# data[].attributes.headline
World War I, was a bellicose conflict. From 1914 to 1918. Trhere were 2 sides: The Triple Alliance made up of Germany, Italy and Austria and The Triple Entenete made up of France, England and Russia. Many civilians and soldiers died. They fought over territories, arms and trade.

# data[].attributes.subject
World War I, was a bellicose conflict. From 1914 to 1918. Trhere were 2 sides: The Triple Alliance made up of Germany, Italy and Austria and The Triple Entenete made up of France, England and Russia. Many civilians and soldiers died. They fought over territories, arms and trade.

# data[].attributes.headline
United States becomes part of it. The Tiple Alliance lose the war. They sing the Theaty of Versalles. Germany disagree and under the command of Adolf Hitler the World War II was formed.

# data[].attributes.subject
United States becomes part of it. The Tiple Alliance lose the war. They sing the Theaty of Versalles. Germany disagree and under the command of Adolf Hitler the World War II was formed.

# data[].attributes.headline
The Great War or The World War I. (1914 - 1918)

# data[].attributes.subject
The Great War or The World War I. (1914 - 1918)

# data[].attributes.body
It happened in Europe. 9 million combatants and 7 million civilians died.

# data[].attributes.headline
Background: war between France and Germany. 1870 - 1871

# data[].attributes.subject
Background: war between France and Germany. 1870 - 1871

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This article was most recently revised and updated by

Franco-German War, (July 19, 1870-May 10, 1871), war in which a coalition of German states led by Prussia defeated France. The war marked the end of French hegemony in continental Europe and resulted in the creation of a unified Germany.

Origins of the war

Prussia's defeat of Austria in the Seven Weeks' War in 1866 had confirmed Prussian leadership of the German states and threatened France's position as the dominant power in Europe. The immediate cause of the Franco-German War, however, was the candidacy of Prince Leopold of Hohenzollern-Sigmaringen (who was related to the Prussian royal house) for the Spanish throne, which had been left vacant when Queen Isabella II had been deposed in 1868. The Prussian chancellor, Otto von Bismarck, and Spain's de facto leader, Juan Prim, persuaded the reluctant Leopold to accept the Spanish throne in June 1870. This move greatly alarmed France, who felt threatened by a possible combination of Prussia and Spain directed against it. Leopold's candidacy was withdrawn under French diplomatic pressure, but Prussian King William I was unwilling to bow to the French ambassador's demands that he promise to never again allow Leopold to be a candidate for the Spanish throne. Bismarck edited William's telegraphed description of this interview, and on July 14 he published this provocative message (the Ems telegram), which accomplished his purposes of infuriating the French government and provoking it into a declaration of war.

The French emperor, Napoleon III, declared war on Prussia on July 19, 1870, because his military advisers told him that the French army could defeat Prussia and that such a victory would restore his declining popularity in France. The French were convinced that the reorganization of their army in 1866 had made it superior to the German armies. They also had great faith in two recently introduced technical innovations: the breech-loading chassepot rifle, with which the entire army was now equipped; and the newly invented mitrailleuse, an early machine gun. The French generals, blinded by national pride, were confident of victory.

Bismarck, for his part, saw war with France as an opportunity to bring the South German states into unity with the Prussian-led North German Confederation and build a strong German Empire. The Germans had superiority of numbers, since, true to Bismarck's hopes, the South German states ( Bavaria, Württemberg, and Baden) regarded France as the aggressor in the conflict and had thus sided with Prussia. An equally important asset was the Prussian army's general staff, which planned the rapid, orderly movement of large numbers of troops to the battle zones. This superior organization and mobility enabled the chief of the general staff, Gen. Helmuth von Moltke, to exploit German superiority in numbers in most of the war's battles.

The French collapse and the siege of Paris

The efficient German mobilization contrasted with confusion and delay on the French side. Germany was able to deliver 380,000 troops to the forward zone within 18 days of the start (July 14) of mobilization, while many French units reached the front either late or with inadequate supplies. The vast German and French armies that then confronted each other were each grouped into right and left wings. After suffering a check at the Battle of Wörth on August 6, 1870, the commander of the French right (south) wing, Marshal Patrice Mac-Mahon, retreated westward. That same day, about 40 miles (65 km) to the northeast, the commander of the French left wing, Marshal Achille Bazaine, was dislodged from near Saarbrücken and fell back westward to the fortress of Metz. His further retreat was checked by the German right wing in the blundering Battles of Mars-la-Tour and Gravelotte on August 16 and 18, respectively, and he then took refuge behind the defenses of Metz indefinitely.

The French right wing, commanded by Mac-Mahon and accompanied by Napoleon himself, attempted to relieve Bazaine but was itself encircled and trapped by the Germans at Sedan on August 31. The following day, the Germans on the surrounding heights poured deadly artillery fire down on them. The Battle of Sedan was a disaster for the French. Trapped against the Belgian frontier, the French lost 17,000 men and were compelled to surrender on September 2. About 104,000 officers and men were taken prisoner, including both Napoleon and Mac-Mahon. German losses numbered 460 officers and 8,500 men. Since Bazaine's army was still bottled up in Metz, the result of the war was virtually decided by this surrender.

French resistance was carried on against desperate odds by a new government of national defense, which assumed power in Paris on September 4, 1870, and proclaimed the deposition of the emperor and the establishment of the Third Republic. On September 19 the Germans began to besiege Paris. Jules Favre, foreign minister in the new government, went to negotiate with Bismarck, but the negotiations were broken off when he found that Germany demanded Alsace and Lorraine. Léon Gambetta, the leading figure in the provisional government, organized new French armies in the countryside after escaping from besieged Paris in a balloon. These engaged but could not defeat the German forces. Bazaine capitulated at Metz with his 140,000 troops intact on October 27, and Paris surrendered on January 28, 1871.

Armistice and consequences

The armistice of January 28 included a provision for the election of a French National Assembly, which would have the authority to conclude a definite peace. This settlement was finally negotiated by Adolphe Thiers and Favre and was signed February 26 and ratified March 1. Between then and the conclusion of the formal Treaty of Frankfurt on May 10, 1871, the republican government was threatened by an insurrection in Paris, in which radicals established their own short-lived government, the Paris Commune. The Commune was suppressed after two months, and the harsh provisions of the Treaty of Frankfurt were then implemented: Germany annexed Alsace and half of Lorraine, with Metz. Furthermore, France had to pay an indemnity of five billion francs and cover the costs of the German occupation of France's northern provinces until the indemnity was paid. The culminating triumph of Bismarck's plans came on January 18, 1871, when King William I of Prussia was proclaimed German emperor at Versailles, the former palace of the kings of France.

The Franco-German War had far-reaching consequences. It established both the German Empire and the French Third Republic. With Napoleon III no longer in power to protect them, the Papal States were annexed by Italy (September 20, 1870), thereby completing that nation's unification. The Germans' crushing victory over France in the war consolidated their faith in Prussian militarism, which would remain a dominant force in German society until 1945. (Additionally, the Prussian system of conscript armies controlled by a highly trained general staff was soon adopted by the other great powers.) Most importantly, Germany's annexation of Alsace-Lorraine aroused a deep longing for revenge in the French people. The years from 1871 to 1914 were marked by an extremely unstable peace, since France's determination to recover Alsace-Lorraine and Germany's mounting imperialist ambitions kept the two nations constantly poised for conflict. Their mutual animosity proved to be the driving force behind the prolonged slaughter on the Western Front in World War I.
The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica
Michael Ray.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Franco-German War | History, Causes, & Results

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Franco-German War (July 19, 1870-May 10, 1871), war in which a coalition of German states led by Prussia defeated France. The war marked the end of French hegemony in continental Europe and resulted in the creation of a unified Germany. Superior numbers, organization, and mobility contributed to the German victory.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Signed

8 April 1904

Signatories

French Republic

United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland

Languages

French, English, Spanish

The Entente Cordiale ( French pronunciation: ​[ɑ̃tɑ̃t kɔʁdjal]; lit. 'Cordial Agreement') comprised a series of agreements signed on 8 April 1904 between the United Kingdom and the French Republic which saw a significant improvement in Anglo-French relations. Beyond the immediate concerns of colonial demarcation addressed by the agreement, the signing of the Entente Cordiale marked the end of almost a thousand years of intermittent conflict between the two states and their predecessors, and replaced the modus vivendi that had existed since the end of the Napoleonic Wars in 1815 with a more formal agreement. The Entente Cordiale represented the culmination of the policy of Théophile Delcassé (France's foreign minister from 1898 to 1905), who believed that a Franco-British understanding would give France some security in Western Europe against any German system of alliances (see Triple Alliance (1882)). Credit for the success of the negotiation of the Entente Cordiale belongs chiefly to Paul Cambon (France's ambassador in London from 1898 to 1920) and to the British Foreign Secretary, Lord Lansdowne.

The most important[citation needed ] feature of the agreement was the mutual recognition that the UK was in full control of Egypt and likewise France of Morocco, with the proviso that France's eventual dispositions for Morocco include reasonable allowance for Spain's interests there. At the same time, Britain ceded the Los Islands (off French Guinea) to France, defined the frontier of Nigeria in France's favour, and agreed to French control of the upper Gambia valley; while France renounced its exclusive right to certain fisheries off Newfoundland. Furthermore, French and British proposed zones of influence in Siam ( Thailand), which was eventually decided not to be colonised, were outlined, with the eastern territories, adjacent to French Indochina, becoming a proposed French zone, and the western, adjacent to Burmese Tenasserim, a proposed British zone. Arrangements were also made to allay the rivalry between British and French colonists in the New Hebrides.

