# data[].attributes.body
Hear first hand accounts of the German attempt to bring the war to a swift end.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
21,000 British prisoners were taken on the opening day of the German Spring Offensive. Royal Engineer Thomas Cass was one of them.
There was masses of Germans, they come over like hoards. They come over and overwhelmed us and so I was taken prisoner at 2 o'clock and I was in the German trenches with them until 8 o'clock at night. Then we got up behind the line and they were collecting all the prisoners - the German guards were - and we had to march back to St Quentin, then. I always remember one German soldier, a young chap he was, he was marching by the side of me, and he patted me on shoulder and I'll always remember what he said. He said, 'Brave Englander', he said, 'brave Englander' and patted me on the back.
In response to the overwhelming German assault, reserve troops were moved up to help strengthen the Allied line. Charles Templar of the Gloucestershire Regiment had been nearly 20 miles from the front when the bombardment started, but was hurriedly pushed into action.
We marched the whole of that day with a 10 minute halt each hour as usual, until we came within shelling distance of the line, as it was then. That was about nightfall and we were put into huts, sort of big Nissen huts in our various companies. During the night, when we were all asleep, Jerry started shelling the area and he hit the hut which contained most of the 'C' Company men and caused a lot of casualties there. So that after that, we were more or less awake.
On 22 March, intense fighting continued as the German attack pressed on. Edmund Williams of the King's (Liverpool Regiment) was in action that day.
We'd got settled, and about just as it was coming dawn somebody on my left said, 'They're attacking.' This was Germany's first attack, about half-past six in the morning, the day's start. So we all lined the trench. I found myself firing rapid rounds as fast as I could into the mists. My little brother was firing his Lewis gun. The machine gun in Roupy was enfilading us quite severely, in fact some of the bullets were coming in - I was just got a bit of traverse - but coming into the trench just behind me. One officer managed to make it back from the number three platoon, he got a bullet through the arm and went down. But that was the only person I ever remember going back.
Despite these attempts to stem the German advance, large parts of the front were given up by retiring British forces. Leonard Ounsworth of the Royal Garrison Artillery outlined his part in this confused and hasty retreat.
As we got into a little bit of order on the retreat the major organised it so that we always had at least two - sometimes four - guns in action by splitting the battery duties into three sections, right, left and centre sections. He would take the retreating section back to a position where they'd to be operative, and then he would go forward again - and I was his personal orderly during that time - he would go forward again to the advance section and pull them out. On one or two occasions we pulled out in face of the enemy - had just a few infantry left to sort of cover us till we got the guns out. And then leap-frog that section over the other two, then come back and repeat the process like that so that he always had some of his guns in action, which meant that there was always some cover for the retreating infantry, some protection from enemy traffic coming up, you see.
For the rest of March, the British were forced back, often in a disorganised manner. NCO Ernest Bryan was among these exhausted and depleted troops.
We knew what the orders were; they must not break through. If retirement, and it will be necessary, retire, but don't let them break through. That's all our orders, and that's what was done, from 21 March, nine days and ten nights of scrapping and retiring, scrapping and retiring round the villages. We got to Ham eventually. That was the biggest town there was there, outside St. Quentin. When we got into there nobody knew anybody. There was no such thing as a battalion. We were a nondescript pile of all sorts of regiments, bits and pieces, anybody at all; sanitary people, cooks, everybody, they were all in it.
The retreating men had to abandon their normal daily routine, finding food and shelter where they could. Alfred Griffin of the King's Royal Rifle Corps explained how he kept himself fed.
We came back in dribs and drabbles. You just kept together for safety's sake. We had an officer, up to the time we got to this embankment. We came back here fighting and fighting. We had nothing, never had any rations at all issued to us. All we were doing was, if we saw a dead man the first thing we did was empty his haversack and see what he'd got to eat - we were starving. We'd used up our first rations the first day. We just done what we could. Where we saw a lorry crashed with bully beef and that on, well of course nobody stopped us looting it: we'd have eaten them!
As well as the huge numbers of Allied prisoners taken in the opening phase of the offensive, heavy casualties were suffered. Maberly Esler of the Royal Army Medical Corps described the difficulty of trying to help wounded men amidst the confusion and danger of the fighting.
I remember a sergeant beside me, a shell went up and smoke occurred, as the smoke cleared he was sitting with his two stumps waving in the air, his legs completely shot off, and we said, 'Well, we'll take you to the side of the road.' He said, 'You're not going to leave me here?!' I said, 'I'm afraid we can't do anything about it, we've got no stretcher-bearers, we've got nothing to carry you with, we've got nothing to give you, we'll put you out of the way of the tanks' - which were following us down the road - 'so they won't run over you, and I hope you'll be picked up.' It was an awfully painful thing to have to do. People who could walk and were wounded, a lot of people, were helped along; I had about five people clinging to me, one with a jaw blown away bleeding all over me. Getting through that was a miracle really, a miracle. It was like a nightmare.
By early April, the Germans had advanced around 40 miles into Allied territory. Despite this dire situation, British signaller Jim Crow didn't see men's morale break.
Well, it was... I don't know exactly what you did think. Sometimes you thought, 'Well, we're doing alright.' Then another time you was a bit despondent. I don't know that ever I saw any of the infantry what you might actually term panicking. They'd run back and try and get in some trenches or under a bit of cover. But the morale was really grand, taking it all through. Considering what we were losing.
The Germans launched a second attack, Operation Georgette, on 9 April - further north, in Flanders. Again it opened with a massive bombardment on British lines. Walter Grover of the Sussex Regiment narrowly escaped its effects.
Our post where we were standing, there was a dugout each side. I was on guard at one entrance and another young chap, he was on the other entrance. And one of the German minenwerfers, that was their big mine thrower, the minenwerfer. And it was a great big thing and it fell right onto where this chap was. The explosion, the concussion, fetched the blood from our nose - we were bleeding from concussion - blew us off the fire step. Fortunately we were just suffering from concussion, but this poor chap, it, well... We picked up what pieces were left of him. But it killed most of them down in the dugout. The blast, you see, it went right down and killed most of them then and there.
Intense fighting on that first day led to further German gains and heavy British losses. German gunner Paul Oestreicher witnessed the impact this had on exhausted British prisoners taken in the battle.
We were standing near Armentieres. We had before the attack many weeks of preparations, and were calculating the shooting exactly. This day, we entered Armentieres without practically any difficulties. The day was fighting, with very, very little resistance because the artillery had prepared it extremely well and after a few hours, heaps of prisoners came from the other side. They were in a rather desperate condition and very tired and worn out from the long shooting. They all said nothing else but, 'The war is over for us and we don't want to go back any more.'
German gains continued during the next few days. The situation once again looked critical for the Allies. On 11 April, British commander in chief Sir Douglas Haig issued a special order of the day, urging his men to fight on to the last. British private Walter Cook did not think much of it.
There was a thing given out about 'Backs to the wall' by the commander in chief but I don't know where the wall would be. Backs to the sea, I should thing would have been more like it... But morale was not low it was over the old ground again; they weren't gaining anything. They were only gaining a morass of shell ridden country.
Despite its initial success, Operation Georgette lost momentum and was called off at the end of April. A third phase of fighting began on 27 May, when the Germans attacked along the Chemin des Dames ridge. British officer Sidney Rogerson remembered the opening barrage.
I was actually standing in the mess having a whiskey and soda, when suddenly: whizz plop, whizz plop. Two German gas shells burst right on our doorstep. And within a second, the biggest barrage that I was ever in in the war burst on us. Or rather, we thought it had burst on us, but what the Germans had done on this occasion was to direct the whole weight of their gunfire onto the reserve areas and concentrate their mortars onto the front line, the fighting line. So the casualties among the reserve staff were enormous.
The Allied line was mainly held by the French, although British troops had been sent down for a period of rest. British private George Thompson was wounded in the battle.
As we entered the woods of the Chemin des Dames the bombardment started. Oh, it was a terrific bombardment. We got down into dugouts at first for the worst of it. You see, if they are bombarding you, they can't attack or they'd be bombarding themselves. So you wait until the bombardment's subsided and then you come out. When we came out of dugouts we went forward into trenches. We were standing in the trench waiting for the attack to come and we got heavy rifle fire from the left. And I got a bullet through the shoulder, under my chin like that and went through my shoulder. Then another one in beside my spine and out at the side, that got me down. I went down in the trench and the next thing I knew, I was being rolled over by two German soldiers.
As in March and April, the Germans made large gains and inflicted heavy casualties on the Allies. Yet again, British troops had to make a desperate defence in the face of an enemy onslaught. But Ernest Millard of the Royal Field Artillery kept his nerve.

