2nd Bn Royal Dublin Fusiliers

[LDT006]

The issue of the 2nd Bn Royal Dublin Fusiliers on the Menin Gate has been covered before with some interesting points:

 

[PRC]

5 minutes ago, Allan1892 said:

His rank was Lance Corporal. Illness: 'Rheum'

Thanks Allan

Can you, (or some other kind soul with access to FMP) confirm date of admission, where he was admitted and what happened subsequently.

That will help pin down the timeline and career progression at little bit more between his arrival in France as a Private on the 21st September 1914 and his death somewhere in either France or (less likely) Flanders on the 23rd October 1916 as a Corporal possibly Acting Serjeant.

Cheers,
Peter

[Allan1892]

9 minutes ago, PRC said:

Can you, (or some other kind soul with access to FMP) confirm date of admission, where he was admitted and what happened subsequently.

Hi Peter,

Admitted 26 November 1916 26 April 1915, transferred the same day 'To Base'

Memo to self: go to Specsavers

Allan

Edited 7 July , 2023 by Allan1892
To correct date

[Allan1892]

4 minutes ago, PRC said:

where he was admitted

Had to work backwards in the register until came up with the front which shows No 3 CCS (image courtesy of Find My Past)

[weshallremember]

WAR DIARY AND MAP DETAILS

[weshallremember]

[weshallremember]

HOPE THIS HELPS

 

TREVOR

[LDT006]

1 hour ago, LDT006 said:

Looks like a IWGC/CWGC error and they all should have been on the Thiepval Memorial.

It becomes clear that it is a clerical error somewhere when you sort on name:
All from A to M are on Thiepval, M to W are on the Menin Gate. This can't be a coincidence.......

ALLEN	J	Private	17152'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
ANDERSON	J C	Lance Serjeant	20234'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
BALLANTYNE	J	Serjeant	18214'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
BRADY	J	Private	27248'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
BUSBY	J	Private	43003'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
BYRNE	C	Private	8106'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
BYRNE	M	Private	16392'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
BYRNE	P	Private	8405'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
CASEY	W M J	Corporal	43004'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
COLEMAN	M	Private	25062'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
CONNELL	W	Private	16642'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
CRITCHLEY	J	Private	20312'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
CUMISKY	T	Private	22433'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
DAVIDSON	D	Private	20389'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
DORAN	L G	Second Lieutenant	'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
FENNELL	J	Private	24691'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
FOLEY	D	Private	21420'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
GARVEY	T	Lance Corporal	22263'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
HALL	J S	Private	24024'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
HAYES	J	Private	20368'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
JONES	J	Private	17029'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
KANE	P	Lance Corporal	19311'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
KAVANAGH	P	Private	25164'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
KELLY	D	Private	25779'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
KENNEDY	M	Private	20251'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
KILLEEN	M	Private	20230'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
KILLINGLEY	H G	Lieutenant	'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
KINANE	M	Private	43024'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
LAWLESS	J	Private	20380'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
LEMATHY	W	Private	8640'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
LYNHAM	A	Private	21135'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
MALONE	L	Private	25259'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
McGUIRK	T	Lance Corporal	22647'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
MOLLOY	J B	Private	20590'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
MOORE	H	Private	5829'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
MULHALL	J	Private	18185'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
MURPHY	J	Private	20589'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
MURPHY	J	Corporal	43037'	YPRES (MENIN GATE) MEMORIAL
NAVIN	P	Private	7691'	YPRES (MENIN GATE) MEMORIAL
O'DONOGHUE	M	Private	43041'	YPRES (MENIN GATE) MEMORIAL
O'HARA	F	Private	13599'	YPRES (MENIN GATE) MEMORIAL
O'NEILL	T	Corporal	9981'	YPRES (MENIN GATE) MEMORIAL
RAY	A W	Serjeant	6704'	YPRES (MENIN GATE) MEMORIAL
REYNOLDS	J	Private	25392'	YPRES (MENIN GATE) MEMORIAL
ROCHFORD	A	Private	21661'	YPRES (MENIN GATE) MEMORIAL
RYDER	B	Lance Corporal	9632'	YPRES (MENIN GATE) MEMORIAL
SHEARIN	J J	Private	18548'	YPRES (MENIN GATE) MEMORIAL
SHERIDAN	M	Private	5651'	YPRES (MENIN GATE) MEMORIAL
SMITH	S T	Serjeant	15949'	YPRES (MENIN GATE) MEMORIAL
SPROULE	W J	Corporal	43055'	YPRES (MENIN GATE) MEMORIAL
STEVENS	C	Private	18250'	YPRES (MENIN GATE) MEMORIAL
SWAN	A	Lance Corporal	7073'	YPRES (MENIN GATE) MEMORIAL
VICK	J S	Private	21579'	YPRES (MENIN GATE) MEMORIAL
WATTS	H A	Lance Corporal	17886'	YPRES (MENIN GATE) MEMORIAL
WHISTON	C	Private	16292'	YPRES (MENIN GATE) MEMORIAL

