REVIEW BY JONATHAN EATON
In recent years, historians have increasingly sought to understand major conflicts from a genuinely global perspective. While this approach has perhaps always been synonymous with the Second World War, where the shape of the conflict was inevitably textured by major geopolitical trends, it has been less frequently applied to the First World War, where public perceptions – in Britain at least – are traditionally framed by the experience of the Western Front.
In Ring of Fire, a new work by historians Alexandra Churchill and Nicolai Eberholst, the authors seek to outline the events of August and September 1914 in a different way, demonstrating how traditional and somewhat narrow-minded views of this period have obscured broader international trends.
As the European powers edged closer to the outbreak of war in summer 1914, they sought to draw on the resources of their colonial territories to recruit troops, disrupt the operations of their enemies, and provide economic support. For instance, Britain’s war effort was buttressed by access to more than two million men across its empire. Its territories of Canada, New Zealand, and Australia collectively offered to provide 53,000 men as war was declared. Even a sparsely populated region such as Newfoundland was able to contribute 500 troops within days – a generous offer driven by the patriotic fervour of the time. But, as a consequence, the terrible cost of the conflict was felt in communities around the globe, many of which were far from the battlefields. Around 1% of all Maori men are believed to have been killed while serving in the conflict.
