AP® World History: Modern · Unit 7 · Topic 7.3

Why the Western Front Froze

The Western Front froze because defensive weapons, machine guns, rapid-fire artillery, and barbed wire, were far more lethal than any infantry attack crossing open ground, so both sides dug trenches instead of advancing.

In 1914 everyone expected a fast war of movement, like the quick wars of the 1800s. Instead, new weapons gave defense a massive edge over offense. A machine gun could fire hundreds of rounds a minute, enough to cut down wave after wave of advancing soldiers. Artillery could rain shells on troops crossing open ground. Barbed wire, strung in dense belts in front of enemy lines, slowed attackers down and held them in the killing zone just long enough for machine guns to finish the job. Once both sides realized attacking across open ground meant walking into this, they dug in instead. A trench system was not one ditch but several lines deep: a front line facing the enemy, support trenches behind it, and reserve trenches further back, all connected by zigzagging communication trenches so soldiers and supplies could move without being exposed to fire.

The result was a line of trenches running nearly 475 miles from the North Sea coast of Belgium down through France to the Swiss border. For four years that line barely moved, even though millions died trying to push it. Going over the top meant climbing out of a protected trench into no-man's-land, the shell-torn strip between the lines, and walking into machine gun fire with nowhere to hide. Gains were measured in yards, not miles.

Breaking this deadlock took new technology aimed at specific defensive strengths. Tanks could roll over barbed wire and shrug off bullets that stopped infantry cold. Poison gas could drift into trenches and force defenders out of the cover that protected them. Aircraft could scout troop movements and strike targets behind the lines. None of these alone restored a war of movement, but together they set up the mobile warfare of the next global conflict.

Key terms

No-man's-land
The open, shell-damaged ground between opposing trench lines that attacking infantry had to cross under fire.
Trench system
A network of front-line, support, and reserve trenches connected by communication trenches.
Barbed wire
Dense belts of spiked wire placed in front of trenches to slow and trap attacking soldiers.
War of attrition
A strategy of wearing down the enemy's soldiers and resources over time rather than winning quick decisive battles.

Watch it explained

  1. How it worksShow me how machine guns and barbed wire beat infantry attacks and force both sides to dig.
  2. How it worksWalk me through a trench system in cross section from the front line to the reserve lines.
  3. Worked exampleTrace the Western Front from the North Sea to Switzerland and see how little it moves in four years.
  4. Common mistakeWhy wasn't going over the top into no-man's-land ever a winning tactic against machine guns?
  5. Going furtherWhat changes when tanks, gas and aircraft try to break a line that nothing else could break?

Check yourself

Your turn1 of 2
Throughout much of the First World War, infantry attacks that went 'over the top' out of a trench and across open no-man's-land toward an enemy trench line usually suffered enormous casualties for very little territorial gain. What best explains why this tactic so rarely succeeded?

End of topic.