Ploughing On The Somme

[Max Poilu]

Wisdom is appreciated. The finding/excavation and archaeology policies and procedures have as yet to be properly and accurately defined for battlefield enthusiasts. Once done everybody would know where they stood. Any person having found an item i.e. cap badge and took it away after having formally first correctly recording the accurate location/description of item etc etc. Should any remains be found later, which were correctly FORENSICALLY excavated, reference could then also be made with the recorded log of the finder of the aforementioned cap badge. It may/may not coincide, but is extremely useful knowledge to assist in identifying the fallen, even at the very least allowing the remains headstone to carry the emblem/crest of his regiment.

I guess anyone who disagrees with you shows no wisdom? You have voiced a lot of complaints in a strong fashion in your opening posts to this forum yet you refuse to put forward any answers:

I'm not interested in all your scenarios

Can you explain exactly how a cap badge found on the surface would be categorically linked with a body found nearby? I am not sure of your archeological background but you should put your answer to some of the posters in this topic:

http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/i...topic=32266&hl=

[Guest PAJORO]

THUNK............ my head just hit the desk. Good grief ***edited by Moderator***don't forget forum rules**** again. Will you give me a break! It's not personal please believe me. I can't cover the plethora of all the scenarios you can present re my opinion. It's impossible. See my last posts and don't take them personally. Please also don't tag me as a Troll either (now that I know the meaning) as a few people took that banner up when replying to me in here. However my banner is firmly planted to my viewpoint and that's where you will finding standing/defending to the sound of the Black Watch Pipers (humour and meladrama caught me there whilst typing).

I'm not the high cardinal of ethics and morals here, just stating a viewpoint albeit contrary to some (notice how I don't quote that 'Book of Most') as I feel necessary. I've already mage suggestions/simple strategies to resolve the issues I have raised. Read my last posts. You've had one apology already and that's all you merit. So, if you don't mind...................

[Max Poilu]

It's obvious by that posting and your complete inability to support any of your arguments by reasoned discussion you really have cemented your position as a true troll. This is a place for civilised discussion and reasoned debate.

You have put forward ONE scenario of a cap badge being linked to a body. In the light of your scenario I simply ask of your scenario:

Can you explain exactly how a cap badge found on the surface would be categorically linked with a body found nearby? I am not sure of your archeological background but you should put your answer to some of the posters in this topic...

[Paul Reed]

In 25 years on the Somme, I know of only three bodies found anywhere near the surface; two were uncovered by the plough, and the other was the Canadian referred to above (although I do not recognise the scenario explained regarding his discovery). Neither of these were found with any sort of badge (although one did have AIF collar badges); indeed, bodies on the Somme rarely have any badges near or on them. Most human remains are found 1-2+ feet beneath the surface; either during building or agricultural work. In recent years several 'surface finds' of remains have in fact been remains found much deeper, unearthed, and then left for someone to discover them. Who had unearthed them is of course open to debate, but any "crime" relating to the discovery of bodies or their non-reporting is not committed by people casually walking the battlefield. It is much more complex than that.

[Guest PAJORO]

It's obvious by that posting and your complete inability to support any of your arguments by reasoned discussion you really have cemented your position as a true troll.  This is a place for civilised discussion and reasoned debate.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

What is it with you and (I'm tempted to use foul language here but won't) trolls?

[Max Poilu]

I cannot say any more, please understand that there is a tradition of sensible, reasoned, informed debate (sometimes lively but always civil) on the GWF and some of your posts are not in keeping with that as is your absolute refuasal to substantiate much of what you say. I can't keep repeating the same old message. Please note I removed my post that you still quote (re' battlefield junkie) early this morning.

[Guest PAJORO]

In recent years several 'surface finds' of remains have in fact been remains found much deeper, unearthed, and then left for someone to discover them. Who had unearthed them is of course open to debate, but any "crime" relating to the discovery of bodies or their non-reporting is not committed by people casually walking the battlefield. It is much more complex than that.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Paul please understand I agree with you and am not here to damn/blame anybody for any contrary oppinion.

