a soldier who used to have a grave

[Aurel Sercu]

Jacky,

Sorry. Now I realize that my question

Quote

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 ?

Unquote

is nonsense, and therefore could not be answered. (The two options mean the same thing !

So let me try again :

Are you suggesting that the Gardiner cross was a gravemarker / memorial TO ALL of them (Gardiner, NCO's and men), and not a gravemarker / memorial FROM NCOs and men.

And I understand that your answer in the latest posting means : "I think it was a gravemarker / memorial from NCO's and men. (The argument being that only 1 NCO (CSM David Wood(s) died that day.)"

Sorry if I am a bit confused. Can't think properly anymore. (Must be Andrew's compliments to my wife !

Aurel

[ian turner]

Pals,

First, thanks to all those who sacrificed their weekend (and eyesight) to the detective work. I cannot add to the scan deciphering from my side.

So far we seem to have ID'd more missings from our row. Whilst that supports the 'marker only' theory, it does not discount entirely the (possibly remote) chance that they remain missing in Potijze, and commemorated on Menin Gate. Though even as I write these words that idea seems to have a hollow ring about it.

What I would say is I doubt the idea that there were real graves in this row which were later added to the graves of other unknowns in Plot II.

The whole ethic of the IWGC was individual commemoration. Ideally in an individual named grave, or as a 'Known unto God', and finally if really missing entirely, then on a memorial.

Therefore if the markers of row A* were real, and were somehow lost and not matchable to the graves, then surely these men would have been reburied (if that was necessary) as unknowns, but in their own graves, and not simply added to other exisitng unknowns. I would suggest the multiple burials to be seen (both today and in the old views) were original multiple burials for expedient reasons (=shellfire).

Or am I assuming too much?

Ian

[Aurel Sercu]

(...) if the markers of row A* were real, and were somehow lost and not matchable to the graves, then surely these men would have been reburied (if that was necessary) as unknowns, but in their own graves, and not simply added to other exisitng unknowns. I would suggest the multiple burials to be seen (both today and in the old views) were original multiple burials for expedient reasons (=shellfire).

Or am I assuming too much?

Ian

Ian,

No, you probably are not.

Sorry if I myself assumed something disrespectful or unethical.

The fact that there are quite a number of multiple burials in Plot II (11 graves with each remains of 2 men (9 headstones) or 3 men (2 headstones)) must have made me jump to the wrong conclusion. They may have already been buried together (2 or 3) in the graves where they were found before they were taken to Potijze Chateau Ground Cemetery.

Besides, the longer metal strips on cross A 17 (Sabine's photo) suggests that already then (in 1919) that cross probably was on a double grave. (Though that's only a guess.)

Aurel

[Auimfo]

I've been staring at the scans posted here for several hours and can only agree with what's been said so far...

"16th", "C or G.V. Jones" and "J Russell" above that. It's also important to note that I think the writing on the cross is all in uppercase except the first letter which is in larger font.

For example: C V JONES. Therefore all the text will be the same height and we shouldn't be looking for any text that extends below or above like, y's, t's and l's.

To be certain, I'll wait till Sabine's copy reaches me and have a closer look at what I can do and take it to the forensic photographer at work.

Just another thought, and perhaps someone can set me straight here...

It has been suggested that Torrome's cross may also have been just a marker but he was later located, identified and buried at Poelcapelle. This is a plausible theory and I think Alan stated Torrome first appeared at Poelcapelle in 1928. But since the Menin Gate Memorial was opened in 1927 would it be correct to assume his name first appeared there along with Gardiner, Cobbold and the rest?

Is there some way of checking when Torrome was first buried at Poelcapelle and if prior to this his name was on the Menin Gate?

Tim L.

[Auimfo]

And I'm not sure if anyone's posted this before (apologies if they have)...

[Alan_J]

Tim,

I (and others) have suggested Torrome could be explained by his remians being found later and then reburied at Poelcapelle. I haven't suggested a date though - I haven't had any luck in finding information on when Poelcapelle cemetery was made.

However, as you say, if Torrome was originally listed on the Menin Gate then this (for me) would be support to the theory of 'grave markers but no graves' in row A* - the other names there that can be read are listed on the Menin Gate, and if Torrome was but was later found and identified he also would fit this hypothesis.

The one who could add to this is Terry Denham, but I think he has asked the question and is waiting for the response.

Alan

[ian turner]

It has been suggested that Torrome's cross may also have been just a marker but he was later located, identified and buried at Poelcapelle. This is a plausible theory and I think Alan stated Torrome first appeared at Poelcapelle in 1928. But since the Menin Gate Memorial was opened in 1927 would it be correct to assume his name first appeared there along with Gardiner, Cobbold and the rest?

