Did General Sordet intervene on the british left at le cateau.

[dansparky]

It has been alleged that General Sordet emerged from cambrai and attacked the german right in the evening.  This helped to ensure no attack delived on the left of the 4th division.  Smith Dorrien and General Shea (who was at the time the french liason officer), backed this up.  However Snow found nothng to the left of 4th division on the 26th, the next day edmonds spoke directly to sordet who said he could not interviene with out the say so of Joffre.  They were retreating hard and looked paniked. 

[lostinspace]

DS,

I've just read Snow's account and was surprised how angry he seemed to be about Sordet, I think he (Snow) did acknowledge that the French territorials at Cambrai were of assistance though? If I remember correctly Sir J. French had literally begged Sordet for help on the 24th in a brief meeting which resulted in the cavalry corps moving from right to left across the British line of retreat and clogging up the roads. I know in some accounts, Sordet's assistance seemed to have been largely artillery fire from a few French batteries, but I don't think anyone ever claimed that his cavalry came as far north as Cambrai.
Didn't Edmonds have his nervous breakdown around the 26th or 27th?

Dave

[dansparky]

According to a french report, it was indeed only an artillery duel. I read somewhere that sordet was observed and as soon as german returned fire he made a dash for it. 

 

A letter addressed to smith dorrien written by john Vaughan? mentions that sordet emerged from Cambrai and offered valuable assistance.    A motorcyclist was sent out the night before to ascertain the whereabouts of this force.   He covered 40 miles and found nothing.  according to a letter written t the historical section, German accounts do not mention anything in this area.  Sordet's force failing to locate british left, british left failing to locate him and no german accounts of this action is a little strange.

[dansparky]

ah, it is in snow's account he said he saw sordet the next day.  He was going to ask Sordet to stand with him to the death or words to that effect.  However, shrapnel soon burst above their heads and they bolted.   It also appears that sordet knowing the situation facing the British but had no intention of supporting claiming 'his horses were dead beat' and that he could not do anything without orders.  It was not until later in the day that he was ordered by Joffre to directly intervene with all force at his disposal on the British left.  This it is argued enabled the British to successfully break free.  Snow casts doubt on this stating there was never enough german forces to turn our flank till 3 pm by which time the 4th was already on the move.

 

So snows account would then appear to suggest that even if he did intervene it was too little to late.  He also notes that at 1 pm he was fighting a winning action and was in fact advancing.

[lostinspace]

This is very interesting. I'm reading through the Historical Section file (CAB 45/129) kindly provided by Andy (stiletto), and it's obvious that Edmonds, GSO-1, 4 Div. at the time, was very anxious to prove that Sordet was not on their left flank during the battle. He had apparently sent out the divisional intelligence officer on the evening of 25 Aug. on a motor bike to search for the French cavalry; but after a couple of hours this officer reported back and stated that he had seen some German cavalry but no French. The next day four artillery subalterns were sent out by Edmonds to search to the west but also returned without locating any of Sordet's troops. It was on the 27th that Edmonds found the French cavalry and asked them to cover the left flank of the retreating 4th Division and was refused. As you say, S-D and Shea were both certain that Sordet was on the flank during the battle; per Shea "Suddenly a very hot fire broke out away on the left flank, and the German guns which had been shelling the British heavily were apparently all turned on this unexpected development. The guns were Sordet's 9 batteries which had come into action on our left...I have always thought that it was the timely arrival of Sordet's guns that enabled S.D. to get away." .

When Edmonds contacted Snow in Sept. of 1919 about this matter, he (Snow) was noncommittal, saying that he knew something had stopped the Germans from turning his flank but wasn't exactly sure what it was; thinking that it may have been due to German ineptitude or maybe Sordet. I'm not sure when Snow wrote his account of Le Cateau and the retreat but by that time he had definitely changed his mind, maybe he was still angry that the French refused to help on the 27th.

