How Europe Went to War in 1914

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

silence said:
Seems to me that they're so remote form Germany and Russia that the fear of invasion seems a bit fantastical. I don't see either country able to land a strong enough force at one time to successfully take on the An(Zac)s on their home ground.
Click to expand...

Could not agree more. However it is what it is. The Germans did have colonial posessions that bordered Australian territory in the form of Papua, and the Russians at the time were developing their naval facilities at Port Arthur. 3 years after federeation, in 1904, the Russians did send a sizable fleet to attack the japanese, but were defeated.

However mythical the threat of invason was, it was real enough in the minds of Australians, and there were the circumstances to fuel such xenophobia
 
I have some problems with the causality,

19th Apr, 1839

Guarantee of Belgium Neutrality – This document guaranteed that France, Russia, Prussia, Austria and Great Britain would recognize Belgium as an independent and neutral country
Click to expand...

This was a Treaty 75 years back, where the political, military and territorial circumstances were totaly others then 1914.
Also I'm not very impressed from the claim, that the breaking of the neutrality of Belgium was this big issue. To me it was made from the Triple Entente propaganda to an issue and excuse to have something to present. Also from one of Niall Ferguson's books, that indicates Great Britain itself was ready to violate Belgian neutrality for military reasons
Only three examples were neutrality wasn't interesting anyone.
Battle of Copenhagen 1801 and 1807 also Operation Catapult, classical examples, where was argumented with military reasons to break neutrality, but here the breaker wasn't Germany.


18th Jan, 1871

The German Empire is created out of Prussia. Kaiser Wilhelm I takes the throne.
Click to expand...

You see the creation of the German Empire causal to the outbrake of WWI?
What has happened if Germany would have stand a multi prince state?
Don't you think that France and Russia perhaps had forced their imperialism (as all other major countries of this time in Europe) and revenche much earlier?
I admit that for the other Nations and countries it was easier to live in Europe with a weak german prince state building instead of a strong german Empire, because they could force their plans easier, but it is hard for me to believe, that the creation of the german Nation (which was in the end the german Empire) was causal for the outbreak of WWI.

Also I want to add, that France declared war at 1870 to the Norddeutschen Bund for a more then banal reason, because they thought "Germany" was weak and they can win the war easily. They didn't calculate with the spirit of the "german Nation" and that the 4 big south prince states support the Norddeutschen Bund.
I also admit that the treaty at 1871 was to harsh, but the last 100 years "germany" (all different countries) was the primary goal of France with several different wars to annex territory

With your other points I have also realy problems with the causality till 1890-1900.
I would agree that with Wilhelm II as Emperor and the the release of chancelor Otto von Bismarck, on a very wide subjectiv side you can argument, this had favor the outbreak of WWI, but nothing more.

1st Jan, 1889

1913, The Anglo-German Naval Race – The English and the Germans start to focus on strengthening their naval fleets.

Years specified; Day and month not specified
Click to expand...

This is one of the next heightened propaganda issue mostly from Great Britain.
The german Navy was till 1905 about 25% of the strenghts of the british Navy and till 1914 35%, where was this to any point a race?
Germany was from 1890 on an export economy, with a constant increase of the economy and export, so the german Empire had an interest to support it's world wide increasing trade lines. To me it is curious that the concurrent activity of the USN/USA wasn't at any time a problem for Great Britain.
 
Australia's early involvement in the Great War included the Australian Naval and Military Expeditionary Force landing at Rabaul on 11 September 1914 and taking possession of German New Guinea at Toma on 17 September 1914 and the neighbouring islands of the Bismarck Archipelago in October 1914. On 14 November 1914 the Royal Australian Navy made a significant contribution when HMAS Sydney destroyed the German raider SMS Emden.

The Asian and Pacific Theatre of World War I was a conquest of German colonial possession in the Pacific Ocean and China. The most significant military action was the careful and well-executed Siege of Tsingtao in what is now China, but smaller actions were also fought at Bita Paka and Toma in German New Guinea.
All other German and Austrian possessions in Asia and the Pacific fell without bloodshed. Naval warfare was common; all of the colonial powers had naval squadrons stationed in the Indian or Pacific Oceans. These fleets operated by supporting the invasions of German held territories and by destroying the East Asia Squadron.

One of the first land offensives in the Pacific theatre was the Occupation of German Samoa in August 1914 by New Zealand forces. The campaign to take Samoa ended without bloodshed after over 1,000 New Zealanders landed on the German colony, supported by an Australian and French naval squadron.

