COMMONWEALTH WAR GRAVES COMMISSION AND RACISM

[Gareth Davies]

10 hours ago, Gunner Bailey said:

What can we say?

 

The report was written in 'todays world' and things were very different 100 years ago. 

 

It could be said that there seems to have been no concern or campaign for memorials in these countries, so is the outrage just the opinion of a modern writer?

 

Personally I think the Commonwealth War Graves Commission do an amazing job with the resources they have. They can't be blamed for mistakes made in the past.

 

Yes they can and yes they are. And they are admitting to mistakes made in the past.

[squirrel]

10 hours ago, healdav said:

...Muslim graves are never marked in any way.

It is increasingly common these days for Moslem graves to be marked with a headstone, perhaps a 20th/21st century change, that wasn't seen 100 plus years ago.

I arranged such a memorial after a burial some years ago. The memorial was defaced  by other Moslems of a different sect, much to the distress of the family involved.

[depaor01]

9 hours ago, Gunner Bailey said:

 

I fully agree with you. I have always found the Chinese cemetery at Noyelles-sur-mer a place of inspiration. Designed by Lutyens himself, a magnificent  memorial to the humble Chinese labourers. Given equal status to soldiers who served in France. To me such a place exemplifies the good values of that time. Was that mentioned in the report?

I've been there and totally agree. It has a unique ambience and it must have been extraordinarily difficult to engineer the standard headstone manufacturing process to accommodate Chinese script and phrasing to suitably commemorate the dead. 

Dave

Edited 23 April , 2021 by depaor01
Spelling

[Gareth Davies]

1 hour ago, squirrel said:

It is increasingly common these days for Moslem graves to be marked with a headstone, perhaps a 20th/21st century change, that wasn't seen 100 plus years ago.

I arranged such a memorial after a burial some years ago. The memorial was defaced  by other Moslems of a different sect, much to the distress of the family involved.

 

I can't put a number on it but there are many CWGC Great War muslim graves that are marked with a headstone. @healdavis wrong in his assertion.

[kenf48]

Examples of headstones of CWGC reflecting various faiths are on their Shaping Our Sorrow page

https://shapingoursorrow.cwgc.org/bargaining/families-make-their-mark/

 

I am at a loss as to what this discussion as to the commemoration of Muslim graves  has to do with the report published by the CWGC yesterday. 

 

[NigelS]

On 23/04/2021 at 18:15, healdav said:

Not a racist comment at all if they are Muslims. Muslim graves are never marked in any way.

 

On 24/04/2021 at 04:38, squirrel said:

It is increasingly common these days for Moslem graves to be marked with a headstone, perhaps a 20th/21st century change, that wasn't seen 100 plus years ago.

I arranged such a memorial after a burial some years ago. The memorial was defaced  by other Moslems of a different sect, much to the distress of the family involved.

 

Hansard reporting in 1916 indicates that headstones for Western Front Muslim and Hindu burials were planned pre the formation of the IWGC:

HC Deb 09 May 1916 vol 82 cc448-9 448
The SECRETARY of STATE for INDIA (Mr. Chamberlain) Under the conditions of warfare it is not generally possible to arrange for the cremation of the bodies of Hindu soldiers killed in action or otherwise dying at the front, nor is it required by religious precept. As far as circumstances have permitted, interments have been reverently carried out by fellow castemen with appropriate rites, frequently in special plots in the local cemeteries. The burial of the Mahomedan dead has similarly been carried out by fellow Moslems in accordance with their religious ritual. Careful records of all such burials of Hindus and Mahomedans have been kept so that permanent headstones may hereafter be put up. At the larger base hospitals in France and England it has been possible to provide crematoria for the cremation of Hindus. A special burial ground has been provided at public expense at Woking for Mahomedan soldiers who have died in this country.

 

The earliest Muslim casualties buried at Brookwood Cemetery have standardised headstones (below) which, being pre IWGC formation, were probably supplied  by the military authorities in accordance with the above; the same pattern can be seen in photos for GW burials at the Woking Muslim cemetery, with the CWGC pattern being used for WWII  burials there, and for all once these were moved to the special plot within Brookwood Military Cemetery in the 1960's. The other  adjacent graves shown below are contemporary non-military Muslim burials; I suspect that as to whether or not Muslim graves a hundred years ago elsewhere were marked are likely to be because of local custom, or for the same reasons that there are many unmarked graves in Christian cemeteries - that of a cost that couldn't be met by relatives or friends - pauper's graves. 

