Yeomanry troops

[Guest]

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

Sepoy, I suspect this is another myth. The 'lying on the ground out or reach' story goes back at least to the Sudan campaign and the 1885 pattern sword (34.5 inch blade)

Tent-pegging was practised as a sport and a training method among the British Army mounted troops many years before the issue of the 1908 pattern sword (35.5 inch blade). I think it is a stretch of someone's imagination that a cavalryman with an 1890 pattern sword (34.5 inch blade) could not reach a man lying on the ground. Edit: did one inch make that much of a difference? How could men be successful tent-peggers yet fail to strike a man on the ground? It also raises the question: could a cavalry charge can be rendered ineffective by simply lying on the ground?

It also seems unlikely that the Yeomanry didn't have the 1908 pattern sword (1912 Officers' pattern sword) in 1916. Possible, but unlikely I think as the available swords would very likely have been with the first line units. I am fairly sure the 2nd Mounted Div (of which the QODY was part) was equipped with the 1908 pattern sword before deploying overseas. Worth checking though.....

The reserves of the Derbyshire Yeomanry, South Notts Hussars and Sherwood Rangers Yeomanry who were left in Egypt while their comrades fought in Gallipoli also fought the Senussi in 1915 as the Gallipoli men were returning in Nov 1915. The reserves from these three regiments formed a composite regiment for the campiagn as did other Yeomanry regiments in reserve in Egypt along with some ALH. I am more familiar with their histories and diaries and don't recall any anecdotes that fit this story. I have the Queen's Own Dorset Yeomanry history too and don't recall anything from that publication. I am away travelling and unless anyone can answer you question in the meantime, I should be able to dig up references from the aforementioned units on my return his weekend.

MG

Edited with additional info and edited for typos.

[Guest]

Going back to the OP, here is some interesting parliamentary debate from 1909 and 1910.....which indicates in the pre war period the sword was not standard and the role of the Yeomanry was being debated or at least questioned. Note their incorrect use of 'Imperial Yeomanry' nearly 2 years after it had ceased to exist.

Mr Lane Fox MP certainly had the bit between his teeth on this subject........MG

Territorial Force.

HC Deb 21 March 1910 vol 15 cc913-5W

Mr. LANE-FOX asked whether, in the event of the majority of the Imperial Yeomanry accepting the Imperial Service conditions, the sword will be added to their equipment; and, if not, how can Yeomanry called up for service abroad and armed only as mounted infantry, act with cavalry?

Mr. HALDANE: It is not proposed to add a sword to the equipment of the Yeomanry, even in the case of those who accept Imperial Service conditions, as the short period of their annual instruction is barely sufficient for their training in the use of horse and rifle. In the event of their offer to serve abroad being accepted it is not intended that Yeomanry should be sent there without a period of training on embodiment.

Mr. LANE-FOX asked how the census of horses is to be kept up to date, and, if this is to be done annually by the county associations, what allowance will be made to them for the cost of the record and annual classification of the horses in their area?

Mr. HALDANE: The police authorities have undertaken to make a census every year in December, which will be used by the association's collectors for the purpose of keeping their lists up to date. Associations are asked to satisfy themselves that this is being done, but I do not think it calls for a special grant.

Yeomanry Drill Book.

HC Deb 23 June 1910 vol 18 c502 502

Mr. LANE-FOX asked when the Yeomanry drill book promised by him will be issued?

Mr. HALDANE The question of the issue of a manual of drill and training for the Yeomanry is under consideration.

Yeomanry (Armament).

HC Deb 12 July 1910 vol 19 c180 180

Mr. LANE-FOX asked the Secretary of State for War whether he anticipates that the Yeomanry may have to fight in closely enclosed country, involving the probability of ambuscade and hand-to-hand fighting; and upon what weapon of defence they were to rely under such circumstances?

Mr. HALDANE The hon. Member is doubtless alluding to the question of the supply of bayonets. The Yeomanry, when acting dismounted under the circumstances suggested by him, would not be at any greater disadvantage than cavalry in the matter of their armament.

Mr. GIBSON BOWLES What is the weapon?

Mr. HALDANE They use the rifle in the first instance

Mr. WEDGWOOD Has the right hon. Gentleman read "War and the Arme Blanche," by Mr. Erskine Childers?

Mr. HALDANE I had that in my mind when I gave the answer.

Mr. LANE-FOX Will the Yeomanry soon be equipped with carbine buckets?

Mr. HALDANE Perhaps the hon. Member will give notice of that question.

Carbine Buckets.

HC Deb 14 July 1910 vol 19 c744W 744W

Mr. LANE-FOX asked the Secretary of State for War whether the Yeomanry will soon be equipped with carbine buckets; whether such equipment can be effected before next spring; and whether he will consider the issuing to them of some weapon for defence in hand-to-hand fighting as soon as this has been done?

Mr. HALDANE The present type of bucket in possession of the Yeomanry is suitable for the short rifle, and it is not intended to issue any other type of bucket to this force. As regards the last part of the question I may refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave him on Tuesday last.

HC Deb 27 June 1910 vol 18 cc689-760

Mr. LANE-FOX. At an earlier stage of this Session the right hon. Gentleman gave an undertaking that a simple drill book for Yeomen would foe provided. That would be a very great advantage and a very great help. It is at present necessary for the Yeoman to wade through the pages of the Cavalry drill book to find out his requirements. I hope that, if possible, a Yeomanry drill book will soon be issued, explaining as far as possible the real functions of the Yeomen of the Territorial Force. It is absolutely absurd to say that the Yeoman can be made what is called a Cavalry soldier. The sooner we do away with that idea the better. You can get a most valuable product—you can train a man to be a more or less efficient scout, an efficient horseman, and very likely efficient with his rifle, and if you can get the combination of those three you will get a very valuable and useful unit. Do not let us try to call him a Cavalry soldier, or set him to know the more elaborate drill which at present are contained in the Cavalry drill book.

And from 1911......

Territorial Force and Regular Cavalry.

