Nelson, I did n 't mean to imply that a sergeant actually had a typical smell about him/her although many of them would have been described as stinkers, or worse, by those unfortunate to fall foul of their particular sergeant. I could have said, sounds or looks like one but smell followed on in my mind from my Shakespeare quote about a rose and Rabbie Burns 's use of the word, rank ( which can also mean , smell or pong) . I did n 't know that about Wellington. Thanks for the info. It gives a totally different meaning to the term, the great unwashed. From what you said about the Duke, we can now apply the term to the aristocracy as well as to ourselves and to our friends . To misquote, George Orwell, " All of us pong but some of us pong more than the others ". Now that 's a very egalitarian thought, I like it. Regards. Patrick Holland. Perth Western Australia. Nelson Denton wrote: > ""Surely if a man ( or women) say they are a Sergeant > and looks like a Serjeant (ie. he/she wears three stripes on the sleeve > of his/her uniform ) and smells like one then surely that is what they > are."" > > I must object! > I have it on good authority that Serg/jents took baths at least as often as > the men. They were expected to set a good example!. > > "A good rinse every spring does a man good." > Field Marshal The Duke of Smelington > > > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GREATWAR-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > >

""Surely if a man ( or women) say they are a Sergeant and looks like a Serjeant (ie. he/she wears three stripes on the sleeve of his/her uniform ) and smells like one then surely that is what they are."" I must object! I have it on good authority that Serg/jents took baths at least as often as the men. They were expected to set a good example!. "A good rinse every spring does a man good." Field Marshal The Duke of Smelington

Good afternoon, The length of this thread about the spelling of just one word, ie. Sergeant, etc,etc, etc amazes me. As Shakespeare said, over 400 years ago, " A Rose by any other name would smell as sweet " what more is there to be said ? Surely if a man ( or women) say they are a Sergeant and looks like a Serjeant (ie. he/she wears three stripes on the sleeve of his/her uniform ) and smells like one then surely that is what they are. After all, that 's all that a word is meant to do, convey a meaning. The meaning of the word " Sarg." is clear to everybody, I would have thought. As Robert Burns said, " The rank is but a guinea's stamp ; The man's the gowd for a' that ! " Patrick Holland. Perth Western Australia.

Peter This has been discussed on the Great WAr Discussion Forum though without reaching any conclusion. However they are interesting discussion, especially to my mind the information relating to CWGC policy. http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=52790&hl=serjeant,or,sergeant and http://www.1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=8964&hl= I seem to recall it being discussed on the GWF boards on other occasions as well. Kind regards Mike Shingleton -----Original Message----- From: Peter Metcalfe <Peter-redfern@runbox.com> Sent Subject: [GREATWAR] Serjeant / Sergeant > I have seen both spellings on British headstones and the CWGC website. > Is there a good reason or was it simply because someone couldn't spell? > Regards > Peter > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GREATWAR-request@rootsweb.com > with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

During my time in the RASC/RCT 1960-6 the 3 chevron rank was to be written as 'Serjeant' or 'Sgt'. As a mere Corporal Clerk I obeyed this instruction without question even though it made no sense to me because the Sgt was Sergeant! I do believe this varied between Corps. Alan T... >Going by the dictionary then it seems it should be spelt with a "G" in the military and "J" in the legal profession. Just as the meaning of words change over the years, the spelling can change too. King's Regulations for the Army for 1912 spells it Serjeant (44 times on just one page!), as does the edition for 1935. Queen's Regulations for 1955 also spells it Serjeant, but Queen's Regulations for 1975, which is the edition currently in use, uses Sergeant.

I have an Australian in the AIF in 1917 and it is spelt Sergeant on all his papers. I was one too in a different service. :o) Gordon Kelly Sydney ----- Original Message ----- From: "George Smith" <airforce@localdial.com> To: <greatwar@rootsweb.com> Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2007 8:23 PM Subject: Re: [GREATWAR] Serjeant / Sergeant > Sergeant was the regular spelling during the war in the Royal Air Force. I > was one! How the Americans or Canadians spelled it I don't know. Could be > anyting. Serjeant in the UK was used for civilian titles i.e. Serjeant at > Arms

On Sat, 12 May 2007 14:48:36 +0000 (UTC), "Peter Metcalfe" <Peter-redfern@runbox.com> wrote: >Going by the dictionary then it seems it should be spelt with a "G" in the military and "J" in the legal profession. Just as the meaning of words change over the years, the spelling can change too. King's Regulations for the Army for 1912 spells it Serjeant (44 times on just one page!), as does the edition for 1935. Queen's Regulations for 1955 also spells it Serjeant, but Queen's Regulations for 1975, which is the edition currently in use, uses Sergeant. Forrest -- Forrest Anderson, Edinburgh, Scotland. E-mail: forrest@military-researcher.com Website: www.military-researcher.com Forrestdale Research - Military Genealogical Researcher

