Mass Grave

[ChrisBryett]

If the Germans used quicklime on this burial site, as was common practice for bodies gathered from a battlefield and buried en-masse, what do the professional archaeologists consider the state of the remains to be in; and what state any personal items on them which would be needed to lead to an identification?

Paul you must have felt ignored. Since no expert has come forward. I'll have a go this is as I understand it:

There is documentary evidence that the Germans laid out the bodies in rows, and covered each layer of bodies with soil and lime. This does not bode well for the survival of soft tissue, since each and every body will have been in direct contact with groundwater and with an alkaline soil environment. In mass graves however where bodies are buried in heaps the middle of the heap can be so cut off from oxygen in groundwater and precipitation that even eyelids can be preserved for some time. On the edges of the same heap a body could be totally skeletonised.

The point is that aerobic putrefying bacteria like alkaline soil over acid. By contrast to the indirectly destructive effects that lime has on soft tissue we can predict that lime will have enhanced the prospects for the survival of bones. Bones don't like acid soils.

Hope that answers your question.

regards,

Chris.

[Martin Brown]

If the Germans used quicklime on this burial site, as was common practice for bodies gathered from a battlefield and buried en-masse, what do the professional archaeologists consider the state of the remains to be in; and what state any personal items on them which would be needed to lead to an identification?

Hello Paul, good to hear from you.

At Auchy the burials I excavated had been limed. There were remnants of the lime in the soil and a very strong smell of it in the grave. However the remains hadn't been unduly affected by the process and textiles and papers survived well, as did the bones. Thankfully there was no soft tissue, save one fingernail. Trust me, total skeltonisation is good, it removes a H&S issue and you can still get DNA and stable isotope data from teeth.

Martin

[Paul Reed]

Thanks Martin and Chris for your answers. Most interesting.

[Crunchy]

Now this I agree with with a twist, perhaps "postitively" should be replaced with "more probably". I think postively is a bit steep. There has to be a rule.

Hi Chris,

That is the rule.

Unless the remains can be positively identified they will not mark the grave as such. Where they think the remains are of a specific person but they are not positive the marker or gravestone is worded "Believed to be ..." . This covers your probables.

Why change it?

I am not suggesting we don't make the effort to identify them because it is too hard. I was simply responding to a claim that the War Graves people in the 1920's "didn't try hard enough" and pointing out the difficulties of their task and that the Westhoek six (the sixth is actually part of a skull) are a much easier proposition than a large number of men in a mass grave.

Currently they are not sure if Westhoek six came from the same cemetery as the seven names released by the Minister due to the difference in grid references - if they are not, then the identification becomes much harder. Who do we start DNA testing then? Let's hope they are from the same cemetery and are six of the seven names.

A couple of question if I may? Why the imperative to identify the men in the mass grave and "gain closure for their families" and not the 410 buried at VC Corner now that we have DNA testing and a list of names of the missing from Fromelles? A very subjective question I grant - but are we really gaining closure for relatives two or three removed who didn't even know the soldier?

The real issue, if the bodies are there, is ensuring they are commemorated and not left in an unmarked mass grave. Whether we exhume them and place them in VC Corner or create a new cemetery at Pheasant Wood in the same vien as VC Corner will be the real debate.

Regards

Chris

[Simon R]

Dave that is the point only a non intrusive test dig will tell. No one know if they are there. There must be a test dig.

What is a non-intrusive test dig?

[ChrisBryett]

I am not suggesting we don't make the effort to identify them because it is too hard. I was simply responding to a claim that the War Graves people in the 1920's "didn't try hard enough" and pointing out the difficulties of their task and that the Westhoek six (the sixth is actually part of a skull) are a much easier proposition than a large number of men in a mass grave.

Currently they are not sure if Westhoek six came from the same cemetery as the seven names released by the Minister due to the difference in grid references - if they are not, then the identification becomes much harder. Who do we start DNA testing then? Let's hope they are from the same cemetery and are six of the seven names.

A couple of question if I may? Why the imperative to identify the men in the mass grave and "gain closure for their families" and not the 410 buried at VC Corner now that we have DNA testing and a list of names of the missing from Fromelles? A very subjective question I grant - but are we really gaining closure for relatives two or three removed who didn't even know the soldier?

