The Personal Side of Transcription: Remote Volunteering for the First World War Archives Project

By volunteer Samantha Woods-Peel

The Royal Armouries ‘First World War Digitalisation Project’ has recently taken on a dedicated group of remote volunteers from all over the country to help with the transcription and indexing of the archives. Below, one of these volunteers describes how transcribing can be a very personal experience inspiring an often unfulfilled need for closure.

Diary of AS Lanfear – Rotherham Heritage Services: York and Lancaster Archive (Collection 578-K/)/ Royal Armouries FWWAP

Diary of AS Lanfear – Rotherham Heritage Services: York and Lancaster Archive (Collection 578-K/)/ Royal Armouries FWWAP

Transcribing someone’s diary is an intense experience. After all, it was meant to be private. Arthur Sydney Lanfear was from Doncaster and served in the 12th Battalion York & Lancaster Regiment in 1916. This is the Sheffield City Battalion, so my ‘home regiment’. Call me soft, but I felt a connection to Arthur straight away. The diary covered two and a half months of his life as he left England and arrived in France to serve his country.

It was a window on his life as a soldier. Billets were uncomfortable and there were lots of parades. I was quite surprised he had plenty of training once he got to France – for some reason I thought soldiers got off a boat and went straight to the trenches. I felt comforted there was some preparation before battle, but obviously there could never be enough.

SamWoods2

Mon. 8th         Parade 9am-12am Gas Helmet Drill

Parade 2pm-4pm and Bayonet work. Musketry

Evening listening to Band.

Tue. 9th           Parade 9am-12am Bayonet, Musketry

2pm-4.30pm Field practice

Evening at Bus (1m).

Wed. 10th       Parade 7-7.30am Physical Drill

Parade 9-12am [sic.] Helmet Drill and Extended order Drill. Inspected at work by General Sir Douglas Haig and staff attended by Colour bearers and six Lancers with lances.

Leisure time was important and evenings were spent in local villages and listening to regimental bands and concert parties. Arthur was also concerned about the weather, as he commented on it every day – British to the end.

 

documentApril 1916

Wed. 19th       Parade 6am Roll Call.

Heavy hailstorm covering ground

Parade 9.30am Rifle inspection

2-5.30pm No. 2 Training Ground making

at top of Training ground.

Tea and evening at Tipperary Hut.

[Down side of entry] Hail rain sleet.

Reading his diary I felt a sense of impending doom, as I had already looked him up online and knew he was killed on 1st July 1916, the first day of the Battle of the Somme. Arthur was transferred to the 94th Brigade Trench Mortar Battery two weeks before his death and stopped writing his diary at that time, however I couldn’t help doing a little more research as I wanted to know more – I wanted to know more about those two weeks. Sadly, not everything can be discovered online, and I could find no further mention of Arthur. I did find a quote from Private Bartram of the 94th Trench Mortar Battery who said of the 1st July that ‘from that moment, all my religion died’. The fighting was particularly fierce where Arthur’s battalion went into battle at Serre, but unlike many of his comrades also killed on that first day whose bodies were never identified, Arthur’s body was recovered and buried at Euston Road Cemetery, Colincamps, close to the front line.

The internet truly is a marvellous thing and while researching Arthur’s end I came across an organisation called The War Graves Photographic Project and it felt like a fitting end to my work on Arthur’s diary that I get a copy of the photo of his grave.

Arthur’s story did not have a happy ending, but it was a story worth knowing.

Arthur’s grave in France – Courtesy of the War Graves Photographic Project (http://www.twgpp.org)

Arthur’s grave in France – Courtesy of the War Graves Photographic Project (http://www.twgpp.org)

 

#Gallipoli 100 – The Suvla Bay Landings

100 years today the Suvla Bay landings, a major milestone in the Gallipoli campaign, commenced. Material digitised from the York and Lancaster Regimental Archive by the First World War Archive Project shows a fascinating glimpse of the campaign, as explored by the project’s Placement Student Aidan Peel.

The Gallipoli campaign lives infamously in British military history as having cost many lives and resources in the attempt to re-open the straits of the Dardanelles in Turkey, which Britain’s Russian allies relied on for access to aid. The amphibious offensive at Suvla Bay in particular was a military failure, plagued with poor judgement and planning from senior officers. Despite the failures of the offensive the many courageous men involved deserve to be remembered with honour

The British 11th (Northern) Division, who were to participate in the landings under Major General F. Hammersley, consisted of three Brigades, numbering 13,700 men and 12 guns. These brigades included voluntary ‘weekend soldiers’ such as the 32nd Brigade, comprised of four Yorkshire regiments under Brigadier General H. Haggard which included the 6th York and Lancaster Regiment.

Extract from the 6th Bn York and Lancs Scrapbook  © Rotherham Heritage Services: York and Lancaster Archive (Collection 578-K/7/1/8/1)/ Royal Armouries FWWAP

Extract from the 6th Bn York and Lancs Scrapbook © Rotherham Heritage Services: York and Lancaster Archive (Collection 578-K/7/1/8/1)/ Royal Armouries FWWAP

The Suvla Bay landing was initially planned to be a support operation for the offensive on the Sari Bair straights, however the scale and situation of the enterprise forced the high command to re-adjust the aims. Suvla Bay offered a great deal of space to amass troops and the landings would provide the additional forces needed for an assault on the Sari Bair Ridge from which they could secure a position across the narrow point of the peninsula. For those involved with the landings the primary objectives were to capture the Turkish artillery and secure the hills surrounding the Suvla plain from which an offensive to take the Sari Bair ridge could be progressed. Each regiment was to focus on their own specific objectives which were to be achieved in a strict time frame in order to maintain the initiative and advance before the enemies reserve could be brought up from Bulair. The whole operation itself was kept in upmost secrecy, to the extent that even the officers themselves had little knowledge of the undertaking.

 Extract from Report on Operations at Suvla Bay  © Rotherham Heritage Services: York and Lancaster Archive (Collection 578-K/7/1/4/2)/ Royal Armouries FWWAP

Extract from Report on Operations at Suvla Bay © Rotherham Heritage Services: York and Lancaster Archive (Collection 578-K/7/1/4/2)/ Royal Armouries FWWAP

“Bde [Brigade] orders were recd [received] at mid-day on 6th. Till then not a soul below C.O’s [Commanding Officers] had the slightest idea of what was intended as maps of the ASIATIC side had been issued (as a blind to the swarm of spies placed in Egypt) it was thought that a landing was intended here.

The landings themselves took place just before 10pm on the night of the 6th August in perfect conditions, with minimal resistance from Turkish forces upon initial landing. Many of the landings went disastrously as Lighters transporting the troops ran aground far from the beaches and the soldier’s weapons becoming waterlogged as they swam to shore. Nevertheless, the 32nd Brigade landed successfully at Beach B (one of three beaches) with the objective of  capturing the settlement at Lala Baba and advancing to Hill 10 to merge with the 34th Brigade and proceed to take Chocolate Hill by first light on 7th.

