882 had stated expressly that the alliance was not against England.

On September 5, 1914, Russia, France, and Great Britain concluded the Treaty of London, each promising not to make a separate peace with the Central Powers. Thenceforth, they could be called the Allied, or Entente, powers, or simply the Allies.

The outbreak of war in August 1914 was generally greeted with confidence and jubilation by the peoples of Europe, among whom it inspired a wave of patriotic feeling and celebration. Few people imagined how long or how disastrous a war between the great nations of Europe could be, and most believed that their country's side would be victorious within a matter of months. The war was welcomed either patriotically, as a defensive one imposed by national necessity, or idealistically, as one for upholding right against might, the sanctity of treaties, and international morality.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
World War I | History, Summary, Causes, Combatants, Casualties, Map, & Facts

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
World War I, international conflict that in 1914-18 embroiled most of the nations of Europe along with Russia, the U.S., the Middle East, and other regions. It led to the fall of four great imperial dynasties and, in its destabilization of European society, laid the groundwork for World War II.

# data[].attributes.body
During World War I, women on the home front primarily took on new roles in the workforce, filling jobs previously held by men who were drafted to fight, including working in factories, particularly munitions production, as well as taking on roles in agriculture, transportation, and clerical work

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
JSTOR is a digital library of academic journals, books, and primary sources.

# data[].attributes.body
this Article talks about survivers Just over 21.9 million U.S. military Veterans are part of the 307 million people living in the United States; another 1.4 million Americans serve in the active duty military. On Veterans Day, we honor all who served, knowing that all Veterans, whether they served through the harshest conditions of combat or during peacetime, took on the ultimate responsibility of citizenship in a free society and in doing so served us all.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Honoring America’s Last Surviving WWI Veteran - VA News

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Department of Veterans Affairs honors Mr. Buckles, who is the last living U.S. Veteran of World War One.

# data[].attributes.body
This article talks about the aftermath of World War 1 on Germany

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
JSTOR is a digital library of academic journals, books, and primary sources.

# data[].attributes.body
Social and community context includes key issues such as cohesion within a community, civic participation, discrimination, conditions in the workplace, and incarceration.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Social and Community Context | Prepare Your Health | CDC

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Social and community context includes key issues such as cohesion within a community, civic participation, discrimination, conditions in the workplace, and incarceration. These issues can make it difficult or impossible for people to prepare for and respond to an emergency to the best of their abilities.

# data[].attributes.body
The article is talking about the impact of the PTSD in the veterans in world war one. How they probably live with all that trauma all their lives. The impact that the world war one leaves in the veterans and in all the world.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
To some extent, shell-shock still shapes our understanding of PTSD today.

# data[].attributes.body
This article is about the economical- viewpoint on war it talks about costs in war

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
JSTOR is a digital library of academic journals, books, and primary sources.

# data[].attributes.body
This article talks about how after World War 1, when the German soldiers returned home, everyone thought they had gone crazy. This was before the idea of "PTSD" was unacceptable in Germany and the soldiers were dubbed "hysterical".

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
When Germany Called its Soldiers Hysterical - JSTOR Daily

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
After WWI, German psychiatrists diagnosed traumatized soldiers as having “hysteria,” othering the men to somewhat disastrous effect.

# data[].attributes.body
This article is talking about the change of attitudes toward World War One. how the impacts that left and the developed of the world .

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This is a preview. Log in through your library.

After the First World War the belief became substantially widespread among developed countries that the venerable institution of war should be abandoned from their affairs. It was an idea whose time had come. Historically, the war does not seem to have been all that unusual in its duration, destructiveness, grimness, political pointlessness, economic consequences or breadth. It does seem to have been unique in that (1) it was the first major war to be preceded by substantial, organized anti-war agitation, and (2) for Europeans, it followed an unprecedentedly peaceful century during which even war enthusiasts began, perhaps unknowingly, to appreciate the virtues of peace. Thus the war served as a necessary catalyst for opinion change. The process through which the change took place owes much to British war aims and to their efforts to get the United States into the war. The article concludes with some reflections on the historical movement of ideas.

Journal Information

The British Journal of Political Science is a broadly based journal aiming to cover developments across a wide range of countries and specialisms. Contributions are drawn from all fields of political science (including political theory, political behaviour, public policy and international relations), and articles from scholars in related disciplines (sociology, social psychology, economics and philosophy) appear frequently. With a reputation established over 50 years of publication, the British Journal of Political Science is widely recognised as one of the premier journals in its field. Instructions for Contributors at Cambridge Journals Online

Publisher Information

Cambridge University Press (www.cambridge.org) is the publishing division of the University of Cambridge, one of the world's leading research institutions and winner of 81 Nobel Prizes. Cambridge University Press is committed by its charter to disseminate knowledge as widely as possible across the globe. It publishes over 2,500 books a year for distribution in more than 200 countries. Cambridge Journals publishes over 250 peer-reviewed academic journals across a wide range of subject areas, in print and online. Many of these journals are the leading academic publications in their fields and together they form one of the most valuable and comprehensive bodies of research available today. For more information, visit http://journals.cambridge.org.

Rights & Usage

This item is part of a JSTOR Collection.
For terms and use, please refer to our Terms and Conditions
British Journal of Political Science © 1991

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Changing Attitudes towards War: The Impact of the First World War on JSTOR

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
John Mueller, Changing Attitudes towards War: The Impact of the First World War, British Journal of Political Science, Vol. 21, No. 1 (Jan., 1991), pp. 1-28

# data[].attributes.body
This article discusses the aftermath affects of world war 1, like cost of lives and damage and so on.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
JSTOR is a digital library of academic journals, books, and primary sources.

# data[].attributes.body
This article is discussing about how ptsd can start like from being in battle and seeing who you most care about die. Then it is compared to people who get Ptsd from another source without being in the war.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Study: economic burden of PTSD ‘staggering’

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A new study finds that the national economic burden of PTSD exceeds the financial cost of other common mental health conditions, such as anxiety and depression.

# data[].attributes.body
This journal article goes through the economic impact of WWI which includes Germany, inflation, export prices, etc.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Adam Tooze, Ted Fertik, The World Economy and the Great War, Geschichte und Gesellschaft, 40. Jahrg., H. 2, Der Erste Weltkrieg in globaler Perspektive (April - Juni 2014), pp. 214-238

# data[].attributes.body
This short article explains how German-American immigrants were treated out of fear during the First World War.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Sometimes immigrants face hardships that have nothing to do with learning a new language, finding a clean place to live or getting a good job. Those difficulties can be much easier to overcome than dealing with an invisible problem—discrimination…

# data[].attributes.body
In the article All Quiet on the Western Front and the Fate of war, Modris Ekstiens talk about how Erich Maria novel changed the way people thought about World War. The book helped shape the society memory and understanding of the war.http://jstor.org

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
JSTOR is a digital library of academic journals, books, and primary sources.

# data[].attributes.body
This article talks about how the banning of All Quiet on the Western Front in Germsny and Austria reflected the rise of political tensions of time, the nazi party saw the novel as a threat to the nationalists ideals.

http://jstor.org

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
JSTOR is a digital library of academic journals, books, and primary sources.

# data[].attributes.body
It helps to read this article because this article it gives you more facts about what happened. The actual it talks about about the Great War that happened in 1014. This article gives us so much contact on who was involved and exactly about the cause of conflict. The major events that were happening Germany's Schlieffen Plan and battles and the First Battle of the Marne. The Russians revealution in 1917 to lead the Russia leaving the war. This can help give us a better understanding of the movie and all the background behind it.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Archduke Franz Ferdinand

Tensions had been brewing throughout Europe-especially in the troubled Balkan region of southeast Europe-for years before World War I actually broke out.

A number of alliances involving European powers, the Ottoman Empire, Russia and other parties had existed for years, but political instability in the Balkans (particularly Bosnia, Serbia and Herzegovina) threatened to destroy these agreements.

The spark that ignited World War I was struck in Sarajevo, Bosnia, where Archduke Franz Ferdinand -heir to the Austro-Hungarian Empire-was shot to death along with his wife, Sophie, by the Serbian nationalist Gavrilo Princip on June 28, 1914. Princip and other nationalists were struggling to end Austro-Hungarian rule over Bosnia and Herzegovina.

The assassination of Franz Ferdinand set off a rapidly escalating chain of events: Austria-Hungary, like many countries around the world, blamed the Serbian government for the attack and hoped to use the incident as justification for settling the question of Serbian nationalism once and for all.

Kaiser Wilhelm II

Because mighty Russia supported Serbia, Austria-Hungary waited to declare war until its leaders received assurance from German leader Kaiser Wilhelm II that Germany would support their cause. Austro-Hungarian leaders feared that a Russian intervention would involve Russia's ally, France, and possibly Great Britain as well.

On July 5, Kaiser Wilhelm secretly pledged his support, giving Austria-Hungary a so-called carte blanche, or "blank check" assurance of Germany's backing in the case of war. The Dual Monarchy of Austria-Hungary then sent an ultimatum to Serbia, with such harsh terms as to make it almost impossible to accept.

World War I Begins

Convinced that Austria-Hungary was readying for war, the Serbian government ordered the Serbian army to mobilize and appealed to Russia for assistance. On July 28, Austria-Hungary declared war on Serbia, and the tenuous peace between Europe's great powers quickly collapsed.

Within a week, Russia, Belgium, France, Great Britain and Serbia had lined up against Austria-Hungary and Germany, and World War I had begun.

The Western Front

According to an aggressive military strategy known as the Schlieffen Plan (named for its mastermind, German Field Marshal Alfred von Schlieffen), Germany began fighting World War I on two fronts, invading France through neutral Belgium in the west and confronting Russia in the east.

