Capture of Major Yate

[shippingsteel]

To help illustrate the positioning of those units mentioned in the quote that Martin provided, we can see how they were attacking around Le Cateau in the map below.

Both the 26th and 66th Regiment were part of the 13th Infanterie Brigade, 7th Division ... whilst the 72nd Regiment was in 16th Infanterie Brigade, part of 8th Division

Then we have the 3rd Jaeger Bataillon, 5th Division which would have been advancing in the part of III Korps, 5th Division group shown in the map with the darker line.

Cheers, S>S

[trajan]

"the following is quoted from Lt WYNNE's diary from an entry made immediately after he had been taken prisoner: "We were taken into the Yard belonging to the remains of a farm at the cross-roads and placed under a strong guard there. The troops that had captured our position and who now guarded us belonged to four different regiments; the 26th, the 66th, the 72nd and 3rd Guards Regiment"

So for the benefit of others, that's:

The 26 = Infanterie-Regiment Fürst Leopold von Anhalt-Dessau (1. Magdeburgisches) Nr.26, Armeekorps: IV. Armee-Korps / Magdeburg: Division: 7. Division / Magdeburg: Brigade: 13. Infanterie-Brigade / Magdeburg - as on http://genwiki.genealogy.net/IR_26.

The 66 = 3. Magdeburgisches Infanterie-Regiment Nr.66. Armeekorps: IV. Armee-Korps / Magdeburg: Division: 7. Division / Magdeburg: Brigade: 13. Infanterie-Brigade / Magdeburg - as on http://genwiki.genealogy.net/IR_66

The 72 = 4. Thüringisches Infanterie-Regiment Nr. 72. Armeekorps: IV. Armee-Korps / Magdeburg; Division: 8. Division / Halle a.S; Brigade: 16. Infanterie-Brigade / Torgau

And as you say the other regiment is the odd one out. Possibly a case of mistaken identity, as the 3. Garde-Regt. zu Fuß was in the 1st Garde Division of the Garde Korps in the 2nd Armee.

They may have possibly mistook the Jäger-Batl.Nr.3 as a Garde unit.? As this Jaeger unit was attached to the III.Armee Korps which did take part in the battle. These are all Prussian units.

And for further clarification, this is the Brandenburgisches Jäger-Bataillon Nr. 3, which as SS states, was in the III Armee - see

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandenburgisches_J%C3%A4ger-Bataillon_Nr._3

[Guest]

So for the benefit of others, that's:

The 26 = Infanterie-Regiment Fürst Leopold von Anhalt-Dessau (1. Magdeburgisches) Nr.26, Armeekorps: IV. Armee-Korps / Magdeburg: Division: 7. Division / Magdeburg: Brigade: 13. Infanterie-Brigade / Magdeburg - as on http://genwiki.genealogy.net/IR_26.

The 66 = 3. Magdeburgisches Infanterie-Regiment Nr.66. Armeekorps: IV. Armee-Korps / Magdeburg: Division: 7. Division / Magdeburg: Brigade: 13. Infanterie-Brigade / Magdeburg - as on http://genwiki.genealogy.net/IR_66

The 72 = 4. Thüringisches Infanterie-Regiment Nr. 72. Armeekorps: IV. Armee-Korps / Magdeburg; Division: 8. Division / Halle a.S; Brigade: 16. Infanterie-Brigade / Torgau

And for further clarification, this is the Brandenburgisches Jäger-Bataillon Nr. 3, which as SS states, was in the III Armee - see

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandenburgisches_J%C3%A4ger-Bataillon_Nr._3

Excellent Post Mr Trajan. For those of us without foresnic knowledge of German Infantry Regiment clothing, are we sure that none of the men in the POW photo are from any of these regiments? MG

[trajan]

There are three chances for transcription error. Wynnes original, Wynnes transcription for Bond and Bond's transcription for Atkinson. Plenty of scope for error. (I double checked my transcription of Bond's letter). MG

I deal a lot with Roman and Greek inscriptions... Always 'fun' to read the 19th century readings, usually jotted down in a notebook and then published verbatim, with the originals...