 

 

Getting back on topic, on the CWGC's apology, my feeling is that it  right to do so. Modern day versus historical standards shouldn't come into it, the IWGC/CWGC's policy has, from its inception in 1917, always been for Commonwealth casualties  to have either a headstone or their name on a war memorial  with no mention of differences in treatment for rank, race nationality  or creed (ie 'Equality in death').   From the report it is clear that the IWGC/CWGC has, or has had, records, or access to records,  for casualties which it has not commemorated in accordance with its own policies for which it is now, quite correctly  in my view, apologising.   It is also clear that the IWGC/CWGC, because of historical reasons outside of its control  and for which it can't really  be held responsible, lacks any information at all on many tens of thousands of casualties seemingly because of a combination of poor recruitment records, the absence of GRUs or similar,  and general poor recording/reporting  by  the military authorities at the time.  While thorough research may provide  information on some of these casualties, it seems likely the majority of these will remain not just as having 'no known grave,' but, sadly,  forever unknown.  

 

NigelS

 

[Don Regiano]

1 hour ago, NigelS said:

lacks any information at all on many tens of thousands of casualties

 

Yes, we should not forget the scale of the operation too.  By comparison, according to the MoD, the number of UK fatalities arising from the more recent conflict in Afghanistan is ..... 456.  Fortunately, our eldest wasn't one of them, having completed 5 tours of duty there.

[Kitchener's Bugle]

I don't know if it will be possible or feasible to commemorate everyone properly as individuals on plaques or headstones as there will no doubt be significant gaps in records and the like.

 

It will however be possible to erect general memorials that pay respect and homage. 

 

Perhaps this might be the way forward for the time being?.

[healdav]

10 hours ago, NigelS said:

 

 

Hansard reporting in 1916 indicates that headstones for Western Front Muslim and Hindu burials were planned pre the formation of the IWGC:

HC Deb 09 May 1916 vol 82 cc448-9 448
The SECRETARY of STATE for INDIA (Mr. Chamberlain) Under the conditions of warfare it is not generally possible to arrange for the cremation of the bodies of Hindu soldiers killed in action or otherwise dying at the front, nor is it required by religious precept. As far as circumstances have permitted, interments have been reverently carried out by fellow castemen with appropriate rites, frequently in special plots in the local cemeteries. The burial of the Mahomedan dead has similarly been carried out by fellow Moslems in accordance with their religious ritual. Careful records of all such burials of Hindus and Mahomedans have been kept so that permanent headstones may hereafter be put up. At the larger base hospitals in France and England it has been possible to provide crematoria for the cremation of Hindus. A special burial ground has been provided at public expense at Woking for Mahomedan soldiers who have died in this country.

 

The earliest Muslim casualties buried at Brookwood Cemetery have standardised headstones (below) which, being pre IWGC formation, were probably supplied  by the military authorities in accordance with the above; the same pattern can be seen in photos for GW burials at the Woking Muslim cemetery, with the CWGC pattern being used for WWII  burials there, and for all once these were moved to the special plot within Brookwood Military Cemetery in the 1960's. The other  adjacent graves shown below are contemporary non-military Muslim burials; I suspect that as to whether or not Muslim graves a hundred years ago elsewhere were marked are likely to be because of local custom, or for the same reasons that there are many unmarked graves in Christian cemeteries - that of a cost that couldn't be met by relatives or friends - pauper's graves. 

 

 

Getting back on topic, on the CWGC's apology, my feeling is that it  right to do so. Modern day versus historical standards shouldn't come into it, the IWGC/CWGC's policy has, from its inception in 1917, always been for Commonwealth casualties  to have either a headstone or their name on a war memorial  with no mention of differences in treatment for rank, race nationality  or creed (ie 'Equality in death').   From the report it is clear that the IWGC/CWGC has, or has had, records, or access to records,  for casualties which it has not commemorated in accordance with its own policies for which it is now, quite correctly  in my view, apologising.   It is also clear that the IWGC/CWGC, because of historical reasons outside of its control  and for which it can't really  be held responsible, lacks any information at all on many tens of thousands of casualties seemingly because of a combination of poor recruitment records, the absence of GRUs or similar,  and general poor recording/reporting  by  the military authorities at the time.  While thorough research may provide  information on some of these casualties, it seems likely the majority of these will remain not just as having 'no known grave,' but, sadly,  forever unknown.  

 

NigelS

 

French Muslim soldiers do have a headstone, at least in France, but I have travelled in several Muslim countries and have never ever seen any form of commemoration of any dead. In the cemeteries there is just a mound over the grave,often in the shape of a coffin, but it is made of earth and after a while simply dissolves into the ground. There are no headstones or even plaques saying who is buried where.