On August 4, 1914, German troops crossed the border into Belgium. In the first battle of World War I, the Germans assaulted the heavily fortified city of Liege, using the most powerful weapons in their arsenal-enormous siege cannons-to capture the city by August 15. The Germans left death and destruction in their wake as they advanced through Belgium toward France, shooting civilians and executing a Belgian priest they had accused of inciting civilian resistance.

First Battle of the Marne

In the First Battle of the Marne, fought from September 6-9, 1914, French and British forces confronted the invading German army, which had by then penetrated deep into northeastern France, within 30 miles of Paris. The Allied troops checked the German advance and mounted a successful counterattack, driving the Germans back to the north of the Aisne River.

The defeat meant the end of German plans for a quick victory in France. Both sides dug into trenches, and the Western Front was the setting for a hellish war of attrition that would last more than three years.

Particularly long and costly battles in this campaign were fought at Verdun (February-December 1916) and the Battle of the Somme (July-November 1916). German and French troops suffered close to a million casualties in the Battle of Verdun alone.

World War I Books and Art

The bloodshed on the battlefields of the Western Front, and the difficulties its soldiers had for years after the fighting had ended, inspired such works of art as " All Quiet on the Western Front" by Erich Maria Remarque and " In Flanders Fields"by Canadian doctor Lieutenant-Colonel John McCrae. In the latter poem, McCrae writes from the perspective of the fallen soldiers:

Published in 1915, the poem inspired the use of the poppy as a symbol of remembrance.

Visual artists like Otto Dix of Germany and British painters Wyndham Lewis, Paul Nash and David Bomberg used their firsthand experience as soldiers in World War I to create their art, capturing the anguish of trench warfare and exploring the themes of technology, violence and landscapes decimated by war.

The Eastern Front

On the Eastern Front of World War I, Russian forces invaded the German-held regions of East Prussia and Poland but were stopped short by German and Austrian forces at the Battle of Tannenberg in late August 1914.

Despite that victory, Russia's assault forced Germany to move two corps from the Western Front to the Eastern, contributing to the German loss in the Battle of the Marne.

Combined with the fierce Allied resistance in France, the ability of Russia's huge war machine to mobilize relatively quickly in the east ensured a longer, more grueling conflict instead of the quick victory Germany had hoped to win under the Schlieffen Plan.

Russian Revolution

From 1914 to 1916, Russia's army mounted several offensives on World War I's Eastern Front but was unable to break through German lines.

Defeat on the battlefield, combined with economic instability and the scarcity of food and other essentials, led to mounting discontent among the bulk of Russia's population, especially the poverty-stricken workers and peasants. This increased hostility was directed toward the imperial regime of Czar Nicholas II and his unpopular German-born wife, Alexandra.

Russia's simmering instability exploded in the Russian Revolution of 1917, spearheaded by Vladimir Lenin and the Bolsheviks, which ended czarist rule and brought a halt to Russian participation in World War I.

Russia reached an armistice with the Central Powers in early December 1917, freeing German troops to face the remaining Allies on the Western Front.

America Enters World War I

At the outbreak of fighting in 1914, the United States remained on the sidelines of World War I, adopting the policy of neutrality favored by President Woodrow Wilson while continuing to engage in commerce and shipping with European countries on both sides of the conflict.

Neutrality, however, it was increasingly difficult to maintain in the face of Germany's unchecked submarine aggression against neutral ships, including those carrying passengers. In 1915, Germany declared the waters surrounding the British Isles to be a war zone, and German U-boats sunk several commercial and passenger vessels, including some U.S. ships.

Widespread protest over the sinking by U-boat of the British ocean liner Lusitania-traveling from New York to Liverpool, England with hundreds of American passengers onboard-in May 1915 helped turn the tide of American public opinion against Germany. In February 1917, Congress passed a $250 million arms appropriations bill intended to make the United States ready for war.

Germany sunk four more U.S. merchant ships the following month, and on April 2 Woodrow Wilson appeared before Congress and called for a declaration of war against Germany.

Gallipoli Campaign

With World War I having effectively settled into a stalemate in Europe, the Allies attempted to score a victory against the Ottoman Empire, which entered the conflict on the side of the Central Powers in late 1914.

After a failed attack on the Dardanelles (the strait linking the Sea of Marmara with the Aegean Sea), Allied forces led by Britain launched a large-scale land invasion of the Gallipoli Peninsula in April 1915. The invasion also proved a dismal failure, and in January 1916 Allied forces staged a full retreat from the shores of the peninsula after suffering 250,000 casualties.

Did you know? The young Winston Churchill, then first lord of the British Admiralty, resigned his command after the failed Gallipoli campaign in 1916, accepting a commission with an infantry battalion in France.

British-led forces also combated the Ottoman Turks in Egypt and Mesopotamia, while in northern Italy, Austrian and Italian troops faced off in a series of 12 battles along the Isonzo River, located at the border between the two nations.

Battle of the Isonzo

The First Battle of the Isonzo took place in the late spring of 1915, soon after Italy's entrance into the war on the Allied side. In the Twelfth Battle of the Isonzo, also known as the Battle of Caporetto (October 1917), German reinforcements helped Austria-Hungary win a decisive victory.

