CWGC confirms that John Kipling is buried in the correct grave

[Guest]

All the ICRC records Click have John Kipling as 2/Lt. Some of these will be official correspondence from the family, or War Office, and written after 27/9/1915?

Mike

[Muerrisch]

Understandable if stressed on the Western Front too.

As collateral, he does write "out here". And 2 IG held Divine service for RCs and CofE.

During 2014 I frequently typed/ wrote 1914 and I was not stressed. This year has an outbreak of 1916s as well.

[SteveE]

The letter is dated 19 Sept 1914 seems a bit strange he got the year wrong?

Something that we all do from time to time, stressed or not , and as an example, this from the website you linked to...."Our first ‘letter from the archive’ was written by John Kipling on 19th November, 1915"

[Guest]

Yes indeed and here's to young Jack Kipling. Any thoughts on the ICRC documents all being 2/Lt?

Mike

[Muerrisch]

Docs relating to Lt J Kipling [as opposed 2Lt] only appear ANYWHERE in correspondence or official records after the LG announcement in November 1915.

Those related to the search for him were clearly expecting him to be .................... badged as a 2Lt. Now there's a surprise!

Happy to be proved wrong, as ever..

[tullybrone]

Thank you Martin: there was clearly "something going on" with the Coldstream.

You do need to take Majors into account of course: Company commander = major or captain.

Hi,

I'm no expert but having just looked at my copy of Ray Westlake's British Battalions in France & Flanders 1914 the "use" of a Major as a Company Commander in all 3 CG Battalions on embarkation is rare - only 2 out of 12 - 1 each in 1st & 2nd CG. None in 3rd CG. The vast majority of companies have 2 Captain's on their strength.

The explanation may be that perhaps it's just a(nother) Coldstream tradition (that continued throughout the Great War?).

Steve Y

[Guest]

Thank you Martin: there was clearly "something going on" with the Coldstream.

You do need to take Majors into account of course: Company commander = major or captain.

Majors as company Commanders ....0

Two battalions commanded by Majors with no Senior Majors, two commanded by Majors (temp Lt Cols) with one Senior major each. Attrition. MG

[Guest]

Cross-checking the Coldstream Guards Officers against the nominal rolls for all four battalions on the eve of the Battle of Loos in the "Coldstream Guards 1914-1919" - we find come considerable reshuffling. A number of Captains move to Adjutants, the prev Adjutants presumably moving to Staff appointments. The vacuum is filled with Lts and some are cross-posted. Some Lieutenants have been promoted to substantive Captains. The bottom line is that no battalion has more than four Temp Lieutenants. Although it is not concrete proof (the appointments are not given), it seems fairly clear that the Temp Lieutenants are in sufficient numbers to fulfill Coy 2IC roles. My only query is that battalions would have Temp Lts acting as Coy 2IC while substantive Lieutenants remained as Platoon Commanders. Note none of the battalions name a Bn MGO which might account for one Lt, however the rank distribution of the 3rd Bn in particular warrants further research.

The distribution of Ranks against Battalions (excluding Bn HQ)

...............1st Bn....2nd Bn....3rd Bn....4th Bn

Capt...........4...........3............4..............3

T Capt........0...........3............0..............0

Lt................3..........5.............6..............2

T Lt.............4..........1.............4..............0

2 Lt...........12..........7.............4.............16

[Muerrisch]

I have posted an appeal at

http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=238142

regarding any update of the Holts' "My Boy Jack" ..................anything relevant published by them, or versus them, since book in 2007?

[Muerrisch]

Hi,

I'm no expert but having just looked at my copy of Ray Westlake's British Battalions in France & Flanders 1914 the "use" of a Major as a Company Commander in all 3 CG Battalions on embarkation is rare - only 2 out of 12 - 1 each in 1st & 2nd CG. None in 3rd CG. The vast majority of companies have 2 Captain's on their strength.

The explanation may be that perhaps it's just a(nother) Coldstream tradition (that continued throughout the Great War?).

Steve Y

Thank you. Company commander was fluid complemented major/captain but Establishments ensured that, even in peacetime, there were never enough majors for one per company.

In my opinion, beyond a 2 i/c for each battalion, and a depot commander, the other majors were to ensure that there was a decent sized field from which to pick battalion COs.

