Fromelles

[Mat McLachlan]

Simmo,

I wasn't aware that anything as conclusive as personal effects have been found. I thought the investigation was up to the stage that suggested there are pits at Pheasant Wood that haven't been disturbed since the war. My understanding is that this is the objective of the May dig - to carefully determine if there are in fact any bodies to be found at the site.

My guess is that, knowing the circumstances of the original burial by the Germans, if there are any bodies to find it's extrememly unlikely there will be any artefacts with them that could be used for a 'traditional' identification. This definitely seems to be an opinion shared by the authorities I've spoken to.

Cheers,

Mat

[Simmo]

Sorry Mat - i've just checked. The items found cannot be attributed to any individual. My apologies.

[Auimfo]

Today, I attended a presentation by Major General Mike O'Brien and Roger Lee (Head of the Autralian Army History Unit) about the re-interment of Australian soldiers and then afterwards spoke privately with both. Perhaps it might be worthwhile to outline a few things that were brought up during the afternoon.

1. The part of the field where the suspected graves lie is not farmed. It is too muddy and boggy for crops. The farmer who tends the land is happy for the excavation to occur as long as his surrounding crops are not disturbed.

2. This dig is not an exhumation of bodies. It is simply a preliminary dig to establish whether the remains are actually there. Once done the pits will be filled in.

3. Plans and methodology surrounding the dig have continually been submitted to the French authorities all of which have been approved at every step.

4. Discussions with British, French, German and other relevant authorities begun some time ago and continue. These are to establish what action is to be taken in any given set of circumstances.

5. Both were very impressed with the work so far done by the 'amateur' historians and were very keen for them to continue their work in unison with that done by the Army History Unit.

It is also clear that it is far too early to be discussing DNA sampling for the purposes of establishing identity. There is so much work to be done before it can even be considered. Firstly, we need to establish that the remains are there. Next, there must be a consensus that the remains are exhumed and attempts made to identify them. This, of course, involves all the inernational authorities involved. After this, the actual scientific possibilities of extracting DNA (and what type) needs to be assessed. Finally we need to consider the ethics surrounding the collection and testing of DNA from living descendants - a firm and clear set of standards and principles needs to be established.

It just seems to me that everyone here is possibly jumping the gun a little based on rumour rather than actual fact (not that there's much fact to work on yet). Why don't we wait to see if the men actually lie next to Pheasant Wood and what subsequent options are available before we begin a heated debate about what should or should not be done with them.

Cheers,

Tim L.

[Fedelmar]

Sounds like it was a wonderful time at the Shrine Tim. Sad that I couldn't be there too. Trust you will give me the details accordingly

Bright Blessings

Sandra

[Paul Hederer]

I don't think that "forgotten," on its own sells books. It has to be (as oxymoronic as it sounds) forgotten and mainstream. The Eastern Front of the Great War has remained pretty much forgotten, with books on the subject even having titles such as "THe Unknown War." The subject remains forgotten, the last comprehensive (and that not even complete) history of the front was published some thirty (30!) years ago.

Paul

[PDW]

"I find it quite morbid that a very small minority of people, most of whom have no connection with the men who are missing, want to dig these bodies up. Are we just satisfying the minority's curiosity? ...we shouldn't assume that the exhumation of the bodies is a well supported view.Can't we let the guys rest in peace."

Quite right Crunchy. I recently heard Roger Lee and Rick Pelvin ( Army History Unit- Australia) speak on the subject. They will be tasked, if it happens, with the supervision of the 'digging up'. They are well aware of the points you make and see the difficulties you point to. If warrior's remains must be disturbed then it should be done by fellows like them.

Peter

[Auimfo]

I can't understand why we need to label those who have spent years investigating Pheasant Wood as morbid. I'd argue that as Australians we all have a connection to the Australian soldiers who are buried there. What we have is simply a difference of opinion on how best to recognise their service. To call them 'self-serving', 'hooray harries' and 'just curious' is only mud-slinging aimed at discrediting those with an opposing point of view.

