Jump to content
Free downloads from TNA ×
The Great War (1914-1918) Forum

Remembered Today:

Index to be released of pre 1901 DoB service records still held by MoD


Justinth

Recommended Posts

"Indexed data relating to service personnel with a date of birth prior to 1901 will be published on the .gov.uk web site. I will separately e-mail you with a link once this is available.

The data is ordered by account and then date of birth. A description of the relevant accounts can also be found on .gov.uk using “MOD collation summary” as a search term."

Good morning from France

I have just stumbled across this post. Being curious, I followed the link you gave, and guess what, I found my grandfather, for which MANY thanks!

Has the data mentioned been published yet? What information will be available? Will it be his whole service record?

He was a bombardier in the RHA for almost 15 years before he was promoted to 2nd Lieutenant. I have quite a lot of info on his service as an Officer, but know little about when he was in the ranks. He was wounded apparently, but I don't know where or when. Have you any idea where I could find these détails?

I'd love to find out more about my grandfather.

Kind regards

Susan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've done a little more work with this data - I've not been able to find any indication of false enlistment dates around 1896/7, but it does turn out to demonstrate some very strange things about what men thought their birthdays were. A disproportionate number reported a "significant day" - Christmas, St. Patrick's Day, Martinmas, etc.

http://www.generalist.org.uk/blog/2015/when-do-you-think-you-were-born/

Andrew.

Hi Andrew

This is of interest to the wider genealogical community (telling us a little bit more about the mentality of many soldiers/people when it came to times and dates at this time, compared to the concern for absolute accuracy of today) and I have tweeted about it and posted it on my WW2 Medal Cards Facebook campaign page.

Regards

Justin

Regards

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Justin - I'll continue my research.

I have found my way into the War Diaries and ordered some to download concerning the time my grandfather was in France.

On the Messages and Signals sheets (and also in the messages themselves) the appreviation AAA appears - do you know what this means?

Many thanks

Susan

PS What are the Old Sweats??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Susan

Old Sweat means an experienced soldier, in the context of the GWF it means that I have more than a certain number of posts (the real old sweats here have posted many thousands).

The only AAA I know is Anti-Aircraft Artillery, but I will happily be corrected if there is another WW1 meaning.

Regards

Justin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks to both Old Sweats. Why is one a Brigadier General and the other a Captain?

I see that somehow I am a Lance Corporal - how did that happen???

I attach an interesting extract from 1st November 1914 RHA war diaries where you can see use of AAA in both the printed heading and the text.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My apologies - I don't seem to be able to "attach" the document. I'll keep trying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks to both Old Sweats. Why is one a Brigadier General and the other a Captain?

I see that somehow I am a Lance Corporal - how did that happen???

An impertinent question from such a junior rank appointment :hypocrite:

Rank is based on the number of posts made.

Craig

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Andrew

This is of interest to the wider genealogical community (telling us a little bit more about the mentality of many soldiers/people when it came to times and dates at this time, compared to the concern for absolute accuracy of today) and I have tweeted about it and posted it on my WW2 Medal Cards Facebook campaign page.

Hi Justin,

Thanks - good to know it's of interest to someone other than me ;-)

We're getting a bit far from the original topic, but I've tracked down some more data from Canada - the index to the CEF enlistment records there gives us a contemporary sample comparable to this one. The same pattern of overreporting Christmas, St. Patrick's Day, etc holds, but with a couple of interesting twists - a couple of particularly popular Canadian holidays show up, and the Canadians are as likely to overreport 29 February as the British are to underreport it.

http://www.generalist.org.uk/blog/2015/canadian-self-reported-birthday-data/

I've been poking around a bit to look for research on this - as you say, it's of great interest to genealogists, as it tells us a lot about the reliability of the documents we have access to - but it seems surprisingly understudied. One more for the to-do pile...

Andrew.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Justin,

Thanks - good to know it's of interest to someone other than me ;-)

We're getting a bit far from the original topic, but I've tracked down some more data from Canada - the index to the CEF enlistment records there gives us a contemporary sample comparable to this one. The same pattern of overreporting Christmas, St. Patrick's Day, etc holds, but with a couple of interesting twists - a couple of particularly popular Canadian holidays show up, and the Canadians are as likely to overreport 29 February as the British are to underreport it.

http://www.generalist.org.uk/blog/2015/canadian-self-reported-birthday-data/

I've been poking around a bit to look for research on this - as you say, it's of great interest to genealogists, as it tells us a lot about the reliability of the documents we have access to - but it seems surprisingly understudied. One more for the to-do pile...

Andrew.

Hi Andrew

I have really enjoyed your use of the data and now the international comparison you have found, with the inaccuracies being culturally determined and reflecting some differences between British and Canadian key dates. I suspect the further you go back the more pronounced the tendency to identify birth with a key date would become, particularly before the institution of BMD registration in 1837, state education and widespread literacy. It is a shame that no similarly accessible data set exists for the Victorian Army & Pre-Victorian 19th Century Army (the pre WW1 Army service records on Find My Past are indexed by year). If there is one, it would be ripe for a similar analysis. We then get into theories about the affect of industrialisation on changing perception of time and seasons, compared to the pre-industrial past.

