Tag Archive | hashtag

Operation War Diary – Keeping Names Alive

When Operation War Diary launched earlier this year, we aimed to produce a structured data set covering the daily activities of all the diverse units which operated on the Western Front. Three hundred and twenty nine diaries in and the project is not just fulfilling this initial aim, but is also building up a rich resource of hashtags, covering areas from the condition and treatment of horses to the emergence of aerial warfare over the trenches.

One thing that hasn’t changed from the project’s inception is the importance of names. Names are central to Operation War Diary – they are what makes all the other information we’re collecting real, the visual reminder that it relates to the daily experiences of people just like us.

Image © IWM (Q 526) - A group of the King's Liverpool Regiment in the trenches at Blairville, near Wailly, 16th April 1916.

Image © IWM (Q 526) – A group of the King’s Liverpool Regiment in the trenches at Blairville, near Wailly, 16th April 1916.

So far, we’ve identified over 50,000 unique names. Many of these belong to officers, but there are a great number of Other Ranks too, many of them only ever mentioned once in all the millions of pages we have to tag. That’s what makes the work of our Citizen Historians so important – if that person isn’t tagged, we may never find the reference to them again, yet by tagging it we can make it visible and accessible to others who come after us. We can ensure their legacy is preserved.

Tagging names can be extremely time-consuming, especially when we encounter long lists of them, and yet there’s nothing more important. If you find you can’t tag the names for any reason, please use our #nominalroll hashtag to mark the page, to ensure that we can find it again later. We’ll keep track of all these pages and, if necessary, we’ll re-open them for tagging later.

Image © IWM (Q 1064) - Group of Indian Cavalry dismounted near Fricourt, July 1916.

Image © IWM (Q 1064) – Group of Indian Cavalry dismounted near Fricourt, July 1916.

It’s an opportune moment to pause and look back at how many names we’ve tagged – the 11th of November is fast approaching, anniversary of the Armistice and the UK and Commonweath’s Remembrance Day. This year, the Imperial War Museum is encouraging everybody to take an active part in Remembrance through its Let’s Remember Together campaign.

In partnership with the National Archives and the Lives of the First World War community of over 44,000 people, IWM would like to work with you to share the Life Stories that are your connection to the First World War. Your connection could be a relative who served, someone who shares your surname or a person listed on your local war memorial. In the case of Operation War Diary Citizen Historians, it might also be a name you have uncovered in one of the war diaries.

Whoever they are, we encourage you to share their story on Lives of the First World War, the permanent digital memorial to over 8 million men and women from across Britain and the Commonwealth who made a contribution during the First World War. Here at Operation War Diary headquarters, we’ll be blogging again about the connections we’ve uncovered.

War Horses – the power of hashtags in Operation War Diary

Today’s guest blogger is Heather Collins, a volunteer moderator on Operation War Diary and also one of the Citizen Historians involved in tagging the diaries.  She first became interested in WW1 through researching her own family’s contribution to the conflict and has been fascinated by it ever since.

The 2011 film War Horse brought the role of horses in 20th Century warfare back into the public focus and reminded us how much we relied upon them in an age where motor transport was not yet able to go everywhere.  On the Western Front in World War 1, horses were used for moving all types of  supplies and equipment as well as providing the fast moving fighting arm of the Cavalry.  But even knowing how important the horse was, some of the figures relating to their use are still staggering to read:

  • Over 1 million horses were sent overseas to war from the USA
  • By 1917, 1000 horses per day were arriving in France as remounts for the British Army
  • Casualties amounted to about 1 horse lost for every 2 men throughout the war
  • Horse fodder was the largest single commodity shipped to the front by Britain – with a higher tonnage even than ammunition!

At the start of Operation War Diary, there was no way to track information about horses at all and pretty much from the first few days of tagging, users were asking why and wanting to be able to follow the story of the horses as well as that of the men.  Early on we suggested that people use the hashtag #horses but it soon became obvious that as horses get a mention in just about every page of some diaries, this wasn’t really going to bring out much useful information!  A rethink was needed if we wanted to make best use of the obvious desire of Citizen Historians to follow the fate of the horses.

