Just a random Question,if sb. captured more than one whole Trenchline in ww1,were the Trenches (which served as previous Frontline) abandoned,having the Artillery move closer to the "new" Frontline or were the previous ones still populated with Soldiers?
Dear Jesse, Pls can you create a League of History organisation? For historians everywhere and on YT, to share their productions and help people to find more easily, historical content that they’re particularly interested in and is new for them. Bc it’s difficult to find things and stay focused on specialised subjects. With so many distractions and irrelevant attractions on YT. Many thanks and keep up the great work!
I think the craziest thing about WWI is how all the leaders of all the countries were all related to each other in some way. Most of them were 1st or 2nd cousins. I know Britain, Russia, and Germany were the grandsons of Queen Victoria. And some of her granddaughters married other royal families in Greece, Denmark, Romania, Sweden, and Spain. So basically, all they needed was a family dinner to squash this business before it went down the way it did. (I know there's more to it, but still!) They couldn't pick up a telegraph and talk it out? lol
Before voting system countries and vast lands were owned by families and were called as kings or chancellors or whatever and every one came under worked for them killed got killed and they drew borders on papers in their homes and when they knew they are not going to win met at dinner tables and called truce😂 . That why they never killed kings if they got caught instead they took ransom. And he would go to his home and begin preparing for another game. Earlier population was not that much u can counqours state with just 30 Or 40 k troops
"Well... Possibly. But the REAL reason for the whole thing was that it was just too much effort NOT to have a war. You see, Baldrick, in order to prevent war in Europe two super blocks developed: us, the French and the Russians on one side and the Germans and Austria-Hungary on the other. The idea was to have two vast opposing armies, each acting as the other's deterrent. That way there could never be a war." "But, this is a sort of a war, isn't it Sir?" "Yes, that's right, you see, there was a tiny flaw in the plan." "What was that, Sir?" "It was bollocks." "So the poor old ostrich died for nothing..."
I mean…. Why spend so much time and material building an army when you can just defeat your enemy really quickly and have more stuff? And think about the glory! Honour is as important as peace!¡! We would look cowardly backing out without them doing it
This is one of the finest programs on WW I that I have seen. The writing is lucid and succint, and the presentation itself is quite professional. Viewing this program has led me to greater study of the conflict and new appreciation of its complexity.
I think he is a bit biased to make allied side look better than they were... and try to make Germanic people to seem to want war over all else.. This bascially destroyed my homeland so if you are not a Germanic person you will see yourself as the victim while doing devious things to Germans will be okay with you.
I personally believe that a lot of it had to do with the mindset of military leaders at the time, all of whom subscribed to the "Cult of the Offensive." Basically, if you're on defense in war, you've already lost. As we found out in WW1, that was a ridiculous notion as modern warfare had made it so being on defense was often where you wanted to be, but at the time it was taken as gospel. Always be on the offensive. Austria-Hungary moving on Serbia was just the first chess piece, but everyone immediately started moving to make sure they wouldn't get caught on defense, and then that turned into a snake eating its own tail. Why is Russia mobilizing? Because Austria is mobilizing. Why is Germany mobilizing? Because Russia is mobilizing. Why is France mobilizing? Because Germany is mobilizing. Etc. "If there's going to be war, then we'd better win it, and if we're going to win it, we need to attack." - every general in 1914
This idea is less dumb than presented. If you can catch your enemy with their pants down, the war is going to be swift and brutal. WWI was an age of mass mobilization when far larger armies could be mustered and supplied than previous eras, so the size of a wartime army is going to be 100x larger than a peacetime army. And an offensive will certainly work fine with that kind of troop disparity! If you wait around, it could well be too late. Also, a successful offensive offers the chance of knocking your foe out of the war altogether - look at the Franco-Prussian War, over in 6 months after the French lost one battle. It may be worth gambling on that kind of outcome (which DID happen - if not in France, in places like the Balkans, or the idea behind Gallipoli if it hadn't been executed absurdly poorly.).
That might also be the reason why there's been so much opposition to missile defense systems. I think the logic I heard once is that missile defense systems work better if you're already expecting a nuclear strike, and thus works better if your nuclear strike was first and your fighting a retaliation, thus encouraging pre-emptive strikes. I don't entirely buy that, because it doesn't make sense if you're ALWAYS ready to intercept nuclear strikes. What does make sense to me is that is that it allows people to think they'd survive a nuclear war, reducing the MAD discouragement of wars between nuclear powers, but I don't see how that particularly encourages pre-emptive strikes, unless the preparation for those pre-emptive strikes involves evacuating your cities and spreading out your population, infrastructure, and military, which doesn't exactly lend you the element of surprise.
my grandfather was a sapper in the Portuguese army, and he fought against the germans in WWI on the border between Mozambique and what was then Tanganyika (Deutsch-Ostafrika). Even though this conflict was a minor blip in comparison, it would be interesting if you could do a show on the various skirmishes that took place throughout the African continent and why they took place.
@@mrsupremegascon :: In the 2014-2018 episodes of this Great War TH-cam channel, there were a few that treated the war in Africa. It was a terrible merciless use of the native populations as cannon fodder and tactical attrition.
@@deontewynn4325 That was one of the reason, but not the major one. WW1 was the failing of diplomacy, no sides wanted war but none could afford to back down either. Germany also wanted to cut down Russian power until it became too large.
So if you're lonely, you know I'm here waiting for you I'm just a cross-hair, I'm just a shot away from you And if you leave here, you leave me broken, shattered I lie I'm just a cross-hair, I'm just a shot, then we can die Oh, oh, oh I know I won't be leaving here with you
2:20 - Empires Threatened by Germany 3:08 - Triple Entente and the Morocco Resolve 4:35 - German Ambition or British-France Resistance to sharing? 4:57 - The Serbian Context 5:30 - Serb Nationalist and Arch Duke Ferdinand's (heir to Austro Hungary) Assassination 9:42 and 10:52 - Triple Entente vs Triple Alliance perspectives 11:50 - The July Crisis; Ultimatums and Mobilizationj 13:38 - The Austrian Ultimatum to Serbia 15:30 - Partial Mobilization, and Austria's Declaration of War to Serbia 16:50 - Russian full mobilization. German Involvement (Kaiser WIlhelm II) 19:05 - The Schlieffen Plan and State of Threatening Danger of War 21:00 - French General calls to Stop Passivity 21:40 - Germany Calls War with Russia 22:00 - Brits Neutral if Germany doesn't attack France; Kaiser Wilhelm II can't stop the Schlieffen Plan 23:00 - Belgium, the Final Red Line ---- Interpretting the War ---- 25:19 - 1960s Fritz Fischer (German Historian) 'Germans preplanned war' 25:50 - Sean McMeekin (Russia made Balkan Conflict international) and Nial Ferguson (Britians Naivety) 25:57 - Christopher Clark's 'Sleepwalker Theory' (unintended, perceived insecurities, miscalcs, etc) 26:20 - Was it Inevitable? Alliance System did not force anyone to fight. 26:50 - James Joll's cultural, infrastructure and military zeitgeist theory 27:35 - "War is politics by other means" challenged. Belgium-German test case
Lets take a moment to appreciate the narrator's attention to detail when pronunciating any name no matter where it came from, albeit being Austrian, German, French, Russian, etc. Solid video 👍
@@mouthpiece200 He does have language skills, I think he speaks German, French and Russian, but it is appreciated nonetheless, when you speak in English you naturally want to pronounce those names in English.
Solid, yet incomplete, with zero mention of the City of London, House's of Rothschild and Morgan, not to mention the newly minted Federal Reserve and the many industrialists for whom war mean pure profit. Always follow the money.
If you're ever in Vienna, Austria be sure to visit the Bundesheer museum - you can view the shirt and jacket Franz Ferdinand was wearing when he was killed, complete with bullet hole and dried blood. Pretty fascinating and eerie to see the physical damage which caused his death and led to 75-100 million killed in wars over the next 30 years or so
If you ever come to Sarajevo, visit the museum of the hero Gavrilo Princip, who killed the occupier of his country. Germanic kleptomania occupied territories that did not belong to it leading to the death of 75 to 100 million lives in Europe
@@WatchOutPoison I understand that, but it bothers me when Germanoids try to wash away their genocidal history by blaming the victim. They occupied Bosnia and prepared for the First World War for 2 years in order to do to the Eastern Europeans what the English did around the world and now Gavrilo Princip is to blame for everything.
I was just last week in Sarajevo and saw the spot the archduke was killed and visited the museum on the corner. Was really fascinating to be finally here.
This was well done. The entire time I was watching All Quiet on the Western Front, I kept wondering what the preexisting tensions to the war were and this answered my question in detail.
Unfortunately it still isn't detailed enough and gives a bit the expression that Germany/Austria-Hungary are the bad guys while this is most definitely not the case.
Germany is made to be the bad guys because they could have stopped it. They provoked everyone just to show how big their balls were. The problem is they didn't actually have any stamina. If ww1 was a boxing match, Germany definitely had power and was quick. They just didn't have time to keep going. They almost single handedly beat everyone. They just kept pissing off everyone. Had America not joined, I'm sure Germany would have won. 3 revolutions happened, and almost a fourth in England. Had Germany kept up with the navy and made it to England, Europe would be very different.
It's been a few weeks since I've basically put off Netflix and took a deep-dive into World War I. You guys make a fantastic, I mean absolutely *fantastic* job at creating educational and informative material that is entertaining and enthralling to watch. I really dig that you don't go straight to the main events and take some time to research and show things like the communications of several players-big and small- in the months leading to the war. I will be visiting Europe for the first time next June and, after watching so many of these videos, I've decided I will probably spend most of my time in France, visiting WWI battlefields such as Verdun, Fleury or the trenches. Cheers from Argentina!
This is the second time this channel looks at the start of the Great War, this time with Jesse instead of Indy, and I love both equally. Keep being awesome and keep this awesome content coming. Gunfingers to the entire team!
As a lifelong student of history (70 yrs old), I love your content. I'm an American who lived in Slovenia in the late 90s for a few years (worked with an orthopedic surgeon there). While I was there, I read up on the history and traveled as much as possible (restrictions due to the War in Kosovo, etc). Crossing borders was interesting because gun running was a problem. But I collected a few items while there. One is an Austrian saber with the work, "Service in Bosnia - 1878" inscribed on its backstrap (German). The 19th-century Serb wars of independence from Ottoman control had been suppressed by the Hapsburgs who colluded with the Turks who promised to not interfere as Austria conducted a bloody campaign of repression against the Serbs in Bosnia. Gavrillo Princip was a member of a secret society"The Black Hand" which was dedicated to revenge against the Hapsburgs. Aside from the formal history of the Hapsburg Empire, I've read "Balkan Ghosts," Kaplan, and Rebecca West's 1940 tome, "Black Lamb, Grey Falcon - A Journey Through Yugoslavia." I recommend those last two for a deep dive into Balkan cultural history. I have Clark's book, as well as several others on the war. The great thing about reading multiple histories on the same subject is that they always add more dimension with confirmations and exposure of bias and inaccuracy if they exist.
I sympathize with both the Kaiser and Tsar, but their political incompetence played a big role in allowing the situation to escalate to the point of mobilization. In the end, they both lost their empires. Thank you for going into detail of such a complicated subject. I learned things that I didn’t know!
Wilhelm II and Nicholas II? Neither deserves any sympathy at all. Both were vile, dictatorial militarists and imperialists. The fact that both were replaced by worse later on shows the folly of their actions. Wilhelm II deserves particular damning because he shipped Lenin back to Russia.
@@davidpnewton the complete opposite actually lol do you just believe propaganda? Wilhelm tried to cool the war multiple times but the entente just wanted death You can literally see this at the Christmas truce
Thank you for such an excellent presentation. The narrator too was excellent. It was the first time I have heard a North American narrator pronounce a non-English word accurately. German, Hungarian, French and Russian names and places were all enunciated clearly and correctly. I was stunned.
