Trouble-Free Latin Women Dating Programs Across The Uk

10 Great Tips to Meet Solitary People

Certain deliver a few space? I need to find by myself. These are the words you wind up with the moment women want to end their relationship. Sometimes, finding your way through your relationship is definitely difficult to comprehend. There is incidents who have got occurred already and maybe they are difficult to neglect. Because both still absolutely adore one another, people receive a messy life. Males, who still love their particular ex-girlfriend, definitely will perform all kinds of things to win her again. So how are you attending manage using this method of circumstances? Here are some tips for the purpose of guys to make sure you win their ex-girlfriend rear:

Let me take a look at the appraisal on “Asking Questions”. As a writer, When i often need more more knowledge about person or an approach. I might need more data or opinions before I write this information. I just now post an important question concerning LinkedIn. I have an opportunity to write it again in order to great network members or I can post it to everybody. Next, I make a deal back and look forward to the right answers. There are many great reasons to implement LinkedIn must questions, most of which happen to be: puerto rican girls

It appears the ladies what person we now have provided with a captivating a part of ourselves to getting a increased capability injure us versus our men relationships. There seems to be described as a relationship between feminism and self-labeling by women as this foundation for relationship construction. It is actually seen there are generational differences in the best way women of all ages perceive their identity. Feminist self-labeling may be told they have two categories, weak feminists- women who shared the feminist label and supported the attitudes and views inside the circulation although lacking the responsibility; strong feminists- who ended up being built with a distributed ideology that united her members to produce more cohesive, intimate relationships. There are the non-feminists that could demonstrate having less having a feminist identity thus creating additionally discord.

There exists delicious freedom for how we can easily easily strategy finding relationships online equally as there can be letdown. People can regularly oversimplify the procedure, as well intentionally or unintentionally, and represent themselves being far better all those in comparison with they are really. It will require somewhat practice to see the correct person with all the web-based to signify on your absolutely adore life. This is exactly why casting a sizable world-wide-web and taking some time and efforts is important.

When you have some idea medicare supplement wives your web night out tendencies, design two lists of benefits. Call the primary “He would hate me plainly was… “, also, the further one “He need everybody if I was….. ” Separate all the personality which in turn he loves and hates into two groups also now you figure out what to do. For those who still don’t, it’s a trace. If you are attempting to seduce a fabulous male you can be internet dating on the internet, anf the husband mentioned which usually he doesn’t like when women smoke, most likely in addition to very worthwhile for your seduction plan to scream to him about the increasing tariff of cigs…

Do Online Relationships Last Longer? You Are the One to Judge!

Are you currently striking out with your schedules lately and ready for the purpose of sound dating advice for females? All too often women accept a date when asked even though it may not be anyone she chooses to day time, still why? It has to do with not even taking time period to be aware what you desperately want while in the date and a possible relationship.

It truly is true that men from time to time can’t identify somewhere between physical connections and emotive connections. Sometimes women just can’t either, even if they are usually extra in tune because of their views. For this reason, guys can certainly appear to get fickle. In actuality, whenever a fellow falls in love the guy usually stays in love consistently. Many times it is hard to produce a male show up madly in love, however.

1. Online Dating Advice For Women. Really do not decide on all the profile with the primary cute guy the truth is. In its place, read through a variety of styles accessible for you to consider. Contact the folks you ought to would like to grasp way more about. Don’t forget to think past the system when examining styles. Sometimes opposites attract, also, you retain a roofer that you’d don’t you have perceived as your match to aid you nevertheless, is a nice determination.

A Guide To Speedy Methods For https://slayyournextgiant.com/2018/first-date-tips-and-advice/ Any nice girl is too submissive. Instead of enduring and enjoying the potent with the different relationship, and rather than flirting within a nature of fun, she is additional focused on becoming perfect. She hardly says anything, and mostly will certainly abide by without regard to the guy says. She is little by little buying boring. How much longer before person loses desire to have this parasite? Sorry girls, nevertheless that’s everything that a distressed woman is, by strict definition.

five. Improve Your Appearance. Guys are attracted by using a attractive appearance and a nicely dressed woman. Dress up alot more. Very few women do. You can really stand out from any bunch — and that is exactly precisely what you have to do. You have to make it possible for several corners which you can. You’ve got a lots of levels of competition. Thisn’t pretty much guys attempting to find young, shapely women. Doesn’t so what a man sounds like make a difference for yourself? Perfectly it does to men too — more.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Charles Sidney Woplin: Family, War and Imperial War Museums

The staff of the Imperial War Museum taken at the Crystal Palace, 1920s. Charles Woplin is likely to be featured on this photograph, but cannot be identified. IWM Q 55178

In this guest blog post, Imperial War Museum (IWM) Intern Charlie Knight shares stories from his family history, with a special connection to the museum itself. Charlie’s ancestors the Woplin family were affected by both world wars and his great-great uncle Charles dedicated his life to educating people on the dangers of conflict, through his role at IWM.

 

  • First World War connections

Having been in the process of researching my own family tree over the past five years, I was aware that my Nan’s ‘Uncle Charlie’ was employed by IWM for the majority of his working life. It is now only since I have begun working here myself that it seems prudent to begin digging into Uncle Charlie’s story, the tragedy of his family in wartime, and his life at the museum.

Charles Sidney Woplin was born on 15 February 1891 in Thornton Heath, Surrey, to Edward Arthur Woplin, a farm labourer, and Mary Ann Vincent, a laundress. Charles was the second oldest of nine children, four of whom died as a result of war in the twentieth century. Charles’ father, Edward, died in July 1913.

Badge of the Rifle Brigade (Prince Consort’s Own). © IWM INS 7235

At the outbreak of war in 1914, Charles and his family were living at 69 Spa Road, Thornton Heath. Both Charles and his older brother Edward Jnr working as gardeners. Charles joined 3 Battalion (Prince Consort’s Own) Rifle Brigade and served in France for the entirety of the war, sustaining a bullet wound in the shoulder. Charles’ battalion fought in many key actions, including the Battle of Loos in 1915 and the Battle of Arras in 1917.  Whilst he went on to live a long life, his brothers that also served in the First World War were not as lucky.