However, prior to these finding would it be reasonable to consider that many thousands of people could (and I say could) have walked over those fields and collected (please note quite innocently, but naively) buttons, beret badges etc. Bring this forward to the future where remains are then found. It is possible (and I only say possible) that a button or beret badge may have led to that discovery earlier. Now rather than cover the plethora of possibles a beret badge is carried along the wheel of a tracker. Is it possible that dogs tags etc could also have been carried. Of course it is. This would obviously result in a separtion of the remains and ergo the loss of possibly identifying the remains. I accept this. However, it is also possible that if a beret badge was found on the surface, byt digging/searching further we may locate remains of a fallen person. As I have previously stated here, there are feasability issues. I never at no time denied this. My suggestion being a professionally coordinated and strategic forensic excavation of one field at a time, whilst it is not being farmed (fallow for a year) could be undertaken by professionals to locate unrecovered fallen soldiers. Also that a state of preservation and control is necessary to BEST achieve this (identity of the remains etc). I do not wish to blame/damn anyone who has picked up/retained any found item. Who knows that a very wealthy benefactor may choose to undertake Ledger tour of 'The Somme' battle fields and think I'm going to fund a large group of professionally trained archaeologists to excavate that fallow field and return some of those boys home. Okays this maybe fantasy, but if I ever won the Lottery hey hoh I'm getting my team there. The advancements of modern professional archaeology and major crime scene investigation have advanced to such a degree that the most possible best results for identifying those found remains decreases with the loss of preservation and control.

[mcnab]

Take nothing but memories.

Leave nothing but footprints.

I fail to see how anyone can condone removing material from these sites for their personal well being at the expense of the bigger picture, especially when it involves breaking the law of the land.

The code of conduct seems well defined for divers and shipwrecks that are war graves.

I understand the thrill of stumbling across bits of military hardware, it brings out the small boy in all of us, there are plenty of mills bombs and .303 rounds on the yorkshire moors near where I live, I grew up with them, but still find them fascinating.

[Rob Gray]

PJ,

Your suggestion to recover all of the fallen in the Great War via a thorough "forensic??" examination of the Battlefields, is a truly great initiative, especially if funded by your forthcoming Lottery Win...??!!

I lost a relative on a sunken submarine during that war, somewhere in the North Sea, so how do you propose to recover his remains..???

Answers please on a postcard..??

And remember, DON'T FEED THE TROLLS...!!!

Rob.

[Max]

And remember, DON'T FEED THE TROLLS...!!!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Can we please steer clear of personal insults. If you think he is a troll, take your own advuice and don't post.

[Paul Reed]

My suggestion being a professionally coordinated and strategic forensic excavation of one field at a time, whilst it is not being farmed (fallow for a year) could be undertaken by professionals to locate unrecovered fallen soldiers... The advancements of modern professional archaeology and major crime scene investigation have advanced to such a degree that the most possible best results for identifying those found remains decreases with the loss of preservation and control.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think on the whole there are few people who would disagree with the sentiments you express, however the reality of the Great War battlefields is that the human remains are not as complete as your posts might suggest. I am very sensitive about upsetting anyone who has missing ancestors here, but in my experience there are very few 'complete bodies' - you only have to watch Forgotten Battlefield to see that (for example).

As a Police officer you will be used to all sorts of databases to check the identity of remains that might be found now, of people who have lived in recent times. No such databases exist for this period.

The task would also be never ending; in my own village alone, between September and November 1916 some 8,500 Canadians died. Of them around 5,500 are still missing. And that excludes the Germans, and later casualties during the winter of 1916/17 and the fighting in 1918.

On a technical point, because of the existance of steel helmets, there will be very few remains that have badges with them. If you look at the example of the soldiers found by the Diggers who fell at Boesinghe in July 1915, very few even had shoulder titles, let alone cap badges - and this was in a period before helmets.

You raise some interesting points and again I fear the very nature of this medium makes it not a good place to discuss them. I know Giles, and generally he would agree with you on some points; however, like him I cannot see that picking up a surface find of shrapnel ball or fuse will rob anyone of a decent grave. That such activity may have greater archaeological significance can only be decided by those with expertise in that field; and this is a debate that will continue for some time, I am sure.

[DaveBrigg]

Sorry, but I still think Pajoro has a point. All the cases of excavation I have seen on this forum and elsewhere have proved that:

1) Lots of shells were fired in the war and some didn't go off.

2) Lots of people were killed in the war, many in particularly unpleasant and tragic circumstances. Will any personal collection, kept for posterity, alter this?

