When is the absolute earliest that WWI could happen?

GauchoBadger

GauchoBadger

Basically what it says in the title. The composition of each alliance doesn't matter, so long as it involves at least Germany, France, and Britain or Russia.
It is said here in my country's education program that the balance of powers and alliances that would lead to WWI was set by the Berlin Conference and the subsequent carving of Africa.
How different would this pre-1900 world war be in terms of military technology and tactics?
 

Wendell

GauchoBadger said:
Basically what it says in the title. The composition of each alliance doesn't matter, so long as it involves at least Germany, France, and Britain or Russia.
It is said here in my country's education program that the balance of powers and alliances that would lead to WWI was set by the Berlin Conference and the subsequent carving of Africa.
How different would this pre-1900 world war be in terms of military technology and tactics?
Click to expand...
It has to be after 1871 if Germany has to be a participant.
 
BiteNibbleChomp

BiteNibbleChomp

If Germany can mean 'Holy Roman Empire', Britain can mean 'Anglo-Saxon England' and Russia can mean 'Kievan Rus states', then some time in the 10th century.

But seriously, to have a war recognisable as WWI, you need aircraft, two huge alliances and a diplomatic incident of some kind:
  • Diplomatic incidents could happen whenever someone wanted one to. In OTL, there was one in 1911 or so about Morocco/Algeria, and the Balkan wars 1912-3.
  • Aircraft were used by the Italians in their war against the Ottomans in 1912.
  • The Triple Entente was finalised around 1907. The Central Powers (minus the Ottomans but including Italy) existed from 1882.
The earliest when all three of these conditions were met was in 1911 or 1912.

- BNC
 

Kyro92

For a war that turns into a years-long slog like IOTL, I'd say that the invention of the Haber process is the critical limit here. Without that whichever alliance has Britain on it's side will be able to strangle the other's munition industry by cutting off the import of Chilean nitrates.

(Unless we can contrive a WW1-type scenario in which Britain chooses to stay neutral? The earlier the war happens the greater their antipathy towards Russia, especially if we're talking a scenario where Russia has defeated Japan. At the same time British antipathy towards Germany is less established the further back you go)

So I think we need either a scenario in which Britain chooses to not intervene, or a scenario in which the Haber process is invented earlier(IOTL it was only invented a few years before WW1, and wasn't actually translated to mass production until after the war began)
 
GauchoBadger

GauchoBadger

Tech specifications aren't exactly necessary here, so long as the war is large enough and involves enough powers.
Is there any PoD back in the 1890s that could have caused WWI? What i can conclude from here is that this is the earliest that a similar setup to OTL's WWI could happen.
How important would machine guns be in such a war? Would the Maxim still see some action?
 
Last edited:
BiteNibbleChomp

BiteNibbleChomp

GauchoBadger said:
Tech specifications aren't exactly necessary here, so long as the war is large enough and involves enough powers.
Click to expand...

The 7 years war (1756) involved a similar proportion to the world as WWI, so technically any time post 1700 can count.

Can you give us some specifics as to what you define as 'WWI*' vs 'Big Conflict'? Else it is very difficult to settle on any one point.

- BNC
 
GauchoBadger

GauchoBadger

BiteNibbleChomp said:
The 7 years war (1756)
Can you give us some specifics as to what you define as 'WWI*' vs 'Big Conflict'? Else it is very difficult to settle on any one point.
Click to expand...
It must be a shock of imperialistic european powers within a set of intertwining alliances, be them formal or not. It must be fought primarily in the european continent, and victory for one specific side will completely alter the balance of powers for years to come (like how OTL WWI led to the interwar period, eith the rise of new powers such as the USSR and the formation of totalitarian dictatorships like Germany and Italy).
 

Yeti

As long as Bismarck is alive the Entente could not form. So having him die early might permit an 1890s WWI.

