Discarding of Swords by Officers (All Regiments)

[Guest]

Hello Martin,

I was under the impression that the Turks had continually used their swords at Gallipoli, due to culture and partly due to ammo supply shortages. Is this correct ? A number of Ottoman swords, at the time, had their blades 'cut down' to make them more suitable for trench fighting. Perhaps, the sword use by the Ottomans was a last resort towards the end of the conflict and was not considered a "threat" by the British in 1915 ?

David

Quite possibly. You would have to ask someone who has access to Turkish primary material. It is quite difficult to obtain but there are a few forum members with expert knowledge on the Turkish army. I would suggest posting the question on the Gallipoli sub-forum.

[khanda]

Quite possibly. You would have to ask someone who has access to Turkish primary material. It is quite difficult to obtain but there are a few forum members with expert knowledge on the Turkish army. I would suggest posting the question on the Gallipoli sub-forum.

Thank you Martin,

will check it out.

David

[James A Pratt III]

I believe that at least British officer went over the top on the first day of the battle of the Somme carrying a sword.

I believe there is mention of a British officer in an Indian Infantry unit carrying a sword in 1915 in "Mespot"

Also in "Mespot" I believe I have read that a Turkish officer was found killed in some wire sword in hand.

I think some Austrailian officer went ashore at Sulva Bay carrying a Sword

I hope this is of some use.

[Loader]

During the action in which he was wounded Monty describes tripping over his scabbard as mentioned and then coming face to face with a German and realising that apart from draw, carry, salute and return he had no idea how to use a sword for it's original purpose as he had not been trained to use it as such. He therefore kicked the German in a certain delicate part of his anatomy.

The storty I read had Montgomery shooting the enemy soldier with his own rifle as he was shot by another German. He was certainly wounded very badly.

[seaforth78]

I have seen an order for troops about to embark for Gallipoli in early August 1915 that swords were not to be taken. The order was directed at the Yeomanry's 2nd Mounted Division who had swords as part of their normal weaponry. Since they were going dismounted in an infantry role it is not quite the same thing as swords were attached to the saddlery. My reading of this is that Officers who might have considered wearing their swords on their Sam Brownes were ordered not to take their swords.

MG

Out of interest, I just purchased an Officer's 1897 pattern Rifle's Officer's sword to a Gurkha officer http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=224160&hl=erskine and while this sword was sharpened for 1914, I could find no evidence for him using his sword in the 5th Gurkha Regimental History at Gallipoli, one of his officers named Brown was killed charging with his sword so, indeed it seemed a personal choice to have it with him.

[Guest]

The King's Own: The Story of a Royal Regiment Vol III page 31:

13th Oct 1914: "The officers wore their swords and the first casualty was Lieutenant A Waterhouse who had joined A Company only two days before and was killed by a bullet as he walked over quiet fields. It smashed his sword and entered his body..."

21st Oct 1914: "Every Officer in one of their companies had been killed, and Second Lieutenant P Heaney, who had been promoted from the ranks on October 1, volunteered to go inresponse to an urgent appeal for help. Dressed as an officer for the first time, wearing Cowper's sword and Hodgson's spare wrist watch, he was immediately killed".

Which appears to push the date further into the campaign than the crossing of the Aisne. MG

[CambraiComrade]

So is there any evidence to say that officers were seen not carrying swords in 1914?

[seaforth78]

Further to post #55; From the History of the 5th Royal Gurkha Rifles,Volume 1, Col. Weekes, pg 225

June 4th 1915 Gallipoli

".............undeterred by this initial failure the leading lines charged afresh only, however, for the assault to be broken as a result of the hopeless odds to which it was opposed. Again and again the attempt was renewed, always to meet the same fate. On one of these occasions Captain Brown, placing himself at the head of his men, drew his sword-he was probably the only officer on the Peninsula who wore one-and waving it high in the air, dashed upwards in the direction of the crest. He was shot dead, together with Jemader Harishankar Gurung and a number of those who followed him."

[bierast]

One of the personal stories we include in our upcoming book on the Saxons in Flanders is that of Vizefeldwebel and Offiziersstellvertreter Erich Kühn of Reserve-Infanterie-Regiment Nr.244 (53.RD / XXVII.RK), who was shot in the face while leading his company into the attack (after the loss of all its officers) west of Becelaere on 24th October 1914. In his first full-length letter home from hospital he notes that he had handed his sword in to the company transport "a few days before" (so possibly before the major fighting began) and does not have much hope of seeing it again.

