DOCSLIB.ORG

Leon Degrelle

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Leon Degrelle Hitler, Born at Versailles June 18, 2012 1 Introduction For most Americans the globe-girdling catastrophe that we call the Second World War is now a matter neither of personal experience nor of memory, but of wood pulp and celluloid, books and films. Larger still is the majority for whom the cataclysmic First World War - once spoken of as "The Great War" - is ancient history, an antic prelude to what those who participated in it sometimes like to call "The Big One." For most of us, perhaps, the two wars compare as do contrasting movies from the two eras. Our image of the First World War is brief, grainy, silent, with black-and-white, herky-jerky doughboys "going over the top"; we picture the Second as panoramic, technicolor, reverberating with stereophonic sound and fury, armadas of ships and planes and tanks sweeping forward to destiny. A further disparity may be found in the popular historical and political as- sessment, such as it is, of the two wars. The majority of Americans doubtless still believes that the key to the Second World War is a simple one: a.demonic megalomaniac, Adolf Hitler, rose up to lead Germany to world domination and instead led his people to well-deserved ruin. Yet the view of the First World War held by the Americans of today, it is safe to say, is rather more tepid than the white-hot feelings of many of their grandparents in 1917, when "100- per-cent Americans" agitated to "Hang the Kaiser!" and mobs sacked German newspaper offices and presses in the worst outbreak of ethnic bigotry in our country’s history. For the contemporary generation the origins and course of the First World War are murky and obscure. Even the terrible hecatombs of the Western Front have faded into oblivion, and Kaiser Bill and his spike-helmeted Huns have long since been superseded by the Fuehrer and his goose-stepping myrmidons. The evident lack of interest of even the literate American public in their coun- try’s first “famous victory” of this century has been mirrored to a certain extent by the professional historians of the Left-Liberal Establishment, which of course holds sway in the colleges and universities of not only American but the entire Western world. The professors have their reasons, however. The more compe- tent among them are aware that shortly after the First World War, in a signal achievement of historical scholarship, Revisionist writers in this country and in Europe unmasked the mendacious propaganda disseminated by the British, French, Tsarist Russian, and American governments. Professors such as Sidney Bradshaw Fay, Max Montgelas, Georges Demartial, and the incomparable Harry Elmer Barnes overthrew the historiographical and moral underpinnings of the verdict expressed in Article 231 of the onerous Treaty of Versailles, that Germany and her allies had imposed an aggressive war on the Triple Entente and thus bore all responsibility for the calamity. The Englishman Arthur Ponsonby demonstrated just as convincingly that the atrocity charges against the Germans, including such canards as a "cadaver factory" for soap and the like from the corpses of fallen German soldiers, were manufactured and 2 spread by teams of talented fabricators, not a few of them, like Arnold Toynbee, reputable men of scholarship ostensibly dedicated to the search for truth. The modern school of historical obfuscators, propagandists more than scholars, and thus cognizant of the need for a consistent pattern of German “guilt” and “ag- gression” throughout this century, long ago undertook to roll back and suppress the achievements of Revisionist scholarship on the origins of the First World War. Inspired by the German renegade Fritz Fischer, whose Griff nach der Weltmacht (Germany’s Bid for World Power, 1961), they hailed with hysterical relief, they have dismissed with sovereign disdain the notion that powers such as France, the British Empire, Tsarist Russia, or Serbia might have been motivated by aggressive designs. The professors have employed a second sleight-of-hand trick against Revisionist findings. It has been their tactic to separate quite arti- ficially the origins and course of the war from its result, the Paris peace treaties, above all that of Versailles, and from the ineluctable consequences which flowed from that result. For them, and for their public of university students and ed- ucated laymen, Versailles was an entirely justified consequence of the war, and Adolf Hitler sprang up either as a manifestation of the German nation’s twisted “id” (Freud and his numerous epigoni and camp followers) or the puppet of the “Ruhr barons” (the Marxists), propelled along his way by something these professors are always careful to refer to as the “stab-in-the-back legend.” Our leftist educators have also been adept at evading an honest evaluation of the Red terror which swept across Central and Eastern Europe in the wake of the German collapse, although they have wept copious tears behind their pink spectacles over the crushing of Communist juntas in Bavaria, Berlin, and Bu- dapest. The deliberate failure of the professors to make sense of the cataclysmic events of 1914-1920 in Europe has now been redressed, however, by a man of both learning and action, a confidante of statesmen and a worthy comrade of heroes: the Belgian exile Léon Degrelle. Léon Degrelle, who was born in 1906 in the sleepy little town of Bouillon, now a backwater in Belgium’s Luxembourg province, but once the seat of Godefroy de Bouillon, first Crusader king of Jerusalem, speaks in a voice few Americans will be familiar with. French-speaking, Catholic, European with a continental, not an insular, perspective, the man who nearly overturned his country’s corrupt power elite in the 1930’s thinks in a perspective