Transcription
Hello, welcome back to our lecture series for Western Civilization 102. Today's lecture, you'll learn about World War One, of course, from a European standpoint, and not to mention, the United States didn't get involved until 1917. Uh, when World War broke out in Europe, it was, um, the complicated system of alliances that Bismarck had managed to to keep going when he was in power in Germany collapsed. Remember that Bismarck had been forced out, and, uh, Germany, of course, allied themselves with Austria-Hungary, and what Bismarck had been so fearful of, and that he had tried to prevent during his power, was that Germany may eventually get put in the middle. They would be placed between, say, France and Russia, and that's exactly what ends up happening. France and Russia had made some agreements previous to World War One. Germany was alienating itself further and further with other European powers, and Germany, of course, stays with Austria-Hungary. And we'll also see, of course, that Russia will become the protector, the friend, to a place called Serbia, which is in the Balkans. And I had mentioned that the Balkans will be a very much of a hotbed for the development of World War One. So, what takes place? The assassination of Francis Ferdinand, or Franz Ferdinand, the Archduke of Austria-Hungary, will snowball rather quickly into a World War. England tries to stay out of it at first, but when Germany invades in neutral Belgium, which we kind of see this with a lot of the wars, when a neutral Belgium is invaded, England will declare war on Germany as well. Now, this assassination took place in, in the Balkans, but we'll see that at the end of World War One, the country that will have to accept war guilt when it's all said and done, and, and they draw up the Treaty of Versailles and Paris, will be Germany. And, uh, Germany will also be forced to pay huge billions in reparations for the damage that was wrought in World War One because, you know, a lot of people when World War One started, threw parades. They thought this is going to be really a short war. Everybody would be home for Christmas. There were parades given as the soldiers, especially say in England, the soldiers are marching to war, and there's parades. And we'll see, you know, at Christmas, and as we, of course, know, it will drag on and on and on for years. Fact, it ends up becoming a war of attrition, a stalemate. There will be trenches dug between, basically, Belgium and Switzerland. There's a line. It would move within, I don't know, 10 miles of each other, but it's pretty much in that area that these trenches are built and dug. And it becomes a war of just death and destruction. In between those trenches was what's called a no man's land. And each side, if they would rush across their barbed wire, out of their trenches, and try to rush across the, the no man's land, they were just mowed down. It was just barren, full of craters and dead bodies. It wasn't much better, of course, for the men that survived in the trenches because they'd fill up with water, and they had rats, and food was a problem. And so this was just absolutely a miserable, horrifying war. Not that war is not miserable and horrifying, but I don't believe that they expected this at all. And so, you know, as the fighting continues, and you'll learn more about everything that takes place in World War One, people, of course, are becoming a bit disillusioned. And when the United States gets involved, our president at the time was named Woodrow Wilson. When the United States gets involved, the war is not long from being finished. And when we have the Treaty of Versailles, and of course, make Germany, they had no choice except the war guilt clause and pay reparations. This, of course, will, Wilson wanted a peace without victory, and he was an idealist. Obviously, as you look into Europe and you see the destruction that World War One wrought, people were not looking for peace without victory. They wanted their pound of flesh, and they, of course, looked to Germany to get it, which will eventually help us lead into another World War, which is World War II. Um, so let's take a look at the events taking place with World War One.
Okay, this is the first of two lectures on the First World War, and let's begin by making the point that the First World War was arguably the most profound and the most significant event of the 20th century in a very general way. But the First World War did was this: forced systems of government collapse and be transformed. Empires collapsed, systems of economics collapsed and were transformed, societies collapsed, were transformed. To be sure, the First World War changed everything permanently and fundamentally. So that for this reason, the First World War is generally considered to be even more important than the Second World War, even though the Second War was bigger, even though it resulted in far greater casualties, far greater physical destruction. In many ways, the Second World War can be argued to be an extension of the first. Indeed, the Second World War, as many of you probably know, began largely because of issues left outstanding and left unresolved by the First War. Well, with that in mind, let's get down to brass tacks, and what we're going to do first is take a look at one of the most central and most fundamental questions of the First World War, which is the question of responsibility. The main question, one of the most important questions, has been, who started the First World War? Or more of the point, who was most responsible for the First World War? This question remains one of the most important historiographical questions and has been asked, and it's been debated since literally since 1914.