I have no idea why this is so, but presumably some religious requirement. I don't see why any Muslim war dead in a Muslim country would be treated any differently. After all, Christian and Jewish war dead are. in principle, treated like any other dead.

[sassenach]

14 minutes ago, healdav said:

French Muslim soldiers do have a headstone, at least in France, but I have travelled in several Muslim countries and have never ever seen any form of commemoration of any dead. In the cemeteries there is just a mound over the grave,often in the shape of a coffin, but it is made of earth and after a while simply dissolves into the ground. There are no headstones or even plaques saying who is buried where.

I have no idea why this is so, but presumably some religious requirement. I don't see why any Muslim war dead in a Muslim country would be treated any differently. After all, Christian and Jewish war dead are. in principle, treated like any other dead.

The headstone issue is mentioned in a thoughtful piece by Charles Moore in today's Telegraph.

[Gareth Davies]

29 minutes ago, healdav said:

French Muslim soldiers do have a headstone, at least in France, but I have travelled in several Muslim countries and have never ever seen any form of commemoration of any dead. In the cemeteries there is just a mound over the grave,often in the shape of a coffin, but it is made of earth and after a while simply dissolves into the ground. There are no headstones or even plaques saying who is buried where.

I have no idea why this is so, but presumably some religious requirement. I don't see why any Muslim war dead in a Muslim country would be treated any differently. After all, Christian and Jewish war dead are. in principle, treated like any other dead.

 

You very clearly said "Muslim graves are never marked in any way". That's not true.

[EastSurrey]

On 23/04/2021 at 09:09, Liz in Eastbourne said:

I was going to mention Neuve Chapelle too, Mick.  I saw nothing about it in yesterday's coverage. I haven't read the report yet but the coverage does not give the IWGC enough credit.

The rest reflects the times, and as you say there is ongoing work to correct the omissions.  These omissions extend to the Second World War, of course:  West African troops in Burma, for example. It's more important now, I think, that the accounts of what happened should include everyone who was there.  

 

All descendants of 'Other ranks' surely feel something of the same sense of injustice on finding that the war diaries only name the officers killed - the rest are just a lump sum.

 

Liz

 

 

 

Whilst most war diaries don't list O.R. casualties, it should be recognised some do. 6/S. Wales Borderers and 9/E. Surrey are two examples.

Michael

[healdav]

7 hours ago, Gareth Davies said:

 

You very clearly said "Muslim graves are never marked in any way". That's not true.

I was trying to be succinct, but was a little too so.

In civil life, Muslim graves are never to the best of my knowledge marked. The only ones that are certainly marked to my knowledge are the French military graves.

[ianjonesncl]

I thought that this was a well balanced comment on the CWGC Supporters of the North of England FB page

 

There are many many examples of where the CWGC got it right.

There are many examples of where they would have made other decisions in this modern world.

[Gareth Davies]

This issue isn't about what they have or may have got right. This is about what they got wrong. Very wrong. Because of pervasive racism.

[Gunner Bailey]

17 hours ago, Kitchener's Bugle said:

I don't know if it will be possible or feasible to commemorate everyone properly as individuals on plaques or headstones as there will no doubt be significant gaps in records and the like.

 

It will however be possible to erect general memorials that pay respect and homage. 

 

Perhaps this might be the way forward for the time being?.

 

There are parts of the report which give examples of this.

 

"One clear example of this is the commemoration of the Seychelles Carrier Corps. This force of 791 men, drawn from a total island population of around 4,000, was deployed to German East Africa (now Tanzania) in 1916 and suffered 341 deaths. Of these, 290 died in East Africa (only one with a known grave), 3 died in India and 48 died from disease after returning home in August 1917.  In April 1926 the IWGC agreed to provide headstones for the 48 buried at Mont Fleuri in the Seychelles. At the same time, it agreed to erect a memorial within the same cemetery to commemorate, by name, the 289 who had no known graves within East Africa. In a break with the established IWGC policy of commemorating the dead where they fell, this example actively demonstrates this pragmatism – on this occasion to please the governor of the Seychelles who observed that ‘such a memorial in East Africa would have little local interest and would probably never be seen by the relatives’".

 

I think the King's African Rifles did something similar on their own initiative.

[depaor01]

1 hour ago, ianjonesncl said:

I thought that this was a well balanced comment on the CWGC Supporters of the North of England FB page

 

There are many many examples of where the CWGC got it right.

There are many examples of where they would have made other decisions in this modern world.

Agreed.

[squirrel]

On 23/04/2021 at 20:52, Gareth Davies said:

 

I can't put a number on it but there are many CWGC Great War muslim graves that are marked with a headstone. @healdavis wrong in his assertion.

