Romanian Campaign 1916-18

This booklet is a reprint by the Naval and Military Press of Major-General Kirke's 1924 article in the Journal of the Royal United Service Institution. They are discounting WW1 books by 25% this weekend. You would rarely get away with writing such a long article in a journal today! Somewhat embarrassingly, when I started to read it, it seemed familiar. No, I wasn't around in 1924, but I do have a 1997 reprint by Pallas Armata. This imprint was a labour of love by Gareth Simon who brought many of these fascinating articles back into circulation.

This booklet is valuable because very little has been written about these campaigns. Michael Barrett wrote a decent book on the 1916 campaign, and even Kirke's article ends before the final battles of the war, including the Romanian defensive victory at Mărăști.

Romania remained neutral until 1916, when it joined the war on the side of the Entente. They launched an offensive into Transylvania which was initially successful until Germany counterattacked under Field Marshal August von Mackensen and General Erich von Falkenhayn, halting the Romanian advance. Mackensen then led a joint German-Bulgarian-Ottoman army from the south in September 1916, invading Dobruja (southeastern Romania). Meanwhile, Falkenhayn’s forces attacked from Transylvania into Wallachia. The Romanian army, poorly equipped and lacking coordination, suffered heavy defeats. Bucharest fell on December 6, 1916.

This is where the article ends, but it includes a detailed description of the tough fighting the Carpathian Mountains, with decent maps. He also gives a balanced analysis of both sides and the challenges they faced. The Romanians had not learned the lessons from the early stages of the war and were short of modern equipment and crucially ammunition. Attacking Transylvania made sense politically, but strategically it stretched the Romanian army too far. The Russians continually advised them to shorten their lines.

In 1917, with Russian help, Romania rebuilt its army and fought heroically in the battles of Mărăști (July & August 1917) and Oituz (August 1917). These victories stopped the Central Powers’ advance and restored morale. The Russian revolution left Romania without Russian support and they were forced to sign an armistice. They rejoined the war in November 1918.

I visited the fine memorial and museum at Mărăști earlier this year.

I have German, Austrian and Russian figures for these campaigns. However, I don't know anyone who does Romanians, with their distinctive cap. You could probably get away with French troops in smaller scales as they also used the Adrian helmet. There are Romanian WW2 figures with a cap, which are not far out. This needs a bit more research.

Russian 28mm figures from my collection.

Serbia and the End of the Great War

 This book, published by the Historical Museum of Serbia, covers the latter part of Serbia's role in the First World War, after the retreat through Albania and the recovery on Corfu. It appears to have been a limited print run and not widely available. I picked up a copy in a shop attached to the Serbian war museum in Corfu Town.

There are not many books in English dedicated to Serbia in WW1, with Dusan Babac's Serbian Army in the Great War being my usual starting point. This book is in English and Serbian. The text is not that gripping, being largely limited to reproductions of official texts, timelines and pen portraits of the leading personalities. However, it does have a wide range of photographs, many of which I haven't seen before. It also touches on some aspects of war that are rarely mentioned.

One of those is Serbia under occupation. All the occupying powers adopted a denationalisation programme, although the Bulgarians applied it more radically. The Austro-Hungarians applied the Latin alphabet, but the Bulgarians detained and even executed Serbs who used their language, names, books and even folk costumes. Both powers ruthlessly exploited the country economically, bringing the population to the brink of starvation. With the fighting-age population much reduced by the war and the Serbian armies in Macedonia, uprisings were more challenging than in WW2. The most famous is the Toplica Uprising in February 1917, which resulted in around 20,000 victims of the counter-insurgency operation. 

The book also covers Serbian units that served outside the Balkans. These included the Serbian Volunteer Corps, recruited from Austro-Hungarian PoWs. This was eventually transported to the Macedonian Front. Some Serbs ended up in the Czechoslovak Legion during the Russian Civil War, and others fought for the Bolsheviks in the First Serbian Revolutionary Battalion and the Serbian-Soviet Battalion. Several other detachments fought with the Red Army. Sadly, no pictures of these units, which would make an interesting addition to the Red Army on the tabletop.

Serbian refugees found shelter across Europe. Britain received 400 students, who settled in cities across the country, including Edinburgh, Dundee and Aberdeen. France took in 17,000 refugees, and many ended up in French colonies.

There are better books on the Serbian contribution to the Macedonian Campaign, which was crucial to the Entente victory. However, there are some good pictures, if a little too heavy on the commanders rather than the army in the field. The post-war diplomacy that resulted in the creation of what would become Yugoslavia is covered in some detail, with a predictable Serbian slant! Objective history is rare in the Balkans!

Some of my 28mm Serbs

Central European Wars 1918–21

 I love obscure wars, and a new Osprey, Central European Wars 1918–21, by Philip Jowett, certainly hits the mark.

The hastily raised armies that emerged from the demise of the Habsburg Empire were soon fighting each other for control of territory and to defend their own borders. All these armies were desperately short of the necessities of war, including uniforms, equipment and weaponry. This book covers the scratch forces assembled by Romania, Hungary, Austria, Serbia, and Czechoslovakia. 

These were often short border wars, largely forgotten today. The Carinithian War started as a Slovene insurgency aimed at bringing the region into the new Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes, which was to become Serbian-dominated Yugoslavia. Serbian troops got involved in the fighting in April 1919 after an earlier ceasefire ended. As they launched the first of two offensives against the Austrians, the Entente powers intervened, and a plebiscite was held, which determined that the region would remain in Austria.

Romania invaded Hungary and even occupied Budapest, although the war aim was to secure Transylvania.  Hungary was itself engaged in a civil war between left and right-wing forces, with Admiral Horthy's White forces defeating the Communist Government. 

