Soldiers Died data

[The Kneelagger]

good evening all - I am working to update a published 'roll of honour of the fallen' for my home town, and have complied a significant list of new names not featured on the town's war memorial, mainly from searching the 'Soldier's Died 1914-19' Database.

 

However, the increased number of listed men as born in Newton Abbot has generated concern and the following question - How was this 'Born at' information generated?  I need to know if what is recorded in the 'Born' field is likely to mean  a man was actually born in Newton Abbot, or that his birth was registered in the Newton Abbot registration district, which would include a number of outlying towns and parishes.

 

If the information was taken from the man's attestation information, the former is more likely to be true, he was actually born in Newton Abbot, whereas if it was compiled after his death it might have been compiled from the birth registration records which may make it more difficult to be precise on his actually place of birth within a registrations district.

 

Are there any members who have faced and overcome this difficulty.

 

Thank you,

 

John Ellis

[ss002d6252]

Quote

How was this 'Born at' information generated?

It was taken from the service record and what they declared on it.

 

That's not to say that a man born at XYZ on the edge of Newton Abbott didn't just say Newton Abbott to simply the point, and that adds an unknown level in to the data.

 

Craig

Edited 24 November , 2018 by ss002d6252

[The Kneelagger]

Thank you for your prompt response to my question

[Acknown]

It's as well to cross check your names against national census information, which usually states place (eg village) of birth. As you say, the Civil Registration Birth Index entries show where the birth was registered, which may not be the actual place of birth.

Acknown

[GWF1967]

1 hour ago, The Kneelagger said:

good evening all - I am working to update a published 'roll of honour of the fallen' for my home town, and have complied a significant list of new names not featured on the town's war memorial, mainly from searching the 'Soldier's Died 1914-19' Database.

 

John Ellis

There was no national guidance  as to where a particular casualty should be commemorated. On memorials local to me are men born in the parish, men who lived in the parish, and men who had family living locally. 

 My local town lists two different men as the first from the parish to die; the first was born in South Wales, moving to Mid-Wales as an adult, the second Mid-Wales born and raised. 

 

[RaySearching]

1 hour ago, ss002d6252 said:

It was taken from the service record and what they declared on it.

 

And what they declared on it may not be correct

 

Having researched many hundreds of soldiers I have found that the place of birth shown on  "soldiers died" does not always correspond with 

The place of birth shown on the 1911 census return for the same soldier

 

Its quiet possible that a large number of soldiers did not in fact not know where they were actually  born

and simply give the place they were brought up or resided on enlistment which indicates that "Soldiers died database" should only be used as a "guide"

 

 

 

27 minutes ago, Acknown said:

I

It's as well to cross check your names against national census information, which usually states place (eg village) of birth. As you say, the Civil Registration Birth Index entries show where the birth was registered, which may not be the actual place of birth.

Acknown

John   I would note the good advice above from Acknown

 

Ray

 

 

[clive_hughes]

John,

It's as the others say above: a bit of a minefield.  The information in Soldiers Died In The Great War came from the casualties' individual files.  The clerks trawling through these hundreds of thousands of files in order to compile SDGW tended to look at the answers given by the man at the time he enlisted - depending on the type of form, one of the first was his place of birth.  I've seen answers that specified the house or farm involved, and which were duly copied into SDGW.  Others were misread by the clerks (several times, correct village but entirely wrong county seen).  I'm currently looking at a casualty whose SDGW birthplace is "Ebenezer, Anglesey", but no such village or hamlet exists on the Island.  I know where the Censuses place his birthplace and it's nothing like it.   

 

Others for their own reasons either wanted to conceal their origins, or didn't know.  I once noted a series of mid-late Victorian census returns where, over thirty years, a person's parish of birth was given differently each time, and they were miles apart!  I'd go so far as to say it's not unusual.   

 

If the soldier was an early-war Territorial the question of birthplace wasn't even asked on their version of the attestation form, and so is very often altogether absent from SDGW.  If the clerk was bothered to dig a bit further, the birthplace was usually stated on the medical examination form; but subject again to the soldier making a correct answer.

