World War 1 – Western Front

League of Nations: Association of countries established in 1919 and

achieve peace and security

Industrial Revolution: The Industrial Revolution was the transition to

new manufacturing processes in the period from about 1760 to
sometime between 1820 and 1840.

Balkan States: Geographic location in South eastern Europe

Socialism: Political and economic theory of social organisation which

advocates by means of production distribution and exchange and it is
all owned and regulated by the state

1905 revolution: A wave of mass social unrest that spread through

vast areas of the Russian empire

Nationalism: Nationalism is a political, social, and economic system

characterized by promoting the interests of a particular nation
particularly with the aim of gaining and maintaining self-governance, or
full sovereignty, over the group's homeland.

Imperialism: Imperialism is an action that involves a nation extending

its power by the acquisition of inhabited territory. It may also include the
exploitation of these territories, an action that is linked to colonialism
The Balkans
Why the Balkans was so important to the Germany?

- Germany wasn’t a country that was able to provide a lot of its

own natural resources and often traded with other countries to
get these resources
- By gaining entry into the Balkans, Germany easily get oil from the
Middle East creating a railway (Berlin-Baghdad Railway)

Importance of the Suez Canal to Britain

- Considered to be the shortest link between the East and the West,
due to its unique geographic location
- Improved trade
- Safer route to India

Importance of Colonies

- Colonies were able to provide resources and were of great

benefit to imperial societies
- These resources could include natural resources, Military, Navy
and other valuable traded goods

French Colonies

- France had also built up a large colonial empire, mostly in the

north west of Africa

Germany was late in the game

- Germany did not enter the race for colonies until very late and as
a result, much of the land gained was not very valuable
- Despite this, Kaiser(King) William II was determined that Germany
should have a major empire
Effect of Nationalism

- Patriotism to one’s country often lead to rivalries between

countries over territories
- This links back to Russia and its relationship with Bosnia and how
Bosnia did not wish to be part of Austria-Hungary (34.6% were
Serbian)
- As a result, the formation of the secrecy organisations that were
willing to use terrorist actions to achieve this goal

Historical Thoughts on Nationalism

- Eric Hobsbawm: the growing significance of the ‘national

question’ in the forty years preceding 1914…was a significant issue
in the domestic politics virtually all European states
- Mandeep Dhillon: the nationalist sentiment of the masses created
the combustible atmosphere, proved to also be the spark which
ignited it
- Hitler ““As a boy and young man I had so often felt the desire to
prove at least once by deeds that for me national enthusiasm was
no empty whim… Thus, my heart, like that of a million others,
overflowed with proud joy that at least I would be able to redeem
myself from this paralysing feeling...”

Why was it important?

- Ultimately, Slav nationalism became the immediate factor the led

to the war
o Assassination of Arch-duke Franz Ferdinand
- Countries seek independence from empires
o Destabilise the Balkans and the balance of power in Europe
- Intense patriotism = readiness for war, ready to prove power of
their country
What is Slav Nationalism

- Slav: are subdivided into East Slavs (Russians, Ukrainians and

Belarus), West Slavs (Poles, Czechs and Slovaks) and South Slavs
(Serbians, Croatians, Bosnians and Macedonians)
- Pan-Slavism: the belief that the Slavic people of Eastern Europe
should have their own nation, was a powerful force in the region.
Slavic nationalism was strongest in Serbia, where it had risen
significantly in the late 19th and early 20th century

Slav Nationalism

- No nationalism movement had a greater impact on the outbreak

of war than Slavic groups in the Balkans
- Pan-Slavism was particularly opposed of the Austro Hungarian
Empire and it control and influence over the region. Aggravated
by viennas annexation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, young Serbs
joined radical nationalist groups like the black hand
- These groups hoped to drive Austria- Hungary from the Balkans ad
establish a “greater Serbia” a unified state for all Slavic people
- It was this Pan Slavic nationalism that inspired the assassination of
Prince Franz Ferdinand in Sarajevo in 1914