And I'm not too sure how it's possible to make the claim they are in the minority - without a public poll on the issue we can't know. I've spoken to quite a number of descendants and other researchers (both professional and amateur), all of whom are keen to resolve the mystery and more than anything else would dearly love to bury their ancestors in a known grave.

I'm not about to say who's right and who's wrong. It's not a question of that. I have an opinion and others have theirs. Let's at least wait to see what options are available before slinging off at each other over things that might not be possible anyway.

Cheers,

Tim L.

[bluedog]

Tim

Well said mate.

To me the main aim is to try to locate our Aussie and the British missing.

Politics and point scoring either way have NO place here

Peter

[Crunchy]

Tim,

Please read the full post rather than an edited version of it. It seems that those who express a contrary opinion on this subject are accused cover ups, point scoring, slinging off, etc simply because they dare to express such a view. Not the values I fought for Im afraid.

I fully support the need to determine if a mass grave exists at Pheasant Wood and if one does exist then to mark the last resting place of those there appropriately as a war cemetery much the same as VC Corner. I disagree with exhuming all of the bodies on a quest to try and identify some of the them, then re-bury them all again. That I think is morbid and quite unnecessary. It is not slinging off at anyone or attempting to score points - I am simply stating my opinion and one that is held by quite a few others, including a relative of a digger missing in the action. As I said why can't we let these guys rest in peace and mark Pheasant Wood as war grave once we have determined that the mass grave does exist rather than digging them all up.

Chris

[towisuk]

The problem of test digging to determine whether there are any bodies in this field are further exacerbated by the fact that the Germans had three dugouts

adjacent to where the mass burial pits were supposed to have been dug. Somehow I don't think the Germans would have had mass graves in close vicinity to dugouts...unless they abandoned them, and used the dugouts temselves as additional grave pits. I have a photo of the field involved but won't post it for obvious reasons.

regards

Tom

[Auimfo]

Chris,

I think you've missed my point. It's not your contrary opinion on what should or shouldn't be done that I take issue with and I have the greatest respect for your thoughts. I am as open to ideas as the next person and agree with you that there is an initial need to establish whether the graves exist before any decisions are made. Your opinion on what occurs after that is as valid as mine and anyone elses and all should be considered on equal terms.

I just felt using terms such as 'morbid', 'minority', 'not connected', 'curious great war enthusiasts' and 'hooray harries' (not your comment) is unecessary and showed a little bit of disrespect for those who happen to have a different opinion to yourself.

Cheers,

Tim L.

[J Banning]

The problem of test digging to determine whether there are any bodies in this field are further exacerbated by the fact that the Germans had three dugouts adjacent to where the mass burial pits were supposed to have been dug.

Hi Tom,

This is the first I've heard of it! I would be interested to know where you got this information. Can you elaborate?

Many thanks,

Jeremy

[Max]

I hope that someone is managing down the expectations of "relatives". The condition of the ground as described in a previous post may well preclude the possibility of archaeologists retrieving wholly intact, or identifiable remains. Would it be better to leave the men where they are?, or dig them up piece by piece, and only be able to re-bury the odd thigh bone or ribs? How would great uncle Cyrils relatives feel about that possibility. My GGrandfather is laying in front of the Hohenzollern Redoubt somewhere and I would be appalled at the idea of someone disturbing him after all these years....each to his own though.

Andy

[Crunchy]

Tim,

What words would you like me to use? The push for digging up the bodies was initiated and is being pushed through political lobbying by a minority of Great War/ Fromelles enthusiasts, many of whom have no connection with the dead. This has not come from a groundswell of concerned relatives. The motives behind their actions are varied. For some it is driven more by curiosity and their interests in their hobby. Are we not allowed to mention this or question their motives?

