Moderator Control Panel ]

Thomas Cattell. Royal Warwicks. Regt.

Having trouble tracking down a wartime ancestor? Share your queries – and help fellow researchers – here

Re: Thomas Cattell. Royal Warwicks. Regt.

Postby teddygreen1 » Sun Sep 06, 2015 8:30 pm

thanks again for your replies. it appears that my grand dad brothers bertie was in the suffolk and charles henry was in the r a m c ?? mind you my great great grandad albert phillips was in the duke of conwall light infantry but thats another story
teddygreen1
 
Posts: 38
Joined: Tue Aug 25, 2015 6:03 pm

Re: Thomas Cattell. Royal Warwicks. Regt.

Postby ianbee » Sun Sep 06, 2015 10:08 pm

Thanks a lot, Adrian. I was being a bit naive there, thinking that maybe they got their numbers when they enlisted, on the spot! Logistically impossible I would imagine, as they were joining up in many different places at the same time. Ah well, as you have demonstrated, it does seem certain that Thomas joined the army in October 1916.

And a real spot of good fortune for you Kath, finding that absent voters list! If only there were more of them still around.
Ian
ianbee
 
Posts: 2286
Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2010 4:51 pm

Re: Thomas Cattell. Royal Warwicks. Regt.

Postby AdrianB38 » Sun Sep 06, 2015 11:41 pm

Definitely logistically impossible. Like you I originally thought that the recruiting sergeant went out with a stack of numbers in his bag. Then I found a relative joining something called the Sportsman's Battalion - he was something like number 49, say. Numbers 48 and 50 were recruited in London - he joined up in Oxford and there was little time between the three of them. It could only have worked if the numbers were allocated later. I would warn you that I'm being logical about all this, rather than reading dusty old procedures filed somewhere in Kew if at all. However, when you have eliminated the impossible, as Sherlock said. .....

Sent from my GT-I8190N
Adrian
AdrianB38
 
Posts: 2516
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2010 4:07 pm

Re: Thomas Cattell. Royal Warwicks. Regt.

Postby ss002d6252 » Tue Sep 08, 2015 5:05 pm

Numbering is a pain.

With territorials, for example, some handed out batches of numbers to local drill halls to use and some centralised the numbering at the main depot. At the depot men could be numbered in alphabetical batches, sometimes a weeks worth of forms sorted together, or they could be numbered in the order the forms arrived at the depot - I've seen some battalions chop and change.

Knowing that #1100 is next to #1001 numerically doesn't tell you anything other than they were numbered sequentially - they may or may not have been men who enlisted together or at the same place. By looking at large batches of men you can sometimes get the gist of how the battalion numbered men but it's a long haul if you want to try that route (trust me on that).

Craig
ss002d6252
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2015 6:21 pm

Re: Thomas Cattell. Royal Warwicks. Regt.

Postby AdrianB38 » Tue Sep 08, 2015 6:42 pm

Craig - many thanks for the different possibilities of numbering. I guess that number blocks allocated to drill halls isn't that far away from my original presumption that the number was applied at the point of attestation. It was the example of the Sportsman's Battalion that convinced me that was impossible. My mistake was to presume that there was only one method!

Having said all that, even with the variance in the different methods you describe, I think it's probably still true to say that Thomas Cattell joined up in early October - probably. We can't be more accurate than that. And that in the absence of his papers, we'll never know for certain.

Sent from my GT-I8190N
Adrian
AdrianB38
 
Posts: 2516
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2010 4:07 pm

Re: Thomas Cattell. Royal Warwicks. Regt.

Postby teddygreen1 » Thu Sep 17, 2015 11:01 am

thanks to all who replied
kath
teddygreen1
 
Posts: 38
Joined: Tue Aug 25, 2015 6:03 pm

Previous

Return to Military help


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest