Data from Terence Zuber "Ardennes 1914"

Discussions on all aspects of the First World War not covered in the other sections. Hosted by Terry Duncan.
Dave Bender
Member
Posts: 3533
Joined: 24 Apr 2006, 22:21
Location: Michigan U.S.A.

Data from Terence Zuber "Ardennes 1914"

#1

Post by Dave Bender » 23 Aug 2009, 20:29

A great book which I have just finished reading.

30 July 1914.
French army partial mobilization. 5 army corps along the border with Germany.

1 August 1914.
Germany mobilizes XVI Army Corps at Metz.

2 Aug 1914.
First day of full mobilization for both France and Germany.

Gen. Joffre implemented the Belgium variant of Plan XVII. This plan has French 3rd and 4th armies attempting to encircle Metz from the NW by entering the Ardennes. French 2nd Army would form the right pincer by advancing into the Morhange gap.

6 to 15 August 1914.
German 4th and 5th Armies deploy by rail to Metz and Luxembourg.

6 August 1914.
German forces arrive before the Liege fortress complex.

Sordet's (French) Cavalry Corps (3 divisions) enters Belgium.

8 August 1914.
Sordet's Cavalry Corps reaches the vicinity of Liege (i.e. across the entire Ardennes).

15 August 1914.
Sordet's Cavalry Corps reaches Sedan (i.e. back in French territory).

21 August 1914.
French 3rd and 4th armies enter the Ardennes.

At the time the French recon of the Ardennes began there was no guarantee that Belgium would become an ally of France. It appears to me the French Army wanted to ensure that Belgium would not defend the Ardennes before moving their 3rd and 4th armies into the region.

User avatar
Terry Duncan
Forum Staff
Posts: 6270
Joined: 13 Jun 2008, 23:54
Location: Kent

Re: Data from Terence Zuber "Ardennes 1914"

#2

Post by Terry Duncan » 24 Aug 2009, 01:47

At the time the French recon of the Ardennes began there was no guarantee that Belgium would become an ally of France.
Strictly speaking they do not need to be, as self interest for Britain and France will ensure both will oppose a German move in Belgium regardless of the Belgian position over the German plans.


glenn239
Member
Posts: 5862
Joined: 29 Apr 2005, 02:20
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: Data from Terence Zuber "Ardennes 1914"

#3

Post by glenn239 » 24 Aug 2009, 18:36

Dave - what is the partial French mobilization of 5 corps on 30 July? I've never heard of such a thing. Can you better detail?

Also, does Zuber say at what time on the 2nd Joffre called the variant, and did he strip 1st and 2nd armies of one corps each at that time, or were these diverted to 4th and 5th armies later in mobilization?

Thanks,
Glenn

Dave Bender
Member
Posts: 3533
Joined: 24 Apr 2006, 22:21
Location: Michigan U.S.A.

Re: Data from Terence Zuber "Ardennes 1914"

#4

Post by Dave Bender » 24 Aug 2009, 20:27

Dave - what is the partial French mobilization of 5 corps on 30 July?
Straight from the book.
"The first units to deploy on both sides were the covering force units. The French covering force was ordered to take up its positions on 30 July, even before the declaration of mobilization. It consisted primarily of the five corps stationed on the border. These corps were kept at such high peacetime manning levels that they needed few reservists to reach war strength. The German covering force was ordered to deploy late on 1 August. It consisted of XVI Corps at Metz and brigades moved from the interior at peacetime strength."
does Zuber say at what time on the 2nd Joffre called the variant
"Plan XVII had two variants: in the first, the French Army would not enter Belgium; in the second, it would. On 2 August General Joffre, the French commander, implemented the second variant."

Since France began general mobilization on 2 August 1914 I've got to assume the decision for Plan XVII variant II was made at the time the mobilization order was signed. I would guess that decision was made on 1 August 1914.
strip 1st and 2nd armies of one corps each at that time?
'By 16 August the French 4th Army had reached the Meuse at Sedan and Montmedy, where it remained until the 19th. The 4th Army had been heavily reinforced, receiving the XI Corps, 52nd Reserve Division and 60th Reserve Division. The IX Corps was being transferred to it from the 2nd Army and the Moroccan Division, newly created in Bordeaux, was also earmarked for 4th Army. Joffre was buildiing his decisive attack force."