William James Woplin served in the Royal Medical Corps in France from 1914 to 1915 and then in Egypt, where he was injured in 1917 and was sent to hospital in Manchester. He died on 27 February 1920 from his wounds. Edward Arthur Woplin Jnr served in the Royal Machine Gun Corps; in 1917 his left leg was amputated as a result of war wounds. He later died from pulmonary tuberculosis contracted in the trenches, on 29 October 1922.

 

  • Interwar period

Charles began his career at IWM after the war ended. He was appointed as a warden at the original site at Crystal Palace on 8 February 1920 – less than three weeks before William died – and later that year married my great-great aunt Maude Elizabeth Kirby in Croydon. Together Charles and Maude had a daughter, Evelyn (Eva), who was born in September 1922 – a month before Charles’ older brother died from his wounds.

The Army Gallery at the Imperial War Museum, Crystal Palace. © IWM Q 17030

At the museum, Charles worked in the Telephone Exchange before gradually working his way up to a supervisory role. His personnel file in the museum archive notes his dutiful and honest nature but that ‘… he has nothing of the butler or old-fashioned servant about him’. Charles may not have been a people-pleaser but gradually grew accustomed to life in public service.

 

  • Life in the Second World War

A barrage balloon is inflated in front of the Imperial War Museum at Lambeth Road, London. © IWM Q 64060

The Second World War would again affect Charles and his family significantly. Imperial War Museum, now based at its current home on Lambeth Road, was forced to close its doors to the public in 1939 due to the threat of air raids. During the war the museum was hit by bombs a total of 41 times and the building was not fully repaired until the 1950s. Charles did not serve in the armed forces but did undertake fireguard duties at the museum as part of his regular working week. He and Maude were bombed out during the Blitz over London a number of times, seeking refuge with family and friends.

Several members of Charles’ family lost their lives in the conflict. Two of his brothers, Albert and George served in the Royal Navy; Albert on HMS Acheron and George on HMS Barlight. Albert was on HMS Acheron when it hit a mine in the English Channel on 17 December 1940 – his body, along with many others, was never recovered. George was captured by the Japanese in Hong Kong and died from beriberi and malaria in 1942. His son, also called George, was a Volunteer Wireless Operator in the Royal Air Force, before serving as an Air Gunner with 102 Squadron. He died when the Halifax Bomber in which he was serving was shot down over Smaarlands Ocean on 24 April 1944. His body was found over two weeks later, and was buried in Svino Churchyard in Denmark.

 

  • Charles’ legacy

Charles with his stepson ‘Nobby’ Kirby, photograph believed to be taken in the 1940s.

Although he reached retirement age in 1956, Charles chose to continue working at the museum until the age of 70 – even accepting a pay cut and downgrade in responsibility. The museum Director Dr Frank Noble paid tribute to Charles:

‘His cheerfulness, understanding and advice, has been a great inspiration to all … he is an “Old Contemptible” and his many escapades have brought many a good laugh.”

His cheerfulness, understanding and advice, has been a great inspiration to all

On 22 June 1961, Charles was awarded the Imperial Service Medal for his long years of service to IWM. He died in March 1971, at the age of 80.

It is poignant to think that a man whose family life was engulfed by loss in war spent the entirety of his working life in an institution to educate people about conflict. He was faithful to his beloved museum, perhaps in tribute to the four brothers, nephew and brother-in-law who made the ultimate sacrifice.

 

Posted in Life Stories, My Research | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

My research – a fellow University of Manchester Student

 

During her two week student placement at IWM North in July 2018, Bria Cotton was tasked with researching stories that linked to August 1918. From medics to conscientous objectors, and servicemen to victims of the influenza pandemic, she has brought together a Community of fascinating stories. In this guest blog post, Bria shares a story that she found especially interesting – James Stanley Carr who, like Bria, studied at the University of Manchester.

 

  • Before the War

James Stanley Carr was born on 12 January 1893 to a Quaker family in Settle, North Yorkshire. A year after broke out, Carr was 22 and a student at Victoria University of Manchester (also known then as Owens College). When the First World War broke out he registered himself a known conscientious objector due to his faith.

White Peace Poppy © IWM EPH 2284

 

  • Friends’ Ambulance Unit

Even though Carr as a conscientious objector and was thus not obligated to go to the front, he joined the Friends’ Ambulance Unit (FAU) and left England for Dunkirk, France on 23 April 1915. The Friends’ Ambulance Unit was a civilian volunteer medical service that was developed by a group of Quakers within the British Religious Society of Friends in 1914. Under the umbrella of the British Red Cross Society and the Order of St. John of Jerusalem, the FAU provided medical aid to wounded soldiers on the Western Front, and were based in London and Dunkirk.

 

  • A plea for normalcy

In the chaos of working in war hospitals, Carr found the time to pen a letter his former lecturer in medieval history, Professor Thomas Frederick Tout, on 23 August 1918. In this letter, Carr provides details of his struggle to get leave and go back to Owens College, Manchester in order to obtain his “War Degree”. Carr states that because he is a member of the FAU, he does not qualify for to obtain the standard British Forces “war degree”, as he is a civilian volunteer. It is further described that Carr would only be able to become eligible for a degree if he resigned from the FAU and appeared in front of a military tribunal. However, Carr is hesitant to resign from the FAU, because

even could I return to Owens and the War were to continue, I should want to come back again to France.

Carr’s reluctance to resign from the FAU shows a strong sense of national duty and responsibility, a trait that is made all the more admirable due to his service being entirely voluntary.

James Carr letter, held by The University of Manchester Library (TFT/1/167/9). Reproduced with the kind permission of the University of Manchester.

I do not know whether or not Carr was successful in his journey to obtain his “war degree”, but it is clear that Carr was determined to use any means necessary to ensure that his plight was recognised. He notes that the officials in the FAU were “very sympathetic” to his issue, and he enlisted the aid of Captain Tatham, his Commanding Officer, in order to write a separate letter to Professor Tout. Furthermore, Carr also writes at the bottom of Captain Tatham’s letter, his uncle is Sir Henry Alexander Miers, who at the time was Vice-Chancellor of Victoria University of Manchester. This certainly shows the lengths Carr was willing to reach towards in order to be exempt for the rulings against overseas civilian volunteers.