HC Deb 12 July 1909 vol 7 c1628 1628

Mr. LANE-FOX (for Viscount Helmsley) asked the Secretary of State for War whether it is assumed that the cavalry of the Territorial Army would act in war in conjunction with the regular cavalry?

The SECRETARY Of STATE for WAR (Mr. Haldane) Yes, Sir.

Mr. LANE-FOX May I ask what would happen if the order to charge were given to the Yeomanry——

Mr. SPEAKER That is a hypothetical question.

Mr. LANE-FOX On a point of order, Sir, may I say that the question is to suggest that there is a difference in armament?

Mr. SPEAKER In asking the Minister for War what would happen if the Yeomanry were ordered to charge the hon. Member is really projecting his imagination too far.

Territorial Army (Independent Cavalry).

HC Deb 24 May 1909 vol 5 cc811-2 811

Mr. LANE-FOX asked in what manner the selected Yeomanry corps, acting as the independent cavalry of the Territorial Army, and armed as mounted infantry, are to perform the duty of defeating the hostile cavalry, which is the first duty assigned to them in section 144, Cavalry Training, 1907, in view of the fact that the same section states that dismounted action for independent cavalry will at the best have but negative results?

Mr. HALDANE The action of Yeomanry in the circumstances mentioned will be the same as that of cavalry, and the principles are laid down in Cavalry Training, 1907. I cannot, however, undertake, within the limits of an answer to a question, to discuss the detailed instructions laid down in Cavalry Training. The hon. Member has omitted, I think, to read to the end of the manual of Cavalry Training. If he will look at it again he will find an appendix 4 at page 313, which shows the modifications to be read into the general instructions laid down in the manual, when these instructions are to be applied to Yeomanry training.

Mr. LANE-FOX Have we in the Territorial Army any force which is capable of meeting fully equipped hostile cavalry?

Mr. HALDANE I think if that fully equipped cavalry is in anything like the same numbers as we are, the Yeomanry of the Territorial Force would not be able to meet them, but the reason is that the training of the Yeomanry of the Territorial Force cannot be as great as the cavalry who are trained for three years, but I 812 think it is extremely unlikely that any Power will succeed in bringing this large force of cavalry and horses across the seas.

MG

[centurion]

The 1st Glamorganshire Yeomanry went to Egypt, my great uncle was an officer in them. From 1916 to 1918 he served firstly as a mounted officer (with a detachment of the Glamorgans attached to the ICC), then as an infantry officer when the Glamorgans were converted to infantry and finally as an artillery officer when they became a RA regiment (first with 2 inch and then Newton 6 inch mortars). When they returned to Britain they got their horses back. Which goes to show that in the Middle East yeomanry could and were used in a variety of roles and presumably were armed as appropriate to whatever particular one they were filling at the time.

[Guest]

Some more parliamentary debate from 1909....I have tried to keep this in reverse chronological order. It seems bayonets and the a yeomanry were hotly debated in 1909.....

Yeomanry

HC Deb 25 May 1909 vol 5 c1155W 1155W

Mr. HUNT asked the Secretary of State for War whether he has considered if Yeomanry on outpost duty would be at a great disadvantage at night without bayonets; and, if so, what steps he proposes to take in the matter?

Mr. HALDANE The Yeomanry are at no greater disadvantage than cavalry in the matter of their armament when dismounted in the conditions suggested by the hon. Member. The principles and rules for outposts will be found in Field Service Regulations, Part. I., chapter v.

Mr. HUNT asked the Secretary of State for War whether the Yeomanry are only intended for offensive action on account of their mobility and whether, seeing that when acting as advance guard they would he compelled to act on the defensive to hold an enemy till the main body had time to get into battle formation, and in view of the disadvantage of their lack of bayonets on these occasions, he will say what the Army Council propose to do in the matter?

Mr. HALDANE The reply to the first part of the question is in the negative. As regards the second part of the question it is not admitted that the lack of bayonets is any disadvantage, and the Army Council do not propose to take any steps in the matter.

Territorial Army(Cavalry Arms).

HC Deb 24 May 1909 vol 5 c815 815

Major ANSTRUTHER-GRAY (for Sir Samuel Scott) asked the Secretary of State for War whether the present method of arming the cavalry of the Territorial Army as mounted infantry is based upon the assumption that any hostile force which might either raid or invade these shores will be entirely deficient of regular cavalry; and, if so, whether he can state any reasons for such an assumption?

Mr. HALDANE The method of arming the Yeomanry is not based on the assumption suggested by the hon. Baronet.

Sword Training.

HC Deb 20 May 1909 vol 5 c722W 722W

Mr. HUNT asked the Secretary of State for War whether, in view of the intention eventually to arm the Yeomanry with swords, he can say about how much time out of the annual fortnight's training will be given to learning the use of the sword; and whether he is aware that German troops who use the sword are trained for three years?

Mr. HALDANE It is not proposed to devote any of the annual training to learning the use of the sword. As regards German troops, if the hon. Member is alluding to the cavalry the statement is accurate.

Yeomanry Arms.

HC Deb 20 May 1909 vol 5 cc722-3W 722W

Mr. HUNT asked the Secretary of State for War whether, in view of the fact that he has given their mobility as a reason for depriving the Yeomanry of bayonets, he will say how near opposing troops armed with bayonets are to be allowed to approach before Yeomanry retire; is he aware that the German cavalry are in future to be aimed with bayonets as well as swords; and what cavalry, if any, will be attached to the Territorial Army who could oppose the cavalry of an invading force?

Mr. HALDANE In the first part of the question, which can scarcely be intended to be serious, the hon. Member has overlooked the fact that the object of the mobility of mounted troops is to take offensive action. As regards the second part of the question, he has been misinformed: the German cavalry are experimenting with the bayonet with the view of its replacing the sword. The last part of the question is purely a matter concerning plans for home defence, upon which I do not propose to make any statement.

Sir SAMUEL SCOTT asked the Secretary of State for War whether the Yeomanry are to be armed with the short rifle; and whether he can state when these rifles will be issued?