"At 2030 on 20 August the GQG attack order was issued to 3rd Army. The 3rd Army's mission was to guard the right flank against advance from Metz while at the same time attacking towards Arlon. The attack order for 4th Army was issued in fragments on 20 and 21 August 1914. The 4th Army was to conduct the main French attack to push the opposing German forces into the angle formed by the Meuse at Dinant-Namur and the Ourthe. The attack by the 4th Army would catch the left flank of the German main attack as it was moving northwest and roll it up, pushing the German forces south of the river into the Meuse and cutting the lines of communication of the German right wing."

"The French 4th Army, with six corps, was advancing on an 80km front. On 21 August the advance guard II Corps was to reach Bellefontaine, the Colonial Corps (two army corps) Saint-Vincent and Jamoigne, and the other three corps held in place."

French 5th Army was not part of this attack order per se. However we know it was in the vicinity of Dinant-Namur. I assume it was the anvil against which the German Army was to be crushed. Apparently there was no coordination at all with the Namur fortress complex or the BEF. France intended to defeat the German Army all by itself.

chronos20th
Member
Posts: 849
Joined: 24 Jan 2004, 19:44
Location: UK.

Re: Data from Terence Zuber "Ardennes 1914"

#5

Post by chronos20th » 28 Aug 2009, 22:28

"Plan XVII had two variants: in the first, the French Army would not enter Belgium; in the second, it would. On 2 August General Joffre, the French commander, implemented the second variant."
There you are. This is the decision following Grey's telephone call that afternoon that "we will support you" and was taken as his permission to enter Belgium as Joffre had said he would do if British permission was given by M8. It was given on M1.

chronos20th
Member
Posts: 849
Joined: 24 Jan 2004, 19:44
Location: UK.

Re: Data from Terence Zuber "Ardennes 1914"

#6

Post by chronos20th » 28 Aug 2009, 23:46

what is the partial French mobilization of 5 corps on 30 July? I've never heard of such a thing. Can you better detail?
Yes, Glen. Joffre had started an unofficial mobilisation saying "every day lost means the enemy will gain another ten kilometers" before the key members of the French government, who were still on the battleship approaching Dunkirk, had got back to France.

On their return, just after midnight on 30th-31st, they endorsed these measures and set off by sleeper for Paris. the train was shunted into a siding there so they could sleep. When they awoke later that morning an informal group of ministers took a still informal decision to mobilise.

Dave Bender
Member
Posts: 3533
Joined: 24 Apr 2006, 22:21
Location: Michigan U.S.A.

French mobilization of 5 corps

#7

Post by Dave Bender » 29 Aug 2009, 01:50

The problem is this is a lot more then a border protection force. Rather it is an entire French field army. I'm surprised Germany waited so long before mobilizing the entire army in reply.

User avatar
Terry Duncan
Forum Staff
Posts: 6270
Joined: 13 Jun 2008, 23:54
Location: Kent

Re: Data from Terence Zuber "Ardennes 1914"

#8

Post by Terry Duncan » 30 Aug 2009, 04:12

The problem is this is a lot more then a border protection force. Rather it is an entire French field army. I'm surprised Germany waited so long before mobilizing the entire army in reply.
Why? There were no indications France was about to send one army across a very fortified frontier, and Germany too had been conducting certain military actions such as cancelling leave and recalling personel from long before mobilization. These are precautions well short of full mobilization, and even that did not force any nation except Germany to go to war.

For no other nation did the act of mobilization link directly to war, and even in the case of Germany there was no real need to do so until a few days after they declared war on Russia. Consider that nothing happened in the east before the declaration of war on France and Belgium, so if they had only mobilized in this time and used these final days to try for peace still, it may have been solved without a general war. If it had not been possible to get a peaceful solution nobody could accuse Germany of going to war prematurely, but as it is, the original declaration of war lost time that may have otherwise proven critical.

Dave Bender
Member
Posts: 3533
Joined: 24 Apr 2006, 22:21
Location: Michigan U.S.A.

Why?

#9

Post by Dave Bender » 30 Aug 2009, 19:37

What would France do if Germany had mobilized an entire field army on the border during 29 July 1914 (i.e. before France had mobilized any large field army units)?

chronos20th
Member
Posts: 849
Joined: 24 Jan 2004, 19:44
Location: UK.

Re: Data from Terence Zuber "Ardennes 1914"

#10

Post by chronos20th » 30 Aug 2009, 21:10

Both France and Russia fully understood mobilisation meant war, this had been specifically stated by the generals who signed the F-R Military Convention.

