Jump to content
Free downloads from TNA ×
The Great War (1914-1918) Forum

Remembered Today:

Battlefield Discoveries


cooper

Recommended Posts

I agree with you Giles,

Over time the elements will detiorate all that has been left. So there will be nothing left to see anyway, at least some can be preserved for future generations.

James

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that the casual visitor stooping to pick up and pocket a shrapnel ball or similar is part of the natural process whereby the evidence of an event will inevitably decay and disappear. Man intervenes in this process and preserves and treasures the item concerned if only briefly.

No doubt , given the economic conditions of the day , the battlefield of Waterloo was stripped of anything of value by the local inhabitants in very short order - and then flogged to rich British visitors - all part of the natural order of things.

However, the repulsive collecting of human remains and the wholesale destruction of sites to strip out items of value is another thing entirely. We must rely on the Authorities to police this sort of thing and there does not seem much interest in doing this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is never only one or two isolated things beside the field, removed by one or two tourists. It is the effect of thousands and thousands of such incidents year after year. It is the "natural process whereby the evidence of an event will inevitably decay and disappear", as Ian, writes, which is the problem. But the disappearing process is certainly not "natural". It is cultural, something which is clearly shown on this Forum.

Of course, the situation at Waterloo was different, economically, but today there are thousands and thousands of tourists. Same effect, no doubt.

Interesting logic: "Because it will disappear anyway, we can take it." My logic is the opposite: because it is threatened, we must protect it, both in the fields and at the Forum.

/nils

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that we must strive to preserve artefacts and battlefield debris is possilbe in situ, however this just isn't possible, some could class it as being selfish, yes the items may well be visible for a number of years yet and bring to home the war more vividly to us now when visiting, but what about our grandchildren ? What exactly are they going to see in situ? Are they even going to know what battlefield debris look like?

So what can we do in the mean time, conserve and protect.

Don't get me wrong, I disagree with the commercialism of this sort of thing, finding and selling for a profit. But to the few who have occasionally found, recorded when and where found, done the research to give possibilities of when it was lost and have preserved the artefact, is this such a bad thing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nils,

Good point, it certainly is a cultural thing and nothing new, my great grandfather brought back his own relics from the war he had fought in and they sit beside the small number of my own I have found. The relics that most people have found on the battlefields have not lost historical value, indeed its probably become magnified- and out of all proportion to the original historical/archeological value of the object.

I admit it is a subtle argument Nils. Where does one draw the line? Anything I've personally found has been the knock on effect of walking and learning rather than walking and specifically searching for relics to add to a collection. Once a year my shrapnel balls and bayonet go into school with my wife to be talked about around rememberance day or as a study aid for A-level students. As I said, its a subtle argument because it involves people's motives- are you sharing information and interest or do you shut it away? I expect that on this website where people so readily exchange information most people aren't relic hunters, more like custodians of the past.

Despite concerns can anyone really expect that people will stop pocketing shrapnel balls and such like as they find them.?And if they end up displayed on somebody's bookshelf and talked about for years to come well... better than nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is done is done. Unfortunately we cannot put removed things back in their original context. We all have our sins of ours youth... (But that is of course no reason for continue doing something.) Neither do I want to moralize on the issue, nor do I want to close the subject on this forum. I do realize that collecting battlefields relics is exciting, and may easily become obsessive, as the British journalist quoted earlier mentioned (and as some postings may suggest...;)).

In their historical context, with proper (archaeological) provenance documentation (pictures of the finding site, co-ordinates, description, etc. and of course separated from other artefacts in baggies or boxes etc.), battlefield finds are thought-provoking and pedagogical artefacts, as demonstration objects of what the First World War was about. As a physical object from the past, they have obvious pedagogical value indeed, for example at lectures, along with video or slide shows etc., and in the classrooms. But collecting dust in private collections they do no good. There they become merely items to satisfy the collector himself.

But I do believe that the fact that increased battlefield tourism together with an unreflective attitude in general towards cultural heritage concerns is a major problem when it comes to preserving what is still left of the original battlefields. Neglecting this is counterproductive, if we have the extraordinary physical experience of the old battlefield site in mind.

In Africa there are today cameras instead of guns at the safaris. Bird watchers document their experiences instead of shooting birds. These behaviours are probably as socially and personally rewarding as bringing the object of interest back home. “Take photos, but leave stuff where it is”, as Christina wrote. Perhaps such an attitude slowly may develop amongst battlefield tourists in general if the WFA members set the standard? If so, what is left of the original atmospere will survive a bit longer.

