Ever wondered about the intricate alliances, strategic blunders, and political maneuverings that marked the early 20th century and led to the outbreak of the First World War? How did the death of Edward VII impact these turbulent times? Did the famous funeral procession of the late king truly symbolize the end of an era? Immerse yourself in a historical journey of kings, generals, and nations as they prepared for an inevitable conflict, setting the stage for one of the deadliest periods in human history.

The Guns of August

The grandeur and spectacle of the King of the United Kingdom, Edward VII’s funeral in 1910 was a sight to behold. Dressed in a riot of colours, nine kings rode in procession, their jewelled orders glinting in the sunlight. Behind them, a parade of heirs apparent, imperial highnesses, queens and ambassadors from seventy nations followed. 

The new king, George V, was the centre of attention. Among the foreign mourners, German Emperor William II held a prominent position. The Emperor's complex feelings towards his late uncle Edward, whom he viewed as a rival and a hindrance to Germany's ambitions, were apparent. 

Edward's death was mourned across Europe, a testament to his diplomatic finesse and sociability. His efforts had brought England out of splendid isolation and forged alliances with old enemies and new powers. In France, his death was marked with genuine sorrow, while in Germany the appropriate formalities were observed. 

Yet, beneath the public mourning, political maneuverings continued. The Emperor, ever the schemer, seized the opportunity to propose to France that they side with Germany should a conflict with England arise. His attempt was met with diplomatic silence, highlighting the ongoing tensions in Europe. 

Despite this, a sense of relative peace marked the period. The belief that war had become a futile endeavor due to the economic interdependence of nations was propagated by Norman Angell in his book "The Great Illusion". Yet, German General von Bernhardi held a contrasting view, arguing that war was a biological necessity and Germany must secure its place through conquest. 

The grandeur of Edward VII's funeral procession symbolised the end of an era. It was an event that marked a significant turning point in European history, setting the stage for the tensions that would eventually lead to the outbreak of the First World War. 

Did Edward VII's Funeral Procession Set the Stage for the Outbreak of World War I?

Count Alfred Von Schlieffen, Chief of the German General Staff from 1891 to 1906, planned for a war he believed was inevitable. Looking past Belgian neutrality, he devised a strategy based on a massive right-wing sweep through Belgium into France, aiming for a quick victory. His plan was rooted in the belief that war was a matter of absolute will and ruthless strategy. 

However, Belgian neutrality was not something to be dismissed so easily. It had been guaranteed by major European powers, including England. The latter, in particular, had a vested interest in Belgium's independence. England had used Belgium as a neutral buffer zone against potential continental threats since the Battle of Waterloo. 

Schlieffen’s plan, completed in 1906, resolved to allocate six weeks and seven-eighths of Germany’s forces to defeat France, while one-eighth was to hold the eastern frontier against Russia. His strategy was based on envelopment, using Belgium as a pathway. His reasoning seemed flawless from a military perspective, but he overlooked the potential moral failure that could lose public opinion, a critical element in warfare. 

On the other side, France was also preparing for war. The French army had adopted an entirely offensive strategy, ingrained in the belief that the "will to conquer" was the first condition of victory. General Joseph Joffre, the Commander in Chief, and his deputy, General Castelnau, believed that the German forces would launch a major offensive across the plateau of Lorraine, violating the corner of Belgium east of the Meuse.

The French strategy, unlike the German one, left room for flexibility. It was a plan of deployment with directives for several possible lines of attack for each army, depending on circumstances. The French forces were deployed along the frontier from Belfort in Alsace to Hirson, leaving the remaining two-thirds of the Belgian frontier undefended. 

The stage was set for a clash of strategies, with Belgium caught in the crossfire. The question remained: who would make the first move, and would it lead to the victory they so carefully planned for, or would unforeseen circumstances turn the tide of war in an unexpected direction?

Clash of Strategies: The Unforeseen Consequences of Schlieffen’s Plan and the Prelude to World War I

In 1905, the military equilibrium in Europe was destabilized by Russia's defeat to Japan, revealing Russia's military weakness. This led Britain and France to formulate joint military plans to protect themselves from potential aggression. The plans were tested when Germany challenged France after Russia's defeat at Mukden. 

This period marked a significant shift in global politics, as described by Charles Péguy, a French poet and political thinker. Britain also took action, with its military committee, led by Lord Esher, elaborating a plan in case of a German invasion through Belgium.

