15 replies to this topic

[Lachlan]

I have often doubted that Kitchener had a sudden urge, after the war had started, to raise mass armies for the field and thus flying in the face of conventional wisdom that it would be over after the first big battle. It sounds very British and ad-hoc to be sure, with posters appealing to men in this emergency.

It just seems unlikely to me and I'm sure as Sec for War, he had plans for just this contingency for a long time. Considering he had been an observer at German military manoeuvres in 1912/13 and witnessed first-hand German tactics, mass formations and readiness to dig "real" trenches to hold on to positions won, I suspect he had drawn up plans long before August 1914 to raise a large-scale wartime army. How far he got I do not know. He obviously could not raise "pro-actively" such an army in peace-time due to long-standing convention and political opposition, cost, lack of volunteers in peacetime (national service would be needed) and the hostile message it would give to Germany.

Am I giving him too much credit, or did he have such a plan to raise new armies in his pocket weeks or months before, ready to implement if a war started ?

Does anyone know what his plans were regarding "a big war" and how far forward did he plan for it ?

[Terry_Reeves]

Lachlan

I don't think he was in a position to draw up plans prior to the war:

1898 - 1899  Governor of the Sudan

1900-1902    South Africa

1902 - 1909  C in C  Indian Army

1909 - 1914  Proconsul in Egypt and Sudan (de facto Viceroy)

He was in Britain on leave from Egypt when the war started.

TR

[michaeldr]

He was in Britain on leave from when the war started.
and his next move was to return to the middle-east
The PM's message found him already at Dover

[truthergw]

All senior Army officers had contemplated at one time or another how a Continental war would affect Britain. The only actual plans were for the mobilisation and concentration on the left wing of the French forces, under the overall command of Marshal Joffre, These plans were made in the few years prior to the war. Kitchener had almost no contact with the British setup, his career being mainly in India and Egypt. He had, however, stated some time before the war that a continental style war with very large conscript armies would involve the whole resources of the modern industrial nation. Such a war would not be over in one crushing battle, it would take time. KoK thought 2 or 3 years. His idea was that Britain with the resources of the empire should plan to enter at a later stage in the war and bring it to a conclusion while Britain still had a sizeable force in the field. This would ensure Britain an important voice at the treaty table after the war. Kitchener was notorious for keeping his plans and his motives to himself, he was not a committee man. What his long term plans were can only be conjectured with the help of the few general opinions he had stated, as I mentioned above. There are several discussions on the forum re Kitchener and the early plans of the war. A search in the various sections might throw up some items of interest for you.

[KevinBattle]

Until the signing of the Entente Cordiale, I think most British planning for a Continental War was envisioning France as the enemy...
Maybe the defeat by Prussia brought to France a need for stronger alliances?

I think even the Germans half expected "family bonds" to bring Britain into a neutral or pro German stance......

[truthergw]

There was a very strong pro-German movement in Britain but The Kaiser's antics made it very hard to support and easy to attack. From the time of the South African War and the notorious telegram, British minds were turning ever more toward the inevitability of supporting France. After 1871,  Bismarck's efforts to isolate France and Russia were successful but of course, that changed when William II got rid of him. The humiliation of Russia in the Balkans on top of her defeat in Manchuria drove France and Russia together. The biggest bar to the Entente was in fact the association with the Tsar's Russia. He was seen as a reactionary despot by many in Britain and that feeling was widespread across all the democracies of Europe. However, the Tsar had one thing that was essential, manpower. Amazing how easy it was to get along with a bloodthirsty autocrat when he was on our side. To be serious for a moment. Russia's contribution at the start of the war can not be overestimated. The Marne may well have owed its outcome to the efforts made on the Eastern front. I have just glanced at the thread heading and I realise that I have wandered far from Lord Kitchener's plans. As a desperate attempt at a patch-up, might I say that K was very keen to keep the Russians in the war and fighting hard. He was, of course, off to meet the Grand Duke and the Tsar when he lost his life.

[MichaelBully]

In respect of Russia, yes Russia seemed very unpopular  with more Radical and Liberal movements due to its reputation for being an autocracy, but also the more Imperialistic minded realised that Russian designs on India and Persia were not compatible with Britain's interests. Britain of course had also been concerned for generations about the possibility of Russia gaining access to the Mediteranean via the Straits. But conversly it could be argued that being on the same side as Russia could protect Britain's imperial interests, if Britain was going to embark on the course of joining a European alliance.

Lord Kitchener seemed to be genuinely popular in France , and of course managed to avoid a possible serious clash with French forces at Fashoda in 1898.

One of the many things that fascinate me about Kitchener's final mission to Russia is what exactly did he hope to achieve? I appreciate that the Russians invited him in the first place. Kitchener must have realised that a 'big push' was due on the Western Front, so possibly June 1916 was  not the best time to be absent from Britain. Unless he was hoping to somehow co-ordinate a possible 'push' on the Western Front with some further action on the Eastern Front.

[truthergw]

According to George Cassar, Asquith wished for someone to visit the Tsar, discuss the demands for supplies and inspect the Eastern front. The Tsar had invited Kitchener to visit him and of course, it was politically convenient to get KoK out of the country . This all came together when Kitchener set off on the Hampshire. Strangely, Lord Esher, in his work,  has nothing to add except that no one in Paris knew of the planned voyage.

[MichaelBully]

Thanks Tom, yes I had read that a number of politicians wanted Lord Kitchener away from the country at the time. I expect that the fact that few people knew that Kitchener had embarked on the trip to Russia added to the shock impact of his death. Had wondered, was this Kitchener's first visit to Russia, or perhaps his first visit to Russia once the Great War started?

truthergw, on 07 May 2011 - 08:56 PM, said:

According to George Cassar, Asquith wished for someone to visit the Tsar, discuss the demands for supplies and inspect the Eastern front. The Tsar had invited Kitchener to visit him and of course, it was politically convenient to get KoK out of the country . This all came together when Kitchener set off on the Hampshire. Strangely, Lord Esher, in his work,  has nothing to add except that no one in Paris knew of the planned voyage.

[truthergw]

K was well traveled so I could not absolutely rule out a pre-war visit but I am fairly sure this was his first since being made SoS. I assume that there must have been pre-war contact between the respective general staffs to arrange details of the entente but I rather feel K would have been in India or Egypt at the time. There does not seem to have been much in the way of leisure or social travel from Britain to Russia prior to the war. Tours of the continent and America seem to have been common and trips to Africa to kill some animals seem to have been almost de rigeur but I do not recall any equivalent to the Tsar's realm.

[MichaelBully]

Thanks Tom. Yes accept that Lord Kitchener was extremely well travelled, and rarely seemed to be in Britain before 1914, but Russia doesn't seem to have been on his list.
Have found copy of George Cassar's biography in library. Interesting comments on Russian trip, implying that Kitchener let it be known that he wanted to visit Russia and the Czar responded.
This work also offers some useful context to the trip. Seems that there was a need for a visit to help Russia co-ordinate its resources and manpower on the Eastern Front.
As a 'big push' was due on the Western Front, makes some sense for a mission to Russia at this time.

truthergw, on 08 May 2011 - 10:15 AM, said:

K was well traveled so I could not absolutely rule out a pre-war visit but I am fairly sure this was his first since being made SoS. I assume that there must have been pre-war contact between the respective general staffs to arrange details of the entente but I rather feel K would have been in India or Egypt at the time. There does not seem to have been much in the way of leisure or social travel from Britain to Russia prior to the war. Tours of the continent and America seem to have been common and trips to Africa to kill some animals seem to have been almost de rigeur but I do not recall any equivalent to the Tsar's realm.

[truthergw]

MichaelBully, on 10 May 2011 - 09:09 PM, said:

Thanks Tom. Yes accept that Lord Kitchener was extremely well travelled, and rarely seemed to be in Britain before 1914, but Russia doesn't seem to have been on his list.
Have found copy of George Cassar's biography in library. Interesting comments on Russian trip, implying that Kitchener let it be known that he wanted to visit Russia and the Czar responded.
This work also offers some useful context to the trip. Seems that there was a need for a visit to help Russia co-ordinate its resources and manpower on the Eastern Front.
As a 'big push' was due on the Western Front, makes some sense for a mission to Russia at this time.

Absolutely. There was a need for a visit from a high ranking party. Kitchener wanted to go, the Tsar and/or the Grand Duke wanted to see him. It suited everybody and the fact that few, if any, of his Cabinet colleagues would miss him, was icing on the cake. The real tragedy of Kitchener was that Asquith should never have appointed him. A war without him would have been a very different affair.

[MichaelBully]

Interesting, would like to hear more Tom. I have only recently started researching Kitchener, so am keen to read all different opinions. Don't know enough to comment directly. Regards

truthergw, on 10 May 2011 - 10:22 PM, said:

The real tragedy of Kitchener was that Asquith should never have appointed him. A war without him would have been a very different affair.

[truthergw]

MichaelBully, on 11 May 2011 - 09:32 AM, said:

Interesting, would like to hear more Tom. I have only recently started researching Kitchener, so am keen to read all different opinions. Don't know enough to comment directly. Regards

My interest for some time has been in the politics of the war and the pre-war period. The British government were totally unprepared for war. As far as they were concerned, it really did " strike from a clear blue sky". The topic of great concern at the time was Irish Home rule and the very dangerous situation in Ireland, teetering on the brink of armed insurrection and civil war. The Irish question had led to the Curragh Affair earlier in the year when one of the side effects had been that Asquith took on the role of S o S for War. That is a reflection of how unlikely a foreign war was deemed to be. When the Sarajevo murders flashed into a war situation, Kitchener happened to be in England. Asquith was not normally a man to make sudden decisions. He was the great procastinator and the decision to appoint Kitchener Sec. of War proved to be unsound. Though very popular, he was unfitted for the task without a lengthy period to acquaint himself with European affairs and the military set up in UK. Although Churchill must shoulder most of the blame for the Dardanelles fiasco, Kitchener must take his share. In the first place, for allowing it and then for resisting its early termination.

[MichaelBully]

Thanks for the response Tom, helpful. Do you think that Kitchener being appointed as Secretary of War influenced the course of the war in an adverse manner from the Allied perspective? An impression I have from reading so far is that Kitchener is credited with foresight of realising that the Great War would be a prolonged affair, perhaps three years duration. I know that this has been discussed in another thread. Also his popularity helped to stimulate recruiting, and to help mobilise a large section of the population behind the war effort.
On the other hand do you think that his absence from Eurpean political and military affairs hampered the Allies? I know that it has been mentioned earlier on this thread that Kitchener's trip to Russia  was held to be 'poltically convenient'.   Regards.

truthergw, on 11 May 2011 - 10:29 AM, said:

My interest for some time has been in the politics of the war and the pre-war period. The British government were totally unprepared for war. As far as they were concerned, it really did " strike from a clear blue sky". The topic of great concern at the time was Irish Home rule and the very dangerous situation in Ireland, teetering on the brink of armed insurrection and civil war. The Irish question had led to the Curragh Affair earlier in the year when one of the side effects had been that Asquith took on the role of S o S for War. That is a reflection of how unlikely a foreign war was deemed to be. When the Sarajevo murders flashed into a war situation, Kitchener happened to be in England. Asquith was not normally a man to make sudden decisions. He was the great procastinator and the decision to appoint Kitchener Sec. of War proved to be unsound. Though very popular, he was unfitted for the task without a lengthy period to acquaint himself with European affairs and the military set up in UK. Although Churchill must shoulder most of the blame for the Dardanelles fiasco, Kitchener must take his share. In the first place, for allowing it and then for resisting its early termination.

[Old Tom]

I wonder if the last minute decision to appoint K as S of S is an example of the governments tendency to leave the war to the generals (or the admirals, but Churchill does seem to have had a measure of control as 1st Lord). The plans for the deployment of the BEF had been prepared for some time, albiet that the S of S for War at the time (Haldane?) seems to have agreed the staff talks, which led to the plan, without informing the cabinet. The possibility of a major war was 'in the air' and efforts to avoid it had been made. I have forgotten when the previous S of S resigned over the Curragh incidence but Asquith had been assuming the S of S role for a while before ultimatums were issued. One would think that the need for an S of S with recent governmental experience was obvious.

Old Tom