[Guest]

Thank you. Company commander was fluid complemented major/captain but Establishments ensured that, even in peacetime, there were never enough majors for one per company.

In my opinion, beyond a 2 i/c for each battalion, and a depot commander, the other majors were to ensure that there was a decent sized field from which to pick battalion COs.

Majors represented just five in every 100 Officers in the Guards in 1914-15...roughly equivalent to one Major per battalion

1914 Star medal roll (Officers)

Grenadier Guards 100 Officers......10 Majors

Coldstream Guards 130 Officers ....7 Majors

Irish Guards 56 Officers.................4 Majors

Scots Guards 95 Officers...............9 Majors

Total 381 Officers..........................30 Majors = 7.8%

1914-15 Star medal roll (Officers)

Grenadier Guards 163 Officers......5 Majors

Coldstream Guards 182 Officers ...5 Majors

Irish Guards 78 Officers................2 Majors

Scots Guards 82 Officers..............2 Majors

Weslh Guards 26 Officers...............1 Major

Total 531 Officers..........................15 Majors = 2.8%

Total for 1914 Star and 1914-15 Star

Grenadier Guards 263 Officers......15 Majors = 5.7%

Coldstream Guards 312 Officers ...12 Majors = 3.8%

Irish Guards 134 Officers................6 Majors = 4.5%

Scots Guards 177 Officers.............11 Majors = 6.2%

Welsh Guards 26 Officers................1 Major = 3.8%

Total 912 Officers............................45 Majors = 4.9%

MG

Edited

[John_Hartley]

Understandable if stressed on the Western Front too.

As collateral, he does write "out here". And 2 IG held Divine service for RCs and CofE.

During 2014 I frequently typed/ wrote 1914 and I was not stressed. This year has an outbreak of 1916s as well.

Me too.

Although I'm prooof reading the latest book and , only yesterday, spotted that I had the 6th Cheshires attacking the Schwaben Redoubt in 2016.

[Bernard_Lewis]

Maybe they didn't hear the whistle?

Bernard

[Guest]

Thank you. Company commander was fluid complemented major/captain but Establishments ensured that, even in peacetime, there were never enough majors for one per company.

In my opinion, beyond a 2 i/c for each battalion, and a depot commander, the other majors were to ensure that there was a decent sized field from which to pick battalion COs.

One other factor is that by mid 1915 the BEF infantry Officer Corps had experienced overall casualty ratios in excess of 80% While casualties were fairly evenly spread across the battalion Officer ranks, Majors incidentally had marginally higher battle casualty rates.

Perusing the Foot Guards' diaries for 1915, Majors in command of companies becomes a fairly scarce event. MG

[Guest]

The plot thinnens. The LG entry for two groups of 2nd Lts promoted to Temp Lt were all supernumerary to establishment (Grenadier Guards and Coldstream Guards). This might suggest they were employed in roles beyond the battalion Bde MGOs, ADCs etc. My speculation. Probably worth tracing this band of brothers to establish exactly what roles they were employed in at the time.

[trajan]

More grist to this fascinating mill!

I take it (not that important, I know, in overall context, but looking beyond end of one's nose while having no knowledge on the subject) that the Coldstreamer "G.P.Bowes-Lyon" was the brother of Elizabeth, later to be HM?

[Muerrisch]

Martin that is a great discovery.

At Div HQs and above, ADCs [2 of at Div] were "officers", not established at a stated rank. What better than a Guards Lt as an ADC, albeit Temporary?

[Don Regiano]

Me too.

Although I'm prooof reading the latest book and , only yesterday, spotted that I had the 6th Cheshires attacking the Schwaben Redoubt in 2016.

Oh I look forward to bumping into Capt R Kirk when I'm there next month John ;>)

Reg

PS I am looking forward to reading your book.

[Muerrisch]

A look at War Estabs reminds me that NO BATTALION APPOINTMENTS required Lt rank. All subalterns were subalterns on the Estabs.

Not Transport Officer, not MGO, and not even Adjutant, although custom and practice was that the post was for a lt or a captain.

QMs were different, and made Hon Lt on first appointment.

Thus there is not a reason to make up a 2Lt within the unit in the normal course of events.

With casualties carving away captains as company commanders and company 2i/cs, there might be a case for a 2lt to be made TLt as a 2i/c, in that making him a T/capt might be a jump too far.

I know of no regs. forbidding a double step but ...............

