a soldier who used to have a grave

[Ridds]

....

Just a few thoughts on Row A* (what else ?)

As the rows behind it are (probably) numbered A, B, C, D, E, F, G, and these rows form Plot 2, row A* does not belong to Plot 2, and therefore may not be part of the graves that were concentrated in the cemetery post Armistice. (Nothing new so far.)

Yet, the pattern of the row A* seems identical to the rows behind it : 3 x 10. (Though I am not sure there are 10 crosses, maybe only 9)

A problem I had, expressed in a previous posting, was that if I accepted that these are graves of men buried there right after their death, then there is the fact that Gardiner = 31/7/17 and Torrome and Cobbold = 19/4/16 (difference of more than 1 year). Not chronological, even if we can see only 3 names and dates.

I had thought, Well, for some reason that non-chronology may not be that abnormal. Maybe it is the same in Plot 1 ?

So I checked one row in Plot 1, only one, row E (the one in line with Plot 2, row A), a row with 42 graves, and I found it to be very chronological. So for a while I had thought that maybe A* (though far away) was the continuation of the rows in Plot 1. But it obviously is not. (This somehow confirms the non-gravemarkers theory ?)

Alan, what Jacky and I and also Dominiek Dendooven of the IFFM Doc. Centre discussed this morning (but we didn't finish the discussion) ... It seemed to some of us this morning that row A* is slightly irregular. The rows of crosses in A, B, C, D, E, F, G look very regular, a neat line. Are we right when we think that this is not so in row A* ? It seemed to some us that once in a while the crosses in A* are "zigzagging". I mean : one cross a bit more forward than the next one, which is a bit behind, and then the next one a bit forward again. (But the vegetation makes it difficult to see.)

Can you see that ? Either by means of your high resolution scan, or by means of a magnifying glass ?

But again, even if you know the answer, and if the answer is that row A* indeed is more irregular, then I don't know what to do with that. Unless that it is ... not Plot 2. But that's nothing new. And it would not add anything to the discussion grave markers versus commemorative crosses.

Aurel

I'm brandnew here, got referenced to this thread from another board that is well known to Aurel as well.

I've never been a regular poster anywhere, but this time I just couldn't resist.

I've only met Aurel once, and I'm sure he doesn't remember me, but I do remember him very well, mainly because of the passion with which he spoke about our common interest... the Great War that had left so many scars upon our region.

Back on topic... I've spent the last 4 hours (yes, four) reading the entire topic from the OP til the last post, and am fascinated. Being confronted with all the info given, I decided to download some of the pictures and opening them in photoshop (amongst others) to see if I could find out more.

Something that immediately struck me was the irregular pattern of the A* row, and especially Gardingers cross... the others, though not entirely lined up, still seem more or less in a regular line, but Gardingers cross really stands out, in it being quite a bit more forward of the line, especially when blowing up the image.

Everything seems to indicate that he never did get a grave, and if he did, it seems it was never recovered... but everything also seems to indicate that he was liked by the men, so it could be possible they did indeed leave a marker for him at Potijze, it being the closest cemetary to the place where he fell. Purely speculative of course, but it would explain his cross being in a row with soldiers who died a long time before he did... if those were actual graves at all

God, I'm well intrigued by all of this

[Aurel Sercu]

John and Alan,

With regard to Royal Pioneers.

Right, I had already found that "Royal Pioneers" seems to be something related to WW2.

Yet, yesterday night, before going to bed as a mental wreck, I "googled" for "Royal pioneers" (and something else, but I have forgotten what word it was.) And one of the hits led me to this Forum ! To a posting where someone said his great(?)grandfather was a Royal Pioneer !

But I didn't write down anything, and now, after a good night's sleep of course my fresh mind has completely forgotten. Right after this I will try to find it back.

Aurel

Added a quarter of an hour later.

Forget what I wrote.

I rediscovered the posting in this Forum in which there was mention of "Royal Pioneers" in the Great War. (Posting by a member Ger G). A few postings later, after Moonraker intervened, he apologized and said that he meant "Royal Engineers" ("I must have been having a blonde-no-coffee moment", he said. Don't know what that means. I'll have to check in my English-Dutch dictionary.)

Conclusion : no Royal Pioneers in WW1. That's clear. And when I thought I saw "Royal Pioneers" on the right arm of the cross, I must have had "a blonde-no-coffee moment". Whatever that means. I'd better check my dictionary right away. Suppose it is a disease !

[Aurel Sercu]

Position and casualties of 16th (Pioneer) Battalion Royal Irish Rifles on 31/07/17 from "The Terrors" by Stuart N. White.

