Data on the losses of the Russian army during the First World War are still unknown. The estimated number of people killed in it is 2-2.3 million people, prisoners - 4 million. The war made 600 thousand people disabled. The relative number of captured soldiers and surrendered tsarist generals was higher than in the Great Patriotic War, which clearly shows the lack of spirit among the troops.
1914 marks the 100th anniversary of the start of the First World War. Another name for it in Russia is “the forgotten war.” It was forgotten not so much by the memory of ordinary people, but by the elites, for whom this war was a silent accusation of their complete incompetence.
The question remains open about the number of Russian losses in the First World War. As in World War II, it never occurred to the authorities to keep records of them. And today we only have estimated losses.
Let's start from the end of this story - the situation of the winter of 1917, preceding the Revolution and the beginning of the complete collapse of the Russian army.
The answer to the question that worries many: “Could Russia have attacked in 1917 if not for the abdication of Nicholas II?” given by the British Ambassador to Russia D. Buchanan. He wrote in his diary in January 17th:
“On January 19, 1917, in his speech at the opening of the Allied Conference in Petrograd, General Gurko said:
Russia mobilized 14 million people;
lost 2 million killed and wounded and the same number captured;
currently has 7.5 million under arms and 2.5 million in reserve.
He expressed no hope that the Russian army would be able to launch a large-scale offensive until the formation of new units was completed and until they were trained and supplied with the necessary weapons and ammunition. Until then, all it can do is deter the enemy through operations of secondary importance.”
The figures of our losses (and especially the number of prisoners), officially announced for the first time at the allied conference, shocked the allies. Before this, the Tsar and Headquarters got off only with general phrases, such as “the losses are small, we are holding the front.”
Only one fact speaks about the general mood in the Russian army: 73 people surrendered to the tsarist generals. Even the shameful beginning of the Great Patriotic War in 19141-42 did not produce such a number of captured Soviet generals. For comparison: only two German generals were captured in Russia, one of whom committed suicide in captivity.
35 Russian generals were killed in battles and died from wounds during WWII - more than two times less than those who surrendered! If generals prefer to surrender rather than fight to the end, then it is difficult to expect special stamina in battle from the troops.
Even the rare most successful military operations (well thought out and led by talented generals) of the Russian army brought a huge number of casualties.
Thus, S. Nelipovich (data from the book S.G. Nelipovich, Brusilov’s breakthrough as an object of mythology, 1998) indicates the following data on the losses of the South-Western Front during the famous “Brusilov’s breakthrough”: “Only according to approximate calculations according to the Headquarters statements, Brusilov's Southwestern Front lost 1.65 million people from May 22 to October 14, 1916, including 203 thousand killed and 152.5 thousand captured. It was this circumstance that decided the fate of the offensive: the Russian troops, thanks to the “Brusilov method,” choked on their own blood.”
The current figure of Western researchers of 1 million people lost by the Russian armies during the Brusilov breakthrough for the entire period of attacks by the Southwestern Front from May to October 1916 is also not “pulled out of thin air.”
The figure of 980 thousand people lost by the armies of General Brusilov was indicated by the French military representative at the Petrograd Conference of February 1917, General de Castelnau, in a report to the French War Ministry dated February 25, 1917. Apparently, this official figure was given to the French by Russian colleagues at the highest level - first of all, by the acting Chief of Staff of the Supreme Commander-in-Chief, General Gurko.
Western historian D. Terrain gives the following figures for German losses throughout the First World War (presented by the Germans themselves): 1 million 808 thousand killed, 4 million 242 thousand wounded and 617 thousand prisoners.
However, Terrain believed that these figures were incorrect. As his main argument, he cited the figures of the Western allies, according to which the Germans lost 924 thousand people as prisoners (a difference of one third!), “so it is very possible that the other two categories of losses are underestimated to the same extent.” (book by J. Terrain “The Great War. The First World War - prerequisites and development”, 2004)
Russian historian A. Kersnovsky in his work “History of the Russian Army” writes:
“The unprecedented tension brought with it unprecedented losses. The extent of these losses can never be determined exactly. The Russian high command was not at all interested in already used human meat.