One wonders [from a position of sublime ignorance] how easy it was to recognise German infantry units. And did he recognise them and then misremember? Easy to do under undoubted stress, post battle.

The various regiments would all have had their identifying number clearly shown on the shoulder boards, so it would not be that difficult too ascertain which regiment.

As to 'type' of regiment, that would depend on the level of knowledge of the person involved. This probably explains the misunderstanding of the '3rd' unit in this case.

If someone said after the event that it was a number 3 on the shoulderboards, then that would normally mean it was a Garde Regiment (unless it's a Batallion number)

Cheers, S>S

But note also (as SS mentioned earlier) the guards in the photograph at least have their shoulder tabs rolled up to avoid unit recognition. This may not have been the case when Wynne was captured, though. The thing being that it was essentially only the cockades, the coloured bands on the field caps, the numbers on the shoulder tabs, and bayonet troddels that helped one identify a unit - unless they had their pickelhauben and Uhlan and Jaeger hats on!

Not certain about shoulder tabs having battalion numbers...???

[trajan]

Excellent Post Mr Trajan. For those of us without foresnic knowledge of German Infantry Regiment clothing, are we sure that none of the men in the POW photo are from any of these regiments? MG

Thank you Martin! But like I said in post 79, those are basically the only ways (to the best of my limited knowledge) - except for belt buckles, which I forgot to add - to do a unit identification from an anonymous photograph.

However, I think we are all agreed by now that the blouse / tunic type of the 'guards', and the colour thereof; their old-style cartridge pouches; and - I would suggest, although our mate down under might not agree ( ), their old-fashioned weaponry, all point to a rear-guard unit.

To my mind we come back to - I think Seaforths' point? - that this is a posed photograph, taken shortly after capture. It was taken very early in the war, of an enemy officer who has medal ribbons, and so is an experienced 'warrior' decorated in a previous war, who has not even been liberated (yet!) of his binoculars, and is now guarded by a group of men who had probably not previously seen a living version of such a man! (Shades of the 'Hartlepool monkey'...!!!).

BUT, another mystery: who took that photograph, and where was it originally published before it made its way to which English-language newspaper from whence we get the image?

TTFN (I am supposed to be grading 61 x 2nd year essays )

Julian

[shippingsteel]

Another thing which some may not realise is that the Imperial German army was based on a conglomerate of the various states all combined under the "Prussian umbrella".

That's except for Bavaria which decided to remain somewhat independent to a degree, and maintained a separate army to all extents, with their own regiments and uniforms.

They even made their own decisions over when to adopt the certain armaments etc, so basically you could say that they were semi-autonomous within the greater Germany.

So thats what makes this mismatch in the photo so obvious. They are Bavarian Reserve troops, armed and dressed as Bavarians, which were not in the battle at Le Cateau.

EDIT. And the Bavarian Army ( I, II & III Bayerisches Armee-Korps) upon mobilisation formed part of the German 6th Army, tasked with contesting the distant Lorraine sector.

Cheers, S>S

[shippingsteel]

Shipping Steel - some more gold-dust... this time from the pen of Wynne and Atkinson in further correspondence answering specific questions from Atkinson relayed by Lt Col Bond.

1. Atkinson's question to Lt Col Bond in a handwritten letter:

"Wynne's identification of the units against you are most useful but we are surprised to find the 3rd Guards among them because the Corps that Regiment belongs to was miles away fighting the French who had retired to Charleroi. Perhaps they were a machine gun detachment? I wonder if he remembers if there were very many of them?

So it would seem that C T Atkinson had exactly the same question as you in 1918 when he was corresponding with Bond.

2. Here is Wynne's response:

" The 3rd Guards, or what I saw of them arrived just after we had been taken and a certain number of them were detailed to look after us at the Farm at the cross-roads (Pont des 4 Vaux on the sketch) and that many were among the escort that took us (about 200 KOYLI) into Le Cateau Village. At Mr Seydoux's [sp?] house where the Officers were unified for a week a detachment (about fifteen I should say) of them took their turn with detachments of two other regiments 26th and 72nd I think) in parading us. I don't think they were an MG detachment though cannot say for certain."

