RootsChat.Com
General => Armed Forces => Topic started by: mahalia on Wednesday 17 July 13 01:10 BST (UK)
-
Can any one help shed any light on this photo for me. It has only recently been sent to me and is all I have and it is very small and not clear. I am wondering if it could perhaps be a Army Chaplain/Padre insignia.
I have no idea whether my Uncle had religious connections or not but do know that prior to his marriage my Grandfather (Lyonells father) had trained for the priesthood. But he was killed when Lyonell was only a young boy.
I am wondering what the cross on the sleeve signifies - it appears he held the rank of Sergeant???
Family have always claimed that my Uncle Lyonell/Leo/Lionell Fildes was one of the Rats of Tobruk which I have never been able to verify - I have also heard that he fought in Africa. Haven't been able to verify that either, but do know that he was with the Royal Engineers. In fact I have han no success at all finding any trace of his military history. This is the first time I have ever seen a picture of him in Uniform and wonder if anyone might be able to throw any light on it. The picture would have been taken around the time of WWII - Lyonell was born in 1918.
Cheers
Maureen
The Scribbly Bark Poet
-
Its an Army Divisional Patch possibly 1st Army but hard to make out think they had different colours
His record will still be with MOD ...you can apply for copy it costs 30 pounds and long wait
Ady
-
As far as I know all branches of the services in any country that had Chaplains/Padres the person appointed would become an officer. Some had assistants who were just ordinary servicemen (or I suppose officers) who would help them. I have a book with a photograph of Christopher Chavasse a Chaplain during WW1 dressed in his army uniform, complete with Sam Browne belt. The only item different from other officers at that time is his clerical collar. Another photograph later in the war was Christopher with Noel his brother (Noel Chavasse VC and Bar). Both are dressed identically with Noel wearing a Sam Brown Belt, Christopher is not wearing one. Christopher has his clerical collar on.
-
Agree with reply #1, rather then any chaplain / padre connection (I could be wrong! :)).
It looks simply like a formation badge, in design not unlike a crusader shield in which case it might be 1st or 2nd army. Would plump for 1st army as it was involved in the North Africa landings - which would tie in with the family claim.
-
Have a look at this site for a picture of the badge.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Army_%28United_Kingdom%29
-
I always thought that 'Rats of Tobruk' was the name adopted by Australian soldiers.
Even though there were also British troops there at the time.
Could he have been in the Australian Army by any chance?
Have you looked for his War record there?
Dawn M
-
Thanks everyone for your help. He was never in the Australian Army - rumour was he was in South Africa at some stage of the war. Might apply for those records Ady suggested and see how I go from there. That does look like the badge Brummie Nick. Algeria is in Africa too I think so that could well be it.
Cheers
Maureen
-
I always thought that 'Rats of Tobruk' was the name adopted by Australian soldiers.
Even though there were also British troops there at the time.
Could he have been in the Australian Army by any chance?
Have you looked for his War record there?
Dawn M
The term was applied to all Allied forces who served in Tobruk at that time, even after the majority of Australian forces had been withdrawn.
Imber
-
"The term was applied to all Allied forces who served in Tobruk at that time, even after the majority of Australian forces had been withdrawn"
Really?! ??? ??? ???
While Lord Haw-Haw may have applied it to all the Allied forces in Tobruk, I've only ever seen references of the Australian Army adopting it as 'their own'. It is commemorated at the Australian War Memorial in Canberra. All the Rats of Tobruk Associations I've found listed are in Australia???
What have I missed?
Dawn M
-
My understanding is that the name applies to all Allied troops who held Tobruk in 1941, over half (14,000) included Australian troops, but the rest (some 12,000) being British and Indian armoured / artillery / cavalry.
Over a few months from August 1941, the Australian and Indian troops were withdrawn by sea and replaced by a British / Polish / Czechoslovak force.
Edited to add: It might be one of those labels that has evolved over time, I imagine that the deciding factor is that if a British or Indian soldier who held Tobruk in 1941 deemed himself one of the "Rats of Tobruk", then who's to argue?