The Main Sanitary Administration was not interested in this either: there were no statistics of deaths from wounds in hospitals, which cannot but stun the researcher.
Calculations of losses were made during the war and after it by individuals based on incomplete and unsystematized data. They were random in nature and led to completely different, often fantastic conclusions (suffice it to say that the number, for example, of prisoners was determined to range from 1.3 million to 4.5 million people).
The headquarters was not at all interested in the question of the losses incurred.
People who, for three years in a row, killed millions of Russian officers and soldiers, who invented a “double bypass of the Masurian lakes”, “an offensive in the heart of Germany”, who gave frantic directives to the bloodless armies “Not a step back!”, who erected pyramids of skulls on the Bzura, Naroch, Kovel, these people have never in three years inquired about how much, at least approximately, their strategic creativity costs Russia and the Russian army.
When, in July 1917, the French representative at Headquarters, General Janin, asked for information about the losses suffered by Russia, Headquarters was taken by surprise.
After three months of fussy searches, Headquarters presented the French with the first available figures. Only 700 thousand people were killed, but 2.9 million were captured. Giving these explanations without any reservations or explanations, our military bureaucrats did not bother to realize that the count of the dead was carried out in any satisfactory way only for the troops of the Northern Front. The headquarters was completely unaware that this kind of “information” would only dishonor the Russian army in the eyes of foreigners.
According to the Military Department, presented shortly before the February Revolution to the Council of Ministers, our “final losses” - killed, died from wounds and diseases, disabled people, missing and captured - were determined from the beginning of the war to December 1916 at 5.5 million people
According to information officially reported to the Russian Red Cross by the enemy, by the winter of 1916/17 there were 2.2 million prisoners of war in Germany, Austria-Hungary, Bulgaria and Turkey. This figure is quite reliable (the enemy had no intention of downplaying it).
Subtracting this number from the total, we get 3.3 million Russian losses just before the February Revolution.
100 thousand people died from disease (the number is precisely established - the statistics of the sick was kept much better than the statistics of the wounded).
There were 200 thousand people in unauthorized absence (in other words, that’s how many military men deserted). 600 thousand people were discharged from the army due to injuries received in battle, 300 thousand people were discharged due to illness.
Adding up these losses, we get 1.2 million maimed, died from wounds and deserters.
The remaining 2.1 million were listed as killed (we repeat once again - this was before the February Revolution).
There are also ambiguities with the generally accepted figure of 2.4 million Russian prisoners during WWII.
In 1919, “Centrobezhplen”, an organization involved in the return of prisoners to Russia, took into account the following number of captured Russian military personnel using its name lists and registration cards:
In Germany - 2 million 335 thousand 441
In Austria-Hungary - 1 million 503 thousand 412.
In Turkey - 19 thousand 795.
In Bulgaria - 2 thousand 452.
Total - 3 million 911 thousand 100 people.
Let’s add here the 200 thousand who died in captivity and we get a figure of more than 4.1 million people. It is difficult to imagine that in the year from the February Revolution until the conclusion of the Brest-Litovsk Peace Treaty, another 1.7 million surrendered. Most likely, the initial figure of 2.4 million people for the winter of 1917 was an underestimate.
Another important point. The number of Russian soldiers who were captured during the First World War - 4.1 million - in relative terms is much greater than the number of Soviet soldiers who surrendered during the Second World War. 14.5 million people were mobilized in WWI, i.e. prisoners made up 28.2% of the army. 34 million people were mobilized in WWII, 5.6 million people, or 16.2% of the army, were captured. And this also takes into account the fact that WWII for the USSR lasted almost six months longer than for the Republic of Ingushetia the First World War.
That is, not only the number of tsarist generals who surrendered well characterizes the spirit (or rather, its absence) of the Russian army in WWII, but also the total number of prisoners.
Of course, this all proves that the First World War was someone else’s war for Russia (a war for someone else’s interests). It clearly showed the full extent of the decomposition of the tsarist regime and the fact that the two Revolutions of 1917 were not an accident.
Briefly about the losses in the First World War, we can only say that they were colossal. Human, economic, cultural. At the same time, losses were suffered not only by the losing countries, but also by the states that were considered winners.
