The Role of Germany in the Outbreak of the Great War: “the Fischer Controversy”
DOI: https://doi.org/10.17721/1728-2640.2026.162.7
Keywords:
Fritz Fischer, “the Fischer controversy”, Germany, the First World War, responsibility for the war, historiography, academic discussion, criticism of the “historical method”Abstract
Background. The essence of the debates around the book of German historian Fritz Fischer “Griff nach der Weltmacht: Die Kriegszielpolitik des kaiserlichen Deutschland 1914/18” (The Quest for World Power: The Military Objectives of Kaiser's Germany in 1914–18) (1961) is not well known in Ukraine, despite its significant impact on the assessment of Germany’s role in the outbreak of the Great War in historiography.
The purpose of this research is to discuss the academic debates (“the Fischer controversy”), caused by the publication of this high-profile book. The author intends to characterize briefly F. Fischer’s research and his main conclusions; to highlight the arguments of his opponents and supporters; to identify the impact of the debates on the criticism of the “historical method”, and Ukrainian historiography.
Methods: content analysis, systematization, comparative analysis, historiographic analysis, and critical analysis of historical sources.
Results. Based on the study of a wide range of archival sources, F. Fischer has drawn the following conclusions: Germany was responsible for the outbreak of the Great War because of its goals of imperialist expansion, its desire for dominance in Central Europe and for “world power”. Such goals were widespread in German society, not only among pan-Germans. September memorandum by chancellor T. Bethmann Hollweg revealed that the annexation plans had been developed in Germany before the war. Germany’s leaders pushed Austria-Hungary to war with Serbia during the July Crisis, although they understood the risks of the Great War. The chancellor was not concerned with preserving peace, but with splitting the Entente. Since Germany’s goals at the beginning of the war were determined by public sentiments and domestic socioeconomic situation, there was continuity between its goals in the First and Second World Wars. These Fischer’s conclusions renewed the painful “Versailles accusations”. For this reason, his book provoked heated scholarly debates in Germany and abroad. Opponents criticized Fischer not only for his radical conclusions, but also for his incorrect interpretation of historical sources, and his inability to understand them in the historical context. As a result, “the Fischer controversy” questioned the “historical method”, that is, the ability of scholars to illuminate the “historical truth”, based on a study of sources.
Conclusions. The study has shown the significant impact of F. Fisher’s conclusions and arguments on Ukrainian historiography. In “the Fisher controversy”, the author supports his opponents. Although we share some of Fischer’s conclusions, we consider Germany’s motives to be defensive, and his arguments about Germany’s desire for imperialist expansion and “world power” as the main factors of the Great War unconvincing.
References
Albertini, L. (1952–1957). The Origins of the War of 1914. In 3 vols. I. M. Massey (trans. and ed.). Oxford University Press.
Declaration between the United Kingdom, France and Russia, engaging not to conclude peace separately during the present European War. Signed at London, September 5, 1914. Treaty Series. 1915. No. 1. London, 1915. UK Treaties Online. https://treaties.fcdo.gov.uk/awweb/awarchive?type=file&item=63934
Fischer, F. (1967). Germany’s Aims in the First World War. W W Norton & Company.
Fischer, F. (1974). World Power or Decline: The Controversy Over Germany's Aims in the First World War. W W Norton & Company.
Fischer, F. (1975). War of Illusions: German Policies from 1911 to 1914. W W Norton & Company.
Fischer, F. (1986). From Kaiserreich to Third Reich: Elements of Continuity in German History, 1871–1945. Allen & Unwin.
Fischer, F. (1988). Twenty-Five Years Later: Looking Back at the “Fischer Controversy” and Its Consequences. Central European History, 21 (3), 207–223.
Geiss, I. (1966). The Outbreak of the First World War and German War Aims. Journal of Contemporary History, 1 (3), 75–91.
Gonchar, B., Gorodnia, N. (2008). Modern History of Europe and the U.S., 1870–1918. Kyiv University publishing center [in Ukrainian].
Jenkins, J. (2013). Fritz Fischer's “Programme for Revolution”: Implications for a Global History of Germany in the First World War. Journal of Contemporary History, 48 (2), Special Issue: The Fischer Controversy after 50 Years, 397–417.
Joll, J. (1966). The 1914 Debate Continues. Fritz Fischer and His Critics. Past & Present, 34, 100–113.
Joll, J. (1984). The Origins of the First World War». Longman.
Hale, F.A. (1976). Fritz Fischer and the Historiography of World War One. The History Teacher, 9 (2), 258–279.
Kaiser, D. E. (1983). Germany and the Origins of the First World War. The Journal of Modern History, 55 (3), 442–474.
Kronenbitter, G. (2013). Keeping a Low Profile – Austrian Historiography and the Fischer Controversy. Journal of Contemporary History, 48 (2), Special Issue: The Fischer Controversy after 50 Years, 333–349.
Mombauer, A. (2013). The Fischer Controversy, Documents and the 'Truth' About the Origins of the First World War. Journal of Contemporary History, 48 (2), Special Issue: The Fischer Controversy after 50 Years, 290–314.
Mommsen, W. J. (1966). The Debate on German War Aims. Journal of Contemporary History, 1 (3), 47–72.
Otte, T.G. (2013). “Outcast From History”: The Fischer Controversy and British Historiograph. Journal of Contemporary History, 48 (2), Special Issue: The Fischer Controversy after 50 Years, 376–396.
Petzold, S. (2013). The Social Making of a Historian: Fritz Fischer's Distancing From Bourgeois-Conservative Historiography, 1930–60. Journal of Contemporary History, 48 (2), Special Issue: The Fischer Controversy after 50 Years, 271–289.
Pogge von Strandmann, H. (2013). The Political and Historical Significance of the Fischer Controversy. Journal of Contemporary History, 48 (2), Special Issue: The Fischer Controversy after 50 Years, 251–270.
Potiekhin, O., Кlymenko, Yu. (2023). Geopolitics versus Security: Allied Deterrence of Aggression in Europe in the 20th – at the Beginning of the 21st Centuries. Dukh i Litera [in Ukrainian].
Ritter, G. (1997). Anti-Fischer: A New War-Guilt Thesis? The Outbreak of World War One: Causes and Responsibilities. H. Herwig (ed.). Houghton Mifflin Co. 135–142.
Sanborn. J. (2013). Russian Historiography on the Origins of the First World War since the Fischer Controversy. Journal of Contemporary History, 48 (2), Special Issue: The Fischer Controversy after 50 Years, 350–362.
Steinberg, J. (2013). Old Knowledge and New Research: A Summary of the Conference on the Fischer Controversy 50 Years On. Journal of Contemporary History, 48 (2), Special Issue: The Fischer Controversy after 50 Years, 241–250.
Stibbe, M. (2013). Reactions from the Other Germany: The Fischer Controversy in the German Democratic Republic. Journal of Contemporary History, 48 (2), Special Issue: The Fischer Controversy after 50 Years, 315–332.
The September Memorandum (September 9, 1914). German History in Documents and Images. https://ghdi.ghi-dc.org/sub_document.cfm?document_id=980
Trojan, S. (2016). Great War 1914–1918: Geopolitical Shifts in the World System. First World War in the Focus of History (Diplomatic and Political Conflicts of the Great War). S. Trojan (ed). Kondor publishing. 5–33 [in Ukrainian].
Trojan, S. (2017). Foreign Policy in the Early 20th Century and the First World War: Restructuring of the International System, First World War and Revolutions: Vectors of Social and Cultural Transformations. S. Trojan (ed). Kondor publishing. 5–15 [in Ukrainian].
