WW1 Trenches
by Robert Robinson

In the beginning

Trenches have been a feature of warfare for almost as long as armies have existed. Initially they were a part of siege warfare allowing the attacker to work his way closer to the walls despite the arrows, sling shots and catapult loads directed at him by the besieged. However it was with the advent of fire arms that their use became more common. A trench allowed the soldier to stand and load his weapon under cover. As well as being an element in sieges the trench became a general instrument of defence, a force multiplier allowing a smaller number of soldiers to withstand a larger force. Even before the introduction of the machine gun, attacking a well manned trench was seen as a recipe for a high casualty rate amongst the assaulting force.

A classic example was the Battle of Cold Harbour where the attacking Union forces, advancing against a Confederate trench line, had their names pinned to the back of their coats to enable easier identification of the fallen. The use of trenches enabled Lee’s forces to defend Richmond against Grant’s much larger force.

With improvements in rifle design, artillery and the introduction of the machine gun the use of trenches became increasingly common. Trenches played an important role in the Russo Japanese War and the Turkish Army during various wars with Russia and in the Balkans learnt important lessons about the use of trenches and machine guns that they put to effective use at Gallipoli.

World War One – the Western Front

World War One was very largely a war of trenches, this was especially the case on the Western and Italian fronts. Trenches and their supporting infrastructure varied enormously depending both on when and where they were constructed. In the early stages trenches tended to be very basic often being dug in great haste and under fire.

Accounts of the British infantry during the battles at and around Mons in 1914 describe some desperate digging with entrenching tools, bayonets and even bare hands to produce defensive positions in the path of the German advance. Such emergency or temporary trenches might only be waist deep with a rough earth parapet foot or so higher over which kneeling soldiers could fire. Such trenches provided little cover against shell fire and had no supporting infrastructure such as support and communications trenches or dugouts. They could not be occupied for long. Without communication trenches reinforcement and casualty evacuation was only possible across open ground subject to enemy fire.

Although, as the war progressed, trenches became more and more elaborate temporary trenches were still a feature of battle. Temporary trenches might be dug to defend newly occupied ground against counter attack or literally as a last ditch defence where an enemy attack had broken through the main trench line. Temporary trenches were still being dug right up until the Armistice.

Temporary trenches might become more permanent as their occupants dug and delved deepening and widening the ditch, raising the parapet and adding features such as a fire step, loop holes and dugouts. In some instances trenches were dug sufficiently in advance of contact with the enemy and could be elaborate defensive structures. Trenches could be reveted with timber and in some instances concrete (the Germans were particularly good at this). Sandbags would be used extensively.

Wooden duck boards would be laid along the bottom. In some trenches a drainage sump would run beneath the duck boards. Cables for field telephones might be strung along the trench walls (although British recommended ‘best practice’ was to bury these to protect them from shell fire). Forward saps could be dug to provide listening points and sentry posts in advance of the main trench line; these might also be used as sally ports for patrols in no mans land and trench raids. Dug outs would be added, usually with the entrance in the side of the trench facing the enemy (so as to avoid a shell, say from an enemy trench mortar pitching down into the dug out before exploding).

The Germans were particularly good at the creation of deep shelters, often with a concrete construction; a description of the intricacies of the German tunnel and shelter system requires one or more separate articles. Communication trenches would be dug to connect the front line trench with support trenches in the rear and ultimately to rear areas. A feature little mentioned but of extreme importance was the digging of latrine facilities immediately to the rear of the main trench.  The location of these had to be carefully concealed as they were often the subject of enemy fire (a first class cure for constipation!).

The degree of sophistication of a particular trench usually depended very much on the sector of the front in which it was dug. On quiet sectors, where both sides applied a ‘live and let live’ system, soldiers often concentrated on making their trench as comfortable as possible. Food could be cooked in the trench rather than having to be carried from the rear in containers and often arriving cold or not at all (on more active sectors the smoke from a portable oven would invite one or more shells).

The comfort of dug-outs could be improved (at least one British officer’s multi roomed dug out boasted a sofa, side board, dining table and a piano). On more active sectors where any observed activity, such as digging, could draw mortar of regular artillery fire trenches tended to be more rough and ready. In battle zones repeated shelling could turn a well constructed trench line into a shallow muddy ditch.

Despite the best efforts of their occupants trenches could be cold, wet and miserable in the winter and hot and smelly in the summer. They were often rat infested and a breeding ground for unpleasant insect pests. Under battle conditions sanitation was non existent and corpses sometime had to be buried in the trench wall.

Diseases such as trench foot (caused by feet being constantly wet and cold), trench mouth (an unpleasant gum disease) and trench fever (typhus spread by lice) proliferated if troops had to spend too long in the trenches. They were no respecters of nationality and both sides suffered equally. This was recognised and where and whenever possible a system of rotation was applied so that when up at the front a soldier would have periods in the front line trench, in the reserve trenches and at the rear of the battle line. This allowed for matters such as foot care, de lousing, bathing, cleaning of cloths etc without which the armies would have been swept with epidemics of sickness.

Other Fronts

Trenches were used in other theatres although not as extensively, except of course at Gallipoli which was entirely a trench bound campaign.

Trenches on the Eastern front do not appear to have reached the same levels of sophistication as on the Western.