Jump to content
The Great War (1914-1918) Forum

Remembered Today:

CWGC Records


Corporal Chris
 Share

Recommended Posts

I had always assumed that CWGC took their facts from a soldier's service record but is that the case? I am researching a casualty who CWGC and SDGW state was with 11th Suffolks. His MIC states 1/4th Suffolks with his date of entry into theatre (8/11/14) the same as other local casualties with the 1/4th and his number is four away from a known 1/4th Suffolk so everything points to him being 1/4th. Looking at the MIC I can see that reading it hurriedly it could be taken as 11 rather than 1/4. If, at some stage, he had transferred from the 1/4th to the 11th would his MIC reflect his final destination? Any thoughts?

Regards,

Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It has to be borne in mind the sheer volume of forms to be read and transferred to other documents, all in different handwriting. One misread would copied time and time again. 1's and 4;s were mixed up on my relative service number. Some docs show 4984 whereas his number was actually 11984.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Might be worth checking the British War Medal/ Victory Medal rolls; if he is shown in the roll as 11th, it might refer to his former service in 1st/4th as per this example for Percy Stanley Vincent. In this case, neither battalion was named on the Medal Index Card.

C

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many thanks for your replies. I shall check out the rolls and see if that throws any light on it.

Regards,

Chris.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin

There is no administrative reason for a MIC to include mention of a Battalion. Even if it did, CWGC would not being taking details of a man's service from a MIC. A MIC was simply to provide information to the medal manufacturer what to put on a man's medal, that's all.

If a MIC did happen to include a Bn (especially on a 1914 or 1914-1915 medal MIC), then it would likely be the Bn (and Rgt) he first landed with overseas. In your case, he would then have been most likely posted to a different Bn, and CWGC/SDGW would record the unit last served with in which he died.

As per the above, the meal rolls should confirm.

Regards

Russ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My own recent strands of research have uncovered similar discrepancies with 2 lads from the Notts & Derby, namely:

9714 Thomas Duckmanton KIA

12291 Henry Hare DOW

Both CWGC and SDGW describe them as having lost their lives with 1st Btn, on dates before that Btn had even landed in France!!

The medal roll for Hare actually puts him 12th Btn - who were formed less than a month before he died. So, bearing in mind what we know of the Kitchener units, if that were true, he probably did not even have a uniform when his life was lost.

Fortunately, their actual credentials are written on their MIC's, but if you did not know the background, what would you believe?

Still, its all part of the fun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin

You can always check the digitised documents on the CWGC website for each casualty. The vast numbers of records they hold means they scanned and OCRed them and numbers on old records may have been misread. If so, contact CWGC and they'll correct it if it is wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SPOF,

Unfortunately, in the case of my 2 lads, those documents are also equally incorrect. I would also presume that their headstones are incorrect too.

With regard to the OP, is there any vital clue to be had in what those 2 btn's of Suffolks were doing on his date of death (assuming he was KIA rather than Died or DOW) - or perhaps the 2 btns were in completely different locations at the time.

Were other men from both units KIA on the same date? - and what do the records give for them?

Cheers,

Mike

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With regards to Duckmanton its interesting to note that in the Nottingham Evening Post dated 5th February 1915 it shows him as being reported missing under the dates 6th to 10th December 1914. As for Hare, its shown in Long Eaton Advertiser of 29th January 1915 and states was 1st Battalion and died of wounds in the 67th Reserve Field Hospital on the 30th October 1914 having been wounded 20th, most likely at Richebourg, both1st Battalion men. BRONNO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Bronno,

I did reply to you here, and then thought better of it as it is not pertinent to the OP. Sent you a PM instead - hope you don't mind!

Regards,

Mike

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mark asks about the relative locations of the 4th and 11th Suffolks. The Suffolks history shows that they were both in the Ypres Salient. The 4th as working parties with the WD mentioning morning parade and baths for the 17/10/17. The 11th is engaged in road repairs under heavy fire with a number of casualties on the 8th and 9th but a quiet period over the 17th. I have downloaded the 11th WD but it is illegible for this period. Thanks for all the replies.

This is probably the wrong place to ask but on an admin point, in the 'old days' I ticked a box to get an e-mail advising me of a reply to a post. Am I overlooking something when I post or has that facility gone.

Regards,

Chris.

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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...