Monthly Record of Current Educational Publications
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Mires of the Somme: the Actions of the I ANZAC Corps at Flers–Guedecourt November 1916 by Nicholas Jensen
AWM SVSS paper, 2014 Mires of the Somme, Nicholas Jensen Mires of the Somme: The actions of the I ANZAC Corps at Flers–Guedecourt November 1916 by Nicholas Jensen Abstract Considering the vast scope and breadth of the Somme’s historiography, it is surprising that the Ist ANZAC Corps’ role at Flers–Guedecourt has attracted only marginal mention in the Somme’s expanding literature. Aside from C.E.W. Bean’s account in the Official History, in which he vividly describes the Flers–Guedecourt attacks as “undoubtedly the most difficult in which the AIF were ever engaged”, there is no monographic study which examines the role of I ANZAC Corps at Flers–Guedecourt in its final month of combat in the Somme campaign. Historians such as Bill Gammage and Joan Beaumont have suggested that the Flers-Guedecourt attacks should be recognised as a more significant moment in the broader history the AIF in the Somme Campaign. Introduction By the time the I ANZAC Corps reached the Flers-Guedecourt sector in late October 1916, the Somme campaign seemed to be progressing slowly into its final month of combat. The promising successes gained in autumn at Pozières and Mouquet Farm seemed to fade, as the Somme’s milder spring was gradually overtaken by the harsher winter conditions. Nevertheless, for the Somme’s Commander-in-Chief, Field Marshal Sir Douglas Haig and his adjuncts at GHQ, September was seen as the Somme’s long-awaited watershed and, in the mind of its commanders, it was surely a sign of promising things to come. -
Tanks at the Battle of Flers-Courcelette, September 1916
“A useful accessory to the infantry, but nothing more” Tanks at the Battle of Flers-Courcelette, September 1916 Andrew McEwen he Battle of Flers-Courcelette Fuller was similarly unkind about the Tstands out in the broader memory Abstract: The Battle of Flers- tanks’ initial performance. In his Tanks of the First World War due to one Courcelette is chiefly remembered in the Great War, Fuller wrote that the as the combat introduction of principal factor: the debut of the tanks. The prevailing historiography 15 September attack was “from the tank. The battle commenced on 15 maligns their performance as a point of view of tank operations, not September 1916 as a renewed attempt lacklustre debut of a weapon which a great success.”3 He, too, argued that by the general officer commanding held so much promise for offensive the silver lining in the tanks’ poor (GOC) the British Expeditionary warfare. However, unit war diaries showing at Flers-Courcelette was that and individual accounts of the battle Force (BEF) General Douglas Haig suggest that the tank assaults of 15 the battle served as a field test to hone to break through German lines on September 1916 were far from total tank tactics and design for future the Somme front. Flers-Courcelette failures. This paper thus re-examines deployment.4 One of the harshest shares many familiar attributes the role of tanks in the battle from verdicts on the tanks’ debut comes with other Great War engagements: the perspective of Canadian, British from the Canadian official history. and New Zealand infantry. It finds troops advancing across a shell- that, rather than disappointing Allied It commented that “on the whole… blasted landscape towards thick combatants, the tanks largely lived the armour in its initial action failed German defensive lines to capture up to their intended role of infantry to carry out the tasks assigned to it.” a few square kilometres of barren support. -
Learning Lessons? Fifth Army Tank Operations, 1916-1917 – Jake Gasson
Learning Lessons? Fifth Army Tank Operations, 1916-1917 – Jake Gasson Introduction On 15 September 1916, a new weapon made its battlefield debut at Flers-Courcelette on the Somme – the tank. Its debut, primarily under the Fourth Army, has overshadowed later deployments of the tank on the Somme, particularly those under General Sir Hubert de la Poer Gough’s Reserve Army, or Fifth Army as it came to be known after 30 October 1916. Gough’s operations against Thiepval and beside the Ancre made small scale usage of tanks as auxiliaries to the infantry, but have largely been ignored in historiography.1 Similarly, Gough’s employment of tanks the following spring in April 1917 at Bullecourt has only been cursorily discussed for the Australian distrust in tanks created by the debacle.2 The value in examining these further is twofold. Firstly, the examination of operations on the Somme through the case studies of Thiepval and Beaumont-Hamel presents a more positive appraisal of the tank’s impact than analysis confined to Flers-Courcelette, such as J.F.C. Fuller’s suggestion that their impact was more as the ‘birthday of a new epoch’ on 15 September than concrete success.3 Secondly, Gough’s tank operations shed a new light onto the notion of the ‘learning curve’, the idea that the British Army became a more effective ‘instrument of war’ through its experience on the Somme.4 This goes beyond the well-trodden infantry and artillery tactics, and the study of campaigns in isolation. Gough’s operations from Thiepval to Bullecourt highlight the inter-relationship between theory and practice, the distinctive nature 1 David J. -
