Jump to content

Battlefield archaeology.....education or desecration?


Is it acceptable to dig on a Battle field for artefacts...  

47 members have voted

  1. 1. Is it acceptable to dig on a Battle field for artefacts...

    • Yes, i see no problem with it as a hobby
      16
    • No absolutely not, leave it in peace.
      22
    • Only if it is in a period before the conflicts of WW1/WW2
      2
    • WW1/WW2 sites are good for artifact finds
      7


Recommended Posts

I'm fifty in May and if I could learn any new skill that would make me happy it would be conflict archaeology. Keeping artefacts does not motivate me. My odd bits of shell cases are chaff. The thought of finding the remains of a person who could have a decent burial and be 'found' would make my heart sing. I really respect what you do and having the chance to listen to you is amazing.

 

BTW lads, Andy Robertshaw is at Southend WFA on Monday night for another talk.

 

MB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 66
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

one view of taking artifacts was shown on finding the fallen tonight when they discovered that robbers had been over a grave site and taken bits that could have identified the bodies:argh:some artifacts found in the german trench nearbye identified a musician who was in the same regiment as hitler was

if the people had wanted to buy the buttons then one of the lads would have bought them them

but they had left a motor shell that they had dug up

Link to comment
Share on other sites

one view of taking artifacts was shown on finding the fallen tonight when they discovered that robbers had been over a grave site and taken bits that could have identified the bodies:argh:some artifacts found in the german trench nearbye identified a musician who was in the same regiment as hitler was

if the people had wanted to buy the buttons then one of the lads would have bought them them

but they had left a motor shell that they had dug up

 

Don't start Andy on this subject. he gets very heated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just found a new website selling artefacts from battlefields, the following is a rejigged version of part of the original advert to keep the seller I.D. anonymous:

 

"Recovered at Meautis, near Carentan in the Normandy/Cherbourg Peninsular, The helmet is heavily battle-scarred, showing a direct hit from a rifle or shrapnel on the inside - bursting the metal out."

 

A WW2 item, found not far from the D-Day beaches, regardless of the nationality of the soldier who may of been wearing it, my own opinion is that it does not deserve to be paraded as a ghoulish trinket of fascination, which is all it ever will be once purchased.

The only thing i can see coming of this is that historic sites will be turned over for profiteering, after all dig it up for free, and sell it for just under 150 quid.

 

Disgusting.......i would rather donate the money to getting a Veteran over to the D-Day beaches without hesitation than spend it on that.:argh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Disgusting.

 

I just don't know where the fine line is. I wouldn't buy it.

 

The problem is, while their are hundreds of people we all know who wouldn't, there will be the odd extra person who would. If a site is setting itself up as being a promoter of archaeology, but really is just for profit based treasure hunting, then yukkk! Simple, don't look in.

 

M

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have a look at this site, warrelics eu/forum. It appears that any remains are reported and given a military burial. If these people were not hunting the battlegrounds then the relatives of the fallen would never know where their people lay.I think some of the comments on the HMVF thread are slightly hysterical. Many missing men have been found and reported to the appropriate authorities, is that so terrible.No I do not go out with a detector and dig up anything. But if someone did and they found my missing relative I would be happy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't agree that some are being hysterical. I think, to be fair, we have here a collection of strong views about the grave robbing going on all the time. I visit the battlefields regularly and have spoken to many of the professional archaeologists. It is absolutely right that many people do record and report finds leading to burials - and not all of them are professionals, some are farmers and even fieldwalkers. Using a metal detector in France without a licence is a criminal offence and anyone using one in this way can be deemed to be doing it for unscrupulous reasons - generalising, but there you go. I've seen the evidence of what some of the extreme end of treasure hunting can do. I've brought home the odd rusty shell case, fuse heads and a few entrenching tools. I've never found anything more exceptional and always leave live stuff. The very serious historians think lifting this stuff robs them of recording history. I do wonder, given the millions of shells fired - 18 pounder in particular in the case of the British - whether they protest too far; but the principles are all sound. It isn't a grey area. Grave robbing for profit is shameful. It goes on. Fieldwalking for nicknacks and for the experience is a lot different...perhaps. Someone will be along to disagree.

