Meaning of "mebus" in WW1 recollection

[PWM]

Can anyone help me out with the meaning of "mebus" in this 1968 typed recollection by a WW1 veteran?
"Two mebus --full of water and German dead--stench-- platoon lying down all day-- exposed position--  enemy post in front and another partly behind-- this last a great nuisance."
Many thanks.

[EDWARD1]

I believe its a blockhouse/pillbox

[IPT]

Mannschafts-Eisen-Beton-Unterstände, apparently.

 

 

[PWM]

Really helpful answers, thank you. I can now see that there is a relevant discussion here:

 

And helpful article about the same battlefield the writer was recollecting here:

https://www.awm.gov.au/articles/blog/pillbox-fighting-in-the-ypres-salient

 

[MBrockway]

2 hours ago, IPT said:

Mannschafts-Eisen-Beton-Unterstände, apparently.

 

 

 Quite, see below, though apparently the term Minerteeisenbetonunterstände was also used.

 

There is a false lead in a German language Wikipedia article that tripped me up that defines the acronym as Maschinengewehr-Eisenbetonunterstand

 

 

Certainly Pal mebu ought to know

[Colin W Taylor]

PWM,

 

May I ask what recollection you are looking at and where the author was located.  I believe a MEBU referred to a specific type of German MG shelter used in the Hindenburg Line.  Whether the British used the term correctly in the future with other blockhouses or pillboxes is unknown.  Depending on the context of the account it may be possible to identify what type of structure it was and where it was.

 

Regards

 

Colin  

[PWM]

Thanks Colin. This from the Lt RA Burnard, my grandfather. I've been blogging his 1918 WW1 diary, 100 years later to the day, at raburnard.uk (also tweets @RABurnard) from his time in the Royal Flying Corps and as a POW.  Prior to this, from Jan 1916 to late 1917, he was in the army, as far as I know with the London Irish throughout that period, first as a private (a 'rifleman'), then as non-commissioned officer, and finally commissioned as a 2nd Lt.

 

The mention of "mebus" is from notes made in 1968 in preparation for a talk to a class of schoolgirls studying the 1928 play, Journey’s End (the class was taught by his daughter – my mother).  In one section he planned to answer a question they had sent in advance about cowardice, describing two incidents at St Julien "on the Passchendaele Ridge, not far from Ypres".  The first of these incidents concerns what we might now, I guess, call 'friendly fire'. I also have a 1917 letter he wrote – I assume to his commanding officer – about the same incident. No mention of mebus there, but right at the end of the letter he refers to "pillboxes".

Both documents attached. All thoughts, background info, etc welcome...

Bravery and Cowardice (from 1968 Journeys End).pdf

Friendly Fire 1917.pdf

[Colin W Taylor]

PWM,

 

An excellent account (we're obliged to you for sharing) and thank you for letting me know of the blog - I was reading his account of capture with interest.

 

3rd Ypres is not my area of expertise but I had hoped that the 1968 account could be compared to the unit war diary but the latter is so bland of detail it is difficult to place the date or location.  It might be worth a search of the Imperial War Museum catalogue, and that not the National Army Museum and Liddle Collection, to see if there are any other personal accounts from members of 1/18th London Irish which you could compare or which might mention landmarks.  This might enable the pill boxes and positions to be identified or identify the unit that 'attacked' him.  There is no obvious additional detail in the 141 Brigade diary or annexes that I can see in August or Sept I'm afraid. 

 

Kind regards

 

Colin

 

[MBrockway]

On 22/10/2018 at 10:58, PWM said:

Thanks Colin. This from the Lt RA Burnard, my grandfather. I've been blogging his 1918 WW1 diary, 100 years later to the day, at raburnard.uk (also tweets @RABurnard) from his time in the Royal Flying Corps and as a POW.  Prior to this, from Jan 1916 to late 1917, he was in the army, as far as I know with the London Irish throughout that period, first as a private (a 'rifleman'), then as non-commissioned officer, and finally commissioned as a 2nd Lt.

 

The mention of "mebus" is from notes made in 1968 in preparation for a talk to a class of schoolgirls studying the 1928 play, Journey’s End (the class was taught by his daughter – my mother).  In one section he planned to answer a question they had sent in advance about cowardice, describing two incidents at St Julien "on the Passchendaele Ridge, not far from Ypres".  The first of these incidents concerns what we might now, I guess, call 'friendly fire'. I also have a 1917 letter he wrote – I assume to his commanding officer – about the same incident. No mention of mebus there, but right at the end of the letter he refers to "pillboxes".