Well, with respect to the origins of the war, historians tend to make a distinction between two types of causes. On one hand, we have long-term causes, which are developments and conditions which build up over a fairly long period of time. They build up tension, they build up tension, they build up tension. And then there is a short-term, immediate cause. We regard this more as a trigger, a fuse that sets everything into motion. And so what we're going to do is to begin with six broad long-term underlying reasons why Europe goes to war in 1914.
The first, and arguably the most important, is nationalism. Nationalism, the most important political ideology the last two to three hundred years, as undoubtedly most of you know. Nationalism refers to the effort by nations, and by nations we're talking about specific groups of people who regard themselves as a unique and distinct community. Nationalism refers to the problem by which nations agitate to create their own political state. And in the 19th century, the most important example, the most dangerous and most volatile example, is the state of Austria-Hungary, or simply Austria. In Austria, the population breaks down into roughly one-fourth Germans, 23 to 25 percent of the population of Austria is German, and the other 75 to 77 percent, everybody else. So we're talking Poles, Hungarians, Slovaks, Czechs, Croats, Bosnians, Serbs, and so on and so forth.
A second underlying cause was the Eastern question. And again, in a nutshell, the Eastern question refers to all the various problems, all the various issues and concerns that resulted from the breakdown, the gradual and slow disintegration of the Ottoman Empire. Indeed, by the turn of the 20th century, the disintegration of the Ottoman Empire resulted in a number of crises which accelerated the tensions and suspicions among great powers. For example, in 1905 and again in 1911, there's occurred a series of crises over Morocco. More importantly, 1908, 1913, a handful of very important crises in the Balkan Peninsula.
A third underlying cause is imperialism. And of course, what we're talking about with imperialism was a great power competition for colonies overseas in places such as Africa, the Middle East, Southeast Asia, Central Asia. Competition for colonies, which again injected a significant element of tension and friction among the great powers.
The fourth underlying cause was the system of alliances. So that between 1871 and 1914, we get the emergence of two great alliance systems. On one hand, the Triple Entente, consisting of France, Great Britain, and Russia. And on the other hand, the Triple Alliance between Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Italy.
A fifth underlying cause was the growth of the newspaper press. In an effort to win subscribers, newspapers at the turn of the century routinely engaged in inflammatory rhetoric, high-octane inflammatory rhetoric. So that as a routine, newspapers misrepresented situations in foreign countries, they routinely distorted facts, they routinely blew incidents out of proportion, and most importantly, they routinely inflamed nationalistic sentiment. Consequently, European newspapers at the turn of the century fundamentally engaged in what Americans referred to as yellow journalism. So that for all practical purposes, the newspapers of the turn of the century play the same role as talk radio does in our society. In other words, it's not news, it's primarily bluster and demagoguery. So while it sounds ridiculous, perhaps, in the early 20th century, this high-octane rhetoric, this inflammatory rhetoric, did contribute again to a heightening of the tensions among the great powers.
A sixth and final cause, final long-term cause of the war, is what we would call militarism. And militarism itself involved two elements. The first element was the physical enlargement of the military establishments, and this itself involved two elements. In, in one first place, it involved an increase in the actual size of the armies. More of the point, it involved an increase in the number of men serving in the armed forces. Indeed, almost every major Western state introduced at the turn of the century some form of a compulsory military obligation, some form of the draft. And this led to bigger armies and bigger navies. On the other hand, it also involved a tremendous buildup of weapons. Indeed, this is a period, really, the first major arms race, as every great power attempted to build bigger and better weapons. So, for example, everybody tried to build better machine guns, everybody experimented with artillery, everybody is trying to experiment perhaps with poison gas. Britain and Germany are building bigger and better battleships, aircraft, etc. So that we have this tremendous arms race.
Second element of militarism involved the emergence of a new and powerful class of officers, and the most important of these officer groups, the general staff. Now, the general staff, this was a group of professional military advisors that dealt principally with the bureaucratic needs of the military. Their primary job, their primary responsibility, was in fact to provide accurate and timely information on which command decisions can be made. Therefore, the general staffs dealt with things like conscription, they dealt with things like personnel, they dealt with plans for mobilization, they dealt with the laying out of strategic railroads, intelligence, and that kind of stuff. Well, the primary importance of the general staff is that civilian politicians at the turn of the century began to ask for their advice more and more and more and more, to the point they began to act on their advice more and more and more. So that in this way, the general staffs in most countries of Europe began to exercise a tremendous amount of influence, increasing influence over the policies of civilian governments.
