The Home Guard (initially Local Defence Volunteers or LDV) was an armed citizen militia supporting the British Army during the Second World War. Operational from 1940 to 1944, the Home Guard had 1.5 million local volunteers otherwise ineligible for military service, such as those who were too young or too old to join the regular armed services (regular military service was restricted to those aged 18 to 41) and those in reserved occupations. Excluding those already in the armed services, the civilian police or civil defence, approximately one in five men were volunteers. Their role was to act as a secondary defence force in case of invasion by the forces of Nazi Germany.

The Home Guard were to try to slow down the advance of the enemy even by a few hours to give the regular troops time to regroup. They were also to defend key communication points and factories in rear areas against possible capture by paratroops or fifth columnists. A key purpose was to maintain control of the civilian population in the event of an invasion, to forestall panic and to prevent communication routes from being blocked by refugees to free the regular forces to fight the Germans. The Home Guard continued to man roadblocks and guard the coastal areas of the United Kingdom and other important places such as airfields, factories and explosives stores until late 1944, when they were stood down. They were finally disbanded on 31 December 1945, eight months after Germany’s surrender.

Men aged 17 to 65 years could join, although the upper age limit was not strictly enforced. Service was unpaid but gave a chance for older or inexperienced soldiers to support the war effort.

Background

Early ideas for a home defence force prior to the Second World War

The origins of the Second World War Home Guard can be traced to Captain Tom Wintringham, who returned from the Spanish Civil War and wrote a book entitled How to Reform the Army. In the book, as well as many regular army reforms, Wintringham called for the creation of 12 divisions similar in composition to that of the International Brigades, which had been formed in Spain during the conflict. The divisions would be raised by voluntary enlistment targeting ex-servicemen and youths. Despite great interest by the War Office in the book’s assertion that ‘security is possible’, Wintringham’s call to train 100,000 men immediately was not implemented.

Establishing a home defence force

When Britain declared war on Germany on 3 September 1939, debates began in official circles about the possible ways in which the German military might invade Britain. In the first week of the conflict, numerous diplomatic and intelligence reports seemed to indicate that there was the possibility of an imminent German amphibious assault.Many government ministers and senior army officials, including the Commander in Chief Home Forces, General Walter Kirke, believed that the threat of invasion was greatly exaggerated and were sceptical, but others were not, including Winston Churchill, the new First Lord of the Admiralty.

Churchill argued that some form of home defence force should be raised from people who were ineligible to serve in the regular forces but wished to serve their country. In a letter to Samuel Hoare, the Lord Privy Seal, on 8 October 1939, Churchill called for a Home Guard force of 500,000 men over the age of 40 to be formed.

Early local grassroots formation of home defence forces

While government officials were debating the need for a home defence force, such a force was actually being formed without any official encouragement. In Essex, men not eligible for call-up into the armed forces were coming forward to join the self-styled “Legion of Frontiersmen“. Officials were soon informed of the development of the legion, with the Adjutant-General, Sir Robert Gordon-Finlayson, arguing that the government should encourage the development of more unofficial organisations. The fear of invasion in 1939 quickly dissipated as it became evident that the German military was not in a position to launch an invasion of Britain; official enthusiasm for home defence forces waned and the legion appears to have dissolved itself at the same time.

The Battle of France began on 10 May 1940, with the Wehrmacht invading Belgium, the Netherlands and France. By 20 May, German forces had reached the English Channel, and on 28 May, the Belgian Army surrendered. The combination of the large-scale combined operations mounted by the Wehrmacht during the invasion of Norway in April and the prospect that much of the English Channel coast would soon be occupied made the prospect of a German invasion of the British Isles alarmingly real. Fears of an invasion grew rapidly, spurred on by reports both in the press and from official government bodies, of a fifth column operating in Britain that would aid an invasion by German airborne forces.