 

4 hours ago, healdav said:

I was trying to be succinct, but was a little too so.

In civil life, Muslim graves are never to the best of my knowledge marked. The only ones that are certainly marked to my knowledge are the French military graves.

They are,today in civil life, that's where my comment came from, I arranged the funeral and the memorial.

[NigelS]

1 hour ago, squirrel said:

 

They are,today in civil life, that's where my comment came from, I arranged the funeral and the memorial.

 

With the usual reservations about possible inaccuracy, Wikipedia  (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_funeral) gives: 

 

The grave should be perpendicular to the direction of the Qibla (i.e. Mecca) so that the body, placed in the grave without a coffin lying on its right side, faces the Qibla.[14] Grave markers should be raised, not more than about 30 centimetres (12 in) above the ground, so that the grave will neither be walked nor sat on. Grave markers are simple, because outwardly lavish displays are discouraged in Islam. Graves are frequently marked only with a simple wreath, if at all. However, it is becoming more common for family members to erect grave monuments.

 

The Muslim graves shown to the right of the image at Brookwood I posted previously (these are the  non military ones either from before, or around the same time, as the Great War), from recollection don't have headstones - unless off picture further to the right -  but, as can be seen, are marked with kerb sets (whether or not they give names or other details, again, I can't recall).    I also suspect that there are likely to be differences in grave marking practise dependant on which  version of the Muslim faith is being practised.  The comment made about it be becoming more common for grave monuments to be erected is borne out by both Squirrel's experience and by a web-search for 'Muslim Headstones' which  finds any number of companies offering them in the UK.  Possibly Muslims living in Europe  have moved towards  the western custom of having headstones as opposed to countries where the Muslim faith is  predominant, where they haven't

 

NigelS

[Chris_Baker]

My view, for what it is worth.

 

It is absolutely right for the unequal treatment of the dead to be highlighted. It is right for racist attitudes of the day to be pinpointed as the major factor. It is right to call for action to correct the wrongs.

 

It does not take too much thought to understand how difficult the latter will be. The requirement for hard documentary evidence for recognition of an individual burial is most unlikely to be met. Even evidence for a satisfactorily complete listing of men buried in a particular place or even in a given campaign may be very hard to come by. It leads me to suspect that a certain amount of relaxation of the rules of evidence will have to take place (the CWGC statement suggests as much) and that will open a can of worms. A very difficult path for CWGC to design and manage.

[Liz in Eastbourne]

 Nigel S's post about Muslim funerals seems sensible to me.  I have personal experience of Muslim practices in a particular African society but did not post because I feel sure there are, and were even a hundred years ago, many variations.  

 

In any case the comment by the colonial governor which sparked this discussion was clearly not specifically or even mainly about Muslims but included local religions.  It is unfortunate that Sir Gordon Guggisberg should be branded a particular example of pervasive racism, since he was if anything a man who made an enormous practical contribution to combating it.  He is still highly regarded in Ghana where (as in Nigeria) he had been a surveyor and map-maker, travelling widely, for many years before the First World War, in which he served with distinction on the Western Front. Post-war, as Governor of the Gold Coast, he co-founded the co-educational school which is still Ghana's foremost secondary educational institution, Achimota College, alma mater of Nkrumah, and also Ghana's leading hospital, Korle-Bu Teaching Hospital. On occasion he went against the authorities in London on behalf of the people of the Gold Coast and Asante. 

 

It is ironic that Guggisberg himself only got a headstone on his grave in Bexhill Cemetery because it was commissioned and paid for several years after his death by the chiefs and people of the Gold Coast and Asante.
It reads:
TO THE EVERLASTING MEMORY OF 
GOVERNOR SIR GORDON GUGGISBERG
WHO DIED IN 1930 AT BEXHILL
THIS MEMORIAL WAS ERECTED BY THE 
PARAMOUNT CHIEFS AND PEOPLE OF 
THE GOLD COAST AND ASANTE  

The imposing statue of him in the grounds of Korle-Bu Teaching Hospital was erected not by the colonial authorities but by the independent Government of Ghana in 1974 to mark its 50th anniversary the previous year. 

 

So, even if the language he used then grates on modern sensibilities, I think it's reasonable to assume that his comment did in fact reflect a knowledge of and respect for many West African peoples, not disparagement of them. Of course, the IWGC/CWGC has to live up to its principles, and it’s right that they try to put right inequalities as far as they are able.  But it's unduly repressive of discussion in my view to insist that everything said and done at the time – in this case, to query whether individual headstones rather than group memorials were appropriate  –  must be a sign of racism.
 

