The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Territorial Divisions, 1914-1918,
by John Stirling
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at
www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you
will have to check the laws of the country where you are located before
using this eBook.
Title: The Territorial Divisions, 1914-1918
Author: John Stirling
Release Date: April 23, 2023 [eBook #70633]
Language: English
Produced by: Bob Taylor, Brian Coe and the Online Distributed
Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This file was
produced from images generously made available by The
Internet Archive)
*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE TERRITORIAL DIVISIONS,
1914-1918 ***
Transcriber’s Note
Italic text displayed as: _italic_
THE TERRITORIAL DIVISIONS
THE
TERRITORIAL
DIVISIONS
1914-1918
BY
J. STIRLING
LATE MAJOR
8TH BATT. ROYAL SCOTS
[Illustration: Decoration]
1922
LONDON & TORONTO
J. M. DENT & SONS LTD.
NEW YORK: E. P. DUTTON & CO.
_All rights reserved_
INTRODUCTION
These Notes are composed very largely of extracts, relating to the
work of Territorial Infantry Divisions, taken from the published
despatches. These divisions saw a great deal of heavy fighting
throughout the years 1916 and 1917, but the numbers, or Territorial
designations, of formations operating on the Western Front were
not given in despatches, as published in the _Gazette_, until the
Commander-in-Chief reported on 20th February, 1918, as to the battle
of Cambrai, November 1917. However, in the edition of _Sir Douglas
Haig’s Despatches_, published by Messrs. Dent, the divisions, which
are referred to as being engaged in the more important battles, are
identified by number; and, in compiling these Notes, advantage (with
permission) has been taken of this additional information.
The facts recited by the Field-Marshals and Generals, who commanded
the British Armies in the field, and the judgments expressed by them
in their despatches seem to be the best, if not the only reliable,
material from which to form an opinion on the value of the services
of the Territorial Force in the great struggle. It will generally be
admitted that the opinion of units on their own doings would not be
quite impartial and could not be used to form a basis for assessing
the value of the Force as a whole.
Under the Territorial Act of 1907 fourteen infantry divisions were
formed. Some of these sailed for the East in September and October,
1914, and all the fourteen had embarked for abroad before July 1915.
If it had not been necessary to keep in view the question of armament
and the possibility of invasion, several divisions might have been
in France before the close of the first battle of Ypres. If that had
been found practicable Lord French might have had fewer anxieties
in November 1914. His Lordship, in his despatches and elsewhere,
has borne testimony to the valuable services of the Territorial
battalions which were under his command in 1914.
It is doubtful if Britain ever quite realised what it owed to the
Territorials who went abroad before the New Armies were ready. Apart
from the four divisions which went to the East in the autumn of
1914, thus allowing the Indian Corps to be brought to France, the
Territorial strength, in France alone, in April 1915, before the
second great struggle at Ypres broke out, probably exceeded that of
the British Army at Mons, and it is by no means certain that the ten
Regular divisions plus two Indian divisions and one Canadian could
have held the great “gas attack.”
In September 1914 the Army Council decided to raise second line
units to take the place of those which had gone or were to go
abroad. Before the end of that year most counties had raised their
second lines, and in many, third line, or depot battalions to supply
drafts had been recruited. The original function of the second line
divisions was to form an army for use in the event of invasion being
attempted, but, eventually, eight of these divisions went to active
service abroad, chiefly in 1916; and one division of infantry, the
74th, was formed in the East, mainly from dismounted Yeomanry, and
acquitted itself with credit in Palestine and afterwards in France.
From those second line divisions which were not sent abroad some
individual battalions were taken and all “A” category men remaining
went as drafts.
Several of the second line divisions did extremely well, perhaps
because they had the advantage of a long mobilised training at home
before embarking, and the brotherhood or family spirit among all
ranks was thoroughly developed. The original Territorial Force was
doubtless deficient in many respects, but it started on mobilisation
with the enormous advantage that the officers, N.C.O.s and men of
a battalion were known to one another and the family spirit grew
quickly.
During the first four months of the War, as already stated, many
Territorial battalions went to the Front and were attached to Regular
divisions; some of these rejoined the Territorial divisions from
their own districts when the latter arrived in the battle area;
others were never in Territorial formations, serving throughout the
War with the Regular or New Armies. No account of the doings of these
latter battalions is given in these Notes, although some of the very
best units in the Force were among those which never served in it at
the Front. The value of their services, which was enhanced because
they were able to go abroad at a most critical period, should not be
forgotten.
The _Croix de Guerre_ (_Palme en Bronze_), a coveted but seldom
bestowed honour, was awarded by the President of the French Republic
to one such battalion, the 4th, The King’s Shropshire Light Infantry,
T.F., in the following circumstances, as set out in the orders of the
General commanding one of the French Armies:
“On June 6th, 1918, when the right flank of an English brigade, which
had been heavily engaged, was threatened by the enemy’s advance, the
battalion in reserve, the 1/4th Battalion of the King’s Shropshire
Light Infantry, was ordered to deliver a counter-attack against an
important position, from which the garrison had been driven. With
magnificent dash and after heavy fighting the position was recovered,
and with it the key to the whole line of defence, which made it
possible to re-establish the line and maintain it intact.”
At that time the battalion was serving with the 19th (New Army)
Division, south-west of Reims, when the enemy was making one of his
greatest efforts.
There were occasions when Territorial battalions earned the praise
of British Divisional, Corps and Army Commanders, while they were
serving in Regular or New Army formations; but we have not yet
adopted the system of giving honours to units, although there is much
to be said for it.
The Mounted Brigades, Artillery, Medical and Technical branches
of the Force do not come within the scope of these Notes, but no
assessment of its value would be just which neglected to take their
services into account.
It is generally recognised that the defeat of Turkey helped to bring
the end of the War nearer; it is not generally known, or realised,
that the Force under Sir Edmund Allenby, which between 31st October
and 9th December, 1917, smashed the Turks and cleared southern
Palestine from Gaza and Beersheba to Joppa and Jerusalem, was
practically a Territorial Army; nearly five-sixths of the Infantry
belonged to that Force, while the mounted men were chiefly Yeomanry
and Colonials.
At a conference as to the reorganisation of the Force held on 1st
April, 1919, when the Secretary of State for War met representatives
of the County Associations, Mr. Churchill said: “I could not meet
this body representing the Territorial Associations of the United
Kingdom without expressing on behalf of the War Office and on behalf
of King and country our profound gratitude to the Territorial Force
for the services which they have rendered in the Great War. There
have been killed in the Territorial Force more than 6,500 officers,
and more than 105,000 men; and in the killed, wounded, and missing,
26,900 officers and 565,000 men are included. This Force, which in
so many quarters was hardly regarded seriously as a military factor
before the Great War, has sent 1,045,000 men to fight against the
best troops of Germany and of Turkey, and having sustained these
terrible losses, has acquitted itself on all occasions in a manner
which has won the whole-hearted acceptance of their Regular comrades
and of the finest soldiers who have come to our assistance from the
Dominions overseas. Twenty-nine officers and forty-two men of other
ranks in the Territorial Force have gained the supreme honour of the
Victoria Cross.”
As some of the principal newspapers did not quote this part of Mr.
Churchill’s remarks it is excusable to repeat it here.
Most grateful acknowledgment is made of the permission granted by
the Controller of His Majesty’s Stationery Office to quote the
extracts given from the published despatches as appearing in the
_Gazette_, also, of that of Messrs. J. M. Dent and Sons, Limited, to
refer to their edition of _Sir Douglas Haig’s Despatches_, December
1915-April 1919, edited by Lieutenant-Colonel J. H. Boraston, O.B.E.,
Private Secretary to Earl Haig. Permission to refer to Sir Arthur
Conan Doyle’s _British Campaign in France and Flanders_ has also
very kindly been given. Although that work is not recognised as
an official history, Sir Arthur had a very large mass of official
material placed at his disposal, and much of the information he
gives, particularly in regard to the work of divisions and the losses
sustained by them in the big battles, is of great value. Thanks for
similar permissions are also tendered to the author of _The Fifth
Army in March 1918_, Mr. W. Shaw Sparrow, and his publishers Messrs.
John Lane, The Bodley Head, Limited, and to the author of _The
Story of the Fourth Army_, Major-General Sir Archibald Montgomery,
K.C.M.G., C.B., and his publishers Messrs. Hodder and Stoughton,
Limited. In a letter signifying his approval, Major-General
Montgomery remarks: “I know what excellent work the Territorial
Divisions did and I hope that they will always get full credit for
it.”
CONTENTS
PAGE
INTRODUCTION v
42ND (EAST LANCASHIRE) DIVISION. First Line 1
43RD (WESSEX DIVISION), FIRST LINE. 44TH (HOME
COUNTIES DIVISION), FIRST LINE. 45TH (WESSEX)
DIVISION, Second Line 15
46TH (NORTH MIDLAND) DIVISION. First Line 21
47TH (LONDON) DIVISION, FORMERLY 2ND LONDON. First
Line 29
48TH (SOUTH MIDLAND) DIVISION. First Line 41
49TH (WEST RIDING) DIVISION. First Line 51
50TH (NORTHUMBRIAN) DIVISION. First Line 59
51ST (HIGHLAND) DIVISION. First Line 75
52ND (LOWLAND) DIVISION. First Line 91
53RD (WELSH) DIVISION. First Line 109
54TH (EAST ANGLIAN) DIVISION. First Line 121
55TH (WEST LANCASHIRE) DIVISION. First Line 129
56TH (LONDON) DIVISION, FORMERLY 1ST LONDON. First
Line 141
57TH (WEST LANCASHIRE) DIVISION. Second Line 151
58TH (1ST LONDON) DIVISION. Second Line 155
59TH (NORTH MIDLAND) DIVISION. Second Line 165
60TH (2ND LONDON) DIVISION. Second Line 169
61ST (SOUTH MIDLAND) DIVISION. Second Line 179
62ND (WEST RIDING) DIVISION. Second Line 187
66TH (EAST LANCASHIRE) DIVISION. Second Line 195
APPENDIX 203
THE
TERRITORIAL DIVISIONS
42ND (EAST LANCASHIRE) DIVISION
FIRST LINE
The Division sailed for Egypt on September 10th, 1914, at a time when
sanguine people thought that the only rôle of the Territorial Force
would be to provide garrisons for our outlying Dependencies. It was
the first Territorial division to leave Britain.
While in Egypt the Division supplied part of the Canal Defence Force,
the Artillery and Engineers of the Division being engaged in February
1915, when the Turkish attack on the Canal was driven off. See
despatches from Sir A. Wilson, C.B., dated 11th February, 1915, and
1st August, 1915. In the former, paragraph 37, the 19th Lancashire
Battery R.F.A., T.F., was said to have rendered excellent service.
During the six months following their arrival in Egypt, the Division
did much hard marching and training of all kinds.
At the beginning of May 1915 the Division embarked for the
Dardanelles, and the Lancashire Fusilier Brigade, the 125th,
disembarked on 5th May (see Sir Ian Hamilton’s despatch of 20th May)
in time to take part in the sanguinary fighting, 6th-10th May, now
called the Second Battle of Krithia.
In his despatch of 26th August, 1915, Sir Ian Hamilton describes
the struggle. Our tired troops had to attack formidable opposing
lines, the enemy being well entrenched. The Brigade was attached
temporarily to the 29th Division. A certain amount of progress was
made on the 6th May. On the 7th at 3 p.m. the two brigades on the
left, Lancashire Fusilier Brigade and 88th Brigade, were held up,
but a general attack of the whole line ordered for 4.45 p.m. gained
ground. Heavy counter-attacks were delivered till dawn on the 10th,
these were repulsed. On the 11th the 42nd, which had completed its
disembarkation on the 9th, relieved the 29th Division, now worn out
after eighteen days’ hard fighting. Shortly after this the Force
settled down to what was practically siege warfare.
During the latter half of May the 42nd Division worked night and
day on a series of new fire and communication trenches in “no man’s
land,” which brought their front line within assaulting distance. On
25th May the Royal Naval and 42nd Divisions crept 100 yards nearer to
the Turks, and on the night of May 28th/29th the whole British Line
made a further small advance.
Each night till 3rd/4th June attacks by the enemy were made on the
new line, but these were repulsed.
A general assault was ordered for the 4th June. This is now the Third
Battle of Krithia. Sir Ian said: “The Manchester Brigade of the 42nd
Division advanced magnificently. In five minutes the first line of
Turkish trenches was captured and by 12.30 p.m. the Brigade had
carried with a rush the line forming their second objective, having
made an advance of 600 yards in all. The working parties got to work
without incident and the position here could not possibly have been
better.”
Unfortunately the advance was not successful on the front of the
29th Division, on the left of the 42nd, while later there was a
withdrawal of troops on the right. “The enfilade fire of the Turks
began to fall upon the Manchester Brigade of the 42nd Division which
was firmly consolidating the furthest distant line of trenches it
had so brilliantly won. After 1.30 p.m. it became increasingly
difficult for this gallant Brigade to hold its ground, heavy
casualties occurred, the Brigadier and many other officers were
wounded or killed, yet it continued to hold out with the greatest
tenacity and grit. Every effort was made to sustain the Brigade in
its position, its right flank was thrown back to make face against
the enfilade fire.... It became clear that unless the right of our
line could advance again it would be impossible for the Manchesters
to maintain the very pronounced salient in which they now found
themselves.” Eventually “By 6.30 p.m. therefore the 42nd Division
had to be extricated with loss from the second line Turkish trenches
and had to content themselves with consolidating on the first line
which they had captured within five minutes of commencing the attack.
Such was the spirit displayed by this Brigade that there was great
difficulty in persuading the men to fall back. Had their flanks been
covered nothing would have made them loosen their grip.... About 400
prisoners were taken in the attack. The majority of these captures
were made by the 42nd Division under Major-General W. Douglas.”
The Division was not heavily engaged in the battles of 28th June and
12th-13th July.
The despatch of 11th December, 1915, contains an account of the
Suvla Bay fighting and of certain operations undertaken on 6th-8th
August at Helles to contain the enemy there. The 29th Division was to
attack about 1200 yards of front and the 42nd was asked to capture
two trenches. The Turks were found “full of fight.” The 29th did
not progress. “Two resolute separate attacks were made by the 42nd
Division but both of these recoiled in face of the unexpected volume
of fire developed by the Turks.” The reason was that our attack and
one by the Turks had almost coincided and the enemy trenches were
full of men.
On August 7th the attack was renewed and there was again very heavy
fighting. “In the centre a stiff battle raged all day up and down a
vineyard.... A large portion of the vineyard had been captured in
the first dash and the East Lancashire men in this part of the field
stood their ground against a succession of vigorous counter-attacks.
The enemy suffered very severely in these counter-attacks which were
launched in strength and at short intervals.... Owing to the fine
endurance of the 6th and 7th Battalions of the Lancashire Fusiliers
it was found possible to hold the vineyard through the night, and a
massive column of the enemy which strove to overwhelm their thinned
ranks was shattered to pieces in the attempt.... For two more days
the troops (42nd Division) were called upon to show their qualities
of vigilance and power of determined resistance, for the enemy had
by no means yet lost hope of wresting from us the ground we had
won in the vineyard. This unceasing struggle was a supreme test
for battalions already exhausted by 48 hours’ desperate fighting,
and weakened by the loss of so many good leaders and men, but the
peculiar grit of the Lancastrians was equal to the strain, and they
did not fail. Two specially furious counter-attacks were delivered by
the Turks on the 8th August, one at 4.40 a.m., and another at 8.30
p.m., where again our bayonets were too much for them. Throughout
the night they made continuous bomb attacks, but the 6th Lancashire
Fusiliers and the 4th East Lancashire Regiment stuck gamely to their
task at the eastern corner of the vineyard. There was desperate
fighting also at the northern corner, where the personal bravery of
Lieutenant W. T. Forshaw, 1/9th Manchester Regiment, who stuck to his
post after his detachment had been relieved, an act for which he has
since been awarded the V.C., was largely instrumental in the repulse
of three very determined onslaughts.”
By the morning of August 9th “things were quieter and the sorely
tried troops were relieved.” The fighting, 6th to 13th August, is now
officially the “Actions of Krithia Vineyard.”
The Division, which was now at little more than one-third of its
establishment, received a reinforcement of dismounted yeomen in
September. It was incidentally mentioned in Sir C. C. Monro’s
despatch of 6th March, 1916, regarding the evacuation of Helles, as
being, in December 1915, badly in need of rest. The losses of the
Division on the Peninsula, killed, wounded and missing, the last
being mostly killed, exceeded 8000.
After the evacuation, 8th January, 1916, the Division had a short
stay at Mudros and was then taken to Egypt.
In Sir A. Murray’s despatch of 1st October, 1916, dealing with
operations east of the Canal, he stated that of the East Lancashire
troops commanded by Major-General Sir W. Douglas, only two battalions
were in action on the 4th August, now the Battle of Rumani, when the
Turks were driven back with heavy loss, but he said that the force
carried out a march under very trying conditions on the subsequent
days.
At no time during their long war-service did the Division experience
a greater physical strain than on this march. The 52nd on the
left were nearer the coast, with its sea air, and on the whole
had harder going. The two brigades of the 42nd were wading and
struggling in loose desert sand while the heat was intense. Very many
men collapsed. Sir A. Murray in the despatch, paragraph 5, said:
“Vigorous action, to the utmost limits of endurance was ordered
for the 5th August and the troops, in spite of the heat, responded
nobly.” Certainly the sufferings of the 127th Brigade on the 5th and
6th bounded on the limits of human endurance. The 125th had slightly
better ground and a shorter distance. The 126th was in reserve.
The Division, along with the 52nd, alternately formed the advance
guard, in co-operation with mounted troops, until the railhead
reached El Arish, when it returned to Kantara. Before the end of
February 1917 it had embarked at Alexandria for France.
After being re-equipped the Division as part of the III. Corps,
Fourth Army, entered the line in the Epéhy district and thereafter
held a sector about Havrincourt until 8th July, when they went out
for rest and training in the back area of the Third Army, about the
ground of the First Battle of the Somme.
In September 1917, the Division took over from the 15th in the Third
Battle of Ypres, in the area of the Fifth Army. On 6th September they
assaulted several fortified farms, but, in consequence of a little
hill on the left being still in the enemy’s possession, they failed
to make much progress. Their losses were heavy, partly because the
Division was so persistent in their pursuit of a success. During the
following days they had further fighting.
On the 26th the Division relieved the 66th in the Coastal Sector at
Nieuport. When relieved there by a French unit in November the 42nd
moved to Givenchy. There they constructed many concrete defence works
which earned the gratitude and praise of the 55th when the Lys battle
opened on 9th April, 1918. See 55th Division.
When, early in 1918, brigades were reduced to three battalions, any
surplus of men or of experience was transferred to the second line
division, the 66th, a gift which was to be of inestimable value
during the terrible fighting the 66th endured in the March Retreat.
About 23rd March, 1918, the 42nd were “bused” to the Arras-Bapaume
area to assist in arresting the great German offensive. On the 24th
they entered the line about Ervillers, and now had fighting of the
most trying description; the flanks being often “in the air,” partly
because divisions which had been in the battle since its commencement
on the 21st were almost worn to the bone.
In a supplementary despatch of 23rd April, 1918, as to the work of
different divisions, Sir Douglas Haig said: “In fierce fighting at
end of March and early in April around Bucquoy and Ablainzevelle the
42nd (East Lancashire) Division (T.) and 62nd (West Riding) Division
(T.) beat off many attacks and contributed greatly to the successful
maintenance of our line in this important sector.”
In Sir Douglas Haig’s despatch of 20th July, 1918, as to the March
Retreat, paragraph 33, Third Army front, he said: “A counter-attack
by the 42nd Division, under Major-General A. Solly-Flood (on 25th
March) drove the enemy out of Sapignies,” and notwithstanding that
the Germans maintained great pressure and made many attacks, the 42nd
Division at end of the day held Ervillers “where the 1/10th Battalion
Manchester Regiment, 42nd Division, had repulsed eight attacks.”
The fighting 24th/25th March is now the “First Battle of Bapaume,
1918.” Paragraph 42, as to the 26th-27th March: “Elsewhere all his
assaults were heavily repulsed by troops of the 62nd, 42nd and Guards
Divisions.”
Paragraph 45 deals with the great attack on 28th March, now
officially the “First Battle of Arras, 1918,” when the fighting was
“of the utmost intensity.” “On the southern portion of his attack the
enemy’s repulse was, if possible, even more complete than on the new
front east of Arras.... The 42nd Division drove off two attacks from
the direction of Ablainzevelle.”
The worst was over and the line now stabilised, but on the 5th and
6th April the enemy launched very heavy attacks in the neighbourhood
where the 42nd were holding the line. See also 47th Division. These
new attacks were also repulsed. This is now the “Battle of the Ancre,
1918.”
In the _History of the 42nd Division_ by Mr. F. P. Gibbon (_Country
Life_ Office, London, 1921, price 6s. 6d.) there is quoted an
order by the Commander of the IV. Corps, Sir G. M. Harper, in
which he said: “The Corps Commander congratulates 42nd Division on
their magnificent behaviour during the last few days of fighting.
Numerous heavy attacks have been made by the enemy and have been
completely repulsed with heavy loss, and the capture of prisoners and
machine-guns. He heartily thanks the troops for their courage and
endurance, and is confident that they will continue to hold the line
against all attacks.”
The Divisional Commander also issued a special order congratulating
the Division on their “magnificent work,” and subsequently in his
farewell order, dated 18th March, 1919, after referring to the
Division being hurried in buses “to help in stemming the great enemy
offensive,” he said: “This it effectually did in an epic battle, in
a manner which has earned for it undying fame.... For seventeen
consecutive days it remained in action, and held its ground in a
manner that cannot be surpassed by the performance of any troops in
any period of history.”
Mr. Gibbon states the losses of the Division between 24th March and
8th April at 2963. He makes it clear that on no occasion did the
Division retire except under orders.
Throughout the summer the Division, with brief intervals, held
the line about Gommecourt and Hebuterne, and when the Third Army
attacked, on 21st August, the Division advanced through Serre.
The supplementary despatch of 13th September, 1918, said: “The 42nd
Division, which, in the latter days of March, fought with great
gallantry north of Bapaume, took part in the attack launched by us
on the 21st August and in spite of obstinate resistance by the enemy
captured Miraumont. During the following days it had heavy fighting
on a number of occasions but, before the end of the month, reached
and captured Riencourt-lez-Bapaume.”
This good work was again referred to in the despatch of 21st
December, 1918, paragraph 21 of which shows that at 4.55 a.m. on
21st August the IV. and V. Corps of the Third Army attacked, the
42nd Division being in the assaulting troops of the IV. Corps.
“The enemy’s foremost defences were carried rapidly and without
difficulty.”
The fighting 21st-23rd August is now officially designated the
“Battle of Albert, 1918.” Paragraph 22 deals with the fighting on
23rd and 24th August. “Miraumont, which for three days had resisted
our attacks, was taken by the 42nd Division (Major-General A.
Solly-Flood) with many prisoners and, pressing forward, the same
Division seized Pys.”
Mr. Gibbon states that between 21st August and 6th September the
Division took 1261 prisoners and 24 guns, and their casualties were
253 killed and 1305 wounded.
The fighting 31st August-3rd September is now the “Second Battle of
Bapaume.”
During the remainder of the “Advance to Victory,” the 42nd alternated
with the New Zealand Division in one of the two divisional sections
of the IV. Corps.
On 27th September the Division attacked and broke through the portion
of the old Hindenburg line between Havrincourt and Beaucamp. After
two days’ unceasing fighting they were able to claim over 1700
prisoners and nine field guns. Their own losses were about 1000.
In paragraph 35 of the despatch “The Battle of Cambrai and the
Hindenburg line, 27th September-5th October,” Sir Douglas Haig
remarked: “The attack proceeded according to plan from the
commencement. On the right strong resistance was encountered at
Beaucamp. Several strong counter-attacks were made during the day in
this neighbourhood, but in spite of them troops of the 5th and 42nd
Divisions successfully established the right flank of our attack
between Beaucamp and Ribecourt.”
The fighting 27th September-1st October is now officially designated
the “Battle of the Canal du Nord,” and that on 8th-9th October is
the “Battle of Cambrai, 1918.”
During the latter period the Division was resting about Havrincourt
Wood but re-entered the line on the 12th.
On 20th October at 2 a.m. the Third Army and a portion of the
First Army made an attack on the line of the Selle river, north
of Le Cateau. On this occasion the Division carried all its four
objectives. The despatch, paragraph 46, deals with the “Battle of the
Selle,” and states: “On this occasion also the enemy’s resistance was
serious, and he had been able to erect wire entanglements along the
greater part of the line. Our advance was strongly contested at every
point, frequent counter-attacks being made. Supported by a number of
Tanks which had successfully crossed the river, our infantry after
severe fighting ... gained their objectives on the high ground east
of the Selle, pushing out patrols as far as the river Harpies.”
Paragraph 47 described another assault made on the 23rd October, in
which the 42nd is included among the attacking troops. “At the end
of the day the western outskirts of the Forêt de Mormal had been
reached.”
Both on the 20th and the 23rd there was much bitter and often
hand-to-hand fighting. The 42nd had as its opponents a crack German
division, fresh from reserve, the 25th and part of another, and
success was only attained by a fine exhibition of skilful tactics and
great fearlessness on the part of the troops. The Divisional R.E. did
particularly well at the crossing of the Selle.
The map opposite page 294 of Messrs. Dent’s edition of _Sir Douglas
Haig’s Despatches_ shows that the 42nd Division was among the troops
employed at the Battle of the Sambre, commencing 4th November. The
Division took over from the New Zealand Division in the Forêt de
Mormal and, becoming the spear-head of the IV. Corps, kept up the
pressure. This was a task of very great difficulty as the roads
through the Forest had been mined and otherwise destroyed, and off
the roads, owing to continued rain, the ground was a morass. In the
words of a Special Order by the G.O.C. Division they “forced the
passage of the bridgeless River Sambre in face of severe enemy fire
and captured Hautmont.”
On Armistice day the Division was just east of the Maubeuge-Avesnes
road.
All through the “Advance to Victory” the work of the 42nd was up to
the very high standard they themselves had set in Gallipoli in 1915,
and unofficial writers have uniformly referred to their services in
that Advance in terms of the highest praise.
In the Farewell Order before referred to Major-General Solly-Flood
said: “From the 21st August until the Armistice on 11th November
it played a continuous part in the great offensive. We can with
reason be proud of the Division’s share in that fighting. Its record
includes an advance of 64 miles during which it fought in 12 general
actions—each of several days’ duration. Its captures include 18 towns
and villages, over 4,000 prisoners, 37 guns of all calibre, 122
trench mortars, 455 machine guns and much other valuable booty.
“Early in 1918 I set the Division a motto: ‘Go one better,’ believing
the spirit it expressed would always carry them to success. It has
invariably acted up to that motto, and it is my pride to be able to
say that never has the Division been called upon to undertake an
operation in which it did not succeed, and never was it set a task
which it did not more than accomplish.”
These are the words of a friendly critic but they are something
more than “faint praise.” To have so thoroughly satisfied a Regular
officer of the standing of their Commander meant service of great
merit.
The foregoing account had been written and, like a number of those
which follow, had been gone over by a senior officer of the Division
before Mr. Gibbon’s _History of the 42nd_ was published, but the
losses and certain other details concerning 1918 are as given by Mr.
Gibbon. His chronicle gives a full account of the March battle and of
the last Advance, and claims which he makes, such as that the losses
of the Division were increased because it attained its objectives up
to time and while its flanks were uncovered, are substantiated by
other authorities.
43RD (WESSEX) DIVISION. FIRST LINE
44TH (HOME COUNTIES) DIVISION. FIRST LINE
45TH (WESSEX) DIVISION. SECOND LINE
These three divisions sailed for the East early in the war, chiefly
in September 1914, and were among the first Territorial units to
leave Britain. As regards being mentioned in despatches as divisional
units they were unfortunate, no such references having been made, but
their services to the Empire were, nevertheless, very great.
It has been suggested that if these three divisions had been sent to
France when they went East, two months’ intensive training would have
fitted them to be of use in the First Battle of Ypres, certainly they
might have been veterans before the Second. They would have stood the
climatic conditions much better than the two Indian divisions, and
a vast amount of shipping might have been saved. Probably political
reasons demanded that a representation from India should appear
on the Western Front, while, as Mr. Churchill said on 1st April,
1919, the Territorial Force was, in many quarters, hardly regarded
seriously as a military factor before the Great War.
The public has learned that over 20,000 Territorials were still
in India in the beginning of 1919 and were not relieved until the
close of that year. Throughout the war, and for a year after the
Armistice, the garrison of India was largely composed of these
divisions, but units of all three saw much heavy fighting in various
theatres. It should be remembered also that facilities for leave did
not exist in the East.
Doubtless imperious necessity compelled the breaking up of these
divisions, and the sending of a battalion in one direction and its
sister units in others.
In the despatches from India and Mesopotamia one misses that
appreciation, so freely given by Sir John French to even individual
battalions of the Territorial Force in the early stages of the war on
the western front, and in these Eastern despatches the letters T.F.
are not appended to the names of battalions. In Lists of Mention,
however, this omission is remedied.
In Sir John Nixon’s despatch of 1st January, 1916, thirty-five
officers and men of the Hampshire Regiment, T.F., were mentioned for
good services on the Euphrates, 26th June to 25th July, 1915.
About the close of 1915 and early in 1916 the 1/4th Hampshire
Regiment, 1/4th Somersetshire Light Infantry and 1/4th Devonshire
Regiment, all of the 43rd, and 1/5th Royal West Surrey and 1/5th East
Kent Regiments of the 44th Division were in the Mesopotamia Army and
had heavy casualties. Some of the 43rd Division were actually in Kut
when it was besieged and were taken prisoners on the surrender of
General Townshend’s force. Other battalions of these three divisions
sent drafts from India to Mesopotamia, which were, for the most part,
attached to Regular regiments.
Officers and other ranks of the 4th East Kent, 4th Devons, 6th
Devons, and 2/5th Hampshire were mentioned in General Maude’s last
despatch.
In September 1918, the 1/4th Hampshire of the 43rd was serving in a
force which was operating in Transcaspia.
There was published by the War Office on 13th January, 1920, a
list of names, brought forward by Lieut.-General W. R. Marshall,
K.C.B., for distinguished and gallant services with the Mesopotamia
Expeditionary Force; the following units are represented in it:
43rd Division 1/4th and 1/6th Devonshire
1/4th Somersetshire Light Infantry
1/4th and 1/6th Hampshire
1/4th Dorsetshire
44th Division 1/5th Royal West Surrey
1/5th East Kent
1/5th East Surrey
1/5th Royal West Kent
1/9th Middlesex
45th Division 2/7th Hampshire
2/6th Devonshire
The 1/5th Duke of Cornwall’s Light Infantry, originally of the
43rd, were Pioneers to the 61st Division in France in March 1918,
and a successful counter-attack by the battalion is referred to in
paragraph 31 of Sir Douglas Haig’s despatch of 20th July, 1918.
The 1/7th and 1/8th Middlesex of the 44th served throughout most
of the war with the 56th London Division in France. The 1/7th was
selected for the Army of the Rhine.
The 2/4th Royal West Surrey, the 2/10th Middlesex and the 2/4th Royal
West Kent of the 67th, Second Line, Home Counties Division, served
with the 53rd, Welsh, Division and saw much fighting at Suvla Bay,
Gallipoli, and in Palestine. Latterly the 2/4th West Surrey was in
France, and was selected for the Army of the Rhine.
Sir A. Wilson’s despatch of 1st March, 1916, deals with operations
in Western Egypt at the close of 1915, and the beginning of 1916.
He mentions the 2/7th and 2/8th Middlesex, of the 67th Division, as
forming part of the force employed.
When in April 1918 the 52nd Division and other troops were taken from
Palestine to France certain units of these divisions were brought
to Palestine and along with the Indian troops were engaged in the
last victorious operations in that sphere. Among the mentions by Sir
E. Allenby for good work in Palestine, March to September 1918, the
following battalions are represented:
43rd Division 1/4th Duke of Cornwall’s Light Infantry
1/5th Somersetshire Light Infantry
1/4th and 1/5th Devonshire Regiment
1/4th Wiltshire Regiment
45th Division 2/5th Hampshire Regiment
2/4th Dorset Regiment
The 1/5th Devonshire of the 43rd and the 2/4th Hampshire of the
45th joined the 62nd Division in France in June 1918 and were with
it until the Armistice. When the 62nd was with the French Army on
the Ardre, upon the east side of the salient between the Aisne and
the Marne, in July 1918, these two battalions did work which was
highly spoken of and quite worthy of the famous division to which
they were attached. They gained a large number of awards in the
last five months’ fighting. This remark applies particularly to the
2/4th Hampshire, the number of whose awards for work in France was
quite exceptional. As to the 62nd Division, see _The West Riding
Territorials in the Great War_, Kegan Paul and Co. Both the above
battalions were chosen for the Army of Occupation.
The official lists issued by the War Office in November 1920 showed
that awards were gained by a non-commissioned officer of the 1/4th
East Kent for valuable service when with the Baluchistan Force, and
by men of the 1/4th and 1/7th Hampshire for gallant service when with
the Waziristan Force as late as 25th May, 1919.
For the Armies of Occupation there were chosen: Mesopotamia, the
1/5th East Kent, 1/5th Royal West Kent and 1/5th East Surrey of the
44th, and the 1/4th Dorsetshire of the 43rd. For Persia the 1/4th
Hampshire of the 43rd. For Egypt the 1/4th Wiltshire and 1/5th
Somerset Light Infantry of the 43rd, while the 1/8th Hampshire was
also selected for Egypt and the 1/9th (Cyclists) for Siberia.
Although they were never operating as divisions the units from Wessex
and the Home Counties can at least count themselves as very “far
travelled.”
46TH (NORTH MIDLAND) DIVISION
FIRST LINE
This Division sailed for France in February 1915. One brigade was
in reserve at the Battle of Neuve Chapelle, 10th-13th March, see
paragraph 4 of the despatch from Sir John French, dated 5th April,
1915. In that despatch, paragraph 9, Sir John French said: “Several
T.F. Battalions were engaged in the most critical moments of the
fighting which occurred in the middle of March and they acquitted
themselves with the utmost credit.” He looked forward to the T.F.
troops being employed as divisions and said: “These opinions are
fully borne out by the results of the close inspection I have
recently made of the North Midland Division under Major-General The
Hon. Montague-Stuart-Wortley and the 2nd London Division (afterwards
the 47th) under Major-General Barter.”
This generous appreciation gave great encouragement not only to
those of the Force in France, but to those who were then preparing
themselves to go abroad, as well as to those who were working for the
Territorial Force at home.
The Division spent the next six months in front of Neuve Église
and in the Ypres salient, and at times had sharp fighting. It was
involved in the first “Flammenwerfer” attack but stood its ground and
repelled the enemy.
The 46th Division is mentioned in Sir John French’s last despatch
dated 31st July, 1916, as having on 13th October, 1915, taken part
in an attack on the Hohenzollern Redoubt and Fosse 8, near Loos. The
Division retook the redoubt, but as they could make no progress up
the trenches to Fosse 8, and as the Redoubt was commanded from Fosse
8, they were pressed back to the west edge of the Redoubt where they
made a defensive line.
See also an authorised account by the Press Association Correspondent
written on 24th November, 1915, who was then able to stand on the
part captured and look back over the glacis crossed by the Division,
who had done all that the bravest could do.
The Division was, in December 1915, ordered to Egypt; two brigades
had arrived there when the move was countermanded and, in February
1916, it was concentrated in the Arras district, where it took over a
sector hitherto held by our French allies.