-
And it may have been confused with Desert Rat......nickname of Eighth Army in North Africa
Ady
-
Have a look at some of the websites on the subject.
Dawn M
-
Lord Haw Haw aimed the "rats" insult at the whole garrison, however there is plenty to suggest that of the 26,000 Allied defenders, it was the 14,000 Australians who coined and to this day have embraced more than any the phrase "rats of Tobruk".
However, my understanding remains that the phrase doesn't exclude the 12,000 British Troops and Indian Cavalry that served there, there are plenty of references in websites akin to the following:
"The name 'Rats of Tobruk' was well earned by Australians and the other commonwealth forces defending Tobruk..."
"Australian troops, some of the famed Rats of Tobruk..."
"The Rats of Tobruk hold an identifiable place within the ranks of returned servicemen, particularly in Australia..."
"The Allies numbered around 26,000 of Australian and British soldiers, with no air support. The Allies nevertheless repelled the Germans for 242 days and eventually drove them back. Nicknamed "the poor desert rats of Tobruk" by German propagandist Lord Haw-Haw, the soldiers adopted the name themselves..."
Here's a first hand account from a then British Army soldier serving in the RAOC:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ww2peopleswar/stories/68/a4513268.shtml
-
Have a look at some of the websites on the subject.
Dawn M
Oh dear, I do hope I’m not giving the appearance of point scoring. As a family historian I tend to stick to facts – sometimes that runs counter to popular military “history”. I doubt there’s a single military episode in WW2 that hasn’t been skewed one way or the other from the boring facts. Yes, I have looked at the websites. Most of them are Australian and tend to dwell on the Aussie angle. Quite rightly. The large numbers of Australian troops at Tobruk played a very prominent and vital part in its defence. That was a major achievement for which the Australian nation was rightly proud. It’s probably fair to say that it became of greater significance to Australia than perhaps to the British in that the sheer size of the British forces involved in WW2 meant that of necessity it was involved in a much larger range of conflicts and which would tend to dilute any focus on one event (with the obvious exceptions of the earliest conflicts such as Dunkirk and the Battle of Britain). Tobruk was a major symbol to Australians of their contribution to the defeat of the Axis powers. It must also be borne in mind that this label was cemented by the release in 1944 of the Australian film Rats of Tobruk. Do you think there might be some possibility that you might be more exposed to Australian commemoration of this episode given that you seem to live in the Brisbane area?
I don’t really have any time for blowing national trumpets. When I worked for the Commonwealth War Graves Commission my work, as an employee of the Australian and other governments, put me in regular contact with the Australian High Commissioner and his staff and my concern was for the commemoration of all. Their nationality was secondary but accuracy was paramount. What’s not in doubt is that the many nationalities in the 8th Army ultimately achieved their objective in halting then ejecting the enemy from North Africa, albeit at a terrible cost. As regards the question posed by mahalia it would seem that the link provided by gaffy suggests that the few facts available to mahalia may have some credibility.
Imber
-
Where I live, Imber, has nothing to do with my origins.
Dawn M
-
I know it is politically incorrect to judge a person by their appearances but Lyonell looks more like a soldier in the background of War. Remember John Kipling, Rudyard's son who was believed to have lost his glasses in his first day in action during WW1 and was killed. How many front line soldiers wore glasses is perhaps a question better answered by a military expert.
-
Hi,
Here's my twopenn'orth.
I've recently read a book which contains a considerable chunk about Tobruk and its siege. Called "The Phantom Army of Alamein" by Rick Stroud, it centres on the activities of the Royal Engineers Camouflage Sections.
Also to judge from appearances, Lyonell strikes me as an "artistic type" who as a possible Sapper Sgt might well have been in one of the Camouflage Section in Tobruk which were greatly responsible for keeping the Afrika Korps out for the 242 days. Read the book and see how!
One other point that came up earlier; strictly speaking (pedantically, even) "Desert Rats" applies only to members of 7th Armoured Division, not the whole of the 8th Army.
Alan