In the midst of political instability, France sought unofficial support from Britain. Major Huguet, the French military attaché in London, initiated negotiations with Colonel Repington, a military correspondent for The Times. These talks led to the principle that France would not violate Belgian territory unless forced by Germany, and that Britain would support Belgium if its neutrality was violated.

Meanwhile, Britain was experiencing political shifts with the Liberals winning the general election. Despite their opposition to war, they were forced to consider military precautions due to the increasing threat from Germany. 

In 1910, the British Brigadier General Henry Wilson formed a strong alliance with the French General Foch. They worked together to create a plan for the British forces to fight alongside the French in the event of war. 

Despite these alliances, the British were still divided about their military strategy. Some, like Sir John Fisher, advocated for naval action and a focus on Antwerp rather than France. The disagreement about this strategy continued until 1914.

Ultimately, the plans for joint military action between Britain and France were driven by the shared fear of Germany. The French war council decided to abandon defensive strategies and focus on an aggressive approach, which was mirrored by the British Imperial Defence Committee.

On the other side of the continent, Russia was also preparing for potential war. Despite its notorious military inefficiencies, the sheer size of the Russian army was intimidating. Russia's Grand Duke Nicholas was a key figure in the preparations for war, despite internal political conflicts. 

The early 20th century was a period of significant military and political changes in Europe. Britain, France, and Russia, despite their internal differences, were united in their fear of Germany and worked together to prepare for potential conflict.

Did Fear of Germany Spark Unprecedented Military Alliance in the Early 20th Century?

In the summer of 1914, the assassination of Austrian heir, Archduke Franz Ferdinand, by Serbian nationalists set off a chain of events that would lead to World War I. Austria-Hungary, eager to absorb Serbia into its empire, used the assassination as a pretext for war. 

Russia, wishing to maintain its status as the primary Slavic power and avenge past humiliations at the hands of Austria and Germany, prepared for military action. Germany, allied with Austria, signaled its support, triggering a series of ultimatums, mobilizations, and declarations of war.

In this high-stakes political game, the leaders of these nations found themselves caught in a web of military schedules, strategic plans, and national pride. Despite last-minute attempts to avert war, the machinery of mobilization was already in motion, and the leaders felt powerless to stop it. The assassination of the Austrian heir apparent had indeed ignited a war, just as Bismarck had predicted.

While Germany moved to absorb Serbia, Britain and France were grappling with their own dilemmas. France, allied with Russia, faced the prospect of war with Germany. Britain, meanwhile, was undecided about joining the conflict. The British government was split between those who believed that Britain's interests were tied to the preservation of France and those who favored neutrality. 

Despite the internal divisions, British leaders understood that if Germany dominated Europe, Britain would be isolated. This led to a series of diplomatic maneuvers designed to keep Britain in the game without committing to war.

As the political and military machinery of these nations churned, the people were caught in the middle. The fervor of nationalism, the fear of invasion, and the uncertainty of what lay ahead created an electric atmosphere. The world was on the brink of a war that would reshape the geopolitical landscape and leave an indelible mark on the 20th century. 

1914: The Assassination that Ignited World War I and Reshaped the 20th Century

In the summer of 1914, the world was on the brink of a cataclysmic war. The German Minister in Brussels, Herr von Below-Saleske, received a sealed envelope from Berlin with orders to demand a reply from the Belgians within twelve hours. This was the beginning of a tense period that would soon escalate into the First World War.

The German Minister was a tall, erect bachelor with pointed black mustaches and a jade cigarette holder. He had served in Turkey and China, both hotbeds of revolution. Now, he was stationed in Belgium, where he had taken up his post early in 1914. He often joked about his past experiences, but now, with the sealed envelope in his possession, he was no longer at ease.

The Belgian government, led by King Albert and Prime Minister de Broqueville, had been caught off guard by Germany's demands. Despite the assurances of German Minister that "Belgium had nothing to fear from Germany," they remained skeptical.

Belgium, with its history of fighting off foreign rulers and its long-standing neutrality, was reluctant to get involved in the conflict. But when Germany declared war on France, Belgium was faced with a difficult decision. King Albert, a man of great physical and intellectual energy, was adamant about defending Belgium's territorial integrity.

Meanwhile, in Britain, Foreign Secretary Sir Edward Grey struggled to rally support for the war. He made a powerful speech to the House of Commons, warning of the dire consequences if Germany were allowed to dominate Europe. Despite some opposition, his speech was met with overwhelming approval.

Back in Belgium, King Albert made a passionate appeal to his Parliament. He asked them if they were unalterably decided to maintain the sacred gift of their forefathers - their independence. The response was a resounding "Yes!"

By August 4, Britain had declared war on Germany. The German Minister in Brussels, Herr von Below-Saleske, handed over a note to the Belgian government, stating that Germany would carry out measures for its own security, "if necessary by force of arms."

As the first shots of the war were fired, the world watched in despair. The lamps were going out all over Europe, and no one knew when they would be lit again.

Could Belgium Have Prevented the Onset of World War I?

In the pre-dawn hours of August 4, 1914, a wireless message flickered through the air to Admiral Wilhelm Souchon, commanding the German fleet in the Mediterranean. The message read, “Alliance with Turkey concluded August 3. Proceed at once to Constantinople.” 

Although the order was soon canceled, Souchon, commanding the battle cruiser Goeben and the light cruiser Breslau, chose to proceed. This decision sparked one of the most significant naval maneuvers of the war.

Turkey, then isolated and considered the "Sick Man of Europe," had recently undergone a rejuvenation under the Young Turks, led by Enver Bey. Germany saw an opportunity to align with Turkey, further straining relations with Russia, France, and England. A German military mission to Turkey in 1913 had already caused a diplomatic uproar.

As the Great War loomed, Germany became desperate to secure Turkey as an ally to cut off Russian access through the Black Sea. A secret alliance was swiftly signed on July 28, 1914, the day Austria declared war on Serbia, but Turkey hesitated to act openly against Russia.

Meanwhile, the British Mediterranean Fleet, under Admiral Sir Berkeley Milne, was tasked with protecting French troop transports from North Africa to France and keeping tabs on the Goeben and Breslau, battlecruisers of the Imperial German Navy. Despite superior numbers, the British fleet faced challenges due to the Goeben's speed and firepower.

Souchon's fleet, after a tense voyage and several near-misses with British forces, eventually reached the sanctuary of the Dardanelles on August 10. This not only secured Turkey's entry into the war on the side of the Central Powers but also dramatically altered the strategic landscape of the conflict. The presence of the Goeben and Breslau in Istanbul bolstered Turkish resolve and led to the Ottoman Empire joining the war against the Allies, significantly impacting the course of the conflict.

As the war unfolded, the Goeben's voyage cast a long shadow over the strategic dynamics of the Middle East and the Eastern Mediterranean, illustrating the profound impact of naval maneuvers in the early 20th century. The story of the Goeben and Breslau is a testament to the unpredictability of war and the far-reaching consequences of seemingly isolated decisions.

Unforeseen Alliances: The Fateful Voyage that Plunged Turkey into World War I

The fifteenth day on the Western Front marked the end of preliminary skirmishes and the start of full-scale offensive warfare. The French, determined to reclaim German-occupied Lorraine, marched through historic battlefields, their path echoing centuries of conflict. 

As they advanced, the French right wing, led by Generals Dubail and de Castelnau, moved through strategic corridors towards Sarrebourg and Morhange. These locations, heavily fortified by the Germans, posed significant challenges. The French, relying on the speed and spirit of their light artillery, underestimated the need for heavy firepower—a mistake that would haunt them.

The German defense in Lorraine was managed by Prince Rupprecht of Bavaria, who, following Schlieffen’s strategy, planned to lure the French into a vulnerable position. Yet, Rupprecht, a vigorous commander with royal ambitions, struggled with the idea of retreat, yearning instead for a counterattack. As the French advanced, the Germans meticulously prepared for their approach, leading to fierce and bloody encounters.

On the French side, Lanrezac’s Fifth Army faced growing pressure from the German right wing. Despite warnings and desperate pleas for reinforcements, Lanrezac’s concerns were dismissed by the French General Headquarters (GQG), which remained fixated on their offensive strategy. As the Germans pressed harder, the French were forced into a defensive stance, their hopes for a swift victory dwindling.

Meanwhile, the British Expeditionary Force (BEF), led by Sir John French, arrived on the continent amidst a wave of public enthusiasm. However, Sir John’s initial vigor waned as he grappled with the realities of the battlefield and complex alliances. His interactions with French commanders were fraught with misunderstanding and mistrust, complicating cooperative efforts.

As battles raged across the front, including the critical engagements at Mons and Charleroi, the French and British troops displayed remarkable courage but faced overwhelming German forces. The coordination between the Allies faltered, and the relentless German advance forced the French and British into a strategic retreat.

