147 replies to this topic

[Marc Thompson]

Lou Bougias, on 25 October 2010 - 02:14 AM, said:

If you recall, our Goverment did not move on the Fromelles issue until Lambis had discovered the German Commanding General's order to dig burial pits for 400 Allied dead.

Hi Lou,

I think you will find that this was actually discovered by Peter Barton and not Lambis.

Marc

[Auimfo]

Lou,

I'm not disputing that the Germans probably buried Australians in yet to be discovered mass-graves on the Bullecourt battlefield and if I know Lambis well enough, I'm sure they will be located in the fullness of time.

What I'm saying is that based purely on the evidence you have supplied here about Wiese, there's no definite indication that he is one of them - other than the fact he is still listed as missing (which is not particularly uncommon).   Upon examining the Red Cross records of both Reinhold and Carl as you suggested, I can only form the conclusion that all the reports were in fact referring to Carl being wounded and placed in a dugout with other men.   Knowing that Carl then became a POW does not support your theory that all the men in the dugout died (or were killed) and buried in mass graves.  Again, I'm not saying that Reinhold and others didn't end up in mass graves but only that the evidence you've supplied here is far from being convincing.

I also don't subscribe to the conspiracy theory that searches for graves were deliberately hampered for whatever political reasons.   After having read files regarding the conduct of Australian Graves Units after the war I'd agree there seems to have been a degree of in-fighting and incompetance that undoubtedly affected their results, but that doesn't suggest any deliberate conspiracy.

I'd also suggest that the 'conspiracy' spin you've put on discovery of the six British bodies is misleading.   It was decided in the years after the war (someone might have to help me out with the exact year) that there would be a cut-off date for official active searches.   From that time on, remains being inadvertently unearthed by farmers, building works etc, were still to be given proper burials in CWGC cemeteries as they were located.   This has been going on since that date and there have been any number of these cases all over the various theatres of war.   The six British clearly fall into this category and were treated with the exact same honour as any of the others - no conspiracy involved.

I'm also a little unsure how you've come to the conclusion that 90% of statements made by Bullecourt POW's are missing.   Is there any evidence to say they were made in the first place?   I find it difficult to be swayed by an argument that claims to prove a point by suggesting the absence of something that cannot be shown to have ever existed in the first place.   The absence of evidence does not automatically prove a conspiracy.   If some of them ever existed, it's just as likely that the passage of time or some accident like water damage may have destroyed them or perhaps they have just been mis-filed somewhere awaiting re-discovery.   Let's not jump to quickly onto the unfounded 'conspiracy' bandwagon as it's only detrimental to any 'evidential' case trying to be thoughtfully constructed.

As was shown by the Fromelles investigation, these cases are built upon patient and thorough research to uncover the truth based on fact and supported by solid evidence.   To go in waving a big stick and alleging unproven governmental subtefuge is a recipie for failure.  

Cheers,
Tim L.

P.S.  Knowing Lambis like I do, I'm not sure that he would want others making announcements of what research he's conducting and associating it with allegations of conspiracies.   As it's his research, surely it's up to him to release the findings when and where he chooses.

[Lou Bougias]

Hi Tim and Mark,
Mark, thanks for the correction.
And apologiies to Peter.

Tim,
the six British dead were honoured, and I am not disagreeing with that, its just that no furthere searches were conducted in the immeadiate area surrounding them.
I have heard that there are more in that patch of ground, and that they would be easily found and recovered.
I cannot see how so many statements can be missing, or have been destroyed, or mislaid.
Surely not 1021 of them
(approximately, seeing we don't yet know how many died in captivity).
Lambis and his tream had enough information to prove the pheasant wood sites after only 2 years of research, yet the dead had to wait another 8 years.
Many people of influence that  we all know (that have seen the source material) dont want this search/reburial to wait that long.
Perhaps by discussing it all here publcly we  may speed up the process.?
As Lambis has said, there's no intellectual property here,  the purpose is to locate and rebury our glorious dead.
Again, Reinhold Wiese is but one of 866 missing from that day.

cheers,

[Auimfo]

Lou,

As I stated, no further searches were conducted in the area of the six located British quite simply because the regulations had put an end to official grave searching many years before.   The rules apply only to those who are inadvertently uncovered by non-related excavation.   To imply some sort of deliberate plot to avoid finding more is simply ridiculous.

