Wales Remembers

[Scalyback]

The offical Welsh assembly web page up and running. Good intentions but it has already annoyed me on some points.

http://www.walesremembers.org/

There is mention of 38th Welsh as Wales "own" division and rightly mentions Mametz, no mention of 53rd Welsh! If they can mention one Division many times, they can not exclude the other in my view. I will not let my and my forefather units go unmentioned. Also does appear to be inline with natoinal theme of poets and sterotypes.

[Bernard_Lewis]

Agreed.

Bernard

[bruce]

At least the Welsh Govt. has come up with £25,000 towards the cost of the new memorial in the Salient.

The land has been bought. The stones have been obtained and transported to the site, and now just money needed to buy and erect the dragon on top.

The dedication WILL be on August 16th next year, at the side of the Hedd Wyn memorial at Iron Cross Roads at Pilkem, near Langemark. Money is being raised by the distribution (not sale....but a donation in return) of pin badges (available upon request!)

What makes this memorial all the more surprising is that the impetus for it came from Langemark, not Wales, and so is even more support worthy.

Bruce

[Garron]

I'd argue (however unpopular it may be) 53rd Welsh is more of a composite Division a mix of English and Welsh infantry regiments. Its Welsh by name but has rather a weak link to Wales you look at its Orbat, Welsh Regiments served with it but 160 Brigade didn't have a Welsh regiment in its lines after 1915, 159 was 'The Cheshire Brigade' and 158 was North Wales.

I never quite understood the positioning of that Memorial, on the Facebook page when I asked about it they tried to distance it from 38th Welsh Division saying its an all Welsh memorial, yet its right on one of 38th Welsh Divisions battlegrounds the thing they don't want it to be known as. I offered to help fundraise for it and had quite a few local pubs/clubs willing to hold functions, raffle etc but I never heard back of Mr Jones, our communications on facebook just stopped, he never replied which I thought was rather rude seeing as we have been talking and bouncing idea around for quite a while so didn't bother.

[Swiper]

I broadly agree with Gaz (as he knows), personally I've found the attitude to be 38 > 53 in WW1, to a remarkable extent. The cultural and social aspects of Welsh language are very remarkable and I'd argue that WW1 helps define them and break boundaries so that by WW2 we see plenty of official documentation and training/education materials in Welsh.

53 Div's arty/train was certainly mostly Welsh but its been more or less airbrushed out of narrative history, despite the Division's experiences in Gallipoli are wonderfully easy to understand and discuss, but for some reason its pretty much ignored. The First Minister said that 53 Div at Gallipoli would be commemorated, but quite how is very unclear. There is a clear focus away from the battlefield to personal accounts and I fear this approach will distort the perceptions of the past further.

Other Welsh units are also forgotten from a 38 Div centric narrative, for example I found that any Welsh non-Infantry units are airbrushed out of the historical narrative here, much of their information has been lost of buried in County Archives and moves approaching a certain institution about exhibitions or talks have sadly fallen on deaf, corporate ears. Clearly they wish to sell the narrative history they create.

As for the Memorial in Flanders its always struck me as a misguided memorial, its on a 38 Div battlefield, to a 38 Div poet but its not another 38 Div Memorial... in 1944 53 Div occupied positions that 38 Div had occupied in WW1 and a WW1/WW2 Memorial there (even earlier as well) to all Welsh soldiers killed out there would certainly make sense but currently it does not do so. The positioning of such a memorial on top of Snowden of the Black Mountain would be far more fitting and thought provoking in my opinion. Quite why WAG money went into it after WAG said they would never back it bamboozles me.

As I said to Gaz, Penderyn is at least going to do a roaring trade over the next four years...

[Maricourt]

Give the Assembly a chance! I was at the meeting earlier on this year in North Wales and there are plenty of projects in the pipeline to commemorate 1914-1918.

The 53rd [Welsh] Division will not be forgotten as a dedicated group, including myself, have been gathering research for some time.

The Suvla Bay landings at Gallipoli will feature prominently and then we will concentrate on the Division's move to Egypt and the battles in Palestine - those sometime forgotten outposts of the war.

We are also keen to acknowledge the role of 8/RWF, 40th Bde, 13th Division - who supported the ANZACs and went on to Mespot - there is not even a Divisional history that includes them!