Mr. HALDANE The Yeomanry are to be armed with the short rifle, and orders for the issue of the rifles were given yesterday.

Sir SAMUEL SCOTT asked the Secretary of State for War whether he proposes 723W to maintain the bayonet as a weapon for the Yeomanry; and, if not, whether there would be a saving to public funds if the bayonets at present issued to Yeomanry were recalled, so as to be available as a reserve until the new bayonet had been issued to all the infantry of the Regular Army and Territorial Army?

Mr. HALDANE The reply to both questions is in the negative.

Mr. BRODIE asked the Secretary of State for War, whether, in view of the fact that on the 10th May it was stated that the Yoemanry will not be armed with the sword, and on 11th May that it is not the intention to issue sword-bayonets to the Yeomanry after they are supplied with short rifles, he is aware of the principles of the employment of cavalry indicated in section 144 of cavalry training, 1907, issued by command of the Army Council; and whether he will consider the question of so arming and training the Yeomanry as to fit them to carry out what is acknowledged by our own and all foreign military experts to be the most important role of mounted troops?

Mr. HALDANE In view of the limited period available for training the Yeomany, at all events until they are embodied, it is impossible to do more than instruct them in the use of the rifle, together with the other important mounted duties specified in section 2 of cavalry training as modified by section 210.

Mr. BRODIE asked the Secretary of State for War what incident occurred between 10th May and 11th May which caused the apparent change in intention with regard to the arming of the Yeomanry, seeing that on 10th May it was stated that the Yeomanry would be armed, as at present, with rifles and sword-bayonets, while on 11th May it was stated that it is not the intention to issue sword-bayonets to the Yeomanry when the new short rifle is issued to them; whether there is any object in retaining the sword-bayonet in the meantime; and whether the new short rifles are likely to be issued during the current year?

Mr. HALDANE There was no change of intention between the two dates mentioned. The reply of 11th May was intended to be an amplification of that given on 10th May. Orders for the issue of the new rules were given yesterday.

Yeomanry (Arms).

HC Deb 18 May 1909 vol 5 c379W 379W

Mr. HUNT asked the Secretary of State for War whether, in view of the fact that Yeomanry are only mounted infantry and will be required to fight on foot against infantry armed with the bayonet, he will say what weapon is to be provided for them to take the place of the bayonet, which they will no longer carry with the short rifle?

Mr. HALDANE The principles of the leading and training of Yeomanry in dismounted action are given in section 152 cavalry training. In the problem presented by the hon. Member, namely, that of the action of mounted troops on foot opposing infantry armed with the bayonet, the mobility of the Yeomanry has been overlooked by him. In consequence of this mobility the tactics of a mounted force are of such a nature that the possession of a bayonet is not considered necessary. The possibility of eventually arming the Yeomanry, when embodied, with a sword has not been lost sight of, but its use is for action when mounted.

Territorial Force (Independent Cavalry).

HC Deb 17 May 1909 vol 5 cc8-9 9

Lord BALCARRES (for Sir Samuel Scott) asked the Secretary of State for War which Yeomanry brigades he proposed to employ as the independent cavalry of the Territorial Army, and in what respects their duties will differ from those laid down in the cavalry training for the regular cavalry?

Mr. HALDANE The first part of the question is connected with the scheme of home defence, which is of a confidential nature. It is not in the interests of the service to specify the yeomanry brigades which would be employed as independent cavalry of the Territorial Force. The difference between the duties of the regular cavalry and yeomanry is explained in Appendix IV., Cavalry Training, 1907.

Territorial Force (Strategic Cavalry).

HC Deb 13 May 1909 vol 4 cc2146-7W 2147W

Sir SAMUEL SCOTT asked the Secretary of State for War if he can state from what source he proposes to obtain the strategic cavalry of the Territorial Army when the expeditionary force has left this country, in view of the fact that the cavalry of the Territorial Army are neither trained nor armed in a manner to enable them to carry out this most important duty?

Mr. HALDANE It is proposed that certain brigades of Yeomanry should be employed as independent cavalry, but the scope and difficulty of their duties will not be of an exactly similar nature to those anticipated for the regular cavalry, owing to the fact that in the United Kingdom strategical reconnaisance will not be necessary because the locality or localities of an invading army or armies must be known.

Yeomanry (Arms).

HC Deb 12 May 1909 vol 4 c1972W 1972W

Mr. BRODIE asked the Secretary of State for War what numbers of Yeomanry regiments are at present armed with sword-bayonets in addition to rifles; and whether it is proposed to issue sword-bayonets to all Yeomanry regiments?

Mr. HALDANE The whole of the Yeomanry regiments are at present armed with sword-bayonets in addition to long rifles, and will retain sword-bayonets for the present. The Yeomanry are to be re-armed shortly with a short rifle similar to that in use with the Regular cavalry. It is not the intention to issue sword-bayonets to the Yeomanry when the short rifle is issued to them.

Cavalry and Yeomanry (Arms).

HC Deb 10 May 1909 vol 4 cc1421-2 1421

Mr. LANE-FOX asked the Secretary of State for War what difference between the strategic use of cavalry of the Regular Army and that of the cavalry of the Territorial Army accounts for the difference in the arming of the cavalry of the line and the Yeomanry?

Mr. HALDANE The training and service conditions of the Yeomanry are different from those of the Regular Cavalry, and accordingly their arms and strategic use are also different. The arms of the Regular Cavalry include a rifle and sword; but in view of the limited period available 1422 for training the Yeomanry, at all events until they are embodied, it is impossible to do more than instruct them in the use of the rifle, together with the other important mounted duties specified in section 2 of Cavalry Training, 1907, as modified by section 210.

Mr. LANE-FOX May I ask if the Yeomanry fulfil the conditions laid down in the Cavalry Drill Book when drilling with cavalry?

Mr. HALDANE No, the Yeomanry are not trained in the same course as the Regular Cavalry, but they do fulfil the conditions laid down for mounted brigades in the Territorial Force, which have been allocated to them by the General Staff.

Mr. LANE-FOX Does the Cavalry Drill Book only apply to service abroad, and not in this country?

