mca07100 Posted 20 January , 2011 Share Posted 20 January , 2011 I really think Dominque Zinardi has down his best, I had an email from him today, under the condititions he had to work with he has done a fantastic job. We will give this soldier his name and dignity, we are already tracking and have a few maybe's especially I have one chap in mind , so give Dominique some credit for what he has done. I would post the picture he sent of the exact spot but I hate Ghouls , that may visit the spot ,and try and find other relics maybe still there .So for now it will stay with me.I thank Dominique as an Australian from the bottom of my heart.---Maria Cameron --researcher Lambis Englezos Team Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fedelmar Posted 20 January , 2011 Share Posted 20 January , 2011 Well said Maria Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty Posted 20 January , 2011 Share Posted 20 January , 2011 From todays Syney Morning Herald. Scotty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seadog Posted 20 January , 2011 Share Posted 20 January , 2011 Thanks for posting the newspaper report Scotty, I note with interest that a second set of remains have also been found. I believe that no mention of this was made in the original report posted to this thread. Regards Norman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mca07100 Posted 20 January , 2011 Share Posted 20 January , 2011 This is a remarkable discovery and I hope that attention can go to identifying this man and or his role. Do we have a grid reference of where the bloke was found? Under what circumstances would a soldier have a pistol and a rifle and 8 Mills bombs? Or why would an officer have Mills bombs and a rifle? Or are there a few men in the vicinity? The Zonnebeke 5 when originally buried were "back filled" with battlefield debri. If he was an officer why were there no "pips" found? Does the indication that because the holster may be made in West Australia offer any indication that the soldier was West Australian - I would think not? Sounds more like a soldier going up to the front line or being killed during the attack. Are there any indications that he was buried by his comrades or simply buried by the shells? Did specialist bombers,runners or linesmen carry pistols? If it is a service watch to what rank where they normally issued? Regards, Len I am not an expert on exactly what Australian soldiers carried Len , but I believe that bombardiers and Soldiers in tanks carried pistols , but in this case the soldier had a Whistle so far unreported , his rifle had been cut in two by part of a shell and there was a rising sun badge along with 2 shoulder Australia badges which Dominque Zinardi has told me CWG has recovered since ,and this leads to the conclusion that he is an officer . W.A would be the Battalion eg 16th where it was raised in 3/4 Western Australians ,and 1/4 South Australians not exactly where he was born, his dog tag is missing but it may have been an early one and decomposed or been taken by a fellow soldier and lost due to that soldiers death ,as to the service watch I have no idea, no doubt time will tell--I hope this answers some of you questions --Maria Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dfaulder Posted 20 January , 2011 Share Posted 20 January , 2011 >><< Under what circumstances would a soldier have a pistol and a rifle and 8 Mills bombs? Or why would an officer have Mills bombs and a rifle? >><< Regards, Len I recall reading somewhere (in a British Army context), that the Germans could target officers - recognising them from the fact that they were brandishing pistols. Might an officer have chosen to carry a rifle partly to disguise his outline and partly to enable him to fire accurately at a distance? (I will edit and add a reference if I find it - but don't hold your breath - sugestions welcome!) David Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seadog Posted 20 January , 2011 Share Posted 20 January , 2011 Any more news about the second set of remains found? (Post 130) Norman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mca07100 Posted 20 January , 2011 Share Posted 20 January , 2011 Any more news about the second set of remains found? (Post 130) Norman, Dominque told me that other bones had been found next to his find, by the CWG they may belong to the same soldier Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seadog Posted 20 January , 2011 Share Posted 20 January , 2011 Post 135: Or of course they may also belong to a second man, thanks for the info. I am really having difficulty understanding the sequence of events here and my motives in posting the following are genuine. The other bones were found by the CWGC, well who in the CWGC and how come they discovered the bones and apparently two shoulder badges (Post 132) as I had understood there theirs was a non-proactive role and that they would just collect the remains, from I would have expected the police. Has the mysterious CWGC "Exhumation Officer" been involved here and why is the original finder (Dom) so willing to divulge various snippets of information to various people concerning the discovery (ies). To me this is yet another example of why we need a proper official method of exhumation and a reporting procedure which satisfies all of the basic criteria that such solemn and important discoveries of the fallen deserve. Regards Norman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mca07100 Posted 20 January , 2011 Share Posted 20 January , 2011 Post 135: Or of course they may also belong to a second man, thanks for the info. I am really having difficulty understanding the sequence of events here and my motives in posting the following are genuine. The other bones were found by the CWGC, well who in the CWGC and how come they discovered the bones and apparently two shoulder badges (Post 132) as I had understood there theirs was a non-proactive role and that they would just collect the remains, from I would have expected the police. Has the mysterious CWGC "Exhumation Officer" been involved here and why is the original finder (Dom) so willing to divulge various snippets of information to various people