TIFEVISIT, IDEIESMO, IDEEPAW, IDEISABATE, IDEENTRANS, IDEENLAND, IDELJACK, IDIERCAT, IDEENRENG - codes in 2BRC WD

[A Lancashire Fusilier by Proxy]

On 20/02/2023 at 13:39, TEW said:

IDEENLANOP

I've only seen one instance of this for two officers dated 14/5/1917.

I think I should have included this one in my heading. I mentioned it in passing in my OP, but with the wrong date, 13/05/1917 (I have corrected the date in the OP now).

It is odd that this word is mentioned only once, but even odder that when it is mentioned it applies to two men on the same day. I think that that led me to think that it might be merely a variation on IDEENLAND. Having said that, it doesn't look like merely a slip of the pen like the entries IDELAND on 12/06/1917 and IDENNTRANS on 16/04/1917.

There is one other entry for Captain V.E. Badcock RAMC of which I am aware, IDEEPAW on 11/06/1917. I am not aware of any other entries for Lieutenant B. Barnes 2/Batt. AIF. Bearing in mind my observations that a high proportion of IDEENLANDS were "Colonial" men, is it significant that IDEENLANOP Lieutenant Barnes was also from Australia?

By the way, I have had a reply from the British Library now, who say that they can't loan the document that they hold to any other institution. I see that the British Library is just up the road from Euston, the station I arrive at when I go to London. No plans to go to London at the moment, but maybe I will have to make a small diversion next time I do!

[Stuart T]

Sounds good about BL but make sure before you go whether you can pre-order the doc, what ID you need etc. Also read up on their reading room procedures so you are prepared.

[A Lancashire Fusilier by Proxy]

On 21/02/2023 at 18:30, Stuart T said:

Sounds good about BL but make sure before you go whether you can pre-order the doc, what ID you need etc. Also read up on their reading room procedures so you are prepared.

I will do.

I should say that the person who replied to my query addressed to the British Library also suggested that I might look in the India Office's military archive, and gave me a link to the search engine. I used the search term "Government Telegraph Code", which to my surprise has turned up a possible lead, Collection 238, reference IOR/L/MIL/7/10213-10216 : 1901-1916. This comprises 4 files, the first three of which predate WW1, but the fourth may be interesting as it is entitled "War Office Cipher Codes". No more detail is given, but it must go up to 1916 in view of the period covered by the collection. Perhaps it might be, or contain, the amended list of February 1916. Another thing to look at should I ever get to the British Library!

[Stuart T]

Sounds interesting. I've tried googling for the search engine but can only find a family history one, not military. My Grandad's CO in Egypt in 1918 was Indian Army, so I have a couple of things to look up. Last time I tried, I couldn't understand it at all, so please could I have the link?

[Stuart T]

I just had a look at TNA Discovery and searched for 'Government Telegraph Code'. There were 201 hits, starting with some from the BL India Office!

Narrowing the search to WO, there were just two hits, including

1905 revision to the code

[A Lancashire Fusilier by Proxy]

 

8 hours ago, Stuart T said:

Last time I tried, I couldn't understand it at all, so please could I have the link?

The link in question is Explore Archives and Manuscripts (bl.uk) , which does not contain any express reference to the India Office, but nevertheless of the 36 hits in response to my search 21 had the reference "IOR", and my correspondent described the India Office's military archive as "vast", so a useful resource to know about. I hope that you are able to find something relevant to your own search.

I'm afraid that the NA's 1905 revision is going to be too early to be helpful, but thank you for searching.

[Stuart T]

Thanks.

[A Lancashire Fusilier by Proxy]

On 20/02/2023 at 13:39, TEW said:

Unfortunately I can't find a service record for Badcock.

