Talk:51st (Highland) Division

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Andrewa (talk) 04:21, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]


51st (Highland) Division (World War I) → 51st (Highland) Division – the disambiguation (World War I) is not required its already disambiguated by using (Highland). No other British or any other divisions use World War I or any other war. It also explains in the text it served in World War I.

There was a Second World War division called the 51st (Highland) Infantry Division which is separate from this by the use of infantry in the title, so it can not be confused for that one. Jim Sweeney (talk) 21:51, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • support, per WP:MOSDAB. If there are no other articles with the same name, they shouldn't be disambiguated. --Enric Naval (talk) 02:24, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support --The second World War formation has a slightly different name. I have added a hatnote for that. This makes the disambiguator redundant. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:58, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on 51st (Highland) Division. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool. --Lineagegeek (talk) 21:12, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:39, 30 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox: active 1908 - 1919 - Only ?[edit]

The history outline differs from that. You should correct the data. --129.187.244.28 (talk) 10:39, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 51st (Highland) Division. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:57, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It seems unlikely that they were evacuated from Dunkirk and then returned to France, given the timescales involved, if so this must have been very rapid. Reading Dunkirk evacuation it seems that like a significant section of the BEF they were cut off from the main body of the BEF by the German dash to the coast. PatGallacher (talk) 22:35, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, 51 (H) Division was attached to the French Army on the Saar, getting patrolling experience on the Maginot Line, when the German attack began in May 1940. The division was then moved to northern France. It formed part of French 10th army and was involved in operations on the Somme and in the subsequent retreat, until it was overtaken by German armoured formations and forced to surrender. JF42 (talk) 16:42, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Wikipedia editor taken in by WW2 propaganda photograph"[edit]

I have deleted the image of a Highland Division sergeant wearing a kilt in a Maginot line fort in 1940, and the associated text in the article suggesting that "However Imperial War Museum images show the men of the 51st Highland Division wearing kilts while they manned the Maginot Line in France in 1939 and 1940." (bold added). Firstly, the interpretation of a primary source could be judged to be WP:OR and does not over-ride the detailed researches of a notable historical writer. Secondly, the other photographs [1][2][3] of the Highland Division on the Maginot Line all show soldiers in this unit dressed in the normal battledress of the British Army at the time. Lastly, the photograph that I have deleted is clearly a propaganda photograph of a staged scene. Clues include the collection of rifles with their bayonets fixed inside a concrete bunker - looks wonderfully warlike, but of no real use (in fact, an actual danger) inside the fortifications unless they have been breached by the enemy; and the box for the periscope, with its French stencilling, which is rather awkwardly positioned for the user. I suspect that the sergeant in the photograph was persuaded to borrow a bandsman's kilt.
ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 14:44, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

HD flash[edit]

The 'HD' flash was adopted by the re-formed 51st Highland Division in 1941-42. Prior to that the divisional formation flash was a St Andrews Cross. JF42 (talk) 16:46, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

POW destination following St Valery[edit]

Looking at the edit[4] by User:JF42, is this edit based on precise information, or simply on the fact that the officers were sent to a different destination? My understanding of sources is that all the "other ranks" went to Stalag XX in the first instance - though many ended up in other camps once the Germans got their POW arrangements a bit more organised.ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 07:23, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have rephrased to show that the officers went elsewhere. If anyone persists with the view that any significant number of other ranks initially went to a different camp, good refs would be needed. ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 20:28, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The edit was indeed based on the simple fact that the officer POWs of 51<H>Div were sent to separate camps.

JF42 (talk) 12:35, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Photograph: 'Battle of the Scarpe' - inaccurate caption[edit]

" Daylight patrol of the 1/6th Battalion, Seaforth Highlanders ... Troops firing into a dug-out in a deserted German trench to dislodge any remaining Germans."

This photograph has been carelessly captioned, either by IWM or Wikimedia Commons. It is plainly not an action photograph. The one soldier with his rifle vaguely at the ready as he peers into the dug-out entrance is evidently not firing. Not least because a fellow soldier, visible in the entrance, has already entered the dugout and is inspecting the position. JF42 (talk) 02:43, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Numbers of men captured at St Valery-en-Caux too high?[edit]

This article uses Saul David's number of over 10,000 PoWs. In his book David gives no sources for his figure of 10,000. Hugh Sebag-Montefiore in his book "Dunkirk: Fight to The Last Man" cites the Bundesarchive record of 7th Panzer Division from 12 June 1940 RH27-7/220 with a figure of 8,000 British prisoners.

If the number is in doubt and Sebag-Montefiore's number has a source should it be used instead? Brownag (talk) 23:22, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If the source is a war diary dated 12 June, then I would be very surprised if it had an accurate record of all the prisoners taken. There were even, if I recollect the account correctly, some who had yet to surrender. But the main point is that counting all those prisoners is not an instant task and the immediate number is unlikely to be correct. Ideally, a further source can be found.ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 23:30, 13 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The source is a report on the actions of the division on 12 June. I don't have a date when it was written but I doubt 2,000 troops were yet to surrender. Unfortunately David doesn't give a source for his numbers. I suspect it is based on his own calculations in 1994 from Fortune's ciphers and numbers of rescued troops and not from any accurate figures from 1940. Hopefully a further source can be found.

Brownag (talk) 20:27, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking more of the confusion of dealing with several thousand prisoners who were not in the same location - some were in the town, some were on the high ground southeast of the town, and others were on the cliffs toward Veules-les-Roses and the beaches below the cliffs. I think it would be very surprising if the Germans had an accurate count by the end of the day. They were more concerned with getting the prisoners herded into temporary holding areas from which they could not escape. I note that Sebag-Montefiore's footnote on the 8,000 figure says "The reference to 8,000 British prisoners, probably a best estimate, is in the 12 June entry in the 7th Panzer divn files" (bold added). I am checking other sources.ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 21:05, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at 1940 the Last Act by Basil Karslake, (pg183) he gives very precise numbers of those of the 51st Highland Division who were evacuated (including some who, as I understand it, were on the Le Havre side of the encircling German advance, and so were not in St Valery) These total 13,196 men. Karslake then states that the 51st Division had a strength of about 25,000 when it left the Saar. The arithmetic on these numbers: 25,000 less 13,196 = 11,804. Of course, the 51st took substantial casualties on the fight back to and in St Valery. I don't have a figure for them. However, a number of other units had been added to the 51st before the surrender. Sorting out which of these units were where is a real tangle (so avoided by most writers on the subject). I know for certain that most of the 2/6th Battalion, East Surrey Regiment made it to St Valery and were taken prisoner. (They were added to the 51st just days before the surrender, so cannot be in Karslake's 25,000.) There were other similar units that might have been captured here as well, but it is hard to be sure. I recollect that the 7th Royal Norfolks were also attached to the 51st (and may possibly be in the 25,000 total). I am reasonably sure there are other units added at a late stage. What this does to the arithmetic on the numbers of POWs taken is not easy to say. However, it is is possible to see how the 10,000 figure may be correct.ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 23:03, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]


The 7th Royal Norfolks were attached to the 51st as a Pioneer Battalion and were on the strength of the division in France. OB here:
https://51hd.co.uk/accounts/order_bef
Re troops evacuated- a mixed grouping of 51st HD troops, known as 'Ark Force' under Brig. A.C. Stanley Clarke, 154 Bde, was sent back to hold open the route to Le Havre and so escaped the encirclement at St Valery. After defending the harbour perimeter, the survivors were evacuated by sea. Ark Force orders and OB here:
https://51hd.co.uk/accounts/ark_force
JF42 (talk) 11:36, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The source given above ([5]) does not appear to give a complete list of the troops attached to the 51st at the time of surrender. It is a highly mobile and somewhat confusing story - so it is not surprising that this is the case.
On the subject of not everyone surrendering at the same time, Sauls account mentions 3 companies of the 1st Black Watch (about 200 men) a few km inland at Houdetot. They eventually surrendered some time in the afternoon. (The surrender in St Valery was at about 10:00 in the morning.) Also there were 3 companies of the 2nd Seaforth who had been bypassed by the German advance and late in the afternoon the Germans sent a captured Company Quartermaster Sergeant to explain that everyone else had surrendered - even so, a good number attempted to escape whilst some surrendered. This supports the idea that the German war diary figure is incomplete.
Given the detail of Saul's account, I think we have to give some credence to his estimate of the number taken prisoner. He does have some information on the number killed and how many from Ark Force were evacuated from Le Havre (he states this as 4,000 men).ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 14:53, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:51st_(Highland)_Division&oldid=1197059665"