The
introduction of new and improved technology during World War One meant the war
was fought differently than previous wars. Some technological equipment evolved
slowly throughout the war like artillery or the airplane, even though warfare
from the skies would be something new for the world to encounter. Others had sudden and dramatic appearances on
the battlefront taking soldiers and superiors by surprise like the introduction
of the tank or when toxic gas was suddenly unleashed with devastating results.
Changes throughout the structure of warfare from 1914, onwards became apparent
once Britain, Germany and their allies became entrenched within what would
become understood as static warfare where neither side moved or could be budged
from their positions along what would become known as the Western Front. The
war changed the world as new countries rose from the ashes of previous
countries, which no longer existed.[1] Science and improved
construction methods meant older, proven technologies like the battleship and
artillery adapted to improvements unheard of during the nineteenth century as
weapons became more powerful and accurate than before the war. Aircraft were
relatively new to warcraft arena and were initially used for surveillance of
enemy combatants including directing artillery towards those positions. Both
forms of aircraft from aeroplanes to zeppelins were used to attack ground
troops and civilians alike.[2] The expenditure of
armaments like wide spread use of artillery shells meant production on a mass
industrial scale was required once the highly mobile war became static and
trench warfare ensued. Civilians left on the home front pulled their own weight
by joining the production effort in building weapons for the soldiers along the
Western Front.[3]
Technology had been romanticised through novels and hoaxes that had spread fear
amongst the populations before the war. The military and civilians alike had to
think about the war from different perspectives especially the way colonial
wars had been conducted. The war invited devastation on the grand scale, which
had been unseen and death from improved weaponry could come from the land, air
or below the oceans.[4]
The
increasing sophistication of technology used throughout World War One
battlefields demoralised and discouraged men from fighting to the point where
they would hopefully rebel against their superiors. Men would soon learn to
fear and hate technology when they could not see where the shell or bullet had
come from.[5] Attitude towards
technology before and throughout World War One were varied. Ideas about wars
had been romanticised and the British military were focusing their ideas of
wars from colonial periods and from technological change during early twentieth
century. The British were not ready for the scale of World War One, where
sweeping victories had been made using artillery and cavalry charges.[6] People who feared the use
of technology before the war in 1914, were viewed as alarmists especially when
novels were written about future warfare buy authors like H.G. Wells and from
German airship hoaxes around 1913, where people had witnessed supposed sighted
aircraft over Britain bringing great paranoia about Germany. The war would be
bought to the front of people’s minds when zeppelins bombed London in 1915, far
from the front of the battlefield within Europe.[7] Throughout the war between
1914 and 1918, there had been fierce debate between two opposing groups of
military minds and their schools of thought towards how the war was meant to be
fought. The traditionalists who wanted to use conventional means to win the war
and the modernists who wanted to use technology to defeat the enemy like the
landship otherwise known as the tank. The tank had flaws and could be used with
soldiers, but strategy did not always flow freely throughout the many battles.
Some military minds even viewed the conflict from trenches as phoney as they
wanted to some real soldiering once the war ended.[8] Throughout the war there
were always innovation being created against the weapons the enemy were using
against all soldiers. Defences against gas resulted in the creation of the gas
mask that evolved throughout the war and anti-aircraft artillery were used
against aircraft that had been attacking the soldiers from the air or to
prevent the civilian population to being bombed from far off cities. Some of
the technological innovations created throughout the war would still be used
when the next World War began.[9]
Once
the war began countries such as France and Britain early in 1914, realised they
had limited supplies of ammunition especially for artillery where demand was
extreme. Supplies from factories needed to be produced quicker than during
peace time. Through mass employment, industrialisation and mass production,
factories were able to produce more ammunition monthly than what had been
manufactured in one year in peace times. The twentieth century conflict
outstripped production rates from nineteenth century conflicts.[10] Factories solved the
problem of diminished man power once able-bodied men had been sent to the
European continent. Part of the success behind the mass production of munitions
and gears of war like aircraft were the factories being expanded for the labour
force of women and boys. The factories would expand as the war went on and more
men were required to fight. The technology to build aircraft changed as first
all metal planes were being built to replace the older flimsy aircraft and
engines were constantly being improved upon throughout the war.[11] The idea behind mass
production of shells was the same for other equipment throughout the war, which
included technological marvels like aircraft, the tank and the gas mask to
protect the soldiers. Technology would
be used to develop new techniques and improve production even though there was
a reliance of mass produced items as demand would outstrip supply as the war
went on for longer than first predicted.[12] Throughout the war
technology of mass scale would be used against both sides, while each competed
for resources to supply their militaries to dislodge the others within the
stalemate of trench warfare. Factories were built to accommodate towards the
production scale required for the war.[13]
The
image of artillery weapons changed between the nineteenth and the twentieth
century. The weapon had been used throughout wars during the nineteenth century
like the American Civil War and Waterloo but continued to evolve throughout
World War One. Specific artillery had their purposes throughout the war and
ranged from light to heavy guns that could only be used along railway lines due
to their side and inability to traverse the battlefield once it became
unpassable. The smaller guns could be used against aircraft by shooting them
from the air and were known as anti-air artillery.[14] The soldiers had to dig
deeper trenches as artillery was the main weapon used against them and the
soldiers needed to protect themselves from the impact from the deadly weapon.
