considered.
Source D is a memoir of the French General Foche from 1915. The
general suggests that the french tactics that had been used in 1914 were
useless and maybe concentrating on defence would have been a better plan,
and perhaps would have saved the lives of many French soldiers.
Source E is an adaptation from the German General Falkehayns book on
the War, and he is discussing German tactics used in 1916. He tells us,
regardless of how many troops or men were involved, the defenders usually
suceeded and had an advantage over the attackers in a battle. Both Sources
agree that defence should have been more focused on than attack simply
because it was easier- Defence was stronger than attack,m and Generals
were too 'Attack-Minded'.
4) Source F is an entry from the diary of Field Marshal Haig, Commander in
Chief of British forces on the Western Front.
The entry was taken from Haig's personal diary therefore many may
perceive it as a reliable source. However, the way the entry is written in
great detailed descriptions suggests maybe Haig expected or intended for
other people to read it. The War Cabinet included the Prime Minister, Lloyd
George. Haig tells of how the War cabinet asked many questions and their
attitudes towards the war's progress were pessemistic; understanably
because there was no sign of Britain winning the war after 3 years. There
was much apprehension about future plans for the war, yet Haig had faith in
the British troops and seemed to believe that the war would soon be over,
as he states, "I strongly argued that Germany was nearer to her end than
they seemed to think. I stated that Germany was within six months of the
total exhaustion of her avaible manpower, if the fighting continues at it's
present level on the Western Front." Haig was actually proved wrong by
events, as Lloyd George's prediction of the war being over by 1918 was
indeed correct.
I get the impression from the Source that Haig feels of greater importance
than Lloyd George, and his opinion is more valued as he is Commander in
Chief of British Force on the Western Front- In my opinion he also thinks he
plays a greater role in the decision of war on the Western Front. However, I
do feel he respects Lloyd George and his authority.
I feel that this source is a trustworthy account, firstly because it is Haig's
own opinion from his personal diary, and secondly if he had written it after
the war, he would never have stated that he thought the war would be over
by the end of 1917- making his statement incorrect and proving Lloyd
George's prediction had been right.
5) Source G is a table of figures from the British army relating to gas, and
listing casualties and deaths from gas attacks in 1915. As the war
progressed, there were more casualties than deaths from gas attacks. For
example, in 1918 there were 113,767 casualties from gas attacks whilst
there were 2,673 deaths. However, casualties and deaths increased on the
whole throughout the war, as in 1915 there were 12,792 casualties and 307
deaths whilst in 1918 there were 113,767 casualties and 2,673 deaths. This
was only to be expected though, as gas attacks became more common. The
death count was quite low in comparison to casualties because of gas masks
being introduced in 1915. Despite this, casualties increased because of the
developments of gases such as phosgene and mustard gas.
Phosgene is a toxic inhalant that directly damages the lungs, and has the
appearance of a white cloud and the characteristic odour of newly mown
hay. On the other hand, mustard gas (also known as Yperite) was the most
lethal of the poisonous chemicals used during the war and is still used today.
It is so powerful that only small amounts had to be added to high exposive
shells to be effective. Mustard gas caused internal and external bleeding, and
the skin of victims blistered. The eyes became very sore, until victims were
eventually blinded, their throats closing up and choking. Mustard gas killed
4,086 people throughout the duration of the war.
The poem in Source H is written by Wilfred Owen, a former soldier on the
Western Front. The poem, Dulce Et Decorum Est. tells of soldiers greatest
fear- a gas attack, and gives us a descriptive picture of the gas attacks. The
first verse of the poem describes the uncontrollable tiredness of soldiers and
their traumatised behaviour: marching in their sleep, blind, drunk with fatigue.
Owen goes on to describe the gas attacks as a devastating process- soldiers
rushing to get their gas masks on as quickly as possible whilst some
struggled, and failed to put them on in time due to their exhaustion. Owen
describes having to watch these soldiers (sometimes friends) 'drowning in a
green sea'- chlorine gas. The chlorine would destroy the respiratory organs
and lead to a slow death by asphyxiation. The third verse of the poem
indicates the soldier's morale- his willingness to fight, and putting his own life
at risk for his country- and losing it. The poem suggests one of the reasons
why the death count during gas attacks in the war was low in comparision to
casualties was due to soldiers being able to get their gas masks on so quickly
under any circumstances, and regardless of whether they were half asleep
or not.
Source G was written to give us an idea of the death count, and how the
death count during gas attacks was so low in comparison to casualties,
whilst Source H was written to give people an insight of Soldier's state of
mind during attacks and throughout the war.
Source H backs up Source G as Source G gives us an idea of the amount
of deaths in comparison to casualties, and poem in source H describes the
events of a gas attack, and how most soldiers would survive it by quickly
getting their gas masks on under hard circumstances.
