Ossuary at Verdun

[seaforths]

Phil, you have raised so many interesting points along the way during the course of this topic. I had always thought and taken for granted that there must have been at the very least, some level of cooperation or at best a collaboration between the graves commissions of all the nationalities after the war regarding the recovery of the dead and battlefield clearances. I have no idea why I thought that, it was/is total presumption on my part.

[CROONAERT]

... the majority of German cemeteries containing casualties of this battle lie further away (Danvillers, Dun, Dannevoux, Mangiennes, Conflans, Piennes, Metz, Thionville, etc...even as far as southern Belgium) and are heavily 'diluted' with casualties from a far-stretching area of battle and time-zone...

Just for interest, here's an extract from a 1936 dated map of German war cemeteries in France and Belgium showing the locations of German cemeteries - many of which are likely to contain casualties from the Verdun battle of 1916. Most of these still exist today...

Dave

[phil andrade]

This is invaluable help, Dave, to those of us who, like myself, attempt to form conclusions based on contentious casualty returns.

You certainly stop me from running away with o'er hasty assessments. Thank you.

A question : do all French graves in the cemeteries bear a name ? Did they bury individuals as inconnus, or were all unknowns consigned to ossuaries ? I would be tempted to extrapolate by comparison with British practice. I've read that roughly half the British Great War dead registered on CWGC records in the Somme battlefields are identified, while one quarter are buried as Unknowns and the other quarter were never found - or, if found, were subsequently lost on the battlefields. If those 56,000 graves you allude to are all named, then I reckon there is scope for speculation.

Phil (PJA)

[CROONAERT]

A question : do all French graves in the cemeteries bear a name ? Did they bury individuals as inconnus, or were all unknowns consigned to ossuaries ? I would be tempted to extrapolate by comparison with British practice. I've read that roughly half the British Great War dead registered on CWGC records in the Somme battlefields are identified, while one quarter are buried as Unknowns and the other quarter were never found - or, if found, were subsequently lost on the battlefields. If those 56,000 graves you allude to are all named, then I reckon there is scope for speculation.

Far from it... 'Inconnu' is , sadly, a very common inscription (as are partial identifications). Contrary to what many people seem to think, ossuaries are not just for unknowns either. Similar to the German 'kameradengrab', thousands of known and named soldiers lie in ossuaries throughout the Western front (and beyond) with many (especially the larger) French cemeteries containing an ossuary plot with a list of names of those known to lie within it. If I recall correctly (?) only about one third of French remains from the Verdun (1916) battlefield were 100% identified.

Dave

[Jack Sheldon]

You need to remember that the French, at least initially, displayed very little interest in providing decent resting places for their fallen. The great projects of Douaumont and Notre Dame de Lorette would never have got off the ground, had it not been for the tireless effort of of the Bishops of Verdun and Arras. It was these initiatives which embarrassed the authorities into further action. There can be no doubt that a significant proportion of the bones housed at Douaumont is German, no distinction having been made when the battlefield was cleared, though the granite tombs within the ossuary symbolise the different sectors of the battlefield, the bones from which were, I understand, placed together. Similarly it is quite certain that a proportion of those 'Known unto God' in CWGC cemeteries are non-British. Had the remains been anything other than totally unidentifiable, the description on their stones would be different; it being poilicy to provide as much information as possible: viz. 'An Australian Soldier of the Great War', 'A Corporal of the Black Watch', etc, etc. A further point is that not all unknowns described as, 'A British Soldier of the Great War' actually were. The Belgian, French and British authorities relied on local farmers to a great extent to inform them when bodies turned up. They were compensated for their assistance and the British paid the best rates so, if the plough turned up remains, there was nothing simpler than to throw in a British helmet or some webbing and claim the extra bounty.

Jack

[phil andrade]

If I recall correctly (?) only about one third of French remains from the Verdun (1916) battlefield were 100% identified.

Dave

That is in harmony with the British experience.

In his book THE SOMME BATTLEFIELDS, Martin Middlebrook offers a tabulation of how CWGC registers breakdown the dead from different periods of the war.

As might be expected, the fighting on the Somme July to November 1916, which was every bit as intense as that at Verdun, resulted in only 38.5% of British Empire dead being given identified burial.

The Somme and Verdun : twin battles indeed.

Phil (PJA)

[phil andrade]

. Similarly it is quite certain that a proportion of those 'Known unto God' in CWGC cemeteries are non-British.

Jack

Jack,

Franky Bostyn might argue with you about this.

He gives a tabulation of the breakdown of the dead in Tyne Cot,, and attaches a footnote :

" The un-identified from the UK have graves with the words " A Soldier of the Great War - Known unto God." This indicates that at the time of burial it could only be confirmed that this was a soldier from the British Empire."

Only God knows how they could be confirmed as such.

