The Great Retreat, Eastern Front 1915
by Michael Kihntopf
By 23 August 1915 the Russian positions on their fronts with the Central Powers
of Austria-Hungary and Germany were crumbling like mud walls in a rainstorm.
Since April, the combined armies had slowly and methodically destroyed one
Russian corps after another as they marched across the Polish salient and
through the Carpathian Mountains. The strong fortresses of the Vistula River
had succumbed. Voices from the trenches to the desks of the Russian General
Staff or Stavka whispered innuendos of betrayal and incompetence and called for
something to be done before the German hordes gobbled up any more of holy
mother Russia. Tsar Nicholas II, encouraged by his wife, finally gave in to the
allegations and sacked the commander in chief, his uncle, Nicholas Nikolovich,
and took up the reigns of command himself. This assumption of command on
Nicholas's part was one of the contributing factors toward the Russian
Revolution which followed a year and a half later. Was the relief of Nicholas
Nikolovich a prudent measure or had he been the most competent leader of the
time?
Nicholas II had appointed his uncle Grand Duke Nicholas Nikolovich as the
commander in chief of Russian forces at the beginning of the war in August
1914. In accordance with the Russian tradition that dated back to Alexander
Nevsky, the Grand Duke had reluctantly accepted the appointment after numerous
turn downs and wrenching self examinations. Nevertheless, shunning his self
professed incompetence, he had launched the vast Russian army against both
enemies nearly simultaneously in accordance with plans drawn up between 1910
and 1913 [1] of which he had no prior knowledge. By September, the best
laid plans had yielded disaster against the Germans but ripe fruit from the
Austro-Hungarians.
Tsar Nicholas II takes a salute from one of his field commanders. Nicholas
Nikolovich is the tall man standing in the car.
|
Throughout 1914 and the winter months of 1915 the Russian army had fought
stubbornly against the Germans maintaining their hold on the Polish salient
that jutted like a knife at the throat of Germany. Three times the Germans had
attempted to seize the fortress line along the Vistula, and three times the
tsarist soldiers had defeated them. Three times the Grand Duke had attempted to
invade Germany and each had failed. However, in Galicia, Russian General Alexei
Brusilov had pushed his soldiers ever forward to take Lemberg, invest the
fortress at Przemysl, and threaten the ancient Polish capital of Krakow and the
coal rich German Silesia. His soldiers stood on the summits of the Carpathian
Mountains and looked down into the Hungarian plains. The Austro-Hungarian army
was hemorrhaging at an alarming rate. One year's casualties rose to nearly
1,500,000 men of which one third were prisoners of war.[2] But the euphoria of
victories and successful defenses came to a screeching stop in April 1915.
The Austro-Hungarian chief of staff, Franz Conrad von Hötzendorf, had asked the
German chief of staff, Erich von Falkenhayn, for help in repelling Russian
advances since the first month of the war. Falkenhayn had provided a division
here and a brigade there to bolster the dual monarchy's failing lines and even
formed two armies to secure its right flank in southern Poland and center in
Galicia. Conrad's two attempts in late 1914 and winter 1915 at counter offenses
had failed miserably and in March, the besieged men of the fortress of Przemysl
had finally given up sending 130,000 men to the Russian prisoner of war
camps.[3] His requests for help to the Germans became more insistent.
Falkenhayn answered the pleas by planning an offensive along the Galician front
between the villages of Gorlice and Tarnow which German units would carry out
exclusive of Austro-Hungarian control.
To carry out the offensive, Falkenhayn's staff created the Eleventh Army with
2½ corps released from both fronts and placed it under the command of General
August von Mackensen. These were the Guard, X, and XI corps (22 Infantry
Division only). These divisions were supported by an unprecedented
concentration of artillery. There were 302 light pieces, 146 heavy guns, and 96
trench mortars of varying calibers. The units began moving into the assault
preparation area, between the Austro-Hungarian Third and Fourth Armies in late
April at approximately the same time Falkenhayn decided to let Conrad know
about the operation. Falkenhayn had kept him in the dark because of a lack in
confidence in Conrad's staff's security. Conrad, initially surprised at the
plan, supported it but raised objections about its command line. Since it was
clearly in the dual
Green indicates Austro-Hungarian units, Purple are German units, and Red are
Russian units.
|
monarchy's war zone, he felt command should go to his staff. Falkenhayn
uncategorically denied his request and further asked him to turn over control
of the Fourth Austro-Hungarian Army to Mackensen. This added an additional two
corps and 408 additional cannons. Conrad gave in because of his need to keep
the Russians out of the Hungarian plains.
