Capture of Major Yate

[trajan]

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...

(Ooops! tried to add this to the above but it didn't work!)

I agree with you there - but still no idea of where the original photograph was first published? I have seen one other copy on the web that is very slightly different in showing part of the text in the column to the left, but literally just a letter or two in each line so impossible to make any sense of this. Does the KOYLI musuem have any idea as to its origins?

TTFN,

Trajan

[seaforth78]

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...

Hear hear. BTW, has anyone considered WHY he was photographed in particular? It wasn't 'staged' like he was a bloomin General unlike SS who, for reasons for his own, thinks so....

[seaforths]

Some of the reasons why the photograph is cropped might be related to the very location it is taken. They have gone to great pains that the men curl their epaulettes perhaps there was something in the photograph that made the location identifiable.

Martin, apologies I did mean to say in my previous posts that I wholeheartedly agree with your assessment regarding the VC. I was starting to think along the lines of the huge casualties, the retreat etc. It was going to look bleak indeed in the press if it looked as though it could be interpreted that the poor souls weren't putting up a damned stout fight of it. They needed something positive - gallantry awards - and lots of them. However, it does seem strange that they pushed through the highest award for bravery knowing at the time they were processing it, the facts were wrong.

[Muerrisch]

Easy to lose sight, in all the forensic investigation, that we are looking at a poor sod who has had gruelling days, is clearly exxhausted, lost his men, lost his battle, lost his friends, and, in his eyes but not mine, probably lost his honour. Within weeks he also lost his life.

There is a difference between legitimate interest and voyeurism. Please, in petty wranglings over analysis, remember that this man and these men were all that stood between us and our subsequently speaking German as a first language.

[seaforths]

I am not trying to imply that he and those with him were not great men. All of the men who fought whether they made the extreme sacrifice, survived or were taken prisoner were exceptionally brave by the virtue of being there and, staying there to fight - whatever it took. What I am suggesting is that the situation was politically motivated and manipulated at a time when volunteers were required, subscription being not yet introduced. I am not so sure that it would have influenced the situation one way or the other as the volunteers, in the early days, weeks and months flooded in, fearful it would be over before they could see the action themselves.

The volunteers were keen to rush to the aid of their fellow countrymen. To keep the wicked Hun from their doorstep as it would have been seen at the time. Bravery awards raise the moral of the troops and reassure those at home that the forces are not capitulating but putting up a stern fight and resistance is high. As discussed earlier and no real need to revisit, the feeling that awards were given more freely earlier in the war, when the outcome then looked very dark and bleak and painted a picture at home of an army on the run.

I would further suggest that Yate would have fought to his death, had he been allowed to do so. However, I am not sure that intention is enough to satisfy the award of a VC or any other award for bravery, for that matter and that it is the action that counts. Yate would have played no part in the award recommendation and is thus a blameless party. I have no doubt that the emotions of many captured men were shock, horror and shame. Some POWs may have taken the stance to sit out the war and try to survive their terrible conditions and circumstances. Their battle was one of survival. Whereas others such as Yate saw it as their duty to try to escape, to try and continue the fight, from the other side of the wire. This was not just an attitude shown by officers but one shown by the ORs too held at different camps of course. Many of them paid an extremely high price for adopting that attitude - Yate included.

[seaforth78]

Easy to lose sight, in all the forensic investigation, that we are looking at a poor sod who has had gruelling days, is clearly exxhausted, lost his men, lost his battle, lost his friends, land, in his eyes but not mine, probably lost his honour. Within weeks he also lost his life.

There is a difference between legitimate interest and voyeurism. Please, in petty wranglings over analysis, remember that this man and these men were all that stood between us and our subsequently speaking German as a first language.

Lieutenant General Grumpy, that is not what Seaforths meant and your assumption of us questioning his award as questioning his honour is nonsense as making the inference that every body who served who should placed on a pedestal and with a large "Hands Off' placard placed on front. Sorry, but please read the detailed the Yate files like Trajan, Seaforths and I had done.The man, as much as I like my subject, did not deserve the VC, I think this has been proved solidly. And yes he was tired, hungry, and worn out I suppose but so what? He went through much worse in South Africa (dangerously wounded) and in the Russo-Japanese War but he was a soldier and knew what to expect, so let's not baby the guy huh?

