Linesman, Trench maps, War Dairies and map co-ordinates

[Jonathan Saunders]

Just working my way through War Diaries and appendices of 6/RWK and 37 Inf. Bge. and plotting movements, raids, actions etc on the Linesman maps. Just wondered if any one else has done this and what problems they encountered and views on accuracy of co-ordinates given in the diaries and appendices.

Occasionally the references fit in perfectly – are logical and can even refer back to a published maps detailing advances, but other times the co-ordinates seem to be all over the place and anywhere but on the map in question. One example is where all the co-ordinates for each document referred to grid references in map section “E”, where the narrative actually suggested they were east of this position and in map section “F”. What confuses me in this instance was that if this was an error and was consistent through all the documents and I find that difficult to believe. (This was in the Bge War Diary, I haven’t yet cross-reference this with the Bttn Diary).

Obviously others have tried similar projects and I just wondered if your experiences are similar to mine and how you dealt with the problem.

Thanks and regards,

Jonathan S

[Robert Dunlop]

Jonathan, it can be a major problem. My first step is to recheck my interpretation. What with Eastings and Northings The difference is easier to remember now that I have read about the Battle of 73 Easting (Operation Desert Storm). There are many instances, however, where the position on the map is as described but does not fit the narrative. Occasionally, the discrepancy can be resolved as there is a clear problem. Often, however, it seems to reflect problems in recalling the details of an engagement, especially if the report is written some time later or by someone not directly involved. Then I have to go by descriptions from surrounding units. If publishing, I indicate clearly where the original description was located versus my interpretation.

Robert

[Jonathan Saunders]

Then I have to go by descriptions from surrounding units.

Hi Robert - thanks your reply. I was hoping by combining the Bttn War Diary with the Brigade Diary I would cover most angles but annoyingly not. I might try adding another Bttn from the same Brigade. I might try using the Chasseaurd book as well where trench names are given.

Regards,

Jonathan S

[Smithmaps]

Jonathan

It seems to me that you are doing a very important excersise, that of identifying, and highlighting inaccuracies in the written accounts.

I know it seems a pain, but historically, you have new tools which were not previously at the disposal of the historians, your efforts are adding to history.

A very important task, which if resolved and shared, should be very worthy of your time spent.

One other point: you would be amazed how little the general public know about map references. (I know from my job, how few people understand Ordnance survey co ordinates)

The Army was a cross section of that general public too, and you should not be surprised if map references are inacurate. Likewise, narratives can be equally vague, as memory can play all sorts of tricks.

Good luck

Guy

[Chris_Baker]

We should also not forget that, for those operational records written at the time as opposed to retrospectively, the writers may have had other pressing matters to attend to. Accuracy is map referencing may not have been at the forefront of their mind in comparison with survival.

[Jonathan Saunders]

Many thanks for the further comments. I will of course be struggling on ....

[truthergw]

Many thanks for the further comments. I will of course be struggling on ....

As a signaller who often accompanied officers on tewts, ( I have been at various times, half a company and half a batallion, the driver being the other half), I can testify to the less than solid grasp of map reading in some officers. Map references also had to be encoded, his job but often left to me ( griddle anyone?). If the diaries were written up from this sort of data, possibly a few days later. even without the distractions of enemy artillery I would not be surprised if you sometimes find yourself on the wrong sheet, never mind the wrong grid square. It also throws light on the difficulties of staffs at various levels of HQ, trying to make sense of those reports. An onerous task but the results will be all the more worthwhile.

[Jonathan Saunders]

Thanks Tom and these are all good points you raise. I might be confusing myself now but I think some of the problems I am expreriencing are with Brigade orders/appendices and I am looking at the map and thinking, thats not where they were. I thought it might be me but as I said sometimes the results are as expected!

Its a great exercise - time consuming - but can give lots of benefits when out in the field, but it is also becoming so frustrating ...

[Chris Henschke]

Jonathan,

I have been involved in a project that covers the assault of one area, and then the subsequent occupation involving consolidation, track laying, patrols, handovers, etc over two months. Cross-referencing the War Diaries of four Divisions, and the Brigades. Plotting the patrols from Battalions and checking the intelligence summaries.

They are all consistent. Very occasionally, the reference is misinterpreted, i.e., J.a.3.4.8., rather than J.3.a.4.8. (From the Corps Burial Officer!)

Or if reports are type written, comparing the original notes made in a field message book, an 8 is typed instead of the written 6. These are things that you would expect.

I can see where human error might creep in if a map is folded not showing the letter E or F, but that must be unusual.

Chris Henschke

[Robert Dunlop]

Chris, I have seen it happen where the action took place across two maps. In one example, most of the events occurred on one map, but the jumping off point was on the other map. In the War Diary, a map reference was clearly incorrect, and the original was (heavily) overwritten in pencil. In this example, the problem was not related to the similarity between E and F.

Robert

[Smithmaps]

Have seen it happen where the action took place across two maps. In one example, most of the events occurred on one map, but the jumping off point was on the other map.

Johnathan

You can 'Merge' the maps together to create one.

Its basically electronic sticky tape.

try it, it's fun

It doesn't help when the War Diaries have got it wrong though, but it helps you make sense of it all.

Guy

[Graham.Mott]

Johnathan

You can 'Merge' the maps together to create one.

Its basically electronic sticky tape.

try it, it's fun

It doesn't help when the War Diaries have got it wrong though, but it helps you make sense of it all.

Guy

Jonathan

Not sure how far you have got by I have been making some limited attempts on this.

The errors I have noted are on 23/8/18 where the War Diary coordinates for the start line are different to those in the actual orders.

(both taken from the War Diary which I have donwloaded.

There is also an error between the paper copies of the maps I have, 62d NE2 Ed 2B (Mametz and Fricourt) doesnt match the adjacent sheet 62c NW1 ed 2C (carnoy) If you align the numbers 6, 12 18 on the 62d obvious features dont align with 62c and the cells seem to be one out.

Graham

[Smithmaps]

Jonathan

Not sure how far you have got by I have been making some limited attempts on this.

The errors I have noted are on 23/8/18 where the War Diary coordinates for the start line are different to those in the actual orders.

(both taken from the War Diary which I have donwloaded.

There is also an error between the paper copies of the maps I have, 62d NE2 Ed 2B (Mametz and Fricourt) doesnt match the adjacent sheet 62c NW1 ed 2C (carnoy) If you align the numbers 6, 12 18 on the 62d obvious features dont align with 62c and the cells seem to be one out.

Graham

Graham,

An interesting observation, and one that I had not noticed. I have looked at the maps you quote, and indeed the squares do not continue across. However, the actual land features do match up exactly. If you then go the the next maps up the same half square is also missing. So it seems that it was by design, and not an error.

What you have to remember, (and this is commonly misunderstood) is that the squaring is a 1000 yard grid (which does not fit), overlaid on a metric base, so some squares have to be lost at some point. The only reason for the squaring was for no geographical purpose, but was only to enable map references to be exchanged precisely. (this was a British overprint on the Belgian system) As all maps were printed the same, all map references are correct for the maps in question, as they correspond to what all were using, and will always relate to the same location.

Guy