Australian forces attacked German New Guinea in September 1914: 500 Australians encountered 300 Germans and native policemen at the Battle of Bita Paka; the Allies won the day and the Germans retreated to Toma. A company of Australians and a British warship besieged the Germans and their colonial subjects, ending with a German surrender.

After the fall of Toma, only minor German forces were left in New Guinea and these generally capitulated once met by Australian forces. In December 1914, one German officer near Angorum attempted resist the occupation with thirty native police but his force deserted him after they fired on an Australian scouting party and he was subsequently captured.

By 1915, the only uncapitulated German force was a small expedition under the command of Hermann Detzner which managed to elude Australian patrols and hold out in the interior of the island until the end of the war, for which he became a figure of some renown.

German Micronesia, the Marianas, the Carolines and the Marshall Islands also fell to Japanese forces operating with the allies.

When war was declared on Germany in 1914, the German East Asia Squadron withdrew from its base at Tsingtao and attempted to make its way east across the Pacific and back to Germany. After concentrating the majority of its force at Pagan Island, the fleet raided several Allied targets as it made its way across the Pacific.
Detached cruisers raided the cable station at Fanning and then rejoined with the squadron. Later the German forces would attack Papeete where Admiral Maximilian von Spee with his two armoured cruisers sank a French gunboat and a freighter before bombarding Papeete's shore batteries.

The next engagement was fought off Chile at the Battle of Coronel on November 1, 1914, Admiral Spee won the battle by defeating a British squadron which was sent to destroy him. His two armored and three light cruisers sank two Royal Navy armored cruisers and forced a British light cruiser and auxiliary cruiser to flee. Over 1,500 British sailors (all hands aboard both cruisers) were killed while only three Germans were wounded. The victory did not last long as the German fleet was soon defeated in Atlantic waters at the Battle of the Falklands in December 1914. Spee himself went down with his own flagship SMS Scharnhorst.

The only German vessels to escape the Falklands engagement was the light cruiser Dresden and the auxiliary Seydlitz. Seydlitz fled into the Atlantic before being interned by neutral Argentina, while Dresden turned about and steamed back into the Pacific. The Dresden then attempted to act as a commerce raider, without much success, until March 1915 when its engines began to break down.
Without means of getting repairs, the German light cruiser sailed into neutral Chilean waters at the island of Mas a Tierra where it was cornered by British naval forces. After a short battle in which four of her crew were killed, the Dresden was forced to scuttle and her crew was interned by Chilean authorities.

The cruise of the Emden.

SMS Emden was left behind by Admiral Graf Maximilian von Spee when he began his retreat across the Pacific. The ship won the Battle of Penang, in which the Germans sank a Russian cruiser and a French destroyer. Emden also harried merchant vessels of the Allies and destroyed over thirty of them. This was an issue of great concern to the Pacific dominions, as the seaborne trade routes were vital to their terms of trade

Emden went on and bombarded Madras, India, causing damage to British oil tanks and sinking an Allied merchant ship. The attack caused widespread panic in the city and thousands of people fled from the coast, fearing that the Germans may have begun an invasion of India as a whole.

After a very successful career as a merchant raider, Emden was engaged by HMAS Sydney at the Battle of Cocos, where the German vessel was destroyed. A group of sailors under the command of Hellmuth von Mücke managed to escape towards the Arabian peninsula which was then part of the Ottoman Empire, an ally of the German Empire during World War I. I do not know if they made it….
 
This is an account largely drawn from Larry Zuckermann (The Rape Of Belgium; The Untold Story). The Treaty of London of 1839, also called the First Treaty of London, the Convention of 1839, and the London Treaty of Separation, was a treaty signed on 19 April 1839 between the European great powers, the United Kingdom of the Netherlands and the Kingdom of Belgium. It was the direct follow-up of the 1831 'Treaty of the XXIV Articles' which the Netherlands had refused to sign, and the result of negotiations at the London Conference of 1838-1839.

Under the treaty, the European powers recognized and guaranteed the independence and neutrality of Belgium and confirmed the independence of the German-speaking part of Luxembourg. Its main historical significance was Article VII, which required Belgium to remain perpetually neutral, and by implication committed the signatory powers to guard that neutrality in the event of invasion. It was an undertaking taken very seriously by the British in particular

Belgium's de facto independence had been established through nine years of intermittent fighting, the Belgian Revolution. The co-signatories of the Treaty of London—Great Britain, Austria, France, the German Confederation (led by Prussia), Russia, and the Netherlands—now officially recognised the independent Kingdom of Belgium, and at Britain's insistence agreed to its neutrality.

