Graves Registration Report forms - silly question(s)

[Tom Tulloch-Marshall]

14 hours ago, Chesterboy said:

Tom, so, basically you have given us is a load of waffle with no hardened facts to back this up.  which I politely asked for.  you never know, somebody may wish to take it up.  Will

 

Sorry but the answer is still no. I delved further into the reburial cemetery records today and the area of interest is an absolute farrago of post-war corrections and amendments due mainly to memorial crosses / "believed to be" crosses - and crosses for men found to be (reliably ?) actually buried many miles away.

 

I today predicted the chance of success here as 8% on the basis of what is currently known and I'm not going to attach my name specifically to this claim.

Tom

[Chesterboy]

Tom, sorry for your time and effort. 
 

I hoped that you would have been able to answer a question or 2 about a Graves Registration sheet 

[LDT006]

On 23/09/2020 at 18:05, Aurel Sercu said:

And true, Schedule 27 c in not in the CWGC cloud. :-(

 

CWGC replied to my inquiry and they have that document :-)

 

It was added to the GRRF forms on 16/2/1923, this provides more information on the date of the originally typed GRRF schedules 1/C through 26/C,, so those original GRRF forms were typed between the removal of the 2 US soldiers and February 1923.

 

The information on this document raises more questions:

Why were they digging there?

Why is the space between 2.C.10 and 2.C.13 so large for only 2 graves?

Were more soldiers buried in that space and the remains with their crosses blown away by a shell impact as could be seen on aerial photo's?

Maybe those graves were destroyed before they could be registered?

Are those soldiers now commemorated on special memorials?

 

We will probably never know the answer to those questions but this document helps in understanding what happened at Talana Farm.

 

Luc.

 

[jay dubaya]

Thanks for this update Luc. Did the CWGC offer any explanation as to why this schedule isn’t included in the sequence for the rest of Talana Farm? Is it now included? Interesting that it is one of only three schedules in the sequence that relate to Talana Farm Cemetery and not as the others that relate to Talana Farm Military Cemetery. I’ve just realised that most of the analysis I did was sent via email to Aurel and is not included here in this thread.

On 16/10/2020 at 06:58, Chesterboy said:

Tom, sorry for your time and effort. 
 

I hoped that you would have been able to answer a question or 2 about a Graves Registration sheet 

please do ask any questions Chesterboy, we’ll do what we can to answer them

[Aurel Sercu]

Thanks, Luc.

And like Jay D.  I ... have a question too. Maybe only a detail. Just asking for your opinion ...

 

The date on the document is 12-06-1923, handwritten.

The information that the remains of the two men were found by gardeners is typewritten.

The correction regarding the row (D corrected into C) is handwritten.

I know what caused the correction : originally in that Plot 2 there was one and a half rows of French soldiers (from when the cemetery was begun : April - June 1915). The approx. 30 men were moved to Notre Dame de Lorette (aublain St. Nazaire, near Arras)

 

And now the question ... Considering the date of the correction, do you think that we can say that the gardeners found the remains at a time before the French graves were removed ? I.e. in a period that that row was still Row D.

Somehow I think this is obvious. But ... I just want to be sure ... (And here it from you too.)

 

(Not that this really would help me, or would be relevant. For ... I never found out when exactly the French graves were moved to France. I only assumed that it was early 1920s ...)

 

Aurel

P.S. You mention the width of the gap, and also shell impact. I have something related to that remark, but I'll keep it for later. (It's about whether there were shell impacts indeed, and ... regarding another very intriguing gap in a different row...

[LDT006]

5 hours ago, jay dubaya said:

Did the CWGC offer any explanation as to why this schedule isn’t included in the sequence for the rest of Talana Farm? Is it now included?

 

No explanation from CWGC and I didn't ask for it, don't know if it's online now but that is not important as we have it now.

 

5 hours ago, jay dubaya said:

I’ve just realised that most of the analysis I did was sent via email to Aurel and is not included here in this thread.

 

That is a pity, I would have liked to read your expert analysis, could you post the important stuff here?

 

2 hours ago, Aurel Sercu said:

The date on the document is 12-06-1923, handwritten.

The information that the remains of the two men were found by gardeners is typewritten.

The correction regarding the row (D corrected into C) is handwritten.

 

I am not sure that the handwritten date 12/6/23 ("Entered - Slips checked") is the same as the change of the grave numbers (XY/2767). It looks different: larger pen width? and the changes/additions to the document are  different: "Entered - Slips checked" versus the change of row numbers. I am quite sure that there is no correlation but could be wrong.....