Sir Douglas Haig’s despatch of 23rd December, 1916, which deals with
the Somme battle, paragraph 8 (Dent’s edition), shows that the 46th
and 56th Divisions, VII. Corps, Third Army, made a subsidiary attack
at Gommecourt on 1st July, 1916. “The subsidiary attack at Gommecourt
also forced its way into the enemy’s positions; but there met with
such vigorous opposition that, as soon as it was considered that the
attack had fulfilled its object, our troops were withdrawn.”
The losses of both the 46th and 56th Divisions were very heavy. None
of the other divisions operating north of La Boisselle succeeded
in consolidating the ground gained on 1st July. At that part of the
line the enemy seems to have expected the attack and had made the
most ample preparation to meet it. The efforts of these divisions,
however, certainly contributed to the success of those further south.
In March 1917, when there were signs of a German retreat, the
Division was about Bucquoy, as part of the II. Corps, and at times
had sharp fighting and considerable losses. Thereafter they were
taken to the north of Arras, where they were when the Battle of Arras
opened on 9th April.
The despatch of 25th December, 1917, paragraph 36, Dent’s edition,
deals with “Minor Operations” in the Lens area and states:
“Substantial progress was made in this area on the 5th and 19th
June, and five days later North Midland troops (46th Division,
Major-General W. Thwaites) captured an important position on the
slopes of a small hill south-west of Lens, forcing the enemy to make
a considerable withdrawal on both sides of the river.” On 28th June
an attack was made by the 46th Division and the 3rd and 4th Canadian
Divisions on a front of two and a half miles astride the Souchez
river. “All our objectives were gained,” and 300 prisoners taken.
At that time the Division was in the I. Corps. Sir A. Conan Doyle
states that when they were taken out on 2nd July, after ten weeks’
continuous service in the line, none of the battalions were more than
300 strong. The tasks set to their neighbours, the Canadians, and to
the 46th involved almost constant fighting, many strong positions
being assaulted between the middle of April and the end of June.
The Division remained in the Lens-Givenchy area for many months. They
were frequently engaged about Givenchy when the enemy made his great
effort in that district in April 1918 (see 55th Division). They took
part in the first advance eastward which began at the end of August.
In September they were relieved and taken south where on the 19th
they joined the IX. Corps, Fourth Army, and they remained in it till
the battle of one hundred days was closed by the Armistice.
In Sir Douglas Haig’s despatch of 21st December, 1918, paragraph 36,
“The Hindenburg Line broken,” 29th September, he said, “On the Fourth
Army front the 46th Division (Major-General G. F. Boyd) greatly
distinguished itself in the capture of Bellenglise. The village is
situated in the angle of the Scheldt canal, which, after running in a
southerly direction from Bellicourt, here bends sharply to the east
towards the Le Tronquoy tunnel. Equipped with life-belts and carrying
mats and rafts, the 46th Division stormed the western arm of the
canal at Bellenglise and to the north of it, some crossing the canal
on footbridges which the enemy was given no time to destroy, others
dropping down the sheer sides of the canal wall, and having swum or
waded to the far side, climbing up the farther wall to the German
trench lines on the eastern bank. Having captured these trenches,
the attacking troops swung to the right and took from flank and
rear the German defences along the eastern arm of the canal, and on
the high ground south of the canal, capturing many prisoners and
German batteries in action before the enemy had had time to realise
the new direction of the attack. So thorough and complete was the
organisation for this attack, and so gallantly, rapidly and well was
it executed by the troops, that this one division took on this day
over 4000 prisoners and 70 guns.”
This feat of arms seems to be as fine as anything done in the whole
course of the war.
The despatch as published in the _Gazette_ speaks of the 32nd
Division passing through the 46th and taking Lehaucourt and Magny La
Fosse, but according to the history of the 46th[1] the 46th captured
these villages which were within their objectives. The 32nd then
passed through them at 5.30 p.m. and next day took Levergies. The
error is corrected by a note on page 283 of Messrs. Dent’s _Sir
Douglas Haig’s Despatches_.
A detailed account of the battle of 29th September is given by
Major-General Sir Archibald Montgomery in his _Story of the Fourth
Army_ (Hodder and Stoughton). Towards the close of that account he
says: “The success attending the operations of the IX. Corps was
primarily due to the dash and determination with which the troops
of the 46th Division pressed forward to their objective, and to the
excellent leadership and initiative of the subordinate commanders.
When their flanks were exposed, they exerted pressure where the
enemy was weak and gave way, and only strengthened their flanks just
sufficiently to safeguard them.”
The fighting 29th September-2nd October is now designated the “Battle
of St. Quentin Canal.”
The Division captured Ramicourt and broke the Beaurevoir-Fonsomme
line, after stiff fighting, on 3rd October—the “Battle of the
Beaurevoir Line.”
One brigade, the 139th, was attached to the 6th Division, for an
attack on 8th October when Mannequin Hill and other strong positions
were captured. (_Story of Fourth Army_, pp. 194 and 195.)
The Division was in the line on 9th and 10th October during the
“Battle of Cambrai, 1918,” when rapid progress was made until they
were stopped at Riquerval Wood. They were again employed in the
Battle of the Selle River, 17th-25th October, see paragraphs 37 and
46 of the despatch.
In his _Breaking the Hindenburg Line_, Major Priestley gives detailed
accounts of the Battle of Ramicourt, 3rd October, and the Battle
of Andigny or Riquerval, a phase of the Battle of the Selle, 17th
and 18th October. He points out that on the 3rd, the 46th not only
took Ramicourt but captured and cleared Montbrehain to the east
of it, 1000 prisoners being taken in the latter place; but, in
consequence of the Division on the left of the 46th having been held
up, the latter had to withdraw from Montbrehain, establishing their
line to the west of it. He also mentions that both on the 3rd and
17th/18th October, as well as in the preliminary actions between
these dates, the enemy’s resistance was much more stubborn than at
Bellenglise, where the crossing of the canal had probably upset all
his calculations and temporarily knocked the heart out of him.
The IX. Corps took part in the “Battle of the Sambre,” 4th November,
and continued to move forward till the 10th November. The 46th
Division, which had been out at rest from 18th October till 1st
November, on the night of the 4th relieved brigades of the 1st and
32nd Divisions and continued to press and pursue the enemy. On the
evening of the 6th they entered Cartignies and on the 7th, in face of
resistance, crossed the Petite Helpe. On the 8th they had crossed the
La Capelle-Avesnes road and when the Armistice came the Division was
east of Sains.
The 1/5th South Staffordshire was selected for the Army of the
Rhine.
FOOTNOTES:
[1] _Breaking the Hindenburg Line. The Story of the 46th (North
Midland) Division_, by Major Priestley. London. Fisher Unwin.
47TH (LONDON) DIVISION, FORMERLY 2ND LONDON. FIRST LINE
The 47th Division went to France in March 1915, and a reference
to its being inspected by Sir John French will be found under the
46th. In his despatch of 15th June, 1915, Sir John French mentioned
that the First Army made an effort to advance its line in the Neuve
Chapelle-Festubert district during May, the Battle of Festubert,
and said, paragraph 5: “On 24th and 25th May the 47th Division (2nd
London Territorial) succeeded in taking some more of the enemy’s
trenches, and in making good the ground gained to the east and
north.” Various writers say that in this, the Division’s first big
battle, they made a very fine advance and held the ground gained
against many counter-attacks, during the succeeding days.
In Sir John French’s despatch of 15th October, 1915, as to the
Battle of Loos, etc., he said that the 47th Division was on the
extreme right of the British Army on 25th September. Paragraph 10:
“The 47th Division on the right of the IV. Corps rapidly swung its
left forward and occupied the southern outskirts of Loos and a big
double slag-heap opposite Grenay known as the Double Crassier.
Thence it pushed on and by taking possession of the cemetery, the
enclosures and chalk pits south of Loos, succeeded in forming a
strong defensive flank. The London Territorial Division acquitted
itself most creditably. It was skilfully led and the troops carried
out their task with great energy and determination. They contributed
largely to our success in this part of the field.”
Paragraph 11: “As the success of the 47th Division on the right of
the IV. Corps caused me less apprehension of a gap in our line near
that point I ordered the Guards Division up to Nœux-les-Mines.”
Paragraph 15, 27th September: “The 47th Division on the right of the
Guards captured a wood further to the south and repulsed a severe
hostile counter-attack”; and later: “The Division made a little more
ground to the south, capturing one field gun and a few machine guns.”
Sir Douglas Haig’s despatch of 19th May, 1916, Messrs. Dent’s
edition, paragraph 3, shows that the 47th (Major-General Sir C. St.
L. Barter) and 25th Divisions were holding positions on the Vimy
Ridge on 21st May, 1916, when the enemy attacked, making “a small
gain of no strategic or tactical importance.”
The Division was taken to the Somme, and the despatch of 23rd
December, 1916, paragraph 27 (Dent’s edition), shows that as part of
the III. Corps, Fourth Army, it was in the attack of 15th September,
1916. “On our left High Wood was at last carried, after many hours
of very severe fighting, reflecting great credit on the attacking
battalions of the 47th Division.”
Paragraph 31, note, shows the Division was employed on 1st October,
1916, in a successful attack on Eaucourt l’Abbaye and the defences
east and west of it.
A week later the Division made an attack on the Butte de Warlencourt,
an extremely strong point, but were not successful. Already the
mud was making movement almost impossible. The fighting 15th-22nd
September is now designated the Battle of Flers-Courcelette, and that
between 1st and 18th October the “Battle of the Transloy Ridges.”
The despatch of 25th December, 1917, paragraph 33 (Dent’s edition),
contains an account of the Messines battle on 7th June, 1917. “Heavy
fighting took place in Wytschaete and further north. London troops
(47th Division, Major-General Sir G. F. Gorringe) encountered a
serious obstacle in another strong point known as the White Château.
This redoubt was captured while the morning was yet young.” The
41st and 47th had further resistance in Ravine Wood, “killing many
Germans.” In this battle the 47th Division was in the X. Corps,
Second Army.
The 47th Division was in the later stages of the Third Battle of
Ypres in the autumn of 1917, see _History of the 25th Division_, by
Col. Kincaid-Smith, Harrison and Sons, page 94. They were in the
undesirable Glencorse Wood area. About the third week of August they
relieved the 8th Division, and as part of the II. Corps had heavy
fighting about 22nd to 24th August when, at serious cost, their line
was advanced. On 9th September they took over from the 25th in the
same district.
In Sir Douglas Haig’s despatch of 20th February, 1918, dealing with
the “Battle of Cambrai, 1917,” he said, paragraph 11, German attack
of 30th November, 1917: “In the northern area the German attack was
not launched until some two hours later. This was the enemy’s main
attack and was carried out with large forces and great resolution.”
“After a preliminary bombardment and covered by an artillery barrage
the enemy’s infantry advanced shortly after 9 a.m. in dense waves, in
the manner of his attack in the first battle of Ypres. In the course
of the morning and afternoon no less than five principal attacks were
made in this area, and on one portion of the attack as many as eleven
waves of German infantry advanced successively to the assault. On the
whole of this front a resolute endeavour was made to break down by
sheer weight of numbers the defence of the London Territorials and
other English battalions holding the sector.”
“In this fighting the 47th (London) Division, T.” (Major-General
Sir G. F. Gorringe) (which had entered the battle on the night of
the 28th-29th November), “the 2nd Division and the 56th (London)
Division, T., greatly distinguished themselves and there were
accomplished many deeds of great heroism.” After describing attacks
made during the day, which were driven back, the enemy’s losses
being enormous, the despatch says: “Early in the afternoon the enemy
again forced his way into our foremost positions in this locality
(west of Bourlon), opening a gap between the 1/6th and 1/15th
Battalions, London Regiment. Counter-attacks led by the two battalion
commanders with all available men, including the personnel of their
headquarters, once more restored the situation. All other attacks
were beaten off with the heaviest losses to the enemy.
“The greatest credit is due to the troops at Masnières (29th
Division), Bourlon and Mœuvres for the very gallant service performed
by them on this day. But for their steady courage and staunchness in
defence the success gained by the enemy on the right of our battle
front might have had serious consequences.”
Paragraph 13, withdrawal from Bourlon, etc., night of 4th/5th
December, 1917: “Much skill and courage were shown by our covering
troops in this withdrawal, and an incident which occurred on the
afternoon of 6th December, in the neighbourhood of Graincourt,
deserves special notice. A covering party, consisting of two
companies of the 1/15th Battalion London Regiment, 47th Division,
much reduced in strength by the fighting at Bourlon Wood, found their
flank exposed by a hostile attack further east and were enveloped
and practically cut off. These companies successfully cut their way
through to our advanced line of resistance, where they arrived in
good order after having inflicted serious casualties on the enemy.”
As to the Cambrai battle see also under 51st, 55th, 56th and 62nd
Divisions.
The Division was moved south, and in January 1918 took over in the
Ribecourt area of the Flesquières salient, east of Havrincourt Wood.
As part of the V. Corps, Third Army, it was involved in the March
Retreat although perhaps not so seriously as the Fifth Army further
south. In his despatch of 20th July, 1918, paragraph 17, speaking of
the events of 21st March, Sir Douglas Haig said: “The enemy’s advance
south and north of the Flesquières salient rendered a withdrawal
by the V. Corps and by the 9th Division on its right necessary
also.” Orders were issued accordingly. These different withdrawals
were carried out successfully during the night. Paragraph 21: “The
Divisions holding the Flesquières salient were not seriously involved
during the morning of 22nd March but in the evening strong attacks
were made both at Villers Plouich and at Havrincourt. All these
attacks were repulsed with great slaughter.”
Paragraph 28, 23rd March: “At the junction of the Third and Fifth
Armies the situation was less satisfactory and as the day wore on it
became critical.”
As the result of the withdrawal of the VII. Corps, Fifth Army, a
gap was formed between the flanks of the V. and VII. Corps though
“vigorous efforts were made” by the 47th Division of the V. Corps
and the 2nd of the VII. Corps to establish touch. These were
unsuccessful; consequently, “The right of the V. Corps was forced
back by pressure from the south-east first to Four Winds Farm, south
of Ytres, where troops of the 47th Division made a gallant stand
until nightfall.”
Paragraph 30, as to 24th March: “The 47th Division held the village
of Rocquiny from sunrise until well into the afternoon, beating off
all attacks with rifle and machine-gun fire until the enemy worked
round their flank and forced them to withdraw.”
On the 25th the Division, now very exhausted, was again heavily
attacked near Contalmaison but successfully repulsed the enemy. The
retreat was continued across the Ancre to about Bouzincourt north of
Albert and, with intervals of rest, the Division remained in that
area till the British advanced in August, although not always exactly
in the same portion of the line.
The fighting 21st-23rd March is now designated the “Battle of St.
Quentin,” and that on the 24th-25th the “First Battle of Bapaume.”
The Division was engaged near Albert when the enemy attacked the four
British Divisions in that neighbourhood, 4th, 5th, and 6th April, the
“Battle of the Ancre, 1918.” The attack was pressed by large forces
with great vigour and determination, but the line, though dented,
remained unbroken. The depleted and weary ranks of the 47th responded
to every call.
In his _Fifth Army in March 1918_ (John Lane, 1921), perhaps the
most searching, fearless, and able work published in Britain on the
war on land, Mr. Sparrow comments on those passages of the despatch
which deal with the withdrawal from the Flesquières salient and the
subsequent loss of connection between the Third and Fifth Armies. Mr.
Sparrow thinks that the gap was caused primarily by the delay on the
part of the V. Corps in withdrawing from the salient, and secondly
because that corps, of which the 47th was the right division, tended
north from the boundary line previously laid down by G.H.Q. He shows
that the VII. Corps of the Fifth Army, although hardly pressed, did
its best to maintain connection, and with that object crossed the
boundary into Third Army ground. He concludes that the northward
trend of the V. Corps was partly attributable to the break in the
Third Army front about Lagnicourt. Doubtless this was the case.
Certainly the Third Army was in very serious difficulties between
the 21st and 29th, and its withdrawals were sometimes more rapid
and carried further than those of the Fifth. To assume that all the
“breaks” were on the front of the Fifth is to ignore the despatch
itself.
In his telegraphic despatch of 13th September, 1918, as to the
work of various divisions, Sir Douglas Haig said: “The 47th was
continuously engaged in March throughout the retreat, fighting
successful rearguard actions from La Vacquerie to Albert. Going
into line on August 13th, in the neighbourhood of Morlancourt, it
fought its way forward to St. Pierre-Vaast Wood, which it cleared of
the enemy, overcoming fierce hostile resistance and capturing many
prisoners and several guns in the course of its advance. Included
among the latter was a German field gun battery which was rushed
while in action firing over open sights.”
The Division was then in the III. Corps, Fourth Army.
The despatch of 21st December, 1918, paragraph 21, shows that the
III. Corps including the 47th, 12th and 18th Divisions attacked on
22nd August, during the “Battle of Albert, 1918”; the 3rd Australian
and 38th Divisions co-operated. The left of the Fourth Army was
brought forward and over 2400 prisoners and a few guns were taken.
Paragraph 22. The III. Corps again attacked on the 23rd and progress
was made. At 1 a.m. on the 24th the latter was renewed, the 3rd
Australian Division took Bray-sur-Somme and the 47th, 12th, and 18th
Divisions carried the line across the high ground between Bray and La
Boisselle and took prisoners.
Paragraph 24. In support of the operation against Mont St. Quentin
“on the morning of 31st August the left of the Fourth Army (3rd
Australian Division, 58th London, 47th and 18th) attacked towards
Bouchavesnes, Rancourt and Frégicourt, and by successful fighting
on this and the following day, captured these villages and several
hundred prisoners.” The fighting 31st August-3rd September is now the
“Second Battle of Bapaume.” See also under 58th Division.
In the _History of the Fourth Army_ (Hodder and Stoughton) there will
be found an account which correlates the doings of the III. Corps
and the Australian Corps in the fighting between 22nd August and
4th September. On several occasions the task of the 47th Division
was a very hard one as at the “Happy Valley” on 22nd August and
subsequently. At page 111 there occurs the following sentence:
“The operations of the III. Corps were also worthy of the highest
praise. The advance of this Corps from the capture of Albert on
August 22nd, until they crossed the Canal du Nord on September 4th,
covers a distance, as the crow flies, of some fourteen miles, over
the desolate, shell-pitted area of the old Somme battlefields.
The operations require to be studied in greater detail than is
possible here before the magnitude of the task the troops were asked
to perform, and the demands on the officers and men which such an
advance in face of determined opposition entailed, can be fully
realised. The spirit, however, of the young soldiers of the 12th,
18th, 47th and 58th Divisions successfully overcame every difficulty,
and well did they answer every call made on them, and uphold the
best traditions of the British soldier by their cheerfulness and
endurance.”
The Division left the III. Corps on 7th September and moved north to
join the Fifth Army, and it was not thereafter in any hard-fought
battle. Shortly thereafter Headquarters of the III. Corps also moved
north to the Flanders area, where they were employed during the
closing weeks.
For a time the 47th was in the line in the Lys area and after a short
rest moved through Armentières to Lille, and, continuing to press
and follow up the enemy, the Division was east of Tournai when the
Armistice was concluded.
At Loos, in September 1915, the 47th Division had earned and received
the praise of the Commander-in-Chief, Sir John French. In the next
big battle—the Somme—at High Wood, September 1916, it had fought
so well as again to be commended by the then Commander-in-Chief,
Sir Douglas Haig, and at Bourlon Wood on 30th November, 1917, it
“greatly distinguished” itself. Few if any divisions in the British
Army received such recognition on three separate occasions. This most
brilliant reputation remained, as will be seen from the foregoing
extracts, absolutely untarnished to the end.
The 1/6th London Regiment, originally belonging to the 56th, but
which served with the 47th Division, was selected for the Army of the
Rhine.
NOTE.—In _Happy Days with the 47th and 49th Divisions_, by Benedict
Williams (Harding and More, 1921, 7s. 6d.), there will be found
many graphic descriptions of scenes in the Great Retreat, in the
Advance from Albert in August and September, and in the final
movements through Lille and Tournai.
48TH (SOUTH MIDLAND) DIVISION
FIRST LINE
The 48th Division sailed for France in March 1915. The outstanding
features in their war experiences are their long and memorable
services in the Battle of the Somme in 1916, and in the Third Battle
of Ypres, 1917, and their most successful advance in Italy in the
last few days of the war with Austria.
The Division was present as part of the VIII. Corps at the Somme on
1st July, when the battle commenced, but fortunately for them they
were in support that day and had an opportunity of learning from the
misfortunes of the divisions in the front rank at that part of the
line. The fighting 1st-13th July is now designated the “Battle of
Albert, 1916.” About 15th July the Division was transferred to the
III. Corps.
On 16th July the 143rd Brigade made a very fine advance in the
“Battle of Bazentin Ridge,” and the capture of Ovillers was
completed, the Division securing ground to the north and east of the
village. During the ensuing fortnight the Division had constant and
very heavy fighting.
Pozières was the next objective. The Australians attacked from the
south on 23rd July and the 48th on their left from the south-west.
Both attacks were pushed home with splendid resolution and by the
29th July the 48th had secured its objectives north of the village.
On the 27th the 145th Brigade did exceptionally well. After a short
rest the Division was, about 10th August, again in the line, pushing
towards the ridge. A strong counter-attack was driven back on the
17th and on the 18th the 143rd Brigade captured a big stretch of
trenches and 600 prisoners. The fighting 23rd July-3rd September is
now designated the “Battle of Pozières Ridge.” There were few tougher
struggles in the whole course of the war.
When the arrival of winter and oceans of mud made offensive
operations an impossibility, the Division, as part of the III. Corps,
was still on the Somme.
In the despatch of 23rd December, 1916, paragraph 14 (Dent’s
edition), Sir Douglas Haig said: “On the 16th July a large body of
the garrison of Ovillers surrendered, and that night and during the
following day, by a direct advance from the west across No Man’s
Land, our troops (48th Division, Major-General R. Fanshawe) carried
the remainder of the village and pushed out along the spur to the
north and eastwards towards Pozières.”
Paragraph 17: “An assault delivered simultaneously on this date—23rd
July—by General Gough’s Army (1st Australian Division and 48th
Division) against Pozières gained considerable results, and by the
morning of 25th July the whole of that village was carried, including
the cemetery, and important progress was made along the enemy’s
trenches to the north-east.”
Paragraph 19: “Apart from the operations already described others of
a minor character, yet involving much fierce and obstinate fighting,
continued during this period (August). Our lines were pushed
forward,” etc. Among the troops mentioned in a note as engaged was
the 48th Division.
In February 1917 the enemy opposite Gough’s Fifth Army commenced to
withdraw, and early in March the Fourth Army found a similar movement
commencing on their front. The 48th were then in the Fourth Army.
The despatch of 31st May, 1917, as to the German Retreat, paragraph
13 (Dent’s edition), states: “At 7 a.m. on the 18th March our
troops (48th Division, Major-General R. Fanshawe) entered Peronne
and occupied Mont St. Quentin, north of the town.” Paragraph 16
shows that the Division “after fighting of some importance” on
4th and 5th April took part in the capture of Ronssoy and other
villages. At this time the Division formed part of the XV. Corps,
Fourth Army. In the _History of the Fourth Army_ by Major-General
Sir A. Montgomery (Hodder and Stoughton) at page 93, the Advance to
Peronne, on 29th August, 1918, there is a note which says that the
whole ground was familiar to the Fourth Army as they had crossed it
in the early spring of 1917. “The first troops to reach the eastern
bank on that occasion had been those of the 48th Division. They had
secured Biaches and La Maisonette and then, forcing a crossing where
the embankment of the Canal du Nord crossed the Somme south-west of
Halle, had seized Mont St. Quentin.”
The despatch of 25th December, 1917, Third Battle of Ypres, as to the
attack on the 16th August (Dent’s edition), states, paragraph 46: “On
the left centre West Lancashire Territorials and troops from other
English Counties (48th and 11th Divisions) established themselves on
a line running north from St. Julien to the old German third line due
east of Langemarck. This line they maintained against the enemy’s
attacks and thereby secured the flank of our gains further north.”
Officially this is the Battle of Langemarck, 1917.
Paragraph 54, as to the attack on 4th October: “On the left of our
attack South Midland troops (48th Division) forced their way across
the valley of the Stroombeek, in spite of difficulties due to the
rain of the previous night, and gained their objectives according to
programme, with the exception of a single strong point at the limit
of their advance.” Officially this is now the Battle of Broodseinde.
Paragraph 56, as to the attack on 9th October: “Australian troops,
East Lancashire, Yorkshire and South Midland Territorials (66th, 49th
and 48th Divisions) carried our line forward in the direction of
Passchendaele and up the western slopes of the main ridge capturing
Nieuwemolen,” etc. Officially this attack is now the Battle of
Poelcappelle.
During these operations the Division was in the XVIII. Corps. No
division had a longer spell of the great struggle known as the Third
Battle of Ypres, and to say that any did better would be making a
bold claim. They were in support on the opening day, 31st July, and
apart from the actions mentioned in the above extracts, they made
successful advances on 19th, 22nd and 27th August and had heavy
fighting on many other days, while they endured very great hardships
for nearly three months.
Before the close of 1917, the Division, along with other troops,
was taken to Italy to assist in arresting the Austrian invasion.
In the Earl of Cavan’s despatch of 14th September, 1918, as to the
operations of the British Army in Italy, he said: “Early in the
morning of June 15th, after a short but violent bombardment, in which
smoke and gas were freely employed, the Austrian attack was launched.
The fronts of attack extended from St. Dona di Piave to the Montello
on the plains and from Grappa to Canove in the mountains, fronts of
25 miles and 18 miles respectively. The whole of the British sector
was involved.
“The British front was attacked by four Austrian divisions. It was
held by the 23rd Division on the right and the 48th Division on the
left. On the front of the 23rd Division the attack was completely
repulsed. On the front of the 48th Division the enemy succeeded
in occupying our front trench for a length of some 3000 yards and
subsequently penetrated to a depth of 1000 yards. Here he was
contained by a series of switches which had been constructed to meet
this eventuality. On the morning of June 16th the 48th Division
launched a counter-attack to clear the enemy from the pocket he had
gained. This attack was completely successful and the entire line was
re-established by 9 a.m.
“Acting with great vigour on the 16th both divisions took advantage
of the disorder in the enemy’s ranks and temporarily occupied certain
posts in the Asiago plateau without much opposition. Several
hundred prisoners and many machine guns and two mountain howitzers
were brought back in broad daylight without interference. As soon
as No Man’s Land had been fully cleared of the enemy we withdrew to
our original line. The enemy suffered very heavy losses in their
unsuccessful attack. In addition we captured 1060 prisoners, seven
mountain guns, 72 machine guns, 20 flammenwerfer and one trench
mortar.”
In a telegram of 3rd November Lord Cavan mentioned that the 48th
Division was advancing on the Asiago plateau and had taken 100 guns.
In his despatch of 15th November, 1918, as to the concluding
operations on the Italian front, Lord Cavan stated, paragraph 30,
that the 48th Division, Major-General Sir H. B. Walker, K.C.B.,
D.S.O., had been employed on the Asiago plateau as part of the 6th
Italian Army. It formed part of the XII. Italian Corps. “Successful
raids were carried out on the 4th, 11th and 23rd October, which
resulted in the capture of 445 prisoners and 12 machine guns.”
Raids and patrols on 29th and 30th October found that the enemy
were moving back, and a general advance of the 6th Italian Army was
ordered. The 48th British and a French Division were the first to
move. On 1st November the 4th Royal Berkshire Regiment captured Mont
Catz.
“On the morning of 2nd November the success gained on Mont Catz by
the 145th Infantry Brigade was widely exploited. Mont Mosciagh was
in the hands of the 48th Division by 7.30 a.m. and the Interrotto
position was thus outflanked. The advance then became more rapid,
and by dark the advanced guards had reached Vezzena, and thus set
foot on Austrian soil. This Division was therefore the first British
division to enter enemy territory on the western front.” The 4th
Berkshire was part of the 145th Brigade.
“On the morning of 3rd November the advance was again resumed and by
dark both Caldonazzo and Levico had been occupied.
“At 3 p.m. on 4th November when the Armistice (with Austria) came
into force, the leading troops were on the line Miola-eastern
outskirts of Trent.
“The captures in prisoners and guns made by the 48th Division cannot
be accurately ascertained: they amounted to at least 20,000 prisoners
and 500 guns. Included amongst the prisoners were the Commander of
the III. Corps and three Divisional Commanders.
“It must be remembered that this division was attacking very
formidable mountain positions with only a fifth part of the artillery
that would have been at its disposal had the initial attack started
on the Altipiano. Its performance therefore in driving in the enemy’s
rearguards so resolutely while climbing up to heights of 5000 feet,
is all the more praiseworthy.
“During these operations the leadership of Brigadier-General G. C.
Sladen, C.M.G., D.S.O., M.C., commanding the 143rd Infantry Brigade,
was particularly noticeable.
“31. The infantry had been waiting for an opportunity to show that
they could worthily emulate the performances of their comrades
in France. When the opportunity came they fulfilled my highest
anticipations.”
Lord Cavan’s despatch of 15th November, 1918, paragraph 2, shows
that three battalions of the 48th Division were taken to France
on 13th/14th September of that year. These were the 1/8th Royal
Warwickshire Regiment, 1/5th Gloucestershire Regiment, and 1/8th
Worcestershire Regiment. They formed the reconstituted 75th Brigade
in the 25th Division, which, after being sadly battered in the
March Retreat, the Lys Battle of April and the German offensive on
the Aisne at the end of May, had been withdrawn from the line and
formed anew. The Division was concentrated in front of Combles on 3rd
October and on the 4th commenced a hard struggle for the capture of
Beaurevoir. This was completed by the 75th Brigade on the 5th after
two previous attempts had failed. Sir A. Conan Doyle, vol. vi. p.
174, speaking of this achievement, says: “Fryell’s 75th Brigade was
now assembled in the dead ground west of Beaurevoir, and at about
6.30 dashed at it with levelled bayonets and a determination which
would take no denial. The enemy were swept out of it and the line
carried forward 500 yards to the east of it.” Another account of
the operation will be found at pp. 187 and 188 of _The Story of the
Fourth Army_, and it is there remarked: “Perhaps the outstanding
feature of the operations was the daylight attack of the 1/5th
Gloucestershire and the 1/8th Worcestershire, which finally captured
Beaurevoir village.” At p. 198 of that work it is stated that the
same brigade and a brigade of the 66th captured Maretz on the 9th.
At p. 227 there is an account of a battle on 18th October when the
75th Brigade, which was temporarily attached to the 50th Division,
again got credit by its capture of La Roux Farm and Bazuel and some
heavy guns. P. 234 shows that the Brigade did fine work on the 23rd
when the 1/8th Worcestershire captured Tilleuls Farm and a battery of
howitzers.
On 4th November, the day on which the last battle of the war
commenced, the Brigade gained great distinction by its capture of
Landrecies, which involved the crossing of an unfordable canal. A
detailed account will be found at p. 252 of _The Story of the Fourth
Army_, and, regarding it, Major-General Montgomery says: “The capture
of Landrecies was an operation beset with many difficulties, but,
thanks to good leadership, the bravery of the troops, and the skill
and devotion of the divisional engineers and pioneers, the 75th
Brigade met with the success and good fortune which such a well
planned and boldly executed operation deserved.”
_The History of the 25th Division_ (Harrison) also gives details of
the splendid work of the 75th Brigade between 5th October and the
close. See also the despatch of 21st December, 1918, paragraphs 37,
42, 47 and 50.
It is rather remarkable that in the short space of five weeks two men
of the Brigade won the Victoria Cross.
The 1/7th Royal Warwickshire Regiment and 1/6th Gloucestershire
Regiment were selected for the Army of Occupation, Egypt.
49TH (WEST RIDING) DIVISION
FIRST LINE
The Division sailed for France in April 1915, and before the end of
that month entered the line about Fleurbaix as part of the IV. Corps,
First Army.
In the Battle of Aubers Ridge, 9th and other days of May 1915, the
Division held most of the Corps line while the 7th and 8th Divisions
attacked.
About the end of June the Division was transferred to the VI. Corps,
Second Army, and thereafter did six months’ arduous work in the Ypres
salient.
In January 1916 the Division marched to Calais, whence, in February,
they were railed to near Amiens. During the ensuing five months they
held trenches in the Authuille-Thiepval district and did much work in
preparation for the great battle. They were now in the Fifth Army, at
first in the X. Corps, afterwards in the II.
From 1st July, 1916, when the Battle of the Somme opened, to nearly
the end of September, they were almost constantly engaged, the
task of the Fifth Army being to maintain vigorous pressure, and
so facilitate the advance of the Fourth Army on its right. On the
Division leaving the Fifth Army the Corps Commander expressed himself
as gratified by their spirit and work.
The despatch from Sir Douglas Haig of 23rd December, 1916, paragraph
8, deals with the attack on Thiepval and other strongly fortified
positions on 1st July, a phase of the “Battle of Albert, 1916,” and
in Messrs. Dent’s edition, p. 26, there is a note in the following
terms: “In the course of this fighting a brigade of the 49th
Division, Major-General E. M. Percival, made a gallant attempt to
force Thiepval from the north.” The Division or one or other of the
brigades was engaged in several subsequent actions in the Somme
campaign of 1916.
The Division was taken north again in October to the Ypres area where
it was to be employed for nearly two years. In July 1917 the Division
moved from the Merville district to Nieuport where they experienced
a particularly bad month. The hostile bombardment was ceaseless, and
the troops in the line crowded in a very circumscribed space north
of the Canal suffered very heavily. In the beginning of October
the Division entered the main battle in the Ypres salient and took
part in several attacks under most trying conditions; these were
characteristic of the Third Battle of Ypres. A quotation as to the
attack of 9th October, the Battle of Poelcappelle, has already been
given under the 48th Division, who were on the left of the 49th, the
66th being on their right.
In November the Division was in the line in the Menin Road area, and
although the great battle had died down losses from the unceasing
shell fire kept high, while the physical sufferings from mud and cold
were almost beyond the endurance of the strongest.
In January 1918, when brigades were cut down from four to three
battalions, the 1/8th West Yorkshire Regiment, 1/5th West Riding
Regiment and the 1/5th The King’s Own Yorkshire Light Infantry were
taken from the 49th and sent to the 62nd, the second line West Riding
Division.
The 49th was still in the Ypres salient in the beginning of April
1918. Few divisions had a more intimate acquaintance with its
shell-fire and mud.
The Division gained great distinction in the battles about the Lys
river in April when the British were “fighting with their backs to
the wall.”[2] From 10th April till the end of that month one or other
of the three brigades was almost daily engaged, on the northern
side of the salient, which the enemy had made after overwhelming
the Portuguese division on the 9th. The task of the 49th and other
divisions near them was to stem his rush and prevent him spreading
out to the north and west. If he had succeeded in gaining more ground
to the north, Ypres would have gone.
In his written despatch of 20th July, 1918, as to these events Sir
Douglas Haig said, paragraph 59, 12th April: “Troops of the 25th,
34th and 49th Divisions although heavily attacked maintained their
positions to south and south-east of Bailleul.”
Paragraph 60, 13th April: German troops had entered Neuve Église,
“but before noon were driven out by troops of the 33rd and 49th
Divisions in a most successful counter-attack in which a number of
prisoners were taken.”
Paragraph 64: “At different times on the 16th April a number of
strong local attacks were made by the enemy on the Meteren-Wytschaete
front, which were for the most part repulsed with heavy loss by the
25th, 34th and 49th Divisions.... The enemy’s attacks in the Kemmel
sector (17th April) were pressed with great determination, but ended
in his complete repulse at all points by troops of the 34th, 49th
and 19th Divisions, his infantry being driven out by counter-attacks
wherever they had gained a temporary footing in our line.”
