Images of Conflict : Military Aerial Photography and Archaeology [1 ed.] 9781443803144, 9781443801713

Citation preview

Images of Conflict

Images of Conflict: Military Aerial Photography and Archaeology

Edited by

Birger Stichelbaut, Jean Bourgeois, Nicholas Saunders and Piet Chielens

Images of Conflict: Military Aerial Photography and Archaeology, Edited by Birger Stichelbaut, Jean Bourgeois, Nicholas Saunders and Piet Chielens This book first published 2009 Cambridge Scholars Publishing 12 Back Chapman Street, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE6 2XX, UK British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Copyright © 2009 by Birger Stichelbaut, Jean Bourgeois, Nicholas Saunders and Piet Chielens and contributors All rights for this book reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the copyright owner. ISBN (10): 1-4438-0171-2, ISBN (13): 978-1-4438-0171-3

TABLE OF CONTENTS

List of Illustrations ................................................................................... viii List of Tables.............................................................................................. xi Preface ....................................................................................................... xii Chapter One Images of Conflict: An Introduction Jean Bourgeois, Birger Stichelbaut.............................................................. 1 Chapter Two The Last Witness. Military Aerial Photography used in a Modern Museum Context Piet Chielens.............................................................................................. 13 Chapter Three Ulysses’ Gaze: The Panoptic Premise in Aerial Photography and Great War Archaeology Nicholas Saunders ..................................................................................... 27 Chapter Four Why the Air War Really Mattered: a Guide to Understanding the Significance of Aviation in World War One James Streckfuss........................................................................................ 41 Chapter Five Shaping 20th Century Military Intelligence Through a Static Battlefield: Aerial Photography’s Impact Terrence Finnegan ..................................................................................... 55 Chapter Six Strategic Aerial Research During the Second World War: the Case of Germany’s New Weapons Yves Le Maner .......................................................................................... 69

vi

Table of Contents

Chapter Seven Imaging Golgotha: Photogrammetry on the Western Front 1914-1918 Peter Chasseaud......................................................................................... 87 Chapter Eight Déjà vu all over again? A Brief Preservation History of Overseas Service Aerial Photography in the UK Chris Going ............................................................................................. 121 Chapter Nine Military Aerial Photographs from 1914 to the Present: A Survey of the Sources Agnès Beylot ........................................................................................... 135 Chapter Ten Great War Aerial Photographs in German Archives: a Guide to the Sources Peter Haupt .............................................................................................. 151 Chapter Eleven History of Military Aerial Photographs in Italy and Addressed Archives Laura Castrianni, Giuseppe Ceraudo....................................................... 165 Chapter Twelve The Interpretation of Great War Air Photographs for Conflict Archaeology & Overview of the Belgian Royal Army Museum Collection Birger Stichelbaut.................................................................................... 185 Chapter Thirteen World War 1 Battlefields of the Ypres Salient Mapped and Analysed with Aerial Photographs. A Confrontation with the Current Landscape and Archaeology Mathieu de Meyer.................................................................................... 203 Chapter Fourteen Air Photographs, Military Archaeology and Human Memory: A Case Study from South East London Andy Brockman, Kevin Barton ............................................................... 221

Images of Conflict

vii

Chapter Fifteen Suffolk’s Defended Shore and Beyond: The Use of Military Aerial Photographs in Systematic Archaeological Survey in England Sarah Newsome ....................................................................................... 241 Chapter Sixteen The Scottish Home Front 1939-45: Gathering information on Military and Civilian Structures from RAF and Luftwaffe Aerial Coverage of Scotland David Easton ........................................................................................... 259 Chapter Seventeen A Proposal for an Encyclopaedic Internet Database of Air Photo and Land Photo Images of Earth Surface Marks and Signatures Waclaw Godziemba-Maliszewski ........................................................... 281