Okay, well, by the summer of 1914, as a result of all this kind of stuff, tensions within Europe were basically brought to a breaking point. So that all was needed was a small little incident to trigger the outbreak of War. Well, the incident, the short-term, immediate cause of the war, was a political assassination. And the story of the assassination was rooted in the problem of nationalism, particularly within Austria-Hungary. As we just noted, Austria-Hungary was a state that consisted of multiple national groups, and this included the Serbs. Well, most of the Serbs in Austria lived in an area called Bosnia-Herzegovina, and those Serbs wanted Bosnia-Herzegovina to come to become part of Serbia proper, the neighboring state. Well, because of a series of incidents in the Balkan Peninsula between 1908 and 1913, hatred for Austria among Serbs became increasingly violent and increasingly venomous. And this was true among all Serbs, not only Serbs in Bosnia-Herzegovina, but Serbs in Serbia as well. This basically represented a very significant political problem for the government of Austria-Hungary. And as an effort to deal with this problem, the government of Austria decided to send a high-ranking government official to Bosnia on what was essentially to be a public relations mission. And so the decision was made to send the Archduke of Austria-Hungary to Bosnia. Now, the Archduke, this is the heir to the throne. His name is Franz Ferdinand, and it was largely thought, it was commonly thought that because the next, or because the current Emperor was in his 80s, it was thought the Archduke was going to die any day. So that the Archduke was very soon to become the new emperor of Austria-Hungary. In any event, it was decided that the Archduke Franz Ferdinand and his wife Sophie would visit the capital of Bosnia, the city of Sarajevo, on the 28th of June, 1914. And this was essentially to be a goodwill trip, a public relations trip. They would go down there, try to settle things down a bit, pat a few people on the back, make a few speeches, shake a few hands, calm everybody down.
Well, the visit to Sarajevo by the Archduke and his wife, this was very big news in Sarajevo. And so the itinerary for all their activities was published in the daily newspaper, including the route of the public motorcade that they would follow. Long story short, tragically, the Archduke and his wife were assassinated by a single gunman named Gavrilo Princip, around 10:30 in the morning, June 28th, as they were being driven through the streets of Sarajevo.
Well, this assassination, assassination of the Archduke and his wife, triggered a tremendous diplomatic crisis known as the July Crisis. Major question we begin with: was this a conspiracy? And the answer is yes, it was a conspiracy. It is absolutely clear that the assassination had been planned by a secret society of Serbian nationalists, which were referred to as the Black Hand. The most fundamental question, of course, is why? Why did they shoot them? Well, the answer is because the Archduke Franz Ferdinand was a supporter, he was an advocate of a new proposal that was intended to reorganize the state of Austria-Hungary. The plan was called trialism. Fundamentally, this was a proposal to reorganize Austria-Hungary into three semi-independent regions: Austria itself, Hungary, and a southern region that would be dominated by Southern Slavs, including the Serbs. Well, Serbian nationalistic groups, such as the Black Hand, became very concerned that if this plan were put into effect, then Austrian Serbs, as well as other Southern Slavs, might be contented to remain within the Austrian-Hungarian state. In other words, they feared that these Austrian Serbs and Southern Slavs might lose their enthusiasm for union with Serbia. Therefore, the Black Hand decided, for political reasons, of course, that it would be necessary to assassinate the principal supporter of such a proposal. In any event, it is also clear that within the Black Hand itself, the principal ringleader for the assassination was a guy by the name of Dimitrijević, which you don't need to worry about, but he was the head of Serbian intelligence. In other words, the guy who led this plot, who was the brainchild of the plot, he was a member of the Serbian government. And this is also clear: this guy was acting on his own initiative. Therefore, the Serbian government was not involved. Indeed, there is no evidence that has ever been uncovered to indicate that the Serbian government had any fundamental role in the plot to assassinate the Archduke. Nevertheless, the Austrian government, they believed that Serbia was to blame, evidence or not. Therefore, Austria decided to take advantage of this assassination to crush Serbia once and for all. In doing so, in making this decision to crush Austria or Serbia, sorry, in doing so, Austria was given the absolute support of its ally, Germany. Indeed, in early July, the German government gave Austria a promise of support. Indeed, Germany promised that they would stand behind Austria as an ally and a friend in anything that Austria wanted to do to Serbia. And this promise was known as the blank check.
