Australian Mounted Division

[Doug Lewis]

Has anyone any information or point me in the right direction(I have already

looked on mother site) on the Australian Mounted Division and their actions in Oct

1917 -Affair of Huj,the action of El Mughar and Capture of Junction Station,Im

particularly interested in the Worcester Yeomanry' involvement.

Regards

Doug

[Doug Lewis]

Since posting this request I have managed to find out the information I

required.Im researching a local man who was KIA while serving with The

Worcestershire Yeomanry.

I have just discovered he was killed while involved in the final calvary charge of

the British Army.

Thought Pals might be interested.

"At Huj in the Sinai Desert at 1.30pm on Nov 8 1917,181 horses of the Worcester

Yeomanry Cavalry,ridden by men armed with sabres,galloped into a force of 20,000 Turks,21 German field guns and three Austrian 5.9 Howitzers.

The action lasted 20 minutes scattering the Turkish Army.

36 Yeomanry and four officers were killed and 57 wounded. 100 prisoners were taken."

(Daily Mail 28/12/96)

In my opinion incredibly brave men!

Regards Doug

[christine liava'a]

Did the Australians have sabres too?

In fact, what weapons did mounted troops usually carry? I know there were mounted rifles units, but were there other weapons used as well?

[Doug Lewis]

Christine.

Reading the article it does not mention the Australians, the charge was only made

by the Worcestershire Yeomanry. It goes on to say that they were armed with a

rifle and sabre but only the sabre was used in this action.

Regards Doug

[Terry_Reeves]

Doug

I'm probably going to sound both parochial and pedantic here. The charge at Huj was a combined effort with the Warwickshire Yeomanry, amongst them were a troop from the Coventry based C Squadron. The so -called Huj gun, captured in the charge, is on display at the Warwickshire Yeomanry Museum in

Warwick.

On the pedantic side of things, the British Army had dispensed with sabres long before WW1. Apart from the rifle, they were armed with the 1908 pattern sword. A change in the riding posture of the cavalry in the early 1900's caused the design of the sword to be changed from a cutting weapon to a thrusting weapon . Officers carried a similar version, the 1912 pattern, which was a little more decorative.

Terry Reeves

[Guest stevebec]

Sorry mate?

one of us must be reading the wrong account of this action?

The charge was made by one and half sqn's of the Worcester and the same of the Warwick Yeomanry Regiment suported by the remainder of the 5th Yeomanry Bde and the 60th Division.

The Turkish force was small and as a rear guard was well dispossed with Guns and MG.

The 11 guns captured most were captured still manned by there crews who went down fighting although not all were taken in postion but during there withdraw and over ran.

70 prisoners were taken prisoners while the killed are not shown in any work I have but may have been as many as two hundred.

The charge or charges as there were three were handled with great skill by their commander LtCol Cheape and show great credit to what could have happen if British Horse armed with sabres had been used at Beersheba.

Sorry sabres had not been issued to Australian LH units and were not untill July August 1918 and only to half the LH Bde's as most didn't what it.

There is a small account of this action in "The Palestine Campaigns" by Wavell and the British Offical history but the best and detailed account is in the Aust Offical History.

S.B

[Geoff S]

Just to add to S.B.

The Australian Mounted Div received swords because of the role that they were to undertake in the advance in 1918. The Anzac Mounted Div were not issued with the pattern 1908 (rapier type) cavalry sword. It was not required for the Jordan Valley. Prior to the issue of swords in mid 1918 the bayonet, hand held or fixed on rifles as lances were used when required by these men for this type of fighting.

This method of using a bayonet attached to a rifle as a lance was pioneered by the 5th Australian Light Horse regiment when it galloped 2,000 yards in two lines to capture Katia Oasis on the evening of August 5th, 1916.

Cheers

Geoff S

[Doug Lewis]

I apologise If Ive offended anyone by not posting the correct account of the charge at Huj,I donot profess to be an expert on WW1 battles or horses or even swords/sabres.I have a very general interest in military history.

My interest in WW1 has been fuelled by my first visit to Ypres and Somme in March and my recent research of my family who were KIA, this interest has been hightened by this excellent forum and the amazing support and information i have received from the members.

I found this article and thought it was very interesting so posted it.I wouldn't have a clue if I was reading the correct account or not. Will think before posting in future

Regards Doug

[Neil Mackenzie]

Doug.

I don't think you need to apologise. You were quoting from an article as you made clear in your post and your conclusion is true whatever the size of the force they were attacking.

We are all better informed thanks to you having raised this thread and the clarification that Steve and others have provided.

[Guest stevebec]

Yes Mate, sorry if I sounded off, it wasn't my intention. It was only the press report I didn't like.

We see now how the media "SEX" up a report of an action so far away.

How many times and in how many wars have we seen this done by both the Media and should I say Politicians and or the Military.

In some cases we think its good that our boys did so well while on closer inspection we find it wasn't the case or it was taken out of all proportions.

Vietham brought it out on me and now the British public is exposed to it every day thanks to those who see it different then some of us.

S.B