Muerrisch Posted 2 March , 2008 Share Posted 2 March , 2008 I have just replaced my photocopy with the N&M reprint and been struck by a big error and a hint of hyperbole in it. My howler is the 2nd RWF ceasing to exist as a unit after 1st Ypres. He probably means 1st RWF, but even that is piffle. Units apparently ended up commanded by the QM, the Doctor, or a subaltern. These are outside my detailed knowledge, but I would be interested to hear from Pals who detect other errors. Trouble is, although the book seems an excellent resource, I cannot trust it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muerrisch Posted 3 March , 2008 Author Share Posted 3 March , 2008 come on you lot: someone must have read the book! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jay dubaya Posted 3 March , 2008 Share Posted 3 March , 2008 ..so much so I got a copy of British Regiments by Brig. James just to compare the typos and misprints...so which is the worst... Jon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muerrisch Posted 3 March , 2008 Author Share Posted 3 March , 2008 Judging by my one regiment, James is far better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jay dubaya Posted 3 March , 2008 Share Posted 3 March , 2008 that said, I still use both, just to make sure Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muerrisch Posted 3 March , 2008 Author Share Posted 3 March , 2008 have you noticed that battalions come out of the line commanded by a very junior officer/doctor/QM and are reduced to a pitiful remnant rather often ..... not always squaring with what I thought I knew? 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