Jump to content

Talk:Neville Howse

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Australian ?

[edit]

He was born in England how was he an Australian - he would have been called a pom by the Aussies Jim Sweeney (talk) 08:36, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

King's South Africa Medal

[edit]

I initially had some doubts about Howse's entitlement to the KSA medal - however this source shows quite clearly that he was entitled to it (with two clasps). The entitlement for the KSA (from it's wiki page) is that it was "awarded only to those troops who fought in 1902, and who had served for 18 months. Service did not have to be continuous, but even with continuous service the recipient would have had to serve from December 1900 to have 18 months service before the war ended in May 1902". Howse arrived in South Africa in early 1900, and was there in 1902, with a period in the middle where he returned to Australia. Whilst I can't confirm the length of time he spent away (from South Africa), I gather that the ref above is correct. PalawanOz (talk) 10:10, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would have to disagree. In no portrait or photograph of Howse does it show him wearing the ribbon of the KSA medal nor is it among his medal set. Abraham, B.S. (talk) 05:29, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I just had a look at the timeline of Howse's life at the AWM website, and it states that Howse was in South Africa from February 1900 until January 1901 and then again from February 1902. While it does not specify the date of his return to Australia, the war finished in May 1902, meaning that Howse would have incurred a maximum of six months of service during the qualifying period of December 1900 and May 1902, and a maximum total of fifteen months service all up; meaning he was not entitled to the KSA medal. Abraham, B.S. (talk) 05:41, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"I would have to disagree. In no portrait or photograph of Howse does it show him wearing the ribbon of the KSA medal nor is it among his medal set." - I've already addressed this at length elsewhere. You classified it as a personal attack, so I'll keep this completely impersonal. What I said then, and repeat now, is that: "Just because you haven't seen it, doesn't mean he isn't entitled to it", and I drew your attention to Major Peter Badcoe VC, where only 5 medals of his entitlement are publicly displayed. Yes, the conclusion you have come to is that, on the basis of the data you are using, it appears that he may not be entitled. However:
1) You may be wrong.
2) There may be other factors you have not considered, or do not know about.
3) PalawanOz says: "I initially had some doubts about Howse's entitlement to the KSA medal - however this source shows quite clearly that he was entitled to it (with two clasps).". You don't seem to have addressed that.
Hence, until you can find some independent evidence that he is not entitled to the medal, I'm inclined towards the evidence that he is entitled to the medal. Pdfpdf (talk) 13:44, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I take it you actually mean http://members.pcug.org.au/~croe/ozb/oz_boer_more.cgi?record=9356 ? Only one of the sources there gives the KSAM, others only mention the QASM. This is precisely why I dislike these summaries. If the matter was dealt with in text, the differing sources could more easily be dealt with, inclusion in a list means we have to come down on one side or the other. David Underdown (talk) 14:17, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It being past midnight here, I can't be certain as to what I mean. Will respond at another time. Pdfpdf (talk) 14:39, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
But until then, I don't see why this has to be an "either/or" matter, (particularly if you dislike it.) I see no reason why it can't be incorpoated both visually and as text. I really feel you're trying to create a "conflict scenario" when it really isn't necessary. What's the problem with including both text and pictures? Pdfpdf (talk) 14:39, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Inclusion in a list automatically biases the reader towards assuming that they definitely were awarded the medal, even if there's then a note to say, well some sources don't actually include this amongst his medals. If under the section on the Boer War we just say, he was awarded the QSAM, and some sources state he also received the KSAM, it doesn't get that privilieged status. David Underdown (talk) 14:52, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Pdf, I may be wrong, but I do not see how you can really compare Howse's medal set to Badcoe's, due to the fact that the missing medals for Badcoe's set were not established until after the man's death, while, of course, the KSA medal was awarded during Howse's life time, and service in fact. You state that I may not be considering other factors, and, yes, I may not be, but you appear to not be considering the information that I posted above stating that from the brief timeline of Howse's life at the AWM site it specifies that Howse was in South Africa for a maximum of fifteen months during the Boer War, and not the required eighteen for the KSAM. As for what PalawanOz stated, David Underdown has already addressed this issue. The reference states in one section that he was awarded the KSAM, while in another it states only the QSAM, with a differing number of clasps. Personally, I do not believe the reference is to be trusted, due to the fact that it contradicts itself. That is another reason why I no longer support the inclusion of "Honours and Awards" sections, as it can be difficult to determine whether a person was awarded a medal or not. Abraham, B.S. (talk) 00:42, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid I've become rather bored with this topic. It seems to me that no-one (probably including me) has any interest in considering any views that don't match their own. Well folks, I have news for you: Not everybody has the same opinion as you! Further, there is no progress to be made in ignoring opinions contrary to your own, and repeating your own opinions.
Never-the-less, and probably forlornly, I will attempt to address the issues raised.
I will point out, probably unnecessarily, that eveyone seems to be busy pushing their own POV, and ignoring anyone else's questions which do not support their own POV.
I was going to try to be reasonable, rational and balanced, but you know what? I can't be bothered, because I'm expecting that no-one is going to pay any attention to what I had intended to say. Do what you damn well please. I no longer care. Pdfpdf (talk) 17:08, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"but I do not see how you can really compare Howse's medal set to Badcoe's"
I guess this fits into the category: "I was about to say something here". ... Pdfpdf (talk) 17:32, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Excuse me, I was not trying to push my own point of view, but bring in information that challenges your belief that Howse was awarded the KSA medal. Mr Underdown and I also challenged the reference that PalawanOz provded due to the fact that it contradicts itself. If we ignored the fact that Howse never wore the KSAM and it could have been a case such as Badcoe's, there is still the fact that the AWM source states he was in South Africa for a maximum of fifteen months service; three months short of the required service period for the KSAM. Abraham, B.S. (talk) 00:40, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gents - one important thing to note is that the www reference above lists the information contained in a variety of hardcopy published sources - and the first extract listed is from 'Murray' - in full, this is the "Official Records of the Australian Military Contingents to the War in South Africa", compiled and edited for the Department of Defence by Lt.-Col. P. L. Murray. 'Murray' is seen as _the_ authority for information on personnel who took part in the South African war(s). Since Murray lists Howse as receiving the KSA medal, I am very happy to believe that he did so. Also, the absence of any particular medal from a physical medal set does not mean that the recipient was not entitled - the medal may have been lost, or even that the medal set itself was split for some reason (different medals to different children following someone's death for example). A physical medal set shows you the medals that someone definitely received, but is no guarantee of a complete set. PalawanOz (talk) 02:06, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Problem is that one of the other references listed, NAA Series B5204, also looks pretty authoritative to me, and doesn't include the KSAM, and has a different number of clasps for the QASM-and for the reasons of timing given by Bryce, it seems unlikely that he really did meet the qualification criteria (though this is obviously OR). David Underdown (talk) 09:19, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I guess the only thing for is to check the original references! I am going to be in Canberra in about 3 weeks time - I will go to the War Memorial Research Centre and check their records.... this site states that "The Research Centre holds a fragile microfilm copy of Medal rolls and correspondence, Sudan and South Africa (ORMF 0055) documenting the issue of Queen's and King's Medals to soldiers in Australian contingents with an index to the unit." PalawanOz (talk) 08:17, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds like a good idea, PalawanOz; I was considering contacting the Directorate of Honours and Awards at the Department of Defence myself, lol. Abraham, B.S. (talk) 00:47, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dates in South Africa

[edit]

I managed to get my hands on a copy of Murray's Records of Australian Contingents, which does indeed list Howse as receiving the KSA medal with two clasps (on page 18). However there are some inconsistencies which need further research. The following details are listed on page 16:

  • The Second Contingent of the NSW Army Medical Corps left Sydney on 17 January 1900
  • The corps disembarked in East London (South Africa) on 22 February 1900.
  • Part of the contingent left Cape Town on 3 November 1900 (arriving Sydney 8 December 1900)
  • The main portion left Cape Town on 13 Dec 1900 (arriving Sydney 8 January 1901).

Assuming that Howse left with the main portion, then he had 295 days in theatre.

But.... (there's always a but)... this site lists shipping movements, and states that Lieutenant N R Howse of the NSW Medical Staff arrived in Southhampton Water (ie, England) on the evening of 18 Dec 1900, having left Cape Town on 28 November 1900 as an invalid on the Orotava. The same site also notes that the Orient left Cape Town for Australia and New Zealand 13 December 1900, and does not list Howse in the NSW Medical Staff contingent.

Assuming Howse arrived in South Africa on 22 Feb 00, and left on 29 Nov 00, then he had 281 days in theatre. I would prefer to validate this detail before committing to it.

To continue on page 16 of Murray:

  • The Australian Commonwealth Army Medical Contingent embarked in Sydney on 11 February 1902.
  • The transport reached Durban on 17 March 1902, disembarking on 19 March 1902.
  • The Bearer Company (under Howse's command) embarked at Durban on 8 July 1902

This gives Howse 111 days in theatre, of which 74 days was within the KSA medal entitlement period (up to 1 June 1902)

As a result - Howse had either 369 or 355 days (12.3 or 11.8 months) in South Africa.

From those dates, Howse failed to meet the 18 months minimum service time for the KSA medal. Also - he is listed as receiving two clasps (South Africa 1901 and South Africa 1902), however from the dates given, he could not have been entitled to the 1901 clasp.

Summary so far - I am beginning to doubt his entitlement to the KSA, however I have not seen absolute proof of Howse's arrival and departure dates in South Africa (only his contingent arrival and departure dates). I will check the War Memorial records in a few weeks, and also try and access the Sydney Morning Herald archives for the period (which should list arrivals/departures). PalawanOz (talk) 09:43, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The plot further thickens.... I have now found a copy of Australian Awards of the Kings South Africa Medal, a paper prepared by Major R. Clark and published by the Military Historical Society of Puckapunyal (date unknown, but from the look of it, probably early 1980's as it has been prepared on a typewriter using military formatting from that era). The editor makes a disclaimer at the start that due to a number of factors, he would "make no foolish claim that this roll is perfect". With that in mind, I can not find Howse listed in the roll. I can, however, find more than one member of the NSW Army Medical Corps (who subsequently served in the Commonwealth contingent) - eg, WO J.F. McEwen and Sergt C. White. There is also a note under the Commonwealth roll to the effect:

In addition to those listed above on the AAMC Roll a further 17 individuals were issued medals without bars. These medals were required to be returned in 1906

Additionally, contained in an annex to the paper is a copy of the Military Forces of the Commonwealth, General Order 1902 No. 208, issued on 7 November 1902. That order published an extract from Special Army Order dated 29th September regarding the issue of the King's South Africa Medal.

4. In interpretation of this rule [regarding dates of service and eligibility] that actual period of absence from duty, either at Home or in South Africa on account of wounds or sickness directly attributed to service in the Field, will be allowed to count to make up the period of eighteen months.

This information is also available here.

Noting the information I previously posted from this site regarding Howse leaving South Africa separate to his contingent as an invalid on the Orotava, it is a possible conjecture that under the provisions of the quoted paragraph 4, Howse could have been entitled to the KSA medal due to his time as an invalid in England. As I said... the plot thickens. It may well be that the only way to be sure of the entitlement would be to examine Howse's personal file - I will see if I can do so whilst at the AWM. PalawanOz (talk) 00:36, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Medal Entitlement - new reference

[edit]

I have just got hold of two biographies that provided a wealth of information - Anzac Doctor by Stuart Braga and Neville Howse by Michael Tyquin. From those, it appears clear that Howse was not entitled to the Kings South Africa Medal. In fact, Braga actually notes on page 76 the confusion caused with Murray "erroneously indicating that Howse received the Queen's Medal with six clasps and the King's Medal with two clasps". I will amend the main page with the information contained in the two biographies. PalawanOz (talk) 07:17, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Surgeon General

[edit]

(reproduced from User talk:Pdfpdf)

It's arguable whether it's a rank or the name of the appointemnt - from other gazette entries I've seen it does surgeon-general does at this time seem to have been used for anyone in the Medical Corps ranked higher than colonel (compare with the naval practice which still distinguishes those in medical and dental professions as surgeon-(rank)), but I was in two minds as to whether to change that one or not at the time, so I'll leave it alone. David Underdown (talk) 14:05, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I also was not sure on the term - my wording in the article came from the two bibliographies. Tyquin (2000) on page 68 talks of "Howse's promotion to surgeon-general on 7 December (retrospective from 22 November". The rank and posting detailed on the same page states:
  • promoted to colonel on 24 Dec 1914
  • ADMS (Assistant Director Medical Services) to the 1st Australian Division on 28 Dec 1914
  • provisionally appointed DDMS (Deputy Director Medical Services) to the ANZAC Corps on 11 Sep 1915
  • temporary surgeon-general and DMS (Director Medical Services) AIF on 22 Nov 1915
Page 67 of Tyquin (and page 213 of Braga (2000)) also quotes a letter from Colonel Fetherston that Howse "should have the rank of Surgeon-General".
page 240 of Braga quotes a letter from General Birdwood "commenting on his promotion from the temporary rank of Surgeon-General to substantive rank as Major-General. 'By the same post, you will here of your promotion to Surg.-Genl in the A.I.F. instead of Temporary'"
I would infer from all these sources, that 'Surgeon-General' was indeed a rank at the time, equivalent to 'Brigadier-General' (as used in the British Army until 1922). PalawanOz (talk) 07:31, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Although I should be, I'm still not comfortable with classing Surgeon General as a rank. I guess I'll just have to learn to live with the discomfort ... Pdfpdf (talk) 12:46, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Neville Howse. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:18, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Neville Howse. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:55, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Neville_Howse&oldid=1207654956"