Both documents attached. All thoughts, background info, etc welcome...

Bravery and Cowardice (from 1968 Journeys End).pdf

Friendly Fire 1917.pdf

 

22 hours ago, Colin W Taylor said:

PWM,

 

An excellent account (we're obliged to you for sharing) and thank you for letting me know of the blog - I was reading his account of capture with interest.

 

3rd Ypres is not my area of expertise but I had hoped that the 1968 account could be compared to the unit war diary but the latter is so bland of detail it is difficult to place the date or location.  It might be worth a search of the Imperial War Museum catalogue, and that not the National Army Museum and Liddle Collection, to see if there are any other personal accounts from members of 1/18th London Irish which you could compare or which might mention landmarks.  This might enable the pill boxes and positions to be identified or identify the unit that 'attacked' him.  There is no obvious additional detail in the 141 Brigade diary or annexes that I can see in August or Sept I'm afraid. 

 

Kind regards

 

Colin

 

 

 

PWM,

As Colin has said, what great accounts, not only for their intrinsic interest, but for the trouble your grandfather took to pass them on to another generation in 1968 - that alone is priceless.

 

I enjoyed them so much, I thought I'd wade in to try and help with the puzzles.

 

First, here's more detail on your grandfather's career from the London Gazette, the medal rolls and bolstered by some info from your blog ...

 

Robert Alexander BURNARD

13 May 1916 - landed in France as 4476 with 18/Londons (London Irish), rank on landing unknown [London Reg BWVM roll (TP18/102B/16)]

14 Dec 1916 - returned to UK with rank L/Cpl to begin officer training at No 4 Officer Cadet Battalion, Keble College, Oxford [London Reg BWVM roll (TP18/102B/16)]

30 May 1917 - commissioned 2nd Lieutenant, London Regiment from No 4 Officer Cadet Battalion, Keble College, Oxford [LG 1917 30136, p.6039]

   The LG does not specify which battalion of the Londons.

Date unknown - promoted to Lieutenant

12 Jan 1918 - seconded as 2/Lt from London Regt to Flying Officer (Observer), Royal Flying Corps

31 Mar 1918 - shot down and taken POW

11 Nov 1918 - rank at Armistice was Lieutenant [RFC Officers BWM roll (OFF/168/69E)]

 

The 18th London Regiment (London Irish) British War & Victory medal ('BWVM') roll (which is the 'TP18/102B/16 reference on his Medal Index Card) gives his number as 592103, which is in the London Irish's allocated range for the TF re-numbering.  That re-numbering arose from Army Council Instruction (ACI) 2414 of 1916, published on 23 December 1916, after he'd gone to the OCB, and anyway generally were not put into effect until March 1917.  Presumably as an Officer Cadet, he still needed an Army service number - possibly he was still on the strength of the Londons and had to be accounted for?  Whatever, he would not have used the longer number while he was fighting in the ranks.

 

The 18th London Regiment (London Irish) BWVM roll also states he was commissioned into the 18th Londons on 29 May 1917 as well as that the Air Ministry would be administering issue of his campaign medals.

 

However there are few anomalies in your grandfather's accounts, which contradict some of this.

 

Firstly, in the notes he made on his Great War service, he describes being commissioned thus ... "

"In due course I passed out as an officer without trouble and, in early summer, was posted again to France, but not alas to my London Irish Battalion."

 

and in his account of the September 1917 'friendly fire' iincident he shouts over to the British attackers ...

 

It looks to me that even if he was formally commissioned into the London Irish, his actual posting was to the 2/3rd (City of London) Battalion (Royal Fusiliers), London Regiment.

 

2/3rd Londons were in 173 Infantry Brigade, 58th Division.  Robert's note is addressed to OC 'C' Coy, so we can assume this was to his own Company commander and that he was in 'C' Coy.  In Sep 1917, 58th Div were in XVIII Corps, Fifth Army and were in the front line just east of ST JULIEN holding the right (South) sector of the Corps front.  The front line was not a continuous trench, but a series of connected posts utilising shell holes, ruined buildings and captured enemy MEBUs.

