Talk:First Battle of the Marne

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the First Battle of the Marne article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

	This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated task forces: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- B-Class-1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- B-Class-2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- B-Class-3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- B-Class-4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- B-Class-5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no This article has been selected for use on the World War I Portal. Associated task forces (nations and regions): British military history task force French military history task force Associated task forces (periods and conflicts): World War I task force

	Germany Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles related to Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project and help with our open tasks.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.
Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a group devoted to the the study, and improvement of Wikipedia articles on the subject, of History. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked Neutrality: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no <!-- 6. It is written from a neutral point of view. --> |B-Class-6=yes/no

	France Portal First Battle of the Marne is within the scope of WikiProject France, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to France on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project and help with our open tasks.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, an attempt to better organise information in articles related to the United Kingdom. For more information, visit the project page.
???	This article has not yet received a quality rating on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received an importance rating on the importance scale.

Contents 1 Marne Taxis "critical"? 2 Discussion. 3 French Military 4 Who won? 5 Short article 6 BEF 7 250,000 German casualties at First Marne? 8 'Von Kluck, happily met the French women on his right leg...' ??? 9 Why was Info about General Gallieni removed?

[edit] Marne Taxis "critical"?

In the German article, it says that the famous Marne taxis were mainly a propagandistic success but in fact rather insignificant for the actual fighting, because they only managed to take a total of about 6,000 troops to the front, while 50,000 troops were killed every day and many more were wounded.

Are there any sources for the "critical" role that is attributed to the Taxi cabs in the English article? --Cancun771 06:53, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

It doesn't say that - it says they are TRADITIONALLY described as 'critical'. Tom Black 19:12, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion.

Ipage. Plus if you have anymore info on this subject or any other WWI battle, could you please add to Spawn Man 00:57, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

As I can see, no one actually has been on this page & has decided to write anything. Ah well. Spawn Man 05:09, 7 September 2005 (UTC) Hi i think this it at school im going to belgium next week and now understand everything i needed to thankyou, jodie

[edit] French Military

Maybe the Republican politician (and Vietnam era draft dodger), Roy Blunt, should apologize for the ignorant joke that he made concerning the French, "Do you know how many Frenchmen it takes to defend Paris? It's not known. It's never been tried". Apparently in September, 1914 80,000 Frenchmen died SUCCESSFULLY defending Paris! Jay Gregg

[edit] Who won?

I know that the side box is supposed to be a quick reference, but neiter that nor the article stated who won. So who is it???Dogmanice 00:30, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Result: Strategically decisive Allied victory -- Mackensen (talk) 00:33, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Well, no one really won, as far as I remember. The First Battle of the Marne was the desperate Allied attempt to keep the Germans from reaching Paris. In the end, hundreds of thousands died, and then everyone settled down in trenches. This was the beginning of trench warfare, which lasted throughout World War One. -Gunslinger

Yes, a Phyrrhic victory in some respects. It's an open question whether a German victory would have ended the war and thus saved everyone a lot of aggravation. On the other hand, the battle was a clear victory for the Entente in that it stopped the German offensive. Mackensen (talk) 01:51, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Well, it may have taken France out of the picture. But I don't believe that it would have ended the entire war. Although the Schlieffen Plan could have worked if they had only taken Paris. Eh, who knows? It really is impossible to draw any conclusions, as there are so many variables in war.

At that stage of the War "Taking France out of the picture" would have ended the land war in the west. And unlike WW2 I doubt Britian would have continued the fight. Remember if the Marne was lost the BEF, basically the entire British Regular army would have been destroyed. Chances are the war would have ended in Central powers victory with the removal of France, that was the plan after all!