They advanced and they captured 'C' Battery of my brigade from the rear and they were at our rear, left rear. So they came in through the woods. There was no question of nerves. I never had any thought of nerves. There was a job to be done, whether it was under fire or not it had to be done, that was a priority. I'd never had any flinching - 'Oh God, this is awful.' Nothing like that, nothing ever. There was a job to be done and we just got on with it. Despite huge successes since March, by early June the overall German offensive was faltering.

The German soldiers were exhausted from successive battles and had out-run their supplies of manpower and food by advancing so far and so fast. British signaller George Banton recalled the end of this phase of the offensive.
We retreated day by day and almost invariably Jerry was in that place within 24 hours. But it gradually simmered out. The 19th Division, they went in and they managed to hold up the advance and it gradually petered out. But the Germans had made a very large salient and that might've assisted - been partly responsible - for their not proceeding further. It was getting dangerous for them. They'd reached Chateau Thierry and that was as far as they dared go.
The German Spring Offensive delivered stunning successes and nearly succeeded. But ultimately, the advance could not be sustained. For Allied troops, it was difficult to maintain morale as they gave up ground and retreated under fire. Alexander Jamieson of the Royal Scots summed up how he felt as the enemy closed in during the early part of the offensive.
We retired again to what was known as the Green Line. The Green Line was a recently constructed defence trench that was nothing like finished and while we were there the order came along, 'This position must be held at all costs - to the last man.' And I felt terrible. I just thought, 'I'm only 19, I've only been here five weeks and apparently I'm going to be killed. And how am I going to be killed..?'
Voices of the First World War is a podcast series that reveals the impact the war had on everyone who lived through it through the stories of the men and women who were there.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Voices of the First World War: The German Spring Offensive

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Episode 41: By early 1918, Allied troops on the Western Front were weary from years of launching failed campaigns against the Germans. Meanwhile the German Army was boosted by the arrival of men from the Eastern Front - and busy preparing for a huge attack.

# data[].attributes.body
Read about the events leading to the end of war.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
From the largest naval battle, and the longest battle, to the most painful and infamous battle, and the battle that marked the end of mobile warfare on the Western Front, discover 10 significant battles of the First World War that took place between 1914-1918.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
From Amiens to Armistice: The Hundred Days Offensive

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
From the largest naval battle, and the longest battle, to the most painful and infamous battle, and the battle that marked the end of mobile warfare on the Western Front, discover 10 significant battles of the First World War that took place between 1914-1918.

# data[].attributes.body
Listen to these first hand accounts of the Allied offensive

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In the early hours of 8 August, the Allies launched their attack against the German lines near Amiens. It started with a sudden, devastating artillery barrage. The infantry followed it up, advancing through thick mist. British private William Gillman took part in the assault that day.
We went a very good distance, considering we were all on foot: there was no transport, everything you did was foot slogged. And you went until you got an order to stop and you might take one or two lines of Gerry. It all depended on what the resistance was, you see. We were still belting them: our artillery was still going over, you know and it was hell, you know. You couldn't hear yourself speak and shells were exploding all round you and there was smoke and shouting and hollering and all this kind of thing, you know. And it was a real good old battle, really. It got hold of you, sort of. You just knew that you'd got to get on and you were making advances, instead of sitting on your backside in the trench, you know, waiting for something to happen. There was a certain amount of excitement in this that removed fear. We cleared the lot in front of us. You would get machine-gun posts that could hold you up for perhaps an hour or two. And you got to hand it to them that they put up a resistance and a line there that was very, very difficult. And I think our people realised it. It took all that we'd got and that they produced to shift it. Which we did, eventually. Because from then on it was advance. From then on it was always advance.
The Germans were completely taken by surprise, and the advancing Allied troops were able to make significant gains. But there were still pockets of fierce German resistance that inflicted losses on the attacking troops. Royal Fusiliers officer Jim Davies was wounded in the battle.
I'd been going forward I suppose about 10 minutes when I got it. This machine gun got me through both legs I went down and the bloke next to me was killed. He was one of my men and I couldn't see who he was because he was lying about four feet away from me. I realised then what I'd got and I put a tourniquet on: took my scarf off; put it round my left leg and my pistol through and tightened up. I was lying there, it was daybreak. I couldn't move at all and then there was a sergeant and about four Fusiliers appeared. Told them to move me into a shell hole because there were bullets - I had been wounded again, I'd had another piece of shrapnel through the knee while I was lying out there, two or three hours afterwards, from a shell. And I wanted to be moved into a shell hole. I was past commanding anything then, so I said, 'Move me into a shell hole.'
As part of the new all-arms battle, tanks were used to great effect at Amiens. They were able to crush German defences and clear a path for the infantry. Ralph Cooney was an officer in the Tank Corps.
We had then the experience of Cambrai we knew that we were going to do it properly and that was all our training was. We knew that we would be used as an attack of surprise without any artillery preparation, so that the going would be good and we could make lots of headway and we weren't going to be fouled up horrors like we were in the early days. And that we would also be supported by adequate forces of the other arms - and we were. And the thing was an immense success from the start. I was commanding a section of tanks and they went over on the 8th of August in the initial attack. We went over at zero hour and everything went according to plan. We had no troubles or difficulties and we went to our objective and we reached it without any absurd incident. We just motored straight through and attacked such enemy as we found and saw them off and the infantry came along and in due course occupied the line. And in due course, two cavalry divisions went through and as far as we were concerned the day's battle was over. We got a couple of cavalry horses and went off to see the fun!
Norman Dillon explained how the tanks were able to deal with the German's deadly barbed wire defences.
The anchors were only used after the battle to clear the way for other troops to get through. You could walk through the barbed wire after the tanks on the track marks where the tanks left by them. Although there would be six to eight inches or more of solid barbed wire under where the track had been, which shows how thick it was. It was all flattened completely down and you could walk on it like a road, but you couldn't take animals over it very well and you couldn't take wheeled transport over it. So what they did was to get two tanks together, to go into the wire, drop their anchors and drive away from each other. And the wire would roll out into an enormous ball and clean the ground as clean as a whistle.
Allied forces advanced 7 miles on 8 August. They also dealt a huge psychological blow. German general Erich Ludendorff called it 'the black day of the German army.' Australian officer S Evers remembered the buoyant mood of the Allied forces that day.
The tanks were going forward and taking position after position, the infantry following up behind and even though the Germans brought their artillery up out of their pits, it was of no avail that the Australians got all round them. While this was taking place the Horse Artillery, with the howitzers and the 18-pounders, galloped into action. The horses would be turned round, the guns turned round and then pipped off their different amounts of fire there and limbered up again. In the meantime the German prisoners were coming up and I saw one Australian private actually prodding the rear of a German brigadier, much to the amusement of everybody else at the time. But it was a morning of victory. You could feel the hair prickling up your spine with the excitement because we knew that that was going to be the end of the war.
Around 12,000 German prisoners were captured on 8 August. Walter Grover of the Sussex Regiment recalled the demoralised state of the POWs he saw.
The Germans were beginning to realise now the number was up and they gave themselves up quite a lot. I remember one party came over with their hands up, there must've been about 40 or 50 of them came over with their hands up. That was on August the 8th. I think they called that the black day of the German army that was. They were just giving themselves up ad lib, you know. They made a bit of resistance for a start but not for long, not like they did in 1916. They weren't a very - the lot I saw were a very bedraggled-looking lot, you know. All sorts, not like the big hefty fellows that we saw on the Somme, the Bavarians you know, six feet or so, odd. These were small, like the scrapings of the barrel I should think they were. You felt like we were just kingpins when the Germans were coming over with their hands up and surrendering.
Fighting continued for the next three days. William Tobey of the Lancashire Fusiliers described the busy, chaotic scenes near the front line on 10 August.
We were carried towards front in lorries and then the traffic on this Amiens-Roye road, which is where we were advancing along, was so terrific. Coming back from the front in all the thousands of prisoners that were being marched back and the ambulances, captured guns, wounded etc. etc. that we couldn't advance any further in our lorries. We got out and we started to march in columns of four and we found that that was quite impracticable. We had to march in single file with many halts, filtering through the oncoming traffic. And this took us a great deal longer to get to the front than had been anticipated.
After the stunning success of the opening day, the Allied momentum began to slow down. The attack was called off after 4 days in order to regroup and prepare for the next assault. The new phase began on 21 August, this time centred around Albert. Harry Smith of the Royal Field Artillery described his role in the battle.
Well the bombardment lasted about two and a half hours to three hours. And during this period there was over 400 shells per gun, six guns fired well over 2,000 shells - between 2,000 and 3,000 shells - for the six guns. Of course, they were firing all the time and occasionally some of the breaches overheated. I had to oil them and ease them as best I could so that the shells could be fired. It didn't take long but it was only occasionally, an odd one or two. There was one occasion one shell stuck and I had to get it out. I had a long stick with a rubber end and it's a very difficult job but of course when you're young enough there's no trembling hands or anything like that, you can do the job and... Confidence - you needed confidence to do it. If you hit the right spot you were alright, but if you hit the wrong spot, well you and the gun would have been blown up.
Intense fighting continued over the following days as Allied forces sought to push the Germans back. Ground troops had aerial support as they advanced. Russell Tapp of 20 Squadron, RAF remembered his work at this time.
Well we did various things. Sometimes we did purely offensive patrols and other times we would escort bombers and then after we left them we would do an offensive patrol on our own, afterwards. And other times we actually carried bombs ourselves, as well. And we would go over on a bomb raid, drop our bombs wherever we had to and then become an offensive patrol afterwards. An offensive patrol is offensive against the German aircraft; whereas a bomb raid you would fly in direct as far as you can, avoiding any kind of contact with the enemy, who would sometimes come in and make things difficult. You reached your target and dropped your bomb, so purely on the bomb running you were purely defensive.
August 1918 developed into a month of Allied advance and German retreat. Hartwig Pohlmann was one of the huge numbers of Germans who were captured during that period.
I myself didn't experience the end of the war in the front line. On the 27th of August I was taken prisoner by a highlander division in the Battle of Bapaume. It was the big advance of the British forces again back to the Siegfried Line. So I came over to England and experienced the end of the war in a prisoner of war camp in Skipton, Yorkshire.
British private Herbert Cooper described the Germans as they retreated.
When we went up to the observation post we noticed quite a lot of movement: Germans here and there and so on. And then it was really from our own troops that we heard that they were going forward and finding all the German posts had been vacated and they were withdrawing. Owing to the British attacks in the north of us and in the south and even right down to the Americans were making advances in the south - well that meant to say if the Germans didn't withdraw, they were going to be left in the salient and the troops would go in behind them and capture the whole division perhaps. So that's why they withdrew, so as to straighten their line and not be left behind between the two advancing armies.
On 2 September, Allied troops attacked the German defensive system known as the Drocourt-Quéant Line. James Lovegrove took part in the fighting there.
Each bay, when I got there, had a German and a machine gun and all of them were lying like that, dead, from this barrage. My men, when I found them, were sitting down eating the Germans' breakfast: we'd never got our rum ration - the Munsters got that - we never had anything to eat or drink from the previous night when we got there. And I've never heard such a barrage, all these shells fell at... they caught... the Germans were out wiring if you please. They had no idea that anything was happening like that. First of all I told the men, 'Keep away from the tank; it's out of action.' And all the bullets were ricocheting off, you see, and I was afraid that we'd get hit that way. I forget how many of my men were killed.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Voices of the First World War: The Beginning Of The End

