88 / 128
Heavy Losses
The heavy cost of one battle alone, can be demonstrated by
the losses at Messines
Ninth Brigade’s Losses at Messines
33
rd
Infantry Battalion
8 Officers
382 Other Ranks
34
th
Infantry Battalion-
Maitlands’ Own
10 Officers
378 Other Ranks
35
th
Infantry Battalion-
Newcastles’ Own
5 Officers
31 Other Ranks
36
th
Infantry Battalion
9 Officers
421 Other Ranks
Reference David Dial
Coal Miner Diggers page 67
When the term “casualty” means both killed in action, and wounded and
unable to participate in the short term in any new military engagement and
we consider a Battalion’s strength to be approximately 1000 other ranks,
it is easy to see why some Battalions spent a considerable period behind
the lines preparing reinforcements for what lay ahead.
The loss of experienced and respected officers was a serious and
debilitating factor. Many fought close to their men and their deaths or
serious wounding often left their battalions lacking direction and new
officers needing to learn their decision making roles very quickly and
under duress.
Battalions fought as a brigade. Therefore, our two “local” Hunter
battalions, the 34
th
and 35
th
Battalions, fought together as part of the ninth
brigade along with the 33
rd
and 36
th
Battalions.
The heavy casualties is demonstrated by the fact that by September 1918
Australian battalions had an average strength between 300 and 400 men,
less than half of the 1,000 men expected.
Finally, the widespread use of new technologies like gas, the early tanks
and the advanced artillery fire made life in the trenches horrendous but
were unable to give the edge they required to gain victory. Many of these
new technologies required refinement so that in many ways the war
actually produced an excellent training field for these weapons use.
86