The Secret Anglo-German Alliance Plan 1914: The Tyrrell Mission

In 1914, the British and German Empires engaged in the most destructive war in human history at that point. Yet there was nothing inevitable about the conflict that consumed both powers.
Much is often made of the antagonism between London and Berlin in the lead up to the July Crisis, with events such as the Naval Arms Race supposedly showing a clear progression towards war.
Lesser known however, is the period of detente between the two nations from 1912-1914. This era of friendly relations coincided with the end of the arms race, and the resurgence of Russian power. Hoping to capitalise on the easing of these tensions, Sir William Tyrrell, Private Secretary to Sir Edward Grey, planned to see the German foreign minister in the September of that year, to cement the new relationship.
As is well known, the Great War intervened and for ever ended this brief opportunity for reconciliation.
This video aims to be a short documentary looking at the motives for the Tyrrell mission in 1914, and what both parties hoped to achieve.
Sources:
T.G. Otte, DÉTENTE 1914 : SIR WILLIAM TYRRELL’ S SECRET MISSION
TO GERMANY: (The fascinating article that inspired this video. If you have access through a university or other means, it is well worth a read).
Robert K. Massie, Dreadnought: (The best introduction to the period, though a popular history that falls into the trap this video talks about, of viewing the Naval Arms Race as a key factor in the war).
Christopher Clark, The Sleepwalkers: (The best overall analysis of the period I've read, though I disagree with the ultimate thesis on war guilt).
T.G. Otte, Statesman of Europe: (A biography of Edward Grey that goes a bit more in depth on his and Tyrrell's thinking in 1914).
#britishempire, #germanempire, #ww1

[@OldBritannia]

I hope you enjoy this short video on what I think is an interesting and lesser studied topic in the build up to the Great War. I wasn't exactly sure what to title it, Tyrrell didn't intend to form a full alliance with Germany, but I'm not really sure what other word could best describe the actual aims of the mission. If you have any suggestions on that front I'm very open to them. I know some of you are still waiting patiently for War Aims part 2. Please be assured I am working on it. Though I've enjoyed working on the video, the Balkans is not an area I know much about, so have had to do a lot more research than usual. Added with the huge amount of maps needed for the video and I ended up putting it on pause for a few weeks to make this. Thank you all for watching, any constructive criticism or comments are welcomed.

[@explodingwolfgaming8024]

:)

[@LucidFL]

At 0:17 its difficult to read the text. Also maybe you could have added the years and the Berlin-Baghdad railway although I know you mention that later

[@internetenjoyer1044]

You're the best youtuber on british history, keep it up bro!

[@Cotswolds1913]

Maybe “Plan for Reconciliation.”

[@erikbrus8388]

Why Prussia was right at 1:04:00 and had the right institutional evolutionary sequence at 1:10:00 Ps: right economic system at 47:20 also: m.kzbin.info/www/bejne/b6PEnGeEfrx9ma8 Fascism is the second best system thereafter: m.kzbin.info/www/bejne/fnqbhnxoj76Bi6M

[@Harrys-History]

Great video, as always. I love how chaotic the geopolitics was during this period. If war was held back by just 1 or 2 more years, then who knows how else the alliance system would have formed.

[@therearenoshortcuts9868]

the German-Chinese alliance Rofl

[@05EVORS]

Britain and France and ultimately USA were/are controlled by Rothschild money/Debt since 1700. Remove R's from the equation and world would look like the Jetsons by now

[@AJPMUSIC_OFFICIAL]

We are looking at the end of a period where Europe had been at war every 5 years with different countries on either side each time

[@Angelcynn_2001]

It saddens me and irritates me that we were unable to make an alliance

[@petergilbert72]

Tremendous short analysis clearly communicated - thank you. Ultimately, German foreign policy post-Bismarck seems predicated on rapid military successes instead of peaceful co-existence. Bismarck was surely correct on insisting on a close alliance with Russia, and maintaining good relations with Great Britain.

[@poiuyt975]

I feel like using the term "foreign policy" for post-Bismarck Germany might be an overstatement. It seems that, like Napoleon was France's last great commander, Bismarck was Germany's last politician. Those who followed only understood the argument that "the might is right".

[@melchiorvonsternberg844]

It is extremely gratifying that someone is pointing out these facts, which apparently hardly anyone is aware of. It's also an excellent example of how a bad cold can affect a causal chain that ends in 150 million deaths. The deadliest cold ever...!

[@RBN1939]

never knew about this most who talk about WW1 and its lead up talk about only that straight line of event and never really the more intricate and lesser know events really great and informative work keep up the great work

[@Cotswolds1913]

You may enjoy reading about the Haldane Mission that really underscored these efforts prior to the scheduled 1914 meetings mentioned in the vid.

[@alexplotkin3368]

Great video. I've read a lot about World War I. But I did not know of the Tyrrell mission. A joint Anglo-German alliance might have prevented World War I. Britain's position as the leading financial power may have continued for some time under this alliance. Fascinating stuff. Keep up the great work! Excellent imagery and historical commentary!

[@brooklynhounsell4135]

Wonderful video! Love the covering of these lesser known aspects of geopolitics before ww1! keep it up!

[@anneonymous4884]

I found your channel recently. You're really underrated. Great work!

