held strongly. On the 28th they took Marrières Wood.
Paragraph 24 deals with the fighting for Mont St. Quentin and the
capture of Peronne, in support of which operations the 58th, 47th and
other divisions attacked on 31st August, and “by successful fighting
on this and the following day, captured Bouchavesnes, Rancourt and
Frégicourt, with several hundred prisoners.” This is now the “Second
Battle of Bapaume.”
Paragraph 30 described the Battle of Havrincourt and Epéhy, 12th-18th
September, and as to 18th September, the “Battle of Epéhy,” said, “On
the extreme right, and in the left centre about Epéhy the enemy’s
resistance was very determined and in these sectors troops of the
6th, 12th, 18th and 58th Divisions had severe fighting. Before
nightfall, however, the last centres of resistance in Epéhy were
reduced, and both in this area and on our right about Gricourt local
actions during the succeeding days secured for us the remainder of
the positions required for an attack on the main Hindenburg defences.”
On the 18th September the 58th took Peizières and made further
progress during the next 48 hours.
On 24th September the Division, now weakened by the heavy tasks it
had carried through during eight weeks’ fighting, left the III. Corps
and moved north to join the First Army. It had no more hard fighting.
In October, headquarters of that Corps were transferred to the Fifth
Army in Flanders where times were less strenuous.
Major-General Montgomery’s _Story of the Fourth Army_ (Hodder and
Stoughton) contains many flattering references to the work of the
Division in August and September, 1918.
59TH (NORTH MIDLAND) DIVISION
SECOND LINE
This Division was employed in Ireland at the time of the Dublin
rebellion of April 1916, and, but for that outbreak, might have gone
abroad earlier than it did. It sailed in February 1917, was taken
to the district east of Amiens and assisted to press the enemy when
he retreated in March of that year. When the retreat was over they
occupied the line near Havrincourt Wood; at that time they formed
part of the III. Corps, Fourth Army. On 13th April, the 59th and
other troops made an advance when ground near Gricourt was taken and
consolidated.
In the autumn of 1917 the Division was in the Ypres salient, and was
employed as part of the V. Corps about the Wieltje-Gravenstafel road,
east of St. Julien, in the attack of 26th September, now called the
“Battle of Polygon Wood,” a stage in the Third Battle of Ypres, when,
at the cost of heavy losses various strong points were captured and
the line advanced. A quotation as to this from the despatch of 25th
December, 1917, paragraph 52, has already been given under the 58th
Division, see also map opposite p. 123 of Messrs. Dent’s edition of
_Sir Douglas Haig’s Despatches_.
The map opposite p. 163 of the same edition shows that the 59th was
at Cantaing, south-west of Cambrai, when the enemy made their great
counter-attack on 30th November, 1917, but it was not so severely
pressed at that point as on the immediate left of the Division.
The Division was heavily involved in the great German offensive—the
“Battle of St. Quentin”—which commenced on 21st March, 1918, and
had very severe losses. The map opposite p. 186 of the edition
above referred to shows that the Division was occupying the line
about Bullecourt in the area of the Third Army on the 21st and a
break-through took place between Bullecourt and Lagnicourt, the
latter place being in the area of the 6th Division on the immediate
right of the 59th. This part of the line was evidently one of those
selected by the enemy for a special effort, five divisions attacking
the 59th and a portion of the 34th on its left. Sir Arthur Conan
Doyle gives an excellent account of this part of the great battle;
he states that the 178th and 176th brigades were in the front line.
These were destroyed but the 177th in support beat off three very
heavy attacks and held out till assistance came from a division in
reserve, the 40th. The 177th Brigade remained with the 40th Division
and saw further intense fighting during the next few days—the “First
Battle of Bapaume.” Sir Arthur, vol. v., p. 77, puts the losses of
the Division in the March battle at 5765.
The Division was taken to Flanders and was involved in the “Battles
of the Lys,” in April. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, in the volume above
referred to, draws attention to the excellent work of the 178th
(Sherwood Forester) Brigade, when attached to other divisions about
12th to 14th April, but as a whole the Division was still suffering
from the grievous losses sustained three weeks before; that period
being obviously insufficient to assimilate the new drafts which
formed such a large proportion of the total strength.
