Britain's First Naval Defeat in 100 years - Coronel 1914

For unlimited access to the world’s top documentaries and non­fiction series go to curiositystream.thld.co/histo... and use the promo code 'historigraph' to get 30 days free access.
Support the channel on Patreon: / historigraph
Buy Historigraph Posters here! teespring.com/stores/historigraph
#BattleOfCoronel #Historigraph #CuriosityStream
► Twitch: / historigraph
► Twitter: / historigraph
►Facebook: / historigraph
►Instagram: / historigraph
►Patreon: / historigraph
Music:
"Rynos Theme" Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 4.0 License
creativecommons.org/licenses/b...
Crypto by Kevin MacLeod
Link: incompetech.filmmusic.io/song...
License: creativecommons.org/licenses/b...
Night Vigil by Kevin MacLeod
Link: incompetech.filmmusic.io/song...
License: creativecommons.org/licenses/b...

[@historigraph]

For unlimited access to the world’s top documentaries and non­fiction series go to curiositystream.thld.co/historigraphsep and use the promo code 'historigraph' to get 30 days free access.

[@maycuervo]

There’s a mistake in the video. Canopus had 4 12 inch guns. Not two.

[@kkirschkk]

So question, I am doing a report on this battle for my ROTC class, do you mind if I use images from your video in the report, giving you credit for them at the end?

[@historigraph]

@@kkirschkk of course.

[@kkirschkk]

@@historigraph thank you so much

[@fabricioJiuJitsu]

Where's part 2??

[@jayteegamble]

Naval technology really evolved quickly. A ship built in 1907 was "a modern, state-of-the-art cruiser" while one built in 1903 was an "ancient, obsolete armored cruiser"

[@davidlewis5312]

four words Battle of Tsuhima straits

[@recoil53]

Well it was the timing, the combination of technology and better design coming together. Whereas between wars there was a big jump in technology, but that allowed the improvements of the same basic layouts.

[@andrewcanady6644]

@DaveLewis: Hey, Dave. Can you elaborate a little on what made that battle a starting point for some new technology or innovation in the ships of the time? Why that battle was important in this regard. Thanks and have a good day. 🤙🏽

[@nelsblair2667]

You are correct in that it was inappropriate to use the word “modern” to describe a 1909 ship. There is a meaning to the word modern; 1909 isn’t it.

[@xanderwusky3001]

It’s crazy the speed of progress during wars. One of the reasons I’m really into history of wars and battles is that you can track exactly why and how certain technologies where invented. Take radar, specifically created at some point to find enemy air raids and alert your own fighters in time. Now used to predict weather, navigate and even for cars in adaptive cruise control (several different types of radar, but all developed from the original invention) Planes as well would have never been where they are today without war. Might have never moved to jets without military need for it.

[@redram5150]

Churchill wasn’t lying when referring to Canopus as a “citadel”. It coincidentally having a similar top speed as one

[@gazof-the-north5708]

The irony is, HMS Canopus had the power to beano Scharnhorst and Gneisenau. Unfortunately, her speed made her a total liabilty.

[@redram5150]

@@gazof-the-north5708 not really ironic. Speed is a major factor in obsolescence

[@jpheitman1]

@@gazof-the-north5708 You could say the same about Gibraltar.

[@ed209d2]

😀

[@joeshearer3620]

A constantly recurring name in every British misadventure.

[@gernhard.reinholdsen]

Cradock and von Spee, both incredibly brave men. Both knew they likely wouldn't survive and still had the balls to do their job.

[@SamtheIrishexan]

I did a little reading on Spee he was a interesting man

[@jonchowe]

Their jobs were to get human beings to blow other human beings into little bits. They should be abhorred not respected. Think of all those young men on the Monmouth, blown up or drowned, simply because they were ordered not to surrender in an utterly hopeless situation. The captain of that ship is mass murderer, not a brave hero.

[@recoil53]

von Spee absolutely knew. He was able to replenish in Chile, a neutral country. There was a reception by the Germans there. They gave him flowers and he said they would do nicely for his grave. He understood his situation but was going to go down fighting.

[@Thomas_Name]

Replace bravery with normalcy, and doing their job with getting themselves killed for nothing, and your comment actually starts to make sense.

[@JoboGamezzz]

@@Thomas_Namebro nobody cares

[@jetgnome]

My great-grandfather was a sailor in one of Von Spee's ships. He fell seriously sick and had to be left in Valparaiso. His ship, sadly I was never told which one, was lost in the Falklands and he remained in Chile his whole life.

[@ethanbrown3714]

Could be SMS Scharnhorst

[@3vimages471]

He was lucky he got sick then.

[@carmium]

My grandmother, who was born to a German father in Central America, told me of visiting Germany as a child, and meeting many relatives, including Graf Spee (and Graf Zeppelin, if that wasn't enough).She couldn't recall their relation ("Zey were uncles or somesing) unfortunately, but I was goggle-eyed to think our family had a relationship to these two historical figures.

[@niuchajianfa6222]

so are you chilean?

[@byalexnd200]

weeena compadrito!

[@primal_guy1526]

“You’re Leipzig, you’re Leipzig, you’re Leipzig, I’m Leipzig, are there any other Leipzig’s I should know about?”

[@viktorjoachimmoscoso6327]

yes

[@DarkVeghetta]

13:42 I'd like to take a moment and show respect to Karl von Schönberg's gentlemanly handling of his ship's encounter with Monmouth. He gave her every chance to surrender and thus displayed exemplary naval courtesy, even if the situation deteriorated from that point onwards, it was still the Brit's choice to go out swinging. That said, his positioning doesn't seem to have been ideal, allowing Monmouth to try a desperate ramming maneuver. Still, I thought this was worth pointing out - especially given that in future wars, such knightly gallantry would, for the most part, fade away due to advances in weaponry and tactics (especially air power and submarines).

[@charakiga]

More like the Monmouth's captain's choice to not surrender and kill his whole crew.

[@DarkVeghetta]

@@charakiga A captain's duty is split between what's best for his country and what's best for his men. To have to choose between those two duties is a terrible burden. Regardless of the outcome, Monmouth's captain fulfilled his duty to his country to the bitter end; there is _honor_ in that.

[@shononoyeetus8866]

Last time I was this early Greece was the largest navy in the world

[@AndrewBaker-ym3mk]

Last time I was this early I thought the Charles Martel Class would be homogeneous.

[@Speedster___]

Lol

[@somespacemarineontheintern5804]

Last time I was this early, we only used boats for river transport.

[@JBGARINGAN]

Last time I was this early Gilgamesh of Ur sailed up the Euphrates and the Tigris and conquered Mesopotamia.

[@JBGARINGAN]

Or last time I was this early Noah built the Ark to save the animals and humanity from the great flood.

[@6jordana]

This just shows that while Churchill was very inspirational in his leadership, his understanding of tactical and strategic matters was limited to say the least. He left Craddock hanging out to dry and the losses from Coronel are directly attributable to him. If anyone is in doubt about Churchill's limitations in military matters I would recommend Lord Alanbrooke's diaries from World War II. This clearly shows what a menace Churchill was to tactical and strategic operations.

[@CrazyNikel]

Coming from an American that loves anything ww2 related I must say out of *all the British top echelon* Brooke impressed me most. In fact id argue he had one of the best strategic minds in ww2.

[@peterlovett5841]

@@CrazyNikel In fact I would argue that he had the best strategic mind - way better than any of his contemporaries and his diaries make for compulsive reading.

[@keiranallcott1515]

Don’t forgot Gallipoli

[@peterlovett5841]

@@keiranallcott1515 Churchill's plan for Gallipoli was for the navy to force the Dardenelles and take Constantinople (as it was then). When that failed it was others who said it could be done with an amphibious landing and Churchill went along with them. The strategic aim was spot on as it would have driven Turkey out of the war.

[@keiranallcott1515]

Peter Lovett hmmm , well Churchill did originally planned the navy alone , and after that failed in which admiral John de robeck and sir Ian Hamilton ( might have not spelt them correctly ) recommended that an army be landed on the Gallipoli peninsula to aid the navy advance through to the Dardanelles , the war cabinet and Churchill gave it his support despite intelligence briefings before hand saying that it was high risk and likely to fail . Watch the Gallipoli documentary in 2003 I think for more details , it was Gallipoli that haunted Churchill more than ever ,for example his private secretary JR Coville said that many ministers in the May 1940 crisis didn’t want Churchill because they reminded him of Gallipoli , George Lucas who was the allied commander at the landing at Anzio later said after the debacle “ that it was run by the same guy who did Gallipoli) , in fairness your correct in regards to both Anzio and Gallipoli as it was his idea but poorly executed by other people . I would recommend looking for nextflix the two part series about Churchill one episode called Churchill’s soft underbelly that covers the Italian campaign in great detail. There were many more strategic errors that Churchill did , when World War One started he seized two Turkish battleships that Turkey paid for that thanks to the snub and then the Germans offering the Breslau and the goeben might have got turkey into the war against Britain. World war 2 , well he had the use of fleet aircraft carriers against submarines which nearly lost ark Royal to a Ubo’s and the loss of HMS courageous. The Norwegian campaign was his idea backed by the French to aid Finland against the Russians and to cut off the supply of iron ore to Germany , keep in mind that if it had succeeded that it might have lead to a conflict between Russian and the allies (Russia was neutral but was cooperating with the nazis in the Molotov Ribbentrop pact )but thankfully Finland submitted before that could happen. I could go on

[@STM1066]

“A naval officer must never let his boat go faster than his brain”-Rear Admiral Sir. Christopher Craddock

[@skullsaintdead]

Its like an aviation saying "Never let an airplane take you somewhere that your brain didn't get to five minutes earlier."