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In the early hours of 8 August, the Allies launched their attack against the German lines near Amiens. It started with a sudden, devastating artillery barrage. The infantry followed it up, advancing through thick mist. British private William Gillman took part in the assault that day.

# data[].attributes.headline
Discover more about the men from our local area who fought in the war

# data[].attributes.subject
Discover more about the men from our local area who fought in the war

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
A Street Near You - exploring the local legacy of the First World War

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A First World War legacy project bringing together data sources such as IWM's Lives of the First World War and Commonwealth War Graves records

# data[].attributes.headline
10 interpretations of who started the war

# data[].attributes.subject
10 interpretations of who started the war

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
As nations gear up to mark 100 years since the start of World War One, academic argument still rages over which country was to blame for the conflict.

Education Secretary for England Michael Gove's recent criticism of how the causes and consequences of the war are taught in schools has only stoked the debate further.

Here 10 leading historians give their opinion.

Sir Max Hastings - military historian
Germany
No one nation deserves all responsibility for the outbreak of war, but Germany seems to me to deserve most.

It alone had power to halt the descent to disaster at any time in July 1914 by withdrawing its "blank cheque" which offered support to Austria for its invasion of Serbia.

I'm afraid I am unconvinced by the argument that Serbia was a rogue state which deserved its nemesis at Austria's hands. And I do not believe Russia wanted a European war in 1914 - its leaders knew that it would have been in a far stronger position to fight two years later, having completed its rearmament programme.

The question of whether Britain was obliged to join the European conflict which became inevitable by 1 August is almost a separate issue. In my own view neutrality was not a credible option because a Germany victorious on the continent would never afterwards have accommodated a Britain which still dominated the oceans and global financial system.

Sir Richard J Evans - Regius professor of history, University of Cambridge
Serbia
Serbia bore the greatest responsibility for the outbreak of WW1. Serbian nationalism and expansionism were profoundly disruptive forces and Serbian backing for the Black Hand terrorists was extraordinarily irresponsible. Austria-Hungary bore only slightly less responsibility for its panic over-reaction to the assassination of the heir to the Habsburg throne.

France encouraged Russia's aggressiveness towards Austria-Hungary and Germany encouraged Austrian intransigence. Britain failed to mediate as it had done in the previous Balkan crisis out of fear of Germany's European and global ambitions - a fear that was not entirely rational since Britain had clearly won the naval arms race by 1910.

The generally positive attitude of European statesmen towards war, based on notions of honour, expectations of a swift victory, and ideas of social Darwinism, was perhaps the most important conditioning factor. It is very important to look at the outbreak of the war in the round and to avoid reading back later developments - the German September Programme for example (an early statement of their war aims) - into the events of July-August 1914.

Dr Heather Jones - associate professor in international history, LSE
Austria-Hungary, Germany and Russia
A handful of bellicose political and military decision-makers in Austria-Hungary, Germany and Russia caused WW1.

Relatively common before 1914, assassinations of royal figures did not normally result in war. But Austria-Hungary's military hawks - principal culprits for the conflict - saw the Sarajevo assassination of the Austro-Hungarian Archduke Franz Ferdinand and his wife by a Bosnian Serb as an excuse to conquer and destroy Serbia, an unstable neighbour which sought to expand beyond its borders into Austro-Hungarian territories. Serbia, exhausted by the two Balkan wars of 1912-13 in which it had played a major role, did not want war in 1914.