Is there some way of checking when Torrome was first buried at Poelcapelle and if prior to this his name was on the Menin Gate?

Tim L.

Tim, I think Terry stated that Torrome was on the 1928 cemetery register, not that he first appeared there in 1928 - ie. he could have been at Poelcapelle from the beginning, when the cemetery was started after the Armistice. I hazard a guess that Torrome was never listed for the Menin Gate, but of course the truth of that would be in the CWGC records.

Ian

[Andrew Hesketh]

Tim - thanks for the picture of Torrome's grave. Who is buried either side of him?

[ian turner]

Andrew,

Don't remember the full details but we checked this out early in the game. I think it is an unknown on the other side (out of view in this pic).

Ian

[ian turner]

Further my last - see

Post #32

Ian

[ianw]

It would seem that it was understandably common practice for memorials to be erected in graveyards by comrades in circumstances where the actual body of the man commemorated was known to be missing. If this was the case, the IWGC/Army would have had to have developed a code of practice to deal subsequently with the presence of these informal memorials. That said, they would have had their own contemporary problems distinguishing between burial crosses and commemorative crosses.

[Aurel Sercu]

Tim - thanks for the picture of Torrome's grave. Who is buried either side of him?

Andrew,

In a previous posting I listed the names of all the men on the headstones in Torrome's row (A) and the Row behind him.. Each row 20 headstones. Many unknowns.

I don't think we can draw conclusions from that.

See my posting # 250

Since then I have also had a look at the row before him (preceding plot, LV.F).

11 names out of 20 headstones.

No results either I'm afraid.

Aurel

[Aurel Sercu]

Tim,

I (and others) have suggested Torrome could be explained by his remians being found later and then reburied at Poelcapelle. I haven't suggested a date though - I haven't had any luck in finding information on when Poelcapelle cemetery was made.

Alan

Alan (and all),

For my John Condon research I have the Burial Return for the remains among which "John Condon" (in fact someone else's ) were reburied at Poelkapelle.

These men were reburied in Plot LVI Row F.

Torrome is in Plot LIV Row A.

Both Plots are very close (only Plot LV is in between).

Whether LIV or LVI was laid out first (did they start at the front or at the back of the cemetery ?) I don't know. But that's hardly relevant. I think there were only a few days, or even less between the reburials in Plot VIV and LVI.

The Burial Return document I have has a Checked date in Sept. 23.

So I think we can say that Torrome's remains were discovered and reburied in Poelkapelle in or just before Sept. 1923.

Aurel

[Auimfo]

Ok, so it wasn't Alan who mentioned 1928 but Terry (and I'm sure someone else).

Nevertheless, depending on the results of Terry's info from the CWGC, I'm beginning to agree with Alan on this one.

If Torrome was buried at Poelcapelle after the opening of the Menin Gate but his name appeared on the Menin Gate prior to this then I would begin to suspect that these crosses are simply memorial markers brought in from outside cemeteries where the actual body could no longer be found.

However, if he was interred at Poelcapelle after the Menin Gate opened but was never on the Menin Gate, I would be asking questions as to where he had been prior? This, would tend to suggest that maybe his marker at Potijze is actually a grave that was relocated for some reason.

Tim L.

[Auimfo]

Oh, and by the way, my missus was looking at the scans on the computer and tried to decipher them.

After she came up with "Purple Partners" on the right arm of the cross I suggested she put her glasses on. When I realized she was wearing them I told her to go to bed and never darken the Forum's door again.

No wonder I drink!!

Tim L.

[ian turner]

Tim,

Of course the answer to this lies with Torrome's file, and maybe even with his service record, if it still exists.

We have no idea when his original grave was discovered and his remains reinterred at Poelcapelle, other than that he was on that register by 1928.

It seems illogical that he would have had an original battlefield grave (definite in view of Potijze Grounds being post-war), been reinterred at Potijze with his plot-mates being just markers, and then further reinterred at Poelcapelle, whilst appearing on the Menin Gate?

My money is on his having an original battlefield grave, his marker lost and placed at Potijze and then his subsequent discovery and positive ID and final interral at Poelcapelle. But it is all speculation in the absence of his file.

Ian

[Aurel Sercu]

It would seem that it was understandably common practice for memorials to be erected in graveyards by comrades in circumstances where the actual body of the man commemorated was known to be missing.

Ian,

So you mean that Gardiner's cross may have been such an informal memorial. But in such cases something was written on the cross like "NCOs and men of ...."

If there is a cross with only a name + battalion + date (like Torrome and Cobbold), could that be such an informal commemorative cross too ?

Just asking.