[@big_2361]

Very interesting. Britain saw Germany as her main enemy and was even ready to let Russia have the Turkish Straits over in exchange for her support in the war against Germany. But with Russia's economic boom and the completion of her railway lines, Russia could have somewhat catch up with Germany and Britain could have also seen Russia as an enemy. Makes you think how strong Russia would be in the following years if war did not break out in 1914. The potential future for the Ottoman Empire is also interesting. After the Second Balkan War the CUP gained total control of the empire and things were going good for the empire. The empire was modernizing overall; Enver Pasha had modernized the army with German help, which turned it into a force that withstood Britain, France and Russia for four years; the empire was getting good harvests; and the administration was efficient. And what Germany was to its army, Britain was to its navy. In this scenario I think we would have seen an CUP-energized Ottoman Empire with a modern army and modern navy, finally free of the threat of partition, start to rise economically and rapidly industrialize. Then again there is the question of debts and capitulations, the Armenian question, the Greek and Russian threat, the new revolutionary administration and a new identity for the empire etc. Just very interesting to even think about it

[@sjsyhm646]

@@secretname4190 But Russia had its moment in the sun with the Soviet Union even after their decline following the early 19th century, so Turkey could also find itself being a great power again

[@IPlayWithFire135]

There are good reasons to think that Russia's economic boom had already shot its wad. It was headed straight for the middle income trap.

[@EliStettner]

The CUP: “The Armenian question” Me: What’s the answer The CUP: Genocide, genocide is the answer.

[@big_2361]

@@EliStettner when you learn history from memes 🤡

[@EliStettner]

@@big_2361 Is there a different definition of the Armenian Question that I am not aware of?

[@politicalengineer25]

Awesome video! I’ve watched a lot of videos on WW2 history and have been wanting to learn more about the period surrounding WW1. I like that you’ve covered a lot of the geopolitics from the British perspective. Can’t wait to see more!

[@StoicHistorian]

Great video man, really loving these

[@xadri2243]

Yesterday I was rewatching your videos and hoping another one would come early so yeah, I'm definitly going to enjoy it ;)

[@itsyaboithanos717]

what an interesting and fascinating topic, cheers to another good video!

[@jurgenp.schooner8514]

Great video! Videos like this always make me depressed. Love the style and artistic display in the video. Def will subscribe!

[@olefante380]

Very good video! However, I must note, didn't Russia & Britain mostly sort out their differences in the Anglo-Russian agreement of 1873 and the Anglo-Russian Entente of 1907? I don't see it reasonable that Britain would be that committed to any containment efforts of Russia - especially with Germany which some may say they had a stronger rivalry with then Russia - as they had sorted out all their disputes. But, still, this Tyrrell Mission is a very interesting part of history I had never heard of, and thanks for sharing it! Also, do you have a discord? A place for all us Victorian-era nerds and/or scholars to talk would be great.

[@OldBritannia]

The 1907 Convention I talked about in the video. It was pretty much dead by 1914, the resurgence of Russian power meant they were repeatedly violating it. Aligning with Germany was seen as a way of potentially forcing them to hold to it. More likely it would have collapsed in 1915. I do not have a discord unfortunately. I think it’s an interesting idea though, got quite a lot of work irl at the minute, but once that’s calmed down and my output becomes more consistent in a month or so I’ll look at getting one set up. Thanks for watching.

[@olefante380]

@@OldBritannia Alright, cool!

[@Muesli711]

Excellent video, thanks! @1:58 The Riddle of the Sands (1903) by Erskine Childers is another famous spy/invasion novel.

[@mehmetalipasa]

Very good video mate, a lot of work I think. Educationally very valuable I think.

[@learningagain4094]

Solid video👍

[@fantasyfleet]

More great work thanks

[@niekhofman428]

Great video! I’m such a history nerd and yet I never even heard of this story. You really got me looking at the situation from a different perspective. You have my like and sub

[@Walgriff]

British - German close ties were not unheard of: Britain and Prussia were allies in the 7 years war, and Prussia and Austria were British allies during the Napoleonic period - so there were precedents, etc.

[@JPGoertz]

Very interesting indeed. Always alternatives... We should heed that lesson today as well and not get locked into linear thoughts. Greetings from Berlin! Happy and peaceful New Year 2023!

[@EmperorKlaus7068]

If only Britain and Germany had allied… if only…

[@Englishman-_-Mongolia2022]

Yeah, as a Briton, I wish we sided with the Germans. We are brothers, but I don't care about Belgium or the french

[@melchiorvonsternberg844]

@@Englishman-_-Mongolia2022 It was also the wish of Queen Victoria...

[@billyosullivan3192]

@@melchiorvonsternberg844 Queen victoria was dead mait

[@billyosullivan3192]

@@Englishman-_-Mongolia2022 We share far more in common with the french than the germans

[@melchiorvonsternberg844]

@@billyosullivan3192 Yep! In first line the language and a lot of Germanic blood. And therefore, you fought 800 years against each other...

[@thebalkanhistorian.3205]

Great video! I can’t wait for the War sims video!

[@OldBritannia]

Taking a bit of time as much of the research I’m doing for the first time. But it’s mainly just editing now which will be my sole focus from now.

[@thebalkanhistorian.3205]

@@OldBritannia Great to hear!

[@lucasvals4354]

With Britain and Germany allied, the world would likely not have had to endure WW2 and its many atrocities. Pity.

[@Dybbouk]

May have been better if the French had been rolled over (as in 1870 and 1940)

[@herrrabe7123]

Probably completely new atrocities, which we can't imagine today 🤷🏼‍♂️

[@Sceptonic]

After reading more into it, Germany and more specifically the Kaiser are at fault for completely jeopardizing their position by turning away Russia, not taking advantage of Franco-British quarrels, and having a generally aggressive foreign policy which put off Britain who wanted to keep the status quo even though they offered many concessions they wouldn't normally of.