I'm still a bit perplexed by your claim that there's only 107 POW statements made by men captured at Bullecourt.   I just did a (very quick) count of the index of POW statements made by soldiers of the 4th Division who were captured at 1st Bullecourt and came up with something in the region of 700!!  

I too would like to see any more mass graves discovered asap but I firmly believe that it needs to be based on solid evidence and thorough research - not sabre rattling.

Cheers,
Tim L.

[ianw]

It is my understanding that the imperial governments agreed to end the formal battlefield clearances - at least on the Western Front - in 1921 claiming that the job as substantially complete. This was plainly untrue. This decision seems to have been prompted by cost but I don't think it can be described as a conspiracy of any sort. Therefore, as Tim reminds us, since as early as 1921 dealing with remains has been essentially reactive and this stance continues today.

Bullecourt does interest me because there have been continuing rumours that there are signicant numbers of remains in the area. It also is arguably similar to Fromelles being a secondary battlefield that may have escaped the early closer scrutiny given to the Somme, Ypres and Arras.

I can't comment on the detail of information loss from the Australian archive but, in the absence of sound reasons, would be more likely to ascribe any such losses to incompetence and over-zealous file tidying than conspiracy to destroy information.

[Auimfo]

Thanks for clarifying that Ian.

1921 it was.   Indeed, I have no problem agreeing that one of the primary reasons for setting this date was prohibitive cost.   Most countries involved in the conflict had stretched their budgets to breaking point and although they wanted to make every effort to locate the dead, they had a primary responsibility to the living.   Hence there needed to be a cut-off date for justifiably economic reasons.   This does not constitute a conspiracy.

As for any 'loss' of documents from Australian archives, it seems that Lou may not be looking in the right place.   He says only 107 are in existance and thinks about 1000 are missing, whereas I can readily identify nearly 700 and don't think there are any great number missing beyond that (if any).

Cheers,
Tim L.

[Lou Bougias]

Hi all,
Good to see the conversation has restarted!
Dont be concerned about the methodology Sandra, its all about getting the conversation started!

Tim, there are only 107 POW statements available from the AWM, in 2 files.(some of these are available on the NAA database, most aren't.)

It is nIce to have an index, but even nicer to actually have the statements. The government is familiar with numerous German files that have never been examined by Australia, and just needs to be encouraged to retain the services of someone like Peter Barton or a War Memorial historian to do so, otherwise private individuals will be forced to do it. And that is the last thing we need! in other words, just some thorough research to prove the hard evidence we all ready have, ie German burial documents, missing soldier id tags, and the irregular  unearthing of human remains.

[Auimfo]

Lou,

Are you talking about the Red Cross files?

Cheers,
Tim L.

[Lou Bougias]

The Pow statement index,

[Auimfo]

Thanks Lou.   Just checking that we were on the same page.

But I'm a bit surprised that you say that most aren't recorded on the NAA database.   That's where I found all the 700 records I'm talking about and it gives the reference number of the corresponding AWM file that contains the statements.

For example....

4th Australian Division, 14th Battalion 8 to 13 April 1917. [Statements made by prisoners of war: 4 officers, 138 other ranks]

4th Australian Division, 16th Battalion 8 to 13 April 1917. [Statements made by prisoners of war : 6 officers, 160 other ranks]

4th Australian Division, 13th Battalion 8 to 13 April 1917. [Statements made by prisoners of war : 7 officers, 126 other ranks]

4th Australian Division, 4th Australian Light Trench Mortar Battery 8 to 13 April 1917. [Statements made by prisoners of war No 1165 Private C A Morris, No 2716 Private H S Weight]