September 1St, 1916 the War Moonshine Law Ontario
September 1st, 1916 The War Moonshine Law Ontario Temperance Act, 1916 The Enactment of the War Measures Act of 1914, in Canada, opened the door to many curtailments of citizen's rights for the efficient prosecution of the war. Among the laws produced as subsidiary to the War Measures Act, the Federal Prohibition Laws reduced the freedom of Canadian citizens to produce, transport and sell intoxicating beverages. Each province in turn could amplify these laws within its boundaries. The Ontario Temperance Act was enacted in the summer of 1916 by the Hearst Government and took effect on 1 September 1916. Various provincial amendments to this law came between 1916 and 1927, when it was finally repealed. -------------------------------- !Less Peate, Esprit de Corps, 11:7 (June 2004), p. 21. September 2nd, 1916 The U-Boat Option U-Boats Return to Raiding British Commerce During 1916, the German Navy had attempted to use submarines to compensate for the High Seas Fleet's numerical disadvantage compared to the British Grand Fleet. U-boats took part in several operations designed to lure the British battleships into traps, but these efforts produced few engagements. Accordingly, German naval strategy in the waters around Britain returned to commerce raiding to starve Britain of essential food and military supplies. Although there was no immediate return to unrestricted submarine warfare because of American threats of entering the war, that debate was renewed among naval and political authorities. German analysis of the British war economy concludes that sinking 600,000 tons of shipping per month, over a period of five or six months, will force Britain to sue for peace. -
The Great War: the Welsh Guards and the Police of South Wales
HEDDLU DE CYMRU • SOUTH WALES POLICE THE GREAT WAR: THE WELSH GUARDS AND THE POLICE OF SOUTH WALES LED BY IWM LEARN • ENGAG1 E • REMEMBER THE GREAT WAR: THE WELSH GUARDS AND THE POLICE OF SOUTH WALES Glamorgan policemen from Porthcawl who joined the Welsh Guards: Back row left to right: PC DC Grant, PC WJ Thomas and PC D Hayes. Front row sitting left PC W. Richardson, sitting right PC F Trott. Only PC’s Hayes and Richardson survived the war. 1 THE GREAT WAR: THE WELSH GUARDS AND THE POLICE OF SOUTH WALES THE GREAT WAR: THE WELSH GUARDS AND THE POLICE OF SOUTH WALES 2015 sees the centenary of the commemorative booklet for 1915 formation of the Welsh Guards in but in view of the amount of February 1915. material which we have available, As will be seen in the pages which we have produced it as a separate follow, South Wales Police’s booklet. predecessor forces of Glamorgan, We hope that it will provide a Cardiff, Swansea, Merthyr and fitting tribute to those policemen Neath had close connections with from South Wales who served the regiment from its formation. with the regiment during the First It had been our intention to World War and especially those include details of this in our who made the ultimate sacrifice. Gareth Madge OBE Chair, First World War Project Group, October 2015 2 THE GREAT WAR: THE WELSH GUARDS AND THE POLICE OF SOUTH WALES The Welsh Guards is the youngest Notwithstanding the existence of of the Foot Guards Regiments such formations, Lord Kitchener having been formed in 1915 when expressed a wish to see a it joined the Grenadier Guards, regiment of Welsh Foot Guards Coldstream Guards, Scots Guards being raised as well. -
The Operational Role of British Corps Command on the Western Front, 1914-18
The Operational Role of British Corps Command on the Western Front, 1914-18 Andrew Simpson University College, London Submitted for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy © Abstract British corps command having been neglected in the literature, this thesis sets out to assess what British corps did, and how they did it, on the Western Front during the Great War. It attempts to avoid anecdotal sources as much as possible, drawing its evidence instead as much as possible from contemporary official documents. It is a central argument here that Field Service Regulations, Part 1 (1909), was found by commanders in the BEF to be applicable throughout the war, because it was designed to be as flexible as possible, its broad principles being supplemented by training and manuals. Corps began the war in a minor role, as an extra level of command to help the C-in-C control the divisions of the BEF. With the growth in numbers and importance of artilleiy in 1915, divisions could not cope with the quantity of artilleiy allotted theni, and by early 1916, the corps BGRA became the corps artilleiy commander (GOCRA). In addition to its crucial role in artillery control, corps was important as the highest level of operational command, discussing attack plans with Armies and divisions and being responsible for putting Army schemes into practice. Though corps tended to be prescnptive towards divisions in 1916, and Armies towards corps, a more hands-off style of command was generally practised in 1917, within the framework of FSR and the pamphlet SS13S (and others - to be used with FSR). -