[@Dybbouk]

@@Sceptonic They also overestimated the Russians. And violated Belgian neutrality

[@stephenjenkins7971]

Well, the atrocities we KNOW would've happened wouldn't have happened, sure. But new atrocities may have occurred; for all we know we have the best timeline lol

[@fritoss3437]

Toujours aussi intéressant 👍

[@trashedhead]

Great video, an interesting period that you don’t hear too much about; I love your illustrations and maps as well!

[@derrickstorm6976]

Never heard of this even in advanced history classes! Perhaps the greatest what-if scenario in Europe for several decades?? So glad this was in my recommendations 👌

[@coloniser.-]

i love your videos mate

[@malopthemapper]

Hi love ur vids

[@kaiden7063]

just on time with Jabzy’s video

[@thatsaboat2882]

I saw that too lol

[@nathanjames3102]

Another fantastic video. Well done 👌🏻 Keep it up 👏🏻

[@tyronejones5639]

Another banger

[@danoman8289]

Nice video again, I was wondering if there was a way you could provide me with some of the sources for a few points in a few of the videos thus far.

[@OldBritannia]

Most outright facts I try to cite in the video itself. Other than that all sources are in the video description.

[@danoman8289]

Yes I see, I was particularly interested in the notes from the British empire documentary whereby it was stated that several nations had attempted to be integrated into the British empire but were rejected, I've watched a lot of history pertaining to Britain but had never heard that.

[@OldBritannia]

@@danoman8289 That’s from Robert Tombs ‘The English and Their History’, from the chapter called ‘Imperial England’. I don’t have my notes on me so can’t give an exact page number, but it’s fairly near the start of the chapter.

[@jerolvilladolid]

Russia had an enormous army in 1914 but had no intention of using it offensively. While Germany had been consumed by fear and trepidation and had to declare war preemptively before Russia could further mobilize its reserves. The war was basically nightmares and dark thoughts entering reality when those fears were totally unfounded.

[@codieloades5741]

Really true, you have to also think about alliances and a political standpoint, Germany wanted land and wealth, Russia wanted to extend its influence and also protect the Slavic peoples, Britain hated the fact that Belgium was brought into the war, all of the these factors lead to war.

[@greatpowerpolitics6023]

Hello Old Britannia, i was wondering what Video make you use for your videos

[@LiberalCounterpart]

Great video, but there is one major caveat to this story: Germany had an informant in London who told Berlin about an exploratory Anglo-Russian concept to land Russian troops in north Germany using the British navy in case of a war. When Bethmann Hollweg contacted London about this issue as it concerned core security interests of Germany, Grey lied and said such discussions had never taken place. This explains to some extent why Berlin didn't try to negotiate all the way with London in summer 1914. There was a severe personal loss of trust on the part of Bethmann Hollweg who no longer believed he could count on Grey in good faith negotiations where Germany's core interests were concerned. It had been Bethmann who had kept the paranoid German army leadership in check in prior years, but in the July crisis he was no longer able to credibly present a negotiated alternative to a military resolution before completion of Russia's "Great Program". Please note, this is not meant to justify the decision to go to war, merely suggest why in July 1914, some diplomatic options were discarded that had been previously available.

[@mimizonmimizon3468]

This informant was Benno Alexandrowitch von Siebert. He passed on all Russian embassy correspondence to Berlin and informed about all the intentions of the Triple Entente. His information was always reliable. The fact that Grey denied what was obvious came as a severe shock in Berlin. They lost all confidence in London.

[@gadimir4757]

What a great alliance this would've been

[@thesecondsilvereich7828]

So great even hitler wanted one even when it was just Britain on own in ww2

[@Sajuek]

@@thesecondsilvereich7828 that is a lie.

[@thesecondsilvereich7828]

@@Sajuek no it's well known even his general's though it was a good idea hitler wanted the Anglo german alliance just like before the great war with the kaiser

[@Sajuek]

@@thesecondsilvereich7828 He wished to divide and conquer his enemies, so that the German reich could extend from France to the Urals without interference and by that time Britain could not hope to win an engagement against them. Hitler, a naive and meandering diplomat, thought he could achieve this by offering a false promise to protect Britain’s colonies. In reality that would not have lasted beyond his use for such an arrangement.

[@thesecondsilvereich7828]

@@Sajuek don't forget thatvthe English are Germanic hitler wanted the British on his side to fight the ussr and even the us

[@lordedmundblackadder9321]

It’s so cool to think about what would have happened if an Anglo-German alliance had come about. Some hoi4 modded should get on that.

[@PMMagro]

The German naval race (and scramble for colonies) was a grave misstake. Germany had already outgrown France on land and economically also the UK. Germanys rise from new state to economical powerhouse (Prussia had been an army happning to havce country attached to it) was without any colinies or big navy.

[@normiron736]

Yes I agree, Bismarck wanted the German Empire to be a European power, he had little interest in acquiring colonies. It was the Kaiser who pushed for their 'place in the sun'. I personally think this alliance would not have lasted long as the erratic Kaiser would have said or enacted something that would have shattered the wafer thin trust between the two. If this alliance had held, you could see Britain behind the scenes encouraging the Germans to adopt the Constitutional Monarchy that the Kaiser's Father and Mother had been so keen to implement. This could have clipped the Kaiser's political wings and strengthened the bonds and trust between the 2 nations. But alas, it was not to be. I always thought it unfair that so many German Royal houses lost their thrones because of the actions of an erratic Prussian Emperor.

[@raultalmon1467]

the weltpolitik, Willhem 2 wanted all

[@petergilbert72]

@@normiron736 yes, Bismarck was strategic in outlook whereas Wilhelm II was driven by his personal insecurities and jealousies. The non-Prussian royal families were still there in their now federated kingdoms but with the German Emperor and his government ruling the foreign policy and military.