France was secretly unofficially mobilising in the same way as Russia.
This was known at the time as was the danger.

8-) 8-) :roll: :roll: :wink: :wink: :cry: :cry:

User avatar
Terry Duncan
Forum Staff
Posts: 6270
Joined: 13 Jun 2008, 23:54
Location: Kent

Re: Data from Terence Zuber "Ardennes 1914"

#11

Post by Terry Duncan » 31 Aug 2009, 03:22

What would France do if Germany had mobilized an entire field army on the border during 29 July 1914 (i.e. before France had mobilized any large field army units)?
Probably mobilized too, but there was no timetable forcing her to go to war once mobilized. Everyone, including the diplomats - many German ones too - thought mobilization possible and still to be short of war rather than one continuous process. Even the German notes to Russia say Russian mobilization would lead to 'military measures' from Germany and do not specify that this means war, rather a huge oversight if they intended to notify Russia how seriously Germany though the significance of mobilization.
Both France and Russia fully understood mobilisation meant war, this had been specifically stated by the generals who signed the F-R Military Convention.
None of who ran the military in 1914, even less the nations involved. The armies would and did await their orders before doing anything, none of the military acted before getting political approval. There is no indication France or Russia was about to attack irrespective of Austrian or German actions.

The much cited military convention still only states both nations should move troops to the German border at the same time to force Germany to fight on both fronts together, not that this can only be achieved by offensives - indeed until 1911-12 France would not have been capable of a proper offensive in the west and had no plans for one, only a counter offensive after Germany had committed her forces.

mars
Member
Posts: 1174
Joined: 03 Oct 2002, 20:50
Location: Shanghai

Re: Data from Terence Zuber "Ardennes 1914"

#12

Post by mars » 15 Feb 2010, 06:12

Is Mr Zuber the same gentleman who suggests that Schlieffen Plan was a post-World War I fabrication ?

Ken S.
Member
Posts: 1372
Joined: 14 Feb 2006, 10:30
Location: Kanada
Contact:

Re: Data from Terence Zuber "Ardennes 1914"

#13

Post by Ken S. » 09 Mar 2010, 23:10

mars wrote:Is Mr Zuber the same gentleman who suggests that Schlieffen Plan was a post-World War I fabrication ?
"Based on original planning documents, some of which only became available in Germany with the fall of the Wall, I showed in 1999 in ‘The Schlieffen Plan Reconsidered’ and in 2002 in Inventing the Schlieffen Plan that there never was a “Schlieffen plan”. The “Schlieffen plan” was never implemented as a real German war plan, and was not the German war plan in 1914. Schlieffen never tested the “Schlieffen plan” in a war game. Schlieffen’s real intent was to counterattack against the expected Franco-Russian attacks. The original “Schlieffen plan” document was a rough draft that was not typed until 1911. Indeed, in August 1914 the original document was the property of Schlieffen’s daughters, who stored it with the family photos."

http://www.terencezuber.com/

User avatar
Terry Duncan
Forum Staff
Posts: 6270
Joined: 13 Jun 2008, 23:54
Location: Kent

Re: Data from Terence Zuber "Ardennes 1914"

#14

Post by Terry Duncan » 10 Mar 2010, 01:45

Is Mr Zuber the same gentleman who suggests that Schlieffen Plan was a post-World War I fabrication ?
He has certainly shown German military planning was not as rigid as many thought, but the nature of the massive right flank attack will always be associated with Schlieffen despite the war plan adopted in 1914 probably being largely down to Moltke's years in charge.

He has also shown that nobody made referrence to a master plan until long after the war, Goener taking until 1928/9 to put anything much on paper, and which even then did not answer many questions about how it was supposed to work, whilst others never even managed to describe anything other than a theory they could not quite describe how it worked even though they felt sure it must have done so.

Mad Zeppelin
Member
Posts: 1286
Joined: 08 Sep 2004, 21:05
Location: Germany

Re: Data from Terence Zuber "Ardennes 1914"

#15

Post by Mad Zeppelin » 10 Mar 2010, 13:36

Groener didn't write about a 'master plan', he wrote about an operational concept, which Schlieffen had developed, and which Moltke and the German army commanders in 1914 did not follow.
Instead of elegantly outflanking the enemy, the Germans fought costly and ineffective frontal battles, this is the core of Groener's two books on the subject.

Post Reply

Return to “First World War”