According to Zuckermann the treaty was an important document, especially in its role in bringing about World War I. It was a treaty that retained great significance in Whitehall, though the Germans tended to try and minimise its importance. When the German Empire invaded Belgium in August 1914 in violation of the treaty, the British declared war on 4 August. Informed by the British ambassador that Britain would go to war with Germany over the latter's violation of Belgian neutrality, German Chancellor Theobald von Bethmann Hollweg exclaimed that he could not believe that Britain and Germany would be going to war over a mere "scrap of paper." Therein lies in large measure why Germans would consider it an unimportant event, whilst to people of British descent, it remains a significant feature and reason for the war. It leaves unanswered why the Germans would find it necessary to invade Belgium in the first place. What thret to German security did the Belgians pose? As i understand it, one of germany's security concerns was with France. how does an independant nation, like Belgium, with signed gurantees of neutrality from all the major powers, including the predecessor of the German state, have any relevance to the security issues relating to France? Sure, the belgians were a victim of geography, but that in my opinion is not sufficient reason or justification to violate its neutrality.

In terms of latter day parallels, the best I can think of are the NATO treaties and the ANZUS alliance. The ANZUS alliance is now 61 years old, and if its immediate predecessor is included, 71 years old. This makes it almost as old as the treaty of London at the time of WWI. In time of invasion, Australians would very seriously expect the US to come to its aid, and vice versa. Age of a treaty can sometimes have nothing to do with its relevance
 

It would be very important to mention, that only in the event of a two-front war, it was necessary to invade Begium to hit France first, from imperative military reasons.
This is the main reason, that it is to me more then curious, that the Belgium issue hangs this high. At 1839 the military and much more important the territory backgrounds were totaly different. With the rising of a two front war, after the triple entente Treaty of 1904, the german General Staff began to plan a counterplan against a possible two-front war, the Schlieffen-Plan 1905.
As you can see the Schlieffen-Plan has an absolut dircet bond/connect to the triple entente treaty of 1904.
Before this treaty Belgium wasn't in any plan of the General Stuff, after this treaty, the General Staff involved Belguim in it's plans (and so a break of neutralty) to counter a two-front war, from imperative military reasons.
Also you can see this at the war at 1870, where the neutrality of Belgium was respected and accepted.
If 1914 the germans had only a war against France, without the other major powers especially Russia, the neutrality of Begium would be respected.

I repeat my question, why were the military reasons of breaking the Neutrality of Denmark and Vichy France higher, then the miltary reasons of breaking the neutrality of Belgium, even if this treaty was 75 years old and the borderlines were totaly different at the timeline of 1839 then 1914 and the military circumstances also totaly different.

To me it is and was an excuse, every other major power had done the same as Germany, if they were in the same position of a two front war, between France and Russia and has someting to do, to counter such an event.
 
Last edited:
Bear in mind that the French had asked the Belgians for access through thier countryside and were denied, just as the Germans were. A confrontation between Germany and France was inevitable but in order to expedite an attack, they had to bypass the Franco-German frontier. This is where Belgium became involved, because the Belgian countryside offered quick access for transporting soldiers and equipment.

The Germans gambled on knocking out the French as fast as possible and then turning to counter a Russian attack that they knew was coming. So the Germans struck first.

The flaw to the German's planning, was that the Russians attacked much faster than they had calculated.
 
The Churchill Era: An Educational Resource

How serious was the German naval threat to Great Britain before 1914?


For a hundred years after Nelson's victory at Trafalgar in 1805 Britain's navy was the largest and most powerful in the world. It had no serious rival in Europe or America. Britain's naval power allowed her to build up a vast overseas empire, and to conduct trade safely all over the globe. But as the twentieth century dawned, for the first time Britain's leading position was challenged, by the strong new empire of Germany.

Britain had adopted a "Two-Power" standard in 1889 - i.e. her fleet was to be larger than the fleets of the next two powers combined. At the time these were assumed to be France and Russia, with the United States as a future possibility. Germany, with its relatively short coastline and with no overseas empire to defend, was not considered a serious potential naval power. But Kaiser Wilhelm II, who came to the throne in 1888, was both fascinated by and resentful of British naval dominance. He was determined to build up a German fleet to rival Britain's. His vision was enthusiastically shared by the German Secretary for the Navy, Admiral Tirpitz. Tirpitz got the necessary funding from the German parliament, the Reichstag, for an ambitious programme of naval expansion, contained in a series of Navy Laws.

