TRAGEDY AND REVENGE: The Battles of Coronel & the Falklands, 1914

The Last of Scharnhorst and Gneisenau
William Lionel Wyllie, 1918

Steve R Dunn 

Seaforth Publishing 2025

 Adrian Roberts, Reviewer

The naval battles of 1914 such as Battles of Coronel and the Falklands, and others such as the destruction of SMS Emden, were the first use by European nations of the warships that they had been developing for the previous forty years, fighting at distances of thousands of yards with explosive shells that could smash through several inches of armour. They were also the beginning of the end of fighting battles according to the ancient ideals of chivalry, honour and sacrifice. 

Honour is emphasised in this book by Steve Dunn, a leading authority on WWI naval warfare. The book is particularly strong in describing how decisions were made, at the Admiralty in London as well as at sea, and how the personalities of the leading commanders and politicians affected those decisions. 

To simplify the history for the sake of this review: when World War One broke out the crack squadron of the Imperial German Navy, the Asiatic squadron, was at its base in the German colony of Tientsin in China (now Qingdao). Commanded by Vice Admiral Graf Maximilian von Spee, it consisted of the state-of-the-art armoured cruisers Scharnhorst  and Gniesenau  and the light cruisers Dresden, Leipzig and Nürnberg. They put to sea and crossed the Pacific with the intention of going into the Atlantic and potentially destroying much of the vital merchant trade around South America, and becoming a valuable resource if they made it back to Germany. 

There was a considerable amount of indecision and delay in the British Admiralty. Winston Churchill was First Lord of the Admiralty which was a political post not a Naval one, but nevertheless he had a tendency to over-rule the naval experts. The First Sea Lord was Admiral Prince Louis of Battenberg; the Chief of the War Staff was Vice Admiral Doveton Sturdee. Neither was particularly decisive: also Battenberg was under unjustified suspicion due to his German ancestry and Sturdee was an unpopular character. Eventually they ordered the British second cruiser squadron which was the nearest to South America to intercept the German squadron. Commanded by Rear Admiral Sir Christopher Cradock, this eventually consisted of the protected cruisers Good Hope and Monmouth, the light cruiser Glasgow and the armed merchant cruiser Otranto. Spee's Scharnhorst  and Gneisenau were each equipped with a main armament of 4 x 8-inch guns. Good Hope had two 9.2-inch guns but they were older and with a shorter range then the German 8-inch weapons. Good Hope's secondary armament and the entirety of Monmouth’s armament were 6-inch guns, and some of those were mounted in casements one above the other in the hull sides with the lower ones so close to the waterline that they could not be used in rough weather. Both Cradock and the Admiralty in London knew all this, and the book goes into great detail as to what Cradock's orders were and why no reinforcements were sent. 

Under Admiral Jackie Fisher's reforms the Royal Navy had developed a new class of warship, the battle-cruiser. This was essentially a battleship-sized vessel with a battleship’s 12-inch guns but with thinner armour to reduce weight and so increase speed: which was fine so long as they were used for their intended purpose of hunting down enemy cruisers rather than engaging similarly armed warships. However none of these vessels could be made available at the time. Cradock knew that the armoured cruiser Defence was in Gibraltar and could get to the South Atlantic fairly quickly and would probably be at least the equal of the German vessels. He requested that it be sent and at one time believed it was coming but the Admiralty did not permit it to go. 

Certainly, Cradock believed that his orders were to engage the enemy, and if there were any ambivalence about the orders, as an officer of the old Nelsonian school he was not going to refuse combat and risk the reputation of himself, and more importantly of the Royal Navy to which he was utterly loyal. His only potential reinforcement was the old battleship Canopus, but its arrival was delayed and it may well have been more of a liability than an asset. When Cradock’s squadron lined up against the German Asiatic squadron off the Chilean port of Coronel on the 1 November 1914 he must have known what the outcome would be. His ships were silhouetted against the setting sun; the sea was too rough to use the lower casemates and Good Hope’s forward 9.2 inch gun was disabled early in the action. Good Hope and Monmouth went down with all hands, 1640 men including Cradock which is more than the Royal Navy lost at Trafalgar. This was Britain’s first naval defeat since 1814.

