Hackney Gurkhas

[Guest]

41 minutes ago, Steve B said:

 

The Nickname "Hackney Gurkhas."

 

"The Regiment is proud of its nickname of the "Hackney Gurkhas," although its origin is obscure. It was originally given to the 1st Battalion about the time when they were at Norwich and they carried the name throughout the War, but the 2nd Battalion also seem to have come into the inheritance and took it to France with them and it has stuck ever since."

 

Steve

 

 

Steve - Going on this account it is worth noting the battalion (and the rest of the 54th Division) went to Norwich then St Albans between April 1915 to July 1915 when they departed for Gallipoli. The 1/4th Nortamptonshire Regt (TF) history (same Brigade) indicates the stay in Norfolk was short, recording a move to St Albans in May....so the window of opportunity looks like Apr-May 1915 in the environs of Norwich - Thetford. 

 

Interesting that the name allegedly started in the UK before the battalion had seen any action. It would be interesting to see a trawl of the Norfolk newspapers in Apr-May 1915. The research target area seems to be narrowing. Martin

[Steve B]

Going back to the now-discounted theory about the 10th Londons being called the "Hackney Gurkhas" on account of their diminutive stature, the following link may be of interest. It shows an image the 1/10th parading at Hatfield House in their newly issued tropical kit prior to their departure for Gallipoli. As you will all see, they actually present as representative a cross section of shapes and sizes as you'd expect from any English Infantry Battalion. 

 

http://www.europeana.eu/portal/en/record/2024904/photography_ProvidedCHO_TopFoto_co_uk_EU006986.html#&gid=1&pid

 

[Gareth Davies]

I like Steve's bayonet story and I can well imagine the event being recounted by someone from the Bn soon after the event, in a show of bravado, and either the story teller or the listener making the comparison.  Were they in Hatfield before they went to Norwich?

[Stoppage Drill]

Some nicknames have their origin in some sort of fact, true or not, creditable or not. An event, a uniform distinction, a defined recruiting area and so on.

 

Others are simply a humorous or ironic construction, created because an affectionate and amusing handle is required to avoid too much formality. Conflating a regiment's title with the qualities of some other wildly differing organisation is common: think 'Andy Capp's Commandos' for the Army Catering Corps. 

Group self-deprecation is often a driver too.

Some sharp-witted individual coins a term, it raises a laugh, it gets repeated, it spreads. The originator doesn't feel any need to claim credit.

Maybe that's the way 'Hackney Gurkhas' arose.

 

 

[Steve B]

19 minutes ago, Gareth Davies said:

I like Steve's bayonet story and I can well imagine the event being recounted by someone from the Bn soon after the event, in a show of bravado, and either the story teller or the listener making the comparison.  Were they in Hatfield before they went to Norwich?

 

Norwich to join the 54th Division, then Hatfield. After that, Gallipoli via Liverpool.

[Gareth Davies]

Thanks. I still think it's possible if not plausible. 

[Steven Broomfield]

18 hours ago, Steve B said:

 

Steven,

 

This quote from Colonel Francis, CO of the 5th Royal Berkshire Regiment on or around the time of the changeover, reveals all:

 

"In 1921 when I first went to the 10th London Regt I found the officers wore the mess kit (except badges) of the Essex Regt. The adjutant was drawn from the HQ pool but on this occasion was a Sherwood Forester. The Staff came from the Rifle Brigade. The Regt was a Line Regt. It was however allied to and formed part of the Rifle Brigade. This all appeared to not make sense. His Majesty's permission for a change was sought and gave the condition that all ranks agreed. We then sought a Line Regt to take us. We found the Royal Berkshire Regt had but one Territorial Bn and its Depot was within easy reach of London. We therefore approached the Colonel of the Regt, Gen Sir Felix Ready and were in due time received into the fold as the 5th Bn The Royal Berkshire Regt TA."

 

Regards,

 

Steve

 

Thanks for that. Can I use the word 'bizarre' in this context. Interesting, given the 7th Essex 'connection' that they were carrying on Essex traditions.

[Steven Broomfield]

14 hours ago, Gareth Davies said:

Thanks. I still think it's possible if not plausible. 

 

I'd say plausible and possible.

 

 

"How often have I said to you that when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains,however improbable, must be the truth?"

[Guest]

20 hours ago, Steve B said:

This quote from Colonel Francis, CO of the 5th Royal Berkshire Regiment on or around the time of the changeover, reveals all:

 

"In 1921 when I first went to the 10th London Regt I found the officers wore the mess kit (except badges) of the Essex Regt. The adjutant was drawn from the HQ pool but on this occasion was a Sherwood Forester. The Staff came from the Rifle Brigade. The Regt was a Line Regt. It was however allied to and formed part of the Rifle Brigade. This all appeared to not make sense. His Majesty's permission for a change was sought and gave the condition that all ranks agreed. We then sought a Line Regt to take us. We found the Royal Berkshire Regt had but one Territorial Bn and its Depot was within easy reach of London. We therefore approached the Colonel of the Regt, Gen Sir Felix Ready and were in due time received into the fold as the 5th Bn The Royal Berkshire Regt TA."