alien to our (comparatively recent) intellectual heritage of pragmatism, positivism, and unbounded faith in the inevitability of "progress." Before all a man of action, Degrelle is in a tradition of vitalism, combining an inborn elan and chivalry with a hard-eyed, instinctual grasp of the calculus that determines politics - activity in relation to power - today foreign, for the most part, to the "Anglo-Saxon" nations. It was precisely Degrelle’s will to heroic action in the defense of Europe and its values that led him to raise a volunteer force of his French-speaking country- men, many of them followers of his pre-war Rexist political movement, and to ally with his country’s conqueror, Adolf Hitler, in a European crusade against Communism and Communism’s citadel, the Soviet Union. Degrelle, who has 3 matchlessly recounted his role in that struggle (Campaign in Russia: The Waf- fen SS on the Eastern Front, Institute for Historical Review, Torrance, CA, 1985), began the project to which this volume is the introduction in his late seventies. From the vantage point offered by decades of reflection in his Span- ish exile, the former charismatic political leader and highly decorated combat veteran has undertaken nothing less than the thorough, searching, and (insofar as possible) objective account of the character and career of the man who once told him, “If I had a son, I would want him to be like you”, Adolf Hitler. Those inclined to dismiss Degrelle’s objectivity in examing the life of his commander- in-chief with a supercilious sneer will shortly have the mandatory for Establish- ment scholars on so much as mentioning the dread name. Indeed, ample material for comparison already exists in the fawning name. Indeed, ample material for comparison already exists in the fawning biographical homages offered to Roo- sevelt and Churchill by their one-time courtiers and authorized hagiographers, not to mention the slavish panegyrics offered the Western leaders’ ally and boon companion, Stalin, by his sycophants (not a few of them residents and citizens of the Western “democracies”). There are those readers who will fault this first volume of Degrelle’s ambitious project, which demonstrates the moral and intellectual bankruptcy of the bour- geois leadership of the West and their unavoidable responsibility for the rise of Hitler. Some will object that it might have been more scholarly, while others will quibble that it ought to have given recognition to more recent trends in the his- toriography of the First World War. Such criticisms miss the point of Degrelle’s work, to reach the broadest interested and intelligent public with an approach the French have styled haute vulgarisation, which is to say, popularization of a high order. Indeed Hitler: Born at Versailles, in encompassing the turbulent years 1914- 1920, boasts a thematic unity that few but Degrelle could have brought to the period. For in chronicling the shady plots and complots of the European regimes before the war, the awful bloodbaths of the Western and Eastern fronts, and the fall of empires and the rise of Communism after the war, Degrelle is telling of the collapse of 19th-century Europe - its economic liberalism, its parliamentary democracy, its self-satisfied imperialism, its irrational faith in reason and progress. He is, furthermore, hammering mercilessly at the puny successors of the Poincarés, the Lloyd Georges, and the Wilsons, the present-day “liberals” and “conserva- tives” who dominate in the governments and the academies and the media: skewering their baneful lies one by one. Degrelle knows that there is little that is more contemptible than the posturing of our academics, who snivel their love of peace at every instance where it means supine acquiescence in the latest advance of Communism or of atavistic savagery under the banner of “self-determination” or some other such transparent lie, but who dilate with sanguinary enthusiasm over the “necessity” of the blood baths that marked the two world wars of this century.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Vichy Against Vichy: History and Memory of the Second World War in the Former Capital of the État Français from 1940 to the Present
    Vichy against Vichy: History and Memory of the Second World War in the Former Capital of the État français from 1940 to the Present Audrey Mallet A Thesis In the Department of History Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy (History) at Concordia University Montreal, Quebec, Canada, and Paris I Panthéon-Sorbonne December 2016 © Audrey Mallet, 2016 CONCORDIA UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF GRADUATE STUDIES This is to certify that the thesis prepared By: Audrey Mallet Entitled: Vichy against Vichy: History and Memory of the Second World War in the Former Capital of the État français from 1940 to the Present and submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (History) complies with the regulations of the University and meets the accepted standards with respect to originality and quality. Signed by the final examining committee: Chair Dr. G. LeBlanc External Examiner Dr. E. Jennings External to Program Dr. F. Chalk Examiner Dr. D. Peschanski Examiner Dr. C. Claveau Thesis Co-Supervisor Dr. N. Ingram Thesis Co-Supervisor Dr. H. Rousso Approved by: Dr. B. Lorenzkowski, Graduate Program Director December 5, 2016 Dr. A. Roy, Dean, Faculty of Arts & Science Abstract Vichy against Vichy: History and Memory of the Second World War in the Former Capital of the État français from 1940 to the Present Audrey Mallet, Ph.D. Concordia University & Paris I Panthéon Sorbonne, 2016 Following the June 22, 1940 armistice and the subsequent occupation of northern France by the Germans, the French government left Paris and eventually established itself in the city of Vichy.