At 0530 on 31/07/17 battalion commenced task of clearing & repairing the Wieltje - Spree Farm(L6) road from where it crossed the German frontline(L7) to Bossaert Farm(L8).

Casualties No 1 Coy 3 OR killed & 1 off(Lt Dolling) + 5 OR wounded

No 3 Coy 5 OR killed, 2 offs (2/Lts Ross & McMaster) + 6 ORs wounded plus 1 OR missing.

Thanks, Richard, for joining Andrew's madhouse. (Which of course does not suggest that the greratest madman is ... )

And for the information you provided. I know where Spree Farm and Bossaert Farm were. The latter was only 2 km (1 1/4 mile) northwest from Potijze Chateau Grounds Cemetery.

As to the numbers of casualties, OR. You mention 3 + 5 + 1 missing. = 9.

That's close to the 11 I found on SDGW.

(I forgot to check the officers.)

Aurel

[Aurel Sercu]

Hello "Ridds",

Welcome in the "madhouse" too !

And you being Flemish it looks that sooner or later the balance in this "madhouse" one day will incline in favour of the Flemish pals.

(Let me also say : your first posting on the Forum, and in THIS Topic ? Well, you have g*ts ! )

So you too think that Row A* (Gardiner's row) is a "gravemarkers only but no graves" row ? (If maybe only for a limited number of crosses in the row.) And your opinion is based on the irregularity of some parts in the row ?

Somehow it makes sense, I agree. I guess sooner or later I will give up defending my "real graves" conviction. (Though it has never been a real conviction.)

You also write : "Purely speculative of course, but it would explain his cross being in a row with soldiers who died a long time before he did... "

That makes sense too. On the other hand, graves that were brought in from surrounding battlefields, post Armistice, were often arranged in a way the dates of adjacent graves (understandably) were very different. (But then, I have already said that I do not think Row A*, not really being in Plot 2, was brought in from elsewhere. God, this is driving me schizophrenic.)

Maybe someone should list all the arguments of the arguments for and against.

***

And to all. Focussing on the double cross again.

I made clear in a previous posting that I am giving up defending "Royal Pioneers" on the right arm of the cross. Mainly because there were no "Royal Pioneers" in WW1. So : I may have been wrong when I thought I read "Royal", and I may have been wrong when I saw "Pioneers". Yet, it's a coincidence that

- I read . V. Jones (and Sabine read the other name as Russell)

- that combining this with the "16" I think I read on the left arm (I know, not everybody agrees, it may be IG or I.G.)

leads us to 16/Royal Irish Rifles,

who were ... a Pioneer Battalion.

(And I had thought I read "Royal Pioneers" long before I had seen "Jones" and "16".)

One more thing about Cecil Victor Jones. Something I had not noticed before. SDGW says he "Died of Wounds". (All the other men in 16/RIRifles who died that day are KIA, including J. Russell.)

Is this important ? What am I think of that ? A Died of Wounds on the Menin Gate Memorial is a bit exceptional, isn't it ?

Also : if he Died of Wounds, then he may have died in a Dressing Station ? And Potijze Chateau was a dressing station, wasn't it ? And was close (2 km / 1 1/4 miles) from where Cecil Victor Jones was, near Bossaert Farm (see posting of Richard Greenwoodman.)

And all this on a Sunday. Day of Rest ...

Aurel

[ianw]

Must admit I admire greatly the effort being put into trying to resolve this mystery - and a terrific cooperative effort between Flemish , British and Aussie pals. Isn'nt it amazing how these puzzles are so difficult to get to the bottom of. The passage of time seems to draw a discreet veil over these matters and makes us really work for the solutions. However, if any one can do it, the Pals can.

Good luck to all the detectives at work !

[Aurel Sercu]

Good luck to all the detectives at work !

Thanks, Ian, for the compliments to the Topic Pals.

But it looks more and more that if there is one thing we need, it's ... luck indeed.

Aurel

[Guest geoff501]

Geoff - firstly welcome to the madhouse. I think this is a great idea. I can see that name too, on the right arm of the cross. Though am I seeing it because you suggested it!?

Thanks, as good a place as any to go mad...

maybe you are seeing it because I suggested it. Did you see another name (but a lot clearer) very early in the thread once it was pointed out. But I think that one was real. Look what Rolf Harris can do with just a couple of brush strokes.

I'm starting to believe the 16th RIR theory and CV Jones. So my current idea is:

As suggested before, on the shield:

Name: RUSSELL, JOHN

Regiment: Royal Irish Rifles

Unit Text: 16th Bn.