At the same time, at the same time that Austria is being assured of German support, Serbia was being given assurances of support from its principal ally, Russia. In fact, in mid-July, Russia warned Austria very clearly to leave Serbia alone. And Russia was encouraged in its tough position by its principal ally, France. In fact, the French urged the Russians, quote, "to be firm." And so here we are in mid-July 1914. Things are starting to get serious, but they're not quite critical just yet.
Well, this begins to change on the 23rd of July. Things get a lot more serious. On the 23rd, what happens on the 23rd of July is that Austria presented Serbia with a very severe ultimatum. This was an ultimatum that consisted of ten demands, and Austria insisted that Serbia accept all ten demands unconditionally within 48 hours, or else. Well, two days later, on the 25th of July, about five minutes before the ultimatum was to expire, literally hour number 47 and 55 minutes, the Serbian government gave its reply. The Serbian government announced that they would accept nine of the ten demands. In other words, what we have here is Serbia giving Austria the finger, and I think you know which one. Therefore, three days later, on the 28th of July, Austria declared war on Serbia. And so now we got a declaration of war. Things clearly much more serious, much more volatile, much more dangerous. But in spite of this declaration of war, there was still a glimmer of hope, a glimmer of optimism. Well, optimism probably not the right word, confidence that the war could be contained. A very slim hope that the war might be localized between the borders of Austria and Serbia itself. However, this was going to depend on the actions of Russia. And so what's Russia up to at this point? Well, at this point, the Russian General Staff, with this Austrian declaration of war, the Russian General Staff is urging the government, the Tsar's government, to mobilize. They're calling for mobilization. However, in doing so, there is one major critical question: will Russian mobilization be general mobilization, or will it be partial mobilization? This is the critical question understanding the beginning of the war: partial or general? So what's the difference? Well, partial mobilization, Russian partial mobilization meant mobilization against Austria alone. But general mobilization meant Austrian, sorry, Russian mobilization against Austria and Germany.
Well, the answer to that question, what are we going to do, partial or general? This is critical. And the reason it's critical has to do with German military strategy. For several years, the Germans feared the possibility of having to fight a two-front war. In other words, they feared the possibility of having to fight Russia and France at the same time. Well, in order to deal with that, or more to the point, in order to avoid that, to avoid a two-front war, the Germans came up with a military plan called the Schlieffen Plan, which was designed to avoid a two-front war. This Schlieffen Plan, the key to understanding it is to understand that the Schlieffen Plan depended on the absolute adherence, a strict adherence to a timetable. Indeed, the Schlieffen Plan was based on the German assumption that it would take the Russians six weeks to get their forces to the German border. In other words, the German assumption is that between the time that the Russian army mobilized and the time it would take Russians to threaten the German border, that would take six weeks. Within those six weeks, the Germans anticipated within those six weeks they could attack France, they could invade France and defeat France. And why not? They defeated them in 1871, and in the intervening years, the French army had gotten weaker, the German army had gotten stronger, the French population had gone down, the German population has gone up. The Germans believe that within this six-week period, they can invade France and defeat France, put their troops on trains, send them to the east to get them ready to fight the Russians, who should be showing up at about that time. Therefore, because of this strict dependence on a timetable, it should be clear that once certain events are set into motion, most importantly Russian general mobilization, once certain events such as Russian general mobilization are set in a motion for Germany, there is no choice but to move to the West. If the Russians, for example, if the Russians were to mobilize against Austria alone, then war might conceivably be contained to the border between Austria and Serbia. But if the Russians mobilize against Germany as well, the Germans would have no choice, if they wanted to avoid a two-front war, they would have no choice but to move against France immediately.
Which one brings us all back to the discussions within the Russian military. So that on the 30th of July, 1914, after several days of internal debate, on the 30th of July, the Russian Tsar Nicholas II was ultimately convinced by his general staff to order general mobilization. And with that order, with the order of Russian general mobilization, the point of no return is crossed. Over the next five days, everything went completely to hell. Long story short, there were ultimatums, there were counter-ultimatums, there were rejections, there were recriminations, and ultimately declarations of war. The ultimate result is that by the 4th of August, 1914, all of the great powers, for the first time since the defeat of Napoleon Bonaparte in 1815, for the first time, great powers are all at war.