[@normiron736]

@@petergilbert72 but they lost their thrones in 1918, too. There were no reigning German Monarchs in Weimar Germany

[@petergilbert72]

@@normiron736 ah yes indeed they did.

[@sglenny001]

I recently found your channel you know your stuff well done have you or do plan on going to University. I am currently an traibing to be leacher at University of Bradford Peace studys we look at thisvery topics today

[@mimizonmimizon799]

In fact there was no British - German antagonism. It's a chronology of unable politicians and missed chances - on both sides. After WW 2 Adenauer preferred the entente with France, which became Germany's most important partner. This proved a wise and - final - decision. Germany and GB simply missed the boat!

[@swanner95]

To be fair about Grey, and I speak as a detractor, his main mistake in the July/August crisis was to be persuaded by French ambassador Paul Cambon's tears as he begged the British to come to the aid of France. He was forced or forced himself into a guarantee to Cambon that at the next cabinet meeting, which was on the afternoon of the 2nd August, that he would get the cabinet to allow him to give him a guarantee of British intervention on France's side It is also not lost on me that if Grey was on good terms with Cambon, it was certainly true of Cambon's German equivalent, Lichowsky right up until the eve of war. Something that should not go unnoticed and indeed something I feel could and should have been built on.

[@kubhlaikhan2015]

This is a very important point. So far as Britain is concerned, the war was caused by our alliance with France, not by enmity with Germany. The video says virtually nothing about what France was doing while all these other things were happening but France is the linchpin in the path to war.

[@swanner95]

@@kubhlaikhan2015 no doubt the French, even well before the war, started using the Entente and various other arrangements such as the separation of the fleets (royal navy would guard the North sea so the French could concentrate in the med) to rope Britain into a 'soft alliance'. Yet it is important to note that Britain never acknowledged or for that matter considered there to be an alliance with France. At that 2nd August cabinet one member actually resigned there and then saying that giving Cambon a guarantee of naval protection was tantamount to an alliance which had never been recognised since the Entente was signed. Ultimately it was the Hawks in the British cabinet who spun it into an alliance when it suited them, the fact it wasn't had allowed Grey to play it down at times when it was convenient (when the French/Russians were getting to assertive).

[@kubhlaikhan2015]

@@swanner95 I think there has been an informal anxiety to keep the French happy ever since the Napoleonic wars ended. Comically evident in Lord Raglan's frequent "slips of the tongue" when he ordered attacks against the French instead of the Russians (allegedly).

[@edmundironside9435]

Could you do a video on Hong Kong's role in the Empire?

[@OldBritannia]

Most of the empire will be featured at some point. When that is I can't really say, my mind tends to flit from idea to idea.

[@csvickers151]

You would assume that an alliance of Germany Britain and Russia would have been a strong possibility due to their family ties

[@OldBritannia]

Unfortunately, in the age of nationalism the opinion of kings increasingly counted for very little.

[@csvickers151]

@@OldBritannia precisely that’s why absolute monachy was abolished in the UK in the 1600s.

[@hugocampbell9209]

how about a video on Thomas Babington Macaulay?

[@tritium1998]

So the British only wanted Germany to be their new proxy if Russia was to become stronger than Germany.

[@RSmyII]

What happened to the first video on Lord Salisbury?

[@OldBritannia]

Deleted for licensing concerns, it’s why I’m trying to use cartoons for portraits now. Sucks because I thought it was one of my more interesting videos, but I wanted to be on the safe side now the channel is monetised.

[@devinbal9041]

Cam Somebody tell me the music at the beginning?

[@akramrashid642]

Yes it is really beautiful music. I would like to know it as well. I would really appreciate if the credits for the background music are also included in the video description

[@howtoappearincompletely9739]

Eheu! It's presentations like this that remind me that things could so easily have been different, that so much could have been saved from the catastrophë of WWI, if only certain events hadn't occurred as they did. 😞

[@RSmyII]

Hey man, do you know of any good books on Benjamin Disraeli (besides his own)?

[@OldBritannia]

Robert Blake’s biography is probably the best. Honestly I don’t really rate any biographies of Disraeli that highly though. The lion and the Unicorn is quite enjoyable, thought it’s a dual biography of him and Gladstone. My interest is mainly diplomatic history, so John Charmley’s ‘Splendid Isolation?’ is very good (if a bit too critical for my taste) on his foreign policy.

[@RSmyII]

Thank you!

[@calibvr]

2:45 Are you aware of the title of the piece of Nicholas II?

[@Shire_England01W.HamF.C]

We defeated the wrong enemy, 1918 😭

[@mimizonmimizon3468]

Worse still, you became a defeated victor

[@Mercian-Lad]

Yes, yes did. And it irritates me

[@davidcunningham2074]

good to see this neglected subject properly covered

[@bobbertrobbert6282]

This is kind of random but seeing the map of europe with only germany and Britain colored in made me think how interesting it would be to see a scenario where ww1 was britain, Germany, and maybe the us against pretty much all the other great powers like in the seven years war. In my opinion that would be a very interesting alternate history if someone could find a way for it to make sense.

[@levitschetter5288]

An interesting reminder that the alliances of ww1 weren't absolute, and many times the powers were suspicious or even hostile to each other, as seen with Britain's suspicion of Russia and the enmity between Italy and Austria-Hungary. A longer term analysis would be interesting to see how this would have changed things of the war was delayed a couple years, as Britain was already reluctant to enter until the invasion of Belgium, and especially how the US would have sided if they still joined later on

[@darth_nihilus_]

I think that Germany would have still won a one v one because nobody how easily modern weapons can destroy entire armies. But nobody was smart enough to think outside the Napoleonic era box.

