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

Remembered Today:

164 Battery Royal Garrison Artillery


Guest Simon Bull

Recommended Posts

Guest Simon Bull

I am researching Gunner Alfred Ernest Smith who was a member of 164 Siege Battery, which is shown by Chris' site to have been part of 52nd Artillery Brigade. Alfred Ernest Smith died in May 1918 whilst serving with the battery.

An earlier inquiry with the Pals confirmed that my failure to find 164 Battery War Diary on PROCAT indicated that the diary did not in fact exist.

Accordingly, on a recent visit to the National Archives I looked at the War Diary of the 52nd Brigade of the Royal Artillery. This was a relatively comprehensive War Diary, and as I began to approach the dates that I was interested in I was very hopeful that I might well be able to find out fairly detailed information about the circumstances of Smith's death. However, the entry for the 12 April 1918 records that 164 battery, together with 264 battery, was "ordered north" and moved off in the afternoon. No information is given about where 164 Battery went. Nor is it specifically stated that 164 Battery came under another Brigade's command. However, that is implicit in a comment on 21 May 1918 (after the man in whom I am interested had been killed) that "164 & 264 Batteries rejoin Brigade". There is one other reference to 164 Battery during the relevant period, which indicates that a visit to the battery on 12th May found that it had "suffered very heavily from gas bombardments".

This is all by way of a very long introduction to a relatively simple question which is, does anyone know which Artillery Brigade 164 Battery was part of during this period of six weeks in April and May 1918? I am aware that there is a document in the National Archives (WO95/5494) which records, I believe, the unit to which RGA Batteries were attached. However, judging by a similar document which I have consulted in relation to the Labour Corps, it will not cover short-term moves of this nature. I was not able to look at WO95/5494 during my recent visit to the National Archives as it was out to another reader.

Any help appreciated.

Simon Bull

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...