ss002d6252 Posted 8 July , 2021 Share Posted 8 July , 2021 29 minutes ago, Skipman said: Interesting stuff thanks all. There seems to be two versions of the book Terry mentions 'available' online. No idea how you access ProQuest? https://search.nls.uk/primo-explore/search?query=any,contains,General Annual Report of the British Army 1913-1919&search_scope=SCOPE1&sortby=date&vid=44NLS_VU1&facet=frbrgroupid,include,41245484&facet=tlevel,include,online_resources&lang=en_US&mode=basic&offset=0 Mike This is the relevant part of the General Annual Return1913-1919 Craig Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phil andrade Posted 8 July , 2021 Share Posted 8 July , 2021 Craig, The missing are missing in that tabulation : forgive the play on words, but it’s very important as an attribute of the final death toll. The deaths are for confirmed deaths only : there would be, I think, another 130,000 posted as missing in action, and these were undoubtedly soldiers who had been killed but whose fate had not been accounted for in that General Annual Return. Phil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ss002d6252 Posted 8 July , 2021 Share Posted 8 July , 2021 Yes, that table was deaths confirmed within the relevant dates. Another 99,868 men were reported missing and had not been recorded as being released from being POWs. Craig Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
augmauns Posted 9 July , 2021 Share Posted 9 July , 2021 An earlier post mentioned 50% of AIF probably were UK born. The attached newspaper report from 1929 shows the figure was just below 20%. Being 1929 I don't know in the report if the UK included Ireland or whether that was counted as Foreign Country. However the summary is that 77% were born in Australia. I'm guessing that if you used the modern Census question of whether you had a parent born overseas and included those, I wouldn't be surprised if the number for UK born (plus 1st generation immigrant) would be very much higher. Greg AIF Birth Statistics.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phil andrade Posted 9 July , 2021 Share Posted 9 July , 2021 On 08/07/2021 at 10:13, ss002d6252 said: Yes, that table was deaths confirmed within the relevant dates. Another 99,868 men were reported missing and had not been recorded as being released from being POWs. Craig Thanks, Craig. That still leaves a shortfall of thirty thousand plus : I expect that their names were added to the confirmed dead in the following couple of years. Phil Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fromelles Posted 10 July , 2021 Share Posted 10 July , 2021 On 08/07/2021 at 01:01, JMB1943 said: Also, don't forget that ca. 50% of both the AIF and CEF were British-born. Regards, JMB JMB, where did you find this stat? Less than 20% of the AIF were born in the UK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dai Bach y Sowldiwr Posted 10 July , 2021 Share Posted 10 July , 2021 1 hour ago, Fromelles said: JMB, where did you find this stat? Less than 20% of the AIF were born in the UK Yes. That was demonstrated 3 posts ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMB1943 Posted 10 July , 2021 Share Posted 10 July , 2021 (edited) Since the GWF, memoirs and other books are my principal sources of info, my source was one of these; I don't have a chapter and verse reference. Regards, JMB [EDIT: I believe that I have seen the 50% number more than once, so am surprised at the official number of 23% quoted above]. Edited 10 July , 2021 by JMB1943 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fromelles Posted 16 July , 2021 Share Posted 16 July , 2021 On 11/07/2021 at 02:52, Dai Bach y Sowldiwr said: Yes. That was demonstrated 3 posts ago. Hmmm .... no it wasn't ... read my question Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dai Bach y Sowldiwr Posted 16 July , 2021 Share Posted 16 July , 2021 36 minutes ago, Fromelles said: Hmmm .... no it wasn't ... read my question Yes it was. I wasn't responding to your question. Merely showing that the 'less than 20% figure' had already been quoted by augmauns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fromelles Posted 18 July , 2021 Share Posted 18 July , 2021 On 16/07/2021 at 21:29, Dai Bach y Sowldiwr said: I wasn't responding to your question. Merely showing that the 'less than 20% figure' had already been quoted by augmauns. Heaven forbid ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now