Interpreting documents

[nina]

I was wondering if anyone could identify what the abbreviations mean. I know his regimental number is on the right hand side. I have been researching this man for a book I am writing, all the documents I have found add up, He was born on O6/01/1894 in Norwich and served with the Royal Norfolk Regiment. Regimental number 203497/ He was awarded the SWB after suffering from neurasthenia. This document says he died in 1957. I know that if this is the person I am researching that he died in 1942 after his house was bombed. Have tried the Royal Norfolk Regimental Museum, but their archivist is not taking enquires until after Easter, as she is busy with another project. They do have a sick and casualty book, but not sure that will help. 

[charlie962]

Briefly, Dead refers to the file, not the person. Someone will come along shortly to expand.

@ss002d6252 or @Matlock1418?

and of course for Norfolk @PRC

charlie 

ps welcome!

 

 

Edited 21 January , 2022 by charlie962

[Dai Bach y Sowldiwr]

7 minutes ago, nina said:

This document says he died in 1957.

I'm not sure it does? Are you referring to the writing in red?

Anyway, what Charlie said is correct.
The claim became 'Dead' when all his dependents died.
I can't find any children, were there any elderly dependent parents who survived him I wonder?

[Michelle Young]

The Norfolk Regiment didn’t become the Royal until post Great War. 

[PRC]

Hi @nina and welcome to the forum.

Practically all of the references are likely to be admin, and refer to managing his claim. As well as 203497 which was his final service number, there may also be some relevance to 5098 beneath it.

At the start of 1917 other ranks serving with the Territorial Force moved over from various service number systems to a standardised one. The number range including 203497 was allocated to the 4th Battalions of the Norfolk Regiment. https://www.longlongtrail.co.uk/soldiers/a-soldiers-life-1914-1918/renumbering-of-the-territorial-force-in-1917/renumbering-the-tf-infantry-in-1917/

Prior to this most men who served with the 4th Battalions would have had at most a four digit number with a number prefix reflecting the Battalion they were in - although the prefix is the thing most often dropped in the day to day admin records. Thus you could have a 4/5098, a 5/5098 and a 6/5098.

However the picture, at least for me is a bit cloudy. I'm still working on understanding the general pattern but I've come across a number of men who had moved back and forth between the various home service only Battalions of the Norfolk Regiment and a Provisional Battalion not attached to anyone, before ending up back in the 4th Reserve Battalion in the summer of 1917 when they then seem to have been renumbered into the range 203400 to 203599. They were then sent out as part of drafts overseas, or discharged as unfit for war service. That number range though was also subsequently used for men transferring into the Norfolk Regiment regardless of whether they were transferring into a Territorial Force Battalion or not.

As you say "Sidney" Albert Blogg died in one of the Baedekker raids on the city of Norwich on the 28th April 1942. The additional information on his Commonwealth War Graves Commission webpage is that he was aged 48, and "of 47 Elm Grove Lane. Son of the late Arthur Blogg; husband of Gladys Violet Blogg. Died at 47 Elm Grove Lane." https://www.cwgc.org/find-records/find-war-dead/casualty-details/3146177/sidney-albert-blogg/

But Gladys, (47), died in the same raid. https://www.cwgc.org/find-records/find-war-dead/casualty-details/3146176/gladys-violet-blogg/

To the best of my knowledge they are not in the mass grave in Earlham Cemetery.

As there are no surviving service records for Sidney \ Sydney can I ask how you've been able to link the man who died in the 1942 air raid to the soldier, as that may also provide some clues to his service and why the Pension claim remained live until 1957.

And as @Michelle Young says, not the Royal Norfolk Regiment until 1935.

Cheers,
Peter

[ss002d6252]

38 minutes ago, nina said:

I was wondering if anyone could identify what the abbreviations mean. I know his regimental number is on the right hand side. I have been researching this man for a book I am writing, all the documents I have found add up, He was born on O6/01/1894 in Norwich and served with the Royal Norfolk Regiment. Regimental number 203497/ He was awarded the SWB after suffering from neurasthenia. This document says he died in 1957. I know that if this is the person I am researching that he died in 1942 after his house was bombed. Have tried the Royal Norfolk Regimental Museum, but their archivist is not taking enquires until after Easter, as she is busy with another project. They do have a sick and casualty book, but not sure that will help. 

The 1957 'dead' marking will most likely be when his wife died, and the pension claim also 'died'. There could, of course, also be other reasons why the claim ceased ('died') but the death of the wife is the most likely.

