|
Post by Waverley on Mar 15, 2008 14:52:10 GMT 1
Some 350 members of the British and Empire Forces were 'shot at dawn' by firing squads during the Great War...were these executions warranted or just an excuse by the military authorities to judicially kill soldiers as a lesson to other soldiers who , it was thought, might crack. 'I could not look on Death, which being known, Men led me to him, blindfold and alone.' ( Epitaphs of the War: The Coward by Rudyard Kipling)
|
|
|
Post by Waverley on Mar 16, 2008 21:49:41 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by Waverley on Jun 15, 2008 12:25:05 GMT 1
Rank Name Regiment Offence Private J.Fox 2nd HLI striking a S/O Private G.Cutmore 2nd Black Watch desertion Private A.Reid 16th HLI murder Private W.Murphey 5/6th Royal Scots desertion Private J.Archibald 17th Royal Scots desertion Private E.Mackness 1st Cameronians desertion Private CM Milligan 10th Cameronians desertion Private RW Simmers 2nd Royal Scots desertion Private J.Higgins 1/9th Argylls desertion
|
|
Isabel
New Member
3 Words, 2 Hearts, 1 Love.
Posts: 450
|
Post by Isabel on Jun 16, 2008 19:49:14 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by Waverley on Aug 4, 2008 1:13:02 GMT 1
I heard a nice song the other day which dealt with the shooting of young Crozier from Ulster...he was one who was shot at dawn for no other reason than he had shell shock...I will add his story soon.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 8, 2008 20:58:22 GMT 1
Ah suppose some of the executions wid've been justfied in any war, Charlie - such as the wan for murder. But ah think the vast majority could only hiv been justified in the military sense - tae stop mass desertion if soldiers knew it wid go unpunished. Most of these men wid've gone through a hell we can only imagine, an who's tae say any wan o us widnae hiv become deserters under thae circumstances?
|
|
|
Post by jimmypunter on Sept 10, 2008 16:43:11 GMT 1
I firts heard of SAD in 1998 when I watched a Sunday documentary done by their founder, the name of who I can't recall - he's now in his 80's and was a school teacher and was the youngest "cabin boy" in the RN in WW2 - someone remind me.
Some of these poor guys were not even represented legally at their "trial" and were up against a buch of former Etonian-type officers, very eloquent and knowledgeable in law and who could "speak properly".
The British Army, in those days, had NOTHING to be proud of.
Lions led by Donkeys!
|
|
|
Post by Waverley on Sept 11, 2008 0:23:51 GMT 1
Lions led by Donkeys!
Explain that statement for the rest of us Jimmypunter....
|
|
|
Post by jimmypunter on Sept 11, 2008 9:31:26 GMT 1
It was a very popular saying after and during WW1. There were those in power who would have not hesitated to allow the deaths of tens of thousands of men to gain, say, 500 yards of "no mans land". Does that clear it up for you ?
|
|
|
Post by jimmypunter on Sept 11, 2008 9:56:10 GMT 1
I meant to say if you get the chance watch "Oh! What A Lovely War". A 1970 film made to show exactly what the generals were like in WW1 and their attitude to sending 1000's to their deaths to gain a few hundred yards of no man's land.
Also, go onto Wikipedia and insert "Lions Led by Donkeys" - it'll give you a run down there as well.
In joining this board I really didn't expect the have red lettered responses more or less demanding an explanation to perfectly reasonable and quite acceptable comments made by me!