After Caporetto, Italy's allies jumped in to offer increased assistance. British and French-and later, American-troops arrived in the region, and the Allies began to take back the Italian Front.

World War I at Sea

In the years before World War I, the superiority of Britain's Royal Navy was unchallenged by any other nation's fleet, but the Imperial German Navy had made substantial strides in closing the gap between the two naval powers. Germany's strength on the high seas was also aided by its lethal fleet of U-boat submarines.

After the Battle of Dogger Bank in January 1915, in which the British mounted a surprise attack on German ships in the North Sea, the German navy chose not to confront Britain's mighty Royal Navy in a major battle for more than a year, preferring to rest the bulk of its naval strategy on its U-boats.

The biggest naval engagement of World War I, the Battle of Jutland (May 1916) left British naval superiority on the North Sea intact, and Germany would make no further attempts to break an Allied naval blockade for the remainder of the war.

World War I Planes

World War I was the first major conflict to harness the power of planes. Though not as impactful as the British Royal Navy or Germany's U-boats, the use of planes in World War I presaged their later, pivotal role in military conflicts around the globe.

At the dawn of World War I, aviation was a relatively new field; the Wright brothers took their first sustained flight just eleven years before, in 1903. Aircraft were initially used primarily for reconnaissance missions. During the First Battle of the Marne, information passed from pilots allowed the allies to exploit weak spots in the German lines, helping the Allies to push Germany out of France.

The first machine guns were successfully mounted on planes in June of 1912 in the United States, but were imperfect; if timed incorrectly, a bullet could easily destroy the propeller of the plane it came from. The Morane-Saulnier L, a French plane, provided a solution: The propeller was armored with deflector wedges that prevented bullets from hitting it. The Morane-Saulnier Type L was used by the French, the British Royal Flying Corps (part of the Army), the British Royal Navy Air Service and the Imperial Russian Air Service. The British Bristol Type 22 was another popular model used for both reconnaissance work and as a fighter plane.

Dutch inventor Anthony Fokker improved upon the French deflector system in 1915. His "interrupter" synchronized the firing of the guns with the plane's propeller to avoid collisions. Though his most popular plane during WWI was the single-seat Fokker Eindecker, Fokker created over 40 kinds of airplanes for the Germans.

The Allies debuted the Handley-Page HP O/400, the first two-engine bomber, in 1915. As aerial technology progressed, long-range heavy bombers like Germany's Gotha G.V. (first introduced in 1917) were used to strike cities like London. Their speed and maneuverability proved to be far deadlier than Germany's earlier Zeppelin raids.

By the war's end, the Allies were producing five times more aircraft than the Germans. On April 1, 1918, the British created the Royal Air Force, or RAF, the first air force to be a separate military branch independent from the navy or army.

Second Battle of the Marne

With Germany able to build up its strength on the Western Front after the armistice with Russia, Allied troops struggled to hold off another German offensive until promised reinforcements from the United States were able to arrive.

On July 15, 1918, German troops launched what would become the last German offensive of the war, attacking French forces (joined by 85,000 American troops as well as some of the British Expeditionary Force) in the Second Battle of the Marne. The Allies successfully pushed back the German offensive and launched their own counteroffensive just three days later.

After suffering massive casualties, Germany was forced to call off a planned offensive further north, in the Flanders region stretching between France and Belgium, which was envisioned as Germany's best hope of victory.

The Second Battle of the Marne turned the tide of war decisively towards the Allies, who were able to regain much of France and Belgium in the months that followed.

The Harlem Hellfighters and Other All-Black Regiments

By the time World War I began, there were four all-Black regiments in the U.S. military: the 24th and 25th Infantry and the 9th and 10th Cavalry. All four regiments comprised of celebrated soldiers who fought in the Spanish-American War and American-Indian Wars, and served in the American territories. But they were not deployed for overseas combat in World War I.

Blacks serving alongside white soldiers on the front lines in Europe was inconceivable to the U.S. military. Instead, the first African American troops sent overseas served in segregated labor battalions, restricted to menial roles in the Army and Navy, and shutout of the Marines, entirely. Their duties mostly included unloading ships, transporting materials from train depots, bases and ports, digging trenches, cooking and maintenance, removing barbed wire and inoperable equipment, and burying soldiers.

Facing criticism from the Black community and civil rights organizations for its quotas and treatment of African American soldiers in the war effort, the military formed two Black combat units in 1917, the 92nd and 93rd Divisions. Trained separately and inadequately in the United States, the divisions fared differently in the war. The 92nd faced criticism for their performance in the Meuse-Argonne campaign in September 1918. The 93rd Division, however, had more success.