 

  • Reflections

I am a student pursuing a degree in Politics and Modern History at the University of Manchester, and researching the lives of those who served, died, and were former students has led me to reflect on my experience as a student during peacetime in the 21st century. James S Carr went to the front as part of the Friends’ Ambulance Unit when he was only 22 years old and still pursuing his degree. He, and like thousands of other students, went to the frontlines because they believed it was their national duty. Although we are not living in a time of war, I believe that students across the nation are redefining what it means to act in the name of national duty. From protests to petition, the students of today are continually striving towards a better future.

Generations of school children have grown up with the shadow of remembrance for the First World War and Second World War. We have continually expressed sentiments of sacrifice, loss, and horror at the destruction caused by war. We are taking the lessons learned from the events of the World Wars and turning them into a driving force to push for peaceful resolutions to domestic and international tensions.

 

Posted in My Research | Tagged , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Gassed: creativity out of destruction

Gassed by John Singer Sergeant. © IWM ART 1460

John Singer Sargent’s painting Gassed is amongst the most well known in the Imperial War Museums’ art collection. Measuring over 2 x 6 metres (7 ft x 20 ft), this vast artwork depicts the horrific effects of mustard gas on the body, which often caused severe burns and blindness. From 27 July 2018 to 24 February 2019 Gassed will be on display in the Lest We Forget? Exhibition at IWM North, Manchester, and in this blog post we explore the story behind this iconic image.

 

  • Early works

John Singer Sargent was born Florence, Italy in 1856, and spent much of his youth travelling and painting in Europe and America. Known largely as a portrait and landscape artist before the war, his work was exhibited in galleries around the world.

Portrait photograph of John Singer Sargent. IWM HU 56114

Sargent was commissioned by the British Ministry of Information in 1918 to depict scenes of ‘Anglo-American co-operation’ on the Western Front. He joined other commissioned artists such as William Orpen and Muirhead Bone, whose works would perform a dual role: firstly, to promote the values of British liberal democracy; and secondly to commemorate the conflict for both current and future generations.

 

  • To the Western Front

In July 1918, 62-year-old Sargent travelled to France with fellow artist Henry Tonks. He made sketches of life at the front with British and American troops, which formed the basis for ten paintings that he completed back in Britain. He reflected on the challenges that he faced as an artist, trying to capture the human experiences of the war:

 

“The further forward one goes, the more scattered and meagre everything is. The nearer to danger, the fewer and more hidden the men – the more dramatic the situation, the more it becomes an empty landscape.”

 

However, a particular scene that he came across in August 1918 inspired him to produce a series of striking pencil drawings. His companion Henry Tonks later described what they saw:

 

After tea we heard that on the Doullens Road at the Corps dressing station at le Bac-du-sud there were a good many gassed cases, so we went there. The dressing station was situated on the road and consisted of a number of huts and a few tents. Gassed cases kept coming in, led along in parties of about six just as Sargent has depicted them, by an orderly. They sat or lay down on the grass, there must have been several hundred, evidently suffering a great deal, chiefly I fancy from their eyes which were covered up by a piece of lint… Sargent was very struck by the scene and immediately made a lot of notes.

 

Gassed cases kept coming in, led along in parties of about six … their eyes were covered up by a piece of lint 

Study for ‘Gassed’, showing a medical
orderly helping wounded men.
© Art.IWM ART 16162 6

Mustard gas was an indiscriminate weapon causing widespread injury and burns, as well as affecting the eyes. In his sketches, Sargent draws the viewer into the tactile relationships between the blinded men, and the care shown by the medical orderlies. It was these drawings that Sargent presented to the War Memorials Committee, who clearly saw the potential for them to become an evocative painting.

 

  • Reception at home

Gassed was first put on public display in December 1919 in the Royal Academy, London. You can imagine the response of the public seeing it for the first time, many of whom would have experienced war or knew someone who had. Whilst some early reviewers said that the artwork was too painful to look at, others were inspired by the depiction of comradeship and humanity in times of conflict.

Sargent’s painting was also accepted for inclusion into a proposed Hall of Remembrance. This space, which unfortunately was never built, would be devoted to ‘fighting subjects, home subjects and the war at sea and in the air’. Nevertheless this group of paintings formed a key part of the newly-formed Imperial War Museums’ collection, under whose custodianship it has remained ever since.

 

John Singer Sargent’s grave in Brookwood Cemetery, Surrey. Image taken by Jack1956, licensed under Creative Commons

  • After the war

Sargent continued to paint after the war, and co-founded New York City’s Grand Central Art Galleries. He returned to England, where he died in 1925 and is buried in Brookwood Cemetery in Surrey.

Sargent’s legacy to the art world is vast, completing more than 2,000 pieces in his lifetime. One hundred years after the first sketches were completed, Gassed continues to provoke an emotional response in those that encounter it.

 

Posted in Life Stories | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Big Stunt – escape in the First World War

Escape equipment belonging to a POW at Holzminden Camp, Germany. IWM EPH 810

A German prisoner of war camp. A tunnel. A plan for a mass breakout. If you think this is a familiar story you’d be right – but this isn’t the ‘Great Escape’. This was the Big Stunt, when 10 Allied Officers made a ‘home run’ after escaping from Holzminden prisoner of war (POW) camp on the night of 23/24 July 1918. In this article, Lives of the First World War Volunteer Trevor Torkington takes a look at the camp and the stories of those who escaped.

 

  • The Camp

Holzminden is located in northern Germany on the River Weser, approximately 150km from the Dutch border. A POW camp for British officers was established there in 1917 and was quickly placed under the command of Hauptmann Karl Niemeyer who, along with his twin brother Heinrich in charge of the nearby camp at Clausthal, would make life a living hell for the prisoners.  Lieutenant Leonard Pearson had been in six camps while in captivity and expressed the view that Holzminden was the worst, with the very worst commandant.