[@pedroledoux9779]

If WW1 has begun later than 1914 the time was running in favor of Russia. Britain, Germany and France had already completed the transition from agrarian society to urban industrial. Russia not. 80% of Russian population lived in rural zone in 1914. When a country is in the transition from rural to urban industrial the economy growth tents to skyrocket. In 1914 Russia was the fastest growing economy of Europe. Once Russia could complete this transition this country would become something huge, much bigger than Germany, Britain and France. Many economists in the beginning of 20th century predicted that Russia would become a superpower. Russian didn't has become a superpower because of communism. They had become a superpower despite of communism and civil war. Once Russia had completed the transition from rural to urban industrial society this country has become a superpower.

[@OldBritannia]

I absolutely agree it was in spite of communism. Much of the Soviets supposed achievements were begun under the Tsars, the mass literacy they took credit for as an example. Whilst I agree it was on its way to superpower status, Russia had her own set of problems. The rapid increase in strikes is just one example in the years prior to 1914. If it could overcome them, then yes it would have been a real force to be reckoned with.

[@pedroledoux9779]

@@OldBritannia Britain always had only one side. The balance of power in continent. As a result Britain always oposed to the strongest country of continental Europe, for a period it was Spain, after them was the France of kings Louis and Napoleon in 20th century was Germany. Without the murder in 1914 and WW1 being trigged Russia would continue on their transition from agrarian to urban-industrial society, more the time pass closer they are to become a superpower and it could shift Britain to be more aligned with Germany.

[@pedroledoux9779]

@@OldBritannia From 1928 to 1938 USSR economy skyrocketed because of transition to urban industrial society, without WW1, the chaos and disorder brought by communist revolution it would happened earlier, maybe after the period from 1914 to 1924 Russian empire would risen as superpower.

[@mrsupremegascon]

Russia was already a superpower or very close to it even before WW1. They had an Empire stretching from Baltic sea to China sea, had a massige sphere of influence in Asia, Balkan, had a massive army, as a Grand winner of the Napoleonic War, they had a huge diplomatic weight and prestige.

[@pedroledoux9779]

@@mrsupremegascon yes but in 1914 Russia was a rural country. 80% of the population lived in rural zone. The transition to a urban industrial soceity was ongoing and once completed Russian empire would be something huge in economy. Russia was in 1914 what China is today. The fastest growing economy of the world.

[@saxon..falkenhayn2908]

as a Deutsche, it is simply frustrating the UK fought the wrong enemy

[@ChevyChase301]

Who is the wrong enemy? Tsarist Russia? Germany dominates the continent today. It’s a good thing it isn’t dominated by a Kaiser

[@Englishman-_-Mongolia2022]

​@@ChevyChase301 Britain should have sided with the Kaiser

[@darkknight6432]

@@Englishman-_-Mongolia2022 Why should they die for Kaiser Willy's Ego?

[@rayzas4885]

You were their enemy lmao

[@GerMFnU1848Sax]

Same. I got British blood, as an American. I hate that we fought on the wrong side

[@andrewdgw6779]

The alliance the world needed

[@TheTarget1980]

LOL 2.32. The Wilhelmstraße in Pirna, a small town in Saxony, has nothing to do with the Wilhelmstraße in Berlin.

[@OldBritannia]

Ahaha, my bad, apologies. That'll teach me to quickly add pictures without research.

[@TheTarget1980]

@@OldBritannia no problem. ;) I have a friend living in Pirna so it was easy for me to find this mistake....this happy little accident. :)

[@ralphbernhard1757]

After 15 years of "dragging feet" regarding an Anglo-German Alliance of sorts, how come anybody is so sure that this "renewed attempt" at an alliance was just not more "dragging feet"?

[@OldBritannia]

'Alliance' is something of a misnomer on my part - just wasn't sure what else to call the Tyrrell Mission. A formal alliance was pretty much an impossibility, but a closer working relationship over the next few years from 1914 was definitely possible. I think what was different this time was an increasingly aggressive and strong Russian Empire that was spooking both Germany and Britain.

[@ralphbernhard1757]

@@OldBritannia Agreed about Russia. Therefore the "logic" was actually to unite forces (Anglo-German Alliance of sorts), thereby creating an overpowering hegemony, drawing others in per signature until it had blossemed into a *comprehensive European security agreement* which was open for all to join.

[@IrishCarney]

Two unmentioned factors driving forward German-Russian conflict and creating opportunity for Anglo-German rapprochement. First, it wasn't just the increasing size of the Russian Army and treasury that concerned Berlin: it was the expansion of Russia's rail network westward toward Germany, and into Russian-ruled Poland. Once this rail network was complete, it would enable Russia to suddenly surge its huge army into Germany. This in turn negated the German army's long-standing Schlieffen Plan which assumed that, in a two-front war against France and Russia, the slower pace of rail-deprived Russia's movement would allow Germany to assume a defensive posture in the east and focus offensive efforts west, on France. Under Schlieffen, once France was knocked out of the war, Germany could turn its focus to the east to finish off Russia with the soldiers freed up from the fighting in France. But a Russia able to mobilize and transport its army all the way to Germany via rail much earlier meant a Germany at risk of being crushed. This explains how the German leadership from the Kaiser on down felt that time was on Russia's side and why they felt under pressure to take action soon before it was too late. Second, the Kaiser allowing a Russo German treaty to lapse in 1890 in the foolish belief that his personal charm would enable him, via the Czar, the maintain a positive relationship without the need for the commitments in the treaty. But Russia was offended by the lapse and turned to France instead, in an alliance that made no sense ideologically (czarist abolutism and French republicanism) but was necessary from a practical basis. The previous League of Three Emperors under which Russia, Austria-Hungary, and Germany formed a team against the forces of democracy, liberalism, and socialism was a more natural fit, but Wilhelm's bungling wrecked it.