As Badcock is not a very common name, I thought that it might be worth a look in the London Gazette. This has revealed that Captain Vincent Edgar Badcock MD was initially appointed as a temporary Lieutenant in the RAMC on 25 June 1915, becoming a temporary Captain on 28 June 1916. He was then awarded the MC in June 1917, the citation for which was published in the London Gazette on 18 June 1917, and in the Edinburgh Gazette on 20 June 1917. The preamble to the citation shows that he was attached to the HLI. The citation reads: For conspicuous gallantry and devotion to duty. He has behaved in a most gallant manner on several occasions in attending wounded under intense shell fire, showing an utter disregard for personal danger, and setting a splendid example to all. This award may ultimately have been generated by the action which led to him being treated at 2BRC in May 1917, and losing his foot. 

The only other entry in the LG for him is that, still a temporary Captain, he resigned his commission on 11 December 1918, retaining the rank of Captain.

[A Lancashire Fusilier by Proxy]

 

The other day I was having another look at @DavidOwen's post of 26 April 2022 on page 1 of this thread concerning the equivalent WW2 codes. David's link http://ww2talk.com/index.php?threads/general-procedure-for-dealing-with-casualties-in-war-1939.60053/page-2#post-69453 connects to a post on the WW2 Forum, WW2talk, specifically to enclosure 19 of TNA file reference WO162/199, entitled General procedure for dealing with Casualties in War, 1939. Enclosure 19 is only a small part of  the file reference WO162/199, the entire contents of which have been set out in the WW2talk thread by a member who calls himself Drew5233.

File reference WO162/199 comprises two parts, containinf a total of 32 enclosures:

1.       The first enclosure is a pamphlet entitled Procedure for dealing with Casualties, Serious and Dangerous Illnesses, etc., by the Home Authorities in War which references the King’s Regulations 1928 paragraphs 1593-1595, and was issued by Command of the Army Council on 24 January 1933. I believe that the reference of this pamphlet is 1/General/3618.

Paragraph 4 of the pamphlet reads:

When officers, nurses, Other Ranks, and enrolled civilian personnel are placed on the seriously or dangerously ill list, the personal or army number, rank and name of officers, other ranks, etc, and the units to which they belong, together with the nature of the disability, will be telegraphed as follows:- [here is attached a document setting out how the information is to be telegraphed, but I can’t access this as I am not a member of the WW2 Forum]

Further details are set out in subsequent paragraphs as to reporting changes in a patient’s condition, who is to tell the next of kin, how permits for visiting will be dealt with etc.

In other words, all this was the subject of active consideration in 1933 in anticipation of the possibility of another war, which makes me think that possibly the 1933 edition of the Government Telegraph Code held by the British Library may already contain the new codes.

2.       The second enclosure is a list of registered files relating to Casualties and R. Records in War, which include the following:

History of M.S.3 Casualties during 1914-1918 (reference 1/General 3361*).

Formation of Code Section by R. Casualties on outbreak of war (reference  45/General/4250).

It would be particularly interesting to be able to see the first of these, as it may give the list of code words used in WW1, or at least recount the history of their adoption.

3.       The third enclosure comprises extracts from a book or document entitled War Instructions for R. Casualties 1939, which begin by describing the work of a section known as R. Casualties in dealing with the registration, distribution, publication, etc, of all reports of casualties in the field, and goes on:

An account of the manner in which the section was organised during the Great War has been drawn up in considerable detail. (1/Gen.No./2584). This account has been studied and a draft plan of procedure for dealing with casualties in war has been drawn up. The necessary instructions have been included in Field Service Regulations and the Regulations for the Medical Services of the Army. 

 4.       The fifth enclosure makes it clear that there were to be three copies of the WW2 code, of which two were to be held by R. Casualties section, and the third in Arnside Street, i.e. the building that was hit by a bomb and caught fire in WW2. If only one master copy of the earlier code was retained and it was also held there, it would explain why TNA do not have a copy of it.

 5.       The nineteenth enclosure is, as mentioned above, the one with which David Owen’s link connects, i.e. the one which contains a list of the codes to be used by the R. Casualties section in WW2. The information translated into code in some cases tallies exactly with the known translations of some of the WW1 codes. Having said that, the WW2 codes seem to be much more comprehensive and more methodically worked out than the WW1 codes.

