Difference between CWGC and Soldiers Died

[matthew_family_research]

Dear all

I'm researching a solider, S/1236 Arm S/Sgt Victor Harold Bowes, RAOC, who shows on the CWGC site as dying on 10 Mar 1915.

The other day I looked on Soldiers died, hoping to find some simple additional details such as place of enlistment etc. To my great shock, the only Victor Harold Bowes there was a L/Cpl, with a different regimental number, and a different date of death (slightly).

Could someone please tell me what is going on?!

Thank you

[ianw]

In my experience this level of error is fairly common. Only one effective difference in rank and a few days on the date. His record at the National Archive might clear up the disparities between CWGC and SDGW.

Did you notice that there was another Portsmouth born Harold Bowes (6th Wilts Died 23.09.17) A relative ?

[matthew_family_research]

Thanks for getting back.

When you say 'his record at the NA' what exactly do you mean?

[Muerrisch]

My 2RWF data base is riddled with disagreements between CWGC and SDIGW or ODIGW.

Often, but not always, diligent further enquiry demonstrtates CWGC is more reliable.

But if you know your man existed, and there is a precise CWGC lookup, go with it, place a query against it, and ferret around. After all, SDIGW has never been revised or corrected. Not since Pontious was a Pilate.

[ianw]

National Archive at Kew. I am trying to get out of the habit of calling it the PRO !

[Jock Bruce]

Did you look at a hard-copy version of SDitGW or the CD ?

I always assume some errors were introduced when the info from the books was entered into the database for the CD. I know I've managed to introduce enough errors into my own data this way.

That said this one seems a bit extreme - I can believe a difference in rank (because of the acting/temporary thing) and 10 became 18 in the date of death, but the service number is way out.

I don't know how death certificates worked for servicemen who died in England & Wales, but that would be final arbiter.

Jock

[Sue Light]

I think that there have got to be two different men here, whose records have become muddled on 'Soldiers Died'. CWGC states that Victor Harold Bowes, your man, is recorded on Le Touret memorial to the missing, while the man on 'Soldiers Died', died at home, i.e. of natural causes. Is it possible that the record on 'Soldiers Died' is an error, that combines the details of two men - Victor Bowes name, and A.N. Other's rank, number and date of death? I suspect that S/6740 was another man entirely. I would go with the CWGC details.

Sue

[ianw]

Yes, of course, Sue and Jock were right to point out the magnitude of the number problem and the place of death discrepancy and there is a problem in SDGW.

S/6740 also produces a name William George Biggs of the Ordnance Corps showing the same place details. He is buried in Crowborough Sussex. It seems the details of these men have been scrambled together in SDGW and therefore I would assume CWGC info to be correct.

[matthew_family_research]

thanks to all.

ianw did the clever thing of searching by number again...! well done!

can anyone tell me if Victor Harold BOWES exists at all in Soldiers Died....? I really need to know the details that it should provide. If he's not on the CD, does anyone know if he's in the book???

[ianw]

Tricky this one because there are both Biggs and Bowes families shown on the 1901 census living in Portsmouth so the SDGW entry may have the place details for either man but I would guess that they are those of Biggs.

Unfortunately , I can find neither men definitively on the census - at least not listed under their full names !

[Terry Denham]

BIGGS was born in Southsea, Hants and enlisted in Dublin according to SDGW.

He is buried only a couple of miles from where I am sitting. He has a grave with a private headstone but it bears no more information other than that which appears on the CWGC record.

There was a large army camp at Crowborough (and there still is an army training facility there in Ashdown Forest) and he may have been from the camp rather than being a local lad. He is one of the Sussex burials for which I have very little additional info.