When were CWGC details taken from NoK

[lionboxer]

I have just discovered another lad who should be on our memorial with his brother, or precisely his half brother. One of the reasons I had missed him was that his NoK details were not on the CWGC certificate, yet his brother who died three months earlier has his mother's name and address on the certificate. This seems rather strange and I'm wondering when the details were taken from the NoK for the CWGC records. Of course there could have been a family fallout, with another factor that our "new man" was a regular soldier who enlisted when he was eighteen in 1911.

Lionboxer

[dycer]

LB,

Don't know the date when the verification forms were issued but I am in a similar situation with my Uncles.

Both served in the same TF Battalion.

The one who was killed in January 1915 and has a known grave,has no NofK details recorded by the CWGC.His Medals were delivered to the same address as his Brother,by Registered Post, and the Grave Commission sent a Card complete with photo of his temporary Marker.Don't think there was a falling out as his Obituary records that his Brother wrote to his Father, before the official notification, advising him of his Son's death and that he had been the first to reach his Brother when he was mortally wounded.

The one who was killed in March 1918 has no known grave yet the CWGC hold his NofK details including his age at death!His Obituary records that his Brother died earlier in the War.

Fickle Family?

George

[museumtom]

One peculiarity I find is that there is more likelyhood of next of kin details being included when the casualty has a grave. If he is just a name on a memorial it is rare to find such details.

Regards.

Tom.

[welshdoc]

I dont think there is any pattern re memorials or graves it seems about 40-50% do have details ( very rough observation).

[lionboxer]

The NoK details are given for the brother who was lost on the Royal Edward with no known grave but his brother with no details has a grave in Kut. What I can't understand is that there is only three months between their deaths so surely the same would have applied? Now whether it was much later when news of of his death finally came through from Mespot that made the difference. It just depends when the details were asked for.

Lionboxer

[Chris_Baker]

Of those I have seen, the dates of sending the FVFs vary considerably but most seem to be 1919-20.

[kenf48]

I dont think there is any pattern re memorials or graves it seems about 40-50% do have details ( very rough observation).

I f you haven't seen it a copy of the form has recently been posted on this thread

http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/i...=141796&hl=

M. Middlebrook in his introduction to 'Memorials of the Somme' quotes 60% returned - but then maybe that was his 'rough observation' too

(Not really surprising there was not a higher percentage given the literacy rates and transient nature of the working class population who made up the bulk of the casualties - never mind the reaction that they wanted no part of an establishment that caused such grief - having filled in one form one can imagine (well almost) the anger at having to deal with the bureaucracy of grief all over again).

Chris, I understand the verification forms were destroyed by the CWGC in the '70s would be interesting to see a completed one!

Ken

[CROONAERT]

Chris, I understand the verification forms were destroyed by the CWGC in the '70s would be interesting to see a completed one!

Not a problem...

...

...

[kenf48]

Now how about one with the inscription filled in

Seriously, thank you very much for posting - another piece falls into place. Was this one ever sent? It seems CWGC (or more correctly IWGC) filled in the basic details leaving the family to add personal details in the blanks. I'm not a handwriting expert but it does seem like the same hand.

Ken

[Bardess]

I'm not a handwriting expert but it does seem like the same hand.

Ken

I think it is a carbon copy of the original

[clive_hughes]

If you look carefully at the bottom edges of the forms Croonaert has posted, you will see the typical Government printing contractor's dates: in this case November 1922 and April 1923.

The forms therefore can't be earlier than the 1923 date, and may indeed have been sent out some time later.

LST_164

[CROONAERT]

Was this one ever sent?

Those forms came with a pile of other paperwork (killed notification, grave notification, memorial scroll, etc) from the family. These particular ones were never sent back to the IWGC.

Dave

[CROONAERT]

I think it is a carbon copy of the original

Nope...it is the original (with basic details individually handwritten by the IWGC).

Dave

[CROONAERT]

If you look carefully at the bottom edges of the forms Croonaert has posted, you will see the typical Government printing contractor's dates: in this case November 1922 and April 1923.

The forms therefore can't be earlier than the 1923 date, and may indeed have been sent out some time later.

LST_164

Note also the advertisement for 'The King's Pilgrimage' book that came stapled to the papers. That was published in 1922. In this case,however, the family recieved these papers in late 1923.