Date of Death: 31/07/1917

Cemetery: YPRES (MENIN GATE) MEMORIAL

Name: JONES, CECIL VICTOR

Regiment: Royal Irish Rifles

Unit Text: 16th Bn.

Date of Death: 31/07/1917

Cemetery: YPRES (MENIN GATE) MEMORIAL

And on the right arm.

Name: PUTNAM, CHARLES

Initials: C

Regiment: Royal Irish Rifles

Unit Text: 16th Bn.

Date of Death: 31/07/1917

Cemetery: YPRES (MENIN GATE) MEMORIAL

What seems most certain to me is V. J---- and J. R----- and 16. That must narrow down the possibilities to just a few. There is a matching set in the 16th Mancs but I think wrong date and place.

[Jacky Platteeuw]

I don't think this is a coincidence anymore that for all the proposed names we end up on the Menin Gate.

Torrome is the exception but there is a perfectly logical explanation for this. We assumed that the cross at Potijze was a grave but in fact it now appears to be a grave marker. Torrome was found sometimes after the war and was reburied at Poelcapelle. His 'original' gravemarker was found somewhere and was brought to Potijze. Same for Gardiner, Cobbold. Thats is precisely my point: could Potijze Chateau have functioned as concentration cemetery,for the sector, for all crosses found in the surrounding battlefields during the battlefield clearence after the war ?. This would explain why this row was not considered to be graves but gravemarkers. We all know of photos of lonely crosses in the field during WW1. At that time there were certainly already plans to commemorate the missing but possibly not yet how and where. By 1924-1925, as Terry states in a posting, this was certainly the case as the building of the Menin gate was to begin in 1925 . This certainly took some planning and in that line of thinking when Potijze Chateau was made the crosses did disappear. However in my opinion not the entire row just disappeared it is reflected in the number of 'collective' graves in the Cemetery.

Jacky

[Aurel Sercu]

Geoff,

As to Jones, from the beginning I have been very (but not completely) sure I read V. JONES, and an initial before the V, possibly C or G. So in my opinion Cecil Victor Jones, 16/RIRifles certainly qualified. (This I combine to the near certainty that I think I see a 16, of a battalion, on the left arm of the cross)

I was not so sure I read Russell, but it could be, corroborated by the fact that there was indeed a John Russell in the same battalion.

Charles Putnam : I had thought of him too. Possible. My problem : so one name on the right arm, 2 on the central shield ?

And I also have my questions about that type of shield (as I remarked in a previous posting). Is this something that was on the cross from the beginning ? Or only added later ? And if later, why ? And what could have been on the left half of the shield ? More names ? Dates ? Does anyone have an example of a comparable cross ?

Last question (in this posting) : does anyone, on the left arm of the cross, after what I think is 16, see TH, in smaller letters, and a little higher ?

Aurel

[Aurel Sercu]

Jacky,

Do you realize what you have done ???!!!!

Suppose you are right (and you could be) ! Then this will be the end of this Topic, because nothing more can be added.

What will we do know, in Australia, UK and Flanders with our spare time ?

Aurel

[Ridds]

Thanks for the warm welcome.

I would agree on the assumption that row A* isn't part of plot 2 based on the signs put up next to it on the postcard.

I'm not at all sure that row A* are all just markers rather than graves, but the fact that Gardingers cross is quite a bit forward when compared to the rest of the line, and the fact that even the other crosses aren't lined up like the ones behind it in plot 2 (and even in plot 1 from the looks of it) combined with the fact that private Torrome later turns out to be burried at Poelcappelle and the others turn out to have their names on the Menin Gate Memorial seem like strong indicators to me...

Then again, considering the time between the original photograph and the point where the CWGC took over, anything could have happened

I'll leave the search up to the experts and will just give my two cents from time to time based on the 'evidence' they put forward

I was planning a visit to a series of cemetaries this afternoon before I go and watch the football (Roeselare - Bruges, got to support the blues) but because of this topic, I think there will be a change in plans and I'll be going to Potijze instead and get a better idea of the exact locations of the positive ID's we have until now. I can't help it, I'm just drawn to it...

... just hope the magpie doesn't get me

Even though it seems like this topic will soon be coming to its end, as I'd have to be with Jacky on this one, I still think it is worth going, if only to pay my respect...