Germany
In short, the greatest losses in the First World War were undoubtedly suffered by Germany. More than 56% of those mobilized, which is almost 7.5 million people, were killed, wounded, or disappeared during the war. There were also significant losses among the civilian population, primarily due to hunger.
The country's economy also suffered significantly. Thus, industrial production volumes decreased by more than half compared to pre-war levels. The state lost ¾ of the annual production of iron ore, a quarter of coal, and more than 30% of steel. The country's financial system also suffered.
According to the Treaty of Versailles, in which Germany was declared the main instigator of the war, and therefore had to bear the main responsibility for it, the former Kaiser's empire also suffered significant territorial, military and financial losses.
Austria-Hungary
As for human losses, about 9 million residents aged 15 to 49 were mobilized to the front. And more than 50% of them were killed, wounded or captured.
Actually, Austria-Hungary ceased to exist as a result of the war, and its territory was divided between the countries that formed in its place and neighboring states.
The losses of Austria, which occupied a leading role in the former empire, included the territories of the Czech Republic (became part of Czechoslovakia), Slovenia, Bosnia, Herzegovina and other parts of the lands that went to the newly created Yugoslavia. In addition, the South Tyrol territories went to Italy, and Galicia and Lodomeria went to Poland.
Ottoman Empire
The results of the First World War for the Ottoman Empire were equally disastrous. After the end of the conflict, it disappeared from the world political map, and its territories were divided between new states and victorious countries.
And, of course, hundreds of thousands of dead and wounded, millions of crippled lives.
Russia
The outcome of the First World War was unique for Russia. She lost to the country that itself was defeated.
Russia's human losses in the First World War, briefly speaking, were estimated at more than 11 million people, which amounted to about 65% of those called up to the front (it is worth noting that these figures vary significantly according to various sources).
The country's economy was also seriously affected. The fall in industrial production, the cessation of operation of large factories and, as a consequence, the growth of unemployment, the food problem and inflation - all this was the result of the military conflict into which the empire entered the twilight of its existence.
Moreover, unlike its former allies, the Russian side received absolutely no compensation for its losses, since it left the war before Germany capitulated. And as a result of the separate Brest-Litovsk Peace Treaty signed between Germany and the Bolsheviks, it also lost several of its territories, on which independent states were formed after the surrender of the Central Powers.
Great Britain
The British Empire suffered the largest economic losses - more than US$24 billion. In addition, its external debt at the end of the war exceeded 850 million in national currency. At the same time, the volume of British foreign trade decreased by almost half compared to pre-war.
A significant part of the navy and almost half of the merchant fleet were also lost.
However, the human losses were even more significant. The country lost about 3 million people in land and sea battles. True, most of them survived, but were seriously wounded and maimed. However, the bodies of more than half a million British soldiers were never discovered (sunk and missing during the battles).
France
French territory, where fierce fighting took place from the first days of the war, also suffered huge losses. Lands where nothing grew, destroyed cities, small towns and businesses. In total, more than 900 homes and 10 thousand businesses were destroyed. The total damage was estimated at 200 billion francs. Not only the volume of industrial production decreased, but also agricultural production. Exports also decreased several times. At the same time, an external debt amounted to about 7 billion US dollars.
During the fierce fighting, France lost, according to various estimates, from 3 to 5 million of its citizens killed, wounded and captured.
The First World War completely changed the world. The post-war division of the world caused a significant weakening or collapse of the strongest empires, all trade ties were disrupted, the development of national capitalism and anti-war movements of workers accelerated. And in Russia, active military operations on the world stage coincided with the fall of the monarchy and the establishment of Bolshevik power.
But the results of the world war were not only geopolitical and economic. The fighting directly or indirectly affected the majority of the civilian population of the participating countries, destroyed families, deprived many families of shelter, made healthy men disabled, women into unhappy widows, and children into orphans. The casualties in the First World War were not comparable to those of conflicts that had occurred before.
Parties to the conflict
The lead-up to the outbreak of World War I was the assassination of ex-Duke Franz Ferdinand by Serbian terrorist Gavrilo Princip. How did it happen that this particular crime a few years later became the reason for calculations of how many people died in the First World War? In fact, the war could have started ten years before this event.