Portrait of Lieutenant William Leefe Robinson VC. IWM Q 66470

German troops were encouraged to use their bayonets to encourage discipline, and Niemeyer frequently ordered his troops to fire on prisoners leaning out of windows. One prisoner who Niemeyer took deliberate delight in punishing was Captain William Leefe Robinson who had received the Victoria Cross for shooting down a Zeppelin in September 1916. When Robinson was shot down himself in April 1917 he was eventually transferred to Holzminden where, after a failed escape attempt, he was kept in solitary confinement (known to the POWs as “the chamber of horrors”) almost continually. He was subjected to sleep deprivation and only permitted meagre rations. On one occasion he was whipped to the point of collapse for disobeying an order.

It was under these harsh conditions that prisoners began to forge a plan for escape, and the construction of a tunnel began in autumn 1917 near to the camp’s perimeter fence.

 

  • The tunnel

As the work progressed many of the original tunnellers were transferred out of the camp (possibly on the suspicion that something was going on), and a number of others were interned in Holland until the end of the war as part of a prisoner exchange programme. This could have led to abandonment of the plan but for the transfer to the camp of three friends and serial escapees: Captain David ‘Munshi’ Gray; Lieutenant Cecil Blain; and Lieutenant Caspar Kennard.

They were willingly recruited and eventually a tunnelling team of thirteen officers was formed. As tunnelling progressed a supplementary team was formed where support activities, such as smuggling in escape equipment, could be managed. Some of the methods of obtaining equipment may have followed the novel approach taken by Captain Thomas George Mapplebeck, who acquired an Army and Navy Stores catalogue and ordered a number of useful items such as compasses and civilian clothing.

Panama hat for use as a civilian disguise. IWM EPH 3682

Most of this was hidden before the Germans discovered it, but for refusing to reveal where he was hiding six hats (which had already been confiscated once, and recovered) he was sentenced to six months’ solitary confinement.

 

  • The Escape

By the time the tunnel was ready in summer 1918, eighty six men were eager to escape. Twenty-nine prisoners actually got out of the tunnel on the evening of 23/24 July, before it caved in. Some of the escapees travelled alone but the others were in pairs and threes all aiming for the Dutch border, crossing the Weser on the way.

Portrait photograph of Captain E W Leggatt. IWM HU 124039

Some of those fluent in German decided to take the train which, in the case of Lieutenant Colonel Charles Rathborne, meant he was able to cross the border just five days after his escape. He was followed a few days later by travelling companions Lieutenants John Keith Bousfield and Leonard James Bennett, and also Captain Edward Wilmer Leggatt. Over the course of the next few days they were joined by six more of their comrades. One of the last to arrive was Second Lieutenant Peter (Pierre) Campbell-Martin – he went on to serve in the Second World War and was sadly killed in a bombing mission in October 1941.

In total ten escapees made it to freedom, with the rest being captured a few days or weeks after escaping.

In total ten escapees made it to freedom, with the rest being captured a few days or weeks after escaping. Perhaps the unluckiest was Lieutenant Alan Thomas Shipwright, who was caught just a few hundred yards from the Dutch border.

 

  • Aftermath

All the recaptured officers were sent back to Holzminden. They were kept in solitary confinement for up to eight weeks living on bread and water. Niemeyer ordered reprisals against the prisoners, confiscating goods from home and randomly arresting prisoners for no reason.

Despite this, work on a new tunnel began within two weeks of the Big Stunt. Where escape attempts failed, the consequences were severe. Second Lieutentant Alexander Couston was shot in the arm and the jaw as he tried to surrender upon recapture – although he survived, he required treatment at Queen’s Hospital, Sidcup once repatriated.

That didn’t deter other would-be escapers, however, such Canadian Lieutenant William Samuel Stephenson who escaped in October 1918. Interestingly, in the Second World War Stepehenson was recruited for UK-US intelligence activity, and it is believed by many that he was the inspiration for James Bond.

 

  • Legacy

A film about the escape entitled ‘Who Goes Next?’ was released in 1938, and there was a reunion later that year to celebrate the 20th anniversary of the escape in Ye Olde Cheshire Cheese pub in Fleet Street, London. The pub, a listed building, still exists and I have every intention of raising a pint (or two) to the twenty nine men who made it through the tunnel one hundred years ago, and to the ten who made it home.

Discover more stories of men who were imprisoned in Holzminden, in this Lives of the First World War Community

 

Posted in Life Stories, My Research | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Over the Silver Sea: 119 Battery Royal Field Artillery in the First World War

119 Battery Royal Field Artillery – Winners of the 27 Brigade RFA Shield 1912-13

In this guest blog post, Paul Bourton shares the latest instalment of his series revealing stories through the pre-war photograph pictured above. In this post, Paul details the mobilisation of the 119 Battery and its arrival at Mons with the British Expeditionary Force (BEF).

 

  • Parallel Journeys

In late July 1815, HMS Bellerophon, a 74 gun Royal Navy ship of the line and veteran of the Battle of Trafalgar, made passage from France to England with a precious human cargo.  That single unremarkable voyage marked the end of a conflict that had raged for over two decades; a truly global conflict that, in terms of chronology, history could easily have dubbed the ‘First World War’.  The man held personally responsible for the greater part of that conflict had stepped aboard the vessel on 15 July and formally surrendered himself to the ship’s captain, Frederick Maitland.  He was now being transported to England to await his fate; a fate that was to be decided by a government fearful of his influence if he be allowed to set foot on British shores.

The surrender was the culmination of Napoleon Bonaparte’s flight from the field at Waterloo the previous month.  The peace that followed meant that the epic battle was the last action fought on European soil by British troops for very nearly a century.

HMS Bellerophon, 1914 battleship shared the same name as 1815 ocean-going liner predecessor. Image in the public domain.

Almost exactly a century after the Bellerophon’s historic voyage and following the outbreak of what would become the next great global conflict, three ships made the crossing from Ireland to Napoleon’s former homeland carrying more human cargo.  The SS Courtfield and the SS Chinese Prince were two of the ships conveying the Brigade to French soil, where it was to assemble with the other units of the British Expeditionary Force that made up the 5th Division.  Somewhat ironically, the third vessel in the convoy bore the name of the ship that had been the harbinger of the peace that ended the Napoleonic Wars and brought stability and security to Europe.  The SS Bellerophon now conveyed British troops to fight on European soil once more.