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Fig. 1-1: Trench system near Lichtervelde .................................................. 9 Fig. 1-2: Breast worked World War One trench in the Belgian dunes ...... 10 Fig. 2-1: Oosttaveerne Wood 1917............................................................ 14 Fig. 2-2: German aerial photograph near Poperinge.................................. 15 Fig. 2-3: Lyssenthoek Military Cemetery 1915......................................... 17 Fig. 2-4: Lyssenthoek Military Cemetery 1915 detail ............................... 18 Fig. 2-5: Detail of animation .................................................................... 21 Fig. 2-6: Caesar’s Nose September 1915................................................... 22 Fig. 2-7: Caesar’s Nose March 1916 ......................................................... 23 Fig. 2-8: Caesar’s Nose July 1917............................................................. 23 Fig. 2-9: Caesar’s Nose modern view........................................................ 24 Fig 3.1: Poster for Theo Angeloupolos’ 1995 film Ulysses’ Gaze............ 29 Fig. 3-2: Angelopulos’s photographer....................................................... 30 Fig. 3-3 Generic WW1 air photo, Belgian-German frontline near Dikmuide ................................................................................................... 34 Fig. 4-1: American aircrew unloading their aerial camera ........................ 42 Fig. 4-2: French photo mosaic ................................................................... 50 Fig. 5-1: Oblique air Photo of Seicheprey ................................................ 59 Fig. 5-2: Aerial camera mounted for oblique aerial photography.............. 64 Fig. 6-1: Large scale rocket in a photo taken over Peenemünde ............... 78 Fig. 6-2: “Yvrench – “Bois Carré”. ........................................................... 79 Fig. 6-3: A “modified site” for the flying bomb at Vincly (Pas-de-Calais)80 Fig. 6-4: Sonderbauten, near Calais. ......................................................... 82 Fig. 6-5: “The Mittelwerk, September 1944”. ........................................... 84 Fig. 7-1: French Roussilhe photo-restitution apparatus, 1916 ................... 95 Fig. 7-2: German Hugershoff-Heyde Autocartograph, 1917-18.............. 104 Fig. 7-3: British rapid graphic restitution method, 1916 ......................... 112

Images of Conflict

ix

Fig. 8-1. The former film store at Archives Two, Maryland, USA in 1998..................................................................................................... 130 Fig. 8-2: Luftwaffe Target dossiers – UK airfields. ................................. 133 Fig. 9-1: Oblique air photos of gas being released in the Aurin sector.... 137 Fig. 9-2: Aerial view of the Macedonian front, the Vardar area 1917..... 139 Fig. 9-3: Brest 1945, in the aftermath of the Second World War, aerial photographs were taken to study the effect of military pollution ............ 142 Fig. 9-4: Aerial photo of the archaeological site of Djemila in Algeria .. 146 Fig. 9-5: The vertical air photo shows one of the Angkor temples.......... 147 Fig. 10-1: Typical German air photo near Lizerne .................................. 153 Fig. 11-1: Aerial image of the archaeological central area of Rome ....... 168 Fig. 11-2: Aerial view of the Ostia excavations shot from the balloon in 1911..................................................................................................... 170 Fig. 11-3: The port of Brindisi in 1943.................................................... 175 Fig. 11-4: Anglo-American Aerophotographic Centre near San Severo . 177 Fig. 11-5. Bombardment effects of Cassino and Montecassino, 15/03/1944............................................................................................... 178 Fig. 11-6. The town of Alife in two USAAF vertical photos .................. 180 Fig. 12-1: Distribution of air photos of the KLM-MRA collection in Belgium and France............................................................................. 190 Fig. 12-2: Comparative study of air photos ............................................. 193 Fig. 12-3: Example of an anaglyph.......................................................... 196 Fig. 12-4: Generated orthophoto.............................................................. 198 Fig. 12-5: DSM of the studied area ......................................................... 199 Fig. 13-1: Historical air photograph projected on top of a modern orthophoto ............................................................................................... 207 Fig. 13-2: The trenches of the aerial photograph can be overlaid on top of the modern image ..................................................................... 208 Fig. 13-3: The projection of the A19 motorway on top of the British frontline near Sint-Juliaan ....................................................................... 210 Fig. 13-4: The Cross roads site during the excavations ........................... 212 Fig. 13-5: Plan of the excavation at Cross Roads .................................... 214 Fig. 13-6: Overview of the georeferenced images in the Ypres Salient .. 216 Fig. 14-1: 7 August 1944, showing the Shooters Hill area with west at top of frame and the Shooters Hill site centre left ............................... 222