 

Regards,

 

Steve

 

        Thanks for this stuff- which helps me fill in some puzzles regarding  10th London, 7th Essex. A glance at the map will show that Hackney, as part of the county  of Middlesex was -in regimental area terms-something of an outlier-and the spread of  London increased this All of this makes sense to me- when you look at the location of LRB and HAC-  Armoury House and Bunhill Row- which act as something of a draw for Hackney-which was then generally more genteel. 

    The 1921 attachment of 10th London to R. Berkshire  suggests that the more obvious regimental associations rejected Hackney-   Essex ('cos it's not) but the London and Middlesex?  Is there anything in the record about 10th London being refused by other TA associations????  Seems likely to me.

[Steve B]

Thanks for this stuff- which helps me fill in some puzzles regarding  10th London, 7th Essex. A glance at the map will show that Hackney, as part of the county  of Middlesex was -in regimental area terms-something of an outlier-and the spread of  London increased this All of this makes sense to me- when you look at the location of LRB and HAC-  Armoury House and Bunhill Row- which act as something of a draw for Hackney-which was then generally more genteel. 

The 1921 attachment of 10th London to R. Berkshire  suggests that the more obvious regimental associations rejected Hackney-   Essex ('cos it's not) but the London and Middlesex?  Is there anything in the record about 10th London being refused by other TA associations????  Seems likely to me.

 

The actual transfer to the Royal Berkshire Regiment took place in 1937; in 1921 the 10th Londons still came under the umbrella of the Rifle Brigade. I have no specific information about the 10th Londons being refused by other TA associations, but within the context that in 1937 all of the more geographically obvious Line Regiments (Middlesex, Royal Fusiliers, Essex etc) were already losing Territorial infantry battalions for compulsory conversion to Anti-Aircraft and Searchlight units it is doubtful if any of them would have been in a position to absorb the 10th London Regiment into their order of battle even if they had wanted to. 

 

 

[Guest]

32 minutes ago, Steve B said:

 

The actual transfer to the Royal Berkshire Regiment took place in 1937; in 1921 the 10th Londons still came under the umbrella of the Rifle Brigade. I have no specific information about the 10th Londons being refused by other TA associations, but within the context that in 1937 all of the more geographically obvious Line Regiments (Middlesex, Royal Fusiliers, Essex etc) were already losing Territorial infantry battalions for compulsory conversion to Anti-Aircraft and Searchlight units it is doubtful if any of them would have been in a position to absorb the 10th London Regiment into their order of battle even if they had wanted to. 

 

 

 

   Thanks SteveB (1921-a slip). It raises one point for GWF-but wider than this thread- why in 1914-5 did some areas have Pals Battalions- which get all the historical glory-while others were specific "others"-artillery, pioneer etc-which get very little memory at all? . As it is, the 1937 changes seem a puzzle- if other RF, Miiddx, Essex, infantry battalions were compulsorily changed-then what was so special about Hackney that it was not given compulsion as well ? Just a thought.

     Your- much needed- reference to "Gurkha" dating to 1914-ish and the East Coast suggests to me that the writer had a specific source in mind- Let's hope we can find it in due course.

[Steve B]

As it is, the 1937 changes seem a puzzle- if other RF, Miiddx, Essex, infantry battalions were compulsorily changed-then what was so special about Hackney that it was not given compulsion as well ? Just a thought.

 

With the Royal Fusiliers, Middlesex and Essex Regiments it may have just been a numbers game. With all of these regiments having four Territorial battalions each, it would be easier to transfer a couple over to the RA/RE without offending Regimental sensibilities too much. For this reason The Royal Berkshires, with only 2 Territorial battalions would have escaped this fate. Just a theory. Interesting to note that all of the battalions affiliated to the KRRC and RB retained their infantry role. 

[Guest]

37 minutes ago, Steve B said:

 

With the Royal Fusiliers, Middlesex and Essex Regiments it may have just been a numbers game. With all of these regiments having four Territorial battalions each, it would be easier to transfer a couple over to the RA/RE without offending Regimental sensibilities too much. For this reason The Royal Berkshires, with only 2 Territorial battalions would have escaped this fate. Just a theory. Interesting to note that all of the battalions affiliated to the KRRC and RB retained their infantry role. 

    

     Your last sentence makes a deal of sense-  There was,of course, a substantive reason why Terrier battalions in the greater London area were converted- Stanley Baldwin's maxim that the bomber will always get through- Thus, London AA regiments seems both logical and sensible. KRRC and RB were capable of infinite expansion for infantry roles, regardless of regimental area traditions.

  PS- I have a lead to check at BL  regarding "Gurkhas". It might just possibly be rhyming slang. More when I have checked the 1934 reference..

[Gareth Davies]

'A Dictionary of Slang and Unconventional English' by Eric Partridge has this:

 

 

[Guest]

16 minutes ago, Gareth Davies said:

'A Dictionary of Slang and Unconventional English' by Eric Partridge has this:

 

 

 

  Eric Partridge died in 1979. His name is continued in use  as a tribute and a selling-point by publishers. His slang dictionaries are excellent-BUT this is still a 1982 reference-making reference in turn to a 1977  book on military badge collecting and a 1982  reference-rather delphic-in New Society. Partridge's original (and best) dictionary of slang is the one on soldier slang and songs of the Great War. Mine is boxed up in store at the moment-Has anyone checked their copy?????? 

