Ruth Ward Posted 7 August , 2011 Author Share Posted 7 August , 2011 Skirth does not appear in the index to the London Gazette for the period 1918-1920. Quelle surprise. I tried every which way to find his 'Mentioned in Despatches', but with no success. Is it likely that all M-i-Ds are actually listed in the LG, do you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_Baker Posted 7 August , 2011 Share Posted 7 August , 2011 They are supposed to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MichaelBully Posted 7 August , 2011 Share Posted 7 August , 2011 Can anyone place where 293 Siege Battery R.G.A were after June 1918 ? Thanks I tried every which way to find his 'Mentioned in Despatches', but with no success. Is it likely that all M-i-Ds are actually listed in the LG, do you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruth Ward Posted 7 August , 2011 Author Share Posted 7 August , 2011 Can anyone place where 293 Siege Battery R.G.A were after June 1918 ? Thanks They stayed on the Asiago Plateau until the end of October 1918, then moved to the Piave front (Battle of the Piave). In November 1918 they were in Bressio di Teolo, Italy. In December they were near Padova, Italy. (Brigade war diary). Ruth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magnumbellum Posted 7 August , 2011 Share Posted 7 August , 2011 The repetition in TRT of Skirth's claim of a Mention in Despatches, without even a comment that the claim cannot be verified, was clearly a gross dereliction of professional editorial standards, not to mention unfair to those whose approbation of the publication of TRT has been trunpeted. They were clearly misled into accepting Skirth's claims at face value. The same goes for the editorial emendations of Skith's text, made without comment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MichaelBully Posted 7 August , 2011 Share Posted 7 August , 2011 Thanks for the information re 293 Ruth. That's a very good point MB. The published edition of TRT could have been footnoted and discrepancies and amendments to the original text indicated. Regards. The repetition in TRT of Skirth's claim of a Mention in Despatches, without even a comment that the claim cannot be verified, was clearly a gross dereliction of professional editorial standards, not to mention unfair to those whose approbation of the publication of TRT has been trunpeted. They were clearly misled into accepting Skirth's claims at face value. The same goes for the editorial emendations of Skith's text, made without comment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David_Underdown Posted 7 August , 2011 Share Posted 7 August , 2011 Weren't there B class mentions which weren't gazetted, but may have been published in the Times? Sure I've seen some mention around the forum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruth Ward Posted 7 August , 2011 Author Share Posted 7 August , 2011 Hello Sorry - this is digressing from the current discussion topic but, for anyone who is interested, I've just been checking on Skirth's 'St. Martin' claim (p.133 & 135) - seems that he's fabricated quite a bit about that as well. There was indeed a St. Martin - patron saint of soldiers (-not patron saint of all those persecuted for their beliefs & reformed drunkards as Skirth claims), feast day 11 November (!) Although there are a few grains of truth in his description of the saint, Skirth has taken some terrible liberties with it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_of_Tours Wonder if there is a patron saint of compulsive fictionalizers...? Ruth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seany Posted 8 August , 2011 Share Posted 8 August , 2011 A long time (very long) since I was in the seminary but here are quite a few St Martins to get muddled up? Hello Sorry - this is digressing from the current discussion topic but, for anyone who is interested, I've just been checking on Skirth's 'St. Martin' claim (p.133 & 135) - seems that he's fabricated quite a bit about that as well. There was indeed a St. Martin - patron saint of soldiers (-not patron saint of all those persecuted for their beliefs & reformed drunkards as Skirth claims), feast day 11 November (!) Although there are a few grains of truth in his description of the saint, Skirth has taken some terrible liberties with it. http://en.wikipedia....Martin_of_Tours Wonder if there is a patron saint of compulsive fictionalizers...? Ruth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruth Ward Posted 8 August , 2011 Author Share Posted 8 August , 2011 A long time (very long) since I was in the seminary but here are quite a few St Martins to get muddled up? Quite possibly (& most likely he did 'muddle' them up), but the one Skirth is referring to generally is the same one mentioned in the wiki artcle - see the refs about St Martin's