Fromelles/Fleurbaix

[Andrew P]

The 19th of July 1916 was one of the most costliest days of WW1 for Australian troops in France. It was the Battle of Fromelles. The 5th Australian Division was decimated.

Remembering those from my local area who gave their lives in this attack.

Pte Richard David Davies - 53rd Battalion

Pte John James Griffin - 32nd Battalion

Pte James Wesley Hutchinson - 32nd Battalion

Pte Richard Liddle - 32nd Battalion

Pte Thomas Clift Cartwright - 32nd Battalion

Pte Percy John Greenwood - 32nd Battalion

Cpl Ernest Hewitt Jarman - 32nd Battalion

Sgt Frederick Joscelyn Colless - 32nd Battalion

Capt Gordon Kingsly Thompson - Field Artillery Bde

The majority were never knowingly buried and are commemorated at VC Corner Cemetery.

[Guest dinkidi]

Andrew

Please don't use the word decimated when discussing Fromelles. It suggests a casualty rate of 10%, which drastically understates the actual AIF loss.

Cheers

Pat

Edited 19 July , 2004 by dinkidi

[Annette Burgoyne]

I'll stop to remember the men of both the 5th Australian Division and 61st British Division who lost their lives on this day.

Annette

[Andrew P]

Thanks Annette.

Pat

I think decimates is a good enough description and conveys the loss of life in the attack. My aim is to remember those soldiers killed not to be pedantic over words used.

Regards

Andrew

[Guest dinkidi]

Andrew

You are of course entitled to use any words you please. You are, however, somewhat of an official Historian, and that is the very reason I tendered my suggestion. For the record, I restate my objection to the use of the word "Decimated" which has a finite definition almost opposite to the true picture. The survival rate was closer to the stipulated ten percent, than was the casualty rate.

I would like to think that nothing I have written could be interpreted as being disrespectful or dismissive of any soldiers' participation.

ooRoo

Pat

[Andrew P]

Hi Pat

Objection noted. To me in current terminology Decimate means 'to destroy a large proportion of' which is what happened at Fromelles.

According to the Oxford Australian dictionary this is acceptable as is your view of it from the old Romanic version.

We will just have to differ on this one.

Cheers

Andrew

[Guest dinkidi]

Andrew, I was just trying

Uh oh! Missus walks in and sez "Very trying"

OK, as you suggest, Let's agree to differ

Cheerio!

Pat

[Annie]

Fromelles, this afternoon

[paul guthrie]

I have been to VC Corner Cemetery, nice that there is a riding school adjacent with happy children. The lack of headstones makes a statement.

In a terrific book, Sardinian Brigade, there is a real threat of decimation - the old meaning - by Italian general. The book is fiction but thinly disguised histroy type fiction.

[Tim Birch]

I haven't been to Fromelles for a couple of years now, but remember that the action was refered to as The Attack on Fromelles on the placque at the Memorial. In some recent literature it seems to have been upgraded to the Battle of Fromelles. Is there a difference?

To the Australians who suffered and died the difference is somewhat academic, but I think the description given to the action may be very telling. I have never read any plausable official expanation given for this action.

One reason given was that it was an attempt to draw German forces away from the fighting further south on the Somme. That certainly provided the planners with a hollow justification for the disaster after the event but, a bit like Gommecourt on July 1, it did not influence the Somme fighting but cost a dispraportionate number of lives. The other stated reason seems to have been an attempt to capture the dominant heights of the Fromelles-Aubers Ridge, but if that was the reason you have only got to walk the ground today and see the sheer strength of the German fortifications and pillboxes, and the way in which they dominate the British positions to realise that an frontal attack on this comparatively small scale was doomed from the outset.

The fact that until recently the action was known as The Attack on Fromelles suggests that was all it was. The planning behind it was woolly, there seemed to be no contingeny to exploit a success or to hold the ridge. Capturing Fromelles Village in isolation from the Ridge would have not have resulted in a tennable gain because the village itself is still below the escarpment.

If the true intention had been to capture and hold the Aubers Ridge, given the strength of the defences I would have expected to have seen a much larger number of troops to have been involved (at least an Army)on a much longer frontage (from Neuve Chappelle to le Maisinil).

Even then the wisdom of a frontal attack against such a domineering escarpment which had previously resulted in a bloody repulse at Aubers is questionable. The topograhy and strength of the German defences on the Aubers Ridge were very similar if not stronger than those at Vimy Ridge, although in this case the British were attacking up the steep escarpment with the German rear being on gently sloping ground favouring resupply - Vimy is the opposite. The British positions were definitely inferior to those at Vimy, and the Germans had a commanding view over them, which precluded any secret build up of forces.

Tim

[Robert Dunlop]

One reason given was that it was an attempt to draw German forces away from the fighting further south on the Somme.

Tim

Just a very minor point, which in no way detracts from your comments. The rationale was to prevent German troops from leaving the Fromelles area to go to the Somme.

