[Newsbot]

Title: HMS Hood's bell lifted from the Atlantic seabed 74 years after it was sunk in battle | Daily Mail Online
Category: History
Posted By: martin14
Date: 2015-08-09 22:39:35

[martin14]

Important historical retrival, or desecration of a war grave ?

[N_Fiddledog]

$1:

Out of the cold and foggy night came the British ship the Hood
And evry British seaman, he knew and understood
They had to sink the Bismark, the terror of the sea
Stop those guns as big as steers and those shells as big as trees
We'll find that German battleship thats makin' such a fuss
We gotta sink the Bismark 'cause the world depends on us
Hit the decks a-runnin' boys and spin those guns around
When we find the Bismark we gotta cut her down
The Hood found the Bismark and on that fatal day
The Bismark started firin' fifteen miles away
We gotta sink the Bismark was the battle sound
But when the smoke had cleared away
The mighty Hood went down

[BartSimpson]

martin14 martin14:

Important historical retrival, or desecration of a war grave ?

Retrieving a ship's bell is usually done respectfully and for the purposes of memorializing the loss.

The Edmund Fitzgerald comes to mind.




It's also not uncommon for a ship's bell to be retrieved and then mounted to a namesake ship which becomes itself a floating memorial to the lost vessel.

[Freakinoldguy]

martin14 martin14:

Important historical retrival, or desecration of a war grave ?

Destruction of a war grave. People who do this are basically no better than the metal thieves that are currently pillaging the Repulse and Prince of Wales with impunity and just because you`re going to display the bell doesn`t mean your intent is any better, just different.

One desecrates for money, one desecrates for glory and both are wrong.

[Thanos]

I'd see it that way if it ended up being sold by some grifter on eBay. But it'll end up in a place of honour, like a museum or at a military base, so I don't have a problem with it being recovered.

This was in the article's comment section too:

$1:

Just to be clear about this: the voyage of recovery was undertaken with the full support of 'Hood' relatives, the HMS 'Hood' Association, and before he died, Ted Briggs, the last of the 3 who survived the sinking. The Ministry of Defence also licensed the expedition, of course, as the site is indeed a war grave. Bluewater Recoveries, the experts who undertook the actual search, went to great lengths to ensure that respect was paid to the memories of those who died and their families. The Search Director has the letters and paperwork to prove all of this. Accordingly, any suggestion that this was not undertaken with the proper consent, care and sensitivity is 100% wrong. Rob White, Vice President, HMS 'Hood' Association.

Good enough for me.

[Jabberwalker]

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

martin14 martin14:

Important historical retrival, or desecration of a war grave ?

Destruction of a war grave. People who do this are basically no better than the metal thieves that are currently pillaging the Repulse and Prince of Wales with impunity and just because you`re going to display the bell doesn`t mean your intent is any better, just different.

One desecrates for money, one desecrates for glory and both are wrong.

I'm not sure, myself.

Would you be interested for an example, in having the bell from Athabaskan (1) recovered if it were to become part of a major War memorial in Ottawa? Most Canadians would have no idea about her or the fate or her crew and we do them a disservice by letting her name fade away, along with her rusting remains.

[BartSimpson]

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015 ... marck-1941

Paul Allen, one of the Microsoft billionaires, was a key source of funding for the recovery effort.

[Freakinoldguy]

Jabberwalker Jabberwalker:

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

martin14 martin14:

Important historical retrival, or desecration of a war grave ?

Destruction of a war grave. People who do this are basically no better than the metal thieves that are currently pillaging the Repulse and Prince of Wales with impunity and just because you`re going to display the bell doesn`t mean your intent is any better, just different.

One desecrates for money, one desecrates for glory and both are wrong.

I'm not sure, myself.

Would you be interested for an example, in having the bell from Athabaskan (1) recovered if it were to become part of a major War memorial in Ottawa? Most Canadians would have no idea about her or the fate or her crew and we do them a disservice by letting her name fade away, along with her rusting remains.

If you want to be honest we don't need physical parts of a War Grave to build a monument to the people who made the ultimate sacrifice. If you did there'd be alot less monuments in France to Canadian Hero's.

And IMO they can use all the altruistic excuses they want for taking the Bell off a war grave but, the act itself and the subsequent media attention is actually advertising for the Paul Allen and the group who conducted the "recovery".