The Polish–Czechoslovak War was fought for just seven days over a region of southeastern Silesia on the border between the newly established states of Poland and Czechoslovakia. The disputed region had a mixed population of Czechs, Poles, Germans, Silesians and Jews, who lived in relative peace before 1919. Poland was preoccupied with a separate conflict with Ukraine, and the region was subsequently incorporated into Czechoslovakia.

The Czechoslovak Republic then addressed the disputed territories around its borders and claimed rights over Slovakia and Subcarpathian Ruthenia, which were part of Hungary. There were smaller conflicts in Burgenland, allocated to Austria. Most of these disputes arose from the provisions of the Treaty of Trianon, which largely remain the current boundaries of Hungary.

For wargamers with WW1 armies, these conflicts are relatively easy to replicate on the tabletop, aided by the colour plates in this book. The uniforms and equipment were essentially the same as in WW1, with changed unit names. French equipment was also commonplace. Some can be played as skirmish games, although the Hungarian wars involved large numbers of troops.

Some of my 28mm Austro-Hungarian figures

Serbian Army in Corfu

 I am in Corfu this week on a family holiday. Leaving my wife to enjoy the sea and sand, I headed for Corfu Town to visit the museum related to the Serbian Army's stay on Corfu in the First World War. 

The Serbian army's (plus many civilians) Great Retreat was a desperate journey through the mountains of Albania and Montenegro during the winter of 1915-1916, following the Central Powers' invasion of Serbia. During the journey, 77,455 soldiers, 47,000 prisoners of war and 160,000 civilians froze, starved to death, died of disease, or were killed by enemy action. Of the 400,000 people who set out, only 120,000 soldiers and 60,000 civilians reached the Adriatic coast, where they were evacuated by Allied ships to the island of Corfu.

Nearly 5,000 Serbian refugees, primarily women and children, were evacuated to Corsica. They were cared for by the Scottish Women's Military Hospital, established by Dr Elsie Inglis, who had been taken prisoner in Serbia. Young boys came to Edinburgh. A British nurse, Flora Sandes, enrolled in the Serbian Army during the retreat and was later wounded in action after reaching the rank of Sergeant Major.

Approximately 152,000 Serbian troops, equipped by the French, played a decisive role in the final Allied offensives, significantly contributing to the breakthrough on the Macedonian (Salonika) front and the liberation of Serbia.

This is all remembered in a small museum in Corfu Town. They have uniforms, equipment, and information boards, supported by knowledgeable volunteers. 

This is an example of a French-equipped Serbian infantryman.

Another Brit not forgotten is Rear-Admiral Troubridge. He commanded the Danube Flotilla and accompanied the Great Retreat. He then assisted in evacuating the army from Albanian ports.

Most of the soldiers were initially treated on the Island of Vido, just off the coast. Many died, but the Allied medical services eventually managed to get organised. There is a mausoleum on the island today.

There are a couple of Serbian shops near the museum, with books and other items. Needless to say, I will not be returning to Scotland empty-handed!

As I usually do on my trips abroad, I also visited the CWGC cemetery. The graves include some of the unluckiest sailors in the Royal Navy. Crew of the destroyers HMS Saumurez and Voltage, which were mined in the Corfu channel in 1946. There is also a nicely renovated grave of Private John Connors, who won a VC in the Crimean War.

P.S.

I later managed a trip out to Vido Island to visit the Serbian Mausoleum. It is a tranquil spot, beautifully maintained. It is a fitting memorial to the thousands who died there.

Gallipoli: Leading the Immortals

 I was in Leeds today attending the launch conference for an English translation of Hüseyin Avni Bey's story of the Ottoman 57th Regiment at Gallipoli. It is a beautifully produced hardback book, featuring numerous colour illustrations and maps.

The theme of the conference presentations reflected the book, This is a study of the other side of the hill. Most Gallipoli books focus on the failures of the British and Anzac commanders, and there were many. They tend to downplay the outstanding performance of the Ottoman troops. I was made aware of this through an excellent paper written by Ed Erickson in 2001, Strength against Weakness: Ottoman Military Effectiveness at Gallipoli 1915 (Journal of Military History, https://doi.org/10.2307/2677626). He highlighted that the Ottoman divisions on Gallipoli were among the best available, and they had well-fortified positions. They were also well led, and not just by Mustafa Kemal. The III Corps commander, Esat Pasha, was also outstanding. 

At the conference, Paul Knight covered the 127th Manchester Brigade at Krithai. Coincidentally, I had walked the area of their initial camp in Rochdale the evening before. Their attack on the Turkish positions was successful, although they had to withdraw because the attacks on both flanks failed. I had thought the British 29th Division on the left of their attack was one of the better British divisions at Gallipoli. However, while the battalions were regulars, they were scraped together from across the Empire, and the attached artillery were territorials. Crucially, they never trained together. Paul did highlight the detailed orders and the effective tactic of leaving a ten-minute gap after the first shelling to encourage the Turks to emerge from their dugouts, while a second barrage caught them. There were armoured cars at Helles in case of a breakout.

Peter Hart covered the Anzac landings, and it was fortunate that no Australians were in the audience! He argued that there was no prospect of success and that the lead brigade commander dug in on the second ridge too soon. Even if they had taken the third ridge, the Ottomans would still hold the high ground. There was an interesting discussion on Ottoman tactics. Contrary to some of the myths, the Anzacs faced very light opposition when they landed. Just a covering force; a trip wire to warn the Ottomans as to where to deploy their reserves. 