Increasing pressure on Government to form a home defence force

The government soon found itself under increasing pressure to extend the internment of suspect aliens to prevent the formation of a fifth column and to allow the population to take up arms to defend themselves against an invasion. Calls for some form of home defence force soon began to be heard from the press and from private individuals. The press baron Lord Kemsley privately proposed to the War Office that rifle clubs form the nucleus of a home defence force, and Josiah Wedgwood, a Labour MP, wrote to the prime minister asking that the entire adult population be trained in the use of arms and given weapons to defend themselves. Similar calls appeared in newspaper columns: in the 12 May issue of the Sunday Express, a brigadier called on the government to issue free arms licences and permits to buy ammunition to men possessing small arms, and the same day, the Sunday Pictorial asked if the government had considered training golfers in rifle shooting to eliminate stray parachutists.

The calls alarmed government and senior military officials, who worried about the prospect of the population forming private defence forces that the army would not be able to control, and in mid-May, the Home Office issued a press release on the matter. It was the task of the army to deal with enemy parachutists, as any civilians who carried weapons and fired on German troops were likely to be executed if captured. Moreover, any lone parachutist descending from the skies in the summer of 1940 was far more likely to be a downed RAF airman than a German Fallschirmjäger.

Nevertheless, private defence forces soon began to be formed throughout the country, often sponsored by employers seeking to bolster defence of their factories. This placed the government in an awkward position. The private forces, which the army might not be able to control, could well inhibit the army’s efforts during an invasion, but to ignore the calls for a home defence force to be set up would be politically problematic.^[4] An officially-sponsored home defence force would allow the government greater control and also allow for greater security around vulnerable areas such as munitions factories and airfields; but there was some confusion over who would form and control the force, with separate plans drawn up by the War Office and General Headquarters Home Forces under General Kirke.

The government and senior military officials rapidly compared plans and, by 13 May 1940, worked out an improvised plan for a home defence force, to be called the Local Defence Volunteers (LDV). The rush to complete a plan and announce it to the public had led to a number of administrative and logistical problems, such as how the volunteers in the new force would be armed, which caused problems as the force evolved. On the evening of 14 May 1940, Secretary of State for War Anthony Eden gave a radio broadcast announcing the formation of the LDV and calling for volunteers to join the force: “You will not be paid, but you will receive a uniform and will be armed.”

Official recognition and enlistment

In the official radio announcement, Eden called on men between the ages of 17 and 65 years in Britain who were not in military service but wished to defend their country against an invasion to enroll in the LDV at their local police station. It was anticipated that up to 500,000 men might volunteer, a number that conformed generally with the Army’s expectation of the total numbers required to fulfill the LDV’s expected functions. However, the announcement was met with much enthusiasm: 250,000 volunteers tried to sign up in the first seven days, and by July this had increased to 1.5 million. Social groups such as cricket clubs began forming their own units, but the bulk were workplace-based, especially as co-operation from employers was necessary to ensure that volunteers would be available for training and operational patrols. Indeed, many employers envisaged the LDV units primarily as protecting industrial plants from fifth column attack.

Women and the Home Guard

The Home Guard did not initially admit women to its ranks. Some women formed their own groups like the Amazon Defence Corps.In December 1941, a more organised but still unofficial Women’s Home Defence (WHD) was formed under the direction of Dr Edith Summerskill, Labour MP for Fulham West. WHD members were given weapons training and basic military training. Limited female involvement was permitted later, on the understanding that these would be in traditional female support roles (e.g. clerical, driving) and not in any way seen as combatants.

Logistics and practical support issues

The War Office continued to lay down the administrative and logistical foundations for the LDV organisation. Eden’s public words were generally interpreted as an explicit promise to provide everyone who volunteered with a personal firearm. In retrospect, it was recognised that recruitment would have been better limited to the numbers required (and capable of being armed), with later volunteers given places on a waiting list. However, once volunteers had been enlisted, it was considered impossible from a public relations perspective to then dismiss them. Nevertheless, the regular forces saw no priority in providing more arms and equipment to the new force than would have been needed had numbers been properly constrained in the first place.

