Special & Extra Reserve Bns

[kevinrowlinson]

Paul,

Quote,"Would it not be good to find an AO or ACI that said that direct recruiting into the SR would cease!"

For someone whose main interest is in the numbering of the RGA I do find the difference between the RA and the infantry a little strange, and is why I picked up on this thread after reading the first few posts.

For the mainland RGA the Special Reserve was started at the beginning of the war, and continued, starting at No. 1 at the outbreak. This was obviously to encourage old gunners to enlist for one years service. It strikes me that just looking at 6 RWFs records one is talking about the 2 types of Special Reserve. Just out of the six I posted 4 were under the one year term, and I see no reason why it should ever have stopped, it would have naturally have slowed down as time passed. What surprises me is why the other 2 young men were signed up for the 6 years Special Reservists when those terms were obviously going to be fairly redundant very quickly. Presumably the pre war 6 year Special Reservists were being mobilised, along with those on reserve. It is made easier with the RGA because it ran a completely new number series, but it would appear the RWF were continuing the Special Reservists numbers irrespective of who was signing up. Therefore, like the RGA, I see no reason why a very late S/R number should not appear, if an old soldier decided, and was fit enough, to sign up late into the war.They did in the RGA, but perhaps that's the difference.

Kevin

[Paul Nixon]

Kevin

"What surprises me is why the other 2 young men were signed up for the 6 years Special Reservists when those terms were obviously going to be fairly redundant very quickly."

I've often wondered the same myself but I supopose that hindsight is a wonderful thing and in 1914, many people thought the war would be over by Christmas, hence no need to think about doing away with the SR and ER or changing the terms of enlistment.

I'm not even sure though that the AO or ACI dealing with a cut-off date for SR recruiting exists. It looks as though it may have just withered on the vine. More research needed.

[Keith_history_buff]

I do think that the reader does need to tread carefully with regard to the terminology "[Special] Reserve" and "Extra Reserve" battalions, and how the nature of their composition changed after the outbreak of war.

For a typical county infantry regiment, it was a given that prior to 1914, and from 1914-15, the [5th] battalion was composed of Privates who had enlisted under Territorial Force terms of service, and supported by a cadre of NCOs that constituted the Permanent Staff who had enlisted under Regular terms of service. It can be too easy to assume a strict segregation is in place, with only regulars in the first two battalions, only Special Reservists in the subsequent battalion/s.

This was not to be the case for the reserve battalions. In the peacetime period from 1908 to July 1914, the lion's share of men associated with the 3rd Battalion would indeed be those who enlisted under Special Reserve terms of service. That said, the Haldane reforms changed the character of these battalions to that of holding units, containing men with a mix of heterogenous terms of service.

 

On 14/10/2020 at 14:11, Muerrisch said:

• The whole point of the SR was that the Militia were not readily available to fight in the Boer War and the SR was immediately available either as drafts or formed bodies. On Mobilization they were to deploy from the Depot to vacated Regular Barracks on Declaration.
• ·       The Special Reserve was part of the Army First Class Reserve, which comprised Sections A, B, D and the SR.
•        Infantry reserve battalions will on mobilisation take over the surplus reservists and men left behind by the regular battalion. (Regulations for the Special Reserve 1911 paragraph 2

 

It has been interesting to see a flow of reinforcements from a reserve battalion, these men's terms of service were:

• Regular, to serve 7 & 5 (or 9 & 3, or 3 & 9), having enlisted prior to the outbreak of the war, having extended the length of their colour service
• Regular, to serve 7 & 5 (or 9 & 3), having enlisted prior to the outbreak of the war, yet to complete colour service
• Regular, to serve 7 & 5, having enlisted after the outbreak of the war, yet to complete colour service
• "Kitchener men", serving under the supplemental Regular terms of service, Short Service for the duration of the war, having enlisted either (i) between 6 August and 7 November 1914, or (ii) from 8 November 1914 onwards prior to the MSA
• Special Reserve, to serve 0.5 & 5.5, having enlisted prior to the outbreak of the war, having extended the length of their service beyond 6 years
• Special Reserve, to serve 0.5 & 5.5, having enlisted prior to the outbreak of the war, still under the obligation of the length of the 6 year service (+1)
• Special Reserve, to serve 0.5 & 5.5, having enlisted after the outbreak of the war, still under the obligation of the length of the 6 year service (+1)
• Special Reserve supplemental terms, reenlisting with prior military experience, to serve 1 year or the duration of the war, having enlisted between 6 August and 7 November 1914
• "Other" - see below

With regard to "other", there was the request for TF men to transfer out of the TF, and to bolster the ranks of the reserve battalions. So, these are "of TF descendancy", even if discharged from the TF, in order to reenlist for the duration of the war.

