RootsChat.Com

General => Armed Forces => Topic started by: JoJoBuggins on Tuesday 12 June 07 19:26 BST (UK)

Title: Completed - Many thanks - Any significance to only wearing one glove
Post by: JoJoBuggins on Tuesday 12 June 07 19:26 BST (UK)
Hi

Hope this is the right board, the photo is of an ancestor, just wondered if there was anything significant with him wearing only one glove

Jo
Title: Re: Any significance to only wearing one glove
Post by: mmm45 on Tuesday 12 June 07 19:54 BST (UK)
Jo
Whats the Corporals name? Do you know what regiment hes in.
An idea on one glove he could have been wounded in action(Hes got overseas service chevrons on) and have either a prosthetic hand or wearing a glove to hide any disfigurement.

Ady
Title: Re: Any significance to only wearing one glove
Post by: JoJoBuggins on Tuesday 12 June 07 19:58 BST (UK)
Hi

Charles Frederick Verity, he was from Leeds, born 1875/6 so I would think, (could be wrong) that he was in a Yorkshire Regiment

So he was a Corporal then, thanks for telling me that, that would probably have been my next question

The overseas service chevrons, are those the ones at the bottom of the sleeve?

Jo

Title: Re: Any significance to only wearing one glove
Post by: mmm45 on Tuesday 12 June 07 20:14 BST (UK)
http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/documentsonline/details-result.asp?Edoc_Id=5885384&queryType=1&resultcount=8

Jo Theres only one CF VERITY listed on NA MICs

I think the link above will take you to his Medal Index card at the NA Kew.
It says he belonged to two regiments and im guessing that the cap badge he has on is Army Ordnance Corps which The MIC says he served in
Yes the chevrons are overseas service on his cuff.
Did he survive the war?
If you download his MIC for £3.50 you may get more info about him.

Ady
Title: Re: Any significance to only wearing one glove
Post by: JoJoBuggins on Tuesday 12 June 07 20:25 BST (UK)
Many many thanks for that :)

Yes he did survive the war, lived till 1935, that is the first photo I have seen of him.

Do you think his hand would have been badly injured, just seems strange only wearing one glove and a tight fitting one at that

Off the subject but my grandad died in Italy in the war, would his medal index card be at the NA at Kew?

Thank you again

Jo
Title: Re: Any significance to only wearing one glove
Post by: mmm45 on Tuesday 12 June 07 20:39 BST (UK)
Hi Jo
It was just a guess that he was covering a disfigured hand.As i said you may get more info on him off his Medal index card it may say discharged and awarded a Silver War Badge to denote this
The Royal Fusilers were infantry and the Army Ordnance Corps dealt with supplying the ammo to the forward troops so... and this is a guess again he had been wounded and unfit for frontline duties  so was drafted to the AOC

Just checked on Army Ordnance Corps and it was formed in 1918 so he has 2 war chevrons so he mustve been oveseas since 1916.


Am not sure on WW2 medals but dont think they are online you have to write to maybe Glasgow?? i think the details are on this forum under resources.
He will be on the CWGC if you google it though.

Ive got a relative buried in Sicily 1943.

Ady
Title: Re: Any significance to only wearing one glove
Post by: JoJoBuggins on Tuesday 12 June 07 20:59 BST (UK)
Ady

Thank you, think my parents have sent off for something from Glasgow, that was back in September 06, and still not got anything back yet.

Been on CWGC site, very good, though I do have some photos of the grave and the actual document that my gr grandparents got for their official War Grave Visit, he his buried in Sangro River.  I also have quite a few photos of him in India and with his trophies for Boxing and Swimming.

Have downloaded Charles F Verity's MIC from NA, doesnt give a great deal of info, and there is nothing in the remarks box to say whether he was discharged.