In signing of the Entente Cordiale both powers reduced the virtual isolation into which they had withdrawn-France involuntarily, Britain complacently-while they had eyed each other over African affairs. Britain had no major-power ally apart from Japan (1902), which held little in European waters; France had none but the Russian Empire, soon to become militarily discredited in the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-05. The agreement upset the diplomacy of Germany, whose policy had long relied on Franco-British antagonism. A German attempt to check the French in Morocco in 1905 (the Tangier Incident, or First Moroccan Crisis), and thus to upset the Entente, served only to strengthen it. Military discussions between the French and the British general staffs were soon[when? ] initiated. Franco-British solidarity was confirmed at the Algeciras Conference (1906) and reconfirmed in the Second Moroccan Crisis (1911).

The French term Entente Cordiale (usually translated as "cordial agreement" or "cordial understanding") comes from a letter written in 1843 by the British Foreign Secretary Lord Aberdeen to his brother, in which he mentioned "a cordial, good understanding" between the two nations. This was translated into French as Entente Cordiale and used by Louis Philippe I in the French Chamber that year. When used today the term almost always denotes the second Entente Cordiale, that is to say, the written and partly secret agreement signed in London between the two powers on 8 April 1904.

The agreement was a change for both countries. France had been isolated from the other European powers, in part because of the destruction of the Napoleonic Wars, threat of liberalism and perceived recklessness in the 1870 war. German Chancellor Otto von Bismarck also managed to estrange France from potential allies, as it was thought that France might seek revenge for its defeat in the Franco-Prussian War of 1870-71, reverse its territorial losses and continue to press for the conquest of the Saar and territories in the Ruhr. Britain had maintained a policy of " splendid isolation" on the European continent for nearly a century, intervening in continental affairs only when it was considered necessary to protect British interests by limiting the power of other countries, such as Russia in the Balkans, or supporting the creation of Belgium to weaken the Netherlands and create a buffer between France and the German states. The situation for Britain and France changed in the last decade of the 19th century.

The change had its roots in a British loss of confidence after the Second Boer War and a growing fear of the strength of Germany. As early as March 1881, the French statesman Léon Gambetta and the Prince of Wales, Albert Edward, met at the Château de Breteuil to discuss an alliance against Germany. The Scramble for Africa prevented the countries from coming to terms, however. On the initiative of Colonial Secretary Joseph Chamberlain, there were three rounds of British-German talks between 1898 and 1901. The UK decided not to join the Triple Alliance, broke off the negotiations with Berlin, and revived the idea of a British-French alliance.

When the Russo-Japanese War was about to erupt, France and the UK found themselves on the verge of being dragged into the conflict on the side of their respective allies. France was firmly allied with Russia, while the UK had recently signed the Anglo-Japanese Alliance. In order to avoid going to war, both powers "shucked off their ancient rivalry" and resolved their differences in Africa, the Americas, Asia, and the Pacific. Toward this end, French foreign minister Théophile Delcassé, and Lord Lansdowne, the British Foreign Secretary, negotiated an agreement on colonial matters, and Lord Lansdowne and Paul Cambon, the French Ambassador to the UK, signed the resulting convention on 8 April 1904.

The Entente was composed of three documents:

The first and most important document was the Declaration respecting Egypt and Morocco. In return for the French promising not to "obstruct" British actions in Egypt, the British promised to allow the French to "preserve order ... and provide assistance" in Morocco. Free passage through the Suez Canal was guaranteed, finally putting the Convention of Constantinople into force, and the erection of fortifications on part of the Moroccan coast forbidden. The treaty contained a secret annex dealing with the possibility of "changed circumstances" in the administration of either of the two countries.

The second document dealt with Newfoundland and portions of West and Central Africa. The French gave up their rights (stemming from the Treaty of Utrecht) over the western coast of Newfoundland, although they retained the right to fish the coast. In return, the British gave the French the town of Yarbutenda (near the modern border between Senegal and The Gambia) and the Iles de Los (part of modern Guinea). An additional provision dealt with the border between French and British possessions east of the River Niger (present-day Niger and Nigeria).

The final declaration concerned Siam (Thailand), Madagascar and the New Hebrides (Vanuatu). In Siam, the British recognised a proposed French sphere of influence to the east of the Menam (Chao Phraya) River basin; in turn, the French recognised a proposed British influence over the territory to the west of the Menam basin. Both parties eventually disclaimed any idea of annexing Siamese territory. The British withdrew their objection to the French introducing a tariff in Madagascar. The parties came to an agreement which would "put an end to the difficulties arising from the lack of jurisdiction over the natives of the New Hebrides".

It is unclear what exactly the Entente meant to the British Foreign Office. For example, in early 1911, following French press reports contrasting the virility of the Triple Alliance with the moribund state of the Entente, Eyre Crowe minuted: "The fundamental fact of course is that the Entente is not an alliance. For purposes of ultimate emergencies it may be found to have no substance at all. For the Entente is nothing more than a frame of mind, a view of general policy which is shared by the governments of two countries, but which may be, or become, so vague as to lose all content."

The Triple Alliance collapsed when Italy remained neutral at the outbreak of World War I, while the Entente endured.

The 100th anniversary of the Entente Cordiale in 2004 was marked by a number of official and unofficial events, including a state visit to France in April by Queen Elizabeth II, and a return visit by President Jacques Chirac in November. British troops (the band of the Royal Marines, the Household Cavalry Mounted Regiment, the Grenadier Guards and the King's Troop, Royal Horse Artillery) also led the Bastille Day parade in Paris for the first time, with the Red Arrows flying overhead.

At both London Waterloo International and Paris Gare du Nord, the flags of the Great Britain and of France were depicted connected with the words 'Entente cordiale' superimposed on posters. Some French political leaders had complained about the name "Waterloo" for the destination of trains from Paris because the British terminus is named after the 1815 battle in which a British-led alliance defeated Napoleon's army, and in 1998 French politician Florent Longuepée wrote to British Prime Minister Tony Blair demanding, without success, that the name be changed. In November 2007 St Pancras International became the new London terminus for the Eurostar service.

Entente Cordiale Scholarships

The name "Entente Cordiale" is used for the Entente Cordiale Scholarships scheme, a selective Franco-British scholarship scheme which was announced on 30 October 1995 by British Prime Minister John Major and French President Jacques Chirac at an Anglo-French summit in London. It provides funding for British and French students to study for one academic year on the other side of the Channel. The scheme is administered by the French embassy in London for British students, and by the British Council France and the UK embassy in Paris for French students. Funding is provided by the private sector and foundations. The scheme aims to foster mutual understanding and to promote exchanges between the British and French leaders of tomorrow. The programme was initiated by Sir Christopher Mallaby, British ambassador to France between 1993 and 1996.

1. ^ "Entente Cordiale", Entente Cordiale | European history, Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopædia Britannica Online, Encyclopædia Britannica Inc, 2016

2. Quoted in ^ Chamberlain, M. E., "Pax Britannica? British Foreign Policy 1789-1914" p.88 ISBN 0-582-49442-7

3. ^ "Entente Cordiale (European history) - Britannica Online Encyclopedia". Encyclopædia Britannica.

4. Quoted in Coleraine K. A. Hamilton, "Great Britain and France, 1911-1914" p.324 in Hinsley, Francis Harry (ed.), ^ British Foreign Policy under Sir Edward Grey (Cambridge University Press, 1977) ISBN 0-521-21347-9, ISBN 978-0-521-21347-9

5. ^ http://www.ambafrance-uk.org/spip.php?page=mobile_art&art=13690 Archived 23 February 2013 at archive.today Entente Cordiale scholarships on the website of the French Embassy in the UK

6. ^ http://www.britishcouncil.fr/en/studyuk/entente-cordiale-apply Entente Cordiale scholarships on the website of the British Council France

7. ^ http://ukinfrance.fco.gov.uk/en/about-us/working-with-france/entente-cordiale/ Entente Cordiale scholarships on the website of the UK embassy in France

8. ^ Wilson, Iain (2010). Are International Exchange and Mobility Programmes Effective Tools of Symmetric Public Diplomacy? (PDF). Aberystwyth University. p. 52.

Andrew, Christopher. Théophile Delcassé and the making of the Entente Cordiale: A reappraisal of French Foreign Policy 1898-1905 (1968)

Andrew, Christopher. "France and the Making of the Entente Cordiale." Historical Journal 10#1 (1967): 89-105. online.

Bell, P. M. H. France and Britain, 1900-1940: Entente and Estrangement (1996).

Capet, Antoine, ed. Britain, France and the entente cordiale since 1904 (Springer, 2006).

Hargreaves, J. D. "The Origin of the Anglo-French Military Conversations in 1905." History 36.128 (1951): 244-248. online

Hargreaves, J. D. "Entente Manquee: Anglo-French Relations, 1895-1896." Cambridge Historical Journal 11#1 (1953): 65-92. online.

Hennlichová, Marcela. "The Royal Visit to Paris and the Presidential Visit to London in 1903 - An Icebreaker of the Public Opinion or a Milestone in the History of the Entente Cordiale?" "Prague Papers on the History of International Relations" 1 (2019): 38-53. online

Keiger, J.F.V. France and the World since 1870 (2001) pp 115-17, 164-68

Langer, William L. The Diplomacy of Imperialism, 1890-1902 (1951).

Macmillan, Margaret. The War That Ended Peace: The Road to 1914 (2013) ch 6

Rolo, P. J. V. Entente Cordiale: the origins and negotiation of the Anglo-French agreements of 8 April 1904. Macmillan/St Martin's Press, London 1969.

Šubrtová, Marcela. "Great Britain and France on the Way to the Entente Cordiale." Prague Papers on the History of International Relations 1 (2014): 79-97. online

Šubrtová, Marcela. "The Anglo-French Rapprochement and the Question of Morocco." West Bohemian Historical Review 2 (2016): 213-241 online

Taylor, A.J.P. The Struggle for Mastery in Europe, 1848-1918 (1954) online free

Williamson, Samuel R. The politics of grand strategy: Britain and France prepare for war, 1904-1914 (1990).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Signed 8 April 1904 Signatories French Republic United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland Languages French, English, Spanish The Entente Cordiale ( French pronunciation: ​ [ɑ̃tɑ̃t kɔʁdjal]; lit. 'Cordial Agreement') comprised a series of agreements signed on 8 April 1904 between the United Kingdom and the French Republic which saw a significant improvement in Anglo-French relations.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
The trigger for the war was imperialism and colonialism and this event unleashed war.

