Ok. Maybe I don't "get it". Maybe I'm blind, stupid, or both, but here it goes. You don't bulldoze the Gettysburg Battle Fields for a Walmart parking lot, so why are we disturbing the Titanic wreck? The bodies maybe gone on the Titanic, but so are the bodies from the battle field. Just because a body has decomposed, doesn't make it "less wrong" to disturb the grave. The Titanic wreck had people still inside when she sank. Today you can still find 2 shoes side by side, where a body once was. The sad thing is people think that we need a warehouse full of Titanic artifacts to learn about her and the people onboard. Now I ask you. Can you tell me the difference between what salvagers are doing, and someone digging up "John William" and taking his pocket watch just to "learn about his life"?

Let Titanic and those lost rest in peace.

Quote:


I totaly agree...i lost 3 relitives in the sinking, and i would not approve of thier stuff or the wreck itself being dusturbed....If I found that they had brought up my great uncle's suitcase and put it on display i would be angry, he is not an exhibit for a museum, he was a real person, just as precious as anyone living today....if they want to learn his story just ask and i would love to share it.....these people never got a headstone. all they got was the skeleton of titanic, let them have that

What do you all think about the former "unknown child" buried in Halifax?

His grave was dug up, and with DNA testing from a bone fragment, they were able to identify him as Eino Viljami Panula.

But until then, they assumed that by the boys description that it was another child lost on the ship.

His surviving relatives were flown to Halifax and were very greatful to know that their relatives remains were now known.

Was this identification not worth the grave tampering?

This topic of gravesites has even a touchy subject here in my state of New Mexico.

Some people a year ago wanted to resume the graves of Billy the Kid and his mother, and do DNA testing to prove if Billy was really buried there or not. But there is more controversy over the thought of loosing the tourist business if they prove he is not buried there, not the disturbing the gravesite matter.

Quote:

The problem here is that unlike Gettysburg, Titanic is not protected as a national park, although I agree, it is hollowed ground. And unlike Gettysburg, Titanic as a memorial will succumb to the greatest desecration force she has ever known: the ocean. The only part about her will be a few objects and iron ore heaps left off the grand banks. Then she will really be comparable to a battleground.

However, at Gettysburg, are there large amounts of remnants of the great battle there today? Thousands of rifles from Picket's Charge? Dead soldier's belongings scattered across Little Round Top? The answer is no. These artifacts were eventually gathered up, and today many pieces are in museums, and like it or not, in private collections.

But does this take away from the emotion and special reverence of this Civil War site? It’s for each person to judge. If the soldier’s letters and personal effects were left out in the elements, we might not have the scraps of information today that we do.

Should the Titanic be protected (somehow under international law) as the U.S.S. Arizona in Pearl Harbor? Well, the Arizona is totally off limits inside of her hull out of respect for the dead, and the wreck of the ore ship Edmund Fitzgerald is the same. I do not remember hearing protests about “Ghosts of the Abyss”, when Cameron used his Robots to look inside “the Tomb”. Is it disrespectful to do this? Would Cameron breaking off rusticles by bumping Jake and Elwood into them be considered “disturbing the Titanic”?

Quote:

I respect your position on this. However, what is one to do when there are no relatives like you to give a narration of a victims history?

For example, there was a person James H. Bracken who lived in my state of New Mexico (Lake Arthur, Chavez County). All I know about him is that he last lived in London, was 27 years old, a stockman, was booked in 2nd class, departed from Southampton, and held the ticket number 220367.

Since he is a relatively unknown person in my state’s history, I wish I could do him justice and let more people know about his passage and death on the greatest ship in history. But, as it is, with all the great Titanic researchers out there, there is not even a picture that survives of him. I just wish I could know a little more about him.

When I really think about it, I guess I have rationalized a historical contributing factor to salvaging. We do not need a piece of Titanic’s hull, we do not need the bell or the running light, we do not need China, Telegraphs, lifeboat davits and so forth. These objects tell us nothing new. I was against it all at first, but since it has happened, I want to focus on paper goods, documents, and other written records that history truly needs.

But maybe it’s not worth it. Maybe I am putting my own selfishness of wanting to know about the lost over the dignity of their grave. I am sorry if I have offended any of my Titanic friends, especially those of you who have a personal connection.

By the way, lilcandycane, I would love to hear your relatives’ stories. Do you have them posted on this site?

MGY Friend,

Thanks for the info on the anoxic beds... I hadn't heard about that. The fact that bodies may have reached the ocean floor puts a whole new complexion on the salvage question, as this would mean that the wreck is indeed a grave.

Point well made about the difference in pyramid and Titanic exploration, I can only say that it's the ship itself that intrigues, not necessarily the desire to gather info on the "gilded age". I agree with the salvage of personal artifacts for precisely this reason. The Titanic - and the human tragedy that surrounds her - is an irresistible combination, and I believe the victims are honoured by our learning more about them. This way, they are no longer just "names" on a memorial.

