Jump to content
Free downloads from TNA ×
The Great War (1914-1918) Forum

Remembered Today:

Yeomanry troops


jscott

Recommended Posts

Hi all

I was wondering whether Yoemanry territorial troops in WW1 were armed with bayonet or sword? Presumably those who were fighting in France or Gallipoli would have used bayonets, but what about those who were serving in Palestine etc (and were involved in cavalry style assaults up till 1917 or so)? I would imagine it would depend on whether they remained mounted (which I presume was unusual) or dismounted.

Any thoughts would be much appreciated.

Thanks, J

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jonathan, I don't believe the Yeomanry of that period were ever classified as traditional cavalry. Since the Boer War always 'Mounted Infantry'.

So that would mean they would be armed with the SMLE rifle and bayonet, similar to the Australian Light Horse, both just Infantry on horseback.

Cheers, S>S

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I think of it, given they were territorials, presumably they may also have been issued with MLEs/CLLEs (and P1888 bayonets) during the early part of the war; and indeed retained these until 1917 or so in Paelstine etc?

Cheers, J

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Yeomanry could be issued with either swords or SMLEs and bayonets or both depending on the neccessity of the role as I belive the Cavalry could [Edit: the Cavalry Training Manual 1912 has a large section on dismounted action]. My understanding is that the Yeomanry, Mounted Rifles and the Cavalry could all expect to be used in the infantry role if required [Edit: the Cavalry Training Manual and the Yeomanry and Mounted Rifles Manual both confirm this] The Life Guards for example fought in the trenches as infantry at a very early stage in the War. The 2nd Mouted Div Yeomanry regiments had swords when in Egypt which were handed in with their saddlery when they went to Gallipoli dismounted and handed back when they returned. Incidentally they were also issued with Infantry webbing for that phase of the War. The Yeomanry also had MG sections with (initially) two maxims (later Vickers) and later still the Hotchkiss was issued (although technically not an MG I am told)

The pre-war Yeomanry trained to the Yeomanry and Mounted Rifles Training Manual (my copy is 1912).[Edit this was not issued until early 1913 and prior to this the Yeomanry didn't have their own training manual which raised many questions in Parliament and with the Army Council. The Yeomanry and Mounted Rifles Training Manual was in two parts with a note that Part III dealing with the training instructions for mounted combat was to be issued at a later date as a separate volume. This never happened as the war started before it was completed.] In Sep 1914 the Yeomanry had to abandon this for the Cavalry Training Manual [Edit: also a 1912 publication following the 1907 predecessor]. There are many recordings of this in the diaries and the initial chaos it caused. In the end, the simpler Cavalry drill was welcomed. Also it is worth noting that the Yeomanry changed from a 4 Squadron formation to a 3 Squadron formation on mobilisation which also casued some grief for the Squadron(s) that were broken up.

The Queen's Own Oxfordshire Hussars (Yeomanry) was the first Yeomanry regiment to deploy overseas [Edit the first to arrive overseas. The Westminster Dragoons and the Herts Yeomanry departed earlier for Egypt but arrived after the QOOH landed on the continent] (thanks to Churchill - he was once a QOOH) and I am sure they went equipped as per a Cavalry regiment of the line. The whole division was certainly equipped with swords when this happened and they were training in Berkshire at Churn en masse. The King inspected the whole Div in Oct 1914 if I recall correctly - there are some photos of this of the Div equipped in the Cavalry role - possibly the largest mounted parade on British soil. Similarly the Essex Yeomanry which fought alongside the 10th Royal Hussars (PWO) were equipped as Cavalry. I am travelling and not near my library but can confirm this if needed on my return

The War diaries in Gallipoli record the date when a longer bayonet was issued which triggered rumours of another Offensive phase. If memory serves this was in late Sep 1915 but might have more to do with available supplies for Gallipoli rather than a Yeomanry wide change.

I am fairly sure the mounted Yeomanry in Egypt and Palestine always had swords as well as SMLEs, but many Yeomanry Regiments were converted to the Infantry role to for the formation of the 74th (Yeomanry) Div ...all becoming battalions of existing Line Infantry Regiments but still with (Yeomanry) in their titles. Some retained their badges and insignia. Other Yeomanry regiments remained in the mounted role throughout. The Yeomanry in Macedonia remained mounted and issued with swords throughout the whole War

So in answer to your question, it really depended on the role. There are many photos of the Yeomanry in theatre with swords in 1914 and beyond.

