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

Remembered Today:

Wounded at duty/named in newspaper report as wounded?


Skipman
 Share

Recommended Posts

A soldier I'm researching was wounded but "at duty" on 24th April, 1917. He is named on a casualty list in The Scotsman 28/5/1917 'wounded'

Would 'wounded at duty' count as 'wounded' and would he be entitled to a wound stripe;  and would this entry, a month later, be the 24th April wound, or perhaps a fresh instance of 'wounding'?

Mike

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't have thought being wounded but back on duty would meet the criteria for a wound stripe via being published in the official WO lists.

Unfortunately the official lists as printed in The Times cease to show British wounded in early May 1917 so although he may be on an official list it was never published nor is it available today.

Having said that, the Regional papers usually took their casualty lists from The Times. Perhaps The Scotsman had a source from the regiment or regional office (Perth?). Failing that he may have written home with the tale of his narrow escape which in turn made it to The Scotsman via a relative.

3-4 weeks is the given normal delay from wounding to publication so your dates fit. Perhaps he took a turn for the worse and became officially wounded?

TEW

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank  you very much TEW "Perhaps he took a turn for the worse and became officially wounded?" That thought had crossed my mind. I will see if I can find any other mentions anywhere.

 

Mike

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Late in the war the Scotsman produced complete copies from the Casualty Lists. It's easy to tell them when you look at them.

I have also come across at least one man who appeared as wounded in a casualty list and had rteurned to duty. I suppose it depends exactly when a casualty list was submitted and how far along the medical process a mengot before he was returned to duty.

RM

Edited by rolt968
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I think a man could be bandaged up in the front line by the RMO and be back at duty or patched up at an ADS and returned to unit on duty.

I'm under the impression that a man's wound and duration of had to meet certain criteria before his wound met the criteria for his inclusion in the official WO lists.

Still not sure how The Scotsman obtained lists of wounded May-Aug 1917 when they are not publicly available. They existed but not published. They could have been leaked from Perth office?

TEW

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TEW said:

 They existed but not published. They could have been leaked from Perth office?

TEW

 

Don't know where they got the information but the first one seems to have appeared on Saturday the 12th of May, 1917.

 

Mike

 

 

Rank and File.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting that "The Scotsman" seemingly published the list before "The Times"... Same casualty list appeared in The Times on Thursday, May 17, 1917. 

image.png.ce8d2481c41c35486fe49df43af7ba75.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Standard practise up to May 1917 to include NOK's town or place of enlistment. Lists of wounded, killed etc. were transmitted to the Regional Infantry Offices who must have added that information before compiling a list forwarded I guess to the WO who copied it to the press.

Odd that The Scotsman managed to pre-date The Times. The general rule I've gone by is that Regionals took the information from The Times, clearly not the case here.

Was your man wounded 24/4/17 and back at duty the same day? Or perhaps wounded earlier but back at duty on that date? Can you give his details?

Would be interesting to compare wounded lists from The Scotsman to the official lists of EG. Sept 1917 (or those in The Times for EG. Jan 1917) to see if there are discrepancies showing that The Scotsman was using additional sources which might include those 'wounded, at duty'.

TEW

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TEW said:

Was your man wounded 24/4/17 and back at duty the same day? Or perhaps wounded earlier but back at duty on that date? Can you give his details?

Would be interesting to compare wounded lists from The Scotsman to the official lists of EG. Sept 1917 (or those in The Times for EG. Jan 1917) to see if there are discrepancies showing that The Scotsman was using additional sources which might include those 'wounded, at duty'.

TEW

 

The first from the 14th A & SH War Diary April 1917 (at bottom of page). Pte 9738 John MacNaughton, the second from The Scotsman 28/5/1917

Forum MacNaughton wounded at duty.JPG

Forum MacNaughton wounded at duty. Scotsman.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not seeing MacNaughton or a few near him from The Scotsman in The Times via TheGenealogist. Not seeing Chisholm either. Can't really say if that's down to The Times' cut off date or their 'at duty' status.

TEW

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, date is dittoed for MacNaughton.

Are there similar 'at duty' lists in the diary for Feb/March, if so a few details then I'll see if they're listed in The Times.

TEW

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The three wounded for 19th & 21st March are on Daily Lists in The Times of 23rd & 24th April.

TEW

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those three are 5 weeks from wound to being published. If that gap remained the same then anyone wounded after about 5th April is not going to make it to The Times.

Somehow The Scotsman continued to publish lists for another 3-4 weeks at least. Does The Scotsman have a cut off date with no wounded being listed?

The Times continues to list Officers wounded and Canadian, ANZAC, RN wounded and British dead, missing, previously reported...etc but no wounded.

TEW

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the last one appears to be dated Monday 8th October 1917

 

Edit 19:12 2/7/2021 Actually this is not correct, there's another for 18/10/1917 will see if can nail final list

 

Mike

Forum rank and file.JPG

Edited by Skipman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do they have them for June & July 1917? The official publication commenced Aug 4th 1917 so the Regional lists should pick things up after that 

TEW

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, TEW said:

Do they have them for June & July 1917? The official publication commenced Aug 4th 1917 so the Regional lists should pick things up after that 

TEW

Yes they appear to have them

 

Mike

Forum rank and file 1.JPG

Forum rank and file 2.JPG

Forum rank and file 3.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Had a look through older forum posts and found a 2012 post mentioning that although The Times wounded lists dried up in May 1917 some regional etc. newspapers continued to publish lists. These lists must have had an official origin.

Various reasons suggested as to why The Times lists dried up EG. paper shortages, censorship of information useful to the enemy or censorship for the British public.

I wasn't aware it seems to only be The Times that dried up.

TEW

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...