With dwindling armies, France asked America for reinforcements, and General John Pershing, commander of the American Expeditionary Forces, sent regiments in the 93 Division to over, since France had experience fighting alongside Black soldiers from their Senegalese French Colonial army. The 93 Division's 369 regiment, nicknamed the Harlem Hellfighters, fought so gallantly, with a total of 191 days on the front lines, longer than any AEF regiment, that France awarded them the Croix de Guerre for their heroism. More than 350,000 African American soldiers would serve in World War I in various capacities.

Toward Armistice

By the fall of 1918, the Central Powers were unraveling on all fronts.

Despite the Turkish victory at Gallipoli, later defeats by invading forces and an Arab revolt that destroyed the Ottoman economy and devastated its land, and the Turks signed a treaty with the Allies in late October 1918.

Austria-Hungary, dissolving from within due to growing nationalist movements among its diverse population, reached an armistice on November 4. Facing dwindling resources on the battlefield, discontent on the homefront and the surrender of its allies, Germany was finally forced to seek an armistice on November 11, 1918, ending World War I.

Treaty of Versailles

At the Paris Peace Conference in 1919, Allied leaders stated their desire to build a post-war world that would safeguard itself against future conflicts of such a devastating scale.

Some hopeful participants had even begun calling World War I "the War to End All Wars." But the Treaty of Versailles, signed on June 28, 1919, would not achieve that lofty goal.

Saddled with war guilt, heavy reparations and denied entrance into the League of Nations, Germany felt tricked into signing the treaty, having believed any peace would be a "peace without victory," as put forward by President Wilson in his famous Fourteen Points speech of January 1918.

As the years passed, hatred of the Versailles treaty and its authors settled into a smoldering resentment in Germany that would, two decades later, be counted among the causes of World War II.

World War I Casualties

World War I took the lives of more than 9 million soldiers; 21 million more were wounded. Civilian casualties numbered close to 10 million. The two nations most affected were Germany and France, each of which sent some 80 percent of their male populations between the ages of 15 and 49 into battle.

The political disruption surrounding World War I also contributed to the fall of four venerable imperial dynasties: Germany, Austria-Hungary, Russia and Turkey.

Legacy of World War I

World War I brought about massive social upheaval, as millions of women entered the workforce to replace men who went to war and those who never came back. The first global war also helped to spread one of the world's deadliest global pandemics, the Spanish flu epidemic of 1918, which killed an estimated 20 to 50 million people.

World War I has also been referred to as "the first modern war." Many of the technologies now associated with military conflict-machine guns, tanks, aerial combat and radio communications-were introduced on a massive scale during World War I.

The severe effects that chemical weapons such as mustard gas and phosgene had on soldiers and civilians during World War I galvanized public and military attitudes against their continued use. The Geneva Convention agreements, signed in 1925, restricted the use of chemical and biological agents in warfare and remain in effect today.

Photo Galleries

Fact Check

We strive for accuracy and fairness. But if you see something that doesn't look right, click here to contact us! HISTORY reviews and updates its content regularly to ensure it is complete and accurate.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
World War I: Summary, Causes & Facts | HISTORY

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
World War I began in 1914, after the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand, and lasted until 1918. During the conflict, Germany, Austria‑Hungary, Bulgaria and the Ottoman Empire (the Central Powers) fought against Great Britain, France, Russia, Italy, Romania, Japan and the United States (the Allied Powers).

# data[].attributes.body
This source it helps us understand the movie more with what the soldiers really felt and how much stress and trama it can give people. The war it affects people in so many ways like when being in war you see fellow soldiers pass and them not being able to be saved. They see countless people die and they have to fight for their life constantly. This article really goes into detail about what happens in peoples minds when they are at war. The drama that it can give overall and even in your later years such as even 20-40 years it can still haunt or affect them in their daily life.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
JSTOR is a digital library of academic journals, books, and primary sources.

# data[].attributes.body
In his article All Quiet on the Western Front and the Fate of a War, Modris Eksteins explains how Erich Maria Remarque's novel changed the way people thought about World War I. He shows how the book helped shape society's memory and understanding of the war.https://www.jstor.org/stable/260517?utm_source=chatgpt.com

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
All Quiet on the Western Front and the Fate of a War on JSTOR

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Modris Eksteins, All Quiet on the Western Front and the Fate of a War, Journal of Contemporary History, Vol. 15, No. 2 (Apr., 1980), pp. 345-366

# data[].attributes.body
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4663500/

This article talks about who ptsd can affect someone in different ways. It can be different based on a persons situation, it can also be different based on what they remember.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.authors[].name
✉Correspondence to: J I Bisson BissonJIcardiff.ac.uk ✉Corresponding author.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Individual reactions to traumatic events vary greatly and most people do not develop a mental disorder after exposure to trauma

# data[].attributes.body
this article talks about what they are trying to do to fix PTSD and how to deal with that disorder.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Study: economic burden of PTSD ‘staggering’

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A new study finds that the national economic burden of PTSD exceeds the financial cost of other common mental health conditions, such as anxiety and depression.

# data[].attributes.body
talks about how many people it effected and what it could do to the mental health of a veteran

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Study: economic burden of PTSD ‘staggering’

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A new study finds that the national economic burden of PTSD exceeds the financial cost of other common mental health conditions, such as anxiety and depression.