The following, which runs counter to segregation, is of interest 

  

On 14/01/2024 at 17:35, Muerrisch said:

Bad form to quote oneself, but in the context of an apparently "wrong form" being issued post-attestation, the very early instruction re. status of New Armies and SR quoted below may explain some irregularities. Anyway, fascinating, please keep digging, even if the 'ole keeps getting deeper.

QUOTE FOLLOWS:

On a more general note on the purpose of this thread:

The status of ‘New Army’ soldiers, Special Reservists and, from 1916, conscripts.

Army Council Instruction (ACI) 123 of 12th October 1914 entitled ‘Status of Special Reserves, New Armies, and Regular Army’ said:

‘From representations made to the War Office it would appear that there is still some misapprehension with regard to the status of the Special Reserve, and the new armies in process of formation, when compared with the regular army as it existed before war was declared.

It is therefore explained that the New Armies, the reserve units and the Special Reserve are, since mobilisation, to all intents and purposes, portions of the regular army.

It is thus apparent that soldiers, whether attested under the ordinary terms of service in the force before mobilisation, or attested for the duration of the war under the conditions of AOs 295 and 296 of 1914, [K_H_B: "Kitchener men" & "SR Reenlistments" respectively, both enlisting for the duration of the war Short Service] are, during the period of embodiment, regular soldiers, and are therefore eligible for posting to any of the units of the corps to which they have been appointed, at the discretion of the competent military authority’.

One of the effects of this instruction was (should have been) that members of the reserve forces and the new armies should be numbered in the regular regimental series. Most were, although batches were issued to new formations and transferees.

 

Regarding the following question

Quote

2. Is anyone aware at what point in time the designations Special Reserve and Extra Reserve fell into disuse - if in fact they fell into disuse? I suspect the terms were obsolete by the end of 1914 but I have nothing to back that up.

 

'Official documents varied as to whether these 3rd battalions were to be called ‘Reserve’ or ‘Special Reserve’. The Army List retained the latter throughout the war, but after mobilisation, official correspondence and documents fairly consistently refer to the former (and referred to the Expeditionary Force and not the British Expeditionary Force). It should here be noted that recruiting for the SR decreased sharply soon after the outbreak of war, when better, shorter terms were offered to the New Armies.'

 

Source:

Stand To! 100 June 2014
British Infantry Reserves for the Great War (Part 1) by David Langley

The OP has hidden his light under a bushel. As well as the sterling work that he has done regarding the number sequences for regular enlistments in specified regiments, he has done the same for some Special Reserve number sequences, as well as the minefield of TF battalion number sequences. 

They can be navigated to via the following link:
https://armyservicenumbers.blogspot.com/p/index.html

Whilst it is a given that most users of the forum owe a debt of gratitude to Chris Baker for both the existence of this forum and his excellent longlongtrail.co.uk domain, I hold the opinion that Paul Nixon's activities on army service numbers has saved many of us thousands of hours of work, and I am likewise indebted to him for his painstaking labours.

Edited 27 March by Keith_history_buff
had omitted battalion number. Given the 4th was not TF for 27 regiments, I thought I would go for "5th" as being, in many cases, a TF battalion. Edited text marked in red font.

[Muerrisch]

Keith, did you mean to say this please?

For a typical county infantry regiment, it was a given that prior to 1914, and from 1914-15, the[3rd]  battalion was composed of Privates who had enlisted under Territorial Force terms of service,

Surely up to about Sep 1914 the Rank and File was on SR terms?

Surely the 3rd was solid SR terms plus PSIs on regular engagements amd almost all officers Special Reserve of Officers

[Keith_history_buff]

As you will see, I was distracted when composing the above, dithered over the battalion number, and then belatedly found I had omitted a placeholder number, to indicate a TF battalion.