Well, in general, the First World War is characterized by trench warfare. And if you understand trench warfare, then good luck, congratulations, you understand the First World War. Therefore, the first month of the war, August 1914, this is the most critical month of the entire war. And primarily because the military campaigns of August 1914 lay the foundations for trench warfare. And so let's begin by pointing out that the most important military action in August of 1914 was driven by the Schlieffen Plan. The obvious question, of course, how is it supposed to work? Well, in general, the German military lined up seven armies along the frontier between Germany and France. And these seven armies were stretched from the Alps to the North Sea. The plan was for four of these armies to sweep rapidly to the West, move through Belgium into France, push to the South, and then ultimately push back to the East in essentially a great sweeping encircling movement. Whereas the other three armies, the other three German armies would push in the South toward the West. So that the French armies, the French defenses would essentially be captured and crushed in a huge encircling pincer movement, basically a vice. Well, this point is important. In order for the Schlieffen Plan to work, in order for it to be pulled off, the key to the success of the Schlieffen Plan was that the German right flank, that would be the first three armies that are pushing out to the West, the key to the success of the Schlieffen Plan is that those armies, the right flank, had to be incredibly strong, much stronger than the other German armies. Why? Because they have the most territory to cover, and they have to do it in the shortest amount of time. So the German right flank had to be exceptionally strong. Anyway, the Germans launched their attack on the West on August the 3rd, and for the first three weeks or so, the plan appeared to be working quite well, extremely well. So that by the last week of August 1914, the Germans are within approximately 30 to 40 miles of Paris. However, the Germans began to encounter a handful of problems. But the most important problem involved a logistical question, which the Schlieffen Plan had never completely resolved: the question of what do we do when we get to Paris? Do we go around Paris? Do we absorb Paris before we cut back to the east? Or do we cut in front of Paris? Well, the German Army, as they're approaching Paris, they made the decision. The German Army is at extreme right. They made the decision to cut in front of Paris for a variety of logistical reasons. They cut in front of Paris on August the 31st. This exposed the German right flank to the French from Paris. So that as the Germans cut in front of Paris with their exposed flank, the French ordered an attack on this German flank from Paris. Well, in response to this French attack, forces of the German First Army stopped to respond to it, whereas the other German forces kept pushing back to the east. As this German Army stopped to fight this French attack from Paris, what occurred was that a huge gap began to emerge in the German lines, a huge gap of approximately 20 to 30 miles. Well, the French commander in Paris observed this gap, and on the 6th of September, he ordered a counter-attack into that gap. Well, in order to respond to this gap of Allied soldiers pushing in this big hole in the German lines, the Germans had no choice but to pull everybody back. Pull everyone back, pull them back, pull them back in order to close this gap up. Well, this takes place from the 9th to the 13th of September, 1914. The Germans are pulling back, the Allies are pushing. By the middle of September, both sides are absolutely exhausted. Therefore, both sides, anticipating that the other one will continue to attack, both sides begin digging into the ground. They began digging into trenches, they set up defensive positions, they set up machine guns, and they waited for the other guys to attack. Consequently, essentially what's happened by the middle of September, everything has come to a halt, everything has stopped. Temporarily, what we've just described is a military engagement that historians call the First Battle of the Marne. And it is the most significant battle of the entire war, the only one we're going to talk about in any kind of detail. It's the most significant battle of the entire war because as a result of this engagement, the Schlieffen Plan broke down completely, broke down. And therefore, with the breakdown of the Schlieffen Plan, the German expectation, the German hope of a quick victory, and thus avoiding a two-front war, all of that simply vanished. In other words, the breakdown, the Schlieffen Plan, as a result of the First Battle of the Marne, this guarantees not only a two-front war, it also guarantees a long war.
Well, shortly after the Battle of the Marne, both sides regrouped, and they engaged in something called the race to the Sea. Well, the race to the Sea was not actually a race to the sea. It was a series of flanking movements. It was a series of operations in which both sides tried to outflank the other. So that essentially what we got, we got the British and French down here, we got the Germans down here. The Germans try to break around the French and British try to get around them, try to surround them and crush them, because that's how armies have been fighting since the Napoleonic period. So the Germans would try to get around the French and British, the French British stop them, they try to get around the Germans, the German stop, and they try to get around them. So on and so on. It's a series of flanking movements that take both armies, both sides, all the way to the English Channel, hence the type, the name, race to the Sea. And all the while, as both sides are trying to get around the other side, both sides, as they engage in this race to the Sea, they're digging in, they're digging into the ground, they're digging defensive positions, they're digging trenches as they're trying to outflank the other side. So that by November 1914, there had emerged a long and unbroken line of trenches. And this becomes known as the Western Front. A long, unbroken line of trenches that extended for about 500 miles, approximately 500 miles, from the Alps all the way to the English Channel.