Sparks landing on bare dirt don't ignite a conflagration. A pile of dry tinder without spark likewise will not spontaneously erupt into a firestorm. People willing and able to quickly pour a bit of water onto a spark that lands in tinder will stop the fire in its infancy, before it spinning out of control. Sadly, Europe in the late 19th and early 20th centuries seemed determined to heap up the tinder and hand out matches to all the Generals to add to the sparks of Sarajevo. Another fine episode Jessie.
Another brilliant episode Jesse, Many thanks! You should reconsider the Ninnie option - making heaps of money while being protected by the japanese armed forces sounds a lot better than present conditions for history channels on TH-cam.
It looks like "the Sleepwalkers" was a major source in your research. Great book. Even humorous at times. I highly recommend it to anyone interested in WWI.
It makes sense since its the most thorough analysis we have to date. My modern history professor reconmended it to me so I picked it up, no regerets. I think we can easily say the poor ostrich died for nothing.
Try Albertini's 'The Origins of the War of 1914 Vols I - III' as a far better overview, it details stuff Clarke left out deliberately to create a false impression allowing for relative German innocence.
Hours of in-depth research, illustrated by solid but not flashy and distracting graphics, plenty of references to primary sources, not shying away from historiography. After watching you, it's hard to go back to most other history TH-cam channels, who often rely on one source, present an interpretation as fact, and haven't learned that ascribing causes to effects can only ever be a theory. You managed to avoid all of that while remaining accessible. To that end, I wonder if I might convince you that a video explaining the aggressive moves and troubling strategic problems each Power had with the others would be a worthwhile supplement, if only to illustrate the complexity of the situation. e.g. the Slap of Tunis, and the Great Game/the Eastern Question don't fit neatly into the standard narratives of blame and inevitability. You could even restrict it to global/colonial issues if that would help squeeze it all into one video.
Slap of Tunis and Great game (Russia and Britain, right?) Are things of 19 century. Slap of Tunis stopped be a problem after Italo-french neutrality pact of 1902, and especially after invasion of Libya. Great Game stopped to be a thing with Britain and France signing the Entente cordiale in 1904, recognizing Germany as greater threat. That's the Central Powers problem, igniting the war they still acted like it's 19th century...
I don't normally respond to these because I don't care to get into online debates, especially when none of the participants are experts, but I have to disagree. I don't think the Central Powers have a special responsibility or a more bellicose mentality. I think the problem arises from treating each Power's policy as something uniform. There was a constant negotiation within these powers as well. Britain was looking to expand in the Middle East, where Russia was the predominant threat-and to a lesser extent France. Colonial office men who made their careers in NE Africa, like Kitchener, and India were incensed that Britain was allying with Russia. They had big dreams of partitioning the Ottoman Empire and taking more of Central Asia off Russia. David Fromkin's book on this is excellent. Italy seriously shook up the international order with their invasion of Libya and the Dodecanese, which itself precipitated the Balkan Wars. Italy was in the Central Powers' camp at the beginning of the war. Movements within Italy hated this because they saw Austria-Hungary as the real enemy. Yet many cleft to A-H and Germany because they saw more opportunity in Africa, if only they could break French hegemony of North Africa and British influence in the Ottoman Empire. My point isn't to blame Britain or Italy for WW1. Rather, it's that there were belligerent parties in all the Powers who did continue the 19th century mentality. Indeed, even the more defensive minded politicians hadn't much broken with 19th century-WW1 itself was the break. You also can't easily group them into bellicose (or 19th century) and defensive (or modern) attitudes.
@Isaac: WW1 was entirely and unequivocally all Great Britain’s fault. For not invading and conquering Germany and much of mainland Europe beforehand. Only a smaller preemptive war, could’ve prevented WW1. As it was inevitable, with 90% of the globe’s power, concentrated in the small corner Europe.
actually history we know today has been altered. seriously, why you think German-hungary really want to fight against allied? and looks who started the war but why historian saying both side are bad guys when the allied are the one started the war? did you ever read about first Zionist congress? Russia spy manage to wrote down what Zionist planning. and why it's impact WW1? and how Britain asking US help but US won't do until Zionist in US manage to give supposed through US army. in every we event, it's always about Zionist involvement
honestly, watching this makes me think that the emperors and kings of europe lost control as soon as mobilisation started. which is incredibly sad considering the fact that the Russian, German, and British kings were family and should have stuck together as family should. it would have been an incredibly short war if those 3 kings and their empires were on the same side.
They couldn't be "on the same side". Did you forget Austria-Hungary attacked Serbia, which is Russian ally ?! If England, Germany and Russia were "on the same side" there would not have been any war.
This was actually a great breakdown. My history teacher actually will very much love this front to back explanation. A little bit of a sidebar would have been helpful if you ask me to kind of explain their training thoughts but I understand the straight explanation of what happened.
It would seem unfathomable that a handful of people could result in millions of deaths. Deaths of folks who by no means had any idea what they were fighting for or why. And yet after seeing this happen not once but twice the world still hasn't learned anything and still only a handful of people could result in millions of deaths all over again.
That's because most ordinary people don't care.... and when they do start to care it's already too late. They mostly care about some small domestic affairs... they "start to care" about what's happening in the world, when the bombs literally start to fall on their heads. Even now, with nuclear weapons "ready to fall" on our heads, we are still the same, we didn't learn our lesson... the problem is, we might not learn, because we might not have a 3rd chance. Some people today even "contemplate" a nuclear world war can be won. (which is complete madness) It seems our brains can't comprehend how powerful are actually nuclear weapons and we fall back to "standard terms". Some say there were "thousands of nuclear tests".... which is true but they were mostly small fission bombs... and the largest part was underground or underwater, thermonuclear tests were far fewer.... and at least one of them was more powerful than "expected". Now let's imagine a 1000 thermonuclear warheads going off at one time.......... over cities and not in the desert or underground....
citizen won't care because they were pleased with unlimited entertainment. you give them entertainmen and the people with power will use their power. "Men with power obey neither policy nor principle. No one is different; no one is neutral."
Excellent analysis! The most in-depth one yet, and I have been a fan of the channel since its very inception. Thank you for this. It was incredibly relevant for current affairs as well.
That was well done. Who was responsible for the war? Everyone. There had been rumors of war in Europe and close calls for more than a decade. It's like most everyone on all sides were either itching for a fight or resigned to its inevitability. Every side had a plan and once the plans were put into motion nobody knew how to stop them. Perhaps if the lines of communication had been more advanced something might have been done reduce tensions but I think it would have only delayed the war. The tragedy of the trenches was that the European officers who had observed the U.S. Civil War didn't learn the proper lesson, that technology was moving faster than tactics. The carnage of the frontal assaults on fortified positions in that war would be repeated in France but on a much larger scale. Countries always prepare for the previous war, that is the real tragedy and that hasn't changed, not even in a world where asymmetrical warfare has become the norm.
The British Colonial Army was prepared for modern war, learned fighting the Boers (who were the ones that first developed the tactics), but it was an Army of just 300,000 men. It positioned in South West Belgium for two months and caused terrible losses to the Germans (maybe half million casualties), but was severely outnumbered and was peeled down to the off, to annihilation.
It’s a tragedy that war happened in the first place, but anything could have sparked it. The reason we look down upon the First World War isn’t because we care about the Balkans but because of the sheer scale and waste of life. That easily could have happened by any other inciting incident. I think it was inevitable for the there to be a giant war near the early 20th century. Before WW1 they treated war like an art, but ever since the industrial revolution and advancement in technologies War became an industry, a “machine” as many people called it.
@@godlovesyou1995 50% Germany, 50% Austria-Hungary. The German Empire and Austria-Hungary attempted to expand their power eastward; Germany by gaining influence in the declining Ottoman Empire (the Eastern Question) and Austria-Hungary through the acquisition of territory in the Balkans (such as Bosnia and Herzegovina).
All the “What If” scenarios a hundred years later. Would the world be better if the war never happened or stopped at the Christmas Truce? If the Flu came any time in 1914? Pandora’s Box was opened and we are still being surprised. Absolutely a great show. I hope that the present generation will watch it and learn that in war there are no victors, just victims. The only thing war decides is who is left.
Yes, without the war world would be much different. Empires would maintain colonies, Ottoman Empire would slowly fall apart...Great powers would put fingers even deeper into China.
WW1 was entirely and unequivocally all Great Britain’s fault. For not invading and conquering Germany and much of mainland Europe beforehand. Only a smaller preemptive war, could’ve prevented WW1. As it was inevitable, with 90% of the globe’s power, concentrated in the small corner Europe.
The world would be immensely better for at least the next ~35 years if Wilhelm I did not start the war against Russia. Assuming another would not start the war in the meantime. Millions people alive and improving civilian technologies, no wide spread of Marxism, the worst scourge of the 20th and 21st century, no fascism and national-socialism. Japan would still attack China probably.
@@PaulVerhoeven2 you are right. The Great War led to the rise of Communism in Russia, Fascism in Italy and National Socialism in Germany. Probably no Great Depression in 1929. Everyone overlooks Japan as a cause for a new war. It would probably have been over China.
In my history class in the US we were taught that there were 5 main reasons for WW1: Alliances, Imperialism, Militarism, Nationalism, and Assassination. However even in my High School World History class they didn’t teach about the specific events that led to WW1. They didn’t teach about the collapse of the Holy Roman Empire or the German and Italian wars of Unification. I didn’t learn about the Russo-Turkish War (1877-1878) or the Balkan Wars which happened right before WW1. I’m not sure if they even told us why the Archduke was assassinated. At the end of the war school focused mainly on Wilson’s 14 Points, the League of Nations, and the Treaty of Versailles. We didn’t learn about the German Civil War, Greco-Turkish War, or the Polish Soviet War. The only conflict after the war we learned about was the Russian Revolution. I didn’t realize how violent the aftermath of the war was. I guess they didn’t want to focus too much on things that weren’t relevant to the US.
Very well made and easy to understand for those of us who are not historians. High production value and neat animations and quotations. One thing I have heard about the beginning of the first world war beginning that bears mentioning is that from what I know there was hardly any active campaigns for peace in any of the countries. By and large, the general populations, perhaps drunk on propaganda, was not against the war. Therefore it became difficult to argue for restraint on a political level, and it further emboldened those who sought to resolve the issue through force of arms.
From what I’ve learned the lack of protest from the citizenry is because they had no concept of the new weapons and weapon systems and the immense slaughter that could now be inflicted by a relatively small number of the enemy. This is manifest in the great lengths England went to so as not to engage in warfare fought with now even more modernized killing machines!
I found Keegan's phrasing on the respective military commands' culture interesting. He notes the difference between a Clausewitzian or Cold War-era "national security strategy" (where military plans are made in consultation between civilian and military authorities, so that military plans are made to suit political ends) and the immediately-pre-WWI system where generals made plans in complete isolation from politicians and often entirely without their knowledge. Kaiser Wilhelm's experience of being surprised when his generals told him there was only one plan - for simultaneous war with France and Russia including a diplomatically-risky violation of Belgian neutrality - was repeated in other capitals across the Continent.
Superb episode team⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️. Yes it was a very complex and long coming crisis. But when I hear Conrad demanding War!War!War, I am ready to let him take all the blame🧐. And of course when he got his war, he covered himself in glory didn’t he?
Someone had commented on one of the other videos on this channel that if you look at the map from that time, the land around that area was prime, and they were actually fighting for that land and Ferdinand's assassination was just an excuse. I thought it made a lot of sense and was quite compelling.
"The bully rises" That was the voice of Pride in that Germany was not going to sit idly by and watch The downfall of The Ottoman without itself being established in The League of Empires. Those were the ninnies. Not one empire was better than the other. Germany proved worse and Russia had so much internal tyranny, who cared, it least they were not crusading the rest of Europe with it. In less than a month of lasting weather (another 2 1/2 weeks longer) and Russia would not "be" after The Second War. The Assassination of The Archduke and his Wife were the excuse for the rise. Months earlier that was not planned but as it happened certainly welcomed for the world stage in the limited time to get it done as it occurred. The rise of the ninnies is no better than the Queen, The King, The Tsar. This was "exemplified conglomeration" to join those ranks rather than be "just another country." The Kaiser of ninnies.
