Sergeant or Serjeant

[dycer]

Kevin,

This has been discussed before on the Forum.

Another example.My Uncle is recorded as Serjeant, by the CWGC, but in the Battalion War Diary he is addressed as Sergeant e.g. "The(Lewis Gun)party will be under Sergeant Souness."

An Officer of his Battalion also reports his death, in the local Paper, using Sergeant.

George

[SFayers]

in the Battalion War Diary he is addressed as Sergeant e.g. "The(Lewis Gun)party will be under Sergeant Souness."

An Officer of his Battalion also reports his death, in the local Paper, using Sergeant.

So from this example clearly the spelling with a 'g' was also used during WWI. I guess the only definitve answer would be found in a WWI vintage Oxford dictionary!

All the best

Steve

[Steven Broomfield]

Sometimes a regimental affectation I suspect: I was browsing the BBC website yesterday, looking at honours and rewards for service in Afghanistan this year, and noticed that Sergeant is spelt thus for all except The Rifles, where it is Serjeant.

However, one would assume consistency in the example given by Kevin.

[dycer]

Steve,

From a 1920 Gresham English Dictionary:

sergeant,serjeant(From Fr.sergent,O.Fr.serjent,originally a servant,an attendant,an official of certain kinds,fr L.serviens,servientis,ppr.of servio,I serve)A non-commissioned officer in the army in rank next above corporal;a lawyer of highest rank in England and Wales;a title given to certain of the British sovereign's personal attendants;in the last two meanings the second spelling is the common one.

George

[squirrel]

IIRC the KRR always used Serjeant and that is probably why it has been carried over to the Rifles.

[David B]

I guess it can be either way. Going back to my g/fathers pay/clothing book HMG printed SERJEANT in the book but hand written entries were written SERGEANT. This book dates from 1885 the hand written

entries from 1890.

David

[museumtom]

Amongst the names of those recently published to whom awards have been made for conspicuous gallantry in the field appears that of Sergeant Michael Healy, Royal Munster Fusiliers. Sergeant Healy is son of Mr James Healy, of Ballinamuck, Dungarvan, County Waterford, and for his great bravery while in action has been awarded the D. C. M., and the Military Medal. This gallant young man is now in hospital in Richmond recuperating from and illness contracted in the trenches. His many friends compliment him on his courage in the hour of danger, and wish him a speedy recovery to health.

[SFayers]

Steve,

From a 1920 Gresham English Dictionary:

sergeant,serjeant(From Fr.sergent,O.Fr.serjent,originally a servant,an attendant,an official of certain kinds,fr L.serviens,servientis,ppr.of servio,I serve)A non-commissioned officer in the army in rank next above corporal;a lawyer of highest rank in England and Wales;a title given to certain of the British sovereign's personal attendants;in the last two meanings the second spelling is the common one.

George

Thanks for the lookup George. So for the time it would appear that either spelling was correct.

all the best

Steve

[headgardener]

My experience is that both spellings were used interchangeably during WW1. You will commonly find the same man described in both ways as per RGArtillery's post. Spelling on MIC's is also variable, but I seem to recall that the people who transcribed the NA's database tended to use the 'j' variant.

[Ron Clifton]

Hello all

The short answer is that, in documents affecting the soldier's legal status, such as the Army Act, King's Regulations and the Pay Warrant, the spelling is always "Serjeant", even as late as Queen's Regulations 1955 so you will still find this spelling in WW2 documents. Service records, and therefore the CWGC records, use the J spelling.

The alternative with G was certainly in common use in and just after WW1, as perusal of the British Official History will show, and as in the War Office letter quoted in the original post.

The RAF has always used "Sergeant" and there is a third spelling peculiar to the Household Cavalry: "Corporal of Horse."

Ron

[Steven Broomfield]

I remember a TA Camp (in about 1980), where my Signals unit was based on an Ordnance Corps site. One of our less-salubrious Signalmen was so intrigued by one glorious-looking RAOC type that he actually asked him "If you're a Conductor, what instrument do you play?"

Collapse, as they say, of stout party.

[auchonvillerssomme]

I access the London Gazette quite a lot in my research and noticed that the term Sergeant was used almost exclusively from 1881 to the early 1900's, possibly before but that isn't my area of interest. During WW1 they seem to be interchangeable commonly where a Warrant rank is involved so for example

S/21343 Serjeant (Acting Sergeant-Major)William John Clark, attached Army Service Corps.

But then it confounds you-

S/18242 Staff Quartermaster-Serjeant Michael Glavey, late Army Service Corps.

and

T/19383 Farrier Staff Serjeant (acting Farrier Quartermaster-Serjeant) Henry Lepper,Army Service Corps.

Mick

[Corporal Chris]

I am researching a sergeant in the Suffolks. SDGW calls him a SERGT. CWGC calls him a Serjeant and his headstone, which Pierre has sent me, says Serjeant. Do regiments use one or the other dependant on status or are they interchangeable? I seem to remember years ago reading that Queen Victoria did not like her Guards Sgts. being called 'servants' but I am probably getting mixed up.

Chris

[David_Underdown]

I understand that a tthe time of the war serjeant was the "official" spelling, but sergeant was in fairly common usage. Even today, some regiments insist on the spelling serjeant, and for reasons similar to your last comment the Household Cavalry have no sergeants, just all sorts of complicated variations on Corporal.

[KevinBattle]

Serjeants is the older form of sergeants. I tend to use Serjeants when referring to WW1 and Sergeants for WW2.

[Piorun]

Don't worry, C. We can dance round the maypole tomorrow . Antony

[Corporal Chris]

Don't worry, C. We can dance round the maypole tomorrow . Antony

Thanks to those who responded to my post. I have obviously frustrated a few people. I should have searched the forum before I did the post. Apologies.

Chris.

[Pierre]

Reading the CWGC list, use Serjeant for British, New Zealand and Sergeant for Canadian, Australian and South African rank.

But here are two photos of Canadians, one is Sergeant, the other Serjeant

Pierre

[centurion]

Thanks to those who responded to my post. I have obviously frustrated a few people. I should have searched the forum before I did the post. Apologies.

Chris.

Nothing meant personally, as a newcomer you're not to know. However the same old topics do keep coming round (and round and round) - on one forum there is a hint to consider using the Long Long Trail and I sometimes wonder if we ought to have something similar on others about the search facility - it could save some people looking for info a lot of time. Even if someone wishes to start a discussion it would probably avoid repetitious argument if they first looked at what has gone before.

I wonder if there is a way to produce a WW1 FAQ sheet.

[Hardrations]

Seems to me, I remember other ways of saying Sgt when I was in, but then I guess this isn't really the place to mention those names.

Drinks all around I see I've reached the dizzy heights of command. L/Cpl..... Whaaa!!!

[Corporal Chris]

Nothing meant personally, as a newcomer you're not to know. However the same old topics do keep coming round (and round and round) - on one forum there is a hint to consider using the Long Long Trail and I sometimes wonder if we ought to have something similar on others about the search facility - it could save some people looking for info a lot of time. Even if someone wishes to start a discussion it would probably avoid repetitious argument if they first looked at what has gone before.

I wonder if there is a way to produce a WW1 FAQ sheet.

A reminder about the search facility might help but it is probably more of a case of "think" before diving in. Certainly in my case!!!

[pmaasz]

This is not the right place to record a general comment about the search facility, but anyway.......

I find 'Search' incredibly frustrating as it always brings up a huge list of threads all of which contain the word or some of the words I am searching, and very few of which are relevant. Just for an example, searching for 'Rifle Wood' brings up every post containing the word 'rifle' and there are more than a few of those.

[centurion]

This is not the right place to record a general comment about the search facility, but anyway.......

I find 'Search' incredibly frustrating as it always brings up a huge list of threads all of which contain the word or some of the words I am searching, and very few of which are relevant. Just for an example, searching for 'Rifle Wood' brings up every post containing the word 'rifle' and there are more than a few of those.

If you put rifle wood in quotes as you have done it should only bring up those that have rifle wood in them.

[pmaasz]

Thanks! I thought there must be a simple solution for simple minds like mine!

[daggers]

QUOTE 'in quotes'

At last!

Thanks

D