[shippingsteel]

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'.

Sorry Trajan, but you're wrong again I'm afraid. I guess now that this has been moved to Uniforms we are allowed to debate such trivia.?

Anyway, the Prussian dark blue Waffenrock was referred to as 'Dunkelblau' while the Bavarian light blue Waffenrock was known as 'Hellblau'.

This is somewhat important as you have acknowledged in earlier posts that the uniform shown on the Germans in the photo is of course light blue.

Cheers, S>S

[trajan]

There is a difference between legitimate interest and voyeurism. Please, in petty wranglings over analysis, remember that this man and these men were all that stood between us and our subsequently speaking German as a first language.

I am not trying to imply that he and those with him were not great men...... Many of them paid an extremely high price for adopting that attitude - Yate included.

... And yes he was tired, hungry, and worn out I suppose but so what? He went through much worse in South Africa (dangerously wounded) and in the Russo-Japanese War but he was a soldier and knew what to expect, so let's not baby the guy huh?

Grumpy, I think the Seaforthers have summed it up well. I don't think any of us have forgotten the circumstances involved, or the man we are concerned with or his colleagues, or what he and they went through that day and subsequently.

But in trying to assess the matter of what happened on the day of his capture, and in particular the reason or purpose of that photograph, we have to let all subjectivity and a degree of sympathy aside and coldly focus on what we can learn from what we see in it, and place that against the written record - it is a form of archaeology: we learn more about what really happened in the personal lives of people and of events in the past from the artefacts, not from the written record. That means looking at the minutiae of what we see in the photograph and how we can interpret it - it's not voyeurism to do that.

I think that in the process of the give and take in the various posts here we have all learnt much more about Major Yate, the circumstances of his capture, the battle itself, the units involved, and, yes, the uniforms and weaponry of those shown in the photograph, which is the only way to accurately identify who those guards are! In the process I personally think we have improved and contributed to a wider understanding of all that happened the day of his capture. Hardly voyeurism.

Trajan

[trajan]

Sorry Trajan, but you're wrong again I'm afraid. ... the Prussian dark blue Waffenrock was referred to as 'Dunkelblau' while the Bavarian light blue Waffenrock was known as 'Hellblau'. ... This is somewhat important as you have acknowledged in earlier posts that the uniform shown on the Germans in the photo is of course light blue....

SS, Just what are you trying to prove here? What I actually wrote was:

whatever the actual shade of blue, I think you'll find that the correct term for the tunic was 'Dunkelblau'.

So read that again... I was simply indicating ("I think") that 'Dunkelblau' was the correct (i.e., the official) term for the colour / type of tunic - at least that is what I have always found implied in German language sources, whatever the actual hue or shade of blue. I could be wrong - but I could be right... But I can hardly be 'wrong again' for suggesting something that you or anyone else can feel free to check on - and correct me with a trusted reference!

To your next point, surprising though it might seem, I do know that in post no. 9 I observed that the tunic colour is a light blue - that is what it is. (Incidentally I did not acknowledge it as being that colour / shade - I identified it as such! Perhaps you might bend a little and give some credit where it is reasonably due? ) But my identifying the colour as a light blue does not mean that I wished to imply that the official term for it was 'Hellblau'.

Much more to the point though, instead of making this attempt at point scoring, why not respond to my actual question, which was: can you support with a reference your claim that only Bavarian units wore 'blue' tunics at the outbreak of WW1? And while you are at that, please also find me a reference indicating that that the Bavarian 'blue' tunic was officially described as 'Hellblau'? I'll make an exception for you that I never make to my senior students, in that for the time being, then for either query I will even accept an internet reference from a trusty source! The point being that it is very easy to make claims without supporting evidence... Even shaky evidence is better than none...