In the East, the Russian armies, under the command of Generals Rennenkampf and Samsonov, launched an offensive into East Prussia to support their French allies. Despite initial successes, the Russians struggled with logistical challenges and miscommunication. German commanders, including the newly appointed Hindenburg and Ludendorff, capitalized on these weaknesses, planning a decisive counteroffensive.

The war, initially expected to be short and decisive, was proving to be a prolonged and brutal conflict. The battles on both fronts were characterized by high casualties, strategic missteps, and the harsh realities of early 20th-century warfare. As the days progressed, the initial optimism faded, replaced by the grim understanding that the war would demand far more than anticipated, reshaping nations and histories in its wake.

Could the French and British Forces Have Overwhelmed the Germans in the Early Days of WWI?

In August 1914, as World War I erupted, the German Army, led by Ludendorff and Hindenburg, strategically engaged with General Samsonov’s Russian Second Army in the Battle of Tannenberg. Haunted by fears of Rennenkampf’s First Army at his rear, Ludendorff pushed General von François to attack Usdau, despite François' protests about inadequate artillery support. François, supported by Hoffmann and General Scholtz, initially resisted but eventually complied under Ludendorff’s orders.

Amidst this tension, Hoffmann intercepted crucial Russian wireless messages revealing that Rennenkampf’s army was not an imminent threat, allowing the Germans to focus on Samsonov. The misinterpretation of German maneuvers as a retreat led Samsonov into a trap. 

Despite initial successes, Samsonov’s forces were overwhelmed by coordinated German attacks, culminating in a catastrophic defeat by August 30. The Germans utilized intercepted communications to outmaneuver and crush Samsonov’s army, leading to his tragic suicide in the forests of East Prussia.

While the German Army celebrated a historic victory, the German Navy, under Grand Admiral Tirpitz, faced a different fate. The British Grand Fleet, wary of risking its prized ships, established a distant blockade from Scapa Flow. Despite fears of German aggression, the High Seas Fleet remained largely inactive, adhering to a defensive strategy imposed by the Kaiser, who sought to preserve his fleet for potential negotiations.

In contrast, Britain’s naval blockade strained relations with the neutral United States, leading to a diplomatic duel over freedom of the seas. President Wilson, striving for neutrality to position the U.S. as a mediator, found himself entangled in legal disputes over contraband definitions. Despite rising tensions, American trade flourished with the Allies, as economic ties deepened.

The German Navy’s inactivity culminated in the Battle of Heligoland Bight on August 28, where a surprise British attack resulted in significant German losses. This reinforced the Kaiser’s reluctance to risk his fleet, leading to a passive stance that allowed the British blockade to tighten. As the war dragged on, the German Navy shifted focus underwater, employing U-boats in a desperate attempt to break the blockade, foreshadowing future confrontations at sea.

Thus, the early months of World War I set the stage for prolonged and complex military and diplomatic struggles, with the echoes of Tannenberg and the silent menace of the High Seas Fleet shaping the course of the conflict.

Echoes of Tannenberg: The Course of Conflict in World War's Early Months

In late August of 1914, the German armies advanced through Belgium into France, marking the start of one of the bloodiest periods in human history. 

The French army, led by General Joffre, faced the invading force of a million Germans, who entered French territory on August 24. Despite furious resistance from French forces, the German right wing continued to march towards Paris. The French army, under Joffre's command, made a strategic retreat while preparing to launch a counter-offensive. 

Simultaneously, the British Expeditionary Force (BEF) under Field Marshal Sir John French was also engaged in a hard fight and a subsequent retreat. Despite their exhaustion, the BEF was determined to continue fighting, contradicting Sir John's personal belief that the campaign was lost and his desire to save the BEF from annihilation. 

In the midst of these grim circumstances, an unexpected ray of hope appeared when the French learned that the Germans were withdrawing troops from the Western Front to the East to face the Russians. This revelation underlined the importance of the Franco-Russian alliance and gave the French a glimmer of hope.

In Paris, the imminent threat of a German invasion sparked debates among French officials about whether the city should be defended or declared an open city. Military Governor Joseph Gallieni insisted on defending Paris, leading efforts to fortify the city and prepare for a siege. However, the French government, fearing a repeat of the disastrous Franco-Prussian War of 1870, decided to relocate from Paris.

Meanwhile, the myth of the 'Russian steamroller,' a massive Russian force supposedly landing in Scotland to aid the Allies, provided some comfort to the beleaguered French and British. This myth, however, was short-lived. 