MG

Edited for typos. Any mistakes are mine.

Edit: due to the various interruptions in role the QOOH was the only Yeomanry regiment to serve continuously as Cavalry throughout the war. A number of others spent a small part dismounted in Gallipoli but remained as cavalry for the vast majority of the War.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Martin, thanks very much for the very comprehensive response, it is extremely helpful.

As an aside, my wife's great grandfather was in the QOOH but left in 1912 from memory. Her grandfather still has a box full of interesting bits and pieces (photos, invoices, uniform lists etc) from his fathers time in the regiment.

Thanks, J

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Two small pieces of info in reference to the Oxfordshire Hussars: 1) "On 15th October (1914) the regiment marched out of the town (Dunkirk) with drawn swords". 2) At St. Omer (on or about 17th October 1914) "our eqipment was completed by the issue of bayonets". A footnote also says that bayonets were first issued to the Regular cavalry about the time of the battle of the Aisne.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The following is an extract from Major Oskar TEICHMAN'S article; The Yeomanry at Huj 8th November 1917; in the Cavalry Journal Vol.XXV1. No. 102, October 1936, page 515:

'This was the first time the sword had been used in the Palestine Campaign; but within a few days it was to prove its worth again at Mughar, and Abu Shusheh. During Sir Archibald MURRAY'S command, G.H.Q. had contemplated withdrawing swords from all Yeomanry Regiments in Palestine to lighten the burden of their horses, on the ground that the arme blanche was little likely ever to be used.

Sir Edmund ALLENBY was, of course, a firm believer in the value of the modern cavalry weapon, and armed the 3rd and 4th Australian Light Horse Brigades with it in the following year.'

For further reading see;The Diary of a Yeomanry M.O.by Captain O. TEICHMAN, D.S.O., M.C, first published in 1920. His description of the charge at Huj 8th November 1917 is well worth reading, as are other published accounts including that in The Warwickshire Yeomanry in the Great War by ADDERLEY (1922.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well worth having: it has some interesting observations on the role and training of the pre-war Yeoman.

Of course, you can sometimes track down an original copy for about £100.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The East Riding Yeomanry in Palestine certainly had swords - numerous photos in our collections and others I've copied from private sources.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

HERE is a nice photo from the Shropshire Regimental Museum showing a Yeomanry trooper decked out as Mounted Infantry, said to be 1914.

It is interesting to see the various combinations of weaponry from these period photos. In this case it is SMLE rifle together with P1903 bayonet.

Cheers, S>S

post-52604-0-73508100-1376170022_thumb.j

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And another photo HERE showing a Yeomanry trooper with sword, and with Lee Enfield rifle secured in the leather gun-bucket, reportedly in 1916.

Cheers, S>S

post-52604-0-05965000-1376171292_thumb.j

Link to comment
Share on other sites

HERE is a nice photo from the Shropshire Regimental Museum showing a Yeomanry trooper decked out as Mounted Infantry, said to be 1914.

It is interesting to see the various combinations of weaponry from these period photos. In this case it is SMLE rifle together with P1903 bayonet.

Cheers, S>S

post-52604-0-73508100-1376170022_thumb.j

I have a similar picture - note how the rifle is slung (from muzzle - where piling swivel would usually be - to barrel band (usually the fore most attachment point). I believe this is to allow the sling to go around the shoulder whilst the butt of the rifle stood vertically in a leather "cup" on the right side of the rider. (note on your second picture the rifle is slung from the butt) Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if the rider in your first picture was nick-named 'Shorty'? Allowing extra height for the angulation of his thigh he appears to be nowhere near as tall as his horse's withers! Even if the horse was 16 hands that would put him at about 5feet tall only.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand in the British army at the time, that only Regular army units could be described as 'Cavalry', so Yeomanry being Territorials were not 'Cavalry'.

It's an interesting case of terminology, so if they were not 'Cavalry' then what were they.? Another description that perhaps could be used is 'Mounted Rifles'.

I know that some of the "premier" Yeomanry units were in fact incorporated into the Line Cavalry Brigades, where in all respects they then became 'Cavalry'.

And the concept of 'Mounted Rifles' was still around in 1914 with the Colonial horse units (ALH/NZMR) serving in this role. They all carried the SMLE rifle etc.