The First Balkan Crisis – 1908

- The crisis started when Austria-Hungary annexed Bosnia. Austria

Hungary annexed Bosnia because they wanted to expand their
empire into the Balkans
- Serbia were annoyed by this because they wanted Bosnia to
become part of a “Greater Serbia” as there were a lot of Slavic
people living in Bosnia
- Also, by annexing Bosnia Herzegovina Serbia were denied the
chance of an Adriatic port by Austrian expansion into 375 miles of
predominantly Slavic territory
- Furthermore, this also gave Austria a base that she could use for
any military adventures against Serbia
- Because Slavs were split up between Austria, Serbia, Montenegro
and Bulgaria and dreamed of becoming their own nation. These
nations though (except for Austria) had not only been part of the
Ottoman Empire for centuries, but violently repressed parts of the
 Ottoman Empire and only recently were they finally able to
determine their own fates
- So, seeing Austria suddenly gobble up new territory with a sizable
Slavic population was not a good thing

Historical thoughts on the Balkan Crisis

- “Europe today is a powder keg and the leaders are like men
smoking in an arsenal… a single spark will set off an explosion the
will consume us all… I cannot tell you when the explosion will
occur but I can tell you where… some damned foolish thing in the
Balkans set it off” Otto Von Bismark, 1890’s
- The Balkan crisis of 1914 proved fatal because two others had
gone before it, leaving feeling f exasperation in Austria,
desperation in Serbia and humiliation in Russia” Palmer Colton and
Kramer

Serbia – first decade of the 20th century – what you will find

- A proud nation. Servia had only gained its independence from

the Ottoman Empire in 1878, and it was intensely nationalistic
- The rest of Europe looked a Serbia suspiciously and its catchphrase
“where dwells a Serb, the is Serbia” (this did not sit well with many
people)
- Only way for Serbia to have united the southern Slav peoples
would have been to bring down Austria Hungary for good.
- In its search from allies, Serbia alienated a lot of Europe by the
brutal and often violent repressions of its own minority peoples,
especially Muslins, in much the same way Serbs and other
minorities were repressed by Austria Hungary so they didn’t get
any sympathy
- Also, endless Balkan violence was nothing new to people, in fact,
it was just one of those things that Europeans were resigned to
reading this from time to time

Who came out on top?

- Russia supported Serbia as it saw itself as the protector of the

Slavic people that Serbia sought to protect
 - Serbia and Russia had to back down because Germany
supported Australia Hungary, in accordance with the triple
alliance of 1882
- Germanys army was far stronger than Russia’s, so backing down
was their only option. However, Russia did begin to modernise her
armed forces and increase the speed of mobilisation
- In addition, Russia was determined not to back down again

The first Balkan war 1912

- When Italy attacked the ottoman empire and won Libya, the
Balkan states seeing how easily the weakest of the powers could
beat the ottoman empire got together and attacked in the first
Balkan war
- In 1912 the Balkan countries were controlled by the ottoman
empire (turkey). After the first Balkan crisis, these nations had
formed the Balkan league, the Balkan countries then fought
against the ottoman empire for independence. The Balkan
league won and conquered turkeys land in Europe
- However, Bulgaria unsatisfied with the way the conquered
territories were split up turned around and attacked Serbia,
leading to more fighting

The Alliance System

The Moroccan Crisis 1905

- France wanted to complete their Empire in North Africa, in order

to do this France wanted to conquer Morocco
- In 1904 Britain and France agreed the Entente Cordiale. This
Entente gave France a free hand in Morocco. The Kaiser,
however, decided to interfere in Morocco because: he wanted to
test the strength of the Entente and believed he could spilt the
agreement
- He did not believe Britain would stand by France over Morocco
- He did not want to see France extend her North African Empire

Continuation
 - In 1905 the Kaiser paid a visit to the Moroccan port of Tangiers.
There he made a speech in which he declared that Morocco
should remain independent from France
- This sparked a crisis. France backed by Britain, refused to back
down but did agree to the Kaisers demands for an international
conference meeting to discuss the future of Morocco
- The conference took place at Algeciras at Spain. It was a disaster
for the Kaiser. Only Austria Hungary backed his demands for
Moroccan independence. Britain supported the French
- France is more or less allowed to do what they wanted in
Morocco. The Kaiser had suffered terrible defeat. He blamed this
defeat on the British and their support for France. Wilhelm II’s
actions had achieved the opposite of what he had hoped. They
had strengthened the Entente Cordiale
- This crisis was important because already there was a starting to
become a division of Europe and Germany had lost against
France, as France now had some control over Morocco
- Also, the Entente Cordiale was strengthened and Britain started to
change its policy of splendid isolation and started to take notice
of the European matters
- To add to this Britain and France secretly started military talks
about Germany after their fears grew about her. This shows then
even in 1905 plans were already being drawn up for war and sides
were beginning to form

