by Simon Fowler
The structure of the army was fairly simple and logical, although the terminology may occasionally be confusing, and there were lots of exceptions. The paragraphs below give only a brief summary, but more detail is available on the Long Long Trail website.
In particular, the army used the word ‘corps’ in several different ways. Corps lay below ‘armies’ and above ‘divisions’ in the army command structure (see below). The specialist arms, such as the Royal Artillery and the Royal Engineers, were also formed into corps.
The campaign in the Dardanelles was the responsibility of the Mediterranean Expeditionary Force (MEF). It was commanded first by General Sir Ian Hamilton, and then from mid-October by General Sir Charles Monro, who had previously commanded the Third Army in France. The MEF was composed of a Headquarters based on the Greek island of Lemnos, with various units attached as army troops. In turn Hamilton reported to Kitchener back in London.
As British forces arrived in theatre, VIII Corps was formed in May 1915, followed by IX Corps. In addition, of course, there was the Australian and New Zealand Army Corps (ANZAC). These corps replicated to an extent the structures of the armies above them. They too had units of army troops attached to their headquarters. And in turn they were responsible for several divisions.
In the case of VIII Corps, these divisions were the 29th (whose troops were among the first to land and the last to leave), the 42nd (East Lancashire), the 52nd (Lowland) and the Royal Naval Division (which was made up of sailors under military discipline). The IX Corps divisions comprised the 10th (Irish), 11th (Northern), 13th (Western), 53rd (Welsh), 54th (East Anglian) and 2nd Mounted. The three latter units arrived as reinforcements in August 1915. The ANZAC Corps comprised the 1st and 2nd Australian Divisions and the Australian and New Zealand Division, as well as some Indian units by August.
Divisions were the highest level echelons actively engaged in action. They were responsible for implementing the orders sent from corps and army headquarters. As a result, they were the most important units with which the ordinary soldier had any affinity. Each division included a number of infantry battalions and divisional troops made up of units of artillery, engineers and medical facilities. Very roughly, each division contained about 20,000 men. Below the divisions lay the brigades, each made up of two battalions and brigade troops.
The most important fighting unit was the infantry battalion, which at full strength consisted of about 1,000 men. Battalions belonged to a regiment. The regimental depot back in Britain was responsible for recruiting and training men (at least initially) and, through the wives of senior officers, organised support for men who had been taken prisoner of war and widows of those who had fallen.
From 1881 the regiments, with the exception of the Rifle Brigade and the King’s Royal Rifle Corps, were linked to particular counties or cities. The affiliation is usually clear from the regimental title. In peacetime the regiment would recruit from the communities in the area, but of course men might choose to join a regiment other than their local one. Everybody at Gallipoli would have been a volunteer in one form or another, as conscription was not introduced until March 1916. Many men would have enlisted on the outbreak of war, or perhaps before the war they had been members of the Territorial Force or were reservists (that is, men who had already spent time in the army and were recalled to the colours on the outbreak of war).
In peacetime the regiment was made up of two battalions of regular soldiers, one of which was normally based in Great Britain or Ireland, while the other was overseas, generally in India. In addition, the 3rd and 4th Battalions were territorial or reservist units made up of part-time soldiers. On the outbreak of war there was a huge expansion of the army as men flocked to the colours. New infantry battalions were created almost on a daily basis. Some Territorial battalions were split to form cadres for new units. In some regiments these were simply sequentially numbered (typically 6th and 7th) but in others they were given a number which showed their ancestry – for example, the 5th King’s Own was split into two battalions numbered 1/5th and 2/5th. Other battalions raised for the war were known as service battalions. These took their numbers immediately after the original Territorial battalions. The Hampshire Regiment, for example, eventually had nineteen battalions, of which the 2nd, a pre-war regular battalion, served in Gallipoli.