In telegrams to the lord lieutenants of each county it was explained that LDV units would operate in predefined military areas already used by the regular army, with a General Staff Officer coordinating with civilian regional commissioners to divide these areas into smaller zones. In London this was organised on the basis of police districts. On 17 May, the LDV achieved official legal status when the Privy Council issued the Defence (Local Defence Volunteers) Order in Council, and orders were issued from the War Office to regular army headquarters throughout Britain explaining the status of LDV units; volunteers would be divided into sections, platoons and companies but would not be paid and leaders of units would not hold commissions or have the power to command regular forces.

Implementation of the legislation proved to be extremely difficult, particularly as the primary focus of the War Office and General Headquarters Home Forces was on Operation Dynamo, the evacuation of the British Expeditionary Force from Dunkirk between 27 May and 4 June 1940. The apparent lack of focus led to many LDV members becoming impatient, particularly when it was announced that volunteers would receive only armbands printed with “L.D.V.” on them until proper uniforms could be manufactured, and there was no mention of weapons being issued to units. The impatience led to many units conducting their own patrols without official permission, often led by men who had previously served in the armed forces.

The presence of many veterans and the appointment of ex-officers as commanders of LDV units, only worsened the situation, with many believing that they did not require training before being issued weapons. That led to numerous complaints being received by the War Office and the press and to many ex-senior officers attempting to use their influence to obtain weapons or permission to begin patrolling. The issue of weapons to LDV units was particularly problematic for the War Office, as it was recognised that the rearming and reequipping of the regular forces would have to take precedence over the LDV. All civilian firearms, especially shotguns and pistols, previously were to have been handed in to local police stations^{[citation needed]}, and volunteers were allowed often by the police to retrieve these for their LDV duties^{[citation needed]}. In rural areas, volunteer shotgun users initially organised themselves into vigilante groups, dubbed ‘the parashots’ by the press, to watch the early morning skies for German parachutists.

For public (and enemy) consumption, the government maintained that large stocks of Lee-Enfield rifles remained from the First World War, but the actual total reserve stockpile amounted to 300,000, and they had already been earmarked for the expansion of the army by 122 infantry battalions. Instead, the War Office issued instructions on how to make Molotov cocktails and emergency orders were placed for Ross rifles from Canada. In the absence of proper weapons, local units improvised weapons, especially grenades, mortars and grenade projectors, from whatever came to hand, and the legacy of self-reliant improvisation in the face of what was interpreted as official disregard and obstruction was to remain as a characteristic of the Home Guard throughout its existence.

Unclear role, low morale and disciplinary problems

Another problem that was encountered as the LDV was organised was the definition of the role the organisation was to play. Initially, in the eyes of the War Office and the army, the LDV was to act as ‘an armed police constabulary’, which, in the event of an invasion, was to man roadblocks, observe German troop movements, convey information to the regular forces and guard places of strategic or tactical importance. The War Office believed that the LDV would act best in such a passive role because of its lack of training, weapons and proper equipment. Such a role clashed with the expectations of LDV commanders and members who believed that the organisation would be best suited to an active role of hunting down and killing parachutists, and fifth columnists, as well as attacking and harassing German forces.

“In the popular mind it was the twin terrors of Nazi paratrooper and Fifth Columnist traitor which were the Home Guard’s nemesis, its natural enemy. Notwithstanding that the Home Guard actually spent most of its time preparing to defend ‘nodal points’ against tank attack, operating anti-aircraft artillery or locating unexploded bombs.”

The clash led to morale problems and even more complaints to the press and the War Office from LDV members who were opposed, as they saw it, the government’s leaving them defenceless and placing them in a noncombatant role. Complaints about the role of the LDV and continuing problems encountered by the War Office in its attempts to clothe and arm the LDV, led the government to respond to public pressure in August, redefining the role of the LDV to include delaying and obstructing German forces through any means possible.Also in August, the Home Office and MI5 instituted the ‘Invasion List’, a list of around 1,000 persons whose ‘recent conduct or words indicated that they were likely to assist the enemy’ and who would be apprehended by the police in the event of an invasion, hoping thereby to forestall the expectations of many LDV volunteers that they would then be empowered to act as ‘Judge, Jury and Executioner’ of potential collaborators and fifth columnists.

