KRRC. Infantry Records Office/s query

[TEW]

I've been scanning through the Casualty Lists topic having thought I'd worked out that KRRC came under Winchester RO based on medal rolls to KRRC being Winchester and the Casualty Lists being listed under Winchester.

Now I'm seeing some KRRC to London RO as well. Are there some KRRC battalions managed by London or is this a timeframe thing? Seems to apply to Rifle Brigade as well.

Just noticed the second image has R/10054 Parsons 5/KRRC whose medal roll was compiled by Winchester but his 'sick list' was sent to London.

Thanks

TEW

April 1917

 

August 1918

[TEW]

Just found another list that shows the same two men being reported to LONDON and WINCHESTER with identical details.

Any ideas if this is a simple admin error?

TEW

[FROGSMILE]

I think that they were linked offices TEW.  Winchester was a “Regimental Records Office” covering the KRRC and RB, with the Hampshire Regiment in another location close by, whereas each of the “Infantry Records Offices” looked after a number of regiments located within its regional command area.  As I understand it there was a subordinate line of communication between the two levels.

“A list of Regional Record Offices during WW1 can be found from a 1918 book ‘War Pensions and Allowances’ by J.M. Hogge, M.P. and T.H. Garside (Hodder and Stoughton) showing the Army Regional Record Offices in 1918 and the groups of regiments which they served.”

The full book can be found here: https://archive.org/details/thewarpensionsallow00hoggrich/page/418/mode/2up?q=Records+Office  (Pages from 419 onward).

“The number of Army Record and Pay Offices was reduced through amalgamations and closures in the 1920s and early 1930s.”

Edited 16 December , 2021 by FROGSMILE

[Ron Clifton]

Several battalions of the London Regiment (TF), such as the London Rifle Brigade, were affiliated to either KRRC or RB, which I suspect explains the anomaly. KRRC and RB did not have TF battalions of their own.

Ron

[FROGSMILE]

4 minutes ago, Ron Clifton said:

Several battalions of the London Regiment (TF), such as the London Rifle Brigade, were affiliated to either KRRC or RB, which I suspect explains the anomaly. KRRC and RB did not have TF battalions of their own.

Ron

I too was wondering if it might have something to do with the TF, Ron, but then it wouldn’t explain why duplicate copies for two men, Chatfield and Richmond, one from 2nd regular battalion, and the other from 18th service battalion, would be sent to both, Winchester and London.  It seems to need more explanation.

[TEW]

It looks to me from my last attachment as though the WO in transmitting this information to the record offices weren't entirely sure which office dealt with 18 KRRC so they sent it to London & Winchester to cover all bases.

Surely, only one office would have the man's records for updating?

Thanks

TEW 

[FROGSMILE]

16 minutes ago, TEW said:

It looks to me from my last attachment as though the WO in transmitting this information to the record offices weren't entirely sure which office dealt with 18 KRRC so they sent it to London & Winchester to cover all bases.

Surely, only one office would have the man's records for updating?

Thanks

TEW 

I did find this link with direct reference to the London Infantry Records Office: https://www.collaborativecollections.org/WorldWarOne/London_Infantry_Record_Office,_British_Army

On the right side of the page it does list the following dependent units very specifically:

1. Honourable Artillery Company (Infantry).

2.  Inns of Court (OTC).

3.  London Regiment [in entirety].

4.  Royal Fusiliers [in entirety].

5.  Royal Defence Corps.

This would chime with Ron’s sensible suggestion that the records in relation to the KRRC and RB related to its TF affiliates in the London Regiment.  It’s an important and sometimes forgotten fact that in 1916 the London Regiment ceased to exist as an administrative body and instead all of its constituent units were dispersed to the responsibility of the regular regiments to which they were affiliated.  There is at least one thread about this in the forum.

NB.  However, I don’t understand how Privates Chatfield and Richmond factor in….  The book I linked above contains a lot of detail about WW1 administration and might well reward more in depth scrutiny.

Edited 16 December , 2021 by FROGSMILE

[TEW]

Thanks

I'd have to go through the London & Winchester lists and ID the battalions involved to see if a pattern emerges and hope that there isn't a change of office during the war.

I've been scanning through the Winchester lists hoping to spot a KRRC man. Will have to back track through London lists as well!

All the London examples I checked have their medals dealt with by Winchester. 

I did find in a Newfoundlander's file a terse geography lesson sent from NF records to the WO that New Zealand and Newfoundland were different countries. WO had been sending NF lists to New Zealand office.

TEW

[FROGSMILE]

7 minutes ago, TEW said:

Thanks

I'd have to go through the London & Winchester lists and ID the battalions involved to see if a pattern emerges and hope that there isn't a change of office during the war.

I've been scanning through the Winchester lists hoping to spot a KRRC man. Will have to back track through London lists as well!

All the London examples I checked have their medals dealt with by Winchester. 

I did find in a Newfoundlander's file a terse geography lesson sent from NF records to the WO that New Zealand and Newfoundland were different countries. WO had been sending NF lists to New Zealand office.

TEW

It’s an interesting subject in terms of understanding how the administration was conducted in those still relatively quill and ink days. Do please elaborate further here if you are able to dig up more.

Edited 16 December , 2021 by FROGSMILE

[TEW]

Yes I will, perhaps locating a service file would be an easier method.

TEW

[TEW]

As an update I've downloaded 15 Lists, 5 for LONDON RO (68 men) and 10 for Winchester RO (108 men) and created a simple spreadsheet.