 

The 2/3rd Londons war diary has this entry for 17 Sep 1917:

 

Transcription: "O.C. [Officer commanding] front right Company reports that his advanced Post - 28.C.12.d.60.85 - was attacked by a raiding party of the Division on right, in mistake - two of our men slightly wounded, but the 'enemy' were repulsed & matters were soon put straight."

 

This fits very closely indeed to Robert's own account, probably further corroborating his posting to 2/3rd Londons.

 

At this time 2/3rd Londons were the right front battalion and 'C' Coy was the battalion's right front company with their right flank on the HANEBEEK forming the division and Corps southern boundary.  Much of the ground between the HANEBEEK and the road from ST JULIEN to WINNIPEG FARM was waterlogged.

 

This map shows the position on 17 Sep 1918 ...

 

Key

The light blue hatching shows waterlogged ground

 

Landmarks

A - C Coy, 2/3rd Londons Advanced post at 28.C.12.d.60.85

B - the Hanebeek

C - German strongpoint at SCHULER FARM

D - WINNIPEG FARM CROSSROADS

E - German dug-outs & prepared shell-holes at 28.C.18.b.75.85 (see below)

 

What of the 'friendly' attackers?  Robert gives us a useful clue ...

 

The Division next in line to their right (South) was 55th (West Lancs) Division forming the left of the V Corps sector, also in Fifth Army.

 

On 17 Sep 1917 the 166th (South Lancs) Infantry Brigade were holding the left of the 55th Div frontage, with 1/10th (Scottish) Battalion, King’s (Liverpool Regiment) - that is the Liverpool Scottish - being the left hand battalion immediately south of Robert and the 2/3rd Londons.  The Liverpool Scottish were of course a kilted regiment proudly wearing the Forbes tartan and a Hamphire lad like Robert could probably be forgiven for not being able to separate Scouse voices from Scots

 

There's not much detail in the Liverpool Scottish diary - a fighting patrol is described on the night of 16/17 against enemy positions on the HANEBEEK in the ground dividing them from the 2/3rd Londons.

 

 

The 166 Bde diary is more helpful.

 

The dugouts at 28.C.18.b.75.85 are marked as E on the trench map above.  We also learn here that Zero Hour for the second raid was 03:30hrs 17 Sep and that the positions were finally taken by a third raid on the following night.

 

166 Bde's Operational Order No 96 covers the attack ...

 

To see this in full requires a larger map ...

 

Landmarks

A - C Coy, 2/3rd Londons Advanced post at 28.C.12.d.60.85

C - German strongpoint at SCHULER FARM

D - WINNIPEG FARM CROSSROADS

E - German dug-outs & prepared shell-holes at 28.C.18.b.75.85 (see below)

F - 1/10th KLR (Liverpool Scottish) forming up point

 

The red dashed line is the front line at 05 Sep.  The Green Line (looks blue here) and the Brown Line were Objectives of earlier pushes starting on 12 Sep.  By 17 Sep, both Divisions had pushed further east, but neither British nor Germans had many stretches of continuous trench lines intact.  The front lines of both sides were formed of connected posts, shell holes and MEBUs.  HINDU COTT was held by 58th Div and the Liverpool Scottish operation was intended to extend the line NW-ards and fill in the gap between the divisions ahead of the launch of the Battle of the Menin Road on 20 Sep.  "W" Day in the 166 Bde war diary above is the countdown to this.

 

Putting all this together it seems the two Liverpool Scottish platoons assembled at the trench N of POND FARM (F) at 02:30hrs and set off crawling so as to be in position to launch their attack against the dug-outs at 'E' some 500 yds away to their north at 03:30hrs.  Their intended attack was clearly designed to use the spur marked by the 20m contour.  Unsurprisingly they lost their way and overshot by some 300 yds before spotting the silhouette of one of the MEBUs in Robert's sector, which they gallantly attacked at c.04:15hrs!

 

With my night navigator hat on, I can see how they probably expected to have the Hanebeek as an easily detected and foolproof 'catching feature' that would tell them they'd overshot, but in reality it was probably very difficult to tell the Hanebeek from the rest of the waterlogged ground south of JURY FARM and they probably crawled over the stream without realising.  A navigator would usually detect the overshoot from the distance travelled, but keeping an accurate reckoning of distance while crawling though mud at night and under hazard would be a major achievement even for an expert navigator.  See the detailed map higher up for a better idea of how my scenario might have worked.