6) Both sources I and J were written at two very different times about
fighting on the Western Front. Source I is adapted from an article by a
historian, John Terraine and was written in 1978, to give people an idea of
the problems confronting soliers. Although source I is well written and
convincing, I see it as a secondary source because it was written 60 years
after the war had ended, therefore I am not sure how reliable this source is.
John Terraine suggests that if technology had advanced a lot quicker, the
war may not have been as extreme and perhaps the death count would
have been lower. He states, "They needed Walkie-Talkies but they did not
exist". Walkie-Talkies could have helped Generals send out further orders to
troops, and they would have been a great advantage in No Mans Land. The
troops in Source B would have been helped if this invention had progressed
quicker, and perhaps they would not have been separated from their group
or left alone.
Regardless of how convincing Source I is, or how little is written in Source J,
Source J was written after the war by John Dale who was actually an eye
witness at the Battle of Passchendaele. I see it as a primary source, due to it
being written by a person who was there, and being written around the time
of the war.
Although the two sources were written for the same reason (To describe
the Western Front and the problems Soldiers faced) they tell of very different
problems: Whilst John Terraine had talked of the problems being down to
Technology and Communication, John Dale tells of more basic problems on
the battlefield. Dale describes how conditions on the battlefield became
terrifying, as men, horses and guns were sucked into the horrendous mud in
No Mans Land.
As I have already stated, due to source I being written 60 years after the
war, I would rely upon source J more although Source I gives a much more
detailed description. Both sources agree that there were problems for
soldiers on the Western Front, but they touch upon two very different
problems
7) Many people originally thought that World War One would be over by
Christmas 1914, so it came as a shock when a year passed. Two. Three.
Four. Four terrible years of stalemate, endless tragedy, devastating effects
on families, many deaths and life altering experiences.
There are many reason to why the war lasted so long. World War One
introduced many new things such as gas attacks. As I have previously said,
gas attacks were very effective and would have devastating effects,
particurlarly mustard gas, which would kill thousands of men at a time. Also,
a few months into the war, when trenches had started being dug, barbed
wire as set up which was a defence measure and machine guns came into
effect. Towards the end of the war, cavalry charges were no longer common
and horses were mainly used to transport supplies. Tanks were first used in
the Battle of The Somme yet were very primative and not very reliable, due
to lack of speed an manoeuvrability.
John Dale describes the battlefield in Source J as terribly muddy. This had
an enourmous effect on the speed of soldiers, slowing them down extremely
as they tried to run due to lack of grip- they would end up slipping and
stumbling. This lead to troops moving slowly, becoming easy targets to
machine gun fire. This caused many deaths in World War One. Soldiers would
be 'Sucked into the Quagmire', as source J describes once soldiers had been
sucked in, they were trapped making it impossible for them to get out.
Source B shows German troops taking shelter in a shell hole, trying to avoid
machine gun fire, probably because of the ridiculously muddy conditions in No
Mans Land.
Another major reason to the war lasting so long was because of too much
emphasis on attack. As the French General Foche had said, focusing on
defence would have been a better plan- defence was stronger than attack.
Falkenhayn, the German General expressed his views in Source E, stating no
matter how many soldiers were used or the amount of heavy artillery used,
attack plans miserably failed because tactics weren't right. Tactics were
extremely poor, leading to many British casualties and deaths.
Many people may have percieved Haig's mere confidence in his army to be
arrogance as h believed the Battle of The Somme would be easy, and
perhaps a simple case of capturing the enemy trenches and rebuilding them.
Of course, he was to be proved wrong. Haig also believed in 1917 that
"Germany was within 6 months of the total exhaustion of her avaible
manpower". Yet, as Lloyd George had previously predicted, the war came to
an end in 1918.
Had communication technology been more advance, a lot of deaths may
have been avoided. When soldiers had left their trenches, verbal
communication was impossible because of the heavy noise of machine guns
firing. Source B shos troops on their own, perhaps unsure what to do. If
Walkie-Talkies had been invented (as said In Source I), Generals would be
able to direct troops what to do, and perhaps battles would have been more
successful. Source G shows an advertisement, promoting the war, and trying
to recruit more soldiers, as volunteers seemed to be the only way of going
about involving more British men- Britain was in desparation for more
soldiers.
Many soldiers minds had been corrupted, and seeing the deaths of other
soldiers (such as Wilfred Owen had in Source H) had a huge emotional and
psychological impact on the troops. Many felt they couldn't cope, and their
fate was similar: they were exhausted, traumatised and no longer had the
motivation or willigness to fight- they simply wanted peace.
Coming back to defence being stronger than attack, even towards the end
of the war, there was still too much emphasis on attack and not as much on
defence. As a result, noone was winning the war, soldiers just continued to
die hence the 4 year stalemate. Finally, on 11th November 1918, the war on
the Western Front was declared over: Britain and France gaining victory.
In conclusion, the main factors that made the War on the Western Front
continue for so long was all because of not enough emphasis on defence,
poor conditions in No Mans Land, awful tactics and unadvanced technology.
World War one caused more deaths than any other war, thus being called
'The Great War'.
