Turkish OOB's

[Nick]

Dear all,

Can anybody suggest where I might be able to locate detailed Turkish Orders of Battle for either the actions El Mughar, Huj or other engagements of that time?

By detailed I mean to the "what regiments" level, with strengths and commanders if possible.

Most of the sources I have accessed are good at giving the British/commonwealth detail, but not so for the Turks.

Hoping you can help,

Nick

[ozgur]

Nick,

Can you be more specific on this. Time period, front etc. I can look at my books but I need more specific info to look at.

Ozgur

[Nick]

Ozgur,

Thanks for the note. I guess that to be specific I am asking two questions:

The first is a very specific one: When the British 155th Infantry Brigade and a mounted cavalry brigade attacked Turkish infantry and Austrian artillery at El Mughar in 1918 what Turkish regiments were holding the villages and the ridge?

The same question applies to the actions at Huj when Yeomanry squadrons again charged defended positions.

A more general question would be where can I obtain detailed OOB's for the main Turkish Corps at this time. "this time" is a broad window - what I mean is at anytime between March 1917 and September 1918. As I know nothing the anything would be a start!

Anything you can offer would be gratefully accepted.

Thanks

Nick

[ozgur]

Nick,

El Magar (El Mughar) village and the ridge was defended by 21st Regt from the 7th Division. 7th Div was part of the 22nd Corps under the 8th Army. The date of the operation was 13rd Nov 1917.

7th Div was holding the line between Zerruka and El Magar. While 134th Regt was holding Zerruka (right flank of the defenses) 21st Regt was holding the left including El Magar Ridge. the 20th Regt was in Reserve (later ordered to reinforce El Magar). main force facing the british assault at El Magar was the 3rd Battalion and the MG company of the 21st Regt.

strength of the 7th Div during the battle of El Maghar: 1260 rifles, 56 Machineguns, 13 pieces of artillery.

I couldnt find any detailed info on the Turkish forces at Huj. I drew a map showing the battle of El Maghar.

The OOB of the 22nd Corps in October 1917:

53rd Div:

161st Regt (3 Bn , 1 MG co)

74th regt

163rd regt

Cavalry Co

Artillery Regt

Sapper Co

Signal Platoon

7th Div:

20th Regt

21st Regt

134th Regt

Cavalry Co

Artillery Regt

Sapper Co

Signal Platoon

3rd Div:

31st Regt

32nd regt

138th Regt

Cavalry Co

Artillery Regt

Sapper Co

Signal Pl

Corps Troops:

Field Howitzer batteries (5 batteries)

150mm Howitzer Bn

Demolition Troops

Engineer Bn

Signal Co

regards

Ozgur

[Guest richpics5174]

Quick query Ozgur,

This isn't the same 7th Division as fought at Gallipoli is it? But if it is, would it have had this same organization?

Thanks,

Richard Picton

[ozgur]

Richard,

as far as I remember it is the same division fought at Gallipoli. It was a very experienced division and British accounts note the high fighting quality of the unit especially in terms of fast reaction and artillery coordination.

I am not sure if it had the same organization. there is 2 years of interval and there are many regiment coming and going in that time period.

Best

Ozgur

[Nick]

Ozgur,

Many thanks for your excellent and rapid reply. The strength you provide for the 7th Division is interesting. The 1260 rifles split across three regiments of the 7th Div suggests regimental strengths of little more than 400 men - given an equal split which I know wouldn't have been the case. This suggests that regiments were down to the equivalent of battalion strengths by this time, with battalions (I assume all regiments had three battalions?) having the strength of weak companies. I'd be interested to know your thoughts. The strength in machine guns though is quite clear.

I have a sketch of the El Mughar battlefield from the Wavell book "Campaigns in Palestine" to which your sketch adds good detail. Can I ask where you get your data and is it a source that I could obtain from somewhere (somehow I suspect it is not in English...)?

Can I also ask who commanded the 7th Division at El Mughar?

Sorry for all the questions, but I am hungry for information!

