jim_davies Posted 28 June , 2004 Share Posted 28 June , 2004 Wondered why the Divisional artillery didn't head out to Gallipoli in july 1915 and instead joined with them in early 1916. I have several theories-but wondered if anyone had the definitive answer. Thanks, Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Pete Wood Posted 28 June , 2004 Share Posted 28 June , 2004 They were, simply, surplus to requirement. Remember the Infantry of the 54th were the last scheduled reinforcements for the Suvla landings - only there to mop up and hold. There wasn't enough space on the island for the guns and gunners of all the Divisions which were arriving. Most of the 54th artillery was also obsolete. It hurts me to say this but, the 54th was also not rated by anyone in authority. Many speculate that this is why the Division was 'spared' from going to F&F. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michaeldr Posted 28 June , 2004 Share Posted 28 June , 2004 Jim, Steel & Hart [Defeat at Gallipoli] and Hickey [Gallipoli] suggest that the British ammunition shortage and Kitchener were behind this problem “The 53rd and 54th Divisions had not got their complement of artillery and despite Hamilton’s increasingly desperate pleading Kitchener had refused to allot any more howitzer batteries to Gallipoli and only grudgingly supplied the necessary shells for the pitifully few batteries that Hamilton had.” “They [the 53rd and 54th Divisions] would be coming without their organic artillery, because of the scandalous shortages of ammunition at home. Undeterred, Hamilton abandoned his normal diffidence when dealing with the War Minister and made what he archly described as ‘a temporary preferential claim’ for extra gun ammunition to compensate for his lack of guns. His bid was for 15,500 rounds for the howitzers and for 400,000 rounds of all natures a month for two months. Casting caution to the winds he also asked for a battery of 4.5-inch howitzers apiece for 10 and 11 Divisions and eight extra medium and heavy howitzers; even these modest demands, however could not be met. IX Corps [to which the 54th Div was attached] was destined to go into battle with woefully inadequate artillery support.” Regards Michael D.R. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim_davies Posted 29 June , 2004 Author Share Posted 29 June , 2004 RT and Michael, Thank you for your thoughts. It looks like a combination of factors came into play. I know the artillery eventually went out to France in mid Nov 1915, serving with a couple of different divisions until rejoining the division in Eqypt. Wonder how they performed in action once they got the chance. Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michaeldr Posted 29 June , 2004 Share Posted 29 June , 2004 Jim, It’s interesting reading around this subject as one is tempted to say, was this the point when Kitchener began to be overwhelmed by the scale of ‘World War’? A couple of lines from John Lee’s biography of Hamilton – ‘A Soldier’s Life’ “Did he [Kitchener] really think that these totally untried divisions [the 53rd & 54th] arriving a couple of days before the new offensive without artillery, could be regarded as effective reinforcements?” And in a coda by Kitchener to his message of 28th July ’15 to Hamilton, he “admitted that the BEF in France actually interfered with the rail transport of shells destined for Gallipoli and that if Hamilton wanted to speed up the supply he himself should send a ship to Marseilles to collect them.” [pages 200 & 199] Regards Michael D.R. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim_davies Posted 30 June , 2004 Author Share Posted 30 June , 2004 Michael, My great-great uncle was KIA at Hill 60 with the 5/Connaught Rangers. Having read several different accounts about the campaign, I am continually shocked by the decison-making and attitudes displayed by the key players at various points in time. While with our hindsight it is easy to criticise the abilities of the commanders on the ground, I can only wonder at how things might have worked out with different leaders.... Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve fuller Posted 5 July , 2004 Share Posted 5 July , 2004 Hi guys Long shot, but anyone have anything on the 5th Beds in Gallipoli? From Aug to Dec 1915? Thanks Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michaeldr Posted 6 July , 2004 Share Posted 6 July , 2004 Steve, If you have not seen it already then you need to get a look at Ray Westlake’s book ‘British Regiments at Gallipoli’ first published in 1996 by Leo Cooper [iSBN 0 85052511 X]. It has just over two pages on the Beds, their officers and their movements at Gallipoli, taken from their War Diary. If you have any difficulties getting hold of it then get back to me and we will find some way to get a copy of what you need to you. Regards Michael D.R. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve fuller Posted 6 July , 2004 Share Posted 6 July , 2004 Steve, If you have not seen it already then you need to get a look at Ray Westlake’s book ‘British Regiments at Gallipoli’ first published in 1996 by Leo Cooper [iSBN 0 85052511 X]. It has just over two pages on the Beds, their officers and their movements at Gallipoli, taken from their War Diary. If you have any difficulties getting hold of it then get back to me and we will find some way to get a copy of what you need to you. Regards Michael D.R. Hi Michael think someone has very kindly sent me extracts of that book and diaries; prob your good self as ive spoken with you before!! Have it all at home so cant see it now, but recall summarised movements to and from the lines from July 1915 up to evac' in Dec - including reference to a catapult being tried (poss' their War diary), and other narratives from another source. Both repeat some phrases and descriptions from memory, so s'pose thats the one ... Does that sound like the book? If so, thank you very much for your kind offer again, if not, yes please!!! Seem to be running outta sources am afraid so any assistance is welcome! Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michaeldr Posted 6 July , 2004 Share Posted 6 July , 2004 Steve, I think that my memory is as good [?] as yours I can’t actually remember sending you the info previously And I would hate to take credit which may rightly be due to another Pal Be that as it may; it does sounds like the same book, as Westlake has ”November War Diary records a bomb catapult being erected on left of line [4th Nov ‘1915]. Captain Webster notes that the machine made such noise during the arming that the Turks had ample warning of its intended use.” Best of luck with your research Regards Michael D.R. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve fuller Posted 6 July , 2004 Share Posted 6 July , 2004 Be that as it may; it does sounds like the same book, as Westlake has ”November War Diary records a bomb catapult being erected on left of line [4th Nov ‘1915]. Captain Webster notes that the machine made such noise during the arming that the Turks had ample warning of its intended use.” Thats the one Michael! Made me smirk at the time! Good old technology; always a pleasure hearing about its introduction ... many thanks anyway, for the assistance and wishes of luck - i need em both!!! Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ARKWRIGHT Posted 16 August , 2004 Share Posted 16 August , 2004 Racing Teapots. Was interested to read your reply to Jims original question concerning the 54th Division and was wondering if you could let me know were you obtained this information as it seems a little unfair of the authorities to condemn a division before they have had a chance to prove themselves. What was the problem ?, also could you tell me on what grounds the speculators who decided that the 54th was not good enough to fight in France base their facts. Ray. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Pete Wood Posted 16 August , 2004 Share Posted 16 August , 2004 General Stopford was the first person to complain about 54th Division - and that was before the Division went into action. After the 'All the Kings men' debacle in August 1915, the Brigade commander also complained about the officers/leadership and that the men were unsteady under fire. Most units were evacuated from Gallipoli on a best-unit-is-the-last-to-leave basis. The units of the 54th Division were among the first to leave the Island. When Allenby (and Murray before him) took control of the Palestine forces, he was asked to send his best infantry Divisions to France. One by one, all the 'British' Divisions were sent to France and replaced with Indian Divisions - all except the 54th Division which remained the only 'white' Division to stay in Palestine throughout the whole campaign. In case you think I am 'against' the 54th Division, you might like to know that I am trying to piece together the actions of 163 Brigade (especially the IoW Rifles) and I have been very saddened to find countless occassions when this brigade was held in reserve, instead of being used to fight. The 54th Division fought the least actions, compared to the other Divisions in the campaign. So I wasn't surprised to find that officers of the 54th Division with a 'spirited' nature, requested attachments with other Regiments (based in France) or transferred to the RFC/RAF etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Pattenden Posted 16 August , 2004 Share Posted 16 August , 2004 Incidently, does anyone know why the 1/1st Battalion, The Cambridgeshire Regiment (T.F.) didn't go with the 54th Division to Gallipoli? They were a part of the 54th in 1914, but were transfered to another division in 1915, and went on to serve in France and Belgium. Thanks, Hugh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve fuller Posted 17 August , 2004 Share Posted 17 August , 2004 When Allenby (and Murray before him) took control of the Palestine forces, he was asked to send his best infantry