Anyone saying "retire" will be shot at once. Spring 1918 orders.

[Simon Cains]

I found this in the orders to the 1st bat, Rifle brigade  from early April through May 1918.   Wow ...

Are there accounts of anyone actually being shot at once ?  I guess this policy only started in April 1918 with the German spring offensive.  I assume it was not just the Rifle brigade.

"The word "retire" will on no account be used.  Anyone heard using it will be shot at once".   In orders 14th May 1918, and on 4th April, etc.  I guess this came from Haig's Backs to the Wall speech on 11th April, "...there must be no retirement".

 

[WhiteStarLine]

Interesting Simon and would have been regarded as an illegal order and countermanded as the situation cleared.

The only similar one I am aware of from around the same time was Australian Brigadier-General Pompey Elliot, a legend with his own men, who issued two similar orders, quickly rescinded by superiors.  The quotation is from the Australian Dictionary of Biography:

Quote

It had been a desperate time [March 1918] in which Elliott's measures were not always approved by his superiors. Under his orders, a British staff officer had been arrested for looting wine at Corbie after which Elliott made it known that looters would be publicly hanged. The looting stopped but the aggrieved officer complained to General Headquarters. In another written instruction, officers rallying British stragglers in his sector were ordered to shoot any who hesitated. This was quickly withdrawn on the orders of Hobbs.

 

[phil andrade]

Graham Seton Hutchison syndrome ?

Hyperbole ?

 

Imagine such an order being implemented  : in March 1918 more British troops would have been killed by their brothers in arms than by the Germans !

 

There must have been instances when soldiers killed men who were endangering their comrades because of their (mis)conduct, but it’s a thoroughly implausible thing to apply officially and systematically on the battlefield.  I state that with some diffidence, because such measures were indeed deployed by the Soviets at Stalingrad.

 

I know that some written orders were  issued to Australian soldiers which explicitly stated that men must fight to the death rather than retire in April 1918.  That’s different from instructing men to kill anyone who advocated retirement.

 

Phil

[Guest]

Mate,

Not to mention the "Backs to the Wall" order by higher command (DH)

These types come around from time to time when the wind comes up.

The old fight or flight

S.B

[phil andrade]

Something comes to the fore when commanders realise that their troops have been surrendering in large numbers :  they issue orders to fight to the death. At Le Cateau in August 1914 this was the appeal made; it happened again in Egypt when Monty took command 28 years later.....and it surely impinged on Haig when he issued his Backs to the Wall order in April 1918.

Scores of thousands of unwounded British soldiers had been taken prisoner, and this was clearly disconcerting.

A famous example comes to mind, which exemplified the frame of mind, and which I’ll attach as an edit, providing source and context.

 

Back soon,

 

Edit :

“1. This position will be held and the section will remain here until relieved .

2. The enemy cannot be allowed to interfere with this programme.

3. If the section cannot remain here alive it will remain here dead, but in any case it will remain here.

4. If any man through shell shock or other cause attempts to surrender he will remain here dead.

5. Should all guns be blown out, the section will use Mills grenades and other novelties.

6. Finally the position as stated will be held.”

 

This is cited by John Terraine in his book DOUGLAS HAIG  The Educated Soldier, pages 433-434.

 

Apparently it was issued by a subaltern of the 1st Australian Division , just after receipt of Haig’s Order of the Day.   This order was found on the bodies of the men of the section.

 

You’ll find echos of this wording in an address made by Montgomery to the men of the Eighth Army in the build up to Second El Alamein.

 

Phil

Edited 27 November , 2021 by phil andrade

[mills-bomb]

On 24/11/2021 at 16:30, Simon Cains said:

 

"The word "retire" will on no account be used.  Anyone heard using it will be shot at once".    "...there must be no retirement".

For goodness sake, don’t give the Government ideas.

 

 

[Simon Cains]

Sorry I see this topic was discussed at length in 2016  

   

[Simon Cains]

11 hours ago, mills-bomb said:

 

Anyone asking to retire under the age of 97, anyway.