Broader European war ensued because German political and military figures egged on Austria-Hungary, Germany's ally, to attack Serbia. This alarmed Russia, Serbia's supporter, which put its armies on a war footing before all options for peace had been fully exhausted.

This frightened Germany into pre-emptively declaring war on Russia and on Russia's ally France and launching a brutal invasion, partly via Belgium, thereby bringing in Britain, a defender of Belgian neutrality and supporter of France.

John Rohl - emeritus professor of history, University of Sussex
Austria-Hungary and Germany
WW1 did not break out by accident or because diplomacy failed. It broke out as the result of a conspiracy between the governments of imperial Germany and Austria-Hungary to bring about war, albeit in the hope that Britain would stay out.

After 25 years of domination by Kaiser Wilhelm II with his angry, autocratic and militaristic personality, his belief in the clairvoyance of all crowned heads, his disdain for diplomats and his conviction that his Germanic God had predestined him to lead his country to greatness, the 20 or so men he had appointed to decide the policy of the Reich opted for war in 1914 in what they deemed to be favourable circumstances.

Germany's military and naval leaders, the predominant influence at court, shared a devil-may-care militarism that held war to be inevitable, time to be running out, and - like their Austrian counterparts - believed it would be better to go down fighting than to go on tolerating what they regarded as the humiliating status quo. In the spring of 1914, this small group of men in Berlin decided to make "the leap into the dark" which they knew their support for an Austrian attack on Serbia would almost certainly entail.

The fine-tuning of the crisis was left to the civilian chancellor Theobald von Bethmann Hollweg, whose primary aim was to subvert diplomatic intervention in order to begin the war under the most favourable conditions possible. In particular, he wanted to convince his own people that Germany was under attack and to keep Britain out of the conflict.

Gerhard Hirschfeld - professor of modern and contemporary history, University of Stuttgart
Austria-Hungary, Germany, Russia, France, Britain and Serbia
Long before the outbreak of hostilities Prussian-German conservative elites were convinced that a European war would help to fulfil Germany's ambitions for colonies and for military as well as political prestige in the world.

The actual decision to go to war over a relatively minor international crisis like the Sarajevo murder, however, resulted from a fatal mixture of political misjudgement, fear of loss of prestige and stubborn commitments on all sides of a very complicated system of military and political alliances of European states.

In contrast to the historian Fritz Fischer who saw German war aims - in particular the infamous September Programme of 1914 with its far-reaching economic and territorial demands - at the core of the German government's decision to go to war, most historians nowadays dismiss this interpretation as being far too narrow. They tend to place German war aims, or incidentally all other belligerent nations' war aims, in the context of military events and political developments during the war.

Dr Annika Mombauer - The Open University
Austria-Hungary and Germany
Whole libraries have been filled with the riddle of 1914. Was the war an accident or design, inevitable or planned, caused by sleepwalkers or arsonists? To my mind the war was no accident and it could have been avoided in July 1914. In Vienna the government and military leaders wanted a war against Serbia. The immediate reaction to the murder of Franz Ferdinand on 28 June 1914 was to seek redress from Serbia, which was thought to have been behind the assassination plot and which had been threatening Austria-Hungary's standing in the Balkans for some time. Crucially, a diplomatic victory was considered worthless and "odious". At the beginning of July, Austria's decision-makers chose war.

But in order to implement their war against Serbia they needed support from their main ally Germany. Without Germany, their decision to fight against Serbia could not have been implemented. The Berlin government issued a "blank cheque" to its ally, promising unconditional support and putting pressure on Vienna to seize this golden opportunity. Both governments knew it was almost certain that Russia would come to Serbia's aid and this would turn a local war into a European one, but they were willing to take this risk.

Germany's guarantee made it possible for Vienna to proceed with its plans - a "no" from Berlin would have stopped the crisis in its tracks. With some delay Vienna presented an ultimatum to Serbia on 23 July which was deliberately unacceptable. This was because Austria-Hungary was bent on a war and Germany encouraged it because the opportunity seemed perfect. Victory still seemed possible whereas in a few years' time Russia and France would have become invincible. Out of a mixture of desperation and over-confidence the decision-makers of Austria-Hungary and Germany unleashed a war to preserve and expand their empires. The war that ensued would be their downfall.

Sean McMeekin - assistant professor of history at Koc University, Istanbul
Austria-Hungary, Germany, Russia, France, Britain and Serbia
It is human nature to seek simple, satisfying answers, which is why the German war guilt thesis endures today.

Find out more

In BBC Radio 4's The Great War of Words Michael Portillo explores why responsibility for WW1 has been a fierce battle for meaning ever since 1914
Listen to the programme
Without Berlin's encouragement of a strong Austro-Hungarian line against Serbia after Sarajevo - the "blank cheque" - WW1 would clearly not have broken out. So Germany does bear responsibility.

But it is equally true that absent a terrorist plot launched in Belgrade the Germans and Austrians would not have faced this terrible choice. Civilian leaders in both Berlin and Vienna tried to "localise" conflict in the Balkans. It was Russia's decision - after Petersburg received its own "blank cheque" from Paris - to Europeanise the Austro-Serbian showdown which produced first a European and then - following Britain's entry - world conflagration. Russia, not Germany, mobilised first.

The resulting war, with France and Britain backing Serbia and Russia against two Central Powers, was Russia's desired outcome, not Germany's. Still, none of the powers can escape blame. All five Great Power belligerents, along with Serbia, unleashed Armageddon.

Prof Gary Sheffield - professor of war studies, University of Wolverhampton
Austria-Hungary and Germany
The war was started by the leaders of Germany and Austria-Hungary. Vienna seized the opportunity presented by the assassination of the archduke to attempt to destroy its Balkan rival Serbia. This was done in the full knowledge that Serbia's protector Russia was unlikely to stand by and this might lead to a general European war.

Germany gave Austria unconditional support in its actions, again fully aware of the likely consequences. Germany sought to break up the French-Russian alliance and was fully prepared to take the risk that this would bring about a major war. Some in the German elite welcomed the prospect of beginning an expansionist war of conquest. The response of Russia, France and later Britain were reactive and defensive.

The best that can be said of German and Austrian leaders in the July crisis is that they took criminal risks with world peace.

Dr Catriona Pennell - senior lecturer in history, University of Exeter
Austria-Hungary and Germany
In my opinion, it is the political and diplomatic decision-makers in Germany and Austria-Hungary who must carry the burden of responsibility for expanding a localised Balkan conflict into a European and, eventually, global war. Germany, suffering from something of a "younger child" complex in the family of European empires, saw an opportunity to reconfigure the balance of power in their favour via an aggressive war of conquest.

On 5 July 1914 it issued the "blank cheque" of unconditional support to the crumbling Austro-Hungarian Empire (trying to reassert its dominance over the rebellious Serbia), despite the likelihood of this sparking war with Russia, an ally of France and Great Britain. However, Austria-Hungary's actions should not be ignored.

The ultimatum it issued to Serbia on 23 July was composed in such a way that its possibility of being accepted was near impossible. Serbia's rejection paved the way for Austria-Hungary to declare war on 28 July, thus beginning WW1.

David Stevenson - professor of international history, LSE
Germany
The largest share of responsibility lies with the German government. Germany's rulers made possible a Balkan war by urging Austria-Hungary to invade Serbia, well understanding that such a conflict might escalate. Without German backing it is unlikely that Austria-Hungary would have acted so drastically.

They also started wider European hostilities by sending ultimata to Russia and France, and by declaring war when those ultimata were rejected - indeed fabricating a pretext that French aircraft had bombed Nuremberg.

Finally, they violated international treaties by invading Luxemburg and Belgium knowing that the latter violation was virtually certain to bring in Britain. This is neither to deny that there were mitigating circumstances nor to contend that German responsibility was sole.

