WO 329 Medal Rolls - Index Download

[seaforths]

Having spent much time using the temperamental search on the TNA using the references from the MIC to find the correct roll, I have now found out that there is a downloadable PDF of the handwritten index on the TNA site here:http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/SearchUI/Details?uri=C4435219

I have downloaded it and ran it through Adobe's OCR and the result has been quite positive, not using the full word with the 'find' tool(which seems to bamboozle it a little) but part of a word. Example gor will find Gordons etc. It has the old refs and new although I did discover it to be one volume out at one point.

Apologies if this is already common knowledge, it wasn't to me.

If anyone would like it sent. Please PM an email.

I trust I am not breaking any copyrights as it is already downloadable for free - I have just applied text recognition to the handwritten original. Also I think if they were concerned about it, they would have locked down their PDF.

[David Porter]

Seaforths,

Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I have downloaded the index which appears to have been compiled in 1964. Looking at the RHA TF volumes I can see that the current NA citable reference is one out from what is given so we get:

A32 = Royal Horse Artillery Territorial Force: medal rolls RHA (TF)/101B-RHA(TF)/102B1. (Pages 1-306) becoming WO 329/33

A33 = Royal Horse Artillery Territorial Force: medal rolls RHA (TF)/102B2-RHA(TF)/103B. (Pages 307-612) becoming WO 329/34

A34 = Royal Horse Artillery Territorial Force: medal rolls RHA (TF)/104B; RHA(TF)/105B. (Pages 613-886). RHA(TF)/101A (Pages 1A-3A) becoming WO 329/35 etc.

This is purely because the index itself has become WO 329/1

Also A224 = WO 329/225 is noted as a missing volume, which I was unaware of, and would have covered RFA TF Regt. Nos. 750390 to 755409. So anyone researching the 1st & 2nd Northumbrian Brigades RFA has to rely on the MICs alone.

[seaforths]

Yes, David,

If I need to get a specific Seaforth roll at Kew using this index they are listed in the index under the 'VOL NOS' column as: 644, 645, 646, 647, 648, 649, 650 & 651

If it put in 'WO 329/1646 into their Discovery Catalogue I get the roll index for 646 (as shown in the index). However, if I enter WO 329/646 (into Discovery) as shown in the index I get Queens West Surreys. Therefore it is picking up the '1' that follows the 'B' so this must be inserted when you pull it up on Discovery to order it for viewing.

[David Porter]

Therefore it is picking up the '1' that follows the 'B' so this must be inserted when you pull it up on Discovery to order it for viewing.

Only volumes in the 'B' series have this peculiarity. The 'A' series (1 - 999) plus index takes us up to WO 329/1000. B1 = WO 329/1001 and B999 = WO 329/1999.

So C1 would be WO 329/2000 meaning you have to now deduct 1 from 2001 etc. right the way through the Officers Star rolls. The last volume of these, C947, should then be WO 329/2946 but it isn't, that belongs to C937. Therefore, 10 'C' volumes look like they have been subdivided making tracing these from the book a bit hit and miss.

It is still a very useful guide and I like the way they tried to give ranges of regimental numbers to some of the rolls.

[seaforths]

Only volumes in the 'B' series have this peculiarity. The 'A' series (1 - 999) plus index takes us up to WO 329/1000. B1 = WO 329/1001 and B999 = WO 329/1999.

So C1 would be WO 329/2000 meaning you have to now deduct 1 from 2001 etc. right the way through the Officers Star rolls. The last volume of these, C947, should then be WO 329/2946 but it isn't, that belongs to C937. Therefore, 10 'C' volumes look like they have been subdivided making tracing these from the book a bit hit and miss.

It is still a very useful guide and I like the way they tried to give ranges of regimental numbers to some of the rolls.

Yes, I must have been playing around in the officers medals when I discovered they were one out. So yes precede with a 2 and deduct 1 from the final four digit number does give you the correct WO 329. I'm surprised no-one noticed this would happen and just make the index WO 329, or WO 329/0.

It doesn't help either in the TF Medals I noticed this evening. However I think I will type up the anomalies in a single page doc and add it as a front page to the PDF so I have it there as a reference/reminder. Also I found the text search was very hit and miss when I tried searching using 'TF' it had numerous erroneous hits. It seems to depend on the letter combination used as to whether it works with any accuracy.

[nhclark]

If anyone is still following this thread...

There are a number of problems with relating the original index references to the modern WO 329/**** number.

First, as already pointed out, it would have been so much better if the index had been given the number WO 329/0, or even better still WO 329/0000. However, because the index was given the number WO 329/1, the first volume of the medal rolls A-1 was given the number WO 329/2, and then the volumes are numbered in order all the way to A-999 which of course has the number WO 329/1000. Again, it would have been better if leading zeros had been used and these files were seen as WO 329/0002 to WO 329/1000.