Paragraph 67 describes the fierce fighting on 25th and 26th April
when the enemy captured Kemmel Hill. Speaking of the 25th, Sir
Douglas Haig said the enemy’s attacks were renewed in great strength,
and after a violent bombardment. “The weight of the attack in the
British sector fell on the 9th Division and attached troops of the
49th Division, who at 7 a.m. were still holding their positions about
Wytschaete intact, though heavily engaged. Fierce fighting continued
in this neighbourhood for some hours later, and great numbers of
Germans were killed by rifle and machine-gun fire at short range.
Later in the morning the right of the 9th Division was forced to fall
back fighting stubbornly to Vierstraat, but at 1 p.m. our troops
still held the Grand Bois north of Wytschaete.”
The 49th was heavily engaged on the 26th. “A very gallant
counter-attack by the 25th Division with attached troops of the
21st and 49th Divisions, undertaken in conjunction with the French,
penetrated into Kemmel village, taking over 300 prisoners. Our troops
then found themselves exposed to heavy machine-gun fire from the
flanks and were unable to maintain their positions. Later in the
morning the enemy renewed his attacks in strength but in spite of
repeated efforts was only able to make small progress at certain
points. Troops of the 21st, 30th, 39th and 49th Divisions and the
South African Brigade of the 9th Division had heavy fighting and made
several gallant counter-attacks.”
Paragraph 68, 29th April: “The enemy’s advance stayed.” “On the
British front the positions held by the 21st, 49th and 25th Divisions
were strongly attacked between 5 a.m. and 5.30 a.m. On the failure of
these attacks bodies of German infantry advanced at 6 a.m. in mass
formation with bayonets fixed against the 49th Division and were
repulsed with the heaviest losses....
“During the morning repeated attacks were made without result against
the 25th and the 49th.... At all points the attack was pressed
vigorously with massed bodies of troops and the losses suffered by
the German infantry were very great. Throughout the whole of the
fighting our infantry and artillery fought magnificently, and in more
than one instance our troops went out to meet the German attack and
drove back the enemy with the bayonet. At the end of the day except
for a small loss of ground at Voormezeele our line was intact and the
enemy had undergone a severe and decided check.” The French retook
Locre on the 30th, and the enemy’s great offensive was ended.
On 2nd May telegrams, sent by Sir Douglas Haig to the G.O.C. Second
Army, congratulating certain divisions, were published. One of
these referred to the 49th Division and was as follows: “I desire
to express my appreciation of the very valuable and gallant service
performed by troops of the 49th Division since its entry into the
battle north of Armentières. The courage and determination shown
by this Division have played no small part in checking the enemy’s
advance, and I wish you to convey to the General Officer Commanding,
and to all officers and men under his command, my thanks for all that
they have done.”
Sir Douglas Haig several times, in the course of his written
despatch, refers to the splendid conduct of the troops engaged
in the Lys battle. The enemy employed 42 divisions of which 33
were “fresh,” while 9 had come from the Somme. The British had 25
divisions of which only 8 had not been in the furnace of the Somme.
Further it has to be kept in view that, as many divisions were sent
from the northern to the southern area during the March retreat, the
work of and strain upon those left in the north, such as the 49th,
were greatly increased: these were thus not “fresh” in the sense
that the enemy’s forces were “fresh.” French assistance was of the
utmost value in finally convincing the enemy that his offensive was
a failure, but that assistance could not come until after the battle
had raged for a full week.
In paragraph 70 Sir Douglas Haig remarked: “Both by them (the
divisions brought from the Somme) and by the divisions freshly
engaged every yard of ground was fiercely disputed, until troops were
overwhelmed or ordered to withdraw. Such withdrawals as were deemed
necessary in the course of the battle were carried out successfully
and in good order.
“At no time, either on the Somme or on the Lys, was there anything
approaching a breakdown of command or a failure of morale. Under
conditions that made rest and sleep impossible for days together, and
called incessantly for the greatest physical exertion and quickness
of thought, officers and men remained undismayed, realising that for
the time being they must play a waiting game, and determined to make
the enemy pay the full price for the success which for the moment was
his.”
When one reads the detailed accounts of the work done by any of the
divisions on the Lys one is filled with wonder and amazement at the
power of endurance, the unbending and self-sacrificing spirit and
technical efficiency of units, many of which had suffered a 50 per
cent. loss a fortnight or less before the 9th April, and were to the
extent of a full half composed of lads sent to France after 22nd
March.
The 49th Division was moved to the south and joined the XXII. Corps
at the end of August 1918. On 12th September they relieved the 51st
in the Plouvain sector, east of Arras. They took part in the last
great advance. Along with the Canadian Corps they were engaged in
an attack on 11th October, north-east of Cambrai. On that date the
fighting was stiff and the losses were severe, but on the 12th good
progress was made. The advance continued on 20th October and the
XXII. Corps drove the enemy across the Selle and the Écaillon rivers
and in the last week of October were up against the Rhonelle position.
In Sir Douglas Haig’s despatch of 21st December, 1918, paragraph 49,
the Battle of the Sambre, 1st to 11th November, he says: “During
these two days, 1st and 2nd November, the 61st, 49th (Major-General
N. J. G. Cameron) and 4th Divisions crossed the Rhonelle river,
capturing Maresches and Preseau after a stubborn struggle, and
established themselves on the high ground two miles to the east of
it. On their left the 4th Canadian Division captured Valenciennes and
made progress beyond the town. As a consequence of this defeat the
enemy on the 3rd November withdrew on the Le Quesnoy-Valenciennes
front.”
The following battalions were chosen for the Army of the Rhine: 1/5th
and 1/6th West Yorkshire Regiment, 1/5th Yorkshire Light Infantry and
1/4th York and Lancaster Regiment.[3]
FOOTNOTES:
[2] As to the Lys battles see also 50th, 51st, 55th and 61st
Divisions.
[3] An account of some of the more important features in the history
of the 49th Division and of its younger sister the 62nd will be found
in _The West Riding Territorials in the Great War_, by Major L.
Magnus (Kegan Paul and Co., 15s.). Some most impressive pictures of
life in the Ypres salient and at Nieuport in 1917 are to be found in
_Happy Days with the 47th and 49th Divisions_, by Benedict Williams
(Harding and More, 1921, 7s. 6d.).
50TH (NORTHUMBRIAN) DIVISION
FIRST LINE
The 50th Division will always be associated with the Second Battle
of Ypres, now designated “The Battles of Ypres, 1915,” which began
on 22nd April, 1915, by a great discharge of gas, then seen and felt
for the first time in warfare, and which lasted till 25th May. Their
presence was of the utmost value when the British and French only
held on with the very greatest difficulty and at tremendous cost.
Some battalions of the Division had only arrived in France a few days
before the commencement of the battle.
In his despatch of 31st May, 1915, Sir John French “mentioned”
officers and men of the following battalions of the 50th Division:
4th, 5th and 6th Northumberland Fusiliers and 5th, 6th and 8th Durham
Light Infantry.
In his despatch of 15th June which deals with the Second Battle of
Ypres Sir John French said, paragraph 4: “During the night” (of
the 22nd April) “I directed the Cavalry Corps and the Northumbrian
Division, which was then in general reserve, to move to the west of
Ypres, and placed these troops at the disposal of the General Officer
commanding the Second Army.”
The fighting on 22nd-23rd April is now the “Battle of Gravenstafel
Ridge.”
On the 24th April the 9th Durham Light Infantry and other battalions
of the Division had very heavy fighting. Several had been detached
to assist the old Regular brigades to hold the line, and all the
battalions of the 50th were in the thick of the struggle during the
ensuing four weeks, either in their own brigades or attached to
others. The pressure was so great and so continuous, and reserves
so scanty, that even the Regular Divisions had constantly to detach
units to help neighbours in distress. On 24th May when the enemy made
his final big effort the 151st (Durham Light Infantry) Brigade were
near Hooge and did most valuable and gallant service.
After describing the heavy and often “hand-to-hand” fighting on
the 23rd, 24th and 25th April, when the enemy put forth his utmost
strength to break the line, while it was yet dazed by the gas,
Sir John French said, as to the 26th: “On the right of the Lahore
Division the Northumberland Infantry Brigade” (the 149th) “advanced
against St. Julien and actually succeeded in entering, and for a time
occupying, the southern portion of the village. They were, however,
eventually driven back, largely owing to gas, and finally occupied a
line a short way to the south. This attack was most successfully and
gallantly led by Brigadier-General Riddell, who, I regret to say, was
killed during the progress of the operation.”
Unfortunately the 151st Brigade was unable to support the attack
as, at the time, they were engaged in assisting the 28th Division
to repel an attack by the enemy further south, and the 150th were
also fighting elsewhere. The fighting 24th April-4th May is now the
“Battle of St. Julien.”
The losses of the Division were very heavy, exceeding 2500 in the
first five days alone.
Towards the close of his despatch Sir John French mentioned that
several Territorial Divisions had in the period under review been
employed as divisional units and had “all borne an active and
distinguished part, and had proved themselves thoroughly reliable and
efficient.”
Sir Douglas Haig’s despatch of 23rd December, 1916, as to the Somme
battle, paragraph 27 (Dent’s edition, note and map, p. 41), shows
that the 50th Division was employed in the attack of 15th September,
officially the Battle of Flers-Courcelette, it being then in the
III. Corps, Fourth Army. The attack was successful and a big gain of
ground was made. The map opposite p. 43 shows that the Division was
again in the attack of 25th and 26th September, the Battle of Morval,
when another section of the German defensive system was bitten off.
During October the Division had, frequently, bitter fighting in
the Eaucourt-Le Sars area, the Battle of the Transloy Ridges, when
further ground was gained and made secure. Winter’s arrival found
them still in the mud of that much fought-for region.
The despatch of 25th December, 1917, dealing with the Battle of
Arras, 1917, paragraph 18 (Dent’s edition) as to 13th and 14th April,
states: “In the centre a Northumberland Brigade of the 50th Division
(Major-General P. S. Wilkinson), advancing in open order, carried
the high ground east of Héninel and captured Wancourt Tower. Three
counter-attacks against this position were successfully driven off
and further ground was gained on the ridge south-east of Héninel.”
Officially this is the First Battle of the Scarpe, 1917.
Paragraph 21, as to the attack on 23rd April, the Second Battle of
the Scarpe, 1917: “On the main front of attack good progress was
made at first at almost all points. By 10 a.m. the remainder of
the high ground west of Chérisy had been captured by the attacking
English brigades (30th and 50th Divisions).” The enemy made many
counter-attacks “in great force ... and with the utmost determination
regardless of the heavy losses inflicted by our fire.” Part of the
ground gained in the morning was lost in the afternoon but all was
made good in another assault on the 24th after very fierce fighting.
In the Arras battle the Division operated with the XVIII. and VII.
Corps.
The Division was brought north in October and entered the line on
the north side of the Ypres salient, where, as part of the XIV.
Corps, they had an indescribably bad time amidst lakes of mud and
water. Movement at the best could only be very slow, often it was
impossible, and thus the losses of the attacking troops were rendered
very heavy.
The despatch of 25th December, 1917, makes frequent reference to
the adverse conditions. In paragraph 55 there is the following
sentence: “The year was far spent. The weather had been consistently
unpropitious, and the state of the ground, in consequence of the
rain and shelling combined, made movement inconceivably difficult.”
After considering the various factors “affecting the problem, among
them the desirability of assisting our Allies in the operations to
be carried out by them on the 23rd October, in the neighbourhood of
Malmaison, I decided to continue the offensive further and to renew
the advance at the earliest possible moment consistent with adequate
preparation.” The Division formed part of the assaulting line on 26th
October when ground was gained. This is officially designated the
Second Battle of Passchendaele.
Much rain fell in October and it was only on ground above the general
level that progress could be made in the various attacks undertaken.
The Division remained in the salient, chiefly between Houthulst
Forest and Passchendaele, for the next three months.
The despatch of 20th July, 1918, deals with the German attack in
the St. Quentin district which began on 21st March. Regarding the
position west of St. Quentin, in the centre of the Fifth Army, on
the 22nd, paragraph 22, Sir Douglas Haig said: “Our troops, fighting
fiercely and continuously, were gradually forced out of the battle
zone on the whole of this front and fell back through the 20th and
50th Divisions holding the third defensive zone ... in the hope of
re-organising behind them.”
“By 5.30 p.m. the enemy had reached the third zone at different
points and was attacking the 50th Division heavily between Villéveque
and Boucly. Though holding an extended front of some 10,500 yards,
the Division succeeded in checking the enemy’s advance, and by a
successful counter-attack drove him temporarily from the village of
Coulaincourt. At the close of the engagement, however, the troops
of the 50th Division about Pœuilly had been forced back, and by
continued pressure along the south bank of the Omignon river the
enemy had opened a gap between their right flank and the troops of
the 61st Division.”... At this gap strong bodies of German troops
broke through the third defensive zone.
As all available reserves at the disposal of the Fifth Army had
been thrown into the fight, the Army Commander at 11 p.m. on the
22nd issued orders to withdraw to the Somme. Paragraph 23: “These
withdrawals were carried out under constant pressure from the enemy,
covered by rearguards of the 20th, 50th and 39th Divisions which were
continually in action with the German troops.”
Paragraph 24 shows that on the 23rd, the Fifth Army Commander issued
orders to cross to the west side of the Somme. In paragraph 26 it
is stated that “Further north the withdrawal to the west bank of
the Somme was carried out successfully during the morning and early
afternoon, effectively covered by troops of the 50th Division. By
3.15 p.m. all troops were across the river, and the bridges, for the
most part, destroyed.” The operations 21st to 23rd March are now
designated the Battle of St. Quentin.
Paragraph 43 deals with the fight for the Rosières line—the Battle
of Rosières—27th March. The 50th Division was in support of “a very
gallant and successful counter-attack” by troops of the 8th Division.
Paragraph 47 describes the fighting in the Avre and Luce valleys,
29th, 30th and 31st March, and says: “In the evening” of the 30th,
“a most successful counter-attack by troops of the 20th and 50th
Divisions re-established our line south of the Luce and captured a
number of prisoners.”
Mr. Sparrow in his _Fifth Army_ gives a very full account of the
invaluable work of the 50th. He indicates the opinion that their
task was made heavier than it need have been, through their having
been kept by G.H.Q. too far from the battle zone, and they had thus
to be thrown into a surging battle immediately after a long and most
exhausting march. Probably there were good reasons why they should
have been located where they were before the battle began. Mr.
Sparrow states that the line which had to be held by the Division,
22nd-23rd March, was 4000 yards longer than the frontage mentioned
in the despatch; at p. 108 he makes it 14,500 yards. The fighting
was so severe and continuous that, by the evening of the 27th, the
4th and 5th Northumberland Fusiliers together could only muster 200
rifles (see p. 129). Other units of the Division were also reduced
to mere shadows, which, however, struggled and fought till the line
stabilised, although scarcely able to keep their limbs moving or
their eyes open. Mr. Sparrow shows conclusively that never did human
beings make a finer effort than did the Fifth Army between 21st March
and the early days of April. That they were successful was almost a
miracle and is a lasting tribute to the spirit of officers and men
and the skill of their leader, General Gough.
When, in the beginning of April, it was seen that the German
offensive from St. Quentin had been stopped, several divisions,
including the 50th, which during the last ten days of March had never
been out of the awful struggle, were taken north to Flanders, as a
quieter part of the line, where they might recuperate and assimilate
their much needed drafts. Alas, they were to find themselves in
another furnace.
The Lys battles are dealt with in the despatch of 20th July, 1918,
and it will be remembered that these began with a great attack on
the Portuguese sector on 9th April, spreading to that of the 40th
Division on their left and that of the 55th at Givenchy on the right.
The 50th had arrived at Merville behind the Portuguese on the 8th.
Their artillery was not forward. The 51st, also just arrived from
the Somme, were behind the 55th. On the morning of the 9th the 50th
deployed and were soon engaged, the 51st also moved forward. After
the Portuguese front was broken in, the 55th succeeded in forming
a defensive flank which bending to the west established touch with
the 51st Division. On the left of the latter were the 50th, but this
division was unable to establish touch with the 40th.
In paragraph 51 Sir Douglas Haig said: “During the afternoon troops
of the 51st and 50th Divisions (chiefly composed of drafts hurriedly
sent up to join their regiments) were heavily engaged east of the
Lawe river and were gradually pressed back upon the river crossings.
The enemy brought up guns to close range, and in the evening crossed
at Estaires and Pont Riqueul, but in both cases was driven back by
counter-attacks.”
In paragraph 53, the struggle for Estaires, Sir Douglas said: “Early
in the morning of the 10th April the enemy launched heavy attacks
covered by artillery fire about the river crossings at Lestrem and
Estaires, and succeeded in reaching the left bank at both places; but
in each case he was driven back again by determined counter-attacks
by the 50th Division.
“The enemy continued to exercise great pressure at Estaires and
fierce street fighting took place, in which both sides lost heavily.
Machine guns mounted by our troops in the upper rooms of houses
did great execution on his troops as they moved up to the attack,
until the machine guns were knocked out by artillery fire. In the
evening the German infantry once more forced their way into Estaires,
and after a most gallant resistance the 50th Division withdrew at
nightfall to a prepared position to the north and west of the town.
East of Estaires” (apparently outside the area of the 50th) “the
enemy had already crossed the Lys in strength.”
In paragraph 56, as to events on the 11th, he said: “At Estaires,
the troops of the 50th Division, tired and reduced in numbers by
the exceptionally heavy fighting of the previous three weeks, and
threatened on their right flank by the enemy’s advance, south of
the Lys, were heavily engaged. After holding their positions with
great gallantry during the morning they were slowly pressed back in
the direction of Merville. The enemy employed large forces on this
front in close formation and the losses inflicted by our rifle and
machine-gun fire were unusually heavy. Our own troops, however, were
not in sufficient numbers to hold up his advance,” etc. Portions of
the Division continued in the fighting line throughout the 12th and
13th April.
Paragraph 58: “Though our troops had not been able to prevent the
enemy’s entry into Merville their vigorous resistance combined with
the maintenance of our positions at Givenchy and Festubert had given
an opportunity for reinforcements to build up our line in this
sector.”
The sacrifices of the 50th Division, which were again very great,
were not in vain.
In the supplementary despatch of 23rd April, 1918, as to work of
certain divisions, Sir Douglas Haig said: “The 50th Division,
though but recently withdrawn from a week of continuous fighting
south of the Somme, on April 9th and subsequent days held up the
enemy along the line of the Lys, and by the stubbornness of its
resistance at Estaires and Merville checked his advance until further
reinforcements could be brought up.”[4]
The despatch of 21st December, 1918, paragraph 10, shows that the
50th along with the 8th, 21st, 25th and 19th Divisions, all very
recently engaged in the struggles in northern France and Flanders,
composed largely of young drafts and “in no condition to take part
in major operations until they had had several weeks’ rest,” formed
the IX. British Corps which was sent to the Aisne in May 1918, and
was involved in the “intense fighting,” when the enemy, employing
28 divisions, commenced his attack on the French Sixth Army on
the 27th of that month. The attacks continued till 6th June, the
Franco-British line being forced back. “Throughout this long period
of incessant fighting against greatly superior numbers the behaviour
of all arms of the British forces engaged was magnificent. What they
achieved is best described in the words of the French General under
whose orders they came, who wrote of them: ‘They have enabled us to
establish a barrier against which the hostile waves have beaten and
shattered themselves. This none of the French who witnessed it will
ever forget.’”
In _The History of the 25th Division_, p. 250, speaking of their
arrival in Champagne, there occurs the following sentences: “To the
few in the 25th Division who had served with the original British
Expeditionary Force in August and September, 1914, the district
brought memories of the Battle of the Marne and the subsequent
advance to the Aisne; but no hint was given of the extent of the
tragedy shortly to be enacted over this historic ground.
“The front of about 24,000 yards held by the IX. British Corps ran
along the high ground about four miles north of the Aisne for the
first” (left) “16,000 yards gradually bending S.E., on its right,
to the important point of Berry-au-Bac, where the line crossed the
river and continued on S.E. in the direction of Rheims for another
8000 yards. The right sector south of the Aisne was held by the
21st Division, in touch with the 36th French Division on its right;
the 8th Division in the centre, and the 50th Division to the left,
joining up with the 22nd French Division of the XI. French Corps,
north of Craonne.”
The 50th, according to all accounts, put up a glorious defence. Its
position made a withdrawal impracticable, even if that had been
contemplated; it was overwhelmed where it stood. As a fighting force
the Division was practically destroyed; to it little more remained
than the splendid tradition it had created.
Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, vol. v., chapter xi., gives an excellent
description, with many interesting details, of the magnificent stand
made on 27th May, by the 50th, 8th, and 21st Divisions, aided each
by a brigade of the 25th, and of the intense fighting which occurred
down to 6th June when the enemy’s effort was spent. As on the Somme
and Lys, his losses had been enormous. The 19th Division came into
the line on the 29th May, when prospects were very gloomy, and their
presence did much to establish a new line. On 6th June the 4th
Shropshire, T.F., of the 19th Division gained the Croix de Guerre,
with palms for the recapture of Mont Bligny.
A well-founded claim might be put forward that history records no
instance where a large body of troops has come through, without loss
of morale or fighting spirit, three such ordeals, within less than
three months, as were endured by the divisions composing the British
IX. Corps on the Aisne. Although one of them, the 8th, had not been
on the Lys, it had very heavy fighting about Villers Bretonneux,
which it assisted to recapture 24th/25th April, three weeks after
the close of the March battle. The other divisions were in all three
struggles. Whereas in old days a battle ended within twelve, or on
exceptional occasions within forty-eight hours of its commencement,
the St. Quentin-Somme battle, generally known as the March Retreat,
raged night and day without cessation for ten days, that on the Lys
for nearly three weeks, and that on the Aisne for over a week. The
question will probably be discussed by the military historian or
essayist of the future.
Before the “Advance to Victory” was commenced the 50th Division had
been reconstituted. The battalions which had been destroyed were
replaced as follows:—149th Brigade: 3rd Royal Fusiliers, 13th Black
Watch, 2nd Royal Dublin Fusiliers; 150th Brigade: 2nd Northumberland
Fusiliers, 7th Wiltshire, 2nd Royal Munster Fusiliers; 151st Brigade:
6th Royal Inniskilling Fusiliers, 1st King’s Own Yorkshire Light
Infantry, 4th King’s Royal Rifle Corps. See _Story of the Fourth
Army_ (Hodder and Stoughton), p. 322.
The 50th was again to do fine work, the tradition held.
As part of the XIII. Corps, Fourth Army, the Division was employed
in the last great British offensive, and played a part worthy of its
past.
In the despatch of 21st December, 1918, paragraph 37, Sir Douglas
Haig said: “On the 3rd October the Fourth Army attacked between
Sequehart and Le Catelet and captured those villages and Ramicourt
(see 46th Division) together with the Beaurevoir-Fonsomme line on
that front. In this operation the 50th Division took Gouy and Le
Catelet after heavy and prolonged fighting, in which a number of
counter-attacks were beaten off.” This is now the “Battle of the
Beaurevoir Line,” 3rd-5th October, 1918.
The XIII. Corps was again employed in the “Battle of Cambrai, 1918,”
on 8th and 9th October, and the 50th was engaged.
Paragraph 46 shows that the XIII. Corps employed the 50th and 66th
Divisions in the successful “Battle for the Selle Crossings” 17th to
25th October. See also under 66th Division.
Paragraph 50, “The Battle of the Sambre,” 1st to 11th November,
states that the XIII. Corps was again engaged. On the 4th at 6.15
a.m. the Corps “attacked with the 25th, 50th and 18th Divisions and
quickly overran the enemy positions despite strong opposition which
at Preux-au-Bois was maintained until the village was completely
surrounded by our infantry and tanks.”
Major-General Montgomery in his _Story of the Fourth Army_ deals
with the fine work of the 50th on 3rd October, at p. 182, and as to
another attack by the Division and other troops on the 8th, which was
“an unqualified success,” at p. 196.
On the 4th-5th November, the “Battle of the Sambre,” the 50th had,
in the clearing of the southern portion of the Mormal Forest, a very
arduous task. It was difficult for the artillery to give adequate
support owing to their movement being hampered by tree stumps and
bogs.
After the 5th, the Division continued to advance. On the 7th,
the Division captured Dourlers and on the 8th took Semousies and
Floursies. On both days there was obstinate fighting. Regarding the
8th, Major-General Montgomery says, p. 259: “that the enemy selected
the line of the Avesnes-Maubeuge road as a rearguard position.
The vigour and determination of the attack, however, overcame all
resistance.” When the Armistice came on the 11th, the Division was
east of the Avesnes-Maubeuge road.
The 50th was along with the 25th and other divisions in the IX.
Corps on the Aisne, May 1918, and again were with the 25th in the
XIII. Corps in the “Advance to Victory.” There is much of interest
regarding the work of both divisions in these operations in the
excellent _History of the 25th_, by Colonel Kincaid-Smith (Harrison).
Apart from the first eight Regular divisions no British division had
a longer spell of fighting than the 50th had, was in more of the big
battles or came out of these with a better record.
The 1/9th Durham Light Infantry served with the 62nd Division in 1918
as Pioneers, but like other pioneer battalions, had frequently to use
their weapons as well as their tools. The battalion was chosen for
the Army of the Rhine, as was also the 1/5th Border Regiment which
was originally “Army troops,” but replaced the 1/7th Durham Light
Infantry, taken out of the 50th to be a pioneer battalion.
Northumbria raised an enormous number of units in the earlier years
of the war, and the second line Territorial Division was, like
several others, sacrificed for draft-finding purposes. A number of
garrison battalions, however, were formed and went abroad; of these
there were selected for the Armies of Occupation, etc.: Western
Front, the 2/6th Durham Light Infantry; the Near East, the 2/5th
and 2/9th Durham Light Infantry; Egypt, the 2/7th Northumberland
Fusiliers; North Russia, the 2/7th Durham Light Infantry; Bermuda,
the 2/4th East Yorkshire Regiment.
FOOTNOTES:
[4] As to the Lys battle see also 49th, 51st, 55th and 61st Divisions.
51ST (HIGHLAND) DIVISION
FIRST LINE
The Division left Britain at the end of April and beginning of
May 1915, and on arrival in France was immediately sent to the
neighbourhood of the firing line.
Early in the year the Division had been bereft of six individual
battalions for immediate service in France with regular divisions.
The battalions which went out separately were replaced by a brigade
of the 55th, West Lancashire, Division, which remained with the 51st
till January 1916, and by the 6th and 7th Black Watch, battalions
raised in the Highland divisional area but which, prior to 1914, were
Army Troops. The two latter battalions remained permanently in the
51st Division.
The 8th Royal Scots, which sailed on 4th November, 1914, joined the
7th Division with which they took part in the stiff battles of Neuve
Chapelle, 10th, 11th and 12th March, 1915, and Festubert, 15th to
18th May, 1915. For their good work on these and prior occasions six
officers and four men were mentioned in the despatch of 31st May,
1915. The battalion, in August 1915, joined the 51st Division as
pioneers. In the same despatch officers and men of the 4th Seaforths,
4th and 6th Gordon Highlanders and 4th Camerons were mentioned. The
last-named belonged to the Division but unfortunately did not serve
with it except for about a month in the beginning of 1916.
The despatch of 15th June, 1915 (as to the Second Battle of Ypres,
now “The Battles of Ypres, 1915,” which commenced with the great
gas attack on 22nd April and lasted till 25th May), paragraph 4,
shows that the 7th Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders and 1st East
Lancashire Regiment (10th Brigade) made a successful counter-attack
on 8th May; for their good work two officers and three N.C.O.’s
and men of the Argylls were mentioned. On the 10th the 9th Royal
Scots, afterwards in the 51st, with other troops, repulsed with
heavy loss to the enemy an attack made under cover of gas. On the
11th “the Germans attacked in force and gained a footing in part of
the trenches, but were promptly ejected by a supporting company of
the 9th Royal Scots.” Unofficial writers have paid tribute to the
splendid fighting spirit of these two battalions, the 7th Argylls and
9th Royal Scots, but the price had to be paid. Sir A. Conan Doyle
remarks that on 24th May, 1915, towards the close of the battle, of
the 7th Argylls there remained only two officers and 76 other ranks.
On 24th May at 2.45 a.m. the 9th Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders
and other troops were “overcome with gas,” and pressed back, “in a
most determined attack.”
In the same despatch, paragraph 5, as to the advance near Neuve
Chapelle and Festubert, Sir John French remarked that on 17th May
he gave orders “for the 51st (Highland) Division to move into the
neighbourhood of Estaires to be ready to support the operations of
the First Army,” and that on the 19th the 2nd Division was relieved
by the 51st Division. On the 22nd the Division was “attached to the
Indian Corps.” Between the 18th May and the beginning of June the
Division worked hard at consolidating the ground recently gained.
On 15th June the 51st along with the Canadians and 7th Division took
part in an attack near Givenchy which met with little success. The
casualties of the Division could not be called slight.
In July 1915 the Division was ordered to join the X. Corps, Third
Army, and on the last days of the month took over from a French
Division a section about Hamel near the Ancre.
About this time the Division seems to have gained the confidence
of G.H.Q., as in August and later various New Army Divisions were
attached to it for instruction, including the 18th, 22nd, 32nd, etc.
In January 1916 the Lancashire Brigade left to join their own
Division and the 51st received the 9th Royal Scots, 4th Seaforths,
4th Gordon Highlanders and 7th Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders.
Sir Douglas Haig’s despatch of 23rd December, 1916, which deals with
the Somme Battle, paragraph 17 (Dent’s edition), mentioned various
engagements, now called the “Battle of Bazentin Ridge,” in the
latter half of July. “That evening (24th July) after heavy artillery
preparation, the enemy launched two more powerful counter-attacks,
the one directed against our new position in and around High Wood
(51st Division, Major-General G. M. Harper) and the other delivered
from the north-west of Delville Wood. Both attacks were completely
broken up with very heavy losses to the enemy.” The Division had
attacked on the 22nd-23rd but had failed to gain much ground.
Paragraph 19 and note: Early in August the 51st, along with other
divisions, was in other operations “involving much fierce and
obstinate fighting,” by which the line was pushed forward. About the
7th of August the Division was relieved and taken to Armentières. In
the beginning of October the Division again went south, at first to
Hebuterne and on the 17th to Beaumont Hamel.
Paragraph 33 and note, also 35 and 36 of the despatch, show that the
51st along with other troops took part in the attack on the Beaumont
Hamel-St. Pierre Divion position on 13th November, now the “Battle
of the Ancre, 1916.” In a note to paragraph 33 it is remarked: “As
the season advanced and the bad weather continued the scope of our
plan had constantly to be reduced, until finally it was only possible
to undertake the much more limited operation of the 13th November
against Beaumont Hamel. The brilliant success of this attack, carried
out as it was under most difficult conditions of ground, affords
some indication of what might have been accomplished had the weather
permitted us to give fuller effect to our original plan.” The 51st
Division captured the village, which was very strongly fortified, and
over 2000 prisoners, their own losses being about 2500.
The “brilliant success” of the Division in the Beaumont Hamel battle
brought it fame which was to endure and increase as the years of the
war rolled on.
During December 1916, and part of January 1917, the Division was
in the Courcelette sector where things were far from peaceful and
hardships were extreme. In February they moved north to Arras, and
remained there till the Battle of Arras.
The despatch of 25th December, 1917, paragraphs 13 and 14, and note
to paragraph 13 (Dent’s edition), describes the opening stages of the
Battles of Arras which began on 9th April, 1917. The 51st, then in
the XVII. Corps, Third Army, attacked east of Roclincourt, north-east
of Arras; they were near the left of the line and next the Canadians
whose task it was to seize the main Vimy Ridge. The 51st and its
neighbour on the right, the 34th, had heavy fighting. “Their advance
was delayed, not checked.” The whole attack on the 9th was a great
success. The fighting between the 9th and 14th is now the First
Battle of the Scarpe, 1917. On the 12th the Division left the line,
re-entering it on the 15th-16th and remaining in the battle till the
24th-25th.
Paragraph 21 deals with a big attack which our troops made on 23rd
April on a front of nine miles, the Second Battle of the Scarpe,
1917. “North of the Scarpe Highland Territorials (51st Division)
were engaged in heavy fighting on the western outskirts of Rœux Wood
and the chemical works.” “During the afternoon many counter-attacks
developed all along the line and were repeated by the enemy with
the utmost determination regardless of the heavy losses inflicted
by our fire.” “North of the Scarpe fierce fighting continued for
the possession of Rœux, the chemical works and the station to the
north without producing any lasting change in the situation.” The
attack was renewed on the 24th and more progress was then made, the
enemy’s resistance weakening. For their “splendid” work on the 23rd,
the Division was thanked and congratulated by the Corps and Army
Commanders.
The losses of the Division during April amounted to about 4500.
Paragraph 27, as to the fighting in May, Third Battle of the
Scarpe, 1917: “On the night of the 13th-14th our troops (51st
Division) captured Rœux.” The Division drove back some very heavy
counter-attacks. Fighting continued for some days. The Army Commander
again wired to the Division his congratulations “on their great
gallantry at Rœux and the chemical works.”
The Division was relieved on the 31st May, and a few days later was
taken to the Ypres sector, there to refit and prepare for another
great battle.
Paragraph 41 of the despatch deals with the assault by the British
troops on 31st July, 1917, the “Battle of Pilckem Ridge” at the
beginning of the Third Battle of Ypres. The note in Messrs. Dent’s
edition, p. 113, gives a list of the divisions employed. Among these
is the 51st, then in the XVIII. Corps, Fifth Army. They were near
the left of the British line. “Highland Territorials (51st Division)
Welsh and Guards battalions secured the crossings of the Steenbeek.”
All objectives were taken early in the day. The losses of the
Division were about 1600 and they took about 650 prisoners.
Paragraph 50 describes a successful attack made on 20th September:
“North of the Zonnebeke-Langemarck Road, London and Highland
Territorials (58th and 51st Divisions) gained the whole of their
objectives by midday though stiff fighting took place for a number of
farms and strong places.”
This action is now the Battle of the Menin Road Ridge. The losses of
the Division were 1150.
The Division received the congratulations of the Corps and Army
commanders on their work in the Ypres battles. In his message the
Corps Commander said: “I venture to place it among the three best
fighting divisions I have met in France during the past three years.”
About this time the enemy published a statement that the 51st was the
“most formidable division on the Western Front.”
In the beginning of October the Division was back in the area
south-east of Arras.
The despatch of 20th February, 1918, paragraph 3, shows that the 51st
Division was part of the attacking force at the Battle of Cambrai,
1917, which commenced on 20th November, 1917. After mentioning
the capture of Ribecourt by the 6th Division and the storming of
Havrincourt by the 62nd, Sir Douglas Haig said: “The capture of these
two villages secured the flanks of the 51st (Highland) Division
(T.), Major-General G. M. Harper, advancing on the left centre of
our attack up the slopes of Flesquières Hill against the German
trench lines on the southern side of Flesquières village. Here very
heavy fighting took place. The stout brick wall skirting the Château
grounds opposed a formidable obstacle to our advance, while German
machine guns swept the approaches. A number of tanks were knocked
out by direct hits from German field batteries in position beyond
the crest of the hill. None the less, with the exception of the
village itself, our second objectives in this area were gained before
midday.” Paragraph 4: “On the morning of the 21st November, the
attack on Flesquières was resumed, and by 8 a.m. the village had been
turned from the north-west and captured.” “Following upon the capture
of Flesquières, the 51st and 62nd Divisions, in co-operation with a
number of tanks and squadrons of the 1st Cavalry Division, attacked
at 10.30 a.m. in the direction of Fontaine-Notre-Dame and Bourlon.
