H Braybrook

[WhiteStarLine]

3 hours ago, MBrockway said:

The attack was launched from GORDON TRENCH between 57D.Q.17.d.1.9 and 57D.Q.17.d.5.6

[Jayuubee]

Mark,

So that location is virtually where i was standing to take this picture................

 

JB

[Jayuubee]

On 09/03/2020 at 04:55, WhiteStarLine said:

 

WSL

 

Many Thanks again

 

JWB

[Jayuubee]

Fellow researchers,

Think I've just made a shocking discovery! There s a Cpl "A" Braybrook same number as my Grandfather 27120 in the same Regiment 2 Royal Warwickshire Regiment.

Question

Could the A" e an error? as it looks like a "H"

They never would use the same Number surely?

He was hospitalised in Jan 17 with Epididymitis (an STI)

Would you be reduced in ranks for this? (it was a family rumour he had been busted but for fighting).

 

I look forward to your replies

JB

Edited 11 November , 2020 by Jayuubee

[travers61]

I have looked on the medal rolls etc on ancestry and can't see another 27120 Braybrook for the Warwicks. The record you have found is probably for your grandfather but with a clerical error or odd looking H, as in 1914 the regular battalions (inc 2nd) & most of the new Service Battalions of the Warwicks used the pre-war regular sequence.

https://armyservicenumbers.blogspot.com/2009/09/roayl-warwickshire-regiment-regular.html

 

 

However for ellimation purposes It is shown again on in the service records on ancestry for the Warwicks. But this turns out to be TR7/27120 Ronald Henry Barnes, who joined the 53rd (Young Soldier) Bn The Royal Warwickshire Regiment of the Training Reserve in June 1918 & later received a number 62637 from the usual R Warwicks sequence. So it looks like it is actually a TR number.

 

STI's were more common than we think in the WW1 army. Have looked it up before & from memory they were 5-10% of all hospitalisations in the British Army, higher in the Australian forces & still higher (saw a figure of over 50%) in the Canadians.  Certainly my relation in the Canadian Army has it on his record.

 

 

Travers

 

[Jayuubee]

16 hours ago, travers61 said:

I have looked on the medal rolls etc on ancestry and can't see another 27120 Braybrook for the Warwicks. The record you have found is probably for your grandfather but with a clerical error or odd looking H, as in 1914 the regular battalions (inc 2nd) & most of the new Service Battalions of the Warwicks used the pre-war regular sequence.

https://armyservicenumbers.blogspot.com/2009/09/roayl-warwickshire-regiment-regular.html

 

 

However for ellimation purposes It is shown again on in the service records on ancestry for the Warwicks. But this turns out to be TR7/27120 Ronald Henry Barnes, who joined the 53rd (Young Soldier) Bn The Royal Warwickshire Regiment of the Training Reserve in June 1918 & later received a number 62637 from the usual R Warwicks sequence. So it looks like it is actually a TR number.

 

STI's were more common than we think in the WW1 army. Have looked it up before & from memory they were 5-10% of all hospitalisations in the British Army, higher in the Australian forces & still higher (saw a figure of over 50%) in the Canadians.  Certainly my relation in the Canadian Army has it on his record.

 

 

Travers

 

TY, for your observations, 

 

Regards

JB