Jump to content
Free downloads from TNA ×
The Great War (1914-1918) Forum

Remembered Today:

MCs Birthday and New year verses ones with citations


27thBN

Recommended Posts

There were approx 37000 MCs awarded during WW1 ,Does anybody have any data as to the amount that had citations verses Birthday or New year awards

Thanks MC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They all had citations - the Birthday Honours ones weren't published in the London Gazette.

I don't know how many of the total were Birthday Honours but I did see the list of Gazette dates for the Birthday Honours somewhere on the Forum. It would be a fairly simple task to add them up and subtract them from the total.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well easy is a relative term to add up the new year and birthday awards would be quite a task ,and then take away from the total that bit would be easy.I am asking because as a general rule citations that are gazetted with the details generally the medal group off the officer concerned sells for about 20 percent more than a new years or birthday award .I rarely get groups that do not have a gazetted citation in detail unless other factors come into play ..unit..rank...theatre of war etc

Thanks MC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Page 34 of 'Honour the Officers - Honours and Awards to British, Dominion and Colonial Officers' published in 2009

Provides a breakdown of MCs per Country - the following being the total only:

MC 35,992

MC 1st Bar 2,984

MC 2nd Bar 177

MC 3rd Bar 4

Total 39,157*

* These figures exclude MC's awarded to our Allies - America, France etc.

The compilers of this book loaded the data in alpahabetical order - and it might be worth asking them whether their detailed lists are capable of being sorted to isolate all the New Year Honours MC's to see what proportion these constitute. In that way you would prove reasonably conclusively the proportions, likewise Birthday Honours.

A random check of this book revealed an average of 7 or 8 New Year's Honour MCs per page - there are 760 pages - therefore broadly speaking if this rather simplistic approach was applied then this potentially implies approx 5,700 New Year's Honour MC's or thereabouts. I think the real figure is more likely to be of the order of 4,000 plus, given the duration of the war and the time lag before the award was announced. Likewise similiar figures may apply to Birthday Honours.

Alternatively if you have a copy of Web's book 'Recipients of Bars to the Military Cross' - it would not take long to pull out the New Year's / Birthday Honours as a proportion of the 2,984 MCs with one bar as both gazette dates are recorded on 80 pages only.

I am not sure what useful purpose any of this would serve as they all had recommendations althougth not all had published citations.

For a representative collection the best way to collect MCs is by theatre of war and year of award or gazette date. Others will of course be collecting MCs for a specific Regiment/Unit, Brigade or Divison - each to their own.

Philip

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A number of comments:

1. Based on my database of MCs to the RA during the Great War it appears that approximately 50% of the MCs were New Year or Birthday honours.

2. Ken Lees wrote: 'They all had citations - the Birthday Honours ones weren't published in the London Gazette.' This is not technically true. All MCs had recommendations, but many, including Birthday Honours and New Year Honours did not have citations. Recommendations and citations are not the same thing. Citations were generally a re-write and somewhat condensed version of the recommendations.

This is the citation for an MC in the London Gazette of 22 September 1916: 'For conspicuous gallantry during a long period of active operations as liaison officer with the infantry. He succeeded in sending back valuable information, which could only be obtained by personal reconnaissance under heavy fire.'

This is the original recommendation for the same MC award: 'From 1st to 8th July and again from 11th to 14th July 1916, this officer acted as liaison officer with the infantry, first at Scot’s Redoubt and then at Contalmaison. He behaved with the utmost gallantry throughout and succeeded in sending back most valuable information, which could only be obtained by personal reconnaissance under heavy fire. His work at Contalmaison was particularly successful as for some time his was the only source of information. During 13th, 14th July this officer went out in front of the line under heavy shell fire to examine and report whether some German guns could be moved.'

3. Some school and college rolls of honour and unit histories contain the original recommendations. Here is an example of a recommendation from a Royal Artillery unit history for a 1918 Birthday Honour:

'For conspicuous gallantry and devotion to duty when he, accompanied by another officer and several men, formed the F.O.O.'s party. Early in the operations the other officer was wounded, and most of the men were either killed or wounded. Quite regardless of heavy shelling he not only maintained the telephone line and enabled most valuable information to be sent back, but when communications were interrupted he himself twice took messages back through a heavy hostile barrage to the nearest cablehead. By his coolness and disregard of personal danger he not only set a magnificent example to all ranks but largely contributed to the success of the operations.'

4. While the Birthday and New Year Honours accounted for most of the MCs without published citations, there were other lists of MC recipients in the London Gazette that did not have published citations.

Regards, Dick Flory

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dick - Thanks that puts a different complexion on the number without any detailed published citation.

Philip

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems to have been a lengthy process and there was some confusion as to what one ended up with !

My grandfather wrote home on 22-9-16 “Was told today by Brigade Major that I have been recommended for M.C. Of course it may not go thro' as many recommendations are quashed, there are so many, so don't think anything about it till we hear more. I only hope it may mean leave.”

But in another letter four days later he wrote “I have just had a card sent from the Divisional General 'placing on record his appreciation & thanks for my val. & gall. service etc on -- at -- by doing so-&-so'. I would send it but it might get lost and prob. is all I get out of it.”

Finally he wrote on 11-10-16 that “It has come thro' & I can sport the white-blue-white.”

Regretably the “card” is lost and I can’t therefore prove that it was for the same action as the MC citation though his letters suggest that this was probably the case.

With regard to NY MCs etc I do know that my g’father was keen to stress that his was an “immediate award” (albeit a month later than the ‘action’) – presumably in contrast to a NY one !?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...