# data[].attributes.body
This article goes in depth about Propaganda used in World War I on both sides of the war. The Germans used propaganda in many ways but on of the more successful ways was its propaganda to urge young men to join the military and the war. They would tell the children that the army was the army was the "school of the nation" and that "such an 'education' of society was carried out not by civilians, but by the military". This was a brainwashing strategy used at a young age to encourage the children to fight when they are able.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Propaganda and Caricature in the First World War on JSTOR

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Eberhard Demm, Propaganda and Caricature in the First World War, Journal of Contemporary History, Vol. 28, No. 1 (Jan., 1993), pp. 163-192

# data[].attributes.body
A short article more on German Propaganda in World War I. This included making the opposing side seem as if they were violent apes, as well as putting the Germans is a positive powerful stance.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Humor and Horror: Printed Propaganda during World War I - The Metropolitan Museum of Art

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Illustrated by works on view in World War I and the Visual Arts, Assistant Curator Allison Rudnick explores the many uses of printed propaganda during World War I.

# data[].attributes.headline
Joel Jimenez - The Economic Impact of World War I on Post-War Germany (Economic Context)

# data[].attributes.subject
Joel Jimenez - The Economic Impact of World War I on Post-War Germany (Economic Context)

# data[].attributes.body
This paper highlights the effects that World War I had on the economy of Germany with respect to the aspect of inflation, war debts, and the economic collapse that followed after the war. All Quiet on the Western Front depicts the dark future awaiting the returning soldiers, and such an economic context could help the viewers to understand the financial conditions under which veterans existed in post-war Germany. The way the film presents financial instability is borne out of reality against which soldiers attempted to readjust in a society that had disintegrated around them.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
World War I, an international conflict that in 1914-18 embroiled most of the nations of Europe along with Russia, the United States, the Middle East, and other regions. The war pitted the Central Powers-mainly Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Turkey-against the Allies-mainly France, Great Britain, Russia, Italy, Japan, and, from 1917, the United States. It ended with the defeat of the Central Powers. The war was virtually unprecedented in the slaughter, carnage, and destruction it caused.

World War I was one of the great watersheds of 20th-century geopolitical history. It led to the fall of four great imperial dynasties (in Germany, Russia, Austria-Hungary, and Turkey), resulted in the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia, and, in its destabilization of European society, laid the groundwork for World War II.

The last surviving veterans of World War I were American serviceman Frank Buckles (died in February 2011), British-born Australian serviceman Claude Choules (died in May 2011), and British servicewoman Florence Green (died in February 2012), the last surviving veteran of the war.

The outbreak of war

With Serbia already much aggrandized by the two Balkan Wars (1912-13, 1913), Serbian nationalists turned their attention back to the idea of "liberating" the South Slavs of Austria-Hungary. Colonel Dragutin Dimitrijević, head of Serbia's military intelligence, was also, under the alias "Apis," head of the secret society Union or Death, pledged to the pursuit of this pan-Serbian ambition. Believing that the Serbs' cause would be served by the death of the Austrian archduke Franz Ferdinand, heir presumptive to the Austrian emperor Franz Joseph, and learning that the Archduke was about to visit Bosnia on a tour of military inspection, Apis plotted his assassination. Nikola Pašić, the Serbian prime minister and an enemy of Apis, heard of the plot and warned the Austrian government of it, but his message was too cautiously worded to be understood.

At 11:15 am on June 28, 1914, in the Bosnian capital, Sarajevo, Franz Ferdinand and his morganatic wife, Sophie, duchess of Hohenberg, were shot dead by a Bosnian Serb, Gavrilo Princip. The chief of the Austro-Hungarian general staff, Franz, Graf (count) Conrad von Hötzendorf, and the foreign minister, Leopold, Graf von Berchtold, saw the crime as the occasion for measures to humiliate Serbia and so to enhance Austria-Hungary's prestige in the Balkans. Conrad had already (October 1913) been assured by William II of Germany's support if Austria-Hungary should start a preventive war against Serbia. This assurance was confirmed in the week following the assassination, before William, on July 6, set off upon his annual cruise to the North Cape, off Norway.

The Austrians decided to present an unacceptable ultimatum to Serbia and then to declare war, relying on Germany to deter Russia from intervention. Though the terms of the ultimatum were finally approved on July 19, its delivery was postponed to the evening of July 23, since by that time the French president, Raymond Poincaré, and his premier, René Viviani, who had set off on a state visit to Russia on July 15, would be on their way home and therefore unable to concert an immediate reaction with their Russian allies. When the delivery was announced, on July 24, Russia declared that Austria-Hungary must not be allowed to crush Serbia.

Serbia replied to the ultimatum on July 25, accepting most of its demands but protesting against two of them-namely, that Serbian officials (unnamed) should be dismissed at Austria-Hungary's behest and that Austro-Hungarian officials should take part, on Serbian soil, in proceedings against organizations hostile to Austria-Hungary. Though Serbia offered to submit the issue to international arbitration, Austria-Hungary promptly severed diplomatic relations and ordered partial mobilization.