    [Show full text]
  • GHR Template
    The Final Nail Maciejewski The Final Nail: The Russians in 1916 JEFFREY MACIEJEWSKI Abstract: The events of 1916 broke Tsarist Russia, putting it on an unavoidable path to revolution, but it was not the revolutionaries that set the empire on that path. Instead, the combination of a small-scale defeat at Lake Narotch, the success of the Brusilov Offensive, the addition of Romania as an ally, and economic changes fundamentally altered Russia’s socio-economic foundation. This negative shift provided the fertile ground the revolutionaries needed to expand beyond being manageable annoyances. As a direct result of 1916’s wartime events, Russia’s longstanding radical sentiment finally began to boil over into actual revolutions in 1917. Introduction Winston Churchill once wrote “the very rigidity of the (Russian) system gave it its strength and, once broken, forbade all recovery.”1 In this respect, 1916 was the decisive year for the Russian Empire as it broke the Tsarist system. World War I’s first two years went poorly for Russia, but circumstances shifted in 1916, offering the Russians their best chance for victory; their economy had significantly improved and their enemies believed they had broken the Russian Army. New leaders with fresh ideas emerged to challenge the Central Powers like never before and with victory Russia gained a new ally, Romania. The Russians finally seemed to have reached parity with their enemies and the ability to fully assist the Allied cause. It was the make-or-break year for Russia. Given such changes in fortune, why did 1916 break both the Russian Army and the Tsarist government? The confluence of changes and events, even positive ones, simply overwhelmed Russia.
    [Show full text]
  • FINAL REPORT International Commission on the Holocaust In
    FINAL REPORT of the International Commission on the Holocaust in Romania Presented to Romanian President Ion Iliescu November 11, 2004 Bucharest, Romania NOTE: The English text of this Report is currently in preparation for publication. © International Commission on the Holocaust in Romania. All rights reserved. DISTORTION, NEGATIONISM, AND MINIMALIZATION OF THE HOLOCAUST IN POSTWAR ROMANIA Introduction This chapter reviews and analyzes the different forms of Holocaust distortion, denial, and minimalization in post-World War II Romania. It must be emphasized from the start that the analysis is based on the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum’s definition of the Holocaust, which Commission members accepted as authoritative soon after the Commission was established. This definition1 does not leave room for doubt about the state-organized participation of Romania in the genocide against the Jews, since during the Second World War, Romania was among those allies and a collaborators of Nazi Germany that had a systematic plan for the persecution and annihilation of the Jewish population living on territories under their unmitigated control. In Romania’s specific case, an additional “target-population” subjected to or destined for genocide was the Romany minority. This chapter will employ an adequate conceptualization, using both updated recent studies on the Holocaust in general and new interpretations concerning this genocide in particular. Insofar as the employed conceptualization is concerned, two terminological clarifications are in order. First, “distortion” refers to attempts to use historical research on the dimensions and significance of the Holocaust either to diminish its significance or to serve political and propagandistic purposes. Although its use is not strictly confined to the Communist era, the term “distortion” is generally employed in reference to that period, during which historical research was completely subjected to controls by the Communist Party’s political censorship.