Divisions to France. One by one, all the 'British' Divisions were sent to France and replaced with Indian Divisions - all except the 54th Division which remained the only 'white' Division to stay in Palestine throughout the whole campaign. In case you think I am 'against' the 54th Division, you might like to know that I am trying to piece together the actions of 163 Brigade (especially the IoW Rifles) and I have been very saddened to find countless occassions when this brigade was held in reserve, instead of being used to fight. The 54th Division fought the least actions, compared to the other Divisions in the campaign. So I wasn't surprised to find that officers of the 54th Division with a 'spirited' nature, requested attachments with other Regiments (based in France) or transferred to the RFC/RAF etc. RT; Well! Havent heard this before; fascinating. So the whole division was resigned to being an 'inferior' unit in the eyes of the commanders? Before theyd even got into combat too? On 15/8/15, The 162 Brigade aquitted themselves well I was led to believe? Kidney Hill with the 10th Irish Division ... Can I ask where this info came from please? Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Pete Wood Posted 17 August , 2004 Share Posted 17 August , 2004 Nearly all the books on Galipolli mention Stopford’s (and others) thoughts on the 54th Division. His [stopford’s] basic premise was that the troops he had been given to carry out the plan [suvla landing] were no good and had been ill suited for the task in hand. He put this to Hamilton at their interview on 11 August. “He tells me straight and without any beating about the bush: ‘I am sure they [the territorials] would not secure the hills with any amount of guns, water and ammunition assuming ordinary opposition, as the attacking spirit was absent; chiefly owing to the want of leadership by the Officers’…. He goes on then to ask me in so many words, not to try to attack with the 54th Division but to stick them into trenches.” General Sir Ian Hamilton, Gallipoli Diary II page 91. Report received from IX Corps headquarters on the 15th August (quoted in Defeat at Gallipoli): ‘Of even more concern were reports from Lindley that his 53rd Division was no longer in a fit state to stay in the line… Stopford was convinced that the 53rd Division was finished as a fighting unit and that the 54th Division was incapable of attacking.’ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew King Posted 17 August , 2004 Share Posted 17 August , 2004 The menof the regiment seemed to be aware of their superiours opions of them. After the First Battle of Gaza there is a definate sense in the accounts of my Grandfather and his friends that the Essexs did themselves proud and hope it would show they were true soldiers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ARKWRIGHT Posted 18 August , 2004 Share Posted 18 August , 2004 Racing Teapots. It would appear that most of the criticism about the 54th division stemmed from General Stopford (even as you state before they went into action). This is the same general who was sacked by General Hamilton not only for being incompetent but for complaining about the quality of his troops, calling 10th 11th and 13th new army divisions worthless. What is it they say about a bad workman ?. As for saying because the 54th were the first to leave on the best is last to leave basis because they were not rated by anyone in authority seems to be per speculation. When you have regular, new army and territorials to evacuate it's obvious that the territorials and the new army troops would be the first to leave. As you may have guessed I lost two relations fighting with the 54th division, one at Gallipoli and another in Egypt ( 2nd Gaza ) and although I don’t believe they were a great division I have yet to see written evidence they were that bad. Jim, sorry to have side-tracked from your original question. Ray. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Pete Wood Posted 18 August , 2004 Share Posted 18 August , 2004 Ray The units which were considered to have 'good fighting spirit' were, in the main, the last to leave the island. By this time Stopford was long gone. As I said, there are plenty of reports by brigade officers that the 54th were unsteady under fire throughout the war. On more than one occasion, one regiment's failure would cause heavy casualties for the other regiments in a brigade. The knock-on effect rippled through the division. This, it appears to me from reading reports/letters/war diaries/regimental histories is nearly always down to the inexperience of the troops (and especially the junior officers). The 54th Division attacked on, basically, only four occassions and was pretty much decimated each time. This meant an influx of (usually) more raw recruits and more untrained officers. I understand (and sympathise) that, having lost relatives from the division that you might somehow wish to fight 'their' cause. I felt the same way. But the more