Jump to content
Great War Forum

Remembered Today:

gayenz

Where was he wounded?

Recommended Posts

gayenz

Hello

If someone could please look at the following Casualty Form and help me follow the dots. The area I am confused about is the timeframe between the 23rd Jan - 17th Feb 1917. 

 

*23 Jan 1917 – from 4th LH Details – Proceed o/seas B E F (???) per SS Princess Clementine, to arrive 24 Jan 1917

 

*27 Jan 1917 - A.G.B.D (Australian General Base Depot) - marched into Etables – arrived 25th Jan 1917

 

*17 Feb 1917 - A.G.B.D (Australian General Base Depot)- Transferred out of Etables back to England due to being Injured – right foot - 13 Feb 1917

 

Does this mean that when Lionel Malcolm finally got to the Western Front, he was injured whilst still in camp at Etables OR that he actually joined his old LH unit who had been amalgamated into the 2nd ANZAC Corps who were around River Lys area and got injured whilst possibly on patrol? 

 

It states that place of injury was Etaples on 13 Feb but also states England 24 Jan. 

 

Any help would be great appreciated. Thank you 

MALCOLM, LF WW1 pg 17.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Waddell

B.E.F is British Expeditionary Force.

 

Reading that I would say that he was injured whilst he was at the base depot at Etaples. Had he been taken on strength by his old unit I would expect to see that noted on the form.

 

Scott 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gayenz

Thanks Scott.

 

So it could read that basically he crossed the channel on the 24th, arrived on the 25th and received a foot injury on day 1!

That would be tough seeing as he had just been able to re-enlist after being shipped home in 1915 for appendicitis. He never even got out of the Mena Camp in Egypt.  

 

He was re-enlisted as part of the 4th LH. So what do you mean by "Had he been taken on strength by his old unit...."? 

 

Do you by any chance understand what the remarks column annotations translate as? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Waddell

Taken on strength is a military term that refers to the day when he was actually taken on by his unit. He remained part of the 22nd Reinforcements until he was taken on strength by the unit in France (which appears not to have happened). When taken on strength he would have been counted as part of the units establishment, not a reinforcement.

 

The terms Marched In and Marched Out are also used in AIF records.

 

See here-

https://www.bac-lac.gc.ca/eng/discover/military-heritage/first-world-war/Pages/read-service-record-casualty-form.aspx

 

It probably was tough for him but he was also getting old for a soldier. I researched a similar case where an AIF soldier spent two days with his battalion in France before damaging his knee which lead to him serving the rest of his service in England with the military police at AIF HQ in London.

 

I'm not strong on this part but the remarks column refers to army forms and documents where the details were taken from. B.213 is another form and some of the details of his movements come from embarkation rolls.

Edited by Waddell
Added more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kenf48
1 hour ago, gayenz said:

So it could read that basically he crossed the channel on the 24th, arrived on the 25th and received a foot injury on day 1!

That would be tough seeing as he had just been able to re-enlist after being shipped home in 1915 for appendicitis.

 

Not sure he was injured on Day , that's not reflected in the form posted above.  He arrived at Etaples, as you say on the 25th January and left on the 13th February. In 1917 conditions at Etaples were so atrocious that later in the year it resulted in one of, if not the greatest almost certainly one of the most notorious mutinies of the war. 

https://libcom.org/history/articles/etaples-mutiny-1917

Men were supposedly 'toughened up' for trench warfare by the universally hated NCOs, known as 'canaries'.   Having visited Etaples, although there is nothing left of the camp, it is easy to see how route marches and running up the hills around, which have been described by some soldiers could cause injury.  In addition men were drilled relentlessly and engaged in bayonet practice and mock assaults.  The regime would have been especially hard for older men.

 

Ken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gayenz

Thank you for your responses, they have been very helpful. 

Regards

Gaye

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...