 

The problem also arises with the "Residence" part of SDGW.  This I think usually applied on earlier types of form to the address of whoever was nominated by the man as his next of kin.  Strictly speaking these needn't even be relatives (friends could be stated, or say the Masters of a Workhouse, or a fiancee) and they needn't necessarily have lived near the man's usual address.  I have noted an expatriate Anglesey soldier in Australia nominate a male friend living in Cambridgeshire!  However, other types of form do ask specifically for a recruit's current address, and sadly I've never spared the time to try to correlate the incidence of SDGW "Residence" addresses with the man's current one if officially recorded; and his next of kin one. Often of course they're the same.  

 

One thing is usually correct, namely the place of enlistment - also recorded on all the forms.  But again, someone not from the area could have attested locally while having only a tangential connection with the place.  Those working away from their birthplace not infrequently signed up wherever they were at the time.  And so on.  For me, the most striking version of this is the Welsh Book of Remembrance, which lists about 35,000 "Welsh" casualties.  But when we read the details, often based on SDGW, a great many were non-Welsh men who had enlisted in (or been transferred to) Welsh units.  Also next-of-kin who weren't Welsh but gave late/post-war addresses in Wales to the CWGC.  This rather dents the statistical value of the work...

 

Clive

Edited 24 November , 2018 by clive_hughes

[The Kneelagger]

Thank you all for the contributions to this conundrum. The answer I now have from the Editor of the Electronic version of Soldiers Died was that;

Regrettably I cannot offer a definitive explanation, largely because the records from which Soldiers Died in the Great War was compiled in 1921 no longer exist. However I suspect that those records largely mirrored the Attestation documents completed by/for each soldier and examination by me of a great number of those documents clearly shows they ask for "Full Address", "Parish or Town where ... born" or similar details. I doubt the Army would have been interested in the registration district.

 

As the information regarding name, address or age was not verified and carried no penalty for falsehood, unlike most other questions asked on that document (which were indeed punishable if incorrect information was declared), it must be realised that deliberate or unintentionally false details were frequently given.

 

With a total of the fallen linked to the town by birth, residence, employment. or parents, now in excess to 370 and not just the 242 on the Warmemorial, cross referencing with the 1911 census will be a major task.

 

John Ellis

[keithmroberts]

I wonder how many of them have a decent match  with the NOK entries on the CWGC. A different exercise would be needed to check that.

 

Keith

[RaySearching]

Running Newton Abbot  though  the soldiers died disc  + Newton Abbott

 

Gives the following results

 

Born Newton Abbot      126

Born Newton Abbott     18

 

Enlisted Newton Abbot  464

Enlisted Newton Abbott 42

 

Residence Newton Abbot 72

Residence Newton Abbott 8

 

should keep you busy for a while analyzing the results

 

Ray

[RaySearching]

Not forgetting the Navy and Air force  personnel who perished

 

A similar search of the cwgc using Geoffs search engine for Newton Abbot (as the search criteria)

 

Brings up with Newton Abbot on the cwgc  entry

Army  191

Navy 40

Air force 2

 

 

Ray

 

[The Kneelagger]

Forum members,

Thank you all for the comments made to my initial post some 6 months ago, but would present to you the finding of my further work in relation to the Solders Died Database.

 

Having now successfully completed the review of the 330 plus fallen men's records linked to Newton Abbot, all I can saw is be very wary of Soldiers Died reference to the subjects birthplace. Within the additional 57 records of men initially thought to be linked to the town, but subsequently rejected, a large many were added to the research population simply because of the fact that they are recorded with Soldiers Died as 'Born Newton Abbot'. However, once census checks were initiated a good percentage of these were rejected because whilst their birth was registered within the Newton Abbot Birth Registration District, the man was actually born in towns and villages surrounding the town, and were not officially Newtonians'.

 

Whilst this in no way not decrys the service each man rendered and the sacrifice he made, it does risk exaggeration the impact of the conflict on the town, and if the research was to be used in later geneology research it could start trails that are not correct.

 

John E.