Dive to recover Lusitania artefacts

[museumtom]

The Lusitania’s Gold.

Until recently there were hopes, says the ‘Evening News,’ that it would be possible to refloat the Lusitania, which for two years has lain under 500 feet of water, ablut twenty miles from the Old Head of Kinsale. Salvage experts, I hear, have come to the conclusion that, even if successful, the effort would not be worth the cost, and the proposal has been abandoned. It is possible, however, that an attempt may yet be made to recover the specis which is known to be locked in the Purser’s cabin on the upper deck.

[ph0ebus]

Hot off the e-presses:

Artefacts Recovered from the Lusitania

The pillage begins.

-Daniel

[bob lembke]

Yesterday I was on another thread on the Forum, and I left to go to my "other" office to find the Lusitania book that I cited, and then when in there (I enter about every 1-2 months) the earthquake hit. Might suggest that G-d does not want me to pursue this line of thought.

Just listened to the radio clip from Irish Radio that Daniel just posted, the diver interviewed has dove on the Lusitania many times, and said that in 2007 he brought up some .303 ammunition, he said that there was 4,000,000 rounds of it on the ship. When asked about arms, he said that we will have to wait until the National Geographic documentary, perhaps May 2012, but said that they found "interesting things". He also mentioned, in regards to the second blast, theories of guncotton or aluminum powder.

Mere humanity aside, do the "facts" of the ship being on the roll of auxilliary cruisers, and carrying at least ammunition, affect its legal position? The book that I mention strongly suggests that the sinking was engineered by the UK to get the US in the war, or at least more firmly on the Allied side, and presented what they felt was evidence that, among others, Churchill and the King were in on the plan.

I have raised this book before on the Forum, and I never have heard a peep from anyone about it, pro or con; the book makes many other assertions, and seems to provide evidence behind these assertions, so I would think that this could be easily corroborated, or the alleged findings exposed as bogus. Also described in detail the court trying the captain after the fact; when it came out that an over-zelous wireless operator kept a set of unofficial transcripts of the messages he handled (if memory serves the book suggests that the government had destroyed the official transcripts of cables, such as one ordering the Lusitania to cease zig-zagging while going thru the known position of a U-boat), the trial was abruptly terminated, and the judge resigned from the bench, remarking: "I no longer wish to administer the King's justice." But of course no one made a big public deal of this during wartime, but everyone realized that the captain had been framed.

In view of the many explosive "findings", why does no one mention this book, and when I mentioned it before? I am no one to look into this, I am not expert on the naval war, and am busy with other projects.

If no one cites the book, I will go into abebooks and do a keyword search or title search on "Lusitania", and will sort thru 10,000 hits.

Bob

[Guest exuser1]

Intrestingly in a 1990s copy of Millers Guide to collectables ,concerning Nautical collectables it showed photographs of pocket watches recoverd from the Lusitania in the 80s with COE from one of the UKs largest supplier of nautical collectables ...price £15 !

On the question of engineering the sinking of the vessel to allow the USA to enter the war ? not a very good calculation was it as they never appeared untill 1917 and then not in any force untill 1918 .

[simonharley]

What is this "rolls" you refer to? Lusitania was listed in the The Navy List as a "Royal Naval Reserve Merchant Vessel", "held by the Cunard Co. at the disposal of the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty" and "the Company holds these vessels, for the time being [December, 1914] the property of the Company, at the disposal of His Majesty's Government for hire or purchase." Taken from p. 422 of the December, 1914 secret issue of The Navy List. Nothing about armed merchant cruiser there, at any rate.

I see on Wikipedia that there are multiple references to an "official list" of armed merchant cruisers - it would be interesting to know what list that refers to.

I'm assuming that the work you're referring to, Bob, is that of Colin Simpson?

Simon

[bob lembke]

I'm assuming that the work you're referring to, Bob, is that of Colin Simpson?

Simon

Again, I am not a student of the naval war, and read this book about 20 years ago, and am flying on only half-interested memory. So the mention of "rolls of auxiliary cruisers" has passed thru a non-expert mind in this area, and then 20 years of memory, and perhaps even my two strokes this Spring. The more expert opinion and description that you gave certainly does not rise to a status as an armed cruiser. This could be the author's error, deception on his part, or faulty memory on my part.

I searched again for the book, despite yesterday's frightening omen that the Diety was opposed to my finding it, and did not. But the name "Colin Simpson" is very familiar, and I think was the author, or one of them. (I now think even more strongly that he was the, or one of two authors.) What is his reputation? (I thought that, at least 20 years ago, the Sunday Times was reputable. Any phone-hacking here?) What is the reputation of the book?

I was very surprised when, several years ago, in a discussion of the Lusitania on this sub-forum, no one rose to my mention of this book. Thank you for responding. I would think that the allegations in the book are so explosive (pun intended!) that there would be a response. Another allegation was that the RN, in the nearby Irish port, in view of the sinking, informed the Irish fishing vessels that if they set out to try to rescue people, they would be fired on. (Again, I am running on memory, but it usually is servicable; this stuff was vivid.)