Germany felt left out for a long time during the colonial division of the world. The power tried to unite either with Great Britain against France, or with France against Great Britain, but the English leadership had good relations with the French, and France’s sphere of interests included Russia. Germany had no choice but to enter into an alliance with the Ottoman Empire, Italy and Austria-Hungary.
After the incident with Morocco, nationalist sentiments spread throughout Europe. All countries have been building up their military capabilities for several years. All that was needed was a reason for the war machine to come into action. This is precisely the reason given by the Serbian student Gavrilo Princip.
Austria-Hungary was the first to declare war on Serbia, and a few days later Germany made the same attack on Russia, France and Belgium. Great Britain declared war on Germany, Montenegro on Austria-Hungary, and Austria-Hungary on Russia. The events of the First World War (table - see below) began to develop rapidly.
Two enemy camps formed even before the start of active hostilities. Russia took the side of the Entente. The union also included France, the USA (only in 1917-1918), Serbia, Great Britain and the dominions, Italy (since 1915). The opponents were the Central Powers (they were also called the Triple Alliance, later the Quadruple Alliance): Germany, Austria-Hungary, the Ottoman Empire, Bulgaria (since 1915).
Human strength
How many people died in the First World War? A monstrously large number, especially if you don’t count the soldiers who were mobilized. In percentage terms, losses look almost the same as in other conflicts. The number of victims seems so huge only because many more people took part in the war than in previous wars.
The Entente forces amounted to more than 45 million soldiers. The population of the member countries of the union at the same time numbered 1.315 million people. For allied countries, mobilization resources (from among men of military age or the total population) are:
- The Russian Empire mobilized 15.3 million soldiers;
- France - 6.8 million men;
- Great Britain - almost five million males of military age;
- Italy - almost six million men of military age;
- Greece - 353 thousand soldiers;
- USA - 4.7 million soldiers (sent just over two million soldiers to Europe);
- Belgium - 500 thousand men of military age;
- Romania - 1.2 million people;
- Serbia - more than 700 thousand;
- Portugal - 53 thousand soldiers;
- India (as a dominion of the British Empire) - 1.4 million people;
- Empire of Japan - 30 thousand people;
- Canada - more than 600 thousand men of military age;
- Australia - 412 thousand.
How many of them died in the First World War? More than five and a half million people are listed as dead. The table of events of the First World War clearly confirms this.
The forces of the Triple Alliance were represented by almost 26 million people (almost two times less than at the disposal of the Entente). Most of the soldiers were mobilized by the German Empire (13.2 million out of 16 million men of military age), less by Austria-Hungary (9 million out of 12 million men of military age). The Ottoman Empire sent almost three million out of five and a half million people to the front. Bulgaria mobilized the fewest soldiers - almost seven hundred thousand out of more than a million men.
Total losses of participants
The archive of those killed in the First World War contains ten million names of soldiers on both sides. More than eighteen thousand were wounded, and 8.5 million were captured. Among civilians, almost eleven and a half thousand people were killed. So how many people died in the First World War, including soldiers, officers, and civilians? More than twenty million people lost their lives during the hostilities.
Russia in World War I
The losses of the Russian Empire in the First World War amounted to more than 1.5 million soldiers. All these people were killed in battle or died during sanitary evacuation. On average, 12% of soldiers died, and 17% of the officers who died in the First World War were officers. Almost four million Russian soldiers were wounded, and 3.3 million were captured. More than a million civilians were killed.
Allied losses
The losses of the Entente together with the Russian Empire amounted to 5.6 million soldiers and almost eight million civilians, a total of almost 13.5 million people. France lost 1.3 million soldiers, Great Britain - 702 thousand, Italy - 462 thousand, Greece - 26.6 thousand, USA - 116 thousand, Belgium - 58.6 thousand, Romania - 219 thousand, Serbia - 127 thousand, Portugal - 7 ,2 thousand, British India - 64.4 thousand, Japanese Empire - 415 people (out of thirty thousand mobilized), Canada - 56.6 thousand.
Central States losses
The Triple (Quadruple) Alliance lost 4.4 million soldiers and 3.4 million civilians in the war. In the German Empire, just over two million people were killed, in the Ottoman Empire - 763 thousand, Bulgaria lost 155 thousand, and Austria-Hungary - almost 1.5 million soldiers.