Aurel

[Aurel Sercu]

Of course the answer to this lies with Torrome's file, and maybe even with his service record, if it still exists.

We have no idea when his original grave was discovered and his remains reinterred at Poelcapelle, other than that he was on that register by 1928.

Ian

Ian and Tim,

You may have overlooked my posting # 428, but it is my conviction that Torrome (or the man whio is buried there) was reburied there in or before September 1923.

Aurel

[Roxy]

Folks,

I asked Mrs Roxy (a former military and forensic photographer) to have a look at some of the photos for her twopence worth.

She suggested that Row A* is likely to be grave markers rather than graves (ie no burials) for the following reasons:

1. There is no evidence of disturbed ground (ie a burial) near any of the markers.

2. Five of the 10 grave markers visible are badly damaged. Not so the others in the cemetery.

She also reckoned that there is forensic software designed to decode this type of detail - Any luck, Tim?

As you would expect, I am inclined to agree with her!

Moreover, I will be pleased to take any credit due. If this is nonsense it is purely Mrs Roxy's work.

Roxy

[SiegeGunner]

I can't add anything to this fascinating quest, except thanks and admiration to those who are pursuing it, and will no doubt get to the bottom of the mystery eventually - but I've just noticed that the subject of 'Remembering today' is, by coincidence (?), buried in Potijze Chateau Grounds Cemetery (Pte James Glennon, 7 Bn Leinster Regiment, 7.8.1917). If any of our Belgian pals are going to the cemetery today, perhaps they could pay their respects on our behalf.

Mick

[Aurel Sercu]

but I've just noticed that the subject of 'Remembering today' is, by coincidence (?), buried in Potijze Chateau Grounds Cemetery (Pte James Glennon, 7 Bn Leinster Regiment, 7.8.1917). If any of our Belgian pals are going to the cemetery today, perhaps they could pay their respects on our behalf.

Mick

Mick,

OK, I will. I had not intended to go to the cemetery today, but I will be very nearby this afternoon. No problem.

Aurel

[Aurel Sercu]

I asked Mrs Roxy (a former military and forensic photographer) to have a look at some of the photos for her twopence worth.

She suggested that Row A* is likely to be grave markers rather than graves (ie no burials) for the following reasons:

1. There is no evidence of disturbed ground (ie a burial) near any of the markers.

2. Five of the 10 grave markers visible are badly damaged. Not so the others in the cemetery.

Roxy

Roxy,

It's not that I like being critical. (I wouldn't dare to, Mrs. Roxy !

Just these questions.

Point 1. If Row A* are graves (I am not saying they are, only : IF) ... If they are graves, some would date from 1916 (Torrome and Cobbold), one July 1917 (Gardiner).

I think we can say that the photo was taken (end of) 1919. That's 2 or 3 years later.

If these are graves, and if the ground were disturbed at the time of burial, would this still be visible after 2 or more years ? (Meanwhile, while laying out (post Armistice) the rows behind Row A*, there would have already been some work done there. Levelling etc.)

Point 2. Yes, 5 of the 10 grave markers in A* are badly damaged, not so the others.

But the other markers (Plot 2, Rows A - G) date from post Armistice, except a number that may have come from the surrounding battlefields, the large white crosses.

Regards and thanks to Mrs. Roxy !

Aurel

[Roxy]

Aurel,

I will pass on your thanks to Mrs Roxy.

1. Her point was that in the photo in post #4 (so many, many days ago!) there appeared evidence of burials in row A (and rows further back) that was not evident/less evident in row A* - so perhaps there were no burials in row A*.

2. The damaged crosses in row A* may indicate battle damage (or wear and tear) from a previous site.

Although I was initially convinced that row A* was for graves (I could not see why grave markers would be lined up in a graveyard over nothing), I am now tending to belive that there were no internments.

Point 2 is a less convincing arguement as this may be purely coincidental or damaged crosses may have been replaced etc.

Roxy

RIP James Glennon, rembered today on the GWF.

[ian turner]

Aurel,

If some 'groundwork' had already been started when this old pic had been taken, would that not also have involved tidying up the grave markers, and making them neater/in line, etc? I am sure it would have, if the ground around was already levelled to this extent.

Ian

[Auimfo]

She also reckoned that there is forensic software designed to decode this type of detail - Any luck, Tim?

Roxy,

I certainly hope there is!! The forensic photographer at work will know and even if he hasn't got the equipment there, I'll try to convince him to take it to our state forensic lab. I've seen what the photographics dept can do and I was amazed.

I only hope they can work from a scan which will be defined by pixels rather than the original print. And I can't guarantee when/if they'll be able to do it.

Tim L.