4th Australian Division, 48th Battalion 8 to 13 April 1917. [Statements made by prisoners of war: Morris, Mott, 4319 Parncutt, 2288 Heddle, 1964 McMahon, 1768 Martin, 2645 Caporn, 4702 Smith, 2933 Symonds, 1656 Dowd, 2274A Henley, 2722 Scott, 2040 Naisbit, 5148 Lucas, 5450 Rewell, 4973 Albert, 2951 Barrett, 5668 Byrne, 2512 Wakelin, 2472 Porter, 2870 Casey, 2141 Conley, 2289 Hodgson, 1034 Eden, 2445 Lynon, 5837 Forbes, 2662 Frapple, 5033 Hammond, 1695 Lugg, 836 Hardwick, 2344 Harsila, 2621 Hill, 5381 Holder, 2206 Miller, 2196 Lihou, 3526 Maher, 2469 Johansen, 1949 Le Brun, 2439 Jones, 4638 Karhu, 4681 O'Sullivan, 1690 Leonard, 2175 Liddy, 2291A Locke, 2200 Lovering, 2699 Lyne, 2571 Mackenzie, 1305 McLeod, 3963 McWilliams, 1699 Matthews, 2203 Maunder, 1640 Mennhennett, 4679 Nicoll, 1720 Philp, 2481 Rose, 5202 Russel, 2031 Smith, 2491 Stevenson, 1995 Symonds, 3797 Williams]

.....and there are more.

Are you sure you've been looking in the right place?

Cheers,
Tim L.

[Auimfo]

Just in addition,

I was speaking with Lambis tonight and he re-iterated that any research he may be conducting is far from complete and most certainly not ready for presentation to any government departments or families of any missing.   He told me that there was still much to do and a great deal of research to be conducted before any facts can be established to prove anything.   Further to that, he also is of the belief that virtually all of the POW statements are on file and doesn't suspect any kind of conspiracy in any of this.

You inferred in your original post that Lambis' 'pinpoint' evidence had been taken to Government and the family of Percy Black.   But was it Lambis who actually presented the research or was it someone else who's been allowed to see it and decided to take it upon themselves to promote (prematurely) because they think thay can get it done faster?

It sounds to me like you may be jumping the gun Lou and I'm not sure that Lambis is particularly pleased.

Cheers,
Tim L.

[Lou Bougias]

Tim,
I didn't say Lambis believed there was a conspiracy nor did I say he believed any files were missing , what I said(ME) is the fact THAT searching has ceased(due to cost) and that is the "conspiracy".
Also what I said about the POW statements is that they are not available to be seen, the indexes survive, but do the statements?
And if they do, why arent they in the AWM.?
They definately are not in the file AWM 30.
Are there no indexes from the 15th, 46th or 47th Battalions?
Can you send me th links please?
I cant remember using the word pinpoint either.
In terms of Lambis being pleased about the government being"invited" to find its dead soldiers quickly/prematurely, you'll remember how disappointed everyone was when the Military panel set up to examine the Fromelle claims rejected them outright,and then, 4 years later the boys were actually found.(was it 4- or 5 Tim?)

As for your comment re Lambis,"any researching he may be conducting is far from complete and most certainly not ready for presentation to any government departments or families of any missing. He told me that there was still much to do and a great deal of research to be conducted before any facts can be established to prove anything"
the entire and complete war diaries of the 2nd Royal Wurttembergers(27th Infantry Division) do exist in Stuttgart, including every one of the regiments that fought against us on that fateful April day. Undoubtably, they WILL/MAY contain material that would be irrefutable to a military review board, thus avoiding any rejection.
That is what the gvernment should be looking at as we speak.

As for jumping the gun Tim, we know the boys are there, the military does to, do we not want to retrieve them?
Politicians on both sides of the divide have said to me they would encourage and support  a search and I cannot understand why the military, and professional historians are so afraid to ask for their permission.
It seems to me a disgrace to know that we have men in shell holes that we can find almost immeadiately, and yet we sit there and procrastinate.
Everyone says we must follow due process, well, due process involves looking at the files, examining the ground and then deciding on whether we excavate or not.
If the government doesent want to do so, I am certain that Australians will take it on themselves to go and see the files themselves. What do you think?

cheers,
Lou

[ianw]

Having had the privilege of attending the Fromelles opening ceremony , no one is keener on getting any of the Great War fallen "in from the cold" but past experience of dealing with government and quasi governmental organisations would seem to indicate that the research spadework needs to be water-tight if they are to be led towards doing the right thing. Immoderate lashings about are not the way to do it.

