an interchange re-posted from ARCH-L (I've been trying to keep-up with
cross-posting the stuff of most interest on this topic to both lists)
... a particular note of private thanks relayed to Alasdair Brooks from
several subscribers over there (and also from the Texas list) for his
timely analysis and postings on the nature of the relationship of NG &
Fox (which, surprisingly, was apparently not widely known here in the US)
~~~~~~
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Latvian War Museum's involvement in "Nazi War Diggers" series
Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2014 13:55:56 -0400
From: Karlis Karklins <[log in to unmask]>
Reply-To: Karlis Karklins <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
As this topic has raised a lot of questions, I wrote to the director of
the Latvian War Museum about their involvement in the NatGeo series and
what the legal aspects of uncovering WWII remains and relics in Latvia
are. Below I present correspondence forwarded to me by the director
between Sam Hardy and Valdis Kuzmins of the War Museum. Start at the
bottom.
The War Museum folks are not archaeologists but are responsible
for Latvian military history. You will note that in
Latvia, "archaeology" refers to the period pre-1699. The subsequent
period is a gray area and the director informs me that legislation
regarding this is in the works.
Karlis Karklins
-------- Original Message --------
**
*Subject: *
Re: Latvian War Museum's involvement in "Nazi War Diggers" series
**
*Date: *
Tue, 01 Apr 2014 16:26:15 +0300
**
*From: *
Valdis Kuzmins LKM <[log in to unmask]
<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
Organization:
Latvijas Kara muzejs
**
*To: *
Sam Hardy <[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
On 2014.04.01. 14:11, Sam Hardy wrote:
In the removed video, the programme's presenters (literally) pulled
bones out of the ground. They did not even know if they were arm
bones or leg bones. Would the Brotherhood Cemetery Committee have
allowed them to excavate if it had known they were that ignorant?
I don't know exactly how the Committee's licensing process looks like
you should ask them. But there is a clip
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EGl-Sh-wwWk published in the official
Latvian Army Youtube channel (with me doing same type of interview)
where you can see some ignorant bone pulling as well. It was perfectly
legal (Police and EOD specialists where on the spot etc) and in 2011 it
was used as a "good example" of how the excavations should be done. BTW
no Legenda involved this time. They found the pilot, identified him,
buried with military honors, sent his belongings to the family, parts of
the airplane was donated to the local museum.
As I said I don't like how it looks like and don't think Committee likes
it either, but since the most important part was done successfully it is
tricky to blame them for the methodological and technical ignorance.
They have to be careful with not allowing something, they have no
resources at all to control who is doing what and how. Now at least they
receive information.
(I've also attached one of their promotional photos, in which they
posed like people who had caught a animal, rather than people who
had recovered a dead body.)
I am sorry but I don't think it is fair. Do some google search like
"archaeology students body"...
Long before the production of the programme, their lead presenter,
Craig Gottlieb, had announced the possession of "ground dug"
(looted) objects (at least in 2003 and 2007). Would someone who
trades in looted objects be allowed an excavation licence?
Recently, Gottlieb has announced that he took and exported "ground
dug" (looted) artefacts from Latvia
(http://conflictantiquities.wordpress.com/2014/03/29/national-geographic-clearstory-nazi-war-diggers-latvia-craig-gottlieb-looting/).
It's not clear whether he took them during the production of the
programme, or whether he went digging separately from the programme.
Presumably, even if he had an excavation licence, that was illegal
(and would have broken the rules of the excavation licence).
My english is not so good to explaine all legal details but i will try
in short. According to the Latvian Laws 20th century ground dug objects
are not looted. It is legal to have a metal detector, it is legal to
have a spade and it is legal to dig as well and if you will find a
helmet it is your property and you can do with it whatever you want. You
can not dig in other persons private property or in places which are
Historical Heritage Objects listed by the State Inspection for Heritage
Protection. There is no listed objects from the 20th century as far as I
know. You can't find and sell weapons, ammo and so on.
You don't have to dig anything in order to find a helmet. In some places
there are literary more helmets laying on the ground than mushrooms. You
have to ask for the Comittee's permission if you think that you maybe
will find burried or unburried soldiers. In case a fallen soldier is
found Comittee should be informed, remains gathered and transported to
the nearest authority. Somebody can found a skull laying around by
accident and you can just hope that the involved person will not throw
away something important.
It is totally different mater with objects older than 1699. While
searching for helmets you found a 11th century burials you have to stop
immediately report your findings to the State Inspection and everything
you found is state property. Not doing so and keeping objects is a
Criminal Offense. If I remember correctly (I have to double check this)
it was Legenda who informed Inspection about a unique Curonian burials
last year.
