Battlefield Discoveries

[Fabiansson]

Jon, you write that "it would take a Herculean effort to remove even 25% of all the artifacts in any given area of the old front lines". As I wrote before, this "Herculean effort" is not that Herculean when you consider the considerable numbers of modern battlefield visitors each year, year after year, who removes artifacts (and have removed during the last 30 years). It becomes even more apparent when you consider which kind of artifacts are removed - the sorting process which will result in that attractive objects will be removed and other less attractive will remain.

You also write that a trained person armed with trench maps etc could make a pretty good guess where these sites were/are. Well, if you only look for sites mentioned in historical sources, you will find only sites mentioned in historical sources. You will confirm your view that historical sources are reliable and sufficent for any study.

But more interesting is to try to use the material remains to study what is not mentioned in the historical documents: What happened outside the control of the officers, what happened as has not been recorded, how can we find the silent actors (those who never have written or said anything or who died), how can we find information about all those things, events and behaviours the people during WW1 considered unimportant and therefore neither documented nor remembered, and, is it possibe to establish some principles about in which ways are WW1 documents unreliable?

In my (historical archaeological) view all to many who study WW1 are limited to what is recorded in the documents, they take them for facts. In that way they allow themselves to be restricted by the structures under which people were restricted during the WW1 period in history (the documents maps etc. from WW1 are biased by these structures: no documents are "correct" descriptions of the reality). Today we have knowledge about that period which they did not have themselves. Why let ourselves let us be restricted by their limitations?

I am aware of that this sounds pretentious, but it is in fact quite basic principles in history, anthropology and archaeology. What I am trying to do is to show that these fundamental principles of historical archaeological research are also something to consider in discussing the preservation-collecting dilemma.

/nils

[AOK4]

Nils,

I think you underestimate what's to be found on the Western Front. I used to search the fields around Geluveld when I was a kid, together with my grandfather.

There were "good fields" which yielded probably more than 15 kilos of lead, brass and cupper each year per hectare (although people had been searching the place for over 70 years)! We of course only kept the interesting stuff (buttons, insignia etc.) and sold the rest as scrap metal.

Other places in the area yielded more interesting things as buttons and other personal things, year after year! All this searching was done without the help of metal detectors or even a spade.

Regards,

Jan

[Fabiansson]

Jan,

Perhaps you are right. But I am pretty sure that many at this Forum underestimate the immense impact of thousands and thousands of people who collect "only the interesting stuff".

/nils

[Fleur]

example of just what has been discussed on this forum about the exploitation of the WW1 battle fields.

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?Vie...&category=13966

openly advertised as battle field dug

Fleur

[Guest Ian Bowbrick]

This eBay item is being sold by the guy Paul Reed pointed out earlier in this thread!

Ian

[Tim Birch]

Interesting Fleur

A blatant example of exploitation motivated by nothing more than profit. Maybe he should be reported to the Belgium authorities for exporting battlefied finds? The problem is how? And by whom? And would anyone take any notice!!?

Tim

[Dragon]

I find that utterly nauseating. Not only the idea of material being casually and anonymously sold, but that it stands for so much human pain and is valued so little.

Gwyn

[Hedley Malloch]

OK, but what is the difference between digging up and selling an artifact and picking it up and taking it away to admire in the privacy of your own home?

There are some interesting views of ourselves and artifacts. One view expresed in this thread is that I know what is important, I can tell the difference between the trivial and the strategic therefore my judgement can be trusted. I am not sure that I agree with this. It encourages a laisser-faire mentality which ignores the fact that what is 'trivial' to you might be crucial to someone else, the missing piece in a very important jigsaw for someone, possibly not yet born.

And if our judgement is OK then surely we must respect the judgment of others to distinguish between the trivial and the strategic, including French farmers who want to build pumping stations on Malins' hide at Hawthorne Ridge; and of Belgian entrepreneurs who want to build strategically important factories on old trenches, sites which are of no possible consequence - to them.

Live and let live. We are stewards; we own nothing; we can take away nothing but photos and memories.

[Steve_McGarry]

The difference is simple

one will be under the ground in context for hundreds of years, if left alone

The other will either rot or be sold as scrap within months.

What about visiting sites on the western front, do we not cause greater damage to sites by climbing all over them than removing the odd piece of roting shell? could you not argue that it is better not to visit places like hill60 or hawthorn crater, but rather read about them and only visit museums and cemeteries!!!! where does it end?