1911, the second Moroccan Crisis

- 1911 the ruling Sultan of Morocco faced a rebellion and decided

to call on France for help. France sent an army to Morocco and
the rebellion soon went away
- however, Germanys reaction to this was to send a gunboat ‘the
panther’ to the port of Agadir, this was to protect the German
people’s interests in Morocco
- The Germans saw nothing wrong with this action as France had
sent an army to look after their interests, but other countries,
especially Britain, it was viewed as war like stance. The British
thought that Germany was going to build a naval base In the
Atlantic to challenge their naval base in Gibraltar. The naval
action of Germany sending the gunshot ‘the panther’ led to
Britain once again supporting France.
 - This overreaction by the Germans brought Europe very close to
war and all countries involved made preparations for war in 1911.
The situation was resolved when Germany accepted two marshy
strips of land in the Congo for recognising and accepting that
France had control over morocco
- This second crisis was far more serious that the first and is key to the
building up for war as it shows clear decision in Europe between
the triple alliance and the triple entente
- It increased tensions rapidly and sped up a chain of events that
led to WW1. The triple alliance was weakened when Italy opposed
what happened in morocco; Germany now felt humiliated and
decided that if another crisis arose then they would not back
down
- The German people were annoyed with Britain and France and
now more than ever supported the idea and need for a war
- Britain now became convinced that Germany was a threat and
that it wanted to dominate Europe. Britain entered another secret
agreement with France, this time it was a naval one, they
promised to defend each other if attacked

Militarism

- Military: Relating to or characteristic of soldiers or armed forces

- Militarism: The belief that a country should maintain a strong
military capability and be prepared to use it aggressively to
defend or promote national interest

Increased budget for defence expenditures for major powers

- France – 10%
- Britain – 13%
- Russia – 39%
- Germany -73%

Britain controls the waves

- In 19th century Britain was the world’s greatest sea power

 - The navy played a vital role in protecting Britain from the threat of
invasion and in trade and control of the empire
- In 1889 the British navy adopted the Two Power Standard
- This meant that Britain must have a larger navy than the fleets of
the next 2 largest navies combined
- At this time the next two largest navies were those of France and
Russia
- Germany was not considered a threat
- Because Germanys economy and military had been getting
rapidly stronger since its unification, Britain had begun to feel
threatened, leading to the Arms Race

Germanys Naval Power

- In 1897 Germany began to create a fleet of 19 battleships, 12

heavy cruisers and 30 light cruisers, this includes the HMS
Dreadnought battleship
- These numbers were doubled by 1906
- This was not enough to threaten Britain enough to stop Germany
from making these ships
- However, Britain responded by building more ships
- A fierce naval race commenced
- Historians claim that the expectation of war and fervent militarism
among the citizens of the Great Powers made general war more
likely
- By 1914, Europe was two heavily armed power blocs. Most states
had adopted compulsory military service and had millions of
trained reservists
- “gun boat diplomacy” and the exercising of military power was a
legitimate means of solving international disputes in the 19th
century. Why should it be different now?
- Some revisionist historians (i.e. Ferguson, 1998) have convincingly
argued that militarists attitudes were not the norm by 1914, and
that military spending and support for war was not the norm.
Britain was woefully unprepared for war when it came, and
Germany’s military spending had decreased substantially

Anglo-German Naval Arms Race

 - Germany had tried, but could not maintain to build a navy rival
Britain. According to American military strategist, Mahan, naval
supremacy was the key to global domination throughout history.

Source E

Why did Tirpitz want an expanded navy?

o Because Britain was a threat to Germany at the time. The
German public were told it was for “protection of the sea
trade and colonies”

Why do you think the public was told a different story?

o The public was told a different story as the Admiral and the
government did not want to cause panic in the streets

What industries in Germany stood to gain the most from a boom in

naval ship-building?
o Won the support of the business industries who stood to gain
by huge orders for steel and guns.