I guess it comes down to how they were trained, which doctrines they followed.? In practice mounted units proved to be versatile & adaptable to many roles.

Cheers, S>S

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand in the British army at the time, that only Regular army units could be described as 'Cavalry', so Yeomanry being Territorials were not 'Cavalry'.

It's an interesting case of terminology, so if they were not 'Cavalry' then what were they.? Another description that perhaps could be used is 'Mounted Rifles'.

I know that some of the "premier" Yeomanry units were in fact incorporated into the Line Cavalry Brigades, where in all respects they then became 'Cavalry'.

Cheers, S>S

I am not sure that I would agree. Certaininly from 1908 onwards after the formation of the Teritorial Force, the Yeomanry were considered as the Cavalry arm of the TF. Nearly all the fifty-five Yeomanry regiments were nominally classified as either Dragoons, Lancers or Hussars and their full-dress uniforms reflected this. Most Yeomanry regiments had histories that extended way back before the Boer War. The permanent staff of the Yeomanry came from the Cavalry. For example every Adjutant in the twelve regiments of the 2nd Mounted Div (Yeomanry) came from line Cavalry regiments, and the COs all had regular service in the line Cavalry. The adoption of the 1912 Cavalry Training Manual in Sep 1914 effectively confirmed the role of the Yeomanry as Cavalry. This coincided with members of the TF formally being asked to take the Overseas Service Obligation. The published histories and War Diaries of the time universally indicate an expectation to be used in the Cavalry role.

Later, in 1917 the Yeomen also changed Army numbers to assimilate with the line Cavalry and the reserve cavalry regiments assimilated the reserve Yeomanry regiments. One often sees for example 'Corps of Hussars' or 'Corps of Dragoons' or 'Corps of Lancers' on Yeomanry medal index cards which reflected which of the three administrative subdivisions of the line cavalry each Yeomanry regiment was associated with.

Some (Imperial) Yeomanry units were raised specifically for the Boer War and were generally used in what you term the Mounted Rifles role which is further supported by the terminology of 'Companies' rather than Squadrons. The Sharpshooters (one of the London Yeomanry Regiments) were formed from Boer War formations for example, very much in the role of Mounted Rifles but by Sep 1914 had a Cavalry structure.

To my knowledge there is no such thing as a 'premier' Yeomanry regiment. It was the luck of the draw as to which units remained mounted throughout and those that were fully converted to Infantry. It is important to remember that the Yeomanry prior to the outbreak of WWI were for Home Defence but their role changed as they signed up for Overseas Service. The expansion of the Cavalry was largely done through the addition of Yeomanry regiments and brigades to Cavalry formations rather than raising new Cavalry regiments.

There is no doubt that the Yeomanry would all have preferred to have remained mounted in the Cavalry role, however the ever changing demands of the Army determined that ultimately the some of the manpower was better used elsewhere. The Yeomanry has an order of precedence that has a complex history but bears no correlation with the units that remained mounted throughout. The driving force was the need to send infantry from Palestine back to the Western Front and have these replaced with whatever manpower was available - mostly with Indian troops but the availability of Yeomanry in Palestine (already partially trained for the infantry role) made it an easy decision to convert many to Infantry and later still some to MGC (Infantry) and later MGC (Cavalry). There are Yeoman who served in all four roles.

If 'premier' means (unofficial) patronage by people in high places, such as Churchill with the QOOH then I would agree but this is the only example I can think of. For complex historical reasons the county Yeomanry regiments had a very strong association with the aristocracy and the landed gentry and arguably were all well connected in high places. An analysis of the aristocracy serving between Aug 1914 and May 1915 (ref material; may 1915 Army List) shows that outside the Guards the Yeomanry had the next highest concentration of titled Officers from this 'class'. Within the Yeomanry some had higher concentrations - the Royal Gloucestershire Hussars Yeomanry springs to mind - but there is no evidence that this unit was treated any differently to other Yeomanry units.

Edit: the Royal Buckinghamshire Hussars, another Yeomanry regiment with a high number of aristocrats ended the war as Machine Gunners. At the beginning of the war according to some Yeomanry authors the MG section was sometimes seen as an embarrassment and posting to the MG section was seen as a punishment, so it seems that starting the war in the Arme Blanche and ending the war as a machine gunner would not be representative of a pre war Yeoman's ideal.

I would be genuinely interested to see any evidence of what made a Yeomanry regiment 'premier'.

