The Battle of Jutland - 31st May 1916

[Gibbo]

Hi - HMS Wallington was a trawler/converted boom vessel. She wasn't at Jutland. HMS Hood was a post-war battlecruiser.

This thread backs you up. The name Wallington was allocated to more than one ship or shore base during the war, but the one that fits the dates given by Wendus is HMT Wallington, a trawler employed as a boom defence vessel.

[MikB]

I think if someone made the comment "I served on HMS Hood", then they only mean one ship, or they were being deliberately misleading.

Regards,

Jonathan S

Well, they'd 'ave to be gettin' on more than a bit to've served on the 1920-41 Hood, never mind the 1893-1914 one. Not the sort of claim you hear down the pub of a normal evening... Regards, MikB

[Jonathan Saunders]

Well, they'd 'ave to be gettin' on more than a bit to've served on the 1920-41 Hood, never mind the 1893-1914 one. Not the sort of claim you hear down the pub of a normal evening... Regards, MikB

Not these days no, but I think the story originated in yesteryear

Regards,

Jonathan S

[wendus]

Thank you everyone for your replies, I really do appreciate your help.

I hope you won't mind my asking just two more questions! I've noticed on other posts that some vessels had another name which followed in brackets. I looked again at the granfather's record and see that there are 3 instances of this, and wondered if you could clarify them please. One name was (Seal), which was written inbetween St.George on one line and Wallington on the next, so not sure which it should go with! The second was Apollo (Garland) - 1st Sep 17 to 4th Feb 19, and the third was Hercules (New Zealand) - 18th May 20 to 8th June 20.

My last little query is ... what does GSOM (or CSOM?) mean?

Thank you again

[Bart150]

This is vital information, Wendus.

An entry such as ‘Wallington (Seal)’ means roughly ‘served on HMS Seal, but admin for that ship done by HMS Wallington.’

So you have here:

- served on the destroyer Seal, admin done by the base at the mouth of the Humber known as Wallington or St George (the name may have changed or the one may be a slightly different location from the other; the information in the reference book is in a bit of a tangle, but essentially they both refer to a base at the mouth of the Humber)

- served on the destroyer Garland; admin done not by a base but by the depot ship Apollo responsible for a flotilla of destoyers

- served on the battlecruiser New Zealand, which was in reserve and likely to be disposed of; admin done for this and other ships in reserve by the battleship Hercules.

Sorry, I can’t help with GSOM (or CSOM).

[wendus]

Bart, I am SO grateful to you for all that information! I didn't realise that the details I gave were so important, and I think I may now love you forever, lol

I now have to go and re-write the message I was about to send to my friend!

The GSOM thing was in brackets underneath the word 'Invalided' in the Discharged column of the grandad's paperwork.

Thank you again for your help, you're a star!

(Wendy)

[wendus]

Sorry to be a nuisance (yet again!), but how do I find out where HMS Seal was between November 1915 and July 1916? I searched the Jutland fleet lists but she doesn't appear to have been there. I tried a Google search too, but kept getting links to a WW2 submarine of the same name, there seemed to be nothing at all about the WW1 vessel.

Many thanks.

Wendy

[Bart150]

As you say, Wendy, SEAL seems not to have been at Jutland.

Maybe somebody else knows a better way, but what I'd do is look at the ship's logbooks in the National Archives at Kew.

That does mean going there in person, unless you know someone else who is going.

The references for SEAL are: ADM 53/59635 (01 December 1915 - 31 January 1916) through to ADM 53/59641 (01 December 1916 - 31 January 1917), two months per book.

Bart

[SiegeGunner]

The position of GSOM in relation to 'Invalided' suggests that it is an abbreviated description of the wound that led to the invalidity. Could you post a photographic image of that part of the document, as GSOM might in fact be GSW followed by one or more Latin numerals, which corresponds to the classification of Gunshot Wounds (GSW) shown in post #12 in this previous thread ....

 

[wendus]

This is the relevant part of the document.

