Missing v dead

[jdajd]

If a soldier was killed and someone was able to collect his ID, but the body was then lost for whatever reason would that person be listed as dead or missing presumed dead? Is this as obvious as it seems reading it back?

Jon

[sandyford]

Jon

Do you mean manner of death listed in SDGW, in official records or on death certificate?

Of soldiers who died at the same time in an advance but whose bodies were not recovered or were missing in one action and who are commemorated on the Menin Gate memorial -

Some soldiers were listed Missing in the War Diary, Died in SDGW and presumed killed in action on the Death Certificate.

One of the soldiers who was listed Missing in the War Diary, has death in action on his death certificate and does not have a 'manner of death' in SDGW. I suppose there would be quite a bit of confusion surrounding circumstances where bodies could not be recovered.

I have come to think that if a soldier's body could not be recovered but his death had been witnessed to happen, then he would be listed killed in action, as he would be, if he died before reaching medical aid.

If he did have medical attention then he would be listed Died of wounds even if he died very soon after.

If his dog tag was retrieved or was not retrieved, and his death had not been witnessed, then I don't know whether SDGW would list him as Died (which they did with some of the men above) or K in A (as they also did with some of the men above).

So - quite straightforward really.

Kate

[Tom Morgan]

The thing to remember here is that we think of "Missing" as meaning that a man has no known grave. It didn't mean quite the same thing to soldiers at the time. Then, it meant "He isn't here and we don't know what's happened to him, yet."

After an attack, the roll would be called. Anyone who wasn't there would be recorded as "Missing."

It was perfectly possible for men recorded as "Missing" to be alive. They could be wounded in No-Man's Land, miles away on their way to hospital, mixed up with another unit, and so on.

In Jon's example, if a man's ID disc had been retrieved from his body, then there would have been a witness to the fact that he was dead. So he would have been listed as Killed in Action. It made no difference whether or not the soldier had been buried, as at the time, the word had nothing to do with known or unknown graves. That came much later.

Tom

[Steve Bramley]

Was there a general rule as to the time between when a man was listed as missing and when he was officially recorded as deceased?

Regards,

Steve.

[sandyford]

In another thread discussing the 1917 renumbering of soldiers who had a date of death of 1916, it seemed that 6 mths was an average time.

Although again there were examples of individual soldiers who had been listed as missing in the earlier months of 1916 who were renumbered in 1917. i.e. Missing in November 1916 still renumbered in 1917.

And - there were people on the Red Cross lists, who were still being sought 18 mths after the date of the action in which they were declared missing.

Perhaps these were people whose relatives had been told that they were missing presumed dead, but whose relatives had been desperately hoping that they were still alive as prisoners, or wounded in some hospital

Kate

[AB64]

When looking through the local papers I noticed several examples where death seemed to be assumed a year after the date the soldier was posted missing, I must admit it got me wondering if their was an official 12 month policy.

Alistair