I really can't understand Edmonds' thinking post war; he did everything he possibly could to locate the French cavalry by sending out five officers over the two days, certainly wasn't his fault if they didn't find what they were looking for. 
 

Dave

 

edit: thoughts in wrong order.

 

Edited 24 January , 2017 by lostinspace

[dansparky]

I have those files as well, unfortunately, cannot read large swathes of this file, due to the handwriting and some material being in french.   Attempts to prove he was or was not seem to be very politically motivated.  I ask myself though why would smith dorrien go to such lengths to state french assistance.  Especially given that French would jump at the chance to praise somebody else rather that SD. 

[lostinspace]

In regards to your point above, here is an interesting quote from S-D in reply to Edmonds on 28 Sept., 1919 - "Sir J.F. was undoubtedly trying to throw as much blame as he could on the French at that time and is the only way I can account for his refusal to clear Sordet's character.". I suppose he might be referring to French's "1914" so I'll take a look and see if I can find what French said about Sordet.

 

Dave

[dansparky]

 

Can you help direct me to which file in this folder states .. "Suddenly a very hot fire broke out away on the left flank, and the German guns which had been shelling the British heavily were apparently all turned on this unexpected development. The guns were Sordet's 9 batteries which had come into action on our left...I have always thought that it was the timely arrival of Sordet's guns that enabled S.D. to get away." . Having trouble finding it. 

For some reason, the letter written to Edmondson sept 1917 comes to an abrupt end, can't find a second page  (CAB 45/129) 

[dansparky]

thanks dave you are a gem just found that quote from smith dorrien I was having trouble reading that.  so it appears SIR J F was using it as a way to castigate the french with whom he was pretty annoyed with at the time.  Why did he then look to refute this in later publication?  damning S D and other political agendas?

[AOK4]

Oh, the famous cavalry corps Sordet, it was everywhere on the Western Front in those early weeks of the war, but it always arrived too late to intervene. It was completely exhausted from running from one place to another just to arrive too late to be involved.

 

For those who understand French: http://www.sambre-marne-yser.be/article.php3?id_article=89

 

Jan

[dansparky]

http://itools.com/tool/google-translate-web-page-translator 

Google page translator.

 

It says Sordet decided to intervene, but he didn't Joffre ordered it. 

[lostinspace]

DS,
 

In reference to your #9, no, it wasn't S-D, it was Lt. Col. John S.M.Shea, haven't been able to figure out if he was II Corps H.Q.,G.H.Q. or maybe cavalry, but he must have been present when S-D was asking Allenby about continuing the retreat during the a.m. of the 26th as the first part of the letter to Edmonds was about the decision to stand and fight.
Must have been one of the H.Q. staff officers as he was staff trained -

Lt. Col. John Stuart Mackenzie Shea, D.S.O., p.s.c., q.c., per October 1914 Indian Army List. He wound up as a Major-General with Allenby in Palestine.

 

Jan,

Yes, Sordet's cavalry had been on the go since early August, I read somewhere that you could smell his columns before they could be seen, poor horses were run ragged by Le Cateau.

 

Dave

 

Edited 24 January , 2017 by lostinspace

[dansparky]

sorry, think my message was a little confusing my message # was in reply to your #7 but could not find #5 either I have since found both :-).  I replied to both threads straight away but looked like I was reply to one.

 

Going to have a poke around to see if I can see further pages to the letter written to Edmonds on the 17th of September 1919 only has one page.   Not sure if this is my mistake or is absent from the archive.   It ends very abruptly.

 

 

[SteveMarsdin]

Good morning,

 

The French Official History confirms Joffre ordered Sordet to assist the BEF by attacking (intervening).

