War Diaries Talk

Different form of map grid references?

  • hammerquill by hammerquill

    Hi all, new here.

    Working on Royal Engineers, 1915. Later diaries from the same division (different unit) use standard map grid references, which can be reported using the standardized grid reference tool given. But these guys in 1915 are using some other system. The form of the references I've seen so far is

    A Vs. 22. 7. 6. 4

    Some are just "A V" rather than "A Vs". Sometimes they omit the last term or two, presumably referring to a larger grid area.

    Anyone know about this? And most important, how should I tag it?

    Posted

  • HeatherC by HeatherC moderator

    Good question. Reading what it says here http://www.greatwar.co.uk/research/maps/british-army-ww1-trench-maps.htm it looks as though Trench Maps as we know them were not produced until early January 1915 and so before that the original maps of France and Belgium would have been used which presumably had a co-ordinates system rather like our own OS maps - that's certainly what your example looks like I think?

    Of course the problem is that the grid reference tag format is designed for trench map style grid references. I'm afraid therefore the answer is that you can't really tag it at all. Interesting that this hasn't come up before, Maybe only the RE were organised enough to use map co-ordinates in the early days? Everyone else seems to have referred to the actual names written on the map - e.g. "just south of the letter "B" in "Bapaume" (which literally meant where the letter is marked on the map!)

    Posted

  • Jan_Greenslade by Jan_Greenslade

    The 19th Hussars author is very precise as to his regiment's positions but uses references I'm not sure how to tag - eg. Contour 120 - and Squadron was on the CHAT of CHATEAU [ie AUXI-LE-CHATEAU] - I've tagged the Contour reference in the map tag with the name of town and date but should I put any future CHAT-type references in the comments box from now - I didn't this time? Thanks Jan
    Image AWD0000vs7

    Posted

  • David_Underdown by David_Underdown moderator

    I think these references predate the grid system - the date shown on the page says only 19 September, can you confirm if it was 1914?. As HeatherC says in the post before yours, they initially referred to things by printed details on the grid, which is just what they are doing in your example too.

    Posted

  • cyngast by cyngast moderator

    I've been tagging those references (south of the letter B in Bapaume) by tagging the town name. My thinking has been that even if the unit isn't actually in Bapaume, they are close to it. This at least gives a general idea of the unit's location.

    I have noticed that more of this type of reference appear early on and by the end of the war diary pages are sometimes clogged with grid references. I've wondered if this is due to improved maps or if they had orders to be as precise as possible in stating locations?

    Posted

  • David_Underdown by David_Underdown moderator

    Maps were a major issue at the start of the campaign (as they had also been in the Boer War, Crimea etc etc). The main responsibility for mapping within the War Office was with MO 4 (later MI4), the Geographical Section General Staff, headed at the time by Colonel (Sir )Walter Coote Hedley, late Royal Engineersm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coote_Hedley - the references in this article (the military parts of which were by me, but I got a bit bogged down so it isn't really finished) shed quite a bit of light on the early issues and how they were overcome, as you'd expect survey was a Royal Engineers activity, with close links to the Ordnance Survey (which came out of the Board of Ordnance, and the first mapping was to aid defence in the event of an invasion by Napoleon)

    Posted

  • Jan_Greenslade by Jan_Greenslade in response to David_Underdown's comment.

    The diary is for September 1918 - What about the reference Contour 20, do I continue tagging this as I explained? Thank you for your help.

    Posted

  • ral104 by ral104 moderator, scientist

    Thanks for the info, David.

    Jan, cgastwein's suggestion for tagging the closest town is a good one, where that makes sense. Beyond that, I don't think there's much you can do. Contour 20 is a similar case to something like Trench B1 - unless it's a very well-known feature from the time, like Hill 60, there's not much point in putting it in a tag as we won't know where to place it. If you think it could help somebody narrow down the unit's position, then by all means put it in a comment, but that's about all you can do with it, I think.

    Posted