[wendus]

I'm truly grateful for the help and interest everyone has shown, and it's been quite a learning curve for me! At the risk of imposing on your kindness once more, I wonder if you could tell me this ... if my friend's grandfather was serving on HMS Seal, is it possible that he could've been temporarily transferred to HMS New Zealand for a few months? On his record, where it shows Wallington (Seal), there is a column at the end, headed 'Remarks', and there it says New Zealand. I've seen a photo online of HMS New Zealand leaving Auckland in 1915, so I'm now confused as to whether the grandfather's record refers to the vessel or the place!

[SiegeGunner]

Thanks, Wendy, and there's no doubt that it does say 'GSOM'. I'm afraid I don't know what that stands for, but it is almost certainly an abbreviated description of the wound or condition that led to him being 'Invalided'.

[Bart150]

Wendy, I'd say the reference to 'New Zealand' must be to the ship rather than the country. What it means though I can't say.

What about posting an image of the whole document?

Bart

[wendus]

The reason I'm so dogged about this is because my friend's grandfather told the family things about his service in the RN, and so far I haven't been able to confirm any of it, and I'm desperately trying to find something positive to tell my friend! He said he'd served on the Hood, which he couldn't have done as that was a WW2 vessel. He also said he'd been at the Battle of Jutland, and I can't confirm that either. I'm SO grateful for all the help you guys have given me so far, and I feel guilty at having to keep asking questions, but your extensive knowledge of all things naval is a lifeline for me.

[Bart150]

Wendy, I should think the entry means that this man, like many others, was entitled to a ‘war gratuity’ after the war; and it was paid while he was serving on NEW ZEALAND.

It seems a bit odd that the entry is written as if it relates specifically to service on DART rather than the whole war, but I’ve seen a similar entry in odd places on other service records.

Bart

[wendus]

DART?

HMS New Zealand is listed as the flagship of the 2nd Battlecruiser Squadron at Jutland, so if the grandfather was serving on New Zealand, instead of Wallington (Seal) as shown, he was telling the truth about being at the Battle of Jutland. Am I reading his record correctly? I must admit I'm now totally confused, but then again that isn't difficult at my age, lol.

[Bart150]

Sorry, Wendy, my mistake. I should have said SEAL in the previous post.

Bart.

[SWET59]

The reason I'm so dogged about this is because my friend's grandfather told the family things about his service in the RN, and so far I haven't been able to confirm any of it, and I'm desperately trying to find something positive to tell my friend! He said he'd served on the Hood, which he couldn't have done as that was a WW2 vessel. He also said he'd been at the Battle of Jutland, and I can't confirm that either. I'm SO grateful for all the help you guys have given me so far, and I feel guilty at having to keep asking questions, but your extensive knowledge of all things naval is a lifeline for me.

Hi Wendy,

There were several earlier HMS Hoods, one was a 14150 ton Battleship sunk as a blockship for Portland harbour on November 4th 1914. But that doesn't quite square with his record showing him on HMS Argyll at the time. Likewise the HMS Hood, lost in 1941, was built in 1918, so again a possibility, but doesn't seem to stack up. Family stories can be notoriously inaccurate, but still can hold a grain of truth. In this case when HMS Hood was sunk by the Bismark, the Hood was in company with HMS Prince of Wales. Later in 1941 HMS Prince of Wales was sunk by the Japanese. Sunk in the same engagement was HMS Repulse. This Repulse was commissioned in 1916. "Your" man served on HMS Repulse from 31st August 1921 to 6th January 1922 and if I was in his position, I think I could spin a yarn, or two, especially down the pub (I hope he wasn't TT )

Peter

[johnboy]

From wiki

At the outbreak of the First World War in 1914, as part of the Grand Fleet, she made her mark quite quickly, when she captured a German merchant ship on 6 August. From late 1914-late 1915, she was employed in many night-time patrols. In late 1915, Argyll — under the command of Captain James Tancred — ran aground on the Bell Rock near Dundee. The lighthouse on the rock had been ordered to switch its lights off for fear of assisting German U-Boats in their operations, and the light was only turned on by special permission. While in view of the lighthouse, Argyll sent a signal requesting the light to be turned on.

[Bart150]

Wendy

Family myths about grandfather’s service in the Navy usually arise not because grandfather tells untruths himself, but because relatives mishear or misinterpret or misremember things they have heard.

