Ranking on memorials

[Clive Maier]

Almost the first decision of the Imperial War Graves Commission was that there should be no distinction between “officers and men”. It became a guiding principle of the work. The decision was made in 1917, well before permanent memorials were planned by communities in the UK, but after war shrines had begun to spring up in 1916. Perhaps for that reason, and in direct contradiction to the principle continually stressed by the commission, many memorials do arrange the fallen by rank. One popular scheme is to list the dead by service, unit, rank and then by name.

I hope the forum can help to establish how widespread was the practice of ranking on memorials. I don’t mean simply stating rank but using rank as a means of sorting to create a hierarchy. Please vote to show whether ‘your own’ memorial sorts in any way by rank.

Many thanks.

[Terry Denham]

Clive

You are right in stating that equality for all is a guiding principle of IWGC/CWGC - probably its main principle.

However, on their official memorials to the missing they do rank the names - firstly by army order of regimental precedence and then by rank of the individual. When it came to the format of these listings, a decision had to be made and, I assume, that this system was selected as being one which would be understood by all military people.

This, of course, did not apply to the thousands of unofficial local memorials that sprung up in the post-war years. The decision on how to display names was a local one. Usually, with far fewer names to accomodate, a simple alphabetical system was adopted regardless of rank.

[Kate Wills]

I have pressed the 'no' button, which applies to the 3,000 WW1 names (+maybe 400 WW2 dead) on the main Northampton War Memorial, and also the vast majority of village and smaller memorials in the locality.

Where ranks/units do appear they are most welcome. However, if you explore further (which fieldwork for the NIWM gives you a very good excuse for so doing) you will have more luck. Many churches also contain books of remembrance, which often give far more information than, for example, a nearby plaque or stone. Also worth investigating are the gravestones in the local churchyard or cemetery. These often include details of other relatives lost in the two wars, many giving details of the casualties recalled.

[Terry Denham]

I think Clive here is not meaning whether the man's rank appears on the memorial but he wishes to know - Are the names ranked (ie officers by rank then men by order of rank) or simply listed in alphabetical order.

[Kate Wills]

Apologies for not reading Clive's post properly, although it doesn't affect my vote.

(If it is any consolation, I glanced at a thread entitled 'Allotments', and assumed it concerned propogating vegetables!! (self included it seems) Further study proved otherwise).

I can think of at least one (Lamport), where the Lord of the Manor gets top billing on the memorial, and I know there are others too.

[Clive Maier]

Terry,

Thanks for that information. I had not realised that the commission included ranking on memorials. It seems an absolute contradiction of its own strongly held conviction.

Kate,

I agree; it is very useful to have informative memorials, and rank is part of that. In this case though, Terry is right. It is the use of rank to sort the fallen that I am interested in.

[John_Hartley]

Clive

None of the four memorials I research list by rank (and neither does the main Stockport town one). Two list names only. One includes unit. One includes rank and unit (which is most helpful. of course).

John

[Sue Light]

I'm one of the 'yes' votes. My current research is on Steyning, West Sussex, memorial, and it employs an interesting way of listing. The Army, as would be expected, provides most of the names, and starts with Lieutenants, on through a CQMS...the CSMs....Sergeants, other NCOs and privates, who are each listed alphabetically within their own group. But all these are below the 'Senior Service', so the four Royal Navy men, the most senior of which was a leading seaman, are at the top of the memorial, before any of the Army names. And the Royal Air Force brings up the rear, with 2nd Lt. McConnell and Air Mechanic Hutchings coming in below the private soldiers of the Army. I can find no hint of how this listing was finally decided upon, but I suspect that a very class conscious Vicar was the driving force behind it, in a town with a slightly uneven social mix - perhaps there was as little equality in death as their was in life. But from my point of view it's been an enormous help with the research.

Regards - Sue

[Bob Coulson]

I have researched two local memorials and am currently working on another two.

Out of the four only one lists purely initial and surname.

The other three all have ranking order for each regt involved.

Bob.

[Tom Morgan]

We need to take care over ascribing reasons for the use or non-use of ranks. It doesn't necessarily follow that there was always a corporate decision towards "class" or classless" commemoration. Sometimes the decision was taken by a very small group or even an individual - the person who was paying for the memorial, or the donor of the land. I imagine such a person would invariably play an important part in taking decisions about the memorial.

Where there was "public subscription" as in the case of my local memorial, it was often the local "great and good" who would have expected (and been expected) to make the decisions. It was indeed a class-oriented society, and the IWGC original decision to insist on a standard method of commemoration regarless of rank or station was very unpolular at the time. And one aspect of this equal commemoration - personal inscriptions - was clearly a matter of who could pay and who could not.

It doesn't always follow that "ranked" or "unranked" memorials reflect the feelings of all local people at the time. A dominant War Memorial Committee member could easily put pressure on people to accept a "ranked" memorial and so ensure that his own officer son's name was near the top.

Such a person could also push the view that ranks were an unneccesary embellishment, irrelelvant to the spirit of commemoration, especially if his own son was a private.

A fascinating thread.

Tom

[Alan Seymour]

An excellent book on the subject of War Memorials is 'Monuments of War - How to read a war memorial' by Colin Mctintyre pub. 1990 Robert Hale Ltd.

Alan

[Will O'Brien]

Don't know how to vote (not literally) - Of the 25 memorials in the North Bucks area I have done reaserch on 2 have provided rank - Mursley & Willan - From memory (although don't hold me to it before i check) both list officers first then OR in alphabetical order.

Will

[Jock Bruce]

A thought provoking thread.

In my home town the memorial is name, initials and gallantry awards - given the fact that half a dozen surnames dominate the effect is striking i.e. M'Kay after M'Kay after M'Kay. So I voted accordingly.

But some of the monuments in landward parishes are rank ordered - I wonder if there is a difference between urban/municipal memorials and rural ones. For the latter the local laird or whoever may have had more influence.

Jock

[Greenwoodman]

I voted No, but I do have one memorial out of the 27 in and around Sandbach that lists men in Rank order - Officers, Sncos, etc.

[Terry_Reeves]

As Tom M has pointed out, much depended on local committees. Jock Bruce also makes an interesting point, witness the photo below. Colonel Henderson was CO 10th Royal Warwicks and was a local landowner with a very large house nearby, now converted into luxury flats. The Feildings were the relatives of the Earl of Denbigh who also lived just ouside the village. The house burnt down in the 1950's.

[Chris]

Hi Clive.

Of the local memorials i have researched they are listed as the following:

Bonby - alphabetical by surname, but does give rank

Worlaby - listed by year of enlistment in the services, but does also give rank, year of death, regiment and service number ( very easy to research)

Barton - alphabetical by surname - no mention of rank, but gives date of death

i would have to check but the only North Lincs memorial i remember that is listed by rank is Brigg, but would have to check at home.

[Malcolm]

My ' local ' Memorial near Edinburgh is not in rank order but alphabetical.

Crieff, Perthshire Memorial, which I've been working on, is in Regiment then Rank order. (see below). The WW2 panel on the same Memorial is in Unit.Regiment then alphabetically.

Aye

Malcolm

[Tom Morgan]

My ' local ' Memorial near Edinburgh is not in rank order but alphabetical.

Crieff, Perthshire Memorial, which I've been working on, is in Regiment then Rank order. (see below). The WW2 panel on the same Memorial is in Unit.Regiment then alphabetically.

Aye

Malcolm

An interesting exercise might be to look at WW2 additions and see if they follow the same pattern as the 14-18 inscriptions. I believe there are quite a few where the 14-18 names are in rank order, but the WW2 additions are alphabetical. Interesting to speculate why.

Another useful (I hope) point for lookers-at-memorials is that the names are sometimes listed in alphabetical order round the memorial, not down each panel. This ensures that each panel will have roughly the same number of names.

Tom

[Clive Maier]

Great stuff everyone. 27 votes in a little over 24 hours, and lots of invaluable comments. Thanks and please keep it coming.

I am hoping to get 60 or more voters. I have guessed that 40 percent of a thousand members may be active and that 15 percent of those might respond. If we can get enough voters – their membership of this forum virtually self-qualifies them as highly knowledgeable – then the outcome will be a useful addition to our understanding and probably second only to what is held in the National Inventory. It is just a pity the inventory is not more accessible.

I realised voters would have a problem trying to reconcile a single vote with knowledge of many and contradictory memorials. I tried to get around that by asking about ‘your’ memorial, meaning the one you know most about or feel closest to. In the event, people have used their discretion to cast either a majority or a representative vote. That is a meaningful vote in the light of what we are trying to discover and is absolutely fine.

[Clive Maier]

Clive,

I would have voted No regardless of the poll outcome. 

Thanks, Sue for the tip. I will remember that for the future

Peter 

MEMO

Include a 'No' vote for member Peter Beckett when totting up the final outcome.

[Malcolm]

An interesting exercise might be to look at WW2 additions and see if they follow the same pattern as the 14-18 inscriptions. I believe there are quite a few where the 14-18 names are in rank order, but the WW2 additions are alphabetical. Interesting to speculate why.

Another useful (I hope) point for lookers-at-memorials is that the names are sometimes listed in alphabetical order round the memorial, not down each panel. This ensures that each panel will have roughly the same number of names.

Tom

Tom,

The local , Currie, WW2 is a separate Memorial of two (small )panels - not an addition to the WW1 one.

They are strictly alphabetically arranged with unit as a secondary inscription.

On the Great War Memorial Sir Archibald Charles Gibson-Craig 3rd Bart of the local ' gentry ' (whose estate is now Heriot-Watt University) is half way down the first of the two (large) panels with Private Robert Gillon, the local butchers son just below. Nae class distinction there - refreshing ain't it.

Aye

Malcolm

[Frank_East]

Portsmouth Naval Memorial.

I notice that Rear Admiral Sir Christopher Craddock's name would appear to be the first on this memorial.His name including rank are on the extreme left hand panel at the top in a somewhat isolated position.

Lincoln High Street Memorial.

All the dead are listed alphabetically round the memorial with rank not indicated.

Regards

Frank East

[Bob Coulson]

Of the four memorials that I mentioned earlier only one has had WW2 panels added. These take the form of black marble tablets mounted low down below the original WW1 names.

Bob.

[Guest Hill 60]

One I found in the Great Glen, near to Loch Ness appears to show where the men came from and some cases it seems to name their house.

[Guest Hill 60]

And a close up of the panel.