24th Regiment of Foot was the 2nd Warwicksire regiment

Some of you may be interested to know that Kenneth had written a script for the director Roy Boulting entitled The Battle of Rorke's Drift. However the project got shelved and was never made.

Kenneth went along the auditions for Zulu hoping to land the role of William Jones V.C., unfortunately he was rejected as not being Welsh enough. The role went to Richard Davies. Kenneth was told that he only affected his Welshness to suit the roles in the Boulting Brothers' comedies.

John Y.

So there it is! my reasons for sharing this..firstly, this forum seeks
to educate, but in my humble opinion to many seem to be caught
up with the ' derring do ' of the British and hardly seem to give a
second thought to the Zulu, who were attacked and then subju-
gated! a proud independent sovereign nation laid waste!. the
world has spun abit since Kenneth made this brutally honest
assessment of British imperialism..but it seems we never learn as
the recent events in Ukraine show us..Kenneth again in my opinion
was the very essence of the true anarchist..not country right or
wrong, some people see beyond that, and show the truth! as he
called it, ' the inconvenient truth '. i love this subject but i haver
never been blind to the true intentions of the British..in the case
of the Anglo Zulu War i say..shame on us.

Les,

A well-known author once referred to Ken as a "Boshie little sh*t!" Ken objected to one word "Little."

John Y.

Les mate, you are a star.

This Kenneth Griffith (real name Griffiths), documentary proves my point doesn't it?

Just look how a regiments identity can be stolen by just choosing some choice sentences and selective wording to make things appear different to what they actually were, ie, carefully choosing sentences and wording things to fit in with the 'all Welsh' theme, taking care not to mention the real name of the regiment by just saying '24th regiment', choosing letters home from Welshmen only thus giving the impression that all the men were Welsh, the playing of M o H instead of The Warwickshire Lad, the programme announcer saying the SWB rather than the 2nd Warwickshire regiment, giving most of the men a Welsh accent (including Hook), the flying of a Welsh flag above the tent, there are many others I could mention, but I would be on here for ages doing that, but at least it all goes to show that I am right about all this false Welshness, just to try to convince the public that the regiment was Welsh when it wasn't.

So Ken wanted to play the part of William Jones VC but wasn't Welsh enough,    I find that rather strange, as William Jones VC was an Englishman from Bristol.

Yes, Ken certainly had it in for the Victorian British (or has he looked upon it), the English establishment didn't he? Seems it's OK for someone to be either a Welsh nationalist, a Scottish nationalist or an Irish nationalist, but if anyone says that they are an English nationalist they seem to get tarred with the 'racist' brush. Same for the filling in of forms etc, you have a choice of either being Welsh, Scottish, Irish, etc, etc, but if you are English you only get the choice of 'British', odd that isn't it, seems like you are not allowed to be English anymore    Well, I have got news for them, no one on earth is going to deny me my birthright or national identity, I am English to the marrow in my bones (even though I have Welsh relatives on my mothers side).

Yes Les, Barry and I talked about what Frere and Chelmsford did without the knowledge or consent of the government, and all the suffering that they caused with their invasion of Zululand, how these sort of people slept at night is totally beyond me.

Cheers mate.  

Martin,

You've got to catch my drift as to who might have said Ken wasn't Welsh enough!

John Y.

I saw Ken in the film 'A night to Remember' (Titanic), he played the part of Phillips (the Marconi operator), but one of the most funny parts I saw him in was the 'gay' man in 'The Wild Geese', when he looked at the size of the big coloured blokes his face lit up and he said, 'my word, you are big lads aren't you', I was in stitches.

Sorry John Y, I think I might have missed something, it may have gone over my head (after all, it is getting rather late).

Hiya JY,

A well-known author once referred to Ken as a "Boshie little sh*t!" Ken objected to one word "Little."

Don't you just love that!.. Kenneth was indeed a one off, we wont see his like again, as you
knew him as a friend. you know that somehow he was elevated beyond mere nationalism!
he was an inveterate champion of the underdog. that he was considered not welsh enough
is beyond funny, i bet he was fit to be tied.

Martin, hiya mate, yeah its bo bo's time, i'm glad i could give you something to get your teeth
into, Kenneth was an amazing documentarist, his fights with tv controllers was legendary, it
came to the point when he was given carte blanche to pretty much make any thing he wanted!.
he chose to make films about the azw, his welsh slant was more instances of his sticking two
fingers up at his english pay master's, who ( in Kenneths view ) only existed to frustrate his
artistic talents at every turn!,

i'm born and bred in Lancashire and proud to say i'm english, british, always in that order, am i
a European?..i would say something different every day.. knock yourself out dissecting Kenneths
work, he would be the first to defend your right to do so!

i love this subject, i have no problem at all with the combatants on either side i love the tales
from this war,as always its the politicians i cant stomach, odious toads all of them.

Go back nine generations, not far in the great sweep of history, and each of us have more than 500 direct ancestors - Grandfather, Grt Grandfather etc etc. Daft really to be so adamant about where we think we are from.

Steve

Spot on Les, the state that this once great country is in today is all down to the 'odious toads' that are politicians.

I always find it rather odd that it's the people who elect a government to serve them, in other words, it's the system that is supposed to work for the people, but it always ends up that it's the people that work for the system. They get elected on promises, yet once in power they forget the promises they made and just please themselves what they do and what sort of crap they drag us into. It's about time we had a government that does what the people want and not what they please. But no matter who gets into power, they all seem to sleep in the same bed, they remind me of identi-kit people, all parties sing in a different key but the song is still the same, so it would appear that this once great country is doomed, and it's all down to the 'odious toads' that are politicians.

I can remember Ken doing a doco about the Battle of Jutland (WW1 Naval battle), if I remember correctly, there was some actual footage of the action at sea, I wonder what happened to this doco, it doesn't appear to have been shown on TV for many years, they might have binned it, but that would be shame as I am sure there was some actual footage of this famous WW1 fleet battle.

Cheers mate.

JY.

Thanks for amending your earlier post, I thought there was something missing in the original.

Yes, got you, I understand now, ironic eh?

  

Ken makes some real bloopers in this doco, it makes you wonder if some, if not all, of them were a deliberate cunning ploy to convince the viewer that the regiment and its men were Welsh   

One of the best (or worst), is in part 4 at around 6.45. He says that PM Disraeli made a 'highly inaccurate' statement about the men defending RD as being English soldiers, Ken then says that no Welsh person likes to be referred to as English, thus implying that the men were Welsh, well, by the same token, the English dislike being referred to as Welsh, and saying that out of the 123 or so men of the 24th (2nd Warwickshire) regiment that fought at RD, only about 14 were Welsh, I don't think that PM Disraeli was all that 'highly inaccurate' was he? He also mentions the 11 VC's (implying that they all went to the regiment), what he doesn't tell you is that 4 of them went to persons not of the 24th (2nd Warwickshire) regiment, making the total of 7 that went to men of the regiment, and that all 7 of them went to Englishmen. One of these (Henry Hook), Ken says came from Monmouth    Henry Hook was an Englishman, he came from Churcham in Gloucestershire, England.

Obviously, this doco was made after 'the Baker film', and also after ZD, so Ken wouldn't want to ruin the 'Welsh myth' that was spun by Baker's film. And no doubt with Ken being a Welsh nationalist himself, he continued along the same lines, and added even more false Welshness to his doco to try to convice the viewers that the regiment was Welsh, and that the soldiers of the regiment were Welsh (well, all exept Hitch, "who wasn't a Welshman"), and let's face it, it was done by BBC WALES.

But no doubt Ken knew he was 'spinning the yarn' when he did this, he wasn't daft, he would have known that the regiment was actually called the 24th (2nd Warwickshire) regiment, and that the men of its ranks were overwhelmingly English, but nonetheless, by making this doco, he has tried to add more weight to the myth that the 24th (2nd Warwickshire) regiment was Welsh, and that the 24th's involvement in the AZW was an all Welsh affair, it's sad really that the Welsh have to steal a regiments identity just to give themselves a little bit of ego.

Hiya mate, cant really argue with any of that!
except to say that Kenneth regarded himself
as an Irish Republican as well! not so strange
when you understand his politic's, i recommend
to all his autobiography ' the fools pardon ' a
truly fascinating and compassionate man! he
did not suffer fools at all never mind gladly, but
as you alluded to.. in the Wild Geese, it was his
idea to make his character ' gay ' and just as he
was about to die horribly..revealed his delightful
delicious dark humour, yeah Kenneth knew what
he was doing alright, he deal with the film in his
book and devotes a whole chapter to it.ch 27.

a few ( out of context ) snippets..

Pitching the film.." and they both listened
sympathetically to my argument that the welsh
element in whatever we might do must be our welsh
spirit and, not not necessarily, a welsh
story"..

" It was i who suggested a welsh subject for us to kick
off with ( of course it was understood that the ball
would be oval shaped. )..ME.. now i take the above
statement to mean..no welsh slant..no film..which would
have been criminal.

Hi Les.

Hell, a Welsh nationalist and also an Irish Republican, I suppose that it might be fair to say that he really didn't care much for the English then did he, I wonder if he was also a supporter of Scottish independence   

Funny isn't it, that most people of the so called 'celtic' nations seem to be under the false impression that they are the 'true' people of Britain, if only they knew where the celts actually originate from they would probably alter their thoughts about that, one thing is for sure, the 'celts' are definitely NOT from Britain.

Oval shaped ball? yes, it most certainly was, and very elongated as well.

Cheers mate.   

Humm, it could work I suppose: Instead of Ivor belting out MoH, Chard turning to his CS and asking him to counter act the Zulu singing and out from the barricade bounces George Formby Ukelele at the ready, " Im leaning on the lampost on the corner of the street in case a certain Cetshwayo pops by, oh me oh my."
Zulus exit stage right screaming.
  

Ha ha, nice one springy.

It might have worked even better if 'Our Gracie' had popped up from behind the mealie bags and blurted out "Sing as we go", everyone might have formed a conga line and danced around the Oscarberg.

The Zulu's would have run off if the old battleaxe Nora Batty (Kathy Staff), had come out from behind the hospital door raising her long brush, in her curlers and wrinkled stockings and gave them all a piece of her mind, "Clear off, go and play round yer own end". Yes, they would have crapped themselves if they had been confronted by battleaxes like Peggy Mount, Nora Batty, Mildred Roper, Sybil Fawlty, and Ena Sharples, it would have been a 'no contest'.

Looks like you are getting back to form old mate, good, glad you are on the mend buddy.   

Morning, Martin. Springbok, cant believe you
left out Margaret Rutherford and the one and
only Hilda Baker!( she knows you know )   

Martin, Griffith had lots of english friends inc
one of our very own..

Morning Les mate.

Yes, dear old Margaret Rutherford and our Hylda (the time now is 1/2 past,,,, oh! I must get a little hand for this watch) LOL.

Who do you mean buddy?

 

The perfect piece of casting of course would be Tommy Cooper ( Not a relative I hope Martin) as Chelmsford: Picture him giving a message to Crealock and Clery, " Not like that, like that !"
Sorry CTSG didn't mean to make you spill the whiskey !

  

Hang on Les, I think I was going down the wrong path.

When you said 'one of our very own', I was thinking along the lines of a Lancastrian, but it has now occurred to me that you might be saying 'one of our very own' meaning someone on the forum, so, thinking about it, would that person be Mr John Young?

Cheers mate    

Hi springy.

Oddly enough I do have a cousin called Tommy Cooper, he does get some stick from folk saying "Just like that", ha ha, even I cop for it with being called Cooper, but it's like water off a ducks back, Hu- hu, hu, hu.  

P.S. Would Chelmsford be wearing a Fez   

Martin next your be telling us your wife's first name is "Mini"   

 
Plaudits Pete.

No Martin a Lancastrian he is not, he's from ' down there ' but
i have never held that against him   you were right it
is he!

David Threfall as TC..magnificent..

No Pete, 'Mini' was my Aunt, 'The Shifter' is the Mrs, or as I say to her many a time, "I see the removal service has been on the prowl again", Jeez, you can't go to the front door without something being moved by the time you get back,,,,,,, now then,,,,,, where is my tin of bacca      

  

Hi Les.

Down there? not an ozzie is he       

No mate, I know where you mean, and I am sure JY gets a good friendly Lancashire welcome when he travels up here on his research visits, he can pop in here anytime for a chinwag a brew and a butty   

  

No Mate, not that far down.      

 

Martin,

Essex is hardly the Antipodes! I might take you up on your offer of hospitality.

Les,

There is another friend of Ken's on the forum as well, I'll look for the photograph.

By-the-way have you found me in A Fool's Pardon?

John Y.

John Y.

I know, I was just kidding with Les.

John, you would be made most welcome if you came to this neck of the woods.

  

Just to say if anybody wants the limited artwork
i have on black as hell, its in my bucket. JY your
so modest and i mean,really, you are..for instance
the prime minister of Zululand is a personal friend
of yours, your name came to my attention so many
years ago now, i imagine you still live in LS, yet
you get all around the world, i think your about the
best we have now, all the others have passed, so
stick around a bit longer yeah! i loved the sound of
mrs Docherty she sounds very formidable.. i hope
you agree that ch 27 is a must for all to read, your
on p 373 listed with his close friend's, you know how
jealous i am of that, oh for a time machine.

Hey Martin, have you seen this short bio?
" As we must now call the ' Old 24th '. is
near the bottom of the piece..   

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Hi Les.

No mention (yet again), of the name that the regiment held for the longest length of time in its entire history (the best part of 100 years), however BIG letters for the SWB (and also 24th in brackets), thus implying that the SWB was still numbered the 24th (which it never was). But it does say 'as we must 'NOW' call the 'OLD' 24th, meaning that the name SWB is a 'new' name for the virtually 'new' regiment that came into being due to the reforms of July 1st 1881. The SWB was just the SWB, the line numbers were officially abolished on July 1st 1881, meaning that the SWB never had the number 24 in its title and therefor was NEVER the 24th, the 24th foot or the 24th regiment, they were just the SWB. The last British infantry regiment to officially have the line number 24 in its title was the 24th (2nd Warwickshire) regiment of foot, and NO other.

  

Not a lot of people know that.   

The official title of the RRW was The Royal Regiment of Wales (24th/41st Foot).  Even today the Yorkshire Regiment is officially The Yorkshire Regiment (14th/14th, 19th and 33rd/76th Foot). Numbered regiments of foot live on.

The 1st Battalion, The South Wales Borderers carried the Colours of the 24th until 1933 - and in case of 2nd Battalion until 1947.  In 1881 it was the same regiment - only the title and facings changed. Remember because of the two world wars more men have worn the SWB cap badge than the 24th - this is why the South Wales Borderers as a name resonates with the general public.

The numbers in brackets were/are only to show the seniority of the amalgamated regiments, they were/are NOT part of the official title. The official title of the SWB was just SWB, the official title of the RRW was just the RRW, the Yorkshire regiment is just the Yorkshire regiment, the numbers in brackets are added only to show the seniority of the amalgamated regiments, there were NO regiments of foot nor were there any line numbers after 1st July 1881 when they were OFFICIALLY abolished.

After the 1st July 1881, the 'new' SWB should have had new colours, as the old colours belonged to the old regiment (as stated on the colours, ie, XXIV, and 2nd Warwickshire), the 'new' regiment was NOT the XXIV and it was NOT the 24th (2nd Warwickshire) regiment, so the colours that the 'new' SWB carried were not rightfully theirs and nor were/are the awards and honours of the regiment pre 1881.

There were more battalions of all regiments raised for the two world wars, and that is why a lot of men wore the SWB badge, however, the regiment had the name of the 24th (2nd Warwickshire) regiment a lot longer than any other title in its entire history (100 years), so there must have been a hell of a lot of men that have worn the badge of the 2nd Warwickshire regiment during those 100 years, so I doubt that more men wore the SWB badge than 2nd Warwickshire.

The only reason why the SWB resonates with the uninitiated general public is because it was used falsely in the 1964 film Zulu to con the general public into believing that it was Welsh, and has since been used time after time to boost that false Welshness, and is now thought by those people gullible enough to believe in the Baker film and other later documentaries, that the regiment that fought in the AZW at both RD and iSandlwana was a Welsh regiment with mainly Welshmen in its ranks. But this is total rubbish and nonesense, the regiment that fought in the AZW at both iSandlwana and RD was the 24th (2nd Warwickshire) regiment of foot, and its ranks were overwhelmingly Englishmen. Baker's film (and other documentaries, articles, etc), making it appear that the regiment was Welsh is wrong, and those responsible are dishonouring the good name of the 24th (2nd Warwickshire) regiment and showing disrespect for the mainly Englishmen who served, fought and died in its ranks, and it cannot be right to steal a regiments identity and take away the honour and glory of the men that served in it just to give others a false ego.

Martin

I hesitate because I know you won't agree, but here goes anyway!

I think your being much too black and white about what "official" means. Of course, this suits your argument, as we know. Are you really saying that carrying the Colour with 24th on it for 50 years was not official! Or that having collar badges with 24th on was not official? Of course it was. It just wasn't consistent with what Cardwell said - but the Army has never been consistent has it. You will think these things should not have been allowed by the War Office - but they were. Politicians are always saying one thing and doing another - I know you agree with that. The Army is run by politicians not soldiers - a damn good thing in a democracy - but logic and consistency doesn't come into it.

As a side issue, I think Kenny may be right about numbers serving in SWB compared with 24th. SWB had 20 Battalions during WW1 alone, while the Georgian and Victorian armies were pretty small. So even over 100 years it may be so. Interesting exercise to undertake.

Stanley Baker is the villain in all this, not the Regiment.  

Steve

Steve.

'Official' by definition is something done with authority, so in 1881 when the reforms changed the army beyond recognition, it was done with authority. This of course meant that when the old regimental names and line numbers were officially abolished it was done with authority, meaning that any mention of the old names and numbers was not official, and anyone using them after 1st July 1881 was not authorised to do so. However, many regiments still used the old line numbers, but officially this was wrong, and should have been quickly stamped out by the authorities. I didn't say that the colours were not official, I said that they were not rightfully theirs (the new regiments). This is because the name and numbers on the colours were not the same as the regiments new name, ie, the regimental colour stated the 2nd Warwickshire, but the regiment was now called the SWB, and the number on the Queen's colour stated XXIV, but the new regiment was not the 24th it was just the SWB, therefor the colours were incompatable with the new regiment, and therefor not rightly their colours because they carried  the old regiments name and old line number, and not the name of the new regiment, and that is why they should have had new colours presented in 1881. Yes many regiments raised lots of battalions during the two world wars, but these were soon disbanded afterwards, but no doubt there would have been many men served in their ranks. It's not just Baker who is the villain, there are also others (mainly Welsh), who have kept, and are still keeping, up the deception of all this nonesense about the regiment that fought in the AZW at iSandlwana and RD being Welsh, a quick glance at a list of regiments will show that there is not one Welsh named regiment that took part in the AZW. They are not being fair to the old regiment nor to the men who served in it by just giving its old  (1751-1782) title of the 24th regiment, the regiments title was the 24th (2nd Warwickshire) regiment and this is what should be stated, but they choose not to do so, and in some cases even quote SWB, how wrong is that? There are even some websites that state that Marlborugh was the SWB's colonel, totally absurd. Politicians? can't trust them as far as you can chuck them, they are the pits, just look at the state of this once great country these days, and it's all down to these cretins called politicians, they are a set of skunks (absolute stinkers).

Sorry Martin, I can't resist.

So official means done with authority, but if something is authorised later it doesn't mean it's official. Can't see it old son.

I don't take such a glum view of the old country, although I don't like politicians either having worked for them for 40 years !

Truth is, as an OAP i'm better off than i've ever been in good old England! Pass the gravy !

Steve

Martin

Stanley Baker made a damn good film which was entertaining and a financial success.  Over 50 years it has introduced thousands and thousands of people around the world to the Anglo-Zulu war and to the courage of those who fought on both sides at RD.  Yes, he did not follow the story accurately in some aspects but it has stood the test of time - made stars of Michael Caine and Prince Buthelezi.  Perhaps you should have found a Warwickshire director/actor in 1964 with the same vision to produce Zulu.  Without the film this website would not probably exist. Yes, the regiment at RD was the 24th (2nd Warwickshire) Regiment of Foot - but the regiment in 1879 was no more Warwickshire than it was Welsh - although I think the Welsh/Monmouthshire lads actually did have the edge.  Almost every Territorial (Country) regiment recruited where it could - it was normal in those days that less than 20% of recruits came from area of the regiment's title.  Many from Ireland and the larger cities.  It is almost like supporting your premier league soccer team - few of the players are local lads.

The Colours of RRW - did have The Royal Regiment of Wales (XXIV/XLI Foot) embroidered on them.

The new Colours of The Yorkshire Regiment do have 14th/15th, 19th and 33rd/76th Foot embroidered on them.

Suggest you go to the Royal Welsh Museum website shop and buy yourself a 24th Glengarry badge 1871 lapel pin - then you can display your allegiance to '2nd Warwickshire' everyday.  After all it was 'The Noble 24th' - a jolly fine regiment..

Well said Kenny. Martin is a typical Englishmad. He wants his cake and eat it too!

Baker made the film with respect in mind to the Welsh defenders who took part in the defence of Rorkes drift. ( More than a any British director did)  When the film was made it was a Welsh Regiment.  
If it wasn't for Baker's and Enfield, the History of the Zulu War would have been lost, along with a lot of the other British battles. The fact that the 24th Regiment is mentioned should be good enough.

Kenny, John
My sentiments exactly.
  

Steve.

For something to be authorised it has to be referred to officials who discuss the matter and either approve it or not, if something is authorised without these officials approval it is not official.

Kenny.

I have always said that the Baker film was a classic, and that many people got interested in the AZW because of it, however, due to this film a lot of people are under the impression that the regiment and its men were Welsh and called the SWB, which it was not. And although it mentions the 24th, this refers to the regiment between 1751 and 1782, as after that and during the AZW it was called the 24th (2nd Warwickshire) regiment, and this is what should have been used in the film.

Yes, I do know that regiments recruited from other areas besides their county names, there were about 12 or so men from Lancashire who fought at RD. You say that the Welsh/Monmouthshire lads had the edge, well you are very wrong on that count. Monmouthshire was legally, judicially and administratively an English county from 1536 and the people of the county classed themselves as being English at the time of the AZW, it did not become Welsh until the 1970's. You say that the regiment was no more Warwickshire than Welsh, well, it was a lot more English than Welsh. It had been raised in Pluckley, Kent, England in 1689, it was raised for the defence of the English Kingdom, it was later given an English county title, so I would say that makes it more of an English regiment than it does a Welsh one. It had no connection whatsoever with Wales, but was relocated to Brecon in 1873, but this was on paper only, as by the time of the AZW in 1879, neither battalion had ever been to Brecon. All this is not my own opinion (as some seem to think), just take a look through Ian Knights companion to the AZW and see what he says about this. And of the 123 or so men of the 24th (2nd Warwickshire) regiment that fought at RD, about 14 were Welsh, there was 1 Scot, and there was around 15 Irish, these were all vastly outnumbered by Englishmen. However, Baker decided to ignore these facts and make the regiment an all Welsh affair (with a few foreigners from England), he also added a lot of false Welshness to the film including the sing off between the Zulu's and (as Baker put it), 'the Welsh', so he added the singing of M o H, sung by 'Owen', there was NO Owen at RD, besides, the regiments song was then the Warwickshire lads not M o H. As before, the numbers you refer to are only added to show the seniority of the amalgamated regiments, they are not part of the regiments official title. I do not need to visit the museum to obtain the badges you speak of, as I already have them, and I do agree that the 24th (2nd Warwickshire) regiment was 'The Noble 24th'.

John.

I don't want my cake and eat it, all I want is the proper recognition for the correct regiment and its men that fought in the AZW at both iSandlwana and RD, and its pre 1881 history and honours. Bakers film deprived those brave men and their regiment of that honour and substituted it with a mythical Welsh regiment that did not exist until 2 years AFTER the AZW, and since then the real regiment and the mainly Englishmen of its ranks have been ignored and replaced by a Welsh myth, and this cannot be right. Again, the 24th regiment only existed for 31 years (1751-1782), the correct title for the regiment after that is the 24th (2nd Warwickshire) regiment, and this should have been made clear in the film, and even at the end of the film the regiment is referred to as the SWB rather than the 2nd Warwickshire regiment, it appears that this was done very intentionally (as was other false Welshness in the film) to make the viewer think that the regiment was Welsh when it was not.

Springy.

The sentiments you mean are about the bringing of the AZW to the publics attention, which otherwise may have been allowed to pass into history without the film being made, however, Baker had an alternative agenda, and it appears that he succeeded. I, on the other hand, do not have an alternative agenda, all I want is justice for the men and their regiment, as it seems that if this is not corrected then the actions of the 24th (2nd Warwickshire) regiment and its involvement in the AZW will be allowed to be forgotten to history and replaced by a mythical Welsh regiment that did not even exist at the time, and that cannot be right. The brave men that did the business deserve better than to be dumped on the scrap pile of history and be forgotten along with their regiment.

Martin wrote:

For something to be authorised it has to be referred to officials who discuss the matter and either approve it or not, if something is authorised without these officials approval it is not official.

We asked the same for David Jenkins being added to the roll?

We asked the same for David Jenkins being added to the roll?...

Who did you ask? and who are we?.

Good morning Les Yawn! When you wake up, read the Jenkins thread.   

Martin your reply to Steve. Well said   

Thank you cstg, i get up at 8-30 am,every day. routine dictates that!
i have read the Jenkins thoroughly, he was there!. the argument against
saddens me, i dont disrespect hero's.

Changes to uniform and badging were approved by The Board of Ordnance and were sealed with a label bearing the shield of the Chief Inspecting Officer. That made it a "sealed pattern" and could not be deviated from without further approval by the Ordnance Board. Somewhere in the depths of the MOD sits the sealed pattern for the SWB collar badges with 24th on them.

No such Board exists to approve the historical presence of particular soldiers at particular battles. History belongs to historians who produce sufficient evidence to support their case in the eyes of their peers. That has been done so far as Jenkins is concerned. You are clutching at straws.

Steve