[@cmachinist]

If anyone is wondering what the previous British naval defeat was 102 years prior, it's the battle of Lake Erie; the only time in history in which a British fleet surrendered en-mass. It's also the battle from which we get commodore Olive Hazard Perry's famous phrase "We have met the enemy, and they are ours", and is the source of the classic blunder "Never go up against an American whose middle name is "Hazard"

[@Thebluernemace]

"wait, its all leipzig?"

[@driesfosseprez756]

Always has been

[@looinrims]

Dries Fosseprez -Von Spee

[@reality8763]

Always has been. Cocks gun

[@zachiahcannizzaro6987]

Thebluernemace Always have been *Loads the 6x11mm Gun**

[@gutholz4443]

if you sink one, there is always another one :-D

[@Jake-xe4cv]

My grandfather, John Henry, was an engine room artificer on HMS Glasgow. I still have post cards he sent home which show images of all the ships that took part in the battle off the Falklands a month later. I also have and a photograph of him standing on the Jetty at Port Stanley. I carried these in a sealed plastic envelope when I sailed for the Falklands in 1982 for another war...

[@historigraph]

That is an excellent story

[@mrthompson3848]

You’ll certainly have a lot to talk about when you both meet in that big warship in the sky

[@kwd3109]

Great story! To be in the same place, under the same circumstances as your grandfather was 68 years earlier must have been very compelling. Thank you for sharing.

[@pcka12]

One of my relatives Harry Pierce Ancill went down with Good Hope.

[@billybird5903]

That’s amazing

[@brandenburgquentinthe3rd532]

You should do the falkland islands next and the end of the german pacific fleet

[@brandenburgquentinthe3rd532]

Does historiograph liking this imply this is getting made!

[@theblackprince1346]

@@brandenburgquentinthe3rd532 sure hope so, fingers crossed.

[@brandenburgquentinthe3rd532]

I am extremely excited if this is being made, it is such a shame that it is not talked a about more

[@johnlavery3433]

I mean, it was a Squadron, not a fleet

[@matthiaseckert4022]

Its easy to destroy ships by larger, more powerfull ships. but it`s not so easy tio win a fight with equal ships.

[@thruthewormhole]

Could we just appreciate how remarkable the technology of the day was? These maneuvers and deployments are taking place over thousands of miles, the breadth of the Pacific Ocean. As a reminder of how vast the Pacific was, all the continents of Earth could comfortably fit inside it.

[@concept5631]

The Pacific is so big that Asia and South America are on opposite sides of the globe.

[@jamesbednar8625]

@@concept5631 So is the USA & Australia!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[@MrHistory269]

And I’m stuck in the middle of it lol

[@Gonzalouchikari]

Fun fact: "Mas Afuera" was the island where Alexander Selkirk survived for 4 years. In 1966, Chile renamed it as "Alexander Selkirk" island in his honor.

[@timothycook2917]

Oh, I thought it was named Robinson Crusoe Island

[@avishalom2000lm]

"mas afuera" = "more outside"??

[@RodrigoFernandez-td9uk]

@@avishalom2000lm Yes. The other island of the archipelago, now "Robinson Crusoe", was then called "Más Atierra" (More to Land). Super Creative.

[@avishalom2000lm]

@@RodrigoFernandez-td9uk like Presque Isle in the Great Lakes ("almost an island")

[@philandsandywest4815]

Did not know that. Very interesting. Many thanks.

[@RodrigoFernandez-td9uk]

The city labeled as Coronel is actually Concepción. Coronel is 20 km south.

[@vrisbrianm4720]

Considering how he used to put the name tag of places over the top, I think he is trying to show that Coronel is south of the tag rather than underneath the tag.

[@RodrigoFernandez-td9uk]

@@vrisbrianm4720 I don't think so, the other tags are right next the places. Coronel is the city directly East from the island, far away from the label. Probably he assumed that Coronel was the largest city of the area. Anyway, just for clarity.

[@harrybourne1149]

Cradock knew he was facing a battle he could not win and he did his very best with what he had. A truly brave man. Respect to the crew members of Monmouth and Good Hope their deaths were the direct responsibility of neglect and abandonment from the Admiralty and they all deserved so much better.

