Reservists on Good Hope and Monmouth at Coronel

[Bart150]

Thanks, Simon. That is certainly a very curious find. The following is the best I can do to explain it.

It seems pretty clear that (1) the normal rule for Third-Fleet ships was that about 50% of the crew were reservists and (2) Monmouth was an exception from this rule.

I suppose that Duff in his previous job was in the habit of distinguishing between a, ships with hardly any reservists and b, ships with 50% reservists, and that for brevity he sometimes referred to these b-cases as ‘ships manned with reserves’ – even though if challenged he would have explained that he actually meant ‘ships 50% manned with reservists, as opposed to ships manned with hardly any reservists.’

I suppose further that he simply forgot that Monmouth’s manning was exceptional, and assumed she was the normal case.

From the text of the diary as a whole you can probably get a good idea whether he was the sort of chap who was pedantically careful about saying precisely what he wanted to say or alternatively was given to slapdash impressionistic terminology, such that his colleagues knew what he meant, even though the thoughtful outside observer would be justified in finding it inexact and confusing.

Bart

[seaJane]

Just as an anecdotal addition to this topic, I have been researching one of GOOD HOPE's surgeons, Fernand L.J.M. De Verteuil, 1879-1914. He had already been in as a surgeon RN (for example, HOGUE 1908) but rejoined as a reservist for the duration.

If anyone's interested I'll post full details when I have them.

seaJane

[Phil Wood]

I am researching a stoker from Good Hope (Alfred Henry Ellaway), one of the names on the Newbury war memorial - and was pointed towards this thread - thanks to all contributors, very interesting.

I just thought I would add a couple of data points:

Ellaway signed up for 12 years (5 & 7) in 1906, discharged to the RFR in 1911. He was mobilised to the Good Hope 13 July 1914 then to Victory on 24 July (ie not to home). He was back on Good Hope on 31 July in time to sail with her for Coronel and a watery grave.

With him on board the Good Hope was another Newbury lad, Walter Sydney Smith, a Royal Marine who was on the ship's complement from 23 Dec 1912 - one of the skeleton crew.

[Bart150]

So his record has him as VICTORY 24 July to 30 July.

My present understanding (others may disagree) is that we can't be sure quite what that means.

The original plan was for the reservists to go home after the practice mobilisation was over.

It may be that some or all of them were kept hanging about in Portsmouth with their time booked to VICTORY just in case war should break out. But if so, none of the history books I've read quite says that.

Or it may be that he was sent home to Newbury, but told that the next few days would count as leave and be booked to VICTORY, and he might be called back at any moment.

Or there are other possibilities ..

It's unclear AFAIK.

[Phil Wood]

Thanks for the input - makes you wonder what actually happened.

[addeter]

This is a fascinating thread. I am working on putting together a Google Sheet containing all of the British casualties of Coronel, from the CWGC data you can download. I have included the Good Hope (including my great great uncle Sidney Cotton) so far, and will add the Monmouth shortly. The spreadsheet can be found at https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1dliSo3j9qZR1wP0ddya1rq6yLcQ9CFqk6X27zMurin0/edit?usp=sharing.

Please take a look at it and let me know what you think, and if there is other information that could be added from other sources that would be useful. I would be open to finding some way to combine information from the other casualty lists mentioned in the thread if that would add value.

Antony

[Bart150]

Port division is another important piece of data about a man. However, that data is exactly related to the memorial data, which you already have; ie a man of port division Portsmouth will certainly be on the Portsmouth memorial.

Good Hope was a Portsmouth ship; this means that the great majority of her men were port division Portsmouth. Monmouth was a Devonport ship. It is interesting to see the small number of exceptional cases; eg a Portsmouth man on a Devonport ship.

'Status' is an interesting piece of data about a man, ie reservist or 'regular' aka 'continuous service'. Within the reservist category there are sub-categories.

If you were really keen you could analyse service numbers to get some indication of how long a man had served in the Navy before his death (In general, the higher the number the more recently he joined.)

Send me a PM if you ever want to get into this kind of detail.

Bart

[addeter]

Sorry, I have had to recreate the spreadsheet. There were records missing due to inconsistencies in the way that the ships were named in the CWGC data. I think I have them all now.

It needs a new link though I'm afraid.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1DIaJO9NOIoVrp1sgxBU1FLEMQO1yrURiGxUxlVVUchc/edit?usp=sharing

Antony