Gavrilo Princip and his organization did not act in the interest of Serbia, but wanted the unification of all Slavic peoples in the Balkans... it can be said that he is a Yugoslav nationalist
Yes, and "Yugoslavia" was an alias for "Great Serbia". Serbians believe that all Croats, Bosniaks, Montenegrins etc are just Serbs with speach impediment.
@@yespeace2000 It's not an alias for Great Serbia, at least the original idea wasn't. That came later, with the Kađađorđević dynasty imposing themselves as the rulers of the Kingdom of the Serbs, Croats and Slovenes. And no, most of Serbs do not think that.
Thank you guys for all of your massive amount of work on this channel. You've helped me learn so much about WW1 and helped bring to life, the lives and memories of those involved.
The First World War was a complex conflict that resulted from a web of alliances, imperialism, militarism, and nationalism. The assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand was the immediate trigger, but the underlying tensions had been brewing for years. It’s fascinating to see how such a massive war started from a relatively small event but escalated due to the fragile balance of power in Europe at the time
@@TheGreatWar Just a random Question,if sb. captured more than one whole Trenchline in ww1,were the Trenches (which served as previous Frontline) abandoned,having the Artillery move closer to the "new" Frontline or were the previous ones still populated with Soldiers?
I feel this quote says it all "The lamps are going out all over Europe, we shall not see them lit again in our life-time", British Foreign Secretary Sir Edward Grey I feel this Quote applies for all the 20th century and see the 20th as the second 100 years war
It helps to recall that the USA quickly became "the workshop of the world at a fair price", post civil war thanks to American enterprise, inventiveness, and open access to British and German lenders. It did not take Germany's ruling class and military establishment long to realize that Russia had the potential to begin taking the same path and Germany would then wind up as a second rate power...
I don’t think it would have happened for 1 simple reason. Russia wasn’t an industrialised nation. I’m not saying it didn’t have industry. But it was more of an agricultural nation. I could see it being the dinner plate of Europe while America was its commercial source.
Bismarck said it best: "Europe today is a powder-keg and all leaders are walking around with lit cigars. I dont know what will set it off but itll be some dammed foolish thing in the Balkans"
Every time I look at the beginnings of the Great War, it makes me overwhelmingly sad. The Old World, which was at the height of culture and civilisation, died as a result. In its wake came untold suffering, evil, disorientation and ugliness.
Both the Habsburg Austrians, and the Imperial Prussians, had visions of expansion. The French were beside themselves with grief at the new united German Reich, and were itching for revenge. The World War could have started near the end of the 19th Century. It is a sheer miracle, that it took until 1914!
At the end of the 19th century there would still be the trenches and barbed wire of the American Civil War and the Maxim Gun of the 1890s so the form (and scale) of slaughter would probably have been similar.
Generations of Frenchmen had been taught geography using a map of France with Alsace and Lorraine coloured black. To reconquer these territories was considered a national duty.
@@BananaRama1312 and yet Germany declared war on France in 1914 and brutally attacked France. while Germany was in possession of Alsace Lorraine in 1914... blame France for WW1 in these conditions is truly stupid. but hey... also let's remember one can easily build a case for Alsace Lorraine being a French territory as it was French from the 17th century up to today (with just 40 years being German), before that it was Frank up to Charlemagne reign, and even berfore that it was Gaulish for thousands of years, the gauls being constantly at war against the German tribes from across the Rhine, according to Ceasar. the best case for Alsace - Lorraine being French is that Alsacians and Lorrainers consider themselves French and not German, although they clearly share a cultural heritage that is German. oh well, always funny to take the german side and blame the french even when the responsability is clearly German...
Have you thought about making a video about the fashoda incident? It would be perfect in his World War Zero series, its consequences were a great turning point in Anglo-French relations by indirectly creating the entente cordiale years later, apart from marking an enduring mark on history, another result and the First World War and her legacy would have been REALLY different from how we know her.
I'm always frustrated when people just say "the assassination of Ferdinand" as the start of the War. No, that was lighting the fuse but the start had been building up for many years before the Archduke (and his wife) were murdered. This video covers a piece of that by mentioning the rising German empire and the existing alliance between France and Russia. But, another crucial piece to this is the annexation of Bosnia by Austria-Hungary and the perception of mistreatment of the Bosnian Serbs. And this all after the Treaty of Berlin which ruffled quite a few feathers in and around the Balkan region. There was already partial mobilization to go to war years before the Archduke met his fate, his death simply gave the "go" for everyone to mobilize. And even back then they thought it would be a short-lived, low casualty war. They were very wrong about that.
Would be interesting to analyze the motives of french politicians, like Poincarré, Delcassé, Paléologue, in preparing the ground since 1892 in alliance with Russia.
Overall it is simple, there were 20 million more Germans than French as Poincare noted. France could not face Germany alone if a new war began, and the best answer was an alliance with the nation Germany had just kicked out of its own alliance system, leaving two nations unable to face Germany alone, but able to do so together.
In my opinion its very important to not only focus onto countries/empires but also the interests of very influential, powerful rich families and banks. Especially in England. There are many documents from 1870 onwards that show the bellicosity of those players.
So, the Archduke (already quite an unpopular figure in the Imperial hierarchy) was sent to visit Sarajevo (the capital of the Austrian colony of Bosnia with a relative Serb majority and the infamous object of anti-colonialist sentiment in the Balkans) on Vidovdan (the biggest Serbian holiday whose main (!) gist is martyrdom against foreign invading armies) and was given scarce security while inspecting the partially - mobilized Austro-Hungarian army on the border with Serbia (doing the invasion excercises). Geez, I wonder how that could've end up badly...
Massive irony - Franz Ferdinand was the one sane person in the austrian royal circle who was against the war and advocate for federal type of government and increased authonomy. And the main oponent of the appaling Franz Conrad von Hötzendorf, Chief of Staff which lead to multiple disastrous decisions over the war.
@@alexmercer8042 One of the reasons for the assassination was precisely the attitude of Franz Ferdinand towards giving the Slavs the same status as the Austrians and Hungarians. The creation of a South Slavic part of the monarchy would make Serbia's aspirations more difficult. Fairy tales about the national composition of Bosnia were part of the Serbian propaganda machine, there were Serbs, but not close to their claims.
@@alexmercer8042 well Serbia is being a scapegoat for everything in the region for last 30 years but isnt it time to move to somene diferent by now ... say Russia...it is popular again... beacause we now that the western countries are never wrong in anything... all those colonies in Africa and everywhere around the world is again Serbia aspirations right, cos everyone else in the world are just humanitarians, like bulgaria was always, especialy when going to war on Hitlers side
This is the clearest account of the start of WW I that I have ever seen/read. Excellent work. Considering how many people were killed in that war and considering how WW II was more or less a continuation of WWI, it is absolutely unbelievable how trivial the spark was.
it's all started when Russian tsar released in newspaper what their spy wrote in 1905. you should check that out and you will know who control world bank, federal bank in US and why Hitler want to rid of them
There is small error. On 21:40 its mentioned that Moscow told Berlin to stop its mobilization, but Moscow was not the capital of the Russian Empire. It was Saint Petersburg
Outstanding & even-handed analysis, thank y'all! I'm in the camp of them ALL being at fault to varying degrees...this stupid & tragic war gives us terrible shockwaves to this day. May mankind one day wise up
Actually there is two cases of guilt, the ones who instigated the war, it would be Germany, Austria-Hungary, Serbia... and the ones who escalated the war to be a massive catastrophe, it would be Great Britain and Germany. Starting dubious neutrality of GB was like a green light for Germany. And them both were attracting new countries to join the war.
WW1 was entirely and unequivocally all Great Britain’s fault. For not invading and conquering Germany and much of mainland Europe beforehand. Only a smaller preemptive war, could’ve prevented WW1. As it was inevitable, with 90% of the globe’s power, concentrated in the small corner Europe.
Starting the was against Serbia was purely the Austrian emperor Franz Joseph I's decision, starting the war against Entente (Russia being a part of it) was purely the Kaiser Wilhelm II's decision. The empires were not democracies. They might have been lied to or prodded by their circles, but the actual decision belongs solely to them.
Solid video, as always, though one important factor to mention was Austrian insecurity: by 1914, Austria-Hungary was decidedly a second-rate power, and knew it. They were facing internal problems with other nationalisms within the Empire, Czech nationalism in particular. This created a push to crush the Serbs, to 1) show that Austria-Hungary was still powerful and relevant, and 2) to send a message to other ethnic minorities in the Empire.
If Kaiser Wilhelm and Czar Nicolas could have seen a crystal ball of four years of war would do to their empires and themselves personally, they would have moved mountains to see that this war never happened. Even the winners Britain and France had to sacrifice so much to win this war and in some ways have still not recovered to this day.
I always wondered what would’ve happened with the world if they chilled the f down. If the others wouldn’t anyway, if socialism and communism would even grow as it did, what would be of our style of clothing, if it would have remained traditional or would ‘modernize’ eventually, same with the technology (though that probably wouldn’t have progressed the way it did without the two world wars)
Www1 was the beginning of Europes decline and partly self-destruction. The participants were unable or unwilling to end the war latest after Verdun or the Somme carnage. Additionally: Only Great Britain and France stood behind the Versailles Treaty. To avoid a German-Sovjet coalition they had to accept and partly to support the rise of Germany from 1925 (Locarno Treaty) to 1938 (Munich Agreement over Sudeten/Czechoslovakia).
I believe that there was also a lot of debate about who was getting, what they thought, was their fair share of Africa. All of the countries mentioned, before they went to war with each other, all teamed up to invade Africa. They then split it among themselves, leaving some with more natural resources than others. Which also helped those nation gain the capital to build their militaries. They were itching to use their newly formed power (military).
This is exactly what happened but we can’t teach our younger generation that. We need them to think that our Ancestors were great. Since we are the winners we get to rewrite history exactly how we want it!
it was a combination of many things. the official detonating factor was the assassination of franz ferdinand, but it might have been avoided at many other steps of the escalation of aggression that followed. extra history has a very compelling series of videos about it. back when extra history was worth watching.
My great-grandfather was a Polish man who fought for the German Empire in northern France. He was probably seriously wounded in 1915. And was stationed in the Balkans afterwards. The whole family was glad that he was wounded before the gas war started. At the time, the civilian population was already shocked by this. I have field postcards and letters from him.
I don't remember who wrote it exactly, but I remember reading a Historian that believed that the cause of WW1 started when the Ottomans started to loose grip on the Balkans, causing European powers to rush to take a piece of the power vaccuum left behind creating attrition amongst them... And ofc there's loads of other events that lead to the War
Yup[ A-H litteraly partnered with Ottom,ans and then later on during Balkan Wars wanted to USE opportunity to get something out of it.Thats why A-H EASLY WITHOUT much protets form World Powers SNATCHED/ANNEXED Bosnia in basical;y quick swoop where it used Ottomans decline and rising extremely depleated and battered newly liberated nation who neigher had power to do anything even if it wanted.
Poor Nicky was thrust into this position without properly being groomed, as his father, Czar Alexander III (The Peacemaker) died at the extremely young age of 49, and the young and inexperienced Nicholas II took over at the age of only 46. To say the whole thing from start to finish was a horrible disaster, would be a huge and insulting understatement.
same could be said about Wilhelm II his father didn't have time to prepare him and then Willy fired Bismark who of course didn't want a war and replaced him with a very inferior man
Seriously? One of the most to the point videos I've ever seen. That's probably one of the greatest questions in modern history : when you think of it, there is no simple explanation as to what caused WWI ; the murder of a crown-prince and a game of alliances aren't a reason for a whole continent to wage a mutually destructive war against each other leading to a collapse in civilisation. The answers can only be conjectural. There is no simple explanation. They're rooted in time depth and ideology.
