Trench Warfare

[Germanicus]

Trench Warfare is mostly associated with WW1 on the western front. The reason that trenches were such an important feature of WW1 combat that because it was difficult to cover the ground necessary to follow up on and consolidate on an attack. I have thought about why trenches were so important in WW1 but not before or after. The range of the weapons used in WW1 made the distance between two armies in the field further than any time before in history. But the increased range of the weapons were not matched by an increase in mobility. If you have seen those awesome pommy tanks from WW1 you know that tanks did not exactly exist in WW1. Horses were not fast enough as well as offering no protection and having no protection. The terrain mostly wet soft and muddy. There were no flanking opportunities and not enough speed or protection to make a signicant charge at the enemies front line.


Trench warfare occurred when a revolution (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolution_in_military_affairs) in firepower (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firepower) was not matched by similar advances in mobility (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobility_(military)), resulting in a grueling form of warfare in which the defender held the advantage. In World War I (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_I), both sides constructed elaborate trench and dugout systems opposing each other along a front (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Front_(military)), protected from assault by barbed wire (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbed_wire). The area between opposing trench lines (known as "no man's land (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_man's_land)") was fully exposed to artillery fire from both sides. Attacks, even if successful, often sustained severe casualties as a matter of course.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trench_warfare

Firepower did not match mobility. So the lack of mobility with the increased range in firepower creates a no mans land that exists between the two front lines that remains even after a solid assault on the enemy. To advance the attackers must charge across the no mans land making them sitting ducks for the rallying defenders. So WW1 descended into a drawn out stalemate that was unique and not seen before or after WW1. A few instances of the use of trenches in different forms can be seen before and after WW1 but none can exactly be described as Trench Warfare employed in WW1. Firepower not matching mobility created the need for Trench Warfare and then the German Blitzkrieg of WW2 rendered Trench Warfare obsolete.

It is interesting that Julius Caesar had a hand in the birth of Trench Warfare. Caesar and his army faced Pompey the Great at the Battle of Dyrrhachium in 48 bc during The Great Roman Civil War. The siege at Dyrrhachium had some similar elements to WW1 Trench Warfare. An assualt on Pomey the Greats position was almost impossible because his back was guarded by the sea and he had hills in front. Caesar had a wall built across the battlefield to pin Pomey against the sea. So Pompey builds his own wall to match Casears and to defend against an assault. The two walls on the battlefield create a type of no mans land that was similar to the no mans land between the front lines on the Western Front of WW1.


Dyrrachium was a strong defensive position for Pompey. His back was guarded by the sea, and at his front there were hills that commanded the immediate area. This made an assault on the position nearly impossible. Caesar instead decided to revisit his Gallic Wars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gallic_Wars) play-book and ordered his engineers to build walls and fortifications to pin Pompey against the sea. Pompey responded with wall and fortifications of his own to prevent any further advancement. Between these two fortifications a no mans land was created which saw constant skirmishes with little or no advancement-- similar to the trench warfare of World War I (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_I).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Dyrrhachium_(48_BC)

The Battle of Dyrrhachium is first gen Trench Warfare. The use of defensive ditches and tunnels is not particularly uncommon before WW1 but the only real battlefield scenario of such dug in style/extreme defender advantage like stand off of opposing lines seperated by a no mans land is The Battle of Dyrrhachium. So Julius Caesar and Pompey the Great are the fathers of trench warfare. Cool hey.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zJZttzblHFQ
Oh Canada!

http://thehistoryofrome.typepad.com/the_history_of_rome/2009/02/44-caesar-triumphant-the-history-of-rome.html

[Mister D]

The range of the weapons used in WW1 made the distance between two armies in the field further than any time before in history.

Oddly enough, the war began to resemble a pre-modern or early modern siege. The lines were sometimes a mere stone's throw apart. The killing zone is what expanded exponentially. Running away was always extremely dangerous in the past especially from a melee but there was still potential for escape. You can't really flee the killing zone in modern war.

[Mister D]

I have yet to see a good WW1 film. The Trench had its moments though.

[The Sage of Main Street]

Trench Warfare is mostly associated with WW1 on the western front. The reason that trenches were such an important feature of WW1 combat that because it was difficult to cover the ground necessary to follow up on and consolidate on an attack. I have thought about why trenches were so important in WW1 but not before or after. The range of the weapons used in WW1 made the distance between two armies in the field further than any time before in history. But the increased range of the weapons were not matched by an increase in mobility. If you have seen those awesome pommy tanks from WW1 you know that tanks did not exactly exist in WW1. Horses were not fast enough as well as offering no protection and having no protection. The terrain mostly wet soft and muddy. There were no flanking opportunities and not enough speed or protection to make a signicant charge at the enemies front line.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trench_warfare

Firepower did not match mobility. So the lack of mobility with the increased range in firepower creates a no mans land that exists between the two front lines that remains even after a solid assault on the enemy. To advance the attackers must charge across the no mans land making them sitting ducks for the rallying defenders. So WW1 descended into a drawn out stalemate that was unique and not seen before or after WW1. A few instances of the use of trenches in different forms can be seen before and after WW1 but none can exactly be described as Trench Warfare employed in WW1. Firepower not matching mobility created the need for Trench Warfare and then the German Blitzkrieg of WW2 rendered Trench Warfare obsolete.

It is interesting that Julius Caesar had a hand in the birth of Trench Warfare. Caesar and his army faced Pompey the Great at the Battle of Dyrrhachium in 48 bc during The Great Roman Civil War. The siege at Dyrrhachium had some similar elements to WW1 Trench Warfare. An assualt on Pomey the Greats position was almost impossible because his back was guarded by the sea and he had hills in front. Caesar had a wall built across the battlefield to pin Pomey against the sea. So Pompey builds his own wall to match Casears and to defend against an assault. The two walls on the battlefield create a type of no mans land that was similar to the no mans land between the front lines on the Western Front of WW1.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Dyrrhachium_(48_BC)

The Battle of Dyrrhachium is first gen Trench Warfare. The use of defensive ditches and tunnels is not particularly uncommon before WW1 but the only real battlefield scenario of such dug in style/extreme defender advantage like stand off of opposing lines seperated by a no mans land is The Battle of Dyrrhachium. So Julius Caesar and Pompey the Great are the fathers of trench warfare. Cool hey.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zJZttzblHFQ
Oh Canada!

http://thehistoryofrome.typepad.com/the_history_of_rome/2009/02/44-caesar-triumphant-the-history-of-rome.html

All the Krauts had to do to defeat the Canucks was throw them a hockey puck. Then they would have been fighting over it among themselves.