Edit: just noticed that the "NOTE" on the document has "XY/2767 dated 22.1.23" typewritten and "Row "D"" was changed handwritten to C. This would indicate that the remains were found before the French were moved.

To increase the confusion: Why has the "NOTE" "XY/2767 dated 22.1.23" typewritten and the change in grave numbers (2.D.10a to 2.C.11.) is "XY/2767" handwritten ??? Mr. Sherlock Holmes where are you? We need you badly.........

 

3 hours ago, Aurel Sercu said:

I never found out when exactly the French graves were moved to France.

 

You might find that answer in the French archives, there was a French guy (and maybe others) here with a lot of knowledge and research in those archives: Pascal Mallet.

There is a long topic on a German cemetery at Comines where his grandfather was buried if I remember correctly.

 

Aurel, I am sorry that we can't answer your questions but I have one for you: Did you look into the medical units that were operating at Talana? Documents from these units might provide more information.

 

Luc.

[jay dubaya]

Expert analysis... most definitely not expert... and analysis, well it’s more observations than anything else and now seeing the elusive 27c it changes my original observations a little. I’ll post later when I’ve added 27c to the sequence. 

[jay dubaya]

Thanks to Luc and his correspondence with the CWGC we now have the elusive Schedule 27C. The observations below were shared with Aurel a few weeks ago without 27C  – there are no conclusions and it does little more than illustrate the chaos that ensued with out of date paperwork and the mammoth task ahead, however. By November 1919 the wholesale demobilisation of troops had led to a shortfall of DGR&E clerical staff. The local offices were becoming choked with reports and documents which could not be typed up and kept in order. The inevitable result was the IWGC took over responsibility for many cemeteries in a much worse condition than it was expected. I have added more which now includes Schedule 27C.

 

Some anomalies with the GRRFs which may have already noticed –

Schedule 28C (doc 2154920) is the only Comprehensive Report (this phrase is missing from all other reports) for the whole of the cemetery and the only one that has an IWGC acceptance stamp - although a small number have been certified by a Registration Officer. The typed date 24th September 1923 and the IWGC verified this 4 days later on the 24th with their red stamp - all the information has been verified, processed and the details of 531 soldiers were committed to Messers Burslem & Sons to be carved in stone, shipped to France and erected in a cemetery which was completed by March 1924.

 

28C is the only GRRF of to be typed on ‘official’ paper – printer’s details with date. It is also 1 of only 2 GRRFs that show the name typed as Talana Farm Cemetery, Boesinghe – all the others were typed Talana Farm Military Cemetery, Boesinghe and then corrected by hand, the other is schedule 5C (doc 2154895) also note on 28C the XY/2767 blue pencil mark and a reference to its date - 6th September 1923.

Some pages are type numbered top left – 1 appears 3 times, 3 appears twice, 4 appears 4 times, 6 appears 9 times (once written in pencil), 24 appears once, 25 appears twice and no numbers appear on 8 pages. Is this a suggestion that these particular pages were typed that many times?

There’s little continuity in the paper type used the omission of plot and row number typed as sub headings and a lack of dates, although 10th September 1923 appears on a small number.

So what happened to the other Comprehensive Reports – they must have existed at one time along with the elusive Schedule 27C – I’ve looked but can’t find anywhere – but it did exist – were there more French Graves or German or American or...
 
Schedule 1C (doc 2154890) notes XY/3230 being the authority to chance the cemetery name, this must post date the XY/2767 reference. 1C also notes ‘This report… 1C – 26C. cancels report … 1 – 34 & 1A. – were there a lot more graves on the latter and what happened to Schedule 1B - ?B that surely necessitated Schedule 1C -28C

Schedule 4C appears twice (docs 2154893 and 2154894) the latter being a continuation of the Memorial Crosses for the 9th Rifle Brigade in 1 E - why so many, 25 crosses takes X amount of space or were the details recorded on one cross and also Prescott. Note the different paper used – doc 2154893 is pencil marked 6 top left corner, doc 2154894 has a typed 6.
 
Schedule 5C appears twice (Docs 2154895 and 2154896) the former being the revised copy of the latter – revised with authority XY/2767. The reason for the revised copy appears to be the removal of the French graves from the report form. Doc 2154895 has no number top left whilst doc 2154896 has a typed 1 and has been certified by a Registration Officer – The continuation of the French graves on to doc 2154897 is marked top left with a typed 6.

 

I don’t know what plan or records the French kept of this cemetery and how this was interpreted by the GRU, DGR&E or IWGC, but the French didn't bury their dead in Plot 2 - the British incorporated them into it when the divided the cemetery.

