First Australian Imperial Force – Mutiny on the Western Front.

The First Australian Imperial Force (1st AIF) was the main expeditionary force of the Australian Army during World War I. It was formed from 15 August 1914, following Britain’s declaration of war on Germany. Generally known at the time as the AIF, it is today referred to as the 1st AIF to distinguish from the 2nd AIF which was raised during World War II.

The 1st AIF was a purely volunteer force for the duration of the war. In Australia, two plebiscites on conscription were defeated, thereby preserving the volunteer status but stretching the AIF’s reserves towards the end of the war. A total of 331,814 Australians were sent overseas to serve as part of the AIF, which represented 13% of the white male population. Of these, 18% (61,859) were killed. The casualty rate (killed or wounded) was 64%. About 2,100 women served with the 1st AIF, mainly as nurses. Close to 20% of those who served in the 1st AIF had been born in the United Kingdom but all enlistments had to occur in Australia (there were a few exceptions). As a volunteer force, all units were demobilized at the end of the war.

The Australian infantry did not have regiments in the British sense, only battalions identified by ordinal number (1st to 60th). Each battalion originated from a geographical region. New South Wales and Victoria, the most populous states, filled their own battalions (and even whole brigades) while the “Outer States” often combined to assemble a battalion. These regional associations remained throughout the war and each battalion developed its own strong regimental identity.

In the manpower crisis following the Third Battle of Ypres, in which the five divisions sustained 38,000 casualties, there were plans to follow the British reorganisation and reduce all brigades from four battalions to three. In the British regimental system this was traumatic enough; however, the regimental identity survived the disbanding of a single battalion. In the Australian system, disbanding a battalion meant the extinction of the unit. In September 1918, when the call was made to disband eight battalions, there followed a series of “mutinies over disbandment” where the ranks refused to report to their new battalions. In the AIF, mutiny was one of two charges that carried the death penalty, the other being desertion to the enemy. Instead of being charged with mutiny, the instigators were charged as being AWOL and the doomed battalions were eventually permitted to remain together for the forthcoming battle, following which the survivors voluntarily disbanded.

Charles Bean in the Official History of Australia in the War of 1914–1918 – Volume VI – The Australian Imperial Force in France during the Allied Offensive, 1918 described the situation as follows:

The 1st and 4th Australian Divisions were now relieved and went to the rear for the “Corps” rest for which they had been hoping since July. General Monash had also insisted that the three remaining Australian divisions must go into rest after the next battle. While he was in the thick of preparation for that offensive, another sharp trouble, though much less serious than it might appear to non-Australians, descended on him.

The Army Council in London was concerned at the depletion of the Australian infantry through lack of reinforcements. It pointed out that the 57 Australian battalions were 8,500 men short, and that reinforcement drafts for the next four months, estimated at 3,000 monthly, would be insufficient to keep up even the present strength. Battalions which entered the battle with 300-400 men were in some important respects uneconomic, requiring the same staff as a battalion that took in 750. In the British Army this difficulty had been met by disbanding the fourth battalion in each infantry brigade; a similar measure had long before been adopted by the French and Germans, and this policy had already been approved for the A.I.F. in February: Battalions had been earmarked for disbandment but, in view of the extreme reluctance expressed by the Australian Government, it was to be carried out only gradually as it became unavoidable.

Three battalions had been thus disbanded in the spring; Haig entirely accepted the Australian Government’s condition, but in June he pointed out that of the 57 remaining battalions 5 now had less than 700 men, 17 less than 800 and only 11 more than 900, which was the strength then laid down as minimum. He considered this (‘a rather alarming degree of unevenness.” Birdwood (as G.O.C., A.I.F.) explained that there were still hopes of keeping the battalions at 900 and that they were disbanded only when so weak as to be inefficient as fighting units. On August 29th the Army Council drafted a letter to Haig saying that, in view of the shortage then evident, it considered that the reduction of the remaining four-battalion brigades to three-battalion ones should be carried out as soon as possible. Before sending this letter it passed the draft to A.I.F. Headquarters for comment, and Birdwood asked Monash for his views. Both realised that the step would cause intense heart-burning, and Monash, even now that his battalions were going into battle 300-400 strong, urged that it should be postponed till the new year.

It is not likely that weather conditions will permit of our carrying on for much longer at the same intense pressure at which the Corps has been going for the last five months, (he wrote to Birdwood on Sep. 7). In all probability if we carry on, at latest till the end of October, we ought to be able to carry on right over the winter. It was possible, he added, that G.H.Q. might then be able to do “what we all desire”-keep the Australian Corps entirely out of the line for the four winter months. Australian battalions had never been so effective as in the last month when they were all far below strength; he urged that 750 should be considered a sufficient strength even for next year. I welcome any pretext (he said to a friend on Sep. 8th) to take the fewest possible men into action. So long as they have thirty Lewis guns (per battalion) it doesn’t very much matter what else they have.

And it was true that the A.I.F. battalions, entering these great battles with 300-400 rifles, still attacked on fronts of 850-1,000 yards, and had even attacked on fronts of up to a mile. Carrying parties could not be provided; Lewis gun teams were reduced to two men, and Vickers gun crews could no longer carry full loads of ammunition. These and the food supplies had to go by pack or waggon, and in recent fights this had worked very well. Monash asked to be allowed to reorganise his battalions on a three company basis, but he well knew that most of them had already done this for themselves, and reduced their companies to three or even two platoons. Finally he asked to be allowed discretion to recommend the disbanding of “one or more battalions” if he and his generals found it advantageous. Birdwood insisted on prompter action, pointing out that the principle had already been determined in January. He and Monash now agreed that it should not yet be applied to the four original brigades, but he informed the War Office that it would be applied in all unreduced brigades as soon as found necessary.

It was immediately after this that Monash learnt of the coming withdrawal of “1914 men” (estimated by him at “upwards of 6,000”) on furlough to Australia, which obviously would render the disbandments more urgent. The battalions selected by divisional commanders on the advice of their brigadiers were the 19th, 21st,25th,37th, 42nd,54th and 60th; and on September 23rd the order went out for their immediate disbandment: in each case their records, and a few representatives were to go to training battalions on Salisbury Plain, whose companies would assume the battalions’ names, but the rest would reinforce some other battalion or battalions of their own brigade.

To officers and men of these battalions the blow was overwhelming. The step might be necessary-but why should their battalion be chosen. Men and even officers held among themselves indignant meetings. In the first battalion to hear of its fate, the 37th, Col. Story, a fine leader, took the step of protesting not merely to the brigadier, but over his head to Gellibrand, Monash and Birdwood, a serious breach of discipline. Moreover in the bitterness of the moment Story’s letter was foolishly drawn, disparaging sister units. He was relieved of his command, but his attitude had become widely known. At a meeting the men of the 37th agreed that on the final parade they would obey every order but the last-the order to march to their new battalions. On September 22nd when that parade took place, they did so, obeying every command but the final one. Brig.-Genl. McNicoll was then summoned and spoke to the men, but with the same result. The officers then reluctantly obeyed an order to fall out; after them the sergeants did the same-and one corporal and one private. The remainder were told that, if they did not join their new units that afternoon, they would be posted as absent without leave. Being left to themselves they at once re-established strict military form in the battalion, choosing from their own number commanders to carry on temporarily the absent officers’ duties. It was noticeable that those selected were not the “bad hats” or of the demagogue type, but the men most fitted to lead in action, and strict discipline was maintained. The battalion marched back to its huts; men already in detention for various offences were retained under guard ; the medical aid-post was re-formed by the orderlies, and church parade for next day arranged with the padre, who went with the men.

The “commanders” had meals with the men, rations being obtained through the support of other units who “lost” occasional boxes of food from their own waggon-loads as they passed near by. There was keen sympathy for these troops throughout the force and, one after the other, the other selected battalions, when ordered to disband (mostly on September 24th and 25th) took the same action. General Gellibrand had asked for representatives of the 37th to meet him, and later went to the camp and talked the matter over with the men in a friendly, informal way. Monash also spoke quietly to representatives of the 37th, and battalion Commanders and brigadiers addressed all the recalcitrant battalions. The men’s argument was the same in every case and was entirely sincere.

Look Colonel (said those of the 25th to Col. Davis) the 25th from the first has been built on esprit de corps. We have been taught that the regiment is everything. You have often told us that we must sacrifice everything for its honour. We have always obeyed you and we always will-in everything but what you now ask. We cannot obey you in this just for that reason-we would sacrifice everything for the battalion. They told General Wisdom that it was their unanimous wish to go into the next battle and to be given the hardest task: there would either be no 25th left to break up, or they would leave such a record as would make it impossible to break them up. All the resisting battalions said they were keen to enter the great attack that they knew to be impending, but they demanded to be allowed to go in with their identity unchanged. A point elicited by Gellibrand was that the amalgamation of two battalions would be much less keenly felt than the extinction (in the field) of one of them.

Some units were clearly affected by their commanders’ arguments, the strongest of which was that they could not indefinitely resist, which the men knew to be true; but only one battalion gave way. It is a tribute to the unrivalled hold of Brig.-Genl. “Pompey” Elliott on the loyalty of his men that the 60th Battalion, after disobeying its commander’s order to join the 59th, agreed to do so upon being addressed by this beloved stout-hearted Australian. What was Elliott’s disgust when next morning, September 27th, he learnt that the other battalions were being allowed to go into the coming battle intact. As the great offensive was only a few days distant Monash had urged upon Rawlinson that the disbandment should be deferred for a fortnight, and asked him to press this upon Haig. The news of the order, says a record of the 21st Battalion, “was received with deafening cheers.” Naturally trouble at once recurred in the 60th, but Elliott again addressed it.

“By using my influence to the utmost,” he wrote in his diary, “I managed to sway the men over the line. My brigade is the only one in which the reorganisation was successfully accomplished.”
This incident has been called that of “the mutinies over disbandment,” and so in the strict sense of the terms it was; but the refusal was not treated as mutiny by any authority, Australian or British. In contrast to the mutiny in the 1st Battalion, it had its origin in some of the best men and finest qualities of the A.I.F. Australian soldiers had experienced few ties of loyalty in their civil lives; and a public loyalty once conceived was sustained with a flaming zeal disconcerting to those who had encouraged it. If, as General Brudenell White always strongly wished, it had been possible to tie the A.I.F. battalions oversea to the corresponding regiments of the citizen forces in Australia, so that the home regiment fed battalions or even companies overseas as in the New Zealand force, this trouble would probably never have arisen. But the A.I.F. was an improvised force and the disbandment of a battalion carried too many of the consequences of its extinction.