 

 

 

[Keith_history_buff]

Para 2 mentions how TF battalions have segregation in place, which would continue until 1916.

The point of Para 3 is to not fall into the trap of assuming that solely SR men are in the reserve battalion, from 5 August 1914 onwards.

[Graham Stewart]

Hi All,

Sorry to interupt this conversation, but among my book collection I have an actual copy of "Regulations for Mobilization 1914" and just hope that you might be interested in the content as regards the Special Reserve.

[Graham Stewart]

Ooops sorry gents I got pages 55 and 56 in the wrong order. My apologies.

Graham.

Edited 27 March by Graham Stewart

[Muerrisch]

Good to hear from you Graham, and thank you.

[Keith_history_buff]

Thank you for taking the time to share these SR elements of the "Regulation for Mobilization". I don't recall having seen there before. They make for interesting reading.

 

 

 

[Graham Stewart]

On 26/06/2010 at 14:01, Paul Nixon said:

I'm putting together a manuscript on numbering in the Special (and where applicable) Extra Reserve battalions of the British Army's sixty-nine infantry regiments and I need to call in some additional expertise.

The majority of these battalions, when formed in 1908, continued with the number series that had been use by their militia forebears, and continued plodding along quite merrily until the First World War began. All battalions saw a huge influx in August and September 1914 but thereafter the numbers dwindle and, for most of the battalions, appear to peter out by the end of the year. It's this petering out date that I'm interested in.

It's quite normal to see men joining a 3rd or 4th or 5th battalion post 1914 of course, but the numbers given to these men were usuually from the number series being used by the service / regular battalions and not from the series that had originally been set aside for the Special and Extra Reserve. There are exceptions of course, a number of the Irish regiments for instance, maintained those Special and Extra Reserve number series throughout the war, but most did not.

So here are the questions:

1. What is the last / highest Special or Extra Reserve number on your database - that is, the number from the original 1908 series - and on what date was it issued?

2. Is anyone aware at what point in time the designations Special Reserve and Extra Reserve fell into disuse - if in fact they fell into disuse? I suspect the terms were obsolete by the end of 1914 but I have nothing to back that up.

Thanks in advance.

Paul

Hi Paul,

Just a quick one to let you know that the numbering that I have for the 3rd(Res)Bn,N.F. during WWI starts with the low number 3/189 Pte Joseph Appleby, who went onto to serve with the 16th Bn,N.F. and then was transferred to KOYLI.

The biggest number in the four figure system is 3/9997 Pte James Tymon, who went onto serve with 'X' Coy, 1st Bn,N.F.

In the five figure numbers I start with 3/10002 Pte Patrick Heany, who went onto serve with the 1st and 25th Bns,N.F. and this grows to 3/19877 Pte Fred Warbuton, who served with the 20th & 24th Bns,N.F. and he was eventually transferred to the York and Lancaster Regt.

Hope this is of some use to you.

Graham.

[Keith_history_buff]

This is the only thread that is ostensibly about reserve battalions. 

It starts off talking about battalions, albeit with reference to the Special Reserve and number sequences, which are two different topics, but they do intertwine.

I would like to make the following point, which touches on the two topics: identifying Special Reserve men from the number sequence, and the Reserve Battalion was not exclusively manned by SR other ranks.

In May 1915, the practice of inserting a battalion prefix in front of a service number was encouraged. I am wondering if this was a practice which had been informally used, and which became formally adopted when the Army Order came into being.

In many instances, "3/" appears. The only certainty is that the individual was in the 3rd (Reserve) Battalion. In many cases, the individual did indeed enlist under Special Reserve terms of service, but the prefix is not a guarantee that the soldier was in the SR. There will be instances of men wounded at First Ypres who were posted to the 3rd following recuperation, who could have this prefix on some of their documents, despite enlisting under Regular terms of service. They are not a Special Reservist, but happened to be with the 3rd when the prefix ruling came out.

'On 18th May 1915, Army Council Instruction 144 attempted to deal with the problem of duplicate numbering by instructing that where such duplication existed, a soldier's regimental number would be prefixed by the number of the battalion in which he was serving thus, for example, 5/3492'

http://armyservicenumbers.blogspot.co.uk/2010/01/army-number-prefixes.html