The storm of artillery shells upon soldiers on the Western Front were the
direct consequences of mass production within the factories. Soldiers learnt
how to identify the various forms of artillery shells by the sound they made
once fired and could estimate where they would land.[15] As artillery could be
fired further than before the war, new and updated techniques were required
especially complementing the use of the aeroplane to provide cartographic
innovations through photography of the landscape, where they could fire
accurately upon targets using tactical information, troop movements and angle
of fire.[16]
Towards the end of the war, soldiers operating artillery learnt about the
impact of weather conditions upon their weapons especially air pressure and wind strenght when firing
shells at targets and decreased the use of range finding targets by firing an
initial shell before a barrage. German soldiers were instructed about
diversionary firings of their artillery especially when the allied soldiers
could accurately pin point the location through the science of range finding.
If one artillery gun fired several others were supposed to provide cover fire
to distract the allied artillery.[17]
Germany
unleased dramatic and unexpected change to how warfare was conducted catching
the allies on the Western Front by surprise when they released gas in 1915.
Cannisters of liquid chlorine were opened near Ypres creating fear, confusion
and death along five kilometres of trenches. Germany had hoped gas warfare
would provide them with a complete victory, but even they were unprepared for
the outcome of the gas.[18] Gas was not as effective
along the Eastern Front due to the weather conditions working against the German
soldiers much to their horror when they found the Russians were pretty much
alive.[19] Weapons like the Livens
projector first used in 1917, by Britain in response to German gas attacks and
was effective when used within trenches to spew either flammable liquid or
toxic gas into German held trenches with a range up to 1,500 metres.[20] Gas was indiscriminate
between civilians and soldiers especially when it was uncontrollable once
released. The vapours could follow soldiers down within the trenches and had
debilitating effects on the psychological wellbeing of soldiers.[21] Defending against such a
formidable weapon meant the invention of breathing apparatus otherwise known as
gas masks. Masks evolved throughout the war and early ones appeared in 1915, simple
and uncomfortable. Soldiers along the front were trained relentlessly about
using gas masks to become comfortable with their use especially when alerted to
the presence of gas.[22] Early gas masks had been
put together by civilians who tried new ideas and sent them to the Western
Front, although there was the fear from civilian populations in Britain when
they were being bombed that they could be attacked by gas at the same time. Gas
masks at first were not fully adaptable against every gas especially when
filters became clogged, which meant the effectiveness wore off and as the war
progressed new gas masks were created.[23] Television and movies
have taken liberty through showing modern audiences the horrors of the World
War One trenches including the latest Wonder
Woman movie involving the use of gases and Doctor Who revisits the Western Front on many occasions.[24] Once Germany had used gas
along the Western Front, Britain and her allies created their own weapon
against Germany by unleashing the same weapon against Germany during the battle
of Loos in September, 1915.[25]
Ocean
going vessels changed long before World War One arrived in August 1914.