Its more likely you'd need an arms race like what actually occurred to set off a larger conflagration. So, anytime after Tirpitz's 1900 naval plan would work. The closer you put it to WWI the more likely it involves more powers...so I'd guess 1906-1907 or 1911+ would be least distant from OTL to get the same scope.

Dropping Britain out of the war is as simple as not having Germany invade Belgium. An author recently did this in an ATL series based on Germany striking east in 1914 instead of west.
 
B-29_Bomber

B-29_Bomber

Banned
GauchoBadger said:
It must be a shock of imperialistic european powers within a set of intertwining alliances, be them formal or not. It must be fought primarily in the european continent, and victory for one specific side will completely alter the balance of powers for years to come (like how OTL WWI led to the interwar period, eith the rise of new powers such as the USSR and the formation of totalitarian dictatorships like Germany and Italy).
Click to expand...

That's way too specific. Never mind the fact that the concept of totalitarianism is a relatively modern concept not necessarily guaranteed to happen even with OTL WWI taking place.
 

Kirook

B-29_Bomber said:
That's way too specific. Never mind the fact that the concept of totalitarianism is a relatively modern concept not necessarily guaranteed to happen even with OTL WWI taking place.
Click to expand...
I think that was just an example of the shifts in the balance of power that GauchoBadger wants this alt-WWI to produce.
 

Panhomo

If you don't consider the technology and specific vast entrenched and grinding characteristics of the war to be its defining features; just a global scale and germany vs france, then any time after the franco-russian alliance is solidified around 1892 is close to the earliest. Before that and the french will be too concerned about rapid defeat by the germans to risk war.

First sino-japanese war seems like a good candidate, with russia intervening on behalf of the chinese in exchange for fleet basing rights and to prevent japanese domination of the region, germany backs the japanese, france backs the russians, austria-hungary back the germans. Fighting continues in Asia but full out war doesn't immediately start in Europe, allowing the various states to mobilize and begin digging trenches, and bring in other powers.

Yeti said:
As long as Bismarck is alive the Entente could not form. So having him die early might permit an 1890s WWI.

Its more likely you'd need an arms race like what actually occurred to set off a larger conflagration. So, anytime after Tirpitz's 1900 naval plan would work. The closer you put it to WWI the more likely it involves more powers...so I'd guess 1906-1907 or 1911+ would be least distant from OTL to get the same scope.

Dropping Britain out of the war is as simple as not having Germany invade Belgium. An author recently did this in an ATL series based on Germany striking east in 1914 instead of west.
Click to expand...
Sounds interesting. Got a link?
 

dandan_noodles

Would it be possible for the Franco-Prussian war to spiral into early WWI? Russia was pledged to enter the war if Austria tried to attack Prussia while it's back was turned, though I can't say for sure if the British planned to intervene.
 

Yeti

dandan_noodles said:
Would it be possible for the Franco-Prussian war to spiral into early WWI? Russia was pledged to enter the war if Austria tried to attack Prussia while it's back was turned, though I can't say for sure if the British planned to intervene.
Click to expand...

Your POD is that the French have some clue how to strategically fight a war in 1871. That's a big POD!
 

galveston bay

BiteNibbleChomp said:
If Germany can mean 'Holy Roman Empire', Britain can mean 'Anglo-Saxon England' and Russia can mean 'Kievan Rus states', then some time in the 10th century.

But seriously, to have a war recognisable as WWI, you need aircraft, two huge alliances and a diplomatic incident of some kind:
  • Diplomatic incidents could happen whenever someone wanted one to. In OTL, there was one in 1911 or so about Morocco/Algeria, and the Balkan wars 1912-3.
  • Aircraft were used by the Italians in their war against the Ottomans in 1912.
  • The Triple Entente was finalised around 1907. The Central Powers (minus the Ottomans but including Italy) existed from 1882.
The earliest when all three of these conditions were met was in 1911 or 1912.

- BNC
Click to expand...

I always wondered if Germany would help Russia if the Russo Japanese War expanded to include the British.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top