German ID Tag Help

[Hooge]

Hi all,

Can you help me to decipher a WW1 German ID Tag. It reads:

2. ERS. Btl. BAY. 4IR.

2. k.n. 364

B.4.J.R.6.K. 545

Best rgds

T

[133.R]

Hi all,

Can you help me to decipher a WW1 German ID Tag. It reads:

2. ERS. Btl. BAY. 4IR.

2. k.n. 364

B.4.J.R.6.K. 545

Best rgds

T

I´ll try it:

2nd battailon 4.bavarian infantry regiment

and

4.bavarian infantry regiment 6.company

Regards

[shippingsteel]

Can you help me to decipher a WW1 German ID Tag. It reads:

2. ERS. Btl. BAY. 4IR. 2. k.n. 364

B.4.J.R.6.K. 545

Best rgds

T

My interpretation is that you have 2 separate designations from 2 different units. Probably just shows movement between units during service.?

First one should be

Bayern. 4. Infanterie-Regt. 2. Ersatz-Batallion. 2. Kompagnie. Nr. 364

Second line should be

Bayern. 4. Jager Radfahrer Batallion. 6. Kompagnie. Nr. 545

Cheers, S>S

[apwright]

Konrad Brütting, by any chance?

From the Bavarian Personnel Rosters on Ancestry:

Born 29/03/95 at Buckenreuth, Bezirksamt Ebermannstadt, Oberfranken, religion Catholic, occupation farmer, resident in Buckenreuth, unmarried, son of Johann and Susanna (nee Hübschmann) of Buckenreuth.

06/05/15 called up as Infanterie-Rekrut to 2. Rekruten-Depot, 2. Ersatz-Batl., 4. bay. Infanterie-Regiment.

07/11/15 posted to 6. Kompanie, 4. bay. Infanterie-Regiment, Stammrollen-Nr. 545.

09/04/17 taken Prisoner of War by the British during the Battle of Arras.

23/10/19 returned from captivity.

30/03/20 discharged.

Adrian

[shippingsteel]

Thanks for following that up. Its good to get a comparison against an actual service record, to see how close we got with the translation. (Not perfect but obviously close enough.!)

PS. Vat ischt stammrollen.??

Cheers, S>S

[SiegeGunner]

Its good to get a comparison against an actual service record, to see how close we got with the translation. (Not perfect but obviously close enough.!)

Interpreting the commonplace JR = Infanterie-Regiment as 'Jäger Radfahrer' is hardly 'not perfect but obviously close enough', S>S ...

[shippingsteel]

Interpreting the commonplace JR = Infanterie-Regiment as 'Jäger Radfahrer' is hardly 'not perfect but obviously close enough', S>S ...

True perhaps - but I'm still learnin'..... ( that their system is obviously flawed, that is.!)

Cheers, S>S

[bob lembke]

Thanks for following that up. Its good to get a comparison against an actual service record, to see how close we got with the translation. (Not perfect but obviously close enough.!)

PS. Vat ischt stammrollen.??

Cheers, S>S

I am going to be lazy here and comment from memory. First of all, I have never worked with Bavarian "dog-tags", and probably not with a Militar=Pass from Bavaria. Of the four German armies in 1914, the Bavarian Army was the one the furthest from the Prussian Army in many practices.

I have never gotten my arms fully about the Stammrolle Nr, and the Kriegs=Stammrolle Nr. I think the former was used pre-war, and the later system or term clicked in on the onset of war. (But, again, this was Prussian practice. I am fortunate to have both my father's dog-tag, and his Militar=Pass. But Prussian; Garde=Reserve=Pionier=Regiment (Flammenwerfer) )

I think that the number was recomputed every year, at least I (from memory) think I saw several different numbers over several years. This might have only been done in war-time, when there was a lot more turn-over of manpower.

The extreme complexity of almost everything associated with the German Army of say 1914 is a source of both great fascination and also frustration, on occasion.

I don't think that I have ever seen or heard of two different units being punched into one dog-tag, perhaps excepting a strike-over if a guy went from one company to another within the same regiment. Not to pile on, but there was nothing like a Jaeger Redfahrer Bataillon; the typical 1914 Jaeger Bataillon structure was four light infantry companies, a Radfahrer=Kompagnie (Bicycle Company), and a MG company, in 1914 having twice as many MGs as an infantry MG company. So the unit was light infantry, but heavily equipped with MGs.

The data that was posted as being on the dog-tag is different from the Prussian pattern. One nice inclusion in the Prussian was the civilian legal address. In my case I saw an address in Hamburg, as my father did not live there, but in Berlin, I assumed it was that of his mother (don't ask, my grand-father had two families at the same time, Gutes deutsches Ordnung! ) I sent a "cold-call" e-mail to the Hamburg City Archives, citing the address, and a kind staffer sent me a lot of information, including info on an aunt and uncle that I never knew I had.

Bob Lembke

[CROONAERT]

I don't think that I have ever seen or heard of two different units being punched into one dog-tag,

That's actually quite a common occurance. Two units being the most common occurance of all... the first unit at recruitment and the first active service unit. Very often , this is all that is encountered with no further change being made even if units change - however, discs can be encountered with further transfers recorded also (though this was against regulations).

The data that was posted as being on the dog-tag is different from the Prussian pattern. One nice inclusion in the Prussian was the civilian legal address.

