The document summarizes key events that led to the stalemate of World War I on the Western Front. It discusses how the failure of the Schlieffen Plan and the Battle of the Marne prevented either side from gaining ground, forcing both armies to dig in along hundreds of miles of trenches. The development of new weapons like machine guns and artillery made offensive operations nearly impossible, as attacking forces could be cut down before reaching enemy lines. This resulted in static trench warfare without major advances by either side for much of the war.

1. The Events of WWI Revision
Session
•Why did World War I become a
stalemated war of attrition?
•What were Trench Conditions like?
•What effect did new weaponry have
on the war?

2.  The Western Front
referred to the line of
fighting stretching from
the North Sea to the
Swiss Frontier with
France.
 This dug in line of fortified
trenches was referred to
as the Western Front.
 The Alliance was on one
side and the Entente on
the other.
 It moved little during the
war, with either side
unable to make much
progress.

3.  The previous slide would be a perfect four mark answer
to this question.
 Remember what a four mark question requires. Four
points- no more, no less, no detail.

4. War
breaks
out.
Stalemated
war of
attrition
Germany declare
war on France
(Schlieffen Plan)
Germany
invade
Belgium
Belgian’s
delay
Germans
at Liege
BEF slow
Germans
at Mons.
Germans
change plan, go
south rather
than to encircle
Paris
French
push
Germans
back to
River Aisne
(Marne)
Schlieffen
Plan failed.
British and
Germans try
to cut each
other off from
supplies.
Race to the Sea:
both sides trying
to beat each
other to English
Channel
French Plan 17
failed. Back to
original
positions.
Troops dig into
trenches.

5. The German’s intended to take over
France very quickly, by using the
Schlieffen Plan.
This meant invading France through
Belgium and Luxembourg to encircle
Paris.
What actually happened was...
The Belgians could not stop the
Germans, but did slow them down.This gave the French and the British
troops time to mobilise and get to
the German army...
The BEF (British Expeditionary Force) were hugely
outnumbered but did slow the German advance
considerably, helping prevent the Germans break
through enemy lines.
The French went in for a direct
attack at first which was a disaster.
They very quickly changed policy
and went for a more defensive
strategy- defending Paris.

6. Russian troops mobilised much
quicker than expected...
This meant that 100,000 troops had
to be pulled out of army advancing
onto Paris.
Finally, the German advance was so
quick that supplies of food and
ammunition could not follow quickly
enough. This was a big problem.
This led to the Battle of the Marne,
as Germany had to attack the East of
Paris instead of the West- which led
to the development of trenches.

7. General von Kluck decided to march
German troops to the east of Paris
instead of entering from the west
French troops quickly moved into
defensive positions

8. French pushed the Germans back to
the River Aisne, but could not get
them out of France completely.

9.  Neither side could make any
progress, so they dug trenches
in order to protect themselves
from snipers and shell fire. A
key reason for the trenches
was the new type of
weaponry that had been
developed, making that kind
of protection necessary.
 By mid-November, during the
Battle of Ypres, stalemate had
set in. Millions of troops dug a
line of trenches that stretched
from the sea in the west to
the Alps in the east.

10.  Both sides failed to break through the other’s defensive
line.
 The trenches were a way of defending against the new
weaponry. Offensive weapons and tactics did not work
against the barbed wire, dug in approach.
 New weapons also made it difficult. Any enemy
approach would be quickly cut down by the newly
developed machine guns. Weapons also had to be
created to get soldiers to come out into the open- such
as poison gas.

11. Good for defence, dug in,
can’t be seen, or attacked
easily as soldiers can be seen
coming and attacked from
safety
Battle does not move from defensive
positions, so little ground is gained and
battle is long.
War becomes stalemated!
Barbed wire makes
offensive action more
difficult as everything gets
trapped in it. Except tanks...
which weren’t always
effectively utilised.
Newly developed machine
guns would immediately cut
through opposing armies
that would ‘go over the top’.

12. a) The failure of the Schlieffen Plan
b) The Battle of the Marne
c) New Weaponry and Technology
 Suggested answer...
 The failure of the Schlieffen Plan meant that the Germans failed to take
France and Russia and could no longer move. They had to defend the
ground they had got.
 The Battle of the Marne was the French failing to push the Germans
completely out of France. As a result, they had to defend the position
that they had got into.
 New Weaponry and Technology was (in part) the reasons both sides
failed to break through each others defences and certainly, why war
could not proceed further once they had moved into the trenches.
You would also need to
compare these reasons to
reach your conclusion as to
which is the most important
reason!

15.  What do they show us?
 Do they show enough?
 Do they fully explain the conditions in the trenches?
 Are they reliable? Does it matter?

16.  Machine Guns: Could fire up to 600 rounds a minute. Cut
down hundreds of troops before they could advance more
than a few years. Prolonged the war, by making it difficult to
attack the trenches across No Man’s Land.
 Gas: Horrible. Mustard (flesh destroying), chlorine
(destroyed lungs) and much feared, but unpredictable and
both sides developed gas masks to deal with it. Also
prolonged the war, by not giving either side an advantage.
 Tanks: could crush barbed wire, successful in battle, but
initially unreliable and broke down, or moved to quickly so
troops couldn’t keep up. Not enough to break the deadlock
on the Somme.
 Aircraft: Could report on enemy troops and generally fought
each other- but little impact on outcome of the war