The Real German War Plan 1904-14 by Terence Zuber

[joerookery]

Thank you for your post Robert! It is wonderful always to read your analysis. And you are of course extremely welcome back. Thank you for your kindness about the handbook that was done in 2009. A far more comprehensive work was done in 2013 called the Great War Dawning (GWD) and although cited in some works, it suffers from a horribly high cover price. In the foreword written by Jack Sheldon, he explains very succinctly how mono linguistic research suffers. A very handsome physical product but extremely expensive. – Not our call.

http://www.naval-military-press.com/great-war-dawning-germany-and-its-army-at-the-start-of-world-war-i.html

 

It is that lack of language skills that gives/gave Zuber first mover advantage. He certainly was the first to get widespread readership in the English language. If you do not speak multiple languages, and are limited to English here was something that was legible if not difficult to wade through.

 

I do cite Zuber. I think he has a lot of good stuff and certainly points you into some interesting directions. I think his early books about planning are far better than his tactical books which came later. Rather than try to comprehend his books, (especially Inventing the Schlieffen Plan) I would take advantage of the articles provided by Paul Hederer from the War in History debate. These articles synthesize points made by Zuber, are in English and show both sides. Zuber weighs in constantly. The Ardennes, Mons, and Liège all suffer from the kind of analysis problems that Robert pointed out so skillfully. He relies very heavily on regimental histories, cherry picks what he wants from them and misses other resources. He certainly does stir the pot however.

 

The reliance on the translation of certain works by Zuber can certainly be contested. For instance he often mis- translates terms such as Abteilung and has a very limited understanding of large cavalry formations. He also tries to put the round peg of more modern NATO standard thought into the round hole of Imperial German writing at the time. Translating is a minefield that is frequently done poorly - by myself also. We are fortunate to have quite a few bilingual people on this forum that can add a lot of nuance which I miss due to my native language limitations. Along these lines one translation that jumps out and I have cited recently is this little booklet by Robert. Highly recommend it.

https://www.amazon.com/Battle-Mons-Robert-Dunlop/dp/0993204600/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1500825421&sr=1-1&keywords=Mons+dunlop

 

Dennis Showalter and I are working on another manuscript which takes you from late July 1914 – 23 August 1914. As an alternative to Zuber, this really looks at the operational level of the  right  side of the German invasion. While Zuber has this very pro-German super Army bias. We show that the plan was really really bad and required a major dose of risk.

 

 

[Robert Dunlop]

Thank you, Joe. It was 'Great War Dawning' that I was thinking of. Didn't check my shelves before posting - a bit rusty... Fabulous book. Absolutely loved it.

 

Super to hear about the new work too. I look forward to that. 

 

Robert