So even when quizzed he still maintains they were the 3rd Guards Regt. The only words difficult to decipher are the Name of the individual who owned the house.

Thank you for this terrific post, and those quotes hold a tremendous amount of information regarding the immediate post-battle circumstances, where the prisoners where held locally "for a week".

And it indicates they were held by the same troops that were involved in the battle and originally captured them, which I think is crucial. Obviously they were all Prussian, so not those in this photo.

As for the "3rd Guards" it simply has to be a case of misinterpretation as I can't begin to imagine a Prussian Guard unit, the incredibly elite 3rd Garde-Regt. zu Fuß being kept back guarding POW.!

As I said earlier, this is most likely a reference to the 3rd Jaeger Bataillon, as they were part of the 5th Division and present for the battle. And it seems a likely job for the Jaegers to be tasked with.

The Jaeger troops would have had the 3 displayed on the shoulder boards, making it quite easy to remember. I don't even think the Prussian Guards had numbers, they were recognisable on sight.!

Cheers, S>S

[shippingsteel]

Thinking some more on this Jaeger unit ... another possible reason for mistaking the Jaeger for Guards is that the Jaeger would have been wearing different headwear to the norm.

The Jaeger units were identifiable from the rest of the Infantry due to the fact that they wore the much more impressive looking Tschako helmet, as opposed to the standard pickel.

There is a link HERE which shows a (mid-war) soldat from that particular unit wearing the Tschako. They would also have had numbered shoulderboards like the one shown below.

Cheers, S>S

[Guest]

Wynne, Bond and Yate were King's Own Yorkshire Light Infantry whose cap badge and collar dogs would have been a French style curled horn (albeit with a rose in the centre). If Jaeger battalion shoulder titles had similar horns as shown in the image above, one might have thought it would have stuck in the minds of the POWs*. Perhaps this is why Wynne remembers the 3rd (assuming they also had the 'French' horn shoulder titles). It might also be some confabulation - Wynne convincing himself they were the elite Guards and not Jaegers and giving the story of their capture extra gravitas.

I understand that after the war when POWs were returned, Biritish Officer POWs had to face an inquisition and make lengthy statements explaining their capture. I have seen some of these statement and they were clearly grilled quite hard. I think there was an assumption that Officers who became POWs had a lot of explaining to do. Bond's assertion that they did not 'surrender' but were overwhelmed is interesting. He takes great pains to make this point in the book and in his letter to Atkinson.

There is the remote possibility of self-preservation here - if they all agreed on a 'version of the truth' that the battalion made a last-stand bayonet charge and just happened to be overwhelmed, they go down in a blaze of glory (and survive). It sounds rather better than capitulating against overwhelming odds and simply surrendering. If the elite Guards can be introduced to the story, it also creates the impression that they were overwhelmed by crack troops. It also gets enhanced if one of the key players is awarded the VC as it creates a framework of heroism that overshadows other considerations.

It seems a distinct possibility that the last charge did not happen in the way the VC citation describes. Bond does not quite go that far. As Battalion HQ was the last trench to succumb, one might think that Bond was one of the last to be overwhelmed and would have witnessed the charge-that-didn't-happen. Given the KOYLI were isolated - the other Battalions having broken free and got away, one might reasonably think Brigade HQ also got away. The point here is that the only Officer witnesses who could make the VC recommendation might have been the KOYLI and Bond himself. It would be interesting to dig up the VC citation and discover who made the original recommendation.