Dave

[Tom Morgan]

Dave, could I ask if there is anything printed on the back of the form headed "Cemetery Registers"?

Tom

[CROONAERT]

Hi Tom.

Going off memory (too lazy to hunt it out), I recall that it was just the IWGC's Baker Street return address ('fold it, stick it & shove it in a postbox' type jobbie).

dave

[kenf48]

I think it is a carbon copy of the original

My thoughts too, but I wasn't going to give away my age

Ken

[Tom Morgan]

Hi Tom.

Going off memory (too lazy to hunt it out), I recall that it was just the IWGC's Baker Street return address ('fold it, stick it & shove it in a postbox' type jobbie).

dave

Thanks very much, Dave. I was very interested to see the forms. Thanks for posting them.

Tom

[Ghost]

Tom transcribed parts of those forms on the other previously mentiond thread. The preperation for erection of a headstone form asks the addressee of the form to ensure that the details are correct, in order that the inscription on the proposed headstone is absolutely correct.

This set me wondering why the cwgc debt of honour records an incorrect surname for a soldier I am following around the houses. His parents names are also spelt wrong, along with street name, and area name. Just to stir things up a little more the man was discharged under para 392.III.©, unlikely to become an efficient soldier. He then enlists in the other county regiment under a slightly different name, (the one recorded by CWGC), before dieing in France. I can only assume that with so many wrong details, the reasion they were not corrected by the family was due to illiteracy, as they came from a very poor part of town which was demolished not too long after the WW1. This must have happened in many many cases.

The above mentioned form is specifically to enable correct details are inscribed on a headstone, would a similar form have been used for soldiers with out a known grave, or would the details (name) just be taken from the mans service record details as supplied to the IWGC?

The 1922 and 1923 dates, are interesting, and may explain why many men had private headstones when laid to rest in the U.K.

Alan

[kinnethmont]

The 1922 and 1923 dates, are interesting, and may explain why many men had private headstones when laid to rest in the U.K.

Home burials were carried out by the NOK, in the usual way, and they own the grave burial rights / headstone. It is none different to any grave in a cemetery today.

IWGC were not asked to record these men until 1920 by which time many headstones were erected, or existing added to. Originally they were to be involved with overseas burials only. Later ( 1920-1930? ) the relatives were given the option of a IWGC stone with care of it in perpetuity by IWGC. If this was declined, as was their choice, IWGC have no involvement bar recording the man's details in their Debt of Honour Roll.

It is also the case that men are detailed on family headstones who did not die of causes which would have entitled them to war grave status. They will not be on the CWGC Roll.

[John_Hartley]

One peculiarity I find is that there is more likelyhood of next of kin details being included when the casualty has a grave. If he is just a name on a memorial it is rare to find such details.

I share the same sense of this as Tom. It's not something that seems easily explained - at least not rationally. Any actual statistics out there?

[KevinBattle]

I may be beaten to the response by other lightning fingered Pals, but some stats are here:-

http://www.ww2talk.com/forum/geoffs-search...xt-kin-why.html

[lionboxer]

I may be beaten to the response by other lightning fingered Pals, but some stats are here:-

http://www.ww2talk.com/forum/geoffs-search...xt-kin-why.html

A WW2 forum discussing WW1? Hmmmm!!

My initial question seems to have aroused quite a response, many thanks for the input. From the replies it seems that the forms were sent out after 1919 and possibly in this case after September 1922 because that's when the father died and only the mother is recorded as NoK. Presumably the mother received both forms at the same time so it seems odd they weren't filled in with the same details.

Lionboxer

[dycer]

LB,

Your argument does not stand up,bearing in mind it is historical.

I have photographic evidence to prove that my Grandfather survived,as a Widower ,pre WW1,into the 1920's and his youngest Son joined the Police Service.

Between them or without them the completed Casualty Forms for my Grandfather's first born Son was completed but his middle Son was ignored?

George

[Ghost]

Still no thoughts on any form for soldiers without a grave?

"The above mentioned form is specifically to enable correct details are inscribed on a headstone, would a similar form have been used for soldiers with out a known grave, or would the details (name) just be taken from the mans service record details as supplied to the IWGC? "

Alan