x

List of Illustrations

Fig. 14-2: 7 August 1944 A detail showing the still operational Z Battery.................................................................................................. 224 Fig. 14-3: POW Camp 1020. ................................................................... 225 Fig. 14-4: Illustrations of POW Camp 1020 in 1946 by Wolfram Dörge ....................................................................................................... 231 Fig. 15-1: The Napoleonic period Martello Tower at Slaughden ............ 250 Fig. 15-2: These two images demonstrate how the historic RAF vertical collections can highlight the dramatic impact of agriculture on archaeological landscapes................................................................... 251 Fig. 15-3: Barrage balloon mooring position at Lowestoft...................... 253 Fig. 15-4: Changes in coastal anti-invasion defences at a particular location .................................................................................................... 255 Fig. 15-5: Barges lined up in the River Orwell in Suffolk in July 1944 .. 256 Fig. 16-1: The cities of Scotland, based on Ordnance Survey “Strategic” data ......................................................................................................... 260 Fig. 16-2: 1940 Luftwaffe target photograph of Errol Airfield, Perthsire 262 Fig. 16-3:The RAF equivalent of Fig. 16-2 flown 27 August 1943 ........ 263 Fig. 16-4: Scanned image of fifteen 12.7cm x 12.7cm prints, digitally enhanced showing the whole of Drem Airfield in 1943 .......................... 266 Fig. 16-5: Vertical air photograph, Torry and Girdle Ness Batteries, Aberdeen ................................................................................................. 268 Fig. 16-6: M series (CAM oblique) 1943 image of heavy anti-aircraft battery with Gl-mat for radar set in foreground, Strone, Argyll and Bute................................................................................................... 270 Fig. 16-7: RAF 1941 showing part of the Command Line, 24 February 1942 showing the anti-tank ditch north of Ladybank, Fife...................... 272 Fig. 16-8: Starfish Decoy at Gleniffer Braes, West Renfrewshire, 1941. 275 Fig. 16-9: Wick Airfield, Highland showing the camouflage scheme on the Type C hangars, 1941 ................................................................... 276 Fig. 17-1 Ozero Sukhoye Russia ............................................................. 288 Fig. 17-2: Ozero Sukhoye........................................................................ 290 Fig. 17-3: Ozero Sukhoye........................................................................ 290 Fig. 17-4: Gnezdovo Russia .................................................................... 292 Fig. 17-5: Gnezdovo Russia .................................................................... 293 Fig. 17-6: Gnezdovo-Katyn Russia ......................................................... 294 Fig. 17-7: Luftwaffe aerial photograph of Kharkiv Ukraine .................... 296 Fig. 17-8: Luftwaffe aerial photograph of Kharkiv Ukraine .................... 298 Fig. 17-9: Luftwaffe aerial photograph of Mednoe Russia ...................... 300

LIST OF TABLES

Table 8-1: GX material............................................................................ 131

PREFACE

This is a book for archaeologists, historians, anthropologists, cultural geographers, museum and heritage professionals, and military and cultural historians. It is a unique undertaking, being the first multi-disciplinary volume ever to focus on, and provide a comprehensive yet accessible introduction to the technical, philosophical, practical and intellectual aspects of military aerial photographs – their origins, use, and current and future applications. It provides a timely and wide-ranging overview of a discipline approaching its centenary, and one that is informed by the latest thinking and discoveries of a global community of scholars. The starting point of this project is to find in the need to get correct and reliable information about military aerial photographic archives. Not only the archives are of importance, but it was also interesting to bring together historians of the world war, aerial photography experts, archaeologists, anthropologists, etc. Therefore it was decided to organise a workshop (October 2006) together with the In Flanders Fields Museum of Ypres. This project was funded by the Research Foundation Flanders (FWOVlaanderen), the Province of West-Flanders, Ghent University and the In Flanders Fields Museum. The workshop was embedded in a Culture 2000 project “European Landscapes: Past, Present and Future”. The diversity of research encompassed by the theoretical and empirical contributions at the 2006 workshop at Ypres was unique, and the potential for archaeology and related disciplines is equally significant. For the first time, these aerial photographs – dating from the first five decades of the 20th Century – have been documented and analysed in their historical context. This has revealed them to be a powerful source and tool for multidisciplinary research rather than, as hitherto, simply a source of background illustrations. Readers of this book will learn equally of the technical, military, social, and cultural aspects of military aerial photographs, discover where to find these resources, and appreciate what kinds of information can be deduced from their study as well the historical context of their production. It will also give an incentive to the growing aerial archaeological

Images of Conflict

xiii

community to begin using these alternative sources of information. After almost a century, military aerial photography’s relationship with archaeology has begun to be theorized and documented in a variety of exciting and innovative ways. The rapid increase of public and academic interest in the First and Second World War, and in the material culture of conflict and commemoration around the world is a sign of changing ideas and attitudes towards our experiences of objects, landscapes and memory. It is as this critical point in time that a book such as this is needed to make a new kind of sense of the past, to stimulate debate, and to point the way forward for new cross-disciplinary and trans-national research. The first part of the book offers an introduction to the theme of historical aerial photography from different viewpoints. A second part focuses more on the early history of military aerial photography. It describes the importance and developments of the discipline in the First World War. The historiography of events such as the exploits of fighter pilots and the technological aspects of early aviation history are well known – yet, to date, there have been few investigations of aerial photographic reconnaissance, despite it being the raison d’être of most aerial activity, and the fact that it transformed not just the conduct of the war, but also human perceptions of landscape in general. Another cluster of papers presents the main collections of World War One and World War Two aerial photographs, and is a unique source in itself. Key issues and questions are raised: “where are these archives?”, “what do they contain?”, and “what is their potential for research in archaeology, history, anthropology, and geography?”. The physical dissemination of the collection is a great challenge to any researcher interested in using these air photos. Gaining insight in these collections and making them available for a broader public through digitalisation may as well be one the priorities of aerial archaeology in the next years. The last part concentrates on the modern use and interpretation of these aerial photographs, and their applications for mainstream archaeological research and in particular, for the fast-developing multidisciplinary field of conflict archaeology (20th-21st centuries). There will be an emphasis on the application of new techniques in archaeology such as GIS and stereoscopy, and their wider role for landscape studies, surveys, and heritage.