I know it's a stupid question, but I have to ask: if you had known
that the programme's presenters were three metal detectorists and an
antiquities dealer, if you had known that the programme's lead
presenter traded in "ground dug" objects, and if you had known that
the programme's lead presenter was taking and exporting objects from
Latvia, would you have contributed to the programme?
To sum it up - being a metal detectorist and an antiquities dealer in
Latvia is not a reason not to contribute. We do not give any kind of
information to the private persons about specific battle places. Like -
where was the HQ of the 19th Latvian Divison or where Tiger tank was
lost in Latvia and so on in order not to encourage them. We don't have
any contacts with individuals who are selling German identification
tags, we don't pay money for the personal artifacts (watches etc). We
keep in contact only with volunteer organizations which are positively
known for not selling ID tags or blackmailing German Organizations to
pay for information. As I said our major concern is make sure every
found soldier is identified if possible and buried appropriately. We
contributed because Legenda assured that they will do that.
Valdis.
I want everything to be accurate and fair, so I really appreciate
all of your help.
Best wishes,
Sam
On 1 April 2014 11:20, Sam Hardy <[log in to unmask]
<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
Can I share what you've written publicly?
On 1 April 2014 11:02, Valdis Kuzmins LKM <[log in to unmask]
<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
Dear Sam,
My name is Valdis Kuzmins and I am working as a historian in the
Department of Second World War History of the Latvian War Museum. I
was the person ClearStory contacted in late September 2013 and asked
for the assistance to make a series of television programmes about
battlefield archeology.
Yesterday Renars gave me your e-mail and I am writing to clear some
misunderstanding about War Museum's role in the making of "Nazi War
Diggers" series. When he yesterday wrote a comment there
http://conflictantiquities.wordpress.com/2014/03/29/national-geographic-clearstory-nazi-war-diggers-daily-mail-legenda/
he was referring to the youtube clip posted not the series trailer
which was removed by then. And by saying "we tried to stop Diggers"
he ment unlicensed "black diggers" in general not the series.
ClearSory were interested in general military history of the battles
in Kurzeme in 1944-1945 (when, operational plans of both sides,
number of men involved, weapons used etc.), we did some filming in
the museum and they acquired copies of documents from our archives
(fragments from corps and divisional war diaries) and copies of the
photos. I was interviewed on the battlefield itself as well, but
that was about military operations in the area. I have not seen any
series so I do not know how if at all they used our materials or my
interview.
Museum was aware of ClearStory plans to excavate key areas of the
associated battlefield but we did not participate in any excavations
itself nor we have any authority allow/not allow/supervise/stop etc
excavations or reburials in Latvia. We were informed that all was
done legally and according to the local practice which means 1) they
received written permission from the Brotherhood Cemetery Committee
and actual excavations were done according to the Committee's
instructions, 2) they were in close contact with Latvian Army in
case the Unexploded Ordnance is found. We were informed that they
will donate all non personal findings from excavations to the museum
and right now we are in the process of the decision making about the
value of the artifacts.
The problem is with generally accepted "local practice" which varies
from the case to case as you can see in youtube clips. We are aware
that this is not archaeology as it should be but unfortunately it is
legal according to the Latvian Laws. Our major concern is to make
sure that remains of the fallen soldiers were collected, if possible
identified and next of kin informed as soon as possible. Those are
the things "black diggers" don't do - usually bones are left where
found and personal items taken away leaving any identification
impossible. It does not look good nor it should be that way but at
the moment it is impossible to force strict rules when the territory
in question is 100 000 square km in Kurzeme alone and there are
still tens of thousands missing persons laying unburied in the
woods. As Renars mentioned we are trying as much as we can to stop
illegal digging, selling or buying of the personal artifacts.
If you have any further questions about our involvement please feel
free to write.
Best Regards,
Valdis Kuzmins
p.s. I will give you an example what is going on here in Latvia.
While I was writting this e-mail a person came up looking for the
Latvian soldier who was missing in Kurzeme. He was the boyfriend of
the person's mother and she was looking for him since 1945 with no
results. She died a week ago. For some reason she did not contacted
War Museum which is bad because according to the documents in our
archives we know the place where he was allegedly buried in March,
1945. There is no cemetery or monumet just a place in someones
garden, maybe he is still over there. For her this information came
one week too late. We are dealing with things like that on the daily
basis; the war is not over there and some people would be very upset
about strict rules of the "excavations".
Subscription options and archives available:
http://listserv.buffalo.edu/archives/arch-l.html
~~~~~~
Below please find my letter to the Director of the Latvian War Museum
and her response which further elaborates on the situation re: war
graves in Latvia. Both messages were originally in Latvia.
