Why did a stalemate develop on the Western Front?

Authors Avatar

Why did a stalemate develop on the Western Front?

A stalemate is a situation where neither of the opposing parties can progress or do any further action.  Often defence is stronger than attack on both sides and there is usually no way to break the deadlock.  This is what happened when The Schlieffen Plan failed.  Instead of the Germans racing out of France and back to Germany, they chose to “dig in”.  Trenches were dug over 700km, reaching from the sea to the Swiss border.

There are many reasons why either side could not advance on the Western Front, thus resulting in a stalemate.  One of the most important was machine guns.  The guns, such as the Vickers or Maxim were ideally suited for defence.  Once set up this colossal firepower could fire 660 rounds per minute.  Any attacker would easily be cut to shreds if they tried to break the stalemate.  Unfortunately these guns were useless in the offensive as they took three men to carry around; one carrying the tripod, one carrying the gun itself and other for the ammunition.  If the men were successful and managed to find a suitable place to set up the machine, it would take two or three minutes to set it up and in No-Man’s Land those three minutes could mean life or death.  It was impossible to move the gun and fire simultaneously.

Join now!

Another key factor in a stalemate was barbed wire.  This was coiled around wooden posts and usually ran the whole length of the trenches.  It was an excellent deterrent of enemies as it prevented them from running across No-Man’s Land and jumping straight into your own trench.  When enemies reached the barbed wire, providing they had not been killed by machine gun fire, they would frantically search for a gap in the wire.  This would usually have been cleared by an artillery strike beforehand.  Enemies would have to avoid further machine gun fire and crawl about finding a gap. ...

This is a preview of the whole essay