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

[dansparky]

Hi Dave,

 

That was my thinking too.  I know I have seen something on it but don't think it was archive material.  It does not mean that Sordet's action not important but maybe, even more, credit could be given to forces in Cambrai.

 

Dan

[dansparky]

In 49#  do not see mention of Art duel?   Summaries of the diaries of the french...etc, but cannot read main title?

[lostinspace]

The main title on post #49 is: "Extract from British air reconnaissance report, August 26, 1914, 8:45 a.m. to 9:30 p.m." . Since it is an extract, hard to tell exactly what "No shells falling in vicinity of Cambrai." refers to without having the time noted when the observation was made; it could have been anytime between 8:45 a.m. and 9:30 p.m.

 

Dave

[dansparky]

Sorry i i meant this article.

[dansparky]

Hastings writes ... Gen. Sordet's French cavalry, which had come into action further west, along with their 75mm guns, played an invaluable role in the covering the British Withdrawal, which continued into the hours of darkness.  Gen. Henri de Ferron's territorial division also attacked  German formations deploying towards Le Cateau.  Without this support, Kluck's men could have turned Smith-Dorrien's left flank during the afternoon and with disastrous consequences. (catastrophe 1914) p236

 

Spiers (liaison 1914) says much the same thing on page 237.  Smith Dorriens recognition of sordet etc, ..gen sordet artillery and cyclists  attacked forces moving against 4th div's left flank... and without d,amande we would have faced another corps.P.237   Col Huguet's letter re withdrawal heaps praises on sordet and d'Amande on page  529.

[dansparky]

I had a bit of a look at vormarsch Walter Bloem, as expected no reference to french cavalry or anything.  Would be fantastic if there is a German account on this, which is very very unlikely.

[lostinspace]

Dan,

I would imagine they were too beat up to fight at le Cateau. I will look at Zuber and see if he has anything to say about Sordet.

Dave

[dansparky]

Hi Dave,

 

He only refers to Sordet and the French territorials being the only cover on the British left and that the German army easily brushed this aside.   Then drove into the British rear turning disaster into a catastrophe.  I would have thought he would have jumped at the chance to say french intervention another factor that helped hapless british (not my opinion).

 

Dan

Edited 27 January , 2017 by dansparky

[dansparky]

On 25/01/2017 at 10:44, AOK4 said:

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

 

 

Hi everyone.

 

Jan, Steve. I tried to access the Sordet diary, but after adding sordet i received about 1,500 hits.  Due to language barrier was not sure how to refine?  I am wondering if Sordet's diary entry give any indication as to how long the encounter lasted?

 

DS

Edited 29 January , 2017 by dansparky

[SteveMarsdin]

Hi Dan,

 

Click "Faire une recherché", Don't specify any search terms but click instead "Consulter l'etat des fonds". On the next page click on "Armee de Terre" and select "JMO de grandes unites", followed by "Consulter l'instrument de recherché". On the next page select "Corps d'Armees etc.." then "Corps de cavalerie" and then you'll see the reference to Sordet's Corps.

 

Steve

[dansparky]

7 minutes ago, SteveMarsdin said:

Hi Dan,

 

Click "Faire une recherché", Don't specify any search terms but click instead "Consulter l'etat des fonds". On the next page click on "Armee de Terre" and select "JMO de grandes unites", followed by "Consulter l'instrument de recherché". On the next page select "Corps d'Armees etc.." then "Corps de cavalerie" and then you'll see the reference to Sordet's Corps.

 

Steve

 

 

Thanks Steve :-), found it. 

Edited 29 January , 2017 by dansparky

[dansparky]

Looking back over the subject of Sordet's intervention. 

 

Motorcyclist found nothing night before and on the day four subalterns found nothing.  However, Edmond states in his memoirs that a french column was spotted the morning of the 26th and at 9 am Edmonds directly asked for assistance.   This being the time were sordet said he could not intervene without orders.

 

The letter to Radcliffe as in the National Archives states that this occurred on the 27th but in Edmonds memoirs, this encounter is found 3 pages on in the Le Cateau chapter meaning it happened on the 26th.  I found no mention of this specifically in the OH, Snow's account states that on the 27th he saw the first sign of Sordet's cav and asked Edmonds to send a message that would fight to the last and that he received a suitable response.  Immediately after shells burst over sordet and he bolted.  I am not sure if this is the same encounter or not?  They read slightly differently despite the similarities.  I think it is likely that Edmonds recounts the events out of Sync in his memoirs as the date everywhere else seems to be different.?

