Mounted Rifles' role straight from the horse's mouth

Devils on Horses is an inside look at the role the New Zealand Mounted Rifles played in the Middle East during WW1.

DEVILS ON HORSES In the Words of the Anzacs in the Middle East 1916-19
Terry Kinloch
Exisle Publishing, hbk, $55

Review by RON TYRRELL

Utilising much primary material, Terry Kinloch focuses on the little-known campaign in which the New Zealand Mounted Rifles (NZMR) took part.

From the defence of Egypt and the Suez Canal to the occupation of the Sinai Peninsula, and the driving out of Ottoman Turkish forces from Palestine and Syria, he gains much by relating events at troop, squadron, regiment and brigade levels.

It is clear the mounted elements of the Egypt Expeditionary Force (EEF), including the New Zealanders, were important to the ultimate success of the force.

NZMR senior commanders brought experience from the South African War, which included care of men and horses in a hostile environment, an understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of mounted troops, who were neither infantry nor cavalry, but groups of four men, one of whom cared for the horses while the others engaged the enemy.

Pre-dating motor mechanisation, logistics were important. Early progress depended upon the extension of railway track and a water pipeline across the Sinai Desert, the availability of water being vital, part of the Turkish defence depending on the blowing up of wells or denying use of this commodity.

At the trooper level, hours were long, horses were cared for first, while for the men there was heat, dust, flies, tinned rations, shortage of water, and many other impacts on their health.

Each side had their strengths and weaknesses. The EEF was short of infantry, artillery and modern aeroplanes, but had the advantages of mounted mobility, however, they could not line up against static fortifications or greater strength of infantry and artillery.

The Turks were vulnerable with their dependence on the long single-track Hejaz railway, less than staunch Arab troops, and a run-down of munitions and supplies. The transfer of MEF divisions to France left the EEF in a holding rather than an offensive position, hence the campaign continued into 1917-18.

The cold, muddy winters delayed each campaign season from starting. Compared with the Western Front, casualties were light, apart from the period some dismounted soldiers spent at Gallipoli.

Several factors stand out, a vividly-told account of the battle of Romani, where the mounted elements had an important role; and as a study in command, the leadership of Chauvel and Chayter, as well as the quality of their regimental subordinates.

Overall the story lacks the expected glamour, even the raiding of the Hejaz railway seems to lack the derring-do of a Lawrence of Arabia. Perhaps this was due to their inability to attack the actual trains, or is the Lawrence story a myth?

As the troops awaited their return home, there was the inexcusable Massacre at Surafend, the action of a few, which sullied the entire brigade.

However, this volume is a fitting tribute to the NZMB, which unfortunately did not include many men from south of the Waitaki River, because after the Gallipoli campaign the Otago Mounted Rifles was disbanded, and the men dispersed.

Ron Tyyrell is a Dunedin historian

Add a Comment