Conversely the published history of Saxon Jäger-Bataillon Nr.13 (XIX.AK) mentions how Oberleutnant Dietrich von Miltitz (as acting commander of 3. / JB 13) personally slew two British sentries with his sword when the battalion infiltrated L'Epinette after dark on 21st October 1914. Olt. von Miltitz (in peacetime a Kammerherr - roughly 'chamberlain' or 'groom of the bed chamber' - to the Saxon royal household) was evidently a daring officer, and figures frequently in the battalion history. He was later awarded the Ritterkreuz des Militär-St. Heinrichs-Orden for his leadership in the fighting for Notre Dame de Lorette on 9th May 1915, and was killed in action in Galicia on 10th August 1916.

[seaforth78]

One of the personal stories we include in our upcoming book on the Saxons in Flanders is that of Vizefeldwebel and Offiziersstellvertreter Erich Kühn of Reserve-Infanterie-Regiment Nr.244 (53.RD / XXVII.RK), who was shot in the face while leading his company into the attack (after the loss of all its officers) west of Becelaere on 24th October 1914. In his first full-length letter home from hospital he notes that he had handed his sword in to the company transport "a few days before" (so possibly before the major fighting began) and does not have much hope of seeing it again.

Conversely the published history of Saxon Jäger-Bataillon Nr.13 (XIX.AK) mentions how Oberleutnant Dietrich von Miltitz (as acting commander of 3. / JB 13) personally slew two British sentries with his sword when the battalion infiltrated L'Epinette after dark on 21st October 1914. Olt. von Miltitz (in peacetime a Kammerherr - roughly 'chamberlain' or 'groom of the bed chamber' - to the Saxon royal household) was evidently a daring officer, and figures frequently in the battalion history. He was later awarded the

Ritterkreuz des Militär-St. Heinrichs-Orden for his leadership in the fighting for Notre Dame de Lorette on 9th May 1915, and was killed in action in Galicia on 10th August 1916.very

Very interesting to hear from the other side on this subject of swords. Thank you.

[aussiesoldier]

Sorry to catch on to this thread so late but the Australian Officer was Capt Joseph Peter Lalor, grandson of Peter Lalor, leader of the 1854 Eureka Stockade revolt.

Killed at about 3:30 pm, 25th April:
'Morshead made his platoon left form and move across to Lalor's left. Lalor waved his hand, and moved his own line to join Morshead's. Fire was coming from the lower knolls down near the beach. Lalor stood up to see, and resolved to charge forward. 'Now then, 12th Battalion,' he cried; and, as he said the words, a Turkish bullet killed him.'
(Bean Vol. 1 p309)

(Mentioned, Bean Vol. 1 p271, 274-5, 276, 283, 286, 287, 288, 291-4, 295, 296, 306, 307, 308, 310, 312, 313, 316, 322; biography 291, killed 309, mentioned 466, 549).

Shortly before his death, Captain Lalor was carrying a family sword. It had been dropped, but was recovered by Lance-corporal Freame some hours later, then dropped again 'in the stress of the fighting at dusk'. (Bean V1 p309). It has never been found, though it was reported at one stage to have been in a Turkish museum. It seems doubtful that there is any connection between the sword and the revolt at Eureka Stockade, despite speculation to the contrary.

[CambraiComrade]

It's ok, that's an interesting story and it's a real shame the sword was never recovered.

[WhiteStarLine]

Noel Loutit, a 10 Battalion AIF platoon commander who landed on Gallipoli on 25 April 1915, once told me that all officers of the battalion were ordered to report to the quartermaster who would sharpen their swords. He claims that they threw them overboard once out of sight of Outer Harbour, Adelaide.

[aussiesoldier]

Lalor story is a CEW Bean recount and he verified everything he wrote - admittedly did get some wrong. Legendary story and also attested to by his family. Truth may be lost in time but it sounds great.

[gew98]

Make me th esecond you know that not only does not use the corrupted info on 'wiki'...I loathe people whom use it like religion. There is too much intentionally flawed data therein. I also don't use google.

Terry

No. Simply asking what date he tripped over his scabbard as it might help establish a date when swords were abandoned.. . as mentioned earlier I thought (apparently incorrectly) it was at Le Cateau. You say Messines and so does Wiki. The Warwickshires never produced a written histoy, so I am intrigued. I would genuinely be interested in the source as my source was from a book, possibly referenced to Wiki.