/Nils

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fabiansson makes some very interesting points. May I second the recommendation for the book 'Aftermarth' - it is one of the most incredible and fascinating books available on this subject.

I note the points regarding removing these objects as somehow taking something away from the events of the fields in which they lay. Speaking personally I visited the fields for many years before finding my first bullet or even shrapnel ball, all I ever seemed to find were broken pieces of iron shell case. These items are simply not that easy to find. Although I found the pieces in my post above this January it does take time to learn to 'see' these things and you also need to know where to look. I only ever look in open fields where crops will be planted and as I said before keep away from commerative sites, cemeteries, preserved trenches, forest areas etc. I have never been to Verdun but I understand that the huge number of human remains makes searching in such an area repugnant.

I know of dealers who in the 50's have collected on average 3 tonnes of balls, 3 tonnes of shell tops etc year on year. Remember after the war and for many years beyond, scores of locals earned an income dealing in this scrap metal.

If as has been calculated, it will take some 400 years to finally clear the Great War battlefields (of munitions), then debris will continue to rise to the surface for many generations to come. Should a schoolboy on his trip to the battlefields bring back a shrapnel ball - is that not better than leaving it in place? We are not talking about bones here but scrap metal. Why is it better it should be left to disintergrate rather than be preserved by one of us to be passed on to future generations and continue to tell a story.

As I understand it, one of the chief pleasures of the Tommies was collecting souvenirs...

Remembering the outcry over the Diggers in the tabloids, I am often confused as to why the antics of the Timeteam/Uncovering Ancestors TV archeological programmes etc are seen as ok - is it because more time has passed?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Why is it better it should be left to disintergrate rather than be preserved by one of us to be passed on to future generations and continue to tell a story?"

In my view of the world, an event takes place at a particular time at a particular place (or several). In this respect the Western Front is the historical landscape of one of the biggest historical events in human history.

Today there are preserved material remains (artefacts and features) of that particular historical event in that particular historical landscape we call the Western Front. These artefacts and features are historical remains in this particular context because they together construct the historical landscape. Removing or changing these features and artefacts, the historical landscape will disappear or change. If everything is removed, which is possible almost only by bombing it with a nuclear bomb, the historical landscape is gone. What would be left is the co-ordinates where the WW1 battle took place. The effects of disintegration, which is the major concern of Giles, is much less dramatic. Archaeologically, that is not a problem. What is a problem is human behaviour. Removing the skyline, as it was seen during the historical event, by building a house will have profound effects on the historical landscape. Removing a rusty splinter will have some affect on it. Removing every splinter will have a large effect on it.

/Nils

Link to comment
Share on other sites

'sadly I know for a fact that some so-called "collectors" have actually removed these remains and they now reside in their so-called "museums".

Paul, in respect of the above, is this correct, have certain 'collectors' pilfered the remains of soldiers found on the western front? were the remains reported to the relevant agency?

Cheers Neil.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a further point the march of 'progress' in the name of industrial and civil expansion ie factories, motorways, airports etc is a very much more substantial threat with the possibility of whole battlefields dissapearing.

And I remember at Sanctuary Wood museum (have not been there for 3 or 4 years) many large bones by the doorway to the 'trenches' - were these human?...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

'sadly I know for a fact that some so-called "collectors" have actually removed these remains and they now reside in their so-called "museums".

Paul, in respect of the above, is this correct, have certain 'collectors' pilfered the remains of soldiers found on the western front? were the remains reported to the relevant agency?

Cheers Neil.

I'm afraid so - it's all too true, and nothing was reported to anybody. These "collectors" even had photos of their finds; one showed me a varied collection of jaw bones... :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I too only started finding the odd item after several trips to the battlefields. I walk the fields to follow certain events and if I happen to find something that's great, but it doesn't bother me if I find nothing. However it's a different story with my 14 year old son and picking up the odd piece certainly helps stimulate his interest. I imagine the majority of visitors to the Western Front have no real idea that there is much out there to be found anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I completely agree that battlfield 'artefacts' should be left alone. Putting money where mouth is, the only things I take when visiting the Western Front are photographs.