 

  • Heading to war

The 27 Brigade Royal Field Artillery was based in County Kildare on the outbreak of war and its home since its move from Ballincollig in County Cork in late 1913 had been the town of Newbridge on the banks of the River Liffey.  The three batteries that formed the Brigade were the 119th, 120th and 121st.  The Brigade had mobilised with the 5th Division on 5 August and set sail for France shortly after.

QF 18 pounder gun in action. © IWM Q 4065

As well as the men from the three field gun batteries aboard, there were also the men of the headquarters staff and the brigade ammunition column that made up a field artillery brigade in 1914.  The weapons and equipment on board included the Brigade’s eighteen Ordnance QF 18 Pounder field guns, which were the stock-in-trade of the Royal Field Artillery at that time,  limbers to transport them, ammunition, wagons and requisite equipage for war.  There were also the myriad horses vital to the role of the field artillery in wartime.

The 27 Brigade was to fire some of the first rounds by British artillery on European soil in ninety-nine years.

The ships landed in France on 18 August and disgorged their cargoes at Le Havre. Only two men did not sail to France with the 119 Battery from its trophy-winning football team of 1913: Gunner Stanley Baker and Driver F. Thomas who appeared in the previous instalment.  The remaining eleven men were to take part in the momentous events which marked the opening of hostilities for the British Expeditionary Force (BEF) just days after landing in France.  The 27 Brigade was to fire some of the first rounds by British artillery on European soil in ninety-nine years.

 

  • Preparing for battle

Between 11 and 17 August 1914 the various parts of the British Expeditionary Force were concentrating at Mauberg about ten miles south of the Belgian city of Mons.  In a plan arranged with the French years before the war, the British forces were to form up on the left flank of the French Army and prevent the right arm of any advancing German Army from entering France, while the main body the French Army would thrust forward in an all-out attack to the east.  This was the long-standing French contingency to meet the threat of attack known as Plan 17.

The gallant but outdated and ultimately catastrophic tactics of headlong attacks requisite of Plan 17 saw wave after wave of infantry and cavalry impaled on the spikes of massed German artillery and machine gun fire.  The French were driven back and their supreme commander, General Joseph Joffre, changed his priorities.  Recognising that he was making no headway, and seeing the threat from the German right arm swinging its way towards France from Belgium, he engaged his Fifth Army under General Charles Lanrezac alongside the BEF to move north into Belgium to meet the Germans head-on.

The main body of the BEF was formed of two Corps each of two infantry divisions.  I Corps, commanded by Lieutenant General Douglas Haig, comprised the 1st and 2nd Divisions and II Corps, made up of the 3rd and 5th Divisions, was led by Lieutenant General Horace Smith-Dorien.  He replaced the original commander, Sir James Grierson, who died suddenly on the train to the front on 17 August.  There was also a cavalry division under the command of General Edmund Allenby, plus support and line of communication troops.  In overall command of the BEF was General Sir John French.

Horses gathered in a field during the Mons campaign, August 1914. © IWM Q 109607

By the evening of the 22 August 1914 the two Corps of the BEF were stretched out along a twenty mile front along the Mons-Conde Canal just to the north of the city.  The I Corps was on the right of the British line and II Corps on the left.  Sir John French had agreed to hold the German advance for twenty four hours to protect the exposed left flank of the French Fifth Army.  The battalions dug in along the canal with the artillery batteries of the various divisions in positions just to their rear.  The BEF was facing the might of the German First Army under General von Kluck and it was to be II Corps, among its number the men of the 119 Battery Royal Field Artillery, that bore the brunt of a German attack.  The attack began on the morning of the following day, the 23 August, when the Battle of Mons began.

 

The aftermath of the action at Mons saw the 119 Battery win the highest award for valour but lose a number of its men, including two men from the photograph of 1913.  The details will appear in the next instalment as my research continues to uncover the stories of the men in the picture.

Posted in My Research | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Second Ostend Raid

Wrecked HMS Vindictive in the Ostend Harbour, May 1918. IWM Q 24030

On 9-10 May 1918 the Royal Navy attacked the German held port of Ostend for the second time in less than a month. In his previous blog post, Lives of the First World War Volunteer Trevor Torkington explained why the first attack on Ostend and Zeebrugge, on 23 April 1918, had been a failure. Here, he looks at the events of the second raid, and focuses on the role played by one of the craft taking part that day.

 

  • A second attempt

The aim of both raids was to block the entrance to the port in order to prevent German U-Boats, destroyers and torpedo boats from entering the Channel. Within the Admiralty, the need for a second attack was questioned, but that wasn’t the case for the officers of the two British blockships, HM ships Brilliant  and Sirius. These ships were grounded outside the harbour wall, yet they immediately volunteered to try again.

Poor weather delayed the second attack until 9 May when the attack force set sail. As it had been badly damaged in the earlier raid on Zeebrugge, the cruiser HMS Vindictive  was chosen as a blockship along with the ageing cruiser HMS Sappho. However, disaster struck just before midnight when one of the boilers on the Sappho blew, and she was no longer able to make way. Vindictive would be on her own.

The second raid fared only slightly better than the first. Thick fog obscured the harbour and when Vindictive finally found the channel mouth it was the target for German guns which exacerbated the damage sustained from the earlier raid. In particular, the port propeller was unable to turn which limited the ship’s ability to manoeuvre. She hit the eastern pier of the harbour where she settled, but she hadn’t blocked the harbour.

Wreck of HMS Vindictive laying in the entrance to Ostend harbour where she was scuttled. IWM Q 90091

  • Gallantry awards

Although the raid failed to meet its objective it was still hailed as a success and three officers were awarded the Victoria Cross: Lieutenants Geoffrey Heneage Drummond and Rowland Richard Louis Bourke were in command of Motor Launches, and Lieutenant Victor Alexander Charles Crutchley took command of HMS Vindictive when her captain, Commander Alfred Godsal, was killed.

In remembering the events of that day, I’d like to take a look at one of the craft that played a vital role in evacuating the crew of the blockship.