Mr. HALDANE Oh, no. There are a large number of Regular Cavalry in this country. The training for the Yeomanry has been considered with great care in consultation with their leaders by the General Staff, and the regulations laid down are the result of what they have settled among them.

Earl WINTERTON Does the right hon. Gentleman intend that the Yeomanry shall act as cavalry to the Territorial Force?

Mr. HALDANE Yes, decidedly. But that depends on what is meant by cavalry.

Major ANSTRUTHER-GRAY Is not the Yeomanry recognised as cavalry for the purpose of invasion?

Mr. HALDANE It is an extremely valuable asset against invasion.

Yeomanry.

Territorial Force (Yeomanry).

HC Deb 10 May 1909 vol 4 c1618W 1618W

Mr. BRODIE asked the Secretary of State for War whether, in view of the fact that Yeomanry are to be used as cavalry in connection with the Territorial Army, and the consequent possibility of their being required to pursue a defeated enemy, it is proposed to provide them with a sword in addition to the rifle which they now carry; and, if not, whether any other weapon is to be issued to them?

Mr. HALDANE The Yeomanry will be armed, as at present, with rifles and sword-bayonets. They will not be armed with the sword.

Territorial Force.

HC Deb 06 May 1909 vol 4 c1327W 1327W

Sir SAMUEL SCOTT asked the Secretary of State for War whether the cavalry of the Territorial Army are cavalry or mounted infantry; if the former, why are they not armed as cavalry; and if the latter, from what source he proposes to find for the Territorial Army the cavalry necessary to carry out operations in the field?

Mr. HALDANE The yeomanry is so trained as to be capable of performing all the duties allotted to cavalry except those connected with shock action. The force is therefore not armed with the sword. It is considered that the mounted troops of the Territorial Force are suitably armed to enable them to perform the duties required of them in connection with home defence.

Cavalry and Yeomanry (New Pattern Sword).

HC Deb 06 October 1909 vol 11 c2002 2002

Major ANSTRUTHER-GRAY asked the Secretary of State for War what progress has been made with re-arming the cavalry with the new pattern sword; and whether there is any intention of arming the Yeomanry with the sword?

Mr. HALDANE As regards the first part of the question, I have nothing at present to add to the information already given. As regards the second part of the question, no decision to arm the Yeomanry with the sword has at present been come to.

Earl WINTERTON Are we to understand that the suggestion has been abandoned of arming the Yeomanry with the sword?

Mr. HALDANE No, the whole thing is under very careful consideration. There is great division of opinion among the commanding officers.

MR. HALDANE'S STATEMENT.

HC Deb 14 March 1911 vol 22 cc2071-185 2071

Mr. J. C. LYTTELTON Will the right hon. Gentleman tell the House how the question of the Yeomanry sword stands at the present moment?

Mr. HALDANE That is a question not of armaments, but of the training of the Yeomanry. The view of the General Staff upon that point is that the time the Yeomanry have is not long enough for the-training in two arms. In time they may be able to give them back the sword, but they are fearful at present of spoiling the training in the most important arm.......

[shippingsteel]

Very interesting reading Martin, thanks for adding. I wonder how things progressed along closer to the war, with that Training manual from 1912.?

Cheers, S>S

[Guest]

S>S...here is part if the answer...

YEOMANRY.

HC Deb 15 July 1913 vol 55 c1046 1046

36. MARQUESS of TULLIBARDINE asked the Secretary of State for War if he will state why the War Office is not to issue swords to the Yeomanry until mobilisation, as a few practice swords are not sufficient to train the men in their habitual use; why, as the swords that are to be issued were found inefficient for the Regular Cavalry, the War Office thinks they will be efficient for Yeomanry; and whether he will consider representations from officers commanding some types of Yeomanry that their regiments would infinitely prefer to be provided with bayonets and would be more efficient if provided with these?

Mr. TENNANT After careful consideration by the most experienced officers it was decided to be advisable to issue a second weapon to the Yeomanry on mobilisation. The method adopted is considered to be the best.

MARQUESS of TULLIBARDINE Why are swords that were found inefficient for the Cavalry to be given to the Yeomanry, and why are they only issued on mobilisation when there is no chance of practice?

Mr. TENNANT As I have already informed the Noble Lord the matter has been very carefully considered, and that is the decision that has been arrived at.

MARQUESS of TULLIBARDINE Will the hon. Gentleman give his authority? Was it the Inspector-General of Cavalry or a Committee?

Mr. TENNANT A Committee of military experts and the Chief of the General Staff.

YEOMANRY (SWORDS).

HC Deb 08 July 1913 vol 55 cc207-8 207

29. MARQUESS of TULLIBARDINE asked the Secretary of State for War 208 whether it is the intention of the War Office to arm the Yeomanry with cast Cavalry swords on mobilisation, and not till then; and whether he will consider the issue of bayonets now to those regiments that prefer this weapon?

Colonel SEELY It has been decided to issue swords to the Yeomanry on mobilisation, but a percentage of practice swords will be issued during peace. The bayonet will not form part of the equipment of the Yeomanry.

MARQUESS of TULLIBARDINE What is the good of issuing weapons on mobilisation which the men will not know how to use? Will the right hon. Gentleman answer my question as to whether these swords he intends to use are not swords which have been found useless in the Cavalry?

Colonel SEELY No, Sir. The answer is in the negative.

MARQUESS of TULLIBARDINE What swords are they going to use on mobilisation, and what pattern?

Colonel SEELY They will be very good swords, and I have no doubt they would be used with great effect.

Mr. HARRY LAWSON Will they be the old or the new pattern?

Colonel SEELY In the first place, they will be the old pattern Cavalry sword, which, as the hon. and gallant. Member knows, is a very good sword indeed. As time goes on no doubt they will be supplied with the present weapon.

Mr. MOUNT Will they be made specially for the Yeomanry or will they be the old swords?

Colonel SEELY They were made specially for the Cavalry.

MARQUESS of TULLIBARDINE Does it not need a perfectly different training for the old sword and the new sword?