The real issue, if the bodies are there, is ensuring they are commemorated and not left in an unmarked mass grave. Whether we exhume them and place them in VC Corner or create a new cemetery at Pheasant Wood in the same vien as VC Corner will be the real debate.

Regards

Chris

Hi Chris,

My point is that it lack's credibility that 410 men did not have anything on them to give a clue to identity two years later and yet all 5 therefter did. Not a single man in 410 had a disc, a letter, a paybook, a pipe or razor or personal item with a name etc. But the 5 found years later up to about 1923ish did. Not too credible. Leads straight back to not try hard enough to identify.

When you say the Westhoek 6 came from the same cemetery didn't they come out of the same hole in the ground made for a gas pipline under or next to a road? They were largely wrapped in sheets. Whether bed sheets or ground sheets I don't know. Where does this 'same cemetery' aspect come from?

Chris I think the task of exhuming the remains of all 'Known unto God's is bit too big of a task and unlikely to be popular or allowed. I think the point is that we are not discovering the 410 in VC Corner we are discoverying (potentially) the 170 odd Australians and 327 Brits. Assuming they must be moved then there is an opportunity to identify them. Not an opportunity to identify the 410 resting in VC Corner. My point is for the small cost of DNA testing let's capture that evidence and use it as best we can over time.

If the instruction is followed they will be exhumed. If an effort is made to keep them together extending VC Corners seems like a good option. Unless there is an open CWGC cemetery that can take them.

regards,

Chris

[ChrisBryett]

What is a non-intrusive test dig?

Simon, it is where a trench is dug up to the edge of the pits. The bones, if there, are not disturbed but can be viewed. The bones remain undisturbed as is the surface above them.

Chris

[Crunchy]

My point is that it lack's credibility that 410 men did not have anything on them to give a clue to identity two years later and yet all 5 therefter did. Not a single man in 410 had a disc, a letter, a paybook, a pipe or razor or personal item with a name etc. But the 5 found years later up to about 1923ish did. Not too credible. Leads straight back to not try hard enough to identify.

Hi Chris,

Were only 410 picked up in 1920? Seems a small collection from the number killed on the day and left in no man's land. What were the circumstances in which the 5 were found in 1923?

Regards

Chris

[Mat McLachlan]

I've been following this (sometimes heated) thread with great interest. A couple of points/queries:

Chris: Regarding the 410 in VC Corner, couldn't it be the case that, after a large number of bodies were collected from the battlefield, these were simply the ones that couldn't be identified? It seems highly likely that identified remains could have been seperated from the unidentified, with the identified buried in cemeteries. The authorities are then left with the issue of what to do with more than 400 unidentified bodies, and decide to create VC Corner. Nothing in this suggests that the work to identify the bodies was in any way substandard (for the time).

After all, I don't think it's reasonable to suggest that NONE of the bodies recovered in the immediate vicinity of VC Corner Cemetery could be identified. Logic suggests that at least a handful were identified and, as they obviously don't lie in VC Corner, they must have been buried in one of the other local cemeteries.

The maths bears this out as well. Of approx 2000 Australian dead, 1299 are unidentified. That means that about 700 were identified, and these men lie in named graves in the other cemeteries in the area.

Additionally, can anyone tell me where the figures of 327 British vs 169 Australians come from? The Australians suffered about four times the casualties of the British in the attack, so it seems odd to me that there would be such a high ratio of British vs Australian bodies in a mass grave that was behind the Australian area of attack. I know Pheasant Wood was adjacent to a light railway which could have been used to bring in British bodies from further afield, so that could be the answer.

Also, to those who've made points about 'second funerals' (implying there was a first funeral at Pheasant Wood), 'buried with honour', etc, I'd like to draw attention to the photo taken by the Germans after the battle showing Australian and British bodies piled on the light railway (presumably the one that ran past Pheasant Wood). No disrespect to the Germans who did the burying, but there was nothing in the photo that indicated the Germans did anything but get rid of the bodies as expediently as possible (as you would expect in a battle zone). Many of the bodies are barefoot - one explanation I've read said that the Germans took the more comfortable Allied boots because they were superior to their own.