Extract from the 6th Bn York and Lancs Scrapbook  © Rotherham Heritage Services: York and Lancaster Archive (Collection 578-K/7/1/8/1)/ Royal Armouries FWWAP

Extract from the 6th Bn York and Lancs Scrapbook © Rotherham Heritage Services: York and Lancaster Archive (Collection 578-K/7/1/8/1)/ Royal Armouries FWWAP

The success of the landing could not be repeated however, with the 32nd suffering heavy casualties at Lala Baba and becoming hopelessly intermingled with other Brigades milling around on the beach after the confusion of the night landing. The 32nd Brigade therefore failed to join the 34th Brigade upon Hill 10, slowing the British offensive considerably with the result that Hill 10 was eventually captured, although six hours behind schedule.

Extract from Report on Operations at Suvla Bay  © Rotherham Heritage Services: York and Lancaster Archive (Collection 578-K/7/1/4/2)/ Royal Armouries FWWAP

Extract from Report on Operations at Suvla Bay © Rotherham Heritage Services: York and Lancaster Archive (Collection 578-K/7/1/4/2)/ Royal Armouries FWWAP

The capture of Chocolate Hill at first light on 7th had been given upmost importance, but failed to materialize until much later than originally planned. Due to problems landing supplies the men had only the water they had landed with and Hammersley had confused matters by issuing 3 different orders in quick succession, each cancelling the other. These orders arrived at their recipients in varying orders adding to the confusion. The attack was temporarily suspended until 5:30pm.  By 7pm the British were able to prise Chocolate Hill away from the hands of the small Turkish force that occupied it, the main Turkish force having withdrawn some time ago. Rather than advancing the high ground gained in the attack, a number of regiments pulled back to the beach and remained there through 8th August.

Extract from Diary of J Crabtree © Rotherham Heritage Services: York and Lancaster Archive (Collection 578-K/8/2/594)/ Royal Armouries FWWAP

Extract from Diary of J Crabtree © Rotherham Heritage Services: York and Lancaster Archive (Collection 578-K/8/2/594)/ Royal Armouries FWWAP

“Aug 8th Set out about 8am in reserve for 33rd Bde and 10th Div. Things are rather sedate just now.”

Tekke Tepe, lay undefended before them and with the Turkish reinforcements earliest possible arrival estimated as the evening of the 8th it was vital to press forward. Despite this a day of rest was ordered and orders to attack Tekke Tepe were only issued late on 8th.

Extract from Report on Operations at Suvla Bay  © Rotherham Heritage Services: York and Lancaster Archive (Collection 578-K/7/1/4/2)/ Royal Armouries FWWAP

Extract from Report on Operations at Suvla Bay © Rotherham Heritage Services: York and Lancaster Archive (Collection 578-K/7/1/4/2)/ Royal Armouries FWWAP

 “Although Hammersley realized that TEKKE TEPE was the key to the situation he never mentioned it in his orders nor did he stress the vitality of pressing on as quickly as possible to the highest point of  ANAFARTA RIDGE, whatever happened his orders contained the fatal words, ‘if possible’”                                           

The orders to attack Tekke Tepe contradicted a previous order and caused a frantic scramble to locate and consolidate the various regiments of the 32nd Brigade. The assault on Tekke Tepe eventually began at 4am on 9th. By daylight on the 9th the Turkish reinforcements had arrived, beating the British to the top of the ridge by approximately two hours. Tekke Tepe, undefended since the landings, now proved to be a challenging obstacle which would cause devastating losses for the Allied Forces. The men assaulting Tekke Tepe were already tired and exhausted and stood little chance facing a fierce Turkish force which decimated the 6/ East Yorks and came within 40 yards of 32nd Brigade’s HQ. The Brigade would be unable to establish itself on Tekke Tepe.

Extract from Report on Action at Suvla Bay by Captain VTR Ford © Rotherham Heritage Services: York and Lancaster Archive (Collection 578-K/7/1/4/2)/ Royal Armouries FWWAP

Extract from Report on Action at Suvla Bay by Captain VTR Ford © Rotherham Heritage Services: York and Lancaster Archive (Collection 578-K/7/1/4/2)/ Royal Armouries FWWAP

The situation in Suvla and the subsequent defeat at Scimitar Hill would prove to be the final blow to British morale in the Gallipoli Campaign. The weather would also deteriorate dramatically, turning to snow and ice within a few months finally forcing the Allied Army to evacuate Suvla in December 1915.

6th Battalion in the Trenches at Gallipoli  © Rotherham Heritage Services: York and Lancaster Archive (Collection 578-K/7/1/8/3)/ Royal Armouries FWWAP

6th Battalion in the Trenches at Gallipoli © Rotherham Heritage Services: York and Lancaster Archive (Collection 578-K/7/1/8/3)/ Royal Armouries FWWAP

 

750th Anniversary of the Battle of Evesham

The 4th of August is the 750th anniversary of the Battle of Evesham. Evesham was the second and final pitched battle of the Second Barons’ War (1263-67).

Setting:

Henry III’s mismanagement of the realm through failure in foreign wars, rebellion in Gascony, poor distribution of patronage and increasing financial and judicial grievances, had led to increasing baronial dissatisfaction. This culminated in the Provisions of Oxford (1258) and Westminster (1259) where the barons forced reforms on the King. These covered three broad areas of grievance. The first was to check his favouritism of his foreign relatives. The second involved restructuring a judicial system which had become increasingly unjust, and the third was an attempt to force the royal finances to be better managed, reducing the need for constant, excessive taxation.

However this watershed moment in English constitutional history, which forced the King to have a privy council partly elected by the nobility, was soon undermined.  Fracturing in the baronial party meant that the King was able to secure a Papal Bull in 1261, declaring the provisions as null and void.  But the royal faction was similarly disparate, and infighting caused by political manoeuvring for power surrounding the Lord Edward (later Edward I) and Queen Eleanor alienated several keys nobles from the King’s cause. When Simon de Montfort returned to England in 1263 to lead the baronial faction, the scene was set for a civil war. This began with both sides raiding the lands of their rivals, with side neither gaining a clear advantage.

Soon both sides attempted to end the troubles peacefully at the Mise of Amiens (1264) when Henry III and Earl Simon de Montfort’s parties agreed to the arbitration of the King of France, Louis IX.  Perhaps unsurprisingly Louis ruled heavily in favour of his fellow royal, which far from ensuring peace left no option to the baronial faction but full scale civil war. A series of sieges (the mainstay of medieval warfare) ensued with neither side gaining significant advantage, and it was not until the Battle of Lewes (14 May 1264) that the two opposing forces met in strength.