Two of the speakers argued that the Ottomans should have deployed closer to the landing beaches. I am not convinced. The Ottoman III Corps would have been very stretched if they did that, leaving insufficient reserves to hold the crucial high ground. A study of the fighting at Gallipoli during the Balkan Wars is essential here, as Erickson highlights. John Wilson finished the conference talking about the Ottoman defences and the role of Avni Bey's 57th Regiment.

I am looking forward to reading this book, and it was an interesting conference. I learned several new details about the campaign.

When in Leeds, it would be rude not to pop into the Royal Armouries.

Pavia

Mughal War Elephant

Back to God's own county, Lancashire, this evening, and my first cricket of the season tomorrow at Old Trafford - weather permitting!

Gallipoli Sniper

 As if I haven't got enough books about Gallipoli, Dave Lanchester's stall at Carronade enticed me to buy John Hamilton's book about Billy Sing, the Anzac Angel of Death.

Billy Sing served in the Australian 5th Light Horse, a singularly inappropriate unit to send to Gallipoli! Needless to say, they left their horses back in Egypt. The primary sources about Billy Sing are limited, so this book does give a lot of context about the Gallipoli campaign, and sniping in particular. Over 33,500 British Empire troops died on this strip of land in modern Turkey next to the Dardanelles, along with 15,000 French and 87,000 Ottoman troops. More staggering is that the 324,000 Australians who served in WW1 were all volunteers, and 61,829 died, and 157,156 were wounded. All from a total population of less than five million. 

Billy Sing was not a typical Australian volunteer. He was half Chinese at a time when Chinese immigrants faced discriminatory legislation and were deemed unfit for anything other than non-combatant roles. The White Australia Policy was not quite Apartheid, but wasn't far off. Billy was a stockman who could ride and was a skilled marksman, having competed in numerous competitions. It appears that a sympathetic doctor, who had watched him play cricket, turned a blind eye to his ancestry and passed him to join the light horse. Others were not so fortunate and received a certificate with the designation, 'not substantially of European origin'.

When the 5th Light Horse arrived at Gallipoli, Ottoman snipers were picking off the inexperienced troops, including many senior officers. The ranges were close, a few hundred yards, well within the range of standard rifles. The descriptions of the fighting are pretty brutal, along with the appalling conditions the soldiers lived in. The author is a former journalist, and he describes just one Ottoman attack in which 10,000 men were casualties, with the line, 'the sweet nauseating smell of decaying flesh spread like a cloying fog over Gallipoli.'

Billy Sing was one of a team of initially 70 marksmen selected to counter the Ottoman snipers, 'hunting the hunters'. They used the standard Lee-Enfield rifle, but adapted it with homemade periscopes, which were later adopted by the Anzac workshops. The Ottomans sent trench raids to capture some, but the copies made in the Constantinople workshops frequently broke down. They also adapted the sights, strictly against regulations, but most officers recognised it worked. Snipers operated in teams of two with a spotter and managed to gain an ascendancy in this grim struggle. The patience Billy developed while hunting in the bush as a child came in handy in this grim task. They often operated behind camouflaged steel screens, while the equivalent Ottoman ones were made of brick.

The Ottoman equivalent of Billy was nicknamed Abdul the Terrible; aside from an interwar series of sensationalist books by Jack Idress, the evidence appears somewhat limited. Billy was Mentioned in Despatches (later awarded the DCM), having accounted for 201 casualties, although the final tally was probably closer to 300. He survived Gallipoli and a later spell on the Western Front, not without wounds. He married in Edinburgh and later returned (without his wife) to relative obscurity in Australia. He died alone in 1943. 

There is a lot of padding in this book, although it is still a good read, about a remarkable soldier. Happily, now properly remembered in the Australian War Museum.

I have walked over the Anzac and other positions on Gallipoli, a pilgrimage still made by many Australians to this day. You are left with the question: why didn't they just embark and land somewhere else?

The Campaign in Gallipoli

 As if I need more books on Gallipoli, this was my thought when faced with more at the Gallipoli Association's stall at the Battleground show. However, I relented for this memoir written by a German officer, Hans Kannengiesser. He was among the German advisors to the Ottoman Empire when the First World War broke out. Not simply as a liaison officer with the Ottoman Army, he commanded Ottoman troops in the field, including the Ottoman 9th Division.

This book gives readers a different perspective on the Gallipoli campaign fought between April 1915 and January 1916. Allied forces, primarily from Britain, Australia, New Zealand, and France, attempted to secure the Gallipoli Peninsula in modern-day Turkey. The goal was to open up a sea route to Russia via the Dardanelles Strait and weaken the Ottoman Empire, a Central Powers ally. The campaign could have been better planned and executed, facing fierce Ottoman resistance and challenging terrain. It resulted in heavy casualties on both sides, over 250,000 for the Allies, and ultimately ended in a costly and humiliating Allied withdrawal.

The author was working with the Ottoman Army when war broke out, and he describes early efforts to strengthen defences on the Gallipoli Peninsula. If you are unfamiliar with the campaign, he covers all the salient points. However, the strength of this memoir is his observations on the Ottoman forces he not only advised but also led.

I have toured this battlefield, hiring a car in Istanbul, so I hadn't appreciated how poor the lines of communication were. He describes the best route as being by sea, although even warships were attacked and sunk by British submarines. The language barrier was challenging, and he often relied on inadequate translators. Not unlike much later NATO officers, it didn't occur to him to at least learn some Turkish! I'm feeling righteous, having just finished a 100-day streak on Duolingo 😁.