Mutiny was one of the only two offences punishable in the A.I.F. by death. No man was punished for his part in the disbandment mutiny. The mutiny in the 1st Battalion was in a totally different category. The men who refused duty, 119 in number, were tried and, with one exception, found guilty, not of joining in a mutiny, but of desertion. The ending of hostilities caused General Monash not to enforce the penalties and almost certainly saved him and the A.I.F. from having to face difficult problems whose solution would have called for not only tact but the highest qualities of wisdom, leadership and moral courage. Monash had some of these. In this decisive fighting, for such it was, he was right to work his troops to the extreme limit of their endurance, which normally is beyond the limit to which men themselves think they can endure. At such times victory often goes to the troops that hold out longest, withstanding strain, toil or exhaustion in perhaps unbelievable degree and for an unbelievable time; and the value of different armies depends largely upon how far they are ready to do this. On the other hand students of history may doubt whether mere eagerness for military prestige could ever, as Monash apparently imagined, maintain the will to such sacrifices, or could be wisely substituted for the high aims of justice and humanity in implanting a motive for which ordinary men, in such a war, will readily die.

Tallest statue – The Spring Temple Buddha China

The Spring Temple Buddha is a statue depicting Vairocana Buddha located in the Zhaocun township of Lushan County, Henan, China. At 128 m (420 ft), which includes a 20 m (66 ft) lotus throne, it is the tallest statue in the world. When the 25 m (82 ft) pedestal/building it is placed upon is taken into account, the monument has a total height of 153 m (502 ft). As of October 2008, the hill on which the statue stands is being reshaped to form two further pedestals, the upper one being 15 m tall. The total height of the monument is now said to be 208 m.[2]

The project as a whole was estimated to cost around $55m, $18m of which being spent on the statue. It was originally estimated to consist of 1,100 pieces of copper cast, with a total weight of 1,000 tonnes. Beneath the statue is a Buddhist monastery. Plans of the construction of the Spring Temple Buddha were announced soon after the blowing up of the Bamiyan Buddhas by the Taliban in Afghanistan. China has condemned the systematic destruction of the Buddhist heritage of Afghanistan which is a ironic considering the depredation of the Cultural Revolution and the destruction in the invasion of Tibet and the ongoing persecution of religious minorities, however……que sera sera.

The Spring Temple Buddha derives its name from the nearby Tianrui hot spring, which spews water at 60°C and is renowned in the area for its curative properties. The Foquan Temple, built during the Tang dynasty, houses the “Bell of Good Luck”, placed on top of Dragon Head peak. This bronze bell weighs 116 tons.

LINA CAVALIÉRI

LINA CAVALIÉRI (Actress and opera singer) (1874-1944) – “The most beautiful lady in the beginning of the twentieth century.” The amazing wasp waist, achieved by tight laced corsetry.

Born Natalina Cavalieri, on Christmas Day at Viterbo, some eighty kilometers (50 miles) north of Rome, she lost her parents at the age of fifteen and became a ward of the state, sent to live in a Roman Catholic orphanage. The vivacious young girl was unhappy under the strict discipline of the nuns, and at the first opportunity she ran away with a touring theatrical group.

Blessed with a good singing voice, a young Cavalieri made her way to Paris, France, where her appearance opened doors and she obtained work as a singer at one of the city’s café-concerts. From there she performed at a variety of music halls and other such venues around Europe, while still working to develop her voice. Cavalieri took voice lessons and made her opera debut in Lisbon, Portugal, in 1900 (as Nedda in Pagliacci), the same year she married her first husband, the Russian Prince Alexandre Bariatinsky. In 1904, she sang at the Opéra de Monte-Carlo then in 1905, at the Sarah Bernhardt Theatre in Paris, Cavalieri starred opposite Enrico Caruso in the Umberto Giordano opera, Fedora. From there, she and Caruso took the opera to New York City, debuting with it at the Metropolitan Opera on 5 December 1906.

Cavalieri remained with the Metropolitan Opera for the next two seasons, performing again with Caruso in 1907, in Puccini’s Manon Lescaut. Renowned as much for her great beauty as for her singing voice (and acting ability), she became one of the most photographed stars of her time. Frequently referred to as the “world’s most beautiful woman,” she was part of the tightlacing tradition that saw women use corsetry to create an “hour-glass” figure. During the 1909–1910 season she sang with Oscar Hammerstein’s Manhattan Opera Company. Her first marriage long over, she had a whirlwind romance and marriage with Robert Winthrop Chanler (1872–1930), a member of New York’s prominent Astor family. However, this marriage lasted only a very short time and Cavalieri returned to Europe where she became a much-loved star in pre-Revolutionary St. Petersburg, Russia, and in the Ukraine.

Other operas in her repertoire included La bohème, La traviata, Faust, Manon, Andrea Chénier, Thaïs, Les contes d’Hoffmann (as the courtesan Giulietta), Rigoletto, Mefistofele (as both Margarita and Elena), Adriana Lecouvreur, Tosca, Hérodiade (as Salomé), Carmen (the title role), Siberia, and Zazà.

During her career, Cavalieri sang with other great singers, including Giuseppe Anselmi, Mary Garden (the world premiere of Massenet’s Chérubin, 1905), Mattia Battistini, Titta Ruffo, Feodor Chaliapin, Nikolay Figner, Antonio Scotti, Vanni Marcoux, Giuseppe Zanatello, Tito Schipa, and the French tenor Lucien Muratore, whom she married in 1913 after his divorce from soprano Marguerite Bériza. After retiring from the stage, Cavalieri ran a cosmetic salon in Paris. In 1914, on the eve of her fortieth birthday — her beauty still spectacular — she wrote an advice column on make-up for women in Femina magazine and published a book, My Secrets of Beauty. In 1915, she returned to her native Italy to make motion pictures. When that country became involved in World War I, she went to the United States where she made four more silent films. The last three of her films were the product of her friend, the Belgian film director Edward José.

Married for the fourth time to Paolo d’Arvanni, Cavalieri returned to live with her husband in Italy. Well into her sixties when World War II began, she nevertheless worked as a volunteer nurse. Cavalieri was killed on 7th February 1944 during an Allied bombing raid that destroyed her home in the countryside of Fiesole, a small town near Florence, where she was placed under police surveillance because of her foreign husband. Hearing an American bomber nearby, Cavalieri, her husband and servants ran to the air-raid shelter in the grounds, but Cavalieri and her husband were delayed because they were collecting her valuable jewellery from the house. Both Cavalieri and her husband were killed running to the air-raid shelter, while the servants inside the shelter all survived.

The Red and White Diamond – The 24th Battalion AIF

The Red and White Diamond – The Official History Of The 24th Battalion AIF
by Sgt WJ Harvey M.M. Published in 1920

The 24th Battalion was formed during the first week of May 1915, and sailed from Melbourne on the same week. Training shortfalls were made up in Egypt in July and August, and on 4 September 1915 the Battalion went ashore at Gallipoli. It spent the next 16 weeks sharing duty in the Lone Pine trenches with the 23rd Battalion. The fighting at Lone Pine was so dangerous and exhausting that battalions rotated every day. While the bulk of the battalion was at Gallipoli, a small party of 52, trained as packhorse handlers, served with the British force in Salonika.
The Battalion was reunited in Egypt in early 1916 and proceeded to France in March. It took part in its first major offensive around Pozières and Mouquet Farm in July and August 1917. The Battalion got little rest during the bleak winter of 1916-17 alternating between the front and labouring tasks.

In May 1917 the battalion participated in the successful, but costly, second battle of Bullecourt. It was involved for only a single day – 3 May – but suffered almost 80 per cent casualties. The AIF’s focus for the rest of the year was the Ypres sector in Belgium, and the 24th’s major engagement there was the seizure of Broodseinde Ridge.

Like many AIF battalions, the 24th was very weak at the beginning of 1918, but still played its part in turning back the German offensive in April. When the Allies took to the offensive, the 24th fulfilled supporting roles during the battles of Hamel and Amiens. At Mont St Quentin, however, it played a major role by recapturing the main German strong point atop the summit on 1 September. The battalion’s last battles of the war were at Beaurevoir on 3 October and Montbrehain on 5 October. It left the front line for the last time on 6 October 1918 and disbanded in May 1919.

Book extract:
POZIERES
.

The British offensive, known as ” the big push of 1916,” had been launched in the vicinity of Albert on the 1st of July, and when the Australian Corps entered the .field here about three weeks later the Boche had been dr1ven back to Pozieres, a distance of about four miles from the starting point. When it is considered that the hammering had been practically incessant, the severity of the struggle and the stubborn resistance of the enemy can be gauged to some extent by the comparatively small’ area of country regained. The 24th Battalion moved off from Varennes on the 26th at about 4 a.m.  and marched to the brickfields on the outskirts of Albert.

­

Prior to the 1st July the opposing lines skirted Albert on the north, the town being within the territory held by the British forces. It had received more than a fair share of attention from the enemy gunners, and we found it in ruin & and deserted as far as the civilian population was con­cerned. The chief feature was its battered cathedral with the famed statue of the Virgin and child hanging from the ruined tower. The current superstition was that when the statue fell to the ground hostilities would cease, and on that account expectant eyes were often turned in its direction. However, it transpired that nothing short of a direct hit by the artillery would bring about its downfall, British engineers having firmly secured the statue to what was left of the tower.

While we awaited orders to move into action, our surplus kit was handed over to the quartermaster, letters and mes­sages entrusted to the padre, and final touches made to our fighting outfit, leaving us in battle array.

The First Division had attacked the village of Pozieres on the night of 23rd-24th July, and after stubborn fighting had ousted the enemy from well-fortified positions. The Second Division was now relieving the First, and the broken units which had been through the first Australian engagement  on this  front were dribbling back  past  our  rendezvous. First-hand information was eagerly sought by our men  as to how  things were going at  the  front. There was  little need  for  questioning, however,  as  the  wornout appearance of  the  men  and   their  reduced numbers supplied sufficient evidence of the nature of the battle.

On the afternoon of the 26th the Battalion left the brickfield and started for the line. The route lay through the deserted town and over the chalk  ridges beyond. A short distance out  of Albert we passed the  crater formed by the mine exploded under the enemy’s line  on  1st July. This had been the signal for the commencement of the first attack in the offensive. The crater was about 8o yards in diameter and 50 feet deep, and on this summer day gave forth unpleasant evidence of the number of Germans caught in the eruption. Smashed trenches and defences ran in all directions, but the fact that the Boche had recently been ejected from them was a source of much satisfaction. On all sides the ground was littered with the refuse of a modern battlefield and torn by shell’s, while numerous wooden crosses bore mute testimony to the struggles and sacrifices of the preceding days.

The ebook of the The Red and White Diamond – The Official History Of The 24th Battalion AIF can be ordered and downloaded in the book store here. The book can also be ordered on CD here.

A reduced size extract of the book can be viewed as a flash book here.

Perkin Warbeck – pretender to the English throne

Perkin Warbeck (circa 1474 – 23 November 1499) was a pretender to the English throne during the reign of King Henry VII of England. By claiming to be Richard of Shrewsbury, Duke of York, the younger son of King Edward IV, one of the Princes in the Tower, Warbeck was a significant threat to the newly established Tudor Dynasty, and gained support outside England. Henry VII declared that he was an impostor and after Warbeck’s capture declared that he was a Fleming born in Tournai around 1474.

