What would have been the consequences had the French decided to abandon (withdraw from) Verdun in 1916 in order to avoid an extremely massive bloodbath and instead set up a new front line elsewhere? In real life, France decided to hold onto Verdun and ultimately won, but at the cost of over 160,000 French deaths. What if France decides that this kind of sacrifice to hold onto a mere border fort simply isn't worth it?
The French abandon (withdraw from) Verdun in 1916
- Thread starter WolfBear
- Start date
sillygoose
Well-known member
So do what Petain wanted at the start? France suffers a morale hit, the existing government falls (in a parlimentary sense), Germany gets a stronger position at low cost, and Falkenhayn has to look at other options for an offensive in the west before the Entente could build up to launch the Somme offensive jointly with their full strength.
What would Falkenhayn's other options be here?
sillygoose
Well-known member
In the west? Spoiling attack against the Somme offensive, which was actually proposed and could have worked if given enough support. Without Verdun that very well could have been an option.
Either that or attack in the East.
Falkenhayn was never a huge fan of the Eastern Front, was he? He only attacked in the East in 1915 out of sheer necessity, no?
sillygoose
Well-known member
Apparently some British deserters even revealed the offensive plans weeks in advance:
en.wikipedia.org
Here is a link that talks about the spoiling attack proposal:
Battle of the Somme - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Here is a link that talks about the spoiling attack proposal:
1916 German offensive on the Somme
I came across an interesting proposal in the Jack Sheldon book "German Army on the Somme 1914-16" in which 2nd army commander von Bulow proposed to OHL first in March and again in May 1916 to launch a short spoiling offensive against Entente forces in the Somme area while they were building up...
www.alternatehistory.com
sillygoose
Well-known member
The Somme plans weren't known about at the time and Verdun was supposed to bleed out the French and break them before the summer campaign season. When I say break I mean render them incapable of offensive action so the Germans could then go after the British.
Why did Verdun fail in this regard?
sillygoose
Well-known member
Falkenhayn came up with the strategy, but the Crown Prince carried out the battle. He screwed it up by abandoning the plan early in the offensive and rushing to take ground for the glory of it rather than follow the attrition strategy of short range attacks (bite and hold) to minimize German casualties and force the French to defend the East bank of the Meuse where they were in a fire sack; the Germans could concentrate their artillery while the French would have most of their's out of range. Problem was the CP saw the French lines crack after the first bombardment and tried to take the entire East bank as quickly as possible and left the artillery behind while rushing his infantry into range of the French guns. So the fighting then just because a roughly equal slugging match. But rather than realize that faulty intelligence analysis resulted in the assumption that the Germans were inflicting 3 casualties for every one taken; they apparently reasoned the rotation of French divisions every two weeks was the result of the divisions getting wrecked in the fighting rather than what it actually was, the rotation of divisions through the 'Meuse Mill' to avoid divisions getting wrecked by too long of exposure to that type of fighting. French morale was already shaky so it was a necessity. It wasn't until later they realized what had happened.
There is a pretty good book on the subject "German strategy and the Path to Verdun".