 

MB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I have already stated I do not use a metal detector but I do know people who do. GRAVE ROBBING is a very emotive ,over the top way to describe people who search battlefields for relics.You make it sound as if their sole intention is to search for and dig up body"s. Isuspect that they would far rather find rusty weapons and other "junk". Do the majority of detectorists sell on their finds or is it a very small minority.Look on Ebay to see crashed aircraft parts being sold with crash details etc.People who dig for aircraft have to have a Home Office licence to do this. The records may tell tham that the body was recovered at the time but sometimes that info.is wrong.Are these bad, grave robbing gouls. John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Snapper and I are proably the strongest advocates of take only pictures and leave as few footprints as possible. But the desecration of sites where human remains have ben found is FACT. I can put you in touch with several archeologists and historians who will give you details. As far as published woks go try reading Andy Robertshaw and Dave Kenyon's Digging the Trenches. The majority of us do not realise how small clues can lead to a big find. For instance you find English Shrapnel balls, there was a guy in Ieper who'd melt them down for you and cast a model soldier. However what is special about finding German Shrapnel balls?

 

English Shrapnel (Not shell fragments, easy way to find if somone really knows there stuff) is lead. Geraman is Steel! So if you find stell after 90 years in an area, you have the conditions for good preservation of other items.

 

As for items for sale, emphasising that there human remains attached. I have been offered such items for purchase in the UK.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi John,

 

I've no problem with field walking, I think too many people who do it have been tarred with a particular kind of brush when only a minority do the nasty stuff. Metal detecting in France or Belgium, does, to me; suggest treasure hunting. We've had many debates about this on the forum, especially as you point out, about aircraft wrecks. I would actually support you in many respects for doing a bit of casual relic finding.

 

I'm fortunate in that my dead great uncle and grandfather have war graves.I think we both know the chances of finding someone who can be identiable these days are getting harder and harder. So, I would always come down on the side of any argument protecting the chance to give them a decent burial. But I can't have it both ways. The thought that keeping an artefact might stop that from happening would really make me feel guilty.

 

We carry on visiting - I'll be back soon. For me it is a genuine pilgrimage and I make no apology for it. I take friends and first time visitors to spread a little knowledge (they say it's dangerous) and spread enthusiasm. It works.

As long as we can respect each other's position while not encouraging the

sharks (for want of a better word), then all's well.

 

Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suspect a lot of the Anti metal detectoring relates to the first World trenches from what I am reading on this site. Fossiking around in Normandy or the Ardennes where the battles were much more fluid and far less trench fighting occured and therefor the finding of human remains is far less likely.When I have been to Normandy with my wife and jeep I meet up with some French resistance veterans, one of them keeps asking me to bring a metal detector onto his farm to find buried arms dropped by the RAF, another told me about a dry well that was supposed to have the remains of a German at the bottom.Would looking into these two places be wrong in your view.I havnt got a detcor but I suppose I could borrow one, but French law prevents detecting anyway.John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very interesting points. I have no clue what the law is on using one on private land when the owner invites the use. I am no expert, more concerned with principles and yes, I suppose I am more atuned to Great War locations.

 

I know of a guy who bought a little ruin in Normandy who knew he would find lots of stuff buried in the attached land because of how it had been used by the Americans. He wanted a house there anyway (lucky sod!) I presume he has been merrily unearthing stuff since the last time I saw him.

 

A body down a well is very interesting - worth finding and giving a proper burial, I'd say.. I think it pays to look if you can.