It is worth remembering that two Battalion Commanding Officers were court-martialled for attempting to surrender - Cheshires and Dublin Fusiliers - in the retreat from Mons. The author (Bond) and Wynne would have been acutely aware of this - even as POWs - as it received wide publicity. The Royal Munster Fusiliers had a similar experience near Etreux with the OC - Major Charrier - personally leading a number of counter attacks when completely surrounded. His end was in the hero-romantic mould so admired by the Victorians and perpetuated by the Edwardians - dying leading his men against impossible odds. Similar stories with very different outcomes for the men in charge. The Suffolks also went down at Le cateau. Atkinson in his letter to Bond mentions this and describes their end like a ship going down with flags flying. Atkinson's letter to Bond is very 'inquisitive' from behind the aegis of the Historical Section he was able to ask very pointed questions. To me Atkinson's questions reveal more than a hint of his doubt about the version of events. It is an interesting read. I am transcribing it and will post it here.

I have no doubt that these men were incredibly brave and faced an impossible situation, but parts of this story do not sit well. The citation and Bond's later version of events are clearly at odds with each other. There are versions of the truth and the 'truth' was often subordinated to preserving battalion and personal reputations. This might be an example.

A modern psychologist would have a field day with this material. A classic interrogation technique is to repeatedly ask the same questions over time and compare the answers. There is a reason for this because people who attempt to create alternative versions of the truth will be exposed by the differences in the various versions. I have researched a similar episode that happened at Gallipoli where a battalion was overrun, the Officers captured and the CO in this case killed - murdered after capture. The objective was Tekke Tepe - a high point dominating the landscape. The surviving POW Officers made repeated attempts to make the authorities believe they had reached their objective - the top of the hill - where they were overwhelmed in a last desperate fight (does this sound familiar?). They even resorted to writing to newspapers in the post war years to enhance their 'achievements'. Unfortunately every other piece of (buried) evidence suggests the Battalion did not get to within a mile of the peak and were in fact overwhelmed near the bottom of the hill. The real version of events did not sit quite so well with the custodians of battalion and regimental reputations and attempts to suppress this were quite successful.

I suspect there is rather a lot of British military history that would not stand up to a more forensic autopsy.

MG

* In the Crimean War Troop Sgt Loy Smith of the 11th Hussars cut the button off a wounded Russian 11th Hussar as a memento. Allegedly he replaced one of his own buttons with the Russian one.

[trajan]

Another thing which some may not realise is that the Imperial German army was based on a conglomerate of the various states all combined under the "Prussian umbrella".

That's except for Bavaria which decided to remain somewhat independent to a degree, and maintained a separate army to all extents, with their own regiments and uniforms.

They even made their own decisions over when to adopt the certain armaments etc, so basically you could say that they were semi-autonomous within the greater Germany.

So thats what makes this mismatch in the photo so obvious. They are Bavarian Reserve troops, armed and dressed as Bavarians, which were not in the battle at Le Cateau.

EDIT. And the Bavarian Army ( I, II & III Bayerisches Armee-Korps) upon mobilisation formed part of the German 6th Army, tasked with contesting the distant Lorraine sector.

Cheers, S>S

I'm not so certain as you seem to be that the Bavarians maintained their own uniforms right through to WWI. IIRC, all of the German armies (that is to say, all those armies of the states that formed the Reich) wore the same field uniform, the only distinction being (apart from the shoulder boards and buckles) the cockade... That is why the cockade existed! However, I have a feeling that I have seen a reference somewhere that the Bavarian version of the feldgrau 1911 tunics had a distinctive edging to the collar - but these men are wearing the blue uniform so that is not really relevant here. I can see why you want these guards to be Bavarian, but the evidence is simply not sufficient to be certain to my way of thinking - you seem to be basing it solely on the weaponry, but as has been shown elsewhere, the bayonets and rifles they have were in use by second and third line units in the other German States. Ok, so Bavarians were on the Lorraine sector, but it is taking it a wee-bit too far to imply that members of these units might be portrayed in the infamous photograph...A bit of clutching at straws here?

Trajan

EDIT: PS, I did observe in post no. 13 that the Bavarian 1st Landwehr Division were in Alsace-Lorraine

[trajan]

I did wonder about the guy at the right back with the funny hat - I wondered if he might be a Jaeger, but eventually decided he just have a puffed up field cap!