Home from his cruise on July 27, William learned on July 28 how Serbia had replied to the ultimatum. At once he instructed the German Foreign Office to tell Austria-Hungary that there was no longer any justification for war and that it should content itself with a temporary occupation of Belgrade. But, meanwhile, the German Foreign Office had been giving such encouragement to Berchtold that already on July 27 he had persuaded Franz Joseph to authorize war against Serbia. War was in fact declared on July 28, and Austro-Hungarian artillery began to bombard Belgrade the next day. Russia then ordered partial mobilization against Austria-Hungary, and on July 30, when Austria-Hungary was riposting conventionally with an order of mobilization on its Russian frontier, Russia ordered general mobilization. Germany, which since July 28 had still been hoping, in disregard of earlier warning hints from Great Britain, that Austria-Hungary's war against Serbia could be "localized" to the Balkans, was now disillusioned insofar as eastern Europe was concerned. On July 31 Germany sent a 24-hour ultimatum requiring Russia to halt its mobilization and an 18-hour ultimatum requiring France to promise neutrality in the event of war between Russia and Germany.

Both Russia and France predictably ignored these demands. On August 1 Germany ordered general mobilization and declared war against Russia, and France likewise ordered general mobilization. The next day Germany sent troops into Luxembourg and demanded from Belgium free passage for German troops across its neutral territory. On August 3 Germany declared war against France.

In the night of August 3-4 German forces invaded Belgium. Thereupon, Great Britain, which had no concern with Serbia and no express obligation to fight either for Russia or for France but was expressly committed to defend Belgium, on August 4 declared war against Germany.

Austria-Hungary declared war against Russia on August 5; Serbia against Germany on August 6; Montenegro against Austria-Hungary on August 7 and against Germany on August 12; France and Great Britain against Austria-Hungary on August 10 and on August 12, respectively; Japan against Germany on August 23; Austria-Hungary against Japan on August 25 and against Belgium on August 28.

Romania had renewed its secret anti-Russian alliance of 1883 with the Central Powers on February 26, 1914, but now chose to remain neutral. Italy had confirmed the Triple Alliance on December 7, 1912, but could now propound formal arguments for disregarding it: first, Italy was not obliged to support its allies in a war of aggression; second, the original treaty of 1882 had stated expressly that the alliance was not against England.

On September 5, 1914, Russia, France, and Great Britain concluded the Treaty of London, each promising not to make a separate peace with the Central Powers. Thenceforth, they could be called the Allied, or Entente, powers, or simply the Allies.

The outbreak of war in August 1914 was generally greeted with confidence and jubilation by the peoples of Europe, among whom it inspired a wave of patriotic feeling and celebration. Few people imagined how long or how disastrous a war between the great nations of Europe could be, and most believed that their country's side would be victorious within a matter of months. The war was welcomed either patriotically, as a defensive one imposed by national necessity, or idealistically, as one for upholding right against might, the sanctity of treaties, and international morality.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
World War I | History, Summary, Causes, Combatants, Casualties, Map, & Facts

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
World War I, international conflict that in 1914-18 embroiled most of the nations of Europe along with Russia, the U.S., the Middle East, and other regions. It led to the fall of four great imperial dynasties and, in its destabilization of European society, laid the groundwork for World War II.

# data[].attributes.headline
Technology in World War I (Technological Context)

# data[].attributes.subject
Technology in World War I (Technological Context)

# data[].attributes.body
This section of Britannica describes World War I technological innovations like tanks, airplanes, and chemical warfare. Such innovations profoundly changed warfare, and their impacts are illustrated exceedingly well in All Quiet on the Western Front, where terrifying soldier experiences in battle were shaped by newer and deadlier weapons. The introduction of technologies of modern warfare was responsible for the huge number of casualties and the trauma inflicted on these soldiers; it is one of the themes vividly portrayed in the film.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Explore the fact-checked online encyclopedia from Encyclopaedia Britannica with hundreds of thousands of objective articles, biographies, videos, and images from experts.

# data[].attributes.body
In the article it talks about a disorder that nearly 30-40 percent of soldiers in battle develop throughout time serving. This disorder is post traumatic stress order which causes flashbacks, distress, and pain. They gain this by having combat stress and witnessing the events of war, including very gruesome deaths and effects on their brain.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Combat Stress and Post-traumatic Stress Disorder from Fiscal and Operational Impacts of Standardizing US Military Resiliency Programs to Minimize Post-traumatic Stress Disorder on JSTOR

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
JSTOR is a digital library of academic journals, books, and primary sources.

# data[].attributes.body
This article talks about the major effects that Germany felt because of the war. Including Germany having to take full responsibility for World War One. They had to pay over 60 billion dollars for the damages of the war, which destroyed their economy. They also lost 13% of land and 12% of its population after the war which had a huge negative effect on the country. The Treaty of Versailles also limited Germany in many ways like more lost land and a limited military.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The First World War, which began in the Summer of 1914 and ended in November 1918, claimed around twenty million lives. The war ended empires and disrupted political systems and economies across the world.