Phil (PJA)

[Jack Sheldon]

I have discussed this with members of the CWGC, but if you think about it anyway, Frankie cannot be correct. Logically, when the British clearance teams went over, say, the slopes below Passchedaele, which they did carefully, three times in all, working from different directions, they recovered all bodies, or body parts they found. Positive i.d.s would have been simple, partial i.d.s would have enabled at least some information to appear on the gravemarker, then headstone and anything obviously German would have been passed over for appropriate burial. That would leave genuinely unknowns. So where did they go? - into British cemeteries of course; they would hardly leave them where they were. If you check out the appropriate section of the CWGC website, you will come across, 'technical developments in the weaponry used by all sides frequenty caused such dreadful injuries that it was not possible to identify or even find a complete body for burial. These factors were generally responsible for the high number of 'missing' casualties on all sides and for the many thousands of graves for which the identity is described as 'unknown'.'

Jack

[seaforths]

Jack,

Franky Bostyn might argue with you about this.

He gives a tabulation of the breakdown of the dead in Tyne Cot,, and attaches a footnote :

" The un-identified from the UK have graves with the words " A Soldier of the Great War - Known unto God." This indicates that at the time of burial it could only be confirmed that this was a soldier from the British Empire."

Only God knows how they could be confirmed as such.

Phil (PJA)

I don't think it would be a fair assumption to apply this equally however, a recent enquiry I made with the CWGC on one particular grave, gave the following response:

'Unknown casualty – Originally buried in Obershwoerstadt Cemetery – Identification: info on cross marking grave.'

We have to rely on those who marked the cross which in turn raises the question you have asked. How did the original burial people identify him? Which in this case must have been German.

I wish the CWGC would be more transparent and put ALL of their information in the public arena. A huge ask and massive task but what a valuable thing it would be.

[phil andrade]

Perhaps we have, in the ossuary, a macabre example of what we call " French pragmatism".

An eminently sensible way of avoiding hassle when it comes to such a dismal and delicate enterprise as battlefield clearance.

Phil (PJA)

[Sly]

In many cases if only a part of a body was found then it was buried, so it means that the number of gravestones in a CWGC cemetery like Tyne Cot doesn't reflect the exact numbers of bodies. Sorry it's a bit macabre but if an unknown arm or a leg was buried how could they know its nationality ? Am I right to think that ?

Sly

[CROONAERT]

...You need to remember that the French, at least initially, displayed very little interest in providing decent resting places for their fallen. ...

I think I'd have to disagree with you there to be honest, Jack.

In the large, flamboyant projects such as you mention it may certainly be the case, but to say that they - the country that, since 1887 already had an organisation that was dedicated entirely to the commemoration and memory of the war dead (a world-wide first?) - displayed very little interest in providing decent resting places for the fallen simply cannot be accurate. The provision and maintenance of military cemeteries (and other means of the 'disposal of the dead') was already an important issue for the French from the earliest days of the war.

On another, slight, deviation which can illustrate the French concern for post-mortem care, it shouldn't be forgotten that it was the French who were the first nation to issue a second identification disc purely in order to increase the chances of after-burial identification (the British only following suite after a (nearly year long) study of the French method... and even they weren't the next to do this) and were also the only nation involved in the war to specifically change the manufacturing material of their discs for no other reason than to increase their longevity when in the ground.

Dave.

[egbert]

............ A further point is that not all unknowns described as, 'A British Soldier of the Great War' actually were. The Belgian, French and British authorities relied on local farmers to a great extent to inform them when bodies turned up. They were compensated for their assistance and the British paid the best rates so, if the plough turned up remains, there was nothing simpler than to throw in a British helmet or some webbing and claim the extra bounty.

Jack

Jack, this is a very interesting contribution, but I am afraid the usual myth believers here won't like it at all . See the same discussion here when they even did not trust a Flemish farmer's first hand report to his son (who is a WWI historian today)

[Jack Sheldon]

I agree, Egbert. The practice is well attested and the principle of compensatory payments was entirely justified. These were men who were trying to get their land back into production and each such incident cost them time and money. I cetainly do not blame them for any such actions; the important thing is to know that whatever the origins of the bodies they were at least laid to rest with due reverence.

Jack

[andalucia]

A further point is that not all unknowns described as, 'A British Soldier of the Great War' actually were. The Belgian, French and British authorities relied on local farmers to a great extent to inform them when bodies turned up. They were compensated for their assistance and the British paid the best rates so, if the plough turned up remains, there was nothing simpler than to throw in a British helmet or some webbing and claim the extra bounty.

Jack

I too have heard this a number of times. I read a book where a gardener in one of the cemeteries mentioned this, though I can not recall the book title.

[seaforths]

Just for interest, here's an extract from a 1936 dated map of German war cemeteries in France and Belgium showing the locations of German cemeteries - many of which are likely to contain casualties from the Verdun battle of 1916. Most of these still exist today...

Dave

I have lists and map for Belgium from (I think) a few years after the war and possibly (this is assumption on my part) after clearances and official cemeteries designated as final resting places. Unfortunately, the map is so big I suspect the quality would be very poor if I posted it - but here are the lists that go with the map if they would be of use:

[phil andrade]

Also, the figures for German graves in cemeteries for the battlefield area can be a little misleading if just looking purely at figures as the majority of German cemeteries in that area are 'rear' cemeteries and include casualties from a number of sectors away from the actual 'Verdun' (1916) battle area,including a great number of casualties from the various actions in the general area of 1914, 1915 and 1918 such as the Woevre, the Argonne and the Meuse in general. The French cemeteries appear to be more 'localised' to specific areas and , thus, are more likely to contain graves actually from the actions in that area.

