Researching the Sappers in Mesopotamia
Over the last few months I have been researching the Mesopotamia campaign, 1914 through to 1918 and beyond. There is couple of things that make this an interesting focus for me. The first reason is that having served in Iraq as part of the 2003 invasion and having covered a lot of the same ground that the British covered in the Great War.
The second is while I was researching the names on a Great War memorial in Wick, in my home county, there was a Royal Engineer Officer that died in Basra in 1920. He was serving with the Inland Water Transport and died during the Arab Rebellion of 1920. All of this was interesting due to location and the fact that for some soldiers the Great War didn’t finish in 1918.
The campaign in 1914 started with some very specific aims to protect the oil supply from Persia, and the taking of Basra was key to provide the stand off for that protection. But it became very clear reading the history that the amount of politics in the background, and the unwillingness to commit resources (troops, equipment and funding) all added to a future disaster. All of this sounds so familiar to the experiences of 90 years later.
Unloading of Artillery at Basra, due to lack of port facilities local boats had to be used in the unloading process. Photo shows a Royal Engineers Field Machine, a standing derrick in use. The other aspect that became very clear of the early campaigns of 1914 and 15 was the lack of allocation of specialist troops to the operation, particularly Sappers and Gunners.
This particularly meant that there was not enough bridging equipment (tressles and pontoon equipment). The availablity of timber was so lacking locally that palm trees were considered until it was realised that they would not be able to give the appropriate level of strength required.
However, as is often the case the RE Officers and the men of the Sappers and Miners Units that were in Theatre took on the traditional mantra of “Improvise, adapt and overcome.” The metal pontoons were used singularly rather than double (while this reduced the loading it was deemed acceptable). Also some of the local fishing boats were taken into service and modified so that they could be used as pontoons in bridges.
These local craft were far from ideal but they worked and became a vital part of the Bridging equipment. They were also an important part of the ability to load and unload the larger ships/ boats that came to Basra or operated further up river on the Tigris or Euphrates.
One of the other problems was water supply. The operation was meant to be a limited action and as such there was a shortage of watersupply equipment for the Sapper Units and also of water carts for all units. With the daytime temperatures being high and the fact that the soldiers had a significant amount of marching and fighting, the 2 pints of water that they carried in their water bottles was wholly inadequate.
Sedimentation pond, part of the water supply process The interference and misreporting on the situation to meet political requirements meant that key equipment such as water supply, medical equipment and medical provision was not provided. It was only the disaster of the surrender of the 6th (Poona) Division at the Siege of Kut in April 1916 brought the Theatre into full focus and a change in the approach to fighting the campaign.
A prepared water distribution point with water being pumped into unit water carts. 
Mechanical pump sets were only seen in the main locations such as Basra and Amara in the early stages of the operation, with them only progressing further into Mesopotamia later in the war (1917 onwards) Another key element that was completely inadequate in the early part of the war was the river transport, in a country where the rivers provide the best and fastest method of movement. There was a significant lack of river capable vessels, therefore it became necessary to utilise every vessels and boat that had a shallow draft.
Indian Sapper & Miners work to salvage and refloat an abandoned Turkish Army vessel With both the Tigris and the Euphrates rivers having such fluctuations in depth it was not uncommon for the vessels to runaground or to get stuck on sandbanks. As such the RE and Sapper and Miners units would often be tasked to free the vessels or assist with salvage and repairs.
Indian Sapper & Miner diver helped back to shore having been down to clear an obstruction. Later in the war it was recognised that the management of the ports and river operations needed to be significantly improved as as such the Sappers became more formally involved by the bringing into to Theatre the Inland Water Transport units and commands. This key addition of the IWT to the ports, particularly Basra, and to the operation of the rivers drastically improved the logistics across the whole of Mesopatamia.
Overall it is proving an fascinating area of research and in particular the amount of bridging carried out by all of the Sapper units and the way that they dealt with improvisation to deal with equipment shortages and also to ensure free movement on the rivers while allowing the movement of troops.
There will be more detailed and focused posts to come.
References:
Lt Colonel EWC Sandes RE, The Military Engineer in India, 1927 Naval and Military press
NS Nash, The Betrayal of an Army, Mesopotamia 1914-16, 2016 Pen and Sword Books
C Townsend, When God Made Hell, The British invasion of Mesopotamia and the creation of Iraq. 2010
Faber and Faber
Major EWC Sandes RE, In Kut and Captivity, 1919, Murry publications
1st July, The Somme Offensive – a personal take
This is a very short post but it would be remiss not to take the time and the moment to just remember that today is the 109th anniversary of the start of the battle of the Somme – 1 July 1916.
As part of the offensive there was one area that was earmarked to act as a diversionary attack to try and prevent the germans from sending reinforcements to the main attacks, that area was at Gommecourt on the northern area of the British Somme area.