Kind regards

Nick

[ozgur]

My pleasure Nick,

Yes. 7th Division had been fighting since the battle of Beersheba. Its strength wa seriously depleted. However as you noticed it has a strong machinegun strength. Batle reports show that despite being seriously outnumbered, careful deployment of machine guns and efficient coordination of artilery spotters they were able to stop many british cavalry charges.

Turks realized that British troops were using dry flood gullies to approach Turkish defenses they deployed machine gun troops on dominant highs and inflict serious losses to the troops that brokethrough main defense line.

7th Division was commanded by Yarbay (lt colonel) Kazım. Divisional chief of staff was Binbaşı (Major) Fikri.

the book is: Birinci Dünya Harbinde Türk harbi (The Turkish war in the ww1): Sina- Filistin cephesi (Sinai- Palestine front) . IV Vol 2nd Part, Turkish Chief of Staff Press. 1986

Yes it is in Turkish

Ozgur

[Nick]

That's interesting Ozgur. Thanks

It's safe to say that speaking Turkish is not one of my skills, I am ashamed to say. In fact, there are some who would question if I can speak English.

I'm curious, do you know what the main form of battlefield communication was for the Turkish forward observers? Are we talking field telephones, heliographs, flags or what? Have you any idea?

Also, I'd love to know OOB's for other Turkish Corps at this time - it's a bit cheeky but I wonder if you might be persuaded to paste up some more.

Ever grateful

Nick

[Guest richpics5174]

While we're on the subject of Turkish OOBs would it be safe to say that, at least in the early period, most of the Turkish divisions were formed of sequential regiments? Like the 9th would have 25th to 27th Alay, therefore the 8th would have 22nd to 24th Alay, the 7th would have 19th to 21st Alay, etc.? I've been looking around for the 7th and 5th at Bulair but all the references to them usually just list individual regiments.

Just wondering,

Richard

[ozgur]

Yes I can speak Turkish but it is unintentional. My mother taught me when I was a little kid.

Frankly I am not sure their artillery communication methods. Field telephones were used but as far as I know most of the divisional communication was done by dispatch riders. In the Greco-Turkish War after ww1 established communication was provided by telephones. However during the operation when established communication is difficult (especially for cavalry division) they relied on dispacth riders.

Here is the OOB of the "Yıldırım Army Group" during the Battle of Nablus (19 September 1918):

Yıldırım Army Group:

8th Army:

22nd Corps:

20th Div

7th Div

Left Wing Group:

16th Div

19th Div

German Expeditionary Group

"Kafkas" Group

7th Army:

3rd Corps:

1st Div

11th Div

20th Corps:

26th Div

53th Div

4th Army:

8th Corps:

48th Div

Mürettep Div

Seria Group:

24th Div

3rd Cavalry Div

2nd Corps:

62nd Div

[Nick]

25th to 27th Alay

Forgive the ignorance. What does Alay mean....is it Regiment?

[ozgur]

Alay means regiment.

I am copy pasting this from another post:

Ordu = Army

Kolordu = Corps

Tümen = Division

Alay = Regiment

Tabur = Battalion

Bölük = Company

Müfreze = Platoon

Manga = Squad

[Nick]

Thanks Ozgur,

funnily enough I saw the other post almost immediately after I posted my earlier one.

Regards to Yilderim - were the German troops actually engaged during 1918? My reading suggests they never actually made it to the front in time to have any impact - would you have a view on that?

Also - what was in the Mürettep Div ? Was it Infantry?

Nick

[ozgur]

Yes they were called German Asian detachment. They were part of the left group under colonel Oppen.

Mürettep means forged or sorted in Old Turkish. as far as I know it was a division formed from the remnants of other disbanded units. Generally such divisions were elite forces since their personal was selected from their previous units.

a small note: Mustafa Kemal's 57th (19th Div) Regiment counter attacked Anzac Bridgehead in Gallipoli was a regiment consisting of best battalions handpicked from other divisions. Another factor Kemal relied on it was that the entire regiment cadre was anatolian Turks while other regiments of the division comsisted of Arabs.