Not if you are dealing with the Great War. Use what was used at the time. >From: "Peter Metcalfe" <Peter-redfern@runbox.com> >Reply-To: greatwar@rootsweb.com >To: greatwar@rootsweb.com >Subject: Re: [GREATWAR] Serjeant / Sergeant >Date: Sat, 12 May 2007 14:48:36 +0000 (UTC) > >Thank you to all who replied. > >Going by the dictionary then it seems it should be spelt with a "G" in the >military and "J" in the legal profession. > >Regards > >Peter > > >------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >GREATWAR-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >quotes in the subject and the body of the message

Thank you to all who replied. Going by the dictionary then it seems it should be spelt with a "G" in the military and "J" in the legal profession. Regards Peter

Sergeant was the regular spelling during the war in the Royal Air Force. I was one! How the Americans or Canadians spelled it I don't know. Could be anyting. Serjeant in the UK was used for civilian titles i.e. Serjeant at Arms At 00:00 5/12/2007 +0000, peter.gower@sympatico.ca wrote: >The j spelling was standard during the war I believe. It only changed >afterwards. > > >>From: "Peter Metcalfe" <Peter-redfern@runbox.com> >>Reply-To: greatwar@rootsweb.com >>To: greatwar@rootsweb.com >>Subject: [GREATWAR] Serjeant / Sergeant >>Date: Fri, 11 May 2007 18:49:50 +0000 (UTC) >> >>I have seen both spellings on British headstones and the CWGC website. >> >>Is there a good reason or was it simply because someone couldn't spell? >> >>Regards >> >>Peter >> >> >>------------------------------- >>To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >>GREATWAR-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >>quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > >------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GREATWAR-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > > Regards George. George Smith <airforce@localdial.com> Home Page: http://web.localdial.com/users/airforce LRFHS Page: http://www.lrfhs.org.uk Jersey Island Page: http://www.jerseyvirtual.net Jersey Insight http://www.jerseyinsight.com Jersey Centenary Battle of Flowers: http://www.localdial.com/users/airforce/battle.html

On Fri, 11 May 2007 22:41:41 +0100, "Peter Appleton" <peter.appleton3@ntlworld.com> wrote: >My grandfather was discharged from the TA under para 193 (3) on 11 Jan 1927. In that case you need to find a copy of Regulations for the Territorial Army, 1924 edition, since the next edition seems to be 1929. I'm afraid I don't have it myself - does anyone have a copy? If not, you may have to try and find one at a large reference library. For instance, the British Library has a copy. Forrest -- Forrest Anderson, Edinburgh, Scotland. E-mail: forrest@military-researcher.com Website: www.military-researcher.com Forrestdale Research - Military Genealogical Researcher

The j spelling was standard during the war I believe. It only changed afterwards. >From: "Peter Metcalfe" <Peter-redfern@runbox.com> >Reply-To: greatwar@rootsweb.com >To: greatwar@rootsweb.com >Subject: [GREATWAR] Serjeant / Sergeant >Date: Fri, 11 May 2007 18:49:50 +0000 (UTC) > >I have seen both spellings on British headstones and the CWGC website. > >Is there a good reason or was it simply because someone couldn't spell? > >Regards > >Peter > > >------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >GREATWAR-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >quotes in the subject and the body of the message

On Fri, 11 May 2007 14:15:19 +0100, "Forrest Anderson" <listmail@military-researcher.com> wrote: > The regulations for both the Regular and Territorial Force/Territorial > Army changed over the years, and very often the paragraphs were > re-numbered when a new edition came out. We need to know when he was > discharged from the TA, so that we know which edition of TA > Regulations to look at. Forrest, Thanks for your reply. I should have thought of that. Sorry! My grandfather was discharged from the TA under para 193 (3) on 11 Jan 1927. regards, Peter Appleton My Family Tree website: http://www.tribalpages.com/tribes/pappleton3

Both spellings are acceptable but Sergeant is the more usual spelling these days, but according to one of my Oxford dictionaries serjeant has been appropriated by the legal profession and is now the correct spelling for a legal officer, eg serjeant at arms John -----Original Message----- From: greatwar-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:greatwar-bounces@rootsweb.com] On Behalf Of Janice Duke Sent: 11 May 2007 20:16 To: greatwar@rootsweb.com Subject: Re: [GREATWAR] Serjeant / Sergeant Hi Peter, It seems to be a chiefly British variant of sergeant. Janice USA ----- Original Message ----- From: "Peter Metcalfe" <Peter-redfern@runbox.com> To: <greatwar@rootsweb.com> Sent: Friday, May 11, 2007 2:49 PM Subject: [GREATWAR] Serjeant / Sergeant >I have seen both spellings on British headstones and the CWGC website. > > Is there a good reason or was it simply because someone couldn't spell? > > Regards > > Peter > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > GREATWAR-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to GREATWAR-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message