Have you ever wondered who and to what extent took part in the First World War and whose contribution to the defeat of Germany and its allies was the most significant? Why this question? - you ask. The fact is that one of my colleagues wrote to me yesterday that if Russia had not withdrawn from the war, then it could have laid claim to the role of the victorious country in the First World War (with all the ensuing consequences). One can argue with this, although there is a certain logic in it. Let's look at the statistics today, which reflect whose contribution to the victory over Germany was the most significant.
So, let's go...
1. Losses of the German army in 1914-1918. along the fronts.
THE WESTERN FRONT 1914-1915.
1. Killed - 160.9 thousand people.
2. Missing - 170.0 thousand people.
Total: 330,9 thousand people
EASTERN FRONT 1914-1915.
1. Killed - 72.0 thousand people.
2. Missing - 68.4 thousand people.
Total: 140.4 thousand people
2,3
THE WESTERN FRONT 1915-1916.
1. Killed - 114.1 thousand people.
2. Missing - 96.3 thousand people.
Total: 210.4 thousand people
1. Killed - 56.0 thousand people.
2. Missing - 36.0 thousand people.
Total: 92.0 thousand people
Year-end results ratio. For every German killed or missing on the Eastern Front, 2,28 killed and missing Germans on the Western Front (!)
THE WESTERN FRONT 1916-1917.
1. Killed - 134.1 thousand people.
2. Missing - 181.6 thousand people.
Total: 315.7 thousand people
EASTERN FRONT 1915-1916.
1. Killed - 37.0 thousand people.
2. Missing - 36.4 thousand people.
Total: 73.4 thousand people
Year-end results ratio. For every German killed or missing on the Eastern Front, 4,3 killed and missing Germans on the Western Front (!)
Compare with previous years! Such a sharp shift in German losses towards the Western Front speaks volumes .
THE WESTERN FRONT 1917-1918.
1. Killed - 181.8 thousand people.
2. Missing - 175.3 thousand people.
Total: 357.1 thousand people
EASTERN FRONT 1915-1916.
1. Killed - 8.8 thousand people.
2. Missing - 2.5 thousand people.
Total: 11.3 thousand people
Year-end results ratio. For every German killed and missing on the Eastern Front, there were 31.6 Germans killed and missing on the Western Front (!)
These data are based on sanitary reports from the war of 1914-1918. (I do not give the name of the German source, I will only say that these data were published in Berlin in 1934)
From the given data it is clear that the Germans on the Eastern Front lost 4 times less than on the Western Front.
“I will cite a little-known but significant fact: our losses on the Eastern Front were significantly greater than the losses we suffered on the Western Front from 1914 to 1918” (source - “Fatal Decisions” Collection). It remains unknown where Blumenritt got his “significant facts” from?
As you already understand, the main enemy of the Russian army in the First World War on the Eastern Front was not the Germans, but the Austro-Hungarians. The following data is available on the distribution of losses of the Austro-Hungarian army on individual fronts (front and number of killed, wounded and prisoners):
1.Russian Front - 2724
thousand people
2. Italian - 1478 thousand people.
3. Romanian - 79 thousand people.
4. Balkan - 295 thousand people.
5. French - 6 thousand people.
The share of the Russian front in the total number of losses of the Austro-Hungarian army is approximately 60%. In total, Austria-Hungary lost 727 thousand people on the battlefield. Losses on the Eastern Front amounted to 450 thousand people killed.
Turkish armies also fought against the Russian armies. It can be roughly assumed that two thirds of the killed Turkish soldiers died from Russian weapons, i.e. about 150 thousand people out of a total of 250 thousand. This number also includes the losses of two Bulgarian divisions that fought against the Russian armies (those “brothers” are assholes!).
Anyone who has a calculator can easily calculate the total losses of the Germans and their allies against Russia.
And further. About the ability to fight. The fields of France and Flanders were watered with the blood of approximately 1.6 million soldiers and officers of the Entente army. These 1.6 million are contrasted with only 1.1 million killed German soldiers and officers. Consequently, the Germans on the Western Front had 1.45 times fewer losses than their opponents.