Any help very gratefully received.

Regards ... Maricourt

[larney]

When the idea for this memorial was first muted I wondered if people had forgotten the plaque on the bunker at Goumier Farm! However, this new memorial is to commemorate all the Welshmen who fell in the war, so we should forget the units involved, as Welshmen fought in every regiment of the British army, as well as with the Aussies, Canadians, South Africans, New Zealanders, Indian Army, French army etc. We should use it to remember all our countrymen, not just the one division.

Reading some of the comments above regarding the 53rd (Welsh) Division, I think the problem it has is that its theatre of operations is not on the beaten track for battlefield tourists.

Just from my own field of interest, almost as many men from West Wales fell with the 53rd Division (around 700 in the 38th to 500 in the 53rd), but the 38th Division is the one that's closer to our hearts, as places such as Fleurbaix, Fromelles, Cuinchy, Mametz Wood, Pilckem Ridge, the Ancre Crossing, Gouzeaucourt and the Selle Crossing seem to strike more of a chord than the three battles of Gaza ever will, and that's no disrespect to the men.

I could drive to France tomorrow, and in a day or so cover all of the battlefields walked by the 38th, yet the 53rd (and the 13th and 74th Yeomanry Divisions for that matter) would be a nightmare to follow, unless you had deeper pockets than I have.

WW2 is a different matter, when the 53rd Welsh fought its way from Normandy to Hamburg, but that's another war (obviously!).

Having several ancestors who fought, and died, in all these divisions in WW1, and an uncle who fought with the 5th Welsh, 53rd Division, in WW2, I appreciate the efforts of them all, but the 38th Welsh is still the division that interests me most, and that's because I've walked in their footsteps, and visited all of their battlefields, so it strikes a chord inside me which the others don't, and I think that's simply because they are easier to follow.

However, if I win the lottery and get to visit Gallipoli, Egypt and Palestine, then who knows! I'd like to get there one day, to see where my Welsh expat ANZAC G. Grandfather and his 24th Welsh brother fought!

Wales has plenty to be proud of- the 1st Welsh and 1st SWB of the 1st Division covered themselves in glory during the war (especially during the Aisne and at First Ypres), as did the 1st and 2nd RWF throughout the war, the 2nd SWB at Tientsin, Gallipoli, Y Ravine, Arras and Ypres, the 9th Welsh and 9th RWF of the 19th Division at Loos, La Boiselle, Messines and Ypres, the Welshmen of the 40th Division at Bourlon Wood and the Lys, the 11th Welsh and RWF at Doiran etc etc.

We can, and should, use this memorial to commemorate them all, even if the memorial is at the centre of a 38th Division battlefield. It's just the press and the Welsh Assembly (who have only heard of the 38th Welsh Division and not the others) who have caused this little controversy, and they don't really matter, so let's just get behind the project, and appreciate a new memorial being built to honour the small part that Wales played in the war, and the sacrifice our ancestors made.

SteveJ.

On a different note, shouldn't a memorial to the 38th Division be raised at Rhyl or Winchester where they were raised and trained, before they lost their innocence in France!

[Garron]

Here is the Orbat of 53rd Welsh Division as it finished the war (taken from an original 53rd Welsh R.A.S.C section Sergeant's diary, I have the only copy in my possession )

Units of the 53rd Welsh Division

158 Brigade

5/6 RWF (1/5 & 1/6 Amalgamated on 3/8/1918)

3/153 Rifles, 3/154 Rifles Indian Infantry

4/11th Gurkha (All Indian Army)

1/1st Herefords (Left E.E.F 19/6/1918)

158th Light Trench Mortar Battery

159 Brigade

4/5 Welsh (1/4 and 1/5 amalgamated on 3/8/1918

3/152, 1/153 Punjabs

1/4th and 1/7th Cheshire (left E.E.F 19/6/1918)

159th Light Trench Mortar Battery

160 Brigade

1/7th R.W.F

1/17th Indian Infantry

1/21st Punjabis

1/1st Cape Corps

2/4th R. W. Kent (disbanded 13/9/1918)

2/10th Middlesex (disbanded 20/8.1918)

2/4th R W Surrey and 1/5th R Sussex (E.E.F 19/6/1918)