Bob

[simonharley]

I would comment about the book, but - also a sign from above, perhaps - I handed it back to the local library yesterday, after having had it for about six months and not looked at it in five! I've read so much since I remember very little about it.

Simon

[ph0ebus]

So, I just read (via Irish Times) they lifted four first-class portholes in addition to the ship's telegraph and telemotor. How do portholes shed any light on the sinking?

Daniel

[Guest exuser1]

Have just quickley looked at my copy of Robert Ballards Exploring the Lusitania ,Chapter 9 he seems to dispel the Churchill did it theory , and shows with his experience and research that the coal bunker theory seems to hold water ?

But intrestingly and the book was printed in 1995 in the final chapter its stated that in 1994 divers reported seeing containers that could contain some lost old Masters ? known to be on the vessel when she sank and these were being deliverd to Dublins National Gallery ,it finishes with the point that the Irish goverment has placed a preservation order on the wreck to protect it and any surviving cargo ?

[bob lembke]

So, I just read (via Irish Times) they lifted four first-class portholes in addition to the ship's telegraph and telemotor. How do portholes shed any light on the sinking?

Daniel

I know you are speaking retorically.

The diver in the radio clip that you provided stated clearly, while artifacts that were personal property of a passenger, or some items that were part of the assigned cargo, still have a tangled and possibly disputatious ownership, parts of the ship itself (I think he mentioned the telemotor), are clearly the property of the owner (Bemis??), who bought the thing, who clearly owns parts of the apparatus prised off of it.

Portholes, perhaps somewhat polished up, placed on a nice mahogany slab, perhaps with a nice plate of info, would go nicely up on a wall, should fetch a nice price, and clearly would educate the new proud owners, along with the BMW 740 in the driveway. They were favorite salvage items for some Jersey wreck divers, even from hum-drum Jersey wrecks; some from U-boat sinkings during WW II. (My father said that, of a summer evening, people would take beach chairs and beverages down to the beach as of a weekend night and watch the tankers burn. This was before TV, "Baywatch", and air-conditioning.)

Of course perhaps the porthole is as useful up on someone's wall as slowly disolving away at 350 feet.

The eeriest thing, to me, for example from video from the Titantic site, is shots of a single shoe, perhaps an elegant evening dress (male or female) pump lying on the sand all by itself. I hope that they do not scoot about in submersibles trying to assemble matched pairs.

A German ship in WW II was transporting thousands of Russian POWs off Norway and was attacked. I think it tried to beach itself, at any rate it is in shallow water, perhaps in a fjord, and 30 years ago sport divers dove on it and collected many Russian skulls as bookends or whatever, that is vile. There were, I think, thousands of skulls in the hull. I am not much worked up by bringing up the stray artifact, for a museum or wall. There are things to be studied and perhaps found, like the nature of the rupture caused by the second explosion. We can imagine that the RN took away anything really incriminating, if actually there and reachable, the Brits have a good sense of history. But the gear of 50-70 years ago would make deep penetration of the hull difficult, unless liberal amounts of dynamite were applied.

The only significant artifact that I brought up was from a steamer that sunk off New Jersey about 1898, it seems to be a bearing device about a foot square, there is a bit of glass imbedded (lubricating oil level indicator?), I crudely attempted to halt corrosion, and then took it apart, photographing each stage, seemingly finding what might be circular graphite plates, possibly bearing plates. Put it together, wrapped it in a towel, still have it somewhere. Took it at about 70', say three miles offshore, two night dives, say 10 PM and 12 PM. Captain was trying to scare us by a story about a 15' sting ray that supposedly lived on the wreck. Dove with a married couple, good friends, for much of the dive we shut off our lights and just crawled over the wreck in a rather deep darkness. There wasn't even a moon above, we had had to light lights on deck to even suit up for the dive, can't remember the visibility, but we usually had about 8' off there. It was also eery, that we were right off of a brightly lit waterfront amusement park, rides, even a Ferris Wheel, viual effect was curious.

Ahh, the ramblings of an old f**t.

Bob

[grantowi]

Maybe one of the "Stop the pillaging" camp can explian the diffrence between bring stuff up from the Lusitania (of any other wreck for that matter) and the Ground Zero Museum Workshop in New York when a lot more peole died and a lot more recently that those on the Lusitania.

http://www.groundzeromuseumworkshop.com/home.html

Part of their mission statemants reads: ".... by viewing items / artifacts recovered from the rubble of Ground Zero"

What, no shouts of Grave Robbing ? no accusations of Pillaging ?

Grant

[Guest exuser1]

Out of intrest spent 2 seasons in Norway diveing a number of WW2 wreck sites but the Soviet POW story never heard of that one ,details please ?

[Guest exuser1]

I would assume as the site from very early on was going to be rebuilt what would happen to all the material removed from the area ? the shocking point was and this is off theme was that near the end of the clean up process body parts were being found at the holding area some miles away.