[@dreamingflurry2729]

And their stubborness! Seriously, with no engines left and almost no weapons: Why not surrender? I get it if your enemy is cannibals or something, but the German Empire was not an inhumane terror state or something (and no, Germany was not (entirely) to blame for WW1...or 2 for that matter (yes, the Nazis started it, but frankly: The Treaty of Versailles made a second WW a certainty! The French just didn't know when to stop (they kicked a Germany that was on the floor!) and the other nations didn't step in (despite being the ones who won the war - the French alone would have (badly!) lost WW1!))

[@wolfgangpagel6989]

@@dreamingflurry2729 And the Germans had the feeling that they did not lose in WWI, and believed in the 10 principles by President Wilson.

[@pcka12]

@@dreamingflurry2729 British had a tradition of not 'hauling down the flag', to do so was a disgrace worse than death!

[@pyropulseIXXI]

@@pcka12 pure nonsense and brainwashing instilled to them by the worldly powers.... of this world (lol). No more Brother wars

[@RodrigoFernandez-td9uk]

9:42 Craddock: We all are going to stay and fight, we cannot abandon Otranto. 12:42 Otranto: Fuck off, this is painting bad. I'm leaving.

[@chanomjea6515]

I pause "The evolution of French infantry in WW1" to watch your video :D. Great work as always.

[@otakurt1149]

Why do i feel like Churchill's ignorance is to blame?

[@gwine9087]

He was, certainly, incompetent at times, during WWI. Look at Gallipoli.

[@razorbird789]

As the below comment reads. Canopus was powerful enough to make a difference in this battle but tactically the British made other choices. Churchill wasn't really to blame on this one, he at least informed Cradock that Defence wasn't coming. Unlike the other people who should have also told him.

[@halojoe21]

@@gwine9087 His plan required the element of surprise, the admiral lost it.

[@gwine9087]

@@razorbird789 The video says, at least, twice that Cradock was NOT informed that Defense was not coming to him.

[@dovetonsturdee7033]

Because you are probably determined to blame him for everything since the Black Death.

[@BA-gn3qb]

Qui-Gon Jin's proverb: "There's always a bigger fish." Comes to haunt Von Spee very soon.

[@omnipotence8826]

Yes! More WW1 videos. Great work as always.

[@TheIndianalain]

Great video as always. Coronel is a almost forgotten battle, it's very difficult to find a complete and accurate depiction of the events. Thanks for filling in the blanks!

[@anonymusum]

That´s often the case when the Royal Navy lost.

[@greyerskullz]

Mongolians haven't suffered a naval defeat for 739 years! I don't know what's the hype about this, "100 years with no naval defeats," thing for the british.

[@roythearcher]

thats a bit academic isn't it? if you don't have a navy I mean!...and are landlocked.

[@roythearcher]

@@K3end0 A bit like the Swiss and Austrians eh?

[@stewy62]

@@roythearcher the Austria-Hungarian Empire did have a Navy in WW1, it’s land included Croatia but it’s now been land-locked for over a hundred years. Austria haven’t lost a sea battle since then of course!

[@roythearcher]

@@stewy62 Quite!....

[@toastytoast9800]

@@roythearcher they do have a navy of 2 gun boats on a lake, look into it, its interesting

[@Alex-cw3rz]

5:17 Canopus may have had a shorter range, but firstly the main battle took place within it's range and Canopus's armour was strong enough to defeat the armoured cruisers rounds. It was too slow to get there in time and had an engineer going through a manic episode. Which was it's main issue. If Canopus couldn't fire it's gun's because of rough seas, no ship there would be able too either.

[@gyrocadiz9912]

See my reply above. One of the things Dr Bailey and Mr French found out was that Canopus had Harvey, and not Krupp cemented, armour. Her 6"harvey belt was not as good as Good Hope's 6"Krupp cemented belt. Canopus was not as well armoured as Good Hope was. Had she been there, she would have been sunk. On the run north, her bow turret was washed out. In that weather, her effective armament was 2 12"guns in the aft turret, and 2 6"upperdeck guns.

[@Alex-cw3rz]

@@gyrocadiz9912 sorry why did you just lie, if Canopus used Harvey the belt would have been 9 inch to compensate (which was done on the majestic class). Even with 6" Harvey that would stop an 8 inch shell, if that wasn't just a barefaced lie. Where in the world did you get the evidence that she would only be able to use those guns and again even then that's still overwhelming firepower compared to the entire German force. Why did you bother with your comment all you've proved is a more inferior pre dreadnought would have changed the tide, if it was there. That's the reason Von Spee said if Canopus was there he wouldn't have attacked.

[@leeneon854]

Canopus could only make 16 knots, better beach her fight in range of her 12 inch guns, course that never happened.

