An Cosantóir

www.military.ie the defence forces magazine | 27 maintain an offensive stance rather than a defensive one; French military doctrine to a great extent still assumed the superior- ity of élan and fighting spirit to carry the day, neither of which they believed would be fostered by establishing permanent defensive positions; some generals believed that if their troops were safe and protected by strong fortifications they wouldn't want to leave them to fight the enemy. British trenches fell somewhere between the two. As time progressed, both sides extended their trench systems. A typical trench sys- tem comprised a front line, fire trench, with a support trench some hundreds of yards to the rear, and a reserve trench further back. The three lines of trenches would be connected by a series of communica- tion trenches, which allowed troops and equipment to pass between them. Masses of barbed wire were placed forward of the fire trench to delay or disrupt an enemy advance across no-man's land, the area between the opposing armies, which varied greatly along the line, from little more than 50 metres in some places to hundreds of metres in others. The idea of strength-in-depth was taken most seriously by the Germans. In many po- sitions they constructed another complete series of trenches some distance to the rear so that in the event of their original posi- tions being taken they could fall back to the pre-prepared system, making it extremely difficult for the enemy to press home any advantage. Life in the trenches quickly became hell- ish. Heavy rains flooded trench systems, particularly on the Allied side where posi- tions were generally on lower ground than their German opponents. Living in wet, cold conditions and often spending hours on end standing knee deep in water caused several health problems for the troops, one of the worst of which was trench foot, a fungal disease that in untreated cases could lead to gangrene and amputation. Unsanitary conditions led to many other problems, such as fleas, lice and tics, the latter of which spread the very serious trench fever. The stench of putrefied flesh from unrecovered bodies or body parts, combined with the smell of stagnant mud and water, uncovered latrines, unwashed bodies, cordite and rotting vegetation, led to conditions in which rats and vermin thrived and which most found almost unbearable on their first experience of the trenches. Regular shelling and snipers made random death an everyday occurrence even in 'quiet' areas of the Front. (Around 107,000 British casualties occurred in the six months leading up the Battle of the Somme despite not being involved in any offensive operations.) While attacks were carried out to try to break the enemy line or gain ground, they were also believed to be important in maintaining a fighting spirit among the troops, for whom long periods of just shel- tering and enduring constant shelling were deemed detrimental to morale. Attacks followed a similar blueprint. Assaulting troops packed into their for- ward trench while artillery shelled enemy positions, concentrating particularly on their forward trench. When the barrage lif ted the signal would be given to 'go over the top', at which point the assault- ing force would clamber out of their trenches with fixed bayonets and dash across no-man's land. Ironically, the pre-assault barrage often did more harm than good. Shells falling short in no-man's land left churned-up mud and water-filled craters, slowing down the attackers. Artillery fire also usually did little to destroy barbed wire, or the defend- ers for that matter who had often with- drawn deep underground until the barrage lifted, before returning to the surface with their machine-guns to mow down the advancing troops. The appalling death toll and apparent futility of waves of attacking troops being slaughtered by artillery and machine-gun fire led to many people seeing the West- ern Front metaphorically as a dreadful 'meat grinder'. The Great War was the first major con- flict in which fighting killed more soldiers than disease. The death rate of 10% in the trenches was twice as high as that expe- rienced by combat troops in the Second World War. Overall 56% of those who served in the trenches were killed, wound- ed, deemed missing in action, or captured. Artillery was the biggest culprit, accounting for an estimated 75% of all casualties. Although tactics did develop throughout the war, they did so slowly and the first two years saw the greatest casualties. It was not until the last year of the war when mobility was restored, in large part due to innovative tactics and weapons as well as the use of massed tanks. But more about that in a later issue...

• Cover