Jump to content

Help with Waterloo Medal


Recommended Posts

Nothing on the man himself, but here's a little info. (from Gordon's British battles and Medals:

The 1st Battalion, 40th Regiment of Foot served in the 10th British Brigade (Maj.-Gen. Sir John Lambert), alonside the 4th and 27th Reg'ts. The 10th Bde was part of the 6th Division under Lieut.-Gen. Hon. Sir L. Cole.

The 40th had 761 men entitled to the Waterloo Medal and their casualties were as follows:

2 officers killed; 10 officers wounded

30 rank & file killed 159 R & F wounded 18 R&F missing, for total casualties of 219

BTW, 12 officers killed and wounded would be, I'm guessing, a fairly high percentage of the officers present, so there is a good chance your man was one of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing on the man himself, but here's a little info. (from Gordon's British battles and Medals:

The 1st Battalion, 40th Regiment of Foot served in the 10th British Brigade (Maj.-Gen. Sir John Lambert), alonside the 4th and 27th Reg'ts. The 10th Bde was part of the 6th Division under Lieut.-Gen. Hon. Sir L. Cole.

The 40th had 761 men entitled to the Waterloo Medal and their casualties were as follows:

2 officers killed; 10 officers wounded

30 rank & file killed 159 R & F wounded 18 R&F missing, for total casualties of 219

BTW, 12 officers killed and wounded would be, I'm guessing, a fairly high percentage of the officers present, so there is a good chance your man was one of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Peter,

I have just downloaded the complete list of men who served in the 1st Batt, 40th Reg of Foot - form the National Archives website.

There too is no mention of a Lieut. Quinwall. In fact a of search all the Archives on the website for the name Quinwall, comes back with a zero. I can only assume that the medal is a re-name. Unless, you can help point me in another direction, or have another idea as to why he is not on the list. This medal was going to be my first purchase in this area - an area in which I must admit I know very little.

Thanks for the info, it is appreciated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Qwinwall: There was an Ensign J. L. Wall in the 40th in 1815 (1815 Army List). He is also on the Medal Roll, appearing in Captain E. C. Bowen's company. This is the closest match I can find in this Regiment, but a medal to this man, would be named to 'Ensign'. Also searched 'Quin*' in the entire 1815 Army List, and found no close matches to any Army Officer. Without seeing the medal and the naming, I feel the medal (real or fake), has been renamed to a person who was not entitled to the medal. Two additional checks you can make - these medals were 'impressed' with the recipient's name, not 'engraved', which should be easy to spot. Another test is to balance the medal on it's edge, on a flat surface. Renames tend to fall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Qwinwall: There was an Ensign J. L. Wall in the 40th in 1815 (1815 Army List). He is also on the Medal Roll, appearing in Captain E. C. Bowen's company. This is the closest match I can find in this Regiment, but a medal to this man, would be named to 'Ensign'. Also searched 'Quin*' in the entire 1815 Army List, and found no close matches to any Army Officer. Without seeing the medal and the naming, I feel the medal (real or fake), has been renamed to a person who was not entitled to the medal. Two additional checks you can make - these medals were 'impressed' with the recipient's name, not 'engraved', which should be easy to spot. Another test is to balance the medal on it's edge, on a flat surface. Renames tend to fall.

Nobody of that name on the Waterloo Roll

Paul

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here are the scans of the medal. I picked it from a local newspaper classified advert and did'nt pay too much for it either. So, if it is a dud you won't hurt my feelings. Any comments are as always greatly appreciated.

Graphic1.jpg

waterloomedaledge.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunately the medal itself is a copy as it does not have the engraver's signature (T. Wyon). The naming is totally in corrct it shold be officially impressed whereas this is engraved. I''m glad you didn't spend a great deal on it. If I didn't know better I would suggest that this was an ex E-Bay starting off the description with "I don't know what this is..." In future you are better to go to reputable dealers or auction houses where if something goes wrong you always have some recourse.

All the best,

Paul

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the reply Paul, I really value the opinions of the members on this forum.

Are the missing engravers signature, and wrong lettering, on these kind of medals the only signs that destinguish the fakes from the real thing? Or are there other tell tale signs that exist that would betray a fake. I believe from reading other threads that it was not uncommon for people to re-engrave and re-name these medals (any medals for that matter). What signs would one look for in such a case. In other words how would one destinguish an original re-named medal from an out-right fake?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A renamed medal will normally show some signs, as a reasonable amount of metal has to be filed off to obliterate the original naming. This means that the bottom of the medal will not be as round as the rest of the disk. Also look at the botom edge from the side. Often the edge will look more like ) than |.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

I've just joined the Club and I noticed this topic while trawling through the older posts.

Ensign J L Wall and Lieut John Quin Wall are the same person.

In his early service he is recorded consistently as J L Wall in the Army Lists, London Gazette and Waterloo medal roll. The 1817 War Office Army List shows him as Lieut J L Wall on half pay of 40th Foot and gives his seniority as 19 July 1815. However, in the 1836 War Office Army List he is listed as Lieut John Quin Wall serving in the 98th Foot. The 1836 list gives his seniority date as 19 July 1815 and he is marked as having served at Waterloo. Moreover, in the medal roll for the Military General Service (MGS) Medal (awarded 1848) he is shown under the roll for the 40th Foot as Lieut J Q Wall entitled to a medal with 6 clasps (Vittoria, Pyrenees, Nivelle, Nive Orthes and Toulouse). He is mentioned in the War Office Monthly Army List for November 1852 as having previously been a Captain in the 89th Regt. The MGS Medal roll additionally shows that Wall commenced his military career as a Volunteer in the 53rd Foot before being granted an Ensigncy in the 40th Foot.

Paul

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Paul,

Could it be that this medal was originally engraved as Ensign J L WALL, then later changed to LIEUT JOHN QUIN ///// WALL?

If you look at the scan below a very faint L can be seen in front of WALL.

waterloomedaledge-1.jpg

If so, why on earth would anyone got to so much hassle on a fake medal?? Taking into account that the name John Quin Wall does not appear on the Waterloo Medal role. Why erase the name that does appear and re-name it with a name that does not!!!

Very strange... maybe some people just have too much time on their hands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As mentioned earlier in this thread your medal is not an official issue. Therefore, the question is was the medal made up to deceive collectors or was it Wall himself (or a relative) who obtained it and had it named up as you see it today. The chances are that we will never know for sure.

If the medal was meant to deceive it would have been safer (for the faker) to use the rank/name as it appeared on the medal roll. It is interesting to speculate whether Wall lost his original official issue medal and the one you now hold was an unofficial replacement obtained later on. Wall was still serving in the army till at least the early 1840s so he needed to have a Waterloo medal to wear with his uniform.

I have found the following reference to Wall's death which occurred on 12 May 1850 as reported in the Colburn's United Service Magazine for 1850:

"May 12, at Tralee Barracks, aged 58, Captain John Quin Wall, late 89th Regiment, and Barrack-Master at Tralee."

Paul

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...