Colonel SEELY That is a large question, which I cannot debate at Question Time. I am sure hon. Members do not expect to discuss the relative merits of the sword at Question Time.

Major ANSTRUTHER-GRAY I asked for the percentages.

Note the Marquess of Tullibardine was the CO of the Scottish Horse Bde at Gallipoli..... MG

[Guest]

YEOMANRY REGIMENTS (FOREIGN SERVICE).

HC Deb 10 September 1914 vol 66 cc658-9W 658W

Mr. WALTER GUINNESS asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether, in view of the fact that Yeomanry regiments that are being sent abroad have been supplied with bayonets, steps may be taken to provide all other Yeomanry regiments which have volunteered for foreign service with the same without delay, so that they may have time to become proficient in their use?

Mr. TENNANT Arrangements to this effect are in progress.

Mr. WALTER GUINNESS asked the Under-Secretary of State for War whether adjutants of Yeomanry regiments are to be allowed adjutant's pay on mobilisation at Army or Territorial Force rates?

Mr. H. BAKER I hope to be in a position to inform the hon. Member on this point shortly.

Walter Guinness was in the Norfolk Yeomanry and is mentioned in Cadogan's book "Under Fire in the Dardanelles".

MG

Please note any typos are due to Hansard.

[Guest]

OK...hopefully my last Hansard post...this one quoting Earl Roberts in a debate in the House of Lords in 1904. It provides some of the factors when deciding just how to arm mounted troops...

YEOMANRY

HL Deb 05 July 1904 vol 137 cc606-16

EARL ROBERTS My Lords, as I have had something to say on this question of the rifle, the sword, and the bayonet, perhaps it will not be out of place if I make a few remarks on this occasion. When we went to South Africa the cavalry were armed with the carbine and sword or lance, as the case might be, or both. A very short time after I arrived out there I received a request from the officer commanding the 18th Hussars asking that his 615 men should be given the rifle. He said that the carbine was practically useless against the Boer Mauser, and he hoped that his regiment might be given rifles. I was able to meet the request, and in a very short time all the other officers commanding cavalry regiments followed this officer's example and begged that their men should be given rifles too. Consequently rifles were given to them. I cannot understand how, if the cavalry found the carbine useless when on service, anyone can possibly propose that they should be armed with it now.

Before the war began a Committee was sitting to see whether the existing rifle could not be made a little handier for general purposes by being made lighter and a little shorter. That Committee did not conclude its proceedings until the war was over, but when I came back to England I remembered that the cavalry had all begged they might have the rifle. It seemed that if this proposal, which had been made before the war began, that the rifle should be shortened could be carried out, it would be as well to have a rifle which would do for infantry and cavalry alike. That was the origin of the shorter rifle. It is as effective in every respect as the long one; it has the advantage of being 5-in. shorter and a pound lighter; and for cavalry purposes, therefore, it is more convenient. As to the question of how the rifle should be carried, the carbine has now a sling attached to it, so that it can be worn across a man's shoulders when on service. It is, of course, only on service that it is necessary that it should be thus carried, but, as the noble Lord has said, it is then essential.

In Afghanistan on one occasion I had about two squadrons of the 9th Lancers numbering about 195 men, and on 11th December, 1879, when we were fighting beyond Kabul, the 9th Lancers were a great deal engaged, and lost a great many horses and a fair number of men. But what surprised me was to find that they had lost more than forty carbines. On inquiry I found that this was due to the fact that the carbine was carried in the bucket, and that when the horse was shot and fell over the weapon was lost. I saw many of the men on foot in this predicament, their sword was dangling between their legs, their lance was in their hands, and they were trying to recover the carbine from the horse. I immediately gave orders that the swords should be attached to the saddle, and that the carbine should be carried on the trooper's back. That did not find favour for many years in this country, and has not up to the present moment; but I believe that it is now to be settled that the carbine shall be carried in the bucket in peace time and in a sling across the back in war time. The proper place for the sword is, no doubt, on the saddle. I would observe, however, that, if the Yeomanry are given the sword, it is essential that they should learn how to use it. I remember hearing a story in the war of some Yeomanry who were chasing a Boer. They overtook him, and the Boer fell down, and they began to slash at him with their swords. Not very much damage was done, and one officer said, "Shoot the poor devil." Then the Boer, who said nothing so long as they merely hacked at him with their swords, called out, "Don't shoot me, Sir." When they proposed to shoot him he begged for his life. Therefore, if the Yeomanry are given swords they should know how to use them, and unless they have sufficient time to learn their use it would be no good giving them swords. I only made these observations in order to tell your Lordships why the cavalry are now given the rifle and why it is difficult to give the sword to men unless they learn how to use it.

MG

[Guest]

One more very interesting snippet from the House of Commons - this one from Capt Sandys MP who had been a Cavalry and Yeomanry officer - expounding on how the Yeomanry should be used. It seems that the author of Sherlock Holmes - Sir Arthur Conan Doyle might have been the first person to suggest the Yeomanry should ride bicycles instead of horses. It was new news to me.....

From the House of Commons on 10th March 1910.