In consequence of the very heavy casualties it had suffered in the
March battle and on the Lys the Division was reduced to a cadre
basis (see note to despatch of 21st December, 1918, paragraph 1,
Dent’s edition), but it recuperated in time to take part in the final
British offensive.
In the despatch of 21st December, 1918, paragraph 45, it is stated
that on 17th October, 1918, the 57th and 59th Divisions of the XI.
Corps were on the outskirts of Lille. On the 18th Lille “was clear of
the enemy,” and our line was carried far to the east. “Thereafter our
troops pressed forward steadily.”
60TH (2ND LONDON) DIVISION
SECOND LINE
The 60th Division went to France in June 1916. Their first experience
at the front was in the Arras district. They were there initiated in
trench warfare by the 51st Division, before the latter moved south to
take part in the great conflict on the Somme.
After about six months in the line on the Western Front the 60th
were, in January 1917, sent to Salonika. There they saw some hard
fighting in May. In June they joined the Egyptian Expeditionary Force
for service in Palestine. In that country, as will be seen from the
extracts given below, they earned great distinction.
Sir E. Allenby’s despatch of 16th December, 1917, recounting the
operations which culminated in the surrender of Jerusalem, shows that
the Division bore a most important and honourable share of the heavy
task that fell to his troops.
The attack was to commence with the capture of Beersheba, situated on
the eastern or left flank of the Turkish position, on 31st October,
1917. The despatch says, paragraph 8: “As a preliminary to the main
attack, in order to enable field guns to be brought within effective
range for wire-cutting, the enemy’s advanced works at 1070 were to
be taken. This was successfully accomplished at 8.45 a.m., after a
short preliminary bombardment by London troops, with small loss, 90
prisoners being taken.... The final assault was ordered for 12.15
p.m.; it was successful all along the front attacked.”
Beersheba was taken at 7 p.m. on the 31st, the Australian Light Horse
and Yeomanry doing very well. The despatch states: “The Turks at
Beersheba were undoubtedly taken completely by surprise, a surprise
from which the dash of London troops and Yeomanry, finely supported
by their artillery, never gave them time to recover. The charge
by the Australian Light Horse completed their defeat.” About 2000
prisoners and 13 guns were taken and 500 Turkish corpses buried. The
enemy’s left flank was laid bare.
Paragraph 11: On 6th November the Kauwukah system of trenches was
attacked. Yeomanry first stormed the works on the left; “soon
after noon the London and Irish troops commenced their attack. It
was completely successful in capturing all its objectives and the
whole of the Rushdi system in addition.... This attack was a fine
performance, the troops advancing eight or nine miles during the day
and capturing a series of very strong works covering a front of about
seven miles, the greater part of which had been held and strengthened
by the enemy for over six months. Some 600 prisoners and some guns
and machine guns were captured. Our casualties were comparatively
slight.”
Paragraph 12: On the 7th November “the London troops, after a
severe engagement at Tel el Sheria, which they captured by a
bayonet charge, at 4 a.m. on the 7th, subsequently repulsing several
counter-attacks, pushed forward their line about a mile to the
north.” The operations of 27th October to 7th November are now the
“Third Battle of Gaza.”
For some weeks the strain on the troops was very great, much
heavy marching on a short supply of water having to be undertaken
in addition to constant fighting, which during the last half of
November became much more intense. Aided by reinforcements and by the
mountainous nature of the country the enemy put up a great effort to
bring the advance to a standstill, but in this he failed.
The assault on the positions defending Jerusalem was fixed for 8th
December, the 60th being again employed. The despatch draws attention
to “the mere physical difficulties of the advance across steep and
rocky hillsides and deep valleys,” artillery support being difficult,
indeed sometimes impossible, while “the opposition encountered was
considerable.” The weather was most unfavourable, rain falling
heavily on the 7th and three following days.
The first objectives were carried soon after dawn and the troops
pressed on. “By about noon London troops had already advanced over
two miles, and were swinging north-east to gain the Nablus-Jerusalem
road,” “throwing back their right to form a defensive flank,
facing east towards Jerusalem, from the western outskirts of which
considerable rifle and artillery fire was being experienced.... By
nightfall ... all the enemy’s prepared defences west and north-west
of Jerusalem had been captured.... The London troops and Yeomanry
had displayed great endurance in difficult conditions. The London
troops, especially, after a night march in heavy rain to reach their
positions of deployment, had made an advance of three to four miles
in difficult hills in the face of stubborn opposition.”