[phil andrade]

14 hours ago, Gunner Bailey said:

 

There are parts of the report which give examples of this.

 

"One clear example of this is the commemoration of the Seychelles Carrier Corps. This force of 791 men, drawn from a total island population of around 4,000, was deployed to German East Africa (now Tanzania) in 1916 and suffered 341 deaths. Of these, 290 died in East Africa (only one with a known grave), 3 died in India and 48 died from disease after returning home in August 1917.  In April 1926 the IWGC agreed to provide headstones for the 48 buried at Mont Fleuri in the Seychelles. At the same time, it agreed to erect a memorial within the same cemetery to commemorate, by name, the 289 who had no known graves within East Africa. In a break with the established IWGC policy of commemorating the dead where they fell, this example actively demonstrates this pragmatism – on this occasion to please the governor of the Seychelles who observed that ‘such a memorial in East Africa would have little local interest and would probably never be seen by the relatives’".

 

I think the King's African Rifles did something similar on their own initiative.

  A namesake of mine,  Onesime Andrade, is commemorated on the Seychelles Memorial to the Carrier Corps, on the Mont Fleurie Memorial.

 

His date of death is cited as 11/09/1917, and he was 35 years old.  There is no matching life story on the register, just the names of his parents and where they lived ( the father had died).  The residence was Anse -aux- Pins, Mahe.

 

I searched websites and found an interesting article about the scandalous conditions in which the porters served and died.

 

Even though the article was written generations ago, it still made pointed reference to callousness and complacency regarding the fate of these wretched carriers.  Reading it today certainly makes me feel uncomfortable.

 

On the other hand, bearing in mind the way people felt about race, class, gender etc in those days, I find it remarkable that such an effort was made to commemorate people who, in the era before the Great War, would not even have registered “ on the radar”, if I may use that tacky phrase.

 

So I would express admiration for the IWGC, and press the point that, by the standards of the time, it was enlightened and resolved to honour the memory of all who perished in the service of the British Empire.

 

A family anecdote, if I may....

 

A welsh great uncle of mine was wounded at Mametz Wood in July 1916.  It was a “ Blighty” one, a bullet through the upper arm.

 

He returned to duty , and was posted to the KAR and  served as an officer in the East African Campaign.  His experience there left him with an awareness of the plight of those “native carriers”, and he trained as a doctor and set up practice in the area of Brixton, where he worked principally in Cold Harbour Lane , a place identified as a focal point for settlement by black people who disembarked from The Windrush after the Second World War.  These were from the West Indies, rather than from Africa....but I do believe that his experience in East Africa thirty years earlier had left him with a sense of obligation born of harrowing conditions that he had witnessed.

 

I even cherish a fantasy that he and my namesake in the Carrier Corps might have encountered each other.  It would make a good story for a play or a novel, wouldn’t it ?

 

Phil

[Gareth Davies]

What is interesting in this discussion is the absence of any comment on the fact that the CWGC knew about this wrong some time ago from work by Prof Barrett and others but did absolutely nothing. It was only when David Olusoga and David Lammy got involved that they started to pay some attention. But hey, Noyelles and NC.

[Hedley Malloch]

Good article in The Observer by David Olusaga today. See

 

 https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/apr/25/britains-failure-to-honour-black-and-asian-dead-is-a-scandal-of-the-present-not-just-the-past

 

He makes it clear that the CWGC have known about this for at least 10 years, but did nothing about it until the C4 documentary in 2019. He makes the point that it is not just a question of what happened in the past; this policy of neglect has continued even when the CWGC's attention was drawn to it in 2007 in a paper written by Mary Barrett. Olusaga also says that her paper was drawn to the attention of  a ' prominent historian who was a CWGC commissioner at the time.' Who he? If this is correct, then this scandal is not simply a question of something that happened in the past. Olusaga concludes:

 

"Yet the fact that it took a documentary to force the CWGC into confronting aspects of its own history that had been in the public domain for so long is a scandal in itself. ... A scandal of now rather than then, one that aggravates the original sin and that cannot be blamed on the “standards of the time” or the attitudes of earlier generations."

 

Hmm ... .

Edited 25 April , 2021 by Hedley Malloch

[SiegeGunner]

There are, I believe, hundreds of names waiting to be added to or removed from stone memorials to the missing in Europe.  There may be some instances where a stone memorial is a viable and appropriate remedy for past omissions in more distant theatres of war, but in general I would hope that restorative commemoration will take a more modern digital form, allowing names (where known) to be recorded (and added, subtracted or amended), and also the stories of the men concerned to be told and remembered ... by people all over the world, not just by those able to visit a fixed stone memorial.