[@cmanningdeal6228]

A leaky valve that could have been repaired in a couple of hours... kzbin.info/www/bejne/hICkqHWlj610a80

[@ivantrapic6209]

Why the Monmouth crew didn't surrender? So much lives lost unvain :( I can understand the reluctance of Nurberg crew because all sailors have I common enemy which is the sea.

[@timonsolus]

In 1914, surrender of a British warship was, unfortunately, considered dishonourable - unlike Nelson's time 120 years earlier. Nelson's victory at Trafalgar in 1804 made the Royal Navy increasingly arrogant over the following decades until finally, it considered itself invincible. Of course, if you're invincible, you can't surrender no matter what the circumstances.

[@looinrims]

“Surrender is not an option”

[@ivantrapic6209]

@@looinrims I think their loved ones wouldn't care for those plain words and would rather to see them alive :(

[@timonsolus]

froggymusicman : Hostages? Don’t be silly. The British already had hundreds of German prisoners taken from captured German merchant ships. Hostages are useless if both sides have them.

[@looinrims]

Ivan Trapić certainly, but they weren’t on the ship, and we don’t know what the crew was thinking, to go down with honor? To not be remembered as the defeated sailors they were? To defy the Germans, who’d been challenging their power for decades? We will never know

[@m.streicher8286]

Churchill is held in such high esteem but is so often shown to be a fool

[@stevenlowe3026]

It would also be good to look at the career of the Emden, which had been detached from Von Spee's fleet, and her path of destruction until she was intercepted and sunk by far superior HMAS Sydney after a valiant defense.

[@leongt1954]

Just finished reading the ebook of this battle and in fact Conopus could make 17 knots but the chief engineer was have a nervous breakdown and told the captain it could only make 12 knots

[@electrohalo8798]

von spee's wild ride!

[@ArcticTemper]

The next video HAS to be on the Falklands and HAS to be called "The Empire Strikes Back" right?

[@historigraph]

No joke that is one of the names I have been considering

[@ArcticTemper]

@Efkarpiotis Sure but Britain really is THE Empire (largest ever) also it's a reference to the famous news headline about Britain sending its fleet to deal with the Argies in the 80's.

[@rednaughtstudios]

As good as it is, I think Mark Felton might have beaten you to this idea… m.kzbin.info/www/bejne/gn3VhWujqapridE

[@Cyricist001]

@@ArcticTemper And the German's is Das Reich, (THE empire), not the largest but one so powerful that it took all the Great Powers, Britain included, to defeat it.

[@ArcticTemper]

@@Cyricist001 Implying it wouldn't have also taken all the Great Powers to defeat Britain?

[@vmedhe2]

Coronel, Gallipoli, unloading troops at Norway, Diverting troops to Greece, "Europe's soft underbelly", Why do the British keep letting Churchill into planning meetings?

[@profesercreeper]

Norway could have gone well just a bunch of unfortunate events. Italy was eventually won.

[@freedomfighter22222]

@@profesercreeper Norway was lost when the Germans captured airfields, before the british even landed a single man. What did attacking Italy accomplish?

[@sammarshall9504]

@@profesercreeper The Germans held Italy 'til the end of the war with 1/4 of the manpower they needed in the West, which in turn was only a fraction (1,5 million men vs 4 million men in 1944) of the strength used on the Eastern Front. The peninsula is suited for defensive warfare, expecially if you climb the boot South to North. Cassino was the best example of how not to wage mountain warfare. In the end, they did prevent Italy from falling to the Soviets, and they learned (thanks to Husky and Shingle) how to prepare for amphibious assaults which led to D-Day. But no "Balkan bridgehead" was entablished, no quick victory either, among other things Churchill wanted to achieve. While a strategic victory, for many reasons the Italian campaign was an operational failure.

[@dabiboi6458]

Freedom Crusader knocking out Italy of the war and diverting german forces

[@vmedhe2]

@@profesercreeper Norway was a mess and many factors played in that mess, but, Churchill was a BIG factor in the mess. Had he stuck with the plan and sent the troops to Norway they would have gotten there, in force , at a critical time and in a professional manner. Instead Churchill called the audible to unload, and in so doing everything went down hill from there. As for Italy, may I remind you that the point of the campaign was to get to Berlin...thats how Churchill sold it, and for a minor amount of men and supplies thanks to the mountains. Entire allied armies were bogged down and not going anywhere.

[@laszlokaestner5766]

I have always had a deep respect for Schonberg. He circled the Monmouth like a gentleman and only sank her when he had to. Both sides knew exactly what the code was and acted it out. it was likely one of the most regrettable and necessary actions of his entire career.