# data[].attributes.headline
On June 28, 1914, Francisco Fernando and his wife  were assassinated in Sarajevo

# data[].attributes.subject
On June 28, 1914, Francisco Fernando and his wife  were assassinated in Sarajevo

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
On June 28, 1914, Archduke Franz Ferdinand, presumptive heir to the Hapsburg throne, was assassinated in the Bosnian capital of Sarajevo by a young Serbian nationalist, Gavrilo Princip in what would prove to be a key turning point in the history of the 20th century. The Archduke's murder put in motion a series of events that would unleash the greatest calamity the world had known up to that point, World War I. The war would destroy an entire generation of European young men, 20 million dead soldiers and another 21 million wounded. It would not be what U.S. President Woodrow Wilson declared, "the war to end all wars." It only laid the ground work for an even greater catastrophe twenty five years later, World War II.

By the beginning of the 20th century, the Hapsburg empire had become an increasingly unruly multi-ethnic empire with various ethnic groups at odds with each other or agitating for independence. One such problematic group was the ethnic Serbs of Bosnia-Herzegovina, a multi-ethnic territory the Hapsburgs seized from the Ottoman Empire in 1874. Ethnic Serbs comprised about 40 percent of Bosnia's population, many of who were intent on integrating Bosnia with Serbia to form a "Greater Serbia" state, a goal that Serbia encouraged and actively worked to realize. Serbian military intelligence, with or without the consent of the Serbian government, was actively engaged in covert actions to undermine Vienna's control over the province. One such operative was Colonlel Dragutin Dimitrijević, the leader of a secret Serbian military society, called "the Black Hand" whose aim was to unite all of the South Slavs of the Balkans under Serbian rule. Dimitrijevic, or Apis, as he was better known, was cultivating ties with a group of radical Serbian separatists called the "Young Bosnia" movement that would play a pivotal role in the events leading up to World War I.

Archduke Franz Ferdinand

The Archduke was not only Emperor Franz Joseph's presumptive heir; he was also inspector general of the Austrian-Hungarian army. And in that capacity, he agreed to attend a series of June 1914 military exercises in Bosnia. Franz Ferdinand was dismissive of the Serbs, often referring to them as "pigs," "thieves," "murderers" and "scoundrels." Nevertheless he was also quite sensitive, perhaps more than any other high level official, to the ethnic powder keg that the multi-ethnic Hapsburg Empire had become as it expanded. The Archduke supported reforming the empire from the dual Austro-Hungarian monarchy to a a triple monarchy of Slavs, Germans and Hungarians each having an equal voice in government. This idea was unpopular with the Hapsburg ruling elite but Franz Ferdinand saw it as a more effective way of neutralizing the problem of the Serbs than military force that risked a larger war with Russia, Serbia's ally.

The date selected for Franz Ferdinand's visit, June 28, unfortunately coincided with another important event in Serbian history. It was the anniversary of the 1389 Battle of Kosovo Polje in which the Serbs were defeated by the Ottoman Turks and subjugated under Turkish rule for the next 500 years. The battle, in which both Serbian King Lazar and the Ottoman Sultan Murad were killed, plays a crucial role in Serbian national identity and the decision to hold the Archduke's visit on that day only fanned the flames of dissent among Serbian nationalists even further.

The Archduke and his wife Sophie

News of Franz Ferdinand's upcoming visit to Sarajevo prompted Serbian radicals associated with the Young Bosnia movement to begin plotting to assassinate him. On the morning of the Archduke's visit, seven Bosnian Serbs, armed with pistols, bombs, and cyanide capsules likely provided by Serbian military intelligence, fanned out along the expected motorcade route as he and his entourage drove through the city to City Hall. As the motorcade approached the first two assassins, they lost their nerve and failed to act. A third assassin, Nedeljko Cabrinovic, was not so reticent. Shortly after 10:00am, Cabrinovic tossed a bomb at the open roof sedan carrying the Archduke and his wife. The bomb bounced off their car exploding underneath the one directly behind it injuring the occupants. The Royal couple arrived safely at City Hall for their scheduled reception with no further attempts on their lives.

After finishing up their reception at City Hall, Franz Ferdinand made the fateful decision that he wanted to go to the hospital and visit those who had been injured in the failed assassination attempt. This change in plans would end in tragedy. The driver, unfamiliar with the local streets accidentally turned down a wrong side street, just where another assassin, Gavrilo Princip, happened to be standing by chance. As the Archduke's driver attempted to reverse back onto the main road, Princip pulled out his pistol and fired two shots at the archduke from point-blank range, piercing him in the neck and also striking his wife in the abdomen. Both would die within minutes of their wounds.

Austria-Hungary was convinced that neighboring Serbia was the true mastermind behind the attack and opted to use the crisis to settle its long-standing score with the Serbs. The Austrians hoped to strike a blow against Belgrade and stymie its efforts to unite the South Slavs of the Balkans under Serbian leadership. Their plan, developed in coordination with Germany, was to force a military conflict that would, they hoped, end quickly and decisively with a crushing Austrian victory before the rest of Europe-namely, Serbia's powerful ally, Russia-had time to react.

On July 23, the Austro-Hungarian government issued Serbia an ultimatum in which it blamed Serbia for the assassination and presented Belgrade with a list of demands that it expected to be fulfilled by Belgrade or it would declare war. The Serbs were given two days to respond. The list consisted of ten demands, many of which the Austrian leadership believed Serbia would never agree to accept. Winston Churchill, at the time in charge of Britain's Royal Navy, called the Austrian ultimatum "the most insolent document of its kind ever devised". In short, the ultimatum was intended as a pretext to justify war. Much to the surprise of the Austrians, Serbia agreed to almost all of the demands, only refusing to accept a direct investigation by Austro-Hungarian police officers on its territory. Serbia continued to insist that it gave no moral or material support to Princip and the other assassins.

Austria-Hungary declared war on Serbia on July 28, 1914, exactly a month after the assassination of the Archduke. The declaration set off a chain of events that would plunge the entire continent into crisis. Russia, Serbia's long-time protector, condemned Austria's aggression and on July 30 began mobilizing its military forces in support of its ally. Germany followed suit as expected and on August 1, declared war on Russia. At the same time Berlin demanded a declaration of neutrality from France to avoid a two-front war. When Paris refused, Germany felt it had no alternative and declared war on France on August 3. The next day Germany invaded Belgium to attack France. Great Britain, which had pledged to defend Belgium demanded an explanation for German aggression against Belgium. When one was not forthcoming Britain declared war on Germany. The war that all the European powers had long expected finally erupted.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
On June 28, 1914, Archduke Franz Ferdinand, presumptive heir to the Hapsburg throne, was assassinated in the Bosnian capital of Sarajevo by a young Serbian nationalist, Gavrilo Princip in what would prove to be a key turning point in the history of the 20th century. The Archduke's murder put in motion a series of events...

# data[].attributes.headline
In 1915, two sides were formed: The Triple Alliance or Central Powers and The Triple Entente.

# data[].attributes.subject
In 1915, two sides were formed: The Triple Alliance or Central Powers and The Triple Entente.

# data[].attributes.headline
Between 1914 and 1915, all of Europe was at war and it was very long and with a lot of weapons, so the jetties appeared as protection.

# data[].attributes.subject
Between 1914 and 1915, all of Europe was at war and it was very long and with a lot of weapons, so the jetties appeared as protection.

# data[].attributes.headline
In 1915, the eastern front, in Germany created a Military Dictatorship, with Paul Von Hindenburg y Erich Ludenfordd.

# data[].attributes.subject
In 1915, the eastern front, in Germany created a Military Dictatorship, with Paul Von Hindenburg y Erich Ludenfordd.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Eastern Front

Part of the European theatre of World War I

Clockwise from top left: soldiers stationed in the Carpathian Mountains, 1915; German soldiers in Kyiv, March 1918; the Russian ship Slava, October 1917; Russian infantry, 1914; Romanian infantry

Belligerents

Central Powers:
Germany

(1916-17)
(1916-17)

Allied Powers:
(1914-17)
(1917)
Romania (1916-17)
(1916-17)
Belgium (1915-17)
(1916-17)
(1916-17) Soviet Russia (1917-18)

Commanders and leaders

Paul von Hindenburg
Erich Ludendorff
Leopold of Bavaria
Max Hoffmann
Conrad von Hötzendorf
A. A. von Straußenburg
Cevat Pasha
Mustafa Hilmi Pasha
Nikola Zhekov

Grand Duke Nicholas
Nicholas II
Mikhail Alekseyev
Aleksei Brusilov
Lavr Kornilov
Alexander Kerensky (1917)
Constantin Prezan Nikolai Krylenko

Units involved

Strength

October 1917
1,178,600 infantry
39,000 cavalry
1,690 light guns
2,230 heavy guns

October 1917
2,166,700 infantry
110,600 cavalry
1,226 light guns
1,139 heavy guns

Casualties and losses

1,500,000:[1][2][3]
300,000 killed
1,151,153 wounded
143,818 captured
4,377,000:[4][5]
730,000 dead
2,172,000 wounded
1,479,000 missing or captured
45,000:[6][7]
8,000 dead[8]
22,000 wounded[8]
10,000 captured[9]
30,250[10][11]Total:
5,952,000+ casualties

9,347,000:
2,254,369 dead
3,749,000 wounded
3,343,900 captured[12][a]
535,700:[14]
335,706 dead
120,000 wounded
80,000 captured Total:
~9,882,000+ casualties

Civilian deaths:
2,000,000+
Russian Empire:
410,000 civilians died due to military action
730,000 civilians died of war-related causes[15]
Kingdom of Romania:
130,000 civilians died due to military action
200,000 civilians died of war-related causes[16]
Austria-Hungary:
120,000 civilians died due to military action
467,000 civilians died of war-related causes[17]

The Eastern Front or Eastern Theater of World War I ( German: Ostfront; Romanian: Frontul de răsărit; Russian: Восточный фронт, Vostochny front) was a theater of operations that encompassed at its greatest extent the entire frontier between Russia and Romania on one side and Austria-Hungary, Bulgaria, the Ottoman Empire, and Germany on the other. It ranged from the Baltic Sea in the north to the Black Sea in the south, involved most of Eastern Europe, and stretched deep into Central Europe. The term contrasts with the Western Front, which was being fought in Belgium and France.