The attack onto the Northern side of Gommecourt Wood was carried out by the 46 North Midlands Division of which the 5 and 6th Bn of the North Staffordshire Regiment were part. These were pre war territorial battalions but were also hard early war volunteers.
One of those Volunteers was my wife’s Grandfather, while he was a Derbyshire man he enlisted in Burton on Trent and found himself initially in the 5th Bn North Staffs but later with the 6th Bn. This would be his, as it would for many others of the regiment, first battle and the first time “going over the top”.
The battle did not go well for the Division that day for a whole variety of reasons, something that I’ll look at doing as an in depth and detailed blog post later.
Having walked over the battlefield and the specific ground that was the trenches of the 5th and 6th Bn North Staffs it is incredible to look south at the couple of hundred yards that had to be covered to reach the German trenches on the edge and inside Gommecourt Wood. Not a big distance but when you are weight down with kit and stores, rifle and ammunition that couple of hundred yards with some “German Bastard” shooting at you, that is a long way by anyone’s money, and it was probably even longer to get back to your own trenches at the end of it as well.
So, just a few things to take a moment and think on:
- The 1st July 1916 is the first day of the battle of the Somme.
- The numbers of casualties are very high on the first day but these are the numbers for dead, injured, missing and prisoners. It is a big butchers bill but look beyond the headline number.
- This battle of the Somme continues onto November 1916.
- While Gommecourt is a failure, there are significant successes on the first day, particularly in the southern areas.
My wife’s grandfather survived Gommecourt and the war, despite being gassed in the March/ April German Offensives of 1918, but all I would ask is that if you read this post, just take a bit of time today and think of those that were on the Somme in 1916.
Recreating the 1890 UP Saddle
Nearly 2 years ago I was contacted by Gerard Hogan, an Australian Saddler and conservator with the Australian Army Museum about my 1890 UP Saddle. Gerard wanted to get some more details about the Saddle and if possible if I could make paper templates of each of the elements of the saddle as there were a whole host of components and parts of the saddle that sparked interest for him.
One of the things that he was particularly interested in was that he wanted to see the feasibility of recreating it as the Australian Army Museum did not have a 1890 UP in its collection.
Having taken a large number of photos and made templates and paper traces for Gerard and now 18 months on I’ve been very fortunate to see the result of the work done by Gerard and others in Australia. The following information and photos have been provided by Gerard.
This saddle (Universal Saddle, Steel Arch, Pattern 1890.) depicts the Mk I without the split seat, and is fitted with the first pattern V-girth attachments (the MKI), and the MKIV numnah felt, as no numnah panels were fitted to the Mk I saddle.
The lancer pattern stirrup irons are fitted to this saddle, and these are original NSW Lancers stirrup irons made in 1885 England. The Mk I also had brass runners fitted to the stirrup leathers but we have to make these as it is impossible to locate brass runners.
However we forgot to add the leather caps to the side bars for this pattern of saddle. This meant this pattern, the Mk I, did not have felt numnah pannels fitted until the Mk II. The purpose of the caps protected the sidebars from damage and were held in position over the fans, by screws.
This was the period of time that the British War Office was experimenting with dispensing with the bulky horse hair pannels and using felt as an option.
Interestingly, the Mk I also had a small tab fitted into the slot on the rear edge of the seat on both sides. This tab looped under the foot of the rear arch as there was a small bevelled channel made into the timber side bar. The idea was to hold the seat down but it was soon found to be unnecessary. By the time of the Mk II introduced into service, this was dispensed with.
In service, the MkI had a brown saddle blanket fitted under the saddle and on top of the felt numnah Mk IV.
The Mk IV numnah felt had a front and rear small strap fitted and this was buckled to the front buckle on the saddle seat, and the rear buckle under the rear spoon of the rear arch, this was to hold the felt and blanket in place whilst in service.
It was found the saddle was too slippery in this manner on the horse and although the numnah felt could be ‘brought up’ into the front arch off the shoulders, the blanket often bunched up or fell out whist in service.
Therefore the MkII was fitted with the first pattern of felt numnah panels. This had a pouch to fit the front arch point and the rear fan had no brass loop fitted. This now provided the necessary grip on the brown blanket. Soon after this the numnah felt was then fully dispensed with.
Saddle Work Credits:
Arches were blacksmithed by WO2 Bruce Sinclair Ferguson RQMS (Australian Army History Unit, Australian Army) and are Mk I arches for the Universal Saddle, Steel Arch, Pattern 1890.
Leatherwork by Gerard Hogan the Regimental SaddlerTM
Timber side bars were made by Australian saddle tree maker Jeff Freeman.
Saddletree and leather assembly by WO2 Ferguson.
I have to say that I’m incredibly impressed with the work and effort that has been done to create the Saddle and I’m very pleased to have been able to help in this project for Gerard and the Australian Army Museum.