[Drummy]

I agree with you Steve, in respect of where does it end, people have differing views. This thread could be endless, I do not agree with battlefields being 'scavenged' by individuals seeking to make a profit. I am however fully in favour of official 'digs' and explorations being conducted to document sites and find/preserve items. Just look at the fine work of the 'Diggers' for example. If it was not for them I imagine that the whole area would have been bulldozed and built over. What good / interest is something buried under the ground, on the basis that it should be left for future generations, when exactly would that be!!

[Fabiansson]

But pleeeeaaaasssse.

Nobody says we should preserve only for future generations. You find no historian or archaeologist; nobody who work in museums, archives, libraries etc. who only wants to save for the posterior. But they care about their stuff, and also take care of it.

The point is that we should try to do as little damage as possible. For ourselves. For other. For today. For tomorrow. For the posterior. What you remove next weekend I will never see in its real context. What you remove this trip will negatively affect my and your own next trip.

/Nils

[Hedley Malloch]

The difference is simple

one will be under the ground in context for hundreds of years, if left alone

The other will either rot or be sold as scrap within months.

What about visiting sites on the western front, do we not cause greater damage to sites by climbing all over them than removing the odd piece of roting shell? could you not argue that it is better not to visit places like hill60 or hawthorn crater, but rather read about them and only visit museums and cemeteries!!!! where does it end?

Bullets and metal don't rot - at least not very quickly.

I would have thought there was the world of difference between visiting a site with the intention of taking material for no other reason than it interests you, and visiting it with the sole intention of taking a few photos. Damage to sites by visitors can be controlled and repaired; damage caused by souvenir hunting cannot

[Steve_McGarry]

hedley

You have obviously never owned a Lancia !

[AOK4]

In Flanders, the greatest danger for what is left in the ground is the pig's manure that is thrown on the fields, which is very acid and in fact dissolves all kind of metals like brass, iron, aluminium, zinc etc.

Jan

[Guest john craven]

A find, but not on a battlefield. My father used to work as a overlooker in a worsted spinning mill in Halifax, called Baldwin and Walkers. In the late 60's I would go with him on Saturday mornings to oil up the machines. As a young boy I liked to explore and found a foom full of junk. Then spotted dozens of ww2 gas masks and tin hats. I asked if I could have some for my collection. On pulling some out I saw two wooden propellors, and asked him if I could have one. In the end he asked a Director who took one prop and we had the other. I sold a tin hats and gas mask as a set for 5 shillings to my mates at school.

Two Company Directors were also brothers and had both gone off and joined the RFC and flew Sopwith Scout Aircraft. When the war ended they simply flew home to halifax, I believe the planes were scrapped and the propellors put in the mill.

The data on mine had some serial numbers and the words 80 h.p Le Rhone

or Le Rone (engine I presume).

I kept it until mid 70's and sold it at auction when I joined the Army, got £200 for it. What would it be worth now?

John Craven

[Dawson]

On walking through delville wood on a official trip I came across a Lee Enfield rifle still cocked with numerous bullets,

after a quick look I put it back, thinking the last chap who held it is probably still in the wood.The place is a sacred ground and should be kept that way.

mind you , on are return to the coach I found out that the coach driver had claimed it and took it home.

If you do find anything of interest why not photograph it and leave it be.

Regards,

Ian.

[Steve_McGarry]

Dawson.... You have raised a few issues here... I agree Delville wood is a place for contemplation not plunder... Human nature is such that this item was never going to stay there once uncovered, ... However I would not recommend trying to take a firearm through customs (however rusty) ... Plastic guns have been known to induce the rubber glove treatment from customs officials let alone a real one !!!! I believe there is a difference between what you discribe and my shrapnel ball (one)..(you will have to read the whole thread to understand what I mean). Others will disagree but we will have to agree to disagree.

[Guest JensF.]

I totally agree with the others about walking the battlefields. NEVER use a metal detector, NEVER dig or use a shovel. In my opinion it is ok to take some items which you find on the ground except live shells, hand grenades or whatever which still can make "Boom". NO item which you can find on a battlefield is worth to risk your life. Always remember that there is blood on every item. Treat every small shell fragment with respect because someone could have died by it. And NEVER sell these items to make profit. If you want to get rid of an item, bring it back to the battlefield!

If I find human remains I always bury them where I found them to prevent some sick "collectors" to take them home.