During 1910, Russian General Yuri Danilov developed "Plan 19" under which four armies would invade East Prussia. This plan was criticised as Austria-Hungary could be a greater threat than the German Empire. So instead of four armies invading East Prussia, the Russians planned to send two armies to East Prussia, and two armies to defend against Austro-Hungarian forces invading from Galicia. In the opening months of the war, the Imperial Russian Army attempted an invasion of eastern Prussia in the Northwestern theater, only to be beaten back by Germany after some initial success. At the same time, in the south, they successfully invaded Galicia, defeating the Austro-Hungarian forces there. In Russian Poland, the Germans failed to take Warsaw. But by 1915, the German and Austro-Hungarian forces were on the advance, dealing the Russians heavy casualties in Galicia and in Poland, forcing them to retreat. Grand Duke Nicholas was sacked from his position as the commander-in-chief and replaced by Tsar Nicholas himself. Several offensives against the Germans in 1916 failed, including the Lake Naroch Offensive and the Baranovichi Offensive. However, General Aleksei Brusilov oversaw a highly successful operation against Austria-Hungary that became known as the Brusilov offensive, which saw the Russian Army make large gains. Being the largest and most lethal offensive of World War I, the effects of the Brusilov offensive were far reaching. It helped to relieve the German pressure during the Battle of Verdun, while also helping to relieve the Austro-Hungarian pressure on the Italians. As a result, the Austro-Hungarian Armed Forces were fatally weakened, and finally Romania decided to enter the war on the side of the Allies. However, the Russian human and material losses also greatly contributed to the Russian Revolutions.

Romania entered the war in August 1916. The Allied Powers promised the region of Transylvania (which was part of Austria-Hungary) in return for Romanian support. The Romanian Army invaded Transylvania and had initial successes, but was forced to stop and was pushed back by the Germans and Austro-Hungarians when Bulgaria attacked them from the south. Meanwhile, a revolution occurred in Russia in March 1917 (one of the causes being the hardships of the war). Tsar Nicholas II was forced to abdicate and a Russian Provisional Government was founded, with Georgy Lvov as its first leader, who was eventually replaced by Alexander Kerensky.

The newly formed Russian Republic continued to fight the war alongside Romania and the rest of the Entente in desultory fashion. It was overthrown by the Bolsheviks in November 1917. Following the Armistice of Focșani between Romania and the Central Powers, Romania also signed a peace treaty with the Central Powers on 7 May 1918, however it was canceled by Romania on 10 November 1918. The new government established by the Bolsheviks signed the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk with the Central Powers in March 1918, taking it out of the war; leading to a Central Powers victory on the Eastern Front and Russian defeat in World War I.

The front in the east was much longer than that in the west. The theater of war was roughly delimited by the Baltic Sea in the west and Minsk in the east, and Saint Petersburg in the north and the Black Sea in the south, a distance of more than 1,600 kilometres (990 mi). This had a drastic effect on the nature of the warfare.

A timeline of events on the Eastern and Middle-Eastern theatres of World War I

While the war on the Western Front developed into trench warfare, the battle lines on the Eastern Front were much more fluid and trenches never truly developed. This was because the greater length of the front ensured that the density of soldiers in the line was lower so the line was easier to break. Once broken, the sparse communication networks made it difficult for the defender to rush reinforcements to the rupture in the line, mounting rapid counteroffensives to seal off any breakthrough.

Propaganda was a key component of the culture of World War I. It was often shown through state-controlled media, and helped to bolster nationalism and patriotism within countries. On the Eastern Front, propaganda took many forms such as opera, film, spy fiction, theater, spectacle, war novels and graphic art. Across the Eastern Front the amount of propaganda used in each country varied from state to state. Propaganda took many forms within each country and was distributed by many different groups. Most commonly the state produced propaganda, but other groups, such as anti-war organizations, also generated propaganda.

Prior to the outbreak of war, German strategy was based almost entirely on the so-called Schlieffen Plan. With the Franco-Russian Agreement in place, Germany knew that war with either of these combatants would result in war with the other, which meant that there would be war in both the west and the east ( two-front war). Therefore, the German General Staff, under Alfred von Schlieffen and then Helmuth von Moltke the Younger, planned a quick, all-out ground war on the Western Front to take France and, upon victory, Germany would turn its attention to Russia in the east.

Schlieffen believed Russia would not be ready or willing to move against and attack Germany due to the huge losses of military equipment that Russia had suffered in the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-1905, its low population density and lack of railroads.

Conversely, the Imperial German Navy believed it could be victorious over Britain with Russian neutrality, something which Moltke knew would not be possible.

Border changes in favor of Romania as stipulated in the Treaty of Bucharest

In the immediate years preceding the First World War, the Kingdom of Romania was involved in the Second Balkan War on the side of Serbia, Montenegro, Greece and the Ottoman Empire against Bulgaria. The Treaty of Bucharest, signed on 10 August 1913, ended the Balkan conflict and added 6,960 square kilometers to Romania's territory. Although militarized, Romania decided upon a policy of neutrality at the start of the First World War, mainly due to having territorial interests in both Austria-Hungary ( Transylvania and Bukovina) and in Russia ( Bessarabia). Strong cultural influences also affected Romanian leanings, however. King Carol I, as a Hohenzollern-Sigmaringen, favoured his Germanic roots, while the Romanian people, influenced by their Orthodox church and Latin-based language, were inclined to join France. Perhaps King Carol's attempts at joining the war on the side of the Central powers would have been fruitful had he not died in 1914, but Romanian disenchantment with Austria-Hungary had already influenced public and political opinion. French endorsement of Romanian action against Bulgaria, and support of the terms of the Treaty of Bucharest was particularly effective at inclining Romania towards the Entente. Furthermore, Russian courting of Romanian sympathies, exemplified by the visit of the Tsar to Constanța on 14 June 1914, signaled in a new era of positive relations between the two countries. Nevertheless, King Ferdinand I of Romania maintained a policy of neutrality, intending to gain the most for Romania by negotiating between competing powers. The result of the negotiations with the Entente was the Treaty of Bucharest (1916), which stipulated the conditions under which Romania agreed to join the war on the side of the Entente, particularly territorial promises in Austria-Hungary: Transylvania, Crișana and Maramureș, the whole Banat and most of Bukovina. According to historian John Keegan, these enticements offered by the Allies were never concrete, for in secret, Russia and France agreed not to honor any conventions when the end of the war came.

The immediate reason for Russia's involvement in the First World War was a direct result of the decisions made by the statesmen and generals during July 1914. The July Crisis was the culmination of a series of diplomatic conflicts that took place in the decades prior to 1914, and this is fundamental to an understanding of Russia's position immediately prior to the War. According to D. C. Lieven, Russia was formidable and was able to back up her diplomatic policies with force. One of the most significant factors in bringing Russia to the brink of war was the downfall of her economy. The 20 percent jump in defense expenditure during 1866-77 forced them to change their position within Europe and shift the balance of power out of her favour. At the time, Russian infrastructure was backward and the Russian government had to invest far more than its European rivals in structural changes. In addition there were overwhelming burdens of defense, which would ultimately result in an economic downfall for the Russians. This was a major strain on the Russian population, but also served as a direct threat to military expenditure. Thus the only way the Russians could sustain the strains of European war would be to place more emphasis on foreign investment from the French who essentially came to Russia's aid for industrial change. The Franco-Russian Alliance allowed for the Russian defense to grow and aid the European balance of power during the growth of the German Empire's might. Nevertheless, one of the key factors was that of the Russian foreign policy between 1890 and 1914. The Russian army was large, but had poor leadership and poor equipment, and increasingly poor morale until by 1917 it turned against the government.

Russian propaganda

World War I caricature from Russia depicting Wilhelm II, Franz Joseph I and Mehmed V. Top: "If only we could get to the top - it would be ours!" Bottom: "Let me help you with that!"

In order for the Russians to legitimize their war efforts, the government constructed an image of the enemy through state-instituted propaganda. Their main aim was to help overcome the legend of the "invincible" German war machine, in order to boost the morale of civilians and soldiers. Russian propaganda often took the form of showing the Germans as a civilized nation, with barbaric "inhuman" traits. Russian propaganda also exploited the image of the Russian POWs who were in the German camps, again in order to boost the morale of their troops, serving as encouragement to defeat the enemy and to get their fellow soldiers out of German POW camps that were perceived as inhumane.

Also, the Russians chose to discard the name Saint Petersburg to remove the German-sounding "Saint" and "-burg", favouring the more Russian-sounding Petrograd.

Illustration from the French magazine Le Petit Journal on the Bosnian Crisis. Bulgaria declares its independence and its prince Ferdinand is named Tsar. Austria-Hungary, in the person of Emperor Francis Joseph, annexes Bosnia and Herzegovina, while the Ottoman Sultan Abdul Hamid II looks on helplessly.

Specifically, the South Slavic people of Austria-Hungary desired to amalgamate with Serbia in an effort to officially solidify their shared cultural heritage. Over seven million South Slavs lived inside the Empire, while three million lived outside it. With the growing emergence of nationalism in the twentieth century, unity of all South Slavs looked promising. This tension is exemplified by Conrad von Hötzendorf's letter to Franz Ferdinand:

The unification of the South Slav race is one of the powerful national movements which can neither be ignored nor kept down. The question can only be, whether unification will take place within the boundaries of the Monarchy - that is at the expense of Serbia's independence - or under Serbia's leadership at the expense of the Monarchy. The cost to the Monarchy would be the loss of its South Slav provinces and thus of almost its entire coastline. The loss of territory and prestige would relegate the Monarchy to the status of a small power.