Sword, probably English, about 1250. IX.5614

Sword, probably English, about 1250. IX.5614

Lewes:

Despite having fewer troops, perhaps as little as half the King’s number, the baronial army under Simon de Montfort won a significant victory.  A seasoned campaigner experienced from the Crusaders and fighting a series of rebellions in Gascony, Simon de Montfort was able to outmanoeuvre the much larger royal army with a forced march in darkness, overwhelming royal sentries and deploying his force on the high ground.

By way of contrast to the Earl Simon, King Henry was no warrior but a scholarly and pious man, who contemporaries said was better suited to a hair shirt than a mail one. De Montfort not only demonstrated his strategic superiority over his King by his forced march and domination of the best ground, but he also showed tactical shrewdness in the disposition of his forces.  Drawing his army into four divisions (known contemporarily as ‘battles’) he deployed three of these to his front and, crucially, kept the fourth under his own command as a reserve.

The royal right was commanded by the Lord Edward. Wishing to avenge the insult that the Londoners had given his mother Queen Eleanor, the Lord Edward led his cavalry against the left wing of the baronial army  – where the Londoners were deployed.  Although the heavily equipped royal knights routed the London levies, the protracted pursuit took Lord Edward and the cream of the royal army from the battle.  By the time they returned de Montfort had, using his command of the ground and tactical reserve, defeated the King’s larger army.  Lord Edward returned only in time to witness defeat.  The battle was a baronial victory against the odds, which resulted in the capture of King Henry, his brother Richard Earl of Cornwall and Lord Edward. Henry III was forced to comply to the Provisions of Oxford once more, with de Montfort effectively a ‘quasi-king’.

[DI 2013-0611] Lance head, European, 12th-14th century. VII.3048.

Lance head, European, 12th-14th century. VII.3048.

Evesham:

Nevertheless, a little over a year later the reforming baronial movement was dealt a fatal blow at the Battle of Evesham. The barons’ once again fractured over patronage and self-interest, with important nobles such as Gilbert de Clare deserting de Montfort’s cause.  By 1265 the Marcher lords Roger Mortimer and Roger Leyburn were in open rebellion against de Montfort, and when Gilbert de Clare orchestrated the escape of the Lord Edward, the Marchers had a royal figurehead to lead them.  Their cause was given added legitimacy by Papal support for Edward to rule in the captive King’s stead.  Running out of powerful allies, de Montfort looked to the Welsh king Llywelyn ap Gruffudd, a move that whilst adding men to his cause, made him more unpopular with English barons and only steeled the Marchers against him.

Whilst de Montfort’s Lewes campaign demonstrated strategic and tactical shrewdness, the events leading up the fateful battle of Evesham showed no such brilliance.  A large portion of his forces, under the command of his son Simon the younger, were ambushed and seriously weakened by a dawn raid by Lord Edward at Kenilworth.  Unable to join his forces, the elder de Montfort found himself outmanoeuvred by Lord Edward’s Marcher army.  When the two opposing forces met at Evesham Simon de Montfort was trapped between the river Avon and the much larger Marcher army.  Lord Edward had totally outmanoeuvred de Montfort, whose escape over the bridge to the east was guarded by the Marcher lord Roger de Mortimer.

Realising the hopeless of his situation, being out numbered and surrounded, Simon de Montfort prayed for God to have mercy on his soul – realising the enemy would soon have his body.  Forced to attempt to fight his way out, de Montfort ordered a central attack on Lord Edward’s army, hoping to break through the encircling force.  However, Humphrey de Bohun refused to led the baronial infantry in the assault, with de Montfort instead having to lead with his cavalry, uphill towards the Marchers.  Before battle was even joined de Bohun’s infantry quit the field, only to be caught and slaughtered in the rout that followed the battle, leaving de Montfort to a similar fate.

Cresting the hill, de Montfort’s contingent fully saw the task that confronted them and the Earl had his outnumbered force form a circle.  From this point the battle descending into a bloody slaughter, with Simon de Montfort, after being unhorsed eventually falling to the lance of Mortimer, who’s contingent  probably advanced from below, through the routing infantry of de Bohun to encircle the remains to de Montfort’s army.

Although the discrepancies between the various chroniclers mean the details of the battle will likely never be known for certain, all agree on its bloodiness. Lord Edward’s Marcher army secured victory swiftly, probably in less than two hours, and showed little mercy even to fellow knights.  Robert of Gloucester termed it the ‘murder of Evesham (for battle there was none).’ Such was the ferocity that the captive King Henry, taken forward by de Montfort when he advanced, only escaped being slain by his would-be rescuers by crying out ‘I am Henry of Winchester, your King. Do not harm me!’

After the battle de Montfort was stripped of his armour, and was found to be wearing a hair shirt underneath it.  A righteous and pious man, he had been convinced of the legitimacy of his cause and was prepared to die for it. But de Montfort’s righteousness did not dampen the ferocity of his opponents, who in the rout slaughtered so many in the local abbey as they attempted to escape or gain sanctuary, that the crypts ran with streams of blood.  Nor did de Montfort’s famous piety and self-conviction stop his enemies from mutilating his body. His killer, Roger de Mortimer sent de Montfort’s head and testicles, the latter draped over the dead Earl’s nose, to his wife as a trophy, whilst his hands and feet were cut off for public display.

With their leader slain, the survivors of the baronial faction fled to late Earl Simon’s stronghold of Kenilworth castle. The siege that ensured was much more typical of medieval warfare than the swift battle of Evesham, although the siege of Kenilworth was more protracted than most – being the longest in English history. The war eventually ended in October 1266, when the Dictum of Kenilworth brought peace to the realm and allowed the remaining Montfortians to buy back their confiscated lands.

The baronial reforming movement was over, and for the remaining six years of Henry’s reign there existed an uneasy peace.His successor Edward I went on to rule with a royal strength that his father had never possessed.  However, the seeds of reform had been sown, and in the 1275 Statues of Westminster Edward himself had enshrined elements of the Provisions of Oxford.  De Montfort was brutally slain at Evesham, but his legacy perhaps lived on.

640px-Morgan_Bible_10r

Image from the ‘Morgan Bible’

Although depicting a crusading scene, this image from the near contemporary Morgan bible shows some of the types of arms and armour that would have been used during the Second Barons’ War.  It also show the potential brutality  of medieval warfare that manifest itself at Evesham.

Arms & Armour at the time of Evesham:

The main form of armour of the knightly classes was mail, which by this time completely covered the body, including hand and feet defences.  Helmets ranged from the conical nasal helm, to the wide-brimmed kettle hat, to the fully enclosed great helm.