Serbia subjected Austria-Hungary to extraordinary provocation and two sides were needed for armed conflict. Although the Central Powers took the initiative, the Russian government, with French encouragement, was willing to respond.

In contrast, while Britain might have helped avert hostilities by clarifying its position earlier, this responsibility - even disregarding the domestic political obstacles to an alternative course - was passive rather than active.
Find out more on Follow @BBCNewsMagazine on Twitter and on Facebook the generals of WW1 and if history has misjudged them and the World War One Centenary.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
As nations gear up to mark 100 years since the start of World War One, academic argument still rages over which country was to blame for the conflict. Education Secretary for England Michael Gove's recent criticism of how the causes and consequences of the war are taught in schools has only stoked the debate further.

# data[].attributes.headline
Why were the Gallipoli landings so disastrous?

# data[].attributes.subject
Why were the Gallipoli landings so disastrous?

# data[].attributes.body
Dan Snow considers the reasons for failure

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why Were the Gallipoli Landings so Disastrous?

# data[].attributes.body
Teaching resource from the Imperial War Museum

# data[].attributes.body
Focus on Balkans

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
How did World War One break out? Professor David Stevenson closely examines the three stages that led to war being declared between Austria-Hungary, Serbia, Germany, Russia, France, and Britain.

In July-August 1914 an international crisis culminated in the outbreak of the First World War. The crisis had three phases. In the first, one of the six European Great Powers, Austria-Hungary, launched a war against Serbia. In the second, this war escalated into a Continent-wide conflict involving Germany, Russia, and France. In the third, the conflict spread into Western Europe as Germany invaded Luxemburg and Belgium, and Britain intervened. The sixth Great Power, Italy, remained neutral.

Phase one: Austria-Hungary declares war against Serbia

In its later stages the crisis ran at breakneck speed, but at first it moved slowly. It began with the assassinations on 28 June of the Archduke Franz Ferdinand and his wife, Sophie, at Sarajevo by Gavrilo Princip. Franz Ferdinand was heir to the Austro-Hungarian throne. He fell victim to what would now be called state-sponsored terrorism. Princip was an ethnic Serb from Bosnia, which Austria-Hungary had annexed in 1908. He belonged to a revolutionary nationalist group that wanted to liberate the South Slav peoples (Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes) from foreign rule and unite them in a new state of Yugoslavia. The conspirators had received their weapons from Serbian military intelligence and been trained in Belgrade, although the Serbian civilian government had not been involved. It was therefore unsurprising that Austria-Hungary made drastic demands on Serbia in an ultimatum delivered on 23 July. But the Austro-Hungarian leaders wanted to use the assassinations to provoke a war, and to a British radical such as David Lloyd George their conduct amounted to bullying. When Serbia failed to accept all of the demands, Austria-Hungary declared war on 28 July.

Phase two: the conflict widens to Germany, Russia, and France

Austria-Hungary's leaders ruled a multi-national empire. They felt that Serbian-backed separatism threatened its survival. Already by 1913 they had decided that only force could solve the problem. But they knew a war against Serbia was almost certain to escalate, and before sending the ultimatum they consulted their ally, Germany, whose leaders urged Austria-Hungary to use force and promised backing if Russia intervened (the secret 'Potsdam blank cheque', 5-6 July). The Germans' motives have been intensively debated. From their perspective, Austria-Hungary was their one reliable Great-Power ally, and enemies ringed them. France and Russia had allied in 1891-94, and since 1904 Britain had co-operated with them. Germany had conducted a battleship-building race against Britain and an army race against France and Russia, and since 1905 the two blocs had clashed repeatedly over Morocco and the Balkans. The German leaders were readier to risk war because they believed the current military balance favoured them but would soon deteriorate. But if Germany threw down a challenge, Russia was quick to respond. Once Austria-Hungary sent the ultimatum Russia began military preparations, and after war was declared on Serbia, Russia ordered 'general mobilisation' (31 July), placing its forces on a war footing. Russia's leaders were willing to accept a European conflict rather than abandon Serbia, partly because of Slav solidarity but more to protect their own interests in the Balkans and because they saw Germany as a danger. They had recently strengthened their army, and they correctly expected France to support them.

German satirical map of Europe in 1914

Satirical map of Europe drawn by German graphic artist Walter Trier in 1914, showing Germany and Austria-Hungary as aggressors.

Phase three: Germany invades Luxemburg and Belgium, Britain intervenes

Germany and France had been at odds since the Franco-Prussian War of 1870-71, after which Germany had annexed the French provinces of Alsace-Lorraine. The French remembered the loss, although they would not have started a war over it. Germany's strategy for a war against France and Russia envisaged first defeating France quickly, outflanking France's border fortresses by invading via Luxemburg and Belgium. Once Russia mobilized (which the Germans feared would undermine their war plan) the Germans declared war on both Russia and France (1 and 3 August) and demanded that Belgium allow them to cross its territory. Britain, Germany, and France had all committed themselves to respect Belgian independence by the 1839 Treaty of London, and the issue swung the doubters in the British Cabinet. As Germany failed to comply with a demand to respect Belgium, on 4 August Britain declared war.

A History of Fidelity, a summary of Alsace-Lorraine's history

Brochure summarising the history of Alsace-Lorraine which by 1914 had been part of the German Empire for 50 years.

In 1914 a Balkan crisis coincided with high tension between Europe's opposing power blocs. For decades the continent had enjoyed relative peace, and many had believed that war was becoming obsolete: some called for a common language such as Esperanto. Now, however, anti-war opposition collapsed, because events moved too quickly and the full facts of the crisis remained hidden, and because each government could present the conflict as a defensive struggle forced on it by the enemy. Partly for this reason, at least until 1917 pro-war consensus generally remained solid.

A World Language: why not Esperanto?, by Margaret L Blaise

Booklet published in June 1916 by Margaret L. Blaise (née Jones, 1878-1935), pioneer of the Esperanto movement in Britain.

Written by Professor David Stevenson

David Stevenson is a Professor of International History at the London School of Economics and Political Science. He has published extensively on the causes, course, and consequences of the First World War. His books include 1914-1918: the History of the First World War; With Our Backs to the Wall: Victory and Defeat in 1918; and 1917: War, Peace, and Revolution. He is currently working on the British home front in 1916-17.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
How did World War One break out? Professor David Stevenson closely examines the three stages that led to war being declared between Austria-Hungary, Serbia, Germany, Russia, France, and Britain. In July-August 1914 an international crisis culminated in the outbreak of the First World War. The crisis had three phases.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Voices of the First World War - BBC Radio 4

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Dan Snow tells the story of World War I through the voices of those who were there.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The 4 M-A-I-N Causes of World War One in 6 Minutes

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
10 Events that Led to World War I - History Lists

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A list of 10 events that played the key role in the outbreak of World War I.

# data[].attributes.headline
Timeline of events leading to the outbreak of war

# data[].attributes.subject
Timeline of events leading to the outbreak of war

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Although the assassination of Franz Ferdinand in 1914 is often cited as the first event leading directly to World War 1, the true build up was much longer. As well as growing public support for a confrontation-which varied but ultimately grew in the period before-the treaties and diplomatic relations so important in 1914 were all established years, often decades, before.

Neutrality and 19th Century Wars

1839: The Guarantee of Belgium Neutrality, part of the First Treaty of London which said that Belgium would remain perpetually neutral in future wars, and the signatory powers were committed to guarding that neutrality. When World War I began, Britain cited Germany's invasion of Belgium as a reason to go to war, but as historians have pointed out, that this was not a binding reason to fight.

1867: The 1967 Treaty of London established Luxembourg's neutrality. This would be violated by Germany, as with Belgium.

1870: The Franco-Prussian War, in which France was beaten and Paris besieged. The successful attack on France and its abrupt end caused people to believe that modern war would be short and decisive-and the Germans saw it as evidence that they could win. It also made France bitter and framed their desire for a war in which they could seize 'their' land back.

1871: The creation of the German Empire. Bismarck, the architect of the German Empire feared being encircled by France and Russia and tried to prevent this any way he could.

Late 19th Century Treaties and Alliances

1879: The Austro-German Treaty tied the two Germano-centric powers of Austria-Hungary and Germany together as part of Bismarck's desire to avoid war. They would fight together in World War I.

1882: The Triple Alliance was established between Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Italy, forming a central European power bloc. Italy would not accept this as binding when the war began.

1883: The Austro-Romanian Alliance was a secret agreement that Romania would only go to war if the Austro-Hungarian Empire was attacked.

1888: Wilhelm II became Emperor of Germany. He rejected the legacy of Bismarck and tried to go his own way. Unfortunately, he was basically incompetent.

1889-1913: The Anglo-German Naval Race. Britain and Germany should, perhaps, have been friends, but the race created an air of military conflict, if not an actual desire for military action by both sides.

1894: The Franco-Russian Alliance encircles Germany, much as Bismarck feared and would have tried to stop if he'd still been in power.

Twentieth Century's First Decade

1902: The Franco-Italian Agreement of 1902 was a secret pact in which France agree to support Italy's claims to Tripoli (modern Libya)

1904: The Entente Cordial, agreed between France and Britain. This was not a binding agreement to fight together but moved in that direction.

1904-1905: The Russo-Japanese War, which Russia lost, an important nail in the coffin of the tsarist regime.

1905-1906: The First Moroccan Crisis, also known as the Tangier crisis, over who controlled Morocco: France or the Sultanate, supported by the Kaiser

1907: The Anglo-Russian Convention, a pact between England and Russia relating to Persia, Afghanistan, Tibet, another pact which encircled Germany. Many in the country believed they should fight the inevitable war now before Russia became stronger and Britain was moved to act.

1908: Austria-Hungary annexes Bosnia and Herzegovina, a significant rise in tensions in the Balkans.

1909: The Russo-Italian Agreement: Russia now controlled the Bosporus, and Italy retained Tripoli and Cyrenaica

Accelerating Crises

1911: The Second Moroccan (Agadir) Crisis, or Panthersprung in German, in which the presence of French troops in Morocco led Germany to demand territorial compensation: the upshot was Germany was both embarrassed and militant.

1911-1912: Turkish-Italian War, fought between Italy and the Ottoman Empire, resulting in Italy's capture of Tripolitania Vilayet province.

1912: Anglo-French Naval Agreement, the last of the Entente Cordiale which began in 1904 and included discussions of who controlled Egypt, Morocco, West and Central Africa, Thailand, Madagascar, Vanuatu and parts of Canada.

1912, October 8-May 30, 1913: The First Balkan War. A European war could have been triggered any time after this point.

1913: Woodrow Wilson was sworn in as US president.

1913, April 30-May 6: The First Albanian Crisis, including the Siege of Scutari, between Montenegro and Serbia against the Ottoman Empire; the first of several crises in which Serbia refused to give up Scutari.

1913, June 29-July 31: The Second Balkan War.

1913, September-October: The Second Albanian Crisis; military leaders and Serbia and Russia continue to battle over Scutari.

1913, November-Janaury 1914: The Liman von Sanders Affair, in which Prussian general Liman headed a mission to take control of the garrison at Constantinople, effectively giving Germany control of the Ottoman empire, which the Russians objected to

War Begins

By 1914, the 'Great Powers' of Europe had already come close to war several times thanks to the Balkan, Moroccan and Albanian disputes; passions ran high and the Austro-Russo-Balkan rivalry remained deeply provocative.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Build Up to War: The Events That Led to World War 1

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Although the assassination of Franz Ferdinand in 1914 is often cited as the first event leading directly to World War 1, the true build up was much longer. As well as growing public support for a confrontation-which varied but ultimately grew in the period before-the treaties and diplomatic relations so important in 1914 were all established years, often decades, before.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
World War I, known as the "war to end all wars," occurred between July 1914 and November 11, 1918. By the end of the war, over 17 million people had been killed, including over 100,000 American troops. While the causes of the war are infinitely more complicated than a simple timeline of events, and are still debated and discussed to this day, the list below provides an overview of the most frequently-cited events that led to war.

Mutual Defense Alliances

Countries throughout the world have always made mutual defense agreements with their neighbors, treaties that could pull them into battle. These treaties meant that if one country was attacked, the allied countries were bound to defend them. Before World War 1 began, the following alliances existed:

Russia and Serbia

Germany and Austria-Hungary

France and Russia

Britain and France and Belgium

Japan and Britain

When Austria-Hungary declared war on Serbia, Russia got involved to defend Serbia. Germany, seeing that Russia was mobilizing, declared war on Russia. France was then drawn in against Germany and Austria-Hungary. Germany attacked France by marching through Belgium pulling Britain into war. Then Japan entered the war to support its British allies. Later, Italy and the United States would enter on the side of the Allies (Britain, France, Russia, etc.).

Imperialism

Imperialism is when a country increases their power and wealth by bringing additional territories under their control, usually without outright colonizing or resettling them. Before World War I, several European countries had made competing imperialistic claims in Africa and parts of Asia, making them points of contention. Because of the raw materials these areas could provide, tensions around which country had the right to exploit these areas ran high. The increasing competition and desire for greater empires led to an increase in confrontation that helped push the world into World War I.

Militarism

As the world entered the 20th century, an arms race had begun, primarily over the number of each country's warships, and the increasing size of their armies-countries began training more and more of their young men to be prepared for battle. The warships themselves increased in size, number of guns, speed, method of propulsion, and quality armor, beginning in 1906 with Britain's HMS Dreadnought. Dreadnoughtwas soon out-classed as the Royal Navy and Kaiserliche Marine quickly expanded their ranks with increasingly modern and powerful warships.

By 1914, Germany had nearly 100 warships and two million trained soldiers. Great Britain and Germany both greatly increased their navies in this time period. Further, in Germany and Russia particularly, the military establishment began to have a greater influence on public policy. This increase in militarism helped push the countries involved into war.

Nationalism

Much of the origin of the war was based on the desire of the Slavic peoples in Bosnia and Herzegovina to no longer be part of Austria-Hungary but instead be part of Serbia. This specific essentially nationalistic and ethnic revolt led directly to the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand, which was the event that tipped the scales to war.

But more generally, nationalism in many of the countries throughout Europe contributed not only to the beginning but to the extension of the war across Europe and into Asia. As each country tried to prove their dominance and power, the war became more complicated and prolonged.

Immediate Cause: Assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand

The immediate cause of World War I that made the aforementioned items come into play (alliances, imperialism, militarism, and nationalism) was the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria-Hungary. In June 1914, a Serbian-nationalist terrorist group called the Black Hand sent groups to assassinate the Archduke. Their first attempt failed when a driver avoided a grenade thrown at their car. However, later that day a Serbian nationalist named Gavrilo Princip shot the Archduke and his wife while they were driving through Sarajevo, Bosnia which was part of Austria-Hungary. They died of their wounds.

The assassination was in protest to Austria-Hungary having control of this region: Serbia wanted to take over Bosnia and Herzegovina. The assassination of Ferdinand led to Austria-Hungary declaring war on Serbia. When Russia began to mobilize to defend its alliance with Serbia, Germany declared war on Russia. Thus began the expansion of the war to include all those involved in the mutual defense alliances.

The War to End All Wars

World War I saw a change in warfare, from the hand-to-hand style of older wars to the inclusion of weapons that used technology and removed the individual from close combat. The war had extremely high casualties over 15 million dead and 20 million injured. The face of warfare would never be the same again.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Top 5 Causes That Led to World War I

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
World War I, known as the "war to end all wars," occurred between July 1914 and November 11, 1918. By the end of the war, over 17 million people had been killed, including over 100,000 American troops.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Loading...