Karlis Karklins
1 April 2014
Dear Mrs. Fleija,
There is currently a lot of excitement on archaeology discussion lists
in America regarding a National Geographic Society television program,
"Nazi War Diggers," which will be aired in April [I sent this before the
decission was made to can the series]. The clip from the program shows
"archaeologists" acting like grave robbers and digging up soldier's
remains in a very irrespectful manner. Then someone found videos on
YouTube prepared by the Latvian group "Legenda" where Latvian lads are
acting in the same way. American archaeologists are asking, aren't there
any laws that regulate where and who can dig in WWII battlefield areas
in Latvia? And if there are, who grants permission for non-professionals
to do so? I would like to clarify this for American archaeologists but
cannot find the relevant statutes. Could you help me in this matter?
Karlis Karklins
Former arhaeologist
Parks Canada
Ottawa,ON
Canada
Good day, Mr. Karklins,
The scandal over the National Geographic film, which we have not seen,
began in the US, where there is a different perception of WWII. This is
reflected in the film's title: "Nazi War Diggers." Their territory was
not the front. There was fighting not only in Courland in 1944-45, but
in the rest of the country as well, with thousands of casualties, both
German and Russian. In battle situations, they were often left unburied
and left where they fell. After the war ended and Latvia came under
Russian occupation once again, cemeteries were created for the Russian
soldiers, but these were symbolic for the most part. The remains of
fallen soldiers were not sought and remained in the ground. There were
no cemeteries for fallen German soldiers at all.
Regarding legislation and archaeology. What constitutes archaeology in
Latvia is presented in the statute "On the Preservation of Cultural
Monuments." It defines what are archaeological finds, and those are
materials found in and above the ground and under water which date up to
the 17th century (Paragraph 7). Several years ago, when the "black
diggers" began to dig in battlefields, we spoke with the National
Monuments Protection Inspectorate about the possibility of declaring
former battlefields as historic monuments. We came to the mutual
conclusion that the territory of the modern war front is quite broad and
that the soil of Latvia is full of bones, unexploded munitions, and
weapon's fragments.
Archaeological methods are employed in Latvia when the remains of
persons suspected to have been executed during the Soviet occupation are
encountered.
So, the discussion is not about graves, but the recovery of the remains
of fallen soldiers, their identification, if possible, and reburial in
war cemeteries.
This is undertaken by the organization "Legenda" which observes accepted
Latvian procedure. To restrict other digging there is the statute "On
War Victim Burials," but that has yet to be adopted.
Respectfully,
Aija Fleija
[Director, Latvian War Museum]
~~~~~~~~~
Dear Karlis,
Thank you for sharing these insights into the relationships between the
Latvian authorities, Legenda, and the origination of the NatGeo Nazi War
Diggers series. This is very enlightening, not only about what
legitimate (exonerating) factors may have motivated the Latvian
authorities to have been loathe to refuse to co-operate with Legenda's
proposals (after all, Legenda apparently did/do masquerade effectively
as "white diggers" ... and, perhaps, can show proof they have actually
contributed toward some repatriation efforts in a few cases), but also
the great magnitude (areal extent and lack of financial support) of the
problem of war-dead discoveries.
I am wondering if you have gotten a sense of how much of the increase in
the market for the "black digging" of war-dead militaria is caused by
the demand for that material by collectors in the United States, versus
other parts of the world? Can the increase in the looting of war-dead
graves be said to be "driven" by the demand in the U.S. market; for
example, in the same manner as the demand for cocaine in the U.S. market
drives the planting of coca in fields of South America?
Regards,
Bob Skiles
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Hi Bob,
Being interested in Latvian military history and having gone to
collector's shows in Latvia, I would say that the for-profit angle is
not really important when it comes to WWII items. I must admit that some
diggers show up at the shows with boxes full of battlefield relics but
the market is minimal. I think most Latvian "black diggers" fall into
the hobbyist/military enthusiast category. It is not illegal to dig on
private property so they do it. I must also note that very little
Latvian material appears on eBay, for instance. So I don't think that
American collectors are fueling "black digging," unlike in Southeast
Asia and South America.
I should also note that while the Legenda group uses methods that make
an archaeologist's hair stand on end, they are not archaeologists nor do
they pretend to use archaeological methods. I think their cavalier
manner of handling human remains comes from having done this a lot and
one becomes hardened. Yet, they are doing a worthwhile job in locating
and trying to identify human battlefield remains which are then
reburied. I know in some cases where an individual's identity can be
determined, the individual's personal possessions are returned to a
relative, if one exists, and other items are often donated to local
museums. Having gone through the Russian Revolution and two world wars,
the entire country really is a graveyard. People do what they can to
recover the remains and, unfortunately, from an archaeological point of
view, aren't really concerned about how they get the job done.
Karlis
~~~~~~~~~~~~
|