 

The MEBU at 'A' was probably not the actual pillbox they attacked.  I suspect that trench map ref was for Robert's platoon HQ.  The MEBU and ruined buildings at JURY FARM 100yds to its SE was likely to also be in Robert's sector and would have been an attractive silhouetted target up on the roadside for anyone crawling up out of the swamp to the south.

 

Robert's report of the Liverpool Scottish officer said ...

 

Note that Robert mentions 'my pillboxes' in the plural.

 

Since the firing began at c.04:15hrs, the raiding party must have begun crawling at ~01:15hrs, some time before they were due at POND FARM.  With the German strongpoint of SCHULER FARM over to their right, that is perhaps not surprising.  The Daily Intelligence Summaries for 16/17 Sep from both divisions mention greater than usual enemy machine gun and artillery activity that night.

 

So no wonder there's little evidence for Robert's account in any of the docs for the London Irish, 141 Bde or 47th Division - he was actually in a totally different Londons unit!

 

This all assumes I'm right in how I've put all this together of course.  What do we all think?

 

Mark

 

 

 

Edited 23 October , 2018 by MBrockway
Typo

[Colin W Taylor]

Mark,

 

I would agree - I should have read the account in greater detail.  I took the MIC stating commissioned into the 18th Londons literally but it's not unusual for such cross-posting - my error entirely.

 

PWM,

 

58th Division would explain the use of the term 'MEBU'.  173rd Bde launched a partially successful attack between Croisilles and Bullecourt on 15 and 16 June 1917 where they were fighting for what I would consider a Hindenburg Line MEBU (a concrete shelter where an MG would be set up on the roof) as opposed to a pill-box/blockhouse.  As his battalion came across a MEBU first this terminology stuck with Burnard for describing future concrete pillboxes.  It is less likely he was involved in an attack two weeks after gaining his commission and he would likely refer to it in his account; I presume he gained the term MEBU from other officers of 2/3 Londons after he joined them.  There's nothing else to add to Mark's comprehensive answer! 

 

Regards

 

Colin

Edited 23 October , 2018 by Colin W Taylor

[MBrockway]

The 58th Division material also includes this interesting reconnaissance report by 2/6th Londons of a MEBU at 28.C.6.d.7.1 in the division's left (northern) sector, but likely to be representative of all the German MEBUs on the northern flank of the Salient ...

 

 

 

 

Interesting that the singular here appears to be MEBUS - presumably using the S of Unterstand - giving the plural in English of 'MEBUSSES'

 

I don't think I've seen that elsewhere.

 

Mark

 

[MBrockway]

17 hours ago, Colin W Taylor said:

Mark,

 

I would agree - I should have read the account in greater detail.  I took the MIC stating commissioned into the 18th Londons literally but it's not unusual for such cross-posting - my error entirely.

 

PWM,

 

58th Division would explain the use of the term 'MEBU'.  173rd Bde launched a partially successful attack between Croisilles and Bullecourt on 15 and 16 June 1917 where they were fighting for what I would consider a Hindenburg Line MEBU (a concrete shelter where an MG would be set up on the roof) as opposed to a pill-box/blockhouse.  As his battalion came across a MEBU first this terminology stuck with Burnard for describing future concrete pillboxes.  It is less likely he was involved in an attack two weeks after gaining his commission and he would likely refer to it in his account; I presume he gained the term MEBU from other officers of 2/3 Londons after he joined them.  There's nothing else to add to Mark's comprehensive answer! 

 

Regards

 

Colin

 

16 hours ago, MBrockway said:

The 58th Division material also includes this interesting reconnaissance report by 2/6th Londons of a MEBU at 28.C.6.d.7.1 in the division's left (northern) sector, but likely to be representative of all the German MEBUs on the northern flank of the Salient ...

 

 

 

Yes - I agree!  The elaborate works around TUNNEL TRENCH etc. are what I would normally think of as MEBUs, whereas the installations in the Salient are more like generic blockhouses.

 

Some of them could be massive - e.g. Au Bon GIte that gave such trouble to 20th (Light) Division at the forcing of the STEENBEEK before LANGEMARCK.  I don't think I've ever seen that referred to as a MEBU and 20th Div had also spent time down at CROISILLES [Edit: Wrong!  I was  thinking of 16/KRRC in 33rd Div!].  I'll have a dig through the diaries.

 

 

Au Bon Gite is approx 3 miles to the NW of these 'MEBUs' at St Julien.