[@thecashier930]

Honestly: Fuck the captain of the Monmouth. The most unnecessary deaths possible. And the worst thing is probably, that the decision to fire was harder to make for the German captain, then the decision to doom the lifes of his crew was for the british captain. What a shameful waste of life.

[@nikowoods5794]

Fun fact : Langsdorff, the man who would later captained the Heavy Cruiser Graf Spee and died in the same general area as the ship's namesake knew Graf Spee's family and were neighbours in Dusseldorf.

[@micahistory]

It's crazy that that was their first naval defeat since the war of 1812

[@jayteegamble]

Hey yeah, the battle of Plattsburgh was in 1814. Only 100 years, not 102!

[@micahistory]

@@jayteegamble that's still during the war of 1812

[@jayteegamble]

@@micahistory Yeah i know, but it was not 102 years before Coronel as claimed in the video.

[@micahistory]

@@jayteegamble ok

[@TheArbieo]

If you think 102 years without a naval defeat is impressive, take a look at the swiss! Their last naval battle was in 1445 and they even won. :P

[@dominicguye8058]

Which one? I know they _lost_ a naval battle to Zurich in 1445

[@TheArbieo]

@@dominicguye8058 Since it's Swiss on both sides I count it as a victory AND defeat and you can't stop me.

[@isaacjoan6426]

Largest Empire on earth and zero naval defeats in 100 years sounds rather nice

[@jeffpollard7304]

That’s like saying Liechtenstein never suffered a naval defeat!!!

[@sfs2040]

His Math doesn't add up though. The battle of Baltimore was in 1814 and I'm pretty sure the British didn't win that... Just saying.

[@jmk1798]

Sometimes you have ro give credit to the other guy. Von Spee was a terrific naval tactician. He had no chance of getting home, no chance of resupply etc, but still fought on and did well with extremely limited resources.

[@dovetonsturdee7033]

'A gallant & honourable foe.' Which was exactly how he himself described Cradock at a dinner in Valparaiso after Coronel.

[@joannen3470]

The world needs more videos that offer the sort of clarity that this video provides. I've read numerous written accounts of the Battle of Coronel. This video accords with all of those accounts, but gives a clearer picture than any of them. Thanks.

[@ZoomZip]

Excellent portrayal and visual. I love these obscure naval battles coming to light. Really don’t hear about naval battles in WW1 as it gets overshadowed by the land battles in Europe. Bravo.

[@beachboy0505]

Amazing video A commander has to be clever. The captain of the small British cruiser was clever in avoiding Spee. Spee was so masterful but in the next battle in Falkland, he himself was destroyed. Naval warfare is so cruel. The sea takes everything Sad.

[@tib9196]

Your videos are actually so great my dude

[@neilcrombie4100]

well the royal navy got revenge at the battle off the falkland islands

[@neilcrombie4100]

@@santiagofaiella1255 there was a battle shortly after said battle between a British squadron and german far east squadon off the falklands. The two British dreadnoughts out gunned the germans and annilated them.

[@canadianmmaguy7511]

@@neilcrombie4100 two? 2 battlecruisers 3 armoured cruisers 2 light cruisers vs 2 armoured cruisers, one lasting until out of ammunition

[@neilcrombie4100]

@@canadianmmaguy7511 sorry dude I was thinking of the two battle cruisers my mistake.

[@michaelmcclellan6944]

It is often ignored Von Spree was a gunnery specialist for the High Seas Fleet and a planner

[@asdsdjfasdjxajiosdqw8791]

Can you include metric measurements as well? Thank you.

[@historigraph]

Will do in next vid

[@ANWRocketMan]

@@historigraph I lived in Canada for a few months. Using imperial was difficult for me. They lie when they say they use metric :'D FYI: There is a town in my country (South Africa) called Cradock. It was named after John Cradock (1st Baron Howden), but I haven't been able to find out if they were related.

[@fredsanford5954]

FWIW, given the relative level of precision of the distances reported (no fault to @Historigraph), you can approximate 1 meter = 1 yard. So the 'range closing to 4,500 yards' is still 4.5 km.

[@looinrims]

If it helps a meter is 1.094 yard, so 1000m is 1094 yards, or 1100 if you’re as lazy as I am

[@anthonysellick3520]

@@ANWRocketMan Hi from durban. They were not related.

[@Jake-rs9nq]

13:00 Cradock: "Would you like to cross the T? What if I do it for you?" Seriously, I'm no military strategist, but that's just begging for your ship to be sunk.

[@1258-Eckhart]

Excellently narrated!

[@audiosurfarchive]

Really dig the infographic side frames. Good shit.

[@luisdestefano6056]

most enjoyable and very well presented video, congrats!

[@witoldmatuszek8736]

Very enjoyable, great work as always.

[@coyote4237]

Great video, as always. Thank you.