The IWGC 1923 -1924 Annual Report (1st April 1923 - 31st March 1924) notes that Talana Farm Cemetery - 531 graves, was one of 515 cemeteries completed in all respects. In 364 of these no architectural treatment was necessary, owing to the number of graves being small, but headstones were erected. In addition 228 War Crosses were erected by direct labour. In the same report is a map showing cemeteries completed – although very pixelated when zoomed in we can see a flag for Talana Farm MC 531.
 

with the addition of 27C - 

 

Like 28C, 27C is titled a Comprehensive Report but pre dates the former by 6 months, it has 4 dates the earliest being 22^nd January 1923 (which makes reference to XY/2767), 16^th February 1923 (when this schedule was typed up), 17^th March 1923 (the IWGC acceptance stamp) and 12^th June 1916 (slips checked and entered).

 

27C along with 5c (doc 2154895 or the 1^st schedule for 5c) and 28c are the only schedules in the whole sequence that are named Talana Farm Cemetery, the word Military being dropped altogether on these 3 schedules whilst it is struck through­­­­­ all the other schedules and this would appear to be the earliest date we have for this XY reference – as noted above the name Talana Farm MC appears in the 1923/24 Annual Report.

 

The removal of the French graves in Plot 2 Row A has caused the rest of Plot 2 to have the Rows amended accordingly, what we don’t know is when the cemetery was divided into todays Plots and Rows – the omission of the sub headings for Plots and Rows are missing on most of the schedules and were only added later using reference XY/2767. I have assumed the DGR&E divided the cemetery into its plots and rows.

 

A regimental cross marked to Pte J Prescott, 1^st Hants, 9/7/15 was found between graves 10 and 11 Plot 2 Row D but no sign of a grave (note the confusion continues with the removal of the whole of the original Row A in Plot 2) – CO Capt D Vetch has made a Memorial Cross of this Regimental Cross but no further information, this cross doesn’t appear in Schedule 4C (docs 2154893 and 2154894) that show the other Memorial Crosses - there is some suggestion that this was done much earlier than 1923. The distance between what was then graves 10 and 11 was approx. 6 meters Pte James Prescott is now remembered at the Menin Gate.

 

2 Gardeners found 2 unmarked and unrecorded graves in Plot 2 Row D between graves 10 and 13, 2 crosses were erected over the graves marked UBS , the date of this appears to be 22^nd January 1923, this schedule being typed up on 16^th February 1923 – all this information is typed, the correction to Row C is handwritten and added later, also note the adjustment of grave numbers in Plot 2 Row C and dated 10^th April 1923 – the French Graves were still in situ on 22^nd January 1923 but have possibly been removed by 17^th March 1923 but it would appear before 12^th June 1923. There is some suggestion that one of these UBS found by the gardeners may be Pte James Prescott and possibly another 1^st Hants casualty now remembered at the Menin Gate.

 

After playing around with an edited and cropped image of the cemetery plan (all post September 1915 graves removed) which I layered over a 1940s image and then layered over an aerial image dated 12^th September 1915 – although there is lots of glare from the spoil (may be shell damage) there does appear to be more graves than we have now, this takes into account the removal of the French graves of which there may have been more than what is recorded on the report forms. Plot 2 and the now Row C does not have large gaps between graves 10 and 13 and similar with the now Row D where we now have a 5 meter gap before the last grave – the aerial image shows these 2 rows as continuous evenly spaced graves.

[Aurel Sercu]

Jay D.,

 

What admirable work and thinking ! Yes, you have many questions. But I'm afraid that I .... I had not even thought of the questions you have, as I had neglected to pay attention to the things that you focus on. (I'll be honest : I am not smart / observative enough.)

 

Just two major "mysteries" in Talana Farm Cemetery bother me. And they have, for months ...

 

1. I read the total of 531 too, from time to time. Three times in your posting, but I have seen it elsewhere as well. And it always makes me wonder : 531 ?! There are 529 casualties now in Talana Farm Cemetery (among who 14 Unknowns). And I think I remember I have counted them a while ago. How can that difference 531 - 529 be explained ? Who are these two ? (Yes, two US men were buried there in October 1918, but they were removed in 1919.) Has it got something to do with that small mass grave in Plot 1 Row D (three headstones shoulder to shoulder, with 3 x 2 = 6 names) ? No, it can't, for that would make a difference of three ...

