Selection of the Unknown Soldier candidates

[Hedley Malloch]

I knew I had read something about it somewhere. I have found some of it in Neil Hanson's 'The Unknown Soldier: The Story of the Missing of The Great War', London, Corgi Books, 2005. In Chapter 23, 'Mere Bones', Hanson writes that 'Great trouble was taken that the identity and origins of the chosen soldier would remain completely unknowable'. This was to offer consolation to all families who had lost a relative that it was their son, brother, father or husband who was now resting amongst Kings. There were four parties chosen for the exhumations, each comprising an officer and two other ranks, equipped with sacks and shovels and in a field ambulance. (Hanson, p.431)

 

In what Hanson calls 'the lofty British tradition, the significance of the day's work they were about to undertake had not been explained to them'. This was to ensure the corpse's anonymity. Hanson says they were sent to cemeteries. He then adds 'However, the burial parties were privately instructed that the soldier should have fallen in the early part of the war ensuring that decomposition was sufficiently far advanced to obviate the need for a cremation ... the church authorities - perhaps worried about the taint of putrefying flesh within Westminster Abbey - made it a condition of burial without cremation that the body dated from 1914'. It was felt that the British public would identify more with remains that had not been cremated. Hanson goes on to say that, 'For the military traditionalist, this had the side-benefit of ensuring that the Unknown Warrior would be a member of the (BEF) rather than one of Kitchener's New Army ... or one of the hundreds of thousands of soldiers drawn from the far-flung reaches of the Empire.' Hanson says it would not have been difficult to identify a 1914 soldier from his later arriving comrades by means of his equipment. (My underlining.) The reference is TNA WORK 20/1/3. (Hanson, pp.431-32)

 

Hanson then goes on to say 'There are, of course, no documents explicitly stating that only soldiers of the BEF were to be exhumed, but it seems clear from the minutes of the discussions that it was the tacit intention of the senior army officers to restrict the selection in this way. If so, it was an outrageous deception on millions of relatives of servicemen who had died in the succeeding years of the war, and who all ... nurtured the belief that the Unknown Warrior could be their missing son, husband or father.' (My underlining.) The references are TNA CAB 27/99 and Adrian Gregory, 'The Silence of Memory', Armistice Day 1919-1946' Oxford, Berg Publishers, 1994, p.46. (Hanson, pp.432-33).

 

So both the church and the British army appear to have been players in the selection process and both had reasons for selecting a corpse from 1914: the church's were sanitary, those of the British army rooted in the culture of the British office class. What we don't know is which cemeteries were on the short-list, who chose them and the details of the briefing given to the exhumation squads.

 

Elsewhere, Hanson adds that the army wanted to include the possibility of a sailor being included and had suggested that a 'site' being chosen in an area where the RND had been fighting, but this clearly conflicted with a requirement for the body to be of 1914 vintage. The RND had not arrived on the Western Front until after 1914.* The navy waived their rights in this matter leaving the army free to make its own arrangements. This further supports the view that it was a dead soldier from the 1914 fighting that was chosen.

 

He concludes by noting that Bernard Shaw wanted to write a play in which the Unknown Warrior would be finally revealed to be a ... German.

 

I expect we will hear more about this in the weeks to come as we approach the centenary of the internment of the Unknown British Warrior in Westminster Abbey. Expect more revelations.

 

* Cue long thread about whether or not Antwerp in 1914 can be considered part of the Western Front.

 

 

[Muerrisch]

Hedley, thank you. very much indeed for the detective work.

If you are happy that Hanson's book is properly referenced, then the references are a step forward.

However, some of his deductions are nonsensical, the major one being "1914 equipment". There are other glaring weaknesses ...... a 1914 cadaver could be an airman, could easily be TF, and could easily be interred in a site so as to retard decomposition, with the even greater possibility that a 1915 corpse, wearing "1914 equipment" could be in soil which hastened decomposition'.

 

The jury is not only out, but it has been sent home!

[PhilB]

Yes, it looks like the scent goes cold as soon as the “officer and 2 ORs” go off with their sandbag and shovel. As an UBS would, I assume, not usually have a date attached, how would they start?

[Muerrisch]

Quite so ........ many a 1914 era burial ground has a mixture of UBSs  from later burials ....... really nasty scenarios obtrude, such as "this one is too fresh, cover it and try the next row". These little teams had no modern aids: echo sounding, X ray, corpse-finder dogs.  Were there really ANY 1914 burial grounds that remained behind our lines and had no additions after 1914? These seem to be the only candidates, and yet Hanson's account as quoted above [and others] suggests no such attempt at overt limitation even if it were possible.

 

There is another evidence trail which might be followed: we have 4 officers and 8 other ranks who did the grisly selections. Did none of them leave a record?

 

I think Hedley is right: this one will run and run.