[simonharley]

Maybe one of the "Stop the pillaging" camp can explian the diffrence between bring stuff up from the Lusitania (of any other wreck for that matter) and the Ground Zero Museum Workshop in New York when a lot more peole died and a lot more recently that those on the Lusitania.

http://www.groundzeromuseumworkshop.com/home.html

Part of their mission statemants reads: ".... by viewing items / artifacts recovered from the rubble of Ground Zero"

What, no shouts of Grave Robbing ? no accusations of Pillaging ?

Grant

You sound like you're presuming that all the so-called '"Stop the pillaging" camp" unequivocally support the Ground Zero Museum Workshop?

Simon

[bob lembke]

Out of intrest spent 2 seasons in Norway diveing a number of WW2 wreck sites but the Soviet POW story never heard of that one ,details please ?

Read it in "Skin Diver Magazine" some 30-40 years ago, I think a full article, with photos, but the mists of memory are swirling about me. Supposedly something like 2000 Russian dead. I probably quite suscribing to the magazine about 1978, when I had ceased wreck diving, after about 8 active years, so I probably read it 1968 to 1978.

Bob

[grantowi]

You sound like you're presuming that all the so-called '"Stop the pillaging" camp" unequivocally support the Ground Zero Museum Workshop?

No, As my post says, I'm asking for some one to tell me the diffrence. As no one has condoned the Museum

Please dont presume what Im thinking, if I thought that then I would have said that !!

Grant

[ph0ebus]

Maybe one of the "Stop the pillaging" camp can explian the diffrence between bring stuff up from the Lusitania (of any other wreck for that matter) and the Ground Zero Museum Workshop in New York when a lot more peole died and a lot more recently that those on the Lusitania.

http://www.groundzeromuseumworkshop.com/home.html

Part of their mission statemants reads: ".... by viewing items / artifacts recovered from the rubble of Ground Zero"

What, no shouts of Grave Robbing ? no accusations of Pillaging ?

Grant

Well, the answer is pretty easy. All of ground zero had to be excavated down to bedrock, and the artifacts were collected along the way, as a part of the body recovery process. I have no problems with that.

This work on the wreck is being done on a millionaire's whim 90 years after the incident, with no interest in remains recovery (not that any would likely be found, anyway). Like Bob said, it's a rich man's trophy hunt. Quite different than filling a public museum. Others may disagree with what I am saying but that's my take.

Daniel

[ph0ebus]

PS: WTC artifacts have been on public view for near 10 years now, and I have no interest in ever seeing them. I have seen enough, thanks.

Grant, I do thank you for asking the question...it was a good one.

[grantowi]

Well, the answer is pretty easy. All of ground zero had to be excavated down to bedrock, and the artifacts were collected along the way, as a part of the body recovery process. I have no problems with that.

Beamis's has always stated that he wants to find out the reason why the Lusitania went down so fast, with that in mind, as far as I know he has only recovered ship related item and not personal items.

Grant

[bob lembke]

This work on the wreck is being done on a millionaire's whim 90 years after the incident, with no interest in remains recovery (not that any would likely be found, anyway). Like Bob said, it's a rich man's trophy hunt. Quite different than filling a public museum. Others may disagree with what I am saying but that's my take.

Daniel

I am less concerned than Daniel about the "trophy hunt", but one possibility that this guy has a spin on the "history" of the sinking and might be interested in "cooking" the investigation into this still controverial event, which already has been used politically in a profound fashion. It's one thing if a rich dude is willing to spend $15 million to have a hair-comb made from the ivory of the skull of the captain, but what if he wanted to use his wealth to cook important world history?

It would be useful to subject this dude's scholars, archeologists, etc. to close scrutiny.

Bob

[grantowi]

It would be useful to subject this dude's scholars, archeologists, etc. to close scrutiny.

He's been part owner of the wreck since the 1970's and sole owner since late 1980's and I think that the fact that he hasnt strip mined the wreck of everything of value speaks volumes on his behalf

Grant

[Guest exuser1]

If he wanted to find out why it sunk so quickly surely it would have been cheaper to buy a copy of Ballards book ,with his findings when he explored the wreck in 95 ,also Ballard states Irish goverment placed a preservation order on the wreck ? and note personel items have been removed in the past and openly sold as such .

[Guest exuser1]

And by the way this is the same bloke who made a unauthorised dive on the ferry Estonia ,which he belives was sunk by the Russian mafia ?

[depaor01]

The National Geographic are filming, retrieval of items is being supervised by Fionnbarr Moore, Senior Archaeologist in the Irish State Underwater Archaeological Unit. Hardly a band of plunderers as is constantly being implied throughout this thread.

[grantowi]

,also Ballard states Irish goverment placed a preservation order on the wreck ? and note personel items have been removed in the past and openly sold as such .

The order was cancelled by the Dublin Supreme Courts in the late 2000's

Plenty of people have dived the Lusitania, so items proberly have been taken, but Bremis has said that every thing his team bring up will go to museums or to the Irish Goverment

Not sure about unauthorised, but he did dive and film the wreck.

Grant