I hadn't appreciated how limited ammunition was, which would have reduced Allied casualties given the modest area they occupied. He also tackled the communication and coordination of Ottoman batteries. Relations with Ottoman commanders were mixed. Some ignored him when in an advisory role, but there were fewer difficulties when he directly commanded Ottoman formations. Heat and disease were constant challenges, not just for the German troops. Scurvy broke out in three battalions he commanded due to the unchanging rations and the lack of vitamins. 

The Ottomans also had a prodigious bureaucracy. Regiments and divisions had to render strength reports every 14 days, which contained 458 columns to be filled in. He complained that methods of correspondence 'were most ceremonious'. 

His personal description of the battle was interrupted when he was wounded by a machine gun bullet to the chest by the New Zealanders. On 7 September, he had recovered enough to return to the front. This is a classic 'The Other Side of the Hill' study, which has been helpfully edited by John Wilson into a very readable study.

Some of my 28mm Ottoman and British WW1 troops.

The Gallipoli Oak

 I was in Manchester last week, and in between the cricket and the football, I visited a few museums, including a return to the Lancashire Fusiliers Museum in Bury. My last visit was rushed, so it was an opportunity to savour this fine regimental museum. I picked up a copy Of Martin Purdy and Ian Dawson's book The Gallipoli Oak in the shop. 

In the Spring of 1922, the parents of a teenager killed at Gallipoli took the sapling of an English oak tree in a bucket of water to Gallipoli. One hundred years on, the sapling has grown into an enduring memorial to the sacrifices of hundreds of men from a close-knit group of old Lancashire mill towns.

This is the hook for the story of the 6th Battalion of the Lancashire Fusiliers. This territorial battalion had its baptism of fire at Gallipoli. The professional soldiers of the 1st Battalion are probably better known because of their landing on 'W Beach' near Cape Helles. The battalion was to win six Victoria Crosses before breakfast as they gained control of this beachhead at a huge cost. I have visited what is now known as the 'Lancashire Landing' in their honour, and it is hard to imagine a more challenging place for an amphibious landing.

The 6th Battalion's territorial's had sailed from Britain to Egypt before sailing to Gallipoli. They landed at night and took their place in the trenches. They were almost immediately thrown into a major assault with the 42nd East Lancashire Division as part of the Second Battle of Krithia. Like so many operations in this campaign, the planning was poor, and the Battalion suffered severely, with around one-third becoming casualties. When the news reached home, the postie had to deliver the news to each family. The local newspaper editor recalled seeing a postman sitting on the kerb sobbing.

With few lessons learned, the Battalion participated in a diversionary attack during the Third Battle of Krithia, losing more men even in a supporting role. Lord Rochdale, the regimental colonel, was particularly scathing about the role of staff officers who failed to understand the conditions on the ground. Even in between the major assaults, the battalion lost six wounded and two killed every day.

The battalion had one short break during the campaign and was eventually evacuated in the only competently managed operation of the whole campaign. They went on to serve in France.

The story is well told, using private papers to add to the operational details. This isn't a cheerful tale, but it is a valuable addition to the extensive literature on the Gallipoli campaign.

Some of my 28mm early WW1 figures.

A Nasty Little War

This is Anna Reid's new book, looking at the West's fight to reverse the Russian revolution. The Allied interventions in support of a mixed bag of White warlords were undoubtedly nasty, but it wasn't that little. Some 180,000 allied troops from 16 countries participated, with varying degrees of enthusiasm. The conflicts ranged from the far north to Siberia, the Black Sea and Poland. 

The nastiest element, which clearly shocked the author, was the consistent antisemitism. The White armies often spent more time carrying out pogroms than they did fighting the Bolsheviks. But what surprised the author was the frequent antisemitic jibes in the diaries of British officers. British officials and government ministers, including Churchill, at best, turned a blind eye to the atrocities that probably killed up to 200,000 Jews. General Holman, commanding the British military mission, was 'obsessed by the idea of wiping out the Jews everywhere, and can talk of little else'.

Churchill's hatred of the Bolsheviks drove British policy until Lloyd George and the rest of the cabinet eventually had enough. When the PM was considering recognising the new regime, Churchill burst into his hotel room saying, 'One might as well legalise sodomy'. There was also resistance at home, with dockers refusing to load aid convoys to the Whites. What aid that did arrive was often stolen by corrupt officers. Admiral Kolchak fled Omsk in seven trains, six for his mistress and staff and another for £65m of gold bullion.

The early focus was on securing ports to bring in supplies. Murmansk in the north and Vladivostock in the east. PoWs were used to construct a rail link to Murmansk, killing 25,000 of them in the process. All were supervised by the British commander. The British army guide was a gem of colonial attitudes, advising troops to treat the Russians as children. The Americans brought somewhat more enlightened views, but also the Spanish flu, which killed countless more civilians.

The author takes us through each theatre of operations. The Whites had some success in the South, but it didn't last. The Bolsheviks had the advantage of interior lines, which allowed Trotsky to shift troops from one theatre to another. The Whites had no common ideology other than antisemitism and failed to coordinate their operations.

When the allies eventually pulled the plug, the permanent secretary to the Foreign Office added a note to the file, 'So ends a not very creditable enterprise, to which Lord Curzon crossed out 'not very' and substituted 'highly dis'. Unsurprisingly, no official histories of the conflict, campaign medals or monuments exist. It was all quickly forgotten. Anna Reid has done a great job reminding us of this great folly.

Zeebrugge 1918: The Greatest Raid of All

 I came across the Zeebrugge raid in my research for the Ambuscade book and the role of the Dover Patrol in WW1. While HMS Ambuscade didn't participate, I made a mental note to look further. At the York show, I picked up this book by Christopher Sandford on the subject from Dave Lanchester.