The British were at first caught off-guard by the German naval programme, and reacted with a mixture of alarm and protest. Popular novels, like Erskine Childers's The Riddle of the Sands imagined a German invasion of Britain; in more practical terms, the Asquith Government faced up to the question of modernising and expanding the British Navy. The Navy was already being thoroughly modernised by the energetic First Sea Lord (most senior Admiral of the Royal Navy), Sir John ("Jacky") Fisher. Fisher was responsible for the launch in 1906 of the revolutionary battleship HMS Dreadnought, whose ultra-modern armament made her overnight the most powerful ship in the world and effectively rendered every other battleship obsolete. But it was clear that other countries, notably Germany, would soon start launching their own dreadnoughts. It was down to the government, therefore, to ensure that Britain still maintained her lead in the new dreadnought age.

Financing naval expansion on this scale would make huge inroads into the budget, and the Cabinet was taken by surprise by the naval spending estimates put forward in 1908 by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Reginald McKenna. Although the Cabinet was divided on the issue, there was a vigorous public campaign for naval expansion, spurred on by the launch that year of the first German dreadnought, Nassau. Churchill, who became First Lord of the Admiralty in 1911, was an enthusiastic advocate of the Anglo-German naval race that ensued.

Britain viewed the german naval expansion programs under Tirpitz with a great deal of alarm. Britain was aware that her naval dominance allowed her political influence far beyond her actual military power and industrial potential. The British also were aware of the vastly superior german industrial resources, which meant that she alone of all the nations in Europe could eclipse British naval power within a generation.

Most other European nations accepted British naval supremacy, Partly of necessity, but also because the british campioned 9at least in theory) the freedom of the seas, and opposed attacks by guerre de course. The Imperial German navy was a bit of an unknown in that regard. nobody was sure how it would be used if it gained dominance. it was certainly viewed as a threat to british security
 
From all primary sources we have today (from all archives), Germany didn't ever planed or had the wish to invade Great Britain or go to war with Great Britain.

What you can say is, that Germany wanted also to be a big player at the world wide imperialism and after the release of Bismarck, their political behavior was partly naive, bearish and arrogant. But show me realy one serious event, where Germany operated directly and seriously against Great Britain between 1890-1914.
There main goal was France and partly Russia through their ally with Austria Hungarian. Even at the big crisis of the Balkan wars 1912, Germany and Great Britain worked hand in hand to avoid any war between Austria Hungarian and Russia.

Also I can't see this big involvement of Germany at Asia between 1890-1914.
Yes they had interests, but they were not invoved in any war or forced territory annexion, other then Russia or Japan.

The german Navy proclaimed, supported and with the major propaganda, was a major failure of WilhelmII, but as I said, if you ckeck the real facts and unit strenghts, the german navy was far away to be a competitor to the Royal Navy, at the best times 35% 1914.

Also after the France-Prussian war of 1870 with the blockade of all german harbours at the North Sea and the permanent increasing economy and export from 1890, I can understand that Germany wanted to have safety at sea with their own Navy and the planed strenghts of the german navy was very official to all other countries through the naval law.
There was to no point any secret, forced or unplaned building.
 
Last edited:
I agree with DonL here. I think the main thread from Germany to the UK was economical. In reality, the German naval power was not a real threath to the British.

But could the British have known at the time that the german navy would not match their strength? I guess for them it seemed like it would. And to be fair, although an inferior power, I think the German navy gave a good account of themselves at Jutland. So maybe the fear was not so unrealistic after all?
 


But Marcel, how should this be possible? Every unit and also every replacement of a unit, was ruled by the german naval law and the budget through the Reichstag. This was all very official and every ambassador could read the naval law and see it.
 
DonL said:
But Marcel, how should this be possible? Every unit and also every replacement of a unit, was ruled by the german naval law and the budget through the Reichstag. This was all very official and every ambassador could read the naval law and see it.
Click to expand...

Laws can be very quickly changed...... expecially in a Country whose Kanzler Otto von Bismarck affirmed "Treaties are simply chiffon de papier"......
 
I think it a fair assessment that the German Navy, on its own would have been hard pressed to defeat the RN.