This concentrated minds at the Admiralty. Battenberg had been replaced by 73-year-old Jackie Fisher. You wouldn’t have wanted Fisher as your boss and when he was wrong he was very wrong, but when he was right he was very right and he could certainly get things done. The battle-cruisers Invincible and Inflexible were being prepared for action at Devonport and were supposed to be ready to go in a week. Fisher telegrammed the dockyard captain and ordered in no uncertain terms that they were to sail in three days: and they did! (As a British person I can’t help comparing this with 2026 when the Royal Navy’s only serviceable destroyer HMS Dragon took three weeks to get out of dock when the Iranian war broke out and arrived too late to be of any use).  

Fisher ordered Sturdee to lead the task force personally, in Invincible. They set off for the Falklands where they were joined by the light cruisers Glasgow, which had survived Coronel, Kent, Cornwall, Carnarvon and Bristol. I had not realised before reading this book how concerned the Falkland Islanders were about invasion by the Germans. At this point no one had any idea where the German fleet was. Sturdee’s squadron arrived at Port Stanley and started to take on coal on 6 December. Von Spee's squadron arrived on the morning of the 8th of December: if he had arrived a day earlier he would have caught the British squadron still being coaled and unable to put to sea. Von Spee knew that he was doomed once he went into action with the battle-cruisers. He could conceivably have escaped by bypassing the Falklands once he was aware that they were there, but he chose to bring them to action. In the event Sturdee’s squadron was able to put to sea and the battle-cruisers’ 12-inch guns had the German armoured cruisers at their mercy. Scharnhorst went down with all hands including von Spee; Gneisenau went down with most of her crew. Meanwhile the light cruisers had their own battle; Nürnberg and Leipzig were sunk; only Dresden escaped. The Germans lost 2094 men; the British just seven. 

Order HERE

At home this was celebrated as a great victory: but the British fleet had a massive technological advantage. A British Captain suggested that “it is ironic that Sturdee, the man mainly responsible for the loss of Cradock’s squadron [is] the person who profits principally from it…the enemy ran into his arms…” Churchill does not come out of the episode well: he made considerable attempts to shift the blame for the defeat at Coronel including blaming the deceased Cradock whom virtually all the rest of the Navy defended. The book’s author, Steve Dunn, clearly regards Cradock as the hero of the story, and certainly he should be more famous as he encapsulated what the British like to see as the virtues of honour, loyalty and courage in the face of adversity. 

TRAGEDY AND REVENGE is all that such a book should be; it is readable and balanced; it investigates the background of events as well as the action; there is a copious index and bibliography and every point that made is referenced. The only slight quibbles are that it could have done with maps of the actions as well as the locality, and the title which was probably chosen by the publisher could be a problem if someone was trying to search online for such a book using the terms Coronel or Falklands. And it does assume a certain level of knowledge of maritime subjects and WW1 naval warfare: admittedly most readers will have some of that knowledge but there are some who may, for instance be perturbed by the statement that on Glasgow the officers’ heads were destroyed, and think this was a tragic occurrence rather than merely an inconvenience.

Adrian Roberts, May 2026

The Challenges of America's First Motorized War

 

Lafayette, We Are Here!

The American Expeditionary Force (AEF) required a massive fleet of approximately 82,500 motor vehicles. About half the total were trucks including 8,000 the famous standardized "Liberty Trucks" (such as the FWD Model B) Other types of transport vehicles, ambulances, and approximately 2,000 Cadillac touring cars used for transporting military officers made up the rest.

The U.S. Army's only previous experience in deploying motorized transportation had been the recent Punitive expedition into Mexico, in which General Pershing had 731 vehicles. When the nation was called to war,  the trans-oceanic deployment of America's army, the 100-times increase in scale, the sped-up learning curves for transport units and personnel, guaranteed that it would be extremely challenging and problem-filled. And it was.