MG

Any mistakes are mine. Edited with additional info and edited for typos.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Martin - the following is an extract from the Warwickshire Yeomanry Pocket Book - reprint published 1st March 1914 - PAGE 7.

THE PRINCIPAL DUTY OF CAVALRY IN WAR

Our arm lends itself specially to offensive rather than defensive tactics. In other words, our special duty on active service should be to do direct damage to the enemy, rather than to prevent him from doing damage to our own forces.

In a campaign opportunities for this will constantly occur, provided that we make them for ourselves by our ceaseless energy and activity,and by never loosing sight of our object.

In defensive tactics Cavalry are invaluable, but to use all of them for this alone is to cramp their action and leave neglected a most powerful weapon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Martin, thank you for taking the time to provide us with a good education in regard to the operations of the Yeomanry during the war - it's appreciated.

I do admit I have only a general understanding of the Yeomanry, and that any knowledge I do have is gained from the Boer War and pre-War periods.

So the various changes that took place during the war are something I am happy to learn more about. My assumptions are as at the start of the war.

I stand by my comment that the Yeomanry were not 'traditional cavalry' as at August 1914 ... even though they may have liked to be seen as Cavalry.

And this would seem to be supported by your statements concerning the changes to the Cavalry Training regimen in the opening stages of the war.

The pre-war Yeomanry trained to the Yeomanry and Mounted Rifles Training Manual (my copy is 1912).

In Sep 1914 the Yeomanry had to abandon this for the Cavalry Training Manual (1912 I think).

There are many recordings of this in the diaries and the initial chaos it caused.

They were obviously never trained as 'traditional cavalry' before the war if the changes to the proper Cavalry Training Manual caused such problems.

And my reference to any "premier" Yeomanry is for want of a better word to describe the handful of regiments that were selected to become Cavalry.

It is my understanding that only 5 of the pre-war Yeomanry regiments were incorporated into the regular Line Cavalry Brigades at the start of the war.

These being the Essex, Bedfordshire, Leicestershire and the North Somerset Yeomanry together with the QOOH. Is this correct or were there more.?

So did ALL the Yeomanry regiments convert to the Cavalry Training Manual at start of the war, or just those regiments that joined the regular Cavalry.?

Obviously as the war wore on many changes occurred, and many of the Yeomanry regiments were dismounted to serve as rifle-ready trained Infantry.

Once again thanks for your informed comments, and as always I am more than happy to be corrected (and of course learn more in the process.!) :thumbsup:

Cheers, S>S

Link to comment
Share on other sites

S>S

Apologies in advance if I am repeating myself. I think there is a danger here of regarding Yeomanry who were attached to Regular Cavalry formations as the only ones that operated as cavalry. All did (initially) regardless of which formation they joined. The Northumberland Hussars for example were designated Divisional Cavalry for a number of divisions (one Sqn per Div) and later were Corps Cavalry. They were mounted and operated as cavalry throughout the war.

All yeomanry regiments adopted the Cavalry Training manual from Sep 1914. Consequently their training was exactly the same as line cavalry. The differences are not that great; just temporary difficulties in breaking long habits, particularly in drill. Perhaps no different to the difficulties faced by the TF Infantry when converting from pre-war Battalions based on eight companies to Battalions based on four companies. If one was to think of venn diagrams with 'mounted troops' as the universal set, the pre-war Cavalry and pre-war Yeomanry sets would have had massive overlap.

There is an interesting comparison between the TF and the Indian Army. Both had very similar structures that really reflected the organisational structure inhereted from the Victorian period rather than the fairy recent changes in structure that the Regular Army had undergone. On mobilisation the TF (Infantry and Yeomanry) underwent organisational changes to quickly bring them into alignment with their Regular counterparts. From Sep 1914 onwards debating the differences between the Yeomanry and the Cavalry is no different to debating the differences between the Regular infantry and the Territorial Force infantry. Both TF organisations came into line with the Regular structure.

Some Yeomanry were attached to existing cavalry formations simply as part of the numerical expnsion required to increase the number of Cavalry Divisions. This was no different to a TF Infantry battalion such as the 1/5th Royal Scots being attached to the regular 29th Div to make up the numbers. At the same time TF infantry Divisions were being formed. While the 1/5th Royal Scots (TF) regarded this as a great honour, it could have been any TF battalion that had satisfied the Overseas Service Obligation in sufficient numbers. Due to the large number of Yeomanry regiments, some formed TF formations such as the 2nd Mounted Div in the same way TF Infantry Divisions were formed such as the 42nd East Lancs Div (TF). The 2nd Mtd Division trained and operated in exactly the same way as a line Cavalry division. The main difference would have simply been experience. Outwardly they would have looked, smelt and felt the same as line Cavalry.

