Use Sources A and B and your own knowledge to outline the main features of trench warfare on the Western Front?

Trench warfare was characterised by lethal weaponry, suicidal strategies, and miserable living conditions for those who took part in it. From a military perspective, this type of warfare involved artillery barrages, infantry attacks, patrolling and the use of gas. An infantry assault would be preceded by massive artillery bombardment, intended to kill as many defenders as possible and destroy their positions. At the Battle of the Somme, for example, 1,437 guns fired over 1.5 million shells into the German trenches over a period of seven days. Often, a patrol would also be sent out to cut the enemy’s barbed wire, and therefore assist the infantry that would follow. Such patrols were highly dangerous, as illustrated in Robert Grave’s account, where only two out of twenty five men managed to return to their trenches after a “feeling patrol”. (See Source A) Having cut the wire or blown it apart, the infantry would then be sent across no- man's land, to seize the enemy’s trenches before the latter had a chance to regroup. Erich Remarque brilliantly describes the impact of such an attack on the German defenders: “The bombardment stops. The attack has come…. We use machine guns, rifles and hand grenades…. A whole line has gone down before our machine guns.” (Source A) It was rare for such attacks to succeed, and if they did, the defenders could usually mount a devastating counter-attack, from their reserve trenches (as occurs in Remarque’s account). These trenches are illustrated in Source B. Apart from the dangers of the fighting, soldiers also had to endure appalling physical conditions. Subject to regular bombardment, the trenches were in a constant state of collapse and disrepair. During the dry, Summer months, they were teeming with rats and other vermin. In Autumn, the rains turned them into bogs. Trench foot became rife. In Winter, soldiers suffered terrible cold, exposed as they were to wind, rain and snow. Sanitary conditions in the trenches were equally bad. Soldiers were expected to eat, sleep, fight and even defecate there, creating conditions ripe for sickness and disease. TB and dysentery were the most common killers, while lice were a source of continual discomfort. Finally, the dreadful conditions and constant danger reduced morale and made for a climate of fear and unease. Men suffered from shell shock and other psychological traumas; some even inflicted wounds upon themselves, in order to get away from the front. Assess how useful Sources C and D would be for an historian studying the large number of deaths and casualties among officers and infantry on the Western Front. In your answer, consider the perspectives provided by the two source, and the reliability of each.

Five main factors explain the horrendously high casualty rate on the Western Front during World War One: devastating new technologies; old-fashioned strategies and tactics; the willingness of troops to fight, despite overwhelming odds; poor sanitary conditions in the trenches; and inadequate medical capabilities and supplies. Source C, an extract from Keith Simpson’s book Home Fires and Foreign Fields (published in 1985), illustrates two of the five factors mentioned above. As a secondary source, it provides a historian’s perspective on the impact of trench warfare on those who had to fight it. In particular, it discusses the unparalleled destructiveness of the weapons used in the war (such as artillery, trench mortars, mines, machine guns and gas), the problem of accidental discharge of guns or shells, and the problem of disease (which was caused by the filthy conditions in the trenches, and by the vermin which shared the trenches with the soldiers). Simpson notes that the First World War “was the first major conflict in which casualties from combat were more than those from disease amongst soldiers.” This source can therefore be regarded as highly useful and very reliable in explaining the carnage on the Western Front. Source D is also useful in explaining the high rate of casualties during the war. An extract from the memoirs of former British prime minister David Lloyd George, it provides the perspective of a man who should have known a great deal about what was happening at the front. In Lloyd George’s opinion, much of the blame for the high number of casualties could be laid squarely on the shoulders of his own generals, who employed unimaginative strategies, and had a lack of first hand experience “of the actual fighting of a battle under modern conditions.” In his account of the war, he stated that the generals’ “brains were cluttered with useless lumber, packed in every niche and corner. Some of it was never cleared out to the end of the war.” General Douglas Haig, in particular, “never even saw the ground on which his greatest battles were fought, either before or during the fight.” This is a damning indictment of the British Army’s supreme commander, and well illustrates one of the most important reasons the casualties were so high. Of course, Lloyd George’s memoirs must be viewed with some scepticism, since they are a secondary source, written fifteen years after the war ended, and by a man who had every reason to hide his own role in that conflict’s many debacles. (He was, after all, responsible for the production of large numbers of faulty artillery shells used in the Somme Campaign.) However, the extract should still be regarded as reliable, since other source substantiate Lloyd George’s allegations about the calibre of his generals.