In this attack the capture of Anneux was completed, and, early in
the afternoon, Cantaing was seized with some hundreds of prisoners.
Progress was made on the outskirts of Bourlon Wood and, late in the
afternoon, Fontaine-Notre-Dame was taken by the troops of the 51st
Division and tanks.”
The last-mentioned village was lost on the following day, see
paragraph 6.
Paragraph 7: “On the morning of the 23rd November the 51st Division,
supported by tanks, attacked Fontaine-Notre-Dame, but was unable to
force an entrance. Early in the afternoon this Division repeated its
attack from the west, and a number of tanks entered Fontaine, where
they remained till dusk, inflicting considerable loss on the enemy.
We did not succeed, however, in clearing the village, and at the end
of the day no progress had been made on this part of our front.”
On the 27th the Guards Division, which had relieved the 51st, again
entered the much fought-for village, but it was partly commanded by
the Bourlon ridge and could not be held.
The 51st were not in the line on the 30th when the German
counter-offensive took place. See 47th, 55th and 56th Divisions.
In the Cambrai battle the casualties of the Division were 1570. They
took 2690 unwounded prisoners.
The great German offensive of March 1918 is dealt with in the
despatch of 20th July, 1918. The 51st Division were then in the
IV. Corps, Third Army, and were holding front line positions near
Hermies, west of the Flesquières salient. On their right was the 17th
Division of the V. Corps and on their left, about Lagnicourt, the 6th
Division of the IV. Corps; see map opposite p. 186 of Messrs. Dent’s
edition of the _Despatches_.
In paragraph 16 Sir Douglas Haig, dealing with the 21st March,
said: “On the Third Army front our line in the Flesquières salient
had not been heavily attacked and was substantially intact.
Beyond this sector fierce fighting took place around Demicourt
and Doignies, and north of the village of Baumetz-lez-Cambrai. In
this area the 51st Division, under the command of Major-General G.
T. C. Carter-Campbell, was heavily engaged, but from noon onwards
practically no progress was made by the enemy.”
In his telegraphic despatch of 22nd March, after referring to the
exceptional gallantry of the 24th and 3rd Divisions, Sir Douglas
Haig said: “A very gallant fight was made by the 51st Division also,
in the neighbourhood of the Bapaume-Cambrai road, against repeated
attacks.”
In paragraph 21 of the written despatch, dealing with the 22nd March,
Sir Douglas Haig said: “In the neighbourhood of Baumetz the enemy
continued his assaults with great determination, but was held by the
51st Division and a brigade of the 25th Division until the evening.
Our troops were then withdrawn, under orders, to positions south of
the village.”
The fighting between 21st and 23rd March is now the Battle of St.
Quentin, and that on 24th-25th March, the First Battle of Bapaume.
During the next few days the 51st Division fought many critical
rearguard actions. It was thereafter taken out of the line. Its total
losses since the morning of the 21st were over 4900.
About 1st April the Division entrained for the Béthune area and it
was hoped that things would be quieter there; that hope was quickly
to be blasted.
The same despatch deals with the German offensive in Flanders which
commenced on 9th April. See also 49th, 50th, 55th and 61st Divisions.
Paragraph 51 deals with the opening of the Lys battle on 9th April.
It is there stated: “Meanwhile, shortly after the opening of the
bombardment, orders had been given to the 51st and 50th Divisions to
move up behind Richebourg-St.-Vaast and Laventie and take up their
positions in accordance with the pre-arranged defence scheme. Both
these divisions had also been heavily engaged in the Somme battle,
and had but recently arrived in the neighbourhood.” In the course of
the forenoon, when the left of the 55th Division had to move back to
form a defensive flank, touch was established with the 51st. The 1st
King Edwards Horse and 11th Cyclist Battalion who had covered the
deployment of the 51st and 50th occupied Lacouture, etc.,” and “by
their splendid defence of these places enabled troops of the 51st and
50th Divisions to come into action east of the Lawe river between Le
Touret and Estaires.” A quotation as to the heavy fighting which took
place during the afternoon of the 9th has already been given under
the 50th, and some remarks by Sir Douglas Haig as to the splendid
bearing of the divisions in the Lys battle have been given under the
49th.
In his telegraphic despatch of 11th April, Sir Douglas Haig said that
“the 51st Division had beaten off incessant attacks with great loss
to the enemy and, by vigorous and successful counter-attacks had
recaptured positions into which the enemy had forced his way.”
Paragraph 58 of the written despatch shows that by a sudden attack
just before dawn on April 12th the enemy broke through the left
centre of the 51st Division about Pacaut and Diez du Vinage, but with
the arrival of reinforcements “the enemy’s progress in this sector of
the front was definitely checked.”
The Division had over 2500 casualties in the Lys battles. In a
congratulatory message to the Division, dated 16th April, the First
Army Commander said, “You have done wonders.”
About the beginning of May the Division moved to the area east
of Arras and remained about Oppy till 11th July. Here they had a
comparatively quiet time.
The despatch of 21st December, 1918, paragraphs 11 and 12, deals with
the assistance afforded by the British to their Allies in the Second
Battle of the Marne. It shows that the XXII. Corps, Lieut.-General
Sir A. Godley, comprising the 15th, 34th, 51st and 62nd Divisions,
were sent south in July. The two latter went to the east side of the
salient. Paragraph 12 says: “On the 20th July, the 51st and 62nd
Divisions of the XXII. Corps, attacked in conjunction with the French
on the eastern side of the salient, south-west of Reims. The sector
assigned to the British troops covered a front of 8000 yards, astride
the Ardre river, and consisted of an open valley bottom, with steep
wooded slopes on either side. Both valley and slopes were studded
with villages and hamlets, which were for the most part intact, and
afforded excellent cover for the enemy. On this front our troops
were engaged for a period of ten days in continuous fighting of a
most difficult and trying nature. Throughout this period steady
progress was made, in the face of vigorous and determined resistance.
Marfaux was taken on the 23rd July and on the 28th British troops
retook the Montagne de Bligny which other British troops had defended
with so much gallantry and success two months previously. In these
operations, throughout which French artillery and tanks rendered
invaluable assistance, the 51st and 62nd Divisions took 1200
prisoners from seven different German divisions and successfully
completed an advance of over four miles.” This is now designated the
“Battle of Tardenois.”
General Berthelot, commanding the Fifth French Army, issued on
1st August an eloquent Order of the Day as to the work of the two
divisions, in which the British had made the Valley of the Ardre
their own, “bountifully watered with their blood.” He mentioned that
in addition to the prisoners 140 machine guns and 40 guns had been
captured. “You, one and all, have added a glorious page to your
history. Marfaux, Chaumuzy and the Montagne Bligny, these splendid
words will be written in letters of gold in the annals of your
regiments. Your French friends will remember your marvellous bravery
and your perfect comradeship in arms.” Later, General Guillaumat,
then commanding the Fifth Army, bestowed on the 6th Battalion, Black
Watch, Royal Highlanders (Perthshire), the exceptionally high honour
of being “cité à l’Ordre de l’Armée” as follows:—
THE 6TH BATTALION ROYAL HIGHLANDERS
“This battalion _d’élite_, under the forceful command of Lieutenant
Colonel Francis Rowland Tarleton, has given proof of splendid
spirit and dash in the course of the hard fought battles between
July 20th and 30th, 1918. After seven days of bloody fighting, in
spite of exhaustion and the heavy losses caused by intense enemy
machine-gun fire, it successfully stormed a wood strongly fortified
and stubbornly defended by the enemy.”
The losses of the 51st in July amounted to about 3900.
Both divisions were brought north to take part in the last British
offensive commencing in August. In the supplementary despatch of 13th
September, 1918, as to the work of certain divisions, Sir Douglas
Haig said: “The 51st Division after taking part in both the Somme
and Lys battles of March and April, and also in the French offensive
south-west of Reims, on August 26th attacked north of the Scarpe, and
in five days of successful fighting captured Rœux, Greenland Hill
and Plouvain.” The despatch of 21st December, 1918, paragraph 27,
deals with the Battle of the Scarpe, 26th August to 3rd September,
and shows that at that time the 51st was serving in General Sir Henry
Horne’s First Army, along with the Canadian Corps, who fought on
their right. The incidents above-mentioned are again dealt with.
The Division’s losses in the Greenland Hill operations amounted to
1145. For their fine work they were congratulated and thanked by the
Commander of the Canadian Corps, under whose orders they were in the
Scarpe battle.
About the end of August and beginning of September the XXII. Corps
took over on the north and south sides of the Scarpe and the 51st
Division became part of that Corps. In the beginning of October the
Corps moved to the south of the Canadian Corps and took part in what
is now the “Battle of Cambrai, 1918,” 8th-9th October, with pursuit
to the Selle, 9th-12th October, and on 11th October an advance
towards the Selle river was commenced. On the 12th and 13th, the 51st
had hard fighting. The attack was renewed on the 19th when there
were signs of the enemy retiring, and he was closely pressed. The
51st took a prominent part, until the 29th of October, in various
actions which involved bitter fighting. For a most gallant charge
against a counter-attack by the enemy, the 6th Argyll and Sutherland
Highlanders, who had rejoined the 51st in October after two years’
service as Pioneers to the 5th Division, were complimented by the
Corps Commander.
Paragraphs 46 and 47 of the despatch deal with the Battle of the
Selle River, 17th-25th October, and show that the 51st, as part of
the XXII. Corps, First Army, were on the left of the attack on 24th
October. The telegraphic despatches stated that the Division had
sharp fighting on the 24th and again on the 27th when they repulsed a
determined counter-attack near Maing with the bayonet. Their losses
during October were 2835.
At the end of October the Division went out of the line to rest, and
its very distinguished fighting career was closed.
Scottish regiments were, at various times during the war, in debt to
the Midlands of England for drafts of young soldiers, who soon got
the _esprit de corps_ of their Scottish units. This debt was, partly
at least, repaid when brigades were cut down to three battalions in
the beginning of 1918. At that time the 51st gave to the 61st (South
Midland) Division, three of its best battalions, the 9th Royal Scots,
5th Gordons, and 8th Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders. These formed
the 183rd Brigade; and, in his detailed description of the awful
struggle during the March Retreat, Battle of St. Quentin, Sir Arthur
Conan Doyle gives the greatest possible credit to this brigade. The
whole Division did splendid work in the St. Quentin battle, and also
in the Lys battles in April. See 61st Division.
After the close of the Lys battles these three battalions were taken
from the 61st and, at Arras, joined the 15th, Scottish, New Army,
Division, which at Loos had earned a reputation it never lost. In
July the 15th, as part of the XXII. Corps, went to the south-west of
Soissons, in the French area, and came under the command of General
Mangin for the great counter-attack on the German salient, which
began on 18th July—the turning-point or day of the War. All three
battalions played a notable part in the Buzancy battle on 28th July
and following days, and paid their full share of the price for the
great distinction earned by the 15th Division on that occasion. No
higher compliment could have been paid by an Ally than the erection,
by the French 17th Division, of the monument at Buzancy to the fallen
of the 15th Division. See paragraph 12 of the despatch of 21st
December, 1918, and note in Messrs. Dent’s edition.
After Buzancy the 15th was taken to the Flanders border; its last
great fight was past.
The following units of the 51st Division were chosen for the Armies
of Occupation: 1/6th Black Watch, 1/4th and 1/5th Gordon Highlanders,
and 1/8th Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders.
NOTE.—Since the foregoing account was written, and revised by two
officers who served with the Division during the last three years
of the war, the most excellent _History of the 51st Division_, by
Major F. W. Bewsher (Blackwood and Sons), has been published. The
“casualties suffered” have, with kind permission, been mainly taken
from Major Bewsher’s work.
52ND (LOWLAND) DIVISION
FIRST LINE
After a long service on coast defence work in Scotland, the Division,
in the last half of May, 1915, sailed for the Mediterranean and
arrived at Alexandria early in June. Considerable intervals separated
the dates of despatch of the various battalions to the Dardanelles,
but the Division had practically all landed there before the first
week of July closed.
The 156th Brigade, which disembarked 13th-16th June, was in time to
take part in the action of 28th June. The Brigade was attached to the
29th Division and came into action on the right of the 87th Brigade.
The main object of the attack was to give the British more elbow
room, our situation being still exceedingly cramped.
Sir Ian Hamilton, in his despatch of 26th August, 1915, states that
the assault was entrusted to the VIII. Corps, Lieut.-General A.
G. Hunter-Weston. The 29th Division on the left had to carry the
greatest extent of ground. “On the right of the 87th Brigade the
4th and 7th Royal Scots captured the further two Turkish trenches
allotted to them, but further to the east, near the pivotal point,
the remainder of the 156th Brigade was unable to get on.” The ground
gained was held against “repeated counter-attacks, which for many
days and nights afterwards the enemy launched against the trenches
they had lost.”
The enemy trenches opposite the right front of the attack, near the
pivotal point, had not been seriously bombarded by the artillery
owing to shortage of shells. At that time a preliminary bombardment
was a mere pretence when contrasted with what it became in 1917 or
1918, while the creeping barrage had not yet been devised. The 8th
Battalion Scottish Rifles, the right battalion of the 156th Brigade,
supported by the 7th Battalion, found themselves, as soon as they
were “over the top,” subjected to a murderous enfilade machine-gun
fire from the right flank. Only a few unwounded men reached the
opposing trenches, which were 175 yards distant. The 8th Battalion
went in about 650 strong, they came out with one officer and 29 other
ranks. One man who had reached the enemy position was captured. The
ordeal of the battalion, in this its first action, seems to have been
as severe as any experienced by an infantry battalion during the war.
The Turkish position at this point, H. 12, was attacked by another
brigade soon afterwards. It remained intact, although the attackers
suffered a loss of 1700.
In Sir Ian Hamilton’s despatch of 11th December, 1915, he described
the battle at Helles on 12th-13th July, and the Suvla Bay fighting
in August. The action of 12th-13th July was supplementary to that of
28th June, the object being to push back the Turkish centre.
“On our right the attack was to be entrusted to the French Corps;
on the right centre to the 52nd (Lowland) Division. On the 52nd
Division’s front the operation was planned to take place in two
phases; our right was to attack in the morning, our left in the
afternoon.” The 29th Division was to make a diversion on the left.
“At 7.35 a.m. after a heavy bombardment, the troops, French and
Scottish, dashed out of their trenches, and at once captured two
lines of enemy trenches.” The 1st Division of the French Corps pushed
forward and carried the whole forward system. “Further to the left
the 2nd French Division and our 155th Brigade maintained the two
lines of trenches they had gained. But on the left of the 155th
Brigade the 4th Battalion King’s Own Scottish Borderers pressed on
too eagerly. They not only carried the third line of trenches, but
charged on up the hill and beyond the third line, then advanced
indeed until they came under the ‘feu-de-barrage’ of the French
Artillery. Nothing could live under so cruel a cross fire from friend
and foe, so the King’s Own Scottish Borderers were forced to fall
back with heavy losses to the second line of enemy trenches which
they had captured in the first rush.”
The second phase of the attack was launched as planned. “The 157th
Brigade rushed forward under heavy machine-gun and rifle fire, and
splendidly carried the whole of the enemy trenches allotted as their
objective. Here then our line had advanced some 400 yards, while the
155th Brigade and the 2nd French Division had advanced between 200
and 300 yards. At six p.m. the 52nd Division was ordered to make the
line good. It seemed to be fairly within our grasp.”
“All night long determined counter-attacks, one after another, were
repulsed by the French and the 155th Brigade, but about 7.30 a.m. the
right of the 157th Brigade gave way before a party of bombers and our
grip upon the enemy began to weaken.” Another attack at 3 p.m. on the
13th, in which the Royal Naval Division and French took part, met
with success, and on the whole the line was greatly improved by the
operations of the two days. “A solid and enduring advance had been
achieved.”[5]
Sir Ian Hamilton said: “The 1/5th Royal Scots Fusiliers commanded
by Lieut.-Colonel J. B. Pollok McCall; the 1/7th Royal Scots,
commanded by Lieut.-Colonel W. C. Peebles; the 1/5th King’s Own
Scottish Borderers, commanded by Lieut.-Colonel W. J. Millar; and
the 1/6th Highland Light Infantry, commanded by Major J. Anderson,
are mentioned as having specially distinguished themselves in this
engagement.”
In his despatch of 6th March, 1916, which deals with the evacuation
of the Gallipoli Peninsula, Sir C. C. Monro remarked: “Meanwhile the
VIII. Corps had maintained the offensive spirit in bombing and minor
operations with which they had established the moral superiority
they enjoyed over the enemy. On the 29th December, the 52nd Division
completed the excellent work which they had been carrying out
for so long by capturing a considerable portion of the Turkish
trenches, and by successfully holding these in the face of repeated
counter-attacks.”
The commander of the Division, Major-General the Hon. H. A. Lawrence,
“was selected to take charge of all embarkation operations.” The
evacuation from Helles took place on the night of 8th January, 1916.
The 52nd Division was taken to Egypt. They crossed to the east side
of the Suez Canal about the beginning of March, 1916, and they were
to spend the ensuing twelve months in the desert of Sinai, their
energies being consumed in assisting with railway construction and
making and manning defensive posts.
In Sir A. Murray’s despatch, dated 1st June, 1916, as to operations
of the Egyptian force, between 10th January and 31st May, 1916,
paragraph 8, after describing the attack on the Yeomanry at Oghratina
and Qatia in the Sinai Peninsula on 23rd April, he says: “Meanwhile,
at 5.30 a.m. a Turkish force, 1000 strong, with one gun, advancing
from the south, attacked Dueidar, the most advanced defensible
post, which was held by 100 men of the 5th Battalion, Royal Scots
Fusiliers, under the command of Captain Roberts, 5th Battalion, Royal
Scots Fusiliers. This officer, who throughout showed conspicuous
skill and ability, succeeded in repelling two determined attacks on
the position at 6.30 a.m. and 8.30 a.m. respectively. Both attempts
cost the enemy dear. At 9.30 a.m. reinforcements of two companies,
4th Royal Scots Fusiliers, under the command of Major Thompson, of
that battalion, who had been despatched from Hill 70, seven miles
away, on the first news of the attack, arrived at Dueidar. The
various posts were strengthened and a counter-attack, delivered at
12.30 p.m. with great spirit, forced the enemy to retire, leaving 30
prisoners in our hands and 70 dead.”
In his despatch of 1st October, 1916, Sir A. Murray dealt with
operations in the desert east of the canal, in particular with the
fighting on 3rd, 4th and 5th August, 1916, an attack by the Turks,
the British counter-attack, etc. Paragraph 5: During the 4th, the
enemy made several attacks against the Romani-Mahemdia defences,
from the east, south and south-west. “These were repulsed by the
garrisons, composed of Scottish and Welsh infantry, with considerable
loss, and in spite of heavy artillery fire from the enemy’s heavy
howitzers, which in one or two cases inflicted severe casualties on
our troops, who behaved with admirable steadiness.” “Vigorous action,
to the utmost limits of endurance, was ordered for the next day, and
the troops, in spite of the heat, responded nobly. At daybreak the
Scottish Territorial infantry, assisted by Australian and New Zealand
mounted troops, took the remainder of Wellington Ridge by assault,
capturing about 1500 prisoners.”
Paragraph 6: “The Scottish troops, commanded by Major-General
W. E. B. Smith, C.M.G., not only showed great steadiness under
heavy artillery fire, but were responsible for the assault which
recaptured Wellington Ridge, on 4th August, and for clearing Abu
Hamra on the 5th.”
The troops mainly responsible for the recapture of the ridge were
the 7th and 8th Scottish Rifles. These moved out from Romani, about
two miles from the Ridge, at dusk on the 4th. The 7th, on the left,
linked up with a work, 22a, garrisoned by the 5th Royal Scots
Fusiliers. The 8th under Colonel Findlay pressed up the hill, and
when the leading lines were about 50 yards from the crest they were
fired on; they then dug in. The 7th moved forward until in line with
the 8th. At dawn mounted troops came up on the right and about the
same time a company of the 5th Royal Scots Fusiliers arrived. An
assault had been ordered when the Turks surrendered. The 8th Scottish
Rifles took 360 prisoners and the mounted troops prevented the
remainder from escaping.
The fighting 4th-5th August is now designated the “Battle of Rumani.”
The Division was in reserve in the first Battle of Gaza on 26th
March, 1917 (see 53rd Division), but had stiff fighting in the second
attempt made by Sir A. Murray’s force to capture Gaza on 17th-19th
April, 1917.
The despatch of 28th June, 1917, paragraph 9, shows that on 17th
April the 52nd Division was in the centre, the 53rd on the left
and the 54th on the right. The Abbas-Mansura ridge was seized by
the 157th Brigade of the 52nd Division, with little opposition,
and preparation was made for a further advance on the 19th. The
arrangement of the divisions was as on the 17th. The 52nd in the
centre unfortunately found its task too heavy.
“The left brigade of the 52nd Division” (the only one, as stated in
paragraph 10, which could with advantage be employed owing to the
configuration of the ground) “made good Lees Hill, the nearest point
to our line of the enemy defences on the Ali Muntar ridge by 8.15
a.m., but on advancing beyond the Lees Hill this brigade came under
very heavy machine-gun fire from Outpost Hill, which checked its
progress.” At 10 a.m. a lunette on Outpost Hill was captured.
Later “the left brigade, 52nd Division, was shelled out of its
position on Outpost Hill, but the position was most gallantly retaken
on his own initiative by Major W. T. Forrest, M.C., K.O.S.B.,
subsequently killed, who collected a few men for the purpose. All
further attempts to launch an attack from Outpost Hill were shattered
by fire at their inception.”
Paragraph 10: In the afternoon the position was that the 52nd could
not advance. A large area of extremely broken ground had been made
exceedingly strong by the enemy, and the nests of machine guns could
not be located and destroyed. The attack was eventually abandoned,
the British losses being about 7000 men, but all ground gained
was consolidated and kept. The “left brigade” was the 155th, the
156th was on the right and the 157th in reserve. The capture of the
objectives involved an advance of two miles, with little cover, and
only moderate artillery support.
At paragraph 15 Sir A. Murray recorded his appreciation of what
his troops had done. “Particular commendation is due to the
infantry—52nd, 53rd and 54th Divisions.” “Under severe trial they
have now given ample proof of the finest soldierly qualities.”
Sir E. Allenby took over the command of the Egyptian Expeditionary
Force on 28th June, 1917. In his despatch of 16th December, 1917,
he recounts the progress of the operations which culminated in the
surrender of Jerusalem. The Army had received increases of strength
and this enabled the commander to deal with a wider front and to
avoid a direct attack on Gaza. Beersheba at the other end of the line
was taken on 31st October. The Lowland Division was second from the
left of the British line, opposite Gaza.
The despatch, paragraph 9, states: “As Umbrella Hill flanked the
advance against the Turkish works further west, it was decided to
capture it by a preliminary operation, to take place four hours
previous to the main attack. It was accordingly attacked and captured
at 11 p.m. on November 1st, by a portion of the 52nd (Lowland)
Division. This attack drew a heavy bombardment of Umbrella Hill
itself and our front lines, which lasted for two hours, but ceased in
time to allow the main attack, which was timed for 3 a.m., to form up
without interference.”
The 7th Scottish Rifles had the principal rôle in the capture of
Umbrella Hill.
In the main attack almost all objectives were reached. Between the
1st and the 6th progress was made east of Gaza and on the 7th it
was found that the fortress had been evacuated. The fighting 27th
October-7th November is now the “Third Battle of Gaza.”
The British at once pursued, the 52nd Division following the
coast. In paragraph 15, Sir E. Allenby speaks “of the rapidity of
our movement along the coast and the determination with which his
rearguards on this flank had been pressed.”
“The advanced guard of the 52nd (Lowland) Division had forced its way
almost to Burkah on the 11th.”
After describing the position taken up by the Turks the despatch
states that an attack for the 13th November was arranged. “This
Katrah-El-Mughar line forms a very strong position, and it was here
that the enemy made his most determined resistance against the
turning movement directed against his right flank. The capture of
this position by the 52nd (Lowland) Division, assisted by a most
dashing charge of mounted troops, who galloped across the plain under
heavy fire and turned the enemy’s position from the north, was a fine
feat of arms. Some 1100 prisoners, 3 guns and many machine guns were
taken here. After this the enemy resistance weakened, and by the
evening his forces were retiring east and north.”
“In fifteen days our force had advanced sixty miles on its right,
and about forty on its left. It had driven a Turkish army of nine
infantry divisions and one cavalry division out of a position in
which it had been entrenched for six months, and had pursued it,
giving battle whenever it attempted to stand, and inflicting on
it losses amounting probably to nearly two-thirds of the enemy’s
original effectives. Over 9000 prisoners, about 80 guns, more than
100 machine guns, and very large quantities of ammunition and other
stores had been captured.”
It is pardonable to point out here that the infantry of Sir E.
Allenby’s army was up till April 1918 composed, to the extent of
four-fifths, of Territorial Divisions.
Jaffa was occupied on 16th November, 1917.
The despatch, paragraph 17, states that the “52nd Division in nine
days covered 69 miles.” Much of this was over heavy sand or very poor
tracks.
Paragraph 20 refers to various attacks by the Turks: there was
“particularly heavy fighting” towards the close of November near El
Burj, “but Yeomanry and Scottish troops successfully resisted all
attacks and inflicted severe losses on the enemy.” A large number of
prisoners were taken. Officially the fighting, 17th-24th November, is
now the “Battle of Nebi Samwil.”
Jerusalem was surrendered to troops of the 53rd and 60th Divisions on
9th December. See also 53rd, 54th and 60th Divisions.
In his despatch of 18th September, 1918, Sir E. Allenby stated that
his next operations were designed to increase the security of Jaffa
and Jerusalem. To the XXI. Corps, 52nd and 54th Divisions, was
assigned the task of increasing the distance, between Jaffa and the
enemy, from three miles to eight miles.
Paragraph 3: “The weather was unfavourable. Heavy rains made the
roads deep in mud and brought down the streams.”
Paragraph 4: “The chief obstacle lay in the crossing of the Nahr El
Auja. This river is only fordable in places and all approaches to
it are overlooked from Sheikh Muannis and Khurbet Hadrah. At these
places two spurs running from north to south terminate abruptly
in steep slopes some 500 yards from the river.” These two places
“and the high ground overlooking the river had to be captured, as a
preliminary to the general advance, in order that bridges might be
built.
“The chief difficulty lay in concealing the collection and
preparation of rafts and bridging material. All preparations were
completed, however, without attracting the enemy’s attention, and on
the night of December 20th-21st, the 52nd Division crossed the river
in three columns. The enemy was taken completely by surprise. The
left column, fording the river near its mouth, at this point four
feet deep, captured Tell Er Rekkeit, 4000 yards north of the river’s
mouth; the centre and right columns crossing on rafts, rushed Sheikh
Muannis and Khurbet Hadrah at the point of the bayonet. By dawn a
line from Khurbet Hadrah to Tell Er Rekkeit had been consolidated,
and the enemy deprived of all observation from the north over the
valley of the Nahr El Auja.
“The successful crossing of the Nahr El Auja reflects great credit on
the 52nd (Lowland) Division. It involved considerable preparation,
the details of which were thought out with care and precision. The
sodden state of the ground and, on the night of the crossing, the
swollen state of the river added to the difficulties, yet by dawn
the whole of the infantry had crossed. The fact that the enemy
were taken by surprise, and that all resistance was overcome with
the bayonet without a shot being fired, bears testimony to the
discipline of this Division. Eleven officers, including two battalion
commanders, and 305 other ranks, and ten machine guns were captured
in this operation.”
Despite “considerable hostile shell fire” bridges were completed,
and by dusk on the 21st the whole of the Divisional artillery had
crossed. On the 22nd, the 54th captured certain villages, and the
52nd not only reached all their objectives but consolidated a line
two miles beyond “to deny direct observation on Jaffa harbour to the
enemy.”
For their particularly fine work the 52nd received the
congratulations of the Army, Corps and Divisional commanders. All
three brigades shared in the work and the distinction it brought. The
155th took Khurbet Hadrah, the 156th Sheikh Muannis, and the 157th,
the brigade which forded the river, captured Tell Er Rekkeit.
The fighting 21st-22nd December is now designated the “Battle of
Jaffa.”
At the close of the despatch, paragraph 15, Sir Edmund Allenby
remarked that the 52nd Division embarked for France in the first week
of April 1918. On 7th-8th May the Division took over a portion of the
line east of Arras. They were now in the VIII. Corps under Commander
Sir A. Hunter Weston, with whom they first fought at the Dardanelles.
In the middle of August they moved further south to take a part in
the big effort to be made there.
A quotation from Sir Douglas Haig’s telegraphic despatch of 13th
September, 1918, as to good work by various divisions, which contains
a reference to the 52nd attacking along with the 56th on 23rd August,
is given under the 56th, London, Division.
In the despatch of 21st December, 1918, paragraph 22, Sir Douglas
Haig mentioned that the 52nd was employed with the VI. Corps, Third
Army, in the main attack on 23rd-24th August, a phase of the “Battle
of Albert, 1918,” in the sector north of Albert. “On the left of the
56th, the 52nd Division (Major-General J. Hill) took Hénin-sur-Cojeul
and gained a footing in St.-Martin-sur-Cojeul.”
Heavy fighting on 24th August and following days brought the 52nd
into the Hindenburg line. On the 26th they made good progress on
the north of the Cojeul and took Hénin Hill, getting well into the
Hindenburg line, and moving down it on the 27th, they gave assistance
to the 56th on their right.
The fighting in this area 26th-30th August is now officially
designated the “Battle of the Scarpe, 1918.”
After three days’ rest the 52nd relieved the 56th and, on 1st
September, cleared the famous Bullecourt, round which there had been
a great struggle; as there was in April 1917. This was a necessary
preliminary to a big attack fixed for the 2nd September.
Paragraph 28 of the despatch deals with “The storming of the
Drocourt-Quéant line” on 2nd September. “The maze of trenches at the
junction of that line and the Hindenburg system was stormed and the
enemy was thrown into precipitate retreat on the whole front to
the south of it. This gallant feat of arms was carried out by the
Canadian Corps of the First Army,” with “the 4th English Division,
and the XVII. Corps of the Third Army, employing the 52nd, 57th and
63rd Divisions.”
After referring to the fine work of the Canadian Corps, Sir Douglas
Haig said: “On the right the attack of the XVII. Corps, launched,
at the same hour by the 52nd and 57th Divisions, directed its main
force on the triangle of fortifications, marking the junction of
the Hindenburg and Drocourt-Quéant lines, north-west of the village
of Quéant. Pressed with equal vigour it met with success equally
complete. There was stern fighting in the net-work of trenches, both
north and south of Quéant, in which neighbourhood the 52nd (Lowland)
Division performed distinguished service, and, by the progress they
made, greatly assisted our advance further north. Early in the
afternoon our troops had cleared the triangle and the 63rd Division
had passed through to exploit the success thus gained.”
The fighting on 2nd-3rd September is now the “Battle of the
Drocourt-Quéant line.”
In a telegraphic despatch of 20th September Sir Douglas Haig said:
“On the 17th a corporal and six men of the 1/5th Highland Light
Infantry, 52nd Division, forming garrison of one of our posts just
north of the village, were surrounded and believed to have been
captured. During two days Germans held the village this party
maintained their position and inflicted many casualties on the enemy.
On the night of 19th-20th, when Mœuvres was retaken, the whole party
regained their unit without loss.”
The very gallant N.C.O. was awarded the Victoria Cross. The village
was retaken by the 52nd Division.
The XVII. Corps was again employed on 27th September, “the Battle
of Cambrai and the Hindenburg line.” Paragraph 35 of the despatch
states: “In the centre the 52nd Division, Major-General F. J.
Marshall, passing its troops across the canal by bridgeheads
previously established by the 57th Division,[6] on the opening of the
assault, carried the German trench lines east of the canal and gained
the high ground overlooking Graincourt.”
The advance was continued successfully by the XVII. Corps between
27th September and 1st October, the 52nd doing particularly well, not
only at the crossing of the Canal du Nord but in the capture of the
heavily wired defences on either side of it.
The designation of the fighting 27th September-1st October, has been
altered by the Nomenclature Committee and is now the “Battle of the
Canal du Nord.” They have fixed the dates of the “Battle of Cambrai,
1918,” to be 8th and 9th October.
Early in October the Division left the XVII. Corps and later that
month took over from the 12th Division in the VIII. Corps, Fifth Army.
With short intervals of rest the Division continued in the line of
the advance until Armistice Day. They crossed the Belgian frontier
south of Péruvelz, and moving eastward by Sirault, were about ten
miles north of Mons on 11th November. During these last few weeks
there was frequently stubborn opposition which involved sharp
fighting.
The 5th King’s Own Scottish Borderers, 8th Scottish Rifles, and 5th
Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders of the 52nd served during the last
five months in the 34th Division (Major-General Nicholson), which
after suffering heavy losses in the German offensive of March and
April was reconstituted largely with battalions from the Palestine
Divisions. It served with the French Tenth Army, south of Soissons
in July 1918, and was highly complimented by General Mangin, the
Army Commander. The battalions from the 52nd seem to have done
exceptionally well both south of Soissons and at the capture of
Gheluwe in Belgium, 14th October, and Anseghem, 31st October, when
the 34th was advancing as part of the X. Corps, Second Army. The 34th
Division reached Halluin.
The 5th and 6th battalions, Scottish Rifles, and 9th Highland Light
Infantry lost their places in the Division through going to France
early in the war. Indeed the 5th Scottish Rifles was one of the
first Territorial battalions to be employed in that theatre, the
5th and 6th were eventually amalgamated. The fine work of all three
battalions when in the 33rd Division was very frequently praised by
unofficial historians.
These three units were replaced by the 4th and 7th Battalions, The
Royal Scots, and the 5th Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders, all from
“Army Troops.”
The following units were selected for the Armies of Occupation on
the Western Front: the 5/6th Royal Scots, which served as separate
battalions in the Near East, the 5th Battalion landing at Helles
with the 29th Division, and, after amalgamation, in France with the
32nd Division; the 1/4th Royal Scots Fusiliers; the 1/5th King’s Own
Scottish Borderers; the 5/6th Scottish Rifles; the 1/8th Scottish
Rifles; and the 1/9th Highland Light Infantry.
The 32nd Division formed part of the Fourth Army throughout the
“Advance to Victory.” In Major-General Montgomery’s _Story of the
Fourth Army_ there are several flattering references to the work of
the 5/6th Royal Scots, as at p. 178, 3rd October, where he refers to
their capture of Sequehart and its retention after the third time of
capture—“partly also to the stubborn manner in which the 5/6th Royal
Scots clung to the village it had three times captured.”
FOOTNOTES:
[5] In _The Fifth Highland Light Infantry_, 1914-18 (MacLehose and
Co., 1921, p. 29), there is a statement that Sir Ian Hamilton had
been misinformed as to the right of the 157th Brigade giving way
before a party of bombers. It is admitted that a portion of trench
had been vacated through an order having been misunderstood, but it
is stated that another company at once occupied it and was holding
it when the afternoon attack commenced. There may have been other
incidents of which the “Fifth” were unaware.
[6] At page 281 of Messrs. Dent’s edition of _Sir Douglas Haig’s
Despatches_ the following note occurs at this point: “This is
incorrect. There were no bridgeheads at this time and the crossings
were forced by the 52nd Division at the opening of their attack.”
53RD (WELSH) DIVISION
FIRST LINE
The Division landed at Suvla Bay, Gallipoli, between 7th and 10th
August, 1915, and became a part of the larger force which landed a
few days earlier.