[Matlock1418]

2 hours ago, PRC said:

Of course CWGC may be correct - Acting Serjeant may only have been temporary and he had reverted back to Corporal by the time of death. But may be worthwhile going through the papertrail - Register of Soldiers Effects, (Ancestry \ Fold 3) and any Pension cards to see if there is any case for getting his rank amended.

Thomas O'Neill. 9981, Royal Dublin Fusiliers

Image thanks to WFA/Fold3

Dependant's pension index card - Showing rank of Cpl [disability and widow's pensions - higher unpaid acting rank would routinely only be paid at the substantive rank rate] - though in this case only a Gratuity was paid to his sister, Mrs Ada SMITH, so it isn't overly helpful on this rank point. 

My, unsubstantiated, feeling is that he probably was a substantive Cpl, as per CWGC. https://www.cwgc.org/find-records/find-war-dead/casualty-details/1622837/thomas-o-neill

M

[Matlock1418]

2 hours ago, PRC said:

His Medal Index Card, (and presumably the associated Medal Roll for his Victory Medal and British War Medal, available on Ancestry), show that the highest rank he served at in a Theatre of War was Acting Serjeant.

I believe unpaid acting ranks were paid at the substantive rate i.e. Corporal - as were their medals also so impressed

M

[PRC]

1 hour ago, Allan1892 said:

Hi Peter,

Admitted 26 April 1915, transferred the same day 'To Base'

Thanks Allan, so in terms of a marker, definately a Lance Corporal by the 25th April 1915. If he was moved to a Base Hospital or a Base Depot then it was lucky he was returned to the 2nd Battalion. If he survived a winter in the trenches of Flanders I'm not surprised he had rheumatism.

@fitz_merc - that an informed assumption on my part that all of his service in France & Flanders was with the 2nd Battalion. That was the only Battalion he could have gone out to serve with in September 1914, the Medical Admission Register entry from April 1915 has him with the 2nd, and he died in October 1916 serving with the 2nd. To add to the confidence around that you may want to check out his entry on the Victory Medal and British War Medal Roll, (Ancestry only). If the clerk completing it followed the instructions on the form then it should include all units served with overseas.

1 hour ago, Allan1892 said:

Had to work backwards in the register until came up with the front which shows No 3 CCS (image courtesy of Find My Past)

Thanks again - so at Poperinghe on the date in question when I believe the 2nd Battalion were in the Ypres Salient. @fitz_merc - don't know of that fits in with your itinerary at all

50 minutes ago, LDT006 said:

It becomes clear that it is a clerical error somewhere when you sort on name:
All from A to M are on Thiepval, M to W are on the Menin Gate. This can't be a coincidence.......

