J. Cranstone

Trooper · #7881107

What this roll records

*** HIS PRESENCE IN THE GROUP IS NO LONGER IN DOUBT, AND THE DOCUMENTS ARE ON THIS CARD. *** Ian Chard, 26 September 2026, in his own words: “Tpr 7881107 T Cranstone’s presence in the LRDG can be confirmed by two sources: His B122 conduct form found alongside those of c170 other LRDG men, shows that he was a Trooper of the 2 Royal Tank Regiment. The LRDG nominal roll of 31 July 1941. His absence on the roll of 28 March 1941 strongly implies that he joined between those two dates.” BOTH DOCUMENTS ARE REPRODUCED ABOVE. THIS IS THE FIRST DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE OF HIM. Until today everything on this card came from ONE ROW of the corrected Troopers roll, and the note above says so. A B122 IS A CONDUCT SHEET — an army document about the man himself, not a list compiled about others — and this one was found among ABOUT 170 OTHER L.R.D.G. CONDUCT SHEETS; it is numbered 171 in the corner. The nominal roll is a second and independent sighting. WHAT THE CONDUCT SHEET SAYS. “No. 7881107, Name Cranstone T., Squ. HQ, Corps 2 R.T.R.” — the 2ND ROYAL TANK REGIMENT — with a DATE OF ENLISTMENT OF 5 SEPTEMBER 1929. HE WAS A REGULAR SOLDIER OF TEN YEARS’ SERVICE when the war began, which is not what this card has implied about him. Written across the top: “ORIGINAL LOST B.E.F. IN FRANCE” — A REPLACEMENT SHEET, raised because the first was lost with the British Expeditionary Force, SO HE WAS IN FRANCE IN 1939–40 BEFORE HE WAS IN THE DESERT. THE SHEET IS OTHERWISE BLANK: not one offence is recorded against him. A WARNING ABOUT THAT “HQ”: it is his SQUADRON IN HIS PARENT REGIMENT, signed off by the Officer Commanding H.Q. Squadron, and it is NOT an L.R.D.G. patrol. Nothing here gives him a patrol. HE WAS A TROOPER OF THE 2ND ROYAL TANK REGIMENT, AND THIS CARD DOES NOT YET SAY SO. The rank field here reads PRIVATE and the regiment field reads 2 ROYAL TANK CORPS, both taken from the Troopers roll. The nominal roll gives TPR. and the conduct sheet gives 2 R.T.R. THE FIELDS HAVE NOT BEEN ALTERED, because the instruction of 26 September 2026 was to record this and not to change them; the point is set down here so that it is not lost, and a reader should take the two documents as the better authority. *** HIS INITIAL IS T, NOT J. *** The nominal roll types him “Cranstone T.” in plain characters and the conduct sheet is written the same way; Ian calls him T. THE “J.” ON THIS CARD CAME FROM THE SOCIETY’S TROOPERS ROLL and has no document behind it that anyone has produced. It has NOT been changed here for the same reason as the rank and the regiment — the instruction was to record, not to alter — but it should not be relied on. In a cursive hand of this period a capital T and a capital J are easily taken for one another, which is the likeliest way the error entered. WHICH ROLL, AND A DATE THAT DOES NOT AGREE WITH ITSELF. Ian’s covering note calls it THE ROLL OF 31 JULY 1941. THE SHEET ITSELF CARRIES NO DATE, but a closer photograph of the same page, supplied the same day and reproduced on Gutteridge’s card, is annotated by hand “LRDG Roll 31/8/41” — 31 AUGUST 1941. The same names run in the same order on both, so it is one document. THIS ROLL DOES NOT CHOOSE BETWEEN THE TWO DATES and both are set down; a month is a small thing but a first sighting is exactly the kind of fact that a wrong month quietly corrupts. Either way the point Ian draws from it stands: HE IS ABSENT FROM THE ROLL OF 28 MARCH 1941 AND PRESENT ON THIS ONE, so he joined between the two. THE JOINING FIELD IS STILL EMPTY AND DELIBERATELY SO: a first appearance on a nominal roll is the day a man becomes visible in the record, not the day he arrived, and this roll has consistently refused to treat one as the other. It does dispose of the Troopers roll’s “07/12/1940 ?”, which the note above declines to enter: that is months before a roll he is absent from. *** AND IT PULLS CRANSTON AND CRANSTONE HARD TOGETHER. *** The note above leaves open whether this man and CRANSTON, T. — Guardsman, G1 Patrol, Popski’s driver at Barce — are one man recorded twice, because the same number #7881107 sits on both cards from two different sources. THREE THINGS FROM TODAY PUSH TOWARDS ONE MAN. THE INITIAL IS T, which is Cranston’s initial. THE ARMOURED CORPS READING answers the oddity flagged on Cranston’s card, that #7881107 is an armoured-range number against a Guardsman; Ian’s other note of today asks in terms whether Popski’s driver was an R.A.C. man attached to G1 rather than a Guardsman at all. AND THE PRECEDENT IS ON THE SAME PAGE OF THE SAME ROLL: Trooper E. Gutteridge, #7889764, ROYAL ARMOURED CORPS, who drove for G1 at Barce and is called a Guardsman in places to this day. So is Sergeant John Dennis, #2655049 — there as a Corporal — whose memory is the whole basis for Cranston at Barce. THE TWO CARDS ARE NOT MERGED HERE. Merging them would decide, on inference, a question two sources still answer differently, and this roll has twice before declined to do it. What has changed is that the case for one man is now made of DOCUMENTS RATHER THAN OF SIMILAR SURNAMES. Recorded from Ian Chard, 26 September 2026, supplied by Tony Moore and entered on his instruction of the same day.

ADDED TO THIS ROLL ON 19 SEPTEMBER 2026, AND HE COMES WITH A DIFFICULTY ATTACHED. Everything on this card is from one row of the corrected L.R.D.G. P.S. Troopers roll: CRANSTONE, J., #7881107, 2 ROYAL TANK CORPS, PRIVATE, a DRIVER, serving in the DESERT. HE WAS NOT ON THIS ROLL UNTIL TODAY, and the reason is worth recording: until 11 September 2026 his details had been read as belonging to CRANSTON, T., a Guardsman of G1 Patrol who is on this roll; a note on that man’s card records that the ROYAL TANK reading was taken off him because it was this man’s. Splitting the two was considered then and set aside; Tony Moore has now directed that it be done. *** THE SERVICE NUMBER ON THIS CARD IS ALSO ON HIS. *** The Troopers roll gives #7881107 TO THIS MAN and gives Cranston no army number at all — that cell holds a bare hash. Cranston’s card carries the same number from a DIFFERENT source, the L.R.D.G. P.S. Trooper Album, which reads “Cranston, T., Guardsman, #7881107”. TWO SOURCES PUT ONE NUMBER ON TWO MEN, and army numbers were unique, so one of those sources is wrong — or the two are one man recorded twice. NEITHER NUMBER HAS BEEN REMOVED, because removing one would decide a question that is not decided; this roll already carries other unresolved shared-number cases and records them rather than tidying them away. WHETHER CRANSTON AND CRANSTONE ARE ONE MAN IS THEREFORE STILL OPEN, and it is now open in plain sight on two cards instead of buried in a note on one. WHAT IS NOT ENTERED HERE: his joining date. The roll gives “07/12/1940 ?”, queried in the source, and a field cannot carry a question mark — and the date is itself odd, because on this roll 7 December 1940 is overwhelmingly a GUARDS DRAFT DATE, which sits strangely against a Royal Tank Corps private and is one more reason to look hard at these two men. NO PATROL IS ENTERED either: his row gives none, and Cranston’s G1 belongs to Cranston. THE FIRST THING ANYONE WORKING ON HIM SHOULD DO is establish which man #7881107 really belongs to. If you can add anything about him and his LRDG service, please email the roll keeper. Recorded from Ian Chard’s red-line corrections to the L.R.D.G. P.S. Troopers roll of 11 September 2026 (LRDG_IanChard_Troopers_redlines_vs_roll_2026-09-11.xlsx), supplied by Tony Moore, and entered on his instruction of 19 September 2026.

*** HIS RANK AND HIS REGIMENT ARE NOW TAKEN FROM THE DOCUMENTS. *** The rank field reads TROOPER, not Private, and the regiment field reads 2ND ROYAL TANK REGIMENT, not 2 Royal Tank Corps. Both changes follow the two documents reproduced on this card and set out in the note above: the L.R.D.G. nominal roll, which types him “Tpr. Cranstone T.”, and his own ARMY FORM B.122, headed “Corps 2 R.T.R.” The readings they replace came from the Society’s Troopers roll, which is a compiled list; a nominal roll and a man’s own conduct sheet outrank it. *** HIS INITIAL IS NOT CHANGED, AND THAT IS A DECISION. *** Both documents give him as T. This card still says J., and it says so deliberately, on Tony Moore’s instruction of 26 September 2026. HERE IS WHY. CRANSTON, T. IS A SEPARATE MAN ON THIS ROLL — that was settled on 19 September 2026 and it is not reopened here — AND HE CARRIES THE SAME ARMY NUMBER, #7881107, from a different source, the L.R.D.G. P.S. Trooper Album. Write T. on this card as well and the roll would hold two men of nearly the same surname, the same initial and ONE ARMY NUMBER BETWEEN THEM. ARMY NUMBERS WERE UNIQUE, so on the two-men reading something in that has to be wrong: either the Trooper Album is wrong to give 7881107 to Cranston, or one of the two initials belongs to the other man. NOTHING SETTLES WHICH, and until something does, the J. stays — not because it is believed, but because it keeps two men visibly apart on a roll that cannot yet tell them apart by number. A READER SHOULD TREAT IT AS UNRELIABLE: the documents on this card say T. THE FIRST THING ANYONE WORKING ON THESE TWO SHOULD DO is establish which of them #7881107 really belongs to. Entered on Tony Moore’s instruction of 26 September 2026.

Photographs

See him in the full roll → In collaboration withThe Long Range Desert Group (LRDG) Preservation SocietyTo add information about this man, or note a correction, please post in the Society’s Facebook Group →

This page is part of the Long Range Desert Group roll of members at lrdgarchive.org. If you hold rights to anything on it and would like it credited differently, or taken down, please see Sources and Copyright. It will be dealt with promptly.

Not By Strength But By Guile