In his despatch of 11th December, 1915, Sir Ian Hamilton describes
the attempt made on the 9th August by the 11th Division to seize
hills north of Anafarta-Sagir. He remarked, “The line was later on
prolonged by the remainder of the 34th Brigade and two battalions of
the 159th Brigade of the 53rd Division. Their right was connected
with the Chocolate Hills by the 33rd Brigade.” “Some of the units
which took part in this engagement acquitted themselves very bravely.
I regret I have not had sufficient detail given me to mention them
by name. The Divisional Commander speaks with appreciation of one
freshly landed battalion of the 53rd Division, a Hereford battalion,
presumably the 1/1st Herefordshire, which attacked with impetuosity
and courage.” “During the night of the 8th and 9th and early morning
of the 9th the whole of the 53rd (Territorial) Division (my general
reserve) had arrived and disembarked.... I had ordered it up to
Suvla.” “The infantry brigades of the 53rd Division (no artillery
had accompanied it from England) reinforced the 11th Division.”
The next paragraph shows that the 53rd Division took part in another
attack on the 10th which failed. “Many of the battalions fought with
great gallantry and were led forward with much devotion by their
officers.”
The 53rd Division along with the 54th were engaged on the 21st
August, the “Battle of Scimitar Hill.” They were to hold the enemy
while the 29th and 11th Divisions attacked. The attack was not
successful.
The troops at Suvla were evacuated in December 1915, the operation
being successfully completed on the night of 19th-20th December.
The Division was taken to Egypt, and in his despatch of 1st June,
1916, paragraph 1, Sir A. Murray stated that the Division was early
that year “occupied in operations on the Western Frontier of Egypt.”
Sir A. Murray in his despatch of 1st October, 1916, paragraph 5,
refers to the fighting in August, to the east of the Suez Canal, and
a quotation as to the repulse of heavy attacks on 4th-5th August has
already been given under the 52nd Division. This is now designated
the “Battle of Rumani.”
In his despatch of 28th June, 1917, paragraph 1, Sir A. Murray refers
to the reconstitution of the “Desert Column” and mentions the 53rd
Division as one of its units in March.
The Division bore a leading part in the “First Battle of Gaza,”
26th-27th March, 1917. Paragraph 2 of the despatch last mentioned
shows that the 53rd Division was “to attack Gaza in front,” their
left being covered by the Gloucestershire Hussars among the sandhills
on the coast. The approach march was made on the 25th and early on
the 26th.
Paragraph 3: “Meanwhile the 53rd Division, under the command of
Major-General A. G. Dallas, C.B., C.M.G., having thrown forward
strong bridgeheads before dawn,” (on the 26th) “crossed the Wadi
Ghuzze at a point some three miles from the sea-coast, with one
brigade on the right directed on the Mansura Ridge, and another
brigade on the left directed on El Sheluf, some two miles south of
Gaza, on the ridge running south-west from that place. A brigade was
held in reserve.” A brigade of the 54th was placed at the disposal of
the G.O.C. 53rd Division when required.
“The deployment of the leading brigades commenced at 11.50 a.m.,
and the brigade in reserve moved forward shortly afterwards to
its assigned position. In co-operation with artillery fire and
long-range machine-gun fire, the brigade on the left pressed forward
along the ridge, and the remaining brigades over the flat, open
ground, practically devoid of cover. The final advance, which began
just after 1 p.m., was very steady, and all the troops behaved
magnificently, though the enemy offered a very stout resistance, both
with rifle and machine-gun fire, and our advancing troops, during the
approach march, the deployment and attack, were subjected to a heavy
shrapnel fire.”
In the afternoon the mounted troops attacked Gaza from north and
north-east, and enveloped it, having heavy fighting among the gardens
and enclosures.
Paragraph 4: “Meanwhile the infantry attack was being pressed with
great vigour, and by 4.30 p.m. considerable progress had been made.
Portions of the enemy’s positions were already in our hands and
shortly afterwards the Ali Muntar Hill, a strong work known as the
Labyrinth, and the ground in the immediate neighbourhood fell into
our hands. The Australian and New Zealand Mounted Division was
already exerting pressure on the enemy, and by 5 p.m. the enemy was
holding out in the trenches and on the hill south of the Mosque only.
The G.O.C. 53rd Division called on the brigade of the 54th Division
(Brigadier-General W. Marriott-Dodington) which had been placed
at his disposal to take this position. The brigade responded with
the greatest gallantry in face of a heavy fire and after some hard
fighting it pushed home its attack with complete success, so that
when darkness fell the whole of the Ali Muntar position had been
carried and a footing gained on the ridge to a point about 1200 yards
north-east of that position.”
Paragraph 5 deals with the “strong columns of the enemy” moving
to the relief of Gaza, and other facts which compelled certain
withdrawals to be undertaken.
In paragraph 6 occurs the sentence, “Nevertheless, though tired
and ill-supplied with water the 53rd and 54th Divisions now placed
under the G.O.C. 53rd remained throughout the day (27th) staunch and
cheerful and perfectly capable of repulsing with heavy losses to the
enemy any Turkish counter-attacks.”
The Turks had been very strongly reinforced, and although a strong
counter-attack at 4 p.m. was shattered it was decided to retire to
the west of the Wadi Ghuzze. This was carried out during the night.
At the close of paragraph 7 Sir A. Murray said: “The troops engaged,
both cavalry, camelry and infantry, especially the 53rd Division
and the brigade of the 54th, which had not been seriously in action
since the evacuation of Suvla Bay at the end of 1915, fought with the
utmost gallantry and endurance and showed to the full the splendid
fighting qualities which they possess.”
Paragraph 8 deals with the preparations for a second attack on the
Gaza positions. For that operation the possession of the Wadi Ghuzze
was necessary, so that the effort of 26th-27th March was not wasted.
The 17th April was the day fixed for the beginning of the second
attack. In his despatch Sir A. Murray said, paragraph 9, that the
“53rd Division, under the command of Major-General S. F. Mott, was
to remain in position just north of the Wadi Ghuzze between the sea
and the Gaza-Khan-Yunus road, but to carry out strong reconnaissances
northward along the coast.”
In the final stage of the attack “the 53rd Division was to attack
the enemy’s trenches in the sand-dunes south-west and west of Gaza,
the line Sampson Ridge-Sheikh Ajlin being its first objective.” The
Division advanced at 7.15 a.m. on the 19th; “though meeting with
considerable opposition, they gradually worked up to Sampson Ridge
which was carried by a brigade early in the afternoon. This enabled
another brigade to carry the high ground between this position and
the coast with little opposition—and the first objective of the
Division was attained.”
At nightfall “the 53rd Division held the Sampson Ridge-Sheikh
Ajlin line,” but other parts of the force had not attained their
objectives, casualties had been very heavy, about 7000, and the
attack was abandoned. The ground gained was kept and consolidated.
(See also 52nd and 54th Divisions.)
Sir E. Allenby assumed command of the Egyptian Expeditionary Force
in June 1917, and the successful operations which began with the
capture of Beersheba on 31st October, and ended with the surrender
of Jerusalem on 9th December, are detailed in his despatch of 16th
December, 1917.
The 53rd Division was, in these operations, on the right of the line.
On 27th October the Turks attacked a line of outposts; paragraph
6: “The gallant resistance made by the Yeomanry enabled the 53rd
(Welsh) Division to come up in time, and on their advance the Turks
withdrew.” On the same date the British bombardment of the Gaza
defences commenced.
Paragraph 10, 1st November: The 53rd (Welsh) Division after a long
march took up a position from six miles north of Beersheba to
Muweileh. Between the 1st and 5th November the Division had sometimes
heavy fighting.
Paragraph 11: “The 53rd (Welsh) Division had again had very severe
fighting on the 6th. Their attack at dawn on Tel el Khuweilfeh
was successful, and though they were driven off a hill by a
counter-attack, they retook it and captured another hill, which much
improved their position. The Turkish losses in this area were very
heavy indeed, and the stubborn fighting of the 53rd Division, the
Imperial Camel Corps and part of the mounted troops during 2nd to 6th
November drew in and exhausted the Turkish reserves, and paved the
way for the success of the attack on Sheria. The 53rd Division took
several hundred prisoners and some guns during this fighting.”
The various actions 27th October to 7th November are now designated
the “Third Battle of Gaza.”
Paragraph 21: An attack on the Jerusalem defences was fixed for 8th
December, the 53rd Division marched up the Hebron-Jerusalem road
and met little opposition from the enemy. Heavy rains on the 7th
and following days delayed the column but on the 9th “Welsh troops
occupied a position east of Jerusalem across the Jericho road,” the
60th Division being to the north of the city. At noon the city was
surrendered. (See also 60th Division.)
In Sir E. Allenby’s second despatch dated 18th September, 1918, he
deals with the operations undertaken to provide more effectively for
the security of Jerusalem and of Jaffa (see 52nd Division). The XX.
Corps, including the 53rd and 60th Divisions, had been ordered to
make an advance on a twelve-mile front to a depth of six miles north
of Jerusalem, but in the meantime “the enemy attacked with great
determination astride the Jerusalem-Nablus-Sechem road,” on December
26th-27th. The 60th was heavily engaged but beat off the enemy
with loss. Paragraph 5: “In the meantime the enemy had delivered
attacks against various points held by the 53rd Division east of
Jerusalem. On the extreme right at Kh. Deir Ibn Obeid a company of
Middlesex troops was surrounded by 700 Turks, supported by mountain
artillery. Although without artillery support, it offered a most
gallant resistance, holding out till relief came on the morning of
the 28th. None of the other attacks on this division’s front were any
more successful.” “By the evening of December 30th the XX. Corps had
advanced on a front of twelve miles to a depth varying from six miles
on the right to three miles on the left. This advance had to overcome
not only a determined and obstinate resistance, but great natural
difficulties as well, which had to be overcome before guns could be
brought up to support the infantry.” 750 prisoners were taken, and
1000 Turkish dead were buried. The fighting 26th-30th December is now
designated the “Defence of Jerusalem.”
The despatch, paragraph 7, shows that the 60th and 53rd Divisions
were engaged in the operations leading to the capture of Jericho,
20th-21st February, 1918.
On 9th, 10th and 11th March further operations were undertaken in
which the fighting was of a bitter character. Paragraph 8: On the 9th
“the 53rd Division on the right had met with considerable opposition
and great natural difficulties especially on the extreme right and
at Tell-Asur, a conspicuous landmark among a mass of high hills.
The importance attached to it by the enemy was shown by the number
of determined efforts he made to recapture it, all of which were
repulsed.” Progress continued on the 10th and 11th.
In his third despatch, dated 31st October, Sir E. Allenby describes
his final operations, now designated “The Battles of Megiddo,” which
led to the armistice with Turkey. The main attack was on the coastal
plain, that is on the left of the line, the 53rd Division and the
10th Division to make an advance on the right of the line some twelve
hours later.
Paragraph 13: “During the night of September 18th-19th the XX.
Corps swung forward its right on the east of the Bireh-Nablus road.
The 53rd Division descended into the basin at the head of the Wadi
Samieh, captured Kh. Jibeit, El Mugheir and the ridge on the far
side of the basin and all its objectives with the exception of one
hill, Kh. Abu Malul. Considerable opposition was encountered and
hand-to-hand fighting took place in which over 400 prisoners were
taken.”
Paragraph 16: On the morning of the 19th “I ordered the XX. Corps
to advance that night on Nablus.” The enemy had long expected such
an attack and his defences were strong and “the task of the Corps
was a difficult one. The enemy in this portion of the field was
not disorganised and was able to oppose a stout resistance to the
advance. The country is broken and rugged, demanding great physical
exertion on the part of the troops and preventing the artillery
keeping pace with the infantry. Nevertheless good progress was made
on the night of September 19th, and during the following day. The
53rd Division captured Kh. Abu Malul and advanced their line in the
centre. On their right Khan Jibeit was heavily counter-attacked on
the morning of September 20th. The Turks succeeded in regaining the
hill but were driven off again after a sharp fight.” By the evening
of the 21st the XX. Corps had reached a line which extended to the
N.E. of Nablus. After that date the fighting operations were mainly
within the sphere of the cavalry and armoured cars, but the infantry
had some severe marching and other hardships. On 31st October the
Armistice with Turkey came into force.
The Division was unfortunate in losing several of its original units
before it went abroad, the 1/4th Royal Welsh Fusiliers, 1/5th and
1/6th Cheshire Regiment and 1/1st, 1/2nd and 1/3rd Monmouth Regiment
having been taken to the Western front early in the war. The 1/4th
and 1/5th Welsh Regiment, originally Army Troops, the 1/4th Royal
Sussex, 2/4th Royal West Surrey, 2/4th Royal West Kent and 2/10th
Middlesex took the place of the units which had left the Division. In
the despatch of 14th January, 1915, Sir John French gave mention to
several officers and men of the 2nd Monmouth Regiment for good work
at the First Battle of Ypres, and in his despatch of 31st May, 1915,
officers and men of the 1/5th Cheshire and 1/2nd and 1/3rd Monmouth
gained mention. The 1/1st Monmouth was Pioneer battalion to the 46th
(North Midland) Division and shared its glory on 29th September,
1918, when they crossed the St. Quentin canal, captured Bellenglise
and broke the Hindenburg line.
The 1/4th Royal Welsh Fusiliers served as Pioneers to the 47th
Division and during the Retreat, March 1918, did outstanding work,
particularly on the 24th when acting as rearguard.
The 6th Cheshire is mentioned by Sir A. Conan Doyle, volume iv. p.
146, as in a Territorial brigade of the 39th Division which on 31st
July, 1917, in the Third Battle of Ypres, made an attack which was
“extraordinarily gallant,” “greater constancy has seldom been seen.”
The same battalion was in the awful fighting on the Aisne at the end
of May 1918, when three divisions of the IX. Corps were destroyed.
An account of the battle is to be found in the _History of the 25th
Division_ (Harrison).
As stated under the 52nd, the divisions in Palestine sent battalions
to France to reinforce the army there after the losses incurred by
it in the great German offensive. The 1/4th Cheshire, 1/1st Hereford
and 1/4th Sussex were put into the 34th Division and fought with it
in the great battle south of Soissons, July 1918, when Marshal Foch
crushed in the sides of the salient between the Aisne and the Marne.
The following units, either belonging to the 53rd Division, or
which had served with it, were chosen for the Army of Occupation on
the Western Front: 1/4th and 1/6th Cheshire Regiment, 2/4th Royal
West Surrey and 1/4th Sussex Regiment. The 1/6th Welsh Regiment,
originally Army Troops, was also selected.
54TH (EAST ANGLIAN) DIVISION
FIRST LINE
In his despatch of 11th December 1915, dealing with the operations
at Suvla Bay, Gallipoli, Sir Ian Hamilton said: “The 54th Division,
infantry only, arrived and were disembarked on August 11th and placed
in reserve. On the following day, August 12th, I proposed that the
54th Division should make a night-march in order to attack, at dawn
on the 13th, the heights Kavak Tepe-Teke Tepe.” “That afternoon
the 163rd Brigade moved off and in spite of serious opposition
established itself about the A of Anafarta in difficult and enclosed
country. In the course of the fight, creditable in all respects to
the 163rd Brigade, there happened a very mysterious thing. The 1/5th
Norfolks were on the right of the line and found themselves for a
moment less strongly opposed than the rest of the brigade, Against
the yielding forces of the enemy Colonel Sir H. Beauchamp, a bold,
self-confident officer, eagerly pressed forward, followed by the
best part of the battalion. The fighting grew hotter, and the ground
became more wooded and broken. At this stage many men were wounded or
grew exhausted with thirst. These found their way back to camp during
the night. But the colonel, with 16 officers and 250 men, still kept
pushing on, driving the enemy before him. Amongst these ardent souls
was part of a fine company enlisted from the King’s Sandringham
estates. Nothing more was ever seen or heard of any of them. They
charged into the forest and were lost to sight and sound. Not one of
them ever came back.”
Owing to representations by the Corps Commander the night march and
projected attack on the 13th were abandoned.
The 162nd Brigade of the 54th Division were in support in an attack
on 15th August, and on the 21st, the “Battle of Scimitar Hill,” “the
53rd and 54th were to hold the enemy from Sulajik to Kiretch Tepe
Sirt, while the 29th Division and the 11th Division stormed Ismail
Oglu Tepe.” These attacks met with little success. During the ensuing
four months the Suvla Force held on to the ground it had won, but
with ever-increasing difficulty, as sickness and casualties had sadly
thinned its ranks.
On the night of the 19th-20th December, 1915, the evacuation from
Suvla and Anzac was completed.
The 54th Division sailed for Egypt and down to the close of the war
remained part of the Egyptian Expeditionary Force. Shortly after
landing in Egypt part of the Division was employed as Lines of
Communication troops for the column working on the western frontier.
(See Sir J. G. Maxwell’s despatch of 1st March, 1916.)
When Sir A. Murray proceeded to press back the Turks in Palestine the
54th Division was employed—quotations from the despatch of 28th June,
1917, as to the action of 26th-27th March, 1917, the “First Battle
of Gaza,” are given under the 53rd Division.
In the despatch of 28th June, 1917, as to the “Second Battle of
Gaza,” paragraph 9, Sir A. Murray stated that on 17th April,
1917, the 54th and 52nd “were to seize and occupy the line
Sheik-Abbas-Mansura-Kurd Hill,” that line was taken by 7 a.m.
On the 19th these two divisions were to attack the Ali Muntar group
of works south of Gaza, the 54th pivoting on the right of the 52nd;
unfortunately the latter division was held up, see 52nd Division.
“Meanwhile the 54th Division with the Imperial Camel Corps had
advanced steadily under fire on the right of the 52nd Division. Its
left brigade was in advance of the right of the rear brigade of the
52nd Division, and thus exposed to a heavy enfilade fire from the
direction of Ali Muntar. At 9.30 a.m. the left of this brigade was
heavily counter-attacked, but the enemy were repulsed by machine-gun
fire. On the right of this brigade another brigade fought its way
forward against the enemy works between Gaza and Khirbet Sihan.”
These were entered by the Camel Corps. The two brigades, “in spite
of most strenuous and gallant efforts to advance, were repeatedly
checked by very heavy fire from this front. Towards noon the left of
the right brigade was forced back by a determined counter-attack from
the north-east,” but with the assistance of the third brigade it was
able to regain the ground lost.
At 3 p.m.: “Reports received from the 54th Division stated that the
situation was satisfactory, and that no help was required to enable
the ground gained to be held until further progress by the 52nd
should render practicable a renewal of the advance. I should like to
state here my appreciation of the great skill with which General Hare
handled his fine Division throughout the day.” A counter-attack by
the Turks at 3.30 p.m. “was shattered.” The attack was not pressed
further, but the ground gained was consolidated.
Sir E. Allenby took command of the Egyptian Expeditionary Force at
the end of June, 1917, and his first despatch, that of 16th December,
1917, shows that in the “Third Battle of Gaza” his main attack on
the Gaza-Beersheba line, 27th October-7th November, was from the
British right (see 53rd and 60th Divisions), but it was essential to
compel the enemy to throw in his reserves at the western end of the
line and, to ensure that, the 52nd and 54th Divisions on 2nd and 3rd
November assaulted the positions guarding Gaza on the south and west.
On the 3rd the 54th after stiff fighting captured several strongly
fortified positions, notably the El Arish redoubt, taken by the 1/4th
and 1/5th Norfolks, the Rafa redoubt and other posts, taken by the
1/5th and 1/6th Essex, while other battalions of the Division seized
the Belah trenches and Turtle Hill. (See Dane’s _British Campaigns in
the Nearer East_, Hodder and Stoughton, vol. ii. p. 91.) Very heavy
counter-attacks to recapture these positions, which were of great
importance, were launched by the Turks but these were repulsed with
heavy loss to the enemy.
Between the 3rd and 6th the hardest fighting took place east of Gaza,
and the enemy’s line was broken there. The despatch, paragraph 12,
notes that “East Anglian troops on the left also found at dawn” (on
the 7th) “that the enemy had retired during the night, and early in
the morning the main force occupied the northern and eastern defences
of Gaza.”
The 54th took part in the pursuit and the British advance to the line
Jaffa-Jerusalem.
Sir E. Allenby’s second despatch, that of 18th September, 1918,
shows that the 54th was, along with the 52nd, in the XXI. Corps to
which was given the task of increasing the distance between Joppa,
or Jaffa, and the enemy. This was duly accomplished on 21st and 22nd
December, 1917, in what is now designated the “Battle of Jaffa” (see
also 52nd Division). Paragraph 4 of the despatch states that “on the
morning of 22nd December, the 54th Division on the right drove the
enemy from the orchards which surround Mulebbis and captured the
villages of Rantieh and Fejja. On the left the 52nd reached all their
objectives.”
Paragraph 8 of the despatch shows that early in March the XXI. Corps
made a further advance. The 54th captured five villages and some
prisoners, and, paragraph 16, the Corps again moved forward, 9th to
11th April, when other positions were taken and held against the
heavy counter-attacks in which the enemy’s losses were considerable,
“over 300 of his dead being counted”.
In his last despatch, that of 31st October, 1918, Sir E. Allenby
described how his infantry broke through the Turkish lines and opened
the gate for the cavalry and armoured cars.
Paragraph 15: “The attack on the coastal plain on the morning of
September 19th was attended with complete success. On the right, in
the foothills, the French Tirailleurs and the Armenians of the Légion
d’Orient advanced with great dash.” “On their left the 54th Division
stormed Kefr Kasim village and wood and the foothills overlooking the
railway from Ras El Ain to Jiljulieh. North of Kefr Kasim the advance
was checked for a time at Sivri Tepe, but the enemy’s resistance was
quickly overcome and the remaining hills south of the Wadi Kanah
captured.” “The 3rd, Lahore, Division pressed on eastwards into the
foothills, near Hableh, joining hands with the 54th Division north
of the Wadi Kanah.” Later the 7th, Meerut, 3rd, Lahore, and 54th
Divisions advanced further in an easterly direction.
After this the infantry of the XXI. Corps were never seriously
opposed but they had many most severe marches during the next three
weeks.
Like its neighbour in the East, the 53rd, the 54th Division lost
some good battalions before it went abroad as a division. The policy
pursued in 1914 and first half of 1915 of “picking the eyes out of”
Territorial divisions has been severely animadverted upon, by, among
others, Sir Ian Hamilton, and no one was better qualified than he was
to judge of the wisdom or folly of this proceeding.
The 1st Hertfordshire Regiment, the 1st Cambridgeshire Regiment and
the 4th Suffolk Regiment, originally units of the 54th Division,
went early to France. The Hertfordshire battalion was mentioned in
Sir John French’s despatch of 20th November, 1914, as among the
territorial battalions which took part in the First Battle of Ypres
(see 56th Division). The despatch of 2nd February 1915, paragraph
4, shows that the 4th Suffolk Regiment was part of a force making a
counter-attack near Givenchy on 20th December, 1914. “About 5 p.m.
a gallant attack by the 1st Manchester Regiment and one company 4th
Suffolk Regiment had captured Givenchy, and had cleared the enemy out
of two lines of trenches to the north-east.”
In the despatch of 15th June, 1915, as to the Second Battle of Ypres,
22nd April to 25th May, the great gas attack, the Commander-in-Chief,
quoting Sir Herbert Plumer, gives some examples of “individual
gallantry,” among these he mentions the visit by a patrol, two
officers and one N.C.O. of the 1st Cambridgeshire to a German trench,
350 yards away. The adventurous party, with great good fortune, got
safely back to their own trench. Officers and men of these units were
mentioned by Sir John French.
The places of these three battalions in the 54th Division were taken
by the 1/10th and 1/11th County of London Regiment from the 56th
Division and the 1/8th Hampshire, a Wessex battalion.
Sir A. Conan Doyle, volume iv. p. 198, draws attention to the fine
work of the 33rd Division in the Third Battle of Ypres on 26th
September, 1917, and among other battalions highly spoken of is
the 4th Suffolks. In the same volume, p. 146, he refers to the 1st
Hertfordshire and 1st Cambridgeshire, then both in the 39th Division,
in terms of praise, for their conduct in the same battle on 31st
July. In volume v. p. 117, he mentions the 1st Hertfordshire, 39th
Division, as retaking “in very gallant fashion,” on 22nd March,
1918, a village which had been lost, and says the battalion had
greatly distinguished itself at St. Julien and elsewhere. In volume
vi. he refers to the gallantry and steadiness of that battalion in
connection with the action about Trescault, 18th September, 1918, and
in the same volume, pp. 33, 62 and 287, he gives great credit to the
1st Cambridgeshire for fine conduct on three occasions in 1918, when
serving with the 12th Division.
These words of praise mean much, as throughout the work individual
battalions are not often mentioned.
The following units which had either belonged originally to the 54th
or had fought with it were chosen for the Armies of Occupation: The
Rhine, 1/4th Suffolk Regiment; Egypt and Palestine, 1/4th Norfolk
Regiment, 1/5th Suffolk Regiment, 1/4th, 1/5th and 1/7th Essex
Regiment, 1/4th Northamptonshire Regiment and 1/10th London Regiment.
55TH (WEST LANCASHIRE) DIVISION
FIRST LINE
As in the case of some other good divisions, the 55th, as a unit,
suffered because its individual battalions were early ready and
eager to go to France. Had it been otherwise the history of the
Division would have been at least one year longer. The 10th Liverpool
Regiment went to France in October 1914, and the other battalions
followed during the succeeding six months. For the most part the
battalions were, on landing, attached to Regular brigades. The
5th Royal Lancaster, 5th, 7th and 9th Liverpool, and 5th South
Lancashire all bore a conspicuous part in the Second Battle of Ypres,
now “The Battles of Ypres, 1915,” the gas attack, April and May
1915, and nobly helped to stem the German flood; or in the battles
of Richebourg-St.-Vaast-Festubert, 9th-16th May, 1915. The North
Lancashire Brigade was attached to the 51st, Highland, Division and
played a prominent part in that division’s first battle on 15th-16th
June. The 4th Loyal North Lancashire, 4th Royal Lancaster and 8th
Liverpool all fought with distinction in that engagement and suffered
very heavy losses. On the same day, 16th June, the 10th Liverpool,
now a band of veteran soldiers, was employed with the 3rd Division
in an attack at Hooge and made a fine, almost over-eager, advance.
Their losses are said by Sir A. Conan Doyle to have exceeded 400.
The Division was represented in the Loos battle, September 1915, by
the 9th Liverpool.
In Sir John French’s despatch of 14th January, 1915, giving the
names of those who had distinguished themselves prior to the end
of November 1914, he mentions an officer and N.C.O. of the 10th
Liverpool, and in that of 31st May, 1915, officers and men of the 5th
Royal Lancaster, 10th Liverpool, 4th South Lancashire and 5th Loyal
North Lancashire. Subsequently other names were mentioned for the
Ypres battle and for the battles about Festubert.
The individual battalions were brought together, and the Division
reconstituted as a unit, under Major-General H. S. Jeudwine, in
January 1916. By that date several battalions had few of their
original members on their strength.
In February the Division joined the XIV. Corps south of Arras. At the
end of July they were taken to the Somme. On 30th July the Division
entered the line under the XIV. Corps opposite Guillemont on the
extreme right of the British Army, the French being their neighbours
on the right flank. On 8th, 9th and 12th August the Division attacked
and a certain amount of ground was gained and consolidated, but the
village was not taken. From 16th August to 4th September they were
at rest and then entered the line under the XV. Corps near Delville
Wood. They took part in an attack on 9th September, the “Battle of
Ginchy.”
The despatch from Sir Douglas Haig of 23rd December, 1916, deals with
the Somme battle. Paragraph 29 (Dent’s edition), shows that the 55th
was employed in the big attack by the Fourth Army beginning on 25th
September, now designated the “Battle of Morval.” The objectives
“included a belt of country about 1000 yards deep, curving round the
north of Flers to a point midway between that village and Martinpuich
(55th Division, Major-General H. S. Jeudwine, and New Zealand and 1st
Divisions).” These objectives were gained.
Paragraph 31 states: “On the Fourth Army front on 27th September a
further portion of the enemy’s fourth system of defence north-west
of Gueudecourt was carried on a front of a mile by the 55th and New
Zealand Divisions.” A further “very considerable advance,” was made
in the afternoon and evening.
On the night of the 28th September, the Division left the line and
was ordered to the Ypres salient. The Commander of the Fourth Army
sent them a message which spoke of their good work and their “spirit
of gallantry and endurance.”
The Division was still in the salient when the great attack of 31st
July, 1917, took place. That assault was the beginning of the Third
Battle of Ypres, now “The Battles of Ypres, 1917.”
Sir Douglas Haig’s despatch of 25th December, 1917, paragraph 41
(Dent’s edition), deals with the initial assault launched at 3.50
a.m. on 31st July, and states: “At 9 a.m. the whole of our second
objectives north of the Ypres-Roulers railway were in our possession
with the exception of a strong point north of Frezenberg, known as
Pommern Redoubt, where fighting was still going on. Within an hour
this redoubt had also been captured by West Lancashire Territorials
(55th Division).” In this attack the Division was in the XIX. Corps,
Fifth Army. See note, Messrs. Dent’s edition, p. 113. The operations
31st July-2nd August are now designated the “Battle of Pilckem Ridge.”
Paragraph 50 of the same despatch gives an account of the attack
launched at 5.40 a.m. on 20th September (the Battle of the Menin
Road Ridge), “a most successful operation,” notwithstanding the
excessively bad state of the ground. “West Lancashire Territorials
(55th Division) found the ground south-east of St. Julien very wet
and heavy after the night’s rain. None the less, they made steady
progress, reaching the line of their final objectives early in the
afternoon.”
Needless to say, the losses of the Division in the Third Battle of
Ypres were heavy.
In the last week of September the Division left the salient after
over eleven months’ service there. They were taken to the Epéhy
district south-west of Cambrai and at once entered the line.
The Division held the right of the battle line when the British
attacked on 20th November, 1917 (the “Battle of Cambrai, 1917”)· In
his telegraphic despatch of 21st November, Sir Douglas Haig said:
“West Lancashire Territorials broke through positions about Epéhy.”
This part of the attack was really a feint or holding attack, but it
cost the Division heavy casualties.
On 30th November the enemy made his great counter-attack with very
strong forces. The Division held the southern part of the British
line where it was attacked. The Divisional frontage was nearly eight
miles, and as it was impossible to man a continuous line, it was
held by posts. Another British division was on the right of the 55th
but it was not seriously involved in the fighting on 20th and 30th
November.
The battle is described in paragraphs 9 and 10 of the despatch of
20th February, 1918.
Paragraph 9 states: “From the Banteux ravine southwards the divisions
in line were weak and held very extended fronts.” “In view of
the symptoms of activity observed on the enemy’s front, special
precautions were taken by local commanders, especially from Villers
Guislain to the south.” The map opposite p. 163 of Messrs. Dent’s
edition shows the latter portion to have been in the area of the 55th
Division.
Paragraph 10: “Between the hours of 7 and 8 a.m. on the last day of
November, the enemy attacked, after a short but intense artillery
preparation, on the greater part of a front of some ten miles, from
Vendhuille” (on our right) “to Masnières” (on our left) “inclusive.
From Masnières to Banteux, both inclusive, four German divisions
would seem to have been employed against the three British divisions
holding this area (29th, 20th and 12th).” The map above referred
to shows these are from left to right. “Between Banteux exclusive
and Vendhuille one German division and portions of two others were
employed against the northern half of the British division holding
that front (the 55th Division, Major-General H. S. Jeudwine).”
“At the northern end of the Bonavis Ridge, and in the Gonnelieu
sector[7] the swiftness with which the advance of the enemy’s
infantry followed the opening of his bombardment appears to have
overwhelmed our troops, both in line and in immediate support, almost
before they had realised that the attack had begun.”
“East of Villers Guislain[8] the troops holding our forward positions
on the high ground were still offering a strenuous resistance to
the enemy’s attack on their front, at a time when large forces of
German infantry had already advanced up the valley between them and
Villers Guislain. South of this village a single strong point known
as Limerick Post, garrisoned by troops of the 1/5th Battalion (King’s
Own), Royal Lancaster Regiment and the 1/10th Battalion, Liverpool
Regiment (both of the 55th Division), held out with great gallantry
throughout the day, although heavily attacked.
“The progress made by the enemy, however, across the northern end of
the Bonavis Ridge and up the deep gully between Villers Guislain and
Gonnelieu, known as 22 Ravine, turned our positions on the ridge as
well as in both villages.”
Towards the close of the despatch, paragraph 15, Sir Douglas Haig
said: “On the 30th November risks were accepted by us at some points
in order to increase our strength at others. Our fresh reserves had
been thrown in on the Bourlon front, where the enemy brought against
us a total force of seven divisions to three and failed. I do not
consider it would have been justifiable on the indications to have
allotted a smaller garrison to this front.” And again: “Though the
defence broke down for a time in one area the recovery made by the
weak forces still left and those within reach is worthy of the
highest praise. Numberless instances of great gallantry, promptitude
and skill were shown, some few of which have been recounted.”
It would be against the spirit of what has been said in the
introduction if any stress were laid here on what a unit said about
itself, but in view of the discussion which took place on the events
of 30th November it does seem fair to say that in the _Story of the
55th Division_ (_Liverpool Daily Post_ Office), there is quoted a
letter from the Commander of the VII. Corps, under which the Division
was serving on the 30th, in which he said: “He knows that the 30th
November, 1917, in spite of the heavy losses incurred, was a day
which will always reflect credit on the 55th Division. The fact that
not a man returned from the 5th South Lancashire Regiment” (the
battalion next the ravine) “when that battalion was attacked by
overwhelming numbers, tells its own tale.” In a message on another
occasion he said: “It cannot be contradicted by anyone that the
55th saved the day on November 30th, 1917. You got a most infernal
hammering, but you saved the day.”
On 8th December the Division was relieved and shortly afterwards
moved north. After two months’ training, when much-needed drafts were
absorbed, the Division entered the line in the Givenchy-Festubert
area on 15th February, 1918. About this time brigades were reduced
from four to three battalions. The 1/8th and 1/9th Liverpool Regiment
and 1/5th Loyal North Lancashire were taken out of the 55th and sent
to the 57th. In the beginning of 1918 there was difficulty in keeping
second line divisions up to establishment.
When the Lys battle broke out the 55th Division was put to as severe
a test as could be imagined, and stood it magnificently. The Division
was congratulated in an order by the Commander-in-Chief, and the
terms of his supplementary despatch, dated 15th April, 1918, could
not have been more flattering. It was as follows:
“The 55th Division at Givenchy, 9th-14th April, 1918.
Headquarters, France, Monday, 1.15 p.m.
“On the morning of the German attack on the 9th April, 1918, the
55th (West Lancashire) Division (Territorial) was holding a front
of about 6000 yards, extending from the La Bassée Canal to just
south of Richebourg l’Avoué, where its line joined that held by the
Portuguese.
“The enemy’s attack on the southern portion of this front was
delivered by all three regiments of the 4th Ersatz Division, which
was well up to strength.
“A captured Divisional order issued by the General Staff of
this German Division, and dated 6th April, 1918, shows that its
objectives were ‘the ground and the British position in the
triangle formed by Givenchy-Festubert-Gorre.’
“The following passages from this captured order are of special
interest.
“‘In our attack our three regiments will be opposed by at most six
companies in front and at most two reserve battalions in Festubert
and Givenchy. One battalion in divisional reserve is south of the
La Bassée Canal, in Le Preol. It will be prevented by our powerful
artillery fire from taking part in the fight for Festubert and
Givenchy. The troops are elements of the English 55th Division,
which, after being engaged on the Somme, has suffered heavy losses
in Flanders and at Cambrai, and was described by prisoners in
March, 1918, as a division fit to hold a quiet sector, that is
below the average quality.’
“The order containing the passages quoted above was distributed
among all officers and under-officers of the 4th Ersatz Division
down to platoon-commanders, presumably with a view to encouraging
the troops prior to their attack, and in the belief that the
opposition met with would not be very serious. If this was his
expectation, the enemy was most signally disappointed.