[ianw]

As an interesting footnote, one of the Australian Bullecourt missing from May 1917 is a 22 year old cricketer by the name of Norman Callaway. His record of being the youngest scorer of a century on debut for New South Wales was only beaten very recently. Norman in fact scored a double century in what was his only ever game of first class cricket.

Just another example of the talent and potential lost in the Great War.

[J Banning]

Lou Bougias, on 25 October 2010 - 02:14 AM, said:

If you recall, our Goverment did not move on the Fromelles issue until Lambis had discovered the German Commanding General's order to dig burial pits for 400 Allied dead.

Further to Marc Thompson's post and the one quoted above:
  The documentation Lou refers to was actually found by Dr Lothar Saupe of the Kreigsarchiv, Munich. Lambis approached Peter Barton in Melbourne 2002 with his theory regarding the burials at Pheasant Wood. Peter insisted that Lambis needed solid documentary evidence to back up his theory and that the only place to look would be in the Bavarian archives, which Peter already knew. If Lambis could find some solid evidence Peter promised he would bring it up with the Parliamentary Group for whom he is secretary. Three years later the Australian authorities approached Dr Saupe to look in the files. Dr Saupe then found the original burial order in the BRIR 21 war diaries. It was copied to Lambis who copied it to Peter, and that started the entire ball rolling with the All Party Group, the CWGC, the MOD, the Australian Army, and led to the subsequent work done by GUARD. At no point did Lambis visit the archives in Munich.  This is in no way decrying the efforts made by Lambis over the years – everyone acknowledges he has done an astonishing job in the face of bitter opposition - but I think it important that the true facts regarding the process are known. Recently, there have been a number of occasions when erroneous statements about this have been published; if it continues it will sooner or later be taken as the truth by readers.

[Lou Bougias]

Thank you Gentlemen,
His Grace, His Royal Highness Carl, Duke of Wurttemburg has a family archive and archivist.
It is this Herr Doktor who kindly referred the enquiry to the State Archives of Stuttgart, where all Wurttemburg militrary documentation has been taken, and it was never been  damaged by either WW1 or WW2.
The state archivist's there  are the ones who have told us that the 2nd Royal Wurttembergers war diaries exist,and they are too LARGE for them to do a cursory search.
Hence their invitation to us(ALL OF US) to "hop over and have a thorough look"
.
That is all I am trrying to encourage and achieve.
And Tim,
The Wiese brother's   and the AWM files are examples that I have used to recreate interest, i agree with just about all you say, and am sorry if I was overzealous in making you disagree with me,but I hope we now have enough interest regenerated to restart this thread and continue the search.


thanks mate,
cheers,
Lou

[Marc Thompson]

Jeremy,

My thanks for the clear statement of events and apologies for my misinterpretation.

Marc

[Auimfo]

Lou Bougias, on 27 October 2010 - 02:47 PM, said:

Everyone says we must follow due process, well, due process involves looking at the files, examining the ground and then deciding on whether we excavate or not.

Lou,

You eagerness is praiseworthy but I seriously feel your analysis of due process is simplistic and perhaps a little naieve.   For example, I suspect the French Government, CWGC and local landowners would all want to have their say in the matter as well.   It's not just a case of the Australian Government deciding to send over people with spades to dig up half of France for $20 an hour.   Your view strongly reminds me of the adage about the old bull and the young bull.

Yes, the Fromelles investigation took a number of years but it must be remembered that it was forging new ground and setting a precedent.   Now that's been set, I would hope any research regarding Bullecourt might have a smoother passage BUT the case still needs to be irrefutable from the outset; otherwise we risk losing all the ground that has been gained.