Due to uncertainty as to whether Richard of Shrewsbury had died in the Tower of London, or had survived, Warbeck’s claim gathered some followers, whether due to real belief in his identity or because of desire to overthrow Henry and reclaim the throne. Most historical accounts mention that Warbeck cost Henry VII over £13,000, putting a strain on Henry’s weak financial state.

Perkin Warbeck’s personal history has been fraught with many unreliable and varying statements. He himself gave out that he was Richard of Shrewsbury, Duke of York, the younger son of King Edward IV. After he was captured and interrogated in 1497 under the eye of King Henry VII, another version of his life was published, based on his confession. This confession is considered by many historians to be possibly only partially true as it was procured under duress. According to the confession, Warbeck was born to a man called John Osbeck (also known as Jehan de Werbecque). Osbeck, who was married to Warbeck’s mother Katherine de Faro, was Flemish and held the occupation of comptroller to the city of Tournai. These family ties are backed up by several municipal archives of Tournai which mention most of the people whom Warbeck declared he was related to. He was taken to Antwerp by his mother at around age ten to learn Dutch. From here, he was undertaken by several masters around Antwerp and Middelburg before being employed by a local English merchant named John Strewe for a few months. After his time in the Netherlands, Warbeck yearned to visit other countries and was hired by a Breton merchant. This merchant eventually brought Warbeck to Cork, Ireland in 1491 when he was about seventeen, and it was here that he learnt to speak English. Warbeck then claims that upon seeing him dressed in silk clothes, some of the citizens of Cork who were Yorkists demanded to “do him the honour as a member of the Royal House of York.” He said they did this because they were resolved in gaining revenge on the King of England and decided that he would claim to be the younger son of King Edward IV. However, many historians believe that Warbeck lied about the story of how he came to be a pretender in order to cover his tracks and hopefully allow himself to escape the death penalty.

Warbeck first claimed the English throne at the court of Burgundy in 1490.

In 1491, he landed in Ireland in the hope of gaining support for his claim as Lambert Simnel had four years previously. However, little was found and he was forced to return to the European mainland. There his fortunes improved. He was first received by Charles VIII of France but in 1492 expelled under the terms of the Treaty of Etaples, in which Charles had agreed not to shelter rebels against the Tudors. He was officially recognised as Richard of Shrewsbury by Margaret of York, sister to Edward IV and the widow of Charles the Bold. Whether Margaret genuinely believed in Warbeck’s Yorkist credentials or considered him a fraud but supported him anyway is unknown. She tutored him in the ways of the Yorkist court. Henry complained to Philip of Habsburg, Duke of Burgundy, about the harbouring of Warbeck, and, since he was ignored, imposed a trade embargo on Burgundy, cutting off important Burgundian trade-links with England. Warbeck was also welcomed by various other monarchs and was known in international diplomacy as the Duke of York. At the invitation of Duke Philip’s father, King Maximilian I, he attended the funeral of Emperor Frederick III in 1493 and was recognised as King Richard IV of England. Warbeck also promised that if he died before becoming king, his claim would fall to Maximilian.

On 3 July 1495, funded by Margaret of Burgundy, Warbeck landed at Deal in Kent, hoping for a show of popular support. Warbeck’s small army was routed and 150 of the pretender’s troops were killed without Warbeck even disembarking. He was forced to retreat almost immediately, this time to Ireland. There he found support from the Earl of Desmond ,(most likely Maurice FitzGerald, 9th Earl of Desmond), and laid siege to Waterford, but, meeting resistance, he fled to Scotland.

Warbeck was well received by James IV of Scotland who realised that his presence gave him international leverage. As Ferdinand and Isabella of Spain were negotiating an alliance with Henry VII, James IV knew that Spain would help him in his struggles with England, in order to prevent the situation escalating into war with France. Spanish ambassadors arrived in Edinburgh, and later Pedro de Ayala was established as a resident ambassador during the crisis. Warbeck was permitted to marry James’s distant cousin, Lady Catherine Gordon, a daughter of George Gordon, 2nd Earl of Huntly. The marriage was celebrated in Edinburgh with a tournament. James gave Warbeck clothes for the wedding and armour covered with purple silk. The historian Katie Stevenson suggests the clothing bought for the tournament shows Perkin fought in a team with the king and four knights. A copy of a love letter in Latin obtained by Pedro de Ayala, is thought to be Perkin’s proposal to Lady Catherine.

In September 1496, James IV prepared to invade England with Warbeck. A red, gold and silver banner was made for Warbeck as the Duke of York, James’s armour was gilded and painted, and the royal artillery was prepared. John Ramsay of Balmain, (who called himself Lord Bothwell), described the events for Henry VII. He saw Roderic de Lalanne, a Flemish knight arrive with two little ships and 60 German soldiers and meet James IV and talk to Warbeck. In Edinburgh Castle Ramsay saw two great French guns called ‘curtalds,’ 10 falconets or little serpentines, and 30 iron breech loading ‘cart guns’ with 16 close-carts or wagons for the munitions. He estimated the invasion force would last only 4 to 5 days in England before it ran out of provisions. He suggested, from the safety of Berwick upon Tweed, that the Scots could be vanquished by a modest English force attacking from north and south in a pincer movement.

The Scottish host assembled near Edinburgh and James IV and Warbeck offered prayers at Holyrood Abbey on the 14 September, and on the next day at St Triduana’s Chapel and Our Lady Kirk of Restalrig. On 19 September the Scottish army was at Ellem and on 21 September 1496 they crossed the River Tweed at Coldstream. Miners set to work to demolish the tower of Hetoune (Castle Heaton) on 24 September, but the army quickly retreated when resources were expended, and hoped-for support for Perkin Warbeck in Northumberland failed to materialise. According to an English record, the Scots penetrated four miles into England with royal banner displayed, and destroyed 3 or 4 little towers (or Bastle houses). They left on 25 September 1496 when an English army commanded by Lord Neville approached from Newcastle. When news of this invasion reached Ludovico Sforza, Duke of Milan, on 21 October 1496, he wrote to his ambassador in Spain, to request the Spanish monarchs make peace between England and Scotland. The peace mission was entrusted to Pedro de Ayala.

Later, wishing to be rid of Warbeck, James IV provided a ship called the Cuckoo and a hired crew under a Breton captain which returned Perkin to Waterford in shame in July 1497. James IV made peace with England by signing the Treaty of Ayton at St Dionysius’s Church in Ayton in Berwickshire. Once again Perkin attempted to lay siege to Waterford, but this time his effort lasted only eleven days before he was forced to flee Ireland, chased by four English ships. According to some sources, by this time he was left with only 120 men on two ships.

On 7 September 1497, Warbeck landed at Whitesand Bay, near Land’s End, in Cornwall hoping to capitalise on the Cornish people’s resentment in the aftermath of their uprising only three months earlier. Warbeck proclaimed that he would put a stop to extortionate taxes levied to help fight a war against Scotland and was warmly welcomed. He was declared “Richard IV” on Bodmin Moor and his Cornish army some 6000 strong entered Exeter before advancing on Taunton. Henry VII sent his chief general, Giles, Lord Daubeney, to attack the Cornish and when Warbeck heard that the King’s scouts were at Glastonbury he panicked and deserted his army. Warbeck was captured at Beaulieu Abbey in Hampshire where he surrendered. Henry VII reached Taunton on 4 October 1497, where he received the surrender of the remaining Cornish army. The ringleaders were executed and others fined. Warbeck was imprisoned, first at Taunton, then at the Tower of London, where he was “paraded through the streets on horseback amid much hooting and derision of the citizens”.

Perkin Warbeck Claimant to the English Crown is Placed in the Pillory on the Henry VII

Warbeck was held in the Tower alongside Edward, Earl of Warwick. Allegedly, the two tried to escape in 1499. Captured once again, on 23 November 1499, Warbeck was drawn on a hurdle from the Tower to Tyburn, London, where he read out a confession and was hanged.

Perkin reportedly resembled Edward IV in appearance, which has led to speculation that he might have been Edward’s illegitimate son, or at least some genuine connection with the York family. Some authors, for example Horace Walpole, have even gone as far as to claim that Warbeck actually was Richard, Duke of York, although this is not the consensus.

Extract from a Child’s History of England:

All of a sudden there appeared at Cork, in a vessel arriving from Portugal, a young man of excellent abilities, of very handsome appearance and most winning manners, who declared himself to be Richard, Duke of York, the second son of King Edward the Fourth. “O,” said some, even of those ready Irish believers, “but surely that young Prince was murdered by his uncle in the Tower!” — “It IS supposed so,” said the engaging young man; “and my brother was killed in that gloomy prison; but I escaped — it don’t matter how, at present — and have been wandering about the world for seven long years.” This explanation being quite satisfactory to numbers of the Irish people, they began again to shout and to hurrah, and to drink his health, and to make the noisy and thirsty demonstrations all over again. And the big chieftain in Dublin began to look out for another coronation, and another young King to be carried home on his back.

Now, King Henry being then on bad terms with France, the French King, Charles the Eighth, saw that, by pretending to believe in the handsome young man, he could trouble his enemy sorely. So, he invited him over to the French Court, and appointed him a body-guard, and treated him in all respects as if he really were the Duke of York. Peace, however, being soon concluded between the two Kings, the pretended Duke was turned adrift, and wandered for protection to the Duchess of Burgundy. She, after feigning to inquire into the reality of his claims, declared him to be the very picture of her dear departed brother; gave him a body-guard at her Court, of thirty halberdiers; and called him by the sounding name of the White Rose of England.

The leading members of the White Rose party in England sent over an agent, named Sir Robert Clifford, to ascertain whether the White Rose’s claims were good: the King also sent over his agents to inquire into the Rose’s history. The White Roses declared the young man to be really the Duke of York; the King declared him to be PERKIN WARBECK, the son of a merchant of the city of Tournay, who had acquired his knowledge of England, its language and manners, from the English merchants who traded in Flanders; it was also stated by the Royal agents that he had been in the service of Lady Brompton, the wife of an exiled English nobleman, and that the Duchess of Burgundy had caused him to be trained and taught, expressly for this deception. The King then required the Archduke Philip — who was the sovereign of Burgundy — to banish this new Pretender, or to deliver him up; but, as the Archduke replied that he could not control the Duchess in her own land, the King, in revenge, took the market of English cloth away from Antwerp, and prevented all commercial intercourse between the two countries.

He also, by arts and bribes, prevailed on Sir Robert Clifford to betray his employers; and he denouncing several famous English noblemen as being secretly the friends of Perkin Warbeck, the King had three of the foremost executed at once. Whether he pardoned the remainder because they were poor, I do not know; but it is only too probable that he refused to pardon one famous nobleman against whom the same Clifford soon afterwards informed separately, because he was rich. This was no other than Sir William Stanley, who had saved the King’s life at the battle of Bosworth Field. It is very doubtful whether his treason amounted to much more than his having said, that if he were sure the young man was the Duke of York, he would not take arms against him. Whatever he had done he admitted, like an honourable spirit; and he lost his head for it, and the covetous King gained all his wealth.

Perkin Warbeck kept quiet for three years; but, as the Flemings began to complain heavily of the loss of their trade by the stoppage of the Antwerp market on his account, and as it was not unlikely that they might even go so far as to take his life, or give him up, he found it necessary to do something. Accordingly he made a desperate sally, and landed, with only a few hundred men, on the coast of Deal. But he was soon glad to get back to the place from whence he came; for the country people rose against his followers, killed a great many, and took a hundred and fifty prisoners: who were all driven to London, tied together with ropes, like a team of cattle. Every one of them was hanged on some part or other of the sea-shore; in order, that if any more men should come over with Perkin Warbeck, they might see the bodies as a warning before they landed.

Then the wary King, by making a treaty of commerce with the Flemings, drove Perkin Warbeck out of that country; and, by completely gaining over the Irish to his side, deprived him of that asylum too. He wandered away to Scotland, and told his story at that Court. King James the Fourth of Scotland, who was no friend to King Henry, and had no reason to be (for King Henry had bribed his Scotch lords to betray him more than once; but had never succeeded in his plots), gave him a great reception, called him his cousin, and gave him in marriage the Lady Catherine Gordon, a beautiful and charming creature related to the royal house of Stuart.

Alarmed by this successful reappearance of the Pretender, the King still undermined, and bought, and bribed, and kept his doings and Perkin Warbeck’s story in the dark, when he might, one would imagine, have rendered the matter clear to all England. But, for all this bribing of the Scotch lords at the Scotch King’s Court, he could not procure the Pretender to be delivered up to him. James, though not very particular in many respects, would not betray him; and the ever-busy Duchess of Burgundy so provided him with arms, and good soldiers, and with money besides, that he had soon a little army of fifteen hundred men of various nations. With these, and aided by the Scottish King in person, he crossed the border into England, and made a proclamation to the people, in which he called the King “Henry Tudor;” offered large rewards to any who should take or distress him; and announced himself as King Richard the Fourth come to receive the homage of his faithful subjects. His faithful subjects, however, cared nothing for him, and hated his faithful troops: who, being of different nations, quarrelled also among themselves. Worse than this, if worse were possible, they began to plunder the country; upon which the White Rose said, that he would rather lose his rights, than gain them through the miseries of the English people. The Scottish King made a jest of his scruples; but they and their whole force went back again without fighting a battle.

The worst consequence of this attempt was, that a rising took place among the people of Cornwall, who considered themselves too heavily taxed to meet the charges of the expected war. Stimulated by Flammock, a lawyer, and Joseph, a blacksmith, and joined by Lord Audley and some other country gentlemen, they marched on all the way to Deptford Bridge, where they fought a battle with the King’s army. They were defeated — though the Cornish men fought with great bravery — and the lord was beheaded, and the lawyer and the blacksmith were hanged, drawn, and quartered. The rest were pardoned. The King, who believed every man to be as avaricious as himself, and thought that money could settle anything, allowed them to make bargains for their liberty with the soldiers who had taken them.

Perkin Warbeck, doomed to wander up and down, and never to find rest anywhere — a sad fate: almost a sufficient punishment for an imposture, which he seems in time to have half believed himself — lost his Scottish refuge through a truce being made between the two Kings; and found himself, once more, without a country before him in which he could lay his head. But James (always honourable and true to him, alike when he melted down his plate, and even the great gold chain he had been used to wear, to pay soldiers in his cause; and now, when that cause was lost and hopeless) did not conclude the treaty, until he had safely departed out of the Scottish dominions. He, and his beautiful wife, who was faithful to him under all reverses, and left her state and home to follow his poor fortunes, were put aboard ship with everything necessary for their comfort and protection, and sailed for Ireland.

But, the Irish people had had enough of counterfeit Earls of Warwick and Dukes of York, for one while; and would give the White Rose no aid. So, the White Rose — encircled by thorns indeed — resolved to go with his beautiful wife to Cornwall as a forlorn resource, and see what might be made of the Cornish men, who had risen so valiantly a little while before, and who had fought so bravely at Deptford Bridge.

To Whitsand Bay, in Cornwall, accordingly, came Perkin Warbeck and his wife; and the lovely lady he shut up for safety in the Castle of St. Michael’s Mount, and then marched into Devonshire at the head of three thousand Cornishmen. These were increased to six thousand by the time of his arrival in Exeter; but, there the people made a stout resistance, and he went on to Taunton, where he came in sight of the King’s army. The stout Cornish men, although they were few in number, and badly armed, were so bold, that they never thought of retreating; but bravely looked forward to a battle on the morrow. Unhappily for them, the man who was possessed of so many engaging qualities, and who attracted so many people to his side when he had nothing else with which to tempt them, was not as brave as they. In the night, when the two armies lay opposite to each other, he mounted a swift horse and fled. When morning dawned, the poor confiding Cornish men, discovering that they had no leader, surrendered to the King’s power. Some of them were hanged, and the rest were pardoned and went miserably home.

Before the King pursued Perkin Warbeck to the sanctuary of Beaulieu in the New Forest, where it was soon known that he had taken refuge, he sent a body of horsemen to St. Michael’s Mount, to seize his wife. She was soon taken and brought as a captive before the King. But she was so beautiful, and so good, and so devoted to the man in whom she believed, that the King regarded her with compassion, treated her with great respect, and placed her at Court, near the Queen’s person. And many years after Perkin Warbeck was no more, and when his strange story had become like a nursery tale, she was called the White Rose, by the people, in remembrance of her beauty.

The sanctuary at Beaulieu was soon surrounded by the King’s men; and the King, pursuing his usual dark, artful ways, sent pretended friends to Perkin Warbeck to persuade him to come out and surrender himself. This he soon did; the King having taken a good look at the man of whom he had heard so much — from behind a screen — directed him to be well mounted, and to ride behind him at a little distance, guarded, but not bound in any way. So they entered London with the King’s favourite show — a procession; and some of the people hooted as the Pretender rode slowly through the streets to the Tower; but the greater part were quiet, and very curious to see him. From the Tower, he was taken to the Palace at Westminster, and there lodged like a gentleman, though closely watched. He was examined every now and then as to his imposture; but the King was so secret in all he did, that even then he gave it a consequence, which it cannot be supposed to have in itself deserved.

At last Perkin Warbeck ran away, and took refuge in another sanctuary near Richmond in Surrey. From this he was again persuaded to deliver himself up; and, being conveyed to London, he stood in the stocks for a whole day, outside Westminster Hall, and there read a paper purporting to be his full confession, and relating his history as the King’s agents had originally described it. He was then shut up in the Tower again, in the company of the Earl of Warwick, who had now been there for fourteen years: ever since his removal out of Yorkshire, except when the King had had him at Court, and had shown him to the people, to prove the imposture of the Baker’s boy. It is but too probable, when we consider the crafty character of Henry the Seventh, that these two were brought together for a cruel purpose. A plot was soon discovered between them and the keepers, to murder the Governor, get possession of the keys, and proclaim Perkin Warbeck as King Richard the Fourth. That there was some such plot, is likely; that they were tempted into it, is at least as likely; that the unfortunate Earl of Warwick — last male of the Plantagenet line — was too unused to the world, and too ignorant and simple to know much about it, whatever it was, is perfectly certain; and that it was the King’s interest to get rid of him, is no less so. He was beheaded on Tower Hill, and Perkin Warbeck was hanged at Tyburn.

Such was the end of the pretended Duke of York, whose shadowy history was made more shadowy — and ever will be — by the mystery and craft of the King. If he had turned his great natural advantages to a more honest account, he might have lived a happy and respected life, even in those days. But he died upon a gallows at Tyburn, leaving the Scottish lady, who had loved him so well, kindly protected at the Queen’s Court. After some time she forgot her old loves and troubles, as many people do with Time’s merciful assistance, and married a Welsh gentleman. Her second husband, SIR MATTHEW CRADOC, more honest and more happy than her first, lies beside her in a tomb in the old church of Swansea.

Stonehenge in Esperance, Western Australia

KIM and Jillian Beale’s private construction of what is thought to be the world’s only life-size replica of the ancient Stonehenge Druid ruins on their 1,066 acre Merivale Road property has now reached completion.

The nine-month project began in the final week of January 2011, with the final lintel laid Wednesday, October 26 2011.

Esperance Stonehenge has a centre structure with 10 trilithon stones ranging in height from 4.5-7m in pairs, with one lintel on each pair weighing 18 tonne, and the total height being up to 7.7m on the tallest pair.

Esperance Stonehenge has been constructed on the South Coast of Western Australia. While there are thought to be 66 large, permanent replicas of Stonehenge throughout the world, the Esperance project is one of a handful built life size out of stone.

One can wonder about the folly of this, but I guess most things of wonder probably started off as follies.

photo from The Esperance Express, showing Kim and Jillian Beale at the henge

The Fall of Fort Naulila

On December 30 1886, Portugal and Germany signed a bilateral agreement, in which the borders between Angola and South-West Africa were defined along the Okavango River. The tribes of the Kavango people, who at this time settled on both sides of the river, were informed about this new territorial setting only afterwards. On the north side of the river, the Portuguese started with the construction of a number of forts; among others Fort Cuangar, directly opposite of the residence of the Kwangali kings. On the south side, a number of military and missionary expeditions were carried out along the river. On August 17 1909, Berengar von Zastrow, for the German administration, and King Himarua (1886-1910), for the Uukwangali hompas, signed a protection agreement (Schutzvertrag) with general authority for the government in Windhuk and land ownership of the kings. In response to those forts on the northern side of the river, the German administration opened a police station in Nkurenkuru on June 17, 1910, which over the following years mainly assumed representative tasks.

Naulila was the scene of fighting between Portuguese Angola and German South West Africa during the early stages of World War I.

In October 1914, after the outbreak of the First World War, Schutztruppe, the German territorial forces were threatened by British forces and troops of the Union of South Africa. In order to ensure that they would not have to fight on two fronts, the Germans sent a German delegation, led by Dr Schultze-Jena, District Officer for Outjo, to negotiate a non-aggression treaty and to attempt to find food supplies which went missing in Angola. Schultze-Jena crossed the border illegally, and was accosted by Portuguese officer Alferes Sereno who requested the delegation to accompany him to Fort Naulila. An exchange of fire took place in which most of the German delegation was killed ( Dr Schultze-Jena and 2 German officers, First Lieutenant A Lösch and Second Lieutenant K Roeder where killed by garrison soldiers on 19th October 1914).

In response to the incident, the Germans dispatched a force commanded by Oswald Ostermann from the police post at Nkurenkuru on the Okavango River. On 31 October, the force attacked Fort Cuangar, destroying the fort and killing most of the Portuguese and Angolan inhabitants by machine gun. This is known as the Cuangar Massacre. The forces went on to destroy Forts Bunya, Shambyu, Dirico and Mucusso. On 12 November Joachim von Heydebreck, commander of the Schutztruppe was killed in a rifle-grenade accident at Karasburg (then Kalkfontein South). Major Franke took command of the Schutztruppe. On 18 December, Franke led the troops against the Portuguese at Naulila. They were transported by rail from Karasberg to Otjiwarongo with the remainder of the journey to the Kunene River being undertaken on foot. Franke had amassed a small battalion of over 500 men. Water was hard to come by on their journey.

On 18th December 1914, Franke’s Regiment delivered an attack of the fort from the east and south-west. Franke was wounded in the attack, and Hauptmann Georg Trainer took command. Although they were outnumbered and exhausted from their trek north, the Portuguese soldiers fled after a period of heavy fighting. It is believed that around 150 Portuguese soldiers were killed in action or wounded, as opposed to 31 losses on the Franke Regiment’s side. German spoils of war included large amounts of small arms ammunition, a machine-gun and a field hospital wagon.The Portuguese were defeated, and some Portuguese prisoners-of-war were executed.

The battle is also notable for the fact that the Himba leader, Vita Tom took part on the side of the Portuguese, but escaped.

Germany went on to declare war on Portugal on 9 March 1916.

Today, in the town of Outjo, Namibia, there is a monument and a cemetery commemorating German losses in the incidents at Naulila in 1914.

Naulila Memorial in Outjo

With the end of the war the station was closed and first replaced by a temporary British occupation and from April 1921 onwards by a permanent governor for the newly established Kavango district. The new local government resulted in an extended political presence of the new League of Nations mandate government of South-West Africa.

A Fugitive in South-West Africa 1908 to 1920

The Fall of Fort Naulila by Ernst Wilhelm Mattenklodt

Ernst Wilhelm Mattenklodt (1886-1931)

We posted outposts as a precaution against being taken by surprise. I rode down to the Kunene with an orderly to find a good place to water the horses. We kept to the valley, which was under close observation, and reached the river between two little woods where the bank offered a good watering-place. All about us everything seemed quiet and safe, nor did we observe anything to rouse our suspicions on the hill on our left. After we had watered the horses, one at a time, we filled our water bottles and trotted back to the others. We left two men with the casualties and the prisoners and led the rest down to the river again.

While all our men were engaged in watering their horses, Suhling, du Plessis and I took up our position on the slope and studied the country. Suddenly on our right, upstream, in the direction of Naulila a dense, black column of smoke rose into the azure of the sky, the signal for which must have been given, either by heliograph or flag flapping, from the hill. But carefully as we scrutinised every tree, every fissure and every rock through our glasses, we could find no evidence of human occupation. Then, farther upstream, a second column rose and a third far on the skyline. The signal beacons, warning the enemy of our approach, were rising all along the river.

On returning to the wood we carried the two wounded on to higher ground, off-saddled, and turned the horses out loose to grass close at hand. Sentries were posted, the camp-fires lighted, and the rice was soon bubbling in every mess tin. Then the sentry came in at a double from the edge of the wood and reported that he had sighted Portuguese cavalry in the scrub on the other bank. We poured the half-cooked rice out on the ground, saddled the horses, left them behind under guard, and occupied the edge of the wood.

We saw three enemy troopers trotting across the middle of the valley. More of them were under cover in the scrub. The three approached cautiously, pulled up every now and then and scanned the edge of the wood through their glasses. When they were within about eighty yards I asked Suhling, in a whisper: “How about emptying their saddles for them ?” “Right ready ?” They pulled up suddenly and looked round suspiciously. “Fire.” In a twinkling they had wrenched their horses round and were making for cover in the scrub in headlong flight. One man reeled in his saddle, but kept his seat and got away. The others had almost reached the little wood when our bullets outstripped them. The horses fell and their riders lay motionless under them. All our men fell in, and we advanced across the valley in short rushes. The wood was unoccupied. On the other bank we saw a detachment of infantry and horse in the distance on the open plain. They did not move, and seemed to be conferring. After keeping them under observation for some time we withdrew, dragged the Portuguese clear of their dead horses, carried them to the edge of the wood and gave their wounds a first dressing. We then had to leave them to take their chance.

Suhling with his patrol turned off downstream here. My intention was not to move out before I had to, to locate the fort during the night, keep it under observation during the daylight and then to make my way back. So until about five o’clock I stayed where I was. The Portuguese seemed to have sheered off. We gave our last drops of water to the wounded, although we were all very thirsty. So I decided to refill the water bottles in the Kunene and to water the horses at the same time. This time I moved downstream to find a convenient spot below the hill. Beyond the bare plain in front of us the close green screen of rushes extended the whole length of the river as far as the eye could reach and barred access to the water. There was only one break in the vicinity of the hill. I rode up to it and looked round. The opposite bank, too, was thinly screened by rushes. As everything seemed to be safe I waved to the patrol to follow. At a spot where the bank fell away gently a rhinoceros track, leading through the reeds, allowed us to water our horses two at a time.

Except for Corporal Bergmann, Trooper Kraft and myself, who were on the look out on the slope, all the men were on the river brink, busy with the horses. We saw nothing suspicious anywhere near, not a movement, not even on the hill on which our excellent glasses enabled us to distinguish almost every single blade of grass against the setting sun. Even the river, usually restless enough, lay like a mirror in the deep evening hush, and only the current swayed the rushes gently.

Suddenly a mounted man broke out of the wood at the foot of the hill. The setting sun lit up his picturesque Portuguese uniform. He dashed upstream at a hand gallop in the direction of Naulila. We followed him with our glasses for some time and then lost sight of him. The thin screen on the opposite bank seemed of a sudden to become alive with electric sparks. A volley crashed over us three, standing as we were, entirely without cover from head to foot, on the bank, over our horses and over the watering party among the rushes. A moment of wild confusion followed ; every man grabbed his rifle, left everything else to look after itself and legged it for all he was worth. One or two succeeded in mounting, but the majority fled on foot and their horses raced over the plain with trailing reins. I contrived to grab the bridle of a bolting horse, but had to run alongside it for some three hundred yards amid a hail of bullets before I succeeded in getting into the saddle. Just as I was mounting a bullet carried the martingale clean away. Right up to the edge of the wood the bullets pursued me, then all became quiet again.

I dismounted ; we rallied, and then the men brought in the riderless horses. Except for one trooper, all were pesent and correct. Only one man was wounded. Three horses had flesh wounds. It seemed a miracle to all of us that, with the short range and liveliness of the enemy’s fire, we had got away so lightly, because even the missing trooper, Baericke, was not hit, but, as it turned out later, had stumbled when he bolted and stayed where he fell. The Portuguese took him prisoner during the night.

When darkness had fallen I went back with Bergmann and Kraft to look for Baericke. Stalking cautionsly, we reached the Kunene. Dogs started barking on the far bank, and every now and then we saw a feeble streak of light. In this way we reached the scene of the surprise attack, filled the abandoned water-bottles and skins and took them back for the others. We failed to find Baericke. Exhausted and dog-tired after our fruitless quest, we arrived back at the wood about one o’clock. But the others had gone. So we lay down there and then to get some rest. At the first crack of dawn I woke up and listened ; a curious thudding noise rose in the direction of Naulila. I roused the others at once : “The Portuguese are on us.” But the charge swept over us—a rabble of anything between thirty and forty zebras. In the grey morning light they sped past us like a spectral chase.

We started out on the trail of the others. After we had followed the track for over a mile into the forest we were suddenly challenged by Lieutenant Suhling’s patrol. As we were on foot and I, to make matters worse, was wearing a red handkerchief round my neck, he had mistaken us for Portuguese. I reported what had occurred, and found the rest of my party round the stretcher of the disabled sergeant. We had turned up in the nick of time, for a strong enemy patrol was just completing its dispositions for an attack on the camp. We went into the firing-line at once and kept the Portuguese at arm’s length.

Suhling then fell back on the regiment. I intended to push on for Naulila in the afternoon and to devote the interval to rest and refreshment for ourselves and the horses. I took a backwater of the Kunene farther down stream as our first objective. We watered the horses and turned them out in a clearing of the forest to graze. Going the rounds, I came across a whole number of Ovambo game-traps. They were constructed on quite different principles from those in the East. The long gangway of branches with drops for the game was the same in both cases. But whereas in the case of the eastern tribes the pits consist of excavations, some twelve feet by three, the lateral sides of which were taken at a slant to a point some six feet in depth, the traps here were six feet in length by six deep, in which three long stakes as sharp as needles were embedded.

At three p.m. we upsaddled and rode upstream with the object of making Naulila the same night. Towards evening, however, we came upon a fairly strong mixed force of Askaris and Portuguese mounted infantry, who had obviously had our movements under observation, for they at once tried to rear on the right there was nothing for it except to take to our heels if we hoped to forestall being cut off. We rode hard for the Kunene and then swung round sharply for the south. The Portuguese did not take up the pursuit . . .


Ernst Wilhelm Mattenklodt (1886-1931)

Ernst Wilhelm Mattenklodt was born in Lippstadt (Germany) on 20 May 1886, the son of Marie Zimmermann and Heinrich Mattenklodt. His parents were ordinary peasants but one of his grandparents, Christiane Kähler, worked as a missionary in South Africa: After finishing high school Wilhelm started as a farmer’s apprentice although he yearned for the wider world. He served as a volunteer guard in Berlin-Lichterfelde for a year but an elderly South Westerner convinced the young Wilhelm to try one of the German colonies and, at the age of 22, he arrived in Namibia in 1908 for the first time. He participated in two military exercises organized by the mounted colonial military forces (berittenen Schutztruppe) and then bought Leipzig Farm with its 5000 hectares of farmland. He went back to Germany in 1912 for a few months and on returning to Namibia he built his own house. When World War I broke out in 1914 he owned a herd of some 500 sheep and 60 cattle.

Soldier
One of the war’s first military operations took place just across the Namibia-Angola border in October 1914 when Dr Schultze-Jena, the Bezirksambtmann (Districtsofficer) of Outjo, crossed the border in search of a food convoy (Lenssen 1994: 222). A Portuguese officer invited them to Fort Naulila where the Germans Schultze-Jena, Röder and Lösch were killed as well as the servants Andreas and Hugo (the latter are not usually mentioned as casualties in the reports). A popular German version of this incident which Mattenklodt calls a Meuchelmord (assassination) is to be found in Tanz (1938); and for a more elaborate eyewitness account, see Baericke (1981). German retaliation came on 18 December 1914 under the command of Major Franke with the capture and destruction of Fort Naulila. Finally, in July 1915, the Germans had to capitulate when faced with an overwhelming majority of British and South African soldiers near the town of Otavi.

Fugitive
The German colonial militia (Schutztruppler) were allowed to return to their farms but every minor transgression against their autochthonous servants (mainly Ovambo and Herero) was heavily punished by the English. The German literature under review here presents these cases as an attempt by das perfide Albion to show that Germans were unworthy and incapable of administering colonies. Mattenklodt and four others were captured when they tried to move to East Africa. Wilhelm managed to escape his followers and, in 1918, was joined by Georg Voswinckel and Alfred Feuerstein.They lived as outlaws in the north of Namibia and Angola and after many adventures and narrow escapes from the English (‘lieber elend im Busch verrecken, als sich diesen Höllenhunden ergeben’) they arrived back in Germany in the middle of 1920. Not only Mattenklodt but also his two companions published brief accounts of their adventures (see Tabel 2007).

Ethnographer
After the war, Mattenklodt returned to Africa four times and organized regular hunting and filming expeditions as a living. His experiences with wildlife and to a lesser extent with the Eingeborene (natives) during these journeys were used in a manuscript which his father forwarded to Julius Steinhardt and was published as Afrikanische Jagden und Abenteuer. Less well-known is Mattenklodt’s work as an anthropologist for the Berlin Museum für Völkerkunde. (He also had close contacts with the Berlin Zoo). Although Mattenklodt had no training as an ethnographer, his work on Angola’s Kisama ethnic group contains fascinating details and one of his manuscripts was edited and published posthumously by Baumann (1944). Although there is no, or at least very little, analysis of social and cultural phenomena, Mattenklodt’s description of material culture, including sketches of household utensils, musical instruments and architecture, is very rich. He probably worked with a kind of checklist, because many paragraphs start with negative statements like: “The Kisama don’t know where souls are going after death” or “Totemism is alien to the Kisama.”

On one of his expeditions, the then 45-year-old adventurer had a severe attack of sleeping sickness and died several months later in 1931. The epitaph on his grave reads: hier ruht ein aufrechter Deutscher (here lies an honest German).

Book history
Between the wars and also afterwards, his published adventures proved quite lucrative with three different editions of Verlorene Heimat appearing in the 1920s and 1930s.

Two 1931 hardcover editions were translated into English by Oakley Williams. The London version was published under the title A Fugitive in South-West Africa, 1908-1920 while the American edition appeared in Boston as A Fugitive in the Jungle in the same year. Afrikanische Jagden came out in 1936 introduced and edited by Julius Steinhardt, the author of similar colonial adventure books. Six years later (1942) F.C. Mayer in Munchen reprinted the title. In 2002 the hunt and culture specialist Jagd- und Kulturverlag in Vaduz republished both Verlorene Heimat and Afrikanische Jagden and a year later even a paperback edition of the first title appeared.

Mattenklodt’s books reflect the ideas of the German colonial revisionism movement with the wish to recolonize lost possessions overseas. Even Afrikanische Jagden, which is primarily about African wildlife, is permeated by a craving for the glorious German past.

The number of print runs and copies sold indicate that there was indeed a market for this kind of literature in which the ‘theft’ of colonial possessions was lamented. The themes presented in these books reflect the rise of National Sozialismus between the two World Wars.

The Hikikomori Phenomenon

Hikikomori, (literally “pulling away, being confined”, i.e., “acute social withdrawal”) is a Japanese term to refer to the phenomenon of reclusive people who have chosen to withdraw from social life, often seeking extreme degrees of isolation and confinement because of various personal and social factors in their lives. The term hikikomori refers to both the sociological phenomenon in general as well as to people belonging to this societal group.

Definition

The Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare defines hikikomori as people who refuse to leave their house, and isolate themselves from society in their homes for a period exceeding six months. While the degree of the phenomenon varies on an individual basis, in the most extreme cases, some people remain in isolation for years or even decades. Often hikikomori start out as school refusals. The Ministry of Health estimates that approx. 50,000 hikikomori live in Japan, about one third of which are aged 30 and older.

Common traits

While many people feel the pressures of the outside world, hikikomori react by complete social withdrawal. In some cases, they lock themselves in their room, apartment or house for prolonged periods, sometimes measured in years. They usually have few, if any, friends.

While hikikomori favor indoor activities, some venture outdoors on occasion. The withdrawal from society usually starts gradually. Affected people may appear unhappy, lose their friends, become insecure, shy, and talk less.

Prevalence

According to government figures released in 2010, there are 700,000 individuals living as hikikomori with an average age of 31. Among these are the hikikomori that are now in their 40s and have spent 20 years in isolation, this group is generally referred to as the “first-generation hikikomori,” and there is concern about their reintegration into society in what is known as “the 2030 problem,” when they are in their 60s and their parents begin to die off. Additionally the government estimates 1.55 million people to be on the verge of becoming hikikomori. Originally psychologists, who first coined the phrase, estimated that there may be one million hikikomori in Japan, representing 20% of all male adolescents in Japan, or 1% of the total Japanese population.

Theories on cause

PDDs and autism spectrum disorders

Hikikomori is similar to the social withdrawal exhibited by people with pervasive developmental disorders (PDDs), a group of disorders that include Asperger’s, PDD-NOS and “classic” autism. This has led some psychiatrists to suggest that hikikomori sufferers may be affected by PDDs or other disorders that affect social integration, but that their disorders are altered from their typical Western presentation because of the social and cultural pressures unique to Japan.

According to Michael Zielenziger’s book, Shutting out the Sun: How Japan Created its Own Lost Generation, the syndrome is more closely related to PTSD. The author claimed that the hikikomori interviewed for the book had discovered independent thinking and a sense of self that the current Japanese environment could not accommodate.
The syndrome also closely parallels the Western terms “avoidant personality disorder” and “social anxiety disorder” (also known as “social phobia”).

Social influence

Sometimes referred to as a social problem in Japanese discourse, hikikomori has a number of possible contributing factors.
Though acute social withdrawal in Japan appears to affect both genders equally, because of differing social expectations for maturing boys and girls, the most widely reported cases of hikikomori are from middle and upper middle class families whose sons, typically their eldest, refuse to leave the home, often after experiencing one or more traumatic episodes of social or academic failure.

In The Anatomy of Dependence (Tokyo: Kodansha, 1973, translated by John Bester), Takeo Doi identifies the symptoms of hikikomori, and explains its prevalence as originating in the Japanese psychological construct of amae (in Freudian terms, “passive object love”, typically of the kind between mother and infant). Other Japanese commentators such as academic Shinji Miyadai and novelist Ry? Murakami, have also offered analysis of the hikikomori phenomenon, and find distinct causal relationships with the modern Japanese social conditions of anomie, amae and atrophying paternal influence in nuclear family child pedagogy. Young adults may feel overwhelmed by modern Japanese society, or be unable to fulfill their expected social roles as they have not yet formulated a sense of personal honne and tatemae – one’s “true self” and one’s “public façade” – necessary to cope with the paradoxes of adulthood.

The dominant nexus of hikikomori centers on the transformation from youth to the responsibilities and expectations of adult life. Indications are that advanced industrialised societies such as modern Japan fail to provide sufficient meaningful transformation rituals for promoting certain susceptible types of youth into mature roles. As do many societies, Japan exerts a great deal of pressure on adolescents to be successful and perpetuate the existing social status quo. A traditionally strong emphasis on complex social conduct, rigid hierarchies and the resulting, potentially intimidating multitude of social expectations, responsibilities and duties in Japanese society contribute to this pressure on young adults. Historically, Confucian teachings de-emphasizing the individual and favoring a conformist stance to ensure social harmony in a rigidly hierarchized society have shaped much of the Sinosphere, possibly explaining the emergence of the hikikomori phenomenon in other East Asian countries.

In general, the prevalence of hikikomori tendencies in Japan may be encouraged and facilitated by three primary factors:

1. Middle class affluence in a post-industrial society such as Japan allows parents to support and feed an adult child in the home indefinitely. Lower-income families do not have hikikomori children because a socially withdrawing youth is forced to work outside the home.

2. The inability of Japanese parents to recognize and act upon the youth’s slide into isolation; soft parenting; or even a codependent collusion between mother and son, known as amae in Japanese.

3. A decade of flat economic indicators and a shaky job market in Japan makes the pre-existing system requiring years of competitive schooling for elite jobs appear like a pointless effort to many. While Japanese fathers of the current generation of youth still enjoy lifetime employment at multinational corporations, incoming employees in Japan enjoy no such guarantees in today’s job market. Some younger Japanese people begin to suspect that the system put in place for their grandfathers and fathers no longer works, and for some, the lack of a clear life goal makes them susceptible to social withdrawal as a hikikomori.

Japanese education system

The Japanese education system, like those found in China, Singapore and South Korea, puts great demands upon youth. A multitude of expectations, high emphasis on competition, and the rote memorization of facts and figures for the purpose of passing entrance exams into the next tier of education in what could be termed a rigid pass-or-fail ideology, induce a high level of stress. Echoing the traditional Confucian values of society, the educational system is still viewed as playing an important part in society’s overall productivity and success.
In this social frame, students often face significant pressure from parents and the society in general to conform to its dictates and doctrines. These doctrines, while part of modern Japanese society, are increasingly being rejected by Japanese youth in varying ways such as hikikomori, freeter, NEET (Not currently engaged in Employment, Education, or Training), and parasite singles. The term “Hodo-Hodo zoku” (the “So-So tribe”) applies to younger workers who refuse promotion in order to minimize stress and maximize free time.

Beginning in the 1960s, the pressure on Japanese youth to succeed began successively earlier in their lives, sometimes starting before pre-school, where even toddlers had to compete through an entrance exam for the privilege of attending one of the best pre-schools. This was said to prepare children for the entrance exam of the best kindergarten, which in turn prepared the child for the entrance exam of the best primary school, junior high school, high school, and eventually for their university entrance exam. Many adolescents take one year off after high school to study exclusively for the university entrance exam, and are known as ronin..More prestigious universities have more difficult exams. The most prestigious university with the most difficult exam is the University of Tokyo.

Since 1996, the Japanese Ministry of Education has taken steps to address this ‘pressure-cooker’ educational environment and instill greater creative thought in Japanese youth by significantly relaxing the school schedule from six day weeks to five day weeks and dropping two subjects from the daily schedule, with new academic curricula more comparable to Western educational models. However, Japanese parents are sending their children to private cram schools, known as juku, to ‘make up’ for lost time.

After graduating from high school or university, Japanese youth also have to face a very difficult job market in Japan, often finding only part-time employment and ending up as freeters with little income, unable to start a family.

Another source of pressure is from their co-students, who may harass and bully (ijime) some students for a variety of reasons, including physical appearance (especially if they are overweight or have severe acne problems), wealth, educational or athletic performance. Some have been punished for bullying or truancy, bringing shame to their families. Refusal to participate in society makes hikikomori an extreme subset of a much larger group of younger Japanese that includes parasite singles and freeters.

Financial

Hikikomori tend to be financially supported by their parents, or by receiving social assistance. They seldom work since jobs usually require socialization. Although rare, some hikikomori have become extremely wealthy. For example, starting with 1.6 million yen (apr. US$14,000) in 2000, Takashi Kotegawa grew his account in the JASDAQ Securities Exchange 10,000 fold over 7 years to 17 billion yen (apr. US$152 million). He first gained fame in Japan after he managed to profit 2 billion yen (apr. US$20 million) in 10 minutes from a Mizuho Securities blunder.

Blog comment

Got an email from a reader in Australia who alerted me to the fact that a documentary about the “Hikikomori” phenomenon was being broadcast on Aussie TV. Hikikomori are people in Japan who shut themselves away from everyone including members of their own families for years at a time. I am not talking about guys going to some monastery and shutting themselves away to meditate on the mysteries of life. No, I am talking about young Japanese men that lock themselves in their rooms and spend all their time sleeping, playing video games, and eating whatever their mommies stick through their cat-flap. I am sure the Aussies found it interesting and I hope it gave them a good view of the real Japan.MADE IN JAPAN: Hikikomori

Well, if they live anywhere near where I do, I can’t say that I blame them one bit. Much of the Tokyo area is just one, big, featureless, gray, urban nightmare with very few redeeming features except for the occasional glimpse of Mt. Fuji when a kindly wind blows the pollution out to sea. Obviously, living in this mess is not healthy, mentally or physically. Add to this unpleasant environment the intense pressures of school, work, and the fact that women find your fascination with filthy magazines and rape videos repugnant and you have all the ingredients you need to become a Hikikomori.

That’s not to say that these nutcases sometimes don’t venture out of the safety of their rooms. They do leave and it is the most basic instinct of all that drives them out of their holes: SEX! Yes, these guys often like to prowl the streets looking for young ladies to abduct and rape. Some of them kidnap young girls as young as 9 years old and force them to live with them in their tiny little rooms. One guy was caught just yesterday after he had abducted a 15 year old and held her for 11 days.Just another pervert in Japan. She was only found after the abductor’s parents noticed the girl in his room and released her while the pervert went out for snacks.

This is nothing unusual, unfortunately. Another nutcase who was a long-term Hikikomori kidnapped a 9 year old girl and kept her locked up in his room for TEN YEARS!!!!!!!!! This was in spite of the fact that he had been stopped and questioned by police about the time the girl went missing because he had apparently tried to lure some young girls into his car!!!! Of course, the NPA never considered the guy as a possible suspect when the 9-year-old girl went missing because they are so incredibly incompetent. His own mother had contacted the police many times because she noticed that he had been buying tampons and had shoplifted girls underwear!!!! How many more clues to you need?

Anyways, the poor girl was confined in his room as his sex slave for TEN YEARS!!!! Read the story here: The NPA=Incompetent Baboons She was finally released when the pervert’s mother gave up on getting any help from the police and contacted social workers. Apparently, they went to the house several times but nothing was ever done. Finally, on a later visit the social workers gained entrance into his room and discovered the emaciated girl shackled to the floor. The police were called to the scene of this obvious kidnapping and began “investigating”. The Chief of Police, however, was busy at a karaoke party and declined to attend the scene of the crime! Can you believe this?

After all was said and done, the pervert got only 14 years for his crime. The girl will have to live with this the rest of her life. She is, no doubt, being attended to by Japan’s incredibly bizarre mental health system….which means she got a lollipop, a pat on the head, and a huge jar of sedatives.

There are loads of girls missing here in Japan. Most are never found. There are also loads of Hikikomori here who are very rarely seen….except when they try to kidnap little girls. Is there a connection? Hmmmmmmmm…..probably has never occurred to the NPA.

www.littlespeck.com
Japanese financial crisis

The Battle of Peleliu

The Battle of Peleliu, codenamed Operation Stalemate II, was fought between the United States and the Empire of Japan in the Pacific Theater of World War II, from September–November 1944 on the island of Peleliu, present-day Palau. U.S. forces (originally consisting of only the 1st Marine Division, but later relieved by the Army’s 81st Infantry Division), fought to capture an airstrip on the small coral island.

Palau is marked in green

Major General William Rupertus—commander of 1st Marine Division—predicted the island would be secured within four days. However, due to Japan’s well-crafted fortifications and stiff resistance, the battle lasted over two months. In the United States, it was a controversial command decision because of the island’s questionable strategic value and the high casualty rate, which was the highest for U.S. soldiers of any battle in the Pacific War. The National Museum of the Marine Corps called it “the bitterest battle of the war for the Marines”.

By the summer of 1944, victories in the Southwest and Central Pacific had brought the war closer to Japan, with American bombers able to strike at the Japanese main islands from air bases secured during the Mariana Islands campaign (June—August, 1944). There was disagreement among the U.S. Joint Chiefs over two proposed strategies to defeat the Japanese Empire. The strategy proposed by General Douglas MacArthur called for the recapture of the Philippines, followed by the capture of Okinawa, then an attack on the Japanese mainland. Admiral Chester Nimitz favored a more direct strategy of bypassing the Philippines, but seizing Okinawa and Formosa as staging areas to an attack on the Chinese mainland, followed by the future invasion of Japan’s southernmost islands.

Both commanders’ strategies included the invasion of Peleliu, but for different reasons. The 1st Marine Division had already been chosen to make the assault. President Franklin D. Roosevelt traveled to Pearl Harbor to personally meet both commanders and hear their arguments. MacArthur’s strategy was chosen. However, before MacArthur could retake the Philippines, the Palau Islands, specifically Peleliu and Angaur, were to be neutralized and an airfield built to protect MacArthur’s right flank.

Preparations

Japanese

By the summer of 1944, the Palau Islands were occupied by approximately 30,000 Japanese troops, with about 11,000 men on Peleliu, made up of the 14th Infantry Division, and Korean and Okinawan laborers. Colonel Kunio Nakagawa—commander of the Division’s 2nd Regiment—led the preparations for the island’s defense.

After their losses in the Solomons, Gilberts, Marshalls and Marianas, the Imperial Army assembled a research team to develop a new island defense strategy. The team chose to abandon the early beach-based perimeter defense tactics and reckless Banzai attacks. The new strategy was only to disrupt the landings, to form a “honeycomb” system of fortified positions inland, replace the fruitless banzai attacks with coordinated counterattacks, and draw the Americans into a bloody war of attrition to wear them down and force them to commit ever more resources to the attack. Colonel Nakagawa concentrated his defenses inland. Using the rough terrain to his advantage, he constructed a system of heavily fortified bunkers, caves, and underground positions.

Japanese fortifications.

The majority of Nakagawa’s defenses were based at Peleliu’s highest point, Umurbrogol mountain, a collection of hills and steep ridges. Located at the center of Peleliu, Umurbrogol overlooked a large portion of the island, including the crucial airfield. The Umurbrogol contained some 500 limestone caves, connected by tunnels. Many of these were former mine shafts that were turned into defense positions. Engineers added sliding steel armor doors with multiple openings to serve both artillery and machine guns.

The Japanese army dug and blasted other positions throughout Umurbrogol, armed with 81 mm (3.19 in) and 150 mm (5.9 in) mortars, and 20 mm (0.79 in) cannons, and backed by a light tank unit and an anti-aircraft detachment. The cave entrances were built slanted as a defense against grenade and flamethrower attacks. The caves and bunkers were connected to a vast system throughout central Peleliu, which allowed the Japanese to evacuate or reoccupy positions as needed, and to take advantage of shrinking interior lines.

The Japanese also used the beach terrain to their advantage. The northern end of the landing beaches faced a 30 ft (9.1 m) coral promontory which overlooked the beaches from a small peninsula, a spot later known to the Americans simply as “The Point”. Holes were blasted into the ridge to accommodate a 47 mm (1.85 in) gun, and six 20 mm cannons. The positions were then sealed shut, leaving just a small firing slit to assault the beaches. Similar positions were crafted along the 2 mi (3.2 km) stretch of landing beaches.

The Japanese covered the beaches with thousands of obstacles for the landing craft, principally mines and a large number of heavy artillery shells, buried with the fuses exposed to explode on being run over. A battalion was placed along the beach to defend against the landing, but the defenses were meant simply to delay the American advance. The invaders eventually would be led inland to be mauled along the fortified ridges and hills.

American

Unlike the Japanese, who drastically altered their tactics for the upcoming battle, the American invasion plan was unchanged from previous amphibious landings, even after suffering 3,000 casualties and two months of delaying tactics against the entrenched Japanese defenders at the Battle of Biak. On Peleliu, American planners chose to land on the southwest beaches, due to their proximity to the airfield on South Peleliu. The 1st Marine Regiment—commanded by Col. Lewis B. Puller—was to land on the northern end of the beaches. The 5th Marine Regiment—under Col. Harold D. Harris—would land in the center, and the 7th Marine Regiment—under Col. Herman H. Hanneken—would land at the southern end.

The division’s artillery regiment—the 11th Marines—would land after the infantry regiments. The plan was for the 1st and 7th Regiments to push in land, guarding the 5th Regiment’s left and right flank, and allowing them to capture the airfield located directly to the center of the landing beaches. The 5th Marines were to push to the eastern shore, cutting the island in half. The 1st Marines would push north into the Umurbrogol, while the 7th Marines would clear the southern end of the island. Only one battalion was left behind in reserve, with the Army’s 81st Infantry Division available for support from Angaur, just south of Peleliu.

On 4 September, the Marines shipped off from their station on Pavuvu, just north of Guadalcanal, a 2,100 mi (3,400 km) trip across the Pacific to Peleliu. The Navy’s Underwater Demolition Team went in first to clear the beaches of obstacles, while U.S. Navy warships began their pre-invasion bombardment of Peleliu on 12 September.

The battleships Pennsylvania, Maryland, Mississippi, Tennessee and Idaho, heavy cruisers Indianapolis, Louisville, Minneapolis and Portland, light cruisers Columbia, Cleveland, Denver and Honolulu, and three fleet and five light aircraft carriers dropped 519 rounds of 16 in (410 mm) shells, 1,845 rounds of 14 in (360 mm) shells, 1,793 500 lb (230 kg) bombs, and 73,412 .50 in (12.7 mm) machine gun rounds onto the tiny island, only 6 sq mi (16 km2) in size.

The Americans believed the bombardment to be successful, as Rear Admiral Jesse Oldendorf claimed that the Navy had run out of targets. In reality, the majority of the Japanese positions were completely unharmed. Even the battalion left to defend the beaches was virtually unscathed. During the assault, the island’s defenders used unusual firing discipline to avoid giving away their positions. The bombardment managed only to destroy Japan’s aircraft on the island, as well as the buildings surrounding the airfield. The Japanese remained in their fortified positions, ready to attack the troops soon to be landing.

