westkent78 Posted 24 April , 2005 Share Posted 24 April , 2005 I have recently embarked upon the possibly foolhardy project of compiling nominal rolls for a number of battalions that I'm interested in, from my remote location away from Kew. The MICs online has been extremely helpful in this regard, but I've now noticed that partway through the alphabet the NA stopped transcribing the battalion information and used the generic regimental title instead, so if you are looking up 1st Royal West Kent you only get 724 hits, 6th RWK a meager 298 and 8th RWK 398 for example whereas the whole RWK comes to over 40,000 entries. The situation is even more confusing with the London Regiment having 184,781 entries, only 2,220 being defined as 23rd London for example. Punching in a random service number will often produce more than one candidate because the London regiments appear to have issued similar number to their members. I'm sure the ratios for other multi battalion regiments are just as daunting. Does anyone know if there is a plan afoot to accurately complete the indexing of the online MICs? Or better yet, digitize the medal rolls? Regards, Matthew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim_davies Posted 24 April , 2005 Share Posted 24 April , 2005 Hi Matthew, I think it is more of a case of the actual battalion being seldom recorded on the MIC. I believe that it was more likely earlier in the war rather than later. The medal rolls would be more accurate with regard to battalion. Have no idea about the PRO's plans. I've been doing a similar project for the 4th Lincs and found doing a wild card search for 200* has yielded many more members of the battalion than just searching for "4th lincs". Good luck, Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westkent78 Posted 24 April , 2005 Author Share Posted 24 April , 2005 Jim, Thanks for the tip. I fear that plugging in the wildcard numbers is probably the way to go. At least I know the block numbers for the 23rd Londons. I agree that there are plenty of MICs where the original clerks only listed the regiment, but it seems a strange coincidence that to take 1st RWK for example, there are plenty of members with surnames A-G listed and then nothing. These can't all be early war, and clerks wouldn't have suddenly stopped recording battalions on the MICs would they? I don't know enough about the creation of the cards in the 20s, so perhaps there was a policy established then. It just seems more likely that the NA was running behind schedule on their digitizing project and thought that this would be a corner to cut, so they didn't have to decipher battalion affiliation. (Perhaps I'm being too cynical) Glad to see I'm not the only person creating rolls from this source. Good luck with your project too. Regards, Matthew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harneyn Posted 24 April , 2005 Share Posted 24 April , 2005 Hi, Jumping in here to ask a question... In searching the MIC's for a battalion you mention searching on the number 200* What is the number you are using? If I search on the battalion number listed I get same numbers in different battalions. I get 37 returns on the Bn name. Seems there should be more. What is the best seach criteria under Corps: Keyword: TIA, Ann <I've been doing a similar project for the 4th Lincs and found doing a wild card search for 200* has yielded many more members of the battalion than just searching for "4th lincs". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stebie9173 Posted 24 April , 2005 Share Posted 24 April , 2005 Ann, The 4th Lincs is a Territorial Battalion. All these were allocated a new number in a given range as at 1-3-1917, which is summarised on the page here: http://www.tf.1914-1918.net/TF_renumbering_infantry.htm This means that anything in the range 200000 to 240000 will be a 4th Lincs battalion number (as long as he searches by Lincs regiment), although there were a few exceptions. As always! Hence if Jim searches with "Lincolnshire" as the Corps and "200*" or "210*" etc. in the number the search should return a 4th Lincs man The 9th West Yorkshires that you are interested in are a New Army battalion (i.e. Regular army) so no re-numbers and no easy options! Hope this helps, Steve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harneyn Posted 25 April , 2005 Share Posted 25 April , 2005 Thanks Steve... On the NA site I searched on all the numbers that come up under West Yorkshire and Regiments 10684 ( 2 ), 11455 ( 1 ), 6556 ( 3 ), 268044 ( 1 ) and come up with many variations. If I search on 9th West Yorkshire I get a return of 37 people with no Luke Lowry Still confused! Ann >The 9th West Yorkshires that you are interested in are a New Army battalion (i.e. Regular army) so no re-numbers and no easy options! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim_davies Posted 25 April , 2005 Share Posted 25 April , 2005 Hi, Steve has hit the nail on the head with regard to my use of the MICs to search for members of the 4th Lincs. The only exception would be those men the the search generates who have a five digit (new army) numbers beginning 200??, it also doesn't help with regard to identifying pre 1917 members of the battalion, who were not serving after the number change. Good luck to all. Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarryBettsMCDCM Posted 25 April , 2005 Share Posted 25 April , 2005 If I search on 9th West Yorkshire I get a return of 37 people with no Luke Lowry ! <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Presumably you have searched just "Luke Lowry" or "Lowry"[leaving other fields open,???? This search will find 4 Luke Lowrys,2 of which[Luke Lowry 10684 W.Y.Rgt] & [Luke L.Lowry 11455{Also has TF Nos:6556 & 268044}] are West Yorkshire Regiment,the other 2 are Liverpool Regt;& South Lancashire Regt; & a Royal Engineer,there are only 355 "Lowry" Listings in all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harneyn Posted 25 April , 2005 Share Posted 25 April , 2005 Thanks! I do have my ancestors info - Luke. Actually I was searching to find others in the same regiment / brigade / battalion - 9th (Service) West Yorks. {Also has TF Nos:6556 & 268044}] These are territorial force units - meaning in England? Cheers, Ann Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westkent78 Posted 26 April , 2005 Author Share Posted 26 April , 2005 Thanks! I do have my ancestors info - Luke. Actually I was searching to find others in the same regiment / brigade / battalion - 9th (Service) West Yorks. {Also has TF Nos:6556 & 268044}] These are territorial force units - meaning in England? Cheers, Ann <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Ann, Yes, those appear to be Territorial numbers so at some time he must have served in the 7th West Yorkshires (whose number block is 265001 - 305000). Which means you have two battalions to search for. Territorials are reasonably similar to National Guard. 9th West Yorkshire : 37 hits 7th West Yorkshire : 322 hits The reason a Luke Lowry doesn't come up is because he is listed only as West Yorkshire Regiment on the MIC index, no battalion designation. Try these other searches to capture some of his colleagues information. (Some of these may not be exactly what you're looking for but that is the hazard of using the wildcard *) West Yorkshire & 106* : 274 hits West Yorkshire & 268* : 614 hits Regards, Matthew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Fair Posted 4 May , 2005 Share Posted 4 May , 2005 I've now noticed that partway through the alphabet the NA stopped transcribing the battalion information and used the generic regimental title instead<{POST_SNAPBACK}> There was a discussion on this some time ago on this thread. From my experience the MICs for the London Regt usually record the battalion number, this perhaps reflects the strange nature of the London Regt. At least we have the post March 1917 number block to fall back on, though its not much help for men with 4 digit numbers who had been transferred out by then. Charles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westkent78 Posted 5 May , 2005 Author Share Posted 5 May , 2005 There was a discussion on this some time ago on this thread. From my experience the MICs for the London Regt usually record the battalion number, this perhaps reflects the strange nature of the London Regt. At least we have the post March 1917 number block to fall back on, though its not much help for men with 4 digit numbers who had been transferred out by then. Charles <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Charles, Thanks for the link to the other thread. I hadn't seen the NA's reply before. Shame that collectively we can't do something to rectify the situation, but I suppose it wouldn't be practical. Yes, at least I can largely use the individual battalion blocks for post-1917 service to catch most of the 23rd Londons in the later years. Regards, Matthew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harneyn Posted 10 May , 2005 Share Posted 10 May , 2005 Many thanks. I am travelling, thus the delay. Will try this when I return! Ann >Yes, those appear to be Territorial numbers so at some time he must have served in the 7th West Yorkshires (whose number block is 265001 - 305000). Which means you have two battalions to search for. TerrYes, those appear to be Territorial numbers so at some time he must have served in the 7th West Yorkshires (whose number block is 265001 - 305000). Which means you have two battalions to search for. Territorials are reasonably similar to National Guard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now