What do you, and anyone else, think?

Tigro,

I agree with you that the victims can be honored by learning about them. But the problem with many of them is that there is not much known. Many passengers, especially 3rd class, packed up everything they owned on earth on the crossing.Therefore, some today have been largely forgotten by the sands of time because of this. Their surviving relatives have either died or knowledge was lost generation after generation.

I think of that scene from "Schindler's List", where the Nazi workers at the train station were confiscating the Jew's luggage and throwing their letters, postcards and thousands of family pictures into a pile to throw away. Everything about them was destroyed as the Haulocost intended to do.

In a way, the Titanic tragedy did this to many people, I mean, entire families were lost in 3rd Class. In Southampton, almost every street had a person died on the ship.

But as I stated to rip1912 and lilcandycane, I guess what I have done is try to rationalize a good aspect of salvaging, that is, honoring the memory of the forgotten or unknown (not even personal objects like pocket watches and such, just paper goods).

But in doing this, maybe we who find no objection to this are indeed putting our own selfishness of wanting to know about the lost above the respect of their grave.

Many survivors, like the late Eva Hart were against salvaging for this reason. However, survivor Edith Brown Heisman and her daughter were aparently apreciative when her father's pocket watch was salvaged, treated and preserved, and presented back to her in a display case.

Other shipwrecks have been protected but have still had salvage operations. The Edmund Fitzgerald, which sank in Lake Superior in 197--- ???, is protected from large scale salvage, but, they have salvaged the ship's bell to make into a memorial on land (they put a new bell with the crew's names on them back on the shipwreck).

I think the grave question is a problem for the Titanic, because of it's facination, and for the fact that it is not protected like the Fitzgerald, U. S. S. Arizona, or H.M. S. Royal Oak in Scapa Flow.
If we are really going to make it a "tomb" under some form of international law with all of the rights and respects thereof, then we need to stop going into the tomb every time we visit it. Out of respect for the dead, no one goes into the Arizona or Edmund Fitzgerald, no matter how many maritime or World War II buffs want to see their interiors.

As a matter of fact, the Arizona has been sturring controvercy because of her decay and the fact that when her fuel bulkheads go, she could release all of her remaining oil at once, instead of a little at a time as she does now. Some people say this is "the ships blood" and reminds us of her tragedy. Others say that the ship's fuel should be pumped so that the harbor and it's marine animals will not be harmed.

Ah, yes the pocket watch. I knew this would come up soon or later. I think that's the only exception for the salvaging of artifacts. If your going to salvage personal artifacts from the Titanic passengers, they should contact living relatives. I was glad Edith got her father's watch back. What bothers me is when salvagers go down and disrespect the wreck. I was a tour guide for Titanic The Exhibition in 1996 (The traveling exhibit that started in Memphis, TN), and things, like the mast marker light, always choked me up. I knew how the salvagers RIPPED it off the mast and in doing so, knocked into the crows nest. I was really upset over that. There's other artifacts that were torn from the wreck, but I think that the mast light is better known. It wasn't necessary to get the light, it would've been better to snap a picture. It was total disrespect for the wreck.
By the way, I know about the new rules put in place because of this incident, but I still get hot under the collar when I hear of MORE artifacts being brought up.

That's interesting Robert!

Yes, I totally agree about the distruction of the ship's mast, as well as the rest of the distruction of the hull. That was uncalled for. I guess Ballard observed that someone tried unsuccessfully to rip off the telemoter on the bridge as well.

You know, unfortunately, Pandora's box has already been opened. With all of the millions of dollars that is locked away in Titanic and no police force to really guard her, illegal salvage is something I think we are going to see more and more of.

Lets just hope that she does not end up like the Lusitania and have artifacts like her propellers made into golf clubs or wind up in a Welsh junkyard.

By the way, since you worked with the artifacts, can you tell me where they got the ship's bell from? Did they tear it off of the mast as well? Or did they pick it up in the debris field? The reason I ask is because I do not see it in the pictures of the mast and remaining crow's nest that Ballard took in 85-86.

i had the privilge of meeting mr. robert ballard and he was angry about the artifacts being taken...with little or no respect to the wreak or the lost. He said there are times he wishes he had never found it....people now a days are drawn to the wreak,not to honor those lost but just to see how much money they can make. I gues it's a no win situation...to salavge means some damage will be done, but we will have something from the Titanic to show others...but not to salvage means we lose everything. It is a sad fact to this whole thing.

It would be impossible to salvage the titanic from the ocean floor. It would probably crumble and be in worse shape then it already is. It's meant to stay there undisturbed. And thats how it should remain.