They wouldn't create militarization productions for free of business models...it would be produced for the generating profits ..this would be correct observation..what that would open for narrative that would help develop criterion for understanding...
Not really. In the first attempt, Princip failed in the assassination. Officials wanted the Archduke to stop the tour and head to a safer route to his destinatin. But Franz Ferdinand thought himself a Gigachad and ordered to take another round to drive past his subjects. That time, Princip could not believe his luck and tried again, and succeded.
@@swashbukk Actually, the first attempt was done by Nedeljko Cabrinovic who threw a bomb. And the driver was the very one who saved Ferdinand with a quick reaction on the flying object, he just immediately step on the throttle. I am not sure if Ferdinand himself urged for another round, his intention was to see the members of his staff wounded by the bomb. The other members of the staff suggested this might be dangerous, but Oskar Potiorek, Governor of the Austro-Hungarian province of Bosnia and Herzegovina, felt that his authority in Bosnia will be compromised: "Do you think Sarajevo is full of assassins?" Still, Potiorek suggested a new shorter route, but his subordinates in a first car didn't do well and made wrong turn followed by Ferdinand's car. The mistake was acknowledged and they stalled. Princip happened to be right there... So, if there had been anyone to be blamed in personally that would be Oskar Potiorek. Moreover, there is a theory that Potiorek maybe wasn't just vain and incompetent but also a tool for a plot. The theory is a very well documented, not just in a part that German military plans for war were made more prior to the assassination, but even in the search for a cause of war. The choice of Ferdinand to be a scapegoat is still in area of speculations. These speculations are based on 2 facts: 1) He wasn't popular in Habsburg family due to his marriage with Sophie Chotek who was of non-royal origin, 2) The visit to Sarajevo was scheduled for 28th of June, the biggest and the most important date for all Serbs wherever the live. And they were the majority of population in Bosnia, 43.5% in 1910. Bosnia was occupied by Austro-Hungarians back in 1878, but in 1908. the annexation was declared. So, in a some way, we may consider Potiorek as a brutal liar: there were a lot of angry men in Sarajevo and Bosnia on that day and he was certainly aware of them...
Would be great to see a series about the 19th century sometime maybe, or one telling how each European country became a nation over time. There's a lot less coverage of this around.
The driver had no idea where he was and was lost. The would be assassin was sitting in a cafe upset that he lost his chance and then the car stopped directly in front of him.
As Bismarck notes in his Books: "The european war will be caused by some foolishness in the Balkans." He and William I. would turn in their graves if they knew what would become of the Germany they created... tragedy
Stop trying to paint Bismarck as some sort of pacifist visionary. He was all for the annexion of Alsace-Moselle when it happened, and thus sowed one of the core reasons for WW1 to happen as it did
Great video. I recently read another recent book on this topic by a different Australian author, Paul Ham, whose book "1914" very much came from the Fischer school of analysis. He didn't agree with Clark's "Sleepwalkers" theory - to him it was obvious that from the moment the Germans issued the blank cheque, they ceased any action to de-escalate the possibility of a continental war. Right from the beginning the Germans and Austro-Hungarians knew their actions risked a war with Russia, and did nothing to de-escalate that possibility.
WW1 was entirely and unequivocally all Great Britain’s fault. For not invading and conquering Germany and much of mainland Europe beforehand. Only a smaller preemptive war, could’ve prevented WW1. As it was inevitable, with 90% of the globe’s power, concentrated in the small corner Europe.
"Right from the beginning the Germans and Austro-Hungarians knew their actions risked a war with Russia, and did nothing to de-escalate that possibility." That is to say it mildly. In fact, Germans used the Austrian-Serbian war as a pretext to attack Russia (and thus Entente) directly. If not for the decision of Wilhelm II, there would be no WW1 until at least his death (and then responsibility lied with his successors). No widespread of the most destructive ideology ever, Marxism, and its offshoots like national socialism and other forms of socialism/fascism.
History is written by the winners. For the outbreak of the war, France and Russia are at least as guilty as Germany and Austria-Hungary, but as I said, history is written by the victors. After all, the Sarajevo assassination was organized by the Serbian secret service and its patron Russia. The terrorist act was supposed to cause A-H to declare war.
@@drazenbicanic3590 Russia had nothing to do with it, even regarding Serbian involvement, was it a governmental decision or rogue elements? Serbia certainly could not want A-H to attack it.
@@PaulVerhoeven2 Tzarist Russia and most of the supporters of pan-slavic movements wanted to expand the territory of both, Serbia and Russia. Tzarist Russia wanted this war to take place and did her best to escalate it, because only if France and England joined, Russia was able to succed in her expansion project. For this expansion project, Tzarist Russian goverment encouraged and paid pan-slavic terrorists, too. And in order to start a war, they first had to kill the most prominent pacifists in Austria: Sophie and Franz-Ferdinand. Only by killing the leading pacifists of this time, these terrorists could make sure that the war they had desired so urgently could really take place.
You missed the most important build up to WW1, the set up from the english empire, namely Cecil Rhodes, to eliminate both the germans and ottomans while reintegrating the americans back with the english. You even missed the part where there were 2 assassination attempts on the archduke, where the first one failed and in the second one the driver "accidently" drove into a narrow alley where the shooter was waiting for the archduke.
![เจ็บที่ยังฮัก - ม่อน วรวิทย์ [ Official Mv ] จอนนี่มิวสิค](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/KALIGSRSjFs/mqdefault.jpg)
Watch 16 Days in Berlin on Nebula: nebula.tv/videos/16-days-in-berlin-01-prologue-the-beginning-of-the-end
Just a random Question,if sb. captured more than one whole Trenchline in ww1,were the Trenches (which served as previous Frontline) abandoned,having the Artillery move closer to the "new" Frontline or were the previous ones still populated with Soldiers?
Signed up for Curiosity Stream promotion, how do I get Nebula? Only thing I see is a way to go premium for much more money.
@@Hardrada00 You'll get a separate email to sign up for Nebula for free if you used our link to sign up to Curiosity Stream.
Dear Jesse, Pls can you create a League of History organisation? For historians everywhere and on YT, to share their productions and help people to find more easily, historical content that they’re particularly interested in and is new for them. Bc it’s difficult to find things and stay focused on specialised subjects. With so many distractions and irrelevant attractions on YT.
Many thanks and keep up the great work!
‘The League of Historical Gentlemen, Ladies and others’?
Warmongering is so easy when you're not the one who's going to actually fight on the battlefield.
Yep that’s so true even today with joe Biden, Putin, and zelensky
@@tombutler3754 Joe Biden? You mean GW Bush?
@@petert1692 no I mean joe Biden? You know the current president who started a new war?
@@tombutler3754 Zelensky? He didn't want this war.
@@seventh-hydra no one did. But there were no adults willing to compromise. So now we have death on an unforetold scale.
I think the craziest thing about WWI is how all the leaders of all the countries were all related to each other in some way. Most of them were 1st or 2nd cousins. I know Britain, Russia, and Germany were the grandsons of Queen Victoria. And some of her granddaughters married other royal families in Greece, Denmark, Romania, Sweden, and Spain. So basically, all they needed was a family dinner to squash this business before it went down the way it did. (I know there's more to it, but still!) They couldn't pick up a telegraph and talk it out? lol
That’s why all were planned. All wars were /will be banks wars, particularly central banks the real financial communism.
That what I thought. Thanks.
Before voting system countries and vast lands were owned by families and were called as kings or chancellors or whatever and every one came under worked for them killed got killed and they drew borders on papers in their homes and when they knew they are not going to win met at dinner tables and called truce😂 . That why they never killed kings if they got caught instead they took ransom. And he would go to his home and begin preparing for another game. Earlier population was not that much u can counqours state with just 30 Or 40 k troops
Wow!
Most families hate each other.
"Well... Possibly. But the REAL reason for the whole thing was that it was just too much effort NOT to have a war. You see, Baldrick, in order to prevent war in Europe two super blocks developed: us, the French and the Russians on one side and the Germans and Austria-Hungary on the other. The idea was to have two vast opposing armies, each acting as the other's deterrent. That way there could never be a war."
"But, this is a sort of a war, isn't it Sir?"
"Yes, that's right, you see, there was a tiny flaw in the plan."
"What was that, Sir?"
"It was bollocks."
"So the poor old ostrich died for nothing..."
A man called archie duke shot an ostrich cos he was hungry
Boom boom boom boom
I mean…. Why spend so much time and material building an army when you can just defeat your enemy really quickly and have more stuff? And think about the glory! Honour is as important as peace!¡! We would look cowardly backing out without them doing it
Some Austrian circles killed Ferdinand,as they had killed King George of Greece earlier.
But that sounds MAD Mutually Assured Destruction, oh what the heck, let’s do it anyway
This is one of the finest programs on WW I that I have seen. The writing is lucid and succint, and the presentation itself is quite professional. Viewing this program has led me to greater study of the conflict and new appreciation of its complexity.
I think he is a bit biased to make allied side look better than they were... and try to make Germanic people to seem to want war over all else.. This bascially destroyed my homeland so if you are not a Germanic person you will see yourself as the victim while doing devious things to Germans will be okay with you.
Thanks!
I second your comments 😂
Absolutely agree!
Aside from the horrendous echo from the public bathroom stall they filmed this in, i agree.
I personally believe that a lot of it had to do with the mindset of military leaders at the time, all of whom subscribed to the "Cult of the Offensive." Basically, if you're on defense in war, you've already lost. As we found out in WW1, that was a ridiculous notion as modern warfare had made it so being on defense was often where you wanted to be, but at the time it was taken as gospel. Always be on the offensive. Austria-Hungary moving on Serbia was just the first chess piece, but everyone immediately started moving to make sure they wouldn't get caught on defense, and then that turned into a snake eating its own tail. Why is Russia mobilizing? Because Austria is mobilizing. Why is Germany mobilizing? Because Russia is mobilizing. Why is France mobilizing? Because Germany is mobilizing. Etc.
"If there's going to be war, then we'd better win it, and if we're going to win it, we need to attack."
- every general in 1914
This idea is less dumb than presented. If you can catch your enemy with their pants down, the war is going to be swift and brutal. WWI was an age of mass mobilization when far larger armies could be mustered and supplied than previous eras, so the size of a wartime army is going to be 100x larger than a peacetime army. And an offensive will certainly work fine with that kind of troop disparity! If you wait around, it could well be too late. Also, a successful offensive offers the chance of knocking your foe out of the war altogether - look at the Franco-Prussian War, over in 6 months after the French lost one battle. It may be worth gambling on that kind of outcome (which DID happen - if not in France, in places like the Balkans, or the idea behind Gallipoli if it hadn't been executed absurdly poorly.).
That might also be the reason why there's been so much opposition to missile defense systems. I think the logic I heard once is that missile defense systems work better if you're already expecting a nuclear strike, and thus works better if your nuclear strike was first and your fighting a retaliation, thus encouraging pre-emptive strikes. I don't entirely buy that, because it doesn't make sense if you're ALWAYS ready to intercept nuclear strikes. What does make sense to me is that is that it allows people to think they'd survive a nuclear war, reducing the MAD discouragement of wars between nuclear powers, but I don't see how that particularly encourages pre-emptive strikes, unless the preparation for those pre-emptive strikes involves evacuating your cities and spreading out your population, infrastructure, and military, which doesn't exactly lend you the element of surprise.
@@Mr.Nichan you said is that twice
@@rednex1989 Interesting. I only see one copy of the reply.
😱
my grandfather was a sapper in the Portuguese army, and he fought against the germans in WWI on the border between Mozambique and what was then Tanganyika (Deutsch-Ostafrika). Even though this conflict was a minor blip in comparison, it would be interesting if you could do a show on the various skirmishes that took place throughout the African continent and why they took place.