The Allied Powers wholeheartedly supported the Slavs' nationalistic fight. George Macaulay Trevelyan, a British historian, saw Serbia's war against Austria-Hungary as a "war of liberation" that would "free South Slavs from tyranny." In his own words: "If ever there was a battle for freedom, there is such a battle now going on in Southeastern Europe against Austrian and Magyar. If this war ends in the overthrow of the Magyar tyranny, an immense step forward will have been taken toward racial liberty and European peace."

Prior to 1915, the Russians' lack of success in war and diplomacy in the six decades before 1914 sapped the country's moral strength. The triumphs of Britain and Germany in the martial, diplomatic and economic spheres put these countries in the front rank of the world's leading nations. This was a source of national pride, self-confidence and unity. It helped reconcile the worker to the state and the Bavarian or Scotsman to rule from Berlin or London. In the years prior to 1914, Austro-Russian co-operation was both crucial for European peace and difficult to maintain. Old suspicions exacerbated by the Bosnian crisis stood in the way of agreement between the two empires, as did ethnic sensitivities. Russia's historical role as liberator of the Balkans was difficult to square with Austria's determination to control adjacent territories. In 1913-1914 Saint Petersburg was too concerned with its own weakness and what it saw as threats to vital Russian interests, to spare much thought for Vienna's feelings. The Russians were, with some justice, indignant that the concessions they had made after the First Balkan War in the interest of European peace had not been reciprocated by the Central Powers.

This was doubly dangerous given the growing evidence flowing into Petersburg about Germany's aggressive intentions. Both Bazarov and the agents of the Russian secret political police in Germany reported the concern aroused in public opinion by the press war against Russia, which raged in the spring of 1914.

The Russian military was the largest in the world consisting of 1.4 million men on duty just prior to the war. They could also mobilize up to 5 million men, but only had 4.6 million rifles to give them. It also had poor leadership.

Hindenburg at Tannenberg,
by Hugo Vogel

An engagement in Hungary

The war in the east began with the Russian invasion of East Prussia on 17 August 1914 and the Austro-Hungarian province of Galicia. The Russian offensive in the Battle of Stallupönen, which was the opening battle of the Eastern Front, quickly turned to a disastrous defeat following the Battle of Tannenberg in August 1914; even though the Russians were successfully defending at Gumbinnen a while before Tannenberg. After the Russian disaster, German troops under the command of Hindenburg inflicted another crushing defeat on the numerically superior Russian army in the First Battle of the Masurian Lakes. A second Russian incursion into Galicia was more successful, with the Russians controlling almost all of that region by the end of 1914, routing four Austrian armies in the process. Under the command of Nikolai Ivanov, Nikolai Ruzsky and Aleksei Brusilov, the Russians won the Battle of Galicia in September and began the Siege of Przemyśl, the next fortress on the road towards Kraków.

This early Russian success in 1914 on the Austro-Russian border was a reason for concern to the Central Powers and caused considerable German forces to be transferred to the East to take pressure off the Austrians, leading to the creation of the new German Ninth Army. The Austro-Hungarian government accepted the Polish proposal of establishing the Supreme National Committee as the Polish central authority within the Empire, responsible for the formation of the Polish Legions, an auxiliary military formation within the Austro-Hungarian army. At the end of 1914, the main focus of the fighting shifted to central part of Russian Poland, west of the river Vistula. The October Battle of the Vistula River and the November Battle of Łódź brought little advancement for the Germans, but at least kept the Russians at a safe distance.

The Russian and Austro-Hungarian armies continued to clash along the Carpathian Front throughout the winter of 1914-1915. Przemysl fortress managed to hold out deep behind enemy lines throughout this period, with the Russians bypassing it in order to attack the Austro-Hungarian troops further to the west. They made some progress, crossing the Carpathian Mountains in February and March 1915, but then the German relief helped the Austrians stop further Russian advances. In the meantime, Przemysl was almost entirely destroyed and the Siege of Przemysl ended in a defeat for the Austrians.

Russian troops going to the front: Support for the imperial guard being hurried into the fighting line

In 1915 the Chief of German Great General Staff, General of Infantry Erich von Falkenhayn decided to make its main effort on the Eastern Front, and accordingly transferred considerable forces there. The year began with a successful German offensive in the area of the Masurian lakes. At the same time, a large battle for the city of Przasnysz took place on the Polish front. The city changed hands several times but eventually remained in Russian hands. As a result of the battle, the Germans lost 38 000 soldiers and Russian losses amounted to about 70 000 men. In May 1915, to eliminate the Russian threat the Central Powers began the successful Gorlice-Tarnów Offensive in Galicia.

After the Second Battle of the Masurian Lakes, the German and Austro-Hungarian troops on the Eastern Front functioned under a unified command. The offensive soon turned into a general advance and a corresponding strategic retreat by the Russian Army. The cause of the reverses suffered by the Russian Army, despite a significant numerical superiority over the German enemy, was not so many errors in the tactical sphere, as the deficiency in technical equipment, particularly in artillery and ammunition as well as the corruption and incompetence of the Russian officers. Only by 1916 did the buildup of Russian war industries increase the production of war material and improve the supply situation.

By mid-1915, the Russians had been expelled from Russian Poland and hence pushed hundreds of kilometers away from the borders of the Central Powers, removing the threat of Russian invasion of Germany, although there was still slight Russian penetration into Austria-Hungary. At the end of 1915 the German-Austrian advance was stopped on the line Riga- Jakobstadt- Dünaburg- Baranovichi- Pinsk- Dubno- Tarnopol. The general outline of this front line did not change until the Russian collapse in 1917.

During the campaign of 1915, the Russian Empire lost the entire line of western fortresses, and more than 4,000 guns. The causes of heavy defeats and losses of personnel, weapons, and as a result - vast territories (the entire Kingdom of Poland, part of the Baltic states, Grodno, partly Volhynia and Podolia provinces - up to 300,000 square kilometers) were to a large extent systemic shortcomings in the management of the armed forces and the defense industry. The multi-stage placement of military orders, their slow passage in the depths of the War Ministry, the disunity of the front and rear played a negative role. Thus, until the autumn of 1915, the Russian Supreme Commander-in-Chief only coordinated the actions of the commanders-in-chief of the armies of the fronts, distributed reinforcements, requesting them from the War Ministry. The Minister of War was responsible for organizing the production of weapons and ammunition, the implementation of the replenishment of troop personnel, military transportation outside the provinces declared a theater of military operations. The military districts in the theater of operations were subordinate to the commanders-in-chief of the armies of the fronts, but not to the Headquarters. Military production also lagged behind: until the end of autumn, the active army suffered from a shortage of rifles and ammunition, the consumption of which turned out to be incommensurable with the volume of production.

Failures in the Russian system of command and control of troops and the organization of hostilities occurred at other levels. Thus, serious shortcomings in reconnaissance led to the absence of any analysis of the enemy's plans and actions. With a general superiority in forces, almost every Central Powers's operation in 1915 was "unexpected" for the command from the front to the regimental level. Passion for undercover intelligence in the highest Russian headquarters did not justify itself, and tactical intelligence was still based on barely reliable testimony of prisoners, in the absence of which the command up to the army, inclusive, was simply "blind". The separation of artillery from infantry with subordination to the inspectors of the corps and ammunition supply units (park brigades and divisions) created difficulties in the operational replenishment of ammunition and shells in the combat units. At the same time, huge stockpiles of ammunition were created in the fortresses, which were then delivered to the enemy during the retreat or destroyed due to the impossibility of evacuation. Special units were not created for the construction of fortifications in the rear of the troops. Most often, such work was hastily carried out by militia squads and the mobilized local population, sometimes including women, and then brought to the necessary defensive state by the combat units retreating on them, already exhausted by battles and night marches.

The country's geographic expanses and a large population again became the salvation of the Russia from complete military defeat, however, by the end of the 1915 campaign, it became obvious that without a radical restructuring of the war strategy, methods of managing military potential, victory becomes unattainable, and new defeats can cause another collapse of transport (as in the case of mass exodus and the hasty "evacuation" of the western provinces), supplies, public administration and, as a result, the aggravation of the struggle for power in the country. Nevertheless, as before, for the military leadership of the Russian Empire, there was only one way to victory - the numerical superiority over the Germans. To some extent, the Russian side in the autumn played along with E. von Falkenhayn, who, not considering the Russian direction to have at least some strategic prospect for achieving victory in the war, made it impossible to develop the offensive of the Eastern Front.

After the Battle of Sarikamish, the Russo-Turkish front quickly turned in favor of Russian forces. The Turks were concerned with reorganizing their army and also fighting the massive Allied armada that landed in Galipoli. Meanwhile, Russia was preoccupied with other armies on the Eastern Front. However, the appointment of Grand Duke Nicholas Nikolaevich as Viceroy and Commander in the Caucasus in September 1915 revived the situation of the Russo-Turkish front.

When the Allies withdrew from Gallipoli in December, the Caucasus Army's Chief of Staff General Nikolai Yudenich believed Turkish forces would take action against his army. This concern was legitimate: Bulgaria's entry into the war as Germany's ally in October caused serious alarm, as a land route from Germany to Turkey was now open and would allow for an unrestricted flow of German weapons to the Turks. A "window of opportunity" appeared that would allow the Russians to destroy the Turkish Third Army, as the British required assistance in Mesopotamia (now modern day Iraq). Britain's efforts to besiege Baghdad had been halted at Ctesiphon, and they were forced to retreat. This led to an increasing number of attacks by Turkish forces. The British requested the Russians to attack in an attempt to distract the Turks, and Yudenich agreed. The resulting offensive began on 10 January 1916.

This offensive was unanticipated by the Turks, as it was in the middle of winter. The Turkish situation was exacerbated by the absences of Third Army's commander Kamil Pasha and Chief of Staff Major Guse. Coupled with an imbalance of forces - the Russians had 325,000 troops while the Turks only 78,000 - the situation appeared grim for the Central Powers. After three months of fighting, the Russians captured the city of Trabzon on 18 April 1916.[citation needed ]

Allied operations in 1916 were dictated by an urgent need to force Germany to transfer forces from its Western to Eastern fronts, to relieve the pressure on the French at the Battle of Verdun. This was to be accomplished by a series of Russian offensives which would force the Germans to deploy additional forces to counter them. The first such operation was the Lake Naroch Offensive in March-April 1916, which ended in failure.

Brusilov offensive

Brusilov's plan worked impeccably. The Russians outnumbered the Austrians 200,000 to 150,000, and held a considerable advantage in guns, with 904 large guns to 600. Most importantly innovative new tactics similar to those independently invented by Erwin Rommel were used to perform quick and effective close-range surprise attacks that allowed a steady advance. The Russian Eighth Army overwhelmed the Austrian Fourth and pushed on to Lutsk, advancing 40 miles (64 km) beyond the starting position. Over a million Austrians were lost, with over 500,000 men killed or taken prisoner by mid-June.

Although the Brusilov offensive was initially successful, it slowed down considerably. An inadequate number of troops and poorly maintained supply lines hindered Brusilov's ability to follow up on the initial victories in June. The Brusilov offensive is considered to be the greatest Russian victory of the First World War. Although it cost the Russians half a million casualties only during the first two months offensive, the offensive successfully diverted substantial forces of the Central Powers from the Western front, and persuaded Romania to join the war, diverting even more Central Powers forces to the East.

The development of the Russian armament industry was mainly supported by French investors before the war. The Russian High Command saw the reason for the losses of the war in the lack of munitions. Most of these supplies were lost when advancing German troops occupied the fortifications. The production of munitions in the Tsarist empire was difficult, confidence in private enterprise among army personnel was low, and little capital was invested in the industry until 1916. About fifty percent of Russian ammunition requirements were supplied by Britain and the USA. As the Western companies were also responsible for supplying the needs of the Western Front, only a small proportion of the required quantity could be transported to Russia. In the following year, the Russian armaments industry was able to increase its production figures by a factor of two and a half and, despite the insufficient help of the Allies to cover the needs of the Russian army.

It is no exaggeration to say that Roumania may be the turning-point of the campaign. If the Germans fail there it will be the greatest disaster inflicted upon them. Afterwards it will only be a question of time. But should Germany succeed I hesitate to think what the effect will be on the fortunes of the campaign. ... and yet no one seems to have thought it his particular duty to prepare a plan...

British poster, welcoming Romania's decision to join the Entente

Romania's entry into the war provoked major strategic changes for the Germans. In September 1916, German troops were mobilized to the Eastern Front. Additionally, the German Chief of the General Staff, General Erich Von Falkenhayn was forced to resign from office though his successor appointed him to command the combined Central Powers forces against Romania, along with General August von Mackensen. Kaiser Wilhelm II immediately replaced Falkenhayn with Paul von Hindenburg. Von Hindenburg's deputy, the more adept Erich Ludendorff, was given effective control of the army and ordered to advance on Romania. On 3 September, the first troops of the Central Powers marched into Romanian territory. Simultaneously, the Bulgarian Air Force commenced an incessant bombing of Bucharest. In an attempt to relieve some pressure, French and British forces launched a new offensive known as the Battle of the Somme, while the Brusilov offensive continued in the East.

It is certain that so relatively small a state as Rumania had never before been given a role so important, and, indeed, so decisive for the history of the world at so favorable a moment. Never before had two Great Powers like Germany and Austria found themselves so much at the mercy of the military resources of a country which had scarcely one twentieth of the population of the two great states. Judging by the military situation, it was to be expected that Rumania had only to advance where she wished to decide the world war in favor of those Powers which had been hurling themselves at us in vain for years. Thus everything seemed to depend on whether Rumania was ready to make any sort of use of her momentary advantage.

The initial success of the Romanian Army in Austria-Hungarian territory was quickly undermined by the Central Powers. German and Austro-Hungarian troops advanced from the north, while Bulgarian-Turkish-German forces marched into Romania from the south. Although thought to be a tactical blunder by contemporaries, the Romanians opted to mount operations in both directions. By the middle of November the German force passed through the Carpathians, suffering significant casualties due to determined Romanian resistance. By 5 December, Bulgarian troops had crossed the Danube and were approaching the capital, Bucharest. At the same time as the Austro-Hungarian troops moved east, and as the Bulgarians marched north, the Turks had sent in two army divisions by sea to the Dobruja from the east. Eventually, the Romanian forces were pushed back behind the Siret in northern Moldavia. They received help from the Allies, notably from France which sent a military mission of more than a thousand officers, health and support staff.

The Act of 5 November 1916 was proclaimed then to the Poles jointly by the Emperors Wilhelm II of Germany and Franz Joseph of Austria-Hungary. This act promised the creation of the Kingdom of Poland out of territory of Congress Poland, envisioned by its authors as a puppet state controlled by the Central Powers. The origin of that document was the dire need to draft new recruits from German-occupied Poland for the war with Russia. Following the Armistice of 11 November 1918 ending the World War I, in spite of the previous initial total dependence of the kingdom on its sponsors, it ultimately served against their intentions as the cornerstone proto state of the nascent Second Polish Republic, the latter conposed also of territories never intended by the Central Powers to be ceded to Poland.

By January 1917, the ranks of the Romanian army had been significantly thinned. Roughly 150,000 Romanian soldiers had been taken prisoner, 200,000 men were dead or wounded, and lost two thirds of their country, including the capital. Importantly, the Ploiești oilfields, the only significant source of oil in Europe west of the Black Sea, had been destroyed before they were abandoned to the Central Powers.

Eastern Front as of 1917

On International Women's Day, Thursday, 23 February 1917/8 March 1917, as many as 90,000 female workers in the city of Petrograd left their factory jobs and marched through the streets, shouting "Bread", "Down with the autocracy!" and "Stop the War!" These women were tired, hungry, and angry, after working long hours in miserable conditions to feed their families because their menfolk were fighting at the front. They were not alone in demanding change; more than 150,000 men and women took to the streets to protest the next day.

By Saturday, 25 February, the city of Petrograd was essentially shut down. No one was allowed to work or wanted to work. Even though there were a few incidents of police and soldiers firing into the crowds, those groups soon mutinied and joined the protesters. Tsar Nicholas II, who was not in Petrograd during the revolution, heard reports of the protests but chose not to take them seriously. By 1 March, it was obvious to everyone except the Tsar himself, that his rule was over. On 2 March it was made official. From this point onwards Russia was administered by the Russian Provisional Government until the October Revolution.

In early July 1917, on a relatively small area of the Romanian front, there began one of the largest concentrations of combat forces and means known during the conflagration: nine armies, 80 infantry divisions with 974 battalions, 19 cavalry divisions with 550 squadrons and 923 artillery batteries; in total they numbered some 800,000 men, with about one million in their immediate reserve. Between late July and early September, the Romanian Army fought the battles of Mărăști, Mărășești and Oituz, managing to stop the German-Austro-Hungarian advance, inflicting heavy losses in the process and winning the most important Allied victories on the Eastern Front in 1917. As a result of these operations, the remaining Romanian territories remained unoccupied, tying down nearly 1,000,000 Central Powers troops and prompting to describe the Romanian front as "The only point of light in the East".

On 29 June 1917, Alexander Kerensky, the Minister of War in the Russian Provisional Government, launched the Kerensky offensive to end Austria-Hungary once and for all. The Russians made only 6 miles (9.7 km) of progress but the Austrians counterattacked and drove them almost entirely out of Austria-Hungary, and they retreated 150 miles (240 km), losing Tarnopol, Stanislau and Czernowitz. This defeat was accompanied by 60,000 casualties and contributed greatly to the collapse of the Russian Army during the October Revolution.

Although the February Revolution had overthrown the Tsar, the Bolsheviks still were not satisfied. In their view, the new Provisional Government was merely a more deceptive continuation of the previous government; they still refused to withdraw from the war despite how badly it was going. The upper class still wielded considerable influence in Russian economics and politics, so by September 1917, Lenin began advocating for a second revolution - one that would allow the workers and peasants to gain total control over the country. The Central Committee of the Bolshevik Party convened on 10 October, and after much heated debate, agreed that it was time to begin planning for an armed insurrection. Troops who were loyal to the Bolsheviks took control of the telegraph stations, power stations, strategic bridges, post offices, train stations, and state banks.

Petrograd was officially in the hands of the Bolsheviks, who greatly increased their organization in factory groups and in many barracks throughout Petrograd. They concentrated on devising a plan for overturning the Provisional Government, with a coup d'état. On 24 October, Lenin emerged from hiding in a suburb, entered the city, set up his headquarters at the Smolny Institute and worked to complete his three-phase plan. With the main bridges and the main railways secured, only the Winter Palace, and with it the Provisional Government, remained to be taken. On the evening of 7 November, the troops that were loyal to the Bolsheviks infiltrated the Winter Palace. After an almost bloodless coup, the Bolsheviks were the new leaders of Russia. Lenin announced that the new Bolshevik government would immediately be seeking an end to the war, implementing a system of worker's democracy, and establishing collective ownership of all farms and factories.

