Self Inflicted Wounds

[NigelS]

I have a copy of the casualty returns for the 169th Infantry Brigade (part of 56th Divn; 1st London) for August 1917. The Brigade took part in failed attack on Polygon Wood as part of the Battle of Langemark during mid August with its total casualties for the month amounting to 1261 (41 officers & 1220 ORs); Of the 151 ORs wounded of the 1/9th Bn (Queen Victoria's Rifles) three are given as "Self Inflicted"(there are no SIWs for any of the other Bns in the brigade). While SIWs are certainly not unusual (I gather from other threads that a total of 12 Officers & 3882 ORs were charged for the offence), was three in a single Battalion during one month at all unusual? It's very easy to imagine that there might be a story behind this, but suspect it's more likely to be a case of "copycat", or just a coincidence. As the SIWs are mentioned in the casualty figures it's likely that men involved would have been charged and details recorded in the Bn war diary - are any further details known?

NigelS

[Malcolm]

I have the war diary of 17th Royal Scots for 30th September 1918 and it contains five SIW in the casualty returns. In the battle that followed there were around 300 casualties!

Aye

Malcolm

[sotonmate]

Nigel

This was the time of Gheluveldt Plateau,the more southern element of the Battle of Langemarck, and the Bn/Bde suffered heavily prior to, and during, Polygon Wood. Perhaps the prospect of mutilation/death was too much to bear and this was an easier way out. A pact or a conspiracy ?

Maybe someone here has the Diary pages for that time. I will try to get a look at the Diary myself next week if nothing appears here in the interim.

Sotonmate

[NigelS]

Malcolm & Sotonmate

Any idea whether there was a high level of SIWs in other Bns involved on the 30th Sept? maybe it gives an indication of low morale within particular Bns. As with the Battle of Langemarck all Bns involved must, by that stage of the war, have had similar expectations as to what they would be encountering, but I can see a combination of poor morale and a terror of what was to come leading to attempts to get out however drastic. I can also imagine the possibility of SIW post an attack in order to attempt a get away as far away as possible from the trauma encountered on the battlefield, to avoid having to go into action again and a desire to be back safely home with family & friends.

It would interesting to determine the dates of SIWs over the month whether spread out, close together, before or after the attack.

For the record the OR casualties for the other Bns of the 169TH divn for August '17 was:-

Killed/Wounded/missing

2nd London (RF) 28/124/163

5th London (LRB) 29/134/192

9th London (QVR) 31/151*/92 *includes 3 SIW

16th London (QWR) 51/169/28

169th MG Coy 5/17/3

169th TMB -/3/-

Totals 144/598/478 (1220)

NigelS

[joseph]

Nigel,

I have come across two groups one of 3 and one of 5 SIW, both groups were Bombing accidents but it was several days after the events that the enquiry's decided it was accidental. By then the casualty returns would be forwarded. It seems that it was on both occasions the Medical Staff at the CCS informed the CO that there was reason to believe the wounds were Self Inflicted.

Regards Charles

[NigelS]

quote: 'joseph' date='Jun 24 2008, 10:03 PM' post='946634' "I have come across two groups one of 3 and one of 5 SIW, both groups were Bombing accidents but it was several days after the events that the enquiry's decided it was accidental. By then the casualty returns would be forwarded. It seems that it was on both occasions the Medical Staff at the CCS informed the CO that there was reason to believe the wounds were Self Inflicted."

A multiple SIW by bombing would either have to be the act of a lone man with total disregard for his comrades or as a result of a pact and in both cases, with, unlike a rifle shot, such an unpredictable outcome, either a very foolhardy means of SIW or suicide attempts, but I suppose that if you're in a state of mind to consider SIW that aspect isn't considered; I wonder what evidence led to the medical staff believing SIW, the nature of the wounds, what was said, or the mens mental state; from their experience there must have been something which didn't seem quite right to them as I would like to believe that that sort of accusation wouldn't be levelled without very good cause to do so.

NigelS

[joseph]

Nigel,

The accusations as I have said came from the CCS it was a simple letter to the CO saying I believe these wounds to be self inflicted please investigate, it looked like a standard form. On both counts the men were exonorated the 3 chaps recieved thier wound from a mills bomb going off in the throwing pit.

The five from D Coy 1st Bn East Yorkshire Regiment also exonorated (1 DOW) when a bomb was thrown (by one of thier own) in the cookhouse when out of the line. The man that died was the CSM.

I suppose an experienced MO would be able to tell what sort of weapon caused the injury, and to a degree how far away it went off.

Regards Charles

[joseph]

Nigel,

The form that was sent;

Regards Charles

[truthergw]

Nigel,

The form that was sent;

Regards Charles

The fact that there was a form suggests that medical staff were encouraged to report injury which might have beeen self inflicted. A reading of " The War the Infantry Knew", suggests that one of a MO's duties was to weed out malingerers and that there was an assumption that men would exaggerate the extent of illness or injury. TLC was not high in the list of the Army's requirements when providing medical attention.

[59165]

Kinda ties in with your point on the sad thread,Tom.

[truthergw]

Some aspects of the day to day running of the armed services do not fit well with our modern ideas of respect for the individual and catering for each person with sensitivity. The army is not like that. The training a recruit undergoes is mainly intended to get him to change his expectation in that direction. If you fit in, you will see it as a necessary discipline. If you do not , you will likely perceive it as bullying. There is a reference in a poem by Owen, " The Dead Beat".

[Heid the Ba]

The form does allow for the matter to already be in hand. I suspect many self-inflicted wounds are fairly obvious; I have read of soldiers sticking their hands above the parapet or shooting themselves in the foot.

Current A&E practice (no doubt someone will expand or correct me) includes a list of reportable injuries relating to things like gun crime and child abuse.

[joseph]

Just bringing this back to the top, wonder if a conclusion was drawn.

Regards Charles

[sotonmate]

Nigel S

Took a look at WO95/2963 War Diary for the 1/9 Londons (QVR) for August 1917. There is no reference there concerning SIWs. Three pages make up the month's journal,and there are a bunch of questionnaires to Platoon Commanders concerning certain aspects of an attack they had just made. No ref there either.

I could go along with opinion here that the incidents you quote were taken up by the MO.

Sotonmate

[NigelS]

Thanks for looking Sotonmate; in answer to Charles' (Joseph) question, it looks as if the answer has, unfortunately, to be: no conclusion reached.

NigelS