German Files Reveal Depth of Irish Disenchantment With British Army

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, Ron Clifton said:

I think that A.G.3 was the section of the Adjutant-General's Branch that dealt with infantry other ranks personnel. (IIRC A.G.7 did the same for RA personnel.) I don't think the Judge Advocate-General's office used any abbreviation starting A.G.

 

Ron

 

     Thanks Ron- what you say is what I thought.  MOD have queried whether it might be Advocate-General. It's a toss-up-personnel matters (Adjutant-General) v potential disciplinary matters (Advocate-General). I suspect MOD retains something on 100 year closure and MOD has proved to be both friendly and helpful.

    If I could pick your brains a bit- is there any sort of contemporary organizational chart of such War Office structures known to you???  It would all help.

 

[Terry_Reeves]

In fact AG2 dealt with infantry matters. I will post the other branches of the AGs department when I get home later today or tomorrow if they are of interest.

 

TR

[Terry_Reeves]

 

AG 3 ,  responsible for discipline -  the department in question.

 

Edited 18 May , 2018 by Terry_Reeves

[Guest]

  Terry- than you very much indeed for this-   May I ask what date this publication is and what it's titlepage says?????

 

      The listing of these functions gives me a firmer belief that such records  must have continued to be held for a long time after the war-    Although probably junked, some of the listings suggest that there really may be stuff still on closure.

 

    May I sue the scanned pages for a beefed-up FOI request to MOD?

 

 

[Terry_Reeves]

 

 

War Office Administrative Directory 1918 , published by HMSO, corrected to 30 June 1918.  Please use as you wish. 

 

TR

[Murrough]

On 18/05/2018 at 09:15, 2ndCMR said:

 

Well, that hardly sounds like the comments of an impartial observer, but of course a little blarney goes a long way, whether you are hoping to live out your three score and ten in 1917 or hoping to be allowed to rummage about in German archives in 2017.

 

As for the last sentence, the gentleman plainly hasn't got as far in his reading as Hill 70, Vimy, or Passchendaele , quite apart from The 100 Days, or else he's just putting an extra coat of wax on that sugar beet he's polishing so assiduously.

Barton is a well known British observer of the Great War, he shows up on many TV progammes here in Europe,he would not (imo) be considered fluent in blarney.,

[nigelcave]

On 06/05/2018 at 23:44, Wexflyer said:

 

On 06/05/2018 at 23:44, Wexflyer said:

"Mr Barton believes the efficiency of German intelligence-gathering goes a long way to explaining why the Anglo-French alliance never won a set-piece battle, despite their commanding numerical and material advantage."

 

I suppose it rather depends on how one defines a set-piece battle. I would be interested, once defined, to know which ones during the Great War on the Western Front would merit that description.

Edited 9 June , 2018 by nigelcave

[Guest]

On 18/05/2018 at 19:44, Terry_Reeves said:

 

 

War Office Administrative Directory 1918 , published by HMSO, corrected to 30 June 1918.  Please use as you wish. 

 

TR

 

   Thank you Terry-It is most interesting

[2ndCMR]

On 08/06/2018 at 17:01, Murrough said:

Barton is a well known British observer of the Great War, he shows up on many TV progammes here in Europe,he would not (imo) be considered fluent in blarney.,

 

Was he misquoted?

 

I suppose we must await the definition of "a set-piece battle" then?

 

The fact of showing up on TV frequently these days suggests that:

1. a person is of the gender, ethnicity or orientation which is being promoted.

2. that person can be counted upon to read the script prepared or vetted for them as though they believe it.

3. they have a suitably low-brow presentation and preferably a thick regional accent; or can handily imitate one when necessary.

 

 

 

[2ndCMR]

On 06/05/2018 at 15:44, Wexflyer said:

Link to Irish Times article on new research in German archives

 

"Mr Barton believes the efficiency of German intelligence-gathering goes a long way to explaining why the Anglo-French alliance never won a set-piece battle, despite their commanding numerical and material advantage."

 

In the absence of any elucidating comment I suppose this piece of nonsense will have to stand alongside Dennis Winter's comment in "Haig's Command", that the German Army in late 1918 was "undefeated" as an example of how to shoot your credibility in both feet in twenty five words or less.

 

 

 

Edited 4 August , 2018 by 2ndCMR

[Terry_Reeves]

Well said 2ndCMR!

 

TR

[2ndCMR]

On 02/08/2018 at 12:13, Terry_Reeves said:

Well said 2ndCMR!

 

TR

 

Yes, well thank you, but whatever Mr. Winter's gaffe in that regard I'm afraid I don't find that enough to discard all of the evidences he presented in regard to Haig & Co., if that might happen to be your thinking?

[Powerscourt]

On 08/05/2018 at 13:32, charlie962 said:

Daniel Kays 555, 40429 RDF was reported PoW German Hands Cas List  15/3/18 ( I checked- the others are not on same list)

His ICRC card includes this:

          

 

Date of 'capture' agrees so it is him.

 

Charlie

 

 

 

Daniel Kays, Keyes was my grandfather

[Powerscourt]

My grandfather was Daniel Kays or Keyes mentioned in this article

[Powerscourt]

My grandfather was Daniel Kays or Keyes mentioned in this article