BereniceUK Posted 7 July , 2014 Share Posted 7 July , 2014 The CWGC headstone is in Holy Trinity churchyard, Horwich, and looks be fairly new. The date of his death is given as 29th August 1918 (SDGW also has the year as 1918). But the CWGC database gives his date of death as 29th August 1916. Is 1918 the correct year? NOLAN, ROBERT Private 24026 29/08/1916 24 The Loyal North Lancashire Regiment United Kingdom B. C.E. 239. HORWICH (HOLY TRINITY) CHURCHYARD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Langdon Posted 7 July , 2014 Share Posted 7 July , 2014 His MIC (incorrectly on Ancestry under 'Lancers' rather than 'Lancs') states Died of Wounds 29.8.18 Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hywyn Posted 7 July , 2014 Share Posted 7 July , 2014 There are quite a few typos etc on the online database. Some caused by the scanning process I believe. An enquiry with them might resolve it. If not a scanning typo. Do you have access to the burial register either at the church or the area County Archives. That should resolve it, i.e the date albeit quite a few of the other docs are pointing to 1918. If it is then shown to be wrong then the evidence can be provided to CWGC. Hywyn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill24chev Posted 7 July , 2014 Share Posted 7 July , 2014 If serving in one of the TF battalions he has a 5 digit number so would, if a TF soldier, probably have died before 6 digit numbers issued in 1917. But then again may have been discharged because of wounds before 1917 but death attributable to wounds in 1918 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BereniceUK Posted 7 July , 2014 Author Share Posted 7 July , 2014 Thanks, everyone. I'll pass it on to CWGC. I don't live in the Horwich area so can't really follow it up there or by looking up the local newspaper archives which are probably in Bolton.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Lees Posted 7 July , 2014 Share Posted 7 July , 2014 If serving in one of the TF battalions he has a 5 digit number so would, if a TF soldier, probably have died before 6 digit numbers issued in 1917. Either I don't understand what you are saying here, or you have something wrong. In my research, TF soldiers hadn't reached 5-digit numbers, so weren't issued with them, before the 6-digit number series was introduced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JOHN BALL Posted 7 July , 2014 Share Posted 7 July , 2014 England and Wales deaths for Aug 1918, Cheltenhem, Robert Nolan 24 y.o. BMH perhaps. I will be happy to look it up in the BEN archives for any info. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BereniceUK Posted 7 July , 2014 Author Share Posted 7 July , 2014 England and Wales deaths for Aug 1918, Cheltenhem, Robert Nolan 24 y.o. BMH perhaps. I will be happy to look it up in the BEN archives for any info. That's very kind of you to offer; I'll leave the ball in your court, if and when you have the time and opportunity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liz Hall Posted 7 July , 2014 Share Posted 7 July , 2014 My grandfather in 1/5th battalion LNL had the numbers 296, 57756 and 240016. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianmorris547 Posted 7 July , 2014 Share Posted 7 July , 2014 I will be going to Bolton Library tomorrow and will check the papers for you. Brian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BereniceUK Posted 7 July , 2014 Author Share Posted 7 July , 2014 I will be going to Bolton Library tomorrow and will check the papers for you. Brian Cheers, Brian. Go for the 1918 date first, it looks to be the more likely date. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
auchonvillerssomme Posted 7 July , 2014 Share Posted 7 July , 2014 It isn't a SDGW scanning error. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hywyn Posted 7 July , 2014 Share Posted 7 July , 2014 Looks to be a scanning typo as the new CWGC update confirms it is 1918 in the original documents. http://www.cwgc.org/find-war-dead/casualty/376587/NOLAN,%20ROBERT (Ihaven't read the rest about the headstones etc) Sending them the details should rectify it. Hywyn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianmorris547 Posted 8 July , 2014 Share Posted 8 July , 2014 (edited) Berenice Robert's picture and biography appear in the Bolton Journal and Guardian dated 06/09/1918. He died on 29/08/1918 at the St John Hospital, Cheltenham. He sustained severe injuries in the head, left arm and abdomen on 21/04/1918 and was admitted to the St John a week later. He was laid to rest in Horwich Parish Churchyard on Wednesday 04/09/1918 with a full firing party present. His address was 32 Autumn St, Horwich. I can e mail the pic and bio to you if you want it. Please PM me with your e mail address. The report does not say which Bn he was with. On the way to the library I checked the 5th Loyals memorial in Queens Park but he is not shown on that. Brian. Edited 8 July , 2014 by brianmorris547 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BereniceUK Posted 8 July , 2014 Author Share Posted 8 July , 2014 Top man! Cheers, Brian. This now begs the question of how accurate the CWGC database is overall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IRC Kevin Posted 9 July , 2014 Share Posted 9 July , 2014 If serving in one of the TF battalions he has a 5 digit number so would, if a TF soldier, probably have died before 6 digit numbers issued in 1917. But then again may have been discharged because of wounds before 1917 but death attributable to wounds in 1918 Any man in a TF battalion with a five digit number had not actually enlisted into the TF and was either posted in or transferred in from a 'Service' battalion, or had been conscripted and therefore was not serving under TF conditions of engagement. When TF members went to the six digit number around March 17 this change only affected TF soldiers with a 1-4 digit number and not those with a five digit number. Regulars serving with the TF also kept their four digit number. In every case I've seen with the King's Own, those who had both a TF number and then later got a five digit number, had been discharged (usually at termination of agreement before Conscription kicked in), or for medical reasons and then been conscripted at a later date when the medical condition had cleared up. The few who had a 1-4 digit number, a six digit number and a five digit number, had all been put onto munitions work and then later conscripted when their munitions work was no longer required. (They got the six figure number as their munitions work still counted as service, despite their term of engagement having expired in many cases. ) Presumably as they were no longer physically with their parent battalion when conscripted, they were given the five digit number, as those who remained in service with their battalion after the onset of conscription, kept their original numbers and continued to receive the benefits of TF enlistment, i.e. the bounty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now