I have seen both spellings on British headstones and the CWGC website. Is there a good reason or was it simply because someone couldn't spell? Regards Peter

Hi Peter, It seems to be a chiefly British variant of sergeant. Janice USA ----- Original Message ----- From: "Peter Metcalfe" <Peter-redfern@runbox.com> To: <greatwar@rootsweb.com> Sent: Friday, May 11, 2007 2:49 PM Subject: [GREATWAR] Serjeant / Sergeant >I have seen both spellings on British headstones and the CWGC website. > > Is there a good reason or was it simply because someone couldn't spell? > > Regards > > Peter > > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > GREATWAR-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message

On Fri, 11 May 2007 12:29:13 +0100, "Peter Appleton" <peter.appleton3@ntlworld.com> wrote: >I have just received copies of Fred's Army Service paperwork from the MoD's >Historic Disclosures unit at Glasgow. I had hoped that his file would >include his service in WW1 but it only includes his post-war service in the >TA (as 4381434 Private Fred APPLETON, 4th Yorkshire Regiment). > >The final entry in his service record reads: >"Discharged at his own request Para 193 (3) Terr Army Regs" > >Can anyone advise me as to the contents of this paragraph of the >regulations? The regulations for both the Regular and Territorial Force/Territorial Army changed over the years, and very often the paragraphs were re-numbered when a new edition came out. We need to know when he was discharged from the TA, so that we know which edition of TA Regulations to look at. For instance, Para 193 of my copy of Regulations for the Territorial Force for 1912 (amended to Dec 1914) deals with vacancies on the Permanent Staff, and nothing to do with discharges. Forrest -- Forrest Anderson, Edinburgh, Scotland. E-mail: forrest@military-researcher.com Website: www.military-researcher.com Forrestdale Research - Military Genealogical Researcher

Peter The colour has nothing at all to do with cause of death, and the stone used for CWGC headstones comes in many types and colour. Some of these variations are regional, with granite being used a lot in Scotland, and slate in Wales; also red Corsehill limestone, the reddish-green Robin Hood limestone, and here in Sussex, Littlehampton has some in a very pronounced shade of green. The Royal Navy also had some completely different styles of headstone, in the form of a cross, used in it's own cemeteries. These differences are also in evidence in France and Belgium, e.g. the headstones at Martinsart being red Corsehill stone. Sue Sue Light [Lancing, West Sussex] www.scarletfinders.co.uk > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > GREATWAR-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message >

Hi all: Seeking any information on Joseph William Shipman born July 12, 1877 in Brockville, Ontario, Canada, son of Stephen Shipman and Sarah Curran. Joseph later moved to Toronto and joined the Queen's Own Rifles at the age of 32 on October 8, 1909. During the First World War he enlisted at Valcartier, Quebec on September 22, 1914. At first he served with the 2nd Regiment of the Queen's Own Rifles but was then reorganized into the 3rd Battalion, 1st Brigade before departing for France. At the time of his enlistment he was a widower living at 78 Stafford Street, Toronto. Upon his discharge on December 16, 1916 he listed his intended address as 936 Eastern Avenue in Toronto. Shortly thereafter he disappears from the Toronto City Directories and I have no idea where he went or what became of him?? Already have his military records from the Canadian Archives.

I realize that this is slightly out of scope of the list. However, I have used this list in the past for advice and guidance and have found the members to be extremely knowledgeable and very helpful. I have been researching the military service of my grandfather, Fred APPLETON, for over two years now. To summarize briefly: I have established that he first attested into the 4th Yorks in Feb 1913 as 1605 Private Fred APPLETON (specialist qualification - Bandsman). He served throughout the Great War with the Battalion, changing his service number to 200207 when the six-digit numbers were introduced in 1917. I have comprehensive documents associated with his demobilization and disembodiment in April-May 1919. I also have postcards that he sent home which indicated that he had re-enlisted into the Territorial Army post-war. I have just received copies of Fred's Army Service paperwork from the MoD's Historic Disclosures unit at Glasgow. I had hoped that his file would include his service in WW1 but it only includes his post-war service in the TA (as 4381434 Private Fred APPLETON, 4th Yorkshire Regiment). The final entry in his service record reads: "Discharged at his own request Para 193 (3) Terr Army Regs" Can anyone advise me as to the contents of this paragraph of the regulations? I suspect the underlying reason was that he was about to move out of the area (East Cleveland ironstone mines) and seek employment in the Nottinghamshire coalfields - where I have picked up his trail in 1927 at Bircotes near Harworth Colliery. I have documents that show he was a member of the Harworth Colliery Band in the 1930s. He returned to the East Cleveland area in 1938. Sorry if I've rambled on too much. Any information on the Territorial Army regulations would be most welcome. regards, Peter Appleton My Family Tree website: http://www.tribalpages.com/tribes/pappleton3