Build, Demolish & Defuse Weekend-26 & 27 April 25
Last weekend in April I was fortunate to find myself helping at the Royal Engineer’s Museum with their “Build Demolish & Defuse” event.
Once again I was there with the German Mines display. The difference this year is that we had some extra display items for the public to look at and handle. These helped to show the changes in the Tellermines (the 35 model through to the 42 model) (anti-vehicle mines) and also the changes in the S-Mine (anti personnel mines).
The other thing that I used on the display was a set of loaded 37 pattern Webbing and helmet, just to help give and indication of how much extra weight a soldier might be carrying and how with all of the kit they start to come close to the weight required to trigger one of the anti vehicle mines.
It was a busy weekend with a lot of engagement with visitors, a few of which I recognised from last year but there were plenty of first time visitors to the Museum as well.
It was great to chat with the visitors, some were keen to understand about the mines and one of the key things that helped to start the talks was explaining the differences between Mine clearance and bomb disposal.
For those that don’t know, Bomb disposal was a specialist task undertaken by dedicated bomb disposal units but mine laying and clearance could be carried out by any Sapper unit.
It was also great to meet up with Rob Crane from COPP Survey (www.coppsurvey.uk), who deals with the history of Combined Operations Pilotage Parties of WW2, I had previously met Rob at last years We Have Ways Fest where we had spoken about one of his family members that had been an instructor at 1 Training Battalion Royal Engineers that was located at Clitheroe. Rob shared some photos with me of the Mine Warfare training that was carried out at the time.
The above photo provided by Rob is a cracking display of mines and explosives that could be encountered by a WW2 Sapper and it is good to know that my display is in the same vein as this, so it’s good to know that I’m not far off the mark.
The photos provided by Rob have also helped to give me some ideas on how to further develop and evolved the display and the talks.
One of the other Living historians that was in attendance was Sapper Shand, who deals with the work and activities of the RE Tunnelling Companies in the Great War. We had a good chat discussing the variations and modification of tools required by the tunnellers and also the way that tools were modified by the RE Mounted Troops for to be carried in the RE Tool Bucket on the saddle of a horse.
Sapper Shand runs his own facebook group – RE Clay Kickers so if you are interested in the Great War Sappers or in particular in the role of Tunnellers then give him a follow and like.
https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=61558148302748
One of the other visitors was an individual taking a lot of photos, once we got chatting it was interesting to hear how he, Bob, would visit events to get photos from WW2 events and re-enactors. Being happy to oblige we took a number of photos for Bob’s facebook group, one of which is below.
The following is a link to Bob’s group https://www.facebook.com/BobsFighting40s
It was a cracking weekend with a lot of interaction with the public and it was good to know that the changes to the display worked and worked well. Now looking forward to a future visit back to the RE museum.
Visiting the Sappers at Railway Wood
During my last 2 weeks in Belgium I thought I would take time on the weekend to visit the Ypres area to do a bit of battlefield recces and also to visit some of the memorials.
One of the memorials that I always try and take a bit of time to visit when in the area is the Royal Engineer Graves Memorial for the men of 177 Tunnelling Company Royal Engineers. I’ve got into the habit of it being a location that I visit around about lunchtime and try and take a bit of time just to sit down and take in the location, wildlife and to give a moment to think about the men that fought underground.
Its an interesting memorial as it has a Commonwealth War Grave Commission Cross on it but there are no actual graves as it commemorates 12 men of the Tunnelling Company that lost their lives underground and were not recovered.
The other thing is that of the 12 men named on the memorial, 3 are infantrymen attached into the company. Having infantrymen attached into Tunnelling Companies was not unusual it could have been done for several reasons:
- The individual had mining experience from his civilian job.
- They were from a pioneer unit and allocated to work with the Sappers.
- They were from a Infantry unit in the area and were tasked to work with the Sappers as part of their “Working party” duties.
Either way, what ever the reason, their job underground was just as dangerous as for the Sappers that they worked with and they rightly are commemorated on the memorial.
But Railway Wood is worth visiting for more than just the RE memorial.
If you are interested in Tunnelling and the exploits of the men who fought in a world that I just cannot fully comprehend, where Engineering skill and specialist knowledge are vital to keeping you alive as you work and then having to learn the skills of listening for the enemy and counter-mining, then the chances are that you will be thinking of the exploits of the Tunnellers at Hill 60 or Lochnagar Crater on the Somme. Those are really important sites and the exploits are incredible but I would suggest that perhaps you should consider Railway Wood and the local area.
Why? Well to put it simply there is a bloody lot of big holes in the ground all around the area!!