 

Sordets' Corps' diary confirms the  order to attack at 13.30

 

It was largely an intervention by artillery, confirmed by the 5DC JMO for 26 August (although the divisional cyclists were also engaged)

 

Steve

[dansparky]

Thanks steve, where did you obtain sordet's cav diary?   thanks for sharing :-)  

 

[AOK4]

Most of the French war diaries are online on the website mémoire des hommes: http://www.memoiredeshommes.sga.defense.gouv.fr/fr/article.php?larub=2&titre=journaux-des-unites-engagees-dans-la-premiere-guerre-mondiale

 

Jan

[stiletto_33853]

16 hours ago, lostinspace said:

I suppose he might be referring to French's "1914" so I'll take a look and see if I can find what French said about Sordet.

 

Dave

 

Dave,

 

Also look at SD's statement regarding JF's book 1914, I think page 19 covers Sordet.

 

Andy

[dansparky]

It says due to sordet's intervention losses was prevented from being far greater.   Later on p44-45 he takes pains to describe how wrong SJF was in the original dispatch.

[lostinspace]

I looked through the pages describing Le Cateau in French's "1914" but only found a couple of references and they were complimentary to Sordet. Returning to CAB 45/129 there is another letter from S-D, apparently to the Historical Section, and as far as I can tell, without a date, referring to French's dispatch of 7 September, 1914 "I was aghast to read the following regarding General Sordet 'Although he rendered me valuable assistance later on in the course of the retirement, he was unable for the reasons given to afford me any support on the most critical day of all on the 26th.', I took the first opportunity of going into G.H.Q. at St. Omer to point out that there was evidently a clerical error as to dates but the C. in C. would not admit it, asserting that he had better evidence than I had and that I was the person who was wrong as to dates. I then told him the whole story as recited in these pages of Sordet's help and implored Sir John French to correct the matter as in the case of an ally it was doubly necessary to be accurate and just. This he absolutely refused to do. I left with the impression that he was using General Sordet as a scapegoat."
DS, is this the same information you're talking about in the above post?

 

Dave

[dansparky]

you mean in post 18?  sorry i was replying to Andy with regard to smith dorrien statement.  But i have read the letter you refer to in note 19.  Smith-dorrien's diary states "French cavalry did really good work in protecting our exposed or west flank."  He seems to infer that it was this that helped the retirement of 3rd and 4th divs.  Whereas the 5th was in a greater degree of disorder. 

 

For what reason do you feel he says as a scapegoat?  only thing I can think of is evidence that french support not forthcoming and that the french were conducting their operations in isolation to what the British were doing in his opinion.  Retreat on the right (SJF unaware), No conformity. 

[lostinspace]

DS,

Sorry, I should quote you when I refer to you. In regard to the word "scapegoat", this is a direct quote from Smith-Dorrien, not me, the majority of #19 is a quote.
 

Dave

[dansparky]

Dave,

 

Ok sure :-)  I knew it was a quote just wondered your take on that quote.

 

DS

[lostinspace]

10 minutes ago, dansparky said:

Dave,

 

Ok sure :-)  I knew it was a quote just wondered your take on that quote.

 

DS

 

Apologies for that, you were perfectly clear, I read it too quickly. My opinion is that Sir John French knew that Le Cateau with its casualties etc. would be controversial, therefore, after thinking about it for a while, decided to shift the blame to Sordet first and then much later to S-D. Incidentally, according to Smith-Dorrien's Diary (CAB 45/206, page 13) as of 4 September, he still believed one third of II Corps were casualties: 360 officers and 9,200 other ranks, Sir John French would have had the same information.
 

Dave

[dansparky]

ah god point dave, this would have been more likely what Dorrien was refering to rather than what i said.  

 

Thanks

 

DS

Edited 25 January , 2017 by dansparky
spelling mistake

[lostinspace]

3 hours ago, stiletto_33853 said:

Dave,

 

Also look at SD's statement regarding JF's book 1914, I think page 19 covers Sordet.

 

Andy

 Hi Andy,

I didn't find much in French's book about Sordet, he was mentioned a couple of times but favorably. I guess I haven't found S-D's response to "1914" yet, is this in the Sordet file?
 

Dave