John.
I keep finding a vague ref to 111th of foot ( Loyal Birmingham Volunteers).Which may have a link to rwf. but can not find much about them, except that they may have been much to early to be relevant in this. any ideas.
ivor
Printable View
John.
I keep finding a vague ref to 111th of foot ( Loyal Birmingham Volunteers).Which may have a link to rwf. but can not find much about them, except that they may have been much to early to be relevant in this. any ideas.
ivor
There were two, ivor, both in existence for short periods in the 18th century. We do not know how old Terry's certificate is, but it is unlikely that it is that old. Moreover, to the best of my knowledge neither had anything at all to do with the RWF.
Nice find, though.
John
With poor writing and bad ink and pen it could be IN (ie the middle of the N is not there
The most likely explanation, Dave. But we'll have to see a scan first.
John
Bit of a hangover this morning; that + watching a lot of sport means I haven't looked at anything today, till now when I'm off to bed.
It is definitely 111. He was in 1st Bat RWF and married just before he went to France; killed in 1915.
Morning all.
Found a ref to an:-
11th (Service) Btn formed in Wrexham on 18th Oct 1914. which went out to France early Sept 1915 but was at Salonika by 5th Nov 15.
Not sure how this stuff works, but could there have been a 1/11 (service)Btn. Or would the 11th (service) Btn be attached to the 1St Btn ?
hi again.
Just found this. makes interesting reading especially the account of the Welsh assault on Grand Couronne.
http://www.1914-1918.net/salonika.htm
Total Respect for some Very Brave Men.
ivor.
Sorry, Ivor, no to both. The '1/' prefix was only used by the TF as they formed 2nd and 3rd Line bns from the existing bns. And Service bns were not attached to Regular bns. The 11th was forming in Wales. the 1st was fighting for its life in Belgium.Quote:
Originally Posted by vori101
John
john.
thanks for the above. This link, which i am sure you know about is quite informative.
http://www.1914-1918.net/rwf.htm
as i am finding ref's to Co's eg 112/13/14. is it possible that this no refers to the Co that he was with.
ivor
I've seen that page, Ivor, yes. I's informative and even gives more info than Brig James does in his British Regiments.
Coy: very unlikely. In the Great War the RWF used letters. There were coys with three digit numbers, but they were Labour Corps, Royal Defence Corps and such.
Anyway, without a copy of the certificate this is all conjecture.
John