The first world war began in August 1914. It was directly triggered by the assassination of the Austrian archduke, Franz Ferdinand and his wife, on 28th June 1914 by Bosnian revolutionary, Gavrilo Princip.

This event was, however, simply the trigger that set off declarations of war. The actual causes of the war are more complicated and are still debated by historians today.

Loading...

Scroll down for a comprehensive discussion of the causes of World War 1. Alternatively, if you would like to watch a video covering the same events, click below.

Causes of WW1: Alliances

An alliance is an agreement made between two or more countries to give each other help if it is needed. When an alliance is signed, those countries become known as Allies.

A number of alliances had been signed by countries between the years 1879 and 1914. These were important because they meant that some countries had no option but to declare war if one of their allies. declared war first. (the table below reads clockwise from the top left picture)

Loading...

Causes of WW1: Imperialism

Imperialism is when a country takes over new lands or countries and makes them subject to their rule. By 1900 the British Empire extended over five continents and France had control of large areas of Africa. With the rise of industrialism countries needed new markets. The amount of lands 'owned' by Britain and France increased the rivalry with Germany who had entered the scramble to acquire colonies late and only had small areas of Africa. Note the contrast in the map below.

Causes of WW1: Militarism

Militarism means that the army and military forces are given a high profile by the government. The growing European divide had led to an arms race between the main countries. The armies of both France and Germany had more than doubled between 1870 and 1914 and there was fierce competition between Britain and Germany for mastery of the seas. The British had introduced the 'Dreadnought', an effective battleship, in 1906. The Germans soon followed suit introducing their own battleships. The German, Von Schlieffen also drew up a plan of action that involved attacking France through Belgium if Russia made an attack on Germany. The map below shows how the plan was to work.

Loading...

Loading...

Causes of WW1: Nationalism

Nationalism means being a strong supporter of the rights and interests of one's country. The Congress of Vienna, held after Napoleon's exile to Elba, aimed to sort out problems in Europe. Delegates from Britain, Austria, Prussia and Russia (the winning allies) decided upon a new Europe that left both Germany and Italy as divided states. Strong nationalist elements led to the re-unification of Italy in 1861 and Germany in 1871. The settlement at the end of the Franco-Prussian war left France angry at the loss of Alsace-Lorraine to Germany and keen to regain their lost territory. Large areas of both Austria-Hungary and Serbia were home to differing nationalist groups, all of whom wanted freedom from the states in which they lived.

Causes of WW1: Crises

Moroccan Crisis

In 1904 Morocco had been given to France by Britain, but the Moroccans wanted their independence. In 1905, Germany announced her support for Moroccan independence. War was narrowly avoided by a conference which allowed France to retain possession of Morocco. However, in 1911, the Germans were again protesting against French possession of Morocco. Britain supported France and Germany was persuaded to back down for part of French Congo.

Bosnian Crisis

In 1908, Austria-Hungary took over the former Turkish province of Bosnia. This angered Serbians who felt the province should be theirs. Serbia threatened Austria-Hungary with war, Russia, allied to Serbia, mobilized its forces. Germany, allied to Austria-Hungary mobilized its forces and prepared to threaten Russia. War was avoided when Russia backed down. There was, however, war in the Balkans between 1911 and 1912 when the Balkan states drove Turkey out of the area. The states then fought each other over which area should belong to which state. Austria-Hungary then intervened and forced Serbia to give up some of its acquisitions. Tension between Serbia and Austria-Hungary was high.

Loading...

Loading...

Cite This Article

"World War One - Causes" History on the Net
© 2000-2019, Salem Media.
October 3, 2019 <https://www.historyonthenet.com/world-war-one-causes-2>
More Citation Information.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Loading... The first world war began in August 1914. It was directly triggered by the assassination of the Austrian archduke, Franz Ferdinand and his wife, on 28th June 1914 by Bosnian revolutionary, Gavrilo Princip. This event was, however, simply the trigger that set off declarations of war.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Much of what we think we know about the 1914-18 conflict is wrong, writes historian Dan Snow.

No war in history attracts more controversy and myth than World War One.

For the soldiers who fought it was in some ways better than previous conflicts, and in some ways worse.

By setting it apart as uniquely awful we are blinding ourselves to the reality of not just WW1 but war in general. We are also in danger of belittling the experience of soldiers and civilians caught up in countless other appalling conflicts throughout history and the present day.

1. It was the bloodiest war in history to that point

Fifty years before WW1 broke out, southern China was torn apart by an even bloodier conflict. Conservative estimates of the dead in the 14-year Taiping rebellion start at between 20 million and 30 million. Around 17 million soldiers and civilians were killed during WW1.

Although more Britons died in WW1 than any other conflict, the bloodiest war in our history relative to population size is the Civil War, which raged in the mid-17th Century. A far higher proportion of the population of the British Isles were killed than the less than 2% who died in WW1. By contrast, around 4% of the population of England and Wales, and considerably more than that in Scotland and Ireland, are thought to have been killed in the Civil War.

2. Most soldiers died

In the UK around six million men were mobilised, and of those just over 700,000 were killed. That's around 11.5%.

In fact, as a British soldier you were more likely to die during the Crimean War (1853-56) than in WW1.

3. Men lived in the trenches for years on end

Front-line trenches could be a terribly hostile place to live. Units, often wet, cold and exposed to the enemy, would quickly lose their morale if they spent too much time in the trenches.

As a result, the British army rotated men in and out continuously. Between battles, a unit spent perhaps 10 days a month in the trench system and, of those, rarely more than three days right up on the front line. It was not unusual to be out of the line for a month.

During moments of crisis, such as big offensives, the British could occasionally spend up to seven days on the front line but were far more often rotated out after just a day or two.

4. The upper class got off lightly

Although the great majority of casualties in WW1 were from the working class, the social and political elite were hit disproportionately hard by WW1. Their sons provided the junior officers whose job it was to lead the way over the top and expose themselves to the greatest danger as an example to their men.

Some 12% of the British army's ordinary soldiers were killed during the war, compared with 17% of its officers. Eton alone lost more than 1,000 former pupils - 20% of those who served. UK wartime Prime Minister Herbert Asquith lost a son, while future Prime Minister Andrew Bonar Law lost two. Anthony Eden lost two brothers, another brother of his was terribly wounded, and an uncle was captured.

5. 'Lions led by donkeys'

British commanders were thrust into a massive industrial struggle unlike anything the Army had ever seen

This saying was supposed to have come from senior German commanders describing brave British soldiers led by incompetent old toffs from their chateaux. In fact the incident was made up by historian Alan Clark.

During the war more than 200 generals were killed, wounded or captured. Most visited the front lines every day. In battle they were considerably closer to the action than generals are today.

Naturally, some generals were not up to the job, but others were brilliant, such as Arthur Currie, a middle-class Canadian failed insurance broker and property developer.

Rarely in history have commanders had to adapt to a more radically different technological environment.

British commanders had been trained to fight small colonial wars; now they were thrust into a massive industrial struggle unlike anything the British army had ever seen.

Despite this, within three years the British had effectively invented a method of warfare still recognisable today. By the summer of 1918 the British army was probably at its best ever and it inflicted crushing defeats on the Germans.

6. Gallipoli was fought by Australians and New Zealanders

Far more British soldiers fought on the Gallipoli peninsula than Australians and New Zealanders put together.

The UK lost four or five times as many men in the brutal campaign as its imperial Anzac contingents. The French also lost more men than the Australians.

The Aussies and Kiwis commemorate Gallipoli ardently, and understandably so, as their casualties do represent terrible losses both as a proportion of their forces committed and of their small populations.

7. Tactics on the Western Front remained unchanged despite repeated failure

Never have tactics and technology changed so radically in four years of fighting. It was a time of extraordinary innovation. In 1914 generals on horseback galloped across battlefields as men in cloth caps charged the enemy without the necessary covering fire. Both sides were overwhelmingly armed with rifles. Four years later, steel-helmeted combat teams dashed forward protected by a curtain of artillery shells.

