Perth Digger Posted 14 July , 2010 Share Posted 14 July , 2010 I've just looked at the Casualty Form B.103 for a Private in the Labour Corps who first arrived in France, at Boulogne, on 2 June 1917. His record includes the following: Date: 5.6.17 From: C.C.V.D Report: Deprived two days pay for when on Active Service not complying with order, ie, holding intercourse with the Egyptians. Place: Boulogne Date; 3.6.17 Was Egyptians a common euphemism for prostitutes at the time, or have I, ahem, got the wrong end of the stick? Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
headgardener Posted 14 July , 2010 Share Posted 14 July , 2010 Egyptian Labour Corps, I'd reckon..... Which also matches your man's unit. Though I didn't realise they'd served in France. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janecavell Posted 14 July , 2010 Share Posted 14 July , 2010 'Egyptians' could also mean gypsies? Edit: yes, I have just checked OED and it gives one meaning of 'Egyptian' as 'gipsy'. One of the quotes given to back this up is from Henry Fielding's Tom Jones (1749): 'A company of Egyptians, or as they are vulgarly called, gipsies.' Oh, and I would interpret 'holding intercourse with' as 'talking to' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perth Digger Posted 14 July , 2010 Author Share Posted 14 July , 2010 I suppose the obvious questions are: were there Egyptians in Boulogne?; and why were they out of bounds? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
centurion Posted 14 July , 2010 Share Posted 14 July , 2010 'Egyptians' could also mean gypsies? Edit: yes, I have just checked OED and it gives one meaning of 'Egyptian' as 'gipsy'. Used in this way by Philip Pullman in "His Dark Materials" triology Were reputed at the time to be traders in things dodgey (fallen off the back of a GS Wagon for example) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perth Digger Posted 14 July , 2010 Author Share Posted 14 July , 2010 If it was a question of buying dodgy gear, Centurion, why wasn't he charged with that? Having intercourse with the pilferers presupposes that they were known to be so, but that he didn't actually buy anything. He'd only stepped off the boat for the first time the day before. Any idea who/what C.C.V.D was? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
headgardener Posted 14 July , 2010 Share Posted 14 July , 2010 Any idea who/what C.C.V.D was? Something he got from his intercourse with the Egyptians...............? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
centurion Posted 15 July , 2010 Share Posted 15 July , 2010 If it was a question of buying dodgy gear, Centurion, why wasn't he charged with that? Having intercourse with the pilferers presupposes that they were known to be so, but that he didn't actually buy anything. Specific groups of people and/or places (such a estamets with a bad reputation) could be places off limits and talking to and/or visiting alone would be an offence. So a group suspected of being involved in shady business could be so proscribed and there would be no need to have evidence of actual or selling buying of black goods Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perth Digger Posted 15 July , 2010 Author Share Posted 15 July , 2010 The same bloke lost pay for 2 days in August 1918 for taking apples from an orchard. He was dobbed in by a drummer boy, who no doubt had the scrumping monopoly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
headgardener Posted 16 July , 2010 Share Posted 16 July , 2010 Can anyone actually clarify whether any elements of the Egyptian Labour Corps were in France at this time? They were Egyptian, this man was in the Labour Corps; it's a reasonable explanation. If the CLC were in France, then why not the ELC? The wording used on the man's charge sheet ("the Egyptians") seems rather over-embellished if it's being used to describe gypsies; a simple "fraternizing with unauthorised persons", or "engaged in criminal activity", would have sufficed. My experience suggests that the people who filled those sheets out tended not to be very imaginative in their wording. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andiS Posted 16 July , 2010 Share Posted 16 July , 2010 I think the etymology of Gipsies/Egyptians is the other way round - as I understand it the Romanies became called gipsies as a corruption of Egyptians rather than the other way round. I'd guess that if the charge sheet says Egyptians then that's what's meant. It's also 'holding' rather than 'having' which suggests the sense of fraternisation rather than some more professional arrangement! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michaeldr Posted 16 July , 2010 Share Posted 16 July , 2010 Intercourse means "communication or dealings between" and is not confined to s*x. The ELC were in France at this time, including companies at Dunkirk, Calais and Boulogne. Discipline was very harsh and the Egyptians "were restricted to camp when not working. Small groups of up to eight men could go out if granted a pass and escorted by NCOs." Details from our GWF Pal, Ivor Lee's latest book 'No Labour, No Battle' [iSBN 978 0 7524 4975 3] regards Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perth Digger Posted 16 July , 2010 Author Share Posted 16 July , 2010 I think the fact that Egyptians were in Boulogne solves the problem. Thanks for the comments. 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