Ozgur

[Nick]

I know the Germans and Austrians provided machine gun and artillery units in this theatre - German Asian detachment under Oppen for instance - but did any of the ordinary infantry units actually see any action during the campaign or were they behind the frontline? I seem to think there were some but I can't find any direct evidence.

If so, were they good quality?

[jwsleser]

I would like to add a few points and answer some questions.

Mürettep divisions were not usually created from disbanded units. The Ottomans learned during the Balkan War that reserve units lacked battlefield staying power. Because the Ottoman army was unable to properly equip of train reserve units, they adopted a cadre system where a new formation was created using veteran units and new recruits. It was very rare for any new unit raised during the war to be formed without such a cadre. Mürettep divisions generally reflected an expansion in the army and used at least one experienced regiment.

Kemal's 19th Division at Gallipoli is such an example. After the Balkan War, many of the existing divisions were disbanded. Rather than renumbering the remaining units, the Ottomans began to raise new units and allocating them the vacant divisional and regimental numbers. By the time of the Ottoman mobilization in September 1914, most of the divisions had been reestablished (up to the 40th Division). The 19th and 20th were still vacant. The 19th was raised using two regiments from other divisions (the 72nd from the 24th Division and the 77th from the 26th Division). The 57th was a vacant regimental number and was raised using new conscripts. These three regiments exchanged companies, insuring that each regiment had some experienced soldiers.

This is the reason regimental assignments changed during the war. While the design was to have sequentially numbered regiments in each division, this use of cadre units broke the system down. By mid-war, it was unusual to find a division with all its pre-war regiments. Once a Mürettep division had reached a level of sustainability, it was added to divisional list. If it was purely a temporary formation, it was quickly disbanded (usually within a few months of creation). This is not to say that Mürettep divisions were never formed from disbanded units, but disbanded units were almost exclusively used to strengthen other existing units.

Jeff

[Guest Eugen Pinak]

Tümen = Division

It's "Turkish" name. "Ottoman" division was called Firka. Eg. "Piade firka" = Infantry division.

BTW, there was also Liva = Brigade.

Best regards,

Eugen Pinak

[jwsleser]

Eugen

Interesting thought on the names. I checked my old edition of Redhouse’s dictionary. This edition has the Ottoman and the Turkish spellings and definitions. What I did find was firka and liva were Arabic words, while tümen was Persian. Tügay is a new word (neologism-how new I don’t know). Given that Atatürk’s changes to the Turkish language was to provide an easy-to-learn alphabet and standardized spellings, I would be surprised to hear that common terms were changed. However, that is not to say that it didn’t change. The only way to know is to read period Ottoman and see which words were used. I don’t read Ottoman, so I am unable to check. I would be interest to know which terms were correct for the period. On the other hand, given most people’s knowledge of the Ottoman military in WWI is based on modern Turkish works, using correct but now outdated terms might hinder communication.

Jeff

[Guest Eugen Pinak]

Jeff

Firka and Liva is 100% sure. Check any British intelligence handbook (or Russian, if you can read it .

The reason they were changed is probably they were too connected to "Osman" past - after all, they were not only formation names, but also names of the fiefs in old Ottoman Empire (at least for Liva).

Of course, modern Turkish works using modern Turkish language.

BTW, I'm also unsure for Platoon and Squad names - but I've to check my sources.

Best regards,

Eugen Pinak

[jwsleser]

Eugen

Great idea. I checked both the 1916 and the 1892 editions of the British handbook (sorry, don't read Russian but two of my team members do read the language). The 1916 edition has firka and liva. The 1892 doesn’t provide these words in the military terms list (don’t ask me why, but they aren’t there). It does have liva as major (brigadier) general (yes, the book has both ranks). Infantry in the 1892 is spelled piyadé, but in the 1916 is spelled piada.

I believe you are correct in that the Turks change the terms to disassociate from the old Ottoman regime. I feel these changes were limited to ranks and the formations associated with those ranks. Kolordu, Tabrur, alyi, and buluk (for example) stay relatively the same (give the changes to the language in the 1920’s).

Great information! Thanks!

Jeff