Ten years ago this month, John Howard’s Minister for Veteran Affairs, Danna Vale, launched a searchable internet database known as the World War 2 Nominal Roll.
It was intended to be a virtual war memorial, listing all Australians who served in World War II as one of the ways to honour the nation’s annual ANZAC Day pledges “Lest we forget” and “We will remember them”.
While the database now correctly carries details of many of the 1 million Australians who served in the Army, Navy and Air Force, it also includes wrong details of thousands of others and – worse still – completely omits thousands more.
This means that it has practically become pot-luck whether a young person today, searching online for grandma or grandad’s war record, turns up the correct details or finds anything at all.
Lest we omit
These inaccuracies have the potential to spoil family gatherings, ruin Remembrance and ANZAC Day celebrations, and possibly, even crucially, disrupt family payments and entitlements as the war veterans and their spouses near the end of their lives.
How big is the problem? We think it’s about 90,000 – nearly 10% of the total 1 million people who served in Australia’s defence forces and the Merchant Navy during World War II.
That includes people who served in the forces but have been left off the roll completely, and many more whose records of service are wrong when compared with other existing military records such as the Australian War Memorial and wartime paperwork such as individuals’ pay cards which we found in the National Archives.
Notable exceptions
Who are they? Some big wigs are missing completely, including the Boer War and Gallipoli veteran General Sir Harry Chauvel, Inspector General of the Volunteer Defence Corps 1940-1945, and Major General V.P.H. Stantke, who served on the Military Board and was General Officer Commanding the Queensland “lines of communication” area from 1943-1945.
Some enduring heroes have also been caught up in this saga, including Army nurse Vivian Bullwinkel who alone survived the 1942 massacre of soldiers and nurses, many of whom where machine-gunned by Japanese soldiers in the surf off Bangka Island, Indonesia. Nurse Bullwinkel’s record on the nominal roll is incomplete to the point of being inaccurate.
But ordinary Australians who signed up to serve in many inauspicious but necessary parts of the war have also suffered indignities at the hands of the World War 2 Nominal Roll. Because both authors of this article are Queenslanders, our research started there.
Here are some of the Queensland enlistments whose names and service are not on the World War 2 Nominal Roll.
Those who died in service
Captain S.J. Keane, Q39028, was a member of the 51st CMF Battalion for some years, and marched into camp on March 24, 1941. A week later he was admitted to Cairns hospital, but died on April 13.
Captain G.H. Williams, QP185, was a Permanent Army man, with service going back to the Boer War. He was quartermaster of the 15th Infantry Battalion when he died in Rosemount Hospital Brisbane on August 20, 1941.
Sgt V. K. Creed, QP703, in the Permanent Army, Provost Corps, 1 MD, died July 31, 1942.
Private Sacre, Q1215, Signaller, Nth Command Sigs, (died 28/6/1941).
Served, survived but not recorded
Private F.M. Provera, Q102472, was in camp from November 28, 1941, to February 4, 1942, then released to return to studies.
Private P.D.V. Moni, Q100741, was in camp from December 1, 1941, to February 4, 1942, then released to return to studies.
There are more than 5000 Queensland troops whose names and service numbers are not shown on the roll.
Name, but not all service numbers shown
Private E.R. Tibbits, Q102493, was in camp from December 15, 1941 to February 4, 1942, then released to school teaching. In June 1942 he enlisted in the RAAF (426444) and his RAAF record is on the Roll, but not his militia service. He was killed in a raid over France in July 1944.
Private N.H. Traves, Q102493, was in army camp from December 15, 1941, to February 4, 1942, then released to return to studies. After graduation he enlisted in the RAAF (124906) and was discharged in 1946. His RAAF record is on the Roll, but not his militia service.
The names and service numbers of about 9000 Queensland troops are not correctly shown on the roll.
Why does it matter?
The World War II National Roll was planned, compiled and put into operation by the Department of Veteran Affairs (DVA) which has also been responsible for its subsequent management.
A nominal roll is different from an honour roll. The former is a list of those who went to war, while the latter records the names of those who died on active service.
There is no point in having a roll that is not reliable, just as there is no point in having a clock that isn’t accurate, a dictionary that omits and misspells words, or a car that is not reliable. The roll should be the source of accurate information about service in that war. Unfortunately it is not.
This article was co-authored by Bill Park, a veteran of the AIF in World War II, and member of the Australian National University Council (1977-90). He was a senior partner in the stockbroking firm Henderson, Park, Earnshaw & Petfield, and is patron of the Winston Churchill Memorial Trust.
If you, your family or anyone you know, has been omitted from or incorrectly recorded on Australia’s World War 2 Nominal Roll, you can let us know on our blog.
Mat Hardy
Lecturer in Middle East Studies at Deakin University
You've got to admit though that it is quite difficult to accurately manage such a large volume of information with so many different fields. In some cases even the original service records can be at fault. In cases where you cite transfer of service, especially between militia and other arms, what you're really asking for is a complete duplication of service record, and I would suggest that the records won't actually match up in this way without a lot of manual digging and cross-referencing. Perhaps outside the scope and budget of the project. At the present, the common field for everyone is "Posting at discharge". Not 100% satisfactory, I agree, but it's a nominal roll, not a service record or a Wikipedia bio. I submit that an incomplete record having the potential to "spoil family gatherings, ruin Remembrance and ANZAC Day celebrations" is a little hyperbolic.
John Cokley
Associate Professor in Journalism at Swinburne University of Technology
Thanks for your comment Mat. Ironically though, it was precisely at a gathering of mates where this project developed in the first place, where Bill Park and his veteran colleagues discovered that the new WW2NR didn't include quite a few of their service colleagues. Unfortunately space restrictions for this particular article did not permit inclusion of all those details. On the matter of complexity, Bill and I have published on this in Park, William and Cokley, John D. (2009). 'Counting on archives…
Read moreLynne Newington
Lynne Newington is a Friend of The Conversation.
Researcher
Difficultly in managing such a large volume maybe, but ten years is a long time and minister don't work alone past and present.
I don't think it unreasonable for John to be bringing this to light,
Maybe a little shame for the dept wouldn't go astray and move things along, we're speaking about Australians here, not some far off country.
Bruce Moon
Bystander!
Mat
I suggest you are missing the point of both this article and the relevance of the WW2NR.
The Nominal Roll was intended to be, and has now become, the default listing for those who served in WW2.
Sure the 'official' listing is the military records for each service person, but many of these are unavailable.
When undertaking family history on members of my family that served in WW2, there are many service records available on microfiche. But, there are many more that are merely housed in a massive vault. I have had to pay to get the records made available because they lie in a vault somewhere.
The WW2NR was intended to be a convenient means by which anyone could learn of the service contribution of each and every person.
As John has shown, it is incomplete by about 10%.
In light of the fact that the records exist, that is a woeful number.
Cheers
James Walker
logged in via Facebook
This is the sort of project that many people would be happy to volunteer to update. I can't think of a better way to spend remembrance day! There are ways of ensuring accuracy - Zooniverse specialises in this sort of thing, and would likely be happy to add it to their projects: https://www.zooniverse.org/