Medal Card

[Stuart Bates]

I bought the medal card that goes with my latest Wolseley to a Frederick G Rance of the Royal Berkshire regiment. As usual it does not give much information and rarely do they give the theatre of service post 1916. Anyway can anyone decipher the line - '165/W/R Berks R/ 1- 68 & CL Way 1921- 1924.'

The helmet has 'India 1921' and 'Mesopotamia 1921' inked to the interior.

Stuart

Edited January 18, 2008 by Stuart Bates

[Guest Rick Research]

& Cl(asp) Waz(iristan) 1921-24.

? 1st Bn 68th (Punjabis?)

[Ed_Haynes]

Yes, Rick, that might be what it is, from the teeny-tiny scan of the card, as opposed to the GIGANTIC hat-scan .

Although, as an apparent private, his attachment to an Indian Army regiment seems very very (even incredibly) odd indeed. Indian army regiments had no use for European enlisted personnel (not to mention others...).

With a legible scan of the MIC some useful information might be available.

Edited January 18, 2008 by Ed_Haynes

[Stuart Bates]

Rick,

the 'y' could very well be a 'z' and the British frequently mounted punitive campaigns into Waziristan up 'til 1945. The 1st Battalion Royal Berks of the time served as follows-

1919 - Iraq

1920 - Persia

1921 - India, Bareilly

1921 - NW Frontier

1923 - Razmak

1925 - Lucknow

1927 - Fyzabad

etc, and returned to England 1933/34

Ed,

I and a friend enlarged the graphic and both came up with the text stated above. You could always save the image and magnify it yourself to satisfy your concerns. Is it not true that British NCOs were attached to Indian Army units? As to Privates well who knows?

Stuart

[Peter_Suciu]

Yes, Rick, that might be what it is, from the teeny-tiny scan of the card, as opposed to the GIGANTIC hat-scan .

Although, as an apparent private, his attachment to an Indian Army regiment seems very very (even incredibly) odd indeed. Indian army regiments had no use for European enlisted personnel (not to mention others...).

Ed--

I don't know what you mean by "had no use for..." because I don't believe that is the case. As Stuart mentioned there were most certainly NCOs from Europe in the Indian army. While it was uncommon attachments from one's regiment to another for special service was never unheard in the British military.

[Stuart Bates]

Ed,

something I missed in light of your pejorative statements on the size of the attachments I posted and your selection of an emoticon. Who ever said that Private Rance was attached to an Indian Regiment? All of the information that I provided has him serving in the Royal Berkshires.

Why do you consistently appear so anti-British?

Stuart

[Ed_Haynes]

Rick had suggested in his original post that the card had something to do with the 68th Punjabis (which regiment, by the way, mutinied at Bareilly on 31 May 1857, and was not re-raised). It was unusual, but a few NCOs may on occasion have been attached to Indian infantry regiments by the end of the 19th century, most commonly in a training or educational role (teaching English, for example). Most tasks, Indian personnel could perform quite well for themselves. Attachments to what artillery that was allowed to exist in the Indian army was more common, as such technical knowledge was denied to Indians after 1857. I have never seen enlisted personnel so attached in any regiment.

My guess is that this information on the MIC (and these are usually muddy enough to begin with, even when presented large enough to read) is simply a reference to the voume, page, and line in the original rolls where the award of his medal is given. The reverses, uncopied, have details on where the medal was sent. I think parts of these original rolls are now at the NA and it may be worth checking it, but if all you have is his hat and not his medal(s), it probably won't be worth the effort unless you are already at Kew for some other reason.

(I am, by the way not "anti-British"; I am merely anti-imperialist and opposed to many of the ideas that came along with that system.)

[Michael Johnson]

I think it is the reference to the IGS 1908 medal roll for the Royal Berkshires, and gives the cl[asp] earned - Waz[iristan] 1921-24.

Edited January 18, 2008 by Michael Johnson

[Graham Stewart]

His regimental numbers are also "a*rse about face" on his MIC, as the bottom number 55399 is his original R.Berks number and the top number 5329895, is his 1920 R.Berkshire number and it was part of the new regimental block numbering system. In this case the R.Berks were issued block numbers 5328001 - 5373000.

The first number in the R.Berks 55399 is not a 1914 number either and certainly looks to be a number issued much later in the war. So this lad may actually be either a transfer or young conscript into the R.Berks opting to takeup regular service post 1918.

Graham.

[Ed_Haynes]

Good point, Graham. We need to remember that these cards were filled out when the medals were issued, and not at the time the service was rendered. And this could be many years later, long after various regimental reorganizations took place. These changes can also be reflected in medal naming, as it ofter reflects the situation when the medals were issued rather than when the service happened. The variance in pre-1922 and post-1922 regimental names (and service numbers) on things like the GSM or IGS08 is a source of great "entertainment" for Indian Army collectors.