concerning the discovery (ies). To me this is yet another example of why we need a proper official method of exhumation and a reporting procedure which satisfies all of the basic criteria that such solemn and important discoveries of the fallen deserve. Regards Norman Norm I understand everything you have said,and agree , if you read the newspapers , it reports the sequence of events, the latest news will most likely be published as well in a further Newspaper article. I assume that the CWGC have gone to the spot to examine the site and found other bone fragments. which had been missed --only guessing !! A Reporter / Writer from Canberra ,just happened to be in the area , at the time of discovery so of course it would be detailed in the news. --regards Maria Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willy Posted 20 January , 2011 Share Posted 20 January , 2011 And given the fact of the articles found already, quite likely it could be two sets of remains, see my previous posts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trenchtrotter Posted 20 January , 2011 Share Posted 20 January , 2011 CWGC dont just collect they will dig as well! One thing that strikes me reading through this thread is (and I say this in a nice way)is the naievety of some of the posts....why no rank badge for instance. Well was he wearing an officers tunic with cloth pips? Did he remove badges of rank? Why no ID...well rotted or removed? I have already pointed out the dangers of ruling him out as an officer because of the rifle. Also as far as combing the area for bodies........nice thought. It was done in the twenties and they missed loads. Also the whole area is a charnel house and bones can be found everywhere especially after deep ploughing. I suspect the farmers would be upset if their fields were gridded and excavated all over again. It is time to leave them in peace and when by chance a fallen soldier comes back to us then yes a proper recovery and burial are a must. NB many ORs carried pistols....MG troops, Lewis gun troops, any soldier who retrieved one...... Regards TT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
horrocks Posted 20 January , 2011 Share Posted 20 January , 2011 This has been a very emotional thread. Whilst one has all respect for the opinions that have been, sometimes rather vigorously, voiced, it did seem to me as if all the participants in the original article treated the discovery of this fallen soldier(s) with all reverence and care possible under the obviously rather trying circumstances. The article itself seemed very respectful too, and if the publicity provided by the presence of a journalist means that the treatment of future discoveries (and there will be many) is more likely to be subject to some kind of recognised process, then we all have much to celebrate. I am anyway glad that the heat seems to have passed out of the debate and that matters are being taken, as we were assured they would be, down through the proper channels. On the subject of whether the body was that of an officer or not, I recall reading a first hand account by (I think) an officer of The New Zealand Division during the September attack past Flers along Grove Alley towards Factory Corner in which he stated that he, in common with all officers, wore a private's uniform and carried a rifle, as officers were well known to be targeted by German snipers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew pugh Posted 20 January , 2011 Share Posted 20 January , 2011 Good Evening All. It has been mentioned that this chap had a revolver on his remains when found, and because of this it is assumed he is an officer.But I have seen a photograph somewhere showing an Australian soldier, Pte or N.C.O.The photo clearly showed him wearing a revolver and Sam Brown and carrying a rifle.And dont forget the Diggers mode of uniform was a bit more relaxed regarding what he could wear and carry, and they used, and carried anything they could to get the job done.Only an opinion. Best Regards Andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackblue Posted 20 January , 2011 Share Posted 20 January , 2011 Great the CWGC and the Australian Army seem to be involved. Perhaps we will see a complete examination of the site as seems to have been suggested by the latest articles...and there will be all the more chance of a positive identification. My issue lies with the current process. I believe best practice is that funding is made available and it is ensured the relevant authorities (including relevant governments) are advised and intervene as soon as possible with recoveries undertaken accordingly by those acting on behalf of the authorities. How many others out there are not as experienced and/or have the good motives of Dom? The fallen, when they are discovered, deserve improved early intervention to ensure that all relevant steps are taken so that they may one day be named. This said, I still fail to see the need for what I see as the unecessary handling and publishing of photographs of the mans remains. I feel the most positive aspect to the article is the hope that this case will prompt the authorities of various nations to lobby to have the current situation changed for the better. Rgds Tim D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackblue Posted 20 January , 2011 Share Posted 20 January , 2011 As far as whether the man was an officer or an OR the fact that he seems to have been armed with a revolver may indicate that he was an officer. Are there any remains of a Sam Browne which would further support this? Regardless this would by no means be conclusive. There would have been many instances of ORs arming themselves with pistols and corresponding instances of a officer arming themselves with grenades or perhaps a rifle. There could also be the remains of two or more men...as has been alluded or the man could simply have fallen in the same location as other discarded equipment. All the more reason for a comphrehensive survey of the site by the authorities. Rgds Tim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianw Posted 20 January , 2011 Share Posted 20 January , 2011 It is time to leave them in peace and when by chance