|
|
|
Post by Waverley on Sept 11, 2008 10:07:28 GMT 1
Sorry Jimmypunter I am not meaning to dig you up for using the expression I only wanted to clarify what you thought the statement 'Lions Led By Donkeys' actually meant and where it came from...however what I will say is that what you read on Wikipedia is wrong. The expression was coined during the Franco-Prussian War of 1870's to describe the French Army and their leaders and has wrongly over the years been used by many to describe the British Generals of the Great War. The myth has also been established by the media in films like you say 'Oh! What A Lovely War'...it shows a totally wrong side to the British Officers during the Great War and is laughed at by anyone who is a serious student of the Great War. Contrary to popular belief the British aristocracy of which the majority of the Office Corps were recruited from led from the front unlike the Germans who would not allow any above the rank of a NCO to lead their men into an attack on enemy trenches. I have a copy of this book which list something in the region of 41,000 plus British Officers who died during the conflict... The reason I am raising the issue of your statement is simply because I am trying to write an article on the phrase for Remembrance Day and the crux of the story revolves around the sacrifice that was made by the British Gentry. Go to any village in Britain and amongst the names of 'the Fallen' it will list the local landowner , country squire or their sons amongst the names of the rank and file. The Moderator of the Church of Scotland lost his four sons , the then Lord Provost of Glasgow also lost his youngest son , read the Roll of Honour for any of our Universities and you will see hundreds upon hundreds of names of young men who made the ultimate sacrifice who were from privileged backgrounds who died leading their men into battle. Jimmypunter I have to thank you for making me get up aff my chorus and verse this morning and finally make the effort to get over to the church in Ibrox and take a photo of the memorial to the Reverend Brown's four sons who were all killed in action. Thank you.
|
|
|
Post by jimmypunter on Sept 11, 2008 16:25:48 GMT 1
I do hear what you say here. I don't consider myself in any way an expert. I was in some of the local villages today over here and, yes, you are right, many of the fallen are from the local well to do folk. However I still think that those at the very top left a lot to be desired in their leadership skills and their ability to send tens of thousands to their deaths at the sound of a whistle.
I visited Dardanelles and Gallipoli a few years en route to Istanbul. The area is now a "national park" type affair where no building is allowed. The only thing to be seen are the huge amounts of graves of UK, ANZAC and other nationalities. This was an "allied force" really defeated by a very inferior force of Turks, etc. The entire place is deadly quiet and there are graves actually on the shores. It's possible that when dug, these graves were not as near to the shores as they are today. Was this a case of the "Donkey Situation" - this defeat.
My paternal grandfather was captured at The Somme in 1916 - I have all his medals displayed, along with the entire family's medals from WW1 and WW2, in a frame. I recall him and he spoke of the horrors and he was very forthright about his views on "the leadership" - meaning the Generals, not the Captains or Lieutenants.
My maternal grandfather died in 1929 of complications to stomach injuries received in 1917 compliments of a German bayonet. My late mother spoke of him and his similar attitude to "the leadership". He recalled his comrades returning from war and having to display their injuries/loss of limbs in the street to try and get cash for food. The "Donkeys" had returned to their own fields.
My mother's brother was killed in 1945 in the last weeks of the war in Italy. (I visited his grave in Cessena in 1982 - the only family member ever to have done so and it was a very very moving moment). His mother, my grandmother, applied to The Earl Haig Fund for help as he had been a main breadwinner for the family - she was turned down.
My statement stands in this one. I agree that the officers, no matter where they came from, Eton, Parkhead, Anderston or Edinburgh, on the front line, led from the front. I make that very clear. It is the "ivory towers" brigade sitting safely but making those horrible decisions to send thousands to their deaths at the drop of a hat, that I am referring to as the "donkeys".
The front line officers, at the bottom of the officers' chain of command, followed instructions and had to get on with it.
I always attend at the Festival of Remembrance and, through Partick St Mary's Lodge No117, have ensured that Erskine Hospital is not forgotten - the same for Flanders House (now rebuilt in Anniesland).
I am pleased that you responded in the powerful and exact manner you did thereby showing your knowledge of the subject.