The Germans didn't chose Pheasant Wood as a burial site because it was a fitting location to honour a vanquished foe - they chose it because it was a convenient, out of the way spot to dispose of the bodies before they got on the nose. It is highly likely these men were simply piled into pits on top of one another, covered in earth and lime as Paul has suggested and covered up. Personally, I don't feel it's appropriate to either inadequately investigate the site or to leave them discarded in a corner of the battlefield. If they are there, let's recover them and lay them to rest with honour and respect.

[Auimfo]

The Germans didn't chose Pheasant Wood as a burial site because it was a fitting location to honour a vanquished foe - they chose it because it was a convenient, out of the way spot to dispose of the bodies before they got on the nose. It is highly likely these men were simply piled into pits on top of one another, covered in earth and lime as Paul has suggested and covered up. Personally, I don't feel it's appropriate to either inadequately investigate the site or to leave them discarded in a corner of the battlefield. If they are there, let's recover them and lay them to rest with honour and respect.

Wholeheartedly agree with you on this Mat.

Cheers,

Tim L.

[Crunchy]

Mat,

You have put the argument more eloquently than me. To add a few points.

Many infantrymen don't carry much that identifies them when going into battle, apart from their idenitity discs. They take what they need to fight with and in my day personal effects, other than cigarettes and matchs, were left behind in the echelon bag. My relative at the Nek left his pipe, wallet and other small items behind in his echelon kit, which were returned to the family.

It is not uncommon for a soldier to have only his identity discs as a reference of identification. Being made of a hard cardboard fibre in 1916, they may have rotted away or become illegible in the elements over two and half years. There are many instances in the Great War (as discussed on a previous thread) of the identity discs being removed after the battle as proof of death and none being left with the bodies; thus the problem with a large number of unknowns. Add to this the fact that these bodies/skeletons lay out in no man's land for over two and half years subjected to shellfire and a good number of them may have been dismembered and scattered.

Some soldiers may have marked their equipment with indelible penicil or something similar but not everyone does it. Like the identity discs, what letters that were carried may have reached the illegible stage two and half years after the battle. As far as I know, most people don't carve their names on toothbrushes or pipes.

Chris from Sydney may be right but the jump in logic as to why "they didn't try harder" is unconvincing at the moment. Perhaps there are primary source documents which support this assertion. If so, it would be interesting to see them.

regards

Chris

[ChrisBryett]

Hi Chris,

Were only 410 picked up in 1920? Seems a small collection from the number killed on the day and left in no man's land. What were the circumstances in which the 5 were found in 1923?

Regards

Chris

There are many unidentifieds in Cemeteries around the Fromelles area. Clearly there are in all about 1299 of which 170 odd may be at Pheasant Wood if you therefore take 580 off the 1299 you come up with the other unidentifieds.

I have never been interested in working out when they came in only in finding that 170 are still unaccounted for in any cemetery.

The 410 were noticed by Bean after the Armistice so they would have been brought in quite soon after that.

I'm not sure of the circumstances of each of the 5 other than to say:

Rue Petillion Military Cemetery

Major Roy Harrison - Found Nov 1921 at 36.N.10.b.15.05. Identified by 1924 from surname found inscribed on silver cigarette case found with the body.

Arras Road Cemetery

452 Pte. A. Sitlington - Found Dec 1927 at 36.N.9.c.40.80. Identified 1927 from details found on covering ground sheet (4 unidentified Australians recovered at the same time from same location).

Canadian Cemetery No.2

3491 Sgt. J.D. Tulloch - Found Sep 1930 at 36.N.9.a.05.00. Identified 1930 from name inscribed on watch found with the body.

Y Farm Military Cemetery

818 Pte. W.J. Coleman - Found Dec 1919 at 36.I.21.b.1.6. Identified 1927 after damaged Id Disc deciphered (found alongside 2655 Pte. J.J. Purcell, 4636 Pte. M. McLean and 63 unidentified British/Australian soldiers).

3407 Pte. S. Philp - Found Dec 1919 at 36.N.9.d.25.15. Identified 1925? from details found on purse found with the body.

So I come back to the same point. Not one of 410 in VC Corner had a cigarette case, an identity disc, a purse, a watch or anything else with their identity on it but the next 5 all had it. It beggars belief.