[Hedley Malloch]

I think what Hanson does is that he clarifies intentions: both the army and the church wanted a 1914 BEF body, though for different reasons. What happened in the search phase was a different matter. Clearly nobody could absolutely guarantee that the body eventually selected would be of the required year, but what could be done is to take steps to minimise the risk of a non-1914 vintage being chosen. The problem here is one of uncertainty reduction. Cemetery or 'site' selection would be key here. There are cemeteries in the Aisne which are entirely 1914 BEF casualties. Etreux CWGC is one: Le Grand Fayt Communal and Moÿ de l'Aisne Communal are two others, but there must be more, especially along the line of the retreat to the Marne. By the same token, there are some cemeteries where, in 1920, the chances of finding a 1914 BEF soldier were much smaller, though not non-existent. Again, the issue is one of probabilities.

Could the body be identified from clothing and equipment? Steel helmets and gas respirators would rule out the accompanying bodies, but a cloth cap would suggest, though not definitively prove, that the body could be of 1914 origin. Probabilities again.

Both PhilB and Meurrisch are quite right - we need to know who was selected to do the exhumations and the briefing they were given. Given the need for secrecy, then it is likely that the men were carefully chosen for their discretion. Hanson says they were not briefed about the nature of their mission and for whatever reason none of 12 soldiers chose to talk about it. Everything else is speculation.

 

 

 

[PhilB]

2 minutes ago, Hedley Malloch said:

 

Could the body be identified from clothing and equipment? Steel helmets and gas respirators would rule out the accompanying bodies, but a cloth cap would suggest, though not definitively prove, that the body could be of 1914 origin. Probabilities again.

 

I can`t imagine that a steel helmet, cloth cap or gasmask would ever get into a grave? What does that leave us with to identify a 1914 man?

[Dai Bach y Sowldiwr]

5 minutes ago, PhilB said:

I can`t imagine that a steel helmet, cloth cap or gasmask would ever get into a grave? What does that leave us with to identify a 1914 man?

I suppose if a man was killed by being entombed as a result of a shell explosion, and only discovered  years later, his skeleton would be reburied as found, gasmask, helmet and all. It might be very difficult to disentangle the bones from his uniform and equipment.

[Andrew Upton]

56 minutes ago, PhilB said:

I can`t imagine that a steel helmet, cloth cap or gasmask would ever get into a grave? What does that leave us with to identify a 1914 man?

 

 

Whilst in general the less personal kit would be recovered for reuse where possible, leaving items like steel helmets with their original owner when he was buried certainly did happen, eg the Grimsby Chums mass grave found in 2001 had the following:

 

[PhilB]

Surprised to see that - wonder how usual that is. Nice to see that some care has been taken in the laying out of the bodies.

[jay dubaya]

Seldom seen but they do appear on some burial reports, the ones I've seen are all post 1930.

 

 

Given the relative short time frame  in which to complete the task - it wouldn't be difficult for a DGR&E officer to locate a suitable  grave that fitted with the criteria - it couldn't be left to chance and a possibility of several exhumations to retrieve one suitable candidate, which in itself must have been possibility - Hanson suggests it was only a party of three to carry out the exhumation - how many graves were exhumed post Armistice only to find no trace of a body. On the flip side one could assume the party was experienced and knew exactly where to go to find themselves a bag of bones.

Once a suitable candidate was exhumed attempts would be made to remove and identifying effects - back at St Pol the four sets of remains are received by the Rev Kendall who tends the remains and makes them ready for the final selection. How were the remains presented? It's documented and accepted? that no party would ever cross over with another - only three men? ever saw the four sets of remains together - only two men present at the selection.  Any knowledge went to the grave, they understood the enormity of what this represented and that still resonates today.

As for the Bernard Shaw play - perhaps the time is ripe to pick up this batton... 

 

happy to keep this one running...

 

[PhilB]

5 hours ago, jay dubaya said:

 

Once a suitable candidate was exhumed attempts would be made to remove and identifying effects - back at St Pol the four sets of remains are received by the Rev Kendall who tends the remains and makes them ready for the final selection. 

 

 

Are you suggesting that the remains could well have been at least partially identifiable when originally disinterred?

[jay dubaya]

I'm absolutely suggesting that Phil, even armed with a burial report that indicated an Unknown 1914 burial there was no guarantee that when exhumed  the remains could not be identified further. The DGR&E work in France and Belgium upto 22nd March 1920 indicates there were 128,557 re-interments, of these 55,508 were already known, 6,273 were identified for the first time and a staggering 66,796 were again buried as unknowns.

We will never know what was asked of the exhumation party, surely the less they knew the better. The prospect of the first bag of bones, identified or not, found either on the surface or a registered/unregistered grave could be a contender for any/all of the four. Any identification, if any were present, could be easily be removed by the burial party and later still by Rev Kendall. 

[kenf48]

On 10/09/2020 at 22:38, Muerrisch said:

 

There is another evidence trail which might be followed: we have 4 officers and 8 other ranks who did the grisly selections. Did none of them leave a record?

 

This account, in the Leeds Mercury 12 November 1932 by permission of BNA suggests Captain Harry Cope was 'in charge' clearly this was not so and I suspect he was more likely to have been the officer i/c of one of the burial parties.  It can be seen they 'rejected' the body of a Canadian soldier, which of course date the internment to at least 1915 (assuming the veracity of the account esp. when compared to Wyatt's letter to the Telegraph).