Captain SANDYS I want to offer one or two criticisms on the Memorandum issued by the Secretary of State for War—criticisms in relation entirely to one particular branch of the Territorial Force of which in the course of the Debate we have heard very little. In the paragraphs on pages 3 and 4 there are references to the strength of the force, arming and equipping, rearming of the Infantry, technical equipment of the Field Companies and Telegraph Companies of the Royal Engineers, mobilisation, and other matters, but in the whole of these long and interesting paragraphs there is no reference to what I venture to say is an important branch of the force, which, it is acknowledged, did excellent service in South Africa, namely, the Yeomanry. After the war in South Africa, and before the Territorial Force was actually formed, great changes took place in the organisation and training of the Yeomanry. The training of the Yeomanry is now conducted on far more practical lines than in the old days before the South African War, and, as the right hon. Gentleman acknowledged, it now forms a very important and efficient part of the Territorial Force. I venture in the most friendly way to offer one criticism with respect to what I regard as rather a serious defect in the organisation and training of the Yeomanry. In spite of the fact that those changes were inaugurated ten years ago, and in spite of the fact that the right hon. Gentleman in introducing these Estimates stated that he attached very great importance to uniformity of method, even now there is, so far as I have been able to ascertain, no manual of instructions for training the Yeomanry. So far as I have been able to ascertain the only official instructions upon which Yeomanry commanding officers and officers can go are those in Appendix 4 of the CavalryTraining, extending to three and a half pages, a considerable portion of which is taken up with general discussions as to the use of Yeomanry, and do not go into details at all. In fact, the only practical part in that appendix in regard to training of the Yeomanry is that which contains references as to modifications in cavalry training which are necessary for its application to the Yeomanry. I do contend, as one who has served in the Cavalry as well as the Yeomanry, that is a roundabout way of putting the matter. If from the training of any body of mounted men you eliminate all reference to swordsmanship and the use of the lance, I maintain that such troops cannot be considered as cavalry at all. I do urge upon all those responsible for these matters that the Yeomanry, as at present constituted, are not cavalry at all, but in reality mounted infantry.

I think we are making a serious mistake in attempting to have a sort of hybrid cavalry drill. Everyone interested in military matters knows that there is nothing easier than to confuse the functions of cavalry and mounted infantry. A considerable number of mounted officers have served in the Regular Cavalry. Therefore, I do urge, for that very reason, mistakes are more likely to occur because, as we know, cavalry officers are unconsciously prejudiced in favour of cavalry drill. I maintain that it is absolutely necessary, in order to get the best practical use out of the Yeomanry, some manual of drill should be brought out as soon as possible, so that commanding officers themselves may know where they are. I understand that at the War Office the necessity for such a manual is recognised. I do urge that the delay is very serious, and that it is highly necessary that the manual should be produced, at the earliest possible opportunity. If you refer to the official manual issued for the training of mounted infantry you will find that in Part II., which deals with field training of mounted infantry and their employment in time of war, it is made quite clear that the mounted infantry will practically in all cases act in the closest possible conjunction with cavalry and infantry. Therefore I urge that if the best practical use is to made of the Yeomanry such conditions should be reproduced as far as possible in connection with the training of the Yeomanry.

I think it would be highly desirable and of very great importance in the training of the Yeomanry if every Yeomanry regiment could, occasionally at any rate, be given an opportunity of training in conjunction either with cavalry or infantry. I have had experience as a Yeomanry officer, and I can say that never on any single occasion or field day had the regiment to which I belonged an opportunity of acting either with cavalry or infantry. I am aware that there are considerable difficulties in the way, but I contend that these difficulties are not insurmountable. I think occasional training of the Yeomanry might be arranged in conjunction with the training of the Territorial infantry, so as to give an opportunity for these two arms to be exercised together, as undoubtedly they would have to work together in time of actual war. It also may be urged that the training of the Yeomanry is very short, and therefore it is all the more necessary that every hour of that training should be utilised to the best possible extent and in the most practical possible manner. I do maintain that this cannot be done in the most practical way without the co-operation of those other arms with which the Yeomanry would undoubtedly have to act in time of war.

Of course any officer who has served in the Regular Cavalry will undoubtedly see that the length of training in the Yeomanry at the present time is totally inadequate. For instance yesterday the orders were issued for the training of the regiment to which I belong. We march in on Tuesday, 24th May, and the regiment is dismissed on Tuesday, 7th June. That is to say, there is a total of fifteen days, but it is only nominally fifteen days, for exercise. You have to deduct one day for marching in and one day for dismissal. There are also two Sundays. There is one day at any rate for inspection, and Yeomanry regiments, I think, are very lucky to escape with only one day of inspection. You must also deduct half a day, when the drill is curtailed for the purpose of regimental sports, and another half day may be deducted in practice, when the drill is shortened on account of bad weather. I have placed these at the very lowest figure. Yet on this estimate you have to deduct from the fifteen days six days, leaving for actual training only nine working days. Anyone who has had experience of cavalry work in the Regular Army must realise that nine days is a totally inadequate time in which to train in any way a regiment of mounted men. I am quite well aware that there are great difficulties in extending the period of training, but surely this is an argument that every hour of that training should be utilised in the most practical way possible.

There is one other criticism of the Yeomanry in reference to the localities selected for training. They are usually chosen because of their proximity to some large open tract of country upon which the regiment can be conveniently drilled and exercised. No doubt this is useful, at any rate for the first few days of drill, but I submit that training over open countries should not be the first consideration. As we all know, a considerable number of officers of the Yeomanry served during the war in South Africa. Therefore there is, undoubtedly, especially in the absence of an official manual of training such as I strongly hold should be issued by the War Office, a great tendency to select ground for the training of Yeomanry regiments over which movements can be practised similar to those carried out by mounted troops during the South African war. I do urge that this is a very serious mistake. There is, we all trust and hope, no probability whatever of another war in South Africa. That campaign must be acknowledged to have been an exceptional campaign, carried out under exceptional conditions in an exceptional country, and under circumstances which are not liable to arise again. Therefore, I would urge that as Yeomanry are primarily, if not entirely, intended for home defence, it cannot be too forcibly emphasised that active service conditions in this country would be totally different from what they were in South Africa; and as has been frequently pointed out in the course of the Debate and on many other occasions, there can be no question that in case of an invasion of this country that invasion would be carried out by the most highly trained troops at the disposal of the invading Power, and I would urge this argument, that it is in an open country that the highly trained troops would have the greatest advantage over the partially trained troops, such as all we can hope our Yeomanry and Territorial Army would be, and I maintain that the Yeomanry should be trained in making the best possible use of our natural defences.

