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

Remembered Today:

Medal Roll & MIC discrepancy?


10th Batt RWS
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hello

Can anyone explain why a Medal Index Card would show a handwritten battalion number, yet the Medal Roll states two different battalions entirely?

G/11377 JJ Cunningham is listed as having served with the 10th &11th Battalions of the Royal West Surrey regiment but the Medal Index Card and the Silver Wound Badge both document the 3rd Battalion. Could one assume he served all three and was transferred from the 10th or 11th or could this be a clerical error?

Thanks for any help

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Medal Index Card is actually a Silver War Badge card which replicates the SWB roll. This has also been used to show his BWM/Vict entitlement. He was presumably transferred to the 3rd Bn. for discharge. Rolls are the ones to go by for his service battalions.

 

TEW

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

There's a sick and wounded report on FMP which records him as being in 'B' Company, 11th Battalion when he was admitted to the South African Hospital, Richmond Park, Surrey on 1st August 1917 with a severe back wound.

 

Regards

Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks TEW. What was the purpose of transferring a soldier from one battalion to another in order to discharge him? I could understand that if the medal roll also listed the 3td battalion. Glad the Medal Rolls are the main index for battalions as I spent a month building one from them!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many thanks CLK, that is excellent to know. It demonstrates for sure that he must have served both the 10th & 11th Battalions. No doubt this must be the wound which resulted in him being discharged. Shame you have to subscribe to many different websites to build up an overall picture or a soldiers service.

Really appreciate that! Thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin
16 minutes ago, 10th Batt RWS said:

What was the purpose of transferring a soldier from one battalion to another in order to discharge him? I could understand that if the medal roll also listed the 3td battalion.

 

The 3rd (Reserve) Battalion QWRS was exactly that, a reserve and training unit.  Men who were sick or wounded were taken off the strength of an active service Battalion and posted to the 3rd (Reserve) Battalion until either fit enough to be posted or, as in this case discharged from the Army.  It was an administrative expediency, and he may, or may not have physically served with the Battalion.

 

Some Rolls do list the discharge Battalion even though it's irrelevant to the administration of the medals as Reserve Battalions did not serve overseas as a formed unit.

 

Ken

 

Edited by kenf48
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, kenf48 said:

 

The 3rd (Reserve) Battalion was exactly that, a reserve and training unit.  Men who were sick or wounded were taken off the strength of an active service Battalion and posted to the 3rd (Reserve) Battalion until either fit enough to be posted or, as in this case discharged from the Army.  It was an administrative expediency, and he may, or may not have physically served with the Battalion.

 

Some Rolls do list the discharge Battalion even though it's irrelevant to the administration of the medals as Reserve Battalions did not serve overseas as a formed unit.

 

Ken

 

Many thanks Ken, that explains it for me!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

21 minutes ago, 10th Batt RWS said:

Shame you have to subscribe to many different websites to build up an overall picture or a soldiers service

 

To make it worse Forces War Records seem to have 3 transcribed hospital admission/discharge records. One from 1916, and two from 1917.

 

Regards

Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Chris

Doesn't surprise me. They had 5 for my Grandfather, 2 of which were duplicated with a regiment he wasn't even in.

I only found one on FWR  for Cunningham and that was 1918?

Cheers

Andy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FOR had 5 entries for my Grandfather, 2 of which were duplicated but with the completely wrong regiment. Can't be an easy task to decipher some of the writing!

 

These chaps all won the MM during WW1 and all are listed as being in the 10th Battalion when they were awarded / won the medal but they are not listed as having served in the battalion at all in the medal rolls. This is the reverse of the original query! Should I assume the Award is for the 10th?

 

Ernest Stephen Bartlett   1914-1920 Private BWM & VM RWS G/1279 6th. RWS. G/1279 Pte & 10th RWS
Charles William Cook MM   1914-1920 Private BWM & VM RWS G/21487 11th. RWS. G/21457 Pte, 8th. RWS., 10th. RWS.
Felix Oliver Crawford MM Commissioned 26/02/18 1914-1920 Sergeant BWM & VM RWS G/21529 Sussex. Yeo. 2007. Sgt., 4. RWS. G/21529 & 10th RWS (MM Won with 10th)
William Leonard Dalton MM Mid   1914-1920 Corporal BWM & VM RWS G/3894 2nd. RWS. G/3894 Cpl. MM as 10th
Charles Thomas Durrant MM   1914-1920 Private BWM & VM RWS G/6519 8th RWS. G/6519 Pte. MM with 10th
David Victor George MM   1914-1920 Private BWM & VM RWS G/818 6th. RWS. G/818 Pte
William Mayhead MM   1914-1920 Sergeant BWM & VM Labour Corps 691979 10th 6839 Sgt R.W. Surr. R.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

In the 3 years we've been transcribing MH106 now I've had a few dozen reported anomalies sent to me/our data department for checking and can happily state that not in any of the ones reported was there a mistake made by FWR, not even a small one, as a few members of this forum can indeed vouch I am sure.

 

MH106 is a representative sample kept from the records made during the war, it represents some 3-5% maximum of the entire records ever held, meaning what you won't find (unless incredibly lucky) is a full set of A&D records for your ancestor -you may find one record you may find more, you may find none.

 

I've seen plenty of errors in the original source, though-

There are 2 A/D records on the same day, in the same CCS for an ancestor of mine -both have different Christian names but it's definitely the same man.

 

In all of these cases this wasn't a matter of 'interpretation' either - the examples were all, thankfully, very clear.

I am afraid, like all historical records, there will be errors when originally written and is some cases there will have to be 'interpretation' of handwriting.

 

I remain happy to have anything 'odd' sent to me and can, naturally, show FWR full members the original for comparison should they wish of course.

 

 

 

Edited by timbo58
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...