Craig

[nina]

40 minutes ago, Dai Bach y Sowldiwr said:

I'm not sure it does? Are you referring to the writing in red?

Anyway, what Charlie said is correct.
The claim became 'Dead' when all his dependents died.
I can't find any children, were there any elderly dependent parents who survived him I wonder?

His Mother was alive on 1939 census and he had a sister. Still looking for death dates for them.

8 minutes ago, PRC said:

Hi @nina and welcome to the forum.

Practically all of the references are likely to be admin, and refer to managing his claim. As well as 203497 which was his final service number, there may also be some relevance to 5098 beneath it.

At the start of 1917 other ranks serving with the Territorial Force moved over from various service number systems to a standardised one. The number range including 203497 was allocated to the 4th Battalions of the Norfolk Regiment. https://www.longlongtrail.co.uk/soldiers/a-soldiers-life-1914-1918/renumbering-of-the-territorial-force-in-1917/renumbering-the-tf-infantry-in-1917/

Prior to this most men who served with the 4th Battalions would have had at most a four digit number with a number prefix reflecting the Battalion they were in - although the prefix is the thing most often dropped in the day to day admin records. Thus you could have a 4/5098, a 5/5098 and a 6/5098.

However the picture, at least for me is a bit cloudy. I'm still working on understanding the general pattern but I've come across a number of men who had moved back and forth between the various home service only Battalions of the Norfolk Regiment and a Provisional Battalion not attached to anyone, before ending up back in the 4th Reserve Battalion in the summer of 1917 when they then seem to have been renumbered into the range 203400 to 203599. They were then sent out as part of drafts overseas, or discharged as unfit for war service. That number range though was also subsequently used for men transferring into the Norfolk Regiment regardless of whether they were transferring into a Territorial Force Battalion or not.

As you say "Sidney" Albert Blogg died in one of the Baedekker raids on the city of Norwich on the 28th April 1942. The additional information on his Commonwealth War Graves Commission webpage is that he was aged 48, and "of 47 Elm Grove Lane. Son of the late Arthur Blogg; husband of Gladys Violet Blogg. Died at 47 Elm Grove Lane." https://www.cwgc.org/find-records/find-war-dead/casualty-details/3146177/sidney-albert-blogg/

But Gladys, (47), died in the same raid. https://www.cwgc.org/find-records/find-war-dead/casualty-details/3146176/gladys-violet-blogg/

To the best of my knowledge they are not in the mass grave in Earlham Cemetery.

As there are no surviving service records for Sidney \ Sydney can I ask how you've been able to link the man who died in the 1942 air raid to the soldier, as that may also provide some clues to his service and why the Pension claim remained live until 1957.

And as @Michelle Young says, not the Royal Norfolk Regiment until 1935.

Cheers,
Peter

 

[ss002d6252]

43 minutes ago, Dai Bach y Sowldiwr said:

I can't find any children, were there any elderly dependent parents who survived him I wonder?

A dependant claim for a parent would need to have been made within 7 years of the injury/wound occurring (or him otherwise being removed from service due to one) - so a death in the 1940s would be well past the qualifying point for a parent to have claimed a pension.

Craig

[nina]

He has the same name and age. There are not another Sydney Blogg born at that time, living in Norfolk. I have enclosed his SWB file.

 

 

 

[nina]

Also have this document.

[nina]

48 minutes ago, ss002d6252 said:

The 1957 'dead' marking will most likely be when his wife died, and the pension claim also 'died'. There could, of course, also be other reasons why the claim ceased ('died') but the death of the wife is the most likely.

Craig

His wife died in 1942, with him, when a bomb fell on their house.

 

[PRC]

5 minutes ago, nina said:

There are not another Sydney Blogg born at that time, living in Norfolk.

While I suspect you may be right, it won't be for that reason. Men served from the Norfolk Regiment who came from all over the country. Looking at his date of enlistment, 11th December 1915, he is very likely a Derby Scheme man. That was a last attempt to prevent the need for conscription and was "sold" on the basis that if a man signed up for the Reserve he would have a choice over which unit he was sent to when eventually mobilised. However the further into the war that mobilisation came, the less likely that choice would be honoured, and as a consequence the local nature of any particular Regiment became more and more diluted.

His stated aged on discharge on the 17th April 1919 of 25 years and 3 months, if true, would hint at a birth of December 1893/January 1894, so registered in Q4 1893 or Q1 1894. If that was the name his birth was registered with, then there are no Sydney Blogg's recorded in England & Wales, and the only Sidney is Sidney Albert Blogg, mothers' maiden name Chaplin, whose birth was registered with the civil authorities in the Norwich District in Q1 1894. Doesn't rule out the Norfolk Regiment man coming from Scotland or Ireland, or indeed anywhere in the world, but seems less likely.

Sidney and Gladys turn up in the 1945 Probate Calendar, their estates being dealt with by a spinster, Ethel May Rudling - it looks like Rudling was Gladys' maiden name from the civil marriage records in Norwich in Q2 1917, (btw, grooms occupation on that marriage certificate would give an indication of his status at that time. If he was serving it should show Rank & Regiment, although sometimes it just says "A soldier" and others it is much more detailed, including service number).

Image courtesy https://probatesearch.service.gov.uk/Calendar?surname=Blogg&yearOfDeath=1945#calendar

The Absent Voters lists for Norwich are held at both the Local Studies section in the Millenium Library and the County Archive at County Hall.If you can track him down then might be another way to confirm that the soldier is the man you are looking for.  A bit more on how the Absent Voters Lists for 1918 & 1919 can help with tracking down a soldier can be found here: - https://www.longlongtrail.co.uk/soldiers/how-to-research-a-soldier/finding-soldiers-through-the-1918-absent-voters-lists/

Hope that helps,
Peter

[nina]

4 hours ago, PRC said:

Hi @nina and welcome to the forum.

Practically all of the references are likely to be admin, and refer to managing his claim. As well as 203497 which was his final service number, there may also be some relevance to 5098 beneath it.

At the start of 1917 other ranks serving with the Territorial Force moved over from various service number systems to a standardised one. The number range including 203497 was allocated to the 4th Battalions of the Norfolk Regiment. https://www.longlongtrail.co.uk/soldiers/a-soldiers-life-1914-1918/renumbering-of-the-territorial-force-in-1917/renumbering-the-tf-infantry-in-1917/

Prior to this most men who served with the 4th Battalions would have had at most a four digit number with a number prefix reflecting the Battalion they were in - although the prefix is the thing most often dropped in the day to day admin records. Thus you could have a 4/5098, a 5/5098 and a 6/5098.

However the picture, at least for me is a bit cloudy. I'm still working on understanding the general pattern but I've come across a number of men who had moved back and forth between the various home service only Battalions of the Norfolk Regiment and a Provisional Battalion not attached to anyone, before ending up back in the 4th Reserve Battalion in the summer of 1917 when they then seem to have been renumbered into the range 203400 to 203599. They were then sent out as part of drafts overseas, or discharged as unfit for war service. That number range though was also subsequently used for men transferring into the Norfolk Regiment regardless of whether they were transferring into a Territorial Force Battalion or not.

As you say "Sidney" Albert Blogg died in one of the Baedekker raids on the city of Norwich on the 28th April 1942. The additional information on his Commonwealth War Graves Commission webpage is that he was aged 48, and "of 47 Elm Grove Lane. Son of the late Arthur Blogg; husband of Gladys Violet Blogg. Died at 47 Elm Grove Lane." https://www.cwgc.org/find-records/find-war-dead/casualty-details/3146177/sidney-albert-blogg/

But Gladys, (47), died in the same raid. https://www.cwgc.org/find-records/find-war-dead/casualty-details/3146176/gladys-violet-blogg/

To the best of my knowledge they are not in the mass grave in Earlham Cemetery.

As there are no surviving service records for Sidney \ Sydney can I ask how you've been able to link the man who died in the 1942 air raid to the soldier, as that may also provide some clues to his service and why the Pension claim remained live until 1957.

And as @Michelle Young says, not the Royal Norfolk Regiment until 1935.

Cheers,
Peter

 

[PRC]

Hi @nina

The FindAGrave website records that Sidney and Gladys are buried in the Earlham Cemetery, Norwich, in section Y, grave 604, but has no picture of the headstone.
https://www.findagrave.com/cemetery/2252961/memorial-search?firstName=&lastName=Blogg&includeMaidenName=true

I actually had cause to walk through today, so went via Y section. The headstone records their death by enemy action on the 28th.

Regards,
Peter

[George Rayner]

The back of the Pension Card has 4, Upper King's Street, Norwich on it

 

George

[nina]

4 hours ago, George Rayner said:

The back of the Pension Card has 4, Upper King's Street, Norwich on it

 

George

That is where his parents lived. Just proved it was the person I am looking for.

[charlie962]

New member, 7 posts, not one please or thankyou?

Charlie