[@mananrawat9382]

man , it is always great to see your videos

[@Ccccccccccsssssssssss]

Thanks for making this! I think this and the Falklands are some of the most tragic stories: I wish they would make a movie of this someday.

[@joannen3470]

Very informative video. Thank you for posting it.

[@tackies100]

Thank you for a very good and informative video.

[@Ren-tq1hs]

Yess at last ive been waiting for your great vids Especially those little arrows with names in the sea XD

[@paulseacroft9145]

Very detailed, interesting and well researched account of this battle. Whats not to love here! ..... Well done guys

[@brokenbridge6316]

Nicely done video

[@papazoulou9326]

Winston had ten ideas every day,' his Chief of the Imperial General Staff Lord Alanbrooke used to say of him, 'only one of which was good, and he did not know which it was.

[@johnchao2422]

the way they used the light to their relative advantages is so cool

[@jamesjacocks6221]

Well, Sir Winston was a plucky leader and a wonderful wordsmith but he seemed to have a nose for what he didn't understand and meddled quite a few souls into the mists of time. To cover his lapses, he wrote the history.

[@DomWeasel]

'Leader' is being generous. He was a good figurehead but he wasn't capable of leading a boy scout troop. He is the epitome of the British habit of crediting men with rank and talent based on the accomplishments of their ancestors rather than their own.

[@jamesjacocks6221]

@@DomWeasel So, did you add content to my comment? In point of fact, as a figurehead he was marvelously effective during the Second World War. Did you bother to study that? Can you give me a list of British leaders credited with accomplishment which was based on their ancestry? I think you are in love with ideas which aren't rooted in anything. As the British often say upon departure, Cheers!

[@DisgruntledHippo]

Glad to see you back.

[@historigraph]

This has actually been one of the shorter gaps between videos lmao

[@lionljb]

The Story of the SMS Emden and especially it's crew, left behind by the german fleet, to raid enemy ships is also very interesting. Would be great if you could tell it one day

[@micahistory]

It's crazy that the British went once century without a single naval defeat

[@brittakriep2938]

Fun fact: In 1866 in the battle of Lissa the Austrian (!) fleet won against the larger and more modern Italian fleet.

[@spudgamer6049]

​@@brittakriep2938not that it did them much good in the long run. Italy got Venice out of the war, ironcially where much of the Austria-Hungarian Navy personal and officers present at that battle were from.

[@brittakriep2938]

@@spudgamer6049 :My point was simply the Strange fact, that Austria won a naval Battle.

[@spudgamer6049]

@@brittakriep2938 I had thought the Austria-Hungary navy won a few fights in WW1 against the Italians as well? In not sure, it has been too long since I've looked at that particular section of WW1 naval engagements.

[@mabbrey]

great presentation

[@santi0501]

Great work

[@colonelkk]

Excellent video

[@thomasgray4188]

This looks good would love a video on the evolution of the battlecruiser like the dreadnought video could link in well with a follow up on the battle of the falkland islands as well as others such as dogger bank *edit It was very good*

[@cursedcat281]

I feel the adventures of Emden coming.

[@Elangeni1]

Emden , surely.

[@williamcarl4200]

I was a 12 year old American when I read of Craddock and Von Spee. I was an innocent who only read of the people and the deeds involved. Sad brave men fight each other, when in their hearts they probably wanted to drink and play football with their "enemies."

[@Big_E_Soul_Fragment]

Ah, Admiral Von Spee's wild ride

[@rickmoreno6858]

Broseph you do really good work 👍

[@AUGUSTOOCTAVIO1]

A really amazing video! Wich were the other crusiers in the Von Spee Squadron??

[@micahistory]

It's always a good day when Historigraph uploads

[@Joker-yw9hl]

Love your vids mate

[@Patriotic_Brit]

I'm excited for the video about Greece.

[@micahistory]

I usually hate naval history but you have made it very interesting

[@talleywa5772]

Me: "How could London be so inept?" Video: "First Lord of the Admiralty Winston Churchill" Me: "That explains it."

[@predragpea1845]

Finally, historiograph new video!

[@keithlillis7962]

Very interesting - thank you

[@ak9989]

Cool videos. Been into sea warfare since 1975!

[@BigBazz-Clips]

I'm sure that will be the last mistake churchill makes in the great war...

[@sam74mumm]

Agreed. At Gallipoli he`ll prove his worth as a strategic genius. That will teach his critics a lesson...

[@hushpuppy1735]

Ah yes, the Ottomans are incompetent and are incapable to stop us on the Strait. Going into Istanbul would be like a cake walk!

[@dimdimbramantyo7666]

@@sam74mumm I see what u did there * wink wink*

[@josephphoenix1376]

Gallipoli?

