Guest Posted 25 April , 2014 Share Posted 25 April , 2014 by Sir Archibald Home.. Has anyone read this book? I have just ordered it.... can't believe I have missed this. MG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Maria Posted 25 April , 2014 Share Posted 25 April , 2014 I read it quite a long time ago, it is the diary of Brig-Gen Sir Archibald Home of the 11th Hussars from 12 August 1914 till the Armistice ( he was Brig-Gen of the Cavalry Corps from Sept 1916 onwards) and a personal friend of Haig, Allenby and Gough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianw Posted 25 April , 2014 Share Posted 25 April , 2014 Was discussed a bit recently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Broomfield Posted 25 April , 2014 Share Posted 25 April , 2014 A lovely chatty, gossipy book. I've only moderately recently acquired a copy and I love it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 30 April , 2014 Share Posted 30 April , 2014 Book arrived today. Incredible detail. One wonders where he found the time to write so much. An example of a personal account at its very best. Lots of very good photos too, particularly the one of the Hotchkiss team practising coming into action. Foreword by the Marquess of Anglesey no less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Broomfield Posted 30 April , 2014 Share Posted 30 April , 2014 The photos in (IIRC) the first section are all from the Pitman Collection, held in the KRH archives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianw Posted 30 April , 2014 Share Posted 30 April , 2014 Foreword by the Marquess of Anglesey no less. The author of the magisterial multi-volume History of British Cavalry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 30 April , 2014 Share Posted 30 April , 2014 The author of the magisterial multi-volume History of British Cavalry. Indeed - hence the 'no less'. A nice stamp of authority and approval. I think Anglesey's writing is some of the most lucid on the Great War. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nigelcave Posted 30 April , 2014 Share Posted 30 April , 2014 Mind you, he wrote disappointingly little about the key role played by the cavalry in 1914 - I think because, for example, at Ypres they acted as mounted infantry (and for quite a while not very mounted). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Hone Posted 30 April , 2014 Share Posted 30 April , 2014 Is there much on 11th Hussars' defence of Messines on 31st October? Following the discovery of a first hand account of this action by Bury Grammar old boy I shall be covering it on our forthcoming 20th anniversary school tour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 30 April , 2014 Share Posted 30 April , 2014 Mind you, he wrote disappointingly little about the key role played by the cavalry in 1914 - I think because, for example, at Ypres they acted as mounted infantry (and for quite a while not very mounted). That may be true. Some seems to make the assumption that the cavalry, in order to be useful, had to be on horseback. The Cavalry's performance in the trenches in 1914 was quite remarkable. Cavalry doctrine in 1914 and the Cavalry Training Manual 1912 put rather a high emphasis on the cavalry's ability to operate in the dismounted role. There are references (in Anglesey if I recall correctly and recycled in a number of recent books on the cavalry) to the high standard of marksmanship in the Cavalry and their success in shooting competitions. etc against the infantry...also high proportions as first class shots etc. Possibly an area for lots more research. MG P.S. His chapters on the interwar (Boer to Great War) are very interesting. A period of massive change for the mounted arms. MG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Filsell Posted 30 April , 2014 Share Posted 30 April , 2014 Your criticisms of Angelsey's coverage of 1914 is spot on. He did a great disservice to the cavalry. It made me angry when the book was published and makes me more angry now. It was a great lost opportunity and there is a huge amount of primary material available to show how well they fought and how much more than arme blanche for ever the British army's attitude to cavalry was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 30 April , 2014 Share Posted 30 April , 2014 Is there much on 11th Hussars' defence of Messines on 31st October? Following the discovery of a first hand account of this action by Bury Grammar old boy I shall be covering it on our forthcoming 20th anniversary school tour. He was a staff Officer rather than serving with his parent regiment, so there is nothing of great detail specific to the 11th Hussars. The observations are quite interesting though. Well worth buying the book simply for that page. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 30 April , 2014 Share Posted 30 April , 2014 Your criticisms of Angelsey's coverage of 1914 is spot on. He did a great disservice to the cavalry. It made me angry when the book was published and makes me more angry now. It was a great lost opportunity and there is a huge amount of primary material available to show how well they fought and how much more than arme blanche for ever the British army's attitude to cavalry was. David - If I may (politely) say so, I think you are perhaps a little harsh on Anglesey. It is a monumental production and to date unsurpassed in sheer scope. I may now have to re-read the relevant chapters as my recollection is that he did acknowledge their contribution in 1914. The gap on the Cavalry's dismounted actions in 1914 is surely now redressed by Badsey's "Doctrine and Reform in the British Cavalry 1880-1918" and Kenyon's "Horseman in No Man's land: British Cavalry & Trench Warfare 1914-1918". Also R A Lloyds "A Trooper in the Tins" covers the period well from the perspective of one who was in the trenches at the time. Outside these how many general histories of 1914 give due credit to the Cavalry (and incidentally the Indian Army Corps?) Not many. I do empathise with your sentiments in a general sense but I Anglesey's coverage does not inspire anger in me. MG Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gareth Davies Posted 16 May , 2014 Share Posted 16 May , 2014 I have just got hold of the 1985 edition and I have a complaint. Why is the font so bloody small? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Broomfield Posted 16 May , 2014 Share Posted 16 May , 2014 They had better eyesight then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Filsell Posted 16 May , 2014 Share Posted 16 May , 2014 Martin, A history of the cavalry which deliberately ignores it's performance at Ypres because they fought on foot seems deliberately perverse to me - the more so since to be as competent of their hosses , if no more so than on, was most strange. It was a wrong and snobbish decision I feel and a lost opportunity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 16 May , 2014 Share Posted 16 May , 2014 Martin, A history of the cavalry which deliberately ignores it's performance at Ypres because they fought on foot seems deliberately perverse to me - the more so since to be as competent of their hosses , if no more so than on, was most strange. It was a wrong and snobbish decision I feel and a lost opportunity. An excellent point.Although to be fair he covers the other ground well,particularly 1902-1914. I may have to revise my idolatry view of Anglesey. How utterly depressing. I would start a thread but it would have about three contributors. I have a bee up my **** about lots of things regarding the Great War.The lack of acknowledgement of the role of the dismounted Cavalry in 1914, ditto the Indian Army Corps in 1914 (watch this spcae) and the propaganda of the OHs. My only problem is I cant decide on which angers me the most. I would write more but I am in the middle of a rearguard action at Le Cateau and the enemy are trying to roll my right flank.... MG Right flank rear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Maria Posted 16 May , 2014 Share Posted 16 May , 2014 I have just got hold of the 1985 edition and I have a complaint. Why is the font so bloody small? Something it has in common with 'A Kitchener Man's Bit ', rather annoying I agree. 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