 

Mark

 

 

 

Edited 24 October , 2018 by MBrockway

[PWM]

Mark,

Thank you for your extensive research on my behalf and RAB's.  This is tremendous!

 

I think it's just wonderful that RAB's 1917 letter and 1968 description, can be cross-referenced 100 years on with your knowledge of the state of play on the ground.  I'm going to need to read this through quite a few times to properly absorb.  Can I ask about the origin of the maps.  Did you draw them?

 

Very helpful too on Robert Alexander Burnard's service record.

14 hours ago, MBrockway said:

13 May 1916 - landed in France as 4476 with 18/Londons (London Irish), rank on landing unknown [London Reg BWVM roll (TP18/102B/16)]

I believe at this stage he was a Rifleman (based on his army papers - see image) which corresponds to a Private soldier in other regiments, doesn't it?

 

This form is stamped "18th Battalion, London Reg. (London Irish Rifles)" and the number he's assigned is 592103, corresponding to the one you found for him. The form ("Army Form E. 624") is dated 22 January 1916, So it seems like this (re)numbering was in use by then.

 

14 hours ago, MBrockway said:

14 Dec 1916 - returned to UK with rank L/Cpl to begin officer training at No 4 Officer Cadet Battalion, Keble College, Oxford [London Reg BWVM roll (TP18/102B/16)]

I didn't know about the Lance Corporal rank.  Would that be a non-commissioned officer status?  From his photos and 1918 diary, I know that he was an NCO in the London Irish at the time of High Wood attack on 15 September 1916.

 

14 hours ago, MBrockway said:

Date unknown - promoted to Lieutenant

It's my understanding from the army papers, quite possibly mistaken, that RAB was only promoted from 2/Lt to Lt on discharge from the forces in 1919, after his repatriation from the Graudenz POW camp.

 

14 hours ago, MBrockway said:

12 Jan 1918 - seconded as 2/Lt from London Regt to Flying Officer (Observer), Royal Flying Corps

According to his 1968 account (albeit 50 years on), he was with the RFC from autumn 1917.  From his RFC papers (see image), as far as I can decipher, the transfer took place on 9 October 2017; then from 18th October until 4th December in the UK for training; then back with 35 Squadron from 7th December.  As I say, hard to decipher!  I know he was flying by 10th December 1917 with 35 Squadron, as I have record of crash on that date.

 

14 hours ago, MBrockway said:

Firstly, in the notes he made on his Great War service, he describes being commissioned thus ... "

"In due course I passed out as an officer without trouble and, in early summer, was posted again to France, but not alas to my London Irish Battalion."

 

and in his account of the September 1917 'friendly fire' iincident he shouts over to the British attackers ...

 

It looks to me that even if he was formally commissioned into the London Irish, his actual posting was to the 2/3rd (City of London) Battalion (Royal Fusiliers), London Regiment.

 

2/3rd Londons were in 173 Infantry Brigade, 58th Division.  Robert's note is addressed to OC 'C' Coy, so we can assume this was to his own Company commander and that he was in 'C' Coy.  In Sep 1917, 58th Div were in XVIII Corps, Fifth Army and were in the front line just east of ST JULIEN holding the right (South) sector of the Corps front.  The front line was not a continuous trench, but a series of connected posts utilising shell holes, ruined buildings and captured enemy MEBUs.

 

Thank you, I hadn't registered the move to 2/3rd Londons from the army papers.  But now I can see clearly that 2/3rd Londons is flagged on the RFC papers (see image above) and also on a casualty form.

 

Much appreciated, PWM

 

 

[MBrockway]

 

For simplicity I've embedded my replies in-line but in bold red

 

29 minutes ago, PWM said:

Mark,

Thank you for your extensive research on my behalf and RAB's.  This is tremendous!

.He was clearly a remarkable man, but what impressed me most was the trouble he was prepared to take to tell another generation his story in 1968.  If I can add even more to that now, then further generations will hear it too.

 

Can I ask about the origin of the maps.  Did you draw them?

.They're from various the various divisional, brigade and battalion war diaries.  The two with the annotations obviously have annotations added by me, but only using MS Paint, nothing fancy!  Last night I sent you (& Colin) a PM with a link to my DropBox folder where you'll find the full size originals.  If you download from the Forum here, you'll find the forum software has probably compressed them.  Also I reduced the size of most of them myself anyway to save space on the Forum.  They're fine for a webpage, but you'll want the originals for your own & family use. Send me a PM (forum Personal Message) if you cannot get the DropBox link to work..