[@paulritchie5868]

Sadly,it wasn’t,they don’t think a lot of him in NZ or Australia.

[@disbeafakename167]

HMS Canopus wasn't in serious need of repair, she only had a leaky valve. Unfortunately her head engineer was going through a physcotic break, and was crazier than a shithouse rat.

[@zenengineer9277]

A noted side point about the Ostasiengeschwader. After Coronel, it went north to Valparaiso (photo at 1:25) and was greeted by German expat merchants on the 3rd. This put a shiver into the UK. But at the time Germany's OHL barely realized the consequences of imported Chilean nitrate, the only global source outside of much smaller amounts on the (British controlled) Indian subcontinent. No nitrate = no munitions. BASF was just starting to make synthetic ammonia when the British blockade now cut off the sodium nitrate source. The agricultural-intended ammonia was rapidly scaled up for nitrate production ONLY after a senior corporate engineer outlined the doom awaiting a nitrate-less military. Stockpiles would go extinct in 1915, regardless of coalgas and other minor ammonia production techniques. This technocracy expanded dramatically during the run-up to WWII with the same players now constructing numerous high-pressure syngas plants for a Germany with almost no oil deposits. If one could go back to 1900 and eliminate just 5 technocrats the Central Powers would have sued for peace by mid-1916.

[@jimjam7764]

Excellent!

[@squirepraggerstope3591]

Craddock and his men paid the ultimate price with little hope of any other outcome. Knowing this, they still fought with immense courage and any tribute now can only palely reflect such sacrifice. It's important to remember that and equally so to add that not very long afterward, von Spee and several of his ships crews did exactly the same in battle near The Falklands. Both the Royal Navy and Deutsche Marine, heir of the Imperial German Navy, are justified in honouring such conduct as upholding their proudest traditions. While also regretting the necessities war so tragically imposes. May they and the great nations they serve, now friends and allies, never have to do so again.

[@bobns509]

It is really amazing how lost battle is described as rag-tag against so modern fleet yet with a ships of a same classes and victory at Falkland as something almost as brilliant as God commanded himself, yet the ships were of totally different classes. Amazing it is, isn't it?

[@PerfectSense77]

There’s something both terrible and legendary about the WWI naval battles. Brave men, often going down to a man, trapped in circumstances beyond their control.

[@sturmtruppler6909]

I am glad you cover this unknown battle of the war.

[@paulhellawell5920]

unknown ?

[@sturmtruppler6909]

@@paulhellawell5920 Well maybe unknown may not be the best word but not many other history channels have covered this battle.

[@butlersmodellingpaintingan3974]

Brilliant to have the political machinations included in this. Thanks

[@micahistory]

Interesting. I had never heard of this battle

[@nervsouly]

Brits in 1914: Let that be our only naval defeat for the next 100 years too. HMS Hood: Hold my beer.

[@Blei1986]

well... the battle for Jutland was also defenetly not a british victory their dreadnoughts lit up like a chrsitmastree

[@vasilileung2204]

Let’s drink a Tsingtao to this victory

[@haroldcarfrey4206]

Canopus was actually faster than the armed merchant cruisers at 17 knots, but her chief engineer was literally in the middle of a mental health crisis believed to be a nervous breakdown

[@CaliToTheCrowd]

another quality video!

[@Sparky-ov1ot]

I know that Churchill is held up as some kind of hero in Britain but from his earliest days he was in fact a waster who caused more harm than good. The old saying holds true, "lions led by donkeys".

[@jmcr71795]

According to documents I have, HMS Good Hope was technically a ship of the Royal Canadian Navy. Since my "gun guru" died in May, I have learnt a lot about his family, and his namesake uncle, Midshipman John Victor Hatheway. Midshipman Hatheway joined the Royal Canadian Navy in 1910 and was one of the very first to do so, coming from the Royal Canadian Sea Cadets, as well as one of the first casualties at the Battle of Coronel. I have copies of all the known letters that Midshipman Hatheway sent while serving, and they are an interesting glimpse into life on board. I gave the original letters and photos to the Halifax Maritime Museum, in Halifax, Nova Scotia, Cnd.

[@historigraph]

Don't think that was the case, at least in 1914. Good Hope was in reserve in the UK when war broke out, and she was sent straight to the South Atlantic with a British crew.

[@historigraph]

It's obvs entirely possible that canadian sailors would have been on board

[@antoniocarrascosa6060]

Muy muy bueno el video y la narración; enhorabuena desde España

[@greenflagracing7067]

“They pay me to be an admiral. They don’t pay me to think.” -- Sir Berkeley Milne

[@gargoyle7863]

So sad that Monmouth missed the opportunity to surrender. Unnecessary waste of lives.