Well, the type of fighting that emerged almost immediately, and which would characterize the entire First World War, it's called trench warfare. And again, if you understand trench warfare, you understand World War One. So let's just run through a very, very brief description. On each side, we say each side, the Germans up here, the British and French down there, on each side there were usually up to three main lines of trenches: front trench, support trench, couple of supporting trenches. And these three main lines of trenches were all connected by a series of communications trenches. Behind each system of trenches was a quite highly sophisticated network of roads and railroads. And these roads and railroads brought supplies to the trenches, they brought food, they brought ammunition, and most importantly, they brought men, they brought more soldiers. In front of each trench system lay thick entanglements of barbed wire. And the period, or the area in between trenches, an open area of territory known as no man's land.
Well, right from the very beginning, right from the very beginning of these trenches, it became the primary strategic objective of both sides to break through the other trench. So essentially, what both sides would do is line up their armies and send them across no man's land, calling it "go over the top." And they try to charge into the other trench, try to break through the other trench, try to surround and crush the enemy. And again, that's how wars have been fought since the period of Napoleon. So the primary strategic effort, the primary tactical effort, was the frontal assault charge. However, what made the war so incredibly violent, what makes it so incredibly tragic, is that while these basic tactics stress the offensive, at the same time, the existing technology, the existing weapons, favored the defense. They favored the defense. In particular, the primary weapon in trench warfare, which came virtually to be synonymous with trench warfare, was the machine gun. Easy to use, you set it up, you watch those other guys charging at your trench, you open fire, and essentially wipe out an entire attacking army. So that in these assaults, hundreds and ultimately thousands of men were wiped out literally in minutes. And so because of weapons like the machine gun, it became very difficult for each side to break through the existing trench lines. Nevertheless, fairly early in the war, commanders on both sides came to the conclusion that another weapon was the solution. The solution to breaking through the trenches was another weapon, generally referred to as artillery. And again, very closely associated with trench warfare, heavy artillery. Referred to the big guns, referred to the cannons, the huge, huge guns. And it was to be the primary job of artillery, the primary responsibility of artillery, to soften up the other trench, to weaken the other trench, so that the other trenches would be easy to break through. So that for an offensive, before an attack, the artillery would be fired for hours and hours at a time, and then as the war proceeded, days and days at a time. So that once the attacking army was convinced that the opposing enemy, the opposing trench was softened up, then goes the attack.
Well, the problem was that relatively early in the war, trenches became fairly sophisticated. Just to say, opposing forces literally dug themselves deep into the ground, bunkers deep in the ground, which would be reinforced with wood beams and ultimately with concrete. So that when the artillery bombardment began preceding an attack, the, the enemy army that was being attacked, soon to be attacked, they would simply move down into the bunkers and wait. And they would wait and wait and wait for hours on end, days on end, while the artillery bombardment was going on. And these guys sit in the bunkers, they do what soldiers do when they're waiting. They play some cards, they take a couple of drinks to settle their nerves, they lie to all their friends about sleeping with peasant girls in haylofts and that sort of stuff. And they wait. And once the artillery bombardment comes to an end, these guys know that an attack is about to begin. So they scramble up to the top of the trench, they set up the machine guns, they watch those other guys come out over the top, start charging right at them, they open fire. The other guys are absolutely wasted. Therefore, soldiers were literally mowed down by the thousands and the tens of thousands in each and every battle, each and every offensive. And this is why, with a single exception of the First Battle of the Marne, we generally don't talk about specific details in specific battles because the battles of the First World War, in very general terms, are the same battle over and over and over. It's the same tactics, it's the same objective, it's the same result over and over and over. So that again, the key to understanding trench warfare is that the basic fundamental tactics are those of the offensive, but the weapons, the technology, favor the defense. The result, therefore, on the Western Front, the result was stalemate. The result was attrition. Both sides effectively trying to bleed each other to death. So that from late 1914 until the spring of 1918, armies attacked on both sides. They attacked, they attacked again, and they attacked without success. So that from the fall of 1914 until the spring of 1918, these trench lines barely moved, maybe a mile here, maybe 500 yards there. The Western Front literally did not move.
Well, what we've just described is the action on the Western Front. And frankly, this is where the heart and soul of World War One is being fought. And so that's really our focus is the Western Front. However, very briefly, let me mention that there were other fronts of the First World War. There's fighting in Africa, there's fighting in the Middle East, there's fighting on the sea, there's fighting in the Far East. But the other theater I do want to mention very briefly is in the eastern part of Europe, and this is called, of course, the Eastern Front.