The London lists date to Dec 1917-Dec 1918 and the Winchester lists May-Dec 1916 and Apr-Dec 1918 so theyre not covering exactly the same dates which may have a bearing on matters.

I also found more lists which show the same individuals being reported to both ROs, I left these individuals out of the spreadsheet, two examples are attached below.

NB. since writing this there have been quite a few lists posted showing the same individuals being reported to London & Winchester.

With the disparity in dates and the leaning towards Winchester it makes this difficult to interpret with certainty.

For KRRC.
It only seems to be 16th & 18th KRRC that are reported to both ROs, these are Apr/May 1918. Theres one 25th KRRC man being reported to London RO in Dec 1918. Other battalions are consistently to Winchester 1916-1918.

For KRRC there are two Dec 1918 oddities which mention 34th KRRC which doesnt exist. One is to London RO and the other to Winchester RO. I tracked one man whose MIC states 3/Devons, 34/Londons. His date of entry is Aug 1918 with immediate transfer to 34/Londons. 34/Londons had absorbed the cadre of 7/KRRC but clearly had been bolstered from other drafts. KRRC on these lists is erroneous.

For Londons.
Only 8th and 15th Londons seem to get reported to both ROs at the same date but theres  only one example of each office.
As a rule the London regiment seem to be fairly evenly split by battalion between Winchester & London ROs. Some are consistently to one RO but quite why 12th & 13th are solely to Winchester RO, 14th to London RO, 15th to both, 16th to London RO, 17th to Winchester RO?

For Rifle Brigade.
Not picking up enough data to make sense of this. The majority are to Winchester but occasionally a 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 11th and 16th RB man is reported to London RO. 16th RB may be telling in as much as Winchester is the RO in Dec 1916 but London in early 1918.

For Royal Fusiliers.
Consistently to London RO Dec 1917 Dec 1918.
TEW

 

[FROGSMILE]

Thank you for the update TEW, I’m afraid I can’t think what the key is other than some significance in dates and as you say that’s inconsistent.  I wonder if the well known forum riflemen    @stiletto_33853 and @MBrockway can throw any light on this conundrum.

[MBrockway]

I had noticed this too once the Newfoundland Regt data began to flow in earnest and Andy and I had discussed some ideas off the forum.

Because of the affiliations between the various London Regiment battalions with rifles traditions and the KRRC and RB, transfers and/or attachments were not unusual in both directions.  That is one possibility we are considering.

Secondly the RB had a number of TF battalions imposed on it from supernumerary companies of the TF that had been deployed in Home Service garrison duties when it was decided to send these units overseas.  They were designated 18/ to 24/RB.  They were administered through the London area TF Association and, we believe, were also therefore handled by the London TF Record Office.  These battalions were never handled by Rifles Records at Winchester and there was no equivalent in the KRRC.

Thirdly several of the Training Reserve battalions camped on Wimbledon Common were originally KRRC and RB New Army reserve battalions.  Although the TR was supposed to remove all regimental distinctions, the former Rifles TR battalions on Wimbledon Common seem to have continued to focus their replenishment drafts to the KRRC and RB.  Perhaps because of the differences in drill and traditions.  This may account for a Rifles presence in the London RO.  Researching this properly is one of the many back burner projects Andy and I have under way

Lastly examples of KRRC and RB riflemen showing up in London Record Office lists seem to markedly increase in the final stages of the war.  We *speculate* whether there was some sort of satellite desk set up at the London RO by Rifles Records, Winchester ... perhaps as a means of sharing workload.  However we so far have nothing concrete on which to base this theory and as TEW has discovered, the dates are inconsistent.  Rifles Records definitely set up a Branch Office on Guernsey, which handled the RGLI, the RJLI and Channel Isles Garrison battalions.  One could see that as some sort of precedence.

As an example of the scale of the workload, in Sep/Oct 1916, Rifles Records processed 40,000 casualty reports, with peaks on some days of c.2,000.  The office aimed to inform next of kin within 48 hours of receipt of the report and was proud that this was maintained throughout the war.  Over the course of the war, the office handled 116,000 transfers into and out of the two regiments and handled the service records of more than 160,000 men.

The Officer-in-Charge, Base Records, Headquarters, 3rd Echelon, stated Rifles Records was the best he had to deal with.

Info on the Rifles Depot and Record Office during the war does exist, but as rather brief narratives in e.g. the Chronicles.  There's nothing solid we've seen so far to explain these patterns.

 

Mark

 

[TEW]

Thanks for the reply. Essentially I'm only scanning through the lists hoping to spot various men including one from 17/KRRC so was only looking out for Winchester lists until I spotted the London ones as well. It's possible he was moved around within KRRC but not recorded as such in medal rolls.

Setting aside errors on the lists EG. 34/KRRC I think it's odd that some groups of men are simply duplicated and transmitted to both ROs while other groups are to a single RO.

Perhaps an individual somewhere knew the correct RO for that battalion while another just duplicated to both ROs on the basis that EG. London could just cross off the wrong ones. At least the NOK would still get the information ASAP.

You'd think that whoever typed up the lists would query why they were duplicating the same names but perhaps it was quicker to do so rather than check each battalion/RO.

There was a list posted on Saturday 14:54 which is an amendment and says please delete from Winchester RO and add to TF RB London. No relevant man on the list anyway. Headed CR 812.

TEW