Military Cross Mystery?

Discussion in 'Military History and Militaria' started by barbs, Feb 21, 2011.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Ladies and gentlemen,

    I while ago I mentioned an issue with an MC which was in my family's possession but which was not one of the MCs which we knew could be attributed to a family member. I have tried the family name (and similars) against the Gazette and come up with nothing.

    Can any of you out there come up with another avenue for investigation, please?

    The rear of the MC is inscribed with "7th June 1917 MESSINES", I know this is unusual since official dating didn't come into effect until 1937 (and that was only the year of award).
  2. Have you tried the medal roll in the National Archive? Alternatively if you found out which regiments were there you could look in their battle notes also at National Archive a bit laborious and a long shot but might get a result

    Happy hunting!
  3. That's generally my view, but it's not always the best way. This page from Nov 1917 is mostly a list of people awarded the MC, and does not contain service numbers. Also the Gazette search engine doesn't always find things even if you have the right information.
  4. Thanks for the replies.

    Slightly more information has come forward that it might be awarded to an Australian...
  5. Messines Ridge - 7th June 1917

    The Battle of Messines 7 June 1917
  6. Have you tried the British Medal Forum if they cant help they will know someone who might be able to
  7. On using the number as a means to finding a soldier, the advice already given is generally sound, but a point to note is that due to the amounts of troops involved, numbers were often duplicated from regiment to regiment. There could feasibly be two soldiers who had the same number, and occasionally name but served with two different units. All very confusing to the researcher. If this chap was a regular prior to the outbreak of war, he may well have had a four digit number originally. These were later changed to six, because of the confusion caused by the old numbering system. That said, the updated system still had numbers duplicated as above, but was much better overall. If you can establish if he was a regular prior to the war, and which regiment he served with that will definitely help in your search as you will have two references to go by...Good luck!