“Throughout the early part of the morning of the 9th April, the
55th Division beat off all attacks in its forward zone, and
maintained its line intact.
“Later, when the German infantry had broken through the Portuguese
positions on its left, the Division formed a defensive flank facing
north-east on the line Givenchy-Festubert to the neighbourhood of
Le Touret. This line it maintained practically unchanged until
relief, through six days of almost continual fighting, in the
course of which it beat off repeated German attacks with the
heaviest losses to the enemy, and took nearly a thousand prisoners.
“At one time, on the first day of his attack, the enemy’s troops
forced their way into Givenchy and Festubert. Both villages were
shortly afterwards regained by the 55th Division as the result of a
highly successful counter-attack, in which several hundred Germans
were captured.
“All further attempts on the part of the enemy to carry these
positions broke down before the resolute defence of the 55th
Division. Though he succeeded on the 11th April in entering a post
north of Festubert, he was thrown out again by a counter-attack,
and on the night of the 12th April the 55th Division improved its
position in this neighbourhood, capturing a German post and taking
several prisoners.
“Next day, during the afternoon, the enemy heavily bombarded the
whole front held by the Division between Gorre and the Lawe Canal,
and subsequently attacked in strength. He was once more repulsed
with heavy loss by the most gallant and successful defence of a
division which he had been pleased to describe as consisting of
second-class troops.”
The fine conduct of the Division was again referred to in the
despatch of 20th July, 1918, which deals with the Lys battle,
paragraph 51. It was there stated that “Throughout the remainder
of the day, 9th April, the 55th Division maintained its positions
against all assaults, and by successful counter-attacks captured
over 750 prisoners. The success of this most gallant defence, the
importance of which it would be hard to over-estimate, was due in
great measure to the courage and determination displayed by our
advance posts. These held out with the utmost resolution though
surrounded, pinning to the ground those parties of the enemy who had
penetrated our defences, and preventing them from developing their
attack. Among the many gallant deeds recorded of them, one instance
is known of a machine gun which was kept in action although the
German infantry had entered the rear compartment of the ‘pill-box’
from which it was firing, the gun team holding up the enemy by
revolver fire from the inner compartment.”
The losses of the Division at Givenchy exceeded 3000.
The despatch of 21st December, 1918, paragraph 40, shows that in
September there was sharp fighting in which the 16th, 55th and 19th
Divisions pressed back the enemy and “advanced our line close to the
outskirts of La Bassée.”
During the remainder of September pressure was kept up by the I.
Corps, now in the Fifth Army, including the 55th Division. In October
the enemy withdrew slowly, and the Division followed closely on his
heels, driving in rearguards and at times meeting with very stubborn
opposition. On 8th October the III. Corps took control and the same
policy was pursued. The Haute Deule canal was crossed on the night of
15th-16th October after a good deal of fighting. On the morning of
11th November the town of Ath was occupied.
An excellent account of the work of the Division will be found in
_The Story of the 55th (West Lancashire) Division_, by the Rev. J.
O. Coop, D.S.O., T.D., Liverpool, 1919.
The 1/5th Royal Lancaster Regiment, 1/10th Liverpool Regiment,
and 1/5th South Lancashire Regiment were chosen for the Armies of
Occupation.
FOOTNOTES:
[7] The Bonavis Ridge is north-west and Gonnelieu is west of Banteux.
[8] This appears to have been in the area of the 55th Division.
56TH (LONDON) DIVISION, FORMERLY 1ST LONDON. FIRST LINE
The 56th Division does not seem to have been mentioned as a unit till
1916; the reason was that its individual battalions went to France
early in the war, being attached to Regular divisions and, as in
the case of the 55th, many months elapsed before the Division was
concentrated.
Unofficial historians over and over again refer to the splendid
service performed by battalions of the 56th during the critical first
winter of the war, and in the second awful struggle at Ypres in April
and May 1915. Before the Division was constituted as a unit in France
many of these battalions had few of their original members left. Sir
A. Conan Doyle mentions that on 12th May, 1915, before the close of
the battle, the 5th London had only 200 men.
In Sir John French’s despatch of 20th November, 1914, dealing
with the First Battle of Ypres, 11th October to 12th November,
he said, paragraph 10: “In the period covered by this despatch
Territorial troops have been used for the first time in the Army
under my command,” and he mentioned “the London Scottish and Queen’s
Westminster battalions” as among the units actually engaged; both
were afterwards in the 56th Division. “The conduct and bearing of
these units under fire, and the efficient manner in which they
carried out the various duties assigned to them, have imbued me with
the highest hope as to the value and help of Territorial troops
generally.” Events were to prove these hopes well-founded.
Officers and men of the 5th City of London Regiment and of the
9th, 13th and 14th County of London Regiment were mentioned in the
despatch of 14th January, 1915, for good work in the fighting before
that date, and in the despatch of 31st May, 1915, many officers and
men of the 3rd, 4th and 5th City of London and of the 9th, 12th,
13th, 14th and 16th County of London, gained mention; all these
battalions were afterwards in the 56th Division.
In Sir John French’s despatch of 15th June, 1915, paragraph 4,
regarding “The Battles of Ypres, 1915,” which commenced on the 22nd
April of that year with the great “gas attack,” he mentioned two
battalions of the 56th Division. As to the fighting on 8th May,
quoting Sir Herbert Plumer, “A counter-attack was launched at 3.30
p.m.” “The 12th London Regiment, on the left, succeeded, at great
cost, in reaching the original trench line, and did considerable
execution with their machine gun.” As to the 13th May, when another
serious German attack was made “after the heaviest bombardment
yet experienced, ... the 5th London Regiment, despite very heavy
casualties, maintained their position unfalteringly.”
The Division, like other first line Territorial divisions, had their
full share of fighting in the big battles of 1916 and 1917.
Sir Douglas Haig’s despatch of 23rd December, 1916, paragraph 8
(Dent’s edition), shows that the 56th along with the 46th Division
made the subsidiary attack at Gommecourt, north of the Somme, on
1st July. They were then in the Third Army, VII. Corps. (See 46th
Division.)
The 56th was afterwards sent to the XIV. Corps, Fourth Army, and
took part in the successful attack of 9th September, now officially
the “Battle of Ginchy.” Paragraph 23: “At Ginchy and to the north of
Leuze Wood it met with almost immediate success. On the right (56th
Division) the enemy’s line was seized over a front of more than 1000
yards.” Paragraphs 27 and 28 deal with another successful attack
on 15th September and following days, officially the “Battle of
Flers-Courcelette,” when the Division was again employed.
While the French worked up the south side of Combles, the 56th
encompassed it from the north and, on 26th September, met their
Allies in the town. Down to the close of the Somme battles, the
Division, “hard-worked and splendid,” Sir A. Conan Doyle describes
them, “were doing fine work always on the extreme right.”
The fighting between 25th and 28th September has been designated
the “Battle of Morval,” and that between 1st and 18th October, the
“Battle of the Transloy Ridges.”
The despatch of 25th December, 1917, paragraph 13 (Dent’s edition),
shows that the 56th, again in the VII. Corps, Third Army, took part
in the Battle of Arras which opened on 9th April, 1917. Paragraph
14: “By 12 noon the 12th Division had captured Observation Ridge
and, with the exception of Railway Triangle, the whole of our second
objectives were in our possession from south of Neuville Vitasse,
stormed by London Territorials (56th Division), to north of La Folie
Farm.” A large number of prisoners were taken. The 56th had an
extremely difficult task and met with stubborn resistance. As was to
be expected, their losses were considerable.
Paragraph 17: “On 12th April our attacks on Héninel and Wancourt
were renewed, and our troops (21st and 56th Divisions) succeeded in
carrying both villages, as well as in completing the capture of the
Hindenburg line for some 2000 yards south of the Cojeul river.”
Paragraph 27: On 11th May “London troops (56th Division) captured
Cavalry Farm.”
In addition to the actions mentioned in these extracts, the Division
was engaged throughout the Arras operations on many other occasions,
notably on 13th and 14th April and on 3rd May, when one brigade made
an excellent advance. Throughout the battles of Arras the work of the
56th was of outstanding merit.
The fighting between 9th and 14th April is now the “First Battle of
the Scarpe, 1917,” and that on 3rd and 4th May the “Third Battle of
the Scarpe, 1917.”
The Division was employed on 16th August, 1917, in the second big
attack in the Third Battle of Ypres, now “The Battles of Ypres,
1917.” The action of 16th August is now designated the “Battle of
Langemarck.”
Paragraph 46 of the same despatch: “On the right of the British
attack the enemy again developed the main strength of his resistance.
At the end of a day of very heavy fighting, except for small gains
of ground on the western edge of Glencorse Wood and north of Westhoek
by the 56th Division (Major-General F. A. Dudgeon) and the 8th
Division the situation south of St. Julien remained unchanged.”
The losses of the Division on the 16th August were extremely heavy.
In the Ypres battle they were in the II. Corps.
When the Cambrai battle commenced on 20th November the 56th were not
in the main assault on the 20th but kept up a feint or subsidiary
attack on that date.
In the despatch of Sir Douglas Haig, dated 20th February, 1918, as
to the “Battle of Cambrai, 1917,” paragraph 6, he said that the 22nd
November 1917 was spent in organising the ground which had been
captured on the 20th and 21st, carrying out reliefs, etc. “Meanwhile,
early in the night of the 22nd November, a battalion of the Queen’s
Westminsters (16th London), 56th Division, Major-General F. A.
Dudgeon, stormed a commanding tactical point in the Hindenburg line,
west of Mœuvres, known as Tadpole Copse, the possession of which
would be of value in connection with the left flank of the Bourlon
position when the latter had been secured.”
Paragraph 7 deals with the renewal of the British attack on 23rd
November. “Throughout this day also the 36th Division and troops of
the 56th (London) Division (T.) were engaged in stubborn fighting
in the neighbourhood of Mœuvres and Tadpole Copse and made some
progress.”
On the 27th there was again heavy fighting. “During the afternoon
the enemy also attacked our positions at Tadpole Copse but was
repulsed.”
Paragraphs 10-11 deal with the great German counter-attack of 30th
November, and a quotation in which the 47th and 56th Divisions are
both said to have greatly distinguished themselves, is given under
the former. The fine conduct of both divisions could not have been
surpassed.
In Sir Douglas Haig’s despatch of 20th July, 1918, he gives a
detailed account of the German attack in the Cambrai-St. Quentin
district which commenced on 21st March, and compelled the retreat of
the Fifth Army, and the partial withdrawal of the Third.
At paragraph 45 he describes the attack on the Arras front, an
extension to the north of the earlier attacks. “Meanwhile, between
7 and 8 a.m. on the morning of March 28th, fighting of the utmost
intensity had broken out north of the Somme from Puisieux to
north-east of Arras. Finding himself checked on the northern flank
of his attack the enemy on this day made a determined effort to
obtain greater freedom for the development of his offensive, and
struck in great force along the valley of the Scarpe at Arras.”...
“After a bombardment of great violence, three fresh German divisions
advanced to the assault along the north bank of the Scarpe river
against the positions held by the 4th and 56th British Divisions
under the command respectively of Major-General T. G. Matheson and
Major-General F. A. Dudgeon, and were supported in their attack
by the two German divisions already in line.”... “His troops were
everywhere stopped and thrown back with the heaviest loss before our
battle positions.” “A second attack late in the afternoon north of
the Scarpe, after a further period of bombardment, was also repulsed
at all points. At the end of the day our battle positions astride
the Scarpe were intact on the whole front of the attack, and in the
evening successful counter-attacks enabled us to push out a new
outpost line in front of them. Meanwhile the surviving garrisons of
our original outpost line, whose most gallant resistance had played
so large a part in breaking up the enemy’s attack, had fought their
way back through the enemy.”
His defeat on the 28th weakened the enemy’s offensive and it
eventually closed a few days later. The stand made by the Division,
on the flank of the attack, where it was strongly pressed, was not
excelled by the performance of any other unit during the March
battle, and greatly contributed to the cessation of the German
effort. The fighting on 28th March is now the “First Battle of Arras,
1918.” The Division was at that time in the XIII. Corps, First Army
(see paragraph 45 of the despatch). It was the only division of the
First Army engaged on the 28th.
In his telegraphic despatch of 13th September, 1918, as to the
good work of various divisions in the early days of the last
British offensive, under the heading 56th Division, Sir Douglas
Haig said: “The 56th Division, which on March 28th assisted in
the repulse of the German attack north of the Scarpe, on August
23rd attacked successfully, with the 52nd Division, at Boyelles
and Hénin-sur-Cojeul. These two divisions met with very vigorous
resistance about Croisilles and the important feature known as
Hénin Hill to the north of it, but captured both places. On August
29th by a daring operation the 56th Division and the 57th Division
captured Bullecourt and Hendicourt-lez-Cagnicourt. The possession
of both villages was fiercely disputed, but on September 1st
the 52nd and 57th Divisions secured firm hold of them and took
Riencourt-lez-Cagnicourt. Also on September 2nd the 52nd and 57th
Divisions continued the attack, with the 63rd Division, and captured
Quéant, Pronville and Fontaine-lez-Croisilles.”
The despatch of 21st December, 1918, shows that the 56th Division was
on 23rd August in the VI. Corps, Third Army. These events are again
referred to in paragraphs 22, 23 and 28.
Paragraph 22 as to 24th August states: “On the left troops of the
56th Division, Major-General Sir C. P. A. Hull, had heavy fighting
about Croisilles and on the high ground north-west of that village
known as Hénin Hill.”
About 25th August the XVII. Corps was formed with the 52nd, 56th, and
57th Divisions, and later the 63rd. In the beginning of September the
56th became part of the XXII. Corps, First Army. Sir Arthur Conan
Doyle, vol. vi. p. 133, puts the losses of the Division between 27th
and 31st August at 2723 and the prisoners they took at over 1000.
In paragraph 23 as to 29th August, Sir Douglas Haig said: “To the
north of Bapaume a gallant thrust by the 56th and 57th Divisions
penetrated the enemy’s position as far as Riencourt-lez-Cagnicourt.”
Paragraph 35: “The Battle of Cambrai and the Hindenburg Line,
27th September-5th October,” states: “On the extreme left the
56th Division of the XXII. Corps” (on 27th September) crossed the
canal and, having cleared Sauchy Lestrée and Sauchy Cauchy, moved
northwards to Palluel.
About 11th and 12th October the Division was employed in attacks; it
took Fresnes and moved forward, overcoming various obstacles.
The various actions between August and October are now officially
defined as follows: 21st-23rd August, the Battle of Albert, 1918;
26th-30th August, Battle of the Scarpe, 1918; 2nd-3rd September,
Battle of the Drocourt-Quéant Line; 27th September-1st October,
Battle of the Canal du Nord; 8th-12th October, Battle of Cambrai,
1918, with Pursuit to Selle.
Paragraph 50 describes “The Battle of the Sambre, 1st-11th November.”
Regarding the 4th-6th November: “On the front of the First Army, the
XXII. Corps and the Canadian Corps advanced against little opposition
except on their right. Here the 11th and 56th Divisions, having
crossed the Aunelle river and captured the villages of Le Triez,
Sebourg and Sebourg Quiaux, were counter-attacked on the high ground
east of the Aunelle and pressed back slightly.”
On the 6th the Division after heavy fighting gained its objectives.
The advance continued between 7th November and the 11th, Armistice
Day.
It will have been observed that all references to the work of the
Division were invariably of a laudatory character.
The 1/10th and 1/11th County of London Regiment, originally belonging
to the 56th, served with the 54th (East Anglian) Division at Suvla
Bay, Gallipoli, and in Palestine, their places being taken by the
1/7th and 1/8th Middlesex from the 44th (Home Counties) Division.
The 1/6th City of London Regiment, originally belonging to the 56th,
but which served with the 47th, the 1/9th County of London Regiment
of the 56th and the 1/7th Middlesex, which belonged to the 44th, but
served with the 56th, were selected for the Army of the Rhine. The
1/10th County of London Regiment, which, as above stated, served with
the 54th, was chosen for the Army of Occupation, Egypt.
57TH (WEST LANCASHIRE) DIVISION
SECOND LINE
The Division went to France in February, 1917, and was employed in
the Bailleul-Armentières-Ypres area during the greater part of 1917,
and for the first four months of 1918.
A quotation, in which West Lancashire Territorials are mentioned as
taking part in an advance in “The Battles of Ypres, 1917,” on 16th
August, 1917, has been given under the 48th Division. The number
of the West Lancashire Division is not given in the _Gazette_ or
in Messrs. Dent’s edition of _Sir Douglas Haig’s Despatches_. It
seems to be the case that the infantry of the 55th or 57th was not
present on that date. The reference may apply to some West Lancashire
Artillery.
The 57th did attack as part of the XIV. Corps on 26th October, the
“Second Battle of Passchendaele,” see 50th Division. Ground was
gained, but the conditions were most difficult and the casualties of
the 57th were very heavy.
Early in May 1918 the 57th took over from the 42nd in the Bucquoy
area, south of Arras.
In August one brigade of the 57th was, for a time, attached to the
51st Division on the Scarpe and took part in a preliminary attack on
the 19th. During that month the XVII. Corps, which embraced the 52nd,
56th, 57th, and later the 63rd Divisions, took over in that area,
coming in between the VI. Corps and the Canadians.
The XVII. Corps, as part of the Third Army, attacked on the 25th
August (see 52nd and 56th), and the 57th entered the front line on
the night of the 27th. It had very severe fighting between 28th
August and 2nd September and did well, as appears from the extracts
referred to below.
In the telegraphic despatch of 13th September, 1918, as to the work
of certain divisions, a quotation from which has already been given
under the 56th, the 57th was mentioned for its fine services about
Bullecourt and there is also given under the 56th a quotation from
the despatch of 21st December, 1918, paragraph 23, which applies to
both divisions.
Paragraph 28 of the latter despatch deals with the storming of the
Drocourt-Quéant line, 2nd September, 1918. “This gallant feat of arms
was carried out by,” among other troops, “the XVII. Corps of the
Third Army employing the 52nd, 57th, and 63rd Divisions.” A quotation
as to the battle on that date has been given under the 52nd. In the
afternoon there was hard fighting but the enemy’s opposition was
overcome by nightfall “and the 57th Division, swinging to the right,
was threatening the villages of Quéant and Pronville from the north.”
During the night and following day the enemy rapidly retreated.
The fighting in the area in which the XVII. Corps was then operating,
26th-30th August, is now the “Battle of the Scarpe, 1918,” and that
on 2nd-3rd September, the “Battle of the Drocourt-Quéant Line.”
In the big and fiercely contested battle commencing on 27th September
the XVII. Corps had again to make an effort almost, if not quite,
as great as that which broke the Quéant line on 2nd September, and
nothing could have been finer than the work of the 52nd, 57th, and
63rd Divisions on this second occasion. The position of the enemy was
of immense strength and a wide and deep canal was among the obstacles
to be overcome in the advance of the Corps. The fighting on the front
of the XVII. Corps lasted, almost without intermission, from 27th
September to 1st October. This is now designated the “Battle of the
Canal du Nord.”
Paragraph 35 of the despatch of 21st December, 1918, dealing with
“the Battle of Cambrai and the Hindenburg Line, 27th September-5th
October,” states: “In the centre the 52nd Division passing its troops
across the canal by bridgeheads previously established by the 57th
Division, on the opening of the assault carried the German lines east
of the canal,” etc., but in Messrs. Dent’s edition, p. 281, there is
the following note: “This is incorrect. There were no bridgeheads at
this time and the crossings were forced by the 52nd Division at the
opening of their attack.”
The despatch proceeds: “As soon as the line of the canal had been
secured our engineer troops commenced the construction of bridges,
completing their task with remarkable speed, and working with great
gallantry under the fire of the German guns. Greatly assisted by
their efforts our advance continued. Obstinate resistance was met
with at Graincourt, and it was not until late in the day that the
village was finally surrounded and captured by the 63rd Division.
The 57th Division (Major-General R. W. R. Barnes) meanwhile had
passed through and carried the line forward east of Anneux to
Fontaine-Notre-Dame.”
In paragraph 42, “The Second Battle of Le Cateau, 8th-12th October,”
now officially designated the “Battle of Cambrai, 1918,” the despatch
shows that on 8th October the Third and Fourth Armies attacked and
very heavy fighting ensued. “On the extreme left the 57th Division
made progress in the southern outskirts of Cambrai.... During the
following night the Canadian Corps captured Ramillies and crossed the
Scheldt canal at Pont d’Aire. Canadian patrols entered Cambrai from
the north and joined hands with patrols of the 57th Division working
through the southern portion of the town.” Next day, “Cambrai was in
our hands and our troops were three miles to the east of the town.”
Progress continued on the 10th. Shortly after this the 57th was taken
out of the XVII. Corps and entered the XI. Corps, Fifth Army.
The operations referred to above turned the defences of Lille from
the south, and paragraph 45, dealing with “The Evacuation of Lille,”
states that the 57th and 59th Divisions were by the evening of 17th
October “on the outskirts of Lille.” These divisions were then in the
XI. Corps.
Thereafter the work of the 57th Division was less arduous; the
fighting in the area of the Fifth Army was not so severe as it had
been on the fronts of the Third and Fourth Armies farther south.
58TH (1ST LONDON) DIVISION
SECOND LINE
The Division went to France in January 1917. In March and April 1917,
Gough’s Fifth Army, which contained the 7th, 58th and 62nd Divisions
and Australians, was pressing the enemy towards the Hindenburg
line, south of Bullecourt. In April as that line was approached the
resistance became stronger. While the Arras battle was proceeding
on the left (see 56th Division) the Fifth Army had some severe
struggles, in the course of which the line at Bullecourt was pierced.
In these actions the Australians did splendid work and they were
nobly backed up by the three British divisions.
Sir Douglas Haig’s despatch of 25th December, 1917, paragraph 27
(Dent’s edition), shows that on 7th May, 1917, towards the close
of the Arras battle, the 7th Division “gained a footing in the
south-east corner of Bullecourt. Thereafter gradual progress was made
in face of the most obstinate resistance and on the 17th May, London
and West Riding Territorials (58th and 62nd Divisions) completed
the capture of the village.” The Division remained in the southern
area for some months. On 8th July it took over from the 42nd in the
Havrincourt sector.
The Division was employed in the Third Battle of Ypres as part of the
XVIII. Corps, which it joined early in August.
Paragraph 50 of the same despatch deals with the “most successful”
assault which was launched during that battle on 20th September,
1917. “North of the Zonnebeke-Langemarck road London and Highland
Territorials (58th and 51st Divisions) gained the whole of their
objectives by midday, though stiff fighting took place for a number
of farms and strong places.” The official designation of this action
is now the “Battle of Menin Road Ridge.”
Paragraph 52, as to the attack on 26th September: “The assault was
delivered at 5.50 a.m. and, after hard and prolonged fighting in
which over 1600 prisoners were taken by us, achieved a success as
striking as that of the 20th September.” Australian troops carried
the remainder of Polygon Wood, etc., on their left the 3rd Division
took Zonnebeke. “North Midland and London Territorial battalions
(59th Division, Major-General C. F. Romer, and 58th Division)
captured a long line of hostile strong points on both sides of the
Wieltje-Gravenstafel road.” This is now the “Battle of Polygon Wood.”
Paragraph 59, as to the assault on the Passchendaele Ridge on 26th
October, the “Second Battle of Passchendaele”: “On the left of
the Canadians the Royal Naval Division and battalions of London
Territorials (58th Division, Major-General A. B. E. Cator) also
advanced and, in spite of immense difficulties from marsh and floods
in the more low-lying ground, made progress.”
Paragraph 60, as to the attack on 30th October when the Canadians
continued their advance along the ridge: “Further north battalions of
the same London and Naval Divisions (58th and 63rd) that had taken
part in the attack on 26th October again made progress wherever it
was possible to find a way across the swamps. The almost impassable
nature of the ground in this area, however, made movement practically
impossible, and it was only on the main ridge that much could be
effected.”
The fine reputation of the Division was enhanced, not only by the
fighting qualities displayed in these and other actions, but by the
soldierly spirit with which they endured the horrors of the salient
throughout an unusually long spell of service there.
When the German offensive opened on 21st March, 1918, the 58th
Division was in the III. Corps, Fifth Army; the other divisions of
that Corps on the 21st being the 14th on the left and the 18th in
the centre. The 58th on the right was the flank unit of the British
Armies. The Oise above La Fère, opposite the ground held by the
left brigade of the 58th, flows from north to south and thereafter
from east to west. One brigade, the 173rd, was on the west bank
above the bend while the others held a line from the south bank to
Barisis, four miles south of the river. The two latter brigades were
not seriously involved on the 21st. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle gives a
detailed account of the battle on the III. Corps front. At p. 111,
vol. v. he states that the 173rd Brigade, “which filled the space
between Travecy on the left, and the Oise upon the right, had the
2/1st Londons in the forward zone, the 2/4th Londons in the battle
zone opposite La Fère and the 2/3rd Londons in the rear zone upon
the Crozat Canal. The single battalion in front was attacked by the
impossible odds of three German divisions but held out for a long
time with great constancy.” The battalion was overwhelmed but fought
to the end. The enemy stormed forward to the battle zone but were
vigorously opposed by the 4th Battalion aided by some sappers and
pioneers. This force held up the attack for a time but were pressed
back. “By 5 a.m. on the 22nd all troops were across, and the bridges
destroyed. The 2/4th Londons succeeded in removing all their stores
and munitions, and their remarkable achievement in holding the high
ground of La Fère against ten times their numbers for as many hours,
during which they inflicted very heavy losses upon their assailants,
and repulsed six separate attacks, was among the outstanding military
feats of that difficult day.”
The 18th Division made a wonderfully fine and successful stand, but a
break-through occurred on the front of the 14th Division.
Sir Douglas Haig in his despatch of 20th July, 1918, paragraph 10,
gives the dispositions of the various Corps on the Fifth Army front
and states that “Over ten miles of this front between Amigny Rouy
and Alaincourt were protected by the marshes of the Oise river and
canal, and were therefore held more lightly than the remainder of the
line; but on the whole front of this Army the number of divisions in
line only allowed of an average of one division to some 6750 yards of
front.”
On the III. Corps front the extent of ground held was about 30,000
yards by two divisions and a brigade of a third. Their line was
certainly opposite the marsh area but, as pointed out in paragraph 15
of the despatch, “Assisted by the long spell of dry weather hostile
infantry had crossed the river and canal north of La Fère, and, south
of St. Quentin, had penetrated into the battle zone between Essigny
and Benay.”
Paragraph 14 shows that during the morning of the 21st, “the enemy
had penetrated our front line opposite La Fère.” This was in the area
of the 58th, see map opposite p. 186 of Messrs. Dent’s edition.
Paragraph 16 shows that Fargnier and Quessy were lost during the
afternoon and evening of the 21st.
Paragraph 17 states that on the evening of the 21st the Fifth Army
Commander decided to “withdraw the divisions of that Corps (the III.)
behind the Crozat Canal.... These different withdrawals were carried
out successfully during the night.... Instances of great bravery
occurred in the destruction of the bridges.”
Paragraph 18: “On the morning of the 22nd March the ground was again
enveloped in thick mist, under cover of which the enemy renewed his
attacks in great strength all along the line. Fighting was again very
heavy, and short-range fire from guns, rifles and machine-guns caused
enormous losses to the enemy’s troops. The weight of his attack,
however, combined with the impossibility of observing beforehand and
engaging with artillery the massing of his troops, enabled him to
press forward.”
Paragraph 19: “In the south the enemy advanced during the morning
as far as the line of the canal at Jussy” (area of 18th Division),
“and a fierce struggle commenced for the passage of the canal, his
troops bringing up trench mortars and machine guns, and endeavouring
to cross on rafts under cover of their fire. At 1 p.m. he succeeded
in effecting a crossing at Quessy, and made progress during the
afternoon in the direction of Vouel. His further advance in this
sector, however, was delayed by the gallant resistance of troops of
the 58th Division, under command of Major-General A. B. E. Cator, at
Tergnier, and it was not until evening, after many costly attempts
and much sanguinary fighting, that the enemy gained possession of
this village.”
On 23rd March the 173rd Brigade had again very heavy fighting about
Noureuil. The despatch, paragraph 25, refers to “the most resolute
resistance offered to the enemy’s advance” by the III. Corps and
“many gallant actions performed.” The fighting 21st to 23rd March is
now the “Battle of St. Quentin.”
On the 24th the III. Corps, and certain French troops which had come
to its aid, were pushed back to the south and west of Chauny by the
huge forces of the enemy (see paragraph 32). That night the remnants
of the 173rd brigade were ordered to rejoin the remainder of the
Division on the south side of the Oise.
While the British were being pushed back on the north bank, the 174th
and 175th Brigades kept extending to their left along the south
bank and held the river line, until their frontage was about twelve
miles. This task was of absolutely vital importance. Several hostile
attempts to cross were defeated.
Mr. Sparrow in his _Fifth Army_ does not give details regarding
the work of the 58th, but on p. 85 he speaks of their resistance
at Tergnier on the 22nd, and in a note there occurs this sentence:
“What could have been more valuable to the Allied cause than was this
prolonged resistance at a most critical time and place?” On p. 283
there is another note which mentions that the right of the Division
was not attacked, “their left had fought magnificently.”
The Division was taken north early in April, and was immediately to
the south of Villers Bretonneux when that village was captured by the
enemy on 24th April. They were heavily engaged on that and the two
succeeding days during which the village and certain other positions
were recaptured. The Division again had serious losses.
In the telegraphic despatch of 13th September, 1918, as to the work
of various divisions, Sir Douglas Haig said: “The 58th Division,
which held the right of the British line on March 21st, attacked on
August 8th, north of the Somme, and captured Sailly Laurette. In
five days of severe fighting the Division captured many prisoners
and guns, and performed very gallant service on the left flank of
our advance south of the Somme. On the 24th August it again attacked
in the sector north of the Somme, and once more did gallant work,
overcoming strong hostile resistance at Maricourt and Marrières Wood.”
The despatch of 21st December, 1918, shows, paragraph 16, that the
58th was in the III. Corps, Fourth Army, when it was employed in
the attack on 8th August. That date and succeeding days are dealt
with in paragraphs 15 to 18 of the written despatch. In paragraph
15 Sir Douglas Haig remarked that: “A strong local attack launched
by the enemy on the 6th August, south of Morlancourt, led to severe
fighting, and undoubtedly rendered the task of the III. Corps more
difficult.”
On the 8th the 58th took Sailly Laurette, but were held up at
Chipilly Spur. With some assistance this was cleared on the 9th. On
the 10th a further advance was made by the III. Corps. The fighting
8th-11th August is now designated “The Battle of Amiens.”
Paragraph 21 deals with the attack by the III. Corps on 22nd August,
the 47th, 12th and 18th of that Corps and the 3rd Australian and 38th
Divisions being employed in the first line of attacking troops. The
58th reinforced the 47th in the afternoon. Albert was taken and the
left of the Fourth Army brought forward.
Paragraph 22 describes the fighting on 23rd and 24th August when
further progress was made. “Divisions which in the worst days of
the March retreat had proved themselves superior to every hardship,
difficulty and danger, once more rose to the occasion with the most
magnificent spirit; over the same ground that had witnessed their
stubborn greatness in defence they moved forward to the attack with
a persistent vigour and relentless determination which neither the
extreme difficulty of the ground, nor the obstinate resistance of the
enemy, could diminish or withstand.”
The fighting 21st-23rd August is now “The Battle of Albert, 1918.”
On the 24th the 58th had a stiff fight but they and the 47th secured
their objectives.
Paragraph 23 said: “During the next five days our troops followed
up their advantage hotly, and in spite of increasing resistance
from the German rearguards, realised a further deep advance. The
enemy clung to his positions in the latter stages of this period
with much tenacity. His infantry delivered many counter-attacks,
and the progress of our troops was only won by hard and determined
fighting.” On 28th August, “the 12th Division and 58th Division
(Major-General F. W. Ramsay) captured Hardecourt and the spur south
of it, overcoming strong resistance.”
On the 25th the 58th were heavily engaged at Billon Wood which was
held strongly. On the 28th they took Marrières Wood.
Paragraph 24 deals with the fighting for Mont St. Quentin and the
capture of Peronne, in support of which operations the 58th, 47th and
other divisions attacked on 31st August, and “by successful fighting
on this and the following day, captured Bouchavesnes, Rancourt and
Frégicourt, with several hundred prisoners.” This is now the “Second
Battle of Bapaume.”
Paragraph 30 described the Battle of Havrincourt and Epéhy, 12th-18th
September, and as to 18th September, the “Battle of Epéhy,” said, “On
the extreme right, and in the left centre about Epéhy the enemy’s
resistance was very determined and in these sectors troops of the
6th, 12th, 18th and 58th Divisions had severe fighting. Before
nightfall, however, the last centres of resistance in Epéhy were
reduced, and both in this area and on our right about Gricourt local
actions during the succeeding days secured for us the remainder of
the positions required for an attack on the main Hindenburg defences.”
On the 18th September the 58th took Peizières and made further
progress during the next 48 hours.
On 24th September the Division, now weakened by the heavy tasks it
had carried through during eight weeks’ fighting, left the III. Corps
and moved north to join the First Army. It had no more hard fighting.
In October, headquarters of that Corps were transferred to the Fifth
Army in Flanders where times were less strenuous.
Major-General Montgomery’s _Story of the Fourth Army_ (Hodder and
Stoughton) contains many flattering references to the work of the
Division in August and September, 1918.
59TH (NORTH MIDLAND) DIVISION
SECOND LINE
This Division was employed in Ireland at the time of the Dublin
rebellion of April 1916, and, but for that outbreak, might have gone
abroad earlier than it did. It sailed in February 1917, was taken
to the district east of Amiens and assisted to press the enemy when
he retreated in March of that year. When the retreat was over they
occupied the line near Havrincourt Wood; at that time they formed
part of the III. Corps, Fourth Army. On 13th April, the 59th and
other troops made an advance when ground near Gricourt was taken and
consolidated.
In the autumn of 1917 the Division was in the Ypres salient, and was
employed as part of the V. Corps about the Wieltje-Gravenstafel road,
east of St. Julien, in the attack of 26th September, now called the
“Battle of Polygon Wood,” a stage in the Third Battle of Ypres, when,
at the cost of heavy losses various strong points were captured and
the line advanced. A quotation as to this from the despatch of 25th
December, 1917, paragraph 52, has already been given under the 58th
Division, see also map opposite p. 123 of Messrs. Dent’s edition of
_Sir Douglas Haig’s Despatches_.
The map opposite p. 163 of the same edition shows that the 59th was
at Cantaing, south-west of Cambrai, when the enemy made their great
counter-attack on 30th November, 1917, but it was not so severely
pressed at that point as on the immediate left of the Division.
The Division was heavily involved in the great German offensive—the
“Battle of St. Quentin”—which commenced on 21st March, 1918, and
had very severe losses. The map opposite p. 186 of the edition
above referred to shows that the Division was occupying the line
about Bullecourt in the area of the Third Army on the 21st and a
break-through took place between Bullecourt and Lagnicourt, the
latter place being in the area of the 6th Division on the immediate
right of the 59th. This part of the line was evidently one of those
selected by the enemy for a special effort, five divisions attacking
the 59th and a portion of the 34th on its left. Sir Arthur Conan
Doyle gives an excellent account of this part of the great battle;
he states that the 178th and 176th brigades were in the front line.
These were destroyed but the 177th in support beat off three very
heavy attacks and held out till assistance came from a division in
reserve, the 40th. The 177th Brigade remained with the 40th Division
and saw further intense fighting during the next few days—the “First
Battle of Bapaume.” Sir Arthur, vol. v., p. 77, puts the losses of
the Division in the March battle at 5765.