There seems little point wondering how a myth could arise about Stoker North serving on HOOD. It could merely be that a young relative once heard him say ‘I saw that new HOOD at Rosyth the other day; splendid ship’, or any of a thousand other trivial, unknowable reasons.

However, there are two obvious ways that a myth could have arisen about Stoker North being at Jutland.

One possibility is the following generic fallacy: (1) Stoker North served on NEW ZEALAND; (2) NEW ZEALAND was at Jutland; therefore (3) Stoker North was at Jutland. This is of course very bad logic indeed, but it is the cause of myths in many families about relatives being at the Battle of Jutland or the Battle of the River Plate or Arctic convoys etc.

Another possibility is that the destroyer SEAL left her base on the Humber and went to sea on the days that the Battle of Jutland was fought without actually being anywhere near the battle herself. Stoker North may have told his children something like ‘I was in the North Sea that day. Didn’t actually see any German ships, though.’ Over the years that kind of nuance is easily lost.

As I said before, SEAL’s movements can be checked in her logbook at the National Archives.

Bart

[wendus]

Thank you Bart, I agree with everything you say. It isn't easy when someone asks you to research a particular ancestor, gives you what they think is correct information (which they seem quite proud of), then you have to tell them that the truth was probably somewhat different One redeeming point though, is that a later relative, who served as an AB in WW2 and was killed in action, is commemorated on our local memorial in Plymouth, and my friend didn't know that. So at least she'll always have something to be proud of.

Could you clear up one final point for me, please, as I don't really know how to interpret Stoker North's record ... from November 15 to July 16, was he serving on Seal, or was he on New Zealand? I don't know what the reference to New Zealand means in the 'Remarks' column. If he was on SEAL, I'll ask my friend if she wants to pay a few coppers to get a copy of the logbook for the relevant period.

I'll probably lay this whole query to rest after that, as I think I've imposed on everyone's good nature for long enough, but I am truly grateful for all the help I've received.

Wendy

[Bart150]

Wendy, I think the entry means that this man, like many others, was entitled to a ‘war gratuity’ after the war; and it was paid while he was serving on NEW ZEALAND.

It seems a bit odd that the entry is written as if it relates specifically to service on SEAL rather than the whole war, but I think that is irrelevant. I’ve seen a similar entry in odd places on other service records.

I don't know how you'd get on ordering copies from documents remotely from the National Archives. No doubt others can advise.

Bart

[SWET59]

Wendy, There is also the possibility that the Service Record doesn't tell the whole story. There are several mentions of Stone Frigates and that can be a blanket cover for a

multitude of tasks. My Grandad's Record for 1911 shows his "ship" as Victory, however, a Birth Certificate shows him on board HMTB80 and the 1911 Census shows him on board HMTB 14. Also, he is in a photo with his brother, both of them in uniform. His brother's uniform puts the photo as taken between April 1909 and November 1912. Granddad's cap ribbon shows HMS Ribble. Although he served on her sister ship HMS Chelmer (including Gallipoli), his Record doesn't mention the Ribble, however, during that time he was at Victory I and II.

I realise that this isn't too helpful, but at least you know that you are not alone.

Peter

[wendus]

Thanks Peter, it's always nice to know that I'm not the only one (and there was I, thinking I was going barmy, lol).

Bart, ordering copies (either digital or otherwise) from NA is fairly simple but they take a long time to come through. I've done it before

[Hugh Jampton]

I have looked at my grandfather's certificate of service service and he was invalided from HMS Britannia; beneath the word "invalided" is "Haslar" the Naval hospital he received treatment for his temporary blindness. Could GSOM be and abrieviation of his discharge destination?

My grandfather's ship did not get the call into action at Jutland, however his brother William James Murray was a stoker on HMS Marlborough which was torpedoed at Jutland.

Will had also been torpedoed whilst serving on HMS Triumph the previous year in the Dardenelles. He survived the war but left him with bad lungs. He received treatment at the Star and Garter Hospital in Richmond, London and died in 1921 aged 26 at the South African Military Hospital, Richmond. I found his unmarked grave in Richmond Cemetery.

Can you researchers tell me if I went to Kew to look at the ship's logs would they have a note of the injured? HMS Triumph's log may be in Davey Jones' locker.

Has any one heard of the two hospitals?