First Marne was unquestionably an Allied victory, and a very important one. Moltke was under no illusion when he told the Kaiser, "Your Majesty, we have lost the war." The Marne stopped the Schlieffen Plan. Now Germany had a war on her hands that she did not know how to end. It eventually led to her ruin, all because of the Miracle at the Marne.UberCryxic 18:19, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Short article

Surely a battle as significant as this one deserves a longer article... =\ – ugen64 03:46, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

This article was nominated for Wikipedia:Version 0.5 I failed this article because it's too short, just a little more than a stub. Thanks Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 06:16, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes a battle as important as this one deserves to have far more coverage. For some reason I haven't gotten around to expanding this article. I hope someone beats me to it.UberCryxic 03:54, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] BEF

I think special mention should be made of the quality of the BEF troops. AllStarZ 23:59, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Actually, by the time of First Marne, there were few of the original regulars left. The BEF was not retreating in the first part of the war, it was routed. Part of the German 1st Army smashed their positions at Mons on August 23, then on the 25th, at Le Cateau, the BEF suffered more casualties the Wellington did at Waterloo. By the 27th, the BEF HQ was in panic, orders were being sent out to discard ammunition and impedimenta, so as to not impede the retreat. This was when Sir John French started talking about leaving France altogether. The BEF's retreat did not stop till they were at the Seine, and were essentially out of harm's way. Now, it is true that the units of the BEF were the most professional and battle-experienced of all the combatants in the West. The Royal Warwickshire Regiment had seen action in 1907 in the Indian NW frontier area. But that mattered not, in the face of the superior German artillery and mortars. I feel that the BEF's original combat power, and its effectiveness was inflated greatly by later British propaganda, and never retracted.Marhault 05:42, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

I think too much is already being said. It looks like they were outnumbered by the French 60 to 1, yet most of the article is about English greatness. What a joke. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.203.223.82 (talk) 00:08, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 250,000 German casualties at First Marne?

The Germans only turned in 85,000 dead on the Western Front, for the whole of 1914. It's reasonable to assume they had wounded comparable to the 3.25:1 they suffered through the course of the war, or about 275,000, for a total for all of 1914 in the West of 360,000. Were there only 110,000 German casualties in all the battles at the Belgian forts, Antwerp, Lille, "the Race to the Sea", action in the Verdun area, and the border battles? I don't think so. My guess is that they suffered casualties about half that of the Allies. After all, they had entrenched first, they had the heavy guns and mortars that the Allies did not, and they followed a cohesive withdrawal plan, unlike the disjointed Allied effort. The Allles turned in 330,000 dead in 1914, and their dead:wounded ratio was worse, too (i.e. fewer wounded survived). Again, this may well be a matter of obfuscation by later British propaganda.Marhault 05:25, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

If you want to argue numbers then you should back up your argument with a reputable source. Atrian 16:26, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, the German figures are from their own post-war government sources, published in 1935. The French ones came from a monograph published in 1931 at Yale, by Michel Huber. The British War Office published their stats in 1922.Marhault 03:47, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

If the German figures are from 1935, don't you think they might be subject to propaganda as well? The Germans of that era were somewhat known for doing things like that. Atrian 13:39, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Not impossible, no. But the 1935 report came from the medical services, not the government political offices. It's well supported by actual field medical notes, something the Germans were very meticulous about. In any case, the Germans were always very hard-nosed and realistic in re military casualties, even well into WWII. It's the British, and to a lesser extent, the USA, that had historians that consistently ignored their governments' own data. Unfortunately for this approach, the UK brought other nations into the war with it, and figures from Canadian, and especially Australian, sources are available to correct the record. Marhault 16:05, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

The 250,000 figure is very well established. Almost every single work I've come across on the subject gives that number. Whether that is correct or not is not for Wikipedia to decide; the only thing that matter is that it is the dominant view among the historical community, so that is the number that will be placed in the infobox.UberCryxic 01:46, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 'Von Kluck, happily met the French women on his right leg...' ???

I'm not sure what this line is supposed to mean: "Von Kluck, happily met the French women on his right leg, opened up a 50 bottles of wiskey and made a wide gap in the German lines between his First Army and the German Second Army,"

It appears in the first line of the "Battle" section of the article.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 12.6.247.146 (talk • contribs) 16:00, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

That was vandalism, and it was fixed yesterday. You may be looking at an older version of the page. - Eron ^Talk 00:11, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Why was Info about General Gallieni removed?

I added in this section, "By September 3, Joffre recognized the German armies' tactical error..." that it was (according to Barbara Tuchman in The Guns of August), General Gallieni who recognized the Von Kluk's error and forced Joffre to support his request to attack the German flank. This is the widely accepted version of the event and should have been left in.

--192.43.161.1 19:02, 24 January 2007 (UTC)