The 177th Tunnelling Company was active in the Ypres area between Autumn 1915 through to August 1917, with a hard and dangerous fight underground with British and German miners. The area is covered with over 33 Craters created by both sides and covered from Hooge across to Railway Wood
177 Tunnelling Company RE was formed in Jun 1915 and in the Autumn of 1915 it moved to Ypres and built dugouts in the ramparts of the town, this was done from September to November 1915. From November 1915 the Company moved out of Ypres and took over responsibility for mining and counter-mining activity in the Railway Wood to Hooge area and particularly with work under Bellenwaerde Ridge near Zillebeke.
Screenshot taken from the Linesman mapping software of the area covered by 177 Tunnelling Company RE 
Looking across the crater formed on 3 May 1916 towards the RE Memorial. While mining and counter-mining was the main focus of the 177 Tunnelling Company RE they also built and developed an underground Forward Accommodation Scheme at the rear of Railway Wood.
From the photos you can see some of the evidence of the work of the German and British miners through out the wood and it is worth the wander to step away from the main paths onto the smaller tracks to get to see the size and scale of the craters.
The wood also has a lovely memorial to the London Scottish and it is worth just taking a short break to consider how much fighting occurred here across the war both on the surface and below the ground.
So while the craters at Hill 60 and the Caterpillar are important and visually impressive, I would recommend that if you want to look at and study some vital RE Tunnelling works then visit the memorial and the Craters between Railway wood and Hooge.
Quick Update – Adding to the WW2 Display
At the moment I’m being kept busy with the transition from being overseas to coming back home to the UK.
As part of the change there is also a bit of preparation for events and displays for the coming year, and one of the plans is to work on improving the talks and briefs. In particular there has been some work on the Great War saddlery and a the RE tools, but one that will be in use first will be for the WW2 Display on Mine Clearance.
Previously we have used display boards and extracts from the Mine Manuals, however I’m now managed to get some new display items that can be handled. Previously we only had the the Tellermine 35 as a display item but now we can add the Tellermine (S) and the Tellermine 42.
On the Anti Personnel Mine area we also have an increase but I’m also working on adding another couple of items to help with the display, but more to come on that once I’m back in the UK on a full time basis.
Sapper preparations for Beersheba 31 Oct 1917 (Third Battle of Gaza)
In 1917 things were picking up pace in the Middle East against the Ottomans. The Egyptian Expeditionary Force (EEF), made up of British and Imperial units, had advanced out of Egypt, across the Sinai and had launched attacks against the Ottoman defensive line that was anchored against the town of Gaza.
Wire mesh laid to provide foundation for road construction across the soft sand of the desert, These were laid by Sapper units across the Sinai and on the approaches to Gaza. The First and Second offensive against Gaza has failed1, but with a change of command from General Murray to General Allenby there was a change of approach.
General Sir Edmund Allenby and Lt General Sir Harry Chauvel at a medal presentation for the Desert Mounted Corps The aim was now to put together an attack on Beersheba, which was on the eastern end of the Ottoman defensive line, further into the desert and defended by significantly less troops, but to give the impression that this was a feint/ deception as a precursor to another assault on Gaza. The ottomans believed that Beersheba could not be attacked by a large force in strength due to the lack of available water in the area and as such any sizable force would need significant logistical support to sustain it in the field.
And to be honest they were not wrong, Allenby recognised this and realised for his plan to work he would need water supplies as far forwards as possible and stores and supplies as well. The most efficient way for that was to use railways, as they had done for the assaults on Gaza, but for Beersheba there were none existing just as the availability of wells was extremely limited, so everything would need to be built from scratch.
Logistics and Railways.
While it was accepted that water would be the priority it needed to work hand in hand with the creation of the railways. (Water was essential for Men and horses but also for the locomotives, the desert environment put massive limitations on the railway engines so a good supply of water was vital). The Sappers and Egyptian Labour corps of the EEF had already created rail lines from Egypt to the Gaza battle front so it was decided to construct a spur from the Gaza Railway line out into the desert.
The branch line construction started at Rafah 10 days prior to the attack. the line was laid heading east towards Esh Shellal and was constructed by 115th and 116th Field Companys Royal Engineers, half a battalion of Sikh pioneers and 400 labourers from the Egyptian Labour Corps (ELC). The construction of the railway was kept to last safe moment to prevent the Ottoman’s discovery and the majority of the work was carried out at night while the Infantry and Mounted units provided a forward protective screen.
The 266th and the 116th Field Company Royal Engineers then constructed the Imara Station which provided the supply head for 155th Infantry Brigade laydown area. This Brigade then provided the screening troops to allow the construction of line forward to Karm. This would be completed on the 28th Oct and provided the furthest eastern Rail head for supply for the attack, this meant that the British and Imperial forces would have a rail head only 12 miles from Beersheba.
A spur to the rail line was also constructed from Esh Shellal 4 miles south to El Qamie. this would provide supplies to the area occupied by 60 Division.
