Australian Service Numbers

[edergole]

I hope some of the 'Australian' experts can help on this one.

I'm no expert on British Service numbers but it seems that on enlistment at a recruiting station an individual was immediately given the next number on the 'list' for that regiment and he became for example no 5555 and the fellow who came after him no 5556.

Having researched one Australian Unit the numbering seems to have been undertaken in a fundamentally different way. The original nominal roles run from for example 6900 through to 6990 in alphabetical order of recruits. It seems therefore that when the men signed up they were sent to a holding camp/training camp before being assigned to a unit and only at this stage were service numbers handed out. In this particular unit the dates of enlistment vary from July 1915 to September 1915 yet the alphabetical listing and number sequences run together. Clearly the numbers could not have been assigned until the last man joined otherwise the numbers would run out of sequence. The method would appear to suggest that for a period of time after enlistment a man could have no number which must have made administration difficult...or was there an interim number given?

Any one any idea on the Australian practice for issue of service numbers?

By way of illustration

Name No Enlistment Date

Green 6956 3/7/15

Hickey 6957 8/8/15

Higgins 6958 3/7/15

If Higgins joined with Green their numbers wouldn't be in sequence as Hickey is between them alphabetically.

Hoping I've mad myself clear?

Joe

[edergole]

Clearly in the wrong topic!!

Can someone help me out and move this to 'idiots corner'.

Thanks

Joe

[jim_davies]

Joe,

I can't really help you with regard to the Aussie service numbers, but I have come across similar patterns when looking at the Lincolnshire Regt numbers.

For example with Aug 1914 volunteers to the 4th Lincolns, there are a number of alphabetical blocks of men. It would appear that these men enlisted at the same time, and their numbers were given based on surname. Same with a block of transfers from the Leics in late 1914. The pattern gets weaker as the war progresses.

In your example, is it possible that the men attested on a certain date, but did not actually join the battalion until later.

Jim

[Andrew P]

Hi Joe

The service numbers were given to them once they had been assigned to a unit.

In my research of soldiers from Fremantle in Western Australia, I have a few who died of illness while they were at the depot awaiting assignment and so they don't have service numbers.

Each battalion started at Number 1 and went up from there.

For the original battalions who started in 1914 towards the end of the war they were getting towards the service number 8000.

You will also find quite a few who have an a or b after their number. This signifies that this person has transferred into a unit who already has a person with their number i.e

Corporal Harry Conway originally had the service number 1806.

He enlisted on the 17/04/16 and was assigned to the 2nd reinforcement group to the 44th Bn. In England 40 men of this reinforcement group were transferrd to the 33rd Battalion. As their already was a soldier with that service number in this unit, Conway's number became 1806a. He was later killed on the 12/10/17

In 1918 instead of each unit having a reinforcement group come out from Australia, they started to send General Reinforcement Groups. These had a different 5 figure numbering. I think they started at about 50000 and kept going higher. As an example, Herbert Wright who enlisted on the 21/06/18 was assigned to the 3rd General Reinforcements. His service number was 62894. As he was at sea when the wear ended his troopship was recalled, otherwise these 1918 men were generally assigned to units once they got to their England training camps.

Hope this helps.

Andrew