On 2 May the Central Powers' artillery opened fire on the soldiers in the
juncture of the Russian IX and X Corps of the Third Army, a front that was
approximately 50 kilometers long. The bombardment lasted a bare four hours but
was of such a devastating nature that few survived it. Observers reported that
from 240,000 to 700,000 shells fell on the Russian lines.[4] In the last 30
minutes of the cannonade, elements of the 1st and 2nd Guard Divisions moved to
their jumping off points within a few meters of the enemy's trenches. When the
last shell fell, the Germans pounced expecting to catch the Russians as they
emerged from underground shelters. Instead they found that the Russian trenches
were barely deep enough to hide a man and were not furnished with the life
saving shelters. The carnage was horrific. Russian officers had posted the
majority of their men in the line to repel any attacks. There were few
communication trenches and reserves were within a few meters of the front
line.[5] The barrage had wiped out entire units. Within the first four hours
the Central Powers' soldiers captured 4000 and were operating in open ground
areas.[6] Resistance came from areas that were on reverse slopes or wooded
areas. General Hans von Seeckt, Mackensen's chief of staff, had devised the
successful plan which called for a short intensive artillery barrage followed
by a head on assault in overwhelming numbers. This concept was contrary to the
encirclement methods espoused by the German army since the Franco-Prussian War
and Seeckt continued with the concept.
The Eleventh Army moved forward by bludgeoning its way through. The
Austro-Hungarian Fourth Army followed on its left to guard that flank while the
Austro-Hungarian Third Army moved ahead on its right. The idea was that when
the Eleventh ran into strong resistance, it simply repeated the actions of the
initial attack. The artillery was concentrated and its fire devastated what was
in front of it. Then the infantry moved in to secure another 20 kilometers.
Movement by either the Austro-Hungarian Third or Fourth Armies on the flanks
kept the Russians from concentrating their reserves on any one advance. As a
result, Russian units simply dissolved into the dust of explosions. By 4 May,
the X Corps had only 5000 soldiers left and XI Corps had degenerated into a
milling mob.[7] The following day the III Caucasus Corps attempted a stand at
the Wisloka River. For a short time, small arms fire augmented by machine guns
kept the Germans from crossing the river but in a short time the Germans
brought up their heavy artillery, capable of staying outside of the Russian
field batteries range, and opened fire. Within a few days, they crossed the
river having inflicted nearly 32,000 casualties on the III Caucasus.[8]
Normally, defensive lines under such an attack would bulge inwards creating a
salient which defenders could rack with assorted weapons from three sides. This
was what had occurred many times along the Western Front. However, Stavka
reacted differently. As the Russian Third Army fell back under the onslaught of
the German heavy artillery so did its neighbors to the right and left. The
general staff had a real fear of encirclement. Its members reasoned that the
inward thrust on the Third Army was about to lead to either a push to the south
to cut off Brusilov's Eighth Army that stood poised on the summits of the
Carpathians or to turn north against the Ninth Army and the Vistula fortress
line. But there were other reasons also for this decision.
One reason why Stavka ordered a withdrawal was the condition of the
armies' armaments and munitions. The Russian army had started the war with many
deficits in this area. In artillery, bending to the concepts espoused by their
French ally for a mobile war effort, the war ministry had decided to
concentrate on producing light field pieces which soldiers could move forward
quickly in a war of mobility. Larger calibers were seen as defensive weapons.
As a result the Russian Third Army had no heavy artillery or were there any
heavy pieces in the flanking armies.[9] German heavy artillery, with a longer
range than the Russian field pieces, took up position out of their range and
pounded them into slag heaps. But the problem was not solely in a lack of
cannon. It also resided in a lack of ammunition. Russian ordinance officers had
used a standard set by the 1905 Russo-Japanese War to arrive at acceptable
levels for shell stores. During that war Russian cannon had used an average of
87,000 rounds per month.[10] This quota was translated to 1914 where Russian
arsenals contained 12 million rounds. When manufacturers had reached this peak,
they had stopped producing except to replace rounds that were considered no
longer potent. Russian administrators and army officers had failed to see that
rapid fire artillery, which had made a much bolder appearance in the Balkan War
of 1912, had increased the rapidity with which shells were used. In that war
Bulgarian bombardiers had consumed 254,000 rounds per month.[11] Although there
are no available records to chart Russian usage in the first months of the war,
French records show that their army used nearly 900,000 rounds a month in 1914.