Thanks

Jo

P.S Was it normal to be in 2 regiments
Title: Re: Any significance to only wearing one glove
Post by: mmm45 on Tuesday 12 June 07 21:09 BST (UK)
If a bloke was wounded he could end up anywhere after a stint in hospital!
If they were unfit for frontline they could end up in Labour Corps or other non infantry units

later on this year Ancestry are publishing WW1 Pension and discharge records A-Z surnames at present they only cover A-B
If your man was discharged to pension theres a good chance his record will be there.

Does the MIC give which medals he was entitled to?

If no 1915 Star it means he didnt go overseas til 1916.

Ady
Title: Re: Any significance to only wearing one glove
Post by: JoJoBuggins on Tuesday 12 June 07 21:33 BST (UK)
Well looks like I will have a while to wait then, long way off V

He did get a 1915 star, couldnt quite make out the others, will have another look tomorrow, Ive got access to it for 56 days

Jo
Title: Re: Any significance to only wearing one glove
Post by: mmm45 on Tuesday 12 June 07 21:39 BST (UK)
The Photo is definately after Jan 1918 as the overseas chevrons werent introduced to uniforms til then.
If you post the MIC ill have a go at translating it for you.

Ady
Title: Re: Any significance to only wearing one glove
Post by: Maggott on Tuesday 12 June 07 23:04 BST (UK)
Back to the glove for a minute -is the point that he isn't wearing one on his left hand, but that he is wearing a ring on his wedding finger - was the pic taken when he got engaged/married by any chance?
Maggott
Title: Re: Any significance to only wearing one glove
Post by: themonsstar on Wednesday 13 June 07 00:32 BST (UK)
The Army Ordnance Corps(AOC) was formed in the 1800s it got its Royal in 1918, The Royal Army Ordnance Corps(RAOC).



Title: Re: Any significance to only wearing one glove
Post by: manmack on Wednesday 13 June 07 07:07 BST (UK)
hiya joe,before you download the medal card,have a word with monsstar [roy]hes a pal of mine and hes a researcher at kew,charles frederick verity of beeston rd,leeds,was in the rifle brigade,in 1918 he was stationed at northants,his army number was 160577,theres no man called verity with this number in the medal cards,its very likely he didnt serve overseas with this number,so it wont show up in the medal rolls,i could be wrong,but it looks like a bad shadow not a glove,if his service record has survived,roy will find it.
mack
Title: Re: Any significance to only wearing one glove
Post by: JoJoBuggins on Wednesday 13 June 07 07:56 BST (UK)
Hi

Maggott - doubt very much it was a marriage or engagement, married in 1907

Manmack, many thanks for your information - I have 2 Charles Frederick Verity's in my family tree, both born within a year of each other and both from Leeds, it caused a bit of confusion at first, and I think/presume that they both served time in the Army, but..... which one served in which regiment, I have not got a clue :-\

Monsstar
have a word with monsstar [roy]hes a pal of mine and hes a researcher at kew,charles frederick verity of beeston rd,leeds,was in the rifle brigade,in 1918 he was stationed at northants,his army number was 160577,theres no man called verity with this number in the medal cards,its very likely he didnt serve overseas with this number,so it wont show up in the medal rolls,i could be wrong,if his service record has survived,roy will find it.
mack
Quote


Title: Re: Any significance to only wearing one glove
Post by: JoJoBuggins on Wednesday 13 June 07 08:06 BST (UK)
Sorry didnt finish off what I was writing and when I tried to modify it,just kept putting everything in quotes, so thought I would start again :)

Monsstar would it be possible for you to see if Charles Frederick Verity's service record as survived? 

Many thanks in advance

Jo

Title: Re: Any significance to only wearing one glove
Post by: manmack on Wednesday 13 June 07 08:27 BST (UK)
joe,the other charles verity of pollar st,leeds,was pte 440157,553rd agricultural company,labour corps,hes not listed in the medal cards as serving overseas with this number.
mack
Title: Re: Any significance to only wearing one glove
Post by: JoJoBuggins on Wednesday 13 June 07 09:01 BST (UK)
Ok, thank you, was that a Charles Frederick, I have that many Charles  Verity's, cant keep track of them sometimes!!

