john w. Posted 25 January , 2004 Share Posted 25 January , 2004 Today I managed to get to a nearby church and check the Roll of Honour, and as expected Archibald Brown's name is not on it, as he was executed. What would be good for me (a personal crusade), is by the 90th Anniversay of his death have made attempts to get his name added to that list. Easier said than done I fear. By todays standards, it would probably be no major problem, but at present I am unaware of any procedures that need to be performed to get the name added, as there can be strict rules over the inclusion of the name. If a memorial is inside a church, whose responsibility is it regarding the names and the inclusions and the upkeep? To whom would I make application to get the name of Archibald Brown included? John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragon Posted 25 January , 2004 Share Posted 25 January , 2004 I don't know anything about procedures. However, I wondered whether there would be any mileage in writing something for the local newspaper (even its letters page) and generating some public support? I think, as a member of the public, I would wish to know something of his story, including why he was executed. Why was he, by the way? Gwyn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John_Hartley Posted 25 January , 2004 Share Posted 25 January , 2004 John If it inside the church, then it will be the responsibility of the church to update/maintain. Your first port of call needs to be the vicar/minister/priest. You'd like to think that "men of God" would be sympathetic to the idea. There was a story in my local Stockport paper, a couple of weeks back, where a church has a memorial to WW1 casualties. The priest is invitng the community to submit names for an additional panel for those killed in subsequent conflicts. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry Denham Posted 25 January , 2004 Share Posted 25 January , 2004 The local Parochial Church Council will make the decision and so your first step should be contacting the incumbent priest or the church warden (who is responsible for the fabric of the building and everything in it). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john w. Posted 25 January , 2004 Author Share Posted 25 January , 2004 Thanks all, I thought it would be the incumbent. Will tackle him. Dragon, basically he deserted, changed clothes, but to get the clothes had to break into a house to get them, that was plundering I think. When in custody he escaped. So in the end he did himself no favours, and was shot Dec 1914. I have the trial papers for him and in some ways they are a reflection of Thomas Highgate the first to be shot in Sept 1914. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon R Posted 26 January , 2004 Share Posted 26 January , 2004 Works concerned with materially altering the fabric of a church (anglican) fall under faculty jurisdiction - the PCC may need to apply for this before altering any of its monuments within the building. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john w. Posted 26 January , 2004 Author Share Posted 26 January , 2004 Simon Thanks for the info, I have another one to go to as the first might not have been his parish church. I dont expect to find him but I live in hope. Thanks John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragon Posted 27 January , 2004 Share Posted 27 January , 2004 Does he have surviving relatives? If so, what do they think of your proposal? Would their support be helpful? Gwyn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john w. Posted 27 January , 2004 Author Share Posted 27 January , 2004 In this case once again I would have to search for relatives. He left a mum when he waas shot, and although 26 there was no sign on the CWGC site of him being married. So I feel a trip to the Family Records Centre coming on. I cant gain access to the church till saturday due to work and the fact that it is closed between 3pm amd 10 am. SO wont know till then. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john w. Posted 1 February , 2004 Author Share Posted 1 February , 2004 Went today and saw the roll of homour in the church and low and behold he wasnt there. In fact would have been surprised if he was. Got research to do now to make a case for inclusion and present it to the Parochial Church Council. Had a chat with the vicar and she feels that if it is presented to them then it will have to go higher up... and then see what the outcome is. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_Baker Posted 1 February , 2004 Share Posted 1 February , 2004 I think this poses an interesting question. Would his contemporaries (ie those who produced the memorial, those who are already commemorated on it, those who survived), should they be in a position to comment, be happy with his inclusion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pat Posted 1 February , 2004 Share Posted 1 February , 2004 It seems to me that church memorials have 2 roles. 1) They commemorate those who gave their lives, but 2) they are also historical "documents" in their own right. Their design, wording, placing in public places etc etc all give us historical information about the attitudes of the time. Adding names 90 years afterwards changes the historical "document". pat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry Denham Posted 1 February , 2004 Share Posted 1 February , 2004 Those memorials in churches with missing names added often do so by means of a separate addenda panel and so not altering the original historical feature. In fact, they create a new historical record for generations yet to be born. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Posted 1 February , 2004 Share Posted 1 February , 2004 Adding names 90 years afterwards changes the historical "document". I disagree Pat, all it does is commemorate men who should have been commemorated 90 years ago and deserve to be, like all the others on the memorial. It also highlights the inability of people even then to get their admin in order. More power to your elbow John. Andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernard_Lewis Posted 1 February , 2004 Share Posted 1 February , 2004 Whilst I appreciate the motive I'm not sure about whether we should be acting this far on. As Chris says what did the deserter's chums think of his actions at the time? On a separate theme where a man was killed in action how do we know that his family at the time didn't make a conscious decision to NOT include his name on any local memorial e.g. maybe in protest at what they might have seen as a futile sacrifice? Would we be right 90 years on to add this against their (posthumous) wishes? If we are sure it was a genuine oversight then fine but what if there is any doubt about the wishes of the family? A very tricky area... Bernard Lewis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will O'Brien Posted 1 February , 2004 Share Posted 1 February , 2004 John...............Whilst wishing you all the best in your endeavour & not wanting to make comment on the circumstances of Archibald Brown's execution as I am not familiar with this particular case (other than the brief details within Julian Putkowski's 'Shot at Dawn' book), I do wonder how receptive the church is going to be to have the name added. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John_Hartley Posted 1 February , 2004 Share Posted 1 February , 2004 We had a very similar thread some months debating the rights and wrongs of adding to memorials. This case might be different because of its very nature, but my view from months back is generally unchanged. That is that we should not be attempting to rewrite history. There may be very good reason why family did not want someone commemorated and I think that is something that we need to consider. It is, I feel, different when a modern day descendent wants a family member commemorated (as I have recently), in that they are the custodians of the family's history. I would not seek to have someone added to a local memorial simply because I discovered they had some connection with the area (and I have so discovered someone). John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malcolm Posted 1 February , 2004 Share Posted 1 February , 2004 A certain Memorial in Fife was to be erected in 1922 without the inclusion of a BW man who had been SAD. The Memorial committee were informed by some means by the soldier's old comrades that if his name was not included they would blow the Memorial up! His name is on the Memorial. Aye Malcolm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john w. Posted 2 February , 2004 Author Share Posted 2 February , 2004 Have read the points and I take them all on board.... Firstly I am not going to rewrite history. As far as I am aware memorials were constructed by asking those in the vicinity of the village or church if they wanted to have their loved one 'immortalised' if thats the right word on a memorial. That poses an issue, did they ask Archibald's mum if he wanted to be included or did they shun her when they became aware of his fate. I have more work to do on this case as there may be relatives involved as well. It is a complex issue, I know that in Thomas Highgate's home village they refused to put his name on. He was a member of the Essex regt and I am going to see the keeper of the regt archive. I believe that you cannot move on something like this unless all the issues are thought through. If you have any thoughts on this issue then please email me off forum to discuss as I would value the feelings of members. Can see from the response here that it is divided. I am quite sensitive to these issues as when I searched for my natural father and mother it was apparent that you cannot just go blundering along taking all with you You need to have all the evidence available and presented. Until then I am not going to present anything to the parochial church council. On a side issue the Buttsbury church thread has the names of those who fell. Most are remembered on the Stock War memorial, except three. In three weeks they are going to discuss the issue of these three (non SAD i add). I have one tied up and ready to go, all proved and hope to get him added, which I will be pleased about. Just two more to go. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Posted 2 February , 2004 Share Posted 2 February , 2004 I do wonder how receptive the church is going to be to have the name added. Will I would have thought that the church, as the reprentatives of christian love and forgiveness would be only too pleased to have a "black sheep" returned to the flock. Andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john w. Posted 2 February , 2004 Author Share Posted 2 February , 2004 I do have visions of the Parochial church council raising similar objections to the request, hence the reason why I need to be prepared should I attmept the name inclusion John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will O'Brien Posted 2 February , 2004 Share Posted 2 February , 2004 I do wonder how receptive the church is going to be to have the name added. Will I would have thought that the church, as the reprentatives of christian love and forgiveness would be only too pleased to have a "black sheep" returned to the flock. Andy Andy..............You would have hoped so....................however (and apologies here in advance to anyone offended by this).............personally on more than one occasion in my life I have found 'the church' to be intolerant, biased and somewhat two faced..................given this I could quite see them declining John's request purely on the basis that Archibald Brown was a SAD case................I think it's a case of wait and see how John gets on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john w. Posted 2 February , 2004 Author Share Posted 2 February , 2004 I too have reservations hence my wanting to get all the info together first. I have his trial papers, service record was lost. I want to find out if there are family descendants still living I have a fear so that knowing the church it may be what my mum would call high C of E. I dont know the Parochial Church Council members. I will prepare my case carefully before embarking on what may be a major paradigmn shift for some. I still accept the arguments folks dont get me wrong John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon R Posted 2 February , 2004 Share Posted 2 February , 2004 I think you're being perfectly reasonable in your approach and welcome your caution. I would present all this as a fait accompli - the more people you have on your 'side' e.g. English Heritage re: conservation issues, faculty jurisdiction etc, WFA if they can comment (not sure), living relatives, CWGC opinions, the better. Why not even find a sympathetic bishop? Precedents and other examples would be useful. Best of luck. It's an adventure in any event. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul guthrie Posted 2 February , 2004 Share Posted 2 February , 2004 A personal view: the family should not have the right to deny the nation or community the memorilization of its dead. 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