In 1914 Britain’s naval capacity was impressive but given the size and strength of the navy, it seems strange that the navy did not contribute more to the actual conflict in the war. Apart from the Battle of Jutland, Dogger Bank and a few skirmishes there was very little in the way of staged naval battles. The role of the navy was directed towards the preventative and the defensive. The navy was mainly used for blockading the German ports, therefore limiting their merchant shipping and supplies which was an important factor in the final outcome of the war.
Although it is true that there weren’t many navy battles in the First World War, we should not underplay the importance of the blockade. The blockades were particularly effective in the later stages of the war by damaging the German Morale. The British Grand fleet was mainly based at Scapa Flow, just off the north coast, and was in a position there to have full control of the North Sea. All the German’s merchant shipping had to be limited to the Baltic Sea. At first this pressure was not as effective as it could have been. This was because no blockade was enforced on neutral countries that might trade with Germany. By 1915 German imports were down to 55% of their pre-war levels. The Germans also succeeded in cutting British food imports to 75% of their 1913 level. By 1918 it was down to 65%. This shows how important it was to not let enemy countries get supplies.
The introduction of the convoy system severely reduced the success of the German U-boats that had been targeting merchant shipping. Also the Americans were able to produce ships faster than the Germans could sink them. The combination of rationing and an increase in the production of domestic food meant that Britain, unlike Germany, was not seriously damaged by the naval action. The lack of food in Germany put a strain on the German people’s support of the war so I think this was an important factor in the final outcome of the war.
The main naval battle was the Battle of Jutland. Most of the evidence so far has downplayed the significance of the naval effort compared to the land-based offensives: it was not really a major cause of war, it had been abandoned as an offensive military strategy, and much of the work of the blockade had limited success. It is hard to tell who really won the Battle of Jutland. Both sides claimed that the other had suffered extensive damage and neither side seems to have a claim to out-and-out victory. There were some distinct benefits for the Germans but they were only short term. The High Seas Fleet had not been routed by the Grand Fleet, and the North Sea and Baltic were now closed for Allied shipping. This last point was especially significant since it blocked the supply route to the Russians, who desperately needed help. This block was probably a major factor in Russia withdrawing from the war.
There were also negative aspects from the German perspective. If the Battle of Jutland had removed tsarist Russia as a threat it must therefore have assisted the rise of the Bolsheviks to power. Also the increased use of submarines after the success of Jutland prompted America to join the war. The entrance of the U.S.A effectively turned the war in the allies favor. So looking at this I would say the Battle of Jutland was quite significant and played quite an important role of the outcome of the war.
In the short-term story of the war between Germany and Britain the battle was ultimately indecisive. Overall the naval efforts were eclipsed by events further south. Victory and defeat would be decided on dry land in the muddy trenches of Belgium and France, not the icy waves of the North and Baltic seas.