Jo
Title: Re: Any significance to only wearing one glove
Post by: mmm45 on Wednesday 13 June 07 11:53 BST (UK)
Jo
Heres a JPG of the Army Ordnance Corps cap badge pre 1919.
Ady
Title: Re: Any significance to only wearing one glove
Post by: JoJoBuggins on Wednesday 13 June 07 12:05 BST (UK)
Hi

Lovely badge

When my son gets home from college I will get him to post the MIC for you to have a look at, not 100% sure how to do it  :(

Jo
Title: Re: Any significance to only wearing one glove
Post by: JoJoBuggins on Wednesday 13 June 07 12:07 BST (UK)
Ady

I'm really showing my ignorance here, but what exactly did the Army Ordnance Corps do?

Jo
Title: Re: Any significance to only wearing one glove
Post by: JAP on Wednesday 13 June 07 12:21 BST (UK)
...i could be wrong,but it looks like a bad shadow not a glove,if his service record has survived,roy will find it.
mack

Can anyone improve on the "gloved" hand?

The thumbnail (better rephrase that given modern terminology! - the nail of the thumb on that dark hand) is so clear that it does seem odd if it is in a glove ...

Jo, I think that Ordnance Corps were responsible for equipment and especially ammunition.

JAP
Title: Re: Any significance to only wearing one glove
Post by: mmm45 on Wednesday 13 June 07 12:27 BST (UK)
Jo
As JAP says AOC dealt with the supply of weaponry munitions and other military equipment to the Troops.
I had a play with the photo and reckon its either a prosthetic hand or bad shadow.

Ady
Title: Re: Any significance to only wearing one glove
Post by: JoJoBuggins on Wednesday 13 June 07 12:35 BST (UK)
Jap and Ady many thanks, thats cleared that up about Ordnance Corp

The more I look at the photo, dont think it is a bad shadow, because if you look at the "dark" hand/fingers you can see abit of shadow around it, probably is like you say a prosthetic hand :(

Jo
Title: Re: Any significance to only wearing one glove
Post by: goggy on Wednesday 13 June 07 12:43 BST (UK)
G'Day All!
Very intriguing this.I'm not too sure about what I'm about to say,but will say it and see what the comeback is!
Isn't it a basic rule that a soldier is a person trained as such,and all else that follows is secondary to that training?
Every soldier as far as I recall was a Rifleman first,therefore as bad as they may have been with firearms, that was mandatory.
So,would a man with a prosthesis that would hinder the use of a firearm be fit to soldier on?
                   Goggy. ???
Title: Re: Any significance to only wearing one glove
Post by: mmm45 on Wednesday 13 June 07 13:05 BST (UK)
Jo
On his MIC in the rank space does it give anthing The MIC is to a Pte  CF Verity but hes wearing Cpl stripes so he may have been an A/Cpl (Acting) in the AOC.

Ady
Title: Re: Any significance to only wearing one glove
Post by: JoJoBuggins on Wednesday 13 June 07 13:07 BST (UK)
G'day Goggy

Basically in a nutshell, I dont know.

What you are saying makes sense, but wouldnt they have just removed him from frontline duties and put him onto something else,(not familiar with how they did things back then)

Surely they wouldnt just discharge them but then again........

We dont know for sure if he wasnt already discharged when the photo (were they allowed to wear uniform when they had left/been discharged) was taken AND we dont know if it is a prosthesis, its all guesswork isnt it, at the end of the day

Jo
Title: Re: Any significance to only wearing one glove
Post by: JoJoBuggins on Wednesday 13 June 07 13:16 BST (UK)
Ady

It says R. Fus Pte 14965 (there is a x above the R) and A.O.C. Pte 039861

also something else I dont understand, think it says Theatre of War first served in, then in brackets it has (4A)

Date of entry therein 8.5.15

Jo
Title: Re: Any significance to only wearing one glove
Post by: mmm45 on Wednesday 13 June 07 13:46 BST (UK)
Hi Jo
The x usually means his medals would be impressed with that regiment on the rim or back of the Star
The Theatre of war  was the first place he would have served overseas.It was coded (4) if im correct was Africa so (4a) may be east Africa??