TTFN,

Trajan

[trajan]

Trajan,

How you suffer SS is a wonder...You're a better man than I am but I must give him credit for coming back to the playground with his Teddy Bear.

Keeps the brain active and I learn a lot in the process - from my own readings and what SS offers in return! Also, my reading of German - and my knowledge of matters German, Bavarian and Austrian in ww1 - has improved significantly since SS and I had our first sparring match! Every cloud...

[seaforth78]

Thanks to the ehhh, SS rather, I had learned so much on Bavaria and its Army and its uniforms that I call myself an authority....

[trajan]

Must be bedtime in ozzie land... So I offer a mixture of good and not so good news for SS for when he wakes up...

This site - http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deutsches_Heer_(Deutsches_Kaiserreich)#Infanterie - does indeed state that 'Die bayerischen Fußtruppen hatten hellblaue Uniformen'! Is that a reliable source? Well, the same is also indicated on Pl.10 in an 1877 German book on uniform colours...! Shock horror...??? Collapse of stout party??? No, actually as Pl.19 in the same book indicates that a certain "Train" (i,e, supply, etc.) unit (not Bayerische!) also wore 'hellblau' blouses, with - if I have understand the text correctly - black bands around the cuffs... Well, that would fit the photograph and also make sense - it's a rear echelon unit! But as Seaforth (and SS) remind us, who knows where the blasted photograph was taken!

Trajan

PS: Yes, I know, I challenged SS to produce the evidence for his claims on uniform colours and here I am helping him (up to a point)... But that's what I think this forum does best, allowing a balanced discussion usually on equal terms!

[wyliecoyote]

Yes the whole incident of his capture (which incidentally was a VC action) and his later escape and death has been shrouded in controversy since the start.

Here is the VC citation: “Major Yate (deceased), 2nd Battalion The King’s Own Yorkshire Light Infantry, commanded one of the two companies that remained to the end in the trenches at Le Cateau on August 26, and when all the other officers were killed or wounded and ammunition exhausted, led his 19 survivors against the enemy in a bayonet charge in which he was severely wounded. He was picked up by the enemy and he subsequently died as a prisoner of war.”

He was only in the hands of the Germans for less than a month, as he was captured on the 26th August at Le Cateau and then later died on the 20th September 1914.

So the date of the photo is pretty much constrained between those dates. You would think it must have been somewhat staged by the Germans as a propaganda shot.

Cheers, S>S

EDIT. Note the shoulder boards of the 4 German troops surrounding the Major have all been unbuttoned and are rolled back. Possibly to prevent identification.??

Generally when we see the shoulder boards rolled, it is because the troops had been marching with their tornister packs, the shoulder boards were rolled to prevent damage from the pack straps.

[wyliecoyote]

Yes I have been through all the controversy about his escapes and then apparent suicide, but this is a 'mystery' photo which in my opinion doesn't fit it's caption.

This photo is particularly intriguing as I believe it shows possibly Bavarian troops equipped with the Gewehr 88 rifle (note bolt, magazine & side-mounted bayonet)

And the bayonet is a short, knife style weapon which I think can only be the S71/84 model, which would fit the Gew 88, but which was only still in Bavarian service.

There are many more such clues in this photo I am sure, but I was hoping to get some other opinions from any of the forum experts regarding the visible kit & arms.

Cheers, S>S

The photo is dark as newspaper photos generally are, hard to be 100% sure what rifle and seitengewehr is there, but I would like to say that the state cockades look like the typical Bavarian style, slightly larger than the Reiches cockades. They will normally appear all white, as the light blue circle in the cockades are rarely clear and visible in many of these period photos. Still not very clear but for me about 70% sure. The one rifle does appear that it could be a Gewehr 88 by the hint of the protruding magazine.

[wyliecoyote]

SS, Yours came in while I was writing the above. What do you think re: the button colours? IIRC correctly, I think Carter says the 71/84 continued in service with Bavarian Landsturm units with Gew. 88 rifles only into WWI, as they had so many in stock!