As the German armies drew closer to Paris, the French and British forces prepared to make their stand along the Marne River. The Battle of the Marne, which would decide the fate of Paris and possibly the entire war, was about to begin. 

Can the Allies Halt the German Advance and Save Paris During the Gripping Events of 1914?

On August 30, M. Albert Fabre witnessed an imposing figure descend from an automobile at his villa in Lassigny. The officer, with his scarred face and intimidating presence, turned out to be the infamous General von Kluck, the German commander tasked with the ambitious right-wing sweep of the Schlieffen Plan.

Von Kluck was at a critical juncture, confident of a decisive victory after pushing back Maunoury's Army and seeing signs of British retreat. Yet, despite his demands for reinforcements, General Moltke had not sent any. Instead, Moltke, plagued by unease, saw gaps forming between German armies and feared the enemy might regroup.

Meanwhile, in stark contrast, the French high command was grappling with the dire situation. General Joffre and his staff faced the grim reality of retreat, compounded by the British Expeditionary Force's (BEF) reluctance to engage fully. However, amidst the gloom, General Gallieni, stationed in Paris, saw an opportunity. He noticed the vulnerable flank presented by von Kluck's inward maneuver and proposed an immediate counteroffensive.

Gallieni's plan required the support of the BEF and Joffre's approval. After intense discussions and a dramatic appeal to Sir John French, the British commander, a reluctant agreement was reached. The stage was set for what would become the Battle of the Marne.

On September 5, as German forces advanced, Moltke's hesitation culminated in an order to halt the right wing, sensing the danger of a French counterattack. Despite this, von Kluck pushed forward, unaware of the imminent threat. Gallieni, seizing the moment, ordered Maunoury's forces to attack the exposed German flank.

Joffre, after a day of contemplation under a tree, decided to throw the full weight of the French forces into the offensive. With reinforcements being rushed from the east and the BEF reluctantly moving into position, the Allies prepared for a decisive battle.

As September 6 dawned, von Kluck began to feel the pressure. Reports of French movements and the stubborn resistance of the BEF added to his woes. Meanwhile, the French troops, though exhausted, were buoyed by the determination of their leaders. Joffre's order, terse and resolute, left no room for retreat. The fate of France hung in the balance.

The ensuing Battle of the Marne became a turning point. The French and British forces, driven by the urgency of the moment and inspired by leaders like Gallieni and Franchet d’Esperey, managed to halt the German advance. The Germans, stretched thin and fatigued, could not sustain their momentum.

In the end, the battle demonstrated that even in the face of near-defeat, the determination and strategic acumen of a few key leaders could alter the course of history. The Allies' ability to exploit von Kluck’s miscalculation and Moltke’s indecisiveness saved Paris and marked the beginning of the end for the German offensive in the west. The Marne became a testament to resilience and the pivotal role of leadership in times of crisis.

Turning the Tide: Strategic Leadership and Resilience at the Battle of the Marne

The early 20th century was a period of significant turbulence in Europe, with major powers preparing for potential conflict. The death of Edward VII brought a shift in alliances and relationships among these powers. 

Despite the public mourning for Edward VII, political maneuverings continued, with leaders like the German Emperor attempting to form new alliances. This period marked the end of an era and set the stage for the outbreak of the First World War. 

The strategies and plans for the war were driven by the shared fear of Germany's growing power. Various nations like Britain, France, and Russia, despite their internal differences, found common ground in their fear of Germany. They worked together to prepare for potential conflict. However, despite meticulous planning and strategy, the armies involved were constantly adjusting to shifting circumstances and unexpected developments. 

The assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand set off a chain of events that eventually led to World War I, marking the start of one of the bloodiest periods in human history. 

As the political and military machinery of the nations involved churned, the people were caught in the middle. The fervor of nationalism, the fear of invasion, and the uncertainty of what lay ahead created an electric atmosphere. 

During this time, military strategies and decisions played a significant role in shaping the course of the war. The Battle of the Marne, for instance, was a turning point in the war. The decision of French General Joffre to attack the German center, coupled with Governor Gallieni's strike at the German flank, halted the German advance and saved Paris from German occupation. This period underscores the human cost of the war, the unpredictability and chaos of war, and the impact of human error and misjudgment in warfare.

Home

Trending

Collections

Key Ideas & Notes

Insights

Highlights & Bookmarks

Listening History