When we think of raids on occupied Europe, we gravitate to WW2 and the commandos. However, the Zeebrugge raid of April 1918 had many elements we would see in the later conflict and some of the same personalities.

The raid was a British-led naval operation aimed at blocking the German-held port of Bruges-Zeebrugge in Belgium. The port was a significant base for German U-boats that were wreaking havoc on Allied shipping, sinking two Allied ships a day on average. The raid involved a daring attempt to sink old ships at the harbour's entrance, blocking access to German submarines. The plan involved three old cruisers, HMS Thetis, HMS Intrepid, and HMS Iphigenia, packed with explosives and scuttled into the harbour entrance. Simultaneously, a diversionary attack was launched on the nearby port of Ostend to draw German forces away from Zeebrugge.

Sandford starts with the strategic background in the last year of the war. Zeebrugge was home to a force of 36 U-boats, which were causing heavy casualties to allied merchant shipping, despite the best efforts of the Dover Patrol to contain them, sinking six U-boats a month in the early months of 1918. Bombing the port wasn't an option because aircraft couldn't carry a heavy enough payload, and attempts to advance on land up the coast had failed. 

The defences of Zeebrugge were considerable. 232 guns protected the harbour, plus 128 machine gun nests, searchlights, and a garrison of around 700 men. Sea access was heavily mined, and heavy silt created natural defences. Sandford takes us through the options that the commander, Roger Keyes, considered and eventually got approval for. Back in the government, Churchill was also an enthusiastic supporter of the raid. He would recall Keyes to be the first Director of Combined Operations in June 1940.

Most of the book focuses on the raid itself in graphic detail, with many descriptions of outstanding bravery. Six VCs were awarded, some by unit ballot. This wasn't a clean commando raid, silent and violent. The cruiser, HMS Vindictive, carried most of the landing force of seamen and marines onto the mole. They suffered staggering casualties, yet amazingly, the ship managed to sail away. The mole itself probably saved the ship from a critical lower hit, but the superstructure was wrecked. 

Despite heavy casualties and the partial failure of some elements of the operation, the raid was ultimately considered a strategic success by the Royal Navy. While the harbour wasn't permanently sealed, it was sufficiently obstructed to disrupt U-boat operations temporarily and force the Germans to deploy additional resources to clear the blockage. Others regarded the achievements as modest for such casualties. Admiral Fisher was one critic, quoted as saying, 'No such folly was ever devised by fools as that at Zeebrugge.' If it was a failure, it was a classic British 'honourable' failure, which certainly raised morale at an important period in the war.

Although I am not beyond a bit of harbour building on the wargame table, Zeebrugge is beyond me. However, I have started a modest WW1 naval force and plan to refight some Dover Patrol actions. 

Next week, I am off to London for naval archival research at Greenwich and Kew. That may provide some further inspiration!

British Destroyers 1892-1918

 This book is by Jim Crossley in the Osprey New Vanguard series, looks at the development of Royal Navy destroyers in the period up to the First World War. This is a period of naval warfare I know little about and is an introduction to my HMS Ambuscade project.

HMS Ambuscade, in this period, was an Acasta-class destroyer. This appears to be a step up from the previous frigate status, although destroyers were only introduced into the world's navies in the 1880s. However, everything is relative because the HMS Ambuscade we are planning to bring back to the Clyde is a Type 21 frigate and is over 100 feet longer than the WW1 Ambuscade. The size of a modern frigate was brought home to me when I visited Portsmouth in the summer. HMS Iron Duke was in port, and I was astonished to discover this large warship was a frigate.

Destroyers in this period were developed in reaction to the torpedo menace. Here, a bit of Balkan history slips in because the Imperial Russian Navy were one of the first to launch torpedoes at the Ottoman Navy in 1878, sinking a small gunboat. The Royal Navy called their early vessels Torpedo-Boat Destroyers until 1919. The early classes were small ships able to sneak into harbours and launch torpedoes at short range. The development of the 18-inch and then 21-inch torpedoes meant the destroyer could be used with the battlefleets at sea. In theory, attacking at up to 10,000 yards, although in practice, there was little chance of hitting anything at that range.

As the type developed, they got bigger, with the Tribal class at up to 290ft long, setting the standard for future generations of destroyers. Still a lot smaller than modern frigates. The Acasta class was renamed K-Class in 1912 before HMS Ambuscade was launched in January 1913. These ships were 267ft long armed with three 4in guns, one 2pdr gun and two 21in torpedoes. They had a speed of 31 knots. The Royal Navy gave their destroyers a powerful gun armament, which paid off in actions against German destroyers who relied heavily on torpedoes. 

Tactically, the challenge for a destroyer serving with the fleet was to get close enough to the larger enemy ships without being blown out of the water. There were two options. Steer towards the last shell or turn violently when you see the enemy gun flash. German battlecruisers were also well protected against torpedoes, even if you could hit one in battle conditions. The British fired 96 at Jutland and scored six hits. One of those came from HMS Ambuscade. I had thought boarding actions were consigned to the Napoleonic wars, but the author describes a Dover Patrol action when HMS Swift rammed a German ship, and a boarding action commenced.

In conclusion, destroyers made an important contribution to the development of the Royal Navy, but it did not end the era of the big-gun warship as the Germans had hoped. This book has all the technical specifications, lovely colour plates, and plenty of illustrations. All you need for an introduction to the period.

I managed to get this postcard in the Rotary Photo series recently. On the left is George V, and on the right is Admiral Jellicoe.