160th Light Trench Mortar Battery

Divisional Troops

53rd Division Cyclist Company

265th Brigade, R.F.A (A.B & C) Batteries

266th Brigade, R.F.A (A.B & C) Batteries

267th Brigade, R.F.A (A.B & 39) Batteries

53rd Divisional Ammunition Column

436 and 437 Welsh Dd Coy. Royal Engineers

72nd Coy Sappers & Miners (Indian Army)

53rd Divisional Signals

53rd Divisional Machine Gun Battalion

158, 159 and 160 M.G Companies

1/155 Pioneers (Indian Army)

53rd Divisional Train (246,247,248 and 249 Companies R.A.S.C)

53rd Mobile Veterinary Section R.A.V.C

Thought some of you would find it interesting

Gaz

[Maricourt]

Many thanks, Gaz - very interesting - thanks for posting this.

Regards ... Maricourt

[Garron]

Maricourt, I can gladly send you his extracts for Gallipoli if you'd like, he was RASC so never saw much action its mostly rear echelon stuff but it might be useful to you.

Gaz

[bruce]

Whenever I am at the Mametz dragon, I look at the plaque recording the Welsh divisions and have a bit of a giggle. One of them consisted of the usual 4 battns., three from Welsh Wales (and presumably Welsh speaking) and the London Welsh (and presumably cockney). I stand and giggle inwardly at the misunderstandings of two groups of men, each unable to understand English.

Are such thoughts permissible in one born and raised in one of the few areas of England that even the Welsh don't claim as part of Wales?

Bruce

[Maricourt]

Hedd Wynn - 15th [London Welsh] Royal Welch Fusiliers. Definitely a Welsh speaker!

Regards ... Maricourt

[Maricourt]

Gaz - I'd just like to thank you, via the GWF, for your help - very much appreciated.

Regards ... Maricourt

[Guest]

53rd Welsh Div TF in Gallipoli: only five of the twelve battalions were Welsh in name. There were more English battalions than Welsh in this 'Welsh' division right at the very start.

MG

[Scalyback]

Intresting stuff chaps. Sorry been caught up in work!

Maricourt, I thank you for research and if can help in any way will. What I did't like as mentioned in my 1st post, the 38th is mentioned as "wales own", to me that defines only one. They can at least mention the 53rd and what they did.

It may of had English battalions in there but the support units are also Welsh(why be infantry centric). It was named a Welsh division and should be commemarated as one. Yes gaz the division was indianised as the war went on, but what unit did not get diluited at any level from what it was originaly?

[Scalyback]

Whenever I am at the Mametz dragon, I look at the plaque recording the Welsh divisions and have a bit of a giggle. One of them consisted of the usual 4 battns., three from Welsh Wales (and presumably Welsh speaking) and the London Welsh (and presumably cockney). I stand and giggle inwardly at the misunderstandings of two groups of men, each unable to understand English.

Are such thoughts permissible in one born and raised in one of the few areas of England that even the Welsh don't claim as part of Wales?

Bruce

London Welsh tend to be the boyos up at the big smoke.....................London Welsh RFC are causing a few head aches for the RFU

Wonder if the regiment musem have any diarys etc for these? Will have a nose.

[asanewt]

Bruce, I'm fairly confident that during the period of WW1 London Welsh ex pats. would include many if not a majority of welsh speakers and probably devout chapel goers too.
The same could be said of Liverpool the capital of North Wales on Thursday afternoons even in my childhood!
Of course Hedd Wyn's winning Eisteddfod entry of 1917 was at Birkenhead and masses of Welsh troops mustered at Sniggery/Litherland so they certainly knew your general area existed.

[Maricourt]

Originally, the 53rd [Welsh] Division had a lot more Welsh battalions - however, to quote the official history:

"At the outbreak of war the Welsh Division was ready, and was promptly raided by the War office as though it had been a casual pool of battalion reinforcement."

The History of the 53rd [Welsh] Division [TF] 1914-1918 - Major C H Dudley-Ward, DSO, MC [late Welsh Guards]

Many of the Welsh battalions were sent off to the Western Front.

Regards ... Maricourt

[Kevin O'Marah]

We should not forget it's Wales Remembers, and a memorial to all Welshmen who gave their lives for our freedom and way of life in distant lands whether they spoke their mother tongue or not makes no difference,neither does it matter if they fought for Welsh regiments, their passing and the passing of others had an unimaginable effect on their families and community, a permanent memorial to their endeavours and hardships not ours, in any shape or form in my mind is more than welcomed, let's not forget they were Welshmen or of Welsh blood prior to any enlistment.