An infantry battalion was made up of battalion headquarters (BHQ) and four companies. The battalion was usually commanded by a lieutenant colonel, with a major as second in command. In addition, at BHQ would be the adjutant, who was in charge of battalion administration, including writing up the war diary; a quartermaster responsible for stores and transport; and a medical officer, on detachment from the Royal Army Medical Corps (RAMC). There you would also find the regimental sergeant-major (RSM), the most senior non-commissioned officer, plus a number of specialist roles filled by sergeants, including quartermasters, cooks, signallers and the orderly room clerk. There were also a number of specialist sections, such as signallers, machine gunners, drivers for the horse-drawn transport, and stretcher-bearers, who traditionally were the musicians of the battalion band.
As well as the Battalion HQ there were four companies, generally given the letters A to D. Each company was commanded by a major or a captain. In addition, there was a company sergeant-major (CSM) and the ‘quarter bloke’ – the company quartermaster sergeant (CQMS).
In turn companies were divided into four platoons, led by subalterns (junior officers), lieutenants and second lieutenants. Each platoon consisted of four sections, with each section generally comprising twelve men under an NCO. These were the men with whom an ordinary soldier would work, live and socialise. A private might also have dealings with the platoon commander and perhaps know the company and battalion commanders by sight.
More about the general organisation of the army can be found on the Long Long Trail website. In addition, Ray Westlake’s British Regiments at Gallipoli (Pen & Sword, 2004) describes the contribution of each unit during the campaign.
The location of individual units is described in the Orders of Battle (‘Orbats’), which offer a guide to the British Army based on its structure. They can be valuable because they list under which division, corps or army a battalion or unit served. What you won’t find, however, is the physical location of individual units. The National Archives also has sets of Orders of Battle for the Mediterranean Expeditionary Force in WO 95/5473. Tim Travers includes detailed lists of units on the peninsula in April and August 1915 in Gallipoli 1915 (Tempus, 2001).
However, you should not need to use them. Chris Baker’s excellent Long Long Trail website contains increasing number of Orders of Battle arranged by echelon or by unit. Another useful shortcut is to look at the description of the battalion or unit war diary in the Discovery Catalogue on The National Archives website, which will give you the brigade and division that the battalion or unit was serving with, at least for part of its existence. In addition, this information is given in Ray Westlake’s book.
UNIT WAR DIARIES
War diaries are the most important source in researching the activities of army units, whether they were in the front line or stationed a long way from the action. Official war diaries were introduced in 1908 and are still kept by units in action today.
War diaries were designed to record unit activities, particularly when it was in action. This, it was felt, would help analysis by historians and strategists so that they could learn lessons for future wars: they are very much the first draft of history. They were kept by infantry battalions and artillery batteries, as well as by higher echelons, such as brigades, divisions and even armies, as well as by more specialist units such as mobile hospitals, signals companies and field bakeries. With few exceptions, they survive only for units that served outside Britain and Ireland.
For researchers war diaries are the raw material of history because they contain the immediate records of each day’s activities unfiltered by further reflection and they sometimes con
tain the thoughts and feelings of the men compiling them (for some reason this seems to be particularly the case at Gallipoli). But, naturally, they are concerned only with what happened in their unit. To get the best from this source you need to use the diaries in conjunction with other records, such as published histories, memoirs and diaries, and official histories. It is a shame that they have not been more widely used by popular historians – Peter Hart, for example, does not quote from them in his otherwise magisterial account of the campaign. Perhaps this will change once they are all online.
An entry in the 87th Brigade’s War Diary for 28 April describing the events of the day, with a sketch map showing where the units were situated. War diaries are a key resource for the study of the Gallipoli Campaign. (TNA WO 95/4311)
War diaries were generally completed by the commanding officer, or in larger units by the adjutant, who otherwise was responsible for the general administration of the unit. Inevitably war diaries reflect the compiler’s enthusiasm (or otherwise) for the task, but most are reasonably detailed, particularly when the unit was in the front line.