    [Show full text]
  • War in the Balkans, 1991-2002
    WAR IN THE BALKANS, 1991-2002 R. Craig Nation August 2003 ***** The views expressed in this report are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Army, the Department of Defense, or the U.S. Government. This report is cleared for public release; distribution is unlimited. ***** Comments pertaining to this report are invited and should be forwarded to: Director, Strategic Studies Institute, U.S. Army War College, 122 Forbes Ave., Carlisle, PA 17013-5244. Copies of this report may be obtained from the Publications Office by calling (717) 245-4133, FAX (717) 245-3820, or be e-mail at [email protected] ***** Most 1993, 1994, and all later Strategic Studies Institute (SSI) monographs are available on the SSI Homepage for electronic dissemination. SSI’s Homepage address is: http://www.carlisle.army.mil/ssi/ ***** The Strategic Studies Institute publishes a monthly e-mail newsletter to update the national security community on the research of our analysts, recent and forthcoming publications, and upcoming conferences sponsored by the Institute. Each newsletter also provides a strategic commentary by one of our research analysts. If you are interested in receiving this newsletter, please let us know by e-mail at [email protected] or by calling (717) 245-3133. ISBN 1-58487-134-2 ii CONTENTS Foreword . v Preface . vii Map of the Balkan Region. viii 1. The Balkan Region in World Politics . 1 2. The Balkans in the Short 20th Century . 43 3. The State of War: Slovenia and Croatia, 1991-92.
    [Show full text]
  • The Rubicon Theory of War the Rubicon Theory Dominic D.P
    The Rubicon Theory of War The Rubicon Theory Dominic D.P. Johnson and of War Dominic Tierney How the Path to Conºict Reaches the Point of No Return In49b.c., Julius Caesar halted his army on the banks of the Rubicon River in northern Italy. According to Suetonius, he paused in momentary hesitation, before sweepingacross the waters toward Rome with the immortal phrase Alae iacta est (The die has been cast).1 By violating an ancient Roman law forbidding any general to cross the Rubicon with an army, Caesar’s decision made war inevitable. Ever since, “crossing the Rubicon” has come to symbolize a point of no return, when the time for deliberation is over and action is at hand. In this article we set out the Rubicon theory of war. When people be- lieve they have crossed a psychological Rubicon and perceive war to be im- minent, they switch from what psychologists call a “deliberative” to an “implemental” mind-set, triggering a number of psychological biases, most notably overconªdence.2 These biases can cause an increase in aggressive or risky military planning. Furthermore, if actors believe that war is imminent when it is not in fact certain to occur, the switch to implemental mind-sets can be a causal factor in the outbreak of war, by raising the perceived probability of military victory and encouraging hawkish and provocative policies. The Rubicon theory of war has several important implications for interna- tional relations theory and practice. First, it helps to resolve a major paradox in international relations: the widespread fear and anxiety that underlies the se- curity dilemma in times of peace and the prevalence of overconªdence on the Dominic D.P.
    [Show full text]
  • Download the Pdf File
    REVIEW OF ECONOMIC AND BUSINESS STUDIES International Editorial Board Professor Jean-Pierre BERDOT, Université de Poitiers, France Professor Enrique BONSÓN, Universidad de Huelva, Spain Professor Henri BOUQUIN, Université de Paris-Dauphine, France Professor Régis BOURBONNAIS, Université de Paris-Dauphine, France Professor Oana BRÂNZEI, York University, Toronto, Canada Professor Mihai CALCIU, Université de Lille, France Professor Cristian CHELARIU, York University, Canada Lecturer Roxana CHIRIAC, University of Konstanz, Germany Professor Bernard COLASSE, Université de Paris-Dauphine, France Professor Christian CORMIER, Université de Poitiers, France Professor Gerry RAMEY, Eastern Oregon University, United States of America Professor Jaroslav KITA, University of Economics Bratislava, Slovakia Professor Raymond LEBAN, Conservatoire National des Arts et Métiers, France Professor Luiz MONTANHEIRO, Sheffield Hallam University, United Kingdom Professor Winfried POHLMEIER, University of Konstanz, Germany Professor Louis G. POL, University of Nebraska at Omaha, United States of America Professor Danica PURG, President of CEEMAN, Bled School of Management, Slovenia Professor Ravinder RENA, Polytechnic of Namibia, Namibia Professor Jacques RICHARD, Université de Paris-Dauphine, France Professor Antonio García SÁNCHEZ, Universidad Politécnica de Cartagena, Spain Professor Alan SANGSTER, Aberdeen Business School, The Robert Gordon University, Scotland, United Kingdom Professor Victoria SEITZ, California State University, United States of America Professor
