TOPIC:

Boer War Volunteers v. WW1 Pals battalions
I started thinking about his while writing my introduction, and would like to invite other opinions:
The “Pals” battalions are credited as a WW1 invention, but it strikes me that there was a (smaller) parallel in The Boer War with men from the same towns and villages (e.g. In my area, Westmorland - Appleby, Windermere Kirkby Lonsdale) going away to serve and fight together in the volunteer companies and battalions, even if in fewer numbers. I suppose the main difference was that men of the Victorian volunteers probably never really expected to have to go abroad to fight in a “real” war whereas that was precisely what the “Pals” signed up to do. (Remember when thinking about the Victorian volunteers, they were not yet “territorial” battalions as that term was not adopted until 1908 when the 4th & 5th territorial Btns. were formed, and even then they were only for home service unless they agreed to serve overseas as they, almost all, did in 1914)
Also whereas the home towns of “Pals” battalions were devastated when masses of their young men were “culled” within days in the same action, such as the opening days of the Somme, this did not happen on anywhere near the same scale with battles in South Africa. Perhaps this is made apparent by the fact that almost all Boer War memorials (that I have seen anyway) commemorate all the men from a community who served, with a special mention to a handful who died.
I always feel that the Boer War deserves a greater place in history, and probably would have received due recognition had it not been almost immediately overshadowed by The First World War. (Think how many Boers ended up fighting as allies with the British just 12 years later!)
The British army learnt a lot in South Africa (such as not wearing silly red tunics!) and it gave them a taste of fighting an opponent that was not merely armed with spears for the first time since the Crimea (Yes I know there was the Indian mutiny and some Victorian colonial skirmishes, but not a “proper” war)
The Boer War was completely ignored by my school history syllabus, (as was The Spanish Civil War), Hopefully it will one day receive its proper recognition as Britain’s first 20th century War.
Before I am corrected I know that I should really call it “The Second Boer War”, but I think most people will acknowledge that the term "The Boer War" is now (even if incorrectly) accepted as referring to events of 1899-1902.
Any thoughts anyone? – volunteers v pals?, is The Boer War under rated? (I’m trying to stimulate some debate here!)
Cheers Paul.

The Anglo Boer War war really was a new type of war for a new century and I have always felt that it was a dress rehearsal for the Great War, lots of number crunching, 19th century tactics with 20th century weapons and the advances in communications, the first real media war too.
The British Army had already learned not to wear scarlet years before though, in particular after the Transvaal War.

Hello Paul

I don't think you'll get closer to "pals battalions" in the ABW than, as you wrote, the volunteer companies or the first contingent IY. Fortunately none got decimated like their WWI counterparts.

The closest you get to a Somme type slaughter of men from one area is for the Lancashire regiments on Spion Kop.

As to the ABW being forgotten and ignored - hurrah!, have you seen how the Anglo-Zulu War folk carry on Leave us in peace.

They don't call the ABW "the last of the gentleman's wars" for nothing.

Regards
Meurig

Paul

Several years ago, the term "Transvaal Rebellion" was introduced to describe the 1st Boer War, thus leaving "Boer War" to refer to the 1899/1902 affair. The Transvaal Rebellion then joined the ranks of all the other rebellions that took place in southern Africa during the late 1800's and early 1900's, with only the Zulu and Boer Wars designated as 'wars'.

Although I am uncertain about how to refer to the 1840/50's conflicts in the Cape Colony, I like that arrangement, but I wonder how popular it is?

Regards
Brett