[@ivandinsmore6217]

It is tragic that this didn't work out.

[@Englishman-_-Mongolia2022]

As a Brit.. it irritates me we fought the wrong enemy ww1

[@darkknight6432]

Ok Kaiserboo we get it.

[@Englishman-_-Mongolia2022]

@@darkknight6432 nah it has nothing do with the kaiser... we fought the wrong enemy.. I feel no kinship to the french or belgians but the Germans are my brothers

[@darkknight6432]

@@Englishman-_-Mongolia2022 Then go join them then? And I have no pity for the Krauts they deserved everything that came to them and more.

[@Englishman-_-Mongolia2022]

@@darkknight6432 they sure made many bad decisions regarding crimes in war, but the Germans put up a big fight twice and humbled some European powers. Your pity is irrelevant to me anyway lol

[@darkknight6432]

@@Englishman-_-Mongolia2022 And then they got fucked to death twice after that both literally and figuratively and I do not care what you think of my pity its there to let you know that I fucking hate the Krauts so much that I wish they did better in WW2 so that we could turn Krautland into a Wasteland and that rhymes so you know its true.

[@Mongol17TLOU]

If only it happened

[@jensboettiger5286]

Allowing Austria to go to war with Russia alone and break apart would have been the best solution. Germany could have quietly annexed German Austria under the pretext of protecting it from the invading Russians given that the Empire had become a failed state. Just make the Austrian king swear fealty to the German Emperor like the other German kings, and it's over. Russia would not have been in a state to fight further, and while France might have attacked over it, Britain had no reason to.

[@mimizonmimizon799]

"Wenn zwei sich streiten, freut sich der Brite" (German saying before WW1). That Problem got solved with Franco - German Entente and British Brexit 😅

[@AngloJack23]

Germany has total authority in the French-made EU.

[@mimizonmimizon799]

@@AngloJack23 ... and GB may enjoy its new splendid isolation 😁

[@Mercian-Lad]

We should have been allies WW1 😔

[@ArtBriton20]

If only Britain and Germany protected each other, as the brothers we are

[@mimizonmimizon3468]

That may be. Unfortunately brothers are not always friends...🙂

[@IPlayWithFire135]

I see the Hearts of Iron standards for national colors are pretty much universal at this point.

[@osmo3333]

What could have been. Makes me sad :(

[@TheRoyalCavalier]

I wonder then what would have happened had the Germans been more cautious; for example, if they had not given Austria the 'blank cheque' during the July crisis. Britain's greatest geopolitical foe in 1914 was definitely Russia and not Germany. Albert von Mensdorff, the Austrian ambassador to the UK, was extremely popular among the British government and royalty and relations between Britain and Austria were very friendly during this time. Mensdorff supported de-escalating the July crisis, but he was not kept fully informed of his country's intentions as the Austrian government didn't trust his Anglophilia, and they had already been given the blank cheque by Germany. By the way, this video was great!

[@alexzero3736]

Actually, German provocations in Morocco, Tangier and providing guns to the Boers, pretty much turned UK to French side. Britain itself could prevent the war if they provided an ultimatum to Germany to stop and not invade France... I believe the July crisis should go to international conference or international court. German military staff was just too sure about German army power, and too scared of Russian manpower, although new inventions like modern artillery and machine gun pretty much removes this difference... BTW industrially Russia was lagging far behind Germany. I believe Germany would actually win the competition if they just kept the empire.

[@TheRoyalCavalier]

​@@alexzero3736 The UK wasn't pulled into the war because of France. They were keen to stay out of it; it was Belgium being invaded that caused the UK to join, not France (like this video points out). The Germans believed the UK wouldn't go to war over 'a scrap of paper'; they took a risk, it didn't pay off. And, yes, Russian power was overestimated, but both Germany and the UK were thinking about Russia's long-term potential (again, mentioned in this video). No such 'international conference' or 'international court' existed in 1914. Also, I don't get what Morocco 'turning the UK to the French side' has to do with my comment?

[@alexzero3736]

@@TheRoyalCavalier EXACTLY. if Britain did provide an ultimatum to Germany to stop and not invade France early, they could stop the war preemptively. No such 'international conference' or 'international court' existed in 1914. Why not to call it? There were two Berlin congresses in 1880 and 1878 as example.

[@TheRoyalCavalier]

@@alexzero3736 No one, not even Germany or the UK, believed that it was going to be the full scale war it was. A prince was assassinated. These things didn’t normally cause global wars. By the time Germany declared war on France, they were already at war with Russia. France and Russia were formally allied. Britain providing an ultimatum would not have stopped anything. They were interested in a diplomatic solution until Germany illegally invaded Belgium. Again, the UK and France were not allies.

[@alexzero3736]

@@TheRoyalCavalier really now? What about Entente Cordiale agreement (1904)?

[@gideonmele1556]

Brits allying Frenchies to fight Germans instead of allying Germans to fight Frenchies: …this feels so very wrong

[@gurnish9741]

after the French and English are brothers too they have a lot in common

[@GermanicWorldOrder]

@@gurnish9741 English people trace their genes mainly from Germany, not France

[@saxon..falkenhayn2908]

​@@gurnish9741 no. As a half English I do not see the french as my brother.. we have nothing in common

[@Englishman-_-Mongolia2022]

​@@gurnish9741 lmfao good joke

[@Anglo-Saxon_familie]

@@gurnish9741 no, we are not brothers (I am an Englishman). Why would I look at them as my brother?

[@realbaron5714]

This alliance could change the history and ww2 would be between Central Powers vs The Internationale. Interesting.