At the same time, Churchill, who had assumed the position of Prime Minister in May 1940, became involved in the matter after being alerted to the problems, obtaining a summary of the current LDV position from the War Office on 22 June 1940. After reviewing the summary, Churchill wrote to Eden stating that in his opinion, one of the main causes of disciplinary and morale problems stemmed from the uninspiring title of the LDV and suggesting that it be renamed as the ‘Home Guard’. Despite resistance from Eden and other government officials, who noted that one million “LDV” armbands had already been printed and the cost of printing another million ‘Home Guard’ armbands would be excessive, Churchill would not be dissuaded. On 22 July, the LDV was officially renamed the Home Guard. Churchill ruled decisively on the issue of whether civilian volunteers should actively resist German forces, even at the expense of setting themselves outside the protection of the Geneva Conventions. The ‘Rules of War’, he pointed out, had been drawn up with the express intention of avoiding defeated combatants fighting on to the last. However, in the fight against Nazism, any outcome, including the complete destruction of a town and the massacre of its population, would be preferable to its acquiescing to Nazi rule.

Formal combatant status

This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources in this section. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (May 2019) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

The Home Guard in 1940 were an armed uniformed civilian militia, entirely distinct from the regular armed forces. Volunteers originally had no recognised military rank, were not subject to military discipline and could withdraw (or be withdrawn by their employers) at any time. In 1941, nominal ranks were introduced for Home Guard ‘officers’, and in 1942, limited conscription was implemented intended for circumstances where Home Guard forces were taking over functions from regular forces (chiefly coastal artillery and anti-aircraft batteries), and non-officer volunteers became ‘privates’. Volunteers remained legally civilians and failure to attend when ordered to do so was punishable by civilian authorities. Nevertheless, the British Government consistently maintained that as Home Guard service was strictly to be undertaken only in approved uniform. Uniformed volunteers would be lawful combatants within the Geneva Conventions and so would be “prisoners of war” if captured. That was an argument with a long history since armed civilian irregulars (uniformed and non-uniformed) had been widely employed by smaller combatant nations in the First World War, but former British governments had consistently refused to recognise captured irregular combatants in uniform as prisoners of war. Indeed, most of the Irish Republican volunteers executed by the British administration following the 1916 Easter Rising had been fighting or at least surrendered in full Irish Volunteer or Irish Citizen Army uniforms. However, that was an uprising or rebellion of subjects of the Crown and was not entirely comparable to combatants in a war between sovereign states.

German and Austrian military traditions were, if anything, more absolute in rejecting any recognition of civilian militia combatants as prisoners of war since the German response to the nonuniformed francs-tireurs who had attacked German forces during the Franco-Prussian War of 1870. It had long been standard German military practice that civilians who attacked German troops in areas that opposing regular forces had surrendered, withdrawn or chosen not to defend should be considered properly liable to be shot out of hand. Indeed, German military doctrine had always maintained that their military forces were further entitled in such circumstances to take reprisals against unarmed local civilians – taking and executing hostages, and leveling villages: “fight chivalrously against an honest foe; armed irregulars deserve no quarter”. The actions of regular German forces during the Second World War consistently conformed to those principles: captured partisans in the Soviet Union and the Balkans, whether they were fighting in uniform or not, were killed on the spot. German radio broadcasts described the British Home Guard as ‘gangs of murderers’ and left no doubt that they would not be regarded as lawful combatants.