I have as before tweeted about this and also added it to the Facebook page I mentioned.

Regards

Justin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good evening Phil

Yes, that's just what I mean. Do you know what the AAA in the heading means?

I was trying to attach a copy of a message showing the text and heading, but to no avail.

It is an interesting message so I'm copying the text here:

1st November 1914

The German Emperor will arrive in the field today to conduct operations against the British Army AAA I call upon all ranks to repeat their magnificent efforts and to show him what British soldiers really are.

Above received from Sir Douglas Haig to be circulated to all troops.

Kind regards

Susan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As Phil said above, it's basically just a full stop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Justin,

Thanks - good to know it's of interest to someone other than me ;-)

We're getting a bit far from the original topic, but I've tracked down some more data from Canada - the index to the CEF enlistment records there gives us a contemporary sample comparable to this one. The same pattern of overreporting Christmas, St. Patrick's Day, etc holds, but with a couple of interesting twists - a couple of particularly popular Canadian holidays show up, and the Canadians are as likely to overreport 29 February as the British are to underreport it.

http://www.generalist.org.uk/blog/2015/canadian-self-reported-birthday-data/

I've been poking around a bit to look for research on this - as you say, it's of great interest to genealogists, as it tells us a lot about the reliability of the documents we have access to - but it seems surprisingly understudied. One more for the to-do pile...

Andrew.

On reflection, I do wonder how the MoD has actually derivd the dates of birth. Few of the First World War enlistment forms I've seen actually request the soldier's DoB, often you see only age (the TF forms don't even have this, so all you get is the "apparent age" recorded by the MO during the medical examination), which may only be in years, though on occasion you do you get years, months, days or just years and days. Of course from the latter you can derive a DoB, but it might explain the underreporting of 29 February if MoD simply assumed February always has 28 days, and possibly some of the other anomalies could be down to decisions on how ages with just years and months were treated

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My Grandfather William Donald Wareham D.O.B. 25 May 1900 served with the Queens Royal West Surreys (I have photos of him in uniform as a Bugler/Drummer) and he served in the Army after 1920, but I have not found him on the attachment lists provided or any other record of him. Do you reckon his records do not still exist?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On reflection, I do wonder how the MoD has actually derivd the dates of birth. Few of the First World War enlistment forms I've seen actually request the soldier's DoB, often you see only age (the TF forms don't even have this, so all you get is the "apparent age" recorded by the MO during the medical examination), which may only be in years, though on occasion you do you get years, months, days or just years and days. Of course from the latter you can derive a DoB, but it might explain the underreporting of 29 February if MoD simply assumed February always has 28 days, and possibly some of the other anomalies could be down to decisions on how ages with just years and months were treated

On my uncles AIR 79 his date of birth in in his RFC record shows no date of birth but that his apparent age is 22 years 3 months when he joined on 19 Sep 1916 and on his AIR 76 RAF record it shows his date of birth as 29 June 1896 which is out by 4 years as his actual date of birth was 29 June 1892.

So accuracy in Army records is questionable

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Greg

Sadly I think that it may be the case that your uncle's service records no longer exist, however it may be that you will find his post 1920 renumbering records as set out in my post in the 'Attestation books - where are they sent' thread http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=214248&p=2120158

'From a 2010 post by Bootneck:

'THE QUEEN’S ROYAL REGIMENT (WEST SURREY) AND THE EAST SURREY REGIMENT: ENLISTMENT REGISTERS, TRANSFERS-IN/OUT REGISTERS, ANNUAL DISCHARGES BOOKS AND WORLD WAR II HONOURS INDEXES, 1892-1958 (Surrey History Centre reference: 7791/-)

Related records

For the archives of the two regiments, formerly held at the Queen’s Royal Surrey Regimental Museum, see QRWS and ESR. For recruitment registers (Army Book 303) of the 2nd (Queen's Royal West Surrey Regiment) and 31st (East Surrey Regiment) Regimental Recruiting Districts, 1908-1933, see 2496/-.

http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=148375&p=1425714'

Regards

Justin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On reflection, I do wonder how the MoD has actually derivd the dates of birth. Few of the First World War enlistment forms I've seen actually request the soldier's DoB, often you see only age (the TF forms don't even have this, so all you get is the "apparent age" recorded by the MO during the medical examination), which may only be in years, though on occasion you do you get years, months, days or just years and days. Of course from the latter you can derive a DoB, but it might explain the underreporting of 29 February if MoD simply assumed February always has 28 days, and possibly some of the other anomalies could be down to decisions on how ages with just years and months were treated

Hi David

A good point, which set me thinking about this:

1) The dates in this dataset for dates of birth are often far too random to have been written to a rough formula in most cases.