In 8 days the Sappers with Sikh pioneers and Egyptian labours constructed 26 miles of railway, mainly at night and trying to maintain tactical secrecy.
As mentioned earlier the main task for the Sappers in preparation for the attack on Beersheba was to ensure that water could be provided for the large quantities of Men, Horses and as previously mentioned the railway engines.
The intention was that the Desert Mounted Corps would carry out a flank attack on Beersheba from the East of the town, to achieve this in secret the plan was to push out to the south and then sweep wide to the east hopefully unobserved but this route would take the men and horses the furthest away from water for the longest period.
6th Bn Australian Light Horse – Take note of the quantity of equipment on the saddles of the horses and men. While they were aclimatised to the desert the need for water was key. On the 21 Oct 1917 the mounted sapper unit, 10 Field Troop RE, headed out into the desert and established a shallow well at Bir el Eseni, once established this would provide water for 9000 men and horses. With that task complete, the Troop headed 8 miles further south to Wadi Khelasa, near the ruins at Khelasa and constructed another shallow well and waterpoint by the close of 22nd Oct. This was already for the Corps to replenish water prior to the last stage of their approach ride to the east of Beersheba.
As the railway line from Rafah pushed forward Sapper units constructed more wells, initially as shallow wells and then enhanced further to deep wells.
THE BRITISH ARMY IN THE SINAI AND PALESTINE CAMPAIGN, 1915-1918 (Q 12622) Royal Engineer’s pumping water from the subterranean fountain from which Solomon’s Pools reserve are fed. Copyright: © IWM. Original Source: http://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/205067244 by the 24th Oct 155 Infantry Brigade had taken position at El Imara to provide protection to the rail line construction going forward to Karm. A section (a troop size unit in modern Royal Engineer units) from 436 Field Company RE had constructed wells and a water point for the formation.
by the 26th Oct the remainder of 436 Field Company had constructed wells and water points for 60th Division in the Tell El Fara and El Qamie areas.
Major water point with canvas water troughs in radial around the well and what looks like water tanks being constructed in the distance. As part of the final preparations for the attack 9 Field Troop RE moved forward to Goz El Basal, just south of the Karm Station on the 27th Oct to construct a well and water point for the Australian Mounted Division who would provide the troops for the forward defence of the rail head and were located at El Baqqar. These troops were in place by the 27/28 Oct.
The final part of the preparation was for 437th and 439th Field Company RE to go forward and construct infantry defences and 21 defensive outposts. These defences help to protect the troops of the Yeomanry when they were attacked by a Turkish force on the morning of the 27th, who were defeated and this allowed construction on the rail head to continue.
THE TURKISH ARMY IN THE SINAI AND PALESTINE CAMPAIGN, 1915-1918 (Q 58657) A Turkish cavalry patrol on the move in Palestine. Copyright: © IWM. Original Source: http://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/205307837 It can be seen that Sapper units were vital to the operation to attack and take Beersheba, often required to push out well ahead of units to have waterpoints established ready for the troops and horses to arrive.
The Battle of Beersheba on the 31 Oct 1917
The attack was carried out by the following units:
HQ Desert Mounted Corps
ANZAC Mounted Division
Australian Mounted Division
Yeomanry Mounted Division
10th Division less the 30th Brigade (Infantry)
53rd Division with the 30th Brigade (infantry)
60th Division (Infantry)
74th Division (infantry)
The town was attacked from the west by the 60th and 74th Division. The ANZAC Mounted Division moved round to attack from the East.
The aim of the mounted troops was to circle round to the east and to attack from the rear and to secure the towns wells intact.
The attacks by the 60th and 74th initially made good progress but were slowed as the day progressed. It was imperative that the town be taken that day as the soldiers and the horses of the entire Corps had been without water replenishment for nearly 36 hours.
Late in the afternoon of the 31st Oct, the 4th Australian Light Horse Brigade was tasked with attacking Beersheba.
The Australia Light Horse are not a cavalry regiment, but rather a Mounted Infantry Unit, which would normally advance mounted and then dismount and put in the final attack dismounted as convensional infantry.
However the Brigade decided to do something different and rather than dismount they continued mounted and moved from the walk to the Trot onto the Canter and then to the Charge. The Turks were taken by surprise with change of tactics as the Australians managed to break through the defences and to capture the town by 6pm.
The charge of the Light Horse at Beersheba is rightly celebrated by the Australians. Their assault achieved surprise on the Turkish Troops and their German advisors at the cost of 31 Light Horsemen, but it is important not to forget the men of the 60th and 74th Division that had had a hard and thirsty day fighting on the West of the town.
So if you have an opportunity this evening lift a glass to the brave men and horses of the Australian Light Horse, the 60th Division and the 74th division and have a drink on behalf of the dusty and thirsty men and horse who fought at Beersheba in 1917.