Organisation, deployment and tactics

By the end of 1940, the Home Guard was established into 1,200 battalions, 5,000 companies and 25,000 platoons.For its primary defensive role, each section was trained and equipped to operate as a single, largely independent ‘battle platoon’, with an operational establishment of between 25 and 30 men at any one time although, as volunteers would also have full-time jobs, the numbers of volunteers in each section would be around twice that establishment. In the event of an invasion, the Home Guard battle platoons in a town would be under the overall control of an Army military commander and maintain contact with that commander with a designated ‘runner’ (no Home Guard units were issued with wireless sets until 1942), who would usually be a motorbike owner. Otherwise, the battle platoon was static and would defend a defined local area and report on enemy activity in that area, but it was neither equipped nor expected to join up with the mobile forces of the regular army. Each Home Guard unit would establish and prepare a local strongpoint, from which ‘civilians’ (non-Home Guard) would be cleared if possible, and aim to defend that strongpoint for as long as possible. It might be forced to retreat towards a neighbouring strongpoint but would not surrender so long as ammunition held out. Most towns of any size would have a number such Home Guard units, each defending its own strongpoint and providing ‘defence in depth’, which should ideally be sited to offer supporting fire to cover one another and to control road access through the town from all directions.

Each battle platoon had a headquarters section; commander, second in command, runner, and at least one marksman ‘sniper’ with an M1917 Enfield rifle. The fighting force of the platoon consisted of three squads of around 8 men, each squad having a three-man automatic weapons group (usually with one either of a BAR or Lewis gun) and a rifle/bomb group armed with M1917 rifles, grenades and sticky-bombs, and a Thompson or Sten sub-machine gun if possible. Men without rifles should all have shotguns, if available. The basic tactical principle was ‘aggressive defence’; fire would be held until the enemy were within the defensive perimeter of the town in force and they would then be attacked with concentrated firepower of bombs, grenades, shotguns and automatic weapons (as much as possible from above and from the rear), with the object of forcing them into cover close by. Retreating enemy forces would be counterattacked (again preferably from the rear), the automatic weapons group of each squad providing covering fire while the bombing group attacked with grenades, submachine guns and shotguns. As many Germans as possible should be killed, and no prisoners would be taken.

Battle tactics were derived substantially from the experience of Spanish Republican forces although they also drew on the experience of the British Army (and the IRA) in Ireland. The emphasis was on drawing the Germans into fighting in central urban areas at short ranges, where stone buildings would provide cover; lines of communication between units would be short; the Home Guard’s powerful arsenal of shotguns, bombs and grenades would be most effective; and German tanks and vehicles would be constrained by narrow, winding streets.

Secret roles of the Home Guard[edit]

The Home Guard had a number of secret roles. That included sabotage units who would disable factories and petrol installations following the invasion. Members with outdoor survival skills and experience (especially as gamekeepers or poachers) could be recruited into the Auxiliary Units, an extremely secretive force of more highly trained guerrilla units with the task of hiding behind enemy lines after an invasion, emerging to attack and destroy supply dumps, disabling tanks and trucks, assassinating collaborators, and killing sentries and senior German officers with sniper rifles.^[13] They would operate from pre-prepared secret underground bases, excavated at night with no official records, in woods, in caves, or otherwise concealed.

These concealed bases, upwards of 600 in number, were able to support units ranging in size from squads to companies. In the event of an invasion, all Auxiliary Units would disappear into their operational bases and would not maintain contact with local Home Guard commanders, who should indeed be wholly unaware of their existence. Hence, although the Auxiliaries were Home Guard volunteers and wore Home Guard uniforms, they would not participate in the conventional phase of their town’s defence but would be activated once the local Home Guard defence had ended to inflict maximum mayhem and disruption over a further necessarily brief but violent period.

Edward 8th “encouraged Nazis to bomb UK into submission” in World War Two, according to a new Channel 4 documentary.

The documentary, Edward VIII: Britain’s Traitor King, will show evidence the former king — who abdicated in 1936 after the Church of England, the government and the public condemned his decision marry American socialite Wallis Simpson — passed information to Germany and encouraged the Nazis to bomb Britain before reappointing him as king.

It will reportedly also show evidence that Edward VIII aided the Nazis with the fall of France in 1940.

The revelatory documentary, which will air on Sunday, 27 March, is based on the work of historian Andrew Lownie whose book Traitor King will be released in May.