Scarcity showed itself by early 1915. Division commanders limited their
batteries to using five to ten rounds per day per gun. This lack of ammunition
had also reduced battery size from eight guns to six. Russian soldiers took
note that the German cannonades were met with silence on the part of their
supporting guns. Battery commanders were cautioned to open fire only when the
infantry appeared. By then many batteries lay in ruin and the fire from the
surviving cannons amounted to only a few salvos followed again by silence as
they were either blown up by the heavier, longer range German cannons or
because they left the field as useless pieces of war equipment. This shortage
went deeper than just the artillery branch.
Another reason to consider an entire front withdrawal was the strength of the
army. Casualties had topped the million mark during the early months of 1915.
Officer losses by the end of 1914 exceeded the war's beginning strength plus 50
percent more and competent replacements were not coming.[12] Those who had the
necessary education avoided service through deferments and promotion from the
ranks would have been counterproductive since over 50 percent of the soldiers
were illiterate. Noncommissioned officers were in even shorter supply. Third
Army's paper strength showed 232, 000 but those who bore the brunt of the
Mackensen hammer only amounted to 92,800.[13] Many of the regiments had fewer
than 250 bayonets. The constant pleas for replacements from home depots led to
recruits arriving in the trenches with as little as three weeks training and
weaponless.[14] Although the Russian army had started the war with enough
rifles to arm its active and reserve units, there were few replacements. The
large number of
Because of the terrain, Russian commanders put as many soldiers as possible
into the front line to stop advances. This created large numbers of casualties
when shells advanced instead of soldiers.
|
casualties also meant that an almost equal amount of equipment was lost to the
enemy. It was not until April 1915 that Stavka told the corps to
organize salvage units that would clean battlefields and trenches of abandon
equipment.[15] Many of the tsar's soldiers who had survived the whirlwind
bombardments faced the Central Powers' infantry with only a bayonet or a club.
Strong rearguards held the Central Powers' soldiers at every river crossing but
the enemy's mobile artillery soon rolled up and eliminated the resistance. One
Russian general lamented that the Germans used shells to advance while the
Russians used men to defend.[16]
Nicholas Nikolovich's staff, nevertheless, did not allow their armies to be
encircled. Instead, they ordered them to withdraw into Russia. This brought
additional problems. In an effort to deny the enemy of any useable stores,
corps commanders ordered a scorched earth policy. This included the evacuation
of the population. Not only did the Grand Duke have to worry about feeding his
armies but he had the additional responsibility of feeding over a million
uprooted non-combatants.
Mackensen's Eleventh Army, supported by the Austro-Hungarian Fourth and Third
Army continued their drive across Galicia to retake the fortress at Przemysl.
Under the Austrians, the fortress had held out from October 1914 to March 1915.
Russian defense lasted a scant few days.[17] This was attributed not to a lack
of courage on the part of the Russian defenders but to Stavka who
issued conflicting orders. One set of instructions said that the corps
commander was to treat Przemysl as part of the front with no significance.
Under those instructions, the emplacement was ordered to evacuate its
artillery. That order was countermanded half way through the relocation of the
cannons. The new instructions called for a spirited defense of the fortress. By
that time Przemysl was primarily manned with militia who had limited artillery.
They give up the outer works with little opposition after the 100mm and larger
caliber shells began to fall on them. In the eleventh hour Stavka sent
the XXII and II Caucasus Corps to bolster the defenses but they arrived too
late. The militia had evacuated the fortress and the two corps became more
fodder for the advancing artillery barrage as it conducted a frontal attack on
the nearly secured works.
In early June, the German General Staff changed the direction of the advance.
Mackensen's command, with the addition of three and a half corps, was
redesigned the Bug Army and its advance turned north between the Bug and
Vistula with an objective of Brest-Litovsk.[18] At the same time, further to
the north, the German Twelfth Army launched an attack across the Narew River in
a southeasterly direction. Von Falkenhayn saw an opportunity to have the
Twelfth meet the Bug Army at Brest-Litovsk and encircle the Russian First,
Second, and Fourth Armies. The Grand Duke's worst nightmare was coming to pass.
The Twelfth consisted of seven divisions supported by 860 cannons. It fell on
the juncture of the Russian First and Twelfth Armies as Mackensen had done. The
bombardment was horrific. The 11 Siberian Division bore the brunt of the attack
losing half its strength in 30 minutes.[19] Despite the losses, the first
infantry assault was repulsed by survivors who were often without rifles or
bullets. Russian artillery with barely 4 rounds per gun available concentrated
their fire to support the ill trained and badly equipped soldiers. It was not
until nightfall of the first day that the defenders finally gave way and the
German drive continued eastward isolating the Vistula River fortresses but not
the armies that had been around them.