Footnotes:
- 2nd Gaza was almost a break through but General Murray called a halt and withdrawl just at the point when the battle would have been won. ↩︎
The Signals Telegraph Cable Saddle
Several years ago when I started to learn about the various types of military saddles I would try and find as many images of British Military saddles as I could. Eventually I had built up a fair collection of images of the different types and also of the UP pack saddle with different types of loads fitted.
I eventually came across a rather poor quality image of an Indian Soldier leading a Mule in Gallipoli and it looked as if the Pack saddle on the mule had been modified to hold a reel of telegraph wire. The poor quality of the photo meant that it wasn’t clear if the saddle was one of the following:
- a modified Pack Saddle
- a modified UP Saddle (which occasionally happens)
- A bespoke saddle for signals units
At the time I was helping a couple of historians with some of their research into equipment of cavalry and mounted units and I enquired with them if they had ever seen anything like this before and if they knew what is was?
The responses were pretty poor to be honest, ranging from “I’m not interested in that type of detail” to “it doesn’t look like a cavalry item, so it can’t be important.”
It was a bit of a hard lesson for me and helped to shape some of my views on the relationships between Historians, Battlefield Guides and Reenactors. It also made me start to understand where each of these groups have gaps or limits in knowledge or levels of detail.
Not to be daunted I continued to search for information on the different types of saddles and how they were configured and modified, always keeping an eye out for hopefully a clearer image of the “Cable Saddle”
The break through came over this summer as I was researching the Heliograph bucket for the UP saddle and I came across this really clear image of the Saddle with a Canadian Engineer Unit.
While it seemed to me that saddle configuration may have started as a “Heath Robinson” modification of a UP Pack Saddle it appeared to have become a formal Pack Saddle variant, which may have accounted for the slight variations in the saddles in the two photos. I suspected that the saddle shown in the photo from Gallipoli was probably one of the early versions, while the one shown below is a more refined model. My assumptions may well have been influenced by the quality of image rather than detail of the saddles!
It was purely by chance when I was researching the Heliograph saddle buckets that I got chatting via messenger with the a chap called Jonathan Paynter who had an original set of heliograph and telescope buckets and as we chatted he told me that had done a set of drawings of the Cable Pack Saddle, from this I became aware of the cable types used with the saddle.
It is clear that the saddles shown in the two photos had different types of cable, the photo of the Indian Signaller with the mule has a large drum fitted and a different front arrangement, my initial guess was that this may be D1 type cable. However a bit of research into Telegraph cable types provided some real bonus details. The Royal Canadian Signals Website provided the detail of the differences in the cables, a link to the website is below. From the website it states that D2 cable is a lightweight usage telegraph cable and D3 is heavy weight usage, with D2 cable being ideally dispensed from Pack equipment (Bingo!). It is also interesting to note that D2 Twin cable is available. Having looked at the website details I discounted D1 cable as an option as it is a lighter weight cable and only single strand.
D2 single strand is 20-25 lbs per mile and comes in half mile reels and has a breaking strain of 140lbs, D2 twin is approximately 50 lbs per mile with a breaking strain of 250 lbs.
D3 single is 40-50 lbs per mile with a breaking strain of 196 and D3 Twin is 84 lbs and a breaking strain of 354 lbs. Based on that information the larger reels appear to be the D2 & D3 twin Cable reels.
The chat with Jonathan gave me more details and showed that the saddle would carry upto 6 reels of Cable (D2 or D3 type cable) and these would dispense a single reel out over the back of the Pack Horse/ Mule and would allow the signals team to then place the cable in position. I would also suspect that where twin cable is used they would cut the load to 3 cable reels due to both weight and also the space occupied on the saddle.
The Royal Canadian Signals website also has a cracking photo section and in there I was able to find clear photographs of both versions of the Cable Saddle.
The pattern saddle matches the one in the Gallipoli photograph 
a side on view of the cable saddle matching the one shown with the Canadian signals section photo. 
Pack horses being training with the Cable Saddle and dispensing the cable A link to the photo section of the Royal Canadian Signals Website is below, (its a cracking website so please go and have a look round it.) But the real benefit was that it showed that both types of saddle were proper variations of the Cable saddle and both appear to be able to dispense D2 and D3 cable (single and twin). I will make an assumption that the larger reel in the Gallipoli photo is a reel of twin cable.
So what is the purpose of the Telegraph Cable saddle? While the Cable Wagon would rapidly dispense cable along roads and tracks, it would have difficulty moving the cable onto the next stage of the journey going forward. Effectively the Cable wagon would operate at Signal Company/ Squadron level and above, and also with dedicated Cable Laying Units, and they were Divisional level assets. The Cable laying pack horse would be a Brigade level asset and be operated by a Signals Section or Signals Troop connecting Brigade HQ to Regiment/ Battalion HQs and would be able to move over more damaged or constrained terrain. The final connections forward would then be undertaken by men unreeling cable by hand.