Well, the primary action over here in the East is between the Russians on one side, and the Germans and the Austrians on the other. By contrast to the Western Front, the fighting in the East is very different. Fighting in the West, as we've just pointed out, descended into stalemate. But the fighting on the Eastern Front was a war of movement. In other words, armies attacked and generally made great advances, or alternatively, they were forced to make great retreats. There are a number of reasons for this. We'll briefly mention two of them. In the first place, the Eastern Front was twice as long as the West. The Western Front, as we've just pointed out, was approximately 500 miles long. Well, the Eastern Front stretched from the Baltic Sea in the North to the Adriatic Sea in the Black Sea in the South, a distance of approximately a thousand miles. Therefore, because of these great distances, because of the great length of the Eastern Front, the density of the front lines was not as strong, it's not as thick as in the Western Front. Therefore, because of the great length of these lines, the density of the front lines being a lot weaker, they were easier to break. The front lines were far easier to break on the Eastern Front. Secondly, communications and transportation in the East were far more primitive. Which is to say, in the West, if the enemy were able to break through the front lines, there were lots of reserves that could be pushed in a lot faster because of much more sophisticated communications and transportation. The reserves could be pushed in to plug up any gaps, to plug up any holes, much quicker in the West. But again, in the East, where communications and transportation are much more primitive, if anybody broke through the front lines, then it was generally necessary to fall back, to fall back and plug up the gaps in that way. Therefore, because of these two reasons, then there was a lot more movement, a lot more advance, a lot more retreat in the Eastern Front.
Okay, let's shift gears for a few moments and let us turn our attention to the impact of the war on the home fronts. One thing that distinguished World War One from any previous war in Europe, in fact, it distinguished this, this war was distinguished from all previous wars with the exception of the American Civil War. World War One is what we call a total war. Just to say, every state fighting the war attempted to organize its every resource in order to conduct, in order to fight, in order to win the war. And in every case, in every case, in every state fighting the war, the national governments played the most significant part in organizing and mobilizing all of the resources necessary to fight and win. And so for our purposes, talking about the mobilization of resources, what kind of resources? Let's mention three types of resources.
In the first place, governments assumed more and more control over the mobilization of economic and material resources. Which means that the national governments exercised more and more control over their economies. So, for example, states attempted to direct all of the wealth, they attempted to direct all of the industrial resources, they attempted to direct all of the trade, all of the commerce, all of the labor. They directed, they attempted to direct all of these things to the process of fighting and ultimately winning the war. Consequently, this meant things like conducting trade with this country, but perhaps not with that country, because that country might trade with our enemies. It also meant things like keeping the factories open 24 hours a day, seven days a week, to crank out the bullets, to crank out the guns, to crank out the helmets, to crank out the boots, and so on and so forth. It meant rationing of supplies, including food. It meant substitute food products, such as coffee made out of bark, or bread made out of turnips, that sort of stuff. So, in the first place, governments assumed control over the economies of their states.
So secondly, governments also assumed more and more control over the mobilization of human resources. Just to say, virtually every man who could breathe and walk and carry a gun was drafted, drafted into the army. Which means that the societies back home were confronted with a very important question: with every able-bodied man going into the military, who's going to work on the docks? Who's going to work in the factories? Who's going to work on the farms? Well, this mobilization of human resources had profound impact on Western societies because women stepped into those roles. With every able-bodied man being drafted into the army, women picked up the slack. In virtually every state fighting the war, it was women who began working in the factories, women worked on the farms, women worked in the dockyards, women worked in the munitions plants. Women began to assume jobs, they began to assume roles that had traditionally been, to die, to women. They picked up jobs, they did jobs that had been traditionally thought only men could do. As a result, immediately after the war, in virtually every Western state, because of their vital contribution to the war effort, women were given the right to vote and the right to stand for political office. Therefore, it's been argued that in spite of political movements such as the suffragette movement in the 19th century, because of political agitation in the 19th century, it has been argued that in fact, it was the First World War that revolutionized the status of women in the Western world.