Surely those natural defences principally lie in the exceedingly intricate and enclosed nature of ordinary English country. I am quite well aware that manœuvring troops over enclosed land is far more difficult than manœuvring the same body of troops over open country. But for that very reason the argument in favour of its being continually practised is all the stronger; and I think that in actual warfare even partially trained troops, if they had a thorough knowledge of the country and if their training had been directed principally towards practising movements over an enclosed country, would certainly, under those conditions, have very great advantages over any force, however well trained it might be, which had not been accustomed to operate under similar conditions. I know that in this case also considerable difficulties lie in the way, and that if these movements were to be carried out by the Yeomanry in the course of their training they cannot be carried out without considerable damage being done; but I do urge that this is a matter of very great importance, and that in this question money must not be allowed for once to stand in the way. I think that in order to give the Yeomanry a far more practical system of training than they are able to get under present conditions arrangements might be made by the Government with owners and tenants so as to give Yeomanry regiments the opportunity during their training of moving freely over even, at any rate, a small tract of ordinary enclosed country, so that they might have, during the very short training which is all they get, a practical training on the grounds on which I believe in case of actual war it would be most advantageous for them to meet the enemy.

During the last few days there has been a very interesting and valuable suggestion made by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle with reference to his proposal to mount troops upon bicycles instead of upon horses. The advantages which he points out his system would have over the present system are these: first, rapidity of striking, which undoubtedly a force of cyclists would have; secondly, their efficiency at the end of the journey; thirdly, the permanence of a bicycle as opposed to a horse—that is to say, the horse gets tired or wounded and killed, whereas if a bicycle gets into trouble an hour or two in the repairing shop will, or ought, to put it right. It was also pointed out by him, on the question of radius, that the radius of action of a force mounted on bicycles was far greater than the radius of action of a force mounted on horses. He also dealt with the question of expense—pointing out that a £7 bicycle would outlast several £40 horses. He also pointed out as another very important argument in favour of his case that if a battalion of cyclists were actually in touch with the enemy, all the men could be engaged in the firing line, whereas in the case of mounted troops one-fourth of them have to be deducted in order to look after the horses.

In answer to this, Major-General Sir Alfred Turner, who was the Inspector-General of Auxiliary Forces from 1900 to 1904, made two principal objections. The first was the inability of cyclists to do cross-country work, and the second was the fact that engagements do not invariably or indeed as a rule take place on the open road. These were very strong points, undoubtedly, as showing the principal advantages which horse-mounted troops have over bodies of troops mounted on bicycles. They are, or ought to be, able to get across country, and their movements are not confined to the open country. But I do urge this, that unless we give the Yeomanry the opportunity of making use of these advantages and of practising the very difficult movements that are involved in getting across English country, and unless we take the fullest advantage of the fact that the Yeomanry are mounted upon horses and not upon bicycles, we lose these advantages; and that those regiments might with increased efficiency and very much reduced expenditure be mounted on bicycles as Sir Arthur Conan Doyle suggests. Therefore, I venture to make these few criticisms with regard to the Yeomany. The first is that we should have a manual of instruction in which definite lines for our training should be definitely laid down. The second is that in the training of Yeomanry they should have the opportunity of acting in conjunction with those arms with which undoubtedly they would have to act in time of war. In the third place it might be possible for the Government to arrange for the Yeomanry to have the opportunity during their training of operating over that enclosed country which undoubtedly it would be to their advantage to act over in time of war.

MG

[Sepoy]

Sepoy, I suspect this is another myth.

Martin thanks for your comments

Sepoy

[Guest]

Classic photo of the Middlesex Hussars disemarking at Alexandria in Apr 1915....note rifles and swords. Picture is top row, third from left.

http://www.kingscollections.org/servingsoldier/collection/the-dardanelles-expedition#Gallery[gallery1]/2/

[Sepoy]

The swords appear to be 1890 patterns as they have slightly curved scabbards as opposed to the straight bladed 1908 pattern Swords. What do you think??

Sepoy

NB The King's College Collection is certainly an excellent resource.

[Guest]

The swords appear to be 1890 patterns as they have slightly curved scabbards as opposed to the straight bladed 1908 pattern Swords. What do you think??

Sepoy

NB The King's College Collection is certainly an excellent resource.

I think you are right. Looks like 1890 pattern for sure. Basket of the hilt is different too. Looks 1890 to me. MG

[Guest]

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

Sepoy as promised I have checked the histories. 'The Records of the Dorset Yeomanry' covers it well and the charge against the Senussi at Agagia on 26th Feb 1916 has five pages devoted to it. There is a detailed account by Lt J H Blakesley who describes a scene of chaos and slaughter with the Senussi breaking and running and the Yeoman 'slashing right and left' [which suggests the slashing 1890 sword]. No mention of lying on the ground. The odds were 180 Yeomen against 500 Senussi with rifles and at least one maxim. Casualies were 58 Yeomen (including five Officers and 27 ORs killed plus two Officers and 24 ORs wounded) against the Senussi leader Gaafar's estimate of 300 Senussi who according to the history were 'sabred'. There is a painting by Lady Butler of this action held at the National Army Museum.

Cross-checking the other Yeomanry histories I can find no evidence that the Senussi tactics were to lie down. The only tangible reference is from the Derbyshire Yeomanry commenting on the Senussi under a paragraph heading "Traitorous Attacks" which might be the kind of material that fuelled speculation of unconventional tactics. It says;

"In both of these actions [13th and 25th Dec 1915] the enemy made use of machine-guns and also of several mountain guns, but with these they made very poor practice. During our advance on the Christmas Day fight [1915] the Senussi showed that he was unused to the methods of civilised warfare for it was the general custom of both wounded and unwounded to sham dead and to seize the nearest rifle and shoot into the backs of our men after they had passed them. Cases too occurred of men being shot or stabbed by wounded Senussi whilst giving them a drink of water. This was so much the worse for the enemy as after losing a number of men in this way the only possible remedy was adopted."

The formation that the Derbyshire Yeomanry was in included at least five other Yeomanry regiments. The ones that I can trace (South Notts Hussars, etc..) have no anecdotes supporting the view that the Senussi lay down when being charged by cavalry. I note that shamming dead would presumably involve lying down.

