Further mass burials

[towisuk]

What's the moral difference between a RN war grave (sunken warship) and a mass grave on land, why can't they be honored in the same way.

khaki

Ask the relatives of the Fromelles recovered and identified what a difference it makes having their Grandfather, Great uncle etc in a CWGC cemetery..

regards

Tom

[Auimfo]

What's the moral difference between a RN war grave (sunken warship) and a mass grave on land, why can't they be honored in the same way.

khaki

Khaki,

I suppose morally, absolutely nothing and if it were easy to recover the remains from warships, I'd be all for it. But logistically and to a lesser extent scientifically there's probably a great deal of difference.

Why is it we consider sunken ships to be their own graves? No doubt because it's never been possible to recover the bodies from deep underwater and so the next best thing in terms of closure was to think of it as a grave. And even though it might be possible to recover bodies today, it's no doubt still a hugely difficult undertaking and a somewhat dangerous proposition. (and no one is suggesting we risk endangering people just to recover the bodies).

Then we have to consider what may have become of the remains over the years. I'm no marine expert but wonder if the deterioration would have been so complete that there is anything left to find? I'd also wonder how the marine environment may have affected the retrieval of DNA if remains could be found.

So Khaki, from a purely moral standpoint I can see no difference between the two, however the point you're trying to make through the question is a little unbalanced because the circumstances for recovery are and always have been so vastly different that a comparison is pointless.

Cheers,

Tim L.

[Khaki]

I wouldn't have thought that digging into any battlefield is without its dangers, my point was not to find justification in doing recovery but to demonstrate that 'honoring the dead' which seems to be the catchphrase (or similar words) of some recovery advocates, can be achieved without disturbance of a burial site.

I am in principle opposed to the opening of any grave site whether it be Native American or British Tommy.

I am sorry that's just the way I feel and believe.

I will not further exhaust members patience.

regards to all

khaki

[johnboy]

Was it,is it a myth that sailors wanted to be 'buried' at sea?

People these days can stipulate where they want their ashes scattered, including at sea.

[Auimfo]

Khaki,

There's a vast difference between the dangers likely to be encountered whilst exhuming mass graves 6-10 feet deep on land and those to be found if trying to recover remains from shipwrecks deep below the ocean. I understand the point you were trying to make but the virtual physical impossibility of the task you were suggesting has always had it's own set of unique circumstances requiring it to be viewed from a different perspective. This means any comparison between the two conditions isn't really valid.

But there's no need to be sorry about how you feel. You have every right to think as you wish just as everyone else is entitled to their own opinions - it's just that they differ.

Cheers,

Tim L.

[ianw]

When a sailor unfortunately goes down with his ship, there is some little comfort in the fact that the ship concerned was his home and he was with his mates - but of course the practicalities of recovering any remains would be massive.

But the question of how we deal with large numbers of mass groups of remains that will continue to be discovered periodically in France - perhaps on an accelerating basis as development of rural France and Belgium continues - is a thorny one and it is complicated by the fact that we now have the ability to ID a significant proportion of the remains. The game has permanently changed in this regard.

[Fedelmar]

Just to throw a curved ball in here. Never loose sight of the fact that the CWGC relocate remains of NAMED War Dead for various reasons, across the globe. Therefore Kharki, if that was your relative I ask you how you would feel?

When these lads went off to war, they would never have considered not being buried in a grave (in my opinion). If your relative was chucked in a mass grave at all angles with in some cases total strangers of varying religions how would you feel then?

Murderers, child abusers and other criminals get buried in a grave (maybe with two others) so why can't our soldiers have a single marked grave?

Reburying war dead in a cemetery is not a matter for personal opinions it is a matter of respect, honour and appreciation.

PS:
Sherlock, Army has 128 identified last time I looked at their website.

[johnboy]

Reburying war dead in a cemetery is not a matter for personal opinions it is a matter of respect, honour and appreciation

That is your opinion, so why not let others have theirs.?

[keithmroberts]

Steady, there's no intended lack of respect anywhere here. it is about approaches to that respect. The only lack of respect is when grave robbers dig around for metal to sell, or when uncovered remains are deliberately ignored.

Keith

[Auimfo]

Sandra,

If the Army have 128 on their website then they're wrong. The current figure stands at 124 identified.

Cheers,

Tim L.

[Seadog]

Reburying war dead in a cemetery is not a matter for personal opinions it is a matter of respect, honour and appreciation

That is your opinion, so why not let others have theirs.?

The opposite of the quote you include above is of course:

Disrespect, dishonour and unappreciated………..are you serious?

Norman

[johnboy]

I quoted the FULL line so as not to be accussed of being selective. My point as you well know is that there are other views rather than just yours. I think I am entitled, as the last living relative of a person to be able to give my opinion on what I would like if his body was found. I am not speaking for others or trying to persuade them my view is right.