The Jaeger units were identifiable from the rest of the Infantry due to the fact that they wore the much more impressive looking Tschako helmet, as opposed to the standard pickel.

There is a link HERE which shows a (mid-war) soldat from that particular unit wearing the Tschako.

Here for comparison is another Jaeger who has a cap somewhat similar to that in the photograph - although I am more in favour of the man in the photo having a kepi!

https://c1.staticflickr.com/7/6113/6298836760_8f487a08de_z.jpg

EDIT: PS: He is with the Reserve Kurhessisches Jäger-Bataillon Nr.11 - for more on the photo go to https://www.flickr.com/photos/paranoid_womb/6298836760/

[trajan]

A final one for now - according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bavarian_Army the First Army did have the following Landwehr units:

• 10th Mixed Landwehr Brigade
• 11th Mixed Landwehr Brigade
• 27th Mixed Landwehr Brigade

Now, I know Wikki is not entirely reliable.... So unless somebody kindly does it for me ( ) I'll try to verify that later from German sources... On the other hand, the answer might be found in Cron's Imperial Germany Army...

[shippingsteel]

So with no expert opinion forthcoming on this one, I have had to go further afield to find some more corroborating evidence. I do find this a little surprising though. No German experts?

Anyway as I have been saying, these are Bavarian Reserve troops in the photo ... why, because they are dressed like Bavarian Reserve troops.! Any other suggestion is not sustainable.

I have added this photo of a known Bavarian Reserve unit from the same early war period to use as a comparison. Everyone should be able to see the uniforms are identical from this.

This photo is from a Flickr page linked HERE and the caption reads :-

"Men of the Kgl. Bayerische Reserve Infanterie Regiment Nr. 5; Ersatz Bataillon. posing in memory of the "Feldzug 1914".
The men are wearing their pre-war tunics in Bavarian "Hell-Blau", with red straps and yellow numbers, which makes the shoulder straps hard to read.

It doesn't look like a 5, but the stamp on the back is pretty clear." (And further down we can see the reverse of the postcard with Feldpost mark clearly shown)

Why the Bavarians are in this photo which is supposed to be near Le Cateau is the question that needs answering. It cannot be at Le Cateau as the Bavarians were not there for the battle.

Cheers, S>S

[Guest]

Shipping Steel.

Out of sheer interest, do you have similar photos of men in the uniforms of the units that we know were there? 26th 72d etc...? To the uninitiated in German military sartorial variations it would be of some interest.

Is it possible that Yate was allowed to keep all his clobber, including binos? I really cant see a man of his calibre being dressed up as a staged photo. If he was disposed to suicide due to the shame of being captured I would have thought he would have gone down fighting if they were trying to force him into posing for a photo. He was a tall imposing figure and some of the men seem to be looking at him with a certain degree of awe (my conjecture of course).

It is possible the the prisoners were separated and Maj Yate was sent elsewhere for interrogation as the most senior (unwounded) Officer captured that day (Lt Col Bond was wounded) i.e. he might not have been held with Wynne and the others. Wynne does not specify which POWs were there. MG

[trajan]

Shipping Steel.

Out of sheer interest, do you have similar photos of men in the uniforms of the units that we know were there? 26th 72d etc...? To the uninitiated in German military sartorial variations it would be of some interest.

Is it possible that Yate was allowed to keep all his clobber, including binos? I really cant see a man of his calibre being dressed up as a staged photo. If he was disposed to suicide due to the shame of being captured I would have thought he would have gone down fighting if they were trying to force him into posing for a photo. He was a tall imposing figure and some of the men seem to be looking at him with a certain degree of awe (my conjecture of course).

It is possible the the prisoners were separated and Maj Yate was sent elsewhere for interrogation as the most senior (unwounded) Officer captured that day (Lt Col Bond was wounded) i.e. he might not have been held with Wynne and the others. Wynne does not specify which POWs were there. MG

I did suggest a week or so back that this be posted in uniforms! Then a quicker and more informed response might have been possible!

