Officers Transferred or Attached

[Ken Lees]

Once an officer is commissioned into a regiment, is he considered to be permanently a part of a particular battalion, or is he a regimental resource?

I have come across many references within infantry War Diaries of officers being attached to other battalions within the regiment, and many of officers being attached from other regiments. Some of these attachments sem to have lasted most of the war.

I can understand the need for officers to be attached for short periods to Brigade, Division etc., but were officers routinely transferred to other battalions?

Any resources for further reading on this subject would be appreciated.

Regards,

Ken

[rflory]

I do not claim to be an expert on this subject but, at least for RA officers, transferred means that the officer has been permanently removed from his old unit and is now in a new unit. Attached means that he is still a member of his original unit but is serving temporarily with another unit. Officers could be attached for a short period time (a week or two) to a school for training or for other purposes or for long periods (years) as was the case often during the Great War. This was especially true of regular officers serving with reserve or territorial units or reserve and territorial officers serving with regular units.

Regards. Dick Flory

[Muerrisch]

I'm just off to the pub with wife for lunch. If sufficiently sober when I crawl home, I will look out the AO or ACI which goes to trouble to define the terms for you.

You may take it that officers were a regimental resource, indeed, an officer sent from WFront back to UK wounded became a member of his 3rd Battalion whilst in UK.

[rflory]

Since my last message I have consulted "The Artillery Battery Clerk" by Major E I Smith, RA which gives the following definitions:

Transfer: "the removal of a man from one corps to another."

Posting: "the removal of a man from one unit to another in the same corps

Attachment: Vacancies shown in the War Establishment that are filled by men who still belong to some other unit - i.e. they work and live with one unit, but are accounted for and borne on the strength of another.

Regards. Dick Flory

[Muerrisch]

Here I am, slept it off. The RA definitions are sufficiently close to my recollection of the AO/ACI that I will not, unless pleaded with, grovel around to consult.

[Ken Lees]

Thanks to both of you. That is sufficient clarification for my enquiring mind

Regards,

Ken

[Jim Gordon]

Am I correct in thinking that a member of a Territorial Battalion could only be cross-posted to another Battalion of the same Regiment ?

Whilst correlating the names of Officers listed in "Officers Died in the Great War" with those listed in the Ward Diary of a particular Battalion I found 10 who were list in ODGW as losing their lives with that Battalion but never appear in the Monthly Nominal Roll for that Diary. (A bit rambling - hopre it makes sense). All 10 officers names have been checked with the Army List and indeed were allotted to that Battalion. Were they cross-posted before they even had a chance to report to their Battalion at the Front ? I assume my experience is not unique.

Incidentally, in ODGW, the name of a deceased officer seems to be listed under the Battalion into which he was commissioned .

Regards

Jim Gordon

[dycer]

A possible answer.

Prior to embarking for France in 1914 the 8th Royal Scots(TF) were brought up to strength by a detachment from the 8th Highland Infantry.

On 11 June 1915 Lt J Martin(8th H.LI. attached to 8th Royal Scots)was found to be missing leading a bombing party.

I quote from the History of the 8th Royal Scots.

"Early on the morning of the 12th,Lt Martin was observed lying on the German parapet,and was seen to move slightly.Supported by covering rifle and machine gun fire,No 7709,L/Cpl W. Angus(8th Highland Infantry attached to the 8th Royal Scots) crept forward ansd succeeded in rousing Lt Martin,who managed to reach our line in spite of heavy bombing by the enemy.L/cpl Angus also got back,though severly wounded.For this most gallant act,L/Cpl Angus was awarded the V.C."

Lt J Martin was awarded the M.C. on 14 January 1916(I assume for a different action).

The History of the 8th Royal Scots makes it clear that both Lt Martin and L/Cpl Angus were members of the 8th HLI at all times but the Royal Scots were proud to to be associated with the award of the V.C..

George

[Ken Lees]

This is a fascinating subject, which I really would like to know more about.

For example, would an officer attached to another regiment wear his original cap badge or the one of the battalion he was attached to?

I suppose that it was considered a good idea to have a constant flow of officers through various regiments in order to spread good practice and understanding between regiments, but it does seem odd that so many officers didn't seem to spend much time with their own Battalion.

I haven't yet got hold of many of the Army Lists, which is something I must do to try to tie down the officers I am researching, but where would officers on attachment, posted, transferred, etc. be listed? Would they be shown with the unit they were currently serving with, or the one they were attached to, or both?

Thanks again,

Ken

[Ste]

If I remember correctly, Robert Graves gives an intereting perspective on being shunted around various battalions of the Royal Welch in Goodbye to all that. It was not always a welcome experience, as newcomers from other battalions were sometimes looked upon as poor relations by officers of the 'parent' unit.

Just this morning I read of Major Bates, senior major of the 1/5 South Lancs. He was promoted Lieut Col in late 1914 and posted to command the 2/5.

So definitely a regimental resource.

S

[Muerrisch]

Like a lot of other Great War subjects, this needs context: the situation on 4 August 1914. Line Infantry only.

Three sorts of commission: Regular [for life [up to retirement age for rank achieved] with option early retirement by resignation unless in war, and with obligation after retirement to recall], Special Reserve of Officers [3rd battalions, and 4th Extra Reserve if such existed] and Territorial Force.

All Regulars were liable to posting to one or other of the Line battalions, and tended to be long periods in one or the other. All except the most junior and senior were eligible for duty with Depot/SR unit, with colonial/ dominion forces or with friendly powers on attachment. A very small number were attached to TF. In none of these cases would regimental badges be shed, but I do know of adopting local uniforms in colonies etc. Officer stayed in correct place in Army List, and were double-entered ie. an officer on 2Bn books attached depot/SR would be entered also as 3Bn.

Once war expansion occurred, the complication of Temporary Commissions began. Such officers were a special type of Regular and were accounted for in the same way, in so far as they appeared allocated to a Line battalion and were double-entered if serving with say, 19Bn.

Precis of ACI 1840 of 23 Sep 1916:

attachment is of more-or-less temporary character. Remains as member of unit from which detached, and carried supernumerary on own unit books.

posting is from one unit to another of same corps [in this context, corps equals regiment]

Transfer is when moved permanently from one corps [regiment] to another.

Finally, a complication, particularly for officers, was when attachment became posting, or when either became transfer. Here, the badge issue is less clear cut, some jumped the gun to change badges [especially if regarding move as an improvement] and some resisted change until adjutant gripped rear of collar. In active service conditions, it was usually only a change of cap and collar badges in short term, and the nuances of buttons, shirt and tie colour etc could follow later if you got back to the regimentally approved tailor.

Finally, other ranks commissioned were a difficult case, not fully understood. Ex-Regulars were often commissioned within their own regiment, especially pre-1916 and esp. if in the field. It was, however, accepted best practice to commission into another regiment or, failing that, another battalion, for obvious disciplinary implications. Many Regulars, commissioned within their regiment, subsequently took their [regular] commissions with them into another regiment. Subject is a minefield.

Hope this is useful.

[Ken Lees]

That's great LB, the mists are clearing.

I will shortly have access to a large number of named photographs of officers in the battalion I am researching, so I hope to be able to find examples of those you describe to illustrate the various types you describe.

Regards,

Ken