Stavka had striven to maintain the railroad lines from Warsaw to
Bialystok to Vilna. Second and Fourth Armies were successfully evacuated over
the link before the German Twelfth Army cut it on 15 August. They also managed
to maintain the line running from Warsaw to Brest-Litovsk and Baranovichi which
aided the evacuation. The fortress at Ivanogorod was evacuated and destroyed
before its capture; however, the garrison and stores at Novo Georgievsk, just
outside of Warsaw, fell to the Central Powers. Within those walls German
soldiers found vast stores of field artillery shells that Stavka had
overlooked in its effort to find munitions for its silent cannons.
Nevertheless, the general staff had managed to extricate three armies from the
German encirclement. The cost was 1.4 million killed or wounded and 976,000 in
prisoners of war camps.[20]
Although the Central Powers' drive continued for another month, the fall of the
Vistula fortress line along with the loss of the Polish salient by the end of
August prompted many critics to call for someone's head. Open letters appeared
in newspapers which insinuated that the leadership of Nicholas Nikolovich left
much to be desired. Based on this uproar Nicholas II decided that the Grand
Duke had to go. On 23 August an ukase announced that the Grand Duke would
henceforth command the Russian armies in the Caucasus and the tsar would assume
command on the western front. The critics were shocked. They had expected that
the tsar would purge the Stavka but not sack its commander. Hurriedly they
attempt to try and change the tsar's mind but he refused. Many attribute this
steadfastness of the tsar on his wife who was displeased with Nicholas
Nikolovich's disparaging remarks toward the tsarina's court favorite monk
Rasputin. The conduct of the war had become the sole responsibility of the
tsar. The people would blame all future failures on his leadership instead of
advisers. This opened the door to the revolution that followed a year and a
half later.
Show Footnotes and
Sources
Footnotes
[1]. Herwig, Holger. The First World War, Germany and Austria-Hungary
1914-1918. (London, New York, Sydney, Auckland: Arnold, 1997) page 62
[2]. Ibid, page 204
[3]. Ibid, page 139
[4]. Lincoln, W. Bruce. Passage Through Armageddon, The Russian Army in War and
Revolution (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1986) page 127
[5]. Kihntopf, Michael P. Handcuffed to a Corpse, German Intervention in the
Balkans and on the Galician Front 1914-1917. (Shippensburg, PA: White
Mane, 2002) page 46
[6]. Ibid
[7]. Peball, Kurt. "Gorlice, Turning Pont on the Eastern Front", The Marshall
Cavendish Illustrated Encyclopedia of World War I, Vol. 3. (New York,
London, Toronto: Marshall Cavendish, 1984) page 929-935
[8]. Pares, Bernard. My Russian Memoirs (London: Jonathan Cape, 1931)
page 319
[9]. Golovine, Nicholas N. The Russian Army in the World War (New
Haven: Yale University Press, 1931) page 221
[10]. Zbecki, David. Steel Wind, Colonel Georg Bruckmüller and the Birth of
Modern Artillery (Westport, CT: Praeger, 1994) page 8
[11]. Ibid
[12]. Lincoln, page 144
[13]. Ibid
[14]. Brusilov, Aleksiei. A Soldier’s Note Book 1914-1918 (Westport,
CT: Greenwood Press, 1976) page 150
[15]. Gourko, Basil. Memories and Impressions of War and Revolution in Russia
1914-1917 (London: John Murray, 1918) page 101
[16]. Ibid, page 113
[17]. Brusilov, page 148
[18]. Lincoln, page 148
[19]. Ibid, page 150
[20]. Golovine, page 222
Copyright © 2007 Michael Kihntopf.
Written by Michael Kihntopf. If you have questions or comments on this article,
please contact Michael Kihntopf at:
kihnt@swbell.net.
About the author:
Michael P. Kihntopf is a 23 year veteran of the U.S. Air Force. His last
position was as Chief, War Planning-Contingency Operations Division, Personnel
Directorate, Strategic Air Command. During that tour he was directly involved
in the planning and execution of the personnel portions of DESERT SHIELD and
DESERT STORM. His assignments included being a Contingency and War Planning
Officer for the Military Airlift Command from 1983-1986, in which he served on
the battle staff for the Grenada and Panama invasions. He is currently a world
history teacher in the San Antonio, Texas area. His specialization is World War
I's Eastern Front. He is the author of Victory in the East, the Rise and Fall
of the Imperial German Army and Handcuffed to a Corpse, German
Intervention in the Balkans, 1914-1917. Both are available through
White Mane Publishers, Shippensburg, PA.
Published online: 08/26/2007.
* Views expressed by contributors are their own and do not necessarily represent
those of MHO.
|