Secondly why contact the relatives at this early stage of proceedings? How have the relatives been approached, what expectations have they been given and what right have these people to do it unofficially? Certainly it has not been done by the authorities and for good reason. Yet it is the authorities who must manage this process - and it must be done with sensitivity rather than unbridled enthusiasm. The actual condition of the remains are unknown at this stage but we do know some factors: it was a mass burial with bodies thrown in on top of one another, they may well have been quick-limed at the time and they have lain in ground that is often water logged for over 90 years. We don't even know which Diggers were interred there. There is likely to be a mass of intermingled bones in poor condition with few positive means of identifying which body is which nationality, let alone the identity of the dead.

Let us determine the state of the remains first before raising people's expectations. Again the impetus has come from Great War enthusiasts who probably haven't thought about the consequences of their actions. If we dig up all the bodies in Pheasant Wood, why not those at VC Corner or the Nek and try identifying them? If not, why not? Are their identities any less worthy of determining?

Tim, I have no doubt as to your sincerity in this quest. I am disturbed, however, by the motives of others and by those who are jumping the gun and suggesting expectations of identification that cannot be confirmed at this stage. The chances of positive identification from a site such as Pheasant Wood are very slim indeed, if not impossible for the majority of the dead. What earthly good is being done for the dead themselves by digging up their remains?

Again, I ask the question - who are we really trying to satisfy in digging up all the remains? Most of the living relatives are two or three times removed, didn't even know the poor fellows and have not initiated the quest. I have two missing relatives from the Great War, both of whom lie with their mates in known areas with no headstones . I prefer that they rest in peace rather than satisfying enthusiasts who have no connection with them or being trolled over by others who are there simply to earn a living from the retrieval. Others feel the same about Pheasant Wood and the pro's and con's of both sides of the argument have to be considered openly and honestly.

regards

Chris

[Rob Connolly]

I've a copy of Volume 3 of the Australian Official History, which covers 1916. I'll have a look at it tonight and see what mention of Fromelles there is.

Just measured - 12 column inches about Fromelles in the Index alone. Definitely not forgotten!

[Auimfo]

Chris,

I actually agree with much of what you post. At this point in time no relatives have been directly contacted except those who have come forward of their own volition or as a result of required investigation due to the last examination of the site. And I don't envisage any of them being contacted prior to the upcoming dig at least. You are quite right that we don't want to offer false hopes and if/when the time comes to inform them, it must be sensitive and with a complete understanding of all the possible outcomes.

Most certainly, there are probably those who are only seeking notoriety but that extends to both sides of the argument and is probably evident in most investigations and research. What we need to do is ignore them, identify those who have an honest approach to the matter and consider their ideas on an equal basis.

I'd also suggest from what I've seen, that the people behind the push have mainly lobbied for an investigation into the site to establish if the bodies are there - not necessarily to dig them up. Yes, they have their thoughts in this regard but it doesn't form the basis of their investigation. In fact the last time I heard Lambis speak in December last year, he brought this very point up. I thought he was very fair to all sides when he made the comment that although his personal belief is that they should be exhumed, whether that was the right or wrong thing was open to debate. He then shrugged his shoulders and said 'I don't know'. Ultimately, all they seek is recognition for the soldiers who lie there which I think most people will agree with. It's how the remains are treated afterwards that is open to conjecture.

Cheers,

Tim L.

[Crunchy]

Tim,

Thank you for your last post. It would seem that we do agree on the fundamental issues of this project. My only concern has been to keep it within the bounds of decency, sensitivity and practical outcomes whose prime focus is to honour those buried in the pits in a respectful manner.

Best wishes

Chris

[Auimfo]

Chris,

We're most definitely on the same page. Your concerns about decency etc are equally my concerns and an absolute must no matter what the decision regarding the remains. After speaking with Mike O'Brien, I feel he has the exact same determination. He used the word 'reverence' on numerous occasions and explained that any works carried out would be under this strict guideline - as an example, he absolutely refuses 'point blank' to allow photographs to be taken of the remains even for legitimate archeological reasons (let alone press or other interested parties).