On the 9th the advance was resumed, the London troops and Yeomanry
driving back rearguards. At noon the city was surrendered. The Army
had taken over 12,000 prisoners and 100 guns between 31st October and
9th December. (See also under 52nd, 53rd and 54th Divisions.)
Sir E. Allenby’s despatch of 18th September, 1918, shows that after
the surrender of Jerusalem, he desired to drive back the enemy
further from its precincts.
Paragraph 5: While the XX. Corps, which included the 53rd and 60th
Divisions, was making preparations to do this the Turks attacked
during the night of 26th-27th December. “By 1.30 a.m. the 60th
Division was engaged on its whole front.
“Between 1.30 a.m. and 8 a.m. on the 27th the outposts of the 60th
Division on the ridge north of Beit Hanninah repelled four determined
attacks, but the heaviest fighting took place to the east of the
Jerusalem-Nablus road. Repeated attacks were made against Tel el Ful;
a conspicuous hill from which Jerusalem and the intervening ground
can be overlooked. The attacks were made by picked bodies of troops
and were pressed with great determination. At only one point did the
enemy succeed in reaching the main line of defence. He was driven out
at once by the local reserves. In all these attacks he lost heavily.”
After a lull the enemy attacked the front of the 60th Division at
12.55 p.m. “in unexpected strength,” but again “local counter-attacks
were successful in restoring the line—this proved to be the final
effort.”
On the 28th December, General Allenby ordered an advance. The battle
was of a very obstinate character and lasted into the evening of the
29th. On the 28th the 60th captured several strong positions by 1
p.m., further positions by 5.30 p.m. and continued their advance till
9.15 p.m. On the 29th they resumed their forward movement, meeting
heavy rifle and machine-gun fire near Bireh. About 4.15 p.m., “the
left of the attack stormed the Tahuneh ridge.” “Simultaneously with
this attack the right of the 60th Division had stormed Shab Saleh in
face of heavy machine-gun fire; subsequently capturing the ridge east
of Bireh. At 9 p.m. the advance was continued.”
“The Turkish attempt to recapture Jerusalem had thus ended
in crushing defeat. He had employed fresh troops who had not
participated in the recent retreat from Beersheba and Gaza and had
escaped its demoralising effects. The determination and gallantry
with which his attack was carried out only served to increase his
losses.”
Another quotation as to this battle has been given under the 53rd
Division, which was also in the XX. Corps. The operations 17th-24th
November, 1917, are now the “Battle of Nebi Samwil,” and those 26th
to 30th December, the “Defence of Jerusalem.”
Paragraphs 6 and 7 of the despatch deal with the advance to and
capture of Jericho and give a detailed description of the immense
difficulties which the troops had to surmount.
“The 60th Division had taken over the line east of Jerusalem some
time previously. Opposed to it were some 5000 rifles, while to the
north another 2000 rifles were in a position from which to act
against the left flank of the 60th Division as it advanced.
“The chief obstacle to the advance lay in the difficulty of the
ground rather than any opposition the enemy might offer.”
Between the line of the 60th and their objectives lay a succession of
ridges some of which were precipitous.
The advance on Jericho began on 19th February, 1918. On that day the
Division captured several strong positions “in face of considerable
opposition.”
That night the enemy attacked and was repulsed “after a sharp
struggle.”
On the 20th further positions were taken, “the enemy resisting
with stubbornness.... The right brigade met with great opposition.
Moreover, the ground over which the attack had to take place proved
the most rugged and difficult yet met with in this country.... The
left brigade advanced four miles over difficult country, the enemy
fighting a rearguard action from ridge to ridge.”
By the evening of the 20th “the 60th Division had reached a line four
miles west of the cliffs overlooking Jericho.”
On the 21st the advance was resumed, the Division reaching a line
which overlooked Jericho. At 8.20 a.m. mounted troops rode into the
town.
Paragraph 8 describes a further advance, 8th to 12th March, in which
the XX. Corps “had to drive the enemy from ridge to ridge.” On the
9th the right brigade of the 60th Division, which had crossed the
Wadi el Auja, north of Jericho, in the dark, and “had subsequently
met with determined resistance,” seized a position astride the
Beisan-Jericho road. Other troops on their left also made good
progress and by the 11th “a line had been captured with great natural
facilities for defence.”