However in 1889, the British, after 75 years of minimal contact in European affairs, preferring to adopt their traditional role of naval dominance around the seas of Europe, which gave a loose gentle control of Europe anyway, adopted the 2:1 standard, basically that the Royal Navy would be at least twice as powerful as the next two naval powers in Europe. The british felt they could continue their neglect of European affairs if that situation was continued.

The Germans did not accept that situation, and under Tirpitz massive plans were announced for really big expansions of the German Navy. I think it was 1898 that German announcements caused a near panic in the RN. They announced something like 19 Battleships and well over 30 cruisers to be laid down, which completely outclassed the rather leisurely RN building programs. The British responded, culminating in a number of significant changes. In the early part of the 20th century they launched the HMS Drreadnought, which almost completely rendered obsolete all previous Battleship designs. this had a knock on effect of temporarily slowing the rival building programs, whilst the European Navies came up with their own dreadnought designs. It was around this time that three things happened which i think are worth noting. The first was the offer by Churchill for a building holiday for further battleship production. It was rejected by the Germans (not without justification). This really got the attention of the British, and made them realize they really had to pull out the stops to maintain some level of naval supremacy. But given the superior German economic base, it became clear to the British that could no longer maintain the 2:1 basis, and this in turn caused them to get into the European politics even more than they already were (ie find more allies as an alternative to their own power). I believe the Triple Entente was a in part a direct outgrowth of the naval building race.

I think around 1910, there was a further agreement between the germans and the British that set the Capital Ship ratio at 1.6:1. Im pretty sure that agreement was broken by the Germans, but Ill have to check. Im not saying that as an inflammatory statement, from the German perspective it made sense from a naval strategy point of view to close the gap. No reason why the germans should not, except it was terrible diplomacy, and that, in the end, was what drove the major powers to war more than anything.
 
I fully agree with your statement. German policy after Bismarck before WWI has been been a terrible mess in diplomacy and incredible naive. It surely helped a lot in shaping the world running to total destruction.

Still I also think the economic rise of Germany was of major influence on British politics. They were used to being the most powerful economical power. However, after 1870, the German economy started to grow tremedously (don't have the figures here right now, but I have them at home) while their econony didn't. German threat came from this and the German wish to share in the benefits of colonies made the British fearful and drove them into the arms of the French.
 
German Fleet from 1890-1905/06 (pre Dreadnaught Battleships)

Battleships

4 x Brandenburg Klasse 1890; launched 1894 ; 10600 ts; 6 x 11 inch guns
5 x Kaiser-Friedrich-III.-Klasse 1895; launched 1898; 11100ts; 4 x 9,5 inch guns
5 x Wittelsbach-Klasse 1898; launched 1900; 11775 ts; 4 x 9,5 inch guns
5 x Braunschweig-Klasse 1901; launched 1902; 13208 ts; 4 x 11 inch guns
5 x Deutschland Klasse 1903, launched 1905/1906; 13200ts 4 x 11 inch guns

Armored Cruiser:

1 x SMS Kaiserin Augusta, 1890, launched 1892; 6056ts; 12 x 6 inch guns
5 x Victoria Louise Klasse; 1895, launched till 1900; 5660 ts; 2 x 8,2 inch and 8 x 6 inch guns
1 x SMS Fürst Bismarck; 1896, launched 1897; 10690ts; 2 x 9.5 inch and 12 x 6 inch guns
1 x SMS Prinz Heinrich ; 1898; launched 1900; 8900 ts; 2 x 9.5 inch and 10 x 6 inch guns
2 x Prinz Adalbert Class; 1900/01/ launched 1901/1902 9087ts; 4 x 8.2 and 10 x 6 inch guns
2 x SMS Roon Class; 1902; launched 1903; 9533ts; 4 x 8.2 and 10 x 6 inch guns
2 x SMS Scharnhorst 1904; launched 1906; 11616ts; 8 x 8.2 and 6 x 6 inch guns
1 x SMS Blücher 1907; launched 1908; 15850ts; 12 x 8.2 and 8 x 6 inch guns

In summary 24 Battleships and 15 armoured cruiser
Note: The german Navy had in addition 21 small cruisers between 2600ts and 3400ts all armed with 4.1 inch guns.