However, if we were honest we would all have to acknowledge that there is a prevalent and persistent group of folk who scour battlefields with metal detectors who sell their 'finds' on to the local tourist trap museums and shops. They are almost Masonic in their secrecy and are part of a virulent supply chain to 'collectors'. Where else do these artefacts for sale, come from?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And I remember at Sanctuary Wood museum (have not been there for 3 or 4 years) many large bones by the doorway to the 'trenches' - were these human?...

No. Fortunately most are horses/mules bones (with the odd sprinkling of cow!). These are the most common bones to be encountered on the old battlefields.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kerry asks: "Where else do these artefacts for sale [at local tourist trap museums and shops], come from?"

Interesting question. Does anyone know wherefrom, for example, the battlefields relics which are sold at the souvenier shop at the Albert museum, come from? Are they, as Kerry suggest, looted? Or are they "scrap", sold to the museum by local farmers who collected it from their own fields (i.e. stuff that got stuck in the harvest machines etc.)? Perhaps Paul, as a local, knows?

Would be intresting to hear this musum's official policy regarding selling battlefields relics!

/Nils

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a shrapnel ball (one) which I picked up on a path in the forests near douamont... Half a .303 case from the salient and a piece of shell case weighting about a pound that i picked up near the gully on the somme... I don't believe I have damaged the heritage of the sites in doing so as if I had not picked up these items they would have found themselves another home .. I also bought a rusty German Helmet from the shop at Delville Wood ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

-Goodday-

I read with a deep interest those comments. Not only because I am a Somme inhabitant with a passion for WW1 and its various aspects, but because I have also my own collection of war relics. And all members said reflects the evolution of my mind and the present kind of dilemna I feel.

I only collect things from the tiny battlefield I know. I have visited many others but it never cross my minds to search there for relics. At the beginning, I think it was a way to better feel the past by touching it (sorry for my poor english), a complement to books or pictures. I study history at university in amiens for 4 years and there had an initiation in medieval archeology. At this time it became clear for me that WW1 items had a value as archeological remains so worth to be collected and bring home but on the other hand worth to stay on the ground for what we name the "future generation" . I think here is the uncomfortable real debate between two different ways to preserve memory.

Then, I stop to accumulate items I already had in big numbers (bullets, schrapnells, etc). Of course, while trakking, it's not easy to resist the temptation to take home something -even a common one- you see. So, since the place is recently visited by more tourists. I let non-dangerous items where I think tourists may find it. Because I consider that a visitor from far away like Australia has the right to enjoy bringing as an empty .303 cases home. Last year, I bought a numeric camera, its first purpose was to add a virtual museum to my website (see http://www.chez.com/hamel1418/relics.html ) and that way share my collection with people. I thought my collection mustn't be "selfish". I am also very embarrassed because I display there two human bonds.

I finish with three last remarks:

- In the 60's or before, my father told me, many youth passed their time in fields collecting copper, brass and lead. On that time, it was worth to get that way some extra-cash especially for modest people. Note that now there is still crazy but invisible people removing copper bend from non-exploded shells !! I saw some shells modified that way from times to times. It's also a great stupid game to light little cordite strings...

- Just that example : I was very happy to find piece of gaz mask and a british helmet. But every time I have a look at them the progress of rust worry me...

- As already noticed, I am sure that as time passed, the number of relics in the Somme decreased. The region is mainly an open-field one. Things would be different if we were covered by forest. There is also the problem of the business made with relics... I was upset a time I visit a famous international auction website... There is a trus debate about collecting but what about selling ???

Nicolas

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I have to say that apart from the live shells and shell case shards lying about, I never seem to see anything.

Yet one guy I know, who is a regular on our WFA branch trips, can spot a rifle cartridge at 20 paces - and tell you which factory made it - almost everywhere. No kidding. Stop at any field on the Western Front and in minutes he'll have a handful of them. He stops just short of knowing who fired it.

My own rules are simple.

Do not touch anything that can blow you up.

Do not touch anything that can scratch you and give you tetanus.

It is Ok to take away a few specimens of impersonal and mass items such as cartridge cases that are lying around.

If you really must take home a shell fragment then do. But you'll only throw it out in 3 months time so why bother.

It is not OK to take bits of bones away from the battlefield. If you are near a cemetery, unobtrusively bury them under a rose bush or something. If it is more than a fragment, leave it alone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nicolas' site demonstrates splendid examples of that taking pictures of material remains of the war in their original context is better than bringing them home.

