chrisharley9 Posted 25 September , 2007 Share Posted 25 September , 2007 A short article on the 6 oc'lock news on the Carpathia - hopefully will be repeated later Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanCurragh Posted 25 September , 2007 Share Posted 25 September , 2007 Chris - I take it this related to the Carpathia that picked up Titanic survivors? I believe they are starting to bring up relics from the wreck, is that what the report was about? Thanks Alan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kath Posted 25 September , 2007 Share Posted 25 September , 2007 Links on this page: http://news.bbc.co.uk/ Kath. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stan johnson Posted 25 September , 2007 Share Posted 25 September , 2007 Links on this page: http://news.bbc.co.uk/ Kath. I am never sure if it is the right thing to do...Going down onto wrecks...The Carpathia was sunk by U.Boat in 1918 and should be a Maritime grave site. Only my opinion... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisharley9 Posted 25 September , 2007 Author Share Posted 25 September , 2007 Alan thats the one Stan im with you on diving on war graves - does not seem right to me Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilB Posted 26 September , 2007 Share Posted 26 September , 2007 If I had rellies on the wreck, I`d feel unhappy about divers ferreting around, usually for monetary gain. However, if I was one of the skeletons in the wreck, I think I`d quite welcome a visit. If you see what I mean! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr jon Posted 26 September , 2007 Share Posted 26 September , 2007 For those of you who missed the clip here it is http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/nol/newsid_70...sb=1&news=1 Also there is a website detailing the expeditions to Carpathia this year. http://www.provenvcts.com/carpathia As a diver myself, and some of the group being friends, I hope to leave them in a better light. The aim of the expedition is to film the wreck, recording the info and to retrieve a few artefacts for identification of the wreckage that are around the wreck site. The aim is not to interfere with human remains or remove valuable cargo. The team are experienced trimix divers undertaking a deep dive on mixed gases, beyond normal recreational limits 150M+ to provide information into the sinking and condition of the wreck site. Photos and further information on Leigh Bishops Site www.deepimage.co.uk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest KevinEndon Posted 26 September , 2007 Share Posted 26 September , 2007 I see diving a sunken wreck to the same as walking a field on the Western Front. We know that sailors died and went down with the ship, we know that soldiers died and never found, so I cant see any difference in diving a wreck or field walking. If we walk a field and find a shrapnel ball 9/10 of us will pick the ball up and put it in our pockets. 9/10 divers who finds artifacts from a wreck will bring it to the surface to be kept. In my opinion it is the same thing. As long as each are done with the respect the dead deserve I (in my opinion) can't see anything wrong in picking up artifacts. Kevin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
historydavid Posted 26 September , 2007 Share Posted 26 September , 2007 I believe there is a significant difference between walking a battlefield and visiting a wreck. Soldiers who were lost on the battlefield were interred in the mud, holes etc, and as such they have a grave, albeit unmarked. People who go down with a ship lie where they fall, and their remains will be exposed to whoever or whatever visits the wreck. The wreck is their grave, and if people "visited" graves in the ground in the same way, they would be arrested. I am firmly convinced that the reason often put forward in justification of diving famous wrecks , "to survey the wreck and its condition" is merely a sop to public opinion, to shroud the main objective of recovering artifacts. Best wishes David Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
per ardua per mare per terram Posted 30 September , 2007 Share Posted 30 September , 2007 I agree with David completely. To walk across a battlefield is different from walking through a cemetery. Picking up a bit of shrapnel would also be different from picking up a dog tag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
healdav Posted 30 September , 2007 Share Posted 30 September , 2007 On a practical note, it is more than unlikely that there are any human remains left on any ship on the seabed. The life on the seabed will have consumed them long since. I think that the Titanic photos showed that there were only shoes left (inedible). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
submarine Posted 30 September , 2007 Share Posted 30 September , 2007 Hi For what it is worth, i think a grave is a grave,whether a war grave or not , it should not be desturbed , even to make a FILM. Colin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilB Posted 30 September , 2007 Share Posted 30 September , 2007 I think that the Titanic photos showed that there were only shoes left (inedible). Ever see "The Gold Rush"? grave definition n. 1. a. An excavation for the interment of a corpse. b. A place of burial. Oddly, a sunken ship doesn`t meet those definitions, though they are frequently referred to as war graves. I`d see a sunken ship more as a cemetery containing individual grave sites, especially as the ship may be broken up and the remains scattered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now