Really found it interesting..just to be clear, this is a not a documentary about WW1 ,but more about it's affect on this country. I'm sure there will be other docus on the history later.
That's right. It's more of a social history of the impact of the war on actual people rather than the politics or military events. If Paxo had started off in Sarajevo talking about Gavrilo Princip then I'm sure there would be complaints about having heard it all before. There was quite a bit which was familiar in his but I did learn some new things.
I've read some of Paxman's books before and enjoyed them (to dismiss him as someone who was just reading a script is very unfair to him) so I'll add the book that goes with the series to my reading list.
I suppose his 1066 reference was in regard an invasion to take over the country. We always suffered raids from the French, Dutch and Spanish.
William of Orange was invited to invade and take over, by Whigs in parliament, from the Catholic Charles II
Actually it was James II. After he was ousted James invaded with the help of, if I recall correctly, the French and Irish Catholics to reclaim the throne, and was defeated at the Battle of the Boyne, in my opinion, one of the most vital battles in British history.
I found this programme intriguing from start to finish. I've only recently become interested in WW1 history and the Kaiser himself. I think future shows should cover the relationship between the Royals and the Kaiser.
I think even back in the 1890's governments were beginning to realise how dangerous an individual the Kaiser was. He had far too much power and , someone correct me if I'm wrong, sacked German Chancellor Otto Von Bismark in 1890 and decided to take over Bismark's duties. The Kaiser was , as far as I know, a man with limited political experience and his ambitions were ill advised which ultimately lead to WW1.
Channel 4's recent documentary Queen Victoria and the crippled Kaiser touched upon this but it would be nice if Paxman touches on the pretext of WW1 and the events which were boiling over 30-40 years earlier.
I wonder if this series will touch on the Kaiser's support for Hitler years later, and also Churchill's offer of asylum in the country.
Really found it interesting..just to be clear, this is a not a documentary about WW1 ,but more about it's affect on this country. I'm sure there will be other docus on the history later.
BIB Wouldn't think that needed saying, but having skimmed the thread, it seems it does.
Some people try a little too hard to look clever IMO.
Actually it was James II. After he was ousted James invaded with the help of, if I recall correctly, the French and Irish Catholics to reclaim the throne, and was defeated at the Battle of the Boyne, in my opinion, one of the most vital battles in British history.
Agree about how important this battle was, but it is also one of the most mis-understood battles in British/Irish/European history. For example the Pope supported William and a large number of Catholics were in Williams army.
Really found it interesting..just to be clear, this is a not a documentary about WW1 ,but more about it's affect on this country. I'm sure there will be other docus on the history later.
True, it's aim was not to be potted history of the war but how the conflict affected the British at home.
We will have much more detailed historical programmes in the months to come, although to be honest, as others have said, WW1 has been exhaustively chronicled on TV in recent years.
I must say I don't much care for Paxo's style, in fact I'd rather dispense with camera hogging ex-newsreading presenters completely and just have a narrator.
It will be interesting to see which Historical fork in the road this [ and other] series will go down, WW1 as an unutterable folly that costs the lives of millions or a just war that saved Europe from the Evils of teutonic tyranny ?
The war was a folly, but if we hadn't fought with France in 1914, France would have lost and we would have been next and alone.
I learnt something new - I hadn't realised that the soldiers were volunteers, I'd assumed they were conscripted.
My grandfather had the Mons star for service on the Western front between August and November 1914. He was not a full time soldier but he would not been sent out there without proper training. I have always assumed that he was a member of the territorial reserve and called to action.
As a matter of interest does anyone know if the BBC intends to repeat The Great War from 1964 which helped to launch BBC2 and was highly acclaimed at the time ? The main narrator was Sir Michael Redgrave and there were 26x40 minute episodes produced in conjunction with CBC Canada and ABC Australia.
True, it's aim was not to be potted history of the war but how the conflict affected the British at home.
We will have much more detailed historical programmes in the months to come, although to be honest, as others have said, WW1 has been exhaustively chronicled on TV in recent years.
I'm sure we'll have Cherry Healey's "Looking Fashionable in a Gas Mask" and "10 Ways to avoid Trench Foot" to look forward to.
I guess the famous Kitchener poster, "Your Country Needs You" appealing for volunteers, is only familiar to many of the younger generations as a funny picture on a trendy shopping bag.