This is the entry for 10 August 1915 for the 5th Wiltshires, who were engaged in the desperate fight to defend the ridge at Chunuk Bair, as part of the attempted breakout from Anzac to join up with the new beachhead at Suvla Bay:
1a.m. (01.00) Battalion moved away in single file less D company and part of B company. Order of march C – Machine guns – A – B companies. The Battalion was guided, as far as I am able to ascertain, by a New Zealand officer. Here they arrived two hours before sunrise (circa 3.00) and the men were told to dig into dug outs and make themselves comfortable as the position was quite safe. Men therefore removed equipment and rifles. (Circa) 4.30 a.m. As soon as it was light machine guns opened on the men lying in their dug outs. About 1/4 of an hour later there was a rush of Turks from both sides of the depression which drove the men, unarmed and unequipped, down the gulley (SAZLI BEIT). The bottom of the gulley [was] commanded by machine guns and so escape was cut off. Three courses were possible: 1. To rush past the machine guns down the Sazli Beit; this was tried but in nearly all cases proved fatal. 2. To climb the northern slope of the ravine under fire and try to escape over the top. This was done in a few cases with success. 3. Hide in Gulley till night, this also was done with more success. Parties arrived on the Beach in fours, fives, and some carried bodies during the 11th, 12th and 13th unarmed, unequipped and demoralised. The Battalion when mustered on the Beach mustered roughly 420. (This includes 76 men lately arrived as Details from Lemnos.) Officer casualties: Lt Col. J. Carden (missing) 2nd Lieut J.E.R. Firmin (killed) 2nd Lt G. Gamman (missing) Maj. F. Ricketts (killed) 2nd Lieut W.Y. Radcliffe (killed) Lieut A.J. Hinxman (missing) Maj. W.S. Hern (killed) 2nd Lieut C.G.C. Fisher-Brown (missing) Capt & ADJ A.C. Belcher (killed) Lieut A.W. Huckett (missing) Lieut F.E. Hill (wounded) Lieut Brown (wounded – attached).
1a.m (0100) After the Battalion had marched off (A, C and part of B), D company under Major Hern relieved the Gurkhas with the Royal Irish Rifles in reserve. The position was attacked at dawn on Tuesday (10th) morning and through the retirement of the regiments on right and left. D company are left ‘in the air’. Major Hern and Lieut J.E.R. Firmin killed but remainder hold on until surrounded and are forced to retire into Gulley. Here reorganised and sent up to a counter attack – unsuccessfully and with large loss. Lieut Gamman killed – several wanton attacks attempted with handfuls of men. At night men retire from Gulley, some taking refuge with 38th Bde. [www.thewardrobe.org.uk/research/war-diaries/detail/12857]
The Wiltshires had been attacked by a Turkish division led by Mustapha Kemal. The battalion was overrun, with half of the men never being seen again.
Peter Hart summarises the morning’s events on the ridge:
The British plans had fallen into disarray … On Rhododendron Ridge and Chunuk Bair itself there were some 2,000 soldiers representing four different brigades and three different divisions. The New Zealanders had been relieved overnight and the Chunuk Bair positions were the responsibilities of the 6th Loyal North Lancashires and 5th Wiltshires. Many of the British soldiers were already exhausted, thirsty and demoralised … [The Turks] overwhelmed the British defenders before throwing themselves down the precipitous slopes in pursuit. [Gallipoli, p. 326]
Indeed, the 5th Wiltshires’ war diary for the previous day records:
Heavy fighting was in progress in front, and the Battalion was shelled. Capt R.W.F. Jesson (wounded). During the day counter attacks by the Turks were expected but did not develop. Rations were drawn at 5.30p.m. and rumours were current of 24 hours rest. It should be noted that the men had had no rest, and very little water and food since Friday evening and were consequently in a very exhausted condition. [www.thewardrobe.org.uk/research/war-diaries/detail/12856]
Occasionally war diaries mention other, more peaceful activities. In the war diary for the 1/7th Cameronians for 21 July 1915, for example, there is this entry: ‘Sea bathing did something to brighten the existence of the troops on the left flank, with the added novelty that the bathing frequently was interrupted by shell fire.’ [WO 95/4321]
It is very unusual to find individual privates and noncommissioned officers mentioned, unless they had received an immediate gallantry award, and even then they might not appear. However, officers are generally mentioned, particularly those who were killed or wounded; less often individual officers are noted for the award of gallantry medals, when they were sent out to lead a patrol, or returned from leave.