Everything about the photograph (including Yate's kit) suggests it was taken almost immediately after capture, and probably the same day, in which case the way that the 'guards' have their shoulder tabs rolled back, to prevent identification of their unit, is interesting in view of what Wynne reported...

[trajan]

Anyway as I have been saying, these are Bavarian Reserve troops in the photo ... why, because they are dressed like Bavarian Reserve troops.! Any other suggestion is not sustainable.

I have added this photo of a known Bavarian Reserve unit from the same early war period to use as a comparison. Everyone should be able to see the uniforms are identical from this. ...the caption reads :-"Men of the Kgl. Bayerische Reserve Infanterie Regiment Nr. 5; Ersatz Bataillon. posing in memory of the "Feldzug 1914"...."The men are wearing their pre-war tunics in Bavarian "Hell-Blau", with red straps and yellow numbers, which makes the shoulder straps hard to read..." ... Why the Bavarians are in this photo which is supposed to be near Le Cateau is the question that needs answering. It cannot be at Le Cateau as the Bavarians were not there for the battle.

I do sometimes wonder what on earth you are trying to prove here SS! You clearly want these soldiers to be Bavarians, come what may? And/or, that as there are no Bavarian units recorded at Le Cateau then the photograph could not have been taken there or in the vicinity?

Let’s move away from your obvious desire to make these guards Bavarian (as you indicated in post no.4) and instead clinically and objectively look at what the photograph ‘says’, insofar as visual analysis and a limited amount of research reveals.

1) Yate still has most of his kit apart from weapons: thus there is a somewhat more than 50% chance that the photograph was taken soon after Yate was captured at Le Cateau.

2) The German guards are all wearing the pre-1907/1910 Waffenrock (note the collar style, the 'Dunkelblau' colour and how the Unteroffizier to the left of Yate has Brandenburg cuffs, as is apparently the case with the other ‘guards’), and also that the Unteroffizier at least has pre-1909 Patronentaschen: he and therefore they are not 1st line troops and so clearly cannot belong to any of the principal German units involved in the battle and in Yate’s capture.

3) The guards are armed with the Gew. 88 and the short 71/84 bayonet: by 1914 this bayonet at least (and also often the Gew., 88) was in use by the 2nd and 3rd line troops of several states (see my Strassburg photograph above), the Bavarian 1st line units having dropped it 1903 or shortly after (note incidentally how even the Bavarian ersatz troops in the photograph you reproduce above have 1898 bayonets).

4) The lower cockade on the Unteroffizier’s Feldmütze and on those worn by the other guards lacks a distinct dark-coloured centre: so although this could be a Bavarian cockade, it could also be for either the Hanseatic League, Saxony, Hessen, Bremen, or Baden (and as far as we can go with this photograph the bottom cockade is the ONLY way of identifying which state these men came from (Brandenburg cuffs with the red strap are, IIRC (I am working from home), infantry).

That, I think, is all that the photograph says, if we examine it forensically. I for one do not think that anyone can say that "these are Bavarian Reserve troops in the photo ... why, because they are dressed like Bavarian Reserve troops.! Any other suggestion is not sustainable." On the contrary, we need to remember a maxim you yourself have employed in GWF discussions: "Pluralitas non est ponenda sine neccesitate" - "We are to admit no more causes of natural things than such as are both true and sufficient to explain their appearances." By using this principle, or, if you like, lex parsimoniae (aka as Ockham's razor), then let’s cut to the quick here: there is nothing in the photograph - in my honest opinion - to positively identify these guards as Bavarian. In which case it is pointless to speculate that some unrecorded Bavarian unit was operating near Le Cateau, or that the photograph was taken neither at or near Le Cateau but elsewhere where Bavarian units were operating!

Well, that's my opinion, which I know you will probably ignore, dismiss, or take with a pinch of salt - and it is long-winded and you have previously admitted frustration and impatience at my long replies! Your privilege! But I at least do not have any objection to being proven wrong here or on any other topic if you or anyone else can provide a reasonable and well-argued case! Give me and others more secure evidence as to your theories concerning Yate's capture and would be happy!

[trajan]

Oh, lookie lookie here... A photograph shown by Wyliecoyote, a noted collector, at http://forums.gunboards.com/showthread.php?259787-71-84-German-Bayonets-why-so-scarce (side edges cropped to fit here)

He describes this as:

"...a wartime photo of the S71/84 in use, uniquely enough by a soldier in the Prussian Armee, of the Schleswig-Holsteinisches Infanterie-Regt. Nr.163, home stationed in Neumünster / Heide of the IV Armee Korps. He is armed with a Gewehr 88/05 or 88/14 with a non dimpled ejection port cover. Fixed to the rifle is a S71/84 bayonet. Dated on the reverse 9 June 1915. Hard to tell if he is from an Ersatz Btln. or not. Take a look at the crossguard, you can almost make out what appears to be a regimental stamp on the bayonet."

So, further confirmation SS that you are looking at the Yate photograph from the wrong angle, having it seems begun by assuming from the rifles and the bayonets held by the guards that they have to be Bavarian, then going on to deduce that there was a hitherto unknown Bavarian unit in the area where he was captured OR that the infamous photograph was taken somewhere else where there was a Bavarian unit (perhaps the Lorraine?!).. With the greatest of respect, mate, a little bit of focussed research about who used the Gew. 88 and the 71/84 would have brought this up...especially when this is on a dedicated bayonet forum on the web that we both follow...

[seaforth78]

SS,

Why would you think that Major Yate merited being such a special prisoner that the Germans would go to such lengths to make a story out of him? He wasn't the only field officer captured that day and besides his VC recommendation wasn't even put in yet, so I am wondering if you are letting your idea of him being a VC winner before the capture make it in your mind that the Germans would make a Yate a special case?

I obviously can't prove when this photo was exactly taken, but it wasn't in Germany I'll bet and still within France. Remember that he didn't just get evacuated out of the war zone with lightening speed like a Vietnam era movie to have the Germans make an example of him. And being a man of Yate's character, I don't think he would have willfully been at the beck and call of the Germans to put on/or take off his uniform like a slave; you misunderstand his character and his subsequent death proves this; so I don't know what your point is about the photo. I researched this man at length for over a year, read some very pertinent information on him and feel I got to know Yate's thoughts, though 100 years on. I just wish you would take the efforts that others here like Trajan and Seaforths and others to research a bit more. I am not really interested in what unit or division or corps faced 2/KOYLI that day, I realise the Germans in the photo with the odd Frenchman in the background clearly shows these are Out of the Line troops tasked to take the POW's to Germany. By this point the Germans already had a quarter of France under them with its extensive railways. So what's the big deal mate?

Martin,

My sentiments exactly about Yate that he was not the man who would have been used like SS purports. Seaforths sent me Yate's file (which was quite hefty) when doing my own write up on him for publication, he was his own man. No nonsense about him. Thank you for finally saying what you said about Yate. It was well merited.

[shippingsteel]

I don't have anything to prove with this photo. I only noticed this in passing and thought it was something which should be raised, as this photo is not 'right'. It's never about the bayonets.

But it is surprising where some trails can lead.! The simple fact is that the Bavarians were the only troops still wearing their "Hellblau" (light blue with bright red facings) uniforms in 1914.

And if you want to research where all the Bavarian troops were in the early battles of the war (before everything got mixed all together) you will find them with the 6th Army in the Lorraine.

Cheers, S>S

[shippingsteel]

Shipping Steel.

Out of sheer interest, do you have similar photos of men in the uniforms of the units that we know were there? 26th 72d etc...? To the uninitiated in German military sartorial variations it would be of some interest.

Is it possible that Yate was allowed to keep all his clobber, including binos? I really cant see a man of his calibre being dressed up as a staged photo.

Hello again Martin, thanks for your interest. The early war photos of troops in the combat zone are extremely hard to find, and looking for a certain regiment, virtually impossible.

But as an example of a Prussian line regiment infantryman of 1914, dressed as they would have been when they marched across the frontier, I think this photo is good enough.