Vehicle Park at the Gièvres, France, Supply Depot

An interesting 2004 article "Grinding Gears: The AEF and Motor Transportation in the First World War" (Link) does a wonderful job cataloging the many difficulties Motor Transport Corps faced, "some of which were unavoidable; others were self-inflicted, and still others [that] could have been avoided. After digesting it, any reader would be left wondering how the AEF ever managed to get to a battlefield, let alone fight and win a battle. Here's a listing of some the issues the authors pointed out:

• The U.S. Army decided to rely more heavily on motor transportation than animals than any other army in the Great War. [However, the AEF still required over one million horses and mules to support the forces in the field.]

• Inexperienced and undisciplined truck drivers often caused delays, breakdowns, and massive traffic jams.

Classic AEF Traffic Jam at Esnes
(Note Mix of Motorized and Animal Transport)

• This in turn creates the need for proportionately larger mechanical maintenance and spare parts supply operations, as well as higher-level vehicle-friendly road maintenance.

• Mechanics? There were never enough mechanics.

• Failure to predetermine the level of control for the vehicles. Army, Corps, Division, Regimental? The AEF insisted on retaining divisional control of motor vehicles until nearly the war's end. This policy restricted the flexibility of the AEF's corps and army formations, because they could not count on having truck transportation at necessary times. 

• Lack of attention from the highest levels. Issues regarding motorized vehicles did not receive the same attention as the AEF's highly successful railroad operation. 

The author's of "Grinding Gears," however, do point out that there was one insurmountable issue for 1917–18: that the deployment of a huge expeditionary force to distance shores requires a commensurate amount of shipping space.  In the Great War, that factor was intensified by the Allies requests to give precedence to  live bodies over supplies and weapons.

Of even greater disappointment, the U.S. Army did not take to heart all the lessons learned during the war. The idea of a separate transportation branch died with America's postwar military cuts, and would not be resurrected until a new war demanded it in 1942. While the interwar army's small size forced such reductions, the military establishment also failed to heed the problems of operating many different vehicle models. When the army embarked on a major motorization program in 1926, it adopted 360 vehicle types. Not until 1939 did the army finally decide on just six models, greatly simplifying maintenance. The Army had, however,  organized a transcontinental test convoy of 65 trucks that taught it a lot of lessons on motorized transportation and its staff happened to include a certain officer who was destined to command Allied Forces in Europe in the next big war. [Article]

For Memorial Day 2026: Embrace the Grandeur of America's Suresnes Cemetery Outside Paris

(All the Images Here Can Be Enlarged by Clicking on Them)

The Main Entrance, Suresnes American Cemetery

The American Battle Monuments Commission (ABMC) maintains 26 permanent American military cemeteries, 31 federal memorials, monuments, and markers, in 17 foreign countries. More than 200,000  of America's fallen service members are honored at these ABMC sites. One of those cemeteries is located on Mont Valérien in historically important the Parisian suburb of Suresnes. Although, it is one of the smaller ABMC cemeteries, it is especially admired for it's dramatic location, history, and beauty. 

It is also the only ABMC cemetery with burials from both World Wars. The 7.5-acre cemetery contains the remains of 1,559 Americans who died in World War I and 24 unknown dead of World War II. The cemetery also honors approximately 1,000 missing service members—lost or buried at sea—whose names are inscribed on bronze plaques inside the chapel.  Rosettes mark the names of those since recovered and identified.

View from Blvd Washington, Suresnes

A Spectacular Location

The cemetery at Suresnes was established in 1917 by the Graves Registration Service of the Army Quartermaster Corps. A majority of the World War I Dead buried there died of  wounds or sickness in hospitals located in Paris or at other places in the Services of Supply. Many were victims of the influenza epidemic of 1918–1919. Loaned in perpetuity to the United States, it became the site for America's first permanent overseas cemetery. The significance of the cemetery to France is underscored by its location overlooking Paris, and its close proximity to Versailles. The American Cemetery is adjacent to a historic Fort Mont Valérien which is now a memorial to the French resistance movement of World War II.

View from Mont Valérien

 Looking East on a Clear Day, the Bois de Boulogne,
Eiffel Tower, (3.5 miles) and the Pantheon Can Be Viewed

Sunrise Over the Cemetery

A Distinguished History

The cemetery was dedicated by President Woodrow Wilson during Memorial Day ceremonies of 1919, just a month before the signing of the Treaty of Versailles. This  made Suresnes the nation's first overseas  military cemetery. Originally supervised by the Army's Graves Registration service, the cemetery's administration passed to the American Battle Monuments Commission in 1934. The Commission—established in 1923 under General Pershing's leadership—had been responsible for construction of the chapel and landscaping of the grounds, which were completed in 1932. 

At the end of World War II, it was decided that this particular cemetery should serve to commemorate the Dead of both World Wars, making it unique among the ABMC cemeteries. An additional grave plot was created as an eternal resting place for the unidentified remains of 24 World War II Unknowns. Commemorative loggias and with separate war  memorials were also added to the original chapel. Since the Great War, Suresnes has been the site of annual Memorial Day, Veterans Day, and joint French-American commemorations. On 11 November 2018, it was the site of the remembrance of the 100th Anniversary of the Armistice with President Donald Trump in attendance.

Original Dedication Plaque

Suresnes Cemetery Was Dedicated by President Woodrow Wilson During
Memorial Day Ceremonies, 1919

Memorial Day 1922  

Suresnes American Cemetery is the ABMC cemetery with the highest number of women interred—24 in total. These women played a crucial role in World War I as nurses, secretaries and even one of the famous telephone operators, also known as “Hello Girls.”

General Pershing,  Marshal Foch, and Other Notable French and Belgian WWI Commanders Visit in 1927

A Gold Star Mother Visits Her Son's Grave in 1930

When it was decided that Suresnes should serve to commemorate the Dead of both World Wars, and additional grave plot was created as an eternal resting place for the unidentified remains of 24 World War II Unknowns. Commemorative loggias were also added to the original chapel.  The World War II section was dedicated in 1952 in a ceremony presided over by General George C. Marshall, then Chairman of the ABMC.

Construction of the New Loggias

100th Anniversary of the World War I Armistice, 11 November 2018

An Elegant Design 

The original entrance and chapel were designed by architect Charles A. Platt of New York. The landscape design for the Suresnes American Cemetery was created by the French architect and landscape designer Jacques Gréber.  His landscape plan features symmetrical pathways, perfectly aligned crosses, and expansive terraces designed to take advantage of the dramatic elevation and provide panoramic views of Paris. Charles Platt's sons, William and Geoffrey Platt, would later design the loggias and memorial rooms which comprise the loggias added to the chapel after World War II. 

The Graves of the Fallen Are Perfectly Laid Out,  the Crosses and Landscaping in Accordance with the High Standards for All ABMC Cemeteries 

The Additional Plot for the 24 World War Two Burials of the Cemetery

Above the Chapel Entrance Is Inscribed:
PEACEFUL IS THEIR SLEEP IN GLORY

The Chapel 
The "Angel of Victory" Bears a Palm Branch for the Graves of the Fallen

The two "loggias", dedicated post-WWII, are two covered, open-air galleries that flank the central memorial chapel. In the rooms at the ends of the loggias are white marble figures in memory of those who lost their lives in the two wars. Inscribed on the loggia walls is a summary of the loss of life in our armed forces in each war, together with the location of the overseas commemorative cemeteries where our war dead are buried.