It would be particularly interesting to see the documents reference 1/General 3361* and 1/Gen.No./2584 if these are still extant and anyone knows where to find them. Or would they too have been held at Arnside Street?

*Actually the correct reference is 1/General 3351, not 1/General 3361 - see David Owen's post below

Edited 5 March , 2023 by A Lancashire Fusilier by Proxy
To add note regarding reference 1/General 3351

[TEW]

Certainly a comprehensive list of codes used in WW2. They seem to have evolved into a code for every event and scenario possible.

I googled 'History of M.S.3 Casualties during 1914-1918' and Michael Roper's book cites TNA WO32/9317 for this.

I've also just been reading through Justin Nash's website regarding the Arnside records office and fire.

The records that became 'burnt docs' were moved there in 1934, it was a tool store in 1921.

The records that were affected were in rooms 1 & 7 which suggests to me that not everything at Arnside was damaged. Intelligence files seem to have escaped the fire.

It also appears 'R Records' ceased to be responsible for casualty enquiries in 1930, this would be pre-Arnside while the records were at Percy Street (I think).

So, the desired 1/General 3361 may have been at Arnside at some point but it may have been moved before the fire Or, it may have been stored there but unaffected by the fire. 

There's also the question of what was weeded at Arnside between 1934 and 1940.

https://warrecordsrevealed.com/2018/03/15/arnside-street-war-office-record-centre-1934-1940-plus-percy-house-schools-1919-1933/

TEW

[DavidOwen]

Original image from ww2 talk suggests to me the correct reference for History of M.S. Casualties 1914-1919 is 1/Gen.No./3351 not as originally transcribed on that forum as 3361.

[Stuart T]

@A Lancashire Fusilier by Proxy

I may have misread a complex post but the two enclosures you reference in your summary are shown at para 2 and para 3 as being part of the TNA doc in your intro. Do you not expect to find them there?

[DavidOwen]

I realise it is older than ww1 but might this be of use? https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/C6687104

 

[A Lancashire Fusilier by Proxy]

3 hours ago, DavidOwen said:

Original image from ww2 talk suggests to me the correct reference for History of M.S. Casualties 1914-1919 is 1/Gen.No./3351 not as originally transcribed on that forum as 3361.

Thank you, David, I can't open the images on WW2talk as I am not a member, so thank you for flagging this up. I will add a note to my post above as well.

3 hours ago, Stuart T said:

I may have misread a complex post but the two enclosures you reference in your summary are shown at para 2 and para 3 as being part of the TNA doc in your intro. Do you not expect to find them there?

Stuart, my understanding is that the second enclosure in File WO162/199 as itemised in the WW2talk thread is simply a list of other relevant documents, rather than the documents themselves. I may be wrong about this, but the image from that thread posted by David Owen tends to suggest that my understanding is correct. Might be worth a look some time, though, just in case.

5 hours ago, TEW said:

I googled 'History of M.S.3 Casualties during 1914-1918' and Michael Roper's book cites TNA WO32/9317 for this.

3 hours ago, DavidOwen said:

I realise it is older than ww1 but might this be of use? https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/C6687104

Thanks to both of you - another couple of things to look at when I next go to TNA!

[DavidOwen]

Ww2talk is free to join.

[A Lancashire Fusilier by Proxy]

2 minutes ago, DavidOwen said:

Ww2talk is free to join.

Thanks David

[TEW]

TNA have a download of 'Records destroyed at Arnside Street'. WO32/21769.

Quite a mixed lot of material that was lost. Possibly relevant items are: C4 Secret cipher telegrams. C2 Casualty Returns. There are miscellaneous items just listed as Documents, Files Etc.

TEW

 

[A Lancashire Fusilier by Proxy]

6 hours ago, TEW said:

TNA have a download of 'Records destroyed at Arnside Street'. WO32/21769.