 

2. Another mystery, which you mention too : Plot II Row D. It is a row with 25 headstones, but there is a large 5 metre gap between the last headstone nd the last but one. Yet, aerial  photos show a gap-less continuous and regular row of 25 graves. What happened there ? It also makes me wonder : are Soldiers X, Y, Z etc. really where their headstone tells us ? Or : more to the right ? Except the very first, H. Davies II. D. 1, and the very last, J. Walker, II. D. 26. (Yes, 26, because 10 does not exist.) And of course it is unthinkable that later a set of graves (how many ? 10 ? 20 ?) were moved more left.

 

I know, all this won't help you ...

 

Aurel

[jay dubaya]

1 hour ago, Aurel Sercu said:

 (I'll be honest : I am not smart / observative enough.)

I beg to differ, I don’t agree with you Aurel. We perhaps just see different things. Certainly at Talana Farm Cemetery some  of what we see above the ground is not what is underneath.

 

Jon

[Aurel Sercu]

Jon,

 

Honest ... You see things that with some effort I would see too when having a closer look. But then I would wonder : "Is this significant ? Probably not ..." And even when thinking : maybe it is, I would shrug my shoulders and move off.

 

But that row with the 5 metre gap keeps on haunting me ... Because when there I always wonder : Are there men beneath my feet ?

It just does not make sense ...

I also thought, for a while, : is that where the men of the 6 Special Memorials (now near the entrance) could or should be ? No. The dates don't fit in ..

 

Oh, as to the 531 versus 529 ... Maybe Prescott makes the difference ? At least for one. So there should be a second man ... I'll have a look when that dramatic corona situation in Belgium is fading. But I'm afraid that will take some time ..

 

Aurel

[LDT006]

Jon,

 

thanks for your very detailed post, I don't have much time now, so some quick observations.

 

On 27/10/2020 at 17:09, jay dubaya said:

28C is the only GRRF of to be typed on ‘official’ paper – printer’s details with date. It is also 1 of only 2 GRRFs that show the name typed as Talana Farm Cemetery, Boesinghe – all the others were typed Talana Farm Military Cemetery, Boesinghe and then corrected by hand, the other is schedule 5C (doc 2154895) also note on 28C the XY/2767 blue pencil mark and a reference to its date - 6th September 1923.

 

We know that documents were added to the original series of GRRF forms, the latest ones have the correct cemetery name. An example is schedule 5c, there are 2 versions of this one: The older one still has the French graves that were removed and is marked "Cancelled see amended schedule", the new one only has the British soldiers and also the correct cemetery name.

Why are there 2 versions of this 5C? Schedule 6C also has some French soldiers that were removed but there was no new document made.

 

On 27/10/2020 at 17:09, jay dubaya said:

Some pages are type numbered top left – 1 appears 3 times, 3 appears twice, 4 appears 4 times, 6 appears 9 times (once written in pencil), 24 appears once, 25 appears twice and no numbers appear on 8 pages. Is this a suggestion that these particular pages were typed that many times?

 

 

Good observation, I didn't notice that and don't have a clue what it means. Will keep an eye on it when researching other cemeteries.

 

On 27/10/2020 at 17:09, jay dubaya said:

1C also notes ‘This report… 1C – 26C. cancels report … 1 – 34 & 1A. – were there a lot more graves on the latter and what happened to Schedule 1B - ?B that surely necessitated Schedule 1C -28C

 

So far I have never seen GRRF schedules with an "A" or "B" behind the number, only plain numbers and the ones with a "C" which I assume are the ones which are "Certified correct and Complete". My memory could let me down and would be happy to be corrected but this mention of a 1A schedule is new to me.

 

On 27/10/2020 at 17:09, jay dubaya said:

After playing around with an edited and cropped image of the cemetery plan (all post September 1915 graves removed) which I layered over a 1940s image and then layered over an aerial image dated 12^th September 1915 – although there is lots of glare from the spoil (may be shell damage) there does appear to be more graves than we have now, this takes into account the removal of the French graves of which there may have been more than what is recorded on the report forms. Plot 2 and the now Row C does not have large gaps between graves 10 and 13 and similar with the now Row D where we now have a 5 meter gap before the last grave – the aerial image shows these 2 rows as continuous evenly spaced graves.

 

This seems pretty important, are you saying that the 1940 image has more graves than there are now or only the 1915 one?

Also please remember the quote on the CWGC cemetery description : "It is probable that the cemetery contained other graves later destroyed by shell fire."

This sentence clearly explains that there were destroyed graves for which no records existed and could be the reason for the gaps in the rows.

 

Luc.

 

[jay dubaya]

Apologies Luc perhaps I could have worded the last paragraph better. The plots, rows and graves on the 1943 image are exactly what we see today - it was the best image I could find to use as a base layer, so in essence not important. I’ve just found a 1918 aerial image which I shall compare - all rows look intact on this image. There must have been records at this time.