The WWI Loggia and Memorial Entrance Added in 1952
A Matching WWII Complex Is On the Other (North) Side of the Chapel

At the end of the south loggia, one enters the World War I memorial room and faces a pure white statue entitled “Remembrance.” This graceful figure was created in Carrara marble by the American sculptor John Gregory, of New York, New York. The walls and floors of the memorial room are of Italian marbles of varying shades and give a rich subdued effect to highlight the statue.  The WWII room houses a statue titled "Memory," by American sculptor Lewis Iselin.

Relief in the WWI Loggia
(The WWII Loggia Has a Similarly Themed Relief)

An ABMC Staff Member Discusses the WWI Memorial Statue
"Remembrance" with Visitors

Visiting Today

Here are some practical points about visiting Suresnes American Cemetery

Address: 123 Boulevard Washington, 92150 Suresnes, France

Hours: Open daily from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Closed on Christmas Day (Dec 25) and New Year's Day (Jan 1).

Cost: Free, no booking required in advance

Train / Tram: Take the Transilien train (not the Metro) from Gare St. Lazare to the Suresnes Mont Valérien station, or take the tram to the La Défense station. From the Suresnes station, it is about a 10-minute walk uphill to the cemetery.

Taxi/Ride-Share: Approximately a 5-mile (10 to 15-minute) drive from central Paris.

The Visitors Center

Grave Sites on Special Occasions 

Every Memorial Day, Each American Battle Monuments Cemetery Holds a Commemorative Event Like This One at Suresnes in 2016

A Personal Note

On my battlefield tours, I've taken seven groups to visit Suresnes American Cemetery. Most the individuals had never heard of it before. Almost without exception, upon arrival, they were extremely taken by the beauty of the site, and as we departed, collectively, they were always quiet and reflective. If you are ever in Paris and wish to see a memorable and moving example of how the United States honors its Fallen, please consider stopping off at this splendid shrine. MH

P.S.

By All Means—A Visit to Suresnes American Cemetery Can Be Combined with a Visit to the Magnificent Lafayette Escadrille Memorial. It's just a 4-Mile Drive Away

Thanks to Suresnes Superintendent Carly Mathieu for the support on this article.  Photos are mostly from ABMC sources, Wiki Commons, and the Library of Congress.

The London Territorials at the Somme

London's Territorials Attacking at the Somme

London Territorial Force units, often known as "London's Territorials" or the London Regiment, was composed primarily of  London professionals, bankers, clerks, post office workers, and craftsmen. The regiment raised 88 battalions for the war, with roughly 80% of the men being London residents. The London battalions formed the London District, which consisted principally of the 1st and 2nd London Divisions. Most of the battalions served on the Western Front, with a scattering of units deployed to Gallipoli, Palestine, and Salonika.

The Regiment made their mark on Western Front, quite early. The London Scottish was the first Territorial unit to go into battle on the Western Front in October 1914. The London Irish Rifles may have established the practice of kicking soccer balls towards the enemy's trenches during an over-the-top attack at Loos in 1915. It would be in 1916, however, during the Battle of the Somme, that they saw their most memorable service. At great cost, these Kitchener Army units shattered the prewar myth that civilian volunteers could not fight as well as regulars.  

They played their role at the Somme primarily with the the 56th (1st London) Division and the 47th (2nd London) Division. They were involved in major actions including: the 1 July assault on Gommecourt, the attacks on Ginchy and High Wood (September 1916), and the final, costly, and unsuccessful assault on the Butte de Warlencourt in October 1916. 

At the Somme the London Regiment battalions suffered appalling loses. Over the first five days of the battle, the regiment recorded 1,433 men killed in action. Over the 141-day battle, several battalions recorded killed-wounded-missing totals greater than the manning standards for the unit.

Sources:  Several online articles on the London Regiment

A Dozen Drawings from America's Most Pro-War Political Cartoonist, W.A. Rogers

W.A. Rogers

W.A. Rogers (William Allen Rogers, 1854–1931) was a prominent American cartoonist and illustrator, best known for his long career at Harper's Weekly. He succeeded the legendary Thomas Nast as the magazine's primary cartoonist in 1877. Rogers was opposed to Germany's conduct of the war from its beginning. When America entered the World War, he served as an executive member of the Division of Pictorial Publicity within the Committee on Public Information (CPI) during World War I. From August 1914 to November 1918, he produced a constant flow of anti-German and pro-Ally stream of cartoons.