    [Show full text]
  • Bibliographical Records
    international journal of military history and historiography 39 (2019) 121-166 IJMH brill.com/ijmh Bibliographical Records General Wessels, André: Suid-Afrika se Vlootmagte, 1922–2012 (Bloemfontein, 2017), 290 pp., isbn 978-1-928424-04-8. South Africa’s Naval Forces 1922–2012 On three sides South Africa borders on oceans, and in that sense, the country is a large peninsula. It has a coastline of some 2,800 kilometres; approximately 90 per cent of its imports and exports are handled by its ports, and therefore it is a maritime country. Consequently, its navy should form an important com- ponent of its defence force. Although the term South African Navy has only been in use since 1 January 1951, the history of the country’s naval forces goes back at least to 1922. Not much has thus far been published on the history of the South African Navy and its predecessors. To a large extent this gap is filled by Wessels’ book. In the first chapter the South African naval history from 1922 until the end of the Second World War in 1945 is discussed. The following eight chapters are each dedicated to the role played by one of the various kinds of warships in the country’s naval forces since 1945, namely: frigates; destroyers; minesweep- ers and minehunters; patrol ships; hydrographic survey ships; combat support ships; submarines; and other vessels, including boom defence ships, tugs, and search and rescue craft. In the final (tenth) chapter, general conclusions are drawn and guidelines with regard to the ideal navy of the future are provided.
    [Show full text]
  • British Embassy Reports on the Greek Uprising in 1821-1822: War of Independence Or War of Religion?
    University of North Florida UNF Digital Commons History Faculty Publications Department of History 2011 British Embassy Reports on the Greek Uprising in 1821-1822: War of Independence or War of Religion? Theophilus C. Prousis University of North Florida, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unf.edu/ahis_facpub Part of the Diplomatic History Commons Recommended Citation Prousis, Theophilus C., "British Embassy Reports on the Greek Uprising in 1821-1822: War of Independence or War of Religion?" (2011). History Faculty Publications. 21. https://digitalcommons.unf.edu/ahis_facpub/21 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of History at UNF Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in History Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of UNF Digital Commons. For more information, please contact Digital Projects. © 2011 All Rights Reserved “BRITISH EMBASSY REPORTS ON THE GREEK UPRISING IN 1821-1822: WAR OF INDEPENDENCE OR WAR OF RELIGION?” THEOPHILUS C. PROUSIS* In a dispatch of 10 April 1821 to Foreign Secretary Castlereagh, Britain’s ambassador to the Sublime Porte (Lord Strangford) evoked the prevalence of religious mentalities and religiously induced reprisals in the initial phase of the Greek War of Independence. The sultan’s “government perseveres in its endeavours to strike terror into the minds of its Greek subjects; and it seems that these efforts have been very successful. The commerce of the Greeks has been altogether suspended – their houses
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction for Most Americans the Globe-Girdling Catastrophe That
    Introduction For most Americans the globe-girdling catastrophe that we call the Second World War is now a matter neither of personal experience nor of memory, but of wood pulp and celluloid, books and films. Larger still is the majority for whom the cataclysmic First World War - once spoken of as "The Great War" - is ancient history, an antic prelude to what those who participated in it sometimes like to call "The Big One." For most of us, perhaps, the two wars compare as do contrasting movies from the two eras. Our image of the First World War is brief, grainy, silent, with black-and-white, herky-jerky doughboys "going over the top"; we picture the Second as panoramic, technicolor, reverberating with stereophonic sound and fury, armadas of ships and planes and tanks sweeping forward to destiny. A further disparity may be found in the popular historical and political assessment, such as it is, of the two wars. The majority of Americans doubtless still believes that the key to the Second World War is a simple one: a.demonic megalomaniac, Adolf Hitler, rose up to lead Germany to world domination and instead led his people to well- deserved ruin. Yet the view of the First World War held by the Americans of today, it is safe to say, is rather more tepid than the white-hot feelings of many of their grandparents in 1917, when "100-per-cent Americans" agitated to "Hang the Kaiser!" and mobs sacked German newspaper offices and presses in the worst outbreak of ethnic bigotry in our country's history.