/Nils

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nicolas, thank you for a splended web site! A really good visit to Hamel which I visited on the ground last April. Do you live there?

It is fair to say Pershing frequently used bad judgment. He wanted to remove all US troops from this battle because he had not given personal permission. At one point this got so bad he was personally commanding the Services of Supply as well as the AEF, later both AEF and First Army at the same time.

He also managed to ignore four years of war and insist the realities of trench warfare be disregarded. A total lack of tactics by US forces resulted in actions like those of the French and British in the early years and many unneccesary casualties.

The contrast with Monash's meticilious operation of July 4 is clear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone know wherefrom, for example, the battlefields relics which are sold at the souvenier shop at the Albert museum, come from? Are they, as Kerry suggest, looted? Or are they "scrap", sold to the museum by local farmers who collected it from their own fields (i.e. stuff that got stuck in the harvest machines etc.)? Perhaps Paul, as a local, knows?

I can't speak for the Musee des Abris' policy on the sale of battlefield relics, but I can certainly confirm that they are not "looted"; they buy them either from other militaria dealers, or from scrap merchants. In days gone by several local scrap merchants on the Somme used to sell fuses, rifles etc by the weight-load. The Musee is a locally sponsered organisation, so everything is above aboard and within the confines of French law.

The same applies to Delville Wood - there much of the material is sold on behalf of local collectors and dealers, and also several UK based dealers. Nothing is "looted" from the battlefields, and most of the militaria is good quality which has never been in the fields in the first place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nicolas,

Your site is very interesting. I can help ID a few of the objects. On page 5 (weapons and ammunitions) the 'pipes' are flash tubes from shrapnel shells. These connect from the fuse top to the ejector plate (bottom left of page 4) at the base of the shell below the balls. The tube allows a detonation to flow from the fuse, down the tube to the small charge below the plate ejecting the balls.

In the centre of the 'unknown objects' on the same page is the metal piece (with 4 nails) that mounted on the base of a German 1916 model stick grenade - the twist off cap would have screwed onto this. Another (damaged) example is to the bottom left of this. To the right of this is a transport plug from a Kugel or Egg grenade (removed and replaced with fuse for combat). On the far centre left is the fuse body (percussion model) from a French F1 grenade. The washer with tab to the right of the Kugel plug could be the striker from a French VB rifle grenade...or just a piece from a tractor!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear all,

Whilst most of us who visit the battlefields of France and Belgium have picked up and collected various artifacts (of the non - explosive type), I feel I must write about this subject, not to teach you to suck eggs, but to warn those people who are travelling for the first time or those who are unsure about Unexploded Ordanace (UXO). If you are unsure what an object is DONT touch it. Explosive devices such as shells, grenades etc generally become more unstable through time, not safer. Leave the handling of these devices to the experts..Bomb disposal etc. Last year whilst working as the warden at Talbot House, a guest, in his mid sixties, proudly showed me 3 unexploded mills bombs he had picked up that day. He was firmly, but politely told to remove them from the house. At the end of the day its a simple use of common sense. If you don't know what it is then don't touch it. Perhaps abide by these rules:

1. Make nothing but footprints...( with permission on private land ).

2. Take nothing but photographs.

3. Leave nothing but memories.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you esp. Paul & Gilles. Will answer later in your message box in order not to deflect from the current subject : Battlefield Discoveries.

About what Paul wrote and the "musée des Abris", I remember in 1998 (in the heart of the big wave of commemorations) in the well-known french magazine "Telerama" the journalist was offended because they sell personnal insignas (shoulder badges etc.)... I had a time the same feeling but it radically changed when I learnt that it a was a way to keep alive that terrific museum.

Nicolas

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's the value not preserving the record? Roll the clock on 300 years. An eminent historian of the day declares that the Western Front and the conflict of 1914-18 is a myth; it never happened; it was a piece of propaganda devised by Euro-integrationists of the 21st Century to bolster the case for a united Europe. Further, our historian adds with a triumphant flourish, there is no archaelogical record to support the idea of a so-called 'Western Front'.

Stupid? Far-fetched? Then visit some of the holocaust denial/revisionist sites to see examples of this type of reasoning about something which happened less than sixty years ago and killed tens of millions.

Leave it alone. It does not belong to us. We are only stewards for those who co;e after us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...