Anzac Soldier v Ottoman Soldier

 This new book by Si Sheppard in the Osprey Combat series looks at the Gallipoli and Palestine campaigns of WW1. 

My immediate reaction to this was not another book on Gallipoli. My bookcase already groans with them, and this is a rare example of the Turkish archives being much more open. I picked up some detailed studies based on them during my last visit to Turkey. I am less familiar with the Palestine campaign, although Rob Johnson's book, The Great War and the Middle East (2016) is very good. So, the first question is what is there that the general reader might find that is new?

Well, the context chapter has an excellent map, something often missed out in other studies, which highlights the ambiguous Ottoman strategic objectives in declaring war. Nationalism and modernisation seem a poor reason for war. However, as the conflict proceeded, the Ottomans had to defend their territorial integrity, face down the Arab Revolt, and opportunistically go for some pan-Turanism expansion on the Russian front.  

There is a substantial chapter on the two sides with some nice colour plates. A reminder that Australia had a volunteer army that included a staggering 416,809 men enlisting out of a population of fewer than five million. There were 98,850 men from New Zealand – 79,302 volunteers and 19,548 conscripts – from a pool of approximately 250,000 men of eligible age in 1914. This may partly explain Australian attitudes to uniforms, equipment and discipline. Five times more Australian troops were behind bars than other Empire troops!

A key problem for the Ottomans that I had not fully appreciated was the logistical challenge. For example, enlisted men were required to bring their own uniforms (or at least appropriate clothes that could serve the function of uniforms) and good shoes. According to a report by the commander of the 17th Division, more than half of the troops were still wearing civilian clothes even as late as mid-1915. By September 1918, rations had declined to 125g of bread and beans in three meals. In contrast, they were trendsetters in organisation, introducing the triangular division before others. However, attempts to copy German small unit tactics often resulted in expensive bayonet charges, not least because they lacked the educated NCOs vital to the German tactics.

The bulk of the book covers three battles; Lone Pine and Chunuk Bair at Gallipoli, and Beersheba in Palestine. While these are well-written and nicely illustrated chapters, they don't offer much that is new. Inönü is often criticised, as he was by the Germans, for his handling of Ottoman III Corps in the battle. However, this is a more balanced recognition that he held out until nightfall and extracted a significant proportion of his troops under great pressure. This battle included the famous cavalry charge by the Australian Light Horse, brilliantly portrayed in the film The Light Horsemen.

Overall, if you haven't read much about the Ottomans and ANZACs in WW1, this is a good introduction. For those who have, you will find some interesting snippets and fine illustrations. Osprey books are good value for money, so you may think it is worth it for that.

Some of my 28mm Turkish infantry.

The Forgotten Front: Macedonian Campaign 1915-18

 This is a new book by Jon Lewis on the Macedonian (often called the Salonica) Campaign of WW1. My bookcases already groan with books on this campaign, although most tend to focus on one aspect of the conflict. Under the Devil’s Eye by Alan Wakefield and Simon Moody is the best book on the British contribution, and Balkan Breakthrough by Richard Hall covers the all-important final offensive. This study is a rare comprehensive look at the campaign, albeit from an Entente Powers perspective.

The Forgotten Front is a fair description of this campaign. The High Command on both sides regarded it as a sideshow and begrudged the men and materials to sustain it. Clemenceau famously called the troops 'The Gardeners of Salonica'. It started as a French initiative to assist Serbia, using troops freed from the failed Gallipoli Campaign. Unfortunately, despite a bold advance by French and British forces, it was too late to save Serbia, as their army trekked through Albania to be rebuilt on Corfu. 

The Central Powers decided to dig in along the Greek border in what is today North Macedonia to hold what they had captured rather than moving into Greece to capture the Entente base at Salonica. Greece had a pro-German King and a pro-Entente Prime Minister, and its troops formally entered the conflict later. In the meantime, the Entente line was held by British, French, Italian, Serbian and even Russian troops. The Bulgarians did the heavy lifting for the Central Powers, stiffened by German and Austrian units. The Turks held the Thracian end of the line, but that was the quietest part of the front.

The author takes the reader through the different stages of the campaign, from consolidation in 1916 to some limited offensives and finally to the 1918 offensive. He covers all aspects of the campaign, including the Zeppelin attacks on Salonica, the political tensions between the Allies and Greece, and the different commanders. The Italians in Albania are often ignored, but not here. The front line had elements of the Western Front trench warfare, but mountains were the dominant defensive features. The British banged their heads against formidable Bulgarian defences at Doiran, while the Struma front was more fluid. I have visited both of these battlefields, which have mostly stayed the same since 1916-18. 

The Bularian positions at Doiran.

The post of CinC was always a French general. For most of the campaign, it was Sarrail, but he was replaced by Guillaumat in 1918, who built the foundations for Franchet d'Espèrey, who devised the final offensive. The author rightly gives him credit for the victory while recognising that the Serbs did most of the fighting and dying. The Serbian Army, supported by French and Greek divisions, made the breakthrough at the Battle of Dobropolje. The exploitation of the victory saw the most significant advance on any WW1 front, knocking Bulgaria out of the war and making a massive contribution to the collapse of the Central Powers.

The importance of this campaign has been consistently ignored during and since the war's end. The Western Front commanders got all the plaudits. In Britain, the Salonica Campaign Society does a great job remembering those who fought there. This book rightly puts the campaign in its proper place. An excellent read as well.

I have all the armies in 28mm, adapting Bolt Action for the armies that fought here. A much more interesting tabletop experience than the Western Front.