Indian Corps Signal Section putting up a telegraph line, Merville, France. 
Cable being laid by hand in Palestine While this may seem like it is a small deviation from my usual focus it does tick a couple of boxes for me. Firstly it is a variation on the pack saddle and part of the UP saddle family.
Secondly and importantly it is another element of information that debunks the assertion that Engineering can not be carried out from horseback. With Signalling, at this point in time, being an Engineering task this is an almost perfect example of engineering being delivered (dispensed) from Horse Back.
It’s surprising what you find when you go searching for other things!
References:
Royal Canadian Signals Website:
- details for Cables – http://www.rcsigs.ca/index.php/Field_cable
- Images from the Great War – http://www.rcsigs.ca/index.php/Photos_-_The_Great_War
A Refurbished 1912 UP (Swivel Tree) Saddle
Since I started doing Great War riding and re-enacting/ living history one of the things that was always pushed was the need to ensure that I had an appropriate saddle. Be that an Officers pattern saddle or an 1902 UP saddle.
The more that I got into Great War Living History and the more that learned I found that there were various patterns of the 1902 saddle and also that the Universal Pattern saddle had evolved over time, all of which made sense.
As part of that learning process I encountered the 1912 Universal Pattern Saddle. While this looks very similar to the 1902 Saddle the difference is that the Steel Arches of the Saddle are hinged and this allows the wooden boards of the saddle to move and rotate in a limited manner. The purpose of this was to create a Saddle that could fit all varieties of horse and mule. Where a unit with 1902 UP saddles would need a variety of sized saddles (generally Medium (Size 2) and Large sized arches (Size 3)) the adoption of the 1912 UP saddle was meant to do away with the need for holding spare saddles or arches of different sizes.
For Example a Royal Engineer Field Squadron was meant to hold saddles sized at the percentage rate of:
- Size 0 – 0% (this size of saddle was only issued to Mounted Infantry who tended to be mounted on Cob sized horses (less than 15 hands high)
- Size 1 – 10% (Small Horses)
- Size 2 – 50% (Medium Horses)
- Size 3 – 40% (Large Horses)
While this system was fine in peacetime or early in conflicts it was recognised that horses may lose condition, or change the muscle definition when worked/ exercised. in the initial instance some of this variation in the horse can be managed with the way that the horse blanket is folded but this is not the ideal. Also there is the fact that when remounts are provided (horse battle casualty replacements) they may not be of the same size as the horse that they replaced and as such would need different saddles.
The aim was that the 1912 UP saddle would solve this issue by providing a saddle that was “flexible” to meet the sizing and any changes in the physical condition of all horses.
However it wasn’t widely issued with British Units. There are comments that state that the Swivel connection was a point of weakness in the saddle and as such it wasn’t really adopted. This isn’t the case. Firstly the saddle was widely used by the Australian mounted units, particularly the Australian Light Horse and it was viewed as an excellent saddle, very suitable and robust for military usage, both fully loaded and on it’s own. The second, and probably the main reason is that by the time it was accepted for use by the Army the Great War had started and the reality was that the Army already had stocks of the 1902 UP saddles and their components. Also the fixed Arches of the 1902 were considerably easier to manufacture quickly and less complicated when constructing the saddles in comparison to the 1912 UP..
In terms of the Australians, they would have less stock of the older pattern saddles and may well have been in the process of “re-tooling” for the 1912 when the war came and the expansion of the Australian Army and in particular the Mounted Units it would have made sense to just make the new pattern of saddle.
It is certainly the case that most examples of the 1912 tend to be found in Australia.
Over the last 18 months I’ve been linking in with Gerard Hogan in Australia, a Saddler and historian that is working with the Australian Army Museum, and the opportunity arose to obtain a 1912 UP Saddle for my own collection, both in terms of being able to use it for riding as well as for Living History displaying.
The basics of the saddle, such as the arches and boards were originals (from different original saddles) but the leather work would be new. I was asked if I wanted the leather work marked to a particular unit, so I kept it basic and asked that Gerard mark it with his own marks and also with unit marks appropriate to an Australian unit.
To that end there are stamp marks with Broad Arrows but with GH stamped next to them (Gerard Hogan) and also all parts stamped for 10th Battery Australian Field Artillery.
Part of the refurbishment process is to do some treatment work on the saddle. I was under very specific orders not to stain the leather dark, but to keep it the light tan colour as was the case in the Great War, the darkening of the leather was tend to a mix of it being used over a 100 years and also it not being properly cleaned!
So the orders were to make sure that all of the leather was fully coated with dubbing, I have been using Elico’s Gold Label Brown Dubbin, which has been ideal as it is easy to work into the leather.