Yeah that would be very interesting, we don't know much about the Africans theatres.
@@mrsupremegascon :: In the 2014-2018 episodes of this Great War TH-cam channel, there were a few that treated the war in Africa. It was a terrible merciless use of the native populations as cannon fodder and tactical attrition.
@@powerdriller4124 the only real winner in the African Theater was the bees.
@@eandaautosports3143
American civil war: 1861-1865
WW1: 1914-1918
@@deontewynn4325
That was one of the reason, but not the major one.
WW1 was the failing of diplomacy, no sides wanted war but none could afford to back down either.
Germany also wanted to cut down Russian power until it became too large.
Franz Ferdinand's "Take Me Out" - I caught that.
All for you, Sophia: th-cam.com/video/HMfprvLp-t8/w-d-xo.html
Love that subtle reference :D
Oh shoot..
So if you're lonely, you know I'm here waiting for you
I'm just a cross-hair, I'm just a shot away from you
And if you leave here, you leave me broken, shattered I lie
I'm just a cross-hair, I'm just a shot, then we can die
Oh, oh, oh
I know I won't be leaving here with you
No u diiiiiiidnt
2:20 - Empires Threatened by Germany
3:08 - Triple Entente and the Morocco Resolve
4:35 - German Ambition or British-France Resistance to sharing?
4:57 - The Serbian Context
5:30 - Serb Nationalist and Arch Duke Ferdinand's (heir to Austro Hungary) Assassination
9:42 and 10:52 - Triple Entente vs Triple Alliance perspectives
11:50 - The July Crisis; Ultimatums and Mobilizationj
13:38 - The Austrian Ultimatum to Serbia
15:30 - Partial Mobilization, and Austria's Declaration of War to Serbia
16:50 - Russian full mobilization. German Involvement (Kaiser WIlhelm II)
19:05 - The Schlieffen Plan and State of Threatening Danger of War
21:00 - French General calls to Stop Passivity
21:40 - Germany Calls War with Russia
22:00 - Brits Neutral if Germany doesn't attack France; Kaiser Wilhelm II can't stop the Schlieffen Plan
23:00 - Belgium, the Final Red Line
---- Interpretting the War ----
25:19 - 1960s Fritz Fischer (German Historian) 'Germans preplanned war'
25:50 - Sean McMeekin (Russia made Balkan Conflict international) and Nial Ferguson (Britians Naivety)
25:57 - Christopher Clark's 'Sleepwalker Theory' (unintended, perceived insecurities, miscalcs, etc)
26:20 - Was it Inevitable? Alliance System did not force anyone to fight.
26:50 - James Joll's cultural, infrastructure and military zeitgeist theory
27:35 - "War is politics by other means" challenged. Belgium-German test case
are you unreal in Fortnite?
@@Danielpro1278 nope, idk who that is. Just had this to annotate for a pol sci class, stoked people find it useful
Lifestyle ❤UNDER THE SPOT LIGHT🎬🎥💯MARKETS BY PRODUCTS AT WORLD WAR />> CIViL MOVES FORWARD/>> EVERY TIME T00 REMOVE THE UNCIVIL FROM THEIR POSITIONS
When The DAY IS MORE DANGEROUS ❤WORLD WAR IS CALLED💯🎥🎬
It's ALL TRUE❤INDIVIDUAL FAMILY & NATION
Lets take a moment to appreciate the narrator's attention to detail when pronunciating any name no matter where it came from, albeit being Austrian, German, French, Russian, etc.
Solid video 👍
must have some language skills.
@@mouthpiece200 He does have language skills, I think he speaks German, French and Russian, but it is appreciated nonetheless, when you speak in English you naturally want to pronounce those names in English.
Solid, yet incomplete, with zero mention of the City of London, House's of Rothschild and Morgan, not to mention the newly minted Federal Reserve and the many industrialists for whom war mean pure profit. Always follow the money.
Yeah I really appreciate the skill this guy possesses.
He didn't know that in Hungarian, an "s" is pronounced "sh", so István (Stephen in Hungarian) is pronounced Ishtván.
If you're ever in Vienna, Austria be sure to visit the Bundesheer museum - you can view the shirt and jacket Franz Ferdinand was wearing when he was killed, complete with bullet hole and dried blood. Pretty fascinating and eerie to see the physical damage which caused his death and led to 75-100 million killed in wars over the next 30 years or so
@Dalibor Oh, okay. So, they just invaded out of nowhere...
Gavrilo says hi 🔫🇷🇸🇷🇸🇷🇸
If you ever come to Sarajevo, visit the museum of the hero Gavrilo Princip, who killed the occupier of his country. Germanic kleptomania occupied territories that did not belong to it leading to the death of 75 to 100 million lives in Europe
@@tribal4244 conquer or be conquered
@@WatchOutPoison I understand that, but it bothers me when Germanoids try to wash away their genocidal history by blaming the victim. They occupied Bosnia and prepared for the First World War for 2 years in order to do to the Eastern Europeans what the English did around the world and now Gavrilo Princip is to blame for everything.
I was just last week in Sarajevo and saw the spot the archduke was killed and visited the museum on the corner. Was really fascinating to be finally here.
There is a street in Belgrade named after the hero Gavrilo Princip
🇷🇸🇷🇸🇷🇸
Ground Zero.
I am born in Sarajevo.
If this kill did not cause WW1 then something else would.
Classic Serbia, always start the war and then surrender..Cowards
You guys are absolutely great. Thanks for this work that help us understand our history. It is the only way to avoid this type of crisis in our times.
This was well done. The entire time I was watching All Quiet on the Western Front, I kept wondering what the preexisting tensions to the war were and this answered my question in detail.
Same here! I hurriedly searched for documentaries relating to All Quiet on the Western Front... especially the details of the armistice.
Unfortunately it still isn't detailed enough and gives a bit the expression that Germany/Austria-Hungary are the bad guys while this is most definitely not the case.
but allied never told you they started the war. whoever started the war they're the bad guy but sadly allied are the winner and control the history
@@lyancheng785 I literally just paused the movie and came to watch this video to understand the reasons that led to it in details.
Germany is made to be the bad guys because they could have stopped it. They provoked everyone just to show how big their balls were. The problem is they didn't actually have any stamina.
If ww1 was a boxing match, Germany definitely had power and was quick. They just didn't have time to keep going. They almost single handedly beat everyone. They just kept pissing off everyone.
Had America not joined, I'm sure Germany would have won. 3 revolutions happened, and almost a fourth in England. Had Germany kept up with the navy and made it to England, Europe would be very different.
It's been a few weeks since I've basically put off Netflix and took a deep-dive into World War I. You guys make a fantastic, I mean absolutely *fantastic* job at creating educational and informative material that is entertaining and enthralling to watch. I really dig that you don't go straight to the main events and take some time to research and show things like the communications of several players-big and small- in the months leading to the war.
I will be visiting Europe for the first time next June and, after watching so many of these videos, I've decided I will probably spend most of my time in France, visiting WWI battlefields such as Verdun, Fleury or the trenches.
Cheers from Argentina!
Thanks!
Did you happen to see all quiet on the western front? I realized I had no recollection of learning the events and participating countries in WW I
Get to Waterloo my man!
Is there any conspiracy theory of WW1? did WW1 happened or was it caused to happen?
This is the second time this channel looks at the start of the Great War, this time with Jesse instead of Indy, and I love both equally. Keep being awesome and keep this awesome content coming. Gunfingers to the entire team!
"gunfingers"?
Austria-Hungary did not want a war...but were goaded into it by...guess who?
🤨🤔💫👉👉👉👍👌👀
Yeah up ur as
@@frankpienkosky5688 Germany.
This is very clearly explained and makes a very complex situation understandable. Thanks very much!
Thanks!
As a lifelong student of history (70 yrs old), I love your content. I'm an American who lived in Slovenia in the late 90s for a few years (worked with an orthopedic surgeon there). While I was there, I read up on the history and traveled as much as possible (restrictions due to the War in Kosovo, etc). Crossing borders was interesting because gun running was a problem. But I collected a few items while there. One is an Austrian saber with the work, "Service in Bosnia - 1878" inscribed on its backstrap (German). The 19th-century Serb wars of independence from Ottoman control had been suppressed by the Hapsburgs who colluded with the Turks who promised to not interfere as Austria conducted a bloody campaign of repression against the Serbs in Bosnia. Gavrillo Princip was a member of a secret society"The Black Hand" which was dedicated to revenge against the Hapsburgs. Aside from the formal history of the Hapsburg Empire, I've read "Balkan Ghosts," Kaplan, and Rebecca West's 1940 tome, "Black Lamb, Grey Falcon - A Journey Through Yugoslavia." I recommend those last two for a deep dive into Balkan cultural history. I have Clark's book, as well as several others on the war. The great thing about reading multiple histories on the same subject is that they always add more dimension with confirmations and exposure of bias and inaccuracy if they exist.
thanks for this comment, a lot to learn from it
I can't believe i haven't found this channel earlier. This is by far the best war channel i've even seen!!
I sympathize with both the Kaiser and Tsar, but their political incompetence played a big role in allowing the situation to escalate to the point of mobilization. In the end, they both lost their empires. Thank you for going into detail of such a complicated subject. I learned things that I didn’t know!
Tsar Nicholas actually lost his life together with his family...
I sympathize with the Romanov children, no need for them to be killed like that.
Wilhelm II and Nicholas II? Neither deserves any sympathy at all. Both were vile, dictatorial militarists and imperialists. The fact that both were replaced by worse later on shows the folly of their actions. Wilhelm II deserves particular damning because he shipped Lenin back to Russia.
@@davidpnewton Can you cite some examples for kaiser Wilhelm II? Thanks.
@@davidpnewton the complete opposite actually lol do you just believe propaganda?
Wilhelm tried to cool the war multiple times but the entente just wanted death
You can literally see this at the Christmas truce
Thank you for such an excellent presentation. The narrator too was excellent. It was the first time I have heard a North American narrator pronounce a non-English word accurately. German, Hungarian, French and Russian names and places were all enunciated clearly and correctly. I was stunned.
Sparks landing on bare dirt don't ignite a conflagration.
A pile of dry tinder without spark likewise will not spontaneously erupt into a firestorm.
People willing and able to quickly pour a bit of water onto a spark that lands in tinder will stop the fire in its infancy, before it spinning out of control.
Sadly, Europe in the late 19th and early 20th centuries seemed determined to heap up the tinder and hand out matches to all the Generals to add to the sparks of Sarajevo.
Another fine episode Jessie.
Similar to the Sutton we find ourselves in today
Germany, France, and Russia were the kindling.
Austria and Serbia were the Spark.
US, UK, Italy, Ottomans were the ones not pouring any water.
@@kylevernon not only did they not pour water, they poured petrol instead
Another brilliant episode Jesse, Many thanks! You should reconsider the Ninnie option - making heaps of money while being protected by the japanese armed forces sounds a lot better than present conditions for history channels on TH-cam.
Moltke was always thinking ten steps ahead
And the you get the Austrian response.. 'War..War...war'
Germaninny
Lol
The Germans were far too proud to go down without a fight. Of course, things have certainly changed.
It looks like "the Sleepwalkers" was a major source in your research. Great book. Even humorous at times. I highly recommend it to anyone interested in WWI.
It makes sense since its the most thorough analysis we have to date. My modern history professor reconmended it to me so I picked it up, no regerets. I think we can easily say the poor ostrich died for nothing.
@@Mattdewit who is the poor ostrich ?
@@abdulsudaisy
The ostrich had an empire with the Hungarians.
Thanks for the suggestion. I'll check it out!
Try Albertini's 'The Origins of the War of 1914 Vols I - III' as a far better overview, it details stuff Clarke left out deliberately to create a false impression allowing for relative German innocence.
Great video. Educational without being boring and provides information from all sides.