[@johnrohde5510]

It was precisely because England, having got most of what it wanted from the Entente, was looking to jump ship before French and Russian ambitions had been fulfilled, that the latter two were eager for war in 1914.

[@hugocampbell9209]

When’s the next video

[@Chris-kz7us]

We are both germanic brothers

[@micahistory]

very interesting, I had never heard of this mission

[@bob_0146]

noti gang

[@vanman266]

The failure to find common ground was one of tge biggest mistake in both countries histories.

[@mimizonmimizon799]

In the end, we found it with France. Romances with GB brought us no benefit! 😅

[@Mercian-Lad]

​@@mimizonmimizon799 "we"

[@brianplank5905]

A fantastic video. As a person who is, I'd like to think, well versed in history, this is a part of pre-war international relations that i knew nothing about. Thanks! Also, Germany should have won the war!

[@achyuthansanal]

why 'should' a militaristic imperialist aggressor state have won the war

[@MrYourentertainer]

@@achyuthansanal Exactly because that is what the entente was too. Aggressive, militaristic and imperialistic. All these words fit perfectly for russian, french, italian and british politics too. And i would argue that since the entente countries were much more imperialistic than the germans (just take a look at war goals e.g.), it would have been better if the germans won, because the germans were more moderate.

[@mhm6309]

@@achyuthansanal they weren't any different from the entente

[@Real_Mambo]

@@achyuthansanal First of all the entente werent to different. One of the reasons why france got in the war is revenge for 1870.

[@thunderluke6432]

Astounding video! Such information are never broadcrasted properly and only propaganda and vague narratives are left to determine people's impressions of the reasons and circumstances of history.

[@ANONI96]

Quick someone build a time machine!

[@tancreddehauteville764]

The problem with Anglo-German relations in this period is that Great Britain did not need an alliance, but Germany did. So the price of an alliance was always going to be high, from the German perspective. The Kaiser wanted more overseas colonies as well as continental dominance - it was clear that the British would never agree to this, it was either one or the other. The German navy scare was just exaggerated bullshit, because there was no way that the Germany navy was ever going to catch up with the British, but it did annoy many in the British government.

[@MrYourentertainer]

The Kaiser did not want continental dominance. I don't know why people keep claiming that. He did give some bellicistic speeches from time to time, but those were just words and he did not support them with actions. The Kaiser was too erratic a person anyway to even develop a long lasting plan or strategy and was NOT a major figure in german politics at the onset of WW1 anyhow, after his attempt of the "persönliches regiment" failed in the 1890s. So far, nobody has been able to show any documents/plans/etc. that prove the Kaiser planned any sort of war or aggression. In fact, he started crying as the war broke out, exclaimimg "I did not want this!" He certainly would NOT have stood in the way of an Anglo-German alliance. However, other figures, especially Theobald von Bethmann Hollweg and Bernhard von Bülow, as well as Gottlieb von Jagow argueably had a bigger influence on german foreign policy and they made the big mistake of considering an anglo-french rapprochement unthinkable after the fashoda-crisis of 1898 and therefore didnt care much about keeping britain distanced from France.

[@dragonemperorsy2515]

@@MrYourentertainer but the kaiser promised Austria-Hungary with unconditional support against Russia and declared war on France himself and also attacked Belgium and provked a war with GB.

[@MrYourentertainer]

@@dragonemperorsy2515 All of these statements are wrong. One does not even have to be a expert, it is enough to consult wikipedia in order to know this. Concerning the "Blankovollmacht" to Austria-Hungary: it was not given by the Kaiser, but by the Chancellor Theobald von Bethmann Hollweg to the austrian Legionsrat Graf von Hoyos. The Kaiser was NOT directly involved. And as a sidenote: backing up your ally in a crisis is nothing surprising at all. Curently, NATO is backing Ukraine even though they are not even allied, and Germany and Austria WERE formally allied. Concerning the declaration of war against France: I remind you of the famous conversation between the Kaiser and Helmuth von Moltke on August 2nd! The Kaiser urged Moltke to send all troops to the East in order not to provoke Framce and to avoid further escalation. However Moltke reminded the Kaiser that France had already mobilised its troops and was enacting its attack plan (French plan XVII), hence the Kaiser, at last, agreed to send troops west. But it was by no means his idea. And concerning the last point: I don't even know what you are talking about here. Why are you claiming that the Kaiser provoked war with GB? The German attack through Belgium was an idea of Alfred von Schlieffen and was approved by the chief of staff, Von Moltke. This was not an idea of the Kaiser. Also: GB didnt care about the neutrality of other countries either, invading Greeve against the explicit wishes of the greek government just a couple of months later.

[@billyosullivan3192]

@@MrYourentertainer Germany was under no obligation to back austria because its war against serbia was one of agression

[@MrYourentertainer]

@@billyosullivan3192 I diasgree strongly that the Austrian attack on Serbia was a war of aggression. It was the response to the murder of the austrian heir to the throne. I don't know how familiar you are with the Sarajevo assassination, but if you are familiar with it, then you know that Gavrilo Princip and his murderer-companions had been trained and equipped by the serbian terrorist organisation "Црна Рука" or "black hand" which again was in close contact with the serbian government. Documents show that Serbian prime Minister Nikola Pašić knew about the assassination plan beforehand. He cared neither to interfere with it, nor did he inform or warn the austrians about it. In other words, the serbian government knew about and tolerated a plan to murder the future of the Austrian State, when the current austrian emperor was 84 years old. Why? Because they knew that Franz Ferdinand was sympathetic to the Slavs in Austria and was planning to give more freedom and autonomy to them by converting the double-monarchy into a federally organized tripple-monarchy. This would argueably have stabilized Austria and thus have prevented the expansionist and annexationist Plans of the serbian government to get a hold of more foreign territory in the north as a consequence of an austrian collapse. So in other words: the serbian government used terrorism and murder to further their plans of trying to make neighbouring countries collapse, all for the sake of their own national expansion. When the austrians sent their ultimatum to investigate the murder, the serbs obviously declined, since they did not want the truth to be uncovered and because they already knew they had Russia on their side to back them up. In such a situation, I do not think that it is a sign of aggressiveness that Austria declared war, but merely a matter of national honour and self-preservation. Other countries have started wars for much lesser reasons.