Chris

[Mat McLachlan]

Hi Chris,

This was my point from my last post. Isn't it conceivable that, to pick a number, 450 bodies were recovered from the area near the present VC Corner Cemetery. 40 of these were able to be identified, so were immediately buried in a known grave. The grave authorities are then left with 410 unknowns, so create VC Corner Cemetery and bury them there. This is all speculation of course, but the point I am trying to make is that the 410 may well be the remaining unknowns left from a larger group of bodies, after the identified remains were interred elsewhere. It's not necessarily the case that only 410 bodies were collected, and all were unable to be identified.

I don't have any detailed info on the creation of VC Corner Cem, but the above seems entirely possible to me.

Interested to hear your thoughts.

Cheers,

Mat

[ChrisBryett]

I've been following this (sometimes heated) thread with great interest. A couple of points/queries:

The Germans didn't chose Pheasant Wood as a burial site because it was a fitting location to honour a vanquished foe - they chose it because it was a convenient, out of the way spot to dispose of the bodies before they got on the nose. It is highly likely these men were simply piled into pits on top of one another, covered in earth and lime as Paul has suggested and covered up. Personally, I don't feel it's appropriate to either inadequately investigate the site or to leave them discarded in a corner of the battlefield. If they are there, let's recover them and lay them to rest with honour and respect.

Hi Mat,

Its not that these were the once incapable of identification it is that this is 410 brought in off the wire in one go with not one being identified.

Corfield in Don't Forget Me Cobber says:

...the cemetery was made after the Armistice when the bodies of 410 Australians found on the battlefield were buried in 41 groups of ten.

He says elsewhere that it was "certainly a designated cemetery in the Summer of 1920.

The 1925 Register for VC Corner records:

It contains the graves of 410 Australian soldiers who fel in the Attack at Fromelles and whos bodies were fond on the battlefield, but the identification of even a single body proved to be impossible.

It beggars belief.

As for the 327 Brits I am not sure of its source. The 170 odd Australians comes from two sources. Firstly, a reconciliation of all appropriate cemetery registers and also of the 1299 unidentied's Red Cross files.

I think you will find that the Brits suffered the same ratio of casualties. The 61st was quite depleted when it attacked about 3400 men. It was a Territorial unit and had been depleted as it had been used to provide reinforcements for other units.

Mat, the light rail ran up behind the Wick Salient and was used to bring them to Pheasant Wood. The German accounts of the burials name both British and Australian. The number of bodies that can fit in these pits near balances to the suggested numbers of Australians and Brits missing.

Yes they were limed. That is recorded in the German account of the burial.

Yes and as you so aptly put it:

If they are there, let's recover them and lay them to rest with honour and respect.

Well said.

Chris.

[ChrisBryett]

Chris from Sydney may be right but the jump in logic as to why "they didn't try harder" is unconvincing at the moment. Perhaps there are primary source documents which support this assertion. If so, it would be interesting to see them.

regards

Chris

Chris, I don't think there are primary records on this. As I understand it the Graves Recovery Unit diaries were not kept and the map references sourcing of remains became part of the cemetery records.

I wouldn't expect to find 'missed identifying 410 Aussies today but had a great day at the pub'. People aren't prone to record what human nature dictates. If they existed they would more likely say we recovered 410 Ausses despite best efforts no identification. That could be genuine or written in the pub. In reality we will never know. I just feel it is improbable and incredible.

Chris.

[ChrisBryett]

Hi Chris,

This was my point from my last post. Isn't it conceivable that, to pick a number, 450 bodies were recovered from the area near the present VC Corner Cemetery. 40 of these were able to be identified, so were immediately buried in a known grave. The grave authorities are then left with 410 unknowns, so create VC Corner Cemetery and bury them there. This is all speculation of course, but the point I am trying to make is that the 410 may well be the remaining unknowns left from a larger group of bodies, after the identified remains were interred elsewhere. It's not necessarily the case that only 410 bodies were collected, and all were unable to be identified.

I don't have any detailed info on the creation of VC Corner Cem, but the above seems entirely possible to me.

Interested to hear your thoughts.

Cheers,

Mat

Hi Mat,

I can't find anything on the creation of VC corner other than what I have said. No reference says we sent the identified to other cemeteries and put all the unidentifed Aussies in their own. I think what is said is that 410 were found after the Armistice and all were unidentifed.

Pedersen's book on Fromelles at pag 122 says:

"As none of the remains of the 410 dead collected around it in 1918-1919 could be identifed, they were interred in two areas, each marked by a flate white chross, either side of a central grass avenue."

Although not specific it seems to head away from your line of thought.

Chris.

[PBI]

http://www.cwgc.co.uk/

[Paul Reed]

It was my impression that at least some of the 'British' burials at this site were actually from the much earlier 9th May 1915 attack during the Battle of Aubers Ridge. Our Aussie friends need to remember the 5th Division, although it paid a heavy price, was not the only unit to lose men in this area during the four years of the Great War. And it is likely the Germans used burial grounds more than once between 1914 and 1918.

I was also recently sent a document by someone closely involved in this project which is a translation of a German document that indicates all burials made on this site in July 1916 had every form of identification removed at the time of burial. This would seem to indicate that there would be nothing with the remains of these men to say who they were.

[Max]

Not one of 410 in VC Corner had a cigarette case, an identity disc, a purse, a watch or anything else with their identity on it but the next 5 all had it. It beggars belief.

The articles you describe as being aids to identification are really quite tenuous and surely cannot be used as a single definitive piece of ID evidence. If they were used in tandem with DNA testing I would be much happier but I think that IDs based on supposed personal items, which in reality could have been acquired from anywhere, is very unsafe indeed.

Andy

[Simon R]

Simon, it is where a trench is dug up to the edge of the pits. The bones, if there, are not disturbed but can be viewed. The bones remain undisturbed as is the surface above them.

Very interesting - but I'm not sure I understand the practicalities of this.

Are you saying that said trench would be used to view the bones in section?

i.e. non intrusive to the pit (if it exists) but very much intrusive to something else.

As a general point, isn't all excavation intrusive?

[Crunchy]

It contains the graves of 410 Australian soldiers who fel in the Attack at Fromelles and whos bodies were fond on the battlefield, but the identification of even a single body proved to be impossible.

It beggars belief.

Hi Chris,

This is the point you and I are disagreeing on for the reasons that Mat and I have been making.

In the context of the full losses at Fromelles "the identification of even a single body [of the 410] proved to be impossible" doesn't beggar belief IMO. I agree with Mat that the 410 were not the only Australians recovered from the battlefield at Fromelles in 1920, a number of those who were recovered at the same time were identified. You seem to want to ignore this point and not want to consider the points Mat and I have raised.

The way I am reading your message is that only 410 were recovered in 1920, none were identified, hence they didn't try hard enough to identify them because the next five recovered in 1923'ish were all identified.

From your reply to my query about the circumstances in which the next five were recovered, they were actually recovered between 1919 and 1930 amongst a number of recoveries. Coleman was recovered in 1919 along with two other identified remains and 63 unidentified British/Australians; Sitlington was recovered along with four unidentified Australians in 1927.

Why do you suggest that only 410 were recovered in 1920? I think Mat's point on having 410 left who were unidentified and that they were placed together in a cemetery of their own at VC Corner is plausible.

That 410 men out of 2000 didn't carry an engraved silver cigarette case (Harrison was an officer - it is unlikely OR carried them) or a purse with something in it to identify them is not unusual and I doubt that every watch worn had the man's name engraved on it. Some men didn't own watches in those days - they were expensive items. While our wallets and purses these days have plenty of types of identification in them such drivers licences, credit cards, club membership cards and business cards; this was not necessarily the case in in 1916. As a young man (pre-credit and plastic card days) I only carried bank notes and a paper drivers licence in my wallet.

As to the identity discs I have offered a possible explanation as to why they could have deteriorated - Colman's ID disk was damaged and was only deciphered eight years after he was recovered in 1919 - seems to me they tried hard in his case and he would have been recovered around the same time as the 410. Of your five only one was identified by his identity disc. I have also tried to explain that it is not unusual for soldiers to have just their identity discs and no other form of identification on them when going into battle and the custom of leaving most personal belongings in echelon bags.

You may think it is beyond belief by today's standards but consider the points Mat and I have raised to put the situation 90 years ago into context.

I wouldn't expect to find 'missed identifying 410 Aussies today but had a great day at the pub'. People aren't prone to record what human nature dictates. If they existed they would more likely say we recovered 410 Ausses despite best efforts no identification. That could be genuine or written in the pub.

