Military Medal recipients

[Mark Abbott]

With close to 5 million soldiers serving in the British Army in WW1, 115000 represents a very small percentage.  MMs were hard won.  Some, who presumably did not receive the reward may have felt that they "came up with the rations"; they did not!

[Redroger]

There was a strong element of randomness about the awards, as I know of at least one case where 2 signallers were repairing a damaged line under fire, on opposite sides of the same pole, one got the MM, the other didn't.Anyway, good luck to them all, if they survived they often had 40+ years of nightmares reliving the experiences they couldn't bring themselves to talk about.

[Mark Abbott]

I don't disagree with your comment about the randomness; who witnesssed the act and did they survive to report it.

I have several examples of awards to men in the RE and RFA who received them for the same act of heroism, the only difference being a change in the name for each recommendation.

[corisande]

115000 represents a very small percentage.

As I say, I am not decrying the individual acts of heroism. But I am trying to get into perspective for readers here how "common" the MM was, and why it was referred to as it was.

If I accepted your figure of 5 million who served, that would have meant the 1 in every 43 men got the MM.

But it was not  instituted till half way through the war, and on top of that only men in the front line could generally have expected to get it. So in front line soldiers, that is among those who were expecting rations to be sent up, perhaps 1 in 25 would get the MM before the end of the war.

4,100 DSMs were issued during World War I, and that is a rarer decoration

You are unfortunately construing the maths as an attack on the medal recipients, it is not.

[Mark Abbott]

I am not "construing the maths as an attack on the medal recipients".  I am simply pointing out that no matter how "common" the award was, it was always hard won.  The medal awarded to " S A Martin of the 11th Essex Regiment" will have been well deserved and like many MM recipients he remains in France to this day.

According to "The Great War Forum", some 7,165,280   British Army servicemen were available for deployment during WW1. I simply do not know how many RN sailors were involved so I cant comment on the ratio of awards; numerically, the DSM is scarcer and does have the distinct advantage that the citations were publishedin the LG.

If you look at some DCM citations, they could be said to "have come up with the rations".  MMs were always awarded for acts of gallantry.

[corisande]

At the heart of it all, then, as now, a quota system existed for medals

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article7009680.ece

The system could not operate without such quotas.

[Redroger]

These quotas, and in my opinion quotas in any other walk of life e.g. education, should be abolished forthwith. This does indeed give credence to what my father told me about the MM coming up with the rations. A good and current place to start would be with Afghanistan!

[Mark Abbott]

Quotas were indeed used in WW1 when deciding the number of medals to be issued to each individual Division, Brigade and unit.  I do not however see how this supports the contention that they came up with the rations.

I have records that show individuals being recommended for gallantry awards which were refused at Brigade or Divisional level as the CO "whilst admiring the pluck shown by private..." believed the individual concerned was simply doing his duty.  Those that were awarded gallantry medals had clearly acted in a manner over  and above what was expected.

[Redroger]

My point is that to limit any award for merit by quota diminishes the value of the award in the eyes of potential recipients, and could well have led to the belief they come up with the rations.