However, this level of protection would have only been available to the social and military elite.  Infantry would typically be more lightly equipped with less armour, perhaps of fabric rather than metal.  The padded gambeson, worn under mail, could also serve as armour in its own right, but even this level of protection would have not been available to all.

During this period knights still predominately fought mounted, as heavy cavalry dominated the battlefield. The lance was their primary weapon of shock, which when couched with the weight of horse and fully armoured rider behind it could cause immense damage in a charge.  Swords, axes, maces and daggers would have been carried for close combat and the melee or pursuit that followed. Larger, two-handed weapons were also known, but the shield was still an important part of defensive equipment at this time, so most weapons were wielded in one hand.

 

[DI 2010-1561] Sword, probably English, about 1250.

Sword, probably English, about 1250.

[A8.47] Sword, European, about 1260.  IX.1107.

Sword, European, about 1260. IX.1107.

The primary arms of the infantry would have been staff weapons or missile weapons.  The most common form was the spear which if not excessively long could be used in conjunction with a shield, but heavier forms of two-handed staff weapons were also in use.

[DI 2012-1576] Spear head, European, 11th-14th century. VII.1650.

Spear head, European, 11th-14th century. VII.1650.

The infantry of the period also used bows and crossbows.  And although English and Welsh archery had no yet gained the fame it massed use was to win in the next century, they still featured in armies of the period. However at a battle such as Evesham which was decided by a single charge, their opportunity to influence the battle would have been limited.  Crossbows, although also used in the 13th century battlefield, were particularly favoured in sieges. Not yet having reached their full power potential, with prods of the period primarily being wooden rather than composite or steel, they were still potentially deadly to even armoured men.

BL MS Nero D ii –  Detail from f. 177v – The Mutilation of Simon de Montfort,

BL MS Nero D ii – Detail from f. 177v – The Mutilation of Simon de Montfort,

 

 

The Diary of Private Holden: Part Three – The Journey up the Line (1st July – 7th July 1915)

As part of the museums’ ongoing First World War Archives Project, we have been looking into the fascinating diary of Private Wilfred Holden. In our last post Holden described his time in the Rouen camp, and here he goes onto record his journey to the front line.

The train to the line carried 2 men and 8 horses to a compartment, with the men sleeping at the horses’ feet. A precarious place to be one would think, but not Private Holden.

“most people would think this very uncomfortable, but it was much better than riding in an ordinary French 3rd Class Compartment and the truck we had was a fairly large one and that journey was the best railway journey I have ever had”

Holden diary entry 3

The frequent stops made by the train allowed the men to jump out and stretch their legs from time to time. Though the hazard was that the train might move off again without you, as Private Holden found out:

 “ a few of us got some hot water from the engine behind, intending making some tea, but when on the way back to our own trucks, the engine whistled & started off, but we did not like the idea of leaving our tea (we had none since the Thurs morning), we ran along with the water in our mess tins, but the train began to move quicker, so we had to throw the water away, & run for all we were worth, just as we got on again, & settled down the train stopped.”

Album of Thomas Maugham

Soldiers making tea by a train – From the Album of Thomas Maugham © Green Howards Museum (Ref 2005.66.1)/ Royal Armouries FWWAP

Travelling through France and along the coast, the train journey is made to sound almost idyllic with the French people waving and cheering as the train passed along the line. Passing Bethune however, the mood changes as the sound of the shells and the vision of the damage caused by the Germans is seen for the first time.

Arriving at Aire the train was met by the 7th Dragoon Guards who had come for the horses but knew nothing about the men accompanying them.

“here was a fine how do you do, brought eighteen horses all the way from Rouen, & then no one to own us, so whilst waiting we had some breakfast, one of the chaps going after a loaf and another got some hot water and we cleaned ourselves up to try and look our best and make a good impression when we did reach the regiment”

Holden diary entry 3.5

Finally arriving at the squadrons base near Dellettes, Private Holden was issued with a horse, and put to work caring for the horses and carrying out guard duty before moving out for the trenches on 6th July.

“What part of the line we were going to we did not know, as was the case in all the moves we had, we never knew how long we should be or the name of the place until we got there”

A working party in the trenches_from the Photograph Album of the 1_5th Battalion

A working party in the trenches – from the Photograph Album of the 1/5th Battalion © Rotherham Heritage Services: York and Lancaster Archive (Collection 578-K/7/7/5/5)/ Royal Armouries FWWAP

Holden’s diary shows that his life at the front settled into a monotonous mixture of drills, horse care and digging parties, broken only by the odd mishap or annecdote. Coming back from a stint on the work gang one evening he was surprised to find that the regiment had moved billets in his absence and that his kit was nowhere to be found.

 “next morning we had to look round for our kits that we had to leave behind, but my friend’s and my own was missing & was never found. Among my things was my great coat, & I never had another one given me, & all the nights that I spent in the trenches, I was without great coat”

Arrangement of Kit for Inspection

Arrangement of Kit for Inspection © Rotherham Heritage Services: York and Lancaster Archive (Collection 578-K/1/1/4/4)/ Royal Armouries FWWAP

 

 

New to Fort Nelson, a stunning composite Drake gun

Fort Nelson has recently received a donation of a composite drake gun sometimes known as a minion drake. The gun is believed to be Dutch, possibly originating from Amsterdam. Dutch patents of 1627 and 1633 cover this kind of construction. According to the inscription behind the vent, it weighs 260 Amsterdam pounds and was produced in the mid 17th century.

Drake blog 1

The gun was found in inshore waters off the Kent coast by divers Paul Aaronovitch, Vince Woolsgrove and John Webb.

Drake blog 2

This gun is a light version of a minion or roughly 3 pounder, built up of copper alloy and iron, and probably soldered using lead alloy. The copper alloy has been decorated with bands of interlace from the muzzle (head) of the gun down to cascabel (rear) – where arresting ropes are tied to limit the gun’s movement due to recoil when firing. The handles located on the mid-section of the gun have been cast in the form of dolphins which was common for guns of this type

A labelled cross-section of a gun

The gun will be on public display in a desalination tank which will be used to wash the chloride ions out of the gun and to keep it underwater to prevent rapid corrosion until the conservation treatment is completed. This process will take several years in the Artillery Hall at Fort Nelson. Fort Nelson Conservator Matthew Hancock said “Fort Nelson is delighted to be able to add this fine and rare gun to the collection, although it presents some conservation challenges.  It is impossible to put a precise timescale on the project as the amount of chloride ions in the gun cannot be calculated. The process is further complicated by the reactions of the different metals in the gun.  The public will be able to view the gun during the conservation treatment as the gun will be on display in its tank in the Artillery Hall.”

Drake Blog 3

The Royal Armouries would like to thank the Receiver of Wreck for their assistance with this donation.

‘Make do and Mend’: Prussian pistols of the Napoleonic Wars

Two pistols from the Royal Armouries collection, illustrate perfectly the thrifty manner in which some Prussian firearms were put together in the late 18th – early 19th centuries.