They were now armed with flame throwers, portable machine-guns and grenades fired from rifles. Above, planes, which in 1914 would have appeared unimaginably sophisticated, duelled in the skies, some carrying experimental wireless radio sets, reporting real-time reconnaissance.

Huge artillery pieces fired with pinpoint accuracy - using only aerial photos and maths they could score a hit on the first shot. Tanks had gone from the drawing board to the battlefield in just two years, also changing war for ever.

8. No-one won

Swathes of Europe lay wasted, millions were dead or wounded. Survivors lived on with severe mental trauma. The UK was broke. It is odd to talk about winning.

However, in a narrow military sense, the UK and its allies convincingly won. Germany's battleships had been bottled up by the Royal Navy until their crews mutinied rather than make a suicidal attack against the British fleet.

Germany's army collapsed as a series of mighty allied blows scythed through supposedly impregnable defences.

By late September 1918 the German emperor and his military mastermind Erich Ludendorff admitted that there was no hope and Germany must beg for peace. The 11 November Armistice was essentially a German surrender.

Unlike Hitler in 1945, the German government did not insist on a hopeless, pointless struggle until the allies were in Berlin - a decision that saved countless lives, but was seized upon later to claim Germany never really lost.

9. The Treaty of Versailles was extremely harsh

The Treaty of Versailles confiscated 10% of Germany's territory but left it the largest, richest nation in central Europe.

It was largely unoccupied and financial reparations were linked to its ability to pay, which mostly went unenforced anyway.

The treaty was notably less harsh than treaties that ended the 1870-71 Franco-Prussian War and World War Two. The German victors in the former annexed large chunks of two rich French provinces, part of France for between 200 and 300 years, and home to most of French iron ore production, as well as presenting France with a massive bill for immediate payment.

After WW2 Germany was occupied, split up, its factory machinery smashed or stolen and millions of prisoners forced to stay with their captors and work as slave labourers. Germany lost all the territory it had gained after WW1 and another giant slice on top of that.

Versailles was not harsh but was portrayed as such by Hitler, who sought to create a tidal wave of anti-Versailles sentiment on which he could then ride into power.

10. Everyone hated it

Like any war, it all comes down to luck. You may witness unimaginable horrors that leave you mentally and physically incapacitated for life, or you might get away without a scrape. It could be the best of times, or the worst of times.

Many soldiers enjoyed WW1. If they were lucky they would avoid a big offensive, and much of the time conditions might be better than at home.

For the British there was meat every day - a rare luxury back home - cigarettes, tea and rum, part of a daily diet of more than 4,000 calories.

Remarkably, absentee rates due to sickness, an important barometer of a unit's morale, were hardly above those of peacetime. Many young men enjoyed the guaranteed pay, the intense comradeship, the responsibility and a much greater sexual freedom than in peacetime Britain.
Find out more from Dan Snow on Follow @BBCNewsMagazine on Twitter and on Facebook how so many soldiers survived the WW1 trenches and Michael Mosley on the plastic surgery techniques pioneered in WW1.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Much of what we think we know about the 1914-18 conflict is wrong, writes historian Dan Snow. No war in history attracts more controversy and myth than World War One. For the soldiers who fought it was in some ways better than previous conflicts, and in some ways worse.

# data[].attributes.body
An overview of the chronology of events in WW1

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Presented by Sir Hew Strachan Historian

'A war to end all wars'

The First World War was the first truly global conflict - the battle raged not just in the trenches of the Western Front but in Africa, the Middle East and Asia.

Huge armies deployed new weapons to devastating effect. Over nine million soldiers and an unknown number of civilians lost their lives. Empires crumbled, revolution engulfed Russia, and America rose to become a dominant world power.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
World War One: The global conflict that defined a century

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Presented by Sir Hew Strachan Historian The First World War was the first truly global conflict - the battle raged not just in the trenches of the Western Front but in Africa, the Middle East and Asia. Huge armies deployed new weapons to devastating effect.

# data[].attributes.headline
Does Haig deserve to be remembered as the ‘butcher of the Somme’?

# data[].attributes.subject
Does Haig deserve to be remembered as the ‘butcher of the Somme’?

# data[].attributes.body
Dan Snow’s History Hit looks at the case for and against this ongoing historical debate.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The negative reputation of Field Marshal Douglas Haig, the commander of British forces on the Western Front during World War One, rests to a large degree on his performance at the Somme. Indeed, the bloodshed of the summer of 1916 has more or less been roundly laid at his door. But is the blame justified?

The plan

The offensive on the Somme was initially conceived as part of a wider strategy to wear down the German Army by attacking it on all fronts in 1916. The French took the lead in planning the offensive on the Western Front and Haig played second fiddle to commander-in-chief Joseph Joffre.

The Somme was not Haig's favoured battleground. He would have preferred to launch an attack in Flanders, where the terrain was better and the objectives of greater strategic value.

By the summer of 1916, the German attack at Verdun had left the French unable to commit forces on the scale they had envisioned. The result was an under-resourced attack in an unfavourable location of little to no strategic value.

The first day

It is well-known that, by the end of the first day of fighting on the Somme, few objectives had been secured while 19,000 British soldiers were dead. The scale of loss suffered in the first attacks can be attributed to the failure of the Allied artillery to neutralise German defences.

Like the British Army at large, the artillery was on a steep learning curve. Many of the shells fired during the week-long preparatory bombardment were duds. Of those that did explode, too many were shrapnel shells rather than high explosive, which made little impression on barbed wire and reinforced dug outs.

Haig had been convinced of the efficacy of the preparatory bombardment and believed Allied forces would face little to no resistance as they crossed No Man's Land.

The problem of scale

In 1914, Britain went to war with a small professional army. By 1916, the British Expeditionary Force in France numbered two million. This rapid expansion in scale caused major structural challenges for Haig, whose staff had no experience of commanding such large forces.

Not only were the armies bigger, but so were the fronts. The Battle of the Somme took place over a front stretching 15 miles.

Communication

Proponents of the "lions led by donkeys" argument point to the fact that senior commanders tended to be stationed a distance away from the front lines, while the humble soldier slogged it out in the trenches.

But there was good reason for this. The length of the front meant commanders needed to be a further away to get a complete picture of what was happening. However, communications technology was not yet up to the task of keeping commanders updated about the rapidly changing situation at the front. As a result, at the Somme, Haig often made decisions based on out-of-date information.

Where Haig is undoubtedly guilty, is in his decision to continue the offensive into November 1916. By October, poor weather and continuous artillery bombardment had created a hellish environment for both the Allies and the Germans. Yet Haig prolonged this hell for no real strategic or tactical purpose.

Was it worth it?

Over the course of the battle, about one million men were killed, wounded or captured. Haig maintained that the battle achieved the goal of eroding the German Army and its will to fight. But attrition swallowed up Allied manpower and material just as quickly as it did the Germans'.

The scale of the Allied offensive on the Somme had nevertheless come as a shock to the Germans. It was clear that victory on the Western Front was nowhere in sight and planners feared that German industry would not be able to keep up with demand.

In 1917, the Germans carried out a planned retreat to the Hindenburg Line, a line of fortifications that could be defended with fewer men. It may have looked like a victory for the Allies but the reality was quite different, as subsequent operations against the line in 1917 would show.

Haig has been nicknamed "The Butcher of the Somme". But the idea that he wilfully and knowingly sent tens of thousands of Allied soldiers to their deaths is overly simplistic and fails to acknowledge the severe challenges facing a commander in charge of an inexperienced mass army, on a scale unlike anything seen before.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Was Douglas Haig Really "The Butcher of the Somme"?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The negative reputation of Field Marshal Douglas Haig, the commander of British forces on the Western Front during World War One, rests to a large...