Attached is Medal Roll showing units. 20th Divisional Cyclist Company is one unit. The other is XIV Corps Divisional Cyclist Battalion.
As per here
Army Cyclist Corps - The Long, Long Trail
Attached is Medal Roll showing units. 20th Divisional Cyclist Company is one unit. The other is XIV Corps Divisional Cyclist Battalion.
As per here
Army Cyclist Corps - The Long, Long Trail
Just to add to what Mark Said, the likely reason for this is that the medals were issued, usually by post with the madals in paper packets and the ribbons folded separately in the box.
It is very easy to assume that the recipients, who by and large were not regular career soldiers, would have known which medal went with which ribbon. This is especially so when you consider that most of them did not remain in the service where such errors would have been avoided. The matter is of course compounded if the recipient did not survive to mount the medals. So, there is an argument for leaving them as they were found!
Regards
Mark
"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing he cares more about than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature with no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."
Thanks Mark for the info,top stuff,just out of curiosity i noticed on the bay there's quite a few trio sets up for grabs,are these quite common sets in todays market place?as i thought a pair was good but a trio was quite rare,either way having my surname these beauties are staying with me,thanks again Mark and to everyone thats taken the time to chip in.
The trio is generally more sought after than the pair. However the difference is the 1914 -1915 star which means the recipient was an earlier starter than one without the star. However, a recpient of a pair may have had more of a rough time just later. A similar distinction might be made in the case of the variant to the star which is the 1914 or "Mons" star which would make the recipient an "Old contemptible" (a member of what the Kaiser called "That contemtible little army"), now such a trio really is sought after. But I would suggest that the interest is in the man and his experiences rather than just a date.
Regards
Mark
"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing he cares more about than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature with no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."
A lovely grouping! Thanks for sharing!
Beautiful patina to medals, been stored well for the past 100 years !
Well bugger me, I've found his service record.
PM me your email address and I'll send it on, there's nothing juicy in there but at least you'll have his movements which will help with your research.
An example is attached showing his only war wound.
Tony
Good work Tony!!
Thanks but although the number and unit fit, I've just noticed the only page showing his full name has him down as Alfred. However, after cross checking on Brit NA site there are only 5 men listed with the number 4392 who are named Smith and only one of them has the initials AEJ (Albert E J), so I can only assume Alfred is a mistake that wasn't corrected.
Thanks Tony.........
just noticed Italy stamped and dated jan 1918,so possibly mediterranean theatre not western front?interesting indeed.
Similar Threads
Bookmarks