RA XII.1843 (DI 2015-1495)

RA XII.1843 (DI 2015-1495)

RA XII.1844 (DI 2015-1497)

RA XII.1844 (DI 2015-1497)

At first glance, both pistols appear to be the Model 1789, however there are slight differences. For example RA XII.1843 , the darker stained pistol is 4mm longer in length than RA XII.1844 , the lighter coloured pistol.

The Model 1789 was in the height of service from 1790-1813 however, due to the poor state of the Prussian economy in 1815 it most likely also featured on the field at Waterloo. In order to get a sense of the Prussian Military’s situation in 1815, it is useful to understand the consequences of their actions against the French Empire in 1806.

Kingdom of Prussia at the time of Waterloo (1815). Credit BBC http://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/higher/history/nationalism/unification/revision/1/

The Kingdom of Prussia at the time of Waterloo (1815). Credit BBC: http://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/higher/history/nationalism/unification/revision/1/

The Prussian defeat by Napoleon Bonaparte at Jena and Auerstadt, subjugated Prussia to France until 1812, when the 6th Coalition was formed. Prussia lost its rich provinces, thus reducing its territory, whilst its army was limited to 42,000 men. The French also destroyed vast numbers of Prussian small-arms, ammunition and artillery, whilst redistributing the most efficient of these to their own allies. After the defeat of the French in 1812, the Prussians began work on manufacturing the Model 1813 pistol. However, limited funds meant restricted quantities of firearms were being produced and so the Prussian army instead began modifying whatever was available to them.

The most interesting features of these pistols are the royal cyphers located on their grips, which indicate modification. Both pistols bear the cypher of Frederick William III who reigned from 1797-1840.

Frederick William III

Frederick William III

RA XII.1843 (DI 2015-1493)

RA XII.1843 (DI 2015-1493)

Interestingly the form of the ‘W’s on the cyphers differ. The ‘W’ on RA XII.1843 (above) doesn’t quite look like it belongs there, as the actual ‘W’ on the cypher of Frederick William III is double lined (see below). This suggests that this darker stained pistol was assembled during the reign of Frederick William III but adapted from an earlier model, with a ‘W’ added to the cypher of Frederick the Great, who reigned from 1740-1786.

The pistol’s overall length is also 15 mm too long for it to be a true Model 1789 suggesting that this is a Model 1731, used throughout the reign of Frederick the Great, reassembled between 1797 and 1815.

Frederick the Great

Frederick the Great, reign: 31 May 1740 – 17 August 1786

RA XII.1844, the second lighter coloured pistol (below) is also intriguing. In consulting the museum’s catalogue it has been previously identified as being from the reign of Frederick William II who reigned from 1786-97, successor of Frederick the Great and predecessor of Fredrick William III. Given that the pistol resembles a Model 1789 this is a savvy conclusion. Except that the cypher of Fredrick William II does not contain the letter ‘R’, though one is clearly shown below.

RA XII.1844 (DI 2015-1499)

RA XII.1844 (DI 2015-1499) with the double-lined ‘W” and additional ‘R’.

Frederick_Wilhelm_II

Frederick William II reign: 17 August 1786 – 16 November 1797

It is no wonder that this has been confused, as every King of Prussia for over 150 years (1701-1861) was either called Frederick or Frederick William! However the length of the barrel is still too long for it to be a true Model 1789. Therefore one could conclude that the lighter stained pistol was assembled partly from the barrel of the Model 1731, potentially with other parts developed for the Model 1789, which were not used until 1797-1815 during the reign of Frederick William III –  which accounts for the royal cypher being correct and untampered.

These two pistols have been on quite a historical journey, from the Model 1731 to the ‘hybrid’ Model 1789, and they both reveal much about the development and manufacture of Prussian firearms during the Napoleonic period.

One Man’s War – Major Tom Goodall’s Papers

Earlier this year, the First World War Archives Project was at the Duke of Wellington’s Regimental Museum in Halifax continuing to scan material from their collection.

In a stroke of luck the project’s first visit to the museum occurred just after a suitcase brimming with material had been deposited by a member of the public. Looking through the suitcase it was found to contain the amazingly detailed personal archive of Major Tom Goodall. The papers and memorabilia follow Goodall from his enlistment in 1914 as 2nd Lieutenant in the 2/5 Battalion (Territorials) Duke of Wellingtons Regiment, all the way through the first world war and his time as Major in the Home Guard during the second world war.

WWI case

Goodall’s collection is a goldmine of information comprising of his personal journals, trench maps, aerial photographs, battalion orders, medals, certificates, press cuttings, items captured from German Trenches and other ephemera. The collection is an invaluable new resource into the history of the 2/5 Battalion, in particular ‘D’ Coy, and the day to day running of the British Forces.

A personal favourite from the collection has to be this note found pinned at the Entrance to a German Dugout near Achiet-Le-Petit 17th March 1917.

adaw

‘Good Neight Tommy! Auf Wiedersehen!’

Get Involved

Can you read Shorthand or German? If you can then we need your skills!

Tom Goodall’s Archive contains 4 small diaries written primarily in shorthand along with a few bits of correspondence also in shorthand. We would welcome volunteers who would be willing to transcribe these diaries for us so that we can make this resource accessible to all.

The archive also contains a book captured from a German trench which appears to contain a list of code names and some sort of journal or company diary. This is a fascinating item and would be an exciting transcription project for a volunteer.

Volunteers do not need to live in West Yorkshire and anyone interested should contact caroline.walter@armouries.org.uk

And Finally…

I’ll leave you with a few examples of the Battalion Orders which made the British Army the pride of the empire. Each one is a genuine order issued to the 2/5 Duke of Wellingtons Regiment during their time on the Western Front.

Battalion Order 293: Each company having been issued with a Flat Iron, Officers commanding companies will arrange that ironing of the seams of S.D. Clothing is carried out once a week and will forward certificate to Orderly Room every Saturday by 9 am stating that this has been done.

Battalion Order 294: Companies will arrange to inspect their sick before coming down to hospital and see that their men are properly washed and shaved.

Battalion Order 397: The practice of cutting down trousers to turn them into ‘shorts’ is prohibited. ‘Shorts’ are not to be worn in the VI Corps Area. (Vide. C.R.O. 2486 of 8-8-17)

Battalion Order 686: Companies will ensure that Haircutting is carried out as quickly as possible. All men must be completed by 9am 8-12-17.

The retreat to Quatre Bras: Baron von Eben, the 10th (Prince of Wales) Hussars

On the morning of 17 June the Anglo-Dutch army began its retreat from Quatre Bras toward Waterloo, covered by the British cavalry and guns which delayed the French pursuit at every opportunity. The Light Cavalry Brigades under the command of Vivian and Vandeleur formed the left column of the rear guard as it marched northwards, heading for the narrow bridge over the river Dyle at Thuy.

11293006_10152983951041375_697887228_n_cropped1

Ernest Croft: ‘Wellington’s Retreat from Quatre Bras’. On loan to the Royal Armouries by Leeds Art Gallery. Now in the Royal Armouries’ ‘Waterloo: The Art of Battle’ exhibition.

The last of Vivian’s Brigade had crossed the bridge, and as the French cavalry attempted to follow they were met with an accurate fire from troops concealed behind a hedge and in a sunken road on the far bank, and forced to retire. The shots had the familiar crack of rifles, but they were not fired by the riflemen of the 95th Regiment (the Rifles) but by the troopers of the 10th (Prince of Wales) Hussars. The 10th Hussars were the only rifle armed cavalry in the British Army, but how had this come about?

0-Prince-George-IV-1804

Portrait of HRH the Prince of Wales at a review of the 10th Light Dragoons, attended by Lord Heathfield, General Turner and Baron Eben (left); Colonel Quinton in the distance, oil on canvas by John Singleton Copley, 1809. © Museum of Fine Arts, Boston

Friedrich Christian Baron von Eben was born at Creutzburg in Silesia in 1773 the son of a Prussian general. He joined the army in 1787 and served in his father’s regiment of Hussars against the French in the Low Countries between 1792 and 1795, being awarded the Order of Merit for his bravery. He resigned his commission in 1799 when Prussia refused to renew the conflict with France, and entered British service as a Captain in the York Hussars before joining the 10th Light Dragoons. A socialite, who counted amongst his personal friends the Duke of Sussex, the younger brother of the Prince of Wales, he also wrote several military treatises on the use of light cavalry, which brought him to the attention of the Duke of York, the Commander in Chief of the Army. In 1802, when York was establishing the Experimental Rifle Corps (renamed the 95th Rifles in 1803), von Eben wrote a treatise entitled ‘Observations on the Utility of good Riflemen’ in which he proposed the adoption of the rifle by both infantry and cavalry.

Von Eben’s idea for re-equipping the cavalry with rifles was not taken up, but the Colonel of the 10th Light Dragoons – the Prince of Wales himself, took a keen interest in the equipment as well as the appearance of his regiment, and ordered a test to be made of two rifles, one made by Henry Nock and the other by Ezekial Baker.

2-Rifle-Tests

‘Twenty Three Years Practice and Observation with Rifle Guns by Ezekiel Baker, Gunmaker, London’, second edition, London, 1804

The result was clear, and in response Baker was ordered to supply the regiment with an initial 40 rifled carbines. The carbine was essentially a cut-down version of the Baker rifle then in service, but without the bayonet (not required by the cavalry) and with the addition of a captive ramrod (to prevent it from being dropped and lost in the heat of battle) and a safety catch at the rear of the lock plate (for preventing the carbine from going off ‘half cocked’). Later versions had a swell underneath the stock similar to a pistol to improve the grip and steady the aim.

3-Baker-carbine-DI-2013-0816

1803 Pattern Baker Carbine for the 10th Prince of Wales Light Dragoons. XII.1968 © Royal Armouries

The Prince of Wales took great pride in his regiment, and in 1807 he ordered a new sword for the officers from the John Prosser, sword cutler of Charing Cross. The sword was based loosely on the 1796 Pattern Light Cavalry Officer’s Sword, but with a modified hilt bearing the Prince of Wales cipher mounted on the langet.

IX.387

1807 Pattern Light Cavalry Officers Sword for the 10th Prince of Wales Light Dragoons. © Royal Armouries

But what of Von Eben? He left the 10th Light Dragoons in 1806 and returned to his native Prussia the following year where he served as a volunteer until the Peace of Tilsit. He then appeared in Portugal, where he married Elisabetha Contessa d`Astigarraga, the daughter of a Portuguese Admiral, in Porto 1808, only to lose most of his possessions when the French siezed the city the following year. He joined the Portuguese Army under Marshal Beresford, and from 1809 to 1813 he was present at most of the major battles and sieges of the Peninsular War before being made Governor of Tras os Montes province. In 1817 von Eben was implicated in a conspiracy against the King of Portugal, and but for his friendship with the Duke of Sussex and his association with the Prince of Wales he would probably have been executed. Instead he was exiled, and he ended his colourful military career in the service of Simon Bolivar during the South American Wars of Independence. He died in Bogota in Columbia in 1835.

 

Ernest Crofts: Wellington’s March from Quatre Bras to Waterloo. (1878)

‘Napoleon has humbugged me, by God…. I have made arrangements to meet him at Quatre Bras, and if I find myself not strong enough to stop him there, I shall fall back towards Blücher and fight him there.’

                                                                                          – The Duke of Wellington

Battle_of_Quatre_Bras_map

English: Map of the Battle of Quatre Bras. 2006. Source: Gregory Fremont-Barnes (main editor) – The Encyclopedia of the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars, page 800. Adapted from Chandler 1999, 353.

Vital to both sides, the crossroads at Quatre Bras would have allowed Wellington to advance towards his Prussian allies at Ligny. This combined force would have outnumbered the French. However, Napoleon’s plan was to divide the Allies by crossing the border into the United Kingdom of the Netherlands (Belgium). This disruption would give Napoleon time to advance and defeat Blücher, before turning his attention to triumphing over the Anglo-Dutch army.

The story did not unfold by design and instead the Anglo-Dutch met the French at Quatre Bras, 16th June 1815. After a fiercely contested battle, neither side was forced from the field. Wellington gained a tactical victory, whilst Napoleon a strategic one, having prevented the Allies coming to Blücher’s aid.

Meanwhile, the Prussian retreat from Ligny left the flank of Wellington’s army open to attack, therefore, the following morning Wellington withdrew for Waterloo. This painting by Ernest Crofts is a depiction of the allied army marching towards Waterloo, with Wellington leading the procession.

11293006_10152983951041375_697887228_n_cropped1

Ernest Crofts: ‘Wellington’s Retreat from Quatre Bras’ (VIS.1614). On loan to the Royal Armouries by Museums Sheffield. Now in the Royal Armouries’ ‘Waterloo: The Art of Battle’ exhibition.

Born in Leeds in 1847, Crofts studied in Düsseldorf under Emil Hünten, a former pupil of Horace Vernet. Here, Crofts unlike many of his contemporaries, witnessed soldiers in battle during the Franco-Prussian War (1870-1871). On his return to Britain, Crofts continued his studies under Alfred Borron Clay, another painter of military scenes. By the time Crofts had ended his studies, his speciality had, too, become military and historical subjects. His various works include portrayals of English Civil War scenes, and a series of works relating to the Battle of Waterloo. In 1878 Crofts was elected an associate member of the Royal Academy, and a full academician in 1896.