If the Hood had been struck from the roll of RN ships rather than sunk in combat then, you could follow tradition and give the bell away to a museum or other worthy place of honour but, as it is now that bell belongs with the ship and crew and should remain with them.

To put it into perspective. How would people feel if Paul Allen and his crowd started diving on the Arizona to recover parts and put them in a "place of honour"?

[Jabberwalker]

First of all, I don't disagree with your point of view. War graves should be left alone

but

Our decendants should be made to remember. People identify with relics. Ringing bells on anniversaries reaches some of them, anyway.

If the Arizona had been sunk mid Pacific,you can be sure that the Americans would have made another arrangement. They built a huge memorial right over the wreck. No need for any relics, there. I'll bet that there are only a few of us, even in this forum that know anything about Athabaskan 1. It was brought to me because my dad roomed with the surviving XO Jack Scott while in university. Scott wasd badly burned and spent the remainder of the East as a POW. He had a short life, after that. Anyway, her wreck is off the coast of France, badly deteriorated and largely forgotten, now.

I'll bet that those dead sailors, had you been able to ask them when they were alive would to a man preferred to be remembered thasn to care about the retrieval of artifacts.

[BartSimpson]

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

To put it into perspective. How would people feel if Paul Allen and his crowd started diving on the Arizona to recover parts and put them in a "place of honour"?

You mean like this?

[Freakinoldguy]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

To put it into perspective. How would people feel if Paul Allen and his crowd started diving on the Arizona to recover parts and put them in a "place of honour"?

You mean like this?

Gee, was Paul Allan salvaging...........again?

This is part of the Memorial which, is considered part of the ship so, technically the Bell still resides with the ship unlike the Hood's Bell which is now 1271 miles from it's proper resting place.


As for the Arizona, try having some billionaire move "this" Bell to some other student union bldg in Arizona or some other memorial and I'm pretty sure you'd see a very large backlash like their should be for the Hood, Repulse and Prince of Wales.

Allen should have dove to the grave himself and found the christening bell and taken that in place of the Ship's Bell. Then there would have been no need for controversy

[Freakinoldguy]

Jabberwalker Jabberwalker:

First of all, I don't disagree with your point of view. War graves should be left alone

but

Our decendants should be made to remember. People identify with relics. Ringing bells on anniversaries reaches some of them, anyway.

If the Arizona had been sunk mid Pacific,you can be sure that the Americans would have made another arrangement. They built a huge memorial right over the wreck. No need for any relics, there. I'll bet that there are only a few of us, even in this forum that know anything about Athabaskan 1. It was brought to me because my dad roomed with the surviving XO Jack Scott while in university. Scott wasd badly burned and spent the remainder of the East as a POW. He had a short life, after that. Anyway, her wreck is off the coast of France, badly deteriorated and largely forgotten, now.

I'll bet that those dead sailors, had you been able to ask them when they were alive would to a man preferred to be remembered thasn to care about the retrieval of artifacts.

Once again I'll reiterate. You don't need physical artifacts from a war grave to build a monument because if you did they'd have Lord Nelson buried in his monument and not in Westminster Abbey.

As for the individual Ships monuments. IIRC I don't think the RN or RCN allows individual ship monuments which would explain why there are none for the Ships that were lost in combat. We pay respect to the dead of the Battle of the Atlantic every first Sunday in May by reading the roll of the ship's lost so tradition seems to think that's enough to remember them by and we don't need to go salvaging Bells or any other parts of the ships to incorporate them into the ceremony.

But as for the members of the Hood there's a web page called the HMS Hood Association that lists the names of the personnel lost which is a nice touch.
http://hmshood.com/crew/memorial/index.htm

[llama66]

martin14 martin14:

Important historical retrival, or desecration of a war grave ?

I see both sides, but since I'm opposed to the plundering of the Titanic for "museum pieces" I feel the same here. Leave the HMS Hood, and the souls that perished aboard alone.

[Batsy2]

A gun carriage has been recovered from the wreck of a warship which exploded and sank in the Thames estuary in 1665.

The London went down off Southend-on-Sea in Essex, killing 300 crew.

It is the first complete carriage to be raised from the ship, which is lying about 65ft (20m) below the surface.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-33869255