Rather than excavate the entire Western Front (not to mention Gallipoli, Mespotamia, Italy, Jutland etc,) shouldn't we consider the whole battlefield area a grave site and treat it with respect accordingly. Let the local farmers plant and harvest crops as they have done for years, there are enough ways to remember the dead without needing to pocket their possessions. I don't know about everyone else, but I was brought up not to take things that weren't mine.

Apparently in Victorian times it was considered acceptable to chip bits off of Stonehenge for souvenirs...

[Guest PAJORO]

You raise some interesting points and again I fear the very nature of this medium makes it not a good place to discuss them. I know Giles, and generally he would agree with you on some points; however, like him I cannot see that picking up a surface find of shrapnel ball or fuse will rob anyone of a decent grave. That such activity may have greater archaeological significance can only be decided by those with expertise in that field; and this is a debate that will continue for some time, I am sure.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thanks again. I agree with everything you say. I am also aware of the difficulties. Giles hooked onto a point that had little relevance in (picking up a surface find of shrapnel ball or fuse will rob anyone of a decent grave). That is something I agree with totally and never meant to be hooked on as a measured value of what I had to say. However, I remain steadfast in my original viewpoint. I have also recently noticed how this ranking system works. Now I know why the paranoia exists re the troll thing. Could I suggest an addition to thi site called 'The Glass House', which allows those like the author (being nice again) who prophesised my future lottery win and persons named as trolls to verbally slug it out properly. In doing so in 'The Glass House' you get no merit for posts etc. The logical reasonable guys can then relax. Giles put me on his ignore list and I in response did the same. Sad state of affairs, but I can now see how this occurs.

PJ 'The Happy to remain Grunt'.

[Max Poilu]

No-one is on any 'ignore list' but you must see how your posts cause aggravation - we cannot keep repeating the same things. You include a number of personal insults in your wording - and you continue to insult a great many members of this forum with your 'glass house' suggestion. This is far and away the most civil and respectful forum I have ever come across. If you spent some time here before insulting many long term members with your very first posts you would see that too. There is no ranking of importance here and IIRC a virtually zero history of troll like posts.

To repeat myself once again, in the post above you said:

Any person having found an item i.e. cap badge and took it away after having formally first correctly recording the accurate location/description of item etc etc. Should any remains be found later, which were correctly FORENSICALLY excavated, reference could then also be made with the recorded log of the finder of the aforementioned cap badge. It may/may not coincide, but is extremely useful knowledge to assist in identifying the fallen, even at the very least allowing the remains headstone to carry the emblem/crest of his regiment.

As Paul and myself have said in the experience of a great deal of people and also those not involved it must be plainly obvious that a surface find of a cap badge can have no certain link to a body found nearby. As a policeman surely you understand the idea of 'beyond reasonable doubt'. I have asked you a number of times to explain why you disagree and how the two might be linked. I will ask again.

If a badge was found affixed to a 'body' then yes, the two can be linked but that is irrelevant as the whole argument here is about surface finds. No-one here is advocating digging. I guess that will be my last post on this - everthing else has been said above or in the many archived links provided to you. If you read some of the thousands of previous words in dozens of previous topics (links provided above) you will find all the (sensible) debate you could need.

[Bert Heyvaert]

Hi all,

I don't want to get into this too deep, but I would say that all surface finds on a ploughed field are by definition out of context. What would an archaeologist do if he was to escavate such a field? First of all, the field would be extensively walked. Any important surface finds would than be tagged and bagged and the position would be marked. Based on these concentrations, trench maps, geophysics and yes I believe also a sweep with the metal detector, areas would be marked to excavate.

In the UK there is such a thing as the department of portable antiquities if I am not mistaken. People who do certain surface finds are encouraged to provide a picture and the exact location which is than put in d-base. If this field would ever be subject to archaeological research, this data can be used for the desktop study. They work together with many metal-detectorists who have provided much usefull information. Metal detectorists who are practicing their hoby by these standards actually contribute something to the understanding of archaeology and I can only applaud that. Such a department however does not exist in Belgium, and I am not sure about France.

Overall I am really not sure what to think about this. personally I would never pick something up from the surface. But, if a tourist picks something up... there is a big possibility that by the time archaeologists would ever come in, the field has been ploughed over a few more times and the find has disappeared again.

In Belgium, technically speaking all items on the land belong to the landowner. If he gives you permission to take them with you, than there is not much to bring in against that. There is the duty to report potential archaeological sites though. Not reporting them is an offence, which can be punished. This raises another difficulty, what are potential archaeological sites or not...? I would say, a few random bullets aren't, but pieces of wood sticking out of ditch, or more extensive finds like that should best be reported to the V.I.O.E. (their contacts are on-line).