Thanks, Tew, I had noted when I was looking at this the other day the summary of the contents of this document provided on the LLT at https://www.longlongtrail.co.uk/the-1940-fire-at-arnside-street/ . It is heart-breaking to see just how much stuff was lost, though I suppose that some of it, especially that relating to individuals, may have been weeded subsequently even if it had not been drestroyed in the fire.

My thought on seeing the reference to "secret cipher telegrams" was that what we are looking for were not so much "secret" as written in code for convenience and speed, though possibly to those compiling the list anything using ciphers would have been "secret". Sadly we will never know whether these telegrams would have been relevant or held the key.

[Simon Cains]

Many thanks to everyone who discussed this topic.  I was also quite disturbed to see an account of a lady whose husband was seriously ill in hospital in France but visiting was not allowed.  I guess attitudes to this have changed over time, there is a historical account here.  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2151159/   So for instance in 1894 hospital visiting was routinely only twice a week.  The debate still goes on.  The report says it was a "disaster" in 1988 to have family in all day. My mother-in-law was a full time carer at home for her husband but when he was in hospital she was restricted to one hour a day, or even stopped when there was an infection on the ward, but she had full experience of how to manage his diabetes etc.  The hospital would allow any home carers to stay in all day, but they couldn't accept that a relative could also be a useful carer.   

[Stuart T]

I know this is tangential to the main discussion but I don't think it has been mentioned that permission to visit may simply have been refused due to operational reasons or due to obvious safety or security considerations.

[A Lancashire Fusilier by Proxy]

On 02/09/2023 at 07:44, Simon Cains said:

I was also quite disturbed to see an account of a lady whose husband was seriously ill in hospital in France but visiting was not allowed.  I guess attitudes to this have changed over time, there is a historical account here.  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2151159/ 

It must have been soul destroying to learn that a loved one was lying seriously ill, and not be able to visit them. I'm conscious, as I type this, that many people will have experienced just that during covid.

As for Private Newell, I think that more favourable news may have been received in due course, as I can't find him on the CWGC site, though whether he made a complete recovery, or even came close to it, who can say?

You are right, Stuart, that this is somewhat tangential to the main thread, though interesting nonetheless.

With regard to the codes, I have a friend who has just moved back to Australia - sadly 4.5 hours' drive from Canberra, which, even though the Australians don't view distances in quite the way we do, is still a bit of a step. But I wonder whether he might visit some day ... And whether he might be persuaded to look up this all important reference   https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/LIB39879

Or maybe I should post in "Documents - Requests and Offers", in fact, I think I will ...

[DavidOwen]

Just been through the thread and restored the images that I could.

I thought I would check out the Canadian Archives to see if there was any help there. So far have found these:

GOVERNMENT TELEGRAPH CODE (bac-lac.gc.ca)

 

Colonial Office (United Kingdom) - Government telegraph code (bac-lac.gc.ca)

TELEGRAPHIC CODE (bac-lac.gc.ca)

 

Now we just need a friendly Canadian member to go take a look...

[Stuart T]

Like I said, you can contact the local Family History Society and ask if they have a member willing to do a lookup on a voluntary, reciprocal or expenses basis. This is common in FHSs and ought to work in Australia and I don't see why not in Canada. If you have no FH background, believe me it can be that simple, although you will have to be patient.

Secondly, I have followed the link to the AWM catalogue and it states published by HMSO. There used to be a thing whereby, if you contacted HMSO, they were obliged to let you have some sort of copy at negligible cost. Again, well worth a try.

PS, that Canadian link suggests you can have a PDF within thirty days at 30 cents per page. 158 pages would work out at £27 GBP.

Edited 4 September , 2023 by Stuart T

[TEW]

I just found an example of a coded telegram, not sure I've seen one before. The date relates to this mans period of service coming to an end while serving in Salonica. Not very exciting stuff but seemingly worthy of a dastardly devious code.

Still looking out for clues to the original query.

TEW

[JMB1943]

TEW,

This text seems to be a curious mix of straight english and scrambled words.

Were serious casualties likely to have been evacuated to Alexandria or Cairo?

Regards,

JMB