JIM
|
|
|
Post by Waverley on Sept 12, 2008 14:41:38 GMT 1
Sorry Jim for sounding like a 'bloody headmaster' re your post but it gets right up my nose when people come up to me and start to talk about my interest in the Great War and all they talk about is 'the Lions Led By Donkeys' , the War Poets and 'the Bungling Butcher's the British Generals'. I tend to stop and spend a little time at any War Memorial I see whenever I am traveling in Scotland and notice how many of the local landed gentry had lost sons in the conflict. It was normal in Victorian and Edwardian times for the eldest son to join the Ministry and the younger sons to gain a military career in the Army. I was very much like yourself and believed that the 'Generals were nothing short of butchers' . However, I know differently now and have seen Haig in a different way from what I was told to believe by school teachers and left wing friends in my younger years. I have heard many stories of people being refused any aid or assistance from the Earl Haig Trust and I cannot comment on individual cases...I only recently learned from a relative that my granda who was wounded twice in the Great War received some sort of pension for the rest of his days. I have however seen letters and documents listing details of assistance given to veterans of the First World War which shows a real caring side to the Earl Haig Fund and some individual regimental trusts. Partick St.Mary's was my step-father's lodge and the first ever lodge I attended on a visitation when I entered the Craft as a Lewis back in 1973. I have had dealings albeit sparingly with Flanders House when it was connected to my work - so it is a small world. I interviewed a veteran about 15 years ago who was a dispatch rider at Montreul Sur Mer which was the British HQ in France during the Great War and his opinion and the way Haig has been treated by some historians was an enlightenment to say the least. If you ever get the chance buy a copy of John Terraine's excellent book 'The Smoke and the Fire' which is an eye-opener in regards to some of the claims made against the British Generals. The Myths and the Facts The First World War astonished its generation. It is understandable, therefore, that exaggerations should grow up about it. Some of these wrong ideas have been accepted, and are now part of our 'folk memory' of the war. When a wrong idea has been generally accepted, it is called a 'myth'. What are the myths of the Great War? The following come from an important book, The Smoke and the Fire, by the historian John Terraine. The 'Lost Generation' Myth: the First World War was the deadliest experience in human history. A whole generation of young men was wiped out - and this led to the loss of our position as a great power. Terraine: About 13 million people died during the First World War - an horrific figure, but the death toll for the Second World War was over 36 million soldiers and civilians. The entire British Empire lost about one million soldiers dead in the First World War, fewer than any of the main European powers (compare Germany, 1.8 million dead; Russia, 1.7 million; France, 1.3 million and Austria, 1.2 million). The 'Futility' of the Somme Myth: The battle of the Somme was 'the most gigantic, tenacious, grim, futile and bloody fight ever waged in the history of war' (Lloyd George). Terraine: Britain lost 415,000 men killed or wounded during the Battle of the Somme - 2950 men a day. This shocked the British because it was their first experience of modern warfare - up till then the French had dome all the hard fighting. Hence the horror and the revulsion. But the Somme was just typical mass-warfare. For comparison, the Russians lost 4.5 million casualties during the German invasion of 1941 - 23,316 a day. The battle was not futile (wasted). By the end of the battle the German army 'had been fought to a standstill as was utterly worn out'; the battle ; turned the tide' of the First World War. The 'Donkeys' Myth Myth: The British soldiers were lions, but they were led by donkeys - stupid 'amateurish' generals who could not think of any way to win the war but to slaughter men until one side was ground into submission. It was fine for them - safe behind the lines in their comfortable chateaux! Terraine: British Generals worked hard - usually 14 hours a day. Generals had not gone into battle with their men for centuries (it is a stupid idea); but they kept as close a contact with their men as possible, and some went onto the battlefield. They were quick to introduce new technology and ideas - gas, tanks, aeroplanes, flame-throwers, wireless telegraphy, motor cars, dawn attacks, mines, ferro-concrete. the nature of the war (a conflict of whole nations) meant that there was no alternative, given the technology of the time, to a war of attrition (wearing down). John D Clare, The Twentieth Century (1995) The debate on the Generals will continue in future generations I have no doubt about that...
|
|
|
Post by Waverley on Sept 12, 2008 14:57:32 GMT 1
It has long been rumoured that one of the biggest stumbling blocks to giving these soldiers a full pardon is down to the fact that if this was to be the case then the Irish Government and other Republican parties would demand the same for the 'Rebels' who were shot for their role in the Easter Uprising.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2008 19:35:57 GMT 1
If, as Terraine claims, Charlie, the German army had been "fought to a standstill and was completely worn out", how did they manage to prolong the war for another two years? I don't think his comparison with Russian casualties in WW II is valid either. Weaponry used in Hitler's attack on Russia was vastly superior to that used in the Great War.