Nighteenth Century vessel construction evolved from materials like wood and
reliance upon wind power to running on oil and steam. Vessels would later be
constructed with heavy armour and were known as ironclads. Vessels could now
fire long range weapons further and with more frequency, unlike the canons of
their forebearers. Early in the Twentieth Century, Germany and England went
head to head in a naval arms race through building dreadnaughts to outmatch
each other. There had been the fear during this time around 1909, Germany was
preparing for war. Although some British politicians had dismissed the idea
Germany was preparing for war.[26] The introduction of
submarines during the early part of the war by Germany meant they could travel
undetected from surface vessels. Britain
did have submarines but were more interested in using surface ships even when
Germany proved submarines were effective weapons. Submarines especially the
German U-boat employed the use of torpedos to strike at naval and merchant
vessels on the surface unaware of the danger.[27] Germany had on occasion
throughout World War One unleashed unrestricted submarine campaigns aimed
towards sinking Merchant vessels destined for Britain to starve the country out
of the war. In turn Britain came up with the convoy system to protect vessels
from submarines.[28]
Early during the war in December 1914, German navy vessels shelled the British
coastal towns around Scarborough and Hartlepool
hoping the destruction would demoralise the British soldiers on the Western
Front. Instead the attacks caused anger much like bombing campaigns from
zeppelin and Gotha bombers.[29] Britain were also able to
intercept communications from the German fleet with the use if intelligence
gathering services of code breakers by the name of Room 40. The battle of
Jutland proved the German and British vessels were almost equal in strength
even though the German shops returned to port.[30]
Tanks
otherwise known as landships by the British were an important innovation like
gas was to Germany. Designing the tank began during 1914, with objectives in
mind for it to cross no mans land between trenches, crush barbed wire and
protect people inside from heavy machine gunfire. The tank would create fear
amongst soldiers who came face to face with the weapon.[31] France and Britain
designed version of tanks during the war, although they had little consultation
with each other regarding the designs. Strategy for their use were to manoeuvre
behind creeping artillery barrages with soldiers behind the tank protected by
the armour. British tanks were first used under the command of Field Marshal
Douglas Haig in late 1917, which gained territory in less time than the Battle
of Passchendaele between July and November 1917.[32] During the Battle of
Hamel in 1918, where Australian soldiers were supported by British tanks,
German soldiers would routinely surrender since were inexperienced when
encountering the tank.[33] Germany soon used
countermeasures against the armoured tanks through the creation of effective
anti-tank weapons that could pierce the armour once the shock of the tank wore
off.[34] Germany was late when
introducing tanks late in 1918. Other issues would have been on the mind of
German engineers when they had been trying to design vehicles that could cross
the trench lines. German tanks encountered British tanks near Villers
Bretonneux where the first tank on tank battle was recorded.[35] The A7V Sturmpanzerwagen
tank was Germany’s answer to the British tank and only twenty were in service.
Only one of these tanks survive and was captured by Australian soldiers and was
bought to Brisbane, Australia. The name of the tank was Mephisto and went by
the designation of tank 506. The impact of trench warfare meant technology and
new weaponry like the tank would push the war in directions unheard of before.[36]
Powered
flight was an emerging technology that was taken advantage of during World War
One. Heavier than air flight had occurred early in the twentieth century with
the Wright Brothers in 1903. Heavier than air craft were fixed winged powered
aircraft and lighter than air aircraft were machines like balloons and the
zeppelin, which were mainly used by Germany.[37] Technology along the
Western Front had changed warfare by making surveillance from cavalry risky and
unreliable through ground conditions and rapid firing weapons like artillery.
Aircraft could relay information about the enemy movements quickly.[38] Zeppelins became the most
recognised images of World War One and were not just used for observation of
the battlefield. Germany unleashed the horror of air attacks through bombing
campaigns against the London civilian population by using Zeppelins.[39] Gotha bombers replaced
the much slower zeppelin in 1917, when they bombed London. Germany had changed
the dynamic of how war was conducted and how technology had improved aircraft
design throughout the war.[40] The rise of aerial
warfare meant countermeasures were created to combat the attacks from enemy
aircraft. To protect themselves Britain developed an air defence detection
system that would continue to evolve at the end of the war. They relied upon
observers and other early warning signals to detect aircraft approaching.[41] Photography was used
during World War One through aircraft reconnaissance in creating accurate maps
that would help mark out German troops’ positions and other important targets.[42]. Aircraft were able to
take photographs throughout the war to create clear pictures of the landscape
and could be used to direct artillery and organise the soldiers on the ground.