The Division was taken to Flanders and was involved in the “Battles
of the Lys,” in April. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, in the volume above
referred to, draws attention to the excellent work of the 178th
(Sherwood Forester) Brigade, when attached to other divisions about
12th to 14th April, but as a whole the Division was still suffering
from the grievous losses sustained three weeks before; that period
being obviously insufficient to assimilate the new drafts which
formed such a large proportion of the total strength.
In consequence of the very heavy casualties it had suffered in the
March battle and on the Lys the Division was reduced to a cadre
basis (see note to despatch of 21st December, 1918, paragraph 1,
Dent’s edition), but it recuperated in time to take part in the final
British offensive.
In the despatch of 21st December, 1918, paragraph 45, it is stated
that on 17th October, 1918, the 57th and 59th Divisions of the XI.
Corps were on the outskirts of Lille. On the 18th Lille “was clear of
the enemy,” and our line was carried far to the east. “Thereafter our
troops pressed forward steadily.”
60TH (2ND LONDON) DIVISION
SECOND LINE
The 60th Division went to France in June 1916. Their first experience
at the front was in the Arras district. They were there initiated in
trench warfare by the 51st Division, before the latter moved south to
take part in the great conflict on the Somme.
After about six months in the line on the Western Front the 60th
were, in January 1917, sent to Salonika. There they saw some hard
fighting in May. In June they joined the Egyptian Expeditionary Force
for service in Palestine. In that country, as will be seen from the
extracts given below, they earned great distinction.
Sir E. Allenby’s despatch of 16th December, 1917, recounting the
operations which culminated in the surrender of Jerusalem, shows that
the Division bore a most important and honourable share of the heavy
task that fell to his troops.
The attack was to commence with the capture of Beersheba, situated on
the eastern or left flank of the Turkish position, on 31st October,
1917. The despatch says, paragraph 8: “As a preliminary to the main
attack, in order to enable field guns to be brought within effective
range for wire-cutting, the enemy’s advanced works at 1070 were to
be taken. This was successfully accomplished at 8.45 a.m., after a
short preliminary bombardment by London troops, with small loss, 90
prisoners being taken.... The final assault was ordered for 12.15
p.m.; it was successful all along the front attacked.”
Beersheba was taken at 7 p.m. on the 31st, the Australian Light Horse
and Yeomanry doing very well. The despatch states: “The Turks at
Beersheba were undoubtedly taken completely by surprise, a surprise
from which the dash of London troops and Yeomanry, finely supported
by their artillery, never gave them time to recover. The charge
by the Australian Light Horse completed their defeat.” About 2000
prisoners and 13 guns were taken and 500 Turkish corpses buried. The
enemy’s left flank was laid bare.
Paragraph 11: On 6th November the Kauwukah system of trenches was
attacked. Yeomanry first stormed the works on the left; “soon
after noon the London and Irish troops commenced their attack. It
was completely successful in capturing all its objectives and the
whole of the Rushdi system in addition.... This attack was a fine
performance, the troops advancing eight or nine miles during the day
and capturing a series of very strong works covering a front of about
seven miles, the greater part of which had been held and strengthened
by the enemy for over six months. Some 600 prisoners and some guns
and machine guns were captured. Our casualties were comparatively
slight.”
Paragraph 12: On the 7th November “the London troops, after a
severe engagement at Tel el Sheria, which they captured by a
bayonet charge, at 4 a.m. on the 7th, subsequently repulsing several
counter-attacks, pushed forward their line about a mile to the
north.” The operations of 27th October to 7th November are now the
“Third Battle of Gaza.”
For some weeks the strain on the troops was very great, much
heavy marching on a short supply of water having to be undertaken
in addition to constant fighting, which during the last half of
November became much more intense. Aided by reinforcements and by the
mountainous nature of the country the enemy put up a great effort to
bring the advance to a standstill, but in this he failed.
The assault on the positions defending Jerusalem was fixed for 8th
December, the 60th being again employed. The despatch draws attention
to “the mere physical difficulties of the advance across steep and
rocky hillsides and deep valleys,” artillery support being difficult,
indeed sometimes impossible, while “the opposition encountered was
considerable.” The weather was most unfavourable, rain falling
heavily on the 7th and three following days.
The first objectives were carried soon after dawn and the troops
pressed on. “By about noon London troops had already advanced over
two miles, and were swinging north-east to gain the Nablus-Jerusalem
road,” “throwing back their right to form a defensive flank,
facing east towards Jerusalem, from the western outskirts of which
considerable rifle and artillery fire was being experienced.... By
nightfall ... all the enemy’s prepared defences west and north-west
of Jerusalem had been captured.... The London troops and Yeomanry
had displayed great endurance in difficult conditions. The London
troops, especially, after a night march in heavy rain to reach their
positions of deployment, had made an advance of three to four miles
in difficult hills in the face of stubborn opposition.”
On the 9th the advance was resumed, the London troops and Yeomanry
driving back rearguards. At noon the city was surrendered. The Army
had taken over 12,000 prisoners and 100 guns between 31st October and
9th December. (See also under 52nd, 53rd and 54th Divisions.)
Sir E. Allenby’s despatch of 18th September, 1918, shows that after
the surrender of Jerusalem, he desired to drive back the enemy
further from its precincts.
Paragraph 5: While the XX. Corps, which included the 53rd and 60th
Divisions, was making preparations to do this the Turks attacked
during the night of 26th-27th December. “By 1.30 a.m. the 60th
Division was engaged on its whole front.
“Between 1.30 a.m. and 8 a.m. on the 27th the outposts of the 60th
Division on the ridge north of Beit Hanninah repelled four determined
attacks, but the heaviest fighting took place to the east of the
Jerusalem-Nablus road. Repeated attacks were made against Tel el Ful;
a conspicuous hill from which Jerusalem and the intervening ground
can be overlooked. The attacks were made by picked bodies of troops
and were pressed with great determination. At only one point did the
enemy succeed in reaching the main line of defence. He was driven out
at once by the local reserves. In all these attacks he lost heavily.”
After a lull the enemy attacked the front of the 60th Division at
12.55 p.m. “in unexpected strength,” but again “local counter-attacks
were successful in restoring the line—this proved to be the final
effort.”
On the 28th December, General Allenby ordered an advance. The battle
was of a very obstinate character and lasted into the evening of the
29th. On the 28th the 60th captured several strong positions by 1
p.m., further positions by 5.30 p.m. and continued their advance till
9.15 p.m. On the 29th they resumed their forward movement, meeting
heavy rifle and machine-gun fire near Bireh. About 4.15 p.m., “the
left of the attack stormed the Tahuneh ridge.” “Simultaneously with
this attack the right of the 60th Division had stormed Shab Saleh in
face of heavy machine-gun fire; subsequently capturing the ridge east
of Bireh. At 9 p.m. the advance was continued.”
“The Turkish attempt to recapture Jerusalem had thus ended
in crushing defeat. He had employed fresh troops who had not
participated in the recent retreat from Beersheba and Gaza and had
escaped its demoralising effects. The determination and gallantry
with which his attack was carried out only served to increase his
losses.”
Another quotation as to this battle has been given under the 53rd
Division, which was also in the XX. Corps. The operations 17th-24th
November, 1917, are now the “Battle of Nebi Samwil,” and those 26th
to 30th December, the “Defence of Jerusalem.”
Paragraphs 6 and 7 of the despatch deal with the advance to and
capture of Jericho and give a detailed description of the immense
difficulties which the troops had to surmount.
“The 60th Division had taken over the line east of Jerusalem some
time previously. Opposed to it were some 5000 rifles, while to the
north another 2000 rifles were in a position from which to act
against the left flank of the 60th Division as it advanced.
“The chief obstacle to the advance lay in the difficulty of the
ground rather than any opposition the enemy might offer.”
Between the line of the 60th and their objectives lay a succession of
ridges some of which were precipitous.
The advance on Jericho began on 19th February, 1918. On that day the
Division captured several strong positions “in face of considerable
opposition.”
That night the enemy attacked and was repulsed “after a sharp
struggle.”
On the 20th further positions were taken, “the enemy resisting
with stubbornness.... The right brigade met with great opposition.
Moreover, the ground over which the attack had to take place proved
the most rugged and difficult yet met with in this country.... The
left brigade advanced four miles over difficult country, the enemy
fighting a rearguard action from ridge to ridge.”
By the evening of the 20th “the 60th Division had reached a line four
miles west of the cliffs overlooking Jericho.”
On the 21st the advance was resumed, the Division reaching a line
which overlooked Jericho. At 8.20 a.m. mounted troops rode into the
town.
Paragraph 8 describes a further advance, 8th to 12th March, in which
the XX. Corps “had to drive the enemy from ridge to ridge.” On the
9th the right brigade of the 60th Division, which had crossed the
Wadi el Auja, north of Jericho, in the dark, and “had subsequently
met with determined resistance,” seized a position astride the
Beisan-Jericho road. Other troops on their left also made good
progress and by the 11th “a line had been captured with great natural
facilities for defence.”
Paragraph 11 and 12 deal with a raid on Amman. The troops employed
were the 60th Division, the Australian and New Zealand Mounted
Division, the Imperial Camel Brigade, etc., the whole under the
General Officer Commanding 60th Division. Heavy rains made the
crossing of the Jordan a task of almost insuperable difficulty and
also made progress very slow when the eastern bank was reached.
On 24th March the 60th Division drove the enemy from a position
which blocked the road to Es Salt, captured three guns and pursued
him for four miles. On the 25th they occupied Es Salt. The mounted
troops effected the destruction of portions of the railway. There
was heavy fighting on the 29th and 30th March, the Turks having been
reinforced; thereafter the Commander-in-Chief ordered a withdrawal
and this was carried out by the evening of 2nd April. Troops were
left on the east side of the Jordan to form a bridgehead. Over 900
prisoners were taken in this raid.
On 30th April operations east of the Jordan were again undertaken.
“The 60th Division captured the advanced works of the Shunet Nimrin
position but were unable to make further progress in face of the
stubborn resistance offered by the enemy.” On 2nd May there was
another attack but the Turks were found to be in great strength.
“The 60th Division was unable to make any substantial progress, in
spite of determined efforts.” About 1000 prisoners were taken in this
operation. On 4th May the force was withdrawn.
Paragraph 15 of the despatch refers to the reorganisation of the
Palestine Army consequent on the departure of the 52nd and 74th
Divisions for France, and it states that 24 British battalions were
also withdrawn from the remaining divisions and sent to France. The
60th contributed its share of these, while the remainder of the
Division continued to set a very high standard of efficient work in
the field to the troops brought to Palestine from Mesopotamia and
India, to take the place of those who had left for the western front.
The 2/20th joined the famous 62nd Division in August 1918.
In the despatch of 31st October, 1918, as to the final overthrow of
the Turks in Palestine, paragraph 9 shows that the break-through by
the infantry was entrusted to Sir E. Bulfin’s XXI. Corps, to which
the 60th Division was attached, it having been moved from the right
to the left of the line. At 4.30 a.m. on 19th September, the XXI.
Corps attacked and, within 36 hours, “the greater part of the VIII.
Turkish Army had been overwhelmed.”
The 60th Division attacked in the coastal sector, then moved inland
to leave “the coast route clear for the Desert Mounted Corps.”
After the 20th the infantry had heavy marching but no severe
fighting. The operations 19th-25th September are now “The Battles of
Megiddo.”
The armistice with Turkey came into force on 31st October, but
fighting had ceased on the 26th. The 60th Division had certainly done
a great deal to bring about the satisfactory conclusion of the War
with Turkey.
Battalions of the Division were selected for the Armies of Occupation
as follows: for Western Front, the 2/14th, 2/15th, 2/16th, 2/17th and
2/23rd London Regiment; for Egypt, 2/13th, 2/19th and 2/22nd London
Regiment.
61ST (SOUTH MIDLAND) DIVISION
SECOND LINE
The Division went to France in May 1916. On 19th-20th July they and
an Australian division made an attack in the Neuve Chapelle district.
Ground was gained but could not be held as the guns on the Aubers
Ridge had command of it.
The despatch from Sir Douglas Haig, dated 31st May, 1917, paragraph
13, Messrs. Dent’s edition, shows that the 61st was one of the
divisions employed in pursuing and pressing the enemy when he
retreated from the neighbourhood of the Somme battlefield in March
1917. On 17th March the 61st and 2nd Australian Divisions captured
Chaulnes and Bapaume.
The Division was for a time in the Third Battle of Ypres and, as
part of the XIX. Corps, attacked on 22nd and 27th August and 5th
September, 1917.
The Cambrai despatch of 20th February, 1918, paragraph 9 (Dent’s
edition) and map opposite p. 163, shows that the 61st was in reserve
on 30th November, 1917, when the enemy made his great counter-attack.
On the night of the 1st December they took over from the 12th in the
neighbourhood of La Vacquerie and for some days thereafter had to
fight hard to stem the German flood; in this they were successful.
The Division saw a great deal of heavy fighting in 1918 and was
frequently mentioned in despatches. It formed part of the XVIII.
Corps, Fifth Army, in March of that year and was engaged throughout
the whole of the British retreat. At the end of ten days’ continuous
fighting the strength of the Division was down to about 2000. They
came out of the battle with a splendid reputation, which was to be
enhanced later, on the Lys.
In the telegraphic despatch of 26th March, 1918, Sir Douglas Haig
said: “In the past six days of constant fighting our troops on all
parts of the battle-front have shown the utmost courage,” and among
divisions which had exhibited “exceptional gallantry” he mentioned
the 61st.
In the written despatch of 20th July, 1918, paragraph 15, which deals
with the 21st March, it is stated: “Assisted by the long spell of dry
weather hostile infantry had crossed the river and canal north of La
Fère, and, south of St. Quentin, had penetrated into the battle-zone
between Essigny and Benay. At Maissemy, also, our battle positions
were entered at about noon, but the vigorous resistance of the 61st
and 24th Divisions, assisted by troops of the 1st Cavalry Division,
prevented the enemy from developing his success.”
The Division held its battle position intact against the assaults of
three German divisions, and only retired in the afternoon of the 22nd
when ordered to do so in consequence of the enemy’s progress at other
parts of the line.
In his _History of the British Campaign in France and Flanders_, vol.
v., Sir Arthur Conan Doyle gives a full account of the very arduous
work of the XVIII. Corps in the March retreat, and frequently refers
to the conduct of the 61st Division in terms of very high praise. He
gives a detailed description of the most heroic resistance of the
battalions in the front line on the morning of 21st March and, as an
example of what was done, he tells the story of the 2/4th Oxfordshire
and Buckinghamshire Light Infantry which, under Colonel Wetherall,
held out in the Enghien Redoubt until it was finally submerged by the
ever increasing waves from the three German divisions which attacked
the front of the 61st. This took place about 4.30 p.m.
Mr. Sparrow in his _The Fifth Army in March 1918_, also gives many
particulars of the splendid defence put up by the forward battalions
of the 61st, on the 21st, as well as of the endless encounters they
had during the retreat. On p. 239 he mentions that parts of the
Division were first attacked at 5 a.m. on the 21st, and were only
two miles back at 3 a.m. on the 23rd, although for 48 hours the 61st
was attacked by three German divisions. On p. 102 he refers to it as
“this brave Division” and says that a Special Order of the day, dated
18th April, stated that between 21st March and that date the 61st had
been opposed by 14 German divisions.
At p. 287 Mr. Sparrow remarks that the 61st had been continuously in
the line since 27th August, 1917, except when moving from one part to
another, and “then fought for twelve continuous days.”
Paragraph 24 of the despatch states that on the morning of the 23rd
the Commander of the Fifth Army ordered “a gradual withdrawal to the
line of the Somme.”
Paragraph 26: A gap occurred in our line near Ham and bodies of
Germans succeeded in crossing the river. “In the afternoon these
forces increased in strength, gradually pressing back our troops,
until a spirited counter-attack by troops of the 20th and 61st
Divisions about Verlaines restored the situation in this locality.”
The fighting between 21st-23rd March is now designated the “Battle of
St. Quentin.”
Paragraph 31, “The Fight for the Somme Crossings”: On the 24th
various bodies of the enemy had been able to effect crossings at
different points. “During the remainder of the day the enemy repeated
his attacks at these and other points, and also exercised strong
pressure in a westerly and south-westerly direction from Ham. Our
troops offered a vigorous resistance and opposite Ham a successful
counter-attack by the 1/5th (Pioneer) Battalion, Duke of Cornwall’s
Light Infantry, 61st Division, materially delayed his advance.”
Paragraph 44: On 28th March the British were almost back to the
Amiens defences and the enemy were seriously pressing the French
on our right. “A gallant attempt by troops of the 61st Division to
regain Warfusée-Abancourt and lighten the pressure from the north
proved unsuccessful.... At nightfall we held approximately the Amiens
defence line on the whole front south of the Somme.”
Fortunately that same day the enemy had been defeated north of the
Somme (see 56th, 42nd and 62nd Divisions), and in a few days his
offensive on the front south of Arras ceased.
In his account of the 28th, Mr. Sparrow deals with the work of “the
intrepid 61st,” and remarks “one and all behaved with the greatest
gallantry.”
In Colonel à Court Repington’s Memoirs, _The First World War_,
Constable, vol. ii., p. 269, there is detailed a conversation, on
7th April, 1918, with General Gough, the Commander of the Fifth
Army. After some particulars of the great struggle there occurs the
sentence, “He brought with him some of Maxse’s notes, which mentioned
particularly the fine conduct of the 61st Division, under Colin
Mackenzie.” Lieut.-General Maxse commanded the XVIII. Corps.
The despatch of 20th July, 1918, deals also with the Lys battle which
began on 9th April, 1918 (see 55th, 49th, 50th and 51st Divisions).
Paragraph 58 shows that several divisions were brought straight from
the Somme fighting to the Lys area. Among these was the 61st. Dealing
with the 12th April, the despatch states: “On the left of the 51st
the 61st Division was coming into action about the Clarence river.
Both the 3rd and 61st Divisions had been engaged in many days of
continuous fighting south of Arras; but with the arrival of these
troops, battle-weary though they were, the enemy’s progress in this
sector was definitely checked.”
The fighting 12th-15th April is now the “Battle of Hazebrouck.”
Paragraph 65 deals with the great effort made by the enemy on 18th
April on the southern front of his salient. “At certain points there
was severe and continuous fighting.... Elsewhere the enemy failed
to obtain even an initial success, being repulsed, with exceedingly
heavy loss, at all points, by the 4th and 61st Divisions.” And,
referring to a few days later: “Further west the 4th Division,
in co-operation with the 61st Division, carried out a series of
successful local operations, north of the La Bassée canal, resulting
in the capture of some hundreds of prisoners, and a considerable
improvement of our positions between the Lawe and Clarence rivers.”
The action on 18th April is now the “Battle of Béthune.”
The Division joined the XVII. Corps early in October 1918, and with
it took part in the “Advance to Victory.”
The despatch of 21st December, 1918, as to the final British
offensive, paragraph 47, Battle of the Selle River, 17th-25th
October, shows that the 61st Division, as part of the XVII. Corps of
the Third Army, attacked on 24th October. “About many of the woods
and villages which lay in the way of our attack there was severe
fighting, particularly in the large wood known as the Bois L’Évêque,
and at Pommereuil, Bousies Forest and Vendegies-sur-Écaillon. This
latter village held out till the afternoon of the 24th October when
it was taken by an enveloping attack by troops of the 19th Division
and 61st Division.”
Paragraph 49, “The Battle of the Sambre,” 1st-11th November: As a
preliminary to the main attack it is stated that on 1st November
“the XVII. Corps of the Third Army and the XXII. and Canadian Corps
of the First Army attacked on a front of about six miles south
of Valenciennes and in the course of two days of heavy fighting
inflicted a severe defeat on the enemy. During these two days the
61st, Major-General F. J. Duncan, 49th and 4th Divisions crossed the
Rhonelle river, capturing Maresches and Preseau after a stubborn
struggle, and established themselves on the high ground two miles
to the east of it. On their left the 4th Canadian Division captured
Valenciennes and made progress beyond the town.”
The fighting on 1st-2nd November is now designated the “Battle of
Valenciennes.”
On the 3rd November the enemy withdrew, and the British line was
advanced.
The XVII. Corps was again employed on the left of the Third Army
in the Battle of the Sambre on the 4th November when “the enemy’s
resistance was definitely broken.”
Battalions from the Division were selected for the Armies of
Occupation, as follows: Western Front, 2/6th and 2/7th Royal
Warwickshire Regiment, 2/5th Gloucestershire Regiment and 1/5th
Duke of Cornwall’s Light Infantry (Pioneers). For Egypt, 2/8th
Worcestershire Regiment, 2/4th Oxfordshire and Buckinghamshire Light
Infantry and 2/4th Royal Berkshire Regiment.
62ND (WEST RIDING) DIVISION
SECOND LINE
The 62nd Division, under the command of Major-General W. P.
Braithwaite, who had gained distinction as chief of Sir Ian
Hamilton’s staff in Gallipoli, left England for France on 11th
January, 1917, and, on arrival, was taken to the Albert-Arras area.
On 13th February they entered the line about Serre, thereafter until
the end of March they were one of the divisions employed in pressing
the enemy, and in causing him to hasten his withdrawal from the old
Somme front. The pursuit came to a standstill near Bullecourt on the
Hindenburg line. The capture of that place was to involve much hard
fighting. The Division at this time was in the V. Corps, Fifth Army.
Sir Douglas Haig’s despatch of 25th December, 1917, as to the
campaigns of that year, paragraph 16 (Dent’s edition), describes
the fighting on 11th April in the Battle of Arras. “In combination
with this attack on the Third Army front, the Fifth Army launched an
attack at 4.30 a.m. on the 11th April against the Hindenburg Line
in the neighbourhood of Bullecourt (4th Australian Division and
62nd Division, Major-Generals W. Holmes and W. P. Braithwaite). The
Australian and West Riding battalions engaged showed great gallantry
in executing a very difficult attack across a wide extent of open
country. Considerable progress was made and parties of Australian
troops, preceded by tanks, penetrated the German positions as far as
Riencourt-lez-Cagnicourt.” As the Third Army was held up on this day
the Fifth Army had to withdraw. Progress was made on the 12th.
Paragraph 27: “To secure the footing gained by the Australians in the
Hindenburg Line on 3rd May it was advisable that Bullecourt should
be captured without loss of time.... On the morning of the 7th May
English troops (7th Division) gained a footing in the south-east
corner of Bullecourt. Thereafter gradual progress was made in the
face of the most obstinate resistance and on the 17th May London and
West Riding Territorials (58th and 62nd Divisions) completed the
capture of the village.” The operations 3rd to 17th May are now the
“Battle of Bullecourt.”
Throughout the summer of 1917 the 62nd remained in the district south
of Arras, but had no heavy fighting until the “Battle of Cambrai,
1917.”
Sir Douglas Haig’s despatch of 20th February, 1918, as to the
“Battle of Cambrai, 1917,” 20th November to 3rd December, paragraph
3, dealing with the attack on 20th November, said: “The 62nd (West
Riding) Division, T., stormed Havrincourt where also parties of the
enemy held out for a time.... West of Flesquières the 62nd Division
operating northwards from Havrincourt made important progress. Having
carried the Hindenburg reserve line north of that village it rapidly
continued its attack and captured Graincourt, where two anti-tank
guns were destroyed by the tanks accompanying our infantry. Before
nightfall infantry and cavalry had entered Anneux although the
enemy’s resistance in this village does not appear to have been
finally overcome until the following morning. This attack of the 62nd
(West Riding) Division constitutes a brilliant achievement in which
the troops concerned completed an advance of four and a half miles
from their original front, overrunning two German systems of defence
and gaining possession of three villages.”
Paragraph 4, 21st November, stated: “Following upon the capture of
Flesquières the 51st and 62nd Divisions, in co-operation with a
number of tanks and squadrons of the 1st Cavalry Division, attacked
at 10.30 a.m. in the direction of Fontaine-Notre-Dame and Bourlon.”
After drawing attention to the strain on the troops engaged in these
operations Sir Douglas Haig said, paragraph 7: “It was decided to
make another effort on 27th November to capture Fontaine-Notre-Dame
and Bourlon village,” etc. “In this attack in which tanks
co-operated, British Guards temporarily regained possession of
Fontaine, taking some hundreds of prisoners, and troops of the 62nd
Division once more entered Bourlon village. Later in the morning,
however, heavy counter-attacks developed in both localities and our
troops were unable to maintain the ground they had gained.” The
Division was relieved by the 47th on the night of the 28th-29th. It
was in reserve on the 30th November when the enemy counter-attacked
in great force—see paragraph 9 of despatch, also under 47th, 55th,
and 56th Divisions.
In the beginning of 1918, the Division was about Arras, on 5th
January it took over from the 56th between Gavrelle and Oppy.
Soon after the launching of the German attack from the St. Quentin
district, on 21st March, reinforcements were sent to the southern
portions of the British front. On 25th March the 62nd Division
arrived at Bucquoy and joined the IV. Corps of the Third Army. Along
with the 42nd Division they formed a new line through which the
worn-out 19th, 25th, 41st and 51st Divisions withdrew. The 62nd,
which entered the front line on the 25th, had very heavy fighting
on the 26th, 27th and 28th. On the afternoon of the 26th alone five
attacks by regiments of the Prussian Guard were repulsed. After a
magnificent stand the Division was relieved by the 37th on 31st March
and 1st April. The fighting on 24th-25th is now the “First Battle of
Bapaume,” and that on the 28th the “First Battle of Arras, 1918.”
Under the 42nd Division a quotation has already been given from the
telegraphic despatch of 23rd April, 1918, in which the part played by
the 42nd and 62nd about Bucquoy is referred to.
The written despatch of 20th July, 1918, paragraph 42, mentions that
on 27th March the enemy made a series of strong attacks when he
gained Ablainzevelle and Ayette. “Elsewhere all his assaults were
heavily repulsed by troops of the 62nd Division (Major-General W. P.
Braithwaite) and of the 42nd and the Guards Divisions.”
Paragraph 45 as to the attack near Arras, 28th March, states: “The
62nd Division with an attached brigade of the 4th Australian
Division beat off a succession of heavy attacks about Bucquoy with
great loss to the enemy.”
The despatch of 21st December, 1918, paragraph 11, shows that in
July the XXII. Corps, Lieut.-General Sir A. Godley, consisting of
the 15th, 34th, 51st and 62nd Divisions, was sent to the south to
assist the French in their counter-attacks against the salient which
the Germans had created between the Aisne and the Marne. The 51st
and 62nd went to the east side of the salient and had heavy fighting
for a period of ten days—a quotation as to this, now the “Battle
of Tardenois,” is given under the 51st. Both these divisions were
complimented by General Berthelot commanding the French Fifth Army.
The 8th West Yorkshire Regiment (Leeds Rifles) of the 62nd were
awarded the coveted _Croix de Guerre_ with palms, for a brilliant
assault on Mont de Bligny on 28th July.
In the supplementary telegraphic despatch of 13th September, 1918,
as to the work of certain divisions, Sir Douglas Haig said: “The
62nd Division assisted to check the enemy’s advance in March at
Achiet-le-Grand and Bucquoy and since that date took part with
credit in the French offensive south-west of Reims. On August 25th
it attacked and captured Mory. The Division was involved in heavy
fighting about this village and around Vaulx-Vraucourt and Vaulx Wood
and beat off several determined counter-attacks with great loss to
the enemy.” The capture of Mory is again referred to in the despatch
of 21st December, 1918, paragraph 23. Between the 25th August and 2nd
September the Division had some very stern fighting and suffered
heavy losses before its opponents were overcome. The fighting 31st
August-3rd September is now the “Second Battle of Bapaume.”
Paragraph 30 of the despatch, “The Battle of Havrincourt and Epéhy
12th-18th September,” stated: “On the 12th September the IV. and VI.
Corps of the Third Army attacked on a front of about five miles in
the Havrincourt sector, employing troops of the New Zealand, 37th,
62nd and 2nd Divisions. The villages of Trescault and Havrincourt
were taken by the 37th and 62nd Divisions respectively, and positions
were secured which were of considerable importance in view of future
operations.” This is now designated the “Battle of Havrincourt.”
It will be remembered that the Division stormed Havrincourt in the
battle of 20th November, 1917. It was on familiar ground.
In “The Battle of Cambrai and the Hindenburg Line, 27th September-5th
October,” the VI. Corps was again employed, the 62nd being in
support of the 3rd Division. (See paragraph 35 of the despatch and
map opposite p. 280 of Messrs. Dent’s edition.) On 27th and 28th
September the 62nd captured Marcoing and Masnières and established a
bridgehead on the St. Quentin canal. On the 29th they made a further
advance. The Official List has altered the designation given in
the despatch. This is now the “Battle of the Canal du Nord, 27th
September-1st October.”
Paragraph 46. “The Battle of the Selle River, 17th-25th October,”
shows that the 62nd was one of the divisions employed on the 20th.
The fighting was severe but all objectives were gained on the high
ground east of the river. A quotation as to this action has been
given under the 42nd Division. Unofficial accounts agree that both
the 42nd and 62nd did particularly well on the 20th October about
Solesmes.
Paragraph 50, “The Battle of the Sambre, 1st-11th November,” dealing
with the 4th November, stated: “Opposite Orsinval the 62nd Division
of the VI. Corps attacked at 5.20 a.m., and as soon as that village
had been taken the Guards Division of the same corps attacked on the
left of them. Both Divisions had hard fighting but made good progress
capturing Frasnoy and Preux-au-Sart, and reaching the western
outskirts of Commegnies.”
Paragraph 51, “The Return to Mons”: “The enemy’s resistance was
definitely broken. On the 9th November the enemy was in general
retreat on the whole front of the British Armies. The fortress of
Maubeuge was entered by the Guards Division and the 62nd Division
(Major-General Sir R. D. Whigham), while the Canadians were
approaching Mons,” which they entered on the 11th, Armistice Day.
The final despatch of 21st March, 1919 (the anniversary of the great
German offensive), paragraph 5, gives the composition of the troops
selected to form General Plumer’s Second Army, for the march into
the British sector in the Rhine provinces; to the 62nd Division was
awarded the signal honour of representing the Territorial Force. The
Commander-in-Chief may have been influenced by many reasons in making
this choice, but unless its marks had been “very good” the 62nd
would not have been selected.
The 2/4th West Riding Regiment and 2/4th Yorkshire Light Infantry
were chosen for the Army of Occupation, as was also the 1/9th Durham
Light Infantry, originally belonging to the 50th, but which served as
pioneers to the 62nd in 1918.[9]
FOOTNOTES:
[9] Much interesting matter regarding the achievements of the 49th
and 62nd Divisions will be found in _The West Riding Territorials in
the Great War_, by Major L. Magnus. Kegan Paul and Co. Price 15s.
66TH (EAST LANCASHIRE) DIVISION
SECOND LINE
The Division landed in France in the last week of February 1917, and
was employed for some months with the First and Second Armies about
the Bethune-Ypres-Nieuport area.
In the last week of September 1917 the 66th was relieved in the Coast
Sector by the 42nd, the senior East Lancashire Division. The 66th
then moved into the battle area and joined the Fifth Army, east of
Ypres. It came suddenly into prominence in October, when the closing
stages of the Third Battle of Ypres were being fought.
In his telegraphic despatch of 9th October, Sir Douglas Haig said:
“On the right centre a third-line Territorial Division, comprising
Manchester, East Lancashire and Lancashire Fusilier Regiments,
advanced one mile northwards along the ridge in the direction of
Passchendaele, capturing all its objectives under the most trying and
difficult circumstances with great determination and gallantry.”
It was not a “third-line” division in the ordinary acceptance of
the words, but it did contain a third-line battalion, the 3/5th
Lancashire Fusiliers, who were said to have done exceptionally well.
A quotation from paragraph 56 of the written despatch of 25th
December, 1917, as to this attack, now designated the “Battle of
Poelcappelle,” has been given under the 48th Division.
During the German offensive and British retreat of March 1918 the
66th formed part of the XIX. Corps, Fifth Army, the other division of
the Corps in the line on 21st March being the 24th.
On the 21st the XIX. Corps was attacked by the enemy in overwhelming
force. Both divisions fought splendidly and although their forward
posts were surrounded and eventually destroyed, the battle zone of
the Corps was held throughout the day. The enemy made progress,
however, round the left or north flank of the 66th, and the right or
south flank of the 24th Division, which compelled a withdrawal.
In the telegraphic despatch of 26th March, 1918, Sir Douglas Haig
said: “In the past six days of constant fighting our troops on all
parts of the battle front have shown the utmost courage,” and among
divisions which had shown “exceptional gallantry” he mentioned the
66th.
Sir Douglas Haig’s written despatch of 20th July, 1918, regarding
the great German offensive, paragraph 20, the position of affairs
on the 22nd March, stated: “At midday, after heavy fighting in the
neighbourhood of Roisel, the 66th Division, under the command of
Major-General N. Malcolm, D.S.O., still held their positions in
this sector, having, for the time being, definitely stopped the
enemy’s advance. To the south and north, however, the progress of
the German infantry continued, ... Roisel being threatened from the
rear. Accordingly our troops about Roisel were withdrawn during the
afternoon under orders, the enemy making no attempt to interfere.”
The fighting 21st-23rd March, 1918, is now the “Battle of St.
Quentin.”
In paragraph 43, regarding the fight for the Rosières line on 27th
March, now the “Battle of Rosières,” it was said by Sir Douglas
Haig that “the situation south of the Somme was serious.” “A
counter-attack by the 66th Division restored the situation about
Framerville.”
In paragraph 47 as to the fighting in the Avre and Luce valleys, on
29th and 30th March, Sir Douglas Haig said, “North of the Luce also
the enemy made some progress but in the afternoon was held up, and
finally driven back into Aubercourt by counter-attacks carried out by
troops of the 66th Division and the 3rd Australian Division.”
In his “Fifth Army in March, 1918,” Mr. Sparrow constantly refers to
the splendid conduct of the 66th. At p. 101 he mentions that they
fought continuously from the 21st to the 31st and that their losses
were nearly 7000 “apart from sick and spent.” At p. 134 he says that
their strength on the evening of the 30th was 104 officers and 2376
other ranks, excluding transport. “Thus to the last the 66th was in
the fire,” and speaking of the counter-attack which they made on the
30th he said, “seldom have exhausted men made an equal effort.”
Their losses were so severe that the Division was reduced to a
cadre basis, see note, paragraph 1, despatch of 21st December, 1918
(Messrs. Dent’s edition); but it was filled up in time to take part
in the “Advance to Victory.”
The South African Brigade, which had gained very great distinction
on many occasions, as part of the 9th Division, was incorporated
in the reconstituted 66th, and it was also joined by the following
battalions from the Mediterranean: the 6th Lancashire Fusiliers, 5th
Royal Inniskilling Fusiliers, and 6th Royal Dublin Fusiliers, forming
the 198th Brigade; the 18th Liverpool Regiment (formerly Lancashire
Yeomanry), 9th Manchester Regiment and 5th Connaught Rangers, forming
the 199th Brigade, with, as pioneers, the 9th Gloucestershire
Regiment. (See _The Story of the Fourth Army_, p. 322.)
The despatch of 21st December, 1918, paragraph 42, “Second Battle
of Le Cateau, 8th to 12th October,” now officially designated the
“Battle of Cambrai, 1918, with pursuit to the Selle,” shows that the
Division formed part of the troops attacking on 8th October, being
then in the XIII. Corps, Fourth Army, when “on the British front
infantry and tanks penetrated the enemy’s position to a depth of
between three and four miles, passing rapidly over the incomplete
trench lines.”
To the north of the 30th American Division which had “captured
Brancourt and Prémont the 66th Division (Major-General H. K.