 

  • Geoffrey Drummond and ML 254

Geoffrey Drummond was born in London in 1886, the son of Algernon Heneage Drummond. He was somewhat a sickly child growing up as he fell down the stairs at a young age seriously damaging his neck. Nonetheless he was determined to ‘do his bit’ when war broke out and following treatment by a Swedish doctor was able to pass the fitness test for the Royal Naval Volunteer Reserve (RNVR) in 1915. In doing so he joined his younger brother Jocelyn who had joined the Royal Navy in 1905 and was awarded the Distinguished Service Cross in 1917 for his services in minelaying operations. Two other brothers had followed in their father’s footsteps and joined the army where sadly, the eldest, Spencer, was killed in action in 1915.

Geoffrey Drummond. IWM Q 79805

Geoffrey volunteered to command Motor Launch 254 for the Ostend Raid. Its role was to act as a rescue craft and take off the crew of the Vindictive once they had reached their objective. As ML 254 entered the harbour it was hit by shellfire, killing Geoffrey’s second in command, a Canadian, Lieutenant Gordon Fraser Ross, and also an eighteen year old deck hand, John Owen Thomas. Geoffrey himself was severely injured, with his thigh shattered. Ignoring his wound, Geoffrey placed ML 254 next to the Vindictive so that the crew could be evacuated. Now an easy target for the enemy, ML 254 was raked with machine gun fire with Geoffrey being wounded twice more. He stayed at his post until the evacuation was complete and then withdrew. His Victoria Cross citation notes “when informed that there was no one alive left on board he backed his vessel out clear of the piers before sinking exhausted from his wounds”.

ML 254 had rescued 2 officers and 37 men from Vindictive but was on fire and slowly sinking. Lieutenant Victor Crutchley from the Vindictive took over command from the badly-wounded Geoffrey and they were eventually picked up by HMS Warwick before the Motor Launch sank.

 

  • Life after the war

Despite his injuries sustained in the raid, Geoffrey was determined to ‘do his bit’ again in the Second World War. He was however, deemed too old and too unfit to join the RNVR and so entered service with the  River Emergency Service on the River Thames and in 1940 transferred to the Royal Naval Patrol Service, with the equivalent rank of an Able Seaman.

He was a man of great charm and humour and he had a great many friends. He had a strong religious belief and a strict sense of honour and duty to his country and his family. He never hesitated to do what he felt was right.

Sadly, the injuries he received during the raid had taken its toll. While on duty with the Patrol Service his weakened leg gave way while he was carrying a heavy bag of coal, and as he fell he hit his head and suffered severe concussion. He died in St Olave’s Hospital, Rotherhithe on April 21 1941.

Geoffrey’s son, Mortimer, described him as “a man of great charm and humour and he had a great many friends. He had a strong religious belief and a strict sense of honour and duty to his country and his family. He never hesitated to do what he felt was right.”

 

100 years on, we pay tribute to Geoffrey and all those who took part in the second Ostend raid. Find out more about these individuals, on Lives of the First World War.

Posted in Life Stories, My Research | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Behind Every Photograph Lies a Story: The Rogue and the Mystery Man

119 Battery Royal Field Artillery – Winners of the 27 Brigade RFA Shield 1912-13

In this guest blog post, Paul Bourton of the Unknown Soldier Military Archive & Soldier Research Service shares the latest instalment of his series revealing the stories behind a pre-war photograph of thirteen men of 119 Battery Royal Field Artillery. He focuses on the stories of Stanley Baker and F Thomas – the former has been traced, while the wartime exploits of the other remain a mystery.

 

  • The Rogue

To anyone who has ever watched the 1964 film epic ‘Zulu’, the name Stanley Baker is synonymous with heroism and military glory.  In the film, Baker portrayed Lieutenant John Chard of the Royal Engineers; the man who led the gallant defence at Rorke’s Drift during the Zulu War of 1879 and who won one of the eleven Victoria Crosses awarded for that action.

The Stanley Baker who enlisted into the ranks of the Royal Artillery in October 1910 did not enjoy the celebrated military career of the man portrayed by his namesake.  In fact, if he could be compared to any of the characters depicted in the film, it is surely that of Private Henry Hook who was portrayed as a Cockney rogue, a drunk and a ne-er-do-well.  Although this depiction was erroneous (Hook, a native of Gloucestershire, was a model soldier, a teetotaler and a devout Christian) it certainly fits with the man sitting in the front row of the photograph, second from the left and holding the football.

 

Stanley Baker

Stanley Baker was born in Maryport in Cumberland around April 1890.  Nothing is known about his life before joining the Army, but he was working as a General Labourer when he enlisted into the Royal Artillery at Carlisle on 24 October 1910 aged 20.  He signed up for a term of three years of service with the Colours and nine years with the Army Reserve.

He was sent for his basic training at the Number 2 Artillery Training Depot at Athlone in Ireland.  Stanley Baker had a problem with authority and a poor disciplinary record and whilst training spent long periods in military detention.

On 7 February 1911, Gunner 62587 Baker was finally posted to the 119th Battery RFA in Ballincollig in County Cork.  The proximity of his birthplace and age to that of his football teammate Frank Bramwell may have meant that the men were close friends.  But the two men appear to have been polar opposites in terms of conduct.

In July, Baker was found guilty of sleeping whilst on stable duty and was sentenced to fourteen days in custody.  The severity of the sentence reflects the value the Army put on its horses and the consequences of dereliction of duty in regard to their care and security.  In October, the wayward Gunner contracted gonorrhoea and was hospitalised for several days.  His conduct sheet continued to catalogue a string of misdemeanours.  In May 1912, he was fined and confined to barracks for being drunk and creating a disturbance in the barracks.  The following April he was sentenced to a week in the cells for disorderly conduct in the local theatre in Ballincollig and then breaking away from the military escort that arrested him.

His bad behaviour notwithstanding, he was selected for the Battery football team that won the 27th Brigade RFA Shield in the 1911/12 season and retained it in 1912/13.  Shortly after my photograph was taken Stanley Baker got married.  He wed a Ballincollig girl called Annie McDonnell on 13 September.  The following month Stanley left the army on completion of his three years of service and was transferred to the Army Reserve.  He settled for a while in Ballincollig.  Meanwhile, the 119 Battery moved with the 27 Brigade RFA to its new quarters at Newbridge in County Kildare to join the 5th Division.