The documentary uses evidence from captured German documents held in the Royal Archives.

Edward was known to write reports while living in Paris that exposed weaknesses in the French army, including poor leadership. The information was then passed, perhaps unwittingly, to a Nazi sympathiser, Charles Bedaux.

Jane Ridley, a professor of modern history at the University of Buckingham and talking head on the documentary, claims: “[Edward] knew, when he boasted about the inadequacy of French war defences, that this would go back to Germany”.

In 1937, Edward and his wife met Hitler and he was famously pictured giving a Nazi salute.

After Winston Churchill, who was prime minister at the time, sent the Duke to govern the Bahamas, Edward sent a coded telegram to a Nazi associate saying he was willing to return to Europe.

Mr Lownie argues in the documentary that this indicates Edward was aware of Operation Willie, the German plan to put the Duke back on the throne as the head of a puppet state.

The rumours are longstanding. In 2015, researchers at the Institute of Historical Research at the School of Advance Study at the University of London pieced together from open archives across 30 countries, including Germany, Spain and Russia.

They revealed that Edward, the Duke of Windsor, told the Spanish diplomat Don Javier Bermejillo that the effective bombing of England “could bring peace”.

Dr Karina Urbach, the senior research fellow who worked on the study, said: “This report went to Franco and was then passed on to the Germans. The bombing of Britain started on 10 July.”

In April 1945, less than a month before the end of World War II in Europe, an American army captain found an abandoned vehicle with a trove of German government documents, one of which was signed by Joachim von Ribbentrop, the Nazi foreign minister who would later be executed at Nuremberg. Eventually, the Americans searched castles in the nearby area, as well as a country house in another part of the country, and found a huge cache of files that would eventually provide insight into the inner workings of the Nazi state—along with one set of microfilm that detailed the Third Reich’s attempt to build a relationship with King Edward VIII, whose 1936 abdication made him a virtual exile, after his brief reign on the throne.

In his new book, Traitor King, out this week, historian Andrew Lownie uses these files and many more, including documents from the FBI and the State Department, to trace the route that Edward and his American-born divorcée wife, Wallis Simpson, took from France to Portugal to the Bahamas during World War II, and the way that they kept in touch with German agents and officials even after the Battle of Britain began in the summer of 1940. He notes the American intelligence service belief that Wallis was in “constant contact” with Ribbentrop after the war started and cites a report that she even kept a signed picture of him on her dressing room wall. In the book, Lownie also elaborates on Ribbentrop’s eventual plan to kidnap the couple when they wouldn’t willingly join onto a German effort to force a negotiated peace with England.

“It’s to the credit of the Americans, particularly the American historians, that captured German documents found at the end of the war, which give chapter and verse to the duke’s treachery, were saved,” Lownie said in a video call. “Of course, this has provided our evidence, but there’s plenty of other evidence. I found, for example, private diaries of the king’s private secretary, of an MI-5 officer, diplomats, all of this confirming that the German documents were accurate and that the duke had been a traitor.”

The traditional view of Edward is that he chose love over his duty to the country and sparked a crisis in the British government. But in investigating the connections between Edward VIII and Wallis, Lownie finds evidence that it isn’t the whole story. “The revisionist view is my view, which was that he was maneuvered off the throne because they were desperate to get rid of him,” Lownie said. The government may have been skeptical of Edward even before he became king. “Fortunately Wallis came along and gave them their excuse to push him off the throne.”

Vanity Fair spoke to Lownie about the case that Edward and Wallis represented a bigger threat to Britain than previously acknowledged and why he prefers writing about the royal “baddies” rather than those thought to be following the rules and causing no scandal.

Andrew Lownie stated: I’d always suspected that they were more actively involved as intriguers with the Nazis rather than unwitting victims of the Nazis. That’s what I set out to investigate. By looking at files in the States and in other countries and looking at private papers, one began to get the sense that they were much more deeply implicated than perhaps history has realized, because of course, a lot of the files have been destroyed or cleaned out. So the evidence really wasn’t there in the British archives.