[Guest]

A look at War Estabs reminds me that NO BATTALION APPOINTMENTS required Lt rank. All subalterns were subalterns on the Estabs.

Not Transport Officer, not MGO, and not even Adjutant, although custom and practice was that the post was for a lt or a captain.

QMs were different, and made Hon Lt on first appointment.

Thus there is not a reason to make up a 2Lt within the unit in the normal course of events.

With casualties carving away captains as company commanders and company 2i/cs, there might be a case for a 2lt to be made TLt as a 2i/c, in that making him a T/capt might be a jump too far.

I know of no regs. forbidding a double step but ...............

I see Adjutants' appointments were Gazetted.

[Guest]

Guards Div nominal rolls dated end Aug 1915.

224 subalterns. LG promotion announcements traced for all except 12. That leaves 212 subalterns split between Lieutenants, Temp Lieutenants and 2nd Lieutenants: of these 211 are recorded at the 'correct' rank according to their LG announcement date, not the effective date. The one anomaly has an LG announcement date of 21st Aug 1915 and I strongly suspect the info had not quite reached the unit by the time the roll was compiled...or it was an error. Either way there is a 99.5% correlation between rank recorded and the LG announcement date (not effective date). This is the most compelling slice of the data I have seen so far.

MG

[Muerrisch]

Martin,

splendid. As I read you, the anomaly is not an "early" put up rank, but a "late" one?

[Guest]

Martin,

splendid. As I read you, the anomaly is not an "early" put up rank, but a "late" one?

Yes.... still recorded as a 2nd Lt a few days after the London Gazette announcement. It is the only exception.

The anomaly was gazetted on 21st Aug 1915. From evidence of trawling the Routine Orders when LG announcements were repeated there was typically a 3-5 day lag. In this case there is a 7 day lag which is easy to understand if the roll had been prepared on 26th/27th. Worth remembering that the Division had just assembled so there would have been plenty of movement. I will double check to ensure it is not a typo. Either way one might expect at least one error in 212 sets of dates. When we weigh the 'balance' of probabilities the data is heavily tilted one way.

[Muerrisch]

Martin, thank you.

From the blinkered perspective of anaysing the JK case, late arrivals of the news of promotion is not a problem of course.

[Guest]

A graphic illustration of the Guards subalterns on the Guards Div nominal roll at Loos. The orange dots are subalterns recorded as Lieutenants, the blue dots are subalterns recorded as 2nd Lieutenants

The black dot represents the date of the Guards Div nominal roll - 28th Aug 1915 on both axes.

Explanation.

Dots above the black dot are Officers whose LG promotion to Lt was announced after the roll was taken

Dots below the black dot are Officers whose LG promotion to Lt was announced before the roll was taken

Dots to the left of the black dot are Officers whose promotion was antedated to a date before the roll was taken

Dots to the right of the black dot are officers whose promotion was antedated to a date after the roll was taken

The diagonal line represents the line that promotions which became effective on the day they were announced i.e announcement date = effective date

The orange dots on the bottom left. These are Officers whose promotion to Lieutenant was announced before the nominal roll and effective before the nominal roll. These are marked orange if the roll recorded them as substantive Lieutenants. Unsurprisingly all recorded Lieutenants are below and to the left of the black dot. This should be expected.

The blue dots on the top. These are Officers whose promotion to Lieutenant was announced after the nominal roll. If they are recorded on the roll as 2nd Lieutenants they are marked in blue. Note that the effective date of the promotion of many was before the nominal roll date (the dots to the left), however despite this they are all still recorded at 2nd Lieutenants. If they had been recorded as a Lieutenants they would have been displayed in red. The the 'Lt Kipling Theory' of putting up rank held true the dots above an to the left would be recorded as Lieutenants (and coloured orange). They are blue because none were recorded as Lieutenants despite their effective promotions date happening before the nominal roll date. They didn't put up rank.

Kipling is marked in pink.

It takes a bit of time to 'tune into' the graph, but it is a close as I can get to illustrate the fact that subalterns waited until the LG announcement date before putting up rank. The data is over 200 subalterns. Note some of the dots represent groups of officers with the same promotion criteria. MG

The orange dots are subalterns recorded as Lieutenants, the blue dots are subalterns recorded as 2nd Lieutenants (colours changed for colour blind with red/green dichromacy)