In all the details of the War, I would bow to your superior knowledge, except where commonsense dictates otherwise. As far as Haig not being a butcher goes, nothing will ever convince me that pitting men against machines, time after time, with enormous losses and very little gain is the sign of a good general.
|
|
|
Post by Waverley on Sept 14, 2008 10:26:37 GMT 1
BillyDan as you will no doubt remember I went over the same ground before on the Pals board especially with the 'usual suspects' whose minds were entrenched in the left-wing , trendy lefties , we luv the War Poets and Lloyd George version of the Great War. BillyDan I am not an expert at the very most an enthusiastic amateur who is constantly learning and trying to separate myth from fact. Haig certainly wasn't a super-hero but he was the best we had albeit he did tarnish his reputation with his attacks at Passchendaele. It is a little known fact BillyDan, but it is generally accepted, that there more men killed in artillery bombardments than there were in full frontal attacks 'over the top'. I have several references in personal diaries of how the Highland Light Infantry volunteered for trench raids to relieve the boredom of trench life and how the 17th Battalion reveled in them. At the end of the day despite being dug into vastly superior trenches and holding the high ground plus superior artillery fire the Germans had to give this up and attack in March 1918 and almost succeeded in turning the whole tide of the war.Which proves that our Generals not only out-fought the so called superior Germand Prussian Generals but also out-thought them as well...albeit at a costly price. Getting back to the topic Shot At Dawn. Due to the secrecy surrounding these executions for many years the first couple of books were to create a sensation when the came out in the 1980's & 90's and adding even more strength to the myth. However, the records of the court-martials are available on the public domain and some of the case are clear cut whilst there are definite cases of rough justice involved. It should also be remembered that we were at war and there was no room for long drawn out trials and of the 3,500 men sentenced to death by a firing squad only 355 were actually carried out as Haig would not sanction them. Amazingly despite being proven wrong in their original books on several points and indiviidual cases the self-same authors are still regularly gaining appearance money by giving public speeches on the matter. We live and learn.
|
|
|
Post by jimmypunter on Sept 14, 2008 12:31:45 GMT 1
This is turning into an excellent debate. It just shows you that, even although the first centenary of the start of WW1 rapidly approaches, there are may who still debate the subject and many who have great knowledge. I am not just referring to academics. There are ourselves, non-academics (well I am a non-academic anyway!) who have our thoughts, views and memories supplied directly to us by relatives long since dead.
I am certainly not a left-wing "trendy". I came from a strict working class background, of which I am very very proud and always will be. I continually mention to my 3 sons about what I had and didn't have when I was their age. No laptops, Pc's, computers, colour TV, central heating, no bath, no shower, holidays abroad, motor cars. I ended up doing not too badly for myself - some would say "woking class done well" and, dare I say it, voted Conservative since 1979 - yes, I voted for Margaret Thatcher and her gang of keith Joseph, Willie Whitelaw and the rest of the team. My father, a life long member of the Labour Party, will be turning in his grave, not just that his son didn't follow him as a left wing socilist who liked Tony Benn, but at the conduct of "New Labour" and it's theft of Tory policies!
|
|
|
Post by Waverley on Sept 14, 2008 14:05:06 GMT 1
I certainly wasn't implying you were a trendy left wing trendy by any means Jim D. However your politics and mine should be posted on another board if you wish to discuss them with everyone else.