The Development of Weaponry During the War Years
THE DEVELOPMENT OF WEAPONRY DURING THE WAR YEARS The Development of Weaponry during the War Years – Contents 1 The Great war arsenal of weapons 3 1.1 Guns and grenades 3 1.2 Heavy artillery 3 1.3 Mines 4 1.4 Gas 4 1.5 Tanks 5 1.6 War in the air 5 2 individuaL stories 6 2.1 Georges Guynemer 6 2.2 Extracts from the letters of Frank Vans Agnew, British soldier 6 2.3 First-hand accounts of tank warfare 7 3 Things to see 8 3.1 Memorial Museum Passchendaele 8 3.2 Guynemer Pavilion 9 3.3 Lange Max Museum 9 3.4 Langemark-Poelcapelle tank memorial 9 4 More information 9 4.1 Websites 10 4.2 Pictures 10 4.3 Interviews 10 4.4 Visit Flanders contacts 11 4.5 Sources 11 //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// // Pagina 2 van 11 In 1914, the technical, technological, and scientific advances of the 19th century were co-opted for military purposes and applied in the pursuit of military strategy. This led to major tactical changes, industrialised the conflict, and profoundly transformed the way war was conducted and combat engaged in. The first major change was in relation to weaponry. The war of position characterised by the trenches froze the front line, with two armies facing each other across no-man’s-land. In this situation, reminiscent of siege warfare, defence was the central focus of the struggle. Artillery came to dominate the battlefields, employed with the aim of punching holes in the enemy lines and saving the lives of one’s own soldiers. -
M2089 Selected German Documents from the Records of the Naval
M2089 SELECTED GERMAN DOCUMENTS FROM THE RECORDS OF THE NAVAL RECORDS COLLECTION OF THE OFFICE OF NAVAL RECORDS AND LIBRARY, 1897–1917 Timothy P. Mulligan prepared the Introduction and arranged these records for microfilming. National Archives and Records Administration Washington, DC 2006 INTRODUCTION On the four rolls of this microfilm publication, M2089, are reproduced the contents of 34 logbooks and other bound volumes of original German Navy and merchant marine records located among the Naval Records Collection of the Office of Naval Records and Library, 1897–1917, Record Group (RG) 45. The materials reproduced here constitute a part of those original German documents approved for restitution to the Bundesarchiv following the latter’s request and subsequent negotiations with the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For these German documents, microfilm publication M2089 represents the record copy retained by NARA. BACKGROUND President John Adams authorized the establishment of the Navy Department Library on March 31, 1800. Originally a component of the Office of the Secretary of the Navy, the Navy Department Library was transferred by Navy Department General Order 292 on March 23, 1882, to the newly established Office of Naval Intelligence. There an unofficial adjunct staff to the Library, designated the Naval War Records Office, came into being in 1882 to compile for publication selected documents on naval aspects of the Civil War. On July 7, 1884, the Naval War Records Office and the Navy Department Library were formally consolidated by the Naval Appropriation Act (23. Stat. 185) into the Office of Library and Naval War Records. In October 1889 the Office was returned to the Office of the Secretary of the Navy, and assumed custody of the pre-1886 office files of the Secretary of the Navy. -
Claremen Who Fought in the Battle of the Somme July-November 1916
ClaremenClaremen who who Fought Fought in The in Battle The of the Somme Battle of the Somme July-November 1916 By Ger Browne July-November 1916 1 Claremen who fought at The Somme in 1916 The Battle of the Somme started on July 1st 1916 and lasted until November 18th 1916. For many people, it was the battle that symbolised the horrors of warfare in World War One. The Battle Of the Somme was a series of 13 battles in 3 phases that raged from July to November. Claremen fought in all 13 Battles. Claremen fought in 28 of the 51 British and Commonwealth Divisions, and one of the French Divisions that fought at the Somme. The Irish Regiments that Claremen fought in at the Somme were The Royal Munster Fusiliers, The Royal Irish Regiment, The Royal Irish Fusiliers, The Royal Irish Rifles, The Connaught Rangers, The Leinster Regiment, The Royal Dublin Fusiliers and The Irish Guards. Claremen also fought at the Somme with the Australian Infantry, The New Zealand Infantry, The South African Infantry, The Grenadier Guards, The King’s (Liverpool Regiment), The Machine Gun Corps, The Royal Artillery, The Royal Army Medical Corps, The Royal Engineers, The Lancashire Fusiliers, The Bedfordshire Regiment, The London Regiment, The Manchester Regiment, The Cameronians, The Norfolk Regiment, The Gloucestershire Regiment, The Westminister Rifles Officer Training Corps, The South Lancashire Regiment, The Duke of Wellington's (West Riding Regiment). At least 77 Claremen were killed in action or died from wounds at the Somme in 1916. Hundred’s of Claremen fought in the Battle. -
