War Diaries Talk

Best Way to Tag Artillery Activity

  • cyngast by cyngast moderator

    Just thought I'd ask about the best way to tag a page like this one. It's from the 2nd Brigade R. F. A., which includes three batteries of its own and one attached. This diary is very detailed; all but one of the lines on this page contain a reference to firing, retaliating, registering, or testing registration and mentions which battery is engaged in the activity. There are often multiple references to a particular battery under one day if it fired at 10 a.m. and then again at 2:50 p.m., for instance.

    My question is: Should each one of those references be tagged? Or is it better to just tag one of them with "Attacking/Firing" per date? I've been tagging each reference, but decided I would maybe check on this. Either way is fine with me. I just don't want to be overtagging if it will only confuse the issue.

    Another question is how to handle references to the enemy shelling the front lines. I know the guns are back from the front, but enemy activity like that often drives the battery's activity. Should it be tagged as "Enemy activity" or just ignored? I don't want to tag it as "Under fire" since the unit itself is not being shelled.

    Posted

  • ral104 by ral104 moderator, scientist

    I think tagging each reference, as you're doing, is the way to go with this. I assume they're mentioned multiple times because either the battery was engaging a new target, or there'd been a lull before they started up again. But either way, tagging them all gets across the level of the action going on, I think.

    I also think 'Enemy activity' is the correct tag for the shelling you mention. Definitely worth tagging it, because as you say it impacts on the batteries' subsequent activity, but 'Under fire' wouldn't be quite right.

    So, overall, my answer is: carry on! 😄

    Posted

  • deehar by deehar in response to cgastwein@aol.com's comment.

    I'm doing 14th Brigade Royal Horse Artillery and have the same problem. I am tagging each day with "Attacking/Firing" only once and then adding all the times and grid references. I tag hostile fire with "under fire" when batteries are targetted and list the times and grid references of shell fall and possible enemy batteries. I reserve the "enemy activity" tag for enemy attacks on the front line etc. Entering grid references for targets is very tedious especially when each individual battery in the Brigade targets a line with two endpoints. One wonders if anyone will ever make any sense of this data.

    Posted

  • ral104 by ral104 moderator, scientist

    Thanks, @deehar. This kind of tagging does get tedious quickly, I agree, but getting all those grid refs in is so useful for us. It will take a fair amount of mental gymnastics, but we should be able to use them to build up very detailed pictures of not just the batteries themselves, but units they were in contact with as well as the german positions opposite.

    Posted

  • cyngast by cyngast moderator

    Thank you, Rob, for your quick answer. It's good to know I'm on the right track. It's easy to lose my perspective when I'm working on a diary with so much detail.

    The detail makes it extremely compelling and interesting, though. The authors I've encountered so far--two, I think--often include a description of the target as well as its grid reference. So I know they are firing at trains behind the lines and fires in the trenches (presumably to keep the men in them warm in February) along with working parties.

    I can sympathize with @deehar about the tediousness of filling in grid references. For me, the hang up is when the first letter changes and I have to delete the one that's there. After that, tabbing through the other spaces is not a problem. I also take advantage of the fact that if a grid reference is repeated on the same page, I can go back to the first reference, open it so the tag picks up that information, and then click on the repeat reference without having to fill in all the little boxes again.

    Posted

  • ral104 by ral104 moderator, scientist

    Ah, great tips! Thanks for sharing them.

    It is fascinating when the artillery give descriptions of their targets, isn't it? I think more than any other unit, they were very focussed on particular targets, rather than on the general defence of an area. Really gives a full picture of what was going on.

    Posted

  • deehar by deehar in response to cgastwein@aol.com's comment.

    Yes I use those little tricks for tagging too. It is a pity that the first letter of the grid reference cannot be "overwritten" like the rest of the reference and you have to use right arrow backspace before entering the new letter.

    Posted

  • cyngast by cyngast moderator

    If someone puts all these grid references together they would certainly have a comprehensive map of this unit's targets!

    I have another question, about its targets. A new one has been mentioned as TUMP and I'm wondering if this a place I should be tagging. It is east of Ypres and has a grid reference of I 5 b 9 2. One battery that fired on it also fired on Frezenberg crossroads on the same day, but I haven't been able to find anything on Google maps or by a Google search. Although I did find a Tump Nature Centre, but it's near London!

    Posted

  • ral104 by ral104 moderator, scientist

    That's a tough one...difficult to say. It could have been a place which was subsequently destroyed, hence there being no mention of it today. Or it could have just been the troops' name for a particular landscape feature. I think in this case, the grid ref is the thing to tag - somebody might be able to use it to shed more light on the name itself.

    Posted

  • deehar by deehar

    No TUMP in the list of Flemish placenames. Has no resemblance to any placenames I know here on the Belgian/Dutch border. Might it be a reference to tump-line - the backpack gear used by some Canadian units?

    Posted

  • Jan_Greenslade by Jan_Greenslade

    Can you please clarify 'objective achieved'. Does this tag relate to Orders only or can actions as per 2nd Lt. Hatton's below apply as sometimes a soldier or group are successful in undertaking a unauthorised attack?

    I asked this on the relevant page in the diary Talk Comments but think maybe I should have asked here - Regards. Jan

    Image AWD0001apc

    Posted

  • cyngast by cyngast moderator

    I couldn't find any place called Tump, either. I actually thought it looked like an acronym. It doesn't seem to fit in with the actual place names of towns in that area, as far as similarity in sound or spelling patterns.

    Also, this thread doesn't seem to want to acknowledge it has gone onto a second page now.

    Posted

  • ral104 by ral104 moderator, scientist in response to Jan Greenslade's comment.

    Jan, I'd tag that particular instance as 'Attacking/firing' as there was no specific objective in mind, other than to drive the enemy back. 'Objective achieved' relates more to planned offensives, where the battalion are aiming for a particular point.

    Hope that helps.

    Posted

  • ral104 by ral104 moderator, scientist in response to deehar's comment.

    It might be, I suppose, although I'd imagine only as a slang term for something else. Perhaps a particular road of landscape feature which resembled the arrangement of a tump line.

    Posted

  • ral104 by ral104 moderator, scientist in response to cgastwein@aol.com's comment.

    I'm on page 2, so looks like it has caught up!

    An acronym is always possible, of course. The military do love an acronym! But not one I've ever come across before. Perhaps one of the historians might have heard of it.

    Posted

  • cyngast by cyngast moderator

    Hmm...not to change the subject of the thread, but I think there is a problem with it. I can see what would be page two, everything from Jan's original post on, but I have no way to go back to the first page. No grey buttons that say one or two.

    ETA: Okay, the buttons popped up when I submitted this entry, but until then they were not to be seen. So if I wanted to go back and read your answer to my previous questions, I couldn't do it unless I also posted to the thread. I'm using the latest version of Firefox and Windows 8.

    Posted

  • marie.eklidvirginmedia.com by marie.eklidvirginmedia.com in response to cgastwein@aol.com's comment.

    Tump Line: On google - http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=142629 The Great War Forum refers to a Trmp Line Squad. Is this of interest to you. Marie

    Posted

  • cyngast by cyngast moderator

    Marie, Thank you for posting that link. I love the Great War Forum--so much useful information there. In this case, though, what I'm looking for is a place called Tump that was mentioned as being an artillery target. It's somewhere near Frezenberg, east of Ypres. I've looked at a number of trench maps online but I can't find it.

    It's only a matter of my curiosity to find it. I'm a map person. I'm always digging out maps to find places that are mentioned in books, etc. I can go ahead and tag the diary without knowing exactly where it is, but it did catch my attention.

    Thank you again, Marie. Cynthia

    Posted

  • ral104 by ral104 moderator, scientist

    Re. the issues with page buttons. I wasn't experiencing them yesterday on Chrome, but I am today on Firefox. Very odd. I'll see what can be done.

    Posted

  • marie.eklidvirginmedia.com by marie.eklidvirginmedia.com in response to cgastwein@aol.com's comment.

    Hello Cynthia - I can't find this on my Ypres map either. There is a reference to 'in charge of the battalion Tump Liners' see following site and reference to Tump lines below

    http://www.ww1battlefields.co.uk/flanders/passchendaele.html

    Memorial to the 85th (Nova Scotia Highlanders) Battalion -
    see 4th paragraph – Tump liners

    ...At this point, Major Anderson brought some of the reserves of 'D' Company forward. This gave the Canadians the impetus they needed and they pushed on, capturing machine gun posts and 'putting the crews out of action'. They took their objective (the Blue line) at 6.38 a.m., nearly an hour after they had started out. It was just after this that Lieutenant Hutchinson, in charge of the battalion Tump Liners (a group which carried supplies and equipment in containers partly supported by a band around the forehead) led them up carrying ammunition but was killed after being with the battalion less than two weeks. Major Anderson, Second in Command of the Battalion, was also killed about this time...

    Posted

  • DZM by DZM admin

    Oh, great, now it's happening here, too?

    I can get this fixed... give me a day or two...

    Posted

  • ral104 by ral104 moderator, scientist

    Looks like it's already fixed 😄

    Or it is for me, at any rate...

    Posted

  • DZM by DZM admin

    Yep, I got it fixed. 😄

    Posted

  • cyngast by cyngast moderator

    Marie, You're amazing in all the research you do on behalf of various volunteers' questions!

    I wonder if there is a connection between Tump Liners and the Tump referred to as a target. The area where the 2nd Artillery Brigade was at the time had several place names mentioned that seemed to be Canadian in origin: Regina Cross, Alberta, and the obvious Canadian Farm.

    I suppose this is one of those mysteries that may never be solved!

    And thank you to DZM for fixing the button issue!

    Posted

  • ral104 by ral104 moderator, scientist

    Yep, thanks @DZM!

    It could be that the mysterious TUMP was a name given by Canadians stationed there or nearby, but unfortunately I think Cynthia's right - we'll most likely never know 😦

    Posted

  • marie.eklidvirginmedia.com by marie.eklidvirginmedia.com in response to cgastwein@aol.com's comment.

    If I have a query about anything I just google the query and add ww1 and generally some answers come up.

    Posted