Assassination of Prince Ferdinand

- Heir to the Austro-Hungarian throne

- The assassination Prince Ferdinand and his wife in Sarajevo, 28th of
June1914, precipitated Austria-Hungary’s declaration of war
against Serbia
- As a result this caused the central powers (including Germany and
Austria-Hungary) and Serbia’s allied to declare war on each other

Gavrilo Princip

- Was the man who assassinated the Prince and his wife
- At the time he was a member of “young Bosnia” and one of a
group of assassins organised and armed by the black hand

Young Bosnia
 - Was a revolution movement active in the Condominium of Bosnia
and Herzegovina before WW1. The members were predominantly
school students, primary Serbians, but also Bosniaks and Croats.
- They had two main goals; Unifying Yugoslavia and unifying Serbia

The Black Hand

- Was a secret military society formed on the 9th of May 1911 by

officers in the Army of the Kingdom of Serbia, originating in the
conspiracy group that assassinated the Serbian royal couple King
Alexander Obrenović and Queen Draga (1903)

The day of the Assassination

- Earlier in the day, the couple had been attacked by Nedeljko

Čabrinović, who had thrown a grenade at the car. However, the
bomb detonated behind them, hurting the occupants in the
following car.
- The royal couple insisted on seeing those who had been injured at
the hospital. The drivers. who didn’t know there was a change in
itinerary, turned round from their original path and drove to the
hospital
- By chance Gavrilo was sitting in a café across the street and
seized the opportunity and shot the royal couple.

“One bullet pierced Franz Ferdinand’s neck while the other pierced
Sophie’s abdomen… As the car was reversing a thin streak of blood
shot from the Archduke’s mouth onto Count Harrach’s right cheek.
Harrach draws out a handkerchief to still the gushing blood. The
Duchess called ‘for heaven’s sake” What happened to you’ and sank
from her seat, her face falling between her husband’s knees”
– Joachim Remake, Sarajevo

To what extent was the war inevitable (10 marks)

The trigger was the assignation of the Arch Duke but in reality a war
between Russia and Austria was inevitable over the Balkans. The
growing strength of Serbia was alarming Austria and they wanted to
attack Serbia to protect their own interests. They also had a whole
range of domestic issues that could potentially be deflected by
national pride in an a war with Serbia. The moment they would attack
Serbia Russia would defend their ally, Germany would support Austria
and France would support Russia.

France also wanted to regain lost territory from the Germans in Alsace
and Lorraine. The Germans were a military state and wanted to build a
wider Land based empire. To be fair to Germany they also felt
threatened on both sides by Russia and France. There was a feeling
that growing Russian strength was a major threat to the balance of
power.

So Germany, Austria, Russia, France all had an interest in a fight- Clearly

none predicted the horror that happened. Historical wars were limited
affairs that lasted a few months. Because of this everyone was looking
for the opportunity. If the Arch Duke had not been assassinated
something else would have been the trigger and Austria would have
almost certainly attacked Serbia anyway.

Britain’s involvement is fascinating and I personally believe that if the

Germans had not attacked Belgium in 1914 we would have stayed out
, at least initially from the conflict. We were interested in maintaining the
balance of power in Europe but had no clear side. Our interests were
our empire. If we had stayed out initially we would have been drawn in
(I'm sure) later if the war continued.

The German decision to attack Belgium ultimately lost them the war but
was a gamble intended to knock France out quickly (as they did in
1940) before Britain could properly mobilise and then focus on Russia.
As we know the knockout blow failed and they ended up with the worst
of all worlds. A war on two fronts and an unbreakable naval blockade
which by 1918 meant that the civilian population were eating
cardboard.

Blame for the conflict is complex but has to sit with Germany. For a start
it was the Austrian attack on Serbia that caused the war and this would
not have been undertaken without express permission from Germany.
everyone knew that would lead to the war with Russia and France.
Secondly I think they were the only nation that could stop it once the
Arch Duke was assassinated. A phone call from the Kaiser and the
Austrians would have stopped their plans.

Overall you can argued that the war was not inevitable as it could
have been resolved in a different manor however, an attack on
another’s countries Royal family means war.