The following year Stanley and his wife Annie were expecting the arrival of their first child.  He was not to be around to witness the birth of his daughter though.  A daughter called Doris was born on 9 September.  On the outbreak of war in August he was recalled to the Army from the Reserve.  He reported to the 14 Brigade Royal Field Artillery at Woolwich on the same day his old Battery was mobilised for war at Newbridge.  Gunner Baker was posted to the Divisional Ammunition Column of the 4th Division and he landed in France on 23 August 1914, the very day that his former comrades saw their first action at the Battle of Mons.

 

  • The Mystery Man

Driver F Thomas stands in the back row and second from the right in the photograph and, despite a thorough search to uncover his story, his departure from the unit prior to its mobilisation in August 1914, makes him the only man in the photograph of whom nothing is known except his rank, surname and first initial.

Unknown member of 119 Battery

The most likely explanation for his departure is that he either transferred to another unit or was discharged from the Army prior to the outbreak of war.  If the latter was true, and providing the reasons for his discharge were not medical or related to his fitness to serve, then he would have been recalled to the Colours on the outbreak of the war as a reservist.

Working on the assumption that he would have been assigned to an artillery unit on transfer or call-up from the reserves, an assumption based on his previous army experience and training as a driver, a detailed search of soldiers of that name who served with the Royal Artillery in the Great War has revealed several possible candidates but, so far, nothing has been found to link any of them to the man in the picture.

Enquiries into the particulars of Driver F Thomas will be ongoing but enthusiasm and hope will be tempered with a degree of pragmatism; one of the most sobering lessons I have learned in my career as a researcher is that, no matter where or how hard or for how long one searches, there are instances where a particular soldier will always remain ‘unknown’.

 

In the next instalment of the blog I will cover the 119 Battery’s baptism of fire at the Battle of Mons and the subsequent retreat.  I will introduce more of the eleven men from the photograph who served with the Battery in these opening phases of the war and explain how the 119th won honour, glory and even the highest award for valour – but at great cost.

 

Posted in Life Stories, My Research | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Twisting the Dragon’s Tail: The St George’s Day Raids on Zeebrugge and Ostend

The ‘Vindictive’ at Zeebrugge: The storming of Zeebrugge Mole. Art.IWM ART 871

On 23 April 1918 British forces attacked Zeebrugge and Ostend, the two German-held ports which provided them with crucial access to the sea from the inland docks at Bruges. Once through the Channel and out into the Atlantic German vessels could prove deadly to Allied merchant shipping, which this operation aimed to stop. To mark 100 years since these actions, Trevor Torkington shares the story of the raids and highlights the bravery of those who won a Victoria Cross for their contributions.

 

  • The raids

The aim of the attacks was to sink old, obsolete Royal Navy vessels as blockships thereby denying German destroyers, torpedo boats and U-boats access to the English Channel. The strategic success of the operation is disputed, because smaller German craft could still get through the blockade at Zeebrugge and for a variety of reasons the raid on Ostend was not successful – a second attempt was made in May 1918.  Nevertheless, the bravery of all those who took part was celebrated then as it is now. The British troops were all volunteers and had been told to expect heavy casualties before the raid, with some being told it was virtually a suicide mission. As expected, the fighting was ferocious with over 600 Allied casualties compared to just 24 reported by the Germans.

 

Aerial view of the blockships at Zeebrugge after the raid. IWM Q 20648B

 

  • Victoria Crosses

As a result of the raid eight Victoria Crosses were awarded, four of which were made for individual acts of heroism: Lieutenant Richard Douglas Sandford, Lieutenant Percy Thompson Dean, Lieutenant-Commander George Nicholson Bradford and Lieutenant-Commander Arthur Leyland Harrison (the awards for the latter two individuals were made posthumously).

The other four awards were all made under a special provision in the warrant which established the creation of the Victoria Cross: Clause 13. This clause allowed, in circumstances where ‘a gallant and daring act’ was performed by a large body of troops, for officers and men to select by ballot who they thought deserved the award. It was in these circumstances that Commander Alfred Francis Blakeney Carpenter; Captain Edward Bamford DSO; Sergeant Norman Augustus Finch; and Able Seaman Albert Edward McKenzie were awarded their VCs.

More information on these eight individuals is available on this Lives of the First World War Community. All the stories of the eight VCs deserve telling but one that particularly stands out for me is that of George Nicholson Bradford, who died on his 31st birthday.

 

Lieutenant Commander George Nicholson Bradford. IWM VC 117

 

  • George Nicholson Bradford

George Nicholson Bradford was born on 23 April 1887 in County Durham. The son of a colliery manager, he joined the Navy as a cadet around 1900 and was promoted to Sub Lieutenant in 1907. He was a keen boxer and was at one time the Navy’s welter-weight champion, his boxing prowess being noted on his service record in May 1916.  He was promoted to Lieutenant in 1909 as a result of his bravery in rescuing a boy from the trawler ‘Halcyon’ which had been rammed in the dark by HMS Doon. In charge of a rescue boat from HMS Chelmer he jumped aboard the trawler when it was discovered that someone was still missing. The trawler was close to sinking but he emerged from the hold carrying the unconscious boy with only minutes to spare.

By the time of the Zeebrugge raid he was a Lieutenant Commander in charge of naval storming party ‘D’ on HMS Iris II (a converted Mersey ferry). They were to storm gun emplacements on the Zeebrugge Mole, a massive breakwater protecting the harbour. The crew of the Iris had trouble placing parapet anchors to secure the ship so that scaling ladders could be used to disembark. Despite not being his job, George climbed up on a derrick which carried one of the anchors and jumped onto the Mole with it. He hooked it into position but almost immediately was hit by machine gun fire and fell into the sea.

 Without a moment’s hesitation he went to certain death

The end of his Victoria Cross citation states that his “action was one of absolute self-sacrifice; without a moment’s hesitation he went to certain death, recognising that in such an action lay the only possible chance of securing Iris II and enabling her storming parties to land”.