My employee uses it for a safety poster at work. We are encouraged to submit safety observation reports if we see good or bad practice in or out of the workplace.
I did point out the irony that Kitchener himself was killed when he sailed into a minefield, but it seemed lost.
The appearance of Julian Fellowes as 'Julian Kitchener-Fellows'was a bit baffling. I googled to find out that he'd decided to incorporate his wife's family name into his own at some point - she's the actual Kitchener.
So why didn't we see HER on screen, rather than JF who has no actual memories of HER ancestor???
OK - in a nutshell off the top of my head. There was significant tension between the Austro Hungarian Empire and Serbia. Gavrilo Princip (the assassin) was a Serbian nationalist - it is unclear if he was acting with the knowledge of the Serbian authorities. Following the assassination, Austro-Hungaria issued a series of demands to Serbia, which they knew Serbia would not agree to. Meanwhile, Russia considered itself to be the protector of all Slav nations and had treaty agreements with Serbia. Due to the fear of German expansionism both east and west, Russia had treaty agreements with France that it would support Russia if they were at war with Germany. Germany had strong connections and treaty agreements with the Austro Hungarian empire. As Serbia failed to meet the requirements of the Austro-Hungarian demands, war was declared on Serbia. Russia came to Serbia's aid, and Germany supported Austro-Hungary - France thus mobilised against Germany. As Germany did not want to fight a war on two fronts, they had a (cunning) plan - the Schliefen Plan - to take France out of the war quickly. This involved avoiding the strong defences on the Franco-German border by going through (neutral) Belgium. The Belgians were understandably a bit annoyed about this. Britain had treaty agreement protecting the rights of small nations such as Belgium, so issued an ultimatum for the Germans to withdraw , which they did not do, so war was declared on Germany. Is that clear?
I don't claim that the above is 100% accurate, but I think it gets the general idea. Any corrections are welcome.
A bit of revisionist history by Paxman, the Germans weren't as beastly to the Belgian civilians as we have been led to believe.I don't think the Belgians will agree with that.
Also no mention of the Northern towns PALS Battalions where whole streets lost their menfolk.
A bit of revisionist history by Paxman, the Germans weren't as beastly to the Belgian civilians as we have been led to believe.I don't think the Belgians will agree with that.
Also no mention of the Northern towns PALS Battalions where whole streets lost their menfolk.
I think you will find he did mention the Pals Battalions.
He only mentioned sports battalions not the Northern Towns where whole areas lost their menfolk in a single day on the Somme. He dismissed German atrocities as being exaggerated.
The atrocities were exaggerated for propaganda purposes, however they did happen.
The idea of PAL Regiments was mentioned in detail, I don't expect Paxo to cover ALL the various types, he can expect that the viewer is intelligent enough to make conclusions.
He only mentioned sports battalions not the Northern Towns where whole areas lost their menfolk in a single day on the Somme. He dismissed German atrocities as being exaggerated.
The one he covered in most detail was that based around the Hearts of Midlothian football club, but he did cover the Pals Regiments in general.
A bit of revisionist history by Paxman, the Germans weren't as beastly to the Belgian civilians as we have been led to believe.I don't think the Belgians will agree with that.
Also no mention of the Northern towns PALS Battalions where whole streets lost their menfolk.
Coincident that the ship was called Belgian Prince but I suggest you look up the story and I don't think the case is unique. I think it was the same U-Boat captain who was described later as 'specialising in sinking hospital ships'.
IN
SACRED AND LOVING MEMORY
OF
NEIL McDougall MORTON
OF SUNDERLAND
AGED 27 YEARS
CHIEF Officer OF BELGIAN PRINCE
TORPEDOED AND CRUELLY
MURDERED BY THE HUNS
ON 31 JULY 1917
(BODY WASHED ASHORE AT CUAN FERRY
ON 23RD SEPT)
HE GAVE HIS LIFE THAT
WE MIGHT NOT STARVE
ERECTED
BY HIS MOTHER
I found this programme intriguing from start to finish. I've only recently become interested in WW1 history and the Kaiser himself. I think future shows should cover the relationship between the Royals and the Kaiser.
I think even back in the 1890's governments were beginning to realise how dangerous an individual the Kaiser was. He had far too much power and , someone correct me if I'm wrong, sacked German Chancellor Otto Von Bismark in 1890 and decided to take over Bismark's duties. The Kaiser was , as far as I know, a man with limited political experience and his ambitions were ill advised which ultimately lead to WW1.
Channel 4's recent documentary Queen Victoria and the crippled Kaiser touched upon this but it would be nice if Paxman touches on the pretext of WW1 and the events which were boiling over 30-40 years earlier.
There's a 2 part WW1 documentary on BBC2 next Wednesday and Thursday at 9pm about the relationship bewteen the Kaiser and George V.
Comments
And don't forget the Barbary Pirates, some areas suffered quite badly from them. About time we tried to get compensation!
That's right. It's more of a social history of the impact of the war on actual people rather than the politics or military events. If Paxo had started off in Sarajevo talking about Gavrilo Princip then I'm sure there would be complaints about having heard it all before. There was quite a bit which was familiar in his but I did learn some new things.
I've read some of Paxman's books before and enjoyed them (to dismiss him as someone who was just reading a script is very unfair to him) so I'll add the book that goes with the series to my reading list.
Actually it was James II. After he was ousted James invaded with the help of, if I recall correctly, the French and Irish Catholics to reclaim the throne, and was defeated at the Battle of the Boyne, in my opinion, one of the most vital battles in British history.
I think even back in the 1890's governments were beginning to realise how dangerous an individual the Kaiser was. He had far too much power and , someone correct me if I'm wrong, sacked German Chancellor Otto Von Bismark in 1890 and decided to take over Bismark's duties. The Kaiser was , as far as I know, a man with limited political experience and his ambitions were ill advised which ultimately lead to WW1.
Channel 4's recent documentary Queen Victoria and the crippled Kaiser touched upon this but it would be nice if Paxman touches on the pretext of WW1 and the events which were boiling over 30-40 years earlier.
I wonder if this series will touch on the Kaiser's support for Hitler years later, and also Churchill's offer of asylum in the country.
One example shows how detached some members of the establishment were.
Who was it in the Cabinet who said, when it was suggested we should bomb Krups munitions factory, "You can't, it's private property,"?
BIB Wouldn't think that needed saying, but having skimmed the thread, it seems it does.
Some people try a little too hard to look clever IMO.
I'll continue to watch anyway.
What country?
Agree about how important this battle was, but it is also one of the most mis-understood battles in British/Irish/European history. For example the Pope supported William and a large number of Catholics were in Williams army.
True, it's aim was not to be potted history of the war but how the conflict affected the British at home.
We will have much more detailed historical programmes in the months to come, although to be honest, as others have said, WW1 has been exhaustively chronicled on TV in recent years.
It merits a place on terrestial tv. I thought that Paxman was fine.
The Austria/Hungary empire were very annoyed by it
My grandfather had the Mons star for service on the Western front between August and November 1914. He was not a full time soldier but he would not been sent out there without proper training. I have always assumed that he was a member of the territorial reserve and called to action.
I'm sure we'll have Cherry Healey's "Looking Fashionable in a Gas Mask" and "10 Ways to avoid Trench Foot" to look forward to.
My employee uses it for a safety poster at work. We are encouraged to submit safety observation reports if we see good or bad practice in or out of the workplace.
I did point out the irony that Kitchener himself was killed when he sailed into a minefield, but it seemed lost.
Neither would she as he drowned in 1916
Thank you.
"What is wars?"
Also no mention of the Northern towns PALS Battalions where whole streets lost their menfolk.
Not forgetting the raid by John Paul Jones in 1778. They actually landed and burned one of the forts at Whitehaven.
I think you will find he did mention the Pals Battalions.
There were many atrocities committed by the German Army in Belgium in 1914. Look up what happened in the town of Dinant http://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/may/11/andrewosborn
He only mentioned sports battalions not the Northern Towns where whole areas lost their menfolk in a single day on the Somme. He dismissed German atrocities as being exaggerated.
Yes, the Pals Battalions were mentioned and other groups that were targeted for recruitment like "The Artists' Rifles."
The idea of PAL Regiments was mentioned in detail, I don't expect Paxo to cover ALL the various types, he can expect that the viewer is intelligent enough to make conclusions.
Coincident that the ship was called Belgian Prince but I suggest you look up the story and I don't think the case is unique. I think it was the same U-Boat captain who was described later as 'specialising in sinking hospital ships'.
There's a 2 part WW1 documentary on BBC2 next Wednesday and Thursday at 9pm about the relationship bewteen the Kaiser and George V.