to Carne, the Glosters' CO "gave the order to his company commanders to make for the British lines as best as they could" on the morning of 25 April. Only the remains of D Company, under the command of Major Mike Harvey, reached the UN lines after several days. The rest of the battalion surrendered and 459 of them were taken prisoner, including Carne. Aftermath Importance of the battle Had the PVA achieved a breakthrough in the initial stages of their assault, they would have been able to outflank the ROK 1st Division to the west and the US 3rd Infantry Division to the east of the 29th Brigade. Such a development would have threatened the stability of the UN line and increased the likelihood of success for a PVA advance on Seoul. Although the PVA benefited from the brigade's scattered deployment and lack of defensive preparations, they were nevertheless unable to take the positions before UN forces could check further advances. In three days of fighting, the determined resistance of the 29th Brigade severely disrupted the PVA offensive, causing it to lose momentum, and allowed UN forces in the area to withdraw to the No-Name Line, a defensive position north of Seoul, where the PVA/KPA were halted. The scope and the outcome of the Imjin River engagement have been subjected to several interpretations according to different historiography traditions. According to official Chinese history, the elimination of the 1st Battalion, Gloucestershire Regiment by the Chinese 63rd Army is considered to be an important victory, although the failure of the 64th and the 65th Army to eliminate the entire British 29th Independent Infantry Brigade and capture Seoul due to the defense of ROK 1st Infantry Division was a serious setback. On the other hand, the South Korean contributions to the Imjin River battle are only recorded in sparse detail by the official South Korean history, but historian Allan R. Millet has argued that the ROK 1st Infantry Division's performance in battle demonstrated the potential of South Korean armed forces, in the wake of serious failures during the period of 1950–51. In British Empire countries, the engagement has been interpreted as the 29th Brigade's sacrifice, against impossible odds when facing the Chinese 63rd Army, which ultimately prevented the Chinese from capturing Seoul. Regardless of the interpretations, independent research from historians Zhang Shu Guang and Andrew Salmon concluded that the actions of the