Jump to content
Free downloads from TNA ×
The Great War (1914-1918) Forum

Remembered Today:

200040 Acting Warrant Officer Class 2

Guest KevinEndon

Recommended Posts

Guest KevinEndon

Could any pal please find for me what 200040 Acting Warrant Officer Class 2 Ernest Jones of the North Staffs Regt. number was before it became a 6 figure number. Is it as simple as 40 or is that just too good to be true. His 1914-15 star has his number as 200.040 does the dot in between the second and third 0 have any meaning.

Many thanks


Link to comment
Share on other sites


I can't give you his pre-6-digit number, but it would not have been 40. When the 6-digit numbers were allocated to his battalion in early 1917 there were only 39 NCOs/Men with a lower number than his, whatever that was, but considering the number 1 was issued in 1908 then I would guess (based on just one infantry battalion I have studied in detail) that his number may have been around 500, give or take.

I don't think you can read anything into the dot in the number on his star.


Link to comment
Share on other sites


A (very) quick analysis of other soldiers of the North Staffs renumbered in the 2000xx range is inconclusive as far as his previous number goes.......

200031 = 1681

200032 = 2030

200033 = 2022

200034 = 2038

200035 = 2402

200036 = 2403

200038 = 2412

200039 = 325

200040 = ????

200041 = 1868

200042 = 1856

200043 = 1878

200044 = 1869

200045 = 1879

200047 = 1494

200048 = 1866

200049 = 1857.

I'll leave you to draw your own conclusions :unsure:


Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a 'MID, MSM, or TFEM' Medal index Card for this man....

Medal card of Jones, E J

Corps Regiment No Rank

North Staffordshire Regiment 545 Company Quarter Master Serjeant

Link to Card is Here

He doesn't appear to have been a casualty, doesn't have a 'Campaign' medal MIC under the 545 number nor does 545 appear to have been renumbered. Could it be Ernest, I wonder????


Link to comment
Share on other sites

545;It sounds logical,the number immediately preceeding Jones' is 200039,Sergt William Allman whose previous number was 325.

so 200040 is going to be reasonably close{TEFM/MSM/MiD Cards don't give the new numbers unless awarded after the change over}

You do find that many men in these sort of low hundreds number bracket,{ie:1908 men}are often not serving @ the time of re~numbering,in 1916; due to age,wounds,discharge or death,or 'natural wastage'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Strange that his 1914-15 Star has a 6 digit number on it, shouldn't it have a four..

Technically 3 Figure,yes {545 in fact,as that seems to have been his earlier number},it might be that they were late issues or something similar,I have seen this before with TF WW1 Campaign Medals,more usually where the recipient has transferred to another unit & the Medals have been issued from that Unit's record office.

The Roll pages might answer that question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

looks like late issue medals - 1936

MIC often have numbers and reference that "mean nothing" - Ive been told they are a reference number for correspondence sent

Link to comment
Share on other sites

post-11197-1154869722.jpgStill no mention of his star. Are we sure this is the same bloke as 200040 and 545.

Almost undoubtedly,going on the previous number of his Peers & his 200040 number,it would be difficult for it to be anyone else,I would suspect from the MiC that he would appear to have been issued with a Star in stead of the Territorial Force War Medal which is what is stated on the Card,& what it appears he should have had{Both could not [officially] be awarded}I suspect that as they were issued so late someone @ the AMO made what is technically known as a "B*lls~Up" & he was sent a Star instead of the bronze TFWM {Territorial Force War Medal.{possibly misread as TFEM which he was also granted in 1916}

Oh the joys of Medal Research!!! ;)

Copies of the Roll pages MIGHT just clarify the situation{& the Star Roll page for the 5th Bn if he is on it.}

What is the actual composition of the group?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Create New...