Territory lost by Russia under the 1918 Treaty of Brest-Litovsk

Lenin's new Bolshevik government tried to end the war, with a ceasefire being declared on 15 December 1917 along lines agreed in November. At the same time, the Bolsheviks launched a full-scale military offensive against its opponents: Ukraine and separatist governments in the Don region. During the peace negotiations between the Soviets and the Central Powers, the Germans demanded enormous concessions, eventually resulting in the failure of the long-drawn-out peace negotiations on 17 February 1918. At the same time, the Central Powers concluded a military treaty with Ukraine which was losing ground in the fight with invading Bolshevik forces. The Russian Civil War, which started just after November 1917, would tear apart Russia for three years. As a result of the events in 1917, many groups opposed to Lenin's Bolsheviks had formed. With the fall of Nicholas II, many parts of the Russian Empire took the opportunity to declare their independence, one of which was Finland, which did so in December 1917; however, Finland too collapsed into a civil war. Finland declared itself independent on 6 December 1917, and this was accepted by Lenin a month later. The Finnish Parliament elected a German prince as King of Finland. However, the Socialists (The Reds) and the Whites in Finland fell into war with each other in January 1918. The Reds wanted Finland to be a Soviet republic and were aided by Russian forces still in Finland. The Whites of Finland were led by General C.G.E.Mannerheim, a Finnish baron who had been in the Tsar's service since he was 15 years old. The Whites were also offered help by a German Expeditionary Corps led by German General Goltz. Though Mannerheim never accepted the offer, the German corps landed in Finland in April 1918.

After the disintegration of the Russian imperial army and navy in 1917, the Council of People's Commissars headed by Leon Trotsky set about creating a new army. By a decree on 28 January 1918, the council created the Workers' and Peoples' Red Army; it began recruitment on a voluntary basis, but on 22 April, the Soviet government made serving in the army compulsory for anyone who did not employ hired labor. Several officers who had served in the Russian Imperial Army defected to the Red Army in support of the Bolshevik cause. Many of them were of an aristocratic background but became disillusioned with imperialism and monarchism, although the Red Army still mostly consisted of ordinary workers and peasants.

With the German Army just 85 miles (137 km) from the Russian capital Petrograd (St. Petersburg) on 3 March 1918, the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk was signed and the Eastern Front ceased to be a war zone. In the treaty, Soviet Russia ceded 34 % of the former empire's population, 54% of its industrial land, 89 % of its coalfields, and 26 % of its railroads. The total losses in land amounted to 1 million square kilometers. Lenin bitterly called the settlement "that abyss of defeat, dismemberment, enslavement and humiliation." While the treaty was practically obsolete before the end of the year, it did provide some relief to the Bolsheviks, who were embroiled in a civil war, and affirmed the independence of Ukraine. However, Estonia and Latvia were intended to become a United Baltic Duchy to be ruled by German princes and German nobility as fiefdoms under the German Kaiser. A rump Polish state was also foreseen on the formerly Russian territories. Finland's sovereignty had already been declared in December 1917, and accepted by most nations, including France and Russia, but not by the United Kingdom and the United States.

Romanian troops during the Battle of Mărășești, 1917

On 7 May 1918 Romania signed the Treaty of Bucharest with the Central Powers, which recognised Romanian sovereignty over Bessarabia in return for ceding control of passes in the Carpathian Mountains to Austria-Hungary and granting oil concessions to Germany. Although approved by Parliament, Ferdinand I refused to sign the treaty, hoping for an Allied victory; Romania re-entered the war on 10 November 1918 on the side of the Allies and the Treaty of Bucharest was formally annulled by the Armistice of 11 November 1918. Between 1914 and 1918, an estimated 400,000 to 600,000 ethnic Romanians served with the Austro-Hungarian army, of whom up to 150,000 were killed in action; total military and civilian deaths within contemporary Romanian borders are estimated at 748,000.

With the end of major combat on the Eastern Front, the Germans were able to transfer substantial forces to the west in order to mount an offensive in France in the spring of 1918.

This offensive on the Western Front failed to achieve a decisive breakthrough, and the arrival of more and more American units in Europe was sufficient to offset the German advantage. Even after the Russian collapse, about a million German soldiers remained tied up in the east until the end of the war, attempting to run a short-lived addition to the German Empire in Europe. In the end, the Central Powers had to relinquish all of their captured lands on the eastern front, with Germany even being forced to cede territory they held before the war, under various treaties (such as the Treaty of Versailles) signed after the armistice in 1918.[citation needed ] Although the Allied Powers' victory led to the Central Powers being forced to cancel the treaty signed with Russia, the victors were at the time intervening in the Russian Civil War, causing bad relations between Russia and the Allied Powers.

2nd Lt. Ecaterina Teodoroiu, killed in action at Mărășești in 1917, regarded as a national heroine in Romania

In comparison to the attention directed to the role played by women on the Western Front during the First World War, the role of women in the east has garnered limited scholarly focus. It is estimated that 20 percent of the Russian industrial working class was conscripted into the army; therefore, women's share of industrial jobs increased dramatically. There were percentage increases in every industry, but the most noticeable increase happened in industrial labour, which increased from 31.4 percent in 1913 to 45 percent in 1918.

Women also fought on the Eastern Front. In the later stages of Russia's participation in the war, Russia began forming all-woman combat units, the Women's Battalions, in part to fight plummeting morale among male soldiers by demonstrating Russian women's willingness to fight. In Romania, Ecaterina Teodoroiu actively fought in the Romanian Army and is remembered today as a national hero.

British nursing efforts were not limited to the Western Front. Nicknamed the "Gray partridges" in reference to their dark gray overcoats, Scottish volunteer nurses arrived in Romania in 1916 under the leadership of Elsie Inglis. In addition to nursing injured personnel, Scottish nurses manned transport vehicles and acted as regimental cooks. The "Gray Partridges" were well respected by Romanian, Serbian and Russian troops and as a result, the Romanian press went as far as to characterize them as "healthy, masculine, and tanned women." As a testament to her abilities, Elsie Inglis and her volunteers were entrusted to turn an abandoned building in the city of Galați into an operational hospital, which they did in a little more than a day. Yvonne Fitzroy's published journal, "With the Scottish Nurses in Roumania," provides an excellent first hand account of Scottish nursing activities in the Eastern Front.

During World War I, approximately 200,000 German soldiers and 2.5 million soldiers from the Austro-Hungarian army entered Russian captivity. During the 1914 Russian campaign the Russians began taking thousands of Austrian prisoners. As a result, the Russian authorities made emergency facilities in Kiev, Penza, Kazan, and later Turkestan to hold the Austrian prisoners of war. As the war continued Russia began to detain soldiers from Germany as well as a growing number from the Austro-Hungarian army. The Tsarist state saw the large population of POWs as a workforce that could benefit the war economy in Russia. Many POWs were employed as farm laborers and miners in Donbas and Krivoi Rog. However, the majority of POWs were employed as laborers constructing canals and building railroads. The living and working environments for these POWs was bleak. There was a shortage of food, clean drinking water and proper medical care. During the summer months malaria was a major problem, and the malnutrition among the POWs led to many cases of scurvy. While working on the Murmansk rail building project over 25,000 POWs died. Information about the bleak conditions of the labor camps reached the German and Austro-Hungarian governments. They began to complain about the treatment of POWs. The Tsarist authorities initially refused to acknowledge the German and Habsburg governments. They rejected their claims because Russian POWs were working on railway construction in Serbia. However, they slowly agreed to stop using prison labor. Life in the camps was extremely rough for the men who resided in them. The Tsarist government could not provide adequate supplies for the men living in their POW camps. The Russian government's inability to supply the POWs in their camps with supplies was due to inadequate resources and bureaucratic rivalries. However, the conditions in the POW camps varied; some were more bearable than others.

Ultimately, a large scale sanitation program was put into effect. This program, named Sanititätswesen (Medical Affairs), was responsible for ensuring proper hygienic procedures were being carried out in Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland. Quarantine centers were built, and diseased neighbourhoods were isolated from the rest of the population. Delousing stations were prevalent in the countryside and in cities to prevent the spread of typhus fever, with mass numbers of natives being forced to take part in this process at military bathhouses. A "sanitary police" was also introduced to confirm the cleanliness of homes, and any home deemed unfit would be boarded up with a warning sign. Dogs and cats were also killed for fear of possible infection.

The Russian casualties in the First World War are difficult to estimate, due to the poor quality of available statistics.

Cornish gives a total of 2,006,000 military dead (700,000 killed in action, 970,000 died of wounds, 155,000 died of disease and 181,000 died while POWs). This measure of Russian losses is similar to that of the British Empire, 5% of the male population in the 15 to 49 age group. He says civilian casualties were five to six hundred thousand in the first two years, and were then not kept, so a total of over 1,500,000 is not unlikely. He has over five million men passing into captivity, the majority during 1915.

When Russia withdrew from the war, 2,500,000 Russian POWs were in German and Austrian hands. This by far exceeded the total number of prisoners of war (1,880,000) lost by the armies of Britain, France and Germany combined. Only the Austro-Hungarian Army, with 2,200,000 POWs, came even close.

The empire of Austria lost approximately 60% of its territory as a result of the war, and evolved into a smaller state with a small homogeneous population of 6.5 million people. With the loss, Vienna was now an imperial capital without an empire to support it. The states that were formed around Austria feared the return of the Austro-Hungarian Empire and put measures into place to prevent it from re-forming.

Czechoslovakia was created through the merging of the Czech provinces of Bohemia and Moravia, previously under Austrian rule, united with Slovakia and Ruthenia, which were part of Hungary. Although these groups had many differences between them, they believed that together they would create a stronger state. The new country was a multi-ethnic state. The population consisted of Czechs (51%), Slovaks (16%), Germans (22%), Hungarians (5%) and Rusyns (4%), with other ethnic groups making up 2%. Many of the Germans, Hungarians, Ruthenians and Poles and some Slovaks, felt oppressed because the political elite did not generally allow political autonomy for minority ethnic groups. The state proclaimed the official ideology that there are no Czechs and Slovaks, but only one nation of Czechoslovaks (see Czechoslovakism), to the disagreement of Slovaks and other ethnic groups. Once a unified Czechoslovakia was restored after World War II the conflict between the Czechs and the Slovaks surfaced again.

