FROGSMILE Posted 16 February , 2011 Share Posted 16 February , 2011 Just as a thought to throw in, be wary of disregarding drummer because it does not appear on a MIC. Drummer was an appointment that carried extra pay, but his 'rank' would have remained as Private to the army authorities and Drummer would only have been used within his battalion and for strength returns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muerrisch Posted 16 February , 2011 Share Posted 16 February , 2011 Just as a thought to throw in, be wary of disregarding drummer because it does not appear on a MIC. Drummer was an appointment that carried extra pay, but his 'rank' would have remained as Private to the army authorities and Drummer would only have been used within his battalion and for strength returns. Yes, quite so, but drummers fit very uneasily in the structure because they were not "rank and file" being listed separately whereas bandsmen were R&F. I think this derived from the pseudo-heraldic status of drummers, who in early days conducted parleys, carried important messages, and preferably spoke a second language. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackblue Posted 16 February , 2011 Share Posted 16 February , 2011 This outlines the 62nd Division's war service. Confirms that second line units (2/5th Bn West Yorks) heavily reinforced their first line counterparts (1/5th Bn West Yorks) in 1915/1916. This agains supports the hypothesis of 2/5th battalion service outlined in the newspaper article and supported by Maurice's service papers. http://www.1914-1918.net/62div.htm I think that when battalions were disbanded the men generally retained their numbers.....as they were not generally discharged/disembodied. By this time the numbers within the same regiment were largely unique. They were instead transferred to other battalions of the same regiment or broken up and distributed amongst the other battalions of the same Brigade/Division. As far as the newspaper reports go the facts in respect to Maurice and Charles are proven correct. Unless we are able to find something linking the 2589 man to his Herbert Doughty Bishop we can never be certain, and the hypothesis remains circumstantial. Marriages Certificates, Electoral Rolls, papers in the possession of the family or his medals are your best bet I guess Rich. Any other ideas? Rgds Tim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pavster1980 Posted 16 February , 2011 Author Share Posted 16 February , 2011 This outlines the 62nd Division's war service. Confirms that second line units (2/5th Bn West Yorks) heavily reinforced their first line counterparts (1/5th Bn West Yorks) in 1915/1916. This agains supports the hypothesis of 2/5th battalion service outlined in the newspaper article and supported by Maurice's service papers. http://www.1914-1918.net/62div.htm I think that when battalions were disbanded the men generally retained their numbers.....as they were not generally discharged/disembodied. By this time the numbers within the same regiment were largely unique. They were instead transferred to other battalions of the same regiment or broken up and distributed amongst the other battalions of the same Brigade/Division. As far as the newspaper reports go the facts in respect to Maurice and Charles are proven correct. Unless we are able to find something linking the 2589 man to his Herbert Doughty Bishop we can never be certain, and the hypothesis remains circumstantial. Marriages Certificates, Electoral Rolls, papers in the possession of the family or his medals are your best bet I guess Rich. Any other ideas? Rgds Tim No medals or certificates as of yet I spoke to Herberts niece Via a letter but she remembers nothing of him really or her Fathers (Abel in the letter) carrier.no body in the family seem to nkow much about him. and there are not many left if any that would. I have finally found the rolls on TNA and ordered the respective pages, didn't fancy shelling out for thousands of pages that I didn't need. So when I know you will know. I am of out to Weeton and Huby again this weekend, which is where HErbert was from to have a look around and see if I can find anything there. I am pressuming there is a memorial somewhere in the vacinity with Charles on for some info I hope. Rich Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piorun Posted 16 February , 2011 Share Posted 16 February , 2011 The MIC for 2589 says that he (or the battalion) was disembodied. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pighills Posted 16 February , 2011 Share Posted 16 February , 2011 Charles is on the Huby church memorial and the Weeton church memorial. I was only half joking about the building works - I am getting it done, but not just yet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pavster1980 Posted 16 February , 2011 Author Share Posted 16 February , 2011 Charles is on the Huby church memorial and the Weeton church memorial. I was only half joking about the building works - I am getting it done, but not just yet ha ha ha, ok, At st. Barnabas weeton? I have been to that church before but never saw the memorial, I pressume it was inside the church, and the same at Huby? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pighills Posted 16 February , 2011 Share Posted 16 February , 2011 I dunno, I haven't actually seen the memorials myself, I just have a note that he's listed on them. Have a good look on the walls inside the church, that's where these sort of things are usually located. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pavster1980 Posted 16 February , 2011 Author Share Posted 16 February , 2011 I dunno, I haven't actually seen the memorials myself, I just have a note that he's listed on them. Have a good look on the walls inside the church, that's where these sort of things are usually located. will do and will let yo know Rich Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FROGSMILE Posted 16 February , 2011 Share Posted 16 February , 2011 Yes, quite so, but drummers fit very uneasily in the structure because they were not "rank and file" being listed separately whereas bandsmen were R&F. I think this derived from the pseudo-heraldic status of drummers, who in early days conducted parleys, carried important messages, and preferably spoke a second language. That is an interesting point, I had not realised that they did not, at that time, fall within R&F. It is a moot point though, as they do not generally appear on registers, MICs, or war memorials as other than Privates, so in the context of this thread I hope it does not throw off the search. He would have been proud of his status as a drummer and no doubt would have recorded it on his ID, but it would not show on the MIC, or many other records from outside the battalion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pavster1980 Posted 16 February , 2011 Author Share Posted 16 February , 2011 don't suppose 2nd W. Yorks was meant to be 2nd West Riding do you? From the Long Long Trail 2/5th Battalion Formed at York on 28 September 1914. 1 March 1915 : attached to 185th Brigade, 62nd (2nd West Riding) Division. Movedon 1 March 1915 to Matlock and on in May to Thoresby Park, going on in October1915 to Retford, November to Newcastle, January 1916 to Salisbury Plain and June1916 to Somerleyton near Lowestoft. In October 1916 to Bedford and finally landedat Le Havre in January 1917. 13 August 1918 : disbanded in France Rich Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackblue Posted 17 February , 2011 Share Posted 17 February , 2011 The MIC for 2589 says that he (or the battalion) was disembodied. In this context I would think this referred to the man himself (the unit status isn't generally recorded on the MIC for individual men). As far as I am aware 'disembodied' was used to signify 'discharge' or 'no longer required for service' in TF parlance. So essentially I think no real difference when basically written on a TF MIC as in this case. If you look at the other cards it seems the same writer simply went through and recorded this after the war was over....confirming that these men were no longer serving. This said it appears that embodied/disembodied also referred to a whole unit being stood up, or down (again in TF parlance). A difference as far as MICs go may be when a man was 'discharged' under a particular Kings Reg, which may find its way onto the MIC or into the Medal Rolls as outlined by Kevin. This said what was actually recorded on the MIC appears to have varied considerably and there was often no reference at all to a man being discharged, disembodied or transferred to the Reserve even though they physically were. I note the men Kevin has highlighted were discharged under Regulation 392(xxi), which means they had fulfilled their initial term of engagement. Does this appear on their MIC or only on the Medal Rolls? Perhaps 2589 Herbert Bishop had fulfilled his term of engagement? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackblue Posted 17 February , 2011 Share Posted 17 February , 2011 don't suppose 2nd W. Yorks was meant to be 2nd West Riding do you? From the Long Long Trail 2/5th Battalion Formed at York on 28 September 1914. 1 March 1915 : attached to 185th Brigade, 62nd (2nd West Riding) Division. Movedon 1 March 1915 to Matlock and on in May to Thoresby Park, going on in October1915 to Retford, November to Newcastle, January 1916 to Salisbury Plain and June1916 to Somerleyton near Lowestoft. In October 1916 to Bedford and finally landedat Le Havre in January 1917. 13 August 1918 : disbanded in France Rich Mate I think it probably means the 2nd Battalion, West Yorkshire Regiment as we have discussed. Men generally identifed with the Battalion first, then Regiment, then probably Brigade/Division. As Kevin advises there is a possibility it means 2nd (Garrison) Battalion as well. It seems fairly worn in the raised portions so you can probably assume it was actually worn and wasn't left in a drawer somewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pavster1980 Posted 17 February , 2011 Author Share Posted 17 February , 2011 Mate I think it probably means the 2nd Battalion, West Yorkshire Regiment as we have discussed. Men generally identifed with the Battalion first, then Regiment, then probably Brigade/Division. As Kevin advises there is a possibility