CHAPTER ONE IMAGES OF CONFLICT: AN INTRODUCTION JEAN BOURGEOIS, BIRGER STICHELBAUT Introduction In this chapter a general introduction to several issues of historical aerial photography is provided. In a textbook focusing on historical aerial photography, a short overview and introduction to the history of aerial photography is most welcome. However, this topic has already been the subject of detailed research by other authors (Deuel 1969, Nesbit 1996, Bewley 1997: 11, Bewley 2005, Gojda 2007: 18-19, Barber forthcoming). That is why only the most important stages in its development until the First World War are summarised and is tried to analyse how this episode, which we believe was of much importance, is represented in the existing literature. This overview is not intended to be exhaustive. In the following sections, we will emphasize on the possibilities of using historical air photos (i.e. in this case after World War One) and their unique characteristics and some unique fields of application.

Early history and development of (archaeological) aerial photography Birth of the discipline in the 19th century It is commonly known that the development of aerial photography depended on developments in military ballooning, photography and the birth of aviation in the 20th century. Although there already were experiments with optical and chemical processes before the 19th century (Newhall 1982: 9-12), it is the invention of the Daguerro-type by Louis Daguerre (with help of Nicéphore Niepce) in 1839 which marked a major advance in photography. A new stage was reached when glass plate negatives were made sensitive in 1851 (with the use of collodion), which reduced the exposure time of pictures to a couple of seconds (Newhall

2

Chapter One

1982: 59-60). This type of photography required the plates to be wet when exposed and developed and therefore required a portable darkroom. Not long after this, in October 1858, the taking of the first air photo is accredited to Gaspard Félix Tournachon, better know under the pseudonym Nadar (Musson, Palmer et al. 2005: 18). From his balloon he took air photos of the French capital (Deuel 1969: 30-31). Unfortunately these air photos have not survived, the oldest air photos that still exist document Boston around 1860 and were taken by James Wallace Black. Looking back on to the beginnings of aerial photography, it can be noticed that its history is connected with many major conflicts. Obviously the First and Second World War, but this was no different in the 19th century. According to Porter, the French army under command of Napoleon III took aerial pictures of the Austrian troops during the Battle of Solferino (1859) from balloons (Porter 1921: 159, Von Carl s.d.). Balloon air photographs are claimed to have been taken during the American Civil War (1861-1865) (Porter 1921: 165, Deuel 1969: 32, Gojda 2007: 18) on the line between Richmond and Petersburg (Porter 1921: 165) – although clearly contradicted by Nesbit (Nesbit 1996: 4) and during the Franco-Prussian War of 1870 and the Spanish-American War (1898) (Finnegan 2006: 8). In 1871 another milestone in the photographic process was reached with the invention of the dry plate (as opposed to the wet plates) by Richard Maddox (Newhall 1982: 123). It consisted of glass plates coated with a gelatine emulsion in which silver nitrate and cadmium bromide were added (Ibid.: 123)1. The plates were much more sensitive to light and therefore allowed exposure times of less than a second. Additionally plates could be developed much later following the exposures, no longer requiring a darkroom. Exactly for these two reasons aerial photography could now be explored on a larger scale. Several experiments with aerial photography were conducted, mounting cameras on unmanned kites, rockets and even pigeons (Dumarche 1988: 8). In the next years experiments in different armies continued in peacetime and during conflicts such as the Boer Wars (Watkis 1999: 7). The German Franz Stolz was among the first to photograph an archaeological excavation (Persepolis) from the air in 1879 (Chevallier 1971: 8, Nagy, Unold et al. 2001: 8, Musson 2005: 18).

 1

The cadmium bromide and silver nitrate in the gelatine react to form silver bromide crystals (Newhall 1982: 123).

Images of Conflict: an Introduction

3

The first decades of the 20th century Up to this point, balloons, kites and dirigibles were mainly used as aerial camera platforms. It were the events on 17 December 1903 that influenced the history of both aviation and aerial photography forever. On this famous day, the Wright Flyer, constructed by the brothers Wilbur and Orville Wright, made a 12- second flight near the village Kitty Hawk. Another major milestone in aerial archaeology are the pictures of Stonehenge taken