They were used by the Landwehr also. These fellows do not sport the brass collar dogs of Landsturm, but with that said, they do appear to be wearing hellblau M95 tunics, they could be of a mixed Landwehr / Landsturm Regiment as it is supposed to be a 1914 photo, and that would be correct for the very early war period. Too bad we can't see the buttons clearly. A clear rampant lion would definitely identify them as Bavarian.

[wyliecoyote]

Well done that man! Wondered when it would click! But it is the field caps you should be looking at!

Well, I just did an elementary check via Google English (the German pages will have to wait for later!). They have for the 1st Army the 8. Bayerische Reserve-Division. But I still think (from their uniforms, rifles, bayonets and cartridge pouches) that this is a unit in the reserve area, Landstrurm or Landeswehr?

Why not research that line - surely there is something on this in a book I know you possess - "Imperial German Army, 1914-18: Organisation, Structure, Orders of Battle"? In the meantime, when I get some spare time, I will follow up on what I can find! - but bed-time here soon so I expect that you'll have an answer by the 'morn! Happy researching!

In 1914-early 1915, the east front was mainly mixed Landwehr-Landsturm regiments to defend the Reich from the Russians. Also the same type mixed Landwehr-Landsturm regiments were actually the main body of troops battling with Belgian units. The main armee of aktiv & Reserve was fighting the French & British troops in the west. In Belgium there were many reports of blue clad Landsturm in the field in 1914. After the Belgians surrendered, the Landsturm took on the occupation duties for the Alte Armee.

[seaforths]

Generally when we see the shoulder boards rolled, it is because the troops had been marching with their tornister packs, the shoulder boards were rolled to prevent damage from the pack straps.

That's interesting. Thank you. So possibly a spell in the holding pen followed by a march back. Par for the course for captives and added to their physical and mental fatigue.

[wyliecoyote]

That's interesting. Thank you. So possibly a spell in the holding pen followed by a march back. Par for the course for captives and added to their physical and mental fatigue.

That could very well be the situation.

[shippingsteel]

I'd like to thank member Wyliecoyote for providing his excellent input here on this forum.

I have long admired his terrific collection of photos/cards displayed on the net, and greatly respect his knowledge of the Imperial German uniform, weapons and equipment variations.

Cheers, S>S

[wyliecoyote]

Thanks for the kind words Shippingsteel.

Back to part of the original discussion, as far as German soldiers armed with Gewehr 88 and S71/84 bayonets, I agree whole heartedly that the photographic evidence suggests that Bavarian soldiers are the most common photographed with this combination of Gewehr 88 with S71/84. But it is not a guarantee in identification. Case in point other than the photo of the soldier from the 163 Regt., is this photo of Prussians taken at the Schwedenschanze west of Erfurt in Thuringia. All armed with Gewehr 88 with S71/84 bayonets with the exception of one man armed with a Rifle 98 with bayonet S84/98 at the far right. Canceled Erfurt, 1 Oktober 1914. Yes, the Prussian Armee favored the S71 and the Bavarian Armee favored S71/84. But due to the severe shortages of rifles and bayonets in the first half of the war, they would use what was available at a given moment.

Here we have a Bavarian we can identify by the helmet plate on his spiked helmet, armed with Gewehr 88/05 rifle and a fixed S71 sword bayonet. At the reverse: Antwerp. 30 November 1914. B.L.I.R.2.4.Komp. Bavarian Landwehr Infanterie Regiment 2, 4th Kompanie.

In this undated and unidentified photo of another Bavarian, Reserve or Landwehr man with Gewehr 88/05 and fixed S71.

All in all though a rule of thumb is that for Landwehr and Landsturm, Bavarians are more commonly seen with S71/84 bayonets with Gewehr 88. But not always.

[shippingsteel]

Exactly George, that is my understanding as well. It was the combination of Gewehr 88 and S71/84, the Hellblau uniforms and the 1914 date which initially piqued my interest.