it means 2nd (Garrison) Battalion as well. It seems fairly worn in the raised portions so you can probably assume it was actually worn and wasn't left in a drawer somewhere. I agree it probably refers to 2nd BN, it was just a thought was all. I am waitnig for the Medal rolls and will post when I here back, will be a while probably. And again thanks for everyones input Rich Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pavster1980 Posted 17 February , 2011 Author Share Posted 17 February , 2011 Mate I think it probably means the 2nd Battalion, West Yorkshire Regiment as we have discussed. Men generally identifed with the Battalion first, then Regiment, then probably Brigade/Division. As Kevin advises there is a possibility it means 2nd (Garrison) Battalion as well. It seems fairly worn in the raised portions so you can probably assume it was actually worn and wasn't left in a drawer somewhere. I agree it probably refers to 2nd BN, it was just a thought was all. I am waitnig for the Medal rolls and will post when I here back, will be a while probably. And again thanks for everyones input Rich Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pavster1980 Posted 17 February , 2011 Author Share Posted 17 February , 2011 Mate I think it probably means the 2nd Battalion, West Yorkshire Regiment as we have discussed. Men generally identifed with the Battalion first, then Regiment, then probably Brigade/Division. As Kevin advises there is a possibility it means 2nd (Garrison) Battalion as well. It seems fairly worn in the raised portions so you can probably assume it was actually worn and wasn't left in a drawer somewhere. I agree it probably refers to 2nd BN, it was just a thought was all. I am waitnig for the Medal rolls and will post when I here back, will be a while probably. And again thanks for everyone input Rich how did that post three times? Rich Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackblue Posted 17 February , 2011 Share Posted 17 February , 2011 Apparently the imperial service obligation for TF appears to have been 4 years and quite a number of TF men underwent discharge when time expired up until the draft coming into effect (March/May 1916). If they had discharged they would generally have been subject to the draft (and re-enlistment) from this time if they didn't volunteer for re-engagement before this! Read this Rich, as it gives a very good idea of the circumstances your relatives would have served in. http://www.1914-1918.net/tf.htm Rgds Tim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muerrisch Posted 17 February , 2011 Share Posted 17 February , 2011 Apparently the imperial service obligation for TF appears to have been 4 years and quite a number of TF men underwent discharge when time expired up until the draft coming into effect (March/May 1916). If they had discharged they would generally have been subject to the draft (and re-enlistment) from this time if they didn't volunteer for re-engagement before this! Read this Rich, as it gives a very good idea of the circumstances your relatives would have served in. http://www.1914-1918.net/tf.htm Rgds Tim Not quite, but nearly correct. The normal period of TF obligation was 4 years, extendable in 4 year chunks. The Imperial Service [iS] Section ,paras 10 to 12 of TF Regs 1912: ............. unless a notification to the contrary is received, this [iS] agreement will hold good ...... as long as the engagement in the TF. [quite who could make the 'notification' is not specified, but I bet it was not the soldier!] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackblue Posted 17 February , 2011 Share Posted 17 February , 2011 So do you mean they could be 'extended' against their will? Men who had in fact been let go were later subject to the draft were they not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pavster1980 Posted 1 March , 2011 Author Share Posted 1 March , 2011 Hey all Just got my estimate back from NA for the Medal rolls, now it going to take upto 14 days to get here. Will post as soon as I know more Rich Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piorun Posted 1 March , 2011 Share Posted 1 March , 2011 We'll be waiting, Rich. Antony Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pavster1980 Posted 10 March , 2011 Author Share Posted 10 March , 2011 Sorry still not arrived, but will let you all know when they get here!!!! Rich Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pavster1980 Posted 14 March , 2011 Author Share Posted 14 March , 2011 Guess what . . . . still no Rolls yet Rich Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackblue Posted 15 March , 2011 Share Posted 15 March , 2011 They'll be here soon mate! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pavster1980 Posted 31 March , 2011 Author Share Posted 31 March , 2011 Hello all The rolls have finally turned up today . . . . . . . . but guess what. . . .. . . . . . . only two pages of the five I ordered have arrived , and guess who is not on the two page I have. Herbert Bishop!!!!! Will have to keep waiting I suppose. Will let you know when they arrive Rich 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