VC Character

[cliff]

Has anyone on this forum considered the character traits and other influencing factors of those that are awarded the VC; particularly regarding social class where it applies, intelligence (IQ), military rank, age, education, family structure, general demeanour (introvert/extrovert) and so on? Do these people have something significant, other than obvious valour, in common?.

[norwood]

Hi Cliff,

I have left this a couple of days to see what response you would get. I am not an expert , but my feelings are that Class/Education Etc was not the even in the running.

I remember reading that one or some of the VC winners could not read or write, this being indictive of oportunity not IQ. This would have been a general trend before and around this time.


Taken from the Royal Warrent :

Quote :

It is ordained, with a view to place all persons
on a perfectly equal footing in relation to eligibility for
the decoration, that neither rank, nor long service, nor
wounds, nor any other circumstance or condition whatsoever,
save the merit of conspicuous bravery, shall be
held to establish a sufficient claim to the honour.

Unquote :

Bravery has no boundries.



Norwood

[cliff]

It's just that I am in great awe of these guys and occasionally try and imagine the gut-wrenching fear and dread that they must have experienced as part of what happened. I don't believe that I've had the opportunity - God forbid - to be that frightened; and then to overcome this fear and exacerbate the situation by exposing oneself to further danger and almost certain death (apparently half of them died in the action or shortly afterwards) is inconceivable to me. I suppose there is the possibility that many were faced with the dilemma of heading into the danger or having to live the knowledge of what could have been. It's that trait that I'm trying to identify: a sort of obsessive sense of duty.

[roberthenry]

Cliff, Of the 1356 commonwealth VCs awarded less than 300 were awarded posthumously.
If by social status you mean, how many were commisioned officers and how many were other ranks, the ratio is split almost in half between them.
In the commisioned officer ranks Lieutenants have the most VCs at 262
In the other ranks privates have the most at 317
VCs have been awarded to Brigadier Generals.
The average age to have won a VC is 27/28
The secretary of the VC & GC association who has probably met more class 1 medal winners than anyone else, said that almost all winners were surprised at the adulation shown to them and that most said that they were just doing what anybody would have done in the same situation. She also said that the only common trait that she found among them was that they tended to be the eldest sibling .

I also read somewhere, and I cannot remember where, that an officer who had studied what constitutes a VC winner came to the conclusion that some VC winners size up the situation and decide on the probabilities before taking the chance, where others appeared to be oblivious to any danger and went ahead with what they were doing anyway.

Regards
R Henry

[norwood]

Feb 23, 2009 18:04:38 GMT roberthenry said:

Cliff, Of the 1356 commonwealth VCs awarded less than 300 were awarded posthumously.
If by social status you mean, how many were commisioned officers and how many were other ranks, the ratio is split almost in half between them.
In the commisioned officer ranks Lieutenants have the most VCs at 262
In the other ranks privates have the most at 317
VCs have been awarded to Brigadier Generals.
The average age to have won a VC is 27/28
The secretary of the VC & GC association who has probably met more class 1 medal winners than anyone else, said that almost all winners were surprised at the adulation shown to them and that most said that they were just doing what anybody would have done in the same situation. She also said that the only common trait that she found among them was that they tended to be the eldest sibling .

I also read somewhere, and I cannot remember where, that an officer who had studied what constitutes a VC winner came to the conclusion that some VC winners size up the situation and decide on the probabilities before taking the chance, where others appeared to be oblivious to any danger and went ahead with what they were doing anyway.

Regards
R Henry

Very useful information,


Thank You

Norwood

[cliff]

Thanks for the interesting information Norwood and Robert. I find the bit about the posthumous awards interesting; I was under the impression that slightly less than half had posthumous awards. Do you have a reference for the number of less than 300? Perhaps Les can assist and provide us with a precise number from his database.

[norwood]

Hi,

I shall have a look into this, very interesting topic.



Norwood

[roberthenry]

There are several publications on Victoria Cross winners in which you can check the date of death against the date of action and you can work it out yourself, or you can check the same information on this site provided by Les.
You will find that Les has provided the date of the recipients action, the date he was gazetted and the date he died. Basically if the recipient died after his action but before he was gazetted, it is a posthumous award.

Regards
R Henry

[anthony]

Robert

I agree with your definition that if a recipient died after his action but before he was gazetted, it is a posthumous award. On that definition I calculate that there are 322 posthumous awards. A summary is as follows:

Pre WW1 26 of 522
1914-1919 194 of 634
1919-1935 4 of 5
1940-1945 92 of 182
Since 1950 6 of 13
Total 322 of 1356

However, while 26 recipients prior in WW1 died after their action but before gazettal we know that there were only 12 'official' posthumous awards in two batches of six in 1902 and 1907. So Roberts who died of wounds in 1900 was not awarded a posthumous VC because he was alive when he was recommended for the award. On the other hand there were a number of later awards where a recipient was awarded the VC for one action but was killed in a later action or in an unrelated incident such as the death of Peters. So I prefer the definition that a posthumous award is an award where the recipient died after his action but before he was gazetted.

Anthony

[roberthenry]

Anthony

The information of under 300 I gave above about posthumous awards came from Max Arthurs Symbol of Courage and David Harveys Monuments of Courage. I do know there are some mistakes in these publications as there are in most books on the Victoria Cross,we touched on this in another thread but they are pretty accurate for the purposes of determining that there are nowhere near the ammount of posthumous Victoria Crosses that Cliff believes there are.

Max Arthur in Symbol of Courage says

[" In all, 298 VCs have been awarded posthumously."]

David Harvey in Monuments to Courage says

[" As I have stated above, there are discrepancies interpreting the posthumous awards and whilst I bow to current authorities, particularly John Tamplin MBE TD, who states categorically that there were 295 plus the Unknown American Warrior, I offer 'my' 298 as an analysis based on my own reading of the warrants, and leave the reader to reasearch the subject for himself/herself for their own satisfaction"].

I personally have not counted posthumous awards before 1914 and have always assumed ( a dangerous thing to do) that there were only the twelve, six in 1902 and six in 1907. those being.

E Philips
E Spence
N Coghill
T Melvill
F Baxter
H Maclean
F Roberts
a Albrech
R Digby-Jones
D Younger
J Barry
G Coulson

Anthony you say that Roberts is not a posthumous award as he died of wounds in 1900 and was recommended before he died. the information I have is that his deed was on 15/12/1899 and he died of wounds two days later on 17/12/1899, he was not gazetted until 2/2/1900 so he surely must be a posthumous award? Surely it was because he was given the VC posthumously that the other eleven were awarded.

Regards
R Henry

[anthony]

Robert

The figure of 322 is the number of the recipients whose date of death is before the date of gazette. I appreciated our discussion on Elliot-Cooper that helped me refine my database. I mentioned Roberts and Peters as examples of inconsistency in published citations. I consider that Roberts was a posthumous award because as you note his deed was on 15 December 1899, he died of wounds two days later and was not gazetted until 2 February 1900. However, because the recommendation was raised on 16 December 1899 the day before he died of wounds the recommendation was proceeded with and was soon approved. He was one of 14 recipients from the Crimea to the Boer War where the recipient died before the award was gazetted. Below is the list of 26 recipients prior to the First World War who died before gazettal follows. The 12 with an asterisk, which does not include Roberts, are the official posthumous awards gazetted in 1902 and 1907.

Connors, John Crimea
* Phillipps, Everard Aloysius Lisle Indian Mutiny
Purcell, John Indian Mutiny
Home, Duncan Charles Indian Mutiny
Salkeld, Philip Indian Mutiny
Mahoney, Patrick Indian Mutiny
Ryan, John Indian Mutiny
Bankes, William George Hawtry Indian Mutiny
* Spence, Edward Indian Mutiny
Park, James Indian Mutiny
Newell, Robert Indian Mutiny
Hawkes, David Indian Mutiny
Ryan, John New Zealand
* Melvill, Teignmouth Zula War
* Coghill, Nevill Josiah Aylmer Zulu War
Hamilton, Walter Richard Pollock Afghanistan
* Baxter, Frank William Rhodesia
* MacLean, Hector Lachlan Stewart NW Frontier
Roberts, Frederick Hugh Sherston South Africa
* Albrecht, Herman South Africa
* Digby-Jones, Robert James Thomas South Africa
* Atkinson, Alfred South Africa
Parsons, Francis Newton South Africa
* Younger, David Reginald South Africa
* Barry, John South Africa
* Coulson, Gustavus Hamilton South Africa

Anthony

[roberthenry]

Anthony

I have just been looking through some of the recipients you have posted and It is hard to see why some of them are not listed as posthumous when they obviously must have been.

Do you have any idea how Victoria Crosses were awarded in those days, as compared to today when a citation is submitted to the Honours and awards comittee for consideration.

The reason I ask is because it is obvious that Frederick Roberts was awarded his from South Africa, because it would have been impossible to contact London and recieve a reply in two days in those times. Did Govenor Generals or suchlike have authority over these matters?
Regards
R Henry