Paragraph 11 and 12 deal with a raid on Amman. The troops employed
were the 60th Division, the Australian and New Zealand Mounted
Division, the Imperial Camel Brigade, etc., the whole under the
General Officer Commanding 60th Division. Heavy rains made the
crossing of the Jordan a task of almost insuperable difficulty and
also made progress very slow when the eastern bank was reached.
On 24th March the 60th Division drove the enemy from a position
which blocked the road to Es Salt, captured three guns and pursued
him for four miles. On the 25th they occupied Es Salt. The mounted
troops effected the destruction of portions of the railway. There
was heavy fighting on the 29th and 30th March, the Turks having been
reinforced; thereafter the Commander-in-Chief ordered a withdrawal
and this was carried out by the evening of 2nd April. Troops were
left on the east side of the Jordan to form a bridgehead. Over 900
prisoners were taken in this raid.
On 30th April operations east of the Jordan were again undertaken.
“The 60th Division captured the advanced works of the Shunet Nimrin
position but were unable to make further progress in face of the
stubborn resistance offered by the enemy.” On 2nd May there was
another attack but the Turks were found to be in great strength.
“The 60th Division was unable to make any substantial progress, in
spite of determined efforts.” About 1000 prisoners were taken in this
operation. On 4th May the force was withdrawn.
Paragraph 15 of the despatch refers to the reorganisation of the
Palestine Army consequent on the departure of the 52nd and 74th
Divisions for France, and it states that 24 British battalions were
also withdrawn from the remaining divisions and sent to France. The
60th contributed its share of these, while the remainder of the
Division continued to set a very high standard of efficient work in
the field to the troops brought to Palestine from Mesopotamia and
India, to take the place of those who had left for the western front.
The 2/20th joined the famous 62nd Division in August 1918.
In the despatch of 31st October, 1918, as to the final overthrow of
the Turks in Palestine, paragraph 9 shows that the break-through by
the infantry was entrusted to Sir E. Bulfin’s XXI. Corps, to which
the 60th Division was attached, it having been moved from the right
to the left of the line. At 4.30 a.m. on 19th September, the XXI.
Corps attacked and, within 36 hours, “the greater part of the VIII.
Turkish Army had been overwhelmed.”
The 60th Division attacked in the coastal sector, then moved inland
to leave “the coast route clear for the Desert Mounted Corps.”
After the 20th the infantry had heavy marching but no severe
fighting. The operations 19th-25th September are now “The Battles of
Megiddo.”
The armistice with Turkey came into force on 31st October, but
fighting had ceased on the 26th. The 60th Division had certainly done
a great deal to bring about the satisfactory conclusion of the War
with Turkey.
Battalions of the Division were selected for the Armies of Occupation
as follows: for Western Front, the 2/14th, 2/15th, 2/16th, 2/17th and
2/23rd London Regiment; for Egypt, 2/13th, 2/19th and 2/22nd London
Regiment.
61ST (SOUTH MIDLAND) DIVISION
SECOND LINE
The Division went to France in May 1916. On 19th-20th July they and
an Australian division made an attack in the Neuve Chapelle district.
Ground was gained but could not be held as the guns on the Aubers
Ridge had command of it.
The despatch from Sir Douglas Haig, dated 31st May, 1917, paragraph
13, Messrs. Dent’s edition, shows that the 61st was one of the
divisions employed in pursuing and pressing the enemy when he
retreated from the neighbourhood of the Somme battlefield in March
1917. On 17th March the 61st and 2nd Australian Divisions captured
Chaulnes and Bapaume.
The Division was for a time in the Third Battle of Ypres and, as
part of the XIX. Corps, attacked on 22nd and 27th August and 5th
September, 1917.
The Cambrai despatch of 20th February, 1918, paragraph 9 (Dent’s
edition) and map opposite p. 163, shows that the 61st was in reserve
on 30th November, 1917, when the enemy made his great counter-attack.
On the night of the 1st December they took over from the 12th in the
neighbourhood of La Vacquerie and for some days thereafter had to
fight hard to stem the German flood; in this they were successful.
The Division saw a great deal of heavy fighting in 1918 and was
frequently mentioned in despatches. It formed part of the XVIII.