[Scalyback]

Indeed Kevin.

Happy for any Welshman or any man that served in a Welsh unit to see his story seen.

[Guest]

Dudley Ward's account of the Welsh Div at Gallipoli is almost pure fiction. The contemporary accounts of the performance of this half-trained Division was universally negative. In the mountains of correspondence between Aspinall Oglander (the Official (British) Historian of Gallipoli) and surviving Officers, there are more than a few accusations of the 53rd's line breaking. It is extremely unpleasant reading with Officers from other formations recounting having to threaten to shoot men to return to the line. There are accounts of hundreds of men breaking under the slightest excuse; The sort of real history that rarely reaches the printed page.

Should the authorities in Wales decide to do some research on the early months of the 53rd I suspect they will be extremely shocked by what they will read. I have transcribed every single unit War Diary on Gallipoli (seven Divisions' worth) and waded through plies of correspondence with the OH historian and there is near universal condemnation of this Division by men who were there. So much for 'glory'.

Despite this inconvenient truth, they were not alone. The brutal reality is that the Great War was not a series of heromantic successes in the classical stereotypical mould. The reality was far more brutal, punctuated with terrible failures at many levels. In the popular memory much of this has still not been accepted. I would not expect any authority to celebrate failure, but equally it is a strange thing in this supposedly enlightened era of near universal and free access to information that we still have such a blinkered view. It is more reminiscent of the hero-romantic template of the 1920s with all the baggage of misleading narrative and iconography. Build more monuments to imagined success.

Remembering and respecting their sacrifice is fine, but we do their memories little justice by manufacturing a false history. I suspect if any of those terrified men from the 53rd who faced Officers threatening to shoot them were alive today and could speak, they would not be talking of monuments and 'glory' and battle honours. None of the surviving diaries do, so I wonder aloud why in this modern age we continue to believe this imagined history perpetuated by the likes of Dudley Ward and his blind followers. It's not as if we are short of evidence.... it is a fairly easy exercise to demolish his false history. The word 'hero' has almost been worn out. By the 100th anniversary I expect it will be.

MG

[Swiper]

Interesting Martin, a number of the accounts I have read have been fairly damning on the training and employment of the Division, (personally I view the former as a near criminal action of the campaign.) Half-trained is certainly kind!

[Garron]

Intresting stuff chaps. Sorry been caught up in work!

Maricourt, I thank you for research and if can help in any way will. What I did't like as mentioned in my 1st post, the 38th is mentioned as "wales own", to me that defines only one. They can at least mention the 53rd and what they did.

It may of had English battalions in there but the support units are also Welsh(why be infantry centric). It was named a Welsh division and should be commemarated as one. Yes gaz the division was indianised as the war went on, but what unit did not get diluited at any level from what it was originaly?

The Divisional train, artillery, engineers etc might have been Welsh or Welsh by name I don't know the exact figures but the front line units in 1918 were from the Colonies; India, Nepal and Africa come the end, that warrants a remark on that alone, to call it 53rd Div 'Welsh' is I'd say stretched somewhat (my opinion) I'd say 75% or over of the line units weren't Welsh come 1918. As much as I respect their history, starting the war they would have struggled to call themselves 'Welsh' as was pointed out less than Half of the line units were Welsh, rear echelon aside, I'd call it a composite battalion if anything given a whole Brigade was English to start with.

I'd argue 38th Welsh wasn't really diluted as such Regiment wise in it had various Battalions disbanded to bolster others in the Division but they transferred 2 RWF in early 1918 so it was still a Welsh regiment going in into the Orbat (yes there were transfers of Englishmen into various battalions but they were Welsh Regiments by name, I very much doubt the name of any Regiments by 1918 had any significance as to where the men came from as the Army placed men where they were needed with conscription, there was no choice, my Great Uncle born in Mid Wales was attested to the Welsh Regiment in 1915 after he moved to South Wales pre-war but was transferred to the 11th Cheshire Regiment early 1918 to make up numbers for them)

This view much be Infantry centric and you might not agree with me, but when a large proportion doesn't live up to its name (it isn't doing what it says on the tin so to speak) that certainly needs to be commented on even it it ends up a side note in History.

