Jump to content
Free downloads from TNA ×
The Great War (1914-1918) Forum

Remembered Today:

Map printed diagonally - how common was this?


WilliamRev

Recommended Posts

On 1/6/2018 at 15:37, battiscombe said:

while I cannot add to the interesting discussion on map grids - for the purposes of the dissertation note that these were surely Field Survey [not Service] Companies ..

 

 

 

 

 

Thanks - this was a careless mistake that had slipped into the dissertation, and one that I don't think that I would have spotted otherwise!

 

William

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Returning to the side question about maps being taken into the front line ...

 

Quote

Pargraph 24. of the 1st Bn RSF Op Order for the attack on 26th Sep 1917 by Lt Col N McD Teacher DSO  dated 25th Sep 1917 states:

 

" No maps etc showing barrage lines, positions of HQs or anything which would be of use to the enemy will be taken into action. No copy nor extracts of these orders are to be taken into action"

 

 

While maps marked up with key information useful to the enemy were strictly prohibited from going forward, usually no further than Brigade HQs, the troops in the front line definitely did have unmarked message maps.

 

This example is from the 12th East Surreys (122 Bde, 41st Division) from their counter-attack on HOLLEBEKE on 05 Aug 1917 ...

5a5f34ffc71e9_12ESurreyHollbekerecto.jpg.e581433a72886efe03e8bf7af881f26a.jpg

 

On the reverse is printed this Message Pad template ...

5a5f35007e271_12ESurreyHollbekeverso.jpg.76f73655665436203079f36333652ed9.jpg

 

On the map you will see a line drawn in blue crayon from O.6.c to O.11.b.  This signifies the battalion's final position reached in the attack and where they were consolidating - see Point #1 on the Message Pad, which I've blown up below.  The Message Pad also gives the bn's contacts either side, Pts #5 and #6, showing they were in touch with 15/Hants to their left (E) but their right (W) flank was in the air, and, Pt# 8, their remaining effective strength at 100 rifles.  


 

 

5a5f34ff30a9f_12ESurreyHollbekeversodetail.jpg.270436c73dcb93b133c66df46f6969b6.jpg

 

It is very clear this message map was on the ground at least as far as the battalion HQ and given that it has spaces to fill in Platoon and Company details, I'd say it's 90% certain these were definitely carried right to the objectives by platoon commanders leading the assaulting troops.

 

The British trenches are marked only by an Approximate Position line, exactly as per the map that William contends was taken forward by his grandfather.  William's map has labels showing the battalion start positions and what look like corps (green crayon), right battalion ?company (marked 'Dividing Line ...' in pencil) and battalion boundaries (black crayon).  There is a 'Leave' time (I think) marked for 2/RS, but it will be an offset from Zero rather than an absolute time.  There are a couple of other marks which could be the Bn HQs for 1/GH and 10/RWF.

 

Most of these annotations would be of no tactical value to the enemy once the attack had started.  True that the battalions are named rather than using a codename, cf. '12th DAGGER' above, but how critical would it be for the enemy to know this when the assault troops would typically be relieved very soon after the attack?  More relevant for phases of static defence I'd say.

 

Given all the above, I'd say it's entirely reasonable to say William's grandfather did actually carry this map into battle and that that fact is not merely family legend.

 

Incidentally the signature is Major Richard Pennell, 18/KRRC, who was in temporary command of the 12/E Surreys 19 Jul - 05 Aug 1917.  He won the DSO for this counter-attack and returned to 18/KRRC as CO on the same day, winning a Bar to his DSO a mere eight weeks later.  A remarkable rifleman - began the war as a Regular sergeant, ended as a Lt.-Col.

 

Also relevant here is the detail from the DSO citation that Pennell destroyed all the secret papers when the German attack initially dislodged 12/East Surreys from HOLLEBEKE.  The counter-attack was to regain this lost ground ...

post-20192-1275001819.jpg

Having NOT destroyed this message map, clearly Pennell did not regard it as Secret, and Pennell was an exemplary professional soldier.

 

See this topic here for more on Pennell.

 

 

Mark

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mark  -  the main differences are;

 

1. The level of detail

2. The objectives are marked on William's grandfather's map.

3. Other maps identical to William's grandfather's map are marked SECRET. 

4. The battalion Op Order immediately before the attack, signed by the Adjutant makes specific instructions that maps with tactical information will not be taken into battle. Objectives are tactical information. 

 

No-one knows who took which maps into battle, officially or unofficially. It is pure speculation - mine included. People can and will believe what they want to believe. For my money, the type of map  with the level of detail shown in William's post would not be taken into battle, particularly since the Battalion's own Operation Orders specifically mention they should not. At the risk of stating the obvious, marked, tiered objectives are valuable information, particularly if the assaulting forces fail to gain one or more of the objectives as it reveals tactical information - associated fire-plans, subsequent operations etc.... I don't doubt that Officers broke the rules, but without corroboration it will remain 'informed speculation' whether a map was taken into battle or not. I don't know for sure because I wasn't there but in this instance the Adjutant was and I choose to believe his written, signed instructions on behalf of the CO were carried out. It is just a view and to be clear, my speculation.  Nothing more.  

 

Being precise and carefully separating known 'fact' from 'informed speculation' might be important for academic papers.  Great War history is sadly heavily weighed down by modern authors who often confuse the two. I am currently dithering over purchasing a book that claims no-one survived a particular attack at Zandvoorde in 1914; yet three separate War Diaries (all in the public domain and all available online) clearly state there were survivors. It also claims two Squadrons were wiped out yet one can only find less than 40 fatalities in the CWGC data... etc...ad nauseam... The priority of factual accuracy has in the example of the book has been subordinated to creatinga fanciful account full of hyperbole in order to generate sales. It is piss poor research and that is putting it mildly, especially in the centenerary years when we hope that we might push understanding of the Great War forward not backward. Just a thought. MG

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/7/2018 at 15:34, QGE said:

Manual of Map Reading and Field Sketching 1912

A much better copy (edited). 

 

Military Sketching, Map Reading and Topography

by Mockler-Ferryman late Prof of Military Topography Royal Military College Sandhurst. 1911 (second edition)

 

Thanks! Just in time for me! I am back to teaching field surveying to my students next semester - and I might just get them to read these...:thumbsup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...