Wellington’s March from Quatre Bras to Waterloo, is on display at the Royal Armouries as part of our Waterloo exhibition ‘The Art of Battle’ (22 May 2015-23 August 2015), alongside contemporary pieces of arms and armour.

 

 

Dancing into battle: The Duchess of Richmond’s Ball

The Duchess of Richmond’s ball has become a romanticised element of the Waterloo myth, where all the ‘immediate’ drama of the Battle of Waterloo began. It was held on June 15th (1815), the night before the Battle of Quatre Bras. The Duchess Charlotte was married to Charles Lennox the 4th Duke of Richmond, and the Duke and his 15 year old son (Charles Lennox, Earl of March, ADC to the Prince of Orange) were present at Waterloo on 18 June.

1024px-The_Duchess_of_Richmonds_Ball_by_Robert_Alexander_Hillingford

Robert Alexander Hillingford – painting “The Duchess of Richmond’s Ball” in Goodwood House the family seat of the Dukes of Richmond

Brussels was just a short boat ride from the south coast of England, and as a result the city was full of sightseers as well as the wives of senior officers.

The glamorous ball was continuing as any other, with the guests all dressed in their finery. Many of the male guests were high-ranking officers, who would soon be fighting at Waterloo (see full list below). Wellington himself arrived late to the festivities, having heard that the French had crossed the border in Belgium, and had already issued orders to his troops to prepare to move when the direction of Napoleon’s main attack became clear. Wellington was therefore distracted, and regularly speaking with his officers about arrangements during the festivities.

Later that night, a dispatch arrived from Quatre Bras to the Prince of Orange. The message was dated to 10pm that evening, and announced the repulse of Prussian forces from Fleurus on the road north-east of Charleroi – less than 8 miles (as the crow flies) from Quatre Bras.

Intelligence_of_the_Battle_of_Ligny

Intelligence of the Battle of Ligny (1818) by William Heath, depicting a Prussian officer informing the Duke of Wellington that the French have crossed the border at Charleroi and that the Prussians would concentrate their army at Ligny.

Wellington immediately asked the Duke whether he had a good map available, and they retired to his dressing room. Here Wellington supposedly uttered the now famous lines:

‘Napoleon has humbugged me, by God…. I have made arrangements to meet him at Quatre Bras, and if I find myself not strong enough to stop him there, I shall fall back towards Blücher and fight him there.’ – The Duke of Wellington

The illusion of the ball was then shattered. Officers were rushing hither and thither preparing themselves and their troops to depart at 3am. The women were worried and tense, some of whom were saying goodbye to loved ones for the last time. The theatrical drama of the scene has been captured in many works of classical 19th century art, including those below.

The Black Brunswicker by Millais.

The Black Brunswicker by Millais.

Before Waterloo (1868), by Henry O'Neil, depicting officers departing from the Duchess of Richmond's ball

Before Waterloo (1868), by Henry O’Neil, depicting officers departing from the Duchess of Richmond’s ball

Summoned to Waterloo: Brussels, dawn of June 16, 1815 by Robert Alexander Hillingford.

Summoned to Waterloo: Brussels, dawn of June 16, 1815 by Robert Alexander Hillingford.

Below is the guest list to the ball, given to Lord Verulam by the Duchess of Richmond, who sent a copy to Georgina, Dowager Lady De Ross, daughter of the Charlotte Duchess of Richmond. This was then published by her in: “Personal Recollections of the Duke of Wellington” Murray’s Magazine, Part I 1889.

There were approximately 223 people invited and it is thought around 200 attended. Highlighted here are those guests who were either killed or wounded at the battle of Waterloo, only three days later.