Hours of in-depth research, illustrated by solid but not flashy and distracting graphics, plenty of references to primary sources, not shying away from historiography. After watching you, it's hard to go back to most other history TH-cam channels, who often rely on one source, present an interpretation as fact, and haven't learned that ascribing causes to effects can only ever be a theory. You managed to avoid all of that while remaining accessible.
To that end, I wonder if I might convince you that a video explaining the aggressive moves and troubling strategic problems each Power had with the others would be a worthwhile supplement, if only to illustrate the complexity of the situation. e.g. the Slap of Tunis, and the Great Game/the Eastern Question don't fit neatly into the standard narratives of blame and inevitability. You could even restrict it to global/colonial issues if that would help squeeze it all into one video.
Slap of Tunis and Great game (Russia and Britain, right?) Are things of 19 century. Slap of Tunis stopped be a problem after Italo-french neutrality pact of 1902, and especially after invasion of Libya. Great Game stopped to be a thing with Britain and France signing the Entente cordiale in 1904, recognizing Germany as greater threat. That's the Central Powers problem, igniting the war they still acted like it's 19th century...
I don't normally respond to these because I don't care to get into online debates, especially when none of the participants are experts, but I have to disagree. I don't think the Central Powers have a special responsibility or a more bellicose mentality. I think the problem arises from treating each Power's policy as something uniform. There was a constant negotiation within these powers as well.
Britain was looking to expand in the Middle East, where Russia was the predominant threat-and to a lesser extent France. Colonial office men who made their careers in NE Africa, like Kitchener, and India were incensed that Britain was allying with Russia. They had big dreams of partitioning the Ottoman Empire and taking more of Central Asia off Russia. David Fromkin's book on this is excellent.
Italy seriously shook up the international order with their invasion of Libya and the Dodecanese, which itself precipitated the Balkan Wars. Italy was in the Central Powers' camp at the beginning of the war. Movements within Italy hated this because they saw Austria-Hungary as the real enemy. Yet many cleft to A-H and Germany because they saw more opportunity in Africa, if only they could break French hegemony of North Africa and British influence in the Ottoman Empire.
My point isn't to blame Britain or Italy for WW1. Rather, it's that there were belligerent parties in all the Powers who did continue the 19th century mentality. Indeed, even the more defensive minded politicians hadn't much broken with 19th century-WW1 itself was the break. You also can't easily group them into bellicose (or 19th century) and defensive (or modern) attitudes.
@Isaac: WW1 was entirely and unequivocally all Great Britain’s fault. For not invading and conquering Germany and much of mainland Europe beforehand. Only a smaller preemptive war, could’ve prevented WW1. As it was inevitable, with 90% of the globe’s power, concentrated in the small corner Europe.
@@flashgordon6670 WTF are you fascist fantasizing? You think Britain should have conquered all of Europe?????
Your "real history" insight on this subject, and other subjects, is excellent.
More people need to learn history, or be doomed by ignorance.
actually history we know today has been altered. seriously, why you think German-hungary really want to fight against allied? and looks who started the war but why historian saying both side are bad guys when the allied are the one started the war? did you ever read about first Zionist congress? Russia spy manage to wrote down what Zionist planning. and why it's impact WW1?
and how Britain asking US help but US won't do until Zionist in US manage to give supposed through US army. in every we event, it's always about Zionist involvement
?
??
honestly, watching this makes me think that the emperors and kings of europe lost control as soon as mobilisation started. which is incredibly sad considering the fact that the Russian, German, and British kings were family and should have stuck together as family should. it would have been an incredibly short war if those 3 kings and their empires were on the same side.
They couldn't be "on the same side". Did you forget Austria-Hungary attacked Serbia, which is Russian ally ?! If England, Germany and Russia were "on the same side" there would not have been any war.
@@Slav4o911 What he means that it was the nations who wanted the war, not the royal families.
I love how Belgium responds to a 'Yes or No' question with a paragraph.
This was actually a great breakdown. My history teacher actually will very much love this front to back explanation. A little bit of a sidebar would have been helpful if you ask me to kind of explain their training thoughts but I understand the straight explanation of what happened.
It would seem unfathomable that a handful of people could result in millions of deaths. Deaths of folks who by no means had any idea what they were fighting for or why. And yet after seeing this happen not once but twice the world still hasn't learned anything and still only a handful of people could result in millions of deaths all over again.
And again and again. Power mad maniacs run many world capitals.
That's because most ordinary people don't care.... and when they do start to care it's already too late. They mostly care about some small domestic affairs... they "start to care" about what's happening in the world, when the bombs literally start to fall on their heads. Even now, with nuclear weapons "ready to fall" on our heads, we are still the same, we didn't learn our lesson... the problem is, we might not learn, because we might not have a 3rd chance. Some people today even "contemplate" a nuclear world war can be won. (which is complete madness) It seems our brains can't comprehend how powerful are actually nuclear weapons and we fall back to "standard terms". Some say there were "thousands of nuclear tests".... which is true but they were mostly small fission bombs... and the largest part was underground or underwater, thermonuclear tests were far fewer.... and at least one of them was more powerful than "expected". Now let's imagine a 1000 thermonuclear warheads going off at one time.......... over cities and not in the desert or underground....
citizen won't care because they were pleased with unlimited entertainment. you give them entertainmen and the people with power will use their power.
"Men with power obey neither policy nor principle. No one is different; no one is neutral."
Excellent analysis! The most in-depth one yet, and I have been a fan of the channel since its very inception. Thank you for this. It was incredibly relevant for current affairs as well.
I’ve fallen asleep to this for the past 2 weeks
That was well done. Who was responsible for the war? Everyone. There had been rumors of war in Europe and close calls for more than a decade. It's like most everyone on all sides were either itching for a fight or resigned to its inevitability. Every side had a plan and once the plans were put into motion nobody knew how to stop them. Perhaps if the lines of communication had been more advanced something might have been done reduce tensions but I think it would have only delayed the war.
The tragedy of the trenches was that the European officers who had observed the U.S. Civil War didn't learn the proper lesson, that technology was moving faster than tactics. The carnage of the frontal assaults on fortified positions in that war would be repeated in France but on a much larger scale. Countries always prepare for the previous war, that is the real tragedy and that hasn't changed, not even in a world where asymmetrical warfare has become the norm.
The British Colonial Army was prepared for modern war, learned fighting the Boers (who were the ones that first developed the tactics), but it was an Army of just 300,000 men. It positioned in South West Belgium for two months and caused terrible losses to the Germans (maybe half million casualties), but was severely outnumbered and was peeled down to the off, to annihilation.
It’s a tragedy that war happened in the first place, but anything could have sparked it. The reason we look down upon the First World War isn’t because we care about the Balkans but because of the sheer scale and waste of life. That easily could have happened by any other inciting incident. I think it was inevitable for the there to be a giant war near the early 20th century.
Before WW1 they treated war like an art, but ever since the industrial revolution and advancement in technologies War became an industry, a “machine” as many people called it.
90% Germany's fault though.
5% Austria Hungary, 3% Russia, 2% Serbia imo
U mean europeans , don’t blame everyone
@@godlovesyou1995 50% Germany, 50% Austria-Hungary. The German Empire and Austria-Hungary attempted to expand their power eastward; Germany by gaining influence in the declining Ottoman Empire (the Eastern Question) and Austria-Hungary through the acquisition of territory in the Balkans (such as Bosnia and Herzegovina).
Back to 1914… perhaps this war will end by Christmas now
All the “What If” scenarios a hundred years later. Would the world be better if the war never happened or stopped at the Christmas Truce? If the Flu came any time in 1914? Pandora’s Box was opened and we are still being surprised.
Absolutely a great show. I hope that the present generation will watch it and learn that in war there are no victors, just victims. The only thing war decides is who is left.
Yes, without the war world would be much different. Empires would maintain colonies, Ottoman Empire would slowly fall apart...Great powers would put fingers even deeper into China.
WW1 was entirely and unequivocally all Great Britain’s fault. For not invading and conquering Germany and much of mainland Europe beforehand. Only a smaller preemptive war, could’ve prevented WW1. As it was inevitable, with 90% of the globe’s power, concentrated in the small corner Europe.
The world would be immensely better for at least the next ~35 years if Wilhelm I did not start the war against Russia. Assuming another would not start the war in the meantime.
Millions people alive and improving civilian technologies, no wide spread of Marxism, the worst scourge of the 20th and 21st century, no fascism and national-socialism. Japan would still attack China probably.
@@PaulVerhoeven2 you are right. The Great War led to the rise of Communism in Russia, Fascism in Italy and National Socialism in Germany. Probably no Great Depression in 1929. Everyone overlooks Japan as a cause for a new war. It would probably have been over China.
Yeah but will be still a lot if tensions in europe and again war
In my history class in the US we were taught that there were 5 main reasons for WW1: Alliances, Imperialism, Militarism, Nationalism, and Assassination. However even in my High School World History class they didn’t teach about the specific events that led to WW1. They didn’t teach about the collapse of the Holy Roman Empire or the German and Italian wars of Unification. I didn’t learn about the Russo-Turkish War (1877-1878) or the Balkan Wars which happened right before WW1. I’m not sure if they even told us why the Archduke was assassinated.
At the end of the war school focused mainly on Wilson’s 14 Points, the League of Nations, and the Treaty of Versailles. We didn’t learn about the German Civil War, Greco-Turkish War, or the Polish Soviet War. The only conflict after the war we learned about was the Russian Revolution. I didn’t realize how violent the aftermath of the war was. I guess they didn’t want to focus too much on things that weren’t relevant to the US.
time is limited .... there are things more insteresti,g to learn !
Did they mention Germany’s Schlieffen Plan or Germany’s invasion of neutral Belgium ? Barbara Tuchman’s book the Guns of August is excellent.
@@joeroganjosh9333 I don’t really remember. Maybe they did mention that.
Great thumbnail pic. Crazy to know the line between chaos and order is so thin.
Very well made and easy to understand for those of us who are not historians. High production value and neat animations and quotations.
One thing I have heard about the beginning of the first world war beginning that bears mentioning is that from what I know there was hardly any active campaigns for peace in any of the countries. By and large, the general populations, perhaps drunk on propaganda, was not against the war. Therefore it became difficult to argue for restraint on a political level, and it further emboldened those who sought to resolve the issue through force of arms.
From what I’ve learned the lack of protest from the citizenry is because they had no concept of the new weapons and weapon systems and the immense slaughter that could now be inflicted by a relatively small number of the enemy. This is manifest in the great lengths England went to so as not to engage in warfare fought with now even more modernized killing machines!
I found Keegan's phrasing on the respective military commands' culture interesting. He notes the difference between a Clausewitzian or Cold War-era "national security strategy" (where military plans are made in consultation between civilian and military authorities, so that military plans are made to suit political ends) and the immediately-pre-WWI system where generals made plans in complete isolation from politicians and often entirely without their knowledge.
Kaiser Wilhelm's experience of being surprised when his generals told him there was only one plan - for simultaneous war with France and Russia including a diplomatically-risky violation of Belgian neutrality - was repeated in other capitals across the Continent.
Lol
Excellent approach and development, as unbiased as possible, plenty of info, bata, graphs and images. And narration is also Excellent.
Congratulations
Superb episode team⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️. Yes it was a very complex and long coming crisis. But when I hear Conrad demanding War!War!War, I am ready to let him take all the blame🧐. And of course when he got his war, he covered himself in glory didn’t he?
soooooo much glory
why not 6 snake
Someone had commented on one of the other videos on this channel that if you look at the map from that time, the land around that area was prime, and they were actually fighting for that land and Ferdinand's assassination was just an excuse. I thought it made a lot of sense and was quite compelling.
Wasn't really an excuse it was the fire that set it off
That's got to be truer then true
I saw what you did there. “Take me out” by Franz Ferdinand
The quote at 4:00
Ending with
“And develop into ninnies!”
Made me laugh, this belongs in a Monty Python Skit!