MG

PS. I use Wiki a lot, as do most people. In fact I have only encountered one person in my life who claims never to have used Wiki. I am not ashamed to admit it. There is much valuable info stored in it. Surely it cant all be rubbish. I use it but I do understand the caveats, as I use War Diaries and published histories and books on the Great War and understand the caveats. If the last five books I bought are anything to go by they are so full of errors I might as well have used Wiki instead. I think everyone uses wiki. It is utterly brilliant, but we simply need to be aware of inaccuracies. The same inaccuracies that pepper most books I have on my book shelves. . It is not an issue but if you claim you don't use Wiki I think you are missing lots of valuable short-cuts. Centipede claims he doesn't use Wiki so you are in good company. MG

[seaforths]

I recall reading and enjoying this thread a while back and more recently, I read something topical but was unable to post at the time. Perhaps some of you will find it of interest to the subject: Haldane's 'The History of the Fourth Battalion Seaforth Highlanders' from the period 20th November 1914 'One of the first things some of the officers did on arrival at Ecques was to have their swords sharpened by the village blacksmith. Very shortly after all these weapons were packed off home.'

The narrative preceding this snippet was regarding how cumbersome it was for the officers to cope with the Christmas Tree on the march and acquiring less conspicuous and move comfortable web equipment. Which might also be of some relevance.

[CambraiComrade]

I recall reading and enjoying this thread a while back and more recently, I read something topical but was unable to post at the time. Perhaps some of you will find it of interest to the subject: Haldane's 'The History of the Fourth Battalion Seaforth Highlanders' from the period 20th November 1914 'One of the first things some of the officers did on arrival at Ecques was to have their swords sharpened by the village blacksmith. Very shortly after all these weapons were packed off home.'

The narrative preceding this snippet was regarding how cumbersome it was for the officers to cope with the Christmas Tree on the march and acquiring less conspicuous and move comfortable web equipment. Which might also be of some relevance.

It's interesting to see so many officers discarding their swords while being transported to the front or when they actually got there. As you say I'm sure practicality played into this. I would have thought they just didn't take them if they planned to dump them but I'm sure the reason they didn't was probably due to orders. Would that be a likely answer?

[seaforths]

Not being a knowledgeable person on swords, or any other weaponry for that matter. It would be purely conjecture on my part. I would have thought that no-one forwarned them and the made the assumption swords were still accepted as kit that was needed before their departure to France. Newly arrived in France and still not having seen any action, they might have been advised or realised themselves that close contact with the enemy was unlikely. Therefore, a sword would be surplus to requirements. Judging by the remarks, they seemed to arrive full of zest for their swords and quickly realised they were going to be more of a hindrance. That they were all packed up and returned seems to indicate that it was probably an order from the Commanding Officer of the Battalion or, they had received such an order from higher up.

Certainly from their first experiences when they did eventually get in to the line, the frustration of long distance warfare from trenches with bullets and bombs is there to read. They were exasperated that they could not get to the enemy to fight them on a personal level. Even later, when the patrols and raiding parties were a nightly and regular part of trench life, a sword would still have been pretty useless to stumble around in the dark with. The blade catching any light from flares and the size of it etc. By 1916 they had developed their own unsophisticated weapons (in addition to using bombs and revolvers) for those more intimate meetings with the enemy such as maces/knuckle-dusters/knobkerries/knives. Less cumbersome than a sword and probably more useful. I would have thought that other than an attack in battle, they were more likely to encounter the enemy more often, on a personal level while out patrolling and raiding.

[seaforth78]

Noel Loutit, a 10 Battalion AIF platoon commander who landed on Gallipoli on 25 April 1915, once told me that all officers of the battalion were ordered to report to the quartermaster who would sharpen their swords. He claims that they threw them overboard once out of sight of Outer Harbour, Adelaide.

No reflection on yourself of course but the story is rubbish. Soldiers never 'throw away' perfectly good kit unless in an extremity and besides, officers, as opposed to the men, bought their swords and revolvers privately from firms like Wilkinson or Webley. Impossible that the officers would had their swords thrown overboard prematurely as they hadn't landed at Gallipoli yet and gained the measure of the fighting. In my 25 years of collecting I had never heard stories like these, and if spoken about, always seems to come from an other rank, never an officer. In other words, a typical tale over a beer (or 3!)

[seaforth78]

Seaforths,

Orders were issued to all officers to have their swords sharpened by the battalion armourers and to embark with their battalions with their swords as part of their kit. I think because the war turned into a static situation so quickly with officers quickly becoming casualities, I think that swords were be found not useful as they they really showed readily who an officer was, and the chance to use them was limited as they seldom got so close. By the end of 1914/15 they seem to have been sent back to their next of kin.

By contrast in the 2nd war, the Japanese did not abandon their swords and with the war being fluid, found a lot of scope of use notwithstanding the isolated terrible instances of horrid beheading of hapless POW's. They surprisingly succeeded in fighting well with them and getting at close quarters as well as the Americans (Bataan) and British (Singapore and Burma) and Australians (SWP) will easily testify.