Bulgarian Infantry

Tannenberg 1914

 This is the latest Osprey Campaign book covering the destruction of the Russian Second Army at Tannenberg in 1914 by Michael McNally. The naming of the battle as Tannenberg was a political decision, resonating with the defeat of the Teutonic Knights in 1410. But, that was simply a small village on a vast battlefield. 

Tannenberg was one of the opening battles of the war in the east, as the Germans attempted to defend East Prussia. The Russians had split their forces into two, the First and Second armies against the Germans in the north, and the Third, Fourth and Fifth armies against the Austro-Hungarians in the south.

As is usual with this series, you get some background to the campaign, followed by an outline of the opposing commanders. The Russian generals, Rennenkampf and Samsonov, had fallen out during the disastrous Russo-Japanese War, which did not bode well for cooperation in this campaign. The Germans later included von Hindenburg, the classic Prussian Junker, and his right-hand man Ludendorff. 

The Russian Second Army under Samsonov included five corps and two cavalry divisions. The First Army under Rennenkampf had four corps and four cavalry divisions. Each corps had two infantry divisions of two brigades, with two four-battalion regiments. The First Army would consist of some 176,000 infantry, 23,000 cavalry, 408 machine guns and 696 pieces of artillery. Samsonov’s Second Army consisted of 178,000 infantry, 18,000 cavalry, 384 machine guns and 636 artillery guns. All in all, the Russians would field a force of just under 400,000 men. A German corps was similar to its Russian counterpart. After transfers to the west, they had four corps in East Prussia. The book includes a detailed ORBAT.

The Russians operated from occupied Poland and Lithuania, which required troops to defend lines of communication. In contrast, the Germans were fighting on home soil. However, the German plan relied on knocking out the French, allowing troops to be redeployed to the east. The failure of the Schlieffen Plan in the west meant they would have to fight a two-front war.

The book gives a detailed account of the Russian invasion and how the Germans countered it. Understanding is helped through excellent maps in the Osprey style. The big picture is of Russian failure, but they fought well in several battles that constituted the overall campaign. It was the projected abandonment of East Prussia that led to Hindenburg and Ludendorff's appointment to command the German forces. For both sides, the initial clashes of the campaign in East Prussia would prove to be a sharp lesson in the realities of modern warfare. 

The outcome was an overwhelming German victory. From an initial strength of a little under 200,000 men, the Russian Second Army had lost an estimated 50,000 killed, 30,000 wounded and up to 90,000 prisoners, together with up to 500 pieces of artillery. Against this, the German records show 1,891 killed, 6,579 wounded and 4,588 missing from an initial strength of almost 155,000 effectives. 

After the campaign, the Germans recognised the need to reinforce the eastern front with two corps. This may have contributed to the German defeat on the Marne, but they helped the Germans defeat Rennenkamf at the Battle of the Masurian Lakes on 7-14 September. 

This book has all the details the wargamer needs to refight the battles on the tabletop. While there are some decent colour plates, you need the relevant Men-at-Arms titles to paint the units. Given the scale of the actions, Bloody Big Battles is a good rules option.

Some of my Russian 15mm figures of the period.

In Turkish Waters

 My holiday bedtime fiction reading has been 'In Turkish Waters' by Charles Whiting. This is one of a series featuring Common Smith VC and his Motor Torpedo Boat, HMS Swordfish. I have read a couple of his non-fiction books, and the subject title appealed.

The setting is 1922, at the height of the Greco-Turkish War. Smith is given a clandestine mission to sink two ex-British and French battleships being repaired in Istanbul. The 'wicked' Ataturk plans to use them to sink Greek ships carrying refugees fleeing Smyrna. This is to avoid the international opprobrium of massacring them on land, although why it would be any more acceptable to kill them at sea is not made clear.

The Swordfish, suitably civilianised, makes its way from the Humber through French canals, then to Greece and Alexandria. Before sneaking past the Dardanelles forts to attack the ships in the harbour. En-route they are attacked by Germans, Bolsheviks, Turks, and anyone else, it seems.

I regret to say few works of fiction have irritated me more than this book. Not only is the historical premise absurd, but even for historical fiction, the action scenes are ridiculous. Then there is the characterisation. The British are cartoon characters, two public school officer types, a rugged hard-drinking Scot and various working-class stereotypes. Their opponents are equally cartoonish, including the Bolshevik agents. 

But the most egregious characterisation is of the Turks and Kemal Ataturk in particular. The description of him is an offensive, racist stereotype, and every Turkish soldier is a sadist. It is implied that he was gay, which is unlikely given what we know of his personal and public life despite some Greek propaganda. He could be ruthless, but the language attributed to him is equally absurd. Then there is the failure to do any basic research. The most obvious is that his name wasn't Ataturk in 1922. He hadn't 'banished religion'. He hadn't even abolished the caliphate then or instituted his modernisation reforms. There is barely a page without similar inaccuracies. 

In summary, this book is not just awful; it's offensive nonsense. Its only redeeming feature is that it is short. So don't waste your money.

Armies in Southern Russia 1918-19

On the eleventh hour of the eleventh month every year, we commemorate the end of WW1. This new Osprey and others demonstrate that WW1 didn't really end in November 1918. Conflicts involving large armies continued for several years. In this example, Phoebus Athanassiou gives us an overview of the operations and armies that fought in the regions around the northern Black Sea coast in 1918-19. Specifically in Ukraine and Crimea.

