Chris Boonzaier Posted March 3, 2007 Share Posted March 3, 2007 ..considered a wound?I assume yes but for all the documents I have everyone who got a wound badge seemed to have been wounded by shrapnel or bullet as well .....I have groups to folks who were gassed, but without wound badge... maybe they simoly did not apply? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roeland Posted March 3, 2007 Share Posted March 3, 2007 the wound badge is awarded to those wounded by gas,and it cleary states that every soldier that lost his health in the war while on military duty should receive a wound badge(so not just because of shooting or bombarding), I just wonder how many people survived when they breath the gas(immediate or later), therefore they are probably extremely rare and that's why you hardly see them.I don't know why your groups don't have a wound badge, have you looked up what they received(because maybe the badge and document where lost but it was noticed in government archive). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dond Posted March 3, 2007 Share Posted March 3, 2007 Actually the chemical weapons of WW1 were not as deadly as one would think. Of all fatalities during the war less than 4% were from gas (US Army statistics from studies after the war). Far more people were incapacitated though so you would expect to see more awards for it. Of course how many gas victims were also wounded by bullets, shrapnel etc at the same time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leigh kitchen Posted March 3, 2007 Share Posted March 3, 2007 Gassing apparently did'nt qualify for award of the British wound stripe.Neither did shell shock or the officers version of shell shock, neuresthenia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roeland Posted March 3, 2007 Share Posted March 3, 2007 that is something I find somewhat strange, wounded by gas which is seen as done by the enemy, or shell shock which was seen as deserting and you could get shot for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Boonzaier Posted March 3, 2007 Author Share Posted March 3, 2007 the wound badge is awarded to those wounded by gas,and it cleary states that every soldier that lost his health in the war while on military duty should receive a wound badge(so not just because of shooting or bombarding), I just wonder how many people survived when they breath the gas(immediate or later), therefore they are probably extremely rare and that's why you hardly see them.I don't know why your groups don't have a wound badge, have you looked up what they received(because maybe the badge and document where lost but it was noticed in government archive).Hi,Wound badges only appeared in 1918. Many men who were gassed in 16-17 seen never to have applied for the wound badge, any number of them had already changed units in the meantime.Also, there is a difference between lightly gassed and heavily gassed. some folks who were sick after a small whiff of gas were back in service a day or two later.There must be a hard and fast rule as not everyone who was gassed was "REALLY" gassed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leigh kitchen Posted March 3, 2007 Share Posted March 3, 2007 The German ones? They were created by Royal Decree on 3/3/18.The French Insignes des Blesses Militaire ribbon with red enamel star was introduced 22/7/16, but apparently was disliked by the troops who preferred to purchase one of the unofficial Medailles Blesses Militaires big red enamelled stars suspended from the same pattern of ribbon, which were produced from 1919 or 1920?The unofficial Medaille Des Blesse Civils De Guerre was produced 1918? The British Disabled & Discharged Scroll was introduced in 1916, the Silver Wound Badge the same year - the SWB could be awarded for wounds, sickness (other than caused by misconduct) & old age - so you could get discharged through wounds / ill health having been gassed, but would'nt get the wound stripe for being gassed.The wound stripe may have been awarded for gassing for it's first month or so after introduction, but after that it was'nt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leigh kitchen Posted March 3, 2007 Share Posted March 3, 2007 Why am I waffling on about British & French wound insignia in a thread on German Imperial?I'll keep quiet & go back to the Brit & Commonwealth bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Boonzaier Posted March 19, 2007 Author Share Posted March 19, 2007 So, going through my groups, I have a back wound badge document that was awarded to a guy for being gassed and a US purple heart for a gas victim as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kev in Deva Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 (edited) Hallo Gents, in the book " Wound Medals, Insignia And Next of Kin Awards Of The Great War" by Arthur H. Houstan & Vicken Koundakjian, on page 85, under Germany it states:By a Royal Decree of 3 March, 1918, published in the Army Gazette (Armee-Verordnungsblatt) for 9 March 1918, The Emperor Wilhelm II created the Army Wound Badge.The enabling statute reads "In extraordinary appreciation I wish to confer a special badge of recognition on all those soldiers who have been wounded (lost blood) for the Fatherland and those who have lost their health during service against the enemy and have been invalided from service. The Ministry of War will issue the required orders and regulations . . . "Shortly thereafter, on the 11 March, 1918, the King of Bavaria authorised the award of this essentially Prussian insignia to Bavarian servicemen under the regulations to be promulgated by the Minister of War.Part of the Articles states. . . "that such insignia can be validly conferred only during the receipient's lifetime; i.e., such badges were apparantly not given posthumously or bestowed upon the next-of-kin.Kevin in Deva. Edited March 19, 2007 by Kev in Deva Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Rick Research Posted March 19, 2007 Share Posted March 19, 2007 Lt dR Dillner's document for 2 wounds:While the reverse notations are almost certianly in his own hand for preserving the memory of where and when, the gassing is one of his two wounds:My mom had a history teacher so badly gassed that he had to keep the schoolroom windows open all winter due to barely survivable lung function, while the children sat there writing with their mittens on. People forget how debilitating this type of wound was. I had a great-uncle who had been gassed while wounded which so unhinged him that while he "survived" he was never mentally the same again and eventually wandered off some years after the war and was never heard of again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Boonzaier Posted March 19, 2007 Author Share Posted March 19, 2007 That is one very nice document indeed !!!!!I just finished reading an article about a few hundred men of the 476th Infantry Regiment, they were in a tunnel where the exit was collapsed by a 400mm French shell. Gas got into the tunnel and the men were trapped.... the first lot where taken out in the 1930s, the next lot in the 70s.... terrible death... must have been terrifying moments dying deep in the side of a mountain...http://lced.org/div_04.php Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Boonzaier Posted March 19, 2007 Author Share Posted March 19, 2007 321 bodies taken out of the mountain.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Boonzaier Posted February 13, 2009 Author Share Posted February 13, 2009 Still puzzling.... when was "Being gassed" gassed enough to qualify for a wound badge?A full lungs worth of green cross gas? A slight wiff of Yellow cross? Burning eyes from some blue cross?There must have been some hard and fast rule........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dond Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 Maybe you had to require medical treatment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Rick Research Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 The Soviets basically didn't consider a wound a wound unless hospitalizatuion resulted. That could have been the standard for consideration. If you could remain in the unit, eh. 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