Casualties.

This is coolbert:

"'Quoi qu'on fasse, on perd beaucoup de monde.' ('Whatever you do,' (i.e. attack or defend) 'you lose a lot of men.')." - - Charles Mangin.

Charles Mangin, French general officer of the Great War [WW1], affectionately [?] referred to by his men as "The Butcher"!

Back to the subject of:

"9. 'That the British and the French had the better armies (Ferguson claims the German Army was superior)'"

"10. 'That the Allies were more efficient at killing Germans (Ferguson argues that the Germans were more efficient at killing the Allies)'"

From the "myths" of WW1.

Here with a list, not totally inclusive, and not selected with any "malice aforethought" or prejudice in any manner, those important "Battles of the First World War" [WW1], with special regard to causalities.

A listing confined to those combat engagements, combat actions, on the Western Front.

A listing showing extracts from the wiki entries in all cases.

Combatants in all cases English versus German, French versus German, or allies [English and French combined] versus German!

Casualties including all dead [KIA], wounded, captured [PoW] and missing. Missing in many cases a goodly portion of the whole, troops assumed to have been killed, bodies blown into smithereens or buried alive or otherwise, covered over in a trench, body not recovered [BNR]! In many cases, casualties "disputed", figures not totally clear, "ballpark", as they say!!

By chronological order:

1. First Battle of the Marne. [September 1914]

Casualties and losses:
Allies - - 263,000 German - - 220,000 Ratio 1.195:1. Advantage German.

2. First Battle of Ypres. [October 1914]

Casualties and losses:
Allies - - 145,000 German - - 135,000 Ratio 1.07:1. Advantage German.

3. First Battle of Champagne. [December 1914]

Casualties and losses:
French - - 90,000 German - - 90,000 Ratio 1:1. Advantage neither.

4. Battle of Neuve Chapelle. [March 1915]

Casualties and losses:
British - - 11,200 German - - 10,600 killed Ratio 1.05:1. Advantage German.

5. Second Battle of Ypres. [April 1915]

Casualties and losses:
Allies - - 70,000 Germans - - 35,000 Ratio 2:1. Advantage German.

6. Second Battle of Artois. [May 1915]

Casualties and losses:
Allies - - 110,000 German - - 75,000 Ratio 1.48:1. Advantage German.

7. Third Battle of Artois. [September 1915]

Casualties and losses:
Allies - - 110,000 German - - 51,000 Ratio 2.15:1. Advantage German.

8. Second Battle of Champagne. [September 1915]

Casualties and losses:
Allies - - 145,000 German - - 97,500 Ratio 1.48:1. Advantage German.

9. Battle of Loos. [September 1915]

Casualties and losses:
British - 50,000 German - - 25,000 Ratio 2:1. Advantage German.

10. Battle of Verdun. [February 1916]

Casualties and losses:
French - - 400,000-542,000 German - - 355,000-434,000 Ratio 1.18:1. Advantage German.

11. Second Battle of the Aisne. [April 1917]

Casualties and losses:
French - - 118,000 German - - 40,000 Ratio 2.95:1. Advantage German.

12. Battle of Arras. [April 1917]

Casualties and losses
British - - 158,000 German - - 120,000–130,000 Ratio 1.264:1. Advantage German.

13. Battle of Messines. [June 1917]

Casualties and losses:
British - - 23,749 German - - 25,000 Ratio .96/1. Advantage English.

14. Third Battle of Ypres. [Passchendaele] [July 1917]

Casualties and losses:
English - - 200,000 - 448,614 German - - 260,400 - 400,000 Ratio 0.98:1. Advantage English.

15. German Spring Offensive. [March 1918]

Allies - - 851,374 German - - 688,341 Ratio 1.23:1. Advantage German.

16. Third Battle of the Aisne. [May 1918]

Casualties and losses:
Allies - - 127,000 German - - 130,000 Ratio 0.97:1. Advantage allies.

"Defense is the stronger form of combat!" - - Clausewitz.

Meaning that defense is easier to do, you can accomplish more with less.

Do these figures, even taken as a whole, categorically suggest, or even are able to allow us to reasonably infer, that the German soldier of the WW1 era was superior to the allied troop? I am sure that based upon figures only, many would answer in the affirmative.

It should be noted that the German, for a period of slightly over three years, at least on the Western Front, was contented with maintaining a defensive posture. [Verdun represents a very marked exception in this regard, to be sure!!]

The German high command, keenly aware that a war of movement had become impossible, consolidated territorial gains, occupying in a very premeditated manner that terrain most conducive for the defensive, high ground and dominating terrain to the extent that such a landscape existed.

AND, constructing fortifications of an impressive nature, to include "mined" dugouts and strong-points [redoubts] capable of shielding troops for a prolonged period against even the most intensive and destructive of allied artillery bombardments. Dugouts and redoubts "mined", possibly designed by mining engineers and dug by professional miners. Formidable structures IN SOME CASES STILL IN PLACE, SO WELL-BUILT AS TO BE UNSCATHED BY THE PASSAGE OF ALMOST A CENTURY!!

Professor Niall once again is correct? It was the German who was "more efficient at killing" and "had the better army"? Your judgement required!

coolbert.