After the war Hungary was severely disrupted by the loss of 72% of its territory, 64% of its population and most of its natural resources. The loss of territory was similar to that of Austria after the breaking up the Austria-Hungary territory. They lost the territories of Transylvania, Slovakia, Croatia, Slavonia, Syrmia, and Banat.

Italy incorporated the regions of Trieste and South Tyrol from Austria.

The creation of a free and Independent Poland was one of Wilson's fourteen points. At the end of the 18th century the state of Poland was broken apart by Prussia, Russia, and Austria. During the Paris Peace Conference, 1919, the Commission on Polish Affairs was created which recommended there be a passageway across West Prussia and Posen, in order to give Poland access to the Baltic through the port of Danzig at the mouth of the Vistula River. The creation of the state of Poland would separate East Prussia from the rest of Germany, as it was before the Partitions of Poland. Poland also received Upper Silesia. British Foreign Secretary Lord Curzon proposed Poland's eastern border with Russia. Neither the Soviet Russians nor the Polish were happy with the demarcation of the border.

The state of Romania was enlarged greatly after the war. As a result of the Paris peace conference Romania kept the Dobrudja and Transylvania. Between the states of Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, and Romania an alliance named the Little Entente was formed. They worked together on matters of foreign policy in order to prevent a Habsburg restoration.

Erlikman, Vadim (2004). Poteri narodonaseleniia v XX veke [Population loss in the 20th century] (in Russian). Spravochnik.

Sanborn, Josh. "The mobilization of 1914 and the question of the Russian nation: A reexamination." Slavic Review 59.2 (2000): 267-289. online

Wildman, Allan K. End of the Russian Imperial Army: The Old Army & the Soldiers' Revolt (March-April 1917) (1980).

Trevelyan, George Macaulay (June 1915). "Austria-Hungary and Serbia". The North American Review 201 (715): 860-868.

Mamatey, Albert (Oct. 1915). "The Situation in Austria-Hungary". The Journal of Race Development 6 (2): 203-217.

Williamson, Samuel R. Jr. (1991). Austria-Hungary and the Origins of the First World War. New York: St. Martin's Press.

Mason, John W. (1985). The Dissolution of the Austro-Hungarian Empire 1867-1918. London: Longman Group Limited.

Miller, William (1922). The Balkans: Roumania, Bulgaria, Serbia and Montenegro. London: T. Fisher Unwin Ltd.

Hitchins, Keith (1994). Rumania: 1866-1947. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Stone, David (2015). The Russian Army in the Great War: The Eastern Front, 1914-1917. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas. ISBN 978-0-7006-2095-1.

Mosier, John (2002). The Myth of the Great War. New York: Perennial.

Goldman, Wendy Z. (2002). Women at the Gates: Gender and Industry in Stalin's Russia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Coroban, Costel (2012). Potarnichile gri. Spitalele Femeilor Scotiene in Romania (1916-1917). Targoviste: Cetatea de Scaun.

Dupuy, Trevor Nevitt; Onacewicz, Wlodzimiez (1967). Triumphs and Tragedies in the East, 1915-1917. The Military History of World War I. Vol. 4. New York: Franklin Watts. p. 31. LCCN 67010130.

A. Zaitsov (1933). "armed forces". In Malevskiī-Malevīch, Petr Nīkolaevīch (ed.). Russia U.S.S.R. : a complete handbook. New York: William Farquhar Payson. ISBN 9780598750518. JSTOR 2601821.

Jukes, Geoffrey (2002). Essential Histories: The First World War, The Eastern Front 1914-1918. Oxford: Osprey Publishing.

Lieven, Dominic (1983). Russia and the Origins of the First World War. New York: St Martin's Press. ISBN 978-0-312-69611-5.

Liulevicius, Vejas Gabriel (2000). War Land on the Eastern Front: Culture, National Identity, and German Occupation in World War I. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-66157-9.

Kowalski, Ronald (1997). The Russian Revolution 1917-1921. London: Routledge. ISBN 0-415-12437-9.

McRandle, James; Quirk, James (July 2006). "The Blood Test Revisited: A New Look at German Casualty Counts in World War I". The Journal of Military History. Society for Military History. 70 (3): 667-701. doi:10.1353/jmh.2006.0180. S2CID 159930725.

McCauley, Martin (1975). The Russian Revolution and The Soviet State 1917-1921. London: Macmillan.

Roshwald, Aviel; Stites, Richard, eds. (1999). European Culture in the Great War:The Arts, Entertainment and Propaganda 1914-1918. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 6,349-358.

Oxana Nagornaja, Jeffrey Mankoff (2009). "United by Barbed Wire: Russian POWs in Germany, National Stereotypes, and International Relations". Explorations in Russian and Eurasian History 10 (3): 475-498. Retrieved 14 February 2014.

Vinogradov, V.N (1992). "Romania in the First World War: The Years of Neutrality, 1914-16." The International History Review 14 (3): 452-461.

Gatrell, Peter (2005). "Prisoners of War on the Eastern Front during World War I". Kritika 6 (3): 557-566. Retrieved 18 March 2014.

Tucker, Spencer C. (1998). The Great War 1914-18. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. pp. 220-223.

Dowling, Timothy C.: Eastern Front, in: 1914-1918-online. International Encyclopedia of the First World War.

Sanborn, Joshua A.: Russian Empire, in: 1914-1918-online. International Encyclopedia of the First World War.

Steinberg, John W.: Warfare 1914-1918 (Russian Empire), in: 1914-1918-online. International Encyclopedia of the First World War.

Szlanta, Piotr, Richter, Klaus: Warfare 1914-1918 (East Central Europe), in: 1914-1918-online. International Encyclopedia of the First World War.

Zhvanko, Liubov: Ukraine, in: 1914-1918-online. International Encyclopedia of the First World War.

Sergeev, Evgenii Iur'evich: Pre-war Military Planning (Russian Empire), in: 1914-1918-online. International Encyclopedia of the First World War.

Nachtigal, Reinhard, Radauer, Lena: Prisoners of War (Russian Empire), in: 1914-1918-online. International Encyclopedia of the First World War.

Szlanta, Piotr, Richter, Klaus: Prisoners of War (East Central Europe), in: 1914-1918-online. International Encyclopedia of the First World War.

Shcherbinin, Pavel Petrovich: Women's Mobilization for War (Russian Empire), in: 1914-1918-online. International Encyclopedia of the First World War.

"WWI Eastern Front Foto". 18 June 2005 - via Flickr.

"WWI Eastern Front Part II". 26 October 2005 - via Flickr.

With the Russian army, 1914-1917 by Alfred Knox

War And Revolution In Russia 1914-1917 by General Basil Gourko.

WWI German Military Cemeteries in Belarus modern photos by Andrey Dybowski (rus).

Der Vormarsch der Flieger Abteilung 27 in der Ukraine (The advance of Flight Squadron 27 in the Ukraine). This portfolio, comprising 263 photographs mounted on 48 pages, is a photo-documentary of the German occupation and military advances through the southern Ukraine in the spring and summer of 1918.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Eastern Front Part of the European theatre of World War I Clockwise from top left: soldiers stationed in the Carpathian Mountains, 1915; German soldiers in Kyiv, March 1918; the Russian ship Slava , October 1917; Russian infantry, 1914; Romanian infantry Belligerents Central Powers: Germany (1916-17) (1916-17) Allied Powers: (1914-17) (1917) Romania (1916-17) (1916-17) Belgium (1915-17) (1916-17) (1916-17) Soviet Russia (1917-18) Commanders and leaders Paul von Hindenburg Erich Ludendorff Leopold of Bavaria Max Hoffmann Conrad von Hötzendorf A.

# data[].attributes.headline
In 1915 the Germans joined the RMS Lucitania with the U-Boat submarines, a pride ship of the British and where 128 Americans died.

# data[].attributes.subject
In 1915 the Germans joined the RMS Lucitania with the U-Boat submarines, a pride ship of the British and where 128 Americans died.

# data[].attributes.headline
In 1916 the war reached its peak of brutality and mortality on the Western Front, with the Battle of the Somme (June 1 to November 18, 1916) and the Battle of VerdumFebruary 21 to Dicember 18, 1916)

# data[].attributes.subject
In 1916 the war reached its peak of brutality and mortality on the Western Front, with the Battle of the Somme (June 1 to November 18, 1916) and the Battle of VerdumFebruary 21 to Dicember 18, 1916)

# data[].attributes.headline
In 1917, the United States declared war on the Germans.

# data[].attributes.subject
In 1917, the United States declared war on the Germans.

# data[].attributes.headline
On March 3, 1918, the Amnesty and Peace were signed with the Brest-Litovsk treaty, between Russia and the Central Empires

# data[].attributes.subject
On March 3, 1918, the Amnesty and Peace were signed with the Brest-Litovsk treaty, between Russia and the Central Empires

# data[].attributes.headline
July 15 to August 6, 1918 Second Battle of the Marne. Germany loses the war and the United States, France and Italy win the battles.

# data[].attributes.subject
July 15 to August 6, 1918 Second Battle of the Marne. Germany loses the war and the United States, France and Italy win the battles.

# data[].attributes.headline
In 1919, The Versalles  Treaty of Peace was signed, by more than 50 countries and Germany suffered heavy sanctions.

# data[].attributes.subject
In 1919, The Versalles  Treaty of Peace was signed, by more than 50 countries and Germany suffered heavy sanctions.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This article is about the Treaty of Versailles of 28 June 1919, at the end of World War I. For other uses, see Treaty of Versailles (disambiguation).

# data[].attributes.headline
In 1919 after the Treaty of Versailles the world order was altered, 4 empires fell and created great resentment in Germany. Adolf Hitler comes to power and unleashes World War 2

# data[].attributes.subject
In 1919 after the Treaty of Versailles the world order was altered, 4 empires fell and created great resentment in Germany. Adolf Hitler comes to power and unleashes World War 2