 

Very helpful too on Robert Alexander Burnard's service record.

I believe at this stage he was a Rifleman (based on his army papers - see image) which corresponds to a Private soldier in other regiments, doesn't it?

.Rifle regiments are my special interest as my grandfather was in the KRRC.  The London Irish were also rifles - hence Rifleman and black buttons.  Rifleman is the equivalent of Private, but I would say "a Rifleman ...corresponds to a Private soldier in other lesser regiments"   There's a topic somewhere here on Forum where I give the Army Orders that made the term Rifleman official in the 1920s.

 

 

I didn't know about the Lance Corporal rank.  Would that be a non-commissioned officer status?  From his photos and 1918 diary, I know that he was an NCO in the London Irish at the time of High Wood attack on 15 September 1916.

.Lance Corporal is a bit of oddity as technically it is NOT a rank but an appointment.  This allowed local commanders to promote promising soldiers easily, but also to demote them if they did not live up to it.  However it is usually included under the term Junior Non-Commissioned Officers

 

My grandfather's battalion (16/KRRC) was also at High Wood, but without any service record and several Blighty wounds, I have yet to determine he was definitely there.  He certainly told us he was "on The Somme" when we were boys .

 

It's my understanding from the army papers, quite possibly mistaken, that RAB was only promoted from 2/Lt to Lt on discharge from the forces in 1919, after his repatriation from the Graudenz POW camp.

.That was my feeling also as that was very common.  However I had no evidence for it from the London Gazette.  Either I've missed it (most likely), or the returning POWs may have been handled slightly differently from the officers relinquishing their commissions generally.

 

According to his 1968 account (albeit 50 years on), he was with the RFC from autumn 1917.  From his RFC papers (see image), as far as I can decipher, the transfer took place on 9 October 2017; then from 18th October until 4th December in the UK for training; then back with 35 Squadron from 7th December.  As I say, hard to decipher!  I know he was flying by 10th December 1917 with 35 Squadron, as I have record of crash on that date.

.Crikey!  That's just a few days after this friendly fire incident and immediately after the much bigger actions by 58th Division in the Battle of the Menin Road.  He really did not enjoy being a platoon commander did he?!  I got that date from the London Gazette - it seemed to be the 'effective' date, but it's possible I have interpreted that wrong.  The London Gazette pages I found for Robert are also in the DropBox folder.

 

The war diaries, brigade orders and maps are all from Ancestry.  Speak to me before using them in your blog - they definitely have Ancestry security watermarks.

..

Much appreciated, PWM

.No problem - I think your blog is great - keep it up

Cheers,

Mark.

 

 

 

[PWM]

22 minutes ago, MBrockway said:

He was clearly a remarkable man, but what impressed me most was the trouble he was prepared to take to tell another generation his story in 1968.  If I can add even more to that now, then further generations will hear it too.

Thanks Mark, he was...

 

I replied to the PM a few minutes ago. All files downloaded. Great to hear that your grandfather was in the KRRC. Curiously I recently came across a colleague in his regiment, Capt W.L. Clinton, 2nd Btn KRRC. He was in Graudenz with my grandfather.  He escaped twice from there (described in RAB's diary), having previously escaped five times from other camps.  Sadly, after his last and successful escape, he fell ill in Belgrade and died. In 1919 there was an appeal to his fellow prisoners to raise money for a memorial, and I recently went and found it in the village of Padworth.  See this Twitter thread from @RABurnard:

 

 

 

37 minutes ago, MBrockway said:

The war diaries, brigade orders and maps are all from Ancestry.  Speak to me before using them in your blog - they definitely have Ancestry security watermarks.

I'll make sure I do that.  I also asked you a question about this in my PM reply.

 

40 minutes ago, MBrockway said:

Crikey!  That's just a few days after this friendly fire incident and immediately after the much bigger actions by 58th Division in the Battle of the Menin Road.  He really did not enjoy being a platoon commander did he?!  I got that date from the London Gazette - it seemed to be the 'effective' date, but it's possible I have interpreted that wrong.  The London Gazette pages I found for Robert are also in the DropBox folder.

Also possible I've not properly understood the RFC records.  In the PM I sent you a 'WeTransfer' link for PDFs of both the army records and the RFC records.

 

Your encouragement with the blog is much appreciated too.

 

All best, Piers