I'm not sure what you mean by this. What has the day in the pub have to do with the recovery or was it a genuine quote from a source?

Cheers

Chris

[Crunchy]

Pedersen's book on Fromelles at pag 122 says:

"As none of the remains of the 410 dead collected around it in 1918-1919 could be identifed, they were interred in two areas, each marked by a flate white chross, either side of a central grass avenue."

Although not specific it seems to head away from your line of thought.

Chris.

Hi Chris.

Peter and I have had a number of discussions on Fromelles and I am certain you are misinterpreting his words.

I will discuss it with him and get back to you.

Regards

Chris

[ChrisBryett]

It was my impression that at least some of the 'British' burials at this site were actually from the much earlier 9th May 1915 attack during the Battle of Aubers Ridge. Our Aussie friends need to remember the 5th Division, although it paid a heavy price, was not the only unit to lose men in this area during the four years of the Great War. And it is likely the Germans used burial grounds more than once between 1914 and 1918.

I was also recently sent a document by someone closely involved in this project which is a translation of a German document that indicates all burials made on this site in July 1916 had every form of identification removed at the time of burial. This would seem to indicate that there would be nothing with the remains of these men to say who they were.

Paul,

If you get that same source/campaigner to give you the aerials you will see these pits don't exist days before the Battle of Fromelles and 5 close shortly after. It seems unlikely they were used for other battles. The very document you have makes the burial procedure clear and the penalties that would apply if they weren't followed. They were to be treated the same as if German dead. An eye witness account doesn't seem to agree with that but you are only reading an order not reality.

As for personal belongings etc yes you right and I have made the same point earlier that they were to be bagged for return to families. Needless to say that is why I push the DNA barrow so heavily. But DNA is not the only means. There are other means of identification. Rather than be specific the basic ones are uniform based including "Australia badges" and unit colour patches.

You may recall that the Westhoek 6 have had their unit colour patches sent to a laboratory for testing. To some degree it is a wait and see exercise. There are instances where German thoroughness is not complete and the state of decay may vary depending on location within a mass grave.

A non intrusive test dig would provide some answers. Not the least confirm if they are there.

Chris.

[ChrisBryett]

The articles you describe as being aids to identification are really quite tenuous and surely cannot be used as a single definitive piece of ID evidence. If they were used in tandem with DNA testing I would be much happier but I think that IDs based on supposed personal items, which in reality could have been acquired from anywhere, is very unsafe indeed.

Andy

Andy, you may be right but that is the evidence that lead to "positive" id of these 5 men. If that was the standard or rule then why not apply it across the board? I don't say that as a criticism of CWGC but the Graves Recovery Units involved if any one of the 410 had personal belongings on them giving this standard of identification.

Chris.

[ChrisBryett]

Chris, I'm not ignoring your point. I think I have reasonably address it. The years seem to be 1918 and 1919 for VC Corner according to Pedersen's book. I think the point is that the Pedersen reference seems to imply that these were all brought in around the same period. In other words when Bean discovered them on the battlefield they were brought in together in November and/or December of 1918 and during 1919.

I made the point before if those that could be identified were sent to other cemeteries why would you leave one cemetery open for Australian unidentifieds only over this period? Keeping in mind that there are unidentifieds in other cemeteries. So we send all idenfieds away from VC Corner and some unidentifieds away from VC corner and only put some unidentifieds in VC Corner. Doesn't sound logical to me.

What I am saying is that Bean found the 410 on the battlefield and they were collected and taken to VC Corner as one exercise. Other found elsewhere were recovered in dribs and drabs and put in other cemeteries. That's why this cemetery is open for a short period. I can't at present find the Bean reference but will look for it over Easter.

You say they tried hard in Colman's case. I absolutely agree and look at the outcome.

I understand that many may leave some material behind but 410 found in likely one run with any? Not one?

The fact that the next 5 were identified show what can be done in the context of that era.

The day in the pub comment was an off hand comment on what most of would rather be doing than the work these poor fellows had to do. They might be forgiven for missing a few but 410?

Anyway hasn't too much to do with Pheasant Wood other than as you say by our standards today we can and hopefully will do much better.

Chris.

Chris.