Jump to content
Free downloads from TNA ×
The Great War (1914-1918) Forum

Finding out what someone may have done in the war


Raindancer411

Recommended Posts

Hi there

My son is studying the first and Second World War these next two terms at school and it’s made me want to find out more about the family that served in the wars. I saw a family members and she has kindly lent me my great grandads actual papers from WW1. It lists what I guess are training grounds and ships. I am mainly aiming at the ones between 1913-1919. Is there any way to find out more on what the details mean on the papers please? I am new to this so any help is appreciated.

7258A5CA-706C-44F0-ACEB-144BE46A6D0C.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What was his full name, and where is he from?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He served on a couple of gunboats in Mesopotamia (Blackfly & Gnat).

MB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Briefly ......

COCHRANE - Armoured Cruiser 1905 - 1918

VICTORY - Base Portsmouth

EXCELLENT - Gunnery School Portsmouoth (he was likely a Gunnery rating)

SUTLEJ - Armouored Cruiser 1899- 1921 & accommodation base at Rosyth

EGMONT - Base ship at Malta - he might have been involvedin the Dardaneles campaign?

DALHOUSIE -  Troop ship , later base at Basra

BLACKFLY (attached to Dalhousie) Fly class River Gunboat  1917

GNAT - (attached to Dalhousie) Coastal Destroyer of 1906, later TB08.

TAMAR - Troopship, then Base at Hong Kong during 1WW

Am unable to decipher the two ships attached to Tamar.  @horatio2 or @KizmeRD may have more luck than I.

VICTORY again.

Best you post his Service Parchment, it would assist us in interpreting his career for you.

 

Edited by RNCVR
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the ships attached to Tamar might be FAME - she was a Destroyer of 1896 based at Hong Kong in that timeframe. She was sold in 1921 in Hong Kong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The first ship mentioned, based at Hong Kong on the China Station (TAMAR) was HMS Sandpiper (a river gunboat).

Agree with RNCVR that the second ship attached to TAMAR is most likely HMS Fame.

MB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, John(txic) said:

What was his full name, and where is he from?

George David Harriott and from Brighton. 

I shall try and scan the document carefully later as it may show up better 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, KizmeRD said:

Agree with RNCVR that the second ship attached to TAMAR is most likely HMS Fame.

His ADM 188 record lists different ships in Hong Kong and FAME is not one of them. I think the OP's image is a badly-written TAMAR. Compare  -  

https://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/details/r/D6741338

His early WW1 drafts to shore bases meant that he did not qualify for the 1914-15 Star. He only claimed Victory and British War Medals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Herriot had some cell time as well. & managed tto loose all of his 2 GCB's!

Edited by RNCVR
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, RNCVR said:

Herriot had some cell time as well. & managed tto loose all of his 2 GCB's!

Sorry, you will have to forgive me, that went over my head... GCBs are? Where did you see the cell time?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On his ADM188 record (horatio posted the link above)  Badges column - shows the award of his GCB's (Good Conduct Badges) for which he rec'd additional pay.

GCB's were awarded for 3, 8, & 13 years good conduct respectively.

G1(with date beside) means he was granted 1st badge; G2 - 2nd badge, then D2 means he was deprived of both badges(for a disciplinary reason), then R1 means he had 1 badge restored, then D1 again, means he was deprived of this badge again.  When he lost a badge(s) he also lost the pay that accompanied the badge(s).

Cell time awarded (for disciplinary infractions, the actual infractions are generally not shown) are noted in the Remarks column on the right, altho his first cell time(21 days) is noted as "skulking" (basically means he was avoiding duty) . He subsequently rec'd sentences of 5 days, 42 days, & 14 days cells, offences not recorded.

Near the bottom centre of his record there is - Class For Conduct block.  3 times he was placed in the 2nd class for Conduct. This was not good as he would be required to undergo a regular punishment routine for the periods he was inthe 2nd class for conduct. It was demeaning & meant to be to set an example - "pour encourager les autres" ie - in order to encourage the others as a warning - step out of line & you will get punished. He also lost his pay, leave, & grog ration when inthe 2nd class.

Hariott only did his 1st engagement , he was discharged - Shore, CS (Continuous Service) expired, upon the completion of his 12 year engagement.

He could have elected to sign on for a second engagement of 10 yrs to complete time required for a life pension.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 @Raindancer411  How about posting the photo youhave of George Harriott you mentioned in your other post concerning his brothers?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RNCVR said:

He subsequently rec'd sentences of 5 days, 42 days, & 14 days cells

The 42-day sentence in 1919 was to detention ("Detn") not Cells. This reduced his final Charcter assessnment (31/12/1919) right dow down to just "Fair" The Character assessments made at the end of each year, and based on conduct and punishments in the previous calendar year, were - VG, VG*, Good, Fair and Indifferent. It is very likely that, had he wished to re-enlist for pension after his 12 years, he would have been rejected on conduct grounds.

Edited by horatio2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, horatio2 said:

It is very likely that, had he wished to re-enlist for pension after his 12 years, he would have been rejeccted on conduct grounds.

Amazing he did not receive - SNLR - Services No Longer Required.

20 minutes ago, horatio2 said:

It is very likely that, had he wished to re-enlist for pension after his 12 years, he would have been rejeccted on conduct grounds.

Amazing he did not receive - SNLR - Services No Longer Required.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Raindancer411 said:

image.jpg

George is wearing his first GCB on his left sleeve in this photo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I have another query now too, with the ships and if what I am being told is true.  Apparently George was on a ship that was sunk at the Battle of Jutland, but he survived.  However the date I have seen, and the three ships sunk, don't tally with his record.  So is this just a yarn he spun??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No where near Jutland at the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought he was serving out in Malta (EGMONT) June ‘14 - July ‘16?
In any case, no where near Jutland.

MB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, KizmeRD said:

I thought he was serving out in Malta (EGMONT) June ‘14 - July ‘16?
In any case, no where near Jutland.

MB

yes the date I saw, he was on egmont during it. 31 May and 1 June I read as the dates of the battle 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, KizmeRD said:

I thought he was serving out in Malta (EGMONT) June ‘14 - July ‘16?
In any case, no where near Jutland.

MB

Quite correct, @KizmeRD. Thank you for pro,npting me me to visit the optician! I have deleted my previous EXCELLENT (?) suggestion.

Edited by horatio2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

I spoke to a family member and said he wasn’t in the battle according to his records and she said maybe it was another ship that sank. How can I find out is that is a possibility, or if he was just trying to pull peoples legs with his tale?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Raindancer411 said:

trying to pull peoples legs with his tale?

Looks like he was 'bigging-up' his service. It is possible that he was in a recreational rowing boat that sank in Grand Harbour whhen he was shore-based in Malta but any involvement in a major warship sinking in the Med is improbable (to put it nicely).

Edited by horatio2
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
×
×
  • Create New...