 

I visited the Polish memorial near Falaise a couple of years back and learned that they are still finding remains of Germans around there and expect to find them for some time. It's all education.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Mark for taking my point about the vast difference between WWI and WWII battlefields.WWI war for the most part trench warfare and countless men on both sides were killed and buried by shell and mortar fire.We have all seen the pictures of the carnace on these battlefields. The soldier buried in this way would be nearly impossible to mark and recover. Conversly in WWII much more fluid battles took place, for fewer men were killed at any one time and their mates could mark the place with the rifle stuck in the ground with a tin hat on top. The Pardre would mark the places on his map and pass them on to the graves registration unit. I would suspect that very few allied men were buried in slit trenches. I know of two Paras. found buried in a trench on the crossroads near Arnhem and of course there must be others. But I stick to my main point,most detectorists want to find weapons, equiptment etc. not remains. As for Archaeoligists excavating the battlefields, they have neither the funds or the time to cover anything but a minute fraction of the war zones. Watch time team flaffing around with a paintbrush and a pointing trowel. Their most exciting finds have come about through "Treasure hunters" telling them where to look.If the "Profesionals" were the only people allowed to look then nothing would be found. After all that I will say that diggers who sell artifacts containing human remains should be castigated and cursed if and when they are found.John.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do think that you're missing a point. Faffing around with paintbrusehes and toothpicks is to avoid damage. The context an artefact is found in is the information. The angle in the soil, the depth , the structure of the soil can all give viatl information. Say you go out detectoring and start pulling up 'A load of old fragments'. Congratulations, you have just destroyed any chance of mapping where the pices are, that means no hope of working out where the shell fell or any indication of what it might have been aimed at, or were it was fired from.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we've set our stalls out.

 

We have to accept that diametric differences on this issue do meet in broad agreement that the protection of the dead is paramount.

 

Can I ask we take a breather? I actually have sympathy with both parties and hope we can move on to sharing experiences from the battlefields.

 

MB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The previous website i referred to also has a german machine gun, an MG42 i think, belt fed, in reasonable condition considering it was found in the Ardennes in a gun position, what does the vendor do, plot the position, record everything found and give the gun and info to the local museum? put the information out to public information ommitting the exact location for historical reference? no he flogs it on his website for nearly 2000 pounds with an off the cuff description of where it was from.

It is what it is, a theft of history and potentially disturbing grave sites.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

Hi guys,I am in two minds about this.

Its really great for someone KIA/MIA to be found and given a proper burial .

But what are we leaving for the future generations,when these battlefields have been

gone over,we now have DNA where as say 20yrs ago we didnt,what technology will we have in another 20 yrs that could tell us about these past events in history?.

I really enjoy seeing pictures from people digging up the past and what is found at the site,but dont like the stuff being sold for profit.

it is both desecration and education.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Funny enough Ken, spent an afternoon a couple of weeks back at Andy B's dig at Shooters Hill, it's fascinating what is virtually on your door step. A complex defence point in one of the posher parts of London! The point was expert guidance on the dig. The results were amazing,. A vist to a place like that and the chance to have the experts explain things makes me only more determined that such places should only be dug under supervision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 years later...

Why do people buy rusty relics that they have no knowledge of where the material has been recovered from?

 

The idea of buying a dogtag from a dealer that might hinder or totally ruin the chance of someones remains being identified just for money leaves me cold.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2190953/Nazi-grave-robbers-stealing-medals-equipment-BODY-PARTS-sell.html

 

 

Do remember before you reply in one the World War 1 TV series on trench history and archaeology a trench that been newly dug was plundered overnight by so called collectors. I really am tempted to call them something else but I'll be good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A very raw nerve! As Andy Robertshaw said to me on the Somme' Take the artifacts you kill the man twice. There is no chance of identfying a person'. That is why when you walk the Western Front, or any battlefeild. Walk gently, you don't know who you are treading on'. A few years back around local boot sales a, well leave the descriptions, was selling rusty helmets, he claimed there were the reamins of hair etc still inside. If this happned in a cemetery there would be uproar, yet some people boast of having obtained such artifacts.

Edited by Tony B
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...