There was no selection to become cavalry in Sep 1914. They all operated as cavalry from this date onwards until some were temporarily used dismounted - in Gallipoli for example when the MEF was desperate for troops (they were later remounted on their return to Egypt) - and some who were later (Jan-Feb-Mar 1917 from memory) fully absorbed by line infantry regiments as infantry Service battalions when Allenby was stripped of two Infantry divisions and had to improvise to make up the numbers. Prior to this they all operated and trained to the Cavalry Training Manual 1912. I am away travelling without access to my database but I can on my return provide details on what happened to all 55 Yeomanry units if you are particularly interested. The Derbyshire Yeomanry for example operated as Cavalry throughout the War (except a short 4 month dismounted interlude at Gallipoli in 1915). There was nothing special about the Derbyshire Yeomanry, they just happened to be in the right place at the right time and had a rather uneventful war, mostly in Macedonia. One of the other two Yeomanry Regiments in their original brigade became machine gunners. It was merely the luck of the draw.

The Yeomanry is an area of great interest to me. I have over 30 published histories of Yeomanry regiments covering WWI and have transcribed a few dozen Yeomanry war diaries and dozens of private diaries of men (mostly Officers) who served in the Yeomanry in WWI. The culture in these units was totally geared towards the Cavalry and they were initially commanded by cavalry officers. The South Notts Hussars notes in its history that it was not until 1917 that a TF Yeomanry Officer commanded rather than an imported Cavalry Officer. The Yeomen thought the main differences between the Yeomanry and the regular Cavalry were the terms of service. Everything else they considered to be identical. Comparisons were always made with the Cavalry, not the infantry. To get a good feel of how Yeomen thought, I would recommend reading "The Yarn of a Yeoman" by S F Hatton who was an OR in the Middlesex Yeomanry in Eypt, Palestine, Gallipoli, Sinai and Macedonia. It is similar in ways to R A Lloyd's "Troophorse and Trench" which gives a vivid description of life as a trooper in the Life Guards in the trenches. It was also published as "A Trooper with the Tins".

Such was the anger of one Yeomanry regiment when being sent to Gallipoli dismounted, it marched to the entraining stations at Cairo wearing spurs. It is no coincidence that the 74th Yeomanry Division's badge was a broken spur. Culturally they were cavalrymen. Their slang word for the infantry was 'crushers'.

I am certain there is an Army Order somewhere from 1908 that specifically proscribes what the Yeomanry was and how it technically differed from the line Cavalry (terms of service was certainly one) but for the duration of WWI the Yeomanry was fully integrated into cavalry training until early 1917 when a number were converted to Infantry for the 74th (Yeomanry) Div (an infantry formation). Post WWI the role of many Yeomanry regiments completely changed again.

I am not trying to 'correct' any views. This is just information I have gathered from published histories, war diaries and personal diaries over a fair few years studying the Yeomanry.

Any mistakes are mine. MG

EDit: The one exception to this 'cavalry culture' might be the Marquis of Tullibardine who commanded the Scottish Horse and Lord Lovat who raised the Lovat's Scouts. Both it appears preferred their men to be armed with rifles and bayonet. This might stem from a recruiting base tilted towards highland ghillies (sp?) who were more in the mould of scout utilising stalking skills.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you all - these responses have been extremely informative (and go far beyond the scope of my original query). I know its been said many times before but the breadth and depth of knowledge on this forum is phenomenal, and I appreciate people taking the time to share their expertise so comprehensively.

Cheers, J

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have had a quick scan through my small selection of WW1 Yeomanry photographs and there appears to be a 50:50 split between SMLEs and 1908 Pattern Cavalry Swords. Were earlier Cavalry Sword Patterns used in the field?

Years ago, I was told a story about the Dorset Yeomanry charging Sensusi Tribesmen in the Western Desert, during 1916, using 1890 Pattern Cavalry Swords. I was led to believe that when the Dorset Yeomanry charged through the Sensusi lines, the tribesmen simply laid on the ground out of sword reach. Was this true?

Sepoy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...