16th Manchesters on 10 July 1916

[pat]

I am sure somebody can help me with this one. Which wood did the 16th Manchesters (1st Manchester Pals) attack on 10 July?

We have copies of letters a family member sent to his mother. He helped capture Montaubon on 1 July and came through the first day of the Somme "without a scratch". He wrote "We have made a name for ourselves. The village we attacked was mentioned in the Daily Mail"

Then he was in action again and taken prisoner on 10 July. There are 3 clues in his letters:

"I was captured on July 10th with 50 of our Battalion"

"We were cut off in a wood which was a veritable death trap."

"We attacked at 3.45 am on July 10th."

I believe the attack on Bernafy Wood was on 3 July, Mametz Wood on 14 July, and Delville Wood even later.

Could it have been Trones Wood on July 10th?

Thanking you in advance

Pat

[Robert Dunlop]

Trones Wood

This is the Official History account:

'On hearing of the retirement of the 17/Manchester Br General Steavenson called upon the 16/Manchester, which attacked northward from the sunken road east of La Briqueterie at 6:40 pm. The battalion had orders to gain the southern part of the wood and cover the left of the Scots Fusiliers in Maltz Horn trench; this was accomplished with slight loss, for the enemy were unprepared for such a flank movement. Owing to the activities of the German bombers and of snipers in trees, it was thought best to occupy a line outside the wood for the night, and the 16/Manchester dug in about 60 yards from its south-western edge.'

The timing does not accord. There was a party of circa 40 men of the 17/Manchester battalion who were left behind at 3 pm when a withdrawal to Bernafay Wood was ordered ....'(at 3.30pm) the Germans were able to penetrate to the western side of the (Trones) wood, the only opposition coming from the isolated party of the 17/Manchester which resisted stoutly until it was overwhelmed'.

[pat]

Wow, a reply within seconds! Thank you very much.

Interesting that the details don't tie up, but it does sound like the right incident. Nothing is ever simple is it?

Pat

[Robert Dunlop]

The attached map (from later in July) shows the direction of the successful German counter-attack on Trones Wood. The south-east corner was held by the 18/Manchester so the group that was cut-off would have been in the region of the blue arrows.

Bernafay Wood is to the bottom left and Guillemont (from whence came the German attack) is middle right.

Thanks very much for sharing the information. It could be that the author of the letter was attached to the 17/Manchester.

[pat]

Two replies within minutes! Thank you - its great to have the map. It does sound as though his company may have been attached to the 17th Battalion. But he was absolutely beyond any doubt a member of the 16th. Does anybody have access to the 16th or 17th war diaries for that day?

many thanks

Pat

[John_Hartley]

Pat

I have the Battalion histories for the 16th & 17th (and the full diary for the 17th). No companies of the 16th were officially attached to the 17th, although , of course, the attack on Trones Wood developed into absolute chaos and carnage.

There are several pages in the History covering both Battalions. I cannot attach scans to the Forum's email facility, but if you contact me off-Forum with your email address, I'll gladly sort it out for you.

John

[pat]

thank you John. That is really kind. I've just e-mailed you

Pat

[pat]

John has really kindly e-mailed me the relevant pages of the Battalion histories and the timings for the 16th do check out after all, in the more detailed version.

Three companies of the 16th were carrying out "vigourous patrolling of the Wood" all night long. The Germans counterattacked about 5.30am and "occupied the Southern End, cutting off some of the Manchesters patrols". After the action, 85 ORs were missing from teh 16th battalion.

Thanks again to everyone for your help here. Now I can let this chap's daughter know what happened to her father. (The only reason I'm not putting his name on here yet is that I think I should check with his daughter first).

Pat

[John_Hartley]

Now I can let this chap's daughter know what happened to her father. (The only reason I'm not putting his name on here yet is that I think I should check with his daughter first).

And, chaps & chapesses, I'm doing some research for Pat on some of the other names mentioned in the letters. I think we may eventually have a good story to tell.

John