Yeah wtf did he mean by that in this context? 🤔
"The bully rises"
That was the voice of Pride in that Germany was not going to sit idly by and watch The downfall of The Ottoman without itself being established in The League of Empires.
Those were the ninnies. Not one empire was better than the other.
Germany proved worse and Russia had so much internal tyranny, who cared, it least they were not crusading the rest of Europe with it. In less than a month of lasting weather (another 2 1/2 weeks longer) and Russia would not "be" after The Second War.
The Assassination of The Archduke and his Wife were the excuse for the rise. Months earlier that was not planned but as it happened certainly welcomed for the world stage in the limited time to get it done as it occurred.
The rise of the ninnies is no better than the Queen, The King, The Tsar. This was "exemplified conglomeration" to join those ranks rather than be "just another country."
The Kaiser of ninnies.
This is the episode I wanted since the start of this channel. Definitely one of your most well done episodes yet
Gavrilo Princip and his organization did not act in the interest of Serbia, but wanted the unification of all Slavic peoples in the Balkans... it can be said that he is a Yugoslav nationalist
Yes, and "Yugoslavia" was an alias for "Great Serbia". Serbians believe that all Croats, Bosniaks, Montenegrins etc are just Serbs with speach impediment.
@@yespeace2000 It's not an alias for Great Serbia, at least the original idea wasn't. That came later, with the Kađađorđević dynasty imposing themselves as the rulers of the Kingdom of the Serbs, Croats and Slovenes. And no, most of Serbs do not think that.
Thank you guys for all of your massive amount of work on this channel.
You've helped me learn so much about WW1 and helped bring to life, the lives and memories of those involved.
npc
The First World War was a complex conflict that resulted from a web of alliances, imperialism, militarism, and nationalism. The assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand was the immediate trigger, but the underlying tensions had been brewing for years. It’s fascinating to see how such a massive war started from a relatively small event but escalated due to the fragile balance of power in Europe at the time
Well done, Jesse, Flo, and team. Liked and gladly shared.
thanks! great to see you are still here
@@TheGreatWar Just a random Question,if sb. captured more than one whole Trenchline in ww1,were the Trenches (which served as previous Frontline) abandoned,having the Artillery move closer to the "new" Frontline or were the previous ones still populated with Soldiers?
@light Yamuna: They were both abandoned and populated.
@@flashgordon6670 may I ask... how?
Blackadder; "There was a tiny little flaw in the plan."
Baldrick; "What was that?"
Blackadder; "It was bollocks..."
Of course, Baldrick thought that WW1 broke out because "Archie Duke shot an Ostrich 'cause he was hungry".
The animations in your videos keep on getting better and better! Lovely stuff as always.
Heres a tip. Don't record the audio inside a bathroom at the airport. The reverb is overwhelming
I can’t believe they made Willy and Nicky throw hands… That’s the saddest part about WW1😢
What an astonishingly high quality channel this is. Thanks so much for all the wonderful content 🙏
Glad you enjoy it!
I feel this quote says it all
"The lamps are going out all over Europe, we shall not see them lit again in our life-time", British Foreign Secretary Sir Edward Grey
I feel this Quote applies for all the 20th century and see the 20th as the second 100 years war
Brilliant video that highlights the complexities involved in this.
It's ironic that growth of empire was a large cause, yet the world had never seen the demise of so many at once.
IDK If anyone else has said it but I'm just here because of the thumbnail. Now I have Franz Ferdinand's Take Me Out stuck in my head lol.
It helps to recall that the USA quickly became "the workshop of the world at a fair price", post civil war thanks to American enterprise, inventiveness, and open access to British and German lenders. It did not take Germany's ruling class and military establishment long to realize that Russia had the potential to begin taking the same path and Germany would then wind up as a second rate power...
Would Russia become like USA if not for the war?
@@blugaledoh2669 That would assume that the Tsarists would willingly give up some measure of absolute power.
@@blugaledoh2669 Not in the foreseeable future, for many reasons.
@@ZKP314 I meant it as a workshop of Europe.
I don’t think it would have happened for 1 simple reason. Russia wasn’t an industrialised nation. I’m not saying it didn’t have industry. But it was more of an agricultural nation. I could see it being the dinner plate of Europe while America was its commercial source.
4:06 I like how without saying anything, the pause says a lot about how the great war feels about this statement.
Bismarck said it best:
"Europe today is a powder-keg and all leaders are walking around with lit cigars. I dont know what will set it off but itll be some dammed foolish thing in the Balkans"
Of course, when he planned it all along. 😉
Every time I look at the beginnings of the Great War, it makes me overwhelmingly sad. The Old World, which was at the height of culture and civilisation, died as a result. In its wake came untold suffering, evil, disorientation and ugliness.
I mean meh, a bunch of autocrats died and it meant all the colonial empires fell at some point
What a precise shot man, unfortunately we're still living in this walking corpse society. 🔥💀🔥
Feels like it was a family feud that got out of hand and then somehow dragged the rest of the world into it.
The sad part is the loss of young men - something like 1/3rd of all males in Europe , aged 19 to 23 , would be dead at the end of the war .
.
@@cookingwithtool159
But they didn't fall.
If they fell why are they still rich?
Their wealth has to come from somewhere😊
Both the Habsburg Austrians, and the Imperial Prussians, had visions of expansion. The French were beside themselves with grief at the new united German Reich, and were itching for revenge. The World War could have started near the end of the 19th Century. It is a sheer miracle, that it took until 1914!
At the end of the 19th century there would still be the trenches and barbed wire of the American Civil War and the Maxim Gun of the 1890s so the form (and scale) of slaughter would probably have been similar.
Generations of Frenchmen had been taught geography using a map of France with Alsace and Lorraine coloured black. To reconquer these territories was considered a national duty.
@@trismegistus2881 conviently ignoring that alsaß loraine was german for many many centuries and its culture was defenitely german not french
@@BananaRama1312 and yet Germany declared war on France in 1914 and brutally attacked France. while Germany was in possession of Alsace Lorraine in 1914...
blame France for WW1 in these conditions is truly stupid. but hey...
also let's remember one can easily build a case for Alsace Lorraine being a French territory as it was French from the 17th century up to today (with just 40 years being German), before that it was Frank up to Charlemagne reign, and even berfore that it was Gaulish for thousands of years, the gauls being constantly at war against the German tribes from across the Rhine, according to Ceasar.
the best case for Alsace - Lorraine being French is that Alsacians and Lorrainers consider themselves French and not German, although they clearly share a cultural heritage that is German. oh well, always funny to take the german side and blame the french even when the responsability is clearly German...
Britain was yelous.....the empaaare
One thing is for sure. They had some amazing mustaches back in the day
Tsar Nicholas II and King George V looked like brothers even though they were cousins.
Have you thought about making a video about the fashoda incident?
It would be perfect in his World War Zero series, its consequences were a great turning point in Anglo-French relations by indirectly creating the entente cordiale years later, apart from marking an enduring mark on history, another result and the First World War and her legacy would have been REALLY different from how we know her.
I think the best way to summarize WW1 is that all the nations had their guns pointed at each other and were just looking for an excuse to shoot!
I'm always frustrated when people just say "the assassination of Ferdinand" as the start of the War. No, that was lighting the fuse but the start had been building up for many years before the Archduke (and his wife) were murdered. This video covers a piece of that by mentioning the rising German empire and the existing alliance between France and Russia. But, another crucial piece to this is the annexation of Bosnia by Austria-Hungary and the perception of mistreatment of the Bosnian Serbs. And this all after the Treaty of Berlin which ruffled quite a few feathers in and around the Balkan region. There was already partial mobilization to go to war years before the Archduke met his fate, his death simply gave the "go" for everyone to mobilize. And even back then they thought it would be a short-lived, low casualty war. They were very wrong about that.
He mentioned "our own place in the sun" but no mention of the Berlin Baghdad railway....
Would be interesting to analyze the motives of french politicians, like Poincarré, Delcassé, Paléologue, in preparing the ground since 1892 in alliance with Russia.
really they were preparing since 1872 alomst as soon as the Franco Prussian war was over they already wanted revenge
Settling the score for 1870 and Alsasce-Lorraine.
Overall it is simple, there were 20 million more Germans than French as Poincare noted. France could not face Germany alone if a new war began, and the best answer was an alliance with the nation Germany had just kicked out of its own alliance system, leaving two nations unable to face Germany alone, but able to do so together.
Brilliant video Jesse They do say that if you collected all the historians and asked them to work out the reason for the WWI they would fail.
Pretty rare high quality history video.
Very well done.
In my opinion its very important to not only focus onto countries/empires but also the interests of very influential, powerful rich families and banks.
Especially in England. There are many documents from 1870 onwards that show the bellicosity of those players.
And many large French railroad loans to Russia.
So, the Archduke (already quite an unpopular figure in the Imperial hierarchy) was sent to visit Sarajevo (the capital of the Austrian colony of Bosnia with a relative Serb majority and the infamous object of anti-colonialist sentiment in the Balkans) on Vidovdan (the biggest Serbian holiday whose main (!) gist is martyrdom against foreign invading armies) and was given scarce security while inspecting the partially - mobilized Austro-Hungarian army on the border with Serbia (doing the invasion excercises).
Geez, I wonder how that could've end up badly...
Majority serbs?
I'm just watching population review serbs are huge minority 1910-1991
From oficial population counts ;P!
Massive irony - Franz Ferdinand was the one sane person in the austrian royal circle who was against the war and advocate for federal type of government and increased authonomy. And the main oponent of the appaling Franz Conrad von Hötzendorf, Chief of Staff which lead to multiple disastrous decisions over the war.
@@alexmercer8042 One of the reasons for the assassination was precisely the attitude of Franz Ferdinand towards giving the Slavs the same status as the Austrians and Hungarians. The creation of a South Slavic part of the monarchy would make Serbia's aspirations more difficult. Fairy tales about the national composition of Bosnia were part of the Serbian propaganda machine, there were Serbs, but not close to their claims.
@@drazenbicanic3590 How typical. I'm bulgarian, I can talk about serbian aspirations all day
@@alexmercer8042 well Serbia is being a scapegoat for everything in the region for last 30 years but isnt it time to move to somene diferent by now ... say Russia...it is popular again... beacause we now that the western countries are never wrong in anything... all those colonies in Africa and everywhere around the world is again Serbia aspirations right, cos everyone else in the world are just humanitarians, like bulgaria was always, especialy when going to war on Hitlers side
This is the clearest account of the start of WW I that I have ever seen/read. Excellent work. Considering how many people were killed in that war and considering how WW II was more or less a continuation of WWI, it is absolutely unbelievable how trivial the spark was.
Thanks.
This is not a peace. It is an armistice for twenty years - Marechal Foch in 1919 at Versailles.
it's all started when Russian tsar released in newspaper what their spy wrote in 1905. you should check that out and you will know who control world bank, federal bank in US and why Hitler want to rid of them
Amazing summary. Thank you for all the effort you put into this.
8 years after starting a chanel on WWI (been here since) finally time to ask why DID the war start, lol :-)
Never too late. ;)
@@jessealexander2695 that question was satisfactorily answered in the final episode of "Blackadder 4" 😆
There is small error. On 21:40 its mentioned that Moscow told Berlin to stop its mobilization, but Moscow was not the capital of the Russian Empire. It was Saint Petersburg
Yes, my 2022 brain intervened and it slipped through.
Outstanding & even-handed analysis, thank y'all! I'm in the camp of them ALL being at fault to varying degrees...this stupid & tragic war gives us terrible shockwaves to this day. May mankind one day wise up
Wuss.
Actually there is two cases of guilt, the ones who instigated the war, it would be Germany, Austria-Hungary, Serbia... and the ones who escalated the war to be a massive catastrophe, it would be Great Britain and Germany. Starting dubious neutrality of GB was like a green light for Germany. And them both were attracting new countries to join the war.