This board is for the debate on and preserving the memory of those poor unfortunates who were shot at dawn rightly or wrongly.
|
|
|
Post by jimmypunter on Sept 14, 2008 15:56:03 GMT 1
ok, apologies.
|
|
|
Post by amethyst on Sept 18, 2008 14:32:08 GMT 1
My husband,who also is very interested in War History, watched these two films.He recommends them to anyone like himself interested in war history.Both of them treat the problem of desertion.
- Paths of glory -King and country
Amethyst
|
|
|
Post by amethyst on Sept 18, 2008 14:36:08 GMT 1
Paths of glory is more about mutiny.
Amethyst
|
|
|
Post by Waverley on Sept 18, 2008 16:04:18 GMT 1
That is correct Amethyst the French Army did mutiny big time and I could not blame them...there were minor 'unrests' in the British Army especially at Etaples made famous in the TV series 'The Monocled Mutineer' but certainly nothing on the scale to the French mutinies.
|
|
|
Post by amethyst on Sept 18, 2008 16:39:38 GMT 1
That is correct .
Did you also see the two films's that i spoke about? Raymond.
|
|
|
Post by Waverley on Sept 19, 2008 8:31:22 GMT 1
I remember seeing Paths of Glory many years ago. I think Kirk Douglas played a leading part. If I remember correctly almost 30,000 French troops refused to fight as they were totally dismayed at the tactics their General were using in 1917. I think Petain replaced Nivelle as the Field Marshall and the troops were given better leave and compassionate terms in order for them to carrying on the struggle. I think I read somewhere that the French still carried out the old Roman army act of decimation when it came to mutineers. Whereby if it was suspected that the troop had in some way deserted their posts and it could not be proved they simply lined the men up and picked every tenth man and shot him...don't quote me on this as I am not sure if it was the Great War or some other war the French were involved in.
|
|
|
Post by holywell37 on Sept 19, 2008 17:21:45 GMT 1
Funny you should mention "the monocled mutineer ", tearlach, it was you that gave me the book to read many years ago.
|
|
|
Post by amethyst on Sept 22, 2008 13:06:08 GMT 1
Dear Charlie, Sorry to be late in getting back to you.
I would like now to recommend to you the reading of the book la grande guerre by Pierre Miquel. Pierre Miquel is an historian who is considered as a specialist here in France of World War I. I know his book has been translated into English under the name of The World War I so if you are interested yes,try to find this book ( I think you could find this book on Amazon.uk.com) Pierre Miquel also wrote the following book : les oubliƩs de la Somme but I don't think that book has been translated into English. If you can read French Charlie,I would be delighted to send it to you.
Raymond
|
|
|
Post by wildmacrae on Feb 12, 2009 23:32:29 GMT 1
Hi Charlie
Yes young James Croizer case is indeed a sad one indeed Shot at Dawn aged 16 on 27th of February 1916 dragged unconscious to the post and hung up like a bit of meat in a butchers shop and the firing party missed his heart and a officer had to shoot him in the head and finish the job. I visit james grave every time i travel to the somme.
Dan
|
|
|
Post by amethyst on Feb 13, 2009 10:16:07 GMT 1
What a waste of lives wars are.All that youth that sleeps. God Bless them all. The lovely flowers of the forest.
Because of brave men like that,we live today. Free.
Amethyst
|
|
patrick
Full Member
Patrick, the 'Tic Man"
Posts: 2,290
|
Post by patrick on Feb 25, 2009 15:04:23 GMT 1
I have read all youre posts and found them very interesting indeed what I know about war youcould put on the back of a postage stamp, but heres my opinion for what its worth, personally I dont think there were any cowards in the wars, it was just that some men were braver than others.
|
|
|
Post by Waverley on Feb 25, 2009 16:04:11 GMT 1
Yes Patrick it still causes a lot of controversy and I reckon we will never know the full truth behind some of these shootings. There was obviously mistakes made by the authorities but there were many who would have been hanged for their crimes back in civvy street... I have been to a few of their graves and often wonder why we dont give them a pardon but as I say there is underlying circumstances in regards to spies and traitors who were shot at home ...do we give them a pardon as well.
|
|