Robert

[Guest dinkidi]

G'day Annie

Thanks for the photo.

Great to see the new floral tributes.

At the risk of stirring Garth, and maybe a few others, might I quote Bean {Anzac to Amiens}.

"Within a few hours of its delivery, the infantry attack at Fromelles had achieved precisely the opposite effect to that intended. An artillery demonstration, as suggested by Haig's staff, might have avoided all this loss and have lead the Germans to apprehend that a bigger attack was being prepared. But now they knew the operation to be a mere feint, and if they had previously any doubts as to the wisdom of 'milking' that front for reserves for the Somme, the fight had actually dispelled those doubts "

my italics

ooRoo

Pat

[Guest dinkidi]

I haven't been to Fromelles for a couple of years now, but remember that the action was refered to as The Attack on Fromelles on the placque at the Memorial. In some recent literature it seems to have been upgraded to the Battle of Fromelles. Is there a difference?

To the Australians who suffered and died the difference is somewhat academic, but I think the description given to the action may be very telling. I have never read any plausable official expanation given for this action.

G'day Tim.

This may also be a bit academic, but here are the Official Communiques :-

British, July 20

Yesterday evening, south of Armentiers, we carried out some important raids on a front of two miles in which Australian troops took part. About 140 German prisoners were captured.

German, July 21

TheEnglish attack in the region of Fromelles on wednesday was carried out ... by two strong Divisions. The Brave Bavarian Division, against whose front the attack was made, counted in front of them more than 2000 enemy corpses. We have brought in so far 481 prisoners, including 10 Officers, together with 16 machine guns.

Strangely enough, the Germans seemed the only ones prepared to use the word Fromelles, the Brits were very vague, and the AIF tended to call it Flerbaix until such time as it was officially "designated".

ooRoo

Pat

From awm.gov.au site you can browse or download aprox 120 pages of The Official History account of the "Battle". It was written soon after the War and uses info taken from German records. A very good summary is given in 20 pages of Bean's "Anzac to Amiens". A relatively recent work "Don't forget me, Cobber" not only tells the story, but draws some comparisons between Bean's writings and those of Ellis who was a 5th Div AIF Officer who wrote a Divisional History in the early 1920's. For what its worth, I have read only the "Anzac to Amiens" account, mainly because the detail is so depressing.

The AWM Collection also has pictures, including aerial shots in which the troops can be seen attacking.

As a stand alone incident, it may seem strange why such a horrendous Battle could almost disappear from the Australian conciousness. For example, the 5th Division who was the sole Australian participant, chose Polygon Wood for its Memorial, yet all 5 Divisions saw action there. Why not Fromelles? Perhaps everyone wanted to forget that one.

Although it was the first actual Battle of the AIF in Europe, and the casualties were almost numbing, the sheer losses of Poziers & Mouquet Farm were soon to wipe out most previous opinions of the horrors of war.

Edited 22 July , 2004 by dinkidi

[Andrew P]

A soldier called Ern Evans whose diary I have and who was at Gallipoli with the 2nd Australian Stationary Hospital transferred to the artillery after the evacuation and was with the 24th FAB at Fromelles. Unfortunately there was not much written for the 19th but on the 20th was the following.

"All day of the 20th wounded were being cleared away as fast as possible. I having nothing to do went to Dead Dog Avenue and assisted in evacuating the wounded. The night was very quiet on both sides and was mostly spent in bringing in men from No Mans Land."

Regards

Andrew

[Annette Burgoyne]

Hi Andrew

Not sure if you'll be interested in this -The 6/K.S.L.I. were on the left of of the 5th Australian Division, and help with supporting fire on the 19th, they also help bring out the Auussie wounded and were thank by the G.O.C. of the 5th Australian Division.

Annette

[Guest dinkidi]

G'day

Perhaps one of the strangest things about this battle is that more 'historical & personal' attention seems to have focused on the retreival of the wounded, than on the actual attack. Prior to then "Cobber" was almost identical to "Mate', from then on it assumes an almost mystical significance.

I personally cannot get my mind around what happenned within that very small area. For instance on 21 July, the Germans report that SO FAR they have brought in 481 prisoners. There are the accounts of the rescues that lead to the creation of the Cobbers Statue, stories of German soldiers actually delivering AIF wounded to their lines, and others of allowing decoys to trap wouldbe rescuers. The majority of the dead were apparently not recovered, yet all this happenned in full view of both lines. Admittedly most success was achieved at night. But the Germans must have known what was going on, and maybe some or most of them reckoned "enough is enough"

ooRoo

Pat

[Andrew P]

Thanks for that Annette. The recovery of the wounded certainly seems like a large effort as I think the Kiwis in the line nearby also helped out.

Cheers

Andrew

[Annette Burgoyne]

Hi Pat

Looking at a trench map of the area, the front lines look close to each another, so the Germans must have known what was going on but they must like you say reckoned "enough is enough, and let the wounded be brought in, evan in the midst of madness humanity can show through.