As for more precious surface finds like cap-badges. I would say if the landowner gives you permission to take them, take a nice picture, mark the spot on a map and send these details to the V.I.O.E. Their relations with archaeological remains in situ are probably gone, but it is always a good indicator for an archaeologist that something might be underneath.

[Guest PAJORO]

I'm not worthy I'm not worthy. That's what I've been trying to say myself. Please don't feel offended that I use your post as a means of reference you put it more clearly than I could ever have done. In the kingdom of the blind the one eyed man is king and your it at the moment.

[uncle bill]

enough name calling now please.

[iain mchenry]

PAJORO,

Paul Reed, in his last posting, makes reference to the few bodies that are ever found complete, using the "Forgotten Battlefields" TV programme as a good example. Well, assuming you can get BBC 2, its on tommorrow morning at 1110 hrs UK local time. It is well worth watching.

Regards

Iain McHenry

[Guest PAJORO]

PAJORO,

Paul Reed, in his last posting, makes reference to the few bodies that are ever found complete, using the "Forgotten Battlefields" TV programme as a good example. Well, assuming you can get BBC 2, its on tommorrow morning at 1110 hrs UK local time. It is well worth watching.

Regards

Iain McHenry

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Much appreciated Ian I will set the recorder accordingly. Some of you guys in here have got great sites. Head up to you folks.

[Kathie]

I entered a 'thank you' to all those who helped me plan my June July visit on another thread a few hours ago. Therein I mentioned that I had returned with two plastic bags of 'relics' purchased at Delville Wood.

Now I have foudn this thread. I have decided I dont feel bad at all.

In the plastic bags were little balls of shell, some broken nose cones and grenades. There was one buckle.

When I got to England to see grandchildren (aged 13 Claudia and 8 Jake) I took some novels I had purchased on the war from Thiepval etc. They were vaguely interested. When I introduced the plastic bags we got down to it. It became real - what were the nose cones, why were shells fired, who fired, show me on the map, why did I visit the Somme all the way from South aFrica, why on earth had South Africans fought there (I ask myself too?), what was Delville Wood and etc. When we finsihed the shell debris and got to the buckle, for the first time they wanted to know about my twenty soldiers - who were they, what memorial, who put them on ther, how old were they, where did they go to school. The thirteen year old enjoyed a good weep at the last letters which I have on my computer from 17 and 18 and 24 year olds to their mothers whcih I have uncovered.

I reckon they'll come on a trip with me. they may quite like the museums, they may hate the hiking along the path from Martinpuich to Delville Wood and back, thy may still want their game boys etc. But they do care that Hubert Openshaw died near where I bought the plastic bag. (I was told at time of puchase the contents of bag did not necesarily come from around the DW area, I have wondered if it came from someones cement mixer and been all scrunched up and rusted for purchasers - no matter).

so I have no deep thoughts - just a learning experience.

Kathei

[Kathie]

I entered a 'thank you' to all those who helped me plan my June July visit on another thread a few hours ago. Therein I mentioned that I had returned with two plastic bags of 'relics' purchased at Delville Wood.

Now I have foudn this thread. I have decided I dont feel bad at all.

In the plastic bags were little balls of shell, some broken nose cones and grenades. There was one buckle.

When I got to England to see grandchildren (aged 13 Claudia and 8 Jake) I took some novels I had purchased on the war from Thiepval etc. They were vaguely interested. When I introduced the plastic bags we got down to it. It became real - what were the nose cones, why were shells fired, who fired, show me on the map, why did I visit the Somme all the way from South aFrica, why on earth had South Africans fought there (I ask myself too?), what was Delville Wood and etc. When we finsihed the shell debris and got to the buckle, for the first time they wanted to know about my twenty soldiers - who were they, what memorial, who put them on ther, how old were they, where did they go to school. The thirteen year old enjoyed a good weep at the last letters which I have on my computer from 17 and 18 and 24 year olds to their mothers whcih I have uncovered.

I reckon they'll come on a trip with me. they may quite like the museums, they may hate the hiking along the path from Martinpuich to Delville Wood and back, thy may still want their game boys etc. But they do care that Hubert Openshaw died near where I bought the plastic bag. And Les Mandy and Vic Pattison.