2) When you look at the attestation/enlistment books from the time of the renumbering of the Army in 1920 you can see that in many cases (not all as we will see) the clerks had the information to calculate a date of birth. Here are two sets of examples from Enlistment books which can be looked at online (from the http://www.rlcarchive.org/and the Royal Artillery books available on Find My Past):

Examples from a 1920 Royal Army Service Corps Enlistment Book

Arthur Nash Army No T 4120 and Former No T 34949 Age on Attestation 22 years & 6/12 Date of Attestation 29/8/14

James Frederick Platt Army No T4121 and Former No T 34951 Age on Attestation 24 221/365 Date of Attestation 2/9/14

Examples from a 1920 Royal Artillery Corps Enlistment Book (both soldiers from the Royal Artillery Band)

Smith Albert Army No 14089777 and Former No 39489 Age on Attestation 15 165/365 Date of Attestation 19/7/13

Rose Walter Leonard Army No 14089778 and Former No 39490 Age on Attestation 14 279/365 Date of Attestation 19/7/13

There is also the fact that the Attestation Form included in service records in the 1920s changed, with the B 271 form including not just age in years and month but 'Day, Month & Year of birth' as part of question 5. The earliest B 271 attestation form I can find online (there aren't many as most people are interested in posting about WW1 or WW2 service, not interwar service) is from 1927 http://www.kingsownmuseum.plus.com/ko2951c.htm. However it is likely that this form for attestation goes back earlier in the 1920s. This would definitely affect anyone with a break in service before and after the re-numbering. With more research it may be possible to tie down the use of the B 271 form to as early as 1920.

An interesting avenue for more research. Anybody got any examples from the actual service records from the individuals listed in the dataset?

Regards

Justin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The first of the RASC ones illustrate precisely my point, it shows only age in years and months (6/12 ie 6 months) at attestation, so all you can say about his DoB is that it is between 29 February! and 30 January 1892 (if my maths is right)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

David

Please re-read my previous post, which I begin with the statement that you have made 'a good point'. I took a small sample from the enlistment books from RAOC & RA which led to the observation 'you can see that in many cases (not all as we will see) the clerks had the information to calculate a date of birth'.

The main thrust of the post was to illustrate the very large number of dates that are clearly derived from actual or identified DoBs (where a DoB has been recorded from an individual) as firstly the birth dates do not fall on a major anniversary (the majority) and secondly the majority of dates can clearly be derived from information in post 1920 attestation/enlistment books. There is also the possibility via the changes to the attestation forms that even more of the dates used to index the files may be based on actual DoB. There is more research to be done here (again see my previous post - anyone who has the service records from a post 1920 renumbering soldier who served in WW1 or has an example of the use of a B 271 attestation form (the B 271 form asked for a precise DoB - anyone with a gap of service between WW1 & post 1920 service would generate a new attestation form on record) earlier than 1927 (it is not clear when the form was introduced) is particularly welcome to contribute here). There is also no doubt that many of our ancestors were imprecise about their dates of birth (whether it is inaccuracy on the part of the individual or the clerks collecting the data) . Many things in history have a number of likely causes.

Regards

Justin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, and I also acknowledged that in some cases the forms used during the war have years and days too. So you have the "random background" where the clerks (subject to arithmetical error - date calculations are awkward) could derive an exact birthdate from the information to hand, and the spikes noticed by Andrew possibly explained by the treatment applied by clerks (either by some sort of official edict, or simply doing the best they could) to those instances where they only had age in years and months.

Other datasets that may be worth examining are the various Royal Navy and Royal Marines records in Discovery. Admiralty seem to have been more punctilious about recording dates of birth in the first place on enlistment. If the issue is that men did not know their own age accurately and so chose signficant dates, I'd expect to see similar patterns to those visible in the army records (though possibly with a naval bias, do we see 21 October being particularly popular..?). If, however, the patterns in the army records are a result of post hoc calculation of birth dates from imprecise ages, we probably wouldn't see the same spikes in Admiralty records.

One other dataset is the County Durham Home Guard in WO 409. These have dates of birth, and were completed as such on the attestation forms. Some of these men might even overlap with those in the original data set (unfortunately the catalogue description does not include the indication on the attestation forms as to whether a man had any previous service). As it only covers a single county it's a relatively small set. There were a few instances within the set of DoBs being recorded as "impossible dates" ie 31 April, 30 February and so on. As these couldn't be parsed into a valid date, these will be among the men shown without a DoB. From later this year it may also be possibly to look at some of the data from the 1939 register, at least for those born prior to 1915, or born after that date but known to be deceased.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi David

Thanks for engaging with the topic and the suggestions for analysis of other datasets, which are now open to Andrew to take up (I enjoy the results of statistical history but am much less of a practitioner and I applaud his attempt to use this data in such an interesting way). I will pursue the avenue of looking at the information collected from forms and paperwork (administrative history) which is one of my favoured ways of looking at history, principally if the beginning of the use of Form B 271 (which features a requirement for full DoB) can be narrowed down further in time (plus any other paperwork which may have had DoB connected to the individuals concerned).

It is also clear if you look at the online attestation/enlistment books that are available as a sample, plus the dates themselves in the pre1901 DoB dataset that not just some, but a majority have clear non festival/anniversary related DoB which are only partially explained by the attestation book records.

It is also interesting to know that the 1939 National Identity Card register will be released on Find My Past later this year (at least for individuals born prior to 1914). Trying to get any sense of progress and release dates from a site like Find My Past on major projects is often difficult.

Regards

Justin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...