Having looked at the Great War Forum on the Royal Fusiliers bit it lists the 25th Batt Royal Fusiliers as landing at Mombassa May 1915 which ties in with the date on the MIC
As always theres a lot of guessing so i could be wrong

Ady
Title: Re: Any significance to only wearing one glove
Post by: JoJoBuggins on Wednesday 13 June 07 14:02 BST (UK)
Ady

Im very impressed,you were able to decipher all that, I wouldnt have had a clue with the (4A) going to get my atlas out now and have a look

I only received this photo yesterday and you have told me so much, many thank yous

Jo
Title: Re: Any significance to only wearing one glove
Post by: BettyofKent on Wednesday 13 June 07 15:41 BST (UK)
I think mack may be right. I've downloaded & enlarged the pic, & I'm sure I can see fingernails! Perhaps a post on the photo restoration board to ask one of clever people on there to take a look, The graphics programs they use will be much better at showing detail.

Betty

i could be wrong,but it looks like a bad shadow not a glove,if his service record has survived,roy will find it.
mack
Title: Re: Any significance to only wearing one glove
Post by: mmm45 on Wednesday 13 June 07 15:49 BST (UK)
http://www.frontiersmenhistorian.info/


Jo the 25th Royal Fusiliers  were known as "Frontiersmen" with quite a history.

Theres a link above.
The 25th link is on the left.
Ady

Title: Re: Any significance to only wearing one glove
Post by: JoJoBuggins on Wednesday 13 June 07 16:09 BST (UK)
Ady

Thanks for that

This made me laugh
 
"The age limit was 25-48 years; but it was obvious that a few old-timers must have forgotten the year in which they were born..."

 fascinating stuff, you cant believe that some men deserted there normal unit just to join the 25th Fusiliers, bet it was fun at Waterloo Station with the police trying to catch them

Jo
Title: Re: Any significance to only wearing one glove
Post by: JoJoBuggins on Wednesday 13 June 07 16:26 BST (UK)
Ady

as promised MIC

Jo
Title: Re: Any significance to only wearing one glove
Post by: manmack on Wednesday 13 June 07 16:45 BST (UK)
i dont know if anyone has noticed,but charles has been written under the F,not before it,i honestly cant see anything on this card that fits to the charles in the picture,this mans card is for a private,charles is a full corporal,hes also wearing two overseas stripes which indicate that he went overseas in 1916,the bloke in the medal card went overseas in 1915,the card looks to me like it should be f,charles verity not charles,f verity,a soldier wouldnt show that he had lost a limb if he was having his picture taken,he would have hidden it,mack
Title: Re: Any significance to only wearing one glove
Post by: mmm45 on Wednesday 13 June 07 17:04 BST (UK)
Manmack
A lot of its calculated guessing these are the reasons
1.The cap badge on the Phot is(in my opinion) AOC
2.The MIC is to a private however he could have held the rank of Temporary Cpl or Acting Cpl and then been reverted to Pte
3.He has 2 Overseas Chevrons so if he went Overseas in 1915 that would take him to 1917 and then for whatever reason he was rear based in UK he wouldnt qualify for any more.
4. C.F. were written first and the" harles" added after

I know MICs are sometimes lost and inaccurate so we possibly need a little bit more info to clinch it.

Ady
Title: Re: Any significance to only wearing one glove
Post by: JoJoBuggins on Wednesday 13 June 07 17:07 BST (UK)
Manmack, I had noticed that, but didnt think a great deal to it, but on the actual download form it does say Charles Frederick Verity, so if he isnt the Charles in the photo, then he probably is my other Charles Frederick, don't you think?