So he is shown wearing the generic M1907/10 Feldrock in the Feldgrau colour (with the matching Brandenburg cuffs) and apparently in this case, with Armee-Korps piping in red.

He is armed with the Gewehr 98 front-line service rifle but still has the earlier pattern ammunition pouch. Now the shoulderboards MAY indicate he is from Infanterie-Regt. Nr.72.?

But it doesn't matter, and it's probably another argument we don't really need to have. Point being, the vast majority of German line regiments would have been dressed the same.

As for the circumstances of the photo, as an Officer it is quite possible Yate was allowed to keep all his kit. I have seen other photos of early war POW being loaded onto some trains.

Some of them looked like they had just stepped off the parade ground.! Especially striking was a Scottish Regiment soldier still in complete dress, full kilt, stockings up with glengarry.

Cheers, S>S

[seaforths]

As S78 pointed out - his file is hefty indeed. This is from page 4 & 5 of Lt. Breen's 5 page report on Yate regarding his capture, death and other issues. Breen was to have escaped with Yate but because of the attention Yate was receiving from the Germans and their visits, he had to bring the date forward and there was only enough civilian clothes at that time for one of them to go:

'From conversations with British Officers, a German Reserve Lieut in the 72nd Infantry Regiment and Yate himself, I learned that he and his men obstinately resisted when attacked by superior forces at Le Cateau, on the 26th August and I understood that he owed his life to the generosity of a German Lieut commanding the storming party who struck the revolver out of his hand and told him that further resistance was futile he arrived in Torgau unwounded, his Field Service jacket was scorched and burnt by the explosion of a shell...it worried him considerably that he had been captured unwounded; In his opinion no officer should surrender while conscious...'

Also they were not sent directly to Torgau, they went via Magdeburg. I read a description of Magdeburg today with its large cobbled courtyard...I am not suggesting the photo was taken there but it highlights how common cobbled yards and courtyards were so I think it would be unlikely to be able to pin down a location.

So now you know who captured him and the circumstances. No charge but a very brave man nonetheless.

Great to see the images of the German headgear. I was looking at French uniforms tonight. I don't think they look like the German design you posted - I say 'they' because if you look to the other side of him, you can (I think) just about make out the peak of another cap on another man. I could also be a trick of the light but the collar looks very much darker and of a different material. The fabric of the jacket itself also looks much lighter than the others.

[Loader]

Has anyone seen photos of the others captured with him? I'd think the officers would be together except for the wounded ones. I wonder if a photo was taken of each of them but only the ranking officer photo got used? Maybe there was a group photo taken of them too.

[seaforths]

Has anyone seen photos of the others captured with him? I'd think the officers would be together except for the wounded ones. I wonder if a photo was taken of each of them but only the ranking officer photo got used? Maybe there was a group photo taken of them too.

Actually, I was thinking more along the lines of the photograph being cropped down for some reason. I just get the impression it is part of a bigger picture...

[trajan]

The simple fact is that the Bavarians were the only troops still wearing their "Hellblau" (light blue with bright red facings) uniforms in 1914.

Sorry to seem as if I am nagging, but references are all! So, can you support that claim with a reference? IIRC many 2nd and 3rd line units still had the pre-1910 uniform at the start of WW1 - I could probably find a photo on flicker or through wyliecoyote, but too many things to do today. Oh, and by the way, whatever the actual shade of blue, I think you'll find that the correct term for the tunic was 'Dunkelblau'.

TTFN!

[trajan]

... Great to see the images of the German headgear. I was looking at French uniforms tonight. I don't think they look like the German design you posted - I say 'they' because if you look to the other side of him, you can (I think) just about make out the peak of another cap on another man. I could also be a trick of the light but the collar looks very much darker and of a different material. The fabric of the jacket itself also looks much lighter than the others.

Yes, I am with you there, I too think that man has a kepi, but thought it might help matters to find and post the closest Jaeger hat I could to this one to help diminish or eliminate the possibility he was a Jaeger.