[Guest]

Interesting Martin, a number of the accounts I have read have been fairly damning on the training and employment of the Division, (personally I view the former as a near criminal action of the campaign.) Half-trained is certainly kind!

I think one could build a case that this Division (and other TF Divisions at Gallipoli) failed mainly because of the way that they were deployed. The criticism was not only after the event. At the time it was recognised that they were not fully trained and certainly "not troops d'assault" as one critic described them. It was a very tragic and one that Ward managed to completely circumvent in his account. Aspinall Oglander does a similar avoidance of the unpalatable truth in his Official History of Gallipoli. MG

[Guest]

The Divisional train, artillery, engineers etc might have been Welsh or Welsh by name I don't know the exact figures but the front line units in 1918 were from the Colonies; India, Nepal and Africa come the end, that warrants a remark on that alone, to call it 53rd Div 'Welsh' is I'd say stretched somewhat (my opinion) I'd say 75% or over of the line units weren't Welsh come 1918. As much as I respect their history, starting the war they would have struggled to call themselves 'Welsh' as was pointed out less than Half of the line units were Welsh, rear echelon aside, I'd call it a composite battalion if anything given a whole Brigade was English to start with.

I'd argue 38th Welsh wasn't really diluted as such Regiment wise in it had various Battalions disbanded to bolster others in the Division but they transferred 2 RWF in early 1918 so it was still a Welsh regiment going in into the Orbat (yes there were transfers of Englishmen into various battalions but they were Welsh Regiments by name, I very much doubt the name of any Regiments by 1918 had any significance as to where the men came from as the Army placed men where they were needed with conscription, there was no choice, my Great Uncle born in Mid Wales was attested to the Welsh Regiment in 1915 after he moved to South Wales pre-war but was transferred to the 11th Cheshire Regiment early 1918 to make up numbers for them)

This view much be Infantry centric and you might not agree with me, but when a large proportion doesn't live up to its name (it isn't doing what it says on the tin so to speak) that certainly needs to be commented on even it it ends up a side note in History.

The challenges trying to commemorate units identified by nationality are widespread. The 10th (Irish) Division and the 16th (Irish) Division (K1 and K2) respectively had a similarly hard time trying to numerically sustain their national identities. Despite starting the War as (almost) homogeneously Irish (10th (Irish Div) included the 10th (service) Bn Hampshire Regt when deploying overseas) their Irish characteristics became diluted as the War progressed. So keen were some historians to 'backfit' an imagined history, one claimed that the 10th Hampshires had long standing Irish links. A preposterous claim for a K1 battalion raised in Winchester. The Irish units' experiences were severely impacted by the lack of recruits in Ireland. Questions were asked in Parliament why English conscripts were being used to sustain Irish battalions while there was no conscription in Ireland. With the exception of Cyril Fall's history of the Royal Irish Rifles, the Irish military histories generally skate over the thorny issue of the battalions' and Divisions' inabilities to sustain a national identity. The slow and relentless dilution of units by attrition, amalgamation and disbandment with their places in the line increasing being taken up by non-Irish units eventually became so extreme that the 10th (Irish) Div lost its 'Irish' name and ended the War with the majority of the battalions from the Indian Army and one lone Irish battalion. The Irish experience is perhaps more pronounced due to the lack of conscription and their inability to provide enough recruits.

Scotland, despite its limited population was rather better at sustaining national characteristics in its battalions, particularly in the Highland Regiments . There is data that suggests some Scottish formations sustained a very high proportion of Scotsmen in their ranks right through the War. Spare a thought for the 1/4th Suffolks as a lone English battalion in the 15th (fiercely Scottish) Div.

The challenges of maintaining territorially defined identities were universal, even within the English divisions as for example the 11th (Northern) Div included the 5th Dorsets. I think it is accepted that after conscription generally speaking the Army slowly became more homogeneous; The fundamental inherent weakness came from the mis-match between areas of high population and having county-based recruiting districts. The asymmetry between the two was unsustainable.

I tend to agree with one of the earlier posters that their is merit in commemorating all Welshmen in the War, however trying to anchor this sentiment on one unit is likely to be one that involves just a few challenges. MG