rob carman Posted 23 November , 2011 Share Posted 23 November , 2011 Good afternoon, When TA battalions went from 8 to 4 companies, was there any scheme by which companies were amalgamated (e.g. Old A + Old B = New C, etc). I am interested in the 1/4th Norfolks in particular, and would especially like to know into which double company the pre-war F (Wymondham) Coy was placed. For reference the pre-war 1/4th Norfolk Coys were: A Company at St. Giles, Norwich B Company at St. Giles, Norwich C Company at Long Stratton, detachments at Mulbarton and Saxlingham D Company at Diss, with detachments at Harleston and Tivetshall E Company at Attleborough, detachments at East Harling, Kenninghall, Banham, Old Buckenham and Watton F Company at Wymondham, detachments at Hethersett, Swardeston, Colney and Hingham G Company at Brandon, detachments at Thetford, Methwold and Feltwell H Company at Thorpe St. Andrew, detachments at Loddon, Blofield, Acle, Burgh St. Margarets, Framingham Pigot and Coltishall , I have so far tracked down one man Wymondham (a pre-war F Coy town) man who, at his death in April 1917, was in D Coy. Similarly a man from Thorpe (pre-war H Coy territory) was in C Coy by August 1914. Regards, Rob. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Stewart Posted 23 November , 2011 Share Posted 23 November , 2011 Don't know if this will help, but I found those Company amalgamation details for the Northumberlands in the War Diaries. Looking at yours they may have adopted a more simpler system i.e. 'A' & 'B' would become 'A' Coy, which would make sense. Then possibly 'C' & 'D' becoming 'B'; 'E' & 'F' becoming 'C' and 'G' & 'H' becoming 'D'. There again someone with better knowledge of the Norfolks may have the right answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 23 November , 2011 Share Posted 23 November , 2011 In early January 1915 (1/6th battalion) the 8 Coy organization changed to 4 Coys, G & H - No1, B & D - No2, C & E - No3, A & F - No4. from Wauchope's History of the Black Watch. In the book, the companies are usually referred to as, "A" Coy "B" coy etc. Am unsure if No1 coy equates to "A" coy, No2 to "B" coy etc? Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 23 November , 2011 Share Posted 23 November , 2011 " About this time platoon system inaugurated " New Year 1915 1/7th (City of London) battalion. "H" & "E"-A coy, "A" & "F"-B coy, "G" & "D"-C coy, and "C" & "B"-D coy C Digby Planck. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Riley Posted 23 November , 2011 Share Posted 23 November , 2011 Liverpool Scottish , as 1/10th (Scottish) Battalion , the King's (Liverpool Regiment) in 1914 (in the field with 3rd Division in Flanders) went A and B to No 1 Company, C and D to No 2 Company etc then quite soon after (probably because they got confused with platoon numbers though that is total supposition on my part) the numbered companies went sequentially to V, X, Y and Z. Whatever the reason for the change, the numbering phase was very short, a matter of weeks. Ian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Stewart Posted 24 November , 2011 Share Posted 24 November , 2011 To be honest I think it varied from unit to unit. In the cases I've seen where two companies share a Drill Hall, they seemed to amalgamate them as a single entity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dycer Posted 24 November , 2011 Share Posted 24 November , 2011 Although the 8th Royal Scots WW1 Battalion History records "Made into 4 Companies in February 1915". The Battalion War Diary gives no indication how this was achieved but equally the constitution of the pre-War Battalion had already been diluted as it had been made up to War strength by the addition,attachment,etc of one Company from the 6th Royal Scots and one from the 8th Highland Light Infantry. George Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geraint Posted 24 November , 2011 Share Posted 24 November , 2011 As with George above, the 4th RWF the 8 became four overnight! Kept on as A, B, C, and D coys though. The original 8 were based on geographical locations. The new four lost all attempts to keep the regional diversity! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Bloomfield Posted 26 November , 2011 Share Posted 26 November , 2011 Hi Rob I'm now living in Wymondham, any particular lad you have an interest in? Greg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SFayers Posted 27 November , 2011 Share Posted 27 November , 2011 For reference the 1/5th Suffolks (of course being in the same brigade as the 1/4th Norfolks) were reorganized in January 1915 as follows: A Company = former A and C Companies B Company = former B and D Companies C Company = former E and G Companies D Company = former F and H Companies The 1/4th Norfolks may have been similarly reorganized, but given the variation already stated for other units you could not be certain. All the best Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob carman Posted 28 November , 2011 Author Share Posted 28 November , 2011 Thank you all for your replies. It looks as if there may not be a single answer for all battalions. Between them Geraint and Steve cast significant doubt on the logical possibility that geographical neighbours would be in the same double company. The two 5th Suffolks Coys based in Bury St Edmunds in 1914 (E Coy, B St Eds and Barrow and F Coy, B St Eds and Lavenham) were not rolled into the same double company in 1915. Rob. Geoff - I do have a mystery man that I would like to know more about. I will contact you by email. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dycer Posted 28 November , 2011 Share Posted 28 November , 2011 Rob, You dismiss specialisms within a pre-War TF Battalion? e.g. my Forebears,were members of the Maxim Gun Section. Presumably they remained together, as a Section,on Company reorganisation. George Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob carman Posted 29 November , 2011 Author Share Posted 29 November , 2011 George, You may be giving me credit for considerations well beyond me. Until 20 minutes ago I had never given specialisms in the pre-war TA a second thought, dismissive or otherwise. I will now! I will need some input though as I don't get your original point. Could rephrase your post please so I can think about this with a fuller understanding. Rob. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SFayers Posted 29 November , 2011 Share Posted 29 November , 2011 Between them Geraint and Steve cast significant doubt on the logical possibility that geographical neighbours would be in the same double company. The two 5th Suffolks Coys based in Bury St Edmunds in 1914 (E Coy, B St Eds and Barrow and F Coy, B St Eds and Lavenham) were not rolled into the same double company in 1915. Yes, I'm afraid that is certainly the case for the 1/5th Suffolks. Based on my earlier post the following gives a breakdown of the geographical make-up of the other former TF companies: A Company = former A (Stowmarket & Eye) and C (Hadleigh & Bildeston) Companies B Company = former B (Beccles & Bungay) and D (Sudbury, Long Melford & Bures) Companies C Company = former E (Bury St Edmunds & Barrow) and G (Haverhill & Clare) Companies D Company = former F (Bury St Edmunds & Lavenham) and H (Newmarket & Mildenhall) Companies By January 1915 the geographical distribution of the original companies of the battalion probably wouldn't have been a consideration in the reorganization anyway; by this time the battalion as a whole had been mobilized and was stationed just outside Colchester. If geographic location had been a factor in the reorganization it may well have been more in relation to where the different companies were then billeted in Mile End. (Just a thought!) Cheers Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dycer Posted 30 November , 2011 Share Posted 30 November , 2011 Rob, My forebears,were pre-War Members of "A" Company 8th Royal Scots,according to their Camp Postcards,etc. The 8th Royal Scots, were pre-WW1, a geographically far flung Battalion but as members of the pre-WW1 "A" Company,my forebears were directed to/became proficient in the use of the Maxim Gun and as such went to War,in November 1914,or so the surviving photograph testifies. Whether the original Maxim Gun Section was made up, purely from men of "A" Company 8th Royal Scots(which was the "senior" Company),I do not know. But as the "senior" TA Company signaller i.e the Corporal, of a geographically far-flung Battalion, I first had loyalty to my Company i.e. not allow Company Comms to go down but it would have mattered little to me,with hindsight, if the Battalion Signalling Officer had "directed" me to another Company to maintain Battalion communications,because that was my training. Whether specialist Sections, of a pre-War TF Battalion,e.g, the Maxim Gun Section ,were formed from members of "A" Company i.e.where the Colonel was based, I do not have a clue. But it would appear,from the 8th Royal Scots War Diary,that the Machine Gun Section was kept intact,subject to casualties, following Company reorganization,in February 1915. George Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob carman Posted 30 November , 2011 Author Share Posted 30 November , 2011 George, Thanks I see what you are getting at now for the specialists. Rob. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geraint Posted 30 November , 2011 Share Posted 30 November , 2011 The only reason for the pre-war geographical organisation for the companies was because they trained together in the same town or village drill hall. Denbighshire being a mix of north east Wrexham Ruabon urban/colliery men, and the rest being widespread cattle and sheep farmers, saw 6 colliery companies and 2 rural companies. Once the battalion was overseas on 5th Nov 1914 there was no real need for the geographical divisions to exist. There's another thread today on specialisation - which in my case (4th RWF) was not based on specific companies but on a cross-battalion criteria. 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