Roll of honour memorial plaque to the officers and men of the Iris, including George Bradford VC. IWM FEQ 91

George’s body was eventually recovered and buried at the Blankenberge Town Cemetery in Belgium. His mother went to collect the Victoria Cross from King George V in April 1919 – a trip she had made on more than one occasion, to collect medals for her other deceased sons. Four Bradford Brothers had fought in the war – only one survived – and the youngest, Roland, was also a recipient of the Victoria Cross.

 

  • Remembering Zeebrugge and Ostend

Today we pay tribute to all those involved in actions which, in the words of VC recipient Alfred Carpenter, gave “the dragon’s tail a damned good twist”. To commemorate the centenary of the raid, all eight Victoria Crosses from Zeebrugge, plus three VCs from the second Ostend operation, have been brought together for an exhibition at Bruges’ historic Provincial Hall.

 

Posted in Life Stories, My Research | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

“Our Gallant and Worthy Foe” – laying the Red Baron to rest

The remains of Manfred von Richthofen’s wrecked Fokker Triplane and his two Spandau machine-guns. Bertangles, 22 April 1918. Salved by No. 3 Squadron, Australian Flying Corps. IWM Q 10924

Our previous blog post looked at the career of the Red Baron, Manfred von Richthofen, and the stories of some of those who he shot down. The day after his death on 21 April 1918, he was buried with full military honours. In the final part of Trevor Torkington’s guest blog post, we focus on the men who played a part on the day.

 

Cross over the original grave of von Richthofen at Bertangles, made from the boss of a propeller and featuring a metal plate made by Harold Edwards.  IWM Q 8150

 

  • Preparing for the funeral

After being shot down, Von Richthofen’s body and wrecked plane (subsequently stripped by trophy hunters) were recovered from the field and transported to Poulainville, the base of 3 Squadron Australian Flying Corps. Here, his body was cleaned, photographed and medically examined and then placed under guard until the funeral. One of the men detailed to guard the Baron was Air Mechanic 2nd Class Harold Edwards.

Harold had been keen to join up but his father was reluctant to let him go after Harold’s brother Benjamin was killed at Gallipoli. He eventually enlisted in the Australian Flying Corps and sailed for England on his 21st birthday.

As well as guarding the body, Harold, a watchmaker before the war, also made and engraved (in English and German) the plaque for von Richthofen’s cross. Harold Edwards lived until the age of 102, and was the last of the Australian Flying Corps who fought in the First World War.

 

RAF Chaplain George Herbert Marshall leads the funeral procession. IWM Q 10918

 

  • Conducting the service

In the late afternoon of 22 April 1918 von Richthofen’s body was placed on a Crossley Tender and taken to Bertangles Communal Cemetery. The procession was led by Chaplain to the Forces 4th Class George Herbert Marshall. Marshall was attached to 101 Squadron, stationed at Bertangles and as von Richthofen was a Protestant, Marshall was the nearest Church of England Chaplain who could officiate. After the ceremony, officers from 3 Squadron gave him a cylinder from von Richthofen’s engine as a souvenir which he kept in a tin box. When he returned to the army in the Second World War he had to leave his Vicarage, and donated the cylinder to the War Effort Scrap Drive.

 

Four of the six pallbearers L-R: Lieutenant Thomas Leigh Simpson, Second Lieutenant Malcolm Sheehan, Lieutenant Frank Jelly Mart, and Lieutenant George Pickering. IWM Q 10923

 

  • Fellow airmen as pallbearers

Six officers of 3 Squadron acted as pallbearers, two of whom were cousins – Lieutenant Thomas Leigh Simpson and Captain John Robertson Duigan. Duigan was a pioneer of Australian flight – he was the first Australian to design, build and fly an aeroplane. He was awarded the Military Cross for gallantry in action when his RE8 (or ‘Harry Tate’ as they were known colloquially) fought off four German Fokker Triplanes in May 1918. His cousin, Simpson, had been in combat with von Richthofen the previous day, flying a photographic reconnaissance mission in a Royal Aircraft Factory RE8. He had managed to withstand the attack until Sopwith Camels from 209 Squadron came to his aid. When he returned to base he received the news that von Richthofen had been killed.

Simpson was later awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross for his reconnaissance work. All the pallbearers survived the war but one, Lieutenant George Pickering, was a victim of the flu pandemic and died on 21 November 1918. He is buried at the Cemetery of London, Manor Park in Essex.

 

  • Military salute

After the coffin had been placed in the ground by the pallbearers, an honour guard from 3 Squadron’s other ranks fired a salute over von Richthofen’s grave. Sergeant Vincent ‘Vin Blanc’ Smith was in charge of the honour guard. Born in a Melbourne suburb in 1890, Smith joined the Australian Flying Corps in March 1916. He was quickly promoted to Sergeant and was awarded the Meritorious Service Medal for rescuing a pilot from a blazing crash in which he himself was burned.

 

Australians firing a volley at the graveside. IWM Q 10921

 

As well as these incredible photographs, the funeral service was captured on film, which can be viewed on the IWM website. On 23 April 1918 a British pilot flew low over Richthofen’s base at Cappy and threw down a metal container attached to a streamer. Inside was a photograph of the funeral and a message:

To the German Flying Corps

Rittmeister Baron Manfred von Richthofen was killed in aerial combat on April 21, 1918. He was buried with full military honours.

From the British Royal Air Force

 

The von Richthofen family grave in the South Cemetery, Wiesbaden. Image by Richard Croft, licensed under Creative Commons

 

  • Final Resting Place

The Baron was not to be left in peace. After the funeral his grave was desecrated by French civilians who believed, mistakenly, that the Baron had carried out a night time bombing of the area shortly before his death. After the war, his body was moved to a large German cemetery at Fricourt and moved again, in 1925 at the request of the Baron’s mother. She wanted him buried at Schweidnitz alongside his father and brother but instead a formal state funeral was organised and his remains were buried in the Invalidenfriedhof cemetery in Berlin. When East Germany began to consolidate its border in 1976 his body was moved again to a family plot in Wiesbaden in Western Germany. He rests there now, the man who allied pilots called “our gallant and worthy foe”.

 

Posted in Life Stories, My Research | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments