Over the last few years I have concentrated on telling the story (the best that I can) of the men that served with the 1/6th Battalion.
In the process I have somewhat neglected the men that served with the 2/6th Battalion, and of course their story is just as important.
Fortunately, over the years I have collected post cards and other ephemera that are related to the 2/6th – the ‘Green Triangle’ – so I have now decided that the time is right to tell their story; either on-line or by print.
Interestingly, the 2/6th Battalion were engaged in a limited number of historically important actions; these being:-
- The 1916 Easter Rising in Dublin
- The German retreat to the Hindenburg Line on 27th April 1917
- The Battle of Passchendale on 26th-29th September 1917
- The Battle of Cambria on the 1st-2nd December 1917
- The ‘Kaiserchlacht’ Spring offensive on 21st March 1918
- The defence of Kemmel on 14th-18th April 1918
In those later five engagements the 2/6th suffered horrendous casualties and the Battalion was reinforced on many occasions; however, in the end the ‘2/6th’ were reduced to Cadre on the 7th May 1918.
The 2/6th Sherwood Foresters at Buxton in 1914
The reunion of the 2/6th Sherwood Foresters at Bakewell in 1935
Hi Mike I will be very interested in this as my grandfather Frederick William Wood was in the 2/6th Sherwoods.
Thanks for your message Andrew
I’m guessing that is 4838/241748 Frederick Wood, later served with Labour Corps?
Surely 141 men of the original complement were KIA out of an estimated original strength of 800 so 18% were killed leaving 82 % as survivors not 17%?
Sorry David I’m not seeing where in the post it mentions 141 men and 800 – am I looking in the wrong post? thanks Mike
On the table of the numbers of 2/6th Battalion men KIA from the original renumbered contingent you mention 33 + 45 + 17 +38 + 8 = 141 KIA in the various actions.
The Battalion strength of about 800 men allowing for non combatants gives a percentage killed or missing of 141 /800 = approx 18%
Maybe I have misread your table
I see what you mean know and you are quite right that 141 men of the original contingent were killed. What I was trying to do with the table was show that was a decreasing proportion of ‘original’ men as time went by, but the table was a bit misleading, so I have now revised it. Many thanks for pointing this out, cheers mike