About "special finds" I think every item which gives you a name or unit is much more important than rifles or fuses (of course they also tell you a story). Some years ago I saw a german mess-tin made from aluminium (the early type) near Verdun and it had the unit mark "3. J." for the "3. Jägerbattaillon". After studying some old books and maps I discovered that this unit attacked in the beginning of the battle in february 1916 some hundred meters away from the spot where the mess-tin was lying. This are items which tell you a story.

[Simon R]

OK, but what is the difference between digging up and selling an artifact and picking it up and taking it away to admire in the privacy of your own home?

Well many people don't do either of these! I, for one, record finds and donate them to the local museum, which I also volunteer in.

[Tim Birch]

Ian

I am surprised that the coach driver took this item. If he was from a reputable coach company I suggest you register a protest with his employers. Not only was he setting a bad example, but he was breaking French law and British customs restrictions.

Out of curiosity what sort of condition was the rifle in? Was any of the timber still intact?

Tim

[Piscator]

Martin - I was at HMS Victory last year with my 'step'-grand-daughter and in the HMS Victory Museum they were selling pieces of the ship which had been removed during renovation. I think my dad might still have a piece we got from there in the 1970's.

As to expanding the collection, I think Jean might have something to say about that . However, it does sound tempting!!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Years ago during a short draft to portsmouths Reserve Fleet (we had one in those day's) Some of the Victory's timbers were brought on board and made into candle holders for the Senior Rates Trafalgar night dinner, afterwards I manage to rescue a couple of blocks of this timber and made a pair of miniture gun carriages out of them , still have them now. Incidently the wood (oak) was so hard I ruined my plane on it.

Len

[andigger]

Being in the US, its hard enough to find someone who knows about WWI leet alone has an interest in the war itself. So a friend of mine introduced me to another friend of his who was also interested in the war. I was certainly glad to met him, and we started swapping stories. It quickly became obvious that although his research and understanding of the French army was remarkable his hobby had also gone to the darker side and he was almost bragging about his metal detector finds.

Without making a scene I reminded him that it is illegal, disrespectful, and more than likely he was trespassing when he was breaking the law. He had answers for all of that. It was so disappointing to meet someone who has such an interest and at the same time such a lack of understanding about the war.

Andy

[doogal]

Hi

having never been to the battlefields, I've never tested my outlook, but I would have though if you found something as serious as a human remain, or a gas shell, you'd at least want to let someone know. On a personal level, I really don't know what to say about then embarking upon a personal and ad hoc excavation for one's own purposes, it's beyond words. As an historian, I'd be livid.

Now, as I said, I haven't seen the scale and type of battlefield flotsum that is underfoot, so, faced with a badge or similar item, couldn't say whether I'd take it or not. The extension of my above comments would say no, but it's very to easy to see why the answer could be yes.

If I do go, I shall certainly be reading this thread in more detail, as it has made me think twice and at least begin to form an informed opinion.

regards

doogal

[kerry]

Having just got back from the Salient this last weekend, I'm afraid the scavengers are still at work. But are they locals or visitors? No way of knowing. But the scavengers' work I came across was at an undestroyed German bunker in a wood, that owing to the foliage and thick moss, had lain undisturbed for decades. But one or more scavengers had dug out the ground to try to get to the buker entrance, no doubt to take anything they found, and then what? Sell it to Sanctuary Wood/Hill 60/Hooge Crater/Zonnebeke Museum?

In other parts of the wood there was also evidence of a person or people having used a metal detector - the foliage scraped away, a shallow dig, then the top foliage not quite being put back very well to hide their scavenging.

I must admit to having removed from the battlefield, a British 18-pdr fusing cap, on the surface at the edge of the field outside the Lettenberg false entrances to the hill. So it was on the surface, but does that make it OK to remove? The other parts to my huge and extensive personal private collection worth millions and the envy of the secret world of collectors and midnight scavengers that I have amassed over the last 6 visits to the Salient, are:

1 x section of barbed wire picquet found at the car park on the road on the surface near Bayernwald that presumably no-one else wanted;

2 x shrapnel balls (used);

1 x spent K98 round;

3 lumps of shrapnel;

er.....that's it.

But what authority or right did I have to remove these items, even though they were on the surface?

Kerry

[Steve Bramley]

The collecting of souvenirs has been going on for a long time.

a warning from almost ninety years ago,

Regards,

Steve