Dave.

This has got me thinking about the casualties, Dave.

Here I allude to the 1916 battle.

It's apparent that, while overall casualty totals for the two sides were remarkably similar, the French posted rather more men as killed, while the German total included a significantly higher number of wounded.

More Frenchmen might have died on the field, but just as many Germans shed their blood.

Do you think that the location of the German cemeteries more to the rear reflects superior ability to evacuate wounded from the battlefield ?

IIUC, the French suffered from a logistical disadvantage in the battle, their voie sacree being the lifeline. The Germans, I have read, selected the area of attack because it was relatively well served by rail.

This might impinge on the composition of the casualty figures. The higher French numbers of killed reflecting the fate of mortally wounded men who could not be evacuated, and dying in abominable conditions. The German wounded being evacuated and dying in hospitals further back.

I also wonder whether the Germans were more fastidious - meticulous, if you like - in clearing the field of dead and ensuring that they were properly interred.

If my suggestions have merit, then they would have some bearing on the discussion about the proportion of Germans in the ossuary.

I hope you will put me right if I'm off the mark here.

Phil (PJA)

[Chris Boonzaier]

You need to remember that the French, at least initially, displayed very little interest in providing decent resting places for their fallen.

Hi,

I am not so sure if this is the case... A recent book mentions in 1914 the Germans were a bit miffed because the French did not bury their dead and make nice Graveyards like the Germans were doing... but I often wonder if this was because many of the French dead were behind German lines. I can hardly complain my neighbours kids are not fetching their football on their own when i have two Pitbulls keeping people out of the garden.

As for the postwar years... I imagine the Germans and British had the luxury of sending burial parties to frence and Belgium to bury remains... while the Belgians and French had to dig up and bury remains, while at the same time trying to get the war torn sections of the country up and running again.... it would have made the task that bit more difficult.

Best

Chris

[phil andrade]

There is, I suppose, the rather crucial matter of expelling the invader from your soil to consider.

For those who wish to occupy and consolidate, the clearance of the field looms as a priority to a greater extent than it does for those who have to endure the presence of the aggressor.

I did, however, note that in Zuber's accounts of the Ardennes battles of August 1914, the Germans - after one of the biggest fights - reported burying five Frenchmen for every two of their own. Apart from the inference of German tactical prowess ( a fixation of Zuber's, I know ) this is a significant testimony to German meticulousness in battlefield clearance, at a time when fighting was raging at white heat and armies could be excused for worrying about keeping to schedule rather than burying the dead.

Phil (PJA)

[SiegeGunner]

There was no doubt a humanitarian aspect to the Germans' zeal for retrieving and burying enemy dead, but there was also a large measure of self-interest in examining their weapons and equipment and searching the bodies for material of intelligence value.

In addition to their near-paranoid concern about disease and infection, they also believed that unburied bodies had a bad effect on morale, and after major attacks they frequently brought in enemy bodies that could readily be reached in front of their positions, and patrols venturing further out into NML would cover bodies with loose earth or push them into shellholes. Again, though, there was also self-interest at work, as patrolling at night through terrain littered with decomposing corpses was unpleasant and distracting from the mission, and dead bodies offered concealment for enemy troops moving around in NML.

[phil andrade]

dead bodies offered concealment for enemy troops moving around in NML.

That actually relates to this discussion.

There is that iconic ( forgive me for resorting to that over used word !) photo of a German rifleman taking cover beside a partially buried putrefying French soldier at Verdun.

Phil (PJA)

[Christina Holstein]

It might be 'iconic' but that's not a photo known to me, Phil.

As to burying the dead in August 1914 in the Ardennes, which is an area I know well, I've been told many times that the Germans used the local population to do it. They needed their men for fighting.

Christina

[phil andrade]

You'll find it on the front cover of Malcolm Brown's book, Christina.

Regarding your comment about the Germans using the local population to bury the dead in August 1914, I must concede that I looked at my notes, and saw that I extracted from Zuber a reference to Massin - Anloy, 22-08 -1914, and it said Burial details counted 5 or 6 french dead for every two german....yes, the germans might well have counted, but I reckon you're right : they made the civilians do the work of burial.

Phil (PJA)

[Christina Holstein]

Thanks, Phil. I have now seen the photo and of course I have seen it before. It hadn't registered with me as special because I've seen so many.

Christina

[nigelcave]

As regards the ossuary at Douamont, IIRC, after the post war wave of clearances it was part of the duty of the chaplains to continue to bring in the unidentifiable dead and bones and place them in the appropriate part of the ossuary, divided as it is into, for want of a better phrase, topographically named chambers. Therefore, inevitably there would be both German and French burials in there. If I also remember correctly, the ossuary and the attendant chapel were built by the Church with the considerable assistance of international fundraising.