ALLEN	J	Private	17152'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
ANDERSON	J C	Lance Serjeant	20234'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
BALLANTYNE	J	Serjeant	18214'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
BRADY	J	Private	27248'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
BUSBY	J	Private	43003'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
BYRNE	C	Private	8106'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
BYRNE	M	Private	16392'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
BYRNE	P	Private	8405'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
CASEY	W M J	Corporal	43004'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
COLEMAN	M	Private	25062'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
CONNELL	W	Private	16642'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
CRITCHLEY	J	Private	20312'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
CUMISKY	T	Private	22433'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
DAVIDSON	D	Private	20389'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
DORAN	L G	Second Lieutenant	'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
FENNELL	J	Private	24691'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
FOLEY	D	Private	21420'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
GARVEY	T	Lance Corporal	22263'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
HALL	J S	Private	24024'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
HAYES	J	Private	20368'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
JONES	J	Private	17029'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
KANE	P	Lance Corporal	19311'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
KAVANAGH	P	Private	25164'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
KELLY	D	Private	25779'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
KENNEDY	M	Private	20251'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
KILLEEN	M	Private	20230'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
KILLINGLEY	H G	Lieutenant	'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
KINANE	M	Private	43024'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
LAWLESS	J	Private	20380'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
LEMATHY	W	Private	8640'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
LYNHAM	A	Private	21135'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
MALONE	L	Private	25259'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
McGUIRK	T	Lance Corporal	22647'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
MOLLOY	J B	Private	20590'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
MOORE	H	Private	5829'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
MULHALL	J	Private	18185'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
MURPHY	J	Private	20589'	THIEPVAL MEMORIAL
MURPHY	J	Corporal	43037'	YPRES (MENIN GATE) MEMORIAL
NAVIN	P	Private	7691'	YPRES (MENIN GATE) MEMORIAL
O'DONOGHUE	M	Private	43041'	YPRES (MENIN GATE) MEMORIAL
O'HARA	F	Private	13599'	YPRES (MENIN GATE) MEMORIAL
O'NEILL	T	Corporal	9981'	YPRES (MENIN GATE) MEMORIAL
RAY	A W	Serjeant	6704'	YPRES (MENIN GATE) MEMORIAL
REYNOLDS	J	Private	25392'	YPRES (MENIN GATE) MEMORIAL
ROCHFORD	A	Private	21661'	YPRES (MENIN GATE) MEMORIAL
RYDER	B	Lance Corporal	9632'	YPRES (MENIN GATE) MEMORIAL
SHEARIN	J J	Private	18548'	YPRES (MENIN GATE) MEMORIAL
SHERIDAN	M	Private	5651'	YPRES (MENIN GATE) MEMORIAL
SMITH	S T	Serjeant	15949'	YPRES (MENIN GATE) MEMORIAL
SPROULE	W J	Corporal	43055'	YPRES (MENIN GATE) MEMORIAL
STEVENS	C	Private	18250'	YPRES (MENIN GATE) MEMORIAL
SWAN	A	Lance Corporal	7073'	YPRES (MENIN GATE) MEMORIAL
VICK	J S	Private	21579'	YPRES (MENIN GATE) MEMORIAL
WATTS	H A	Lance Corporal	17886'	YPRES (MENIN GATE) MEMORIAL
WHISTON	C	Private	16292'	YPRES (MENIN GATE) MEMORIAL

Pure speculation on my part but looks almost as if one page got on the wrong pile and it was never picked up as a mistake. Hopefully if asked CWGC would see it as a "clear and obvious error" without the need to refer it to the fourth official at Stockley Park

46 minutes ago, Matlock1418 said:

I believe unpaid acting ranks were paid at the substantive rate i.e. Corporal - as were their medals also so impressed

Agreed. However plenty of instances where "Acting" rank is shown on CWGC which is the only reason why I'm even bringing it up for consideration. Would see an even better way to remember an ancestor is if you had a hand in ensuring their correct commemoration

Cheers,
Peter

Edited 7 July , 2023 by PRC
Typos

[Allan1892]

19 minutes ago, PRC said:

To add to the confidence around that you may want to check out his entry on the Victory Medal and British War Medal Roll, (Ancestry only). If the clerk completing it followed the instructions on the form then it should include all units served with overseas.

1914 Star Medal Rolls shows that he entered a ToW on 21 September 1914. The BWM & VM Rolls shows that he was only with the 2nd Battalion (his entry also shows A/S for rank)

[Ivor Anderson]

See this previous thread re 23 Oct 1916 and the names on the Menin Gate/ Thiepval Memorial:

https://www.greatwarforum.org/topic/228786-2nd-battalion-rdf-october-1916/#comment-2889172

Sgt Robert Downie won the VC with the 2nd RDF on 23 Oct 1916:

https://www.greatwarforum.org/topic/302964-sergeant-robert-downie-vc-mm-11213-2nd-royal-dublin-fusiliers-1916/#comment-3188784

 

Edited 7 July , 2023 by Ivor Anderson

[Matlock1418]

2 hours ago, PRC said:

Agreed. However plenty of instances where "Acting" rank is shown on CWGC which is the only reason why I'm even bringing it up for consideration. Would see an even better way to remember an ancestor is if you had a hand in ensuring their correct commemoration

I would agree on how to be commemorated at CWGC [my preference is to show their active role/appointment/'rank' rather than substantive rank - acting-up seems to fall within this approach and better reflects their responsibility level] ... CWGC already commonly show LCpl rather than Pte so if he had three stripes up as an Acting Sgt then there is some logic in showing his rank as Sgt [or should that be Sjt?] - so why not in such a case?

M

Edited 7 July , 2023 by Matlock1418

[FROGSMILE]

24 minutes ago, Matlock1418 said:

I would agree on how to be commemorated at CWGC [my preference is to show their active role/appointment/'rank' rather than substantive rank - acting-up seems to fall within this approach and better reflects their responsibility level] ... CWGC already commonly show LCpl rather than Pte so if he had three stripes up as an Acting Sgt then there is some logic in showing his rank as Sgt [or should that be Sjt?] - so why not in such a case?

M

I understand and sympathise with the sentiment, but it can confuse the uninitiated/unfamiliar if they don’t understand the significance of substantive rank.  Both lance and acting rank are temporary (and often removed after a time if no promotion is sanctioned), whereas substantive rank is permanent and only removable by court martial.  It is also the most commonly recorded rank if correct protocol is followed.

Edited 7 July , 2023 by FROGSMILE

[Matlock1418]

48 minutes ago, FROGSMILE said:

I understand and sympathise with the sentiment, but it can confuse the uninitiated/unfamiliar if they don’t understand the significance of substantive rank.  Both lance and acting rank are temporary (and often removed after a time if no promotion is sanctioned), whereas substantive rank is permanent and only removable by court martial.  It is also the most commonly recorded rank if correct protocol is followed.

We both recognise the complexity of the situation.

I would agree with your position of substantive ranks when it comes to the military services approach and medals, pensions etc. but ... CWGC have already very often commemorated under the acting appointment/position/role [clearly previously accepting it was not a substantive rank but worthy of use as a 'rank' regardless] = so they are technically incorrect, compared to the military service approach in such cases

I gave LCpl as an example - me it seems CWGC have accepted the concept of using a non-substantive position as a 'rank'and if applicable should continue to use their existing approach to new commemoration cases and to new applications for change or change all the other commemorations to reflect the substantive rank service approach.

The concept of uniformity in death commemoration being a fundamental of the CWGC's charter - I think they have already chiselled their position on many uniform CWGC headstones, including in recent years, possible even in recent months .

The CWGC electronic commemoration is easy to change and stonework can follow [eventually, as stonework needs replacement].

Or CWGC should clearly and identify that they are retrospectively reverting to the substantive rank approach for all and are going to [eventually] change all stones too.

I doubt we will get any statement on changing their current approach [as it might appear to downgrade many a casualty's commemoration] = I suspect CWGC will likely go with their current approach for a non-substantive 'rank' - following a suitably made/evidence supported application being made of course.

M

Edited 7 July , 2023 by Matlock1418
typo/correction/addition

[FROGSMILE]

18 minutes ago, Matlock1418 said:

We both recognise the complexity of the situation.

I would agree with your position of substantive ranks when it comes to the armed services approach and medals, pensions etc. but ... CWGC have already very often commemorated under the acting appointment/position/role [clearly previously accepting it was not a substantive rank but worthy of use regardless] - I gave LCpl as but one example - me it seems CWGC have accepted the concept of using a non-substantive position as a 'rank'and if applicable should continue to use their existing approach to new commemoration cases and to new applications for change or change all the other commemorations to reflect the substantive rank service approach.

The concept of uniformity in death commemoration being a fundamental of the CWGC's charter - I think they have already chiselled their position on many uniform CWGC headstones, including in recent years, possible even in recent months .

The CWGC electronic commemoration is easy to change and stonework can follow [eventually, as stonework needs replacement].

Or CWGC should clearly and identify that they are retrospectively reverting to the substantive rank approach for all and are going to [eventually] change all stones too.

I doubt we will get any statement on changing their current approach [as it might appear to downgrade many a casualty's commemoration] = I suspect CWGC will go with their current approach for a non-substantive 'rank' - following a suitably made/evidence supported application being made of course.

M

I’m not quibbling with your motive or what you’ve done, I just added a note of caution for those less familiar.  The knowledge that you and Peter bring to bear in seeking out these records is completely appreciated by me.

[Matlock1418]

Just now, FROGSMILE said:

I’m not quibbling with your motive or what you’ve done, I just added a note of caution for those less familiar.  The knowledge that you and Peter bring to bear in seeking out these records is completely appreciated by me.

 We agree the appointment/acting 'rank' thing is a potential puzzle to many - and in a way CWGC haven't helped either - but the IWGC were and still the CWGC are in many ways something of an unpublished law unto themselves when it comes to commemorating.  Hey ho!

M

[FROGSMILE]

21 minutes ago, Matlock1418 said:

 We agree the appointment/acting 'rank' thing is a potential puzzle to many - and in a way CWGC haven't helped either - but the IWGC were and still the CWGC are in many ways something of an unpublished law unto themselves when it comes to commemorating.  Hey ho!

M

Completely understood, my comment is purely for the OP, as something to keep in mind.  Once one understands the Army’s protocol it’s easier to make allowances for the inconsistencies of the other agencies involved in commemoration.

Edited 7 July , 2023 by FROGSMILE

[PRC]

Took a look at the 2^nd Battalion War Diary to see if I could pick up his likely arrival with the Battalion after landing in France on the 21^st September 1914.

23^rd September 1914 diary entry includes:-
Fourth re-inforcement, Lts Tarleton + Moffit + 163 Section D arrived.
Section D men had completed a 12 year enlistment and were given a one time opportunity to extend their service in the reserves by an additional four years. That is not therefore the profile that fits Thomas O’Neill.
The MiC for 2^nd Lieutenant G.W.B. Tarleton. 2^nd Battalion Royal Dublin Fusiliers shows him as arriving in France on the 15^th September 1914.
No obvious MiC for Moffit. The January 1915 British Army Monthly List has a 2^nd Lieutenant C.W. Maffett recorded serving with the 2^nd Battalion. However the MiC for 2^nd Lieutenant Cuthbert William Maffett shows him as 1^st Battalion and shows disembarkation dates of both the 5^th September 1914 and the 14^th September 1914.

29^th September 1914 diary entry includes:-
5^th re-inforcement, 2 Lt Hallowes + 90 men arrived this evening, 47 of these were men of Battn who were cut off on 26^th Aug. + had escaped to BOULOGNE. Remaining 43 were Special Reservists.
Nothing found so far to suggest Thomas saw service in France before the 21^st September 1914 or that he was a Special Reservist.
The MiC for 2^nd Lieutenant Paul Collis Hallowes, 2^nd Battalion, Royal Dublin Fusiliers has dates of both the 19^th September 1914 and the 21^st September 1914 for him disembarking in France.

26^th October 1914 diary entry includes:-
Captains Trigma + Weir and 179 other ranks (6^th re-inforcements) arrived.
The MiC for Captain Edmund William B Weir, Royal Dublin Fusiliers, shows him first disembarking in France on the 25^th October 1914.
The MiC for Captain Alfred Sceberas Trigona, 2^nd Battalion Royal Dublin Fusiliers, shows him first disembarking in France on the 22^nd August 1914.

Arrival with the 5^th Re-inforcements seems the most likely, but that means either -

-        War Diary has been over-simplified or

-        Thomas saw service in France & Flanders before the date of the 21^st September 1914. Or

-        Thomas was a Special Reservist. I’m not seeing any candidate for service numbers 3/8991, 4/8991 or 5/8991 but as we all know dropping the battalion prefix is very, very common.

So unfortunately another fly in the ointment – maybe I should stop looking at this one so closely.

Unless someone can find a strong match for Thomas in civilian life on a 1911 Census that demonstrates the two Royal Dublin Fusilier soldiers must be red herrings, I don’t see how we can prove \ disprove whether he was a Regular or a Special Reservist.

Back to the drawing board,
Peter

Edited 7 July , 2023 by PRC
Typos

[fitz_merc]

4 hours ago, PRC said:

Thanks Allan, so in terms of a marker, definately a Lance Corporal by the 25th April 1915. If he was moved to a Base Hospital or a Base Depot then it was lucky he was returned to the 2nd Battalion. If he survived a winter in the trenches of Flanders I'm not surprised he had rheumatism.

@fitz_merc - that an informed assumption on my part that all of his service in France & Flanders was with the 2nd Battalion. That was the only Battalion he could have gone out to serve with in September 1914, the Medical Admission Register entry from April 1915 has him with the 2nd, and he died in October 1916 serving with the 2nd. To add to the confidence around that you may want to check out his entry on the Victory Medal and British War Medal Roll, (Ancestry only). If the clerk completing it followed the instructions on the form then it should include all units served with overseas.

Thanks again - so at Poperinghe on the date in question when I believe the 2nd Battalion were in the Ypres Salient. @fitz_merc - don't know of that fits in with your itinerary at all

Pure speculation on my part but looks almost as if one page got on the wrong pile and it was never picked up as a mistake. Hopefully if asked CWGC would see it as a "clear and obvious error" without the need to refer it to the fourth official at Stockley Park

Agreed. However plenty of instances where "Acting" rank is shown on CWGC which is the only reason why I'm even bringing it up for consideration. Would see an even better way to remember an ancestor is if you had a hand in ensuring their correct commemoration

Cheers,
Peter

I am taking the group to Reninghelst Cemetery as one student has 2 relatives, who did not know each other, and both were in Transport attached to Artillery Corps. 

I am having a long weekend between two school groups and staying 2 nights at Talbot House in Poperinghe. I dont suppose there is any trace of the Poperinghe hospital today?

[Matlock1418]

52 minutes ago, FROGSMILE said:

Completely understood, my comment is purely for the OP, as something to keep in mind.  Once one understands the Army’s protocol it’s easier to make allowances for the inconsistencies of the other agencies involved in commemoration.

 Agreed, especially if the OP is passing on such knowledge to a younger generation(s) - which I guess many here will recognise as the necessary next torchbearers for interest in the GW.

M

[fitz_merc]

I could point out the possible injustice of Thomas been recorded as Corporal and not Acting Sarjeant.  Students like injustices. I think they might be intrigued as to why Thomas fought and died on the Somme but his name is recorded on the Menin Gate and not Thiepval. 

If I can get a clearer print out of the Trench maps above I could even take the group there.  Last year I took the school to follow the footsteps of a relative that was killed in NO Man's Land with lots of his mates with none of them reaching the German trenches only for the Germans to withdraw the next day. The students LOVED the experience. It was this Forum that supplied me with the maps and story.

Edited 7 July , 2023 by fitz_merc

[Matlock1418]

14 minutes ago, fitz_merc said:

I think they might be intrigued as to why Thomas fought and died on the Somme but his name is recorded on the Menin Gate and not Thiepval. 

As also on your other thread:

Typically the nearest memorial to the missing was used [but is sometimes seems they ran out of room and commemorated on another memorial] - perhaps CWGC themselves could explain more?? 

Have you asked CWGC? E-mail: enquiries@cwgc.org

M

Edit: I forgot to also say I think the TM ran out of room [but would be good to have it more definitively determined - or not!]

Edited 7 July , 2023 by Matlock1418
edit

[fitz_merc]

I can follow the logic of running out of space but not with dividing up names of Regt soldiers who trained, fought together and died together on the same day.