Query re Diary Title of Divisional Troops - 28th Brigade RFA (Aug 1914-31 Dec 1916).
-
I am just starting to tag the 28th Bde RFA Diary. This Diary Title states: “Divisional Troops 28 Brigade RFA Includes Amount of Ammunition Fired Oct-Dec 1914 by 27th Brigade RFA.
Is this an error regarding ammunition fire? Seems unusual for the 28th Brigade to include ammunition fired for the 27th Brigade. Perhaps it should have read 28th Brigade RFA, not 27th.
PS There is another diary listed for the Divisional Troops 27th Brigade RFA.
Posted
-
by
cyngast
moderator
It may be an error. I can't really tell for sure from what I can see in the diary data. There are two pages that list ammunition expended, but they aren't labeled clearly as to what brigade they refer to.
The months during 1914 seem to be a bit out of order, and the two pages of ammunition expended follow the end of the 1914 diaries. 1915 looks to be in better order, although I didn't look at every page.
Posted
-
by
cyngast
moderator
I just thought to say do let us know what you find. As I mentioned above, I didn't look at every page and I may have missed details on the records of ammunition expenditures.
Posted
-
Actually when I come across them, I was thinking of letting you know when reference to ammunition expenditure is referred to. 😃
Posted
-
Moderators - Up to date information re query: Ammunition Fired by *27th Brigade on the Title of the 28th Brigade RFA.
I believe the following pages are #misfiled because of the following:
Diary of 28 Brigade RFA includes Ammo for *27th Bde. The ammunition expended is for the 27th Bde, RFA - Batteries 119/120 and 121. Dates for Ammunition Expenditure by Batteries 119/120/121 are 27th Bde are Sept-Dec. Presume 1914. Profile page 105 - link: https://talk.operationwardiary.org/#/subjects/AWD0003s7a
This Follows a diary page for the 28th Brigade RFA dated 31st Dec 1914.
Also the following page to profile page 106, also seems to be misfiled – shows ammunition also fired for Batteries 119/120/121 27th Brigade for dates Sept/Oct/Nov. Link: https://talk.operationwardiary.org/#/subjects/AWD0003s4p
PS - Battery Information for *27th & 28th Brigade RFA:
Batteries 28th Brigade RFA. It was originally formed in 1900, with 122nd, 123rd and 124th Batteries. It received a fourth battery - 65th (Howitzer) Battery - in May 1916. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/28th_Brigade_Royal_Field_Artillery
*27th Bde, RFA was composed of 119, 120 and 121 Bde, RFA and was part of the 5th Divisional Artillery. 37th (Howitzer) Battery joined the brigade in May 1916. Link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/27th_Brigade_Royal_Field_Artillery
PPS On some pages of the diary I am tagging for the 28th Brigade RFA the Author is giving the number of rounds fired on certain days up to Dec 1914.
(I am about to continue their diary for Jan 1915).Hope you can understand the above – If the #misfield tags are incorrect, I can change them. Why the ammunition fired for Batteries of the 27th Bde are included in the Diary of the 28th Brigade RFA seems unusual.
There is another diary for the Divisional Troops 27th Brigade RFA (Aug-Dec1914) which I will probably tag when I have finished these 327 pages of the 28th Brigade RFA. I will make a note to let you know, if I do tag it, if there is any information re Ammunition Expenditure. 😃
Posted
-
by
ral104
moderator, scientist
Thanks, Marie. That does sound like a simple case of the report being misfiled. We'll probably never quite know why it happened, but it may well have been during the writing of the official histories, when the diaries were heavily used and things often got a bit out of order.
Posted
-
by
cyngast
moderator
Thanks, Marie. When I was trying to sort this out for you, I didn't think to look at the battery numbers. Good thinking on your part to sort it out.
I agree with Rob that they are probably misfiled. The #misfiled hashtag is just fine.
Posted