I would like to remind you of the casualties among the countries of the anti-German bloc:
Russia - 1200 thousand people.
France - 898 thousand people
Great Britain - 485 thousand people
Italy - 381 thousand people
Etc.
USA - 37 thousand people
I have heard more than once from my opponents that the army of the Russian Empire by 1916 was more combat-ready than ever. They say that after the failures of 1914-1915, by 1916 the army was provided with everything it needed (especially with regard to solving the famous “shell” famine), and was simply eager to go into battle! Just a little more, just a little, and victory would be in our hands!
Well, to begin with, I would advise such people to look at a map of the front line at the end of 1915 and make sure WHO fought and on WHOSE territory. In addition, I wanted to know more specifically what their puppy optimism is based on? What has fundamentally changed in the Russian army and in the attitude of the people to this war, so that one could believe in this nonsense.
They are starting to tell me about the famous Brusilov breakthrough. Yes, there was a breakthrough, but it only softened another bitter pill with which the Germans treated General Alekseev and the Russian army, which was advancing “to the rescue of the allies” who had grappled with the Germans at Verdun. In March 1916, he launched the Naroch offensive. Like the French offensive in Artois and Picardy the year before, this operation turned into a massacre - the corps walked onto barbed wire and died under the fire of German heavy artillery and machine guns. Only on March 15, Alekseev ordered a retreat. “Relief of the Allies” cost 20,000 dead.
Brusilov only saved the situation after the so-called “Great Retreat” of the Russian army. In general, 1916 ended for the Russian army with the inconclusive Battle of Metava, where the Russian army tried to advance, but was driven back by the Germans. Ineffective, except for the loss of 23 thousand people killed, wounded and captured.
Now we come to another interesting piece of information.
Average monthlylosses of the Russian army in 1914-1916.
1914
1. Killed - 8 thousand people.
2. Captured - 11 thousand people.
3. Wounded - 46 thousand people.
TOTAL: 65 thousand people
1915
1. Killed - 23 thousand people.
2. 82 thousand people were captured.
3. Wounded - 102 thousand people.
TOTAL: 207 thousand people.
1916
1. Killed - 22 thousand people.
2. 125 thousand people were captured.
3. Wounded - 77 thousand people.
TOTAL: 224 thousand people.
note :
1. Number of prisoners in 1915 and 1916. In 1916 there were much more of them! And keep in mind that these are monthly averages! The Russian army attacked (or rather tried to attack) several times, but each time it lost its soldiers as prisoners.
And the data on those killed in 1915 and 1916 are almost the same!
2. On average, fewer people were wounded in 1916 than in 1915. Apparently this is the reverse side of point 2 - “Captured captive.” Otherwise, I can’t even imagine the reason for such statistics.
And lastly, a map of the front line in 1914-1915.
Peace of Brest-Litovsk. Lenin's trap for the Kaiser's Germany Butakov Yaroslav Aleksandrovich
Appendix 2 Human losses of the main countries at war in the First World War
Appendix 2
Human losses of the main countries at war in the First World War
1. The main source for us is the classic work of the Soviet researcher B.Ts., which has gone through several reprints. Urlanis “Wars and Population of Europe”, and specifically - § 2 “The First World War”, chapter III, part II.
The data obtained by the researcher is summarized in the following table (the figures are in millions of people, rounded to the nearest hundred thousand, as a rule):
| A country | Killed on the battlefield and irretrievably missing | Died from wounds and chemical weapons | Died in the army from non-combat causes | Total deaths in the army | Died in captivity | Total death toll |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Russia | 1,6 | 0,25 | 0,2 | 2,05 | 0,2 | 2,25 |
| Germany | 1,5 | 0,3 | 0,2 | ? | 0,06 | 2 |
| Austria-Hungary | 0,7 | 0,3 | ? | ? | 0,07 | 1,1 |
| France (without colonies) | 0,9 | 0,2 | 0,2 | ? | 0,02 | 1,3 |
| England (without colonies and dominions) | 0,7 | ? | ? | 0,7 | ? | 0,7 |
| Italy | 0,4 | 0,05 | 0,1 | ? | 0,06 | 0,6 |
First of all, the researcher himself admits doubt about the finality of the figures for the losses of Austria-Hungary. Indeed, what is immediately striking is the disproportionately large number of deaths from wounds compared to the number of killed and missing, based on a similar proportion in other armies. Also surprising is the relatively small number of deaths in captivity - only slightly more than that of the German army. However, it is known that significantly more military personnel of the army of the dual monarchy were captured (especially Russian) than military personnel of the German army. Therefore, the number of losses of Austria-Hungary will have to be double-checked using other data.
Urlanis puts the total number of killed and wounded in the Austro-Hungarian army during the entire First World War at 4.6 million. Golovin gives the usual ratio between the number of killed and those who died from wounds and the total number of killed and wounded in the armies of the First World War. For the French army this ratio was 1:3.39, for the German army - 1:3.35. Taking the proportion 1:3.4, we find that the Austro-Hungarian army could have lost 1.35 million people killed. Having included here those who died in captivity and from non-combat causes, we are unlikely to exaggerate by determining the acceptable number of military personnel of the dual monarchy who died in the First World War at 1.4 million.
How many of them died on the Eastern Front? The distribution of losses of the Austro-Hungarian army in killed and wounded along the fronts is known. The Eastern Front accounted for 59.5% of their total number. From 1.4 million dead this will be a round number of 800 thousand. This is exactly how many Austro-Hungarian military personnel, according to our minimum estimates, died on the Eastern Front.
How are the dead German soldiers distributed along the fronts? According to incomplete data: 1214 thousand on the Western Front, 317 thousand on the Eastern Front. The total number of German army casualties was 2.04 million, of which 56 thousand died in captivity. A certain (small) number died on the Italian and Balkan fronts.
The existing incomplete number of deaths, to obtain the desired figure of 1.98 million, must be increased by 29.3%. We get: 1.57 million for the Western Front (of which at least 1.1 million by the end of 1917) and 0.41 million for the Eastern Front.
The number of losses of the Turkish army is established only approximately. To the total number of approximately 250 thousand dead should be added 68 thousand who died from wounds. More than half of the Turkish army's casualties occurred on the Russian Front. The number of Bulgarian deaths is insignificant.
Thus, in the book we decided to proceed from the following final (of course, very approximate) number of military personnel of the armies of the Quadruple Alliance who died in military operations against Russia: Germany - 0.4 million, Austria-Hungary - 0.8 million, others - 0.2 million Total - 1.4 million
2. It is necessary, however, to note that Urlanis’s final calculations of the losses of the Russian army are based on the assumption that the real number of those killed directly on the battlefield exceeds the registered figure by 300 thousand. This excess of 0.3 million was introduced by him in order to equalize the ratio losses by this indicator between the Russian army and its opponents with the ratio of losses of the parties on the Western Front (4:3). Accordingly, the final figure of those killed in the Russian army includes this arbitrary assumption.
If this researcher’s assumption is incorrect, the final figures for Russia’s losses are correspondingly reduced by 300 thousand. The total number of dead then did not exceed 2 million, of which 1.8 million were at the front. This is only 1.3 times higher than enemy losses, and not one and a half times, as with the assumption. But in principle, this proportion does not differ significantly from the one we gave earlier in the book. It does not allow us to definitively judge that the ratio of losses on the Russian Front was less favorable for the Central Powers than on the Western Front. In the same way as the previous one does not allow us to draw the opposite conclusion. Both of them are within the statistical deviation.
Indirect confirmation that the true losses of the Russian army are overestimated by 300 thousand can be the ratio between the number of those killed directly and the number of those who died from wounds. In the Russian army, according to Urlanis's figures, it is much greater than in other armies. If we take the number of those killed on the battlefield and missing in action not 1.6 million, but 1.3 million, this proportion approaches that of the German and French armies (see table).
The fact that on the Eastern Front the relative losses of the Central Powers bloc could be higher than on the Western Front is quite plausible. After all, only the German army fought on their side on the Western Front (at the very end of the war, two Austrian divisions appeared there). On the Eastern Front, between one and two thirds were Austrian and Turkish troops. It would not be surprising if they suffered significantly greater relative losses in battles with the Russians than the Germans did in battles with the French.
This amendment does not affect the final conclusions of our book, but shows the likelihood of correcting the final number of losses of the Russian army downward.
3. The summary of losses in the Western European theater of operations for the entire war, given by us in Chapter 10, is given taking into account: 1) those who died from wounds and non-combat irretrievable losses, 2) troops of the British and French colonies and British dominions. The number of British casualties is calculated as follows. According to data provided by Urlanis, the armies of the British Empire suffered 90% of their losses in the Western European theater of operations. Based on the total number of losses of the British Empire - 0.9 million, the figure for their losses in France is established - 0.8 million.
By the end of 1917, the German army on the Western Front, taking into account the missing persons, had irretrievably lost 1.1 million people. Allies for the same time, based on what we established in Chapter. 10 proportions 1.4:1, - no less than one and a half million people. In the last year of the war, after the conclusion of the Brest-Litovsk Armistice in the East, the losses of the German army in the West amounted to half a million people, the allies - about 700 thousand.
4. The historian Kersnovsky points out the number of prisoners of war of the armies of the Central Powers in Russia at 2.2 million, an article on Wikipedia - 2.9 million. For our calculations, we used Kersnovsky’s more cautious figure, given by him on the basis of Western reports published then, shortly after the war sources. Moreover, it contains an important distribution for us of the number of prisoners of war among the armies of the Quadruple Alliance: Austria-Hungary - 1.85 million, Germany - 0.25 million, Turkey - 0.1 million.
The Wikipedia article indicates the total number of prisoners of war of the Central Powers at 3.5 million, of which: 2.2 million - Austria-Hungary, 1 million - Germany, 0.25 million - Turkey. Consequently, of all of them, only 600 thousand remain as prisoners taken by Russia’s allies on all fronts. It is obvious, however, that this figure should be higher, since other sources for Turkey alone indicate, for example, almost half a million captured on on all fronts.
Therefore, for our calculations, we will take the number of prisoners taken by Russia’s allies to the maximum. To do this, we subtract the figures given by Kersnovsky for each country from the corresponding figures in the Wikipedia article. We get: 0.15 million Turkish, 0.35 Austro-Hungarian and 0.75 million German prisoners. We will consider the last number as the total number of prisoners of war taken by the allies in the Western European theater of war.
The figure of 750 thousand German prisoners of war on the Western Front also finds indirect confirmation here, where the total number of German prisoners is indicated at 1 million. Subtracting from them the quarter of a million Germans captured by the Russian army, we get the same 750 thousand Germans captured on Western Europe.
At the same time, France lost 0.5 million prisoners, England - 170 thousand. Obviously, almost all of these French losses and about 90% of British losses (i.e., at least 150 thousand) occurred on the Western Front.
It is noteworthy that the total number of prisoners of war on both sides on the Eastern Front exceeded the number of those killed. The situation is the opposite of what took place on the Western Front. A large mutual number of prisoners is characteristic of maneuver warfare. It indicates that the campaigns on the Eastern Front were more dynamic and eventful than the fighting on the Western Front.
From the book Results of the Second World War. Conclusions of the vanquished author German Military SpecialistsHuman losses in the Second World War During the two world wars, humanity suffered enormous damage, exceeding all conventional concepts used in financial and economic statistics. Against the background of those figures that reflect the material losses of a particular people,
From the book Equipment and Weapons 2003 02 author Magazine "Equipment and Weapons"COMPARATIVE TABLE OF POPULATION (IN THOUSANDS) OF EUROPEAN COUNTRIES PARTICIPATED IN THE SECOND WORLD WAR (EXCEPT GERMANY AND THE SOVIET UNION) author Ardashev Alexey Nikolaevich
Appendix 1 Commanders-in-Chief of the armies of the front in the First World War in the Western (European) theater of operations Table Intelligence in the Russian Army in the First World War Simultaneously with the emergence of wars and armies, intelligence arose and began to develop as an important type of support. Its role and importance increased sharply with the transition to mass armies, the increase in the scale of military operations, CHAPTER II PARTICIPATION OF BORDER GUARDS IN THE FIRST WORLD WAR (1914–1918) The military-political situation in the world on the eve of the First World War was characterized by a sharp increase in contradictions between two groups of major European powers - Russia, England, France