The Ordeal of the 44Th Battalion, 25 October 1916
WHEN THE LEARNING CURVE FALLS When the Learning Curve Falls: The Ordeal of the 44th Battalion, 25 October 1916 WILLIAM STEWART Independent Scholar Email: [email protected] ABSTRACT On 25 October 1916, a battalion of the 4th Canadian Division suffered a stinging repulse in a poorly planned operation. This paper examines how, sixteen weeks into the Somme campaign, senior commanders could launch such a poorly conceived operation that violated current operating principles. The attack ran counter to the overarching notion that the British Army experienced a ‘learning curve’. The paper describes the reasons for the failure and argues the learning curve was not a simple monolithic process but multiple curves contingent on circumstances, commander competence, and the pressures from superiors. During the night of 25 October 1916, a meagre number of exhausted, wet, cold, and angry survivors of the 44th Battalion of the 4th Canadian Division trudged to the rear after yet another abortive attack on Regina Trench during the Somme campaign.1 Their confidence in the high command was seriously impaired by the incompetently planned and executed attack, and the battalion took months to recover its edge. This was the fourth Canadian attempt to capture Regina Trench, and only one operation—on 21 October—captured and held even a portion of the objective. This paper examines how, sixteen weeks into the Somme campaign, the senior commanders at the corps, division, and brigade levels could launch such a poorly conceived operation that violated current operating principles. The attack ran counter to the overarching notion that the British Army, and by extension the Canadian Expeditionary Force (CEF), experienced a ‘learning curve’ over the course of the war and during the Somme campaign. -
1St Anzac Corps and the Battle of Pozières Ridge, 1916
1st Anzac Corps and the Battle of Pozières Ridge, 1916 Meleah Elizabeth Hampton Submitted in fulfilment of the requirements of the degree of Doctorate of Philosophy University of Adelaide Department of History April 2014 i Abstract The first major action of the 1st Anzac Corps on the Western Front was the Battle of Pozières Ridge, which was conducted from 23 July to 3 September 1916. During this time the three divisions of 1st Anzac Corps rotated in and out of the line twice, each time conducting one or more offensive operations against heavily-defended German positions. At its conclusion, the fighting around Pozières and Mouquet Farm had to its record a very high casualty rate for only the most modest of territorial gains. This thesis examines the series of operations conducted by 1st Anzac Corps during the six weeks of the Battle of Pozières Ridge. These operations are more representative of the Somme than the large attacks like the ill-fated first day or the night attacks of 14-15 July. On any given day during the Battle of the Somme only a small percentage of the line was engaged in fighting the enemy – almost invariably in the same kind of limited, set-piece attacks made by 1st Anzac Corps at Pozières and Mouquet Farm. The particular focus of this thesis is on the agency of mid to low levels of command in the military hierarchy during this battle. Detailed reports, orders and message of the battle survive in the archives in the Australian War Memorial which are in so many cases simply unavailable for other contemporary British or Dominion formations. -
The Durham Light Infantry and the Somme 1916 Contents
The Durham Light Infantry and The Somme 1916 Contents Part 1: Introduction and Background Notes leading up to the Battle of the Somme. 1.1: Introduction. 1.2: The background to the Battle of the Somme, 1 July – 18 November 1916. 1.3: The Organisation of the Fourth Army, including the composition of Divisions and Brigades in which the DLI Battalions served. 1.4: Battles, Tactical Incidents and Subsidiary Attacks. Part 2: The Battles and Actions in which the Sixteen Battalions of The Durham Light Infantry were involved. 2.1: 1 - 13 July 1916. The Battle of Albert and the Capture of Contalmaison. 2.2: 14 - 17 July 1916. The Battle of Bazentin Ridge. 2.3: 14 July - 3 September 1916. The Battle of Delville Wood. 2.4: 14 July - 7 August 1916. The Battle of Pozières Ridge. 2.5: 3 - 6 September 1916. The Battle of Guillemont. 2.6: 15 - 22 September 1916. The Battle of Flers-Courcelette. 2.7: 25 - 28 September 1916. The Battle of Morval. 2.8: 1 - 18 October 1916. The Battle of Le Transloy Ridges. 2.9: 23 October - 5 November 1916. Fourth Army Operations. 2.10: 13 - 18 November 1916. The Battle of the Ancre. 1 Part 3: The Awards for Distinguished Conduct and Gallantry. 3.1: Notes and analysis of Awards for gallantry on the Somme. 3.2: The Victoria Cross, the Distinguished Service Order and the Military Cross awarded to Officers of the DLI for gallantry on the Somme 1916. 3.2.1: The Victoria Cross. 3.2.2: The Distinguished Service Order.