  • Major- General the Prince of Orange (Commander I Corps)   Wounded
  • Prince Frederic of Orange
  • Duke of Brunswick Dead
  • Prince of Nassau
  • Duke d’Arenberg
  • Prince Auguste d’Arenberg
  • Prince Pierre d’Arenberg
  • Lord van der Linden d’Hoogvoorst, Mayor of Brussels
  • Duke and Duchess de Beaufort and their daughter
  • Duke and Duchess d’Ursel
  • Marquis and Marchioness d’Assche
  • Count and Countess d’Oultremont
  • Countess Douairiere d’Oultremont and the Misses Douairiere
  • Count and Countess Liedekerke Beaufort
  • Count and Countess Auguste Liedekerke et Mademoiselle
  • Count and Countess Latour Lupin
  • Count and Countess Marcy d’Argenteau
  • Count and Countess de Grasiac
  • Countess de Luiny
  • Countess de Ruilly
  • Baron and Baroness D’Hooghvoorst,
  • Miss D’Hooghvoorst and Mr C. D’Hooghvoorst
  • Monsieur and Madame Van der Capellan
  • Baron de Herelt
  • Baron de Tuybe
  • Baron Brockhausen
  • General Baron Vincent, Austrian envoy Wounded
  • General Pozzo di Borgo, Russian envoy Wounded
  • General Alava, Spanish envoy
  • Count de Belgade
  • Count de la Rochefoucauld
  • General D’Oudenarde
  • Colonel Knife (?), A.D.C.
  • Colonel Ducayler
  • Major Ronnchenberg, A.D.C.
  • Colonel Tripp, A.D.C.
  • Captain De Lubeck, A.D.C.
  • Earl and Countess Conyngham and Lady Elizabeth Conyngham
  • Viscount Mount-Charles and Hon. Mr. Conyngham
  • Countess Mount-Norris and Lady Julianna Annesley
  • Dowager Countess of Waldegrave
  • Duke of Wellington (Commander Anglo-Allied Army)
  • Lt.Col. Lord (and Lady Fitzroy Somerset)  Wounded
  • Lord and Lady John Somerset
  • Mr. and Lady Frances Webster
  • Mr and Lady Caroline Capel and Miss Capel
  • Lord and Lady George Seymour and Miss Seymour
  • Mr. and Lady Charlotte Greville
  • Viscountess Hawarden
  • Lieutenant –General  Sir Henry and Lady Susan Clinton
  • Lady Alvanley and the Miss Ardens
  • Sir James, Lady James, and Miss Craufurd
  • Sir George Berkeley, K.C.B., and Lady Berkeley
  • Lady and Miss Sutton
  • Sir Sidney and Lady Smith, and Miss Rumbolds
  • Sir William and Lady Johnstone
  • Sir Hew and Lady Delancey (invited but declined)
  • Hon. Mrs. Pole
  • Mr., Mrs., and Miss Lance, and Mr. Lance, Jun.
  • Mr. and the Misses Ord
  • Mr. and Mrs. Greathed
  • Mr. and Mrs. Lloyd
  • Hon Sir Charles Stuart, G.C.B. (Minister at Bruxelles) and Mr. Stuart
  • Liutenant-General Earl of Uxbridge (Commander Cavalry Corps) Wounded
  • Lt.Col. Earl of Portarlington (23rd Light Dragoons)
  • Capt. Earl of March (52nd Foot) A.D.C.
  • Major-General Lord Edward Somerset  Wounded
  • Capt. Lord Charles Fitzroy (1st Foot Guards)
  • Lt.Col. Lord Robert Manners (10th Hussars)  Wounded
  • Lieutenant-General Lord Hill (Commanding II Corps)
  • Lord Rendlesham
  • Ensign Lord Hay, A.D.C.  Killed
  • Lt. Col. Lord Saltoun
  • Lord Apsley
  • Hon. Col. Stanhope (Guards)
  • Hon. Col. Abercromby (Guards) Wounded
  • Hon. Colonel Ponsonby Wounded
  • Hon Colonel Acheson (Guards)
  • Maj. Hon. Colonel Stewart                                                                             Wounded
  • Capt. Hon. Mr. O. Bridgeman, A.D.C. Wounded
  • Hon. Mr. Percival
  • Ensign Hon. Mr. Wm. Stopford
  • Hon. Mr. John Gordon
  • Ensign Hon. Mr. Ern. A.  Edgecombe
  • Ensign Hon. Mr. Seymour Bathurst, A.D.C.
  • Ensign Hon. Mr. Forbes
  • Ensign Hon. Mr. Hastings Forbes  Killed
  • Major Hon. George Dawson                                                                           Wounded
  • Lt. Hon. Mr. Lionel Dawson, 18th Light Dragoons
  • Major-General Sir Hussey Vivian
  • Capt. Horace B Seymour, A.D.C. Wounded
  • Colonel Hervey, A.D.C.
  • Colonel Fremantle, A.D.C.
  • Lt. Lord George Lennox, A.D.C.
  • Capt. Lord Arthur Hill, A.D.C.
  • Major Percy, A.D.C
  • Lt. Hon. George Cathcart, A.D.C.
  • Lt. Col. Sir Alexander Gordon, A.D.C. Killed
  • Col. Sir Colin Campbell, K.C.B., A.D.C.
  • Major-General  Sir John Byng, G.C.B.
  • Lieutenant-General Sir John Elley, K.C.B Wounded
  • Lt. Col. Sir George Scovell, K.C.B.
  • Col. Sir George Wood, Royal Artillery
  • Lt.Col. Sir Henry Bradford                                                                              Wounded
  • Lt.Col. Sir Robert C Hill, Kt (brother of Lord Hill) Wounded
  • Lt.Col. Sir Noel Hill, K.C.B. (brother of Lord Hill)
  • Sir William Ponsonby, K.C.B Killed
  • Lt.Col. Sir Andrew Barnard Wounded
  • Major-General Sir Denis Packe, G.C.B  Wounded
  • Major-General Sir James Kempt, G.C.B
  • Sir Pulteney Malcolm RN
  • Lieutenant-General  Sir Thomas Picton Killed
  • Major-General Sir Edward Barnes, Adjutant-General Wounded
  • Sir James Gambier
  • Hon. General Dundas
  • Lieutenant-General G Cooke Wounded
  • Major-General P Maitland
  • Major-General Adam (Not present)
  • Colonel Washington
  • Colonel Alexander Woodford
  • Colonel Charles Rowan (52nd Foot)  Wounded
  • Lt. Col. Henry Wyndham (Coldstream Guards)  Wounded
  • Colonel Cumming, 18th Light Dragoons
  • Lt. Col. Edward Bowater (3rd Foot Guards) Wounded
  • Col. Robert Torrens (1st West Indies Regt.)
  • Lt.Col. William Fuller (1st  Dragoon Guards) Killed
  • Maj. Henry Dick, (42nd  Foot) Wounded
  • Col. J Cameron (92nd  Foot) Killed
  • Lt.Col. D  Barclay, (1st foot Guards) A.D.C.
  • Capt. Clement Hill (1st Foot Guards) Wounded
  • Major Gunthorpe, (1st Foot Guards) A.D.C.
  • Major CH Churchill (1st foot Guards) A.D.C.
  • Major Hamilton, (4th West Indies Regt.) A.D.C.
  • Major T N Harris Wounded
  • Major Thomas Hunter Blair (91st Foot) Wounded
  • Capt.  D Mackworth, (7th Foot) A.D.C.
  • Capt. Edward Keane, (7th Hussars) A.D.C.
  • Capt. C A FitzRoy (Royal Horse Guards)
  • Capt. T Wildman, (7th Hussars) Wounded   
  • Capt. John Fraser (7th Hussars) Wounded
  • Capt. William Verner  (7th Hussars) Wounded
  • Capt. Elphinstone, (7th Hussars) (taken prisoner, June 17)
  • Capt. H Webster (9th Light Dragoons)
  • Capt. H Somerset, (18th Hussars) A.D.C.
  • Capt. C Yorke (52nd Foot) A.D.C. (not present)
  • Capt. Hon George Gore, (85th Foot) A.D.C.
  • Capt. Pakenham, R.A.
  • Capt. H Dumaresq (9th Foot) A.D.C. Wounded
  • Capt. F Dawkins (1st Foot Guards) A.D.C.
  • Capt.  G Disbrowe (1st Foot Guards) A.D.C.
  • Capt. G Bowles, (Coldstream Guards)
  • Capt. R B Hesketh, (3rd Foot Guards) Wounded
  • Capt. J Gurwood (10th Hussars)  Wounded
  • Capt. C Allix, (1st Foot Guards)
  • Capt. Hon Francis Russell, A.D.C.
  • Lt. F Brooke, (1st  Dragoon Guards)  Killed  
  • Cornet W Huntley, 1st Dragoon Guards)
  • Mr. Lionel Hervey (In Diplomacy)
  • Mr. Leigh
  • Capt. A Shakespear (10th Hussars)
  • Mr. Standish O’Grady (7th Hussars)
  • Capt. C Smyth, (95th Rifles) A.D.C. Killed
  • Ensign G  Fludyer, (1st Foot Guards) Wounded
  • Ensign Hon. John Montagu (Coldstream Guards) Wounded
  • Ensign Hon. Henry Montagu (3rd Foot Guards)
  • Ensign Algernon Greville (1st Foot Guards)
  • Ensign David Baird (3rd Foot Guards) Wounded
  • Lt. James Robinson (32nd Foot) Wounded
  • Ensign William James (3rd Foot Guards)
  • Mr. Chad
  • Lt. A F Dawkins (15th Hussars) Wounded
  • Dr. Hyde
  • 2nd Lt. Gustavus Hume (Royal Artillery)
  • Rev. Mr. Brixall (Rev. Samuel Briscall)