"It was a glorious Victory
(Over Belgium)"

"The first great German “U” boat Victory"

"Just Whose Pet Snake Is This?"

"Is God Still With Us?"

"A Good Recruiting Sergeant for Uncle Sam"

"The Junker Must Go"

"To France"

"Who Shall Rule? Man or Beast?"

"The Way to Do It."

"Now for a Roundup
(Sedition Law Passed)"

"Speed Up!"

"Christmas in Europe 1918"

Sources:  Library of Congress; America's Black and White Book: One Hundred Pictured Reasons Why We Are At War

Gumbinnen: A Lesser-Known but Highly Influential Eastern Front Battle

 

Russian Infantry

On 20 August 1914, the German Eighth Army was surprisingly defeated by the larger, but clumsily advancing Russian First Army commanded by General Paul von Rennenkampf. It was—by the standards of the Great War—a smaller and less dramatic victory/defeat. This is a relative matter, of course. The two armies committed 138,000 combatants that day and suffered a combined 34,000 killed and wounded. Nonetheless, the responses and subsequent actions to the event by the local commanders and the general staffs overseeing them are a much bigger story. Those men and their immediate decisions would powerfully influence the conduct of the war on both the Eastern Front and Western Front.

In an action just three days earlier at Stallupönen (map below), the Germans—anticipating a Russian drive towards Königsberg—had administered a small but stinging defeat on their adversary.  They been both better prepared for their first battle of the war and lucky. German General Hermann von François, commander of  I Corps of the Eighth Army had decided—on his own initiative—to take his forces to Stallupönen where he expected Russian forces to be probing  for a flanking attack. His quick attack devastated a Russian division that had no awareness of the presence of an enemy corps in the neighborhood. This forced a temporary halt for Russia's First Army, which was just initiating a major invasion of East Prussia. German forces, strategically on the defensive, then withdrew and consolidated at what seemed to be a strong defensive position around Gumbinnen. 

Three days later, German Army Commander General Maximilian von Prittwitz ordered a pre-emptive attack on the now slowly approaching  Russians. German forces initially had some success on the flanks—especially, once again, von François in the north. Overall, however, the attack was largely repulsed by surprisingly strong Russian artillery, against the German XVII Corps under August von Mackensen in the center.  The Germans were forced to retreat — advantage Russia (apparently). However, both commanders were surprised by the results, and responded to the outcome in ways that would dramatically influence future operations. 

The losing commander, General Maximilian von Prittwitz, whose mission had been to slow the Russian advance while the main German forces dealt with France, was overawed by  the combination of the  defeat and the subsequent receipt of information of the advancing Russian Second Army from the south. When he suggested a plan to–in effect–abandon East Prussia to the enemy, he was quickly sacked in favor of the Hindenburg-Ludendorff team. 

General Rennenkampf's response (or maybe non-response) of failing to continue pressuring the Germans, however, would have disastrous implications for his army's further operations on the  Eastern Front. Within a week, it would allow the new Eighth Army leaders to disengage from Russia's First Army, concentrate on Samsonov's Second Army, and administer a catastrophic defeat on it at Tannenberg. Any sort of major thrust by First Army would have forced the Germans to divert troops to face him. But there was no pressure.

Russian Artillery Was the Key to the Russian Victory at Gumbinnen

Despite its setback at Gumbinnen, Eighth Army had been  left free to execute the strategy— worked out in pre-hostilities war games—of punching Russia's northern army hard enough to stop it in its tracks, and then turning south to deal with their enemy's other army deployed in the northern theater. 