[Colonel Rothe]

Good point, Graham. We need to remember that these cards were filled out when the medals were issued, and not at the time the service was rendered. And this could be many years later, long after various regimental reorganizations took place. These changes can also be reflected in medal naming, as it ofter reflects the situation when the medals were issued rather than when the service happened. The variance in pre-1922 and post-1922 regimental names (and service numbers) on things like the GSM or IGS08 is a source of great "entertainment" for Indian Army collectors.

British Army personnel being seconded to the India Army was in fact quite common in the Great War. My own grandfather went from the 2/5th Somerset Light Infantry to the 3/9th Bhopal Infantry in 1918/19, serving a sergeant in the Indian Army as a Lewis Gun instructor. Interestingly, whilst he wore a 3/9th Bhopal puggaree flash upon his Wolseley helmet, he retained his Somerset Light Infantry shoulder titles.

Also seconded from the 2/5th Somerset Light Infantry was my grandafather's fellow soldier, Bert Rendall, who joined, in 1917, as a corporal the Indian Army's 2nd Mechanical Transport Company as a lorry driver. He served through top 1920.

I believe that British soldiers being attached to the Indian Army was reasonably common. This would undoubtedly have saved the Indian Government money in reducing the numbers of Indian Army officers needed. The native army also undoubtedly benefitted from being stiffened up by British soldiers.

I am unsure that British soldiers ever taught the native army how to speak English; a more pressing need was to teach them how to use machine guns and the like.

At its lowest ebb during the Great War, the Indian sub-continent was ruled by as few as 15,000 British soldiers.

Chris Mills.

[leigh kitchen]

Interesting that the actual serial number stamped on the medal isn't indicated, such details as applied to various of a mans medals usually being indicated by a system of crosses & dots etc on his card.

[Stuart Bates]

Leigh,

can you elaborate on the system of crosses & dots and/or is there a reference book that you can recommend? Can you post an example of a medal card showing the system in operation?

Stuart

[leigh kitchen]

I don't think that there was a system as such laid down, but when there's more than one serial number or rank etc noted on a MIC, handwritten symbols are placed next to the serial number or rank, & the medal on which those details appear, often a cross, a cross with a dot in each quarter, that sort of thing.

I will post an example, a MIC to a man of 4th Bn Royal Fusiliers, showing two or three different serial numbers & ranks of L/Cpl & Sgt 7 how they were applied to DCM, 1914 Star, VM & BWM, GSM Iraq & IGSM Waziristan 1921-24, the combinations indicated by "noughts & crosses".

[leigh kitchen]

I forgot to say that Michael's right in his interpretation of the entry as "IGS........Cl Waz 1921-24" a reference to entitlement to the Indian General Service Medal with Clasp Waziristan 1921 -24.

The man whose MIC I said I'd post has a similar entry for the same medal & clasp.

[Tony]

Stuart,

Here's an example of the cross with dots; next to the Victory medal and the rank of Captain. I don't know if it means his Star and BWM were also named to the same rank.

I think Leigh will be able to explain.

Tony

[leigh kitchen]

His Star should show his rank at the time he qualified for it, which was Lance Sergeant, the BWM & VM should show him as Captain.

[Stuart Bates]

Thanks to both of you for the example and information. It certainly is an arcane area.

Stuart

[leigh kitchen]

The MIC that I said I'd put up has finally been put on "ancestry", a matter of days ago (either that or I just could'nt find it before), I only had a black & white paper copy of it before from the National Archives microfiche.

It's a good example of different symbols being used to denote which ranks & serial numbers go on which medals - 1914 Star trio, GSM "Iraq" & IGSM "Waziristan 1921 - 24" in this case & also that the initials of gallantry awards are'nt always shown on the basic MIC - this mans 1916 awarded DCM is'nt noted whereas Tony's MIC shows the initials MM for the award of that medal.

Sometimes the initials of gallantry awards were actually impressed as part of the recipients details on other awards, but not in the case of Sgt Gardner.

Edited June 5, 2008 by leigh kitchen

[Graham Stewart]

Medal Index Cards are really no more than that, an Index Card which guides you to the relevant pages of the Medal Roll Books. The information that both of these sources contain refer only to units that the recipient served overseas with and not units served at home with. All of tht relevent information is contained in the History Sheet of their service records, many of which were destroyed during the Blitz. These records are often referred to as 'unburnt' or 'burnt series records', and often the 'unburnt' records are referred to as "Pension Documents". This is infact incorrect as they are a mans service records, which were sent to the Ministry of Pensions for claims processing only and thus were fortunate enough to escape destruction. Examination of any of these records show how invaluable they are to researchers and I have examined many of those to the Northumberland Fusiliers and find them a great source of information. Sadly unlike Australia we have never had the cash resources which could see the records digitalised and sorted(some are mixed up) which would make them more readable. Currently they are stored in climate controlled conditions in a salt mine somewhere in Cheshire and not at the National Archive.