(I was told at time of puchase the contents of bag did not necesarily come from around the DW area, I have wondered if it came from someones cement mixer and been all scrunched up and rusted for purchasers - no matter).

so I have no deep thoughts - just a learning experience.

Kathei

[Kathie]

I entered a 'thank you' to all those who helped me plan my June July visit on another thread a few hours ago. Therein I mentioned that I had returned with two plastic bags of 'relics' purchased at Delville Wood.

Now I have foudn this thread. I have decided I dont feel bad at all.

In the plastic bags were little balls of shell, some broken nose cones and grenades. There was one buckle.

When I got to England to see grandchildren (aged 13 Claudia and 8 Jake) I took some novels I had purchased on the war from Thiepval etc. They were vaguely interested. When I introduced the plastic bags we got down to it. It became real - what were the nose cones, why were shells fired, who fired, show me on the map, why did I visit the Somme all the way from South aFrica, why on earth had South Africans fought there (I ask myself too?), what was Delville Wood and etc. When we finsihed the shell debris and got to the buckle, for the first time they wanted to know about my twenty soldiers - who were they, what memorial, who put them on ther, how old were they, where did they go to school. The thirteen year old enjoyed a good weep at the last letters which I have on my computer from 17 and 18 and 24 year olds to their mothers whcih I have uncovered.

I reckon they'll come on a trip with me. they may quite like the museums, they may hate the hiking along the path from Martinpuich to Delville Wood and back, thy may still want their game boys etc. But they do care that Hubert Openshaw died near where I bought the plastic bag. And Les Mandy and Vic Pattison.

(I was told at time of puchase the contents of bag did not necesarily come from around the DW area, I have wondered if it came from someones cement mixer and been all scrunched up and rusted for purchasers - no matter).

so I have no deep thoughts - just a learning experience.

Kathei

[Simon R]

Very pleased to hear that your objects excited their imagination, just goes to show the power of artefacts as a historic resource. They become even more powerful when they come from excavated contexts, not just from 'somewhere in France'. A bit tangential to your point I agree, and I really am very pleased you've been able to inflame their imagination and interest.

It's just hard to know where all that stuff really came from, or if it had any archaeological significance in the first place. A lot of imponderables and unknowns. But, ultimately you've awoken interest - perhaps they'll be the ones to further investigate battlefields archaeologically in 50 years time! (When I'm 80... bloody hell what a thought....)

[Borderman]

This is just a thought (‘an ever so ‘umble one). These collections that some people are putting together, why? I understand collecting medals, trench art, plaques etc., but surely, in the name of common decency, not stuff of the battlefields. Are people setting up little museums in their garages or garden sheds? At, what point did someone actually think that they were the guardians and preservers of the nations past?

Or is it something more? Some of the posts that describe ‘finds’ (which I suppose the French Police would call ‘thefts’) use a phraseology that is almost sexual. Bit of a worry really, got to be unhealthy.

Both sides make very good arguments based on their views. I can’t help feel that this is not a black and white issue. What I am amazed at is the aggressive responses and attempts at cheap ridicule towards PAJORO. I would agree that what he wants should happen, but never will.

It might be worth mentioning the British dead of the Napoleonic Wars, including those of the battle of Waterloo. Bodies looted. Teeth removed to make dentures. And later their bones returned in barrels via north east British ports to be ground down for fertilizer.

Poor bloody infantry.

[Borderman]

This is just a thought (‘an ever so ‘umble one). These collections that some people are putting together, why? I understand collecting medals, trench art, plaques etc., but surely, in the name of common decency, not stuff of the battlefields. Are people setting up little museums in their garages or garden sheds? At, what point did someone actually think that they were the guardians and preservers of the nations past?

Or is it something more? Some of the posts that describe ‘finds’ (which I suppose the French Police would call ‘thefts’) use a phraseology that is almost sexual. Bit of a worry really, got to be unhealthy.

Both sides make very good arguments based on their views. I can’t help feel that this is not a black and white issue. What I am amazed at is the aggressive responses and attempts at cheap ridicule towards PAJORO. I would agree that what he wants should happen, but never will.

It might be worth mentioning the British dead of the Napoleonic Wars, including those of the battle of Waterloo. Bodies looted. Teeth removed to make dentures. And later their bones returned in barrels via north east British ports to be ground down for fertilizer.

Poor bloody infantry.