Bullitt Lowry writes in the Journal of Military History,
Vol. 63, 2, April 1999:
"In 1994, the German Historical Institute sponsored a
conference on the Treaty of Versailles in partnership with the University
of California, Berkeley's Center for German and European Studies. This
volume, the fruit of that cooperation, includes the work of twenty-seven
well chosen scholars from seven nations, who direct their attention toward
France, Britain, and Germany.
As the editors explain in the Introduction,
the intent is to explain whether the collapse of the Versailles system
"stemmed from inherent weaknesses of the treaty or from postwar revisionism
and economic instability" (p. 1). In the selections printed, the caricatures
of John Maynard Keynes and Ray Stannard Baker penned are not only laid
to rest, but stakes of fact are driven through their hearts. Absent, also,
are simplistic "too harsh or too lenient" generalizations and facile judgments
on "Wilsonianism versus the balance of power, the new diplomacy facing
the old." An explicit theme of this collection, however, is the persistence
of those legends not only in the popular mind, but also in the work of
scholars.
The volume has five selections, the
first being a look at war aims and the Armistice. Klaus Schwabe looks at
Germany, and David Stevenson presents a particularly cogent examination
of French policy. Alan Sharp comments, sensibly and accurately, on those
essays as well as on articles concerning British and United States policy.
The second section probes the peacemakers
and their home fronts. Particularly noteworthy is Georges-Henri Soutou's
dissection of Clemenceau's multi-tiered policy, and the other essays are
instructive. Lawrence Gelfand, for example, carries forward his classic
study of the Inquiry into an examination of the American Mission at Paris.
The third section is more miscellaneous,
with contributors examining the minorities question, the Rhineland (on
which Stephen Schuker gives a superb analysis of French plans and actions),
Poland, and economics. On reparations, the contribution by Sally Marks,
who updates her work from earlier decades, is a model of analysis. Elisabeth
Glaser writes on economic questions generally, and Niall Ferguson gives
a rigorous analysis of the balance of payments question. Gerald Feldman
comments on this section, centering on three economic articles, do not
minimize the failures of Versailles and are generally traditional in judgment.
The fourth section looks at the aftermath of the Versailles Treaty and
the effect it had on the U.S.S.R. and the League of Nations. William Keylor
examines the effect on events that the precedents and themes of Versailles
et. His concern is to explain why the prevailing assessments of Versailles
remain negative. The last section is more narrowly focused on post-Versailles
interpretations and attempts at revision, with a particularly interesting
and subtle essay by Manfred Boemeke on Woodrow Wilson's image of Germany
before, during, and after the Versailles Treaty.
This volume is a splendid example
of what a group of scholars collectively can achieve in service to scholarship.
In the volume, Diane Kunz notes that "[p]erhaps not enough time has yet
passed for the renunciation of Versailles myths" (p. 525). Indeed, it is
possible that seventy-five years are truly not enough, but with this volume,
scholarship is well on the way. No one who works in the twentieth century
will fail to find articles of interest in this collection. Even the footnotes
form a splendid guide to recent work on, and interpretations of, the first
half of the twentieth century."
John Ikenberry writes in Foreign Affairs, April 1999:
"No peace settlement has provoked more controversy or
regret than the Treaty of Versailles. This massive volume offers new archival
materials and divergent national perspectives in rehashing old historical
controversies, including the central question of Versailles: Was the failure
of the peace and historical controversies, including the central question
of Versailles and the rise of a revisionist Germany due to a flawed treaty
or to wider, uncontrollable forces? The collective scholarship in this
volume generally does further damage to the view, popularized by John Maynard
Keynes, that the victors provoked German hostility by pursuing an unnecessary
vindictive settlement. Instead, it sees the treaty in more favorable terms
as a relatively flexible instrument that ultimately ended the worst of
the reparations dispute and the occupation of the Rhineland in 1932. Woodrow
Wilson, Lloyd George and Georges Clemenceau come across as relatively well
intentioned rational leaders who simply could not bridge Allied differences
and make the commitments necessary for a lasting peace. In addition, the
war's sudden and ambiguous end left the Allied governments unprepared for
the negotiations. As the reader follows the account of diverging national
war aims, shifting domestic coalitions, staggering dislocation, and complex
negotiations, the Treaty of Versailles looks increasingly understandable
-- if not inevitable. For those seeking to understand the tough realities
of building a new world order, this volume will be fascinating to explore."
Further comments include:
"This volume includes excellent chapters on various aspects
of the Versailles treaty of 1919 by many of the leading historians in the
field of international history. It offers new perspectives on the subject
by specialists on the First World War, the Paris Peace Conference, and
the 1920s from the United States and Europe. These chapters show the authors'
familiarity not only with available archival sources but also with both
recent scholarship on and earlier interpretations of the peace treaty with
Germany. This volume as a whole provides excellent analysis of peacemaking
after World War I and also of historiography on the Versailles Treaty."
(Professor Lloyd E. Ambrosius, Department of History,
University of Nebraska)
"The volume will comprise our knowledge about peacemaking
at Versailles. Its contents make it a compendium as well as a basis for
future research."
(Prof. Dr. Peter Krüger, Department of History,
Marburg University, Germany)