The July Crisis 1914

“…the mere narration of successive crises does not explain why the
chief nations of Europe within a few days became locked in combat
over the murder of an imperial personage…”

Palmer, Colton, Kramer, The History of the Modern World

“…There seems to be no obvious connection between the murder

committed by a young man and the clash of armies of millions…”

J.A.S. Grenville

Sequence of Events Pt 1
1. June 28, Sarajevo, Bosnia – Franz Ferdinand and his wife
assassinated

- Gavrillo Princip, a Serb nationalist, supported an encouraged by

the Black Hand, a terrorist organisation hoping to cause a war that
would free Slavs from the Hapsburgs.
- Franz Ferdinand was a moderate reformer who might have found
compromise and allowed nationalist autonomy within the empire.
This would potentially have frustrated Serb goals.
- No direct link to official Serbian government involvement has ever
been proven, but the government of Prime Minister Nikola Pasic
and King Alexander were powerless against the military leadership
 – Serbia’s civilian government did not want war (having just fought
in two Balkan Wars)

Sequence of Events Pt 2
1. Austria-Hungary could not let Serbia go unpunished and retain
prestige as a “great power”. Meant to send a message to
nationalists.
2. Russia had backed down in previous Balkan crises and felt it could
not back down.
3. Germany had mounting paranoia about the improvement of
Russia’s armies, and the dependability of their weak ally – leaders
feared war with Russia or France, not rising out of the Austro-
Serbian dispute, might not result in Austria-Hungary on Germany’s
side?
4. Germany seems to have gambled on one of two “ifs”:

o that France might not support Russia, and the Central Powers
would win a diplomatic victory (and Germany could win
back alliance with Russia);
o or, that if war was to come, then now is better than later.

Sequence of Events Pt 3 The Ultimatum

1. July 23 – Vienna sends an ultimatum to Serbia. Serbia was to allow
Austria-Hungary to investigate the assassination within Serbia’s
borders. The Austrian diplomat who delivered the ultimatum made
preparations to leave Belgrade as soon as possible, indicating that
Vienna never expected the ultimatum to be accepted.
2. July 25 – Serbia carefully worded a reply that accepted all the
demands except Austrian supervision, and then mobilised her
army.
3. Kaiser Wilhelm II “was delighted” upon hearing acceptance of the
Serbians and falsely assumed, briefly, that “every cause for war
has vanished” – the Allied charge that he thirsted for war at this
moment, is not supported by historical evidence. (Historian David
Fromkin alleges that the Bethmann-Hollweg and the German high
command kept true intentions from the Kaiser)
Sequence of Events Pt 4 Diplomatic Failure
1. July 28 – instigated by German Chancellor Bethman-Hollweg, and
Austrian Chancellor Berchtold, Austria-Hungary declares war.
2. July 25-28 – British foreign minister, Sir Edward Grey, tried to
mediate a solution. The German government rejected Britain’s
interference.
3. July 29 – Austrian artillery bombards Belgrade.
4. July 30 - Bethman-Hollweg resists calls for mobilisation and
encourages Austria to localise the war through dialogue with
Moscow.
5. Russia now under pressure by military leaders, and France (worried
Russia is unprepared) to mobilise. France ensured Russia of support
somewhere between July 20-23)

Sequence of Events Pt 5 Mobilisation

1. July 31 – Russia began full mobilisation after having started “partial
mobilisation” on July 29; this however, was technically impossible.
French military leaders (Joffre) demand France mobilises.
2. By July 30, German high command (von Moltke) panicked that
mobilisation must begin and France must be defeated before
Russia could complete mobilisation.
3. August 1 – Germany declared war on Russia. Britain still refused to
declare position to France.
4. August 3 – Germany declared war on France and invaded
Belgium.
5. August 4 – Britain declared war on Germany, supposedly in
defence of Belgian neutrality – “the slip of paper”

Overall
- Historians generally recognise that some long-term developments
played a role in the outbreak of war in 1914:
 1. Franco-Prussian War (1870-1914); “the German Question”
2. Collapse of Ottoman Empire & Balkan independence
movements; “the Eastern Question”
3. Russo-Japanese War and 1905 Revolution
4. Austro-Hungarian annexation of Bosnia (1908)
5. Balkan Wars (1912-13)

The Schlieffen Plan

The Schlieffen Game Plan
- The Schlieffen Plan was based on the theory that Germany would
be at war with France and Russia at the same time. It did not
prepare for many of the events that occurred in July and august
1914. It was based on the belief that, if the country went to war,
Germany would be faced with a war on two fronts with France on
one side and Russia on the other.