 

P.S.  the letter from Edmunds to snow 16th September 1919 also states the 27th.  Below extract from Edmonds Memoirs.

[dansparky]

On 25/01/2017 at 13:30, lostinspace said:

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

 

 

 

Ok revisiting the theme of scapegoat.   I will take a slight diversion by discussing French's change of stance over Smith-Dorrien because I believe the same question applies to Sordet's intervention.  In French's1914 he writes that the retreat was rendered more "Difficult and arduous" due to the losses of some 14,000 men and 80 guns.  We know this represents twice the actual losses of the day.  Terraine Mons Retreat to Victory adds that  French knew this even by the time of his dispatch of 7th September (where he praised smith dorrien), especially given the fact that 2nd Corps had already begun a leading role in the Battle of The Marne.  So this is clearly just propaganda in an attack at Smith-Dorrien (as we know these gentlemen certainly had history), for he knew this was not so.

 

 

So back to Sordet.  If Sordet was a scapegoat, why? what for? As he knew by now that the 2nd Corps was in much better shape than the pessimism at GHQ suggested.  2nd Corps had not ceased to be an effective fighting force and he knew that by the time of the dispatch, so why would he need a scapegoat?   I am guessing that the 4 September entry in Smith-Dorrien's diary that one-third of II Corps were casualties: 360 officers and 9,200 other ranks, must have been unpalatable enough to blame someone else.  As David pointed out Sir John French would have known these figures.  Still, these figures being significantly lower than the level of casualties it had been feared were lost at le cateau you would think there would be less need for blame and that SJF would be careful before waving around accusations even if he did deeply mistrust his allies. 

 

DS

Edited 2 May , 2017 by dansparky

[lostinspace]

Dan,
 

But at that time, who would have gone to bat for Sordet? Sir J. French was constantly complaining about the French; for leaving the BEF in the lurch at Mons, for refusing requests for information, etc., etc. Plus, the losses at Le Cateau, even though not as bad as the F.M. thought, were still severe enough that the government might start asking questions about his (French's) fitness for command. Sir John knew how the game was played - who would care in the U.K. whether Sordet was being given a fair shake?
Just a thought though, nothing I can prove.

Dave

[dansparky]

Pretty much what I was thinking.  Diary entry of the 4th represents large losses 7,812 at Le Cateau, buck would have to stop somewhere.   Also, it served to deflect issues such as a lack command and control at the highest levels, Landrecies affair and failure to support 2 Corps and the fact that 4th division lacked all its auxiliary units, 4th division cav having been pinched by SJF.  2 Corps losses being so much greater than 1 Corps (not sure of this figure at mo), raised awkward questions.

 

DS

[lostinspace]

Dan,
 

While looking for information on the French 84th Territorial division around Cambrai, I stumbled upon a couple of articles in the U.S. Field Artillery Journal relating to Le Cateau which has translated orders to Sordet from Joffre etc. (concerning the cavalry corps movement and deployment to the left of SD's corps) and may be of interest to you. 

Here is the May-June issue:  http://sill-www.army.mil/firesbulletin/archives/1934/MAY_JUN_1934/MAY_JUN_1934_FULL_EDITION.pdf

and the July-August issue:     http://sill-www.army.mil/firesbulletin/archives/1934/JUL_AUG_1934/JUL_AUG_1934_FULL_EDITION.pdf  

Dave

Edited 4 May , 2017 by lostinspace

[dansparky]

Thanks, Dave,

 

Will take a look at these tonight.

[dansparky]

When discussing Sordet in 1914 should it be General, General de Division (i believe his rank at the time in french) or the equivalent Major-General?

[micks]

Technically he was a General de division. However his insignia would have indicated that he commanded a larger force. The French army had no higher rank until that of a Marechal de France.

 

 

 

[dansparky]

Thanks, i kind of thought this.  Joffe though would have been Commander in Cheif at this time right?  Later Marechal de France.  Do you know what rank D,Amande would have been?  Was he also General de division?

[micks]

Yes, Joffre held the position of Commander in Chief but was still a General de division until his promotion to that of Marechal de France. D'Amande was also a General de division.

[dansparky]

Thanks, I will probably put C-IN-C then to reference his superiority.  

[dansparky]

It's strange that a commander-in-chief has the same rank in theory as those that lead an Army group and that those 1 tier down from Army group level also have the same rank.

[micks]

Yes, in some ways it is from our prospective. However when you gained the rank of General de Division in the French army you would know who had seniority within your working environment.