On a broader scale, Gumbinnen may also had a war-shaping impact on Germany's 1914 campaign in the west. After the defeat, General Moltke at the German High Command seems to have lost confidence in the disposition of forces in the East and ordered two army corps and a cavalry division away from the Western Front. This critical troop diversion may have weakened the right wing of the German advance into France, contributing to the eventual failure of  Germany's plan for victory. Such were the consequences of the Battle of Gumbinnen.

Sources:  WorldWarI Today; Gumbinnen 1914, U.S. Army Command and General Staff Paper

Another Guy Who Predicted World War One: August Niemann

August Niemann (1839–1919)

Bio

German actor, editor, and author Wilhelm Otto August Niemann's 1904 novel, Der Weltkrieg: Deutsche Träume (The World War: German Dreams) in 1904, published in English as The Coming Conquest of England. anticipates a coming worldwide war, but his cockeyed starting lineups for the competing alliances led to vastly different outcome. His prediction was that Great Britain would lose a two-front war in India and at home against an irresistible grouping of Germany, France, and Russia arrayed against them. Nevertheless, he accurately recognizes that the latent energy building up beneath the post-Napoleonic great power rivalries is going to result in an explosive release. Niemann is especially disturbed by (envious of?) the British Raj. 

He is more remembered for his science fiction works,  especially  his 1909 Jules Verne-style novel, Aetherio: A Trip to the Planets, a tale of interplanetary voyaging in which the protagonists travel not only to Mars, Venus, and the Moon but also into a hollow Earth. He lived to see the war he predicted come, and its outcome, with which he was presumably extremely disappointed.

British India 

Niemann's Dream

"I recall to mind a British colonel, who said to me in Calcutta: “This is the third time that I have been sent to India. Twenty-five years ago, as lieutenant, and then the Russians were some fifteen hundred miles from the Indian frontier; then, six years since, as captain, and the Russians were then only five hundred miles away. A year ago I came here as lieutenant-colonel, and the Russians are right up to the passes leading to India.

"The map of the world unfolds itself before me. All seas are ploughed by the keels of English vessels, all coasts dotted with the coaling stations and fortresses of the British world-power. In England is vested the dominion of the globe, and England will retain it; she cannot permit the Russian monster to drink life and mobility from the sea. 

“Without England’s permission no shot can be fired on the ocean,” once said William Pitt, England’s greatest statesman. For many, many years England has increased her lead, owing to dissensions among the continental Powers. Almost all wars have, for centuries past, been waged in the interests of England, and almost all have been incited by England. Only when Bismarck’s genius presided over Germany did the German Michael become conscious of his own strength, and wage his own wars.

Are things to come to this pass, that Germany is to crave of England’s bounty—her air and light, and her very daily bread? or does their ancient vigor no longer animate Michael’s arms?

When Germany Unified

Shall the three Powers who, after Japan’s victory over China, joined hands in the treaty of Shimonoseki, in order to thwart England’s aims, shall they—Germany, France, and Russia—still fold their hands, or shall they not rather mutually join them in a common cause?

In my mind’s eye I see the armies and the fleets of Germany, France, and Russia moving together against the common enemy, who with his polypus arms enfolds the globe. The iron onslaught of the three allied Powers will free the whole of Europe from England’s tight embrace. The great war lies in the lap of the future.

The story that I shall portray in the following pages is not a chapter of the world’s past history; it is the picture as it clearly developed itself to my mind’s eye, on the publication of the first despatch of the Viceroy Alexieff to the Tsar of Russia. And, simultaneously like a flash of lightning, the telegram which the Emperor William sent to the Boers after Jameson’s Raid crosses my memory—that telegram which aroused in the heart of the German nation such an abiding echo. I gaze into the picture, and am mindful of the duties and aims of our German nation. My dreams, the dreams of a German, show me the war that is to be, and the victory of the three great allied nations. Germany, France, and Russia—and a new division of the possessions of the earth as the final aim and object of this gigantic universal war."

Author's Preface, The Coming Conquest of England