Jump to content
Great War Forum

Remembered Today:

Selection of the Unknown Soldier candidates


Recommended Posts

At a tangent, briefly, please.

On the subject of Remembrance, the RBL are selling very nice "paired" poppy pins, each with a poppy and beside it a regimental badge of your choice.

My son is ex-RAF Regt, and I was an Hon Member of 4 Squadron RAF, so have bought one of each. A nice little present to give in the next few weeks. £10 or so includes postage.

Not all regiments/squadrons RN are covered yet.

 

Back to the UW .......

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know previous posts have commented on CSI and forensic matters.

 

Just seen this online - has anyone got any access and can comment on what is found within - About the process all the way through to registration  of a grave - ??? 

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0379073820302565 

Forensic Science International

Volume 314, September 2020, 110394

A First World War example of forensic archaeology

Author Victoria Martin

Cranfield Forensic Institute, Cranfield University, Shrivenham, Swindon, SN6 8LA, UK

Available online 26 June 2020.

 

Wondering ...

:-) M 

Edited by Matlock1418
format/layout adjust
Link to post
Share on other sites

My second hand paperback of Hanson arrived yesterday. The front 3/4 is irrelevant to the UW discussion we are having.

 

There are copious end-notes but they are organised by page number, thus the need, when reading the text, to have a bookmark in the end-notes.

On consulting the end-notes the references seem very thin to support his assertions. His assertions teem with detail.

On the other hand, his bibliography is huge and deep.

 

I am not hopeful of being convinced that his detail offered is backed by primary and trustworthy sources: the first one of relevance is a report from the TIMES newspaper!

 

That is not to prejudge, and I will report back, meanwhile hoping that this anniversary year will see an in-depth book or article based on new and referenced research using contemporary primary sources.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Still waiting for my copy to arrive but looking forward to the thrill of the chase-The stuff about choosing a 1914 body just does not make sense to me at all.  I note the same author has done another book on The Missing which is not referenced, save for some,in effect, "Thanks" at the end.  

   What I will be looking for is the same process as Alfred and the cakes, "Contemptible Little Army" and "Lions led by Donkeys"- that is, to find out when these stories first appeared. With Hanson, we are looking for materials of a 1914 man being sought-anything, anything that pre-dates the publication of his book. I am not hopeful.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hedley Malloch
On 22/09/2020 at 10:18, Muerrisch said:

On consulting the end-notes the references seem very thin to support his assertions. His assertions teem with detail.

On the other hand, his bibliography is huge and deep.

 

I am not hopeful of being convinced that his detail offered is backed by primary and trustworthy sources: the first one of relevance is a report from the TIMES newspaper!

 

That is not to prejudge, and I will report back, meanwhile hoping that this anniversary year will see an in-depth book or article based on new and referenced research using contemporary primary sources.

 His two primary sources are TNA CAB 27/99 which presumably give the 'minutes of the discussion that it was the tacit intention of senior army officers to restrict the selection in this way.' (Hanson, p.432) Note the use of the word 'tacit'. If it remained tacit, then one would not expect much to be made explicit in the written record. But as I have previously remarked, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

 

The second, which appears to deal with the church's sanitary-driven requirement for a 1914 body is in TNA WORK 20/1/3.

 

I suspect that people will wish to consult both sources and draw their own conclusions.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Hedley Malloch said:

 His two primary sources are TNA CAB 27/99 which presumably give the 'minutes of the discussion that it was the tacit intention of senior army officers to restrict the selection in this way.' (Hanson, p.432) Note the use of the word 'tacit'. If it remained tacit, then one would not expect much to be made explicit in the written record. But as I have previously remarked, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

 

The second, which appears to deal with the church's sanitary-driven requirement for a 1914 body is in TNA WORK 20/1/3.

 

I suspect that people will wish to consult both sources and draw their own conclusions.

Thank you. My days of visiting TNA  are regrettably over. I almost lived there once!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Matlock1418
10 hours ago, kenf48 said:

The conclusions of the Cabinet Meeting on the 15th October 1920 when the issue was first raised at this level and approval granted can be viewed online

 

http://filestore.nationalarchives.gov.uk/pdfs/large/cab-23-22.pdf

Pages 286 & 288 of 299

[Document pages 282 & 284]

:-) M

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...