So what is the plan for the saddle? The aim is to use it for riding and displays. My horse, Rosey, has high withers and back length that does not suit any of the UP saddles that I currently have:
- The 1890 UP is 24″ long
- The 1902 UP is 23″ long
- The 1902 UP (HC variant) is 22″ long and fits her back but not her withers and shape of her sides.
- The 1902 UP (Indian variants) are 21″ long, they fit by length but are too narrow.
- The 1912 UP is 21″ long and has the movement in the boards to hopefully fit her.
The 1912 will also fit Meg the mule. Also it allows me to show the variation and the evolution of the saddles over time. I will probably look to set the 1912 up as either a typical fit out for Australian Light Horse or for a Driver with the Sappers, Gunners or Army Service Corps, with a Greatcoat strapped to the front of the saddle and plain shoe case (and the Rifle to be slung across the back of the rider.)
Overall, a great addition and once I’m back in the UK full time I’ll be able to get it set up appropriately and hopefully get out for a plod in the local area with either Meg or Rosey using the saddle. More to come……
Signals Equipment and the UP Saddle
During the Great War, signals was an element of Royal Engineers with some parts devolved or shared out to different cap badges including the Cavalry.
Now signals are not a particular interest of mine but they do have some very particular elements of equipment that link into the Mounted Units or have resulted in some interesting horse and saddle equipment.
I will confess that the idea for this post came about when I came across an interesting photo that was unusual for a couple of reasons.
The reason that I first look at this image as it is so unusual to find a rider of a horse in the Great war to be wearing 1908 Equipment (Webbing). The next thing was that item that was strapped next to the rifle bucket, I’d never come across that before and my initial curiosity thought that I may well have been a trials piece of kit or something linked with the Hotchkiss Machine gun, but I couldn’t find anything that related to that.
It was purely by accident that I came across another photo with a similar set up and it referred to it as “Signals Flags Bucket”.
With a little bit more digging and research I found out that this was partially true. The reality is that they form part of a set that are fitted to a saddle and they are for the Heliograph signals equipment. The buckets are fitted to each side of the saddle and are designed to carry the heliograph tripod, signals telescope, and signals flags, thus allowing a Cavalry Regiment to carry signalling equipment in the field.
Signallers of the East Riding Yeomanry using a Heliograph and observing telescope in 1917 I went looking to get some more information on the heliograph equipment and manage to track down the information on the buckets in the List of Changes (LoC) and as part of that it had 2 excellent images of the buckets loaded with equipment fitted to a UP Saddle.
The mirrors and the “headset” of the heliograph would be stored in a leather case with a leather or webbing strap and were carried by the signaller while mounted.
I found that there is a very good facebook group that deals with the Heliograph equipment, of which there are a couple of posts about the use of the Heliograph by mounted units and even some images of the buckets, the photo below is a brilliant image of the two buckets, in what looks like excellent condition. They are owned by a chap called Jonathan Paynter and he states that they are stamped 1914. The Facebook group is the British Heliograph Club https://www.facebook.com/groups/776510812960897/
The left is for the telescope stand and signals flags, the right is for the Heliograph tripod. The Straps/loops at the top of each bucket would have gone around the rear arch of the UP Saddle, allowing the bucket to hang down, in the same way as the Rifle Bucket and the RE Tool Bucket does. On both you can see the leather steadying strap (in the centre of the buckets) that would have reached across to the Girth strap of the saddle and leather loop at the end of the strap would have allowed the buckets to be secured/tied by having the surcingle strap pass through the loop.
On the left bucket the strap at the bottom of the bucket is a short retaining strap to help tie the flag bucket to the Rifle bucket next to it. On the right hand bucket centre strap you will notice a smaller loop, this is to allow the scabbard of the Cavalry Sword to pass through and again this also adds to the stability of the equipment on the saddle. Admittedly that is quite hard to see in the LOC photo above as that has the picket peg secured above the sword scabbard (as it should be) but also over the top of the leather loop on the heliograph tripod bucket
The heliograph was an excellent piece of equipment and was used through out the army from the Victorian period and the Survey Squadrons of the Royal Engineers were still using it through to the 1980s when they were out doing large scale survey works.
The size and weight of the equipment also made sense that Cavalry units should have access to it and that it should be available in the field rather than being in the unit baggage/ stores wagons. From what I can find it was issued at the rate of 2 heliograph sets per cavalry regiment.
Australian Light Horse signals team 1918 in Palestine 
Unit unknown but these signallers are only using the Flags buckets. the lack of rifle buckets on the saddles suggests a mounted infantry unit (they often slung their rifles on their backs) 
So to come back to my original puzzle, I still don’t have an answer as to this rider wearing 1908 equipment but I have at least learned about what the additional equipment is, and also learned that whoever loaded the kit put the heliograph tripod in the wrong bucket! Oh well everyday is a school day and it is always great to use old photos to broaden your knowledge through investigation and research.
