The Guards and Kitchener's Army

[ubervamp]

Hi all

I've been reading up on Kitchener's Army and came across this on another forum:

"Considered by many to be the elite of the infantry of the regular army, the Guards had no battalions of the Territorial Force and raised none for Lord Kitchener's New Armies. In common with all other infantry regiments regiments they eventually took in both "duration only" volunteers and conscripts but the Guards took care to maintain their pre-war standards of efficiency and were amongst the infantry most feared by the enemy."

I don't mean to be obtuse, but isn't "they eventually took in both "duration only" volunteers and conscripts" the definition of how various regiments contributed to the New Army?
It might be just semantics, but can anyone tell me if the Guards took in "duration only" volunteers without creating new battalions?
And if they did create new battalions, why would they not be considered New Army battalions?

Thanks

Colin

[Hussar100]

The Guards were very picky during WW1 and they certainly didn't take advantage of the rush of men to join Kitchener's New Army. Each unit already had 3 battalions and as far as I know they all raised at least an extra one, sometimes two service (wartime only) battalions, (the second one remaining in the UK for public duties).

If you compare this to line infantry of the period when each unit had up to 20 battalions, I think it's fair to say that the Guards Division did cherry-pick its own recruits throughout the war to retain an elitism.

One departure from this was the raising of the Welsh Guards from the core of Welshmen in the Division in 1915. Although again it can be argued that, with a core unit of trained guardsmen and a cherry picked recruitment strategy, they did manage to keep standards higher than line infantry - obviously aided by the recruiters.

[Wmr-RHB]

Originally Posted by Hussar100

Each unit already had 3 battalions .

While I support the general text of your post, imho the facts are that at the start of the war:
. Grenadier Guards had 3 battalions;
. Coldsteam Guards had 3 battailons;
. Scots Guards had 2 battailons;
. Irish Guards hhad 1 battalion.

Raised during the war:
. Grenadier Guards: 4th Battalion and 5th (Reserve) Battalion;
. Coldstream Guards: 4th Battalion and 5th (Reserve) Battalion;
. Scots Guards: 3rd (Reserve) Battalion;
. Irish Guards: 2nd Battalion and 3rd (Reserve) Battalion;
. Welsh Guards: 1st Battalion and 2nd (Reserve Battalion).
Only the 1st Bn, The Welsh Guards was kept after the war.

Also raised during (and for) the war were:
The Machine Gun Guards: 1st Bn, 2nd Bn, 3rd Bn, 4th (Foot Guards) Bn, 5th (Reserve) Bn.

Information can ve found at http://www.1914-1918.net/regiments.htm

[Hussar100]

Originally Posted by Wmr-RHB

While I support the general text of your post, imho the facts are that at the start of the war:
. Grenadier Guards had 3 battalions;
. Coldsteam Guards had 3 battailons;
. Scots Guards had 2 battailons;
. Irish Guards hhad 1 battalion.

Raised during the war:
. Grenadier Guards: 4th Battalion and 5th (Reserve) Battalion;
. Coldstream Guards: 4th Battalion and 5th (Reserve) Battalion;
. Scots Guards: 3rd (Reserve) Battalion;
. Irish Guards: 2nd Battalion and 3rd (Reserve) Battalion;
. Welsh Guards: 1st Battalion and 2nd (Reserve Battalion).
Only the 1st Bn, The Welsh Guards was kept after the war.

Also raised during (and for) the war were:
The Machine Gun Guards: 1st Bn, 2nd Bn, 3rd Bn, 4th (Foot Guards) Bn, 5th (Reserve) Bn.

Information can ve found at http://www.1914-1918.net/regiments.htm

Thank you for your further clarification. I was working from the top of my head so was bound to make the odd error. You've clearly corrected them.

[High Wood]

Unlike the county regiments the various Guards regiments did not raise service battalions from the Kitchener volunteers in 1914.

[Hussar100]

Originally Posted by High Wood

Unlike the county regiments the various Guards regiments did not raise service battalions from the Kitchener volunteers in 1914.

But the Guards did raise service battalions, as detailed by me earlier. And they did it from Kitchener volunteers. They were just more picky who they accepted.

[ubervamp]

Thanks for all the input so far guys!

This is a matter I've been trying to get my head around for ages.
In "British Regiments 1914-1918" by Brig. E. A. James, which I've found to be very reliable in the past, it clearly lists and names all the Line Regiments' war raised "service battalions" as just that, service battalions, along with the date of formation.

In relation to the Guards, though, he refers to the additional war raised battalions (as mentioned in the post above by Henk) as "battalions", i.e. NOT service battalions, and some as reserve battalions.

I still don't know if this is a matter of semantics, but to me, any war raised battalions raised from volunteers should qualify as a Kitchener Battalion, or a "service battalion", no? Is it just that the Guards refused to use the colloquial name for these additional battalions? Or did the Guards have some other way of recruiting? Surely the volunteers they chose from, albeit pickingly, were a product of the Kitchener drive?

How should view these newly raised battalions? Does it lie in the training? I know a lot of the New Army battalions were trained by ex-officers from the Boer War, etc. Is the training and the means to control the recruits accepted from a regimental level a valid way to differentiate the terminology? I.e. recruiting on their own terms?

Colin

[AndyC_65]

I've always thought that the distinguishing feature of Kitchener's army of service battalions was the fact that they were "Pals", ie, raised from the same locality/occupation etc.

I understand that while the Guards did have traditional recruitment areas, their high standards (not to mention height requirements), led them to still take recruits from out with their own area.