As well as the diaries themselves, there may be accompanying appendices. These might consist of regimental orders, plans of attack, maps and other ephemeral information. Of particular interest are typewritten operational reports, which supplement entries in the war diaries themselves. Their survival is somewhat patchy.
It is important to remember that diaries were compiled by the battalion headquarters. Companies or sections may actually have been based some way away from the headquarters and their experiences might have been very different, but were not recorded. To an extent this is excusable in the chaos of battle. If you are lucky, you may be able to overcome this problem by using private papers, such as diaries, letters and memoirs.
War Diaries: Higher Echelons
In addition, there are war diaries for brigades, divisions and higher echelons. Inevitably, these contain less detail about day-to-day activities on the front, but more about the planning of battles and trench raids and meeting the logistical demands of tens of thousands of men. However, I have found copies of reports that are no longer with the battalion records. Certainly it is worth checking the brigade diaries, as these can give a more complete overview of what was actually going on in the trenches than a battalion war diary can.
In fact, for the higher echelons the term ‘war diary’ is rather a misnomer. The actual war diary is often no more than a page or two per month and may just record visits by senior officers and other inconsequential matters. The real meat lies in the accompanying appendices, which can include orders, reports, plans, maps and occasionally photographs. There is much material about the planning and preparation for battle.
There should be war diaries for each component part of divisions, corps and armies: that is, general staff (responsible for the planning and direction of the fighting), adjutant and quartermaster general (administration and supplying troops in the field), artillery, engineers and medical, as well as for those infantry and cavalry units attached to headquarters.
War Diaries: Their Location and Use
An almost complete set of diaries is at The National Archives in series WO 95 (with a few ‘confidential war diaries’ in WO 154, which generally mention individuals who appeared before courts martial). They are arranged by army, corps, division and brigade, although in practice this doesn’t matter because it is easy to pick up individual units through the Discovery catalogue. The diaries are arranged by month and consist of entries in pencil on loose sheets of paper. Appendices tend
to be typed or in the form of cyclostyle copies.
TNA has digitised the diaries for units that served only in France and Flanders. With the exception of the many ANZAC units and a few others, war diaries for units at Gallipoli still await digitisation. This means that you have to visit Kew to read the original diaries, which gives a curiously moving link with the men who compiled these diaries a hundred years ago.
Despite all the evidence to the contrary, TNA does not have a complete set, so if the unit diary appears to be missing it is worth approaching the regimental archives, as they often have duplicates. This is particularly the case with the Royal Artillery as TNA’s holdings are rather patchy.
A few regimental museums have transcribed their war diaries and put them online, generally free of charge. For example, the Wardrobe Museum in Salisbury, which is the regimental museum for the Berkshire and Wiltshire Regiments, has done so for its battalion war diaries for both world wars.
REGIMENTAL HISTORIES
Any regiment worth its name will have had several histories written about it. The earliest were published in the mid-nineteenth century and examples are still being written today. Most regiments and service corps have specific histories relating to the unit during the First World War. Inevitably they vary greatly in quality and interest. The best include interviews with former officers or copies of letters they wrote home describing incidents and battles, but most simply offer a workmanlike overview of what each battalion did, theatre by theatre and month by month. Although they are now rather dated, serious researchers should not ignore them.
