Waggoner Posted 14 February , 2016 Author Share Posted 14 February , 2016 I picked up the copy of the MIC that my friend, Terry, ran off for me. It definitely looks like a "GS" on the MIC. The real proof would be to look at the actual medal rolls. Can anyone find: K/2/102B24 page 1212; and K/2/8c/2 page 128? Thanks in advance! All the best, Gary Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ss002d6252 Posted 14 February , 2016 Share Posted 14 February , 2016 BWM/VM roll shows 'GS' Craig Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveE Posted 14 February , 2016 Share Posted 14 February , 2016 BWM/VM roll shows 'GS'As does the 1914/1915 Star medal roll and I have no doubt that the medal is correctly impressed in accordance with the MICs and Medal Rolls. It is still my belief however that Browne originally had an SS/ prefixed service number but that this was recorded incorrectly as GS/ during one of his transfers and subsequently onto his medal details. With the records available to us we've been able to 'prove' that two of the three GS/ numbers in the same 23*** range were actually SS/ prefixed, Browne is the exception because we have nothing with which to disprove the GS/. It just doesn't sit right with me that in a range of 200 or so SS/ prefixed numbers there should be a single GS/ prefixed one. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waggoner Posted 14 February , 2016 Author Share Posted 14 February , 2016 Craig and Steve, Thank you both for this valuable information. My search of the MIC index shows 18,672 entries with "SS" prefixes whereas there are about 1,608 "GS" prefixes. If I follow Steve's logic, this suggests an almost1 in 10 transcription error rate. That does seem high. My deduction is that there must be some genuine "GS" prefixes but the question remains as to why? Most ASC prefixes are intended to show a particular skill or terms of enrolment. If so, then what is the purpose of the "GS" category? All the best, Gary Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 14 February , 2016 Share Posted 14 February , 2016 Can all these be wrong Click Mike Edit 22:10 14/2/2016 Answer to own question is most likely YES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ss002d6252 Posted 14 February , 2016 Share Posted 14 February , 2016 I also think it is an error along the way that worked its way in to his records and stayed that way, Craig Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveE Posted 14 February , 2016 Share Posted 14 February , 2016 Can all these be wrong Edit 22:10 14/2/2016 Answer to own question is most likely YES I've no intention of checking all 1,608 results but I think I'd agree with your edit, I've just done a snapshot of the first fifteen results (a small sample I know) on your link and guess what? They're all transcription errors. Instead of the GS/ prefix shown on NA what we actually have is a CMT/, S/, RTS/, RP/, ES/ with the remainder SS/ prefixes (in addition we have a Royal Fusilier too ). That's not a 10% error but 100% and one which still doesn't incline me to think that the ASC actually used the GS/ prefix. Steve edit: snapshot increased to first fifteen results. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waggoner Posted 15 February , 2016 Author Share Posted 15 February , 2016 Steve, Very interesting! You may have found a double transcription error...there is no known "RP" ASC prefix. All the bst, Gary Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveE Posted 15 February , 2016 Share Posted 15 February , 2016 Steve, Very interesting! You may have found a double transcription error...there is no known "RP" ASC prefix. All the bst, Gary It was an Indian Army Service Corps man if that makes a difference?Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waggoner Posted 15 February , 2016 Author Share Posted 15 February , 2016 Steve, Not that I know of. Curious. All the best, Gary Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 15 February , 2016 Share Posted 15 February , 2016 There appear to be 13 with possible PR prefix. Have not checked them. Click Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveE Posted 15 February , 2016 Share Posted 15 February , 2016 My search of the MIC index shows 18,672 entries with "SS" prefixes whereas there are about 1,608 "GS" prefixes. If I follow Steve's logic, this suggests an almost1 in 10 transcription error rate. That does seem high. My deduction is that there must be some genuine "GS" prefixes but the question remains as to why? Most ASC prefixes are intended to show a particular skill or terms of enrolment. If so, then what is the purpose of the "GS" category?Gary It's difficult to know at what point sufficient evidence has been presented to prove/disprove a theory but I've now checked 33 records (admittedly only 2% of the 1608 sample set) and have had a 100% transcription error rate. By far the vast majority of errors have been the recording of SS/ as GS/ with a few other prefixes (ES/, TS/, RTS/, S/, CMT/, RP/) thrown in for good measure. As I said in an earlier post I have no intention of going through all of the 1608 'hits' and I believe I've done enough to convince myself, if nobody else, that the theory of transcription error holds true. There will always be anomalies to any theory, Browne is the case in point, but to my mind his GS/ prefix is just that, an anomaly, and that the ASC did not use the GS/ prefix. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waggoner Posted 15 February , 2016 Author Share Posted 15 February , 2016 Steve, Ah, yes, the question of statistical significance! Even in a sample as small as this, one would have expected at least one supporting example. I am inclned to agree with you. Browne's prefix was either a "one of" or a transcription error. Thank you again for all your work in tracking this down! All the best, Gary Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ss002d6252 Posted 15 February , 2016 Share Posted 15 February , 2016 I think the key point is that the ASC got far too clever for their own good with prefixes and no-one knew what to do with them.In some office, somewhere, in 1914/15 there was probably the most hated man in the army. The man who issued the orders for new ASC prefixes. Craig Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 15 February , 2016 Share Posted 15 February , 2016 There is no mention of a GS/**** prefix in Michael Young's book. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waggoner Posted 15 February , 2016 Author Share Posted 15 February , 2016 Mike, Young's book on lists the standard prefixes. There are probably about a third more prefixes out there. As you noted, "GS" is not one of them. All the best, Gary Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 15 February , 2016 Share Posted 15 February , 2016 Mike, Young's book on lists the standard prefixes. There are probably about a third more prefixes out there. As you noted, "GS" is not one of them. All the best, Gary Fair enough Gary. Any chance of a couple of examples that are not mentioned in his book? Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knotty Posted 15 February , 2016 Share Posted 15 February , 2016 Hi Gentlemen I refer to my post in jest on a previous thread (M1 & M2 prefix) http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=236138&p=2362905 Since I put up my pdf list (post #11 in above thread) there are 5 more additions (yet to add)! Gary can probably give you a more definite listing. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waggoner Posted 15 February , 2016 Author Share Posted 15 February , 2016 Mike, Just off the top, "R" for Russia...MR, TR and SR are known. One source suggests "voulunteers for Russia". Then "SA" meaning Colonial enlistments, perhaps South Africa? T1/SA, T2/SA and S2/SA appear on the MIC on-line searches. The Canteens have at least a half dozen: Ex Fce Can, NAC, E, B, CA, A and probably a few more. Under "W", there are WT4 and WS4, most of which are associated with Welsh enlistments in the 38th (Welsh) Division. I thiught there were also WM prefixes but they were transcription errors. Then there are the anomalies. In addition to GS, there is also R3. While they probably shouldn't exist, there are named medals with these prefixes on them. All the best, Gary Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 15 February , 2016 Share Posted 15 February , 2016 No wonder there were errors, still not certain what his number really is? Ralph Tallett ASC. His MIC entry on the National Archives Discovery has " MIC No: TI/SR/596 " His MIC on Ancestry Click Service Record Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ss002d6252 Posted 15 February , 2016 Share Posted 15 February , 2016 An attempt to merge T1 & SR - is it an actual ASC prefix ? Craig Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waggoner Posted 15 February , 2016 Author Share Posted 15 February , 2016 Mike, T1/SR is a pefectly fine and known prefix. It indicates that he was a horse transport driver and a member of the Special Reseve who had enlisted in one of the New Armies. If you have his service record, you should be able to discover which company he as in and, from there, the division. All the best, Gary Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waggoner Posted 16 February , 2016 Author Share Posted 16 February , 2016 Just received this from Howard Williamson who wrote the Collectors Guides to the First World War: GS- Is a previously noted ASC Prefix see page 744 of Vol 2 The C********.Observed number quoted seen is: GS-6341. Best w, Howard All the best, Gary Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveE Posted 16 February , 2016 Share Posted 16 February , 2016 Just received this from Howard Williamson who wrote the Collectors Guides to the First World War: GS- Is a previously noted ASC Prefix see page 744 of Vol 2 The C********.Observed number quoted seen is: GS-6341. Gary At the risk of repeating myself but "One swallow does not a summer make" . Perhaps you can enquire after the name of the ASC man to whom that number was issued (and its source?) as I have singularly failed to find reference to an Army Service Corps' GS/ prefixed 6341 number in any of the usual online sources. Perhaps that's just me though and someone else will have better luck finding it. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waggoner Posted 16 February , 2016 Author Share Posted 16 February , 2016 Steve, The swallow may be forced to leave Capistrano! A friend checked Howard's book and this is the correct number and entry: Reference: WO 372/15/125577 Description: Medal card of Parle, Thomas J Corps Regiment No Rank Army Service CorpsSS/6431Private Date: 1914-1920 Held by: The National Archives, Kew Can you check the actual MIC to verify? All the best, Gary Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now