[sabine72]

Aurel,

I just thought the same , but We are not finished yet all my hope is on tim and andrew now, since i have two smaller pictures of the original scanned in high resolution and will mail them tomorow to their adress, I think they should have them by the end of the week. Who knows they may be able to see more

and don't forget the help my sister in law offerd in two weeks

fingers crossed

and if not we wil have to find an other mystery to be solved

sabine

[Alan_J]

A busy Sunday in this thread! I think Jacky's summing up reflects my own feelings on this very well. It would fit the facts (of which there are only a few!) and also many of the assumptions.

The one doubt would be the grave of a soldier who died of wounds - as Aurel says such a grave (assuming it was near an ADS or similar) would have been less likely to be lost than one perhaps nearer the line. However, it could have been that some graves somewhere (perhaps even Potijze Chateau Grounds Plot 1, or Lawn cemetery) were damaged by shellfire - a grave marker could have been found but then not reconciled with any remians disturbed by the shellfire. Obviously, just speculation, not a fact - but a possibility.

If we can't progress this mystery much further (depending on anything from Sabine), didn't Aurel say that Jacky has a mystery postcard he could start us off with??

Alan

[Andrew Hesketh]

Torrome was found sometimes after the war and was reburied at Poelcapelle.

Jacky, I think that utimately CWGC, via Terry D., will return this verdict. This will be a great disappointment to me and many others I suspect, but the logic of the arguments put forward over many pages strongly suggests that this is the only sensible answer.

Nevertheless, attempts to decipher the names on the other crosses are still worthwhile and I thank and welcome new contributors to the thread. I think that a number of us who have been with this for a week or two now are getting a little stir-crazy so all new suggestions are welcome! The detective work is not over.

Aurel, you suggested that someone put together the arguments in a summary - I would love to, but have you seen how big this thread has grown!?

('Blonde-moment' - based on the idea that blonde women are attractive but dumb, so a blonde-moment is having a moment of stupidity. Apologies to all blondes.....)

[Aurel Sercu]

1. Torrome is the exception but there is a perfectly logical explanation for this. We assumed that the cross at Potijze was a grave but in fact it now appears to be a grave marker. Torrome was found sometimes after the war and was reburied at Poelcapelle.

2. His 'original' gravemarker was found somewhere and was brought to Potijze.

3. Same for Gardiner, Cobbold.

4. Thats is precisely my point: could Potijze Chateau have functioned as concentration cemetery,for the sector, for all crosses found in the surrounding battlefields during the battlefield clearence after the war ?. This would explain why this row was not considered to be graves but gravemarkers.

5. We all know of photos of lonely crosses in the field during WW1. At that time there were certainly already plans to commemorate the missing but possibly not yet how and where. By 1924-1925, as Terry states in a posting, this was certainly the case as the building of the Menin gate was to begin in 1925 . This certainly took some planning and in that line of thinking when Potijze Chateau was made the crosses did disappear.

6. However in my opinion not the entire row just disappeared it is reflected in the number of 'collective' graves in the Cemetery.

Jacky

1. I agree that this is possible.

2. Possible. Do you mean : brought to Potijze CGC either before he was reburied at Poelkapelle ? (Anyway, not important. Somehow related to this could be that his name was no longer readable on the cross by 1920 (?). Right arm of the cross being broken off too.)

3. I agree. I think.

4. Yes, why not ...

5. Makes sense.

6. Do you mean that you believe that in Row A* there must / may have been some real graves, and that these remains were added (integrated) in the rows A - G ? As I pointed out these are the multiple hraves :

A.15 : Two unknowns

A.16 : Two unknowns

A.17 : Two unknowns (these 3 headstones are right behind the Gardiner - Torrome - Cobbold crosses)

D.2 : Three unknowns

D.3 : Two unknowns

D.4 : Two unknowns

D.5 : Two unknowns

E.11 : Three unknowns

E.12 : Two unknowns

E.13 : Two unknowns

E.14 : Two unknowns

***

And I agree with Ridds (and others) : if only we could know what was written on that white sign near the first cross of Row A* on Alan's photo, then the mystery may be solved right away.

Aurel

[Jacky Platteeuw]

Nevertheless, attempts to decipher the names on the other crosses are still worthwhile and I thank and welcome new contributors to the thread

Andrew couldn't agree more because of the efforts made by all contributors I have been able to elaborate my point of view. Possibly another element could appear which would make my theory completely useless.

For information there are 133 soldiers who "Died of Wounds" commemorated on the Menin Gate.