Cathedral in Ypres & St Martin-in-the-Fields in London, & the refs in TRT p.133 & p.135. I've attached a new section to the Review of TRT - 'Passchendaele' & War Story No. 2: Tragedy at Passchendaele. It's a relatively short piece, but is quite significant - I think. I may add a bit more to it at a later date, but have to press on with Skirth's claim to have been treated by the Italian medical authorities at 'Schio Hospital For Neurasthenics' & 'Montegrotto Spa'. Ruth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piorun Posted 8 August , 2011 Share Posted 8 August , 2011 Wonder if there is a patron saint of compulsive fictionalizers...? Ruth Yes. St. Pancras. Antony Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruth Ward Posted 10 August , 2011 Author Share Posted 10 August , 2011 Hello I thought I would float my latest theory about Skirth's motives and see if there are any takers, or if, perhaps, members think I'm getting just as 'fanciful' as him. In the Postscript to TRT Skirth talks about his claim for a War Disability pension. He says he was examined by 3 medical boards (!) followed by an investigation into his service record. He was duly awarded said pension - "an unexpectedly generous one". He then states that the Army "paid its debt" & "the account was settled". "Their representatives treated me with the utmost courtesy and fairness and gave me every reason to forgive and forget. Well, to forgive if not forget." Well, I have been wondering about all this. If it were me, & I'd been through what Skirth claims to have been through, it would have had to have been an extremely generous pension to make me say the army had paid its debt. My thinking is that perhaps the Army pension people didn't give Skirth quite such a generous pension, and possibly gave him an extremely hard & humiliating time over his claim - possibly over issues to do with 'proof'. So, maybe TRT is Skirth's 'revenge' for that. It is possible that the attacks on Snowdon's character, the incompetence of the army, my g/f's MM and so on are designed to deliberately provoke a reaction from army 'bods' (because of these outlandish claims) in the hope that they will then have an extremely hard time proving any of it is untrue. (I can certainly testify to that!). There is little doubt in my mind now that much of the 'confusion' that exists in TRT is deliberate & done with some specific purpose in mind. Surely his genuine experiences in WW1 were dreadful enough without the need to fictionalize them to the extent that he has? Ruth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piorun Posted 10 August , 2011 Share Posted 10 August , 2011 Ruth: To be honest, I'd have a hard time making that argument forensically. Skirth himself didn't publish, so his 'revenge' would have been a pointless exercise. I don't think apples fall that far from their tree. I still judge Skirth to be a crooked peg in a round hole, a self-centred 'dreamer' with a mean streak and a need to justify his weaknesses. That his editor/publisher appears to be cut from the similar cloth when it comes to self-promotion only blankets the truth of Skirth's lies with a further layer of fantasy. Yours, Antony Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruth Ward Posted 10 August , 2011 Author Share Posted 10 August , 2011 Ruth: To be honest, I'd have a hard time making that argument forensically. Skirth himself didn't publish, so his 'revenge' would have been a pointless exercise. I don't think apples fall that far from their tree. I still judge Skirth to be a crooked peg in a round hole, a self-centred 'dreamer' with a mean streak and a need to justify his weaknesses. That his editor/publisher appears to be cut from the similar cloth when it comes to self-promotion only blankets the truth of Skirth's lies with a further layer of fantasy. Yours, Antony ...I thought my new theory sounded so plausible this morning, too. Ruth ps Maybe he thought better of it, or decided to let it be a posthumous 'memoir'. Why would he go to all that trouble just to keep it at home? Cathartic in some way, perhaps? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MichaelBully Posted 10 August , 2011 Share Posted 10 August , 2011 Hello Ruth, I think that many people try their hand at writing, especially when they retire or get to an age when they want to look back on their life. Skirth probably did see some quite harrowing sights in his youth and maybe felt some release in writing them down. I know that were those of that generation who felt great bitterness in having their youth caught up in the Great War- taking 'Testament of Youth' by Vera Brittain (1933) and 'We That Were Young' by Irene Rathbone (1932) as examples. Possibly a mixture of trauma undergone in the Great War, resentment against the Army and those in Authority, made Skirth distort his war time experiences. Once again I stress that this certainly does not give Skirth the right to libel other people, particularly your grandfather. With all good wishes Michael ...I thought my new theory sounded so plausible this morning, too. Ruth ps Maybe he thought better of it, or decided to let it be a posthumous 'memoir'. Why would he go to all that trouble just to keep it at home? Cathartic in some way, perhaps? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawson Posted 29 September , 2011 Share Posted 29 September , 2011 I bought this book today, it's for sale in a book outlet shop for two fifty. Not read it yet, but like The bells of hell go ting along, I can imagine it will ruffle my feathers. Also noticed on the Jon Snow foreword he calls his grandfather a donkey after leading the retreat from Mons in 1915!! and saying Ronald was a lion. Not the best beginning on starting a book. Ian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squirrel Posted 30 September , 2011 Share Posted 30 September , 2011 ...Also noticed on the Jon Snow foreword he calls his grandfather a donkey after leading the retreat from Mons in 1915!!and saying Ronald was a lion. Exactly the opposite of what he says in "The Confusion of Command" the war memoirs of General Sir Thomas D'Oyly Snow! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geraint Posted 30 December , 2011 Share Posted 30 December , 2011 More or less finished this today, and have been reading this thread as an accompaniment. Very odd experience! So very many round holes and square pegs. A book writen from memory 55 years after the event will contain errors of fact; but one would expect the gist to be a fairly accurate reflection of the author's moods, feelings and opinions at the time. Though in this case these memory losses during the events themselves is indictive of a very unreliable memory on a massive scale; which apart for anything else, makes one question his actual grasp on the everyday trivialities of life, let alone his grasp in his belief of a general cock-up by his OC and assorted brass hats. Having said that, he is undoubtedly a scarred soul, a casualty of the War, and his mind ireversibly affected by his experiences. He ellicits a large degree of sympathy in being just that - a casualty, of the Great War. What happened to his manuscript - chopped and changed by his daughter, editor and The Imperial War Museum to me seems barbaric, and the truth is forever lost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MichaelBully Posted 30 December , 2011 Share Posted 30 December , 2011 Geraint, I can feel sorry for Skirth on one level in the sense that he was as as you say a 'scarred soul' but a major concern is when Skirth's unfounded comments about the integrity of other men who also served such as Ruth's grandfather- are somehow presented as being authentic . I do however try to remind myself that TRT was published after Skirth's death and so arguably hard to hold responsible for comments published without his consent. More or less finished this today, and have been reading this thread as an accompaniment. Very odd experience! So very many round holes and square pegs. A book writen from memory 55 years after the event will contain errors of fact; but one would expect the gist to be a fairly accurate reflection of the author's moods, feelings and opinions at the time. Though in this case these memory losses during the events themselves is indictive of a very unreliable memory on a massive scale; which apart for anything else, makes one question his actual grasp on the everyday trivialities of life, let alone his grasp in his belief of a general cock-up by his OC and assorted brass hats. Having said that, he is undoubtedly a scarred soul, a casualty of the War, and his mind ireversibly affected by his experiences. He ellicits a large degree of sympathy in being just that - a casualty, of the Great War. What happened to his manuscript - chopped and changed by his daughter, editor and The Imperial War Museum to me seems barbaric, and the truth is forever lost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruth Ward Posted 12 October , 2018 Author Share Posted 12 October , 2018 (edited) Hello, For anyone still interested in The Reluctant Tommy and 293 Siege Battery RGA I now have an article published in the Canadian Army Journal summarizing the study I did in 2014 which investigated the authenticity of Ronald Skirth’s original Memoir. (Both the memoir & study are held at the Imperial War Museum). http://www.army-armee.forces.gc.ca/en/canadian-army-journal/army-journal-index.page Go to the link ‘Volume 17 no.3, 2017’ – it can be somewhat slow to open the pdf document. Thank you Ruth ps The images & their annotations were chosen by the CAJ, not me! Edited 28 October , 2018 by Ruth Ward 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