Aircraft could be complemented with artillery by providing the ground units with
real time data on their firing positions by providing information back.[43]
World
War One was fought on massive scales involving not only soldiers who were sent
to their deaths to achieve impossible objectives, but technological advances. Technology
before the war had caused fear and confusion especially when civilians thought
they had seen zeppelins before the war began. The war meant fighting would
occur from land, air and the ocean, and involving many countries beyond the
European continent. Those participating in the war thought the fighting would
be over within several months, but as the fighting dragged on for four years
meant technology might force the conclusion of conflict. Once the war became
static where each side faced each other along trenches, technology was used to
break the deadlock. Gas, artillery and tanks were used to dislodge soldiers
from their comfortable holes in the ground creating fear hoping to break the
enemy. Innovation against new weaponry meant soldiers could protect themselves
and fight the enemy at their own game. Gas masks evolved to sustain the lives
of soldiers hidden in trenches when gas was used against them protecting them
from succumbing the chemicals. Aircraft were used for surveillance especially
for photography along the Western Front helping artillery to locate targets. Aircraft
also bought home the horrors of warfare once cities like London had been bombed
first by zeppelins and later by Gotha bombers, which would have implications
for later wars that would be fought. Shortages amongst military supplies
destined for the Western Front meant production rates were required on the
industrial scale unheard of before the war. People were employed within
factories throughout the war to mass produce weapons. World War One changed
warfare forever especially how technology was implemented throughout the war
years, which became costly through the lives of those who fought. Warfare
between 1914 and 1918, changed how countries prepared and fought each other.
Technological innovation was only part of the story to the Great War that cost
many countries their youth and new countries appeared amongst the ashes of
previous countries. Borders had been redrawn and enemies like Germany had been
defeated once World War One concluded.
Bibliography
Primary
Sources
Jenkins, Patty
(director), Wonder Woman, DVD, 2017.
Youtube
Secondary
Sources
Addington,
Larry H. The Patterns of War Since the
Eighteenth Century, Bloomington, Indiana University Press, 1994.
Anon, ‘Mephisto – rarest
tank in the world’, https://www.awm.gov.au/about/ourwork/projects/mephisto,
accessed 4 October 2018.
Beckett,
Ian E.W. The Making of the First World
War, Padstow, Yale University Press, 2012.
Black,
Jeremy War and Technology,
Bloomington, Indiana University Press, 2013.
Bruton, Elizabeth
and Coleman, Paul ‘Listening in the dark: audio surveillance, communication
technologies, and the submarine threat during the First World War, History and Technology, vol. 32, 2016,
pp. 245-268.
Chasseaud, Peter
‘British military mapping on the Western Front 1914–18’, International Journal of Cartography, 2018, pp. 1 – 27.
Cooper,
Malcolm ‘Blueprint for Confusion: The Administrative Background to the
Formation of the RoyalAir Force, 1912-19’, Journal
of Contemporary History, vol. 22, 1987, pp. 437-453.
Cloke,
H.E. ‘Is Anti-aircraft Artillery Overtaking the Airplane?’, Scientific American, vol. 134, 1926, pp.
301-303.
Ferris,
John ‘Fighter Defence before Fighter Command: The Rise of Strategic Air Defence
in Great Britain, 1917-1934’, The Journal
of Military History, vol. 63, 1999, pp. 845-884.
Fitzgerald, Gerard J.
‘Chemical Warfare and Medical Response During World War I’, American
Journal of Public Health, vol. 98, 2008, pp. 611-625.
Forbes,
Peter Dazzled and Deceived, London,
Yale University Press, 2009.
Girard, Marion A Strange and Formidable Weapon British
Responses to World War I Poison Gas, Lincoln, University of Nebraska Press,
2008.
Grayzel, Susan R. At Home and Under Fire Air Raids and Culture
in Britain from the Great War to the Blitz, New York, Cambridge University
Press, 2012.
Grayzel, Susan R.
‘Defence against the indefensible: The gas mask, the state and British Culture
during and after the First World War’, Twentieth
Century British History, vol. 25, 2014, pp. 418 – 434.
Greenhalgh,
Elizabeth ‘Technology Development in Coalition: The Case of the First World War
Tank’, The International History Review,
vol. 22, 2000, pp. 806-836.
Habeck,
Mary R. ‘Technology in the First World War: The view from below’, in The Great War and the Twentieth Century,
Jay Winter, Geoffrey Parker, Mary R. Habeck (eds.), New Haven, Yale University
Press, 2000, pp. 99 – 131.
Halpern, Paul G. ‘The war
at sea’, in A Companion to World War I,
John Horne (ed.), Oxford, Wiley-Blackwell, 2010, pp. 141-155.
Hardach, Gerd
'Industrial Mobilization in 1914 - 1918: Production, Planning, and Ideology',
In The French home front, 1914-1918,
Patrick Fridenson (ed.), Providence, Berg, 1992, pp. 57-88
Hogg, Ian V. Allied Artillery of World War One,
Ramsbury, Crowood Press, 1998.
Holder, Victoria L. ‘From
Handmaiden to right hand -World War I – The mud and the blood’, AORN Journal, vol. 80, 2004, pp. 652 –
665.
Holman, Brett ‘The
Phantom Airship Panic of 1913: Imagining Aerial Warfare in Britain before the
Great War’, Journal of British Studies,
vol. 55, 2016, pp. 99–119.
Jones, Edgar ‘Terror
Weapons: The British experience of Gas and its treatment in the First World
War’, War in History, vol. 21, 2014,
pp. 355 – 375.
Lambert, Nicholas
'Sir John Fisher, the fleet unit concept, and the creation of the Royal
Australian Navy', In Southern trident:
strategy, history and the rise of Australian naval power, David Stevens and
John Reeve (eds), Crows Nest, Allen & Unwin, 2001, pp. 214-
224.
Lehmann, Jorg and
Morselli, Francesca ‘Science and Technology in the First World War’, CENDARI Archival Research Guide, 2016,
pp. 1 - 27.
MacLeod, Roy
‘Sight and Sound on the Western Front: Surveyors, Scientists, and the
‘Battlefield Laboratory’, 1915–1918’, War
& Society, vol. 18, 2000, pp. 23-46.
Magrath, Philip
‘Ordnance, B.L., 18-inch Howitzer, Mark I: The Last of the Super-Heavies’, Arms & Armour, vol. 12, 2015, pp.
181-195.
Main, Steven J.
‘Gas on the Eastern Front During the First World War 1915–1917’, The Journal of Slavic Military Studies, vol.
28, 2015, pp. 99-132.
Morrow,
John H. ‘Defeat of the German and Austro-Hungarian Air Forces in the Great War,
1909–1918’, Why Air Forces Fail,
Robin Higham and Stephen J. Harris (eds), Lexington, University Press of
Kentucky, 2006.
Murray, Williamson War in the Air, 1914-45, London,
Cassell, 2002.
Murray,
Nicholas The Rocky Road to the Great War,
Washington DC, Potomac Books, 2013.
Owen, Roger
‘British and French Military Intelligence in Syria and Palestine, 1914–1918:
Myths and Reality’, British Journal of
Middle Eastern Studies, vol. 38, 2011, pp. 1-6.
Palazzo, Albert P. Tradition, Innovation, and the pursuit of
the decisive Battle: Poison gas and the
British army on the western front 1915 - 1918, Ph.D thesis, Ohio State
University, 1996.
Raths, Ralf
‘German Tank Production and Armoured Warfare, 1916–18’, War & Society, vol. 30, 2011, pp. 24-47.
Schirrmacher, Arne
‘Sounds and repercussions of war: mobilization, invention and conversion of
First World War science in Britain, France and Germany’, History and Technology, vol. 32, 2016, pp. 269-292.
Travers, Tim How the war was won: Factors that led to
victory in World War One, Routledge, Barnsley, 2005.
