Defining the Old Contemptibles

[David_Underdown]

Good thought - not much in the Charity Commission's online records though, probably because the Assocaition was wound up in the 1990s - see http://apps.charitycommission.gov.uk/Showcharity/RegisterOfCharities/RemovedCharityMain.aspx?RegisteredCharityNumber=210701&SubsidiaryNumber=0

It merely says:

A) TO FOSTER THE SPIRIT OF TE CONTEMPTIBLE LITTLE ARMY OF 1914. TO SUBMIT THE CASE OF APPLICATION FROM CHUMS TO RESPONSIBLE AUTHORITIES FOR CONSIDERATION OF THE AWARD OF DISABILITY PENSION AND/OR ALLOWANCES. C) TO ASSIST IN CASH OR KIND CHUMS AND THE WIDOW OF A CHUM WHO MAY BE IN NEED OR DISTRESS. (FOR FULL DETAILS SEE RULES).

The rules aren't there, the IWM does hold some archives http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/nra/searches/subjectView.asp?ID=O38970

[ulsterlad2]

Martin, here's another item with the strong 'Mons Star' date link.

Inside Belfast City Hall. Close up of the plaque has the dates.

[Guest]

Interesting that they have "colours" . Presumably not officially granted and more to the point self-awarded. Even more interesting is that the vast majority of OCA men would have come from units with their own Colours, so it is (to me) fascinating that the OCA essentially identified itself as a large unit that deserved its own singular recognition, despite being one of only two groups of men in the Great War awarded their own campaign medal.

I wonder aloud why the men of 1914 (and later 1915) were recognised with their own respective medal. Why were the men of subsequent years and campaigns not equally recognised? Was serving in 1914 or 1915 so much more worthy than in 1916, 1917, 1918. I can only assume the exact coincidence between the end of the latter period (1914-15 Star) and the beginning of Conscription was the main driver.

One might be forgiven for thinking that the 1914 Star and 1914-15 Star sent a strong signal that "I was a pre-conscription volunteer". One might spare a thought for the late 1915 volunteers who didnt get overseas until 1916. Just a thought. MG.

[ulsterlad2]

Interesting that they have "colours"

Indeed. I believe that there is a thread somewhere about the use of the word 'Colours'. I think 'Standard' or 'Banner' was said to be the correct term.

[Guest]

I believe that King's Colours were simply Union Flags until consecrated. There are ACIs and AOs covering the granting of right to carry Colours (it was in the gift of the King) . There are also strict instructions that Colours must never be entrusted to an individual, but a sacred place, which is why most ended up in Churches and why most were not subsequently preserved particularly well.

"Standard" suggests something that looks like a flag on a pole and "banner" suggests something carried between two poles in my mind. It triggers thoughts of union marches. Have a look at the Pathe film link.

Still, the OCA seemed rather keen to wrap themselves in similar symbols of recognition that their own Regiments already did. It seems interesting that the 'identifier' was the membership of a group much broader than that of the Regiment or battalion. It slightly challenges the view that Regimental tradition or esprit de corps was the primary bond for veterans. MG

[ianw]

Howard Williamson in "The Great War Medal Collectors Companion" states that OCA members had to be entitled to the clasp.

He prints a copy of a confirmatory letter from The War Office which details the entitlement to "the 1914 Star and clasp" for a Suffolk Regiment Serjeant wanting to apply to join the OCA.

He also states that 378,000 1914 Stars were produced and 350,000 clasps ordered with the roses.

Army Order 361 authorising the clasp and roses was promulgated in 1919 and Williamson states that many men did not claim the distinction.

Pity the poor old 9/HLI who missed the clasp by one day joining 2nd Division on 23rd November - having been in France for a fortnight!

[Guest]

Ian, thanks. Nice info with excellent provenance. MG

[Andrew Upton]

I wonder aloud why the men of 1914 (and later 1915) were recognised with their own respective medal. Why were the men of subsequent years and campaigns not equally recognised? Was serving in 1914 or 1915 so much more worthy than in 1916, 1917, 1918. I can only assume the exact coincidence between the end of the latter period (1914-15 Star) and the beginning of Conscription was the main driver.

The original plan was for the BWM to carry bars (like the QSA, KSA and other campaign medals before) which would have filled in many of the gaps for post-1915 service. However, there were so many suggestions put forward, combined with the fact that the process of manufacture and ensuring correct issue would have been hideously complicated on an already over-stretched system, that they were shelved. Interestingly, those to the RN were approved but never issued, so occasionally miniatures turn up with those bars.

[ianw]

I can imagine the War Office shuddering at the thought of the cost of all those bars and/or 1916, 1917, 1918 Stars - after all the Stars cost 7p each!

The clasps were made with sew-on holes rather than sliders because the former cost half as much!

[Tom Tulloch-Marshall]

... many men did not receive or apply for the bar despite being well and truly entitled to it.

Receipt was not automatic, you had to apply.

Doesn't look like my grandfather applied for a bar although he was with the 1st Seaforth when they landed from india in October 1914 and was wounded. He seems to have a clasp though.

H.

If his medal records show "clasp & roses" - that is the award of the bar.

Tom

[hazelclark]

Receipt was not automatic, you had to apply.

If his medal records show "clasp & roses" - that is the award of the bar.

Tom

It does!

Thanks,

H

[Sepoy]

A memorial to the Old Contemptible's outside the Aldershot Garrison Church.

Sepoy

[ianw]

I have my Grandfather's medal ribbon bar with his rose and oak-leaves on it - his medals were buried with him.

Rather tatty but one of my most prized possessions.