CSMMo Posted 27 November , 2005 Share Posted 27 November , 2005 In my research I have found several soldiers who have Regt. #'s that were assigned to the unit I'm researching (4th Highland (Mountain ) Brigade, RGA (TF)), but whose CWGC entries indicate that they were killed while assigned to other units and in other theaters (location of burials/memorials correspond). All except one that I have found in CWGC are in Mountain Brigades and/or Batteries, but they are not with the 4th HMB. Any ideas? Could these soldiers have been assigned to 4th HMB in 1917 when the numbers were issued and kept them after transferring out? Could they have been on temporary loan (from 4th HMB) to these mountain units for a specific mission/purpose? Could they have been transfers who were killed so soon after transferring that they had not yet been assigned new Regt. no.'s? Or is there another answer? There's too much of a coincidence in their affiliation with Mountain Units and the RGA to make me think that they are simply mistakes. I hope someone has the answer, if it is known, as this will help me (and hopefully others) associate soldiers with their appropriate units. Thanks, Mike Morrison Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Stewart Posted 27 November , 2005 Share Posted 27 November , 2005 Mike, I've added this attachment regarding Territorial numbering as it's important to known that your number couldn't be changed unless it involved a transfer. We know that the old TF numbers were changed in 1917, but the regulation remained unchanged about how your number was to be treated. I was a bit confused with the "who have Regt.#'s", but take it to mean "regimental numbers", and that you're finding men who have the new 1917 number allocated to the 4th Highland(Mountain)Bde,R.G.A. being killed elsewhere with other units. 4th H(M)B's new numbers in 1917 were 300001 - 306000, but a similar batch was also issued to the 5th London Regt who were given 300001 - 320000, as were many other infantry units. All I can suggest to you is that if any of your men were transfers then they would have been given a new number corresponding with the unit in which they were serving. Basically without the knowledge of who was using what six figure numbers in 1917 you're stumped. If you wish you could send me the details of those who are causing the problem and perhaps I could try and fathom it out for you. Graham. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rflory Posted 27 November , 2005 Share Posted 27 November , 2005 Mike: The six-digit TF numbers only indicate that the man was serving with the unit at the time of the new numbers being assigned. Many of these men later transferred to other units, carrying their numbers with them. Dick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rflory Posted 27 November , 2005 Share Posted 27 November , 2005 Graham: Are you sure that the attachment above which indicates that numbers were too be changed on transfer held true for the six-digit numbers? My experience is the same as Mike's, that the men who were transferred retained their six-digit numbers. Regards. Dick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim_davies Posted 27 November , 2005 Share Posted 27 November , 2005 Men of the 4th Lincolns retained their six digit 20**** numbers when the battalion was broken up in mid 1918 and they were transferred to other battalions of the regiment. Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandyford Posted 28 November , 2005 Share Posted 28 November , 2005 Cannot be categorical about this. In the battalion I am researching, soldiers appear in the casualty lists who have not got 6 figure numbers within the range allocated to this battalion. Usually I have found that the war diary makes a note that they are e.g. 4th Batt. Attached. perhaps this is the case with the 4th HMB soldiers. I have always thought that this implied a temporary or set time attachment. Not that they would have carried on having this number in perpetuity if they stayed. These are mostly soldiers from the same regiment but a different battalion. Soldiers who TRANSFERRED into this Battalion were given new numbers appropriate to their new battalion. From the MICs, -soldiers who TRANSFER out to a different REGIMENT after getting their 6 figure number, usually seem to be renumbered according to that regiment. I have looked to see if I can find an example of a soldier with a TF 6 figure number from one battalion in the same regiment, being given another 6 figure number but I can't find an example for you. Kate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Stewart Posted 28 November , 2005 Share Posted 28 November , 2005 Dick, Jim, Mike, Even by this stage the regimental numbering was unique within the British Army and unlike Imperial troops, I certainly haven't found any examples of infantrymen taking a six figure number with them to a new unit. On reaching a new unit they were renumbered. Within a Corps that may not have applied, but if he was an gunner moving to either the Labour Corps or Infantry he would be renumbered. There was also a ruling, and I'm sure it's ACI 2198 the one I haven't copied, wherebye you couldn't go from a TF battalion to a regular/new army battalion within your regiment without being renumbered and vice versa. This was probably relaxed during 1918 with the amount of disbandments and re-postings that were taking place. To be honest I should really find somewhere to post all of the ACI's I have regarding renumbering, but would people find them and read them? It is quite a complicated business. As an example ACI 1245 of 11th August 1917 - "Procedure on Transfer and Posting of Regular and Territorial Force Soldiers. Amended Instructions". Defines that in future you're either a regular or Territorial, but recruits who are either called up or volunteer and are posted to either a regular or TF unit will be given a regular number and so on. So in TF units you'll have a mixture of six figure TF numbers and regular five figure numbers. Are any of you familiar with Part II Orders? Having seen copies relating to the Northumberland Fusiliers there are lists and lists of men being drafted in and out and renumbered iaw the above regulations. Graham. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Stewart Posted 28 November , 2005 Share Posted 28 November , 2005 Dick, Jim, Mike, Good example taken from the Medal Roll sheet;- 7912 John Sidney Bircham, 4th Bn, East Yorks - Transferred to N.F. 4/4208 John Sidney Bircham, 1/4th Bn,N.F. - Renumbered 202068 - Transferred to 11th Bn. 202068 John Sidney Bircham, 11th Bn,N.F. - Renumbered 88761. Continues to serve with N.F. and renumbered in early 1920's - 4256775. Also 200002 Sgt Alfred Robson 1/4th Bn,N.F. transferred to R.Berkshires renumbered 227568. 200055 Pte Joseph Hodgson 1/4th Bn,N.F. transferred to R.Berkshires renumbered 227076. Graham. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim_davies Posted 28 November , 2005 Share Posted 28 November , 2005 Hi Graham, This numbering thing is a very interesting, if confusing aspect of the war, especially for me! Think your thoughts about a relaxation of the rules in mid-late 1918 are on the right track. The medal rolls show large numbers of 4th Lincs (both 1/4th & 2/4th, and just 4th battalion after Jan 1918) going to various battalions of the regt. There is a number range, 64*** which were issued to Lincs TF post 1917, which I didn't have a clue about until your posting. Haven't been able to do much work on this, but not have a better idea. Cheers Jim PS-Thank again for your offline help-much appreciated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CSMMo Posted 28 November , 2005 Author Share Posted 28 November , 2005 Maybe it will help if I add some facts: - 301661 Gunner William George MacDonald, died 7 Nov 1917, KIA, Egypt, att'd 313 Bde. (That would make sense as a Gunner att'd for some reason to 313 Brigade, but 4th Highland (Mountain) Brigade was in Salonika - wounded and sent to Alexandria Hospital?) - 301110 Gnr William Penberthy, died 23 Oct 1918 in Palestine, 16th Mountain Battery - 302018 Gnr Samuel Potts, died 9 Dec 1917 in Egypt, 10th Mountain Battery - 301706 Gnr James Rennie, died 28 Nov 1917 in India, 3rd Mountain Battery - 301923 Gnr James Rose, died 26 Oct 1918 in Egypt, 8th Mountain Brigade - 302024 Gnr William James Rossiter, died 25 Oct 1918 in Palestine, 10th Mountain Battery There are a few more, but you can see that they are all assigned to Mountain Artillery units which was a specialty skill in the RGA. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rflory Posted 28 November , 2005 Share Posted 28 November , 2005 Mike: Your experience with TF gunners is same as mine. I don't know beans about the infantry, TF or otherwise, but RFA TF and RGA TF other ranks do not appear to have lost their TF six-digit numbers when they move from one unit to another within the RFA or RGA. The same seems to be true of New Army gunners with W and L prefixes to their numbers. Regards. Dick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Stewart Posted 28 November , 2005 Share Posted 28 November , 2005 Mike, Dick Seen the examples posted and dates in which death occur and would think that what ever their circumstances of finding their way to new units i.e. posted; returned sick/wounded; attached or transferred, that they retained their numbers within the "Corps". The infantry for obvious reasons have had to adhere to the ACI's for obvious reasons and the fact that they had individual Record Offices scattered up and down the country. Do you know if Artillery personnel records were eventually centralised? As I've said in other posts there are many ACI's which cover numbering and it would be nice to see them brought together so that we and others could follow them. The biggest of these and the one which I haven't got a copy of being ACI 2198 published in 1916. Graham. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KONDOA Posted 28 November , 2005 Share Posted 28 November , 2005 The reason RGA & RFA men kept their number was because the artillery was considered to be of the same Corp ie they didnt change unit as such. Roop Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Stewart Posted 28 November , 2005 Share Posted 28 November , 2005 Roop, Cheers Roop thats exactly what I thought and so I would think it would apply to all "Corps", but not the infantry. I'll try and run of some posts of ACI's which include numbering. Graham. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Stewart Posted 28 November , 2005 Share Posted 28 November , 2005 Gents, Starting at the beginning Queens Regs 1895 Regular Army numbering. Graham. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Stewart Posted 28 November , 2005 Share Posted 28 November , 2005 Kings Regs 1908 - Regular Army numbering. Graham. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Stewart Posted 28 November , 2005 Share Posted 28 November , 2005 Kings Reg 1912 - Regular Army numbering. Virtually no change from 1908. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Lees Posted 28 November , 2005 Share Posted 28 November , 2005 My experience of researching the 9th King's Liverpool Regt (TF) has led me to formulate a few theories, some of which agree with thoughts posted above, others don't. If a man with a 6-figure number was transferred to another infantry regiment or to a corps, he was renumbered in line with the new unit's allocation. However, if he went to another battalion within his own regiment he wasn't renumbered, even if he went into a non-TF battalion. I have not seen any reference to a man with two 6-digit numbers within the same regiment. Graham, I would be very interested to see copies of all the relevant ACIs. Ken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Stewart Posted 28 November , 2005 Share Posted 28 November , 2005 Ken, I'll post in order that I have them, but it's by no means a complete run, as I've said before ACI 2198 I don't have, I only have the Appendix's. Graham. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Lees Posted 28 November , 2005 Share Posted 28 November , 2005 Thanks Graham, they will be very useful. Where are the ACIs? National Archives? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Stewart Posted 28 November , 2005 Share Posted 28 November , 2005 ACI 98 of 14th Jan 1915. Ken, ACI's are in the NA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Stewart Posted 28 November , 2005 Share Posted 28 November , 2005 ACI 144 of 18th May 1915. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Stewart Posted 28 November , 2005 Share Posted 28 November , 2005 Sorry, got carried away here are from 1914 ACI 221 of 16th Sept 1914. ACI 294 of 21st Sept 1914. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Stewart Posted 28 November , 2005 Share Posted 28 November , 2005 ACI 126 of 21st Jan 1917 showing a typical amendment to numbering. 1st Cambs original numbers were 315001 - 340000 now 325001 - 350000. 1st Hereford original numbers were 225001 - 250000 now 235001 - 260000. Highland Cyclist Bn original numbers were 340001 - 365000 now 350001 - 375000. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Stewart Posted 28 November , 2005 Share Posted 28 November , 2005 ACI 442 of 12th March 1917 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