[ianw]

No one here is trying to deny anyone the right to their opinion. However it is a Forum and as such a place for people to explain their views - amazingly I have sometimes modified some of my opinions based on other people's viewpoints - and of course agreed to disagree amicably as well.

[keithmroberts]

Well said Ian, debate should not become argument.

Keith

[Guest]

There is much interesting information in Hansard This from 9/11/1921

Mike

[ianw]

Thanks for the 1921 Hansard piece, Mike.

It is clear that the withdrawal of the exhumation parties was a reaction to immediate conditions in the field and was not intended to end the search.

A particularly interesting last few sentences from the Secretary of State for War :-

"In cases where relatives or friends can produce from their own knowledge evidence that the body of an officer or soldier may be found in a particular locality, special search will be made under the instructions of the Imperial War Graves Commission if the Commission is satisfied that a good primâ facie case has been made out. I hope this statement of the work done and the arrangements made for the future will allay any public anxiety in the matter."

It would seem as "relatives or friends" of the fallen from the future, we might be able to use this ministerial commitment in the Commons as a basis to ask the CWGC to undertake a special search of any likely area!

[Auimfo]

Thanks Mike, that made for interesting reading. It was enlightening to read these words by the Secretary of State for War which differentiate between remains discovered accidentally in the future during excavations/roadworks etc. and those pinpointed by research or knowledge. Considering this was the view in 1921, it clearly reflects the thoughts of society at the time and therefore also strongly implies a soldiers expectations should he have been killed. I found the following sentence particularly informative:

"In cases where relatives or friends can produce from their own knowledge evidence that the body of an officer or soldier may be found in a particular locality, special search will be made under the instructions of the Imperial War Graves Commission if the Commission is satisfied that a good prima facie case has been made out."

Is that not exactly what has just been done at Fromelles? I would take this as strong evidence that society (and hence soldiers of the time) wanted an individual grave in a IWGC/CWGC cemetery wherever and whenever possible.

Cheers,

Tim L.

P.S. It seems Ian and I were reading and posting at the same time!!

[Guest]

Yes, that's the part I found interesting. It may well be worth searching Hansard further, for any statements that sought to change or annul this statement? (if these are the right phrases?)

Mike

[johnboy]

Well said Ian, debate should not become argument.

Keith

My point of view has been stated on this thread and keeps being questioned by someone with the opposite point of view. I have not questioned any one elses point of view to which they are entitled.

I'll make this my last word on the subject as I am getting slightly annoyed that my personal view about MY relative cannot be accepted.

[ianw]

Interesting to consider the historical context of the period just after the war and the impetus there would have been to get Imperial troops out of France and Belgium. The corrupt behaviour of some within the Australian Graves Service is a matter of record and there may have been other bad behaviour. No doubt there would have been pressure from the French and Belgian authorities to de-militarise their countryside and this would have chimed with budgetary concerns in Britain and the Empire.

[ianw]

I'll make this my last word on the subject as I am getting slightly annoyed that my personal view about MY relative cannot be accepted.

I think ""slight annoyance" is price we all have to pay sometimes for participating in exchanges on the GWF!

[Guest]

Some interesting pdf downloads from the CWGC Archive catalogue

Mike

[towisuk]

Interesting to consider the historical context of the period just after the war and the impetus there would have been to get Imperial troops out of France and Belgium. The corrupt behaviour of some within the Australian Graves Service is a matter of record and there may have been other bad behaviour. No doubt there would have been pressure from the French and Belgian authorities to de-militarise their countryside and this would have chimed with budgetary concerns in Britain and the Empire.

Interesting point Ian, and one well worth considering. Spending money on armaments to kill people at times of war...."no problem, beat the enemy first deal with the cost afterwards", but when hostilities end and the pressure is off, budgetry is a big concern when it comes to recovering the remains of the, (not all willing) participants from the trenches and the battlefields.

regards

Tom

Edited 8 December , 2013 by towisuk
one line removed - current affairs

[Michelle Young]

If Albert Allen or Henry Johnson (see my signature) were to be found and identified, I would like to be given the option of a quiet family burial service rather than the whole world and his dog approach that seems to be common these days.

Michelle

[roel22]

When the remains of British soldiers are found they will be (re)buried in a single grave.

For Germans it's a different story, though.

For many years I've wanted to find and rebury the remains of my great-grandfather. But not anymore.

If he is ever going to be found (I roughly know where his (mass)grave must be) he will be interred in the 25000+ Kameradengrab in Langemark.

Right now he rests among men he went into battle with. Was laid to rest by his best friend, who brought him in from no mans land.

If I want to honour him, I'll go there.

Roel