Following some discussion on the project’s talk forum pages, which shows one of the strengths of a crowd-sourcing project like OWD, where users can get involved and have a real influence, we decided to try to define some more specific hashtags to follow particular aspects of the life of the horse on the Western Front.

Two months later we now have hashtags telling us about the condition of the horses, their food, their ailments, horse casualties and their evacuation into the veterinary chain.  We have also developed hashtags to look at the condition of the roads and the problems with water supplies as a direct result of these initial ideas.

We already knew how important the horse was in the appalling front line conditions in France and Belgium.  Even though motor transport existed, it was often completely incapable of even moving in the quagmire that developed close to the front lines and horses were sometimes literally the only way of getting the heavy equipment and supplies forward.  For example in 1914 a single battery of the Royal Horse Artillery with 6 x 13 pounder field guns required over 200 horses to provide the motive power to move men and equipment quickly.  So having these additional hashtags has enabled us to look at everyday details that the Units were recording in their War Diaries regarding their horses.

Image © IWM (Q 2981)

Image © IWM (Q 2981)

Here are a few snippets of the kind of information we have found:

Water:  Units seem to have been constantly struggling to find an adequate water supply for their horses.  In September 1916, the 2nd Divisional Ammunition Column sent 1000 horses to the rear area due to water difficulties.

Food :  An Artillery battery describes the ration being cut in February 1917 to 9 pounds of oats and 10 pounds of hay as a result of which “horses lost condition during the cold owing to short food”.  This was apparently due to increased German U-Boat activity in the Atlantic having reduced the amount of oats coming in from the USA.

Equipment:  An ASC Company in the 2nd Divisional Supply Train talks about having “rough shod” their horses in the snowy weather.  This is a process whereby shoes with protruding spikes or nails are fitted to enhance grip and it is the origin of the phrase “to ride roughshod over”, The diary goes on to describe the difficulty of fitting the attachments, which they call “cogs”, to the shoes where the existing shoes were already worn thin.

Fatigue:  A Cavalry unit in August 1914 describes how the long marches (27 miles on this particular day) are taking their toll on the horses “Some were under saddle 20 hours and water was scarce. Most would neither eat nor drink when they got into bivouac”  Most cavalry units already had a number of dismounted men due to the strain on the horses and the Veterinary Corps units were struggling to keep up with the numbers, many of whom simply required rest and food.

Casualties:  Mobile Veterinary Sections (MVS) often talk about “horse floats”.  This turns out not to be some sort of boat, but actually to be another name for a horse trailer or horsebox.  These were being developed so horses that might otherwise have to be shot or abandoned could be recovered to their unit or to the MVS.  In February 1915, 7 MVS report having visited a horse left by its Unit on a farm and they suggest it might be collected in a week’s time by another MVS “who have the use of a horse float”.  The tone of the diary makes it clear the writer thinks all MVS Units should have such a modern innovation!

Why not join us at Operation War Diary and help us to find out more?

Meet the Team: Chris Kempshall & #alliedrelations

As part of an ongoing blog feature, researchers involved with Operation War Diary will be introducing themselves and discussing what the project means to them and their work. This week Chris Kempshall, Project Officer for East Sussex County Council’s WW1 Commemorations preparations and Visiting Researcher and Associate Tutor at the University of Sussex, talks about his research interests and how Operation War Diary will help him develop them further.

Over to you, Chris!

British Intelligence Officer uses a stereoscopic viewer to interpret aerial reconnaissance photographs on the Italian Front.

Image © IWM (Q 26946)


I have had a circuitous approach to the field of First World War studies with my initial university BA degree being in Media Practice and Theory, followed by a Masters in Contemporary War and Peace Studies. It was when I encountered theories of the ‘myth’ of the First World War during history related courses in my undergraduate that the war first took hold as an interest of mine and Dan Todman’s work on the subject cemented my interest in the field. At the time, rather naively, I found the idea that history could somehow lie or lack truth to be extremely unfair.