 

[PhilB]

http://roadstothegreatwar-ww1.blogspot.com/2019/11/selecting-unknown-warrior.html

[Tom Tulloch-Marshall]

7 hours ago, jay dubaya said:

... The DGR&E work in France and Belgium upto 22nd March 1920 indicates there were 128,557 re-interments, of these 55,508 were already known, 6,273 were identified for the first time and a staggering 66,796 were again buried as unknowns. ...

 

That's an extremely interesting statistic. Is the source known ?

Tom

[jay dubaya]

That photo looks like it came from the Goodland Collection at the CWGC - if so I believe it would date to 1919 early 1920. Looking at the IWM catalogue the image posted would appear to be Q109517 credited to no-one but appears in an album of 9 other prints of similar nature. 7806-21 Cook HCB (Col) collection gives this description for this album - Bodies of fallen soldiers being recovered on the Western Front, 1919; possibly one of the groups charged with the exhumation of bodies from four main battle areas (the Somme, Aisne, Arras and Ypres) for the Unknown Warrior (see original caption Q 109517 and Gavaghan, Michael, "The Story of the Unknown Warrior", Cambridge University Press 1995, p 17); graves marked with wooden crosses on the battlefields and cemeteries, including Tyne Cot, Maple Copse and Polygon Wood

 

It's another red herring along with the newspaper clipping was it four or was it six......

 

Tom - the source is the IWGC Annual Report 1919-1920 - page 9

 

Edited 12 September , 2020 by jay dubaya
apologies for highlighted text - I don't know what I've done

[Skipman]

Does anyone else agree with me that it is simply wrong even to try to identify the unknown soldier?

 

Mike

[jay dubaya]

Agree with you 100% Mike. I cannot think of one reason nor any criteria that would warrant his name being revealed in the only one way possible - it really is never going to happen.

[squirrel]

From the account of John Sowerbutts, secretary of the British Undertakers Association "Bringing home the Unknown Warrior":

 

" Wednesday the 10th (November), 10 am a dull morning, the harbour is thronged with people, the roadway and quayside are beflagged; presently, out of the mist over the sea, a grey form emerges, it is HMS Verdun, upon which “our boy” is to go home. It does not take long to make fast alongside. After certain preliminaries the Commander comes ashore and stepping towards the representatives of the BUA, invites them aboard. Then a period of waiting , until in the distance the sound of French trumpets, playing the stirring “Au Champs” and the deeper, impressive music of the massed bands with Chopin’s “Marche Funebre”. Slowly down from the chateau, where he had rested all night under the myriad of November stars, to the Place de Dernier Sou, from thence with General Sir George Macdonagh and Marshall Foch following, borne in a French Army service wagon, through bareheaded ranks to the quayside.

 

It is a scene never to be forgotten, absolutely unknown, just a skeleton and no more. It might have been a baby in the shell for the weight; yet he is a British Warrior. With the grandeur and Triumph of a great victor he comes aboard and resting on the quarter deck, abaft two grim torpedo tubes bowered in flowers and veiled in battle-stained gown of three crosses intermingled, we make him fast for the last crossing. It would take a volume to describe it all. Shortly we cast off and out into the “glory mist” we glide. Just outside the harbour six British destroyers file into position, three each side, and four French cruisers meet us with their salutes, whilst the guns of the land forts boom “Au revoir”, and the bells of Notre Dame sing a requiem".

[TullochArd]

On 01/09/2020 at 17:31, Dai Bach y Sowldiwr said:

A splendid vow by the chaplain.

Although  reading about the process is intriguing, I think this  and all future generations should adhere to the belief that the Warrior truly is and  must remain unknown.

 

I'm with you on that DByS

[Marilyne]

On 01/09/2020 at 18:31, Dai Bach y Sowldiwr said:

Although  reading about the process is intriguing, I think this  and all future generations should adhere to the belief that the Warrior truly is and  must remain unknown.

 

I second that !!! 

 

the same rumors surround the French and the Belgian Unknown Soldier... does it matter??? 

 

M.

[PhilB]

Relax, folks. Nobody’s trying to identify him. The thread is trying to understand the nuts and bolts of the process by which a suitable unidentified body could have been found.

[Skipman]

1 minute ago, PhilB said:

Relax, folks. Nobody’s trying to identify him. The thread is trying to understand the nuts and bolts of the process by which a suitable unidentified body could have been found.

 

OK, fair do's. That is of course extremely interesting.

 

Mike

[Tom Tulloch-Marshall]

22 hours ago, jay dubaya said:

Tom - the source is the IWGC Annual Report 1919-1920 - page 9

 

Thanks Jay - A really interesting piece of information. 

The IWGC annual reports are on the list of things to go through - but its a very long list !

Tom

[jay dubaya]

Indeed, the reports are a very good source of these statistics through the years, although they do present a staging post for further analysis. As for lists - Major Dawnay has just turned up in a CWGC Archive pdf file - his service papers no longer exist.