[aussiesoldier]

Just to follow up on Seaforth 78's comments; ANZAC officers on the Western Front had by 1917 & 18 also adopted the same uniform and kit as their soldiers to reduce their targetability to snipers. Quite a few WW1 photos held by Aust War Memorial show officers in plain soldiers jacket and wearing modified webbing. Perhaps a reflection also on the high death rate and promotion from the ranks. No place for swords by then.

Equally interesting that some regiments in the Australian Light Horse chose to adopt swords following the Beer Sheva battle and used them effectively in 1918. The advance on Damascus gave mounted troops every chance to catch Turkish troops unawares and cavalry scared the hell out of them, especially as the ALH was regarded as crazy.

[seaforth78]

Make me th esecond you know that not only does not use the corrupted info on 'wiki'...I loathe people whom use it like religion. There is too much intentionally flawed data therein. I also don't use google.

Come come now, let's put this into a sensible perspective here. I think you are missing the point of what MG is pointing to. Wikipedia is really quite good with plenty of serious unsung editors who honestly and with much fervour, try to nip things in the bud and present a professional account when possible. But would I cite and use a wiki source as a main source? No way, but for us, including yourself, when wanting to consult on something we haven't had any experience, surely this would be the 1st stop, No?

[seaforth78]

Equally interesting that some regiments in the Australian Light Horse chose to adopt swords following the Beer Sheva battle and used them effectively in 1918. The advance on Damascus gave mounted troops every chance to catch Turkish troops unawares and cavalry scared the hell out of them, especially as the ALH was regarded as crazy.

Out of interest aussiesoldier, you would be interested to hear of a Lieutenant Colonel Clarence Johnson, late Skinner's Horse, who when in August 1914 became 2nd i/c of the 4th Light Horse and took his 1821 Pattern Light Cavalry Officer's sword with him to Gallipoli. See this:

http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=226713&hl=johnson

[trajan]

Come come now, let's put this into a sensible perspective here. I think you are missing the point of what MG is pointing to. Wikipedia is really quite good with plenty of serious unsung editors who honestly and with much fervour, try to nip things in the bud and present a professional account when possible. But would I cite and use a wiki source as a main source? No way, but for us, including yourself, when wanting to consult on something we haven't had any experience, surely this would be the 1st stop, No?

One thing that is often overlooked by critics of Wiki is that in many cases references are supplied. I frequently pop into Wiki for quick access to archaeological topics I am not entirely familiar with (oxygen isotope analysis anyone?!), and just as when using a book (and GWF posts for that matter!), then if there are no credible references to back up "statements of fact" I simply ignore these.

Trajan

[seaforths]

I'm with you on that Trajan. I use it with caution. It's not as bad as it was in the early days. I look for credible references and sources as these in themselves can be handy things to follow up. Rather like reading the bibliography of a book, you can find some gems that you might just want to see for yourself.

There seems to be, from my reading, a divide in the officers' attitudes with regard to standing out or, blending in. This is not something I've researched but it could be attributable to the previous service and age of some officers. Those who went about the lines and indeed into battle wearing their officer's kit and didn't give a tinker's cuss they could be easily spotted and dealt with; versus those who were perhaps younger and more inclined to think along the lines of self-preservation if possible. Ditching the sword, I would have thought, among other things must have been one of the first things those in the latter camp did. Attempting to remain inconspicuous to the enemy but easily recongnisable to their own men in poor visibility and over a distance must have been quite a challenge. Donning the uniform of an OR seems to have had its pitfalls. In 1916 a Seaforth officer in an ORs uniform was dealt with quite severely by the officer of another division while escorting prisoners to the rear. He was relieved of the prisoners and he was flung, unceremoniously to one side/into a ditch (depending on which source you read - there are a few) by the other officer who was by all accounts, a Padre!

Then consider the former, commanders that did not disguise their appearance and some of whom in fact, did the complete opposite. I've read a lot on the different battalions of the Seaforth Highlanders (not surprising really) and came to a conclusion early on that quite a lot of them were completely bonkers. Here to illustrate a gesture carried out and antonymous with those who would disguise themselves to blend in with the men, is something from the German offensive of March 1918: 'It was now the fifth day of the battle and the 154th Brigade had been in it all the time. They still fought on and fought well, and Brigadier-General K.G. Buchanan rode out in front, mounted on a white horse, and cheered them on. The men recognized his cool courage and responded valiantly'. Source: Haldane's History of the Fourth Seaforth (again). I strongly suspect that if he'd had a sword with him, he would have been waving that around as well!