Corps, Fifth Army, in March of that year and was engaged throughout
the whole of the British retreat. At the end of ten days’ continuous
fighting the strength of the Division was down to about 2000. They
came out of the battle with a splendid reputation, which was to be
enhanced later, on the Lys.
In the telegraphic despatch of 26th March, 1918, Sir Douglas Haig
said: “In the past six days of constant fighting our troops on all
parts of the battle-front have shown the utmost courage,” and among
divisions which had exhibited “exceptional gallantry” he mentioned
the 61st.
In the written despatch of 20th July, 1918, paragraph 15, which deals
with the 21st March, it is stated: “Assisted by the long spell of dry
weather hostile infantry had crossed the river and canal north of La
Fère, and, south of St. Quentin, had penetrated into the battle-zone
between Essigny and Benay. At Maissemy, also, our battle positions
were entered at about noon, but the vigorous resistance of the 61st
and 24th Divisions, assisted by troops of the 1st Cavalry Division,
prevented the enemy from developing his success.”
The Division held its battle position intact against the assaults of
three German divisions, and only retired in the afternoon of the 22nd
when ordered to do so in consequence of the enemy’s progress at other
parts of the line.
In his _History of the British Campaign in France and Flanders_, vol.
v., Sir Arthur Conan Doyle gives a full account of the very arduous
work of the XVIII. Corps in the March retreat, and frequently refers
to the conduct of the 61st Division in terms of very high praise. He
gives a detailed description of the most heroic resistance of the
battalions in the front line on the morning of 21st March and, as an
example of what was done, he tells the story of the 2/4th Oxfordshire
and Buckinghamshire Light Infantry which, under Colonel Wetherall,
held out in the Enghien Redoubt until it was finally submerged by the
ever increasing waves from the three German divisions which attacked
the front of the 61st. This took place about 4.30 p.m.
Mr. Sparrow in his _The Fifth Army in March 1918_, also gives many
particulars of the splendid defence put up by the forward battalions
of the 61st, on the 21st, as well as of the endless encounters they
had during the retreat. On p. 239 he mentions that parts of the
Division were first attacked at 5 a.m. on the 21st, and were only
two miles back at 3 a.m. on the 23rd, although for 48 hours the 61st
was attacked by three German divisions. On p. 102 he refers to it as
“this brave Division” and says that a Special Order of the day, dated
18th April, stated that between 21st March and that date the 61st had
been opposed by 14 German divisions.
At p. 287 Mr. Sparrow remarks that the 61st had been continuously in
the line since 27th August, 1917, except when moving from one part to
another, and “then fought for twelve continuous days.”
Paragraph 24 of the despatch states that on the morning of the 23rd
the Commander of the Fifth Army ordered “a gradual withdrawal to the
line of the Somme.”
Paragraph 26: A gap occurred in our line near Ham and bodies of
Germans succeeded in crossing the river. “In the afternoon these
forces increased in strength, gradually pressing back our troops,
until a spirited counter-attack by troops of the 20th and 61st
Divisions about Verlaines restored the situation in this locality.”
The fighting between 21st-23rd March is now designated the “Battle of
St. Quentin.”
Paragraph 31, “The Fight for the Somme Crossings”: On the 24th
various bodies of the enemy had been able to effect crossings at
different points. “During the remainder of the day the enemy repeated
his attacks at these and other points, and also exercised strong
pressure in a westerly and south-westerly direction from Ham. Our
troops offered a vigorous resistance and opposite Ham a successful
counter-attack by the 1/5th (Pioneer) Battalion, Duke of Cornwall’s
Light Infantry, 61st Division, materially delayed his advance.”
Paragraph 44: On 28th March the British were almost back to the
Amiens defences and the enemy were seriously pressing the French
on our right. “A gallant attempt by troops of the 61st Division to
regain Warfusée-Abancourt and lighten the pressure from the north
proved unsuccessful.... At nightfall we held approximately the Amiens
defence line on the whole front south of the Somme.”
Fortunately that same day the enemy had been defeated north of the
Somme (see 56th, 42nd and 62nd Divisions), and in a few days his
offensive on the front south of Arras ceased.
In his account of the 28th, Mr. Sparrow deals with the work of “the
intrepid 61st,” and remarks “one and all behaved with the greatest
gallantry.”