Why the Royal Dublin Fusiliers for a Suffolk lad...

[Uncle Reff]

My grandmother's brother was killed in action at St Julien in April 1915.

I know that in the latter part of the war that men could be assigned to regiments without any resemblence to where they enlisted or lived, but this chap enlisted (I am told at Gravesend during 1908) into the 2nd Battalion Royal Dublin Fusiliers.

I find this somewhat surprising as he came from Woodbridge in Suffolk and as far as I know never left the county until he enlisted. There are no Irish connections at all in the family, so i am wondering why he should end up in an Irish regiment.

In 1911 he is a Lance Corporal in said regiment stationed at the Marlborough Lines Aldershot.

Needless to say, his service record has not survived. His medal card shows that he was awarded the British War Medal, the Victory Medal and the 1914 star.

I would appreciate any views as to why he ended up in the 'Dublins' and not say the 'Suffolks'.

John

[neil1821]

The short answer is there was nothing at all unusual in this.
Suffolk men in Irish regiments, Londoners in Highland regiments, Yorkshiremen in the Devons, Welshmen in the Buffs (East Kents) and vice versa.
The more you look at soldiers records of WW1 and before, the more you'll see it.

And I'm sure the same thing still happens in the Army.

Maybe some asked to join a particular regiment, maybe in some cases they happened to be at the right place at the right time as a regiment was close by, but I'm sure many weren't concerned at all and just went with the flow, happy to be allocated where they may.

[Pete Keane]

It can also be a little misleading to read too much into Regimental names, prior to 1881 Regiments broadly speaking had numbers not names, but the Cardwell Reforms aimed to encourage Regiments to be more 'local'.

To this end numbered Regiments were reduced to a Battalion in a larger 'named' Regiment.

The 40th Regt of Foot (a Devonshire regiment), became the 1st Battalion, South Lancashire Regiment, and I think the 79th Regiment became the 2nd Battalion.

Battalions were rarely posted to the same place, so it is possible that in 1908 the RDF were barracked in the Kent area somewhere - it may even be that the 2nd Bn were originally a Kent Regiment.

Through many subsequent reforms, some within the last couple of years, the original Regiments are long gone, or maybe remembered by naming a Company after them (as happens with the Blues & Royals I believe.)

I wouldnt look for too deep a meaning, I doubt there was one, as mentioned, right place at right time.

Cheers

Pete

[Pete Keane]

It looks like the 2nd Battalion were based in Gravesend.

Follow this link and look for the 103rd Regiment (Royal Bombay Fusiliers).

http://www.waterfordcountymuseum.org/exhibit/web/Display/article/31/4/

Pete.

[Uncle Reff]

Thank you to all for that...

I was obviously looking for something that was not there...

That is a very nice link as well Pete, I had not found that despite 'Googling' I would not have thought that the most direct route from Gravesend to France was via Harrow

John

[Pete Keane]

My pleasure.

Funny thing, regiment histories. You can just imagine the conversation in the office of the bureaucrats responsible ' We've got a Bombay and a Madras Regiment, what shall we call them? - how about the Royal Dublin Fusiliers?'

Pete

[corisande]

Have a research into the Childers reforms of the British Army
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Childers_reforms

The regiment was created on 1 July 1881 as a result of Childers reforms by the amalgamation of the 102nd Regiment of Foot (Royal Madras Fusiliers) and the 103rd Regiment of Foot (Royal Bombay Fusiliers) whose predecessors had been in the service of the East India Company. After the Indian Rebellion of 1857 the Company's private armies were transferred to the British Army in 1862. Under the reforms five infantry battalions were given Irish territorial titles and the 102nd and 103rd Regiments of Foot became the 1st and 2nd Battalions, The Royal Dublin Fusiliers.

I was not quite as haphazard as implied!

[Uncle Reff]

Funny thing, regiment histories. You can just imagine the conversation in the office of the bureaucrats responsible ' We've got a Bombay and a Madras Regiment, what shall we call them? - how about the Royal Dublin Fusiliers?'

Pete

 

[km1971]

Hi John

The 102nd and 103rd Regiments moved to a combined Depot in Naas in the 1870s. Before that both regiments had spent 3-4 years in SE England, so they were a regiment that was known about both locally, and nationally as they had become famous during the Boer War. They were on the armoured train when Churchill was captured. So joining the RDF rather than the Suffolks would have impressed the girls more.

Regarding his record. The nominal cut-off date for records to be in the NA is August 1920. If he enlisted after August 1908 his papers should still be with the MOD. Even if he enlisted before August 1920, there are also a lot of mistakes in filing papers in the correct section. So you may find them when the NA/MOD get around to releasing the inter-war records. And if he stayed on in the Reserves after completing his 12 years you would not expect them to be in with the ‘WW1’ papers anyway. If you have £30 to spare you could apply to the MOD.

Ken