From this starting point I then, over the course of a few years, ended up becoming more intrigued with the nature and construction of the First World War. The original notion behind my PhD thesis was to examine whether the British and French had competing or complementary ‘myths’ of the First World War but it was during that early research that I realized that the relationships between British and French soldiers had been largely overlooked and the more I examined it the more interested I became. The article Elizabeth Greenhalgh wrote on ‘Parade Ground Soldiers’ proved to my mind how important an area this could be.

As a result my research now focuses predominantly on the interactions and relations between allied soldiers of different nationalities. My PhD thesis moved on to focus on the relations between British and French soldiers on the Western Front. Whilst previous studies have touched on the relations between common soldiers, this has often been within specific case studies. I drew particularly on the contemporary diaries, letters and written records of British soldiers within the Imperial War Museum and also the postal censorship records of the French army at the Archives de l’armee de terre in order to trace the nature and evolution of these relations across the war.

One of the main areas of interest for me with Operation War Diary has been examining the records which report on interactions between different allies. Having just recently been appointed to the Academic Advisory Board for the Imperial War Museum I am extremely excited at seeing the results of all this public research.

Alongside my research I also teach and lecture on a First World War course at the University of Sussex and, for the next eight months, am the Project Officer for East Sussex County Council’s ongoing project of World War One Commemorations. I am also preparing my PhD thesis for possible future publication.


You can make a real difference to Chris’ work by using the hashtag #alliedrelations if you come across anything you think might be relevant while tagging the diaries. Relationships don’t need to be limited to those between the British and French forces!

#shellshock – Hashtagging Psychological Diagnoses

As well as the tagged data generated by Operation War Diary’s Citizen Historians, the opportunity exists to classify a wide range of contextual information by recording hashtags on each diary’s talk pages. There have already been lively discussions amongst Citizen Historians over how best to hashtag #horses and #aeroplanes along with a concerted effort by many to do so. Just go to the Operation War Diary Talk forums over at http://talk.operationwardiary.org/ and search for either term to see the results.

In this blog post, Professor Edgar Jones discusses common medical terms which you might encounter, and which can be noted by using the #shellshock hashtag. Edgar is Professor of the History of Medicine and Psychiatry at King’s College London and leads the MSc in War and Psychiatry. He sits on Operation War Diary’s academic advisory group.


War Syndromes or post-combat disorders

The most common psychological diagnosis of the First World War was shell shock. The term was used by servicemen themselves in the winter of 1914-15 but given formal medical authority by Captain C.S. Myers in a Lancet paper published in February 1915. Henceforth, it was used in medical notes. It was a catch-all term without a precise definition and included a wide range of psycho-somatic presentations (a mixture of functional physical and psychological symptoms). It is not the same as PTSD though has some symptoms in common. However, the military medical authorities were concerned about its use and from 1917 onwards tried to restrict the use of the term. Alternative diagnoses included: neurasthenia and war neurosis.

Please note: contemporaries wrote shell shock as one or two words. When tagging the term it is important to record it as a single word, #shellshock.



Image © IWM (Q 79508)


Other labels used to describe psycho-somatic disorders in the British Army included:

Disordered action of the heart (DAH): This was a functional disorder (ie without organic basis) characterised by palpitations, chest pain, shortness of breath, fatigue and difficulty completing tasks. It was prevalent in the British Army throughout the latter part of the nineteenth century and was also known as irritable heart, soldier’s heart, cardiac neurosis and Da Costa’s syndrome.

Effort syndrome: Effort syndrome was the term proposed in 1917 by Thomas Lewis to categorise servicemen suffering from functional cardiac disorders hitherto called disordered action of the heart, soldier’s heart or irritable heart.

Neurocirculatory asthenia: The term introduced by US military physicians serving in the UK and France in 1918 to avoid use of the terms disordered action of the heart or effort syndrome.

Gas hysteria was a term applied to servicemen who believed that they had been exposed to gas but for which there was no organic evidence and also to those who had a mild exposure, had recovered physically but continued to report medically-unexplained symptoms.


If you come across any of these terms while tagging the diaries, we would be very grateful if you could use the hashtag #shellshock to note them in the comments section for the relevant diary page. You could be helping to advance our understanding of the psychological effects of the war on the soldiers who fought in it!