You're right, you didn't say 'pinpointed'...............but maybe you should have.   Unless you can identify the exact sites (within reason) then obviously more research is yet required.  

Yes, there were more statements listed in the NAA database for the other battalions.   As you noted they are all contained within AWM30 however that file is divided into bundles and then broken down further into separate items.   I suspect you may have only been looking at a couple of these items and not through all the 4th Division bundles.

Cheers,
Tim L.

[Fedelmar]

'hop over there and have a look'

What a hoot!!!

Bright Blessings
Sandra

[Lou Bougias]

Hi all,
Tim, can you send me the file numbers and links please.
French landowners, would rent their fields to the governments at their average yearly income for a proper search to be conducted, especially if the landowners were employed on the dig as well.

The French and Australian governmnts and CWGC must be the ones to conduct the search and have their say.
"Within reason" do you mean prior to a scan or after?
And how many meters radius would you require? 50-100 be ok?
I appreciate the young comment , but I have always thought 40 to be middle aged....


Perth is only a hop over to Stuttgart isn't it Sandra?

(wink)
Now, how do we get the government to agree on inspecting the files at Stuttgart?

cheers, again!.
And not a drop to drink!
Lou

[31st Bn AIF]

Hello All,

Tim Whitford just popping in. Some of you might know me as one of Lambis's key co-researcher/advocates.

Lambis and I have been monitoring this thread for a number of days now and would like to ask for restraint. The fact is that our (there are a number of us) work, searching for missing from Bullecourt is nowhere near ready to present to government or anyone.  We are working away quietly WITHIN the established framework and when and IF we are in a position to proceed further, only then will we speak to authorities. It is quite distressing to Lambis who has invested a great deal of time and energy in "the process" to read about lobbying of goverments etc when he has consistently said that he is in no position to even present a case to government, let alone asking them for any action.

Research is fluid and ongoing, and there are documents and areas which are of interest, but charging at the authorities like a bull at a gate without having developed a detaied and specific case, is in our opinion, not helpful to a positive outcome.

We profess no ownership of the missing of Bullecourt, or the process to find them but would respectfully ask that anyone conducting any lobbying or fundraising on their own, do so without referring to Lambis or "Team Lambis" in any way. Lambis is sitting beside me as I write this so please do not think I am putting words in his mouth.

We wish you all well and good luck with your endeavors.

Regards,

Tim

[59165]

I really wish this thread had been drowned at birth.
It has been a lesson in dis/misinformation since it's conception but the icing has to be that the French 'landowners' (there is but one) will be leasing out their fields.
Amazing.
Doris Stokes couldn't have seen that one coming.

[Lou Bougias]

[quote name='59165' timestamp='1288311369' post='1493626']
I really wish this thread had been drowned at birth.
It has been a lesson in dis/misinformation since it's conception but the icing has to be that the French 'landowners' (there is but one) will be leasing out their fields.
Amazing.
Doris Stokes couldn't have seen that one coming.



Surely you are not suggesting that the landowner of the paddocks to the North East odf the Rue De Douai is the same gentleman who owns the paddocks to the South West?
Bonjour.

[David_Ellis]

To Lou and Tim L.

My Great Uncle was wounded and captured at Reincourt on the 11th April 1917 I have found his Red Cross File fairly easily, however I have had no luck finding any statement he may of made after his repatriation to the UK or return home.(assuming he made one)

As you gentlemen are obviously far more skilled at researching these records than I am, could you please point me in the right direction to look deeper?

I have searched the AWM and NAA sites using his surname, service number, unit etc.

P. (Percy) A. Ellis, 14th Bn. Serial number 1736

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Cheers
Dave.

[Lou Bougias]

Hi Dave,


The AWM has file number AWM30.

In it is a smaller file B13.11
Its item barcode is 747677.

In it are the statements of 4 officers and 138 other ranks captured at the 1st battle of Bullecourt from the 14th battalion,
Your great uncles statement should be in it.

I am due in Canberra next week, if you like I can photocopy it for you and fax it .
cheers,
Lou