💥 A short, violent bombardment
The shelling lasted hours, not days, so the enemy had no time to bring up reserves. It mixed gas and high explosive, and aimed at guns, headquarters and telephone lines as well as trenches.
Sign up to access the complete lesson and track your progress!
Unlock This CourseBy early 1918 General Erich Ludendorff was, in practice, running Germany's war. He believed Germany had a few months left in which it could still win. There were three reasons.
Russia's new government stopped fighting and signed the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk on 3 March 1918. Germany could move about 50 divisions, around half a million men, from the east to the Western Front. For once it had more soldiers there than the Allies.
In the lesson The USA Enters the War you saw that American soldiers were arriving slowly at first. By the summer there would be far too many to beat. Germany had to win before then.
The British blockade had left German civilians hungry and short of fuel. Germany could not win a long war, so waiting was not a choice.
So Ludendorff gambled on one great attack. The plan was to hit the British hard, split them from the French and push them back to the Channel ports before the Americans could make a difference.
Key terms:
Most big attacks on the Western Front had begun with days of shelling, which warned the defenders. Ludendorff's army attacked in a new way.
The shelling lasted hours, not days, so the enemy had no time to bring up reserves. It mixed gas and high explosive, and aimed at guns, headquarters and telephone lines as well as trenches.
Small groups of stormtroopers then moved forward fast. They travelled light and carried light machine guns, grenades and flamethrowers. They did not stop to fight strong points. They went round them, pushed deep towards the enemy's guns, and left the strong points for the ordinary infantry behind.
This infiltration turned a line of trenches into a set of surrounded islands, and it broke the deadlock in the west.
The first attack, called Operation Michael, began on 21 March 1918 near St Quentin. Germans also called it the Kaiserschlacht, the 'Kaiser's Battle'. More than 6,000 guns fired over a million shells in about five hours. Then the stormtroopers came forward through thick fog.
They struck the British Fifth Army under General Gough, which was spread thinly along a stretch of line it had only recently taken over. The Fifth Army fell back. About 21,000 British soldiers were taken prisoner on the first day. Within two weeks the Germans had advanced about 65 kilometres and taken back the whole Somme battlefield.
On 26 March the Allies agreed that a French general, Ferdinand Foch, should co-ordinate all their armies on the Western Front. Now one man could send reserves wherever they were needed.
The German advance was stopped just short of Amiens, a vital railway centre, and in early April Ludendorff ended Operation Michael. He then attacked somewhere else, again and again:
Germany had won a great deal of ground, but it had not won the war. There were five main reasons.
The gamble had failed. Germany's army was now smaller, more tired and worse placed than in March. What the Allies did next is in the lesson The Hundred Days and Why Germany Lost.
Do not write that the offensive failed from the start. At first it was the most successful attack on the Western Front since 1914. It failed because the gains did not win the war and cost Germany men it could not replace. Remember it was a series of attacks, not one battle.
Source A: From a Special Order of the Day by Field Marshal Sir Douglas Haig, commander of the British armies in France, sent to all his soldiers on 11 April 1918.
'Three weeks ago to-day the enemy began his terrific attacks against us on a fifty-mile front. His objects are to separate us from the French, to take the Channel Ports and destroy the British Army. In spite of throwing already 106 Divisions into the battle and enduring the most reckless sacrifice of human life, he has as yet made little progress towards his goals. We owe this to the determined fighting and self-sacrifice of our troops.'
Source B: From My War Memories, 1914-1918 by General Erich Ludendorff, published in 1919 (translated). He is writing about the first German attack, which began on 21 March 1918.
'The battle was over by the 4th April. It was a brilliant feat, and will ever be so regarded in history ... Strategically we had not achieved what the events of the 23rd, 24th and 25th had encouraged us to hope for. That we had also failed to take Amiens, which would have rendered communication between the enemy's forces astride the Somme exceedingly difficult, was specially disappointing ... However, our troops had beaten the French and English and proved themselves superior.'
(A division is a large army unit. Objects means aims. Astride the Somme means on both sides of the River Somme.)
Study Sources A and B. How far does Source A support the evidence of Source B about the success of the German offensive in spring 1918? Explain your answer. [8 marks]
Source A supports Source B to some extent. Both agree that the offensive did not achieve its main aims. Source A says the enemy 'has as yet made little progress towards his goals', and Source B admits that 'strategically we had not achieved' what the Germans had hoped for. Both also show that the Germans failed to cut the Allied armies apart. Source A says one German aim was 'to separate us from the French', and Source B regrets the failure 'to take Amiens', which would have made 'communication between the enemy's forces' very difficult.
However, the sources disagree about how well the Germans had fought. Source A presents the attack as a costly failure, a 'most reckless sacrifice of human life' that was held by the 'determined fighting' of British troops. Source B calls the same battle 'a brilliant feat' and claims that German troops 'had beaten the French and English and proved themselves superior'. Source A stresses German losses, which Source B does not mention.
Overall, Source A supports Source B only partly. They agree on the most important fact, that Germany's aims were not reached, but they give opposite pictures of the fighting: a failed attack in Source A and a great German victory in Source B.
What lifts this to the top level: it matches short quotations from both sources for agreement and for difference, then judges how far A supports B.
Look for the point one author would rather not admit. Ludendorff praises his own attack, yet he accepts that Amiens was not taken. That admission is where a German general agrees with a British one, and it gives you your point of support. For more help, see the Exam Skills lesson Paper 2 Section A Question (b): How Far Does Source A Support Source B?