Jacky

[Jacky Platteeuw]

6. Do you mean that you believe that in Row A* there must / may have been some real graves, and that these remains were added (integrated) in the rows A - G ? As I pointed out these are the multiple hraves :

Aurel,

That is exactly what I meant. If time allows I will post some pictures of Kemmel Chateau where I believe a normal or standard procedure can be seen. If not today certainly this week.

Jacky

[Aurel Sercu]

1. The one doubt would be the grave of a soldier who died of wounds - as Aurel says such a grave (assuming it was near an ADS or similar) would have been less likely to be lost than one perhaps nearer the line. However, it could have been that some graves somewhere (perhaps even Potijze Chateau Grounds Plot 1, or Lawn cemetery) were damaged by shellfire - a grave marker could have been found but then not reconciled with any remians disturbed by the shellfire. Obviously, just speculation, not a fact - but a possibility.

2. If we can't progress this mystery much further (depending on anything from Sabine), didn't Aurel say that Jacky has a mystery postcard he could start us off with??

Alan

Alan,

1. Correct. And actually I don't really worry about Cecil Jones possibly have been been a DOW. As Jacky said : 133 DoW on the Menin Gate. And I have found them too, in other pieces of research. Besides, we all know that the difference between a KIA and a DOW is debatable. (I was surprised though : one out of a dozen in that Bn. on that day was DOW, and exactly the one that had "better" been KIA ..)

2. That will be for another Sunday ...

Aurel

[Aurel Sercu]

1. Aurel, you suggested that someone put together the arguments in a summary - I would love to, but have you seen how big this thread has grown!?

2. ('Blonde-moment' - based on the idea that blonde women are attractive

3. but dumb, so a blonde-moment is having a moment of stupidity. Apologies to all blondes.....)

Andrew,

1. Now I haven't seen that. Has it ?

2. My wife says she accepts your compliment.

3. My wife says she accepts your apology.

And as I married her (a moment of stupidity ?) I accept your compliment and apology too ! ;-)))

Aurel

[Jacky Platteeuw]

Now after heavy negotiations with my 2 Ladies (Aurel knows what I mean by that) I have time to post the postcard from Kemmel Chateau. I will make 3 posts:

1. one of the postcard

2. a detail of a cross with multiple names and regiments on it

3. today's situation with the burial details of the 5 men involved.

Here comes nr 1.

[Jacky Platteeuw]

Nr.2

[Jacky Platteeuw]

Nr 3 with the list.

KEMMEL CHATEAU MILITARY CEMETERY, Belgium

BEATTY, Second Lieutenant, ERIC LESLIE FINCH, 12th Bn. attd. Trench Mortar Bty., Sherwood Foresters (Notts and Derby Regiment). , Killed in action 23 June 1916. Age 22. Eldest son of Mr. A. H. Beatty O.B.E., of Chellow Dene, 56c, Putney Hill, London. Grave Ref. F. 5.

BURROUGHS, Lance Corporal, H, 14981, 7th Bn., Northamptonshire Regiment. 23 June 1916. Grave Ref. F. 5.

CLAYTON, Private, FREDERICK ALBERT, 17820, 7th Bn., Northamptonshire Regiment. , Killed in action 23 June 1916. Age 21. Son of Frederick and Ellen Clayton, of 14, Bedford Rd., Rushden, Northants. Grave Ref. F. 5.

MARGETT, Private, W J T, 18161, 7th Bn., Northamptonshire Regiment. 23 June 1916. Grave Ref. F. 5.

RIDLEY, Private, ERIC SAMUEL, G/5763, "D" Coy. 9th Bn., Royal Sussex Regiment. , Killed in action 23 June 1916. Age 19. Son of Frederick Rowland Spencer Ridley of Oak Lodge, Green Lane, Crowborough, Sussex. Grave Ref. F. 5.

[Jacky Platteeuw]

It is understood I hope that I dont want in anyway to hijack this fabulous thread. I think we could possibly be in for more surprises as I mentioned in an earlier posting.

Jacky

[Aurel Sercu]

Jacky,

Just a detail, and I know it's not the heart of the matter ...

On the Kemmel postcard : one officer and 4 OR (though the officer being of a different regiment) ...

Are you (among other things) suggesting that the Gardiner cross with the text "Captain F.T. Gardiner / NCO's and men etc." was

- a gravemarker / memorial TO all of them

- and not a gravemarker / memorial to Gardiner FROM NCOs and men ?

Aurel

(And you're neither a hijacker nor a bigamist. )

[Jacky Platteeuw]

Aurel,

I think the second possibility to be the correct one. As someone wrote in a previous post only 1 NCO was killed on the 31st July and the cross says clearly NCO's and men.

Jacky