you read about them (54th), the more you realise that you can't change historical facts and a unit's performance(s). I am more than happy for you to contact me off-line and discuss it further if you wish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JulianB Posted 18 August , 2004 Share Posted 18 August , 2004 I've been following this one with interest as I had a gt gfthr who was with 53 Div Arty. His diuary is pepered with remarks on the "politics" of arty higher echelon debates. From what I gather from this discussion, 53rd seem to be lumped in with 54th re effectiveness etc BUT, does this all go for the whole divisions, or just the pbi or arty or who. (53 Arty were also sent to France for a short while before rejoining the mauled remnants of the div in Egypt) Julian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michaeldr Posted 18 August , 2004 Share Posted 18 August , 2004 (edited) Can I stick my nose in here again to say a few words in defence of the 54th? As I mentioned back at the opening of this thread, they were sent to Gallipoli sans artillery and Rhodes James mentions other requisites which were missing too; “no signals company, no field ambulances, no mules and no ammunition.” Not an auspicious start. Hamilton had intended to use this division, his “last immediately available reserves,” as a complete unit in a decisive blow. Alas Stopford wasted this resource by piecemeal deployment of 6 battalions on the 10th August and when later ordered to use the division in an attack on Tekke Tepe he ignored that order to give himself time to sort out his scattered forces. This hiatus led to the exchange which Pete (RT) quoted yesterday, however Steele & Hart in ‘Defeat at Gallipoli’ say “Hamilton could not accept this assessment” of the Territorials. And Hickey in his ‘Gallipoli’ notes that Hamilton recorded in his diary at this point that “None of us has any complaint at all of the New Army troops; only of their Old Army generals.” On the 15th August the 54th’s 162nd Brigade (acting along side the 10th Div) advanced “across a mile of open ground towards the ridge and were subjected to heavy shrapnel fire, with one unfortunate soldier having his arm carried away by a shell which did not burst for another 50 yards.” Prof Tim Travers’ ‘Gallipoli 1915.’ When the Turks counter attacked at Kiretch Tepe, the British left 2000 casualties. Alas, the generals were somewhat distracted at this vital moment [15/16th Aug ‘15]. Stopford was finally sacked by Hamilton and temporarily replaced by de Lisle. Then Mahon [who should have been worrying about his 10th Div and the 162nd Brigade which was also under his command at that point in time] asks to be relieved as he could not bring himself to serve under de Lisle, who was technically his junior in rank. The 54th [and the 53rd] had been so reduced by the August offensive that henceforth, being “left without reinforcements, they could only be employed in menial roles such as stevedoring.” Hickey If Napoleon talked about the need for lucky generals, then the Territorials could equally have said here, that troops need to be lucky with their generals too! Regards Michael D.R. Edited 20 August , 2004 by michaeldr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michaeldr Posted 27 September , 2004 Share Posted 27 September , 2004 On dipping again into Lee’s biography of Hamilton, I see that there is an interesting account of an attempt at rewriting history which relates to these divisions. On 31 Dec 1915 Kitchener asks Hamilton to speak to the Adjutant-General, Sclater, about his Final Despatch from Gallipoli. One or two small alterations are made and then Sclater asks Hamilton to exclude any references to his divisions being 45,000 men below strength in August. As an alternative Sclater is prepared to accept a reference to “on the peninsular;” this would have implied that the shortage was only ‘local.’ Hamilton refuses to allow the impression that his staff had ‘mislaid’ the reinforcements and [at long last] he stands up to Kitchener on the issue. “Hamilton could now see that the War Office was trying to argue that the two Territorial divisions (53rd and 54th) that had been sent out in August stripped of everything but their infantry battalions had really been meant as 20,000 drafts to fill up the ranks of the existing divisions. This was news to Hamilton and further served to warn him that certain elements in London were preparing a case, if not against him, then certainly putting their own actions in the most favourable light.” Regards Michael D.R. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Pete Wood Posted 27 September , 2004 Share Posted 27 September , 2004 I saw a new book on Saturday, red cover with a photo of Allenby on it, which contains the letters of Allenby. Anyone know the title..? Anyway, I only had two minutes to flick through it, but he was not at all negative about 54th Division. I'm trying to be fair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now