The Bolshevik or Red armies included separate Ukrainian and Russian forces. The German occupation forces were leaving but still engaged in places. Against the Bolsheviks were the White forces led by Denikin, supported by intervention armies from France and Greece. This is large scale warfare with Denikin's armed forces totalling some 160,000 men, 600 artillery pieces and 34 armoured trains. The French were quickly bundled out of Crimea, not helped by a naval mutiny, which reflected the low morale of French forces. Probably more war fatigue than Bolshevik agitation. The Allies attempted to hold southern Ukraine cities including Nikolaev, Berezivka and finally Odessa. However, they were pushed back and either evacuated or moved to new defensive lines with Romanian and Polish troops in Bessarabia.

Around 12,000 French troops were committed to the campaign - 156th infantry division, part of the 30th division and the 16th Colonial Division. This meant Algerian, Senegalese and even Indochinese units served in General Berthelot's army. 

I had no idea that the Greeks sent an expeditionary force to the region, particularly given their commitments in Thrace and Anatolia. However, some 23,000 men were sent in two infantry divisions. (10th and 13th). Smaller numbers of Polish and Romanian troops also fought in the region, and were only interested in defending their own borders.

Denikin's army was large and diverse, although the French believed only about 25,000 could be described as operational. Former tsarist officers were fairly reliable but the mass of peasant conscripts were not. Having said that, his army performed much better after this campaign in the Russian Civil War. 

As you would expect from this Osprey series, the book is well illustrated with period photos and colour plates. If you like to wargame an obscure conflict, this book has everything you need.

These Greek Evzones in 28mm would work for this campaign.

The Turkish War of Independence: A Military History

 This is an operational history of the Turkish War of Independence 1919-23 by Ed Erickson. It completes a trilogy of books he has written on the Ottoman and Turkish armies in the early twentieth century covering the Balkan Wars, WW1 and now the Turkish War of Independence, often called the Greek-Turkish War.

Unlike the other excellent recent study of the conflict, Salvation and Catastrophe: The Greek-Turkish War, 1919-1922, this is a military history of the campaigns against the Greek invasion and the other lesser-known campaigns of the war. In fact, I found the chapters dealing with the campaigns against the French and Armenians some of the most interesting.

The book is organised chronologically, starting with the end of WW1and the creation of a Nationalist Army out of the remnants of the defeated Ottoman forces. Salvation and Catastrophe covers the political and diplomatic causes of the war in more detail while Erickson outlines these and cracks on with the Greek invasion and the First Inönü Campaign. This includes the less well-known campaign in Thrace, which successfully ejected Nationalist forces and brought the Greeks close to Istanbul. The narrative then shifts to the war against a wide range of insurgents and the Eastern Front campaigns against the short-lived Armenian Republic and the French occupation of Cicilia. Victory against Armenia led to a treaty with the Bolsheviks, and attacking the overstretched French forces caused them to withdraw to their mandates in Syria and Lebanon. The scale of the battles against the French was a surprise to me. For example, the French force at Gaziantepe totalled 13 infantry battalions and 15 artillery batteries. These victories allowed the Nationalists to shift troops and equipment to the main front against the advancing Greeks. 

The rest of the book takes us through the Greek advances in the Second Inönü campaign, which drew the Greek forces closer to the nationalist capital Ankara. However, Mustafa Kemal (Ataturk) was trading space for time and to stretch the Greek forces, which were simply inadequate for such a huge operation at a time when they were losing international support. The Great Offensive destroyed the Greek armies and forced the remnants to evacuate. This brought the Nationalists facing the British occupation forces guarding Istanbul and the Straits.  This resulted in an armistice followed by the Treaty of Lausanne and the establishment of the Turkish Republic.

While the trenches and barbed wire of WW1 were present, this was a war of manoeuvre in which cavalry played an important role. The larger Nationalist cavalry units were able to outflank the Greeks and interdict their supplies and command structures. During the Battle of Sakarya, the Nationalist cavalry even managed to attack the Greek field army HQ. This was war on a large scale, with armies of up to 200,000 men on each side. Casualties are difficult to assess, but Konstantinos Travlos has a go in Appendix A. The Greeks lost around one-third of their army dead and wounded (over 60,000), with many more taken prisoner. The Nationalists about half the Greek casualties. Civilian casualties were massive with atrocities on both sides, compounded by the population exchanges that followed. 

Erickson argues that the Great Offensive was one of the few successful examples of operational-level encirclements conducted before WW2. He ranks it with Tannenberg and Megiddo in this regard. Such an operation could only be delivered by highly trained staff officers who had been trained in the Ottoman war academy using doctrines learned from the Germans. Kemal, Fevzi and Inönü formed an effective command team, along with Karabekir on the eastern front. Railroads, the weather and the Anatolian geography all helped the nationalist victories.

This is an excellent operational history of the war or arguably wars. Each campaign is put into context, followed by the preparations, and each phase of the campaign is broken down into readable chunks. Then, finally, a conclusion which outlines the outcomes and the key lessons. The reader is left with a clear understanding of the war. Highly recommended.

I tried one of the lesser-known campaigns on the eastern front against the Armenian Republic for the tabletop. From the limited pictures, it seems that the Armenian army had a variety of uniforms and equipment. When you are struggling to arm your troops, nice uniforms are not a priority. So, some civilian dress and former Russian uniforms appear to have been the norm. I used my Russian figures of the period in 15mm, who look far too smart, but even for me, this is a project too far! 

My choice of rules for this period is Bloody Big Battles. The armies were not large. With irregular militias incorporated, the Armenian army was about 20,000 men, and the Karabekir's XV Corps had 15,811 men plus irregular formations. This is quite a small battle for Bloody Big Battles to handle. The Turks attacked the rather too spread out Armenian position by pinning their left and concentrating the attack on the right-wing. They fairly quickly outflanked the Armenian right and rolled up the line. A historical outcome!