a fallen soldier comes back to us then yes a proper recovery and burial are a must. I think TT's evaluation of the reality of where we are is realistic. In 1921 when major recovery efforts ceased, it was well known that huge numbers of remains were still unrecovered. I think this was rather glossed over by the powers that be but the desire to return to normality was universally strong - as was the desire to save money by governments! Fromelles was an extraordinary discovery that got an extraordinary response and it is likely that there may be other extraordinary finds of remains. These will have to be treated on their merits. My Great Uncle is lost just north of Ypres. I would be delighted if his remains were chanced upon some day but they will only be found by luck now and the chance of an ID is very low. That said, they should have dignity when found but these finds are commonplace on the Western Front and life has to go on there. I do agree that our collective efforts fall rather short at the moment though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ice Tiger Posted 20 January , 2011 Share Posted 20 January , 2011 .....Also as far as combing the area for bodies........nice thought. It was done in the twenties and they missed loads. Also the whole area is a charnel house and bones can be found everywhere especially after deep ploughing. I suspect the farmers would be upset if their fields were gridded and excavated all over again. It is time to leave them in peace and when by chance a fallen soldier comes back to us then yes a proper recovery and burial are a must. TT Extreemly well put Andy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esskay Posted 21 January , 2011 Share Posted 21 January , 2011 In my naivety throughout this thread - at the back of mind has been the thought that it's all well and good for us Aussies and Brits to want to develop standard procedures/official exhumations/comprehensive surveys/approved teams of archaelogical investigators etc - but wouldn't it require the good will of the French to bring any policy developed into "law" - and then the "honesty" of anyone involved in accidently finding remains - through ploughing/digging/construction work etc to do the right thing Sadly, human nature being what it is today - surely the likely hassle involved to farmers and lost time/money etc to authorities or private contractors on construction works make it more likely that if some sort of 'official policy' was in place - remains and artifacts found in these circumstances would tend to be ignored, dug back in and covered up generally Maybe I'm too cynical??? Cheers Sue Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willy Posted 21 January , 2011 Share Posted 21 January , 2011 No Sue, you are not cynical,see my previous posts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lou Bougias Posted 21 January , 2011 Share Posted 21 January , 2011 You are not beeing cynical, Sue. You are being realistic. However, something needs to be done to create some sort of official process, and to mandate its people to adhere to it. Even if it means the CWG paying the farmer/contractor for their "downtime". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mca07100 Posted 21 January , 2011 Share Posted 21 January , 2011 The Northern French farmers are mainly into cropping, of which their income depends on, they do not own huge tracts of land where they can just plant some where else. And I understand their situation coming from the land myself ,Sometimes their tractors unearth not only our dead ,but unexploded ammunitions putting the farmer at risk. I do not think making any new Policies or laws over there would work. What I really think is that should any farmer uncover one of our soldiers, they should be given monetary compensation, for loss of income etc . Every other country did this post war except the UK and Australia -NZ ,In other words other countries payed bounties !! I read this in a news paper in Australia dated back in the 1920's there was no incentive back them to report our dead, and mostly they were covered up again, and still are in some cases. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willy Posted 21 January , 2011 Share Posted 21 January , 2011 The problem is that gone are the days of someone working the land with a team of horses or by hand, todays farmers driving their large air conditioned tractors,just don't see small items like bones, remains will mainly be missed during normal work, and only found by chance,to offer to pay a "bounty", would not make too much difference, as they just would not be spotted in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lou Bougias Posted 21 January , 2011 Share Posted 21 January , 2011 The Northern French farmers are mainly into cropping, of which their income depends on, they do not own huge tracts of land where they can just plant some where else. And I understand their situation coming from the land myself ,Sometimes their tractors unearth not only our dead ,but unexploded ammunitions putting the farmer at risk. I do not think making any new Policies or laws over there would work. What I really think is that should any farmer uncover one of our soldiers, they should be given monetary compensation, for loss of income etc . Every other country did this post war except the UK and Australia -NZ ,In other words other countries payed bounties !! I read this in a news paper in Australia dated back in the 1920's there was no incentive back them to report our dead, and mostly they were covered up again, and still are in some cases. Yes, but there were many instances when "farmers/bounty hunters" would claim one body as two, I will leave it up to you too work out how they did it! This was in the 1920's of course, God forbid that someone today would want to make a financial gain of something that he found on/in a battlefield, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willy Posted 21 January , 2011 Share Posted 21 January , 2011 Some make financial gain from artefacts they find, why do you think some people field walk? and how do the museums and shops get their items?. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now