- They plan imagined a huge hammer-blow at Paris. Using 90% of its

army, Germany planned to swinging down through Belgium and
northern France. Its plan was to take out France in a quick
defensive campaign.

Why did Germany need a Plan

- In 1907 Russia joined Britain and France (Entente Cordial) to make
the Triple Entente.

- But Russia was also allied to Serbia, Romania and Bulgaria.

The Schlieffen Game Plan

- The plan assumed that France was weak and could be beaten
quickly in just 6 weeks, and that Russia was much stronger but
would take longer to mobilise its army. The plan began to go
wrong on 30th July 1914, when Russia mobilised its army but France
did not. Germany was forced to invent a pretext (or excuse) to
 declare war on France on 3rd August 1914. Things got worse when
Britain declared war on Germany on 4th August 1914 because, in a
Treaty of 1839, Britain had promised to defend Belgium.

- In the event, Russia took only 10 days to mobilise, and the German
General was forced to send some troops to the eastern from,
which weakened the main attack of Paris. When the German
army asked for permission to go through Belgium on 2nd August
1914, the Belgians refused, so the German army had to fight its
way through Belgium. This slowed it down an tired the soldiers

Strategic Optimism
-

Stalemate Reasons

Machine Guns

- Machine guns could shoot hundreds of rounds of ammunition a

minute, and take out waves of men in seconds

- But this meant that neither side could advance as they would be
shot instantly. Generals made soldiers advance anyway but they
were killed very quickly and so no gains we made.

Canned Food

- Canned food provided soldiers with food at all times, so they did
have to worry about their supply lines being cut off

- But this meant that they could remain in the same position for
months and still have access to food. Thus neither side had to
leave early, because they never ran out.
Telephone

- Telephones enabled Generals to direct and command troops

without actually being in the battlefields themselves, so they could
always give orders

- But this meant that units always had to wait for orders and could
not take advantage of any strategic opportunities that arose.
Also, because the generals were not actually there at the
battlefield, they could not always judge the next best move
effectively.

Artillery

- Artillery (large, long ranging guns) could, from long distance

behind the front line, fire missiles into the battlefields and
surrounding area

- But this meant that both sides were trapped in their trenches. The
artillery fire left huge craters making it hard for either side to
advance across the battlefield. More soldiers were killed by
artillery that any other cause

Trenches

- Soldiers dug trenches so that they would have somewhere to

shelter and hide from the fire of the guns. This became their home
until they went over the top

- But this meant that both sides became stuck – the land between
the trenches became known as the ‘no man’s land’ because it
was incredibly hard for anyone to survive once they left the trench
and entered it.

Why did the Schlieffen Plan fail?

- Belgian troops: were able hold up the German advance giving
time for the BEF (British Expeditionary Force) to arrive. Together
they were further able to delay the Germans at Mons, and this
allowed the French to switch their troops from Alsace-Lorraine to
defend Paris
 - Slowing down: a 200 mile advance through Belgium and France,
with fierce fighting along the way, had exhausted many German
troops. The BEF was also a major impact in slowing down

- Kluck’s misjudgement: when he turned his army to help southeast

to help general Karl Von Bülow, he left his battalion open to
attacks

- Battle of Marne: Germany suffered heavy causalities

- Russian mobilisation: Germany did not expect Russia to be able to

militarise so quickly, resulting in Germany having to send troops to
fight Russia.

- Trenches: Both sides had to secure the land they held. Trenches
were dug and machine gun posts erected. The first exchanges of
the war were over; from now until 1918, neither side would
advance more than 10 miles forward nor backwards from the
positions they now held.

First Battle of the War: Strategic Value of Gallipoli

- Tried to break the stalemate by creating a new front in eastern
Mediterranean.
- British war council had been considering a naval attack on the
Turkish Dardanelles with the objective of opening a path to the
Russian Black Sea ports.
- The Dardanelles have been of incredible strategic importance for
centuries. This is the passage the separates Europe from Asia. It
was the gateway to the Russian Black Sea ports which if taken by
the Allies could bring relief to Russia.
- By gaining this territory and conquering Istanbul, the Ottoman
Empire will be out of the war, making it easier to defeat Germany.
- Taking the Dardanelles would mean better trade between Britain
and her colonies, especially India.