I too will have to admit to never seeing a schedule marked B and I can accept that a schedule C may indicate certified/complete but I’m still at a loss to a A schedule - although I have seen a few... maybe schedule A was the original Army (DGR&E) report.

 

[Aurel Sercu]

I compared the 1943 aerial with the present lay-out. And I see no difference indeed. (Except that the (six) Special Memorials which originally were near the west side, later were moved to near the entrance.)

 

Possible destruction by later shellfire indeed is mentioned often. But I must say there is not one aerial photo that made me think I saw the result of (major) shellfire ...

 

Aurel

 

[jay dubaya]

47 minutes ago, Aurel Sercu said:

I compared the 1943 aerial with the present lay-out. And I see no difference indeed. (Except that the (six) Special Memorials which originally were near the west side, later were moved to near the entrance.)

 

Possible destruction by later shellfire indeed is mentioned often. But I must say there is not one aerial photo that made me think I saw the result of (major) shellfire ...

 

Aurel

 

I hadn’t yet noticed the Special Memorials. 
I too am struggling to see any significant damage to the ground from shell fire - there doesn’t appear to be any direct hits to the cemetery and so would unlikely have disturbed actual graves beneath the surface but concealed their appearance from above - Prescott’s grave marker becoming a Memorial Cross.

[Tom Tulloch-Marshall]

On 19/09/2020 at 11:43, Aurel Sercu said:

Aurel

 

Aurel - I haven't been particularly following the precise Talana Farm aspects of this topic, but editing some folders tonight I've come across a couple of items which may be of interest. A 1922 IWGC drawing which notes there being 531 British and 27 French burials. Then - possibly more useful, a survey made by a Lt C.Rowntree 21/3/1918 and drawn up by him the following day. His sketch was traced by Sapper RW Dawson 16/1/1919 - that tracing being completed by an EJ.Fairman 26/2/20 (this including the graves removed by the Americans 12/6/19). The (possibly) interesting thing about this drawing is that it seems to depict the true original layout of the cemetery and shows the plot numbers, row letters, and then individually numbers the graves.

 

If copies of those may be of use to you then PM me an email address and send them to you.

Tom

[jay dubaya]

31 minutes ago, Tom Tulloch-Marshall said:

If copies of those may be of use to you then PM me an email address and send them to you.

Tom

Tom, for whatever reason it appears I cannot PM you.
After playing around with contemporary aerial photos of the original layout and what we see today, I too would very much like to see this original layout if you’re happy to share

 

Jon

[Aurel Sercu]

Tom,

That would be extremely interesting indeed !

PMing indeed is a problem. But I'll find a way. I have to ... For after all Hercule Poirot was Belgian, wasn't he ?  :-)

Aurel

[AOK4]

On 29/10/2020 at 13:17, Aurel Sercu said:

 

2. Another mystery, which you mention too : Plot II Row D. It is a row with 25 headstones, but there is a large 5 metre gap between the last headstone nd the last but one. Yet, aerial  photos show a gap-less continuous and regular row of 25 graves. What happened there ? It also makes me wonder : are Soldiers X, Y, Z etc. really where their headstone tells us ? Or : more to the right ? Except the very first, H. Davies II. D. 1, and the very last, J. Walker, II. D. 26. (Yes, 26, because 10 does not exist.) And of course it is unthinkable that later a set of graves (how many ? 10 ? 20 ?) were moved more left.

 

 

 

Aurel,

 

A very minor remark: There were originally two graves: 2.D.10a en 2.D.10b (see doc 27C), but they were renumbered into 2.C.11 and 2.C.12.

 

Jan

[Aurel Sercu]

Jan,

I'll be honest: I know that there is something special, but I am not sure I understand. Anyway, it's true : 10a and 10b on Schedule 27C

 

And I am also a little (more than a little) confused : what row are we talking about ? I see a problem in what is now Row D, the row with that large 5 metre gap. (Formerly named Row E.) But you are referring to (what is now) Row C (formerly Row D) ?

 

Aurel

Edited 18 November , 2020 by Aurel Sercu
typo

[Aurel Sercu]

Just an alternative attempt to let Tom Tulloch-Marshall know ...

 

Sorry Tom, after your posting of 17 November, regarding promised Talana Farm Cemetery documents ..., but it appears to be impossible to reach you by e-mail. (Or : e-mails do not receive a reply.)

Maybe one day....

So I live in hope ...

 

Aurel