(I think the 1914 date is very important here, as it was the time of the opening battles, when everything was going to plan and before the shortages of equipment, so pre-ersatz)

So next question would be, have you seen any photographic evidence of the Hellblau uniform in use, by any unit in an Aktiv role anywhere during the war (apart from training).?

Cheers, S>S

[seaforths]

I think that in regard to equipment etc. Germany was, according to what we are led to believe from the time, preparing for war quite a while beforehand. However, at that time, it was not a united Germany. With that in mind, they might have been prepared locally, from local funding. Therefore, some would be better equipped than others according to their attitude toward a war and funds available. Therefore, one would expect the professional soldiers to be equipped with the best equipment also those from more prosperous areas.

I am not sure that equipment, the type of and its modernity and its issue can be confined and attributed to the end of war shortages. As an analogy, in times past when there was a battle to be fought. The king would order his lords and squires to turn out men to fight. If the lord was rick and generous, his men would be better equipped. He would have them wear his livery so they were identifiable in the field. Some of his men might be taken from the fields and ordered to fight. If their lord purchased footwear and weapons for them it was a bonus either because their lord was rich or generous. They might not have livery, in which case they would wear a flower or emblem pinned to their collar to make them identifiable to one another. It might be that their lord was not rich or he was particularly miserly or even that he was not wholly committed to the cause.

I would suggest that not all of Germany was at the same state of preparedness at the start of the war.

[Muerrisch]

Would somebody please summarise, briefly, where the investigation has got to?

1. when was the photo taken

2. where. ditto

3.why. ditto

4.what are the facts of his VC award action, as opposed to surmise. Claims of witnesses to be allowed in evidence with caveats.

5. above all, how and when did the photo reach the English media? That may be the key to genuine understanding, as opposed to surmise, however well informed on the minutiei of uniform and clothing aspects.

As historical background to the school of thought which avers that his VC was not earned, how about the undoubtedly political cascade of VCs awarded for Rorke's Drift? It happens all the time when a defeat needs to be sweetened for the unwashed at Home.

Last but not least spare a thought for any surviving Yate family, idly Googling to see what happened 100 years ago. What can we tell them about the man?

[shippingsteel]

Just to add a little military perspective to the defeat that day ... to the top brass it would have seemed a total disaster, but in reality it was a fair outcome in a very bad situation.

The BEF was in retreat and this was a planned holding action against tremendous odds, which by buying the remainder of the Army time to disengage, was partly successful.

To the powers that be it was an undoubted failure ... they lost 38 guns in the action (which was unheard of at that time). So I would imagine plenty of incentive to make awards.

Cheers, S>S

[wyliecoyote]

Exactly George, that is my understanding as well. It was the combination of Gewehr 88 and S71/84, the Hellblau uniforms and the 1914 date which initially piqued my interest.

(I think the 1914 date is very important here, as it was the time of the opening battles, when everything was going to plan and before the shortages of equipment, so pre-ersatz)

So next question would be, have you seen any photographic evidence of the Hellblau uniform in use, by any unit in an Aktiv role anywhere during the war (apart from training).?

Cheers, S>S

That is a tough one, I would have to search many, many photos, but off the top of my head, possibly not, unless the aktiv regiment was still on Bavarian soil. I might have Landsturm or Landwehr wearing the Hellblau uniforms. As for shortages of equipment, pre-ersatz, Germany was not logistically ready for war in 1914. Bavarian Landsturm in early war photos are shown with all kinds of ersatz and obsolete uniforms as early as August 1914. Ersatz pickelhauben and bayonets were already being ordered in 1914.

Ausmarsch photo of Bavarian Landsturm men of the 2nd Bavarian Infanterie Brigade formed up outside Schellingstraße 61, München. September 1914.

Huge mix of equipment. Single & double breasted Joppe tunics. The identical items worn appear to be the trousers, M1866 marching boots, leather belts in the style of mounted drivers, and the M1913 wachstuchmutzen. All men armed with Gewehr 88 rifles. Armbands identify the Batallions, only legible words are Landsturm. Very typical early war Landsturm unit photo. Their bayonets appear to be the S71/84.