Royal Navy from 1890-1905/06 (pre Dreadnaught Battleships)

Battleships

8 x Royal-Sovereign-Klasse 1889; launched 1891; 14150ts; 4 x 13.5 inch guns
3 x Centurion-Klasse 1890/1992; launched (1892/94); 10500ts; 4 x 10 inch guns
9 x Majestic-Klasse 1894; launched 1895/1896; 14900ts; 4 x 12 inch guns
6 x Canopus-Klasse 1897; launched 1898; 13150ts; 4 x 12 inch guns
8 x Formidable-Klasse 1897; launched 1898; 15800ts; 4 x 12 inch guns
6 x Duncan-Klasse 1899; launched 1901, 13750ts; 4 x 12 inch guns
2 x Swiftsure-Klasse 1902; launched 1903 11800ts; 4 x 10 inch guns
8 x King-Edward-VII-Klasse 1902, launched 1904; 16350 ts; 4 x 12 inch and 4 x 9.2 inch guns
2 x Lord-Nelson-Klasse 1905; launched 1906; 16090ts; 4 x 12 inch and 10 x 9.2 inch guns

Armoured Cruiser: first rated cruisers

2 x Blake-Klasse; 1890/1892; 9150ts; 2 x 9.2 inch and 10 x 6 inch guns
9 x Edgar-Klasse 1890/1891; 7700 ts; 2 x 9.2 inch and 10 x 6 inch guns
2 x Powerful-Klasse 1894/1895 14200ts; 2 x 9.2 inch and 12 x 6 inch guns
8 x Diadem-Klasse 1895/1897 11000ts; 16 x 6 inch guns
6 x Cressy-Klasse 1898/1900 12.000 ts; 2 x 9.2 inch and 12 x 6 inch guns
4 x Drake-Klasse 1899/1901 14.100 ts, 2 x 9.2 inch and 16 x 6 inch guns
10 x Monmouth-Klasse 1900/1902; 9800ts; 14 x 6 inch guns
6 x Devonshire-Klasse 1902/1904; 10850ts; 4 x 7.5 inch 6 x 6 inch guns
2 x Duke of Edinburgh-Klasse 1903/1904ts; 13550ts; 6 x 9.2 inch and 10 x 6 inch guns
4 x Warrior-Klasse 1903/1905; 13550ts; 6 x 9.2 inch and 4 x 7.5 inch guns
3 x Minotaur-Klasse 1905/1906 14600ts; 6 x 9.2 inch and 10 x 7.5 inch guns

52 Battleships and 56 first rated armoured cruisers

Note: Also the Royal Navy had in addition 47 second rated cruisers between 3400ts and 5800ts all armed with 6 inch and 4.7 inch guns and 24 third rated cruisers between 2200ts and 3000ts all armed with 4.1 inch guns.

Some explanations:

The four ships of the Brandenburg Klasse were at the timeline of their commissioning already out-dated through their old guns, they had no fast firing guns. The next two battleship classes of the german Navy were small second rated battleships with 4 x 9.5 inch fast firing guns, the last two classes were mostly modern first rated battleship classes with 4 x 11 inch guns. All german battleships till 1906 were much smaller and less heavy armed then all Royal Navy battleships (except Centurion and Swiftsure-Klasse)

So till 1906 the german Navy had 10 first rated and 10 second rated Battleships, plus four out-dated, 15 first rated armoured cruiser and 21 second to third rated small cruisers.

The Royal Navy had 47 first rated battleships and 5 second rated Battleships, 56 first rated cruisers., 47 second rated cruisers and 24 third rated cruisers

My question is, where on earth came this panik at 1890, 1900 and 1905 from Great Britain?
To me there is no reason for this panik, because the german Navy were also bound at the East Sea against the Russians and also to the French Navy. 52 Battleships against much smaller and partly out-dated 24 Battleships and 127 cruisers against 36 cruisers.


German Fleet from 1906-1914 Battleships, which were laid down.

Battleships:

4 x Nassau-Klasse; 1907/1908; 19000ts; 12 × 11 inch SK L/45
4 x Helgoland-Klasse 1908/1909; 22800ts; 12 × 12 inch SK L/50
5 x Kaiser-Klasse 1909/1911; 24800ts; 10 × 12 inch SK L/50
4 x König-Klasse 1911/1913 25800ts; 10 × 12 inch SK L/50
4 x Bayern-Klasse 1913/1915; 28.530 ts; 8 × 15 inch SK L/45 only two were commisioned and the last was laid down at 12.08.1914 (after the War began)


Battlecruisers:

1 x SMS Von der Tann 1907/1909; 19500ts; 8 × 11 inch SK L/45
2 x Moltke-Klasse 1909/1910; 23000ts; 10 × 11 inch SK L/50
1 x SMS Seydlitz 1911/1912; 25000ts; 10 × 11 inch SK L/50
3 x Derfflinger-Klasse 1912/ 1915; 26600ts; 8 × 12 inch SK L/50

In summary laid down till 1914 21 Battleships and 7 Battlecruisers.