Its actually no different to the Prussian at all (other than regimental detail of course)...There was no 'Prussian' or 'Bavarian' style of stamping or disc (other than the extra 'B' or 'Bay.' on Bavarian discs and the colour of the neck cords), they all followed the same (Prussian) regulations as far back as 1869 (though, back then, each individual country (other than Prussia) was diffrentiated ('Bay' for Bavaria, 'Bad' for Baden, etc), this only changing after 1872/3 when Bavaria became the only one to continue with this).

The address (and name) was only officially encountered on the 1915, 1916 and 1917 pattern discs (other than on non-regulation, officer's and 'private purchase' 1878 pattern discs) and detail such as what has been posted is as per the regulations of January (updated in April) 1878 which were only outdated on 13th August 1915 and is practically all that would be expected to be found on an 1878 disc. As the guy was enlisted in May 1915, then its this pattern disc that he would (at least initially) have been issued with.

Dave

[shippingsteel]

Not to pile on, but there was nothing like a Jaeger Redfahrer Bataillon.

Bob Lembke

Thanks for adding that interesting information - I always appreciate learning more about these things.

I'm definitely no expert but I have found references to these kind of units before in my low-level research.

Perhaps you would like to view THIS thread found in another GW forum and then care to comment on its accuracy.?

To streamline the process I have added the important quote from the thread noted above. It reads :-

"A brief outline of the unit.

14th Jäger Battalion was composed of

1st Radfahrerkompanie, 5th Radfahrer Battalion; and,

2nd Radfahrerkompanie, 5th Radfahrer Battalion.

The 5th Radfahrer Battalion was formed on 9 September 1916.

At first it was known as the 1st Jäger Radfahrer Battalion and they trained specifically for deployment in Romania as part of the Falkenhayn force.

The 1st Jäger Radfahrer Battalion was added to the 2nd and 3rd Jäger Radfahrer Battalions to become the 2nd Infantry Radfahrer Brigade.

The first General Officer Commanding the Brigade was Colonel Freiherr Quad-Wykradt, originally commander of the German 153rd Infantry Regiment.

By the end of the Great War the unit bore the name was called the 8th Radfahrer Kürassier Regiment."

Appreciate all your thoughts (Dave's post included)

Cheers, S>S

[bob lembke]

"A brief outline of the unit.

14th Jäger Battalion was composed of

1st Radfahrerkompanie, 5th Radfahrer Battalion; and,

2nd Radfahrerkompanie, 5th Radfahrer Battalion.

The 5th Radfahrer Battalion was formed on 9 September 1916.

At first it was known as the 1st Jäger Radfahrer Battalion and they trained specifically for deployment in Romania as part of the Falkenhayn force.

The 1st Jäger Radfahrer Battalion was added to the 2nd and 3rd Jäger Radfahrer Battalions to become the 2nd Infantry Radfahrer Brigade.

The first General Officer Commanding the Brigade was Colonel Freiherr Quad-Wykradt, originally commander of the German 153rd Infantry Regiment.

By the end of the Great War the unit bore the name was called the 8th Radfahrer Kürassier Regiment."

Appreciate all your thoughts (Dave's post included)

Happy to stand corrected. There certainly were no Radfahrer battalions at the start of the war (note that I covered my butt with the liberal use of 1914), but as the war went on all sorts of units were created, and many of the traditional formations and relationships were broken up. There was a great need for mobility on the Eastern Front. I am guessing that what was done was the same as what the Belgians did; they stripped the independent cavalry squadrons originally included in each infantry division and cobbled them together to form a second cavalry division for their army. Looks like the Radfahrer companies were stripped out of each original Jaeger battalion and formed into Jaeger Radfahrer battalions. Perhaps these were later formed into a Radfahrer brigade or regiment.

Although I have no specific information, parts of what you found on the unnamed forum seems odd, on the face of it. Is it claimed that the 14th Jaeger battalion was comprised out of two Radfahrer companies?

The 14th Jaeger battalion existed in 1900 but in an unusual context. Many army corps had one battalion of Jaegers, often with the same number as the army corps. For example, the III. AK (my family's traditional army corps), had the 3rd Jaeger battalion in its composition. However, there was a 14th Jaeger battalion on the 14th Army Corps (XIV. AK) in 1900, but it was banded together with three other Jaeger battalions to form the 82nd Infantry Brigade of the 39th Infantry division in Colmar. This curiosity may be due to the unit being stationed in Alsace-Lorraine, where many garrisoned units were actually seconded there from other areas of Germany. The other Jaeger battalions making up the brigade were probably seconded from other army corps garrisoned in other part of Germany. They may have wanted to have a brigade of Jaegers to operate in the heavily forested and hilly country along the border in this area of the frontier.

The idea of an "8th Radfahrer Kuerassier Regiment" is a mind-bender. The infantry or Jaegers were a different branch of service than the cavalry. There were dismounted cavalry units. The text you quoted and which I reproduced above has about 3 or 4 odd elements., For example, how would a colonel be a "General Officer"? Oberst Freiherr Quadt=Wykradt=Huechtenbruck was indeed the CO of IR Nr. 153 at the outbreak of war, at the end of the war he was the CO of the 76th Reserve Division, and retired as a Generalleutnant aus Dienst, and was alive in 1926. There was no Colonel Freiherr Quad=Wykrad in the Prussian or Wuerttenburg officer corps, and IR Nr. 153 was a Prussian unit.

As to the dog-tags, there were three patterns of Prussian dog-tags, and I am only familiar with the third, which my father's is. The information on the Bavarian dog-tag is different and more limited than the third Prussian pattern, but easily be equal to an earlier Prussian pattern. I am happy to acknowledge that Dave seems to know a good deal more about German dog-tags than I do.

Bob