MIC Online Records at the NA

[BarryF]

The National Archives say that they now offer 100% availability of MICs online.

Using a number of variations on each element, as well as wildcards, I have searched for men of the 12th [battalion] Royal Fusiliers.

Only those with surnames up to 'HA' are returned (352 names - some duplicates).

Is this it? Or am I missing something. Are the other 12RF men now part of the 117,715 Royal Fusiliers on the system? Or was there a cut off point at some point when the cards were first created or during transcription?

I appreciate the scale of this project, and that not all Bn numbers are included on the cards. And it would be understandable if no Battalion numbers were included (but a bit of a disappointment for those who can't get to the NA), but the search result seems a tad arbitrary, and not a little frustrating. Any help or explanation of the methodology employed would be much appreciated.

Many thanks.

Barry

[Guest lidzy]

Hello Barry!

Unfortunately, after starting off by including the battalion number on most mics, the NA (or the company scanning the mics for them) decided to stop doing it - around the time they had gotten to HA in the alphabet. I'm in the process of compiling a roll of 3rd London regiment men, so the NA's action was (for me) really annoying, to says the least. After HA, it's not possible to know the battalion of a London Regiment man who didn't get a 6 figure number in 1917. I have now at least finished copying all 3rd Londons mics where the battalion number is included - around 2000 - because I'm a bit paranoid that eventually the NA will take away all battalion numbers in order to make the system uniform!

All the best,

Tony

[BarryF]

Hello Tony,

Many thanks for your informative reply. Now I know. Now I'm fed up!

I can understand your annoyance. I feel exactly the same. I wonder who took this decision part way through the project. Clearly, somebody who did not fully appreciate the relevance and value of the battalion number. Do we have the right people making these decisions?

I will be told, I am sure, that it is a matter of how best to allocate limited resources (money, people, time). But the original project must have specified the fields of information to be recorded and at some later date somebody decided to eliminate one. Who? The NA or a sub-contractor? Why? To cut costs?

I am becoming increasingly worried about the seemingly cavalier way that decisions are made regarding our heritage without sufficient discussion or consultation beforehand. I have been reading on this forum about the suspicion that other important records may be destroyed by, for example, the MOD. The view has been expressed that such destruction affects only a very small minority and is therefore not the end of the world. I would suggest that that view is precisely the basis on which these autocratic, and often ill-conceived, decisions are made. I think it is a dangerous road to go down when precedents are being set to destroy public records without reasonable and open consultation beforehand.

But thanks again for your response. All the best.

Barry

PS Now then .... anybody any ideas on how to extract a thousand or two records by Bn number from 120,000 whilst still leaving time to write to MPs about dodgy decisions in high places?!?