Annette

[Robert Dunlop]

I imagine it is much like the situation when a baby cries unconsolably. The cries of adults who are wounded have the same effect, wearing away all but the most hardened of hearts. I have never experienced this in battle situations but as a medical doctor, I have come across similar, particularly with multiple trauma victims.

Robert

[Guest dinkidi]

Annette, Doc.,

Your observations on the retention of some "humanity" prompted a re-read of Bean's "Anzac to Amiens".

This may be of interest :- "Very many wounded lay in no-man's-land, especially opposite the Sugar Loaf. Here an Australian batman, searching for his dead officer right up to the German wire, was challenged by a Bavarian officer, whose humanity now made possible an informal truce to which many Australians owe their lives" [see offficial history Vol III p439 on line at AWM]

I don't mind admitting that a visit to Fromelles really broke me up. It had not been planned and I had not boned up on details etc. Our tour guide made a detour on the way home, and it may have been the late afternoon shadows, but I could just not handle it. Anzac Cove was "something" but Fromelles really "something else", and I can't explain why.

ooRoo

Pat

[Tim Birch]

I imagine it is much like the situation when a baby cries unconsolably.  The cries of adults who are wounded have the same effect, wearing away all but the most hardened of hearts.  I have never experienced this in battle situations but as a medical doctor, I have come across similar, particularly with multiple trauma victims.

Robert

Robert

Not a lot has been written about the cries of the wounded, but it must have been awful. One account was written (I am desperately trying to remember where I read it!) about the night of July 1st 1916 on the Somme when the shooting and gunfire died down and no-man's land became alive with the cries and screams of the wounded, up to 40,000 of them. The writer likened the sound to that of wet fingernails being pulled down a giant sheet of glass. It must have been heart rending.

Some men lay out there for days, slowly dying and tortured by thirst, because it was too dangerous to attempt to reach them. This situation had been brought about in some sectors because the Germans had at first taken a lenient attitude towards those trying to crawl back to the British lines, but when some of the less badly wounded started to snipe at them from no-man's land they became infuriated, and thereafter gave no quarter.

One wonders how many of the 17,000 dead of that terrible day might have survived had a truce been called to allow stretcher bearers to bring them in?

The Germans appear to have adopted a more humane attitude after Fromelles.

Tim

[Guest dinkidi]

The Germans appear to have adopted a more humane attitude after Fromelles.

Tim

Tim

Whilst there was that truce, and despite observations as to 'enough is enough' I doubt that anyone, from any country, who actually went out to collect the wounded at Fromelles, felt that his safety was guaranteed.

I know very liitle detail of July 1 operations, or of non-australian battles, but have formed the opinion that Fromelles is remembered as much for the bravery and dedication displayed during the aftermath, than for the attack itself. Its a bit hard to put it in words.

All the best,

Pat

Funny how things interlock. Desmond mentioned General M'Cay as 1 of his Antrim men. On 'looking him up' it turns out he was in charge of the 5th AIF Divn at Fromelles and was 'eternally damned' because of his refusal to accept a formal truce on that day.

[Guest dinkidi]

G'day.

Am getting more confused!

From 'Australians at War, Western Front 1916-17" John Laffin.

Standing orders...forbade the rescue of wounded men in the open in case yet other men were killed. The Australians would not accept that order. Major Murdoch, 29Bn, with 1 soldier fashioned a Red Cross Flag and crossed no-mans land distributing many water bottles on the way. At the enemy wire Murdoch asked a Bavarian lieutenant for a truce to collect wounded and offered himself as a hostage until the collection finished.

The offer was accepted, the promise kept, but hearing of the unofficial truce Major-General J W McCay, the divisional commander, ordered it to be cancelled and stretcher-bearers were stopped from going out. The truce ended but the work of rescue did not. For another three days and nights small groups of Australians, sometimes one man alone, brought in wounded.

...

More than 300 men who would certainly have perished were rescued. Other wounde, unable to get back to the Australian lines could be seen moving for days. One man in particular was a harrowing sight. Apparently blinded and shocked by a head wound he kept staggering in circles, falling and lurching on again. Because the truce had ended, the Germans neither rescued these suffering men or allowed the Australians to do so, though some tried. The Germans killed some of the wounded, including the blinded man. A few Australians thought that the enemy did this out of mercy.*

[* other accounts suggest this man was used to lure would be rescuers - no further comment.. PG]

[Annette Burgoyne]

Make ya wonder what sort of man Major-General J W McCay was

Annette

[Guest dinkidi]

Annette

McCay rates a mention in Desmonds Sgt Kerr AIF thread.[ most recent posts]

Eric Bogle certainly didn't write any songs about him, and if Albert Jacka VC would publicly refuse to shake his hand, Well!

Would hate to be seen defending Generals, but Laffin seems to think he was not the real bogeyman. it may have been the buck stops where argument with Haking & Haig lurking in the background. [my interpretation, not Laffin's]

ooRoo

Pat