[@ziroja]

First time hearing about this. Wow, entire war madnes could have been avoided if there was a little more sense for diplomacy.

[@logangustavson]

I would like to make the argument that Kaiser Wilhelm was not as foolish and hawkish as many paint him out to be. The construction of a navy was created in order to expand to new markets and secure its trade. The Germans did not explicitly create their navy to threaten the UK, it was with the UKs over-reaction and subsequent build-up of her navy that Germany began to feel threatened and fueled their arms race. The Germans, rightfully, feared the Royal Navy could be used in an event of a war to blockade Germany and starve her, which the RN did in WW1, making the German build-up justifiable in my book.

[@darth_nihilus_]

The German navy was against England because for securing trade you need only a few cruisers and destroyers not battleships.

[@logangustavson]

@@darth_nihilus_ i would claim it was necessary to reach a semblance of parity between the two powers because from the German POV they were vulnerable to the British Royal Navy. They were, in a sense, absolutely correct in fearing the RN would blockade and starve Germany and her citizens.

[@GerMFnU1848Sax]

Britain and Germany should have fought together. They are brothers

[@cjclark1208]

I would love to know what the British and American intelligence agency’s were up to shortly before WW1

[@LucidFL]

MI6 spent its time mostly spying the on German navy. It was created only 5 years before ww1

[@Cotswolds1913]

Don’t think the Americans had one yet.

[@ChevyChase301]

British were tapping us navy communications

[@johnrohde5510]

The folly was Britain's in not realising it's entente allies would seize on any opportunity for war before Britain could pull its usual stunt of switching sides, having cashed in its share of the deal. The Germans were suckered into the war, as they had suckered in France in 1870. Belgium made no difference to British plans: it was our obligation to provide naval support to France in the channel that was decisive.

[@billyosullivan3192]

This is a mornonic claim because it was the germans who started ww1.

[@darth_nihilus_]

@@billyosullivan3192 Yes and no.

[@AngloJack23]

We should have joined the Central Powers

[@ASAogWana]

greets to all saxons around the world.

[@therearenoshortcuts9868]

why oh why... would Britannia allow a single power to dominate Europe on land?...

[@georgeadamsii7777]

Well, assuming a traditional straight-up winner/loser that was exactly what they could have expected to have after the war from their perspective in 1914. Either Germany or Russia. In that case it would be a pick your poison situation. That both nations "lost" the war was pure serendipity.

[@OldBritannia]

It wouldn’t. The reason Britain was moving towards Germany was that Russia’s resurgence meant St Petersburg looked like the power most likely to challenge Europe’s balance in the future.

[@therearenoshortcuts9868]

​@@OldBritannia if Britainiamerica (aka the Anglo-sphere) continue their policy they should now ally with Russia to counter China... but they won't ... becaues they like dim sum too much or something...

[@gimmethepinkelephant3685]

I think things would have worked out much better had Britain and Germany allied with one another and kept a cordial relationship. Probably never would have had a WW2.

[@johnfisk811]

Not only was Germany Britain’s traditional ally over generations but German immigration, music and food was becoming even more popular amongst the public. Germany was probably more popular amongst the general public than France but the ruling classes were cultural francophiles.

[@rayzas4885]

Germany didn't exist prior to 1871. What you're referring to is Prussia and they were only allies because of Britain's attitude towards Austria

[@johnfisk811]

@@rayzas4885 Germany did exist as a region split into assorted states and was a common description long enough ago for the North Sea to also be named the German Ocean. Much as did Italy and India in the past. In the same way one can refer to Iberia or Scandinavia.

[@rayzas4885]

@@johnfisk811 I'm referring to the political entity of germany not the region or culture. The various princes had different alliances with Saxony being traditionally allied with Russia. Does that mean that Germany and Russia were traditional allies because of a single princely German states attitude towards them?

[@gurnish9741]

@@rayzas4885 must not forget that England and France have not experienced any more war, it is logical that the two get closer there were even wars where French and English fought together against the enemy

[@Englishman-_-Mongolia2022]

Yes.. here in the UK.. we hate the fact we fought the wrong enemy ww1. We have more in common with the Germans

[@micahistory]

Have you seen my last upload?

[@kkupsky6321]

Cousins. Don’t they still hand inbreeds crowns to this day? Monarchists. Just don’t tell me how it ends. Don’t spoil the sequel

[@PossessedPotatoBird]

No matter how you feel about this alliance you have to admit it does make sense If the UK was able to focus completely on their navy and Germany on their army the 2 powers would be unstoppable, it was the naval expenditures that dragged Germany down and while there is no evidence that Britain had trouble fielding a large army I do not doubt their naval power would be much stronger with a smaller one

[@erikbrus8388]

Why Prussia was right at 1:04:00 and had the right institutional evolutionary sequence at 1:10:00 Ps: right economic system at 47:20 also: m.kzbin.info/www/bejne/b6PEnGeEfrx9ma8 Fascism is the second best system thereafter: m.kzbin.info/www/bejne/fnqbhnxoj76Bi6M

[@igullisi]

Anyone else think the narrator sounds a bit like Gary Neville?