So I think the distinction is just how the battalions were raised. Concerted effort from local areas/occupations etc with local sponsorship vs. traditional Guards recruiting, albeit on a grander scale.

Cheers,

Andy C

[Charliedog012012]

I agree totally with the views expressed in respect of the Guards being very particular in respect to their selection process. They were after all regarded as the 'Elite'. However, it cannot be an accurate representation to suggest that Kitchener volunteers were all Pals battalions.....we have to be clear that many volunteers joined Territorial battalions and existing Infantry Regiments of the line. In fact, many volunteers for a specific battalion were often 'shipped off' (to use a phrase) to those Regiments who had suffered badly in the early stages of the war. For example, many Durham men found themselves enlisted in the Somersets and Duke of Cornwalls Regiments because of their serious losses.

[Wmr-RHB]

Well, we have now three different terms here that are often used loosely and maybe none of the three has an exact definition. But I will give it a try:

Kitchener's army
The army raised on the recommendation of Lord Kitchener. His ideas being that existing structures would not be able to cope with the war, that in his opnion would not be over in a few monthes. Divided in K1 - K6 Army groups. Read all about in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitchener%27s_Army

Service Battalion
Maybe this can be defined rather exact. Those battalions that in their official title have the part (Service). Roughly all the battalions of Kitchener' Army except those that were (Reserve).

Pals battalions
Again Wikipadia explains it nicely at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pals_battalion.
One statement there is illuminating:

Out of nearly 1,000 battalions raised during the first two years of the war, an estimated 210 were locally-raised Pals battalions.

My conclusion: the three expressions are not synonymous. Pals battalions (there are Service and Reserve battailons amongst them) were only a part of the vast array of battalions (Service and Reserve) of Kitchener's Army.

I already mentioned the usefull web site of the Long, Long Trail at http://www.1914-1918.net/ were you can find all battalions with their official designation and thus also if they were (Service) or (Reserve).

And a list of Pals battalioons (maybe arbritary) is at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_pals_battalions

[ubervamp]

So, going back to the original thread starter, from what I can surmise from the info and links offered;

1) The Guards DID have war raised battalions, most which were duration only.
2) These battalions are NOT considered or designated "service" battalions, possibly due to the recruitment standards, and probably due to the way the new recruits were trained (again, to the higher standards of the Guards).

Could they perhaps be considered "elite service battalions"?
Or is it the Guards just doing their own thing altogether? Like The Guards Division?

Colin

[High Wood]

Originally Posted by Hussar100

But the Guards did raise service battalions, as detailed by me earlier. And they did it from Kitchener volunteers. They were just more picky who they accepted.

They raised an extra battalion but never used the word 'Service' in the title. In many cases the extra battalion was used as a pioneer battalion.

Compare the Grenadier Guards with the East Surrey Regiment.

GG
1st battalion, 2nd battalion, 3rd battalion, 4th (Pioneer) battalion, 5th (Reserve) battalion and 1st (Provisional) battalion.

ESR
1st battalion, 2nd battalion, 3rd (Reserve) battalion, 5th (Extra Reserve) battalion. 1/5th (T.F.) battalion 1/6th (T.F.) battalion, 2/5th and 2/6th (T.F.) battalions, 3/5th and 3/6th (T.F.) battalions, 7th (Service) battalion, 8th (Service) battalion, 9th (Service) battalion, 10th (Reserve) battalion, 11th (Reserve) battalion, 12th (Service) (Bermondsey) battalion, 13th (Service) (Wandsworth) battalion, 14th (Reserve) battalion.

The Guards did use Kitchener men in their battalions but did not have specific Service battalions, neither did they have (T.F.) battalions.

The ESR had two regular battalions both of whom used Kitchener volunteers as reinforcements , 2 original (T.F.) battalions both of which had a second and third battalions created to meet demand. They also had five specific Service battalions made up of some men from regular battalions used as NCO's and the rest made up from the Kitchener Volunteers that enlisted in the original rush to the colours in August-November 1914. These original members were largely destroyed at Loos or more commonly on the Somme.

In my opinion these men were the finest flowering of British manhood, they were not regular soldiers but ordinary men from all walks of life doing their duty for King and Country, with many making the ultimate sacrifice.

We shall not see their like again

[Hussar100]

None of this shows they didn't raise service battalions though. Their establishment was three battalions on paper, although some regiments had less. Whether or not some used their service battalions as pioneers or public duties battalions or if they had the title "service" or not they were still service battalions and were raised from Kitchener volunteers.

Gentlemen, if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck; in all likelihood it's a duck.

[ubervamp]

Originally Posted by Hussar100

None of this shows they didn't raise service battalions though. Their establishment was three battalions on paper, although some regiments had less. Whether or not some used their service battalions as pioneers or public duties battalions or if they had the title "service" or not they were still service battalions and were raised from Kitchener volunteers.

Gentlemen, if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck; in all likelihood it's a duck.

Glyn

This was exactly my thought when I started the thread.
I can't see any other diferentiation other than the Guards strict standards.
It seems it it only the lack of the word "service" in the title of these battalions that might be seen as setting them apart. It seems a bit arbitrary, though.
If the Devonshires had called their battalions "duty battalions" would they not be considered service battalions?

When is a service battalion not a service battalion? Answer: when it's a Guards battalion

[Wmr-RHB]

Originally Posted by ubervamp

If the Devonshires had called their battalions "duty battalions" would they not be considered service battalions?

I assume they hadn't much to say on this subject