Why do brothers,name their sons the same, causes so much confusion

And to be honest I wouldnt know that a Corporal had two chevrons, all I can say is thank goodness for all you kind Rootschatters ;D

My thoughts with regard to the hand sway from one idea one minute to another the next

Jo

Title: Re: Any significance to only wearing one glove
Post by: JoJoBuggins on Wednesday 13 June 07 19:30 BST (UK)
Just to let you know, this might clear one thing up :)

I put the photo up on the Restoration Board and a few people have enlarged it and given it close scrutiny, he his wearing a fine leather GLOVE

Jo
Title: Re: Any significance to only wearing one glove
Post by: meles on Wednesday 13 June 07 19:31 BST (UK)
I seem to recall that some horse riders (those who drive carriages) wear a glove on the right hand (the one that hold the reigns) only. Can anyone else confirm that? Could he have transported ordnance?

meles
Title: Re: Any significance to only wearing one glove
Post by: scrimnet on Wednesday 13 June 07 22:43 BST (UK)
Manmack
A lot of its calculated guessing these are the reasons
1.The cap badge on the Phot is(in my opinion) AOC
2.The MIC is to a private however he could have held the rank of Temporary Cpl or Acting Cpl and then been reverted to Pte
3.He has 2 Overseas Chevrons so if he went Overseas in 1915 that would take him to 1917 and then for whatever reason he was rear based in UK he wouldnt qualify for any more.
4. C.F. were written first and the" harles" added after

I know MICs are sometimes lost and inaccurate so we possibly need a little bit more info to clinch it.

Ady



It is/was usual for an acting rank / tempoaray rank to be only one up...ie L/Cpl from Pte, Cpl from L/Cpl...

It may be that he was busted! :o
Title: Re: Any significance to only wearing one glove
Post by: themonsstar on Wednesday 13 June 07 23:53 BST (UK)
Get someone to have a look at the Medal Rolls at the NA Kew, In the rolls it will tell you the units & Bn he was with.
Title: Re: Any significance to only wearing one glove
Post by: mmm45 on Thursday 14 June 07 00:36 BST (UK)
Jo
Have sent you an email ref 25th (Frontiersmen) Batt Royal Fusiliers
The Charles Fred Verity the MIC belongs to shows He was one of the original members joining up around March 1915.There is no mention of him been wounded in the unit war diary

Thanks to Steve  who has carried out extensive research on the unit for this info.

Ady
Title: Re: Any significance to only wearing one glove
Post by: JoJoBuggins on Thursday 14 June 07 12:38 BST (UK)
Ady

Thanks to you and Steve for all your help (forgot to mention thanking Steve on PM)  It really is much appreciated

As regards to the hand/glove the jury is still out on that one, everybody seems to have a different opinion.   have contacted a member of the family to find out if he did have an injury to his hand, will keep you informed

Many thanks everybody for your input

Jo
Title: Re: Any significance to only wearing one glove
Post by: JoJoBuggins on Monday 18 June 07 11:13 BST (UK)
Ady and Steve a big thank you :)

I passed on the information which you sent me, to Charles's granddaughter she was absolutely over the moon with it.

With regard to any injury Charles may have sustained in the War, she doesn't remember there being any talk about a false hand, though she does remember her mother telling her that he got Malaria.

I cant believe that you could get so much information from the MIC, to me it was just a jumble of letters and numbers.

Jo
Title: Re: Any significance to only wearing one glove
Post by: mmm45 on Monday 18 June 07 11:56 BST (UK)
Hi Jo
Glad to have helped saw the pics in the photo restoration area of the hand and the malaria story adds to the picture of him been a  25th RF Frontiersman-(Theres another avenue to explore!)
have passed your thanks on to Steve.

Ady