Travers, Tim The Killing Ground The British Army, the
Western Front and the Emergence of Modern War 1900-1918, Barnsley, Pen
Sword Military Classics, 2003.
Wilson, Trevor and
Prior, Robin ‘Conflict, technology, and the impact of industrialization: The
Great War 1914–18, The Journal of
Strategic Studies, vol. 24, 2001, pp. 128-157.
[1]
Trevor Wilson and Robin
Prior, ‘Conflict, technology, and the impact of industrialisation: The Great
War 1914 – 18’, The Journal of Strategic
Studies, vol. 24, 2001, p. 128.
[2] Susan R. Grayzel, At Home and Under Fire Air Raids and Culture
in Britain from the Great War to the Blitz, New York, 2012, pp.22 – 23;
Williamson Murray, War in the Air,
1914-45, London, 2002, pp. 32-79.
[3] Susan R. Grayzel, ‘Defence against
the indefensible: The gas mask, the state and British Culture during and after
the First World War’, Twentieth Century
British History, vol. 25, 2014, p. 421; Jorg Lehmann and Francesca
Morselli, ‘Science and Technology in the First World War’, CENDARI Archival Research Guide, 2016, p. 8.
[4] Tim Travers, The Killing Ground The British Army, the Western Front and the
Emergence of Modern War 1900-1918, Barnsley, 2003, pp. 37-61; Nicholas
Murray, ‘The State of Military Thinking in 1914’, The Rocky Road to the Great War, Washington DC, 2013, pp. 216 –
217.
[5] Mary R. Habeck, ‘Technology in the
First World War: The view from below’, in The
Great War and the Twentieth Century, Jay Winter, Geoffrey Parker, Mary R.
Habeck (eds.), 2000, p. 119; Anon, ‘The Somme's Secret Weapon’, Time
Team Special 42, Youtube, uploaded
9 September 2012, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2pGoz4ZDgE,
accessed 3 October 2018.
[6] Travers, Killing, pp.37-61; Murray, ‘The State’, pp. 216 – 217.
[7]
Brett Holman, ‘The Phantom Airship Panic
of 1913: Imagining Aerial Warfare in Britain before the Great War’, Journal of British Studies, Vol. 55,
2016, pp. 99–102; Malcolm Cooper, ‘Blueprint for
Confusion: The Administrative Background to the Formation of the RoyalAir
Force, 1912-19’, Journal of Contemporary
History, vol. 22, 1987, pp. 438-439.
[8] Travers, Killing, pp. 40 – 46.
[9] H.E.
Cloke, ‘Is Anti-aircraft Artillery Overtaking the Airplane?’, Scientific American, Vol. 134, 1926, p.
303; Peter Forbes, ‘Camouflage and cubism in the First World War’, Dazzled and Deceived, Yale University
Press, 2009, p. 101.
[10] Ian E.W. Beckett, The Making of the First World War, Padstow,
2012, pp. 72 – 76; Wilson and Prior, ‘Conflict’, p. 129.
[11] Morrow,
‘Defeat’, pp. 114 – 123.
[12] Jeremy
Black, War and Technology,
Bloomington, 2013, p. 179.
[13] Gerd Hardach, ‘Industrial
Mobilization in 1914 – 1918: Production, planning and ideology’, in The French home front, 1914 – 1918,
Patrick Fridenson (ed.), Berg, 1992, pp. 59 – 60.
[14] Philip Magrath, ‘Ordnance, B.L.,
18-inch Howitzer, Mark I: The Last of the Super-Heavies’, Arms & Armour, vol. 12, 2015, p. 182; Ian V. Hogg, Allied Artillery of World War One,
Ramsbury, 1998, pp. 16 – 17; Cloke, ‘Anti-aircraft’,
p. 301.
[15] Nicholas Murray, ‘The theory of field fortification, 1740 –
1914’, The Rocky Road to the Great War,
Lincoln, 2013, p. 2; Habeck, ‘view’, p. 110.
[16] Peter Chasseaud, ‘British military
mapping on the Western Front 1914–18’, International
Journal of Cartography, 2018, p. 2.
