Gavrilo Princip & The Start of WWI

[Tee Kay]

sorry to butt in here, but the link between the Black Hand and the serbian government has never been proved...

The link between Al Qaeda and the Iraqi government has never been proved, but America invaded anyway.

Such things serves as convenient excuses for Great Powers to "discipline" an uncooperative little state.

 

[happy_Alex]

The link between Al Qaeda and the Iraqi government has never been proved, but America invaded anyway.

Such things serves as convenient excuses for Great Powers to "discipline" an uncooperative little state.

yeh I know, but I said it reference to the OP from what I could make out of it...

 

[say1988]

In school (as the other person from Ontario said), we focused on four causes:
Militarism (the arms race)
Nationalism (such as in the Balkans opposition of Austria, and between major powers)
Imperialism (Austria in the Balkans and world wide imperialism creating tensions, as well as the colonies being drawn into the war)
The Alliance systems (which turned a minor regional conflict into a world war)

These four factors were going to cause a World War. When this would occur, who would start it, or the end result are impossible to determine.

The assassination by Princip, just set events into motion, causing the war then.

He did start the war, but didn't cause it.

 

[sydhe]

To believe that Gavrilo Princip's actions were the cause of the war means confusing causes with occasions.

In 1898 Elizabeth of Austria was similarly murdered, but no war was declared. The Sarajevo murder was "the main catalyst" of subsequent events alright, which means the conditions for war were already there.

Elisabeth was murdered by an Italian anarchist, Luigi Lucheni, and Italy was an ally of Austria at the time, so the international implications were different. Princip could be painted as a tool of the Serbian government, but Lucheni wasn't acting as an agent of a government and didn't choose Elisabeth for Italian nationalism. He mostly chose Elisabeth because she was available, not because she was Austrian.

 

[Oruc]

Nope!

 

[warpus]

The point being that these other factors are almost always implied. Rarely are they explicitly stated, especially to schoolkids at whatever level. Hence my question about whether WWI would have come about regardless of this assassination, or any other like it.

It's more dramatic (not to mention romantic) to teach the assassination as the spark that started WW1..

Not saying it's right, but that's how it is. Obviously the reasons for the start of the war are much more elaborate than that.

 

[Sofista]

Elisabeth was murdered by an Italian anarchist, Luigi Lucheni, and Italy was an ally of Austria at the time, so the international implications were different. Princip could be painted as a tool of the Serbian government, but Lucheni wasn't acting as an agent of a government and didn't choose Elisabeth for Italian nationalism. He mostly chose Elisabeth because she was available, not because she was Austrian.

Yes to all! The alliance between Italy and Austria was shaky at best, but it was there. Also, Austria aimed to defend what she had in Italy rather than expanding her possessions, contrary to the case in the Balkans - after the annexion of Bosnia-Herzegovina in 1907, Serbia was the next logical step.

Princip: tool of the government, or not? I'd say no, unless someone could come up with a good reason for Serbia to stage such a provocation only to later accept almost every part of the diktat Austria tried to impose her. But it does not matter ultimately: the decision in Vienna was made from circles who were after expansion, and took the chance to intervene.

 

[Evie]

Pawn of the government, I doubt.

Supported by elements within the government? I'd have no trouble believing that.

 

[Ferrosol]

I recall reading somewhere that the head of Serbia's Military Intelligence division was either a member and/or the main source of small arms to the Black Hand group that Princip was a part of.

 

[Adler17]

There were connections of the Black Hand with the Serbian government! The Serbian prime minister even feared for his life when getting to know parts of the plot and wanted to warn the Austrians as many members of his government had ties to the Black Hand! So the Serbian government shares also a part of the responsability of that assassination.

Adler

 

[happy_Alex]

There were connections of the Black Hand with the Serbian government! The Serbian prime minister even feared for his life when getting to know parts of the plot and wanted to warn the Austrians as many members of his government had ties to the Black Hand! So the Serbian government shares also a part of the responsability of that assassination.

Adler

Hello Adler. I was not aware of that. Could you be anymore specific?

 

[Rambuchan]

Vrylakas wrote a long article on it...

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=95423

That was a very good read indeed. It accurately addresses the ideas and concerns raised in the OP here (taking much the same position it seemed to me) and gave plenty more material for background understanding and further insights. I'd recommend it to anyone in this thread.

 

[Adler17]

Several Serbian ministers and high officers had close ties to the Black Hand. I how much Russia had also some ties to them is still not known. However, the plan to murder the archduke could not be made in complete secrecy. Indeed the Serbian prime minister got to know about that. But he feared about his life and so send only a "cryptic" warning to Austria nobody there understood. Had he done more he felt in life danger!
In the result it meant the Black Hand was controlling the Serbian government at least partly! And any war with Serbia was justified for the Austrians as the Serbs refused to allow Austrian investigators (which was the main point of the ultimatum). Because they were backed up by Russia. And feared their own guilt become obvious, and nobody would help them then.
So if you want you could compare this with the Taliban backing up Al Quaida in 2001 (although all historical comparisations lack).

Adler

 

[happy_Alex]

Several Serbian ministers and high officers had close ties to the Black Hand. I how much Russia had also some ties to them is still not known. However, the plan to murder the archduke could not be made in complete secrecy. Indeed the Serbian prime minister got to know about that. But he feared about his life and so send only a "cryptic" warning to Austria nobody there understood. Had he done more he felt in life danger!
In the result it meant the Black Hand was controlling the Serbian government at least partly! And any war with Serbia was justified for the Austrians as the Serbs refused to allow Austrian investigators (which was the main point of the ultimatum). Because they were backed up by Russia. And feared their own guilt become obvious, and nobody would help them then.
So if you want you could compare this with the Taliban backing up Al Quaida in 2001 (although all historical comparisations lack).

Adler

| agree that the comparison with Al Queada is wrong, but I think your joining up way to many dots here.

The cryptic warning was given by the serbs to provide themselves with an alibi, of sorts. They could not give a complete warning as they did not themselves possses all the information and facts of the planned assasination, yet they had to convey some message to the austrians. I don't think the black hand were controlling the serbs and think you're way off here. After all they were one of many nationalist groups at the time.The assasins themselves were not at all illustrious, and virtually bungled the assasination attempt. It only succeeded because the driver of the archdukes car took a wrong turn. History can sometimes turn on very small events, a concept I agree that is difficult to accept given the subsequent events.

 

[Dachs]

I recall reading somewhere that the head of Serbia's Military Intelligence division was either a member and/or the main source of small arms to the Black Hand group that Princip was a part of.

Ayup. Colonel Dragutin Dimitrijevic, aka "Apis", was either high up in or in charge of the Black Hand.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

It is commonly stated that Franz Ferdinand's assassination at the hands of Gavrilo Princip was "the main catalyst to the start of WWI".

When we see this simplistic rendering peddled about, and when we peddle it about ourselves, don't we tend to forget and gloss over the fact that it was carried out in response to Austrian Imperial ambition and aggression in the Balkans?

Wouldn't a more truthful, revealing, useful, and still quite digestible account of the start of WWI take into account Austro-Hungarian expansion in this area, as devised and advocated by Count Gyula Andrássy? (Perhaps it could go on to mention that both Italy and Germany had been written off as areas of expansion due to the rise of them as new national powers too, but that's a digression, which may or may not arise later in the thread, as posters wish.)

Of course, history is written by the victor and blah blah blah. But isn't the victor in this case "imperialism in general"? All of the Austro-Hungarian Empire's major enemies, the victors of WWI, were, after all, imperial powers themselves. We can't really say the same about Pan-Slavism and its various grass roots organisations. To propagate the Princip assassination account is to lay the onus and responsibility for the world's most horrific ever war at the time not on imperial powers, and the precarious balance of these in Europe at the time, but on some mad hat, arguably nihilistic, possibly anarchistic, brigade of goons - people acting to resist imperial aggression and overlordship no less. To focus on this group, and other such groups as the likes of Princip belonged to, detracts from the lack of respect for human life and self determination that imperialism brings about on a far greater scale than Princip and his affiliates ever sought to bring about. Instead we are encouraged to perceive such groups not as legitimate resistors to a far bigger "evil", but as lunatics and fanatics who - shock, horror, aren't they evil! - care not for human life and are willing to use violence at the drop of a hat.

---

While I've heard many, many times (and am guilty myself of oversimplifying it for people sometimes) that the Archduke's assassination set WWI in motion, I don't think that I've ever heard anyone say that the assassination was wrong.

~ Shouldn't we, those who care about the accuracy and truthfulness of our histories and their implications for the modern world, have our accounts of the start of WWI include the plans of Count Gyula Andrássy at the very least?

Absolutely.

~ Do you agree with the statement that "imperialist powers in general were the victors who authored the common story of the start of WWI"?

I think that they clearly omitted or glazed over several facts, but I don't think it's a total fabrication on their part, either.

~ Would WWI have happened regardless of the actions of Princip, or anyone else assassinating an Austro-Hungarian Archduke?

Yes. Europe was poised for war. They practically WANTED a war to happen. I'm reminded of the German soldier who, upon recieving his weapon and uniform, procliamed "this is great! War is like Christmas!" to say nothing of the fantastic parties in the streets as men went off to war, the politicans shouting dulce et decorm est pro patria mori all the while. With the alliance system the way it was, and the manner in which mobilization was organized (where it was total mobilization or nothing at all),it was simply a matter of where the spark came from.

~ What implications do you think the common (Princip assassination) account of the start of WWI have on our world today?

I don't think the assassination itself has many implications today (if by that you meant "what influence does our opinion of the action have on our worldview"), at least not in the United States.

 

[Adler17]

Happy Alex, there were indeed many nationalistic fractions within Serbia in that time (like today...). Anyway, Nikola Pasic feared for his life when he got to know the plot, and at least so many details to stop it. But he feared to be shot or at least being seen as traitor. So he sent the cryptic warning. However that means the Black Hand had much influence in the Serbian government and the warning was in no way sufficient to stop it and by no way a real alibi. If a government gets to know such a plot they must act. Not doing so makes them as guilty as shooting themselves. That's why the Serbian government IS guilty. Nikola Pasic might be excused, but only as person. Not as prime minister.

Adler