Next the second problem kicks in, and that is that the original volumes then jumped from A-999 to B-1. The National Archives went merrily on with its numbering, and so volume B-1 became WO 329/1001, and all the way up to B-999 which became WO 329/1999.

B-999 was followed by C-1, which became WO 329/2000, and then the progression continues up to C-309, which becomes WO 329/2308. A description of C-310 is not given in the index (it covers aspects of the Seychelles Labour Force and the Gold Coast Regiment) and this becomes WO 329/2309. The index itself then jumps back to page 74 and continues with volume C-311 which becomes WO 329/2310 and then on to volume C-382 which becomes WO 329/2383.

For some reason The National Archives then decided to insert a number of medal rolls that are not listed in the index of C-volumes. These relate to the Indian Army, and are files WO329/2384 to WO 329/2391 inclusive.

The sequence then resumes with WO 329/2392 (volume C-383 plus some other unlisted rolls) all the way to the final volume C-947 which is WO 329/2956.

I trust that this will be of use to someone out there...

[seaforths]

I think that the indices produced can only give a rough idea of where you might want to be looking because they made a pigs ear of the indexing. I have found issues with another index which they managed to number and reference separately from the files so it doesn't interfere with the sequence which I thought was a good thing until I found that the index is 8 sections so referring to 8 files right? Wrong, it refers to 6 files and somehow, along the way the index has lost touch with the file documents so by the time I get to the third file, the page I am looking for is 60 pages adrift from the page number given in the index. However, there is a plus side there are over 4000 pages within the 6 files if the index can put me in the general area I need to be looking for information, I don't have to search through over 4000 pages to find what I want.

I've wondered about highlighting these issues with TNA regarding their indices but quite frankly, I doubt whether they would consider tackling and renumbering their files and then amending the web searches too. It is a shame of course that it wasn't given due consideration at the early stages in which case they would have got it right.

[David_Underdown]

Note that A1 etc are recorded in Discovery as Former references: in its original department: - you can search specifically by former reference.

The general archival principle is that files are left in their original order ("Respect des fonds"), so the cataloguing should reflect how the volumes were actually received from the Army Medal Office - note that the key in WO 329/1 was clearly prepared and used by AMO for their own reference and is simply included as part of the series that was transferred.

[seaforths]

Note that A1 etc are recorded in Discovery as Former references: in its original department: - you can search specifically by former reference.

The general archival principle is that files are left in their original order ("Respect des fonds"), so the cataloguing should reflect how the volumes were actually received from the Army Medal Office - note that the key in WO 329/1 was clearly prepared and used by AMO for their own reference and is simply included as part of the series that was transferred.

Thank you for that useful snippet of information and handy to know. I hadn't tried searching Discovery with the original references. My other conundrum not related to WO 329 is WO 161 and that index. I do muddle through it but two of the twelve downloads. Off the top of my head I think download 10 and download 11 both give pages 93 to 143.

[David_Underdown]

I'm not so familiar with that series, I assume you're referring in particular to the piece WO 161/100 and the indexes forming items under that? It does look as if these may have got a bit muddled, I'd imagine these were probably transferred into Discovery from docsonline and there were a few problems with that process, the descriptions for items 10, 11 and 12 suggest that item 10 (ie WO 161/100/10) has pages 93-143, 11 has pp 42-92 and 12 has pp 1-41 which doesn't seem quite right. From what you say it sounds further as if 10 and 11 have the wrong image files associated with them. Best just to report this.

[seaforths]

Yes that's right David, but I use the index because I'm working with copies of the original documents from the Archive and not what is online as down loads. If I'm looking for information, I use the index to land me close enough to where I want to be in my files a bit of a muddled system but I'm used to it - sort of

[Phil Wood]

Note that A1 etc are recorded in Discovery as Former references: in its original department: - you can search specifically by former reference.

The general archival principle is that files are left in their original order ("Respect des fonds"), so the cataloguing should reflect how the volumes were actually received from the Army Medal Office - note that the key in WO 329/1 was clearly prepared and used by AMO for their own reference and is simply included as part of the series that was transferred.

David - how do you search by former reference? The new Discovery seems to have lost this facility.

[themonsstar]

Hi Phil

Which unit are you looking for.

[Phil Wood]

Not looking for a unit - an officer's record Capt A Duncombe Shafto - long number 94879. I was trying to work out how to use a long number now the 'Former reference' field has disappeared from the search.

[David_Underdown]

Phil

Sorry, I'm away at the moment, so I've not had chance to reply before. I believe former reference is now included in the main search (which wasn't previously the case), so if if you just do a search along the lines of WO 339 {or 374} {surname} {former reference} it should come back. Note too that I think the re-cataloguing of WO 339 is now complete, so if you're looking in there, you should see all forenames in full, plus (original) regiment.

[Phil Wood]

Thanks David- he doesn't turn up in a surname search, so I looked for him via the long number in case the surname had been mistranscribed. But he still doesn't turn up. I guess this means his record is no more, it is a late record ... (sorry just been watching John Cleese)