I feel very confident that left in his hands, the due decency and respect will no doubt be shown.

Cheers,

Tim L.

[mctaz]

Interesting coincidence that halfway through this discussion I received an email from our state Family History Society forwarding on a pdf promoting the Missing Soldiers of Fromelles Discussion Group whose opening blurb states:

"The Battle of Fromelles was the first major action by Australian troops on

the Western Front during World War One and by all accounts the attack

was an unmitigated disaster. Fifth Division soldiers, together with the

British 61st Division, both of whom were inexperienced formations, went

over the parapet and met withering artillery and machine gun fire

decimating their ranks to the tune of 6,559 men killed, wounded and

missing, including 490 Diggers captured.

INTERESTED IN THE MISSING AUSTRALIAN AND BRITISH SOLDIERS BURIED IN FORGOTTEN

GRAVES AT PHEASANT WOOD IN NORTHERN FRANCE AND CONCERNED ABOUT THE DELAY IN

RECOVERING AND IDENTIFYING THEIR REMAINS? ".....

They have a website with a number of papers at: www.FromellesDiscussionGroup.com

I gave a talk in Launceston the other night on the 40th Bn and several members approached me afterwards asking for comment on this topic as they had never heard of it. As mentioned in this thread most people who have no great interest in WW1 history will not have heard of it (nor most other battles)

I suspect we'll see much more of this revisionist sensationalism as we approach the centenary. On the positive side, if it does cause people to reflect on the sacrifices made by ordinary men & women in the Great War, it can't be all bad.

Jim

[Auimfo]

Thanks for the link Jim. I can't say that I've ever come across this website before.

I'm not in favour of comments like the one you posted ".....concerned about the delay in recovering and identifying their remains" Like Chris, I find it a bit misleading and doesn't seem to understand that identifying any remains is not quite as simple as that.

It could be these type of comments that put understandable concerns in peoples minds.

Does anyone know who's running the website?

Cheers,

Tim L.

[Fedelmar]

Tim ... their contact address is in Melbourne ...

Bright Blessings

Sandra

[john jerome mcmanus]

Gday Matt and all,

With all the debate that has been going on since Matt first posted this thread I think that we have all moved off target - indeed I think we could almost write a book to be added alongside the works of Corlett, Knyvett, Lyndsay et al.

I think Matt's initial post was to address whether or not the Fromelles debacle was covered up or its failure withheld from the Australian public.

I feel that to a degree, yes it was -mainly because it was all over within 24hours and news from Gallipoli was still the talk of the times soon followed by the immensity of the Somme offensive. That being said, however, it did not go unrecorded nor has it been forgotten by the families of those that died or survived nor by historians.

Most of us who access the Great War Forum would probably consider ourselves as amateur historians in the least. Who, however, can say he has a full knowledge of every action (battle) of the Great War?

Apply this to the general populace and you will find a black hole.

Let us wait to see what the dig in May will produce and then say"Lest We Forget'

Regards

Pop

[towisuk]

Hi Jeremy,

I can't really say any more without giving away the position of the suspected mass burial pits.

Regards

Tom

[ianw]

Tom - I think the genie is well out of the bottle on the location of the Fromelles pit - a look at the Wiki entry for the place gives this information.

I understand that there other other pits in the vicinity that may also be investigated in due course.

Interesting questions in this thread regarding the activity in relation to this potential mass grave and whether other potential areas will be similarly investigated.

[Mat McLachlan]

From today's The Australian, March 22.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story...7-28737,00.html

I spoke to Mark Day on Tuesday when he was putting this article together (and asked him to avoid the 'forgotten' battle angle if possible). Some of his facts are a bitt off, but it's a fair summary of the current state of play. It's good to see the increase in ink the Western Front is receiving, especially in the lead-up to the 90th anniversary Anzac service at VB.

Cheers,

Mat