WW1 was entirely and unequivocally all Great Britain’s fault. For not invading and conquering Germany and much of mainland Europe beforehand. Only a smaller preemptive war, could’ve prevented WW1. As it was inevitable, with 90% of the globe’s power, concentrated in the small corner Europe.
Starting the was against Serbia was purely the Austrian emperor Franz Joseph I's decision, starting the war against Entente (Russia being a part of it) was purely the Kaiser Wilhelm II's decision.
The empires were not democracies. They might have been lied to or prodded by their circles, but the actual decision belongs solely to them.
@@alexzero3736 looks like youre really grasping at straws to blame the UK there
Great work… I learned a ton!
Solid video, as always, though one important factor to mention was Austrian insecurity: by 1914, Austria-Hungary was decidedly a second-rate power, and knew it. They were facing internal problems with other nationalisms within the Empire, Czech nationalism in particular. This created a push to crush the Serbs, to 1) show that Austria-Hungary was still powerful and relevant, and 2) to send a message to other ethnic minorities in the Empire.
Национальные "проблемы" в Австро-Венгрии сильно преувеличены.
Basically, Russia-Austria competition for power over the Slavic nations.
@@ТарасКлиментенкоThey really aren't. Many people were fed up with the absolutist regime - especially the slavic peoples.
If Kaiser Wilhelm and Czar Nicolas could have seen a crystal ball of four years of war would do to their empires and themselves personally, they would have moved mountains to see that this war never happened. Even the winners Britain and France had to sacrifice so much to win this war and in some ways have still not recovered to this day.
"The Deluge" by Adam Tooze is worth a visit on the aftermath of WW1 and the forces that shaped it.
@@kumasenlac5504 Thanks for the recommendation, I will check it out
I always wondered what would’ve happened with the world if they chilled the f down. If the others wouldn’t anyway, if socialism and communism would even grow as it did, what would be of our style of clothing, if it would have remained traditional or would ‘modernize’ eventually, same with the technology (though that probably wouldn’t have progressed the way it did without the two world wars)
WW1 broke western civilization completely
Www1 was the beginning of Europes decline and partly self-destruction.
The participants were unable or unwilling to end the war latest after Verdun or the Somme carnage.
Additionally:
Only Great Britain and France stood behind the Versailles Treaty. To avoid a German-Sovjet coalition they had to accept and partly to support the rise of Germany from 1925 (Locarno Treaty) to 1938 (Munich Agreement over Sudeten/Czechoslovakia).
"I heard that it started when a bloke called Archie Duke shot an ostrich 'cause he was hungry."
One of m u favorite quotes, i forget who said it was "the twentieth century began and ended in Sarajevo"
I believe that there was also a lot of debate about who was getting, what they thought, was their fair share of Africa. All of the countries mentioned, before they went to war with each other, all teamed up to invade Africa. They then split it among themselves, leaving some with more natural resources than others. Which also helped those nation gain the capital to build their militaries. They were itching to use their newly formed power (military).
FORCE !!!
This is exactly what happened but we can’t teach our younger generation that. We need them to think that our Ancestors were great. Since we are the winners we get to rewrite history exactly how we want it!
it was a combination of many things. the official detonating factor was the assassination of franz ferdinand, but it might have been avoided at many other steps of the escalation of aggression that followed. extra history has a very compelling series of videos about it. back when extra history was worth watching.
As he pointed out, the real roots of the war were much deeper than Ferdinand... rival Empires, pan-Germanic expansion, and a system of alliances.
Short answer : Yes because it is the breaking point.
Long answer : No because everyone only thought "War ! War ! War !".
My great-grandfather was a Polish man who fought for the German Empire in northern France. He was probably seriously wounded in 1915. And was stationed in the Balkans afterwards. The whole family was glad that he was wounded before the gas war started. At the time, the civilian population was already shocked by this. I have field postcards and letters from him.
Konrad: "War, war, war"
also Konrad: "Lose, lose, lose"
Cadorna: Izonso, Izonso, Izonso....
I don't remember who wrote it exactly, but I remember reading a Historian that believed that the cause of WW1 started when the Ottomans started to loose grip on the Balkans, causing European powers to rush to take a piece of the power vaccuum left behind creating attrition amongst them... And ofc there's loads of other events that lead to the War
Yup[ A-H litteraly partnered with Ottom,ans and then later on during Balkan Wars wanted to USE opportunity to get something out of it.Thats why A-H EASLY WITHOUT much protets form World Powers SNATCHED/ANNEXED Bosnia in basical;y quick swoop where it used Ottomans decline and rising extremely depleated and battered newly liberated nation who neigher had power to do anything even if it wanted.
That's literally the context for Princip shooting the Archduke. Slavic nationalism and Russia-Austria rivalry, which dragged their allies in.
@@jurisprudens2697 Slavic nationalism had nothing to do with inciting the war. German, however, did.
@@thetruechaby I think both share the blame. It was not “German nationalism”, though, that Princip and people like him were fighting.
Poor Nicky was thrust into this position without properly being groomed, as his father, Czar Alexander III (The Peacemaker) died at the extremely young age of 49, and the young and inexperienced Nicholas II took over at the age of only 46.
To say the whole thing from start to finish was a horrible disaster, would be a huge and insulting understatement.
same could be said about Willy
Which one again shows how retarded it is having a monarch as a leading authority in a country.
If Alexander was 49 when he died how could his son be 46.
@@binaway his son (nicolas) was 26...
same could be said about Wilhelm II his father didn't have time to prepare him and then Willy fired Bismark who of course didn't want a war and replaced him with a very inferior man
Seriously? One of the most to the point videos I've ever seen. That's probably one of the greatest questions in modern history : when you think of it, there is no simple explanation as to what caused WWI ; the murder of a crown-prince and a game of alliances aren't a reason for a whole continent to wage a mutually destructive war against each other leading to a collapse in civilisation. The answers can only be conjectural. There is no simple explanation. They're rooted in time depth and ideology.
They wouldn't create militarization productions for free of business models...it would be produced for the generating profits ..this would be correct observation..what that would open for narrative that would help develop criterion for understanding...
World's worst driver, Ferdinand's chauffeur.
Not really. In the first attempt, Princip failed in the assassination. Officials wanted the Archduke to stop the tour and head to a safer route to his destinatin. But Franz Ferdinand thought himself a Gigachad and ordered to take another round to drive past his subjects. That time, Princip could not believe his luck and tried again, and succeded.
@@swashbukk I almost hear him saying: "Here's a route for somebody with a chest hair!"
It was a joke.
@@swashbukk Actually, the first attempt was done by Nedeljko Cabrinovic who threw a bomb. And the driver was the very one who saved Ferdinand with a quick reaction on the flying object, he just immediately step on the throttle. I am not sure if Ferdinand himself urged for another round, his intention was to see the members of his staff wounded by the bomb. The other members of the staff suggested this might be dangerous, but Oskar Potiorek, Governor of the Austro-Hungarian province of Bosnia and Herzegovina, felt that his authority in Bosnia will be compromised: "Do you think Sarajevo is full of assassins?" Still, Potiorek suggested a new shorter route, but his subordinates in a first car didn't do well and made wrong turn followed by Ferdinand's car. The mistake was acknowledged and they stalled. Princip happened to be right there... So, if there had been anyone to be blamed in personally that would be Oskar Potiorek. Moreover, there is a theory that Potiorek maybe wasn't just vain and incompetent but also a tool for a plot. The theory is a very well documented, not just in a part that German military plans for war were made more prior to the assassination, but even in the search for a cause of war. The choice of Ferdinand to be a scapegoat is still in area of speculations. These speculations are based on 2 facts: 1) He wasn't popular in Habsburg family due to his marriage with Sophie Chotek who was of non-royal origin, 2) The visit to Sarajevo was scheduled for 28th of June, the biggest and the most important date for all Serbs wherever the live. And they were the majority of population in Bosnia, 43.5% in 1910. Bosnia was occupied by Austro-Hungarians back in 1878, but in 1908. the annexation was declared. So, in a some way, we may consider Potiorek as a brutal liar: there were a lot of angry men in Sarajevo and Bosnia on that day and he was certainly aware of them...
Would be great to see a series about the 19th century sometime maybe, or one telling how each European country became a nation over time. There's a lot less coverage of this around.
Try Fire of Learning channel.
Franz Ferdinand almost got away ( I think twice). They drove away and then ended up driving back exactly where the assassins were located.
yes, that’s true.
The driver had no idea where he was and was lost. The would be assassin was sitting in a cafe upset that he lost his chance and then the car stopped directly in front of him.
In other words, the pride and greed of man blinds ears and deafs eyes.
As Bismarck notes in his Books: "The european war will be caused by some foolishness in the Balkans."
He and William I. would turn in their graves if they knew what would become of the Germany they created... tragedy
Stop trying to paint Bismarck as some sort of pacifist visionary. He was all for the annexion of Alsace-Moselle when it happened, and thus sowed one of the core reasons for WW1 to happen as it did
Well, he did announce he would create Germany through iron and blood...
@@samarkand1585 by that reasoning it's all Louie XIV's fault for stealing Elsaß in the first place ;)
What do you mean Germany today? Its the richest European country right?
@@scottlindsly cope however you want mate
Great video. I recently read another recent book on this topic by a different Australian author, Paul Ham, whose book "1914" very much came from the Fischer school of analysis. He didn't agree with Clark's "Sleepwalkers" theory - to him it was obvious that from the moment the Germans issued the blank cheque, they ceased any action to de-escalate the possibility of a continental war. Right from the beginning the Germans and Austro-Hungarians knew their actions risked a war with Russia, and did nothing to de-escalate that possibility.
WW1 was entirely and unequivocally all Great Britain’s fault. For not invading and conquering Germany and much of mainland Europe beforehand. Only a smaller preemptive war, could’ve prevented WW1. As it was inevitable, with 90% of the globe’s power, concentrated in the small corner Europe.
"Right from the beginning the Germans and Austro-Hungarians knew their actions risked a war with Russia, and did nothing to de-escalate that possibility."
That is to say it mildly.
In fact, Germans used the Austrian-Serbian war as a pretext to attack Russia (and thus Entente) directly. If not for the decision of Wilhelm II, there would be no WW1 until at least his death (and then responsibility lied with his successors). No widespread of the most destructive ideology ever, Marxism, and its offshoots like national socialism and other forms of socialism/fascism.
History is written by the winners. For the outbreak of the war, France and Russia are at least as guilty as Germany and Austria-Hungary, but as I said, history is written by the victors.
After all, the Sarajevo assassination was organized by the Serbian secret service and its patron Russia. The terrorist act was supposed to cause A-H to declare war.
@@drazenbicanic3590 Russia had nothing to do with it, even regarding Serbian involvement, was it a governmental decision or rogue elements? Serbia certainly could not want A-H to attack it.
@@PaulVerhoeven2 Tzarist Russia and most of the supporters of pan-slavic movements wanted to expand the territory of both, Serbia and Russia. Tzarist Russia wanted this war to take place and did her best to escalate it, because only if France and England joined, Russia was able to succed in her expansion project. For this expansion project, Tzarist Russian goverment encouraged and paid pan-slavic terrorists, too. And in order to start a war, they first had to kill the most prominent pacifists in Austria: Sophie and Franz-Ferdinand. Only by killing the leading pacifists of this time, these terrorists could make sure that the war they had desired so urgently could really take place.
You missed the most important build up to WW1, the set up from the english empire, namely Cecil Rhodes, to eliminate both the germans and ottomans while reintegrating the americans back with the english. You even missed the part where there were 2 assassination attempts on the archduke, where the first one failed and in the second one the driver "accidently" drove into a narrow alley where the shooter was waiting for the archduke.
Guess he did miss that
why they want eliminate German?
Bingo, you are wise
There is no proof that the driver was a Serbian agent. Also Cecil Rhodes was just a business entrepreneur, he didnt integrate the Americans
@boboboy8189 that is a very deep rabbit hole. Don't tread there unless you like being considered 'the baddies.'