15 September 1944-The first wave of LVTs approach the beaches during the American assault on Peleliu.

Landing

Routes of Allied landings on Peleliu, 15 September 1944.

The Marines landed at 08:32 on 15 September; the 1st Marines to the north on “White Beach”, and the 5th and 7th Marines to the center and south on “Orange Beach”. As the other landing craft approached the beaches, they were caught in a crossfire when the Japanese opened the steel doors guarding their positions and fired artillery. The positions on the coral promontories guarding each flank attacked the Marines with 47 mm guns and 20 mm autocannon. By 09:30, the Japanese destroyed 60 LVTs and DUKWs.

The 1st Marines were quickly bogged down by heavy fire from “The Point”. Colonel Puller narrowly escaped death when a dud high velocity artillery round struck his LVT. His communications section was destroyed on its way to the beach by a hit from a 47 mm round. The 7th Marines to the south faced similar problems with gun emplacements on their flank. Many of their LVT’s were knocked out in their approach, leaving their occupants to wade ashore through the coral reef in chest-high or deeper water while being raked by Japanese machine guns; casualties were severe and many who reached the beach alive had lost their rifles and other gear.

The 5th Marines made the most progress on the first day, due to their distance from the heavy gun emplacements guarding the left and right flanks. They pushed toward the airfield, but were met with Nakagawa’s first counterattack. His armored tank company raced across the airfield to push the Marines back, but was soon engaged by tanks, howitzers, naval guns and dive bombers. Nakagawa’s tanks and escorting infantrymen were quickly destroyed.

At the end of the first day, the Americans held their 2 mi (3.2 km) stretch of landing beaches, but little else. Their biggest push in the south moved 1 mi (1.6 km) inland, but the 1st Marines to the north made very little progress because of the relentless attacks from The Point. The Marines had suffered 200 dead and 900 wounded. Rupertus believed the Japanese would quickly crumble since their perimeter had been broken, still unaware of his enemy’s change of tactics.

5th Marines on Orange Beach

The airfield/South Peleliu

On the second day, the 5th Marines moved to capture the airfield and push toward the eastern shore. They ran across the airfield under heavy artillery fire from the highlands to the north, suffering heavy casualties in the process. After capturing the airfield, they rapidly advanced to the eastern end of Peleliu, leaving the island’s southern defenders to be destroyed by the 7th Marines.

This area was hotly contested by the Japanese, who still occupied numerous pillboxes. Temperatures were around 115 °F (46 °C), and the Marines soon suffered high casualties from heat exhaustion. Further complicating the situation, the Marines’ only available water supply was contaminated with oil. Still, by the eighth day the 5th and 7th Marines had accomplished their objectives, holding the airfield and the southern portion of the island.

American forces put the airfield to use on the third day. L-2 Grasshoppers from VMO-1 began aerial spotting missions for Marine and naval artillery. On 26 September (D+11), Marine F4U Corsairs from VMF-114 landed on the airstrip. The Corsairs began dive-bombing missions across Peleliu, firing rockets to open cave entrances for the infantrymen, and dropping napalm; it was only the second time the latter weapon had been used in the Pacific. Napalm proved useful, burning away the vegetation hiding spider holes and usually killing their occupants.

A wounded Marine receives a drink

The Point

The fortress atop The Point continued to cause heavy casualties across the landing beaches. Puller ordered Captain George Hunt, commander of K Company, 3rd Battalion, 1st Marines, to capture the position. He approached The Point short on supplies, having lost most of his machine guns while approaching the beaches. One of Hunt’s platoons was pinned down for nearly a day in a vulnerable position between fortifications. The rest of his company was endangered when the Japanese cut a hole in their line, leaving his right flank cut off.

However, a rifle platoon began knocking out the Japanese gun positions, one by one. Using smoke grenades for cover, they swept through each hole, destroying the positions with rifle grenades. After knocking out the six machine gun positions, the Marines faced the 47 mm gun cave. A lieutenant blinded the 47 mm gunner with a smoke grenade, allowing Corporal Henry W. Hahn to throw a grenade through the cave’s aperture. The grenade detonated the 47 mm’s shells, forcing the cave’s occupants out, where they were shot.

K Company had captured The Point, but Nakagawa counterattacked. The next 30 hours saw four major counterattacks against a sole company, critically low on supplies and out of water. The Marines soon had to resort to hand-to-hand combat to fend off the Japanese attackers. By the time reinforcements arrived, the company had been reduced to 18 men, suffering 157 casualties during the battle for The Point.

Front line warning sign on Peleliu October 1944

Ngesebus Island

The 5th Marines—after having secured the airfield—were sent to capture Ngesebus Island (present day Ngedbus), just north of Peleliu. Ngesebus was occupied by many Japanese artillery positions, and was the site of an airfield still under construction. The tiny island was connected to Peleliu by a small causeway, but 5th Marines commander Harris opted instead to make a shore-to-shore amphibious landing, predicting the causeway to be an obvious target for the island’s defenders.

Harris coordinated a pre-landing bombardment of the island on September 28, carried out by Army 155 mm (6.1 in) guns, naval guns, howitzers from the 11th Marines, strafing runs from VMF-114′s Corsairs, and 75 mm (2.95 in) fire from the approaching LVTs. Unlike the Navy’s bombardment of Peleliu, Harris’ assault on Ngesebus successfully killed most of the Japanese defenders. The Marines still faced opposition in the ridges and caves, but the island fell quickly, with relatively light casualties for the 5th Marines. They had suffered 15 killed and 33 wounded, and inflicted 470 casualties on the Japanese.

Bloody Nose Ridge

After capturing The Point, the 1st Marines moved north into the Umurbrogol pocket, named “Bloody Nose Ridge” by the Marines. Puller led his men in numerous assaults, but every attack was quickly neutralized by the Japanese. The 1st Marines were trapped within the narrow paths between the ridges, with each ridge fortification supporting the other with deadly crossfire.

The Marines took increasingly high casualties as they slowly advanced through the ridges. The Japanese again showed unusual fire discipline, striking only when they could inflict maximum casualties. As casualties mounted, Japanese snipers began to take aim at stretcher bearers, knowing that if two stretcher bearers were injured or killed, more would have to return to replace them, and the snipers could steadily pick off more and more Marines. In place of their banzai attacks, the Japanese infiltrated the American lines at night to attack the Marines in their foxholes. The Marines built two-man foxholes, so one could sleep while the other kept watch for infiltrators.

Marines waiting in their foxholes.

One particularly bloody battle on Bloody Nose came when the 1st Battalion, 1st Marines—under the command of Major Raymond Davis—attacked Hill 100. Over six days of fighting, the battalion suffered 71% casualties. Captain Everett Pope and his company penetrated deep into the ridges, leading his remaining 90 men to seize what he thought was Hill 100. It took a day fighting to reach what he thought was the crest of the hill, which was in fact another ridge, occupied by more Japanese defenders.

Trapped at the base of the ridge, Pope set up a small defense perimeter, which was attacked relentlessly by the Japanese throughout the night. The Marines soon ran out of ammunition, and had to fight the attackers with knives and fists, even resorting to throwing coral rock and empty ammunition boxes at the Japanese. Pope and his men managed to hold out until dawn. When they evacuated the position, only nine men remained. Pope later received the Medal of Honor for the action.

A Corsair drops napalm on Japanese positions atop Umurbrogol

The Japanese eventually inflicted 60% casualties on Puller’s 1st Marines, who lost 1,749 out of approximately 3,000 men. After six days of fighting in the ridges of Umurbrogol, General Roy Geiger, commander of the III Amphibious Corps, sent elements of 81st Infantry Division to Peleliu to relieve the regiment. The 321st Regiment Combat Team landed on the western beaches of Peleliu—at the northern end of Umurbrogol mountain—on 23 September. The 321st Regiment, and the 5th and 7th Marines took turns attacking the Umurbrogol, and all suffered similar casualties.

By mid-October, the 5th and 7th Marines both lost around half their men while clawing their way through the ridges. Geiger then decided to evacuate the entire 1st Marine Division, to be replaced by more 81st troops. The 323rd Regimental Combat Team landed on 15 October, and by the third week of October, almost all of the Marines had been evacuated back to Pavuvu.

The Army troops battled the remaining Japanese on Bloody Nose Ridge for another month before securing the island. At the end, Nakagawa proclaimed “Our sword is broken and we have run out of spears”. He then burnt his regimental colors and performed ritual suicide. He was posthumously promoted to Lieutenant General for his valor displayed on Peleliu.

A Japanese lieutenant with his 26 2nd Infantry soldiers and eight 45th Guard Force sailors held out in the caves in Peleliu until April 22, 1947 and surrendered after a Japanese Admiral convinced them the war was over.

Two marines {Marine Pfc. Douglas Lightheart (right) cradles his .30 in (7.62 mm) machine gun in his lap, while he and Pfc. Gerald Thursby Sr. take a cigarette break}, during mopping up operations on Peleliu on 14 September 1944.

Aftermath

Soldiers wounded in battle of Peleliu

The reduction of the Japanese pocket around Umurbrogol mountain is considered[4] to be the most difficult fight that the U.S. military encountered in the entire Second World War. The 1st Marine Division was severely mauled and it remained out of action until the invasion of Okinawa on 1 April 1945. In total, the 1st Division suffered over 6,500 casualties during their month on Peleliu, over ? of their entire division. The 81st Infantry Division suffered over 3,000 casualties during their tenure on the island.

The battle was controversial due to the island’s lack of strategic value. The airfield captured on Peleliu was of little use for the attack on the Philippines. The island was never used for a staging operation in subsequent invasions; the Ulithi Atoll, in the Caroline Islands north of the Palaus, was used as a staging base for the invasion of Okinawa. In addition, few news reports were made on the battle. Due to Rupertus’ “3 days” prediction, only six reporters bothered coming ashore. The battle was overshadowed by MacArthur’s return to the Philippines and the Allies’ push towards Germany in Europe.

The battles for Angaur and Peleliu showed Americans the pattern of future Japanese island defense which would be seen again at Iwo Jima and Okinawa. Naval bombardment prior to amphibious assault at Iwo Jima was only slightly more effective than at Peleliu, but at Okinawa the preliminary shelling was superb. Frogmen performing underwater demolition at Iwo Jima confused the enemy by sweeping both coasts, but later alerted Japanese defenders to the exact assault beaches at Okinawa. American ground forces at Peleliu gained experience in assaulting heavily fortified positions such as they would find again at Okinawa.

On the recommendation of Admiral William F. Halsey, Jr., the planned occupation of Yap Island in the Caroline islands was canceled. Halsey actually recommended that the landings on Peleliu and Angaur be canceled, too, and their Marines and soldiers be thrown into Leyte Island instead, but was overruled by Nimitz.