9 replies to this topic

[ss002d6252]

Is anyone aware of whether the relevant Army Orders for the 1917 renumbering specified how men should be renumbered within a battalion  e.g did it specify that only men active service should be allocated numbers from the lowest numbers with a later range reserved for those men on detached duties or in hospital.

The reason I've asked is that the 6th DLI numbered all men with the battalion from 250000 however those men who appear to have been in hospital at that time were numbered in a range from 251000 upwards, was a similar method adopted elsewhere and was it mandated in an order?

[Graham Stewart]

 a ACI 2414 - Dec 1916 - Copy (Copy).jpg   27.52K   25 downloads

ACI 2414 od December 1916.

[Graham Stewart]

 b ACI 2414 - Dec 1916 - Copy (Copy).jpg   54.86K   9 downloads

 c ACI 2414 - Dec 1916 - Copy (Copy).jpg   55.32K   9 downloads

 d ACI 2414 - Dec 1916 - Copy (Copy).jpg   54.48K   7 downloads

 e ACI 2414 - Dec 1916 - Copy (Copy).jpg   55.71K   8 downloads

[Graham Stewart]

 f ACI 2414 - Dec 1916 - Copy (Copy).jpg   94.65K   3 downloads

[ss002d6252]

Thanks Graham

[Graham Stewart]

ss002d6252, on 19 June 2012 - 07:41 PM, said:

Thanks Graham

Was it readable? If not send me your e.mail address and I'll send it across. If the Durham's followed the renumbering in-line with the NF, they did it on an 'attestation' basis using the men's records - remember you had two sets of service records(One set remained with your Depot and the other set travelled with you). So those that had served the longest, got the lowest new six figure number.

[ss002d6252]

I could read it but an email copy would be much appreciated.

Quote

So those that had served the longest, got the lowest new six figure number.

That;s what happened with the 6th DLI in the 250XXX range but the men in the 251XXX range appear to be men who where not actively with the battalion in 1917 (e.g in hospital or on attachment elsewhere) and weren't numbered in the normal manner even though, in principal, they should have been (example #2733 was re-numbered #251975 but #2730 was #250261 and #2745 was #250263)

[kevrow]

I suppose there may be an ACI in early 1917 that refined the earlier ones. ACI 126 of 21st Jan. 1917 changed those numbers for the 1st Cambs. Regt., 1st Hereford Regt. and the Highland Cyclist Battalion for example. Just a thought.

Kevin

[David Porter]

I must say that I have found differences in the way certain County Associations renumbered the RHA. Most are based on attestation date, as Graham says, but Leicester and Nottingham batteries renumbered all the 1st line then the 2nd line then the 3rd line.in rank order and alphabetically for each rank. The reserves, those in hospital or on munitions work are usually last on the list. This does make things more complicated as men would have moved after the renumbering depending on fitness.

[Graham Stewart]

 (g)ACI 126 - 21st Jan 1917.jpg   35.58K   0 downloads

Kevin - You mean this one - ACI 126 of 21st January 1917