In April 1917, the United States of America joined the war against Germany. Arriving on the battlefields in 1918, the American army was well trained and equipped, while the Germany army was exhausted. The British navy blockaded German ports, starving German industry of raw materials and the people of food. Between April and August 1918, the German army decided to make one last, determined effort to win the war. They had early successes, but were quickly overwhelmed. By the autumn of 1918, the Germans were losing and senior generals could see that defeat was inevitable. Peace negotiations began and an armistice was signed on 11 November 1918. After four years and millions of lives lost, the guns fell silent.

In Germany, impending defeat triggered a revolution and brought down the German Emperor, the Kaiser. In this section you will find out about the circumstances in which the new democratic German state, The Weimar Republic, came into existence after the First World War.

The First World War, which began in the Summer of 1914 and ended in November 1918, claimed around twenty million lives. The war ended empires and disrupted political systems and economies across the world.

In April 1917, the United States of America joined the war against Germany. Arriving on the battlefields in 1918, the American army was well trained and equipped, while the Germany army was exhausted. The British navy blockaded German ports, starving German industry of raw materials and the people of food. Between April and August 1918, the German army decided to make one last, determined effort to win the war. They had early successes, but were quickly overwhelmed. By the autumn of 1918, the Germans were losing and senior generals could see that defeat was inevitable. Peace negotiations began and an armistice was signed on 11 November 1918. After four years and millions of lives lost, the guns fell silent.

In Germany, impending defeat triggered a revolution and brought down the German Emperor, the Kaiser. In this section you will find out about the circumstances in which the new democratic German state, The Weimar Republic, came into existence after the First World War.

As the war came to an end, the German nation was in a state of collapse. On 29th October 1918, sailors at the German naval base at Kiel refused to obey an order to attack British ships. The German sailors set up councils in order to defy their superiors. Only a year earlier, councils like these, set up by workers in Russia, had led to a communist revolution. Many people feared Germany would end up like Russia, with a communist dictatorship and civil war. By 6th November, the revolution had spread to many German cities and even to soldiers fighting on the Western Front.

Kaiser Wilhelm was the Emperor of Germany and Commander-in-Chief of the German armed forces. On 9 November 1918, with defeat certain and a revolution underway, Wilhelm was forced to abdicate his throne and flee Germany.

Without the Emperor, the Germans had no strong leader in charge of the country. There were different groups who thought now was the time to make changes to the way the country was governed. Some of them believed that Germany should become a democracy, but others believed that strong, military leadership was the only way to keep society safe. Some thought that communism, where everyone was equal, but controlled by a strong state, was a fairer way of living.

Eventually, power was handed to the leader of the moderate left-wing Social Democratic Party, Friedrich Ebert. This did not stop the food shortages or the civil unrest and street battles between rival political groups.

In late 1918 and early 1919 revolutions spread throughout Germany. In the region of Bavaria, in the south, a communist state was established in the capital Munich. In January 1919 revolution threatened Berlin itself. Chancellor Ebert saw that democratic rule was under threat, so he called in the German army and the Freikorps (ex-soldiers who banded together to form small private armies).

They crushed the revolution in Munich and executed the leaders. Although Chancellor Ebert used the army and the Freikorps to crush the Bavarian communists, there were still revolutionaries in other German cities, and fear of revolution still threatened peace in Germany.

ADVANCED CONTENT

On 11 November 1918 Germany found itself without a monarch. It had serious economic and social problems, and there was open political fighting for control.

Two army generals, Paul von Hindenburg and Erich Ludendorff, led the military which had controlled Germany during the war. They asked the politicians to start peace negotiations with the allies. Hindenburg and Ludendorff were keen to avoid being blamed for losing the war.

All the political parties blamed each other. The generals pointed to the fact that at the start of their last big push to win the war, they had been successful.

This argument was used to persuade people that the German army had been 'stabbed in the back' by politicians just as they were about to defeat the Allies.

The very soldiers who had felt victory was close now came home to Germany unsure as to how defeat had come so suddenly, further supporting the "stab in the back" myth.

Patriotic

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The aftermath of the First World War in Germany

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The First World War, which began in the Summer of 1914 and ended in November 1918, claimed around twenty million lives. The war ended empires and disrupted political systems and economies across the world. In April 1917, the United States of America joined the war against Germany.

# data[].attributes.body
This PDF goes into details about how food was distributed and how they dealt with the food situation in general during the war

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
JSTOR is a digital library of academic journals, books, and primary sources.

# data[].attributes.body
Remarque would return to scenes of the war and to postwar Germany for subjects of his novels. The world would read his words and understand the questions of his generation, and the critics would treat his book kindly. Modern readers return again and again to his words because their powerful message delineates a dehumanization vastly surpassed by modern technological warfare.