Talk:Battle of Gemas

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Identity of the Japanese unit[edit]

G'day, this article currently states that the Japanese forces were from the Imperial Guards Division. The entry in Coulthard-Clark (p. 197) says 5th Japanese Division, though. I don't have the 2008 version of Dennis et al, I wonder what it says in this regard. Can someone who has it, please take a look? Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk) 23:24, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

G'day. It seems Battle of Muar suffers from a similar confusion too. Dennis 2008, p. 342 mentions the Imperial Guards but it is unclear if they were at Gemas as he uses fairly broad sentences to describe the campaign fairly briefly. Quoting:
"Yamashita exploited this weakness by attacking it in front by the imperial Guards, and flanking it from the sea by infiltrating a battalion on the defenders' rearward communications." (Dennis 2008, p. 342.)
The official history is more clear (which Coulthard-Clark cites as a reference), and has an excellent sketch map which depicts the battle. From this it would appear that while the 5th Japanese Division moved inland from Tampin to Gemas on 14 January 1942 (and was subsequently ambushed there by 2/30th Bn), the Imperial Guards division moved down the west coast against the 45th Indian Bde around Kesang and S. Mati. See Wigmore 1957 p. 211.
As such IMO it was 5th Japanese Division not the Imperial Guards and both this article and Muar need to be changed. Thoughts? Anotherclown (talk) 23:54, 19 November 2011 (UTC)
Thanks, I will make the changes to this article based on that. The Muar article lists Imperial Guards Div in the lead, but in the Gemensah Bridge and Gemas section seems to say 5th Division. I will make the changes there too based on the Coulthard-Clark and Wigmore sources. Thanks for your help. Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk) 00:13, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
Too easy, sounds good to me. Anotherclown (talk) 00:56, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
Looking at the Muar article has gotten me confused, though. It mentions a figure of 700 Japanese killed, but I can't find that in any sources. As such, I've decided to leave the Muar article alone while I do some more research. Cheers for your help, though. AustralianRupert (talk) 01:19, 20 November 2011 (UTC)