Interestingly the Yeomanry Training Manual 1912 has a chapter titled "Warfare Against Uncivilized Enemies". Paragraph one starts: "In campaigns against savages the armament tactics and characteristics of the enemy and the nature of the theatre of operations demand that methods of regular warfare be somewhat modified..." which presumably was the guidance for the Derbyshire Yeomanry when finding a 'remedy'.

MG

[Sepoy]

Martin

I think I was told about the "laying down" incident by a member of the Surrey Yeomanry (Fred Dixon), who was in the Western Desert during the Senussi Campaign. May be Fred was referring to the "playing dead" incident.

Although, I often spoke to Fred about his time on the Western Front, we rarely spoke about his time at Lemnos or in Egypt. The only conversation I can remember having with Fred about the Senussi Operations, was when he spoke of eating Helva in the desert on Christmas day 1915.

Sepoy

[Guest]

Sepoy - "The Surrey (QMR) Yeomanry 1797-1928" by E D Harison-Ainsworth has a decent chapter on the Surrey Yeomanry troop that served in the Egyptian Desert against the Senussi. The account is largely based on the diary of Tpt C W Harrison (3rd Troop, C Sqn) who was one of the men left behind in Egyptt when the main body departed for HQ MEF at Imbros. The Surrey Yeo troop joined two troops of the Roughriders and one troop of the Derbyshire Yeomanry which was formed on 20th Nov 1915. In addition the Dorsets, Duke of Lancaster's Yeo and the Royal Bucks Hussars provided addition troops for another composite regiment.

No mention of the tactic at all. One interesting snippet: Gaafar/Jaafar Pasha, caught by the Dorset Yeomanry at Agagia was turned and fought with the British. When he received the CMG from Allenby, the guard of honour on that occasion was ...the Dorset Yeomanry.

I think I have nearly exhausted all immediately available sources to try and put flesh on the bones of this story....

MG

[Sepoy]

Martin

Thank you so much for your efforts its greatly appreciated.

I will certainly try and gain access to Harison-Ainsworth's book and read up on their involvement in the Senussi Campaign. It is a shame that I did not discuss the issue with Fred, in any real depth.

However, I always make sure that I have a piece of helva at Christmas in his memory.

Sepoy

[liliasodell]

This was my grandpa's sword - Warwickshire Yeomanry in Palestine, 1917. He used it from on high - when in the saddle of his horse, Jess. They were trained, when charging, to crouch behind the horse's neck, grasping the sword down the horse's side. A tactic which might explain high death counts amongst the horses, but the comparitively lower rate amongst the men.

[Philip Wilson]

Sorry - this is a Turkish Sword Bayonet - spoils of war- see images in

http://worldbayonets.com/Bayonet_Identification_Guide/Turkey/turkey_2.html

[Sepoy]

It looks like a standard French Chassepot Sword Bayonet Model 1866 with yataghan shaped blade.

The give away is the brass grip. It should bear the manufacturer details and date on the back edge of the blade. I am afraid to say that it is a relic of the Franco-Prussian War Period rather than the Great War.

Sepoy

NB You will find it on this page

http://worldbayonets.com/Bayonet_Identification_Guide/France/france_2.html

[Philip Wilson]

Sepoy - the same sword bayonet is shown in the heading of the Turkish Bayonets website

http://worldbayonets...y/turkey_2.html and I can also see it in the heading of the French website - clearly confusing.

However is it possible that the Turkish Army ended up with this style bayonet - for how else would GENT A.E. have acquired this unless he collected assorted militaria after Great War? No doubt ArthurWO will comment on the sword bayonet's provenance further?

[Sepoy]

Philip

In Bayonet collecting terms the Chassepot is quite common and turn up in the UK in surprising numbers. I saw a couple the other day whilst viewing at a general auction.

I believe that because of the brass grips they were quite often used as fire pokers (which did not do the blades much good.) or wall decorators.

If you look at the bayonet website, they use the Chassepot at the top of the page as a logo on all Countries. The Turkish Peabody Bayonet which you saw had a wood grip and is considerably rarer.

On a slightly different tack, what sword did the Warwickshire Yeomanry carry during WW1 - The 1890 Pattern or the 1908 Pattern???

Sepoy

[Philip Wilson]

Philip

In Bayonet collecting terms the Chassepot is quite common and turn up in the UK in surprising numbers.

If you look at the bayonet website, they use the Chassepot at the top of the page as a logo on all Countries. The Turkish Peabody Bayonet which you saw had a wood grip and is considerably rarer.

On a slightly different tack, what sword did the Warwickshire Yeomanry carry during WW1 - The 1890 Pattern or the 1907 Pattern???

Swpoy

Sepoy - Thanks - clearly the bayonet in question was not a sword carried by Warwickshire Yeomanry in the field.

NCO's and ORS in the WkY carried the 1908 pattern sword.

The WkY Officers would have carried the 1912 Officer's pattern sword although some might have retained the earlier version.

[Sepoy]

Thank you Philip

I can see that I had kept my Bayonet head on with the 1907 Pattern rather than the 1908 Pattern.....

Sepoy.

[Guest]

Sepoy - Thanks - clearly the bayonet in question was not a sword carried by Warwickshire Yeomanry in the field.NCO's and ORS in the WkY carried the 1908 pattern sword.The WkY Officers would have carried the 1912 Officer's pattern sword although some might have retained the earlier version.

Philip. - does the Warwickshire Yeomanry record when the 1908 pattern was issued? I have been trying (and failing miserably) to research the transition from the 1890 to the 1908 pattern sword in the Yeomanry and from the images I have seen so far (mostly from the published Yeomanry histories) on mobilisation the Yeomanry had 1890 pattern swords which were replaced with the 1908 pattern at a later date - certainly before 1917 - but I cannot identify the date(s) this happened. I am curious to know as the sword drill differed (I think) between the slashing 1890 sword and the thrusting 1908 sword. I own examples of both (and the 1912 Officers' pattern) and it is very obvious that the swords would have been used in a very different way. I am sure you are familiar with the Cavalry Training Manual which gives very precise instruction on how the 1908 pattern sword should be held.

MG