    [Show full text]
  • The German Minority in Romania
    Zurich Open Repository and Archive University of Zurich Main Library Strickhofstrasse 39 CH-8057 Zurich www.zora.uzh.ch Year: 2015 The German Minority in Romania Edited by: Ursprung, Daniel ; Scheide, Carmen ; Tagangaeva, Maria Posted at the Zurich Open Repository and Archive, University of Zurich ZORA URL: https://doi.org/10.5167/uzh-133324 Edited Scientific Work Published Version The following work is licensed under a Creative Commons: Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) License. Originally published at: The German Minority in Romania. Edited by: Ursprung, Daniel; Scheide, Carmen; Tagangaeva, Maria (2015). St.Gallen: Universitaet St. Gallen * Center fuer Governance und Kultur in Europa. 19-20 / 2015 The German Minority in Romania Guest editor Daniel Ursprung (Zürich) Romanian Germans Elisabeth and Johann Weber during their deportation in the Soviet Union. Certificate of discharge for the former detainee Elisabeth Weber according to which she was released in Brandenburg on 11 december 1946. Photos - Günter Klein’s private archive. Online Open Access Journal of the Center for Governance and Culture in Europe University of St. Gallen URL: www.gce.unisg.ch, www.euxeinos.ch ISSN 2296-0708 Center for Governance and Last Update 28 December 2015 LANDIS & GYR Culture in Europe STIFTUNG University of St.Gallen Table of Contents The German Minority in Romania 3 Editorial by Daniel Ursprung The German Minority in Romania: a Historical Overview 7 by Daniel Ursprung Andreas Schmidt and the German Ethnic Group
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Performance Reviews Romania
    ECONOMIC COMMISSION FOR EUROPE Committee on Environmental Policy ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE REVIEWS ROMANIA UNITED NATIONS New York and Geneva, 2001 Environmental Performance Reviews Series No. 13 NOTE Symbols of United Nations documents are composed of capital letters combined with figures. Mention of such a symbol indicates a reference to a United Nations document. The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city of area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. UNITED NATIONS PUBLICATION Sales No. E.01-II-E.28 ISBN 92-1-116795-7 ISSN iii ___________________________________________________________________________ Preface The Environmental Performance Review of Romania began with a preparatory mission in April 2000, during which the structure of the report was established. Thereafter, the review team of international experts was constituted. It included experts from Bulgaria, Denmark, France, Italy, Netherlands, Poland, Slovakia, Sweden, Switzerland, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, together with experts from the secretariat of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE), the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the European Centre for Environment and Health of the World Health Organization (WHO). The review mission took place in October 2000. A first draft of the EPR report was submitted to the country for updating in March 2001. In September 2001, the draft was submitted for consideration to the EPR Expert Group of the UNECE Committee on Environmental Policy. During this meeting, the Expert Group discussed the report in detail with representatives of the Romanian Government, focusing in particular on the conclusions and recommendations.
    [Show full text]
  • The Field Artillery Revolution and the European Military Balance, 1890-1914
    David Stevenson The field artillery revolution and the European military balance, 1890-1914 Article (Accepted version) (Refereed) Original citation: Stevenson, David (2018) The field artillery revolution and the European military balance, 1890- 1914. International History Review. ISSN 0707-5332 (In Press) © 2018 Informa UK This version available at: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/87945/ Available in LSE Research Online: May 2018 LSE has developed LSE Research Online so that users may access research output of the School. Copyright © and Moral Rights for the papers on this site are retained by the individual authors and/or other copyright owners. Users may download and/or print one copy of any article(s) in LSE Research Online to facilitate their private study or for non-commercial research. You may not engage in further distribution of the material or use it for any profit-making activities or any commercial gain. You may freely distribute the URL (http://eprints.lse.ac.uk) of the LSE Research Online website. This document is the author’s final accepted version of the journal article. There may be differences between this version and the published version. You are advised to consult the publisher’s version if you wish to cite from it. The Field Artillery Revolution and the European Military Balance, 1890-1914 This article analyses the origins and Europe-wide impact of France’s Canon de 75mm Modèle 1897 (75mm model 1897 cannon). A beacon of Gallic engineering prowess, it has been considered the first modern field gun.1 It became the standard field weapon not only of the French artillery but also of the 1917-18 American Expeditionary Force.
    [Show full text]