Casualties due to artillery

[Guest attilio]

There is any statistics about the casualties (%) due to artillery fire compared with those of MG, gas, rifle fire etc..?

Thanks

Attilio

[Old Tom]

Hello,

Wellcome! These figures exist, and I thought I had a note - can't find it! Artillery was by far the greatest cause and I seem to recall bayonets the smallest.

Old Tom

[truthergw]

As Tom ( the good looking one ) said, artillery was by far the main cause of casualties. Hard to distinguish from the records between a MG and a rifle. They would normally be recorded as GSW as was shrapnel on occasion.

[phil andrade]

Statistics exist for wounds treated, and these confirm an overwhelming preponderance of wounds from shell fragments, shrapnel and high explosive : between 59 and 73 per cent. These are, of course, figures for wounds only...they do not necessarilly imply that the same ratio existed for men who were killed outright or died before evacuation from the field.

I think that the proportion of wounds inflicted by bullets, as opposed to artillery, was rather higher in the German armies than it was in the Allied.

Phil.

[chrislock]

Hello,

Wellcome! These figures exist, and I thought I had a note - can't find it! Artillery was by far the greatest cause and I seem to recall bayonets the smallest.

Old Tom

Go carefull on this one. Artillery deffinately but bayonets the smallest? I have several soldiers diary extracts and many books themselves, that reveal the bayonet was used very often! The bayonet would often give a fatal wound hence very little appearence in treatable wound figures at dressing stations, which give the impression to some, that bayonets hardly featured at all. I have a feeling that this appalling weapon, produced more fatal casualties that many realise!

Chris.

[truthergw]

I have wondered about that, Chris. I haven't a scrap of evidence but it seems to me that by all accounts, when men used a bayonet, they were hyped up and taking few prisoners. If you couldn't run away, you were in trouble. I have a feeling that if I jumped into an enemy trench, anything that moved was likely to get poked very hard. I suspect that the rate of killed to wounded was very different to other weaponry.

[melwar]

These figures exist, and I thought I had a note - can't find it! Artillery was by far the greatest cause and I seem to recall bayonets the smallest.

The British Official History (Vol. I for 1916, page 282) cites these figures:

Shell or mortar fire 58.51%, rifle and machine gun bullets 38.98%, bombs & grenades 2.19%, bayonet 0.32%

Not sure if any more recent work on it has been done. As far as bayonets having the smallest impact, with such a high casualty rate from artillery, it was difficult to even reach enemy trenches to find someone to bayonet. Diarists tend to record the unusual events in the day, not the ordinary, and so I would expect to see a disproportionate record of bayonet wounds to the more common occurence of those from shellfire in personal diaries and letters.

[Old Tom]

Melwar,

Thanks, you have bailed me out.

Old Tom

[phil andrade]

Even melwar's citation of 0.32% of all wounds treated being caused by bayonets implies a figure in excess of five thousand British troops being bayoneted, and surviving long enough to reach the CCS. We can only guess at how many more were killed on the spot. Then there were men killed by entrenching tools or rifle butts, or other weapons of hand to hand combat. For all its industrialised slaughter, the war still brought men into deadly close quarters fighting.

Phil.

[melwar]

Even melwar's citation of 0.32% of all wounds treated being caused by bayonets implies a figure in excess of five thousand British troops being bayoneted, and surviving long enough to reach the CCS. We can only guess at how many more were killed on the spot. Then there were men killed by entrenching tools or rifle butts, or other weapons of hand to hand combat. For all its industrialised slaughter, the war still brought men into deadly close quarters fighting.

Certainly, but I think these figures emphasise the firepower that dominated the battlefield on the Western Front. For all the men who died alone on the battlefield from a bayonet wound, or from close quarters fighting, I am absolutely certain many more died in small groups alone and unrecorded of artillery shellfire.

You are most welcome, Old Tom, luckily I had the figures to hand from my dissertation!

[Paul Hederer]

For the Germans, wounded percentages below,

Cause:

37.5% Bullet

54% Artillery

3.5% Grenade

.5% Edged weapons

4.5% Other

Paul

[johnreed]

French Statistics taken from "Evolution in the Great War" by Lt Col A.F. Brooke D.S.O. psc first published in nthe Royal Artillery Journal Vol 51-54 (1924-26)

French Army 1914 Shell and Grenade Wounds 75%, Bullet Wounds (rifle and MG) 23%, Other causes of wounds 2%

Aisne-Champagne April 1917 French Army 1914 Shell and Grenade Wounds 73.5%, Bullet Wounds (rifle and MG) 21.4%, Other causes of wounds 5.5%

Flanders July 1917 French Army 1917 Shell and Grenade Wounds 78.3%, Bullet Wounds (rifle and MG) 9.7%, Other causes of wounds 12%

Verdun August 1917 French Army 1917 Shell and Grenade Wounds 77.2%, Bullet Wounds (rifle and MG) 6.1%, Other causes of wounds 16.7%

Malmaison October 1917 French Army 1917 Shell and Grenade Wounds 77%, Bullet Wounds (rifle and MG) 17%, Other causes of wounds 6%

Picardie March 1918 French Army 1918 Shell and Grenade Wounds 51.7%, Bullet Wounds (rifle and MG) 34%, Other causes of wounds 14.5%

Aisne May 1918 French Army 1918 Shell and Grenade Wounds 56.3%, Bullet Wounds (rifle and MG) 31.6%, Other causes of wounds 12.1%

July 1918 3rd, 4th, 6th & 10th French Armies) Shell and Grenade Wounds 67.9%, Bullet Wounds (rifle and MG) 23.9%, Other causes of wounds 8.2%

Sept-Nov 1918 (4th & 5th Armies) Shell and Grenade Wounds 56.1%, Bullet Wounds (rifle and MG) 27.4%, Other causes of wounds 16.3%

This information was from an original document by "Medecin Inspecteur General Toubert Revue d'Infantevie, 15th September 1921"

John

[phil andrade]

French Statistics taken from "Evolution in the Great War" by Lt Col A.F. Brooke D.S.O. psc first published in nthe Royal Artillery Journal Vol 51-54 (1924-26)

French Army 1914 Shell and Grenade Wounds 75%, Bullet Wounds (rifle and MG) 23%, Other causes of wounds 2%

Aisne-Champagne April 1917 French Army 1914 Shell and Grenade Wounds 73.5%, Bullet Wounds (rifle and MG) 21.4%, Other causes of wounds 5.5%

Flanders July 1917 French Army 1917 Shell and Grenade Wounds 78.3%, Bullet Wounds (rifle and MG) 9.7%, Other causes of wounds 12%

Verdun August 1917 French Army 1917 Shell and Grenade Wounds 77.2%, Bullet Wounds (rifle and MG) 6.1%, Other causes of wounds 16.7%

Malmaison October 1917 French Army 1917 Shell and Grenade Wounds 77%, Bullet Wounds (rifle and MG) 17%, Other causes of wounds 6%

Picardie March 1918 French Army 1918 Shell and Grenade Wounds 51.7%, Bullet Wounds (rifle and MG) 34%, Other causes of wounds 14.5%

Aisne May 1918 French Army 1918 Shell and Grenade Wounds 56.3%, Bullet Wounds (rifle and MG) 31.6%, Other causes of wounds 12.1%

July 1918 3rd, 4th, 6th & 10th French Armies) Shell and Grenade Wounds 67.9%, Bullet Wounds (rifle and MG) 23.9%, Other causes of wounds 8.2%

Sept-Nov 1918 (4th & 5th Armies) Shell and Grenade Wounds 56.1%, Bullet Wounds (rifle and MG) 27.4%, Other causes of wounds 16.3%

This information was from an original document by "Medecin Inspecteur General Toubert Revue d'Infantevie, 15th September 1921"

John

Thanks, John.

Note how high the percentage alluding to "other causes of wounds" is in most of the episodes. I suspect that this might be because gas is included...otherwise it's hard to account for. In chronological terms there is a definite increase in that portion of the casualties occurring after 1914, when there had been no gas, although Malmaison bucks the trend.

Phil.

[Robert Dunlop]

The German author Anton Breitung noted in his book 'Salve! Batterie - Feuer!' that the proportion of artillery casualties in 1914/18 was 65% but as high as 75% at Verdun in 1918.

Robert