And thirdly, in the third place, governments also assumed more and more control over information and ideas. Indeed, one of the main reasons for this was because very, very quickly in the war, it became necessary to control information and ideas because the war began to drag on. To be sure, trench lines never seem to move, casualties were absolutely appalling, hardships at home, which is to say shortages of food and fuel, hardships at home were becoming more and more serious. Therefore, it became more and more difficult for governments to maintain morale. It became difficult for governments to maintain the will to fight. As a result, in order to maintain morale, in order to sustain the nation's will to fight, governments attempted to control the flow of information. And it's easy to forget that this is long before satellites, it's long before laptops, it's long before television. It was a lot easier for governments to control the flow of information.
Well, how'd they do it? Well, they did it really in one of two ways. In the first place, governments attempted to control the flow of information through censorship. Virtually all states fighting the war censored the press, they censored the letters written by soldiers to their families back home. They passed laws that strictly prohibited any criticism of government policy. Secondly, governments controlled the flow of information through propaganda. States, in utilizing propaganda effectively, tried to do one of two things. On one hand, each state tried to convince their people that righteousness and truth and God were on their side. And therefore, in order to do so, both sides came up with all kinds of slogans, all kinds of posters and pamphlets, all designed to make the war seem noble and glorious and patriotic and honorable. On the other hand, both sides, again utilizing propaganda, they attempted to convince their people that the enemy stood for evil and wickedness and barbarism. Indeed, each side accused the other for starting the war, each side accused the other of perpetrating the most horrific atrocities. For example, the British were particularly good at this, and one of the great stories they spread was that Germans passing through Belgian towns forced the people to ring church bells, and when they did refuse, they tied up living priests on the bells as clappers. So as they had making the clang, clang, clang sound. It's important to understand that a lot of this, of course, was complete, outright lies, distortion, exaggeration. Most of this propaganda was based on just complete, complete garbage. But the important point is this: it worked. It worked. Lies or not, exaggeration or not, distortion or not, propaganda did begin to help sustain the will of the people to fight on. It did sustain morale. However, having said that, it's important also to understand that the success of propaganda will lead to a couple of important problems down the road. First of all, when it comes time to make peace in 1919, all of these exaggerations, all of these distortions, all of these lies and tall tales, when it comes time to make peace, all of this stuff will help to sustain and in fact intensify existing hatreds, existing suspicions, which will become an obstacle to a fair and moderate and reasonable peace settlement. However, in the second place, propaganda of the First World War will have a much more tragic impact a little bit later, specifically during the Second World War. Indeed, during World War II, beginning around 1942-43, rumors began to circulate that the Nazis were systematically rounding up and exterminating European Jews. Rumors began to spread about mass graves and mass murder and death camps and all that sort of stuff. But not many people believed it. And not many people during World War II believed the stories of Nazi atrocities against the Jews because of World War One propaganda. People tended to say, you know, we've heard these kinds of stories before. We heard them in the last war, and after the war, those stories were proven to be complete false wartime propaganda. Therefore, during World War II, most people dismissed the stories of what we're going to call the Holocaust because of the effectiveness of World War One propaganda.
Well, as the war struggled along, grinding up its thousands of casualties a day, the strain of the war began to take its toll. So that beginning in 1917, many of the states fighting the war began to fall apart. And in the next lecture, we'll be looking at that, at that stuff a little bit more closely. We'll look at the end of the war, and then we will deal with the Paris Peace Conference and the critical Treaty of Versailles. Of course, with the end of World War One, the Treaty of Versailles, and, uh, you learned, of course, learn about the Treaty of Versailles on our next lecture. We're going to find out about the peace, we'll find out about recovery, uh, not so much for Germany, and of course, the Great Depression, because that's not long after, in the 1930s. The World War One was over in 1918. We have the great, the the crash of the stock market in the United States in 1929, and so we have this Great Depression that actually isn't over until the beginning of World War II. Um, so everyone is going to suffer with the Great Depression, not just the United States. Europe will also suffer with the Great Depression, and this will be extremely hard, of course, on Germany because remember, they're having to pay those reparations because of World War One. And it gets to the point in Germany, for example, that it's worth more to burn money to heat stoves than it is to spend it. That's how much money is worth in Germany with the Great Depression. So everyone is experiencing this as well. And of course, in a future lecture, we'll see the rise of Adolf Hitler in Germany. Um, and of course, we know that with World War One, that the Russians had pulled out because they had a Bolshevik or Communist Revolution that will place, um, Lenin in power. And will also, of course, we'll have to see how this will play out in future lectures in our history. So when we come back for our next lecture, we'll find out about the peace, the recovery, and the Great Depression. Until next time.