[17] Roy MacLeod, ‘Sight and Sound on the
Western Front: Surveyors, Scientists, and the ‘Battlefield Laboratory’,
1915–1918’, War & Society, vol.
18, 2000, pp. 37-38; Arne Schirrmacher, ‘Sounds and repercussions of war:
mobilization, invention and conversion of First World War science in Britain,
France and Germany’, History and
Technology, vol. 32, 2016, p. 269.
[18] Gerard J. Fitzgerald, ‘Chemical Warfare
and Medical Response During World War I’, American Journal of Public
Health, Vol. 98, 2008, p. 611; Marion Girard, A Strange and Formidable Weapon: British Responses to World War I
Poison Gas, Lincoln, 2008, pp.51-52.
[19] Steven J. Main, ‘Gas on the Eastern
Front During the First World War 1915–1917’, The Journal of Slavic Military Studies, vol. 28, 2015, pp. 102-103.
[20]
Edgar
Jones, ‘Terror Weapons: The British experience of Gas and its treatment in the
First World War’, War in History, vol.
21, 2014, p. 359; Anon, ‘The
Somme's Secret Weapon’, Time Team Special
42, Youtube, uploaded 9 September
2012,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2pGoz4ZDgE, accessed 3 October 2018.
[21] Grayzel,‘Defence’, p. 419; Albert P.
Palazzo, Tradition, Innovation, and the
pursuit of the decisive Battle: Poison
gas and the British army on the western front 1915 - 1918, Ph.D thesis,
Ohio State University, 1996, pp. 151 – 153.
[22] Jones, ‘Terror Weapons’, p. 364;
Fitzgerald, ‘Chemical’, p. 615.
[24] Patty Jenkins (director), Wonder Woman, DVD, 2017.
[25] Jones, ‘Terror’, p. 356.
[26]
Nicholas Lambert, 'Sir John Fisher, the fleet unit
concept, and the creation of the Royal Australian Navy', In Southern trident: strategy, history and the
rise of Australian naval power, David Stevens and John Reeve (eds.), Crows
Nest, 2001, p. 116.
[28] Elizabeth Bruton and Paul Coleman,
‘Listening in the dark: audio surveillance, communication technologies, and the
submarine threat during the First World War, History and Technology, vol. 32, 2016, p. 247.
[29] Paul G. Halpern, ‘The war at sea’,
in A Companion to World War I, John
Horne (ed.), Oxford, 2010, p.146.
[30] Hew Strachan The First World War 7/10 Blockade 1916 –
1917, episode 7, YouTube, uploaded 2 April 2017, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXwOZylYHzw,
accessed 18 September 2018.
[31] Elizabeth Greenhalgh, ‘Technology
Development in Coalition: The Case of the First World War Tank’, The International History Review, vol.
22, 2000, pp. 806-807.
[32] Williamson Murray, War in the Air, 1914-45, London, 2002,
pp. 32 – 79; Tim Travers, How the war was
won: Factors that led to victory in World War One, Barnsley, 2005, pp. 40 –
46.
[33] Travers war, pp. 113 – 115.
[34] Palazzo, Tradition, p. 90; Ralf Raths, ‘German Tank Production and Armoured
Warfare, 1916–18’, War & Society,
vol. 30, 2011, p. 33.
[35] Black, War, p. 146.
[36] Anon, ‘Mephisto – rarest tank in the
world’, in Australian War Memorial, https://www.awm.gov.au/about/our-work/projects/mephisto, accessed 4 October 2018.
[38] Wilson and Prior, ‘Conflict’, pp.
140 - 141.
[40] Black, War, p. 177 – 178; Beckett, Making,
pp. 162 – 163.
[41] John Ferris, ‘Fighter Defence before
Fighter Command: The Rise of Strategic Air Defence in Great Britain,
1917-1934’, The Journal of Military
History, vol. 63, 1999, p. 853.
[42] Murray, War, pp.32 – 79;
[43] Roger Owen, ‘British and French
Military Intelligence in Syria and Palestine, 1914–1918: Myths and Reality’, British Journal of Middle Eastern Studies,
vol. 38, 2011, p. 3.; Wilson and Prior, ‘Conflict’, pp. 139 - 144.
No comments:
Post a Comment