[MBrockway]

On 12/08/2017 at 18:35, Steve B said:

 Interesting to note that all of the battalions affiliated to the KRRC and RB retained their infantry role. 

 

Your last sentence makes a deal of sense-  There was,of course, a substantive reason why Terrier battalions in the greater London area were converted- Stanley Baldwin's maxim that the bomber will always get through- Thus, London AA regiments seems both logical and sensible. KRRC and RB were capable of infinite expansion for infantry roles, regardless of regimental area traditions.

 

Not quite correct I'm afraid.

 

6th Londons (City of London Rifles) and 11th Londons (Finsbury Rifles) were both affiliated to the KRRC and were converted in 1935 to 31st (City of London Rifles) Anti-Aircraft Battalion, Royal Engineers and 61st (Finsbury Rifles)  Anti-Aircraft Brigade, Royal Artillery respectively.

 

The RB's London Regt affiliated battalions all survived the 1935 AckAck moves unchanged, though 17/LR (Poplar & Stepney Rifles) was converted to artillery in 1947.

 

Mark

 

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, MBrockway said:

 

 

Not quite correct I'm afraid.

 

6th Londons (City of London Rifles) and 11th Londons (Finsbury Rifles) were both affiliated to the KRRC and were converted in 1935 to 31st (City of London Rifles) Anti-Aircraft Battalion, Royal Engineers and 61st (Finsbury Rifles)  Anti-Aircraft Brigade, Royal Artillery respectively.

 

The RB's London Regt affiliated battalions all survived the 1935 AckAck moves unchanged, though 17/LR (Poplar & Stepney Rifles) was converted to artillery in 1947. Note the first head of Anti-Aircraft Command, 1938-39, was Alan Brooke- nothing Brookie dealt with 

 

Mark

 

 

     Happy to be corrected-it's a little off the thread but how London prepared and responded to possible  attack in the 1930s is  an interest-the evidence is across my part of London but ignored usually (eg Dragon's teeth that can be seen along the Central Line)   I note that the first head of Anti-Aircraft Command was Alan Brooke in 1938-39- Nothing Brookie touched was done otherwise in the best way. 

Edited 12 August , 2017 by Guest

[MBrockway]

Happy to be corrected-it's a little off the thread but how London prepared and responded to possible  attack in the 1930s is  an interest-the evidence is across my part of London but ignored usually (eg Dragon's teeth that can be seen along the Central Line)

 

Mine also - remember a special trip I made in the early 1980's to locate a WW2 flame fougasse site on one of the stop lines somewhere near top of Shooters Hill.  Happy days!

[Steve B]

3 hours ago, MBrockway said:

 

Not quite correct I'm afraid.

 

 

Fair point! Always happy to be corrected.

[Guest]

Hackney Gurkhas 1915 Star Medal Roll for anyone interested.

 

Excel file on the attached Drop-Box link (you don't need a Drop-Box account to download this: top right is 'Download. Click then choose 'Direct Download).

 

973 named individuals: No, Name, Initial, Rank, Disembarkation Date, Place, Fate. etc

871 disembarked in the Dardanelles. - 706 main body plus later reinforcements in Aug, Sep and Dec 1915

181 Fatalities (18.6%).

130 DMU (13.4%)

Place of birth, residence and enlistment added from SDGW and CWGC data. I have a blind spot on 55 names as my SDGW or the London Regt has one sheet missing covering surnames beginning with H to R. When I track down the missing sheet (pages 193-194) I will update the file. A photo of the missing pages would be gratefully received. 

 

Note DMU = Discharged Medically Unfit; King's Regulations para 392 xvi

 

Any mistakes are mine. Martin

 

Edited 14 August , 2017 by Guest

[MBrockway]

Thanks Martin - very useful and much appreciated.

 

I assume DTE is Discharged, Time Expired, but Dtn Pg ???  No doubt it'll be extremely obvious when you reveal it

 

 

Mark

 

[Derek Black]

41 minutes ago, MBrockway said:

Dtn Pg ???  No doubt it'll be extremely obvious when you reveal it

 

I'm stumped too.

 

Derek.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, MBrockway said:

Thanks Martin - very useful and much appreciated.

I assume DTE is Discharged, Time Expired, but Dtn Pg ???  No doubt it'll be extremely obvious when you reveal it

Mark

 

DTE is indeed Discharged Time Expired

"Dtn Pg" should be "Dth Pd" which is (I have just realised "Death Presumed". Original is very feint.

Edited 14 August , 2017 by Guest

[Bartimeus]

That reminds me I had seen this - officers of 1/10th Londons shortly before they embarked for Gallipoli:

 

 

 

Newspaper Image © The British Library Board. All rights reserved. With thanks to The British Newspaper Archive (www.BritishNewspaperArchive.co.uk).

Edited 14 August , 2017 by Bartimeus

[Gareth Davies]

27 minutes ago, johnboy said:

 

And?