Bethell), attacking beside the 25th Division (Major-General J. R. E.
Charles), captured Serain.” The advance was continued on the 9th; “by
nightfall our troops were within two miles of Le Cateau.” A further
forward movement was made on the 10th and in _The History of the 25th
Division_, p. 329, it is stated that by the evening of the 10th “the
66th Division, which had got well forward on the left, had a few
advanced patrols in Le Cateau itself.” This is correct, but there
was to be very heavy fighting before the town was captured. The Selle
runs through the town, and the portion on the eastern side of the
river was not taken till the 17th.
Paragraph 46, “The forcing of the Selle River crossings, 17th-25th
October,” now the “Battle of the Selle,” mentions the 66th as again
employed by the XIII. Corps. “The enemy was holding the difficult
wooded country east of Bohain and the line of the Selle north of it,
in great strength, his infantry being well supported by artillery....
By the evening of the 19th October, after much severe fighting, the
enemy had been driven across the Sambre and Oise canal at practically
all points south of Catillon, whence our line followed the valley of
the Richemont east and north of Le Cateau.” That town was taken by
the 66th Division.
On the night of the 16th the 9th Gloucestershire, Pioneers to the
Division, and the Divisional Engineers threw eight bridges across
the Selle, here twenty feet wide and five feet deep, and the South
African Brigade crossed to the east bank. Later they forced their
way through the wire entanglements and carried their objectives. In
the _Story of the Fourth Army_, p. 224, there occurs this sentence:
“The position attacked by the 66th Division, and especially by the
South African Brigade, requires to be studied on the ground before
the difficulties overcome by the initiative and leadership of the
regimental officers and non-commissioned officers, and by the
gallantry of all ranks, can be fully realised. None but the very
best troops could have attempted, let alone have succeeded in,
such an enterprise, and the crossing of the Selle at Le Cateau will
always remain, like the struggle in Delville Wood in 1916, a lasting
testimony to the fighting qualities of the South African soldier.” A
captured German order contained the sentence: “The English must not
cross the Selle on our front.”
Sir A. Conan Doyle, vol. vi. pp. 187-190, gives a detailed and
excellent account of the attack on 17th October. He says: “It had
been a very desperate battle, the laurels of which rest with the
South African Brigade, who had carried out so remarkable an assault,
and also with the 50th Division which had held on with such a
bull-dog grip to its purpose.”
The XIII. Corps was engaged in “The Battle of the Sambre,” commencing
on 4th November, the 66th being in support of the 25th, which
captured Landrecies. (See under 48th Division, three battalions of
which did great work.) See also paragraph 50 of the despatch and map
opposite p. 294 of Messrs. Dent’s edition.
On 7th November the 66th relieved the 25th and continued the advance
beyond Avesnes, being practically advance-guard to the Fourth Army.
At the date of the Armistice the Division held the front from Sivry
to a point west of Beaumont.
The work of the 66th Division between 8th October and 11th November
is fully described in _The Story of the Fourth Army_ already referred
to.
APPENDIX
APPENDIX
SHOWING THE BATTLES, AS NAMED IN THE OFFICIAL LIST PUBLISHED IN
1921, IN WHICH THE TERRITORIAL DIVISIONS TOOK PART.
Since the foregoing notes were put together there has been published
“The Official Names of the Battles and other Engagements fought by
the Military Forces of the British Empire during the Great War,
1914-1919, and Third Afghan War, 1919, being the Report of the
Battles Nomenclature Committee, as approved by the Army Council.”
A list of the battles in which a division has been present affords
some idea of its services to the Empire, but opportunities varied
according to the theatre, and while the work of those troops which
went early to the East was of inestimable importance and while
very many of their battalions fought in Mesopotamia, Palestine
and elsewhere, they had no chance of employment as divisions in
the field, hence, through no fault of their own, their honours as
divisions are _nil_. In the case of some which operated in France the
urgency of affairs, in the early years of the War, was such as to
necessitate their employment as reinforcements in single battalions
to Regular brigades, and it must not be forgotten that the component
parts of some divisions, such as the 55th and 56th, were nearly a
year, more in the case of some battalions, in France before they were
concentrated as divisions. In their case again a mere list of battle
honours in that formation is inadequate as a token of their value.
Some of those so placed seem to have made up lost time splendidly.
It would be presumption to say that the following table is complete.
There will be many claims which will require very careful scrutiny,
and only the Authorities, with all the material of the Historical
Section of the War Office at their disposal, will be competent to
adjudicate upon them. On the other hand the despatches do mention
certain units, and other works of a semi-official character, already
published, supplement the reports of the various Commanders; from
such sources a fairly complete list can be made up.
In this Appendix, where a division has been mentioned in despatches
or works such as the “Story of the Fourth Army,” as taking part in a
battle, or is shown in the maps appended to these, the Battle is in
ordinary type; but where the information is derived from sources not
so strictly official, the name of the Battle is printed in italics.
In compiling this appendix it has been thought better not to ask
information from units as to their own doings.
The geographical or boundary limits give trouble as regards divisions
in support. Sometimes these seem to have been partly within and
partly outside the limits. Where there is a probable claim this has
been noted.
The chronological or time limits give no licence, and it is perhaps a
little hard on some units that did some very severe fighting on one
or more days before or after a recognised battle that they should
be excluded. Particularly hard cases seem to be those of the 50th,
61st and 66th in connection with the fighting in the region of the
Avre and Luce valleys, 28th-30th March, 1918, when these and other
divisions by their splendid efforts prevented the line from being
broken, and that after they had long passed all credible limits of
endurance. The Battle of Rosières is given the dates 26th and 27th
March, and that of the Avre, 4th April, by which latter date these
three divisions were out of the line, the fighting 28th-30th March,
south of the Somme, is thus outside both battles, although the
despatch, in which these three divisions are mentioned, seems to give
it an importance equal to that of the fighting on 4th April.
Again the Battle of the Somme, 1916, the Third Battle of Ypres, now
the Battles of Ypres, 1917, and the First and Second Battles of the
Somme, 1918, have each been sub-divided into a number of battles with
fixed time limits; but in the course of these epic struggles certain
divisions had intense fighting, with most serious losses, on days
which are not within the dates of any of the recognised battles. For
example, the 55th at the Somme, 1916, the 42nd and 47th at Ypres,
1917, and the 62nd at the Second Somme, 1918, all made big and
costly endeavours on days outside the chronological boundaries of a
recognised battle. No doubt they will get the general honour, such as
“The Battles of Ypres, 1917,” and have to be content with that.
The Committee have clearly taken great pains to arrive at sound
principles, and to apply these wisely, and as they had every possible
advantage in the way of information, their decisions, although in odd
cases causing disappointment, will doubtless be accepted in the true
soldiers’ spirit.
In 1918 several Territorial divisions were practically destroyed,
such as the 50th and 66th; these were during the last few months
reconstituted, being made up largely with Regular or New Army
battalions. Such divisions have been treated as Territorial to the
end. If this is considered more than fair to the Territorial Force it
is counterbalanced by the fact that some of the New Army Divisions,
which had also been very hardly hit, such as the 34th, were, after
the spring campaign of 1918, composed largely of Territorial
battalions from Italy and Palestine. The 25th has most handsomely
admitted their good fortune in receiving seasoned battalions from
Italy, including a brigade of the 48th.
42ND (EAST LANCASHIRE) DIVISION. First Line.
Defence of Egypt. 3-4 February, 1915.
The Battles of Helles, Second Battle of
Dardanelles. Krithia. 6-8 May, 1915.
Third Battle of
Krithia. 4 June, 1915.
Battle of Rumani,
Egypt. 4-5 Aug., 1916.
_The Battles of Ypres, The Division was not mentioned in the
1917._ despatch, but was in line from 1st to
18th September; it attacked on 6th and
later dates. This was not one of the
recognised battles.
The First Battles of First Battle of Bapaume. 24-25 March, 1918.
the Somme, 1918. First Battle of Arras,
1918. 28 March, 1918.
_Battle of the Ancre,
1918._ 5 April, 1918.
The Second Battles Battle of Albert, 1918 21-23 Aug., 1918.
of the Somme, 1918 Second Battle of
Bapaume. 1 Aug.-3 Sept., 1918.
The Battles of the Battle of the Canal
Hindenburg Line. du Nord. 27 Sept.-1 Oct., 1918.
The Final Advance. Battle of the Selle. 17-25 Oct., 1918.
_Battle of the Sambre._ 4 Nov., 1918.
The Division was not engaged at the Battle
of the Sambre on 4th November. It was in
second line (see map, p. 294, Messrs.
Dent’s edition of despatches), but seems
to have been within the official
boundaries. It passed to front line on
the 5th.
43RD (WESSEX) DIVISION. First Line. 44TH (HOME COUNTIES) DIVISION.
First Line. 45TH (WESSEX) DIVISION. Second Line.
The Divisions went to India, were broken up, and were not in action
as divisions.
46TH (NORTH MIDLAND) DIVISION. First Line.
Battle of Neuve
Chapelle. 10-13 March, 1915.
The Battle of Loos 25 Sept.-8 Oct., 1915.
With “attack on Hohenzollern Redoubt,
13th October.” The Division is mentioned
in the despatch as attacking the
redoubt on the 13th, but is not mentioned
as attacking on 25th September. Their
losses on the 13th were very heavy.
The Battles of the Battle of Albert,
Somme, 1916. 1916. 1-13 July, 1916.
_Advance to Hindenburg
Line, 1917._ March, 1917.
The Division was engaged on several
occasions.
The Battles of Arras,
1917. 9 April-4 May, 1917.
With flanking operations towards Lens,
3 June-26 August. The Division was
nearly ten weeks in the line and captured
positions on 24 and 28 June.
_Battle of Hill 70._ 15-25 Aug., 1917.
Only part of the Division was engaged, the
principal attack being by the Canadians
on their right.
The Battles of the Battle of the St.
Hindenburg Line. Quentin Canal. 29 Sept.-2 Oct., 1918.
Battle of the Beaurevoir
Line. 3-5 Oct., 1918.
Battle of Cambrai,
1918. 8-9 Oct., 1918.
The Final Advance. Battle of the Selle. 17-25 Oct., 1918.
_Battle of the Sambre._ 4 Nov., 1918.
The infantry was not heavily engaged on
the 4th, but the Division was in second
line (see map, p. 294), and was within
boundaries. It “passed through” that
night.
47TH (SECOND LONDON) DIVISION. First Line.
Battle of Festubert. 15-25 May, 1915.
The Battle of Loos. 25 Sept.-8 Oct., 1915.
The Battles of the Battle of
Somme, 1916. Flers-Courcelette. 15-22 Sept., 1916.
Battle of the
Transloy Ridges. 1-18 Oct., 1916.
The Battle of Messines,
1917. 7-14 June, 1917.
_The Battles of Ypres,
1917._ 31 July-10 Nov., 1917.
The 47th was not mentioned in the despatch,
but took part in some attacks in latter
half of August. It may not have been
engaged in any of the recognised battles.
Battle of Cambrai,
1917. 20 Nov.-3 Dec., 1917.
The First Battles of Battle of St. Quentin. 21-23 March, 1918.
the Somme, 1918. First Battle of Bapaume. 24-25 March, 1918.
_First Battle of Arras,
1918._ 28 March, 1918.
The 47th might claim to have been in this
battle. They were very close to the
southern boundary, Authuille, but are
not mentioned in the despatch. The
fighting at the south of the line was not
so intense as further north.
_Battle of the Ancre._ 5 April, 1918.
The despatch does not mention the units
engaged, but the 47th was in the line and
had very heavy fighting in this battle
on 5th-6th April.
_The Battle of Amiens._ 8-11 Aug., 1918.
Not in despatch. Entered line on the 10th.
The Second Battles of Battle of Albert, 1918. 21-23 Aug., 1918.
the Somme, 1918. Second Battle of
Bapaume. 31 Aug.-3 Sept., 1918.
48TH (SOUTH MIDLAND) DIVISION. First Line.
The Battles of the _Battle of Albert,
Somme, 1916. 1916._ 1-13 July, 1916.
The Division was in support.
Battle of Bazentin
Ridge. 14-17 July, 1916.
Battle of Pozières
Ridge. 23 July-3 Sept., 1916.
NOTE.—The 48th does not seem to have
attacked in the Battles of Flers-Courcelette
or the Transloy Ridges, but might
have a claim, to the latter at least, as
being within the boundaries. They were
holding the line long after the “official”
battle closed.
Advance to the Occupation of
Hindenburg Line. Peronne, etc. March, 1917.
The Battles of Ypres, _Battle of Pilckem Ridge._ 31 July-2
1917. The Division was in support. Aug., 1917.
Battle of Langemarck,
1917. 16-18 Aug., 1917.
Battle of Broodseinde. 4 Oct., 1917.
Battle of Poelcappelle. 9 Oct., 1917.
Italy. Battle of the Piave
(and Asiago Plateau). 15-24 June, 1918.
Battle of Vittorio
Veneto. 24 Oct.-4 Nov., 1918.
NOTE.—One brigade was with the 25th
Division in the final advance in France
and took the village of Beaurevoir in the
battle of that name, 4th October, took a
prominent part in the battle of the Selle,
18th October, and captured Landrecies
in the Battle of the Sambre, 4th November.
49TH (WEST RIDING) DIVISION. First Line.
_Battle of Aubers Ridge._ 9th May, 1915.
The Division was in support and held the
line, while the 7th and 8th attacked.
The Battles of the Battle of Albert, 1916. 1-13 July, 1916.
Somme, 1916. _Battle of Bazentin
Ridge._ 14-17 July, 1916.
Battle of Pozières
Ridge. 23 July-3 Sept., 1916.
_Battle of Thiepval
Ridge._ 26-28 Sept., 1916.
The 49th was on the Somme, Thiepval
Front, from 30th June to the beginning
of October. They did not attack in the
Battle of Bazentin Ridge, but were in
support and within the official boundary.
Portions of the Division attacked in the
Battles of Pozières and Thiepval.
The Battles of Ypres,
1917. Battle of
Poelcappelle. 9 Oct., 1917.
The Division was about the salient throughout
the period of the Third Battle of
Ypres, and although only mentioned in
the despatch as attacking on 9th October,
it may claim others of these battles as
having been within the boundaries,
particularly the two Passchendaele battles.
Unfortunately their own history gives
almost no guidance.
The Battles of the _Battle of Estaires._ 9-11 April, 1918.
Lys. The Division was heavily engaged on 10th
and 11th.
Battle of Hazebrouck 12-15 April, 1918.
Battle of Bailleul. 13-15 April, 1918.
First Battle of Kemmel
Ridge. 17-19 April, 1918.
Second Battle of Kemmel
Ridge. 25-26 April, 1918.
Battle of the
Scherpenberg. 29 April, 1918.
The Battles of the _Battle of Cambrai_,
Hindenburg Line 1918, with pursuit
to Selle. 8-12 Oct., 1918.
The Division was heavily engaged on
11th and 12th.
The Final Advance Battle of Valenciennes 1-2 Nov.,1918
NOTE.—Although the 49th was not attacking
during the battle of the Selle, 17th-25th
October, or the battle of the Sambre,
4th November, it may have a claim as
having been within the boundaries.
Part of the Division did remain in the
front line between 2nd and 11th November.
50TH (NORTHUMBRIAN) DIVISION. First Line.
The Battles of Ypres, Battle of Gravenstafel
1915. Ridge. 22-23 April, 1915.
In Sir John French’s despatch, paragraph 4,
he mentioned that he placed the 50th
at the disposal of General Plumer on the
night of the 22nd. A portion of the
Division was within the boundary of
the battle on the evening of the 23rd.
Battle of St. Julien 24 April-4 May, 1915.
_Battle of Frezenberg
Ridge._ 8-13 May, 1915.
_Battle of Bellewaerde
Ridge._ 24-25 May, 1915.
The Battles of the
Somme, 1916 Battle of
Flers-Courcelette. 15-22 Sept., 1916.
Battle of Morval. 25-28 Sept., 1916.
Battle of the Transloy
Ridges. 1-18 Oct., 1916.
The Battles of Arras, First Battle of the
1917. Scarpe, 1917. 9-14 April, 1917.
Second Battle of the
Scarpe, 1917. 23-24 April, 1917.
_The Battles of Ypres, _Second Battle of
1917._ Passchendaele._ 26 Oct.-10 Nov., 1917.
The First Battles of Battle of St. Quentin. 21-23 March, 1918.
the Somme, 1918. With actions for the Somme crossings,
24th-25th March.
Battle of Rosières. 26-27 March, 1918.
NOTE.—Paragraph 47 of the despatch shows
that there was very heavy fighting in the
Avre and Luce valleys on 29th, 30th and
31st March, in which the 50th was engaged,
but the official list gives the Battle of
the Avre one day only, the 4th April, and
takes no notice of the battle 29th to
31st March.
The Battles of the Battle of Estaires. 9-11 April, 1918.
Lys. _Battle of Hazebrouck._ 12-15 April, 1918.
The Division was still fighting on the
12th and 13th.
The Battle of the
Aisne, 1918. 27 May-6 June, 1918.
The Battles of the Battle of Beaurevoir
Hindenburg Line. Line. 3-5 Oct., 1918.
Battle of Cambrai,
1918. 8-9 Oct., 1918.
See map, p. 287, Messrs. Dent’s edition.
The Final Advance. Battle of the Selle. 17-25 Oct., 1918.
Battle of the Sambre. 4 Nov., 1918.
51ST (HIGHLAND) DIVISION. First Line.
The Battles of the Battle of Bazentin
Somme, 1916. Ridge. 14-17 July, 1916
And “subsequent attack on High Wood,”
20th-25th July.
The Division is not mentioned as engaged
in the British attack, 14th-17th July,
but is stated in the despatch to have
repulsed an attack at High Wood on the
24th.
Battle of the Ancre,
1916 (Beaumont 13-18 Nov., 1916.
Hamel).
The Battles of Arras, First Battle of the
1917. Scarpe, 1917. 9-14 April, 1917.
Second Battle of the
Scarpe, 1917. 23-24 April, 1917.
Third Battle of the
Scarpe, 1917. 3-4 May, 1917.
And “capture of Rœux, 13th-14th.”
The Battles of Ypres, Battle of Pilckem
1917. Ridge. 31 July-2 Aug., 1918.
Battle of Menin Road
Ridge. 20-25 Sept., 1917.
Battle of Cambrai,
1917. 20 Nov.-3 Dec., 1917.
The First Battles of Battle of St. Quentin. 21-23 March, 1918.
the Somme, 1918. _First Battle of Bapaume._ 24-25 March, 1918.
The Division is not referred to in the
despatch, but was still fighting hard on
the 24th-25th as rearguard.
The Battles of the Battle of Estaires. 9-11 April, 1918.
Lys. Battle of Hazebrouck. 12-15 April, 1918.
The Battles of the Battle of Tardenois
Marne, 1918. (Ardre Valley). 20-31 July, 1918.
The Second Battles of Battle of the Scarpe,
Arras, 1918. 1918. 26-30 Aug., 1918.
The Battles of the _Battle of Cambrai,
Hindenburg Line. 1918, and pursuit to
the Selle._ 8-12 Oct., 1918.
The Division captured several positions
on the 12th, after stiff fighting.
The Final Advance. Battle of the Selle. 17-25 Oct., 1918.
_Battle of
Valenciennes and
capture of Mount Houy._ 1-2 Nov., 1918.
The Division was not in the first line on
the 1st-2nd November, but attacked and
captured a portion of Mount Houy on
28th October. The time limit may
exclude its claim.
52ND (LOWLAND) DIVISION. First Line.
The Battles of Helles. Third Battle of Krithia. 4 June, 1915.
With subsequent actions.
NOTE.—The Division did not land in time
for the battle of 4th June, but, as
narrated in the despatch, took part in
several fiercely contested actions,
mentioned in the Official List subsequent
to that date, when they had very heavy
losses.
Egypt. Battle of Rumani. 4-5 Aug., 1916.
The Invasion of First Battle of Gaza. 26-27 March, 1917.
Palestine. Second Battle of Gaza. 17-19 April, 1917.
Third Battle of Gaza. 27 Oct.-7 Nov., 1917.
Battle of Nebi Samwil. 17-24 Nov., 1917.
Battle of Jaffa. 21-22 Dec., 1917.
The Second Battles Battle of Albert. 21-23 Aug., 1918.
of Arras, 1918. Battle of the Scarpe,
1918. 26-30 Aug., 1918.
Battle of the
Drocourt-Quéant Line. 2-3 Sept., 1918.
The Battles of the Battle of the Canal du
Hindenburg Line. Nord. 7 Sept.-1 Oct., 1918.
53RD (WELSH) DIVISION. First Line.
The Battles of Suvla, The Landing at Suvla. 6-15 Aug., 1915.
Dardanelles. Battle of Scimitar
Hill. 21 Aug., 1915.
Egypt. Battle of Rumani. 4-5 Aug., 1916.
The Invasion of First Battle of Gaza. 26-27 March, 1917.
Palestine. Second Battle of Gaza. 17-19 April, 1917.
Third Battle of Gaza. 27 Oct.-7 Nov., 1917.
Defence of Jerusalem. 26-30 Dec., 1917.
The Battles of Battle of Sharon. 19-25 Sept., 1918.
Megiddo. Battle of Nablus. 19-25 Sept., 1918.
54TH (EAST ANGLIAN) DIVISION. First Line.
The Battles of Suvla, The Landing at Suvla. 6-15 Aug., 1915.
Dardanelles. Battle of Scimitar Hill. 21 Aug., 1915.
The Invasion of First Battle of Gaza. 26-27 March, 1917.
Palestine. Second Battle of Gaza. 17-19 April, 1917.
Third Battle of Gaza. 27 Oct.-7 Nov., 1917.
_Battle of Nebi Samwil._ 17-24 Nov., 1917.
Battle of Jaffa. 21-22 Dec., 1917.
The Battles of Battle of Sharon. 19-25 Sept., 1918.
Megiddo. Battle of Nablus. 19-25 Sept., 1918.
55TH (WEST LANCASHIRE) DIVISION. First Line.
The Battles of the _Battle of Ginchy._ 9 Sept., 1916.
Somme, 1916. The Division is not referred to in the
despatch as attacking on the 9th Sept.
According to the _History of the 55th_
they attacked at Guillemont on 8th August,
during the period of the fighting at
Delville Wood, but the locus of that
battle is the wood, and they also attacked
at Ginchy on the 9th September.
Battle of Morval. 25-28 Sept., 1916.
The Battles of Ypres, Battle of Pilckem
1917. Ridge. 31 July-2 Aug., 1917.
Battle of the Menin
Road Ridge. 20-25 Sept., 1917.
Battle of Cambrai,
1917. 20 Nov.-3 Dec., 1917.
The Battles of the Battle of Estaires
Lys. and First Defence
of Givenchy. 9-11 April, 1918.
Battle of Hazebrouck. 12-15 April, 1918.
The Division was not relieved till the 15th,
and had some hard fighting on the 12th
and 13th, _see_ Sir D. Haig’s special
order.
56TH (FIRST LONDON) DIVISION. First Line.
The Battles of the Battle of Albert,
Somme, 1916. 1916. 1-13 July, 1916.
Battle of Ginchy. 9 Sept., 1916.
Battle of
Flers-Courcelette. 15-22 Sept., 1916.
_Battle of Morval._ 25-28 Sept., 1916.
_Battle of the Transloy
Ridges._ 1-18 Oct., 1916.
The 56th was one of the attacking divisions
on 26th September near Combles, and on
7th-8th Oct. further north.
The Battles of Arras, First Battle of the
1917. Scarpe, 1917. 9-14 April, 1917.
_Third Battle of the
Scarpe, 1917._ 3-4 May, 1917.
The Division attacked on the 3rd, and is
mentioned in the despatch as capturing
a position on the 11th.
The Battles of Ypres, Battle of Langemarck,
1917. 1917. 16-18 Aug., 1917.
The Battle of Cambrai,
1917. 20 Nov.-3 Dec., 1917.
The First Battles of First Battle of Arras,
the Somme, 1918. 1918. 28 March, 1918.
The Second Battles Battle of Albert,
of the Somme, 1918. 1918. 21-23 Aug., 1918.
The Second Battles Battle of the Scarpe,
of Arras, 1918. 1918. 26-30 Aug., 1918.
See Sir D. Haig’s telegram of 13th Sept.
_Battle of the
Drocourt-Quéant Line._ 2-3 Sept., 1918.
The Battles of the Battle of the Canal
Hindenburg Line. du Nord. 27 Sept.-1 Oct., 1918.
_Battle of Cambrai,
with pursuit to the
Selle._ 8-12 Oct., 1918.
The Division attacked and took positions
on the 11th and 12th.
The Final Advance. _Battle of Valenciennes,_ 1-2 Nov., 1918.
Although the 56th did not attack on the
1st or 2nd, they entered the line on the
night of the 2nd, and have a claim as
being within the official boundaries.
Battle of the Sambre. 4 Nov., 1918.
57TH (WEST LANCASHIRE) DIVISION. Second Line.
The Battles of Ypres, _Second Battle of
1917. Passchendaele._ 26 Oct.-10 Nov., 1917.
The Division is not referred to in the
despatch, but as part of the XIVth Corps
they attacked on 26th October.
The Battles of the _Battle of Hazebrouck._ 12-15 April, 1918.
Lys. Part of the Division was engaged.
The Second Battles Battle of the Scarpe,
of Arras, 1918. 1918. 26-30 Aug., 1918.
Battle of the
Drocourt-Quéant Line. 2-3 Sept., 1918.
The Battles of the Battle of the Canal
Hindenburg Line. du Nord. 27 Sept.-1 Oct., 1918.
Battle of Cambrai,
1918. 8-9 Oct., 1918.
58TH (FIRST LONDON) DIVISION. Second Line.
The Advance to the
Hindenburg Line,
1917. March, 1917.
The Battles of Arras,
1917. Battle of Bullecourt. 3-17 May, 1917.
The Battles of Ypres, Battle of the Menin
1917. Road Ridge. 20-25 Sept., 1917.
Battle of Polygon
Wood. 26 Sept.-3 Oct., 1917.
Second Battle of
Passchendaele. 26 Oct.-10 Nov., 1917.
The First Battles of Battle of St. Quentin. 21-23 March, 1918.
the Somme, 1918. Battle of the Ancre,
1918. 5th April
with subsequent
action of _Villers
Bretonneux_. 24-25 April, 1918.
The Division was on the south flank and
had rather heavy losses about the
24th-25th.
The Battle of Amiens. 8-11 Aug., 1918.
The Second Battles of _Battle of Albert, 1918._ 21-23 Aug., 1918.
the Somme, 1918. As part of the III. Corps they entered the
front line on the 22nd.
Second Battle of
Bapaume. 31 Aug.-3 Sept., 1918.
The Battles of the
Hindenburg Line. Battle of Epéhy. 18 Sept., 1918.
59TH (NORTH MIDLAND) DIVISION. Second Line.
The Advance to the
Hindenburg Line,
1917. March, 1917.
The Battles of Ypres, Battle of Polygon
1917. Wood. 26 Sept.-3 Oct., 1917.
Battle of Cambrai,
1917. 20 Nov.-3 Dec., 1917.
See map in Messrs. Dent’s Edition.
The First Battles of Battle of St. Quentin. 21-23 March, 1918.
the Somme, 1918. See map in Messrs. Dent’s edition.
One brigade was
engaged in the
First Battle of
Bapaume. 24-25 March, 1918.
The Battles of the _Battle of Bailleul._ 13-15 April, 1918.
Lys. At this period the Division was much split
up, and parts of it were in others of the
Lys battles.
60TH (SECOND LONDON) DIVISION. Second Line.
Macedonia. _Battle of Doiran, 1917._ 24-25 April,
and 8-9 May, 1917.
The Invasion of Third Battle of Gaza. 27 Oct.-7 Nov., 1917.
Palestine. Battle of Nebi
Samwil. 17-24 Nov., 1917.
Defence of Jerusalem 26-30 Dec., 1917.
and numerous
subsequent actions,
January to July,
1918.
The Battles of Battle of Sharon. 19-25 Sept., 1918.
Megiddo. Battle of Nablus. 19-25 Sept., 1918.
61ST (SOUTH MIDLAND) DIVISION. Second Line.
The Battles of the
Somme, 1916. 14-17 July, 1916.
The Division took part in an attack at
Fromelles, 19th-20th July, 1916, which in
the Official List was stated to be
subsidiary to the Battle of Bazentin Ridge.
Advance to Hindenburg Capture of Bapaume
Line, 1917. and Chaulnes. March, 1917.
_The Battles of Ypres, The Division is not mentioned in the
1917._ despatch, but was engaged at Ypres on
in the latter half of August and first
week various dates of September. These
were not perhaps within the limits of
“recognised battles.”
Battle of Cambrai,
1917. 20 Nov.-3 Dec., 1917.
Mentioned in the despatch as assembling,
took over from the 12th Division about
1st December, and had stiff fighting for
several days.
The First Battles of Battle of St. Quentin 21-23 March, 1918.
the Somme, 1918. And actions for Somme crossings, 24th and
25th March.
Battle of Rosières. 26-27 March, 1918.
The Battles of the Battle of
Lys. Hazebrouck. 12-15 April, 1918.
Battle of Béthune. 18 April, 1918.
The Final Advance. Battle of the Selle. 17-25 Oct., 1918.
Battle of Valenciennes. 1-2 Nov., 1918.
_Battle of the Sambre._ 4 Nov., 1918.
The Division left the front line on the
2nd, but appears to have remained within
the official boundaries.
62ND (WEST RIDING) DIVISION. Second Line.
The Advance to the
Hindenburg Line,
1917. March, 1917.
The Battles of Arras,
1917. Battle of Bullecourt, 3-17 May, 1917.
Battle of Cambrai,
1917. 20 Nov.-3 Dec., 1917.
The First Battles of _First Battle of
the Somme, 1918. Bapaume._ 24-25 March, 1918.
The Division was in action on the afternoon
and evening of the 25th.
First Battle of Arras,
1918. 28 March, 1918.
The Battles of the Battle of Tardenois
Marne, 1918. (Ardre valley). 20-31 July, 1918.
The Second Battles of Second Battle of
the Somme, 1918. Bapaume. 31 Aug.-3 Sept., 1918.
The Division had hard fighting on 25-27
August, but these dates do not fall within
the time limits of either of the battles of
Albert, 21-23 August, or of Bapaume.
The Battles of the Battle of Havrincourt.
Hindenburg Line. 12 Sept., 1918.
Battle of the Canal
du Nord. 27 Sept.-1 Oct., 1918.
See map, p. 280, Messrs. Dent’s edition.
The 62nd passed through the 3rd on the
27th, continued the attack, and captured
Marcoing, etc.
The Final Advance. Battle of the Selle. 17-25 Oct., 1918.
Battle of the Sambre. 4 Nov., 1918.
NOTE.—The Division was not in the front
line during the Battle of Cambrai, 8th-9th
October, 1918, but other divisions
of the VI. Corps were engaged and part
at least of the 62nd may have been within
the official boundaries.
66TH (EAST LANCASHIRE) DIVISION. Second Line.
The Battles of Ypres, Battle of Poelcappelle. 9 Oct., 1917.
1917.
The First Battles of Battle of St. Quentin. 21-23 March, 1918.
the Somme, 1918. With actions for Somme crossings, 24th-25th
March.
Battle of Rosières. 26-27 March, 1918.
_Battle of the Avre._ 4 April, 1918.
Para. 47 of the despatch shows that the
66th was in the heavy fighting, 28th-31st
March, in the Avre and Luce valleys,
when they made counter-attacks; it is
not said they were fighting on 4th April.
The Official List makes no reference to
the fighting 28th-31st March in this
neighbourhood.
The Battles of the Battle of Cambrai,
Hindenburg Line. 1918. 8-9 Oct., 1918.
The Final Advance. Battle of the Selle. 17-25 Oct., 1918.
Battle of the Sambre. 4 Nov., 1918.
The map, p. 294, Messrs. Dent’s edition,
shows the 66th in support to the north-east
of Le Cateau. It would thus be
within the official boundary.
In regard to the Battle of the Beaurevoir
Line, 3rd-5th October, the divisions of the
XIII. Corps in the front line were the
25th and 50th. The 66th was in reserve
and it is not clear that it was within the
official limits, although certainly close
thereto.
PRINTED BY
THE TEMPLE PRESS AT LETCHWORTH
IN GREAT BRITAIN
Transcriber’s Notes
pg 71 Changed: See Story of Fourth Army
to: See Story of the Fourth Army
pg 141 Changed: The despatch of 2nd February 1915, paragragh 4
to: The despatch of 2nd February 1915, paragraph 4
pg 162 Changed: a daring operation the h56t
to: a daring operation the 56th
*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE TERRITORIAL DIVISIONS,
1914-1918 ***
Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will
be renamed.
Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright
law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works,
so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the
United States without permission and without paying copyright
royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part
of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™
concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark,
and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following
the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use
of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for
copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very
easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation
of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project
Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away--you may
do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected
by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark
license, especially commercial redistribution.
START: FULL LICENSE
THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free
distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full
Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or online at
www.gutenberg.org/license.
Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works
1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or
destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in your
possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a
Project Gutenberg™ electronic work and you do not agree to be bound
by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the
person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph
1.E.8.
1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be
used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few
things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See
paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works if you follow the terms of this
agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg™
electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the
Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection
of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the individual
works in the collection are in the public domain in the United
States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the
United States and you are located in the United States, we do not
claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing,
displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as
all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope
that you will support the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting
free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg™
works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the
Project Gutenberg™ name associated with the work. You can easily
comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the
same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when
you share it without charge with others.
1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are
in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States,
check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this
agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing,
distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any
other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes no
representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any
country other than the United States.
1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other
immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must appear
prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™ work (any work
on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the
phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed,
performed, viewed, copied or distributed:
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no
restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it
under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this
eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the
United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where
you are located before using this eBook.
1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is
derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not
contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the
copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in
the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are
redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply
either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or
obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg™
trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted
with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works
posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the
beginning of this work.
1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg™
License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg™.
1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
Gutenberg™ License.
1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including
any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access
to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work in a format
other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official
version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website
(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense
to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means
of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain
Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the
full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works
unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
provided that:
• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the method
you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed
to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, but he has
agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid
within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are
legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty
payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in
Section 4, “Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation.”
• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™
License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue
all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™
works.
• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of
any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
receipt of the work.
• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.
1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project
Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different terms than
are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing
from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of
the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set
forth in Section 3 below.
1.F.
1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project
Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg™
electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may
contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate
or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other
intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or
other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or
cannot be read by your equipment.
1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the “Right
of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
DAMAGE.
1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium
with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you
with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in
lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person
or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second
opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If
the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing
without further opportunities to fix the problem.
1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you “AS-IS”, WITH NO
OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT
LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of
damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement
violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the
agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or
limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or
unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the
remaining provisions.
1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in
accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the
production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses,
including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of
the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this
or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or
additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any
Defect you cause.
Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg™
Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It
exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations
from people in all walks of life.
Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™'s
goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will
remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future
generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see
Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at
www.gutenberg.org
Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation
The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit
501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by
U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
The Foundation's business office is located at 809 North 1500 West,
Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up
to date contact information can be found at the Foundation's website
and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact
Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation
Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without
widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest
array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations
($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
status with the IRS.
The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations
where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND
DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular
state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate
While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
approach us with offers to donate.
International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation
methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other
ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To
donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate
Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be
freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of
volunteer support.
Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed
editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
edition.
Most people start at our website which has the main PG search
facility: www.gutenberg.org
This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™,
including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