Royal Navy Battleships and Battlecruisers laid down till 1914

Battleships:

1 x HMS Dreadnought 1905/1906; 18.110 ts; 10 × 12 inch SK L/45
3 x Bellerophon-Klasse 1906/1907; 18.800 ts; 10 × 12 inch SK L/45
3 x St. Vincent-Klasse 1907/1909; 19.560 ts ; 10 × 12 inch SK L/45
4 x Orion-Klasse; 1909/1910; 22000ts; 10 × 13.5 inch SK L/45
1 x Neptune-Klasse 1909;20000ts; 10 × 12 inch SK L/50
2 x Colossus-Klasse 1909; 20000ts; 10 × 12 inch SK L/50
4 x King George V-Klasse; 1911/1912; 23400ts; 10 × 13.5 inch SK L/45
4 x Iron Duke-Klasse 1912; 25820 ts; 10 × 13.5 inch SK L/45
5 x Queen Elizabeth-Klasse; 1913/1915; 29.150ts; 8 × 15 inch SK L/42
5 x Revenge-Klasse 1913/1916; 28.000 ts; 8 × 15 inch SK L/42
plus
1 x HMS Agincourt
1 x HMS Erin
1 x HMS Canada

Battlecruisers:

3 x Invincible-Klasse; 1906/1907; 17.420ts; 8 × 12 inch SK L/45
3 x Indefatigable-Klasse; 1908/1909; 19.100 ts; 8 × 12 inch SK L/45
3 x Lion-Klasse; 1909/1912; 26.270ts; 8 × 13.5 inch SK L/45
1 x HMS Tiger 1912/1913; 28.500 ts; 8 × 13.5 inch SK L/45

In summary:

35 Battleships and 10 Battlecruisers.

I admit that at 1907 with the observation of the technical advantages of the Dreadnaught and Invincible class ships through the germans and also the next treaty from 1907 from the triple entente a real naval race begun, with disastrous consequences.

The first was the offer by Churchill for a building holiday for further battleship production. It was rejected by the Germans (not without justification).
Click to expand...

Please can you give a timeline? Because it is easy to offer a building holiday for example 1907, when you have already 7 Dreadnaught BB's and 3 Invincible-class BC's in building and your "enemy" had nothing at that time in building of a modern class.

I think around 1910, there was a further agreement between the germans and the British that set the Capital Ship ratio at 1.6:1. Im pretty sure that agreement was broken by the Germans, but Ill have to check.
Click to expand...

I realy doubt this, with the numbers I have presented.
 
Last edited:

You've been busy!

I think its also worth noting that the RN classes tended to have bigger guns than their German class counterparts, e.g. Iron Dukes vs. Koenigs, KGVs vs Kaisers, and so on, not to mention the ten 15" BBs vs the German's two (planned four). IIRC they also tended to be a knot or two faster - except for the QEs, which were almost BCs.

Now, this isn't to say that the British weren't concerned, only that they most likely were a lot more concerned than they should have been.

One final thing that I think is worth mentioning is that the RN had at that time an unparalleled naval tradition, which they earned the hard way over several centuries of fighting all over the world.
 
There is no argument that the RN was larger than the German Navy. My calculation show that British Battleships 1890ish to 1913 were aas follows


Pre-Dreadnoughts

Victoria (1885) 2 (all scrapped 1905)
Trafalgar (1887) 2 (all scrapped 1905)
Centurion ((1890) 3 (all scrapped 1909-11)
Royal Sovereign (1888)1 +7 (scrappedby 1906)
Majestic (1893) 9 (1 lost 1897)
Canopus (1891) 6 (1 lost)
Formidable (1903) 8
Duncan (1899) 6
King Edward VII (1901) 8
Swiftsure (1902) 2
Lord nelson (1904) 2

In 1906 the RN had 40 Battleships, roughly speaking

Dreadnoughts added 1905-14

Dreadnought(1905) 1
Bellephron (1906) 3
St Vincent (1907) 3
Neptune (1909) 1
Colossus (1909) 2
Orion (1910) 4
KGV (1911) 4
Iron Duke (1912) 3 (+1 commissioneed after August)
Agincourt (1911) 1
Erin (1911) 1

There were Battlecruisers and 1 or 2 foreign orders taken over as well. But speaking generally, the RN added 23 Battleships 1905-14. With a little more research we can add those as well if thought necessary

The problem with a straight comparison, is that it fails to take into account the basic missions of the two navies, and also the strategic aims of the RN at that time. The RN was what we would call a sea control force. The RN was tasked with a very wide ranging mission, designed to control and protect the seaborne communications routes. That meant having to be in a lot of places at the same time. The British also wanted a two navy standard, so as to prevent two European countries from combining to defeat them jointly. this was a philosophy clearly based on the Napoleonic experiences, when the fleets of Spain and France had combined to attempt getting control of the European seas.

The German Navy was what we would call a sea denial force. it had a relatively short and easily defended coast , and was not expected to patrol or control large amounts of ocean. It could operate as a concentrated force, able to sortie and cause upset at times of its own choosing. This was similar to the advantages held by the French Navy 120 years previously, and it had been found in that war that in order to control the ocean routes, the RN had needed a force many times the size of napoleons Navy to achieve that mission. there is nothing I can see, that would alter that in 1914 (except the speed of the ships and the non-dependance on the wind). The RN needed to be much larger than the KM, but wasnt big enough, or so it thought. It simply does not alter the fact that the RN was extremely sensitive to the challenge thrown down by the Germans, however hopeless, and that materially affected the diplomatic relationship between the two countries. The sad thing in my opinion is that the German naval expansion really gave them nothing, except an angry opponent that probably toipped the balance in the great War.

Including ships begun before the war, but not completed until after the war is also misleading. The Germans had a number of designs in the pipeline, but these were suspended after the outbreak of war, and not completed. It is not valid to compare one sides building and not the others, and not at all valid to compare anything after the outbreak of hostilities.
 
I don't think we should argue about every little number.

In general I agree your post with the indication, that also the german Navy had an Oversea squadron since Tsingtau but mostly we agree.

Also I agree with your analyse about the issue, that Germany had no advantage, first of it's fleet and second of the naval race in general.
What is also idiotic from ex post observation from a german view, that nobody had the brains of diplomatic and technical understanding to took the chance with the big break through the Dreadnaught and Invincible-class to come to an agreement with Great Britain.

The germans had problems with turbine engines, the first turbine engined Battlecruiser was SMS von der Tann and the first Battleships the Kaiser Class. The Nassau and Helgoland Class werel triple-expansion steam engines driven.
So why didn't the Germans speak with Great Britain at this timeline 1906-1907/08 to come to an agreement, something like 10 Battleships and 5 Battlecruisers in the next 10-15 years or something like that. From a technical viewpoint both Nassau and Helgoland Class were outdated with their introduction from a strictly technical and very modern viewpoint.
To my opinion Tirpitz was at 1905 aware they he can't win the naval race and the charges were exploding and there were a lot of trouble at the Reichstag, because the Reichstag had the budget authorization. So there was more then an open door more an open barn door to come to grip and do it the diplomatic way and go to negotiations.

10-15 capital ships are more then enough to deal with Russia and France and also protect the own trade routes.
 
Last edited:
Marcel said:
I agree with DonL here. I think the main thread from Germany to the UK was economical. In reality, the German naval power was not a real threath to the British.
Click to expand...
They were a fatal mix. The British would have probably accepted the rise in Germany's economic power, if they hadn't mixed it with a naval build up at the same time.
 
redcoat said:
They were a fatal mix. The British would have probably accepted the rise in Germany's economic power, if they hadn't mixed it with a naval build up at the same time.
Click to expand...

I highly doubt that. Any "power" whether it be economic or military was a threat to "Empire" and they would not allow that.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

A
HMS Vanguard explodes at Kiel June 26, 1914
Replies
0
Views
203
Admiral Beez
A
How Europe Went to War in 1914.....
Replies
1
Views
743
nuuumannn
WWI In The Alps, How Bad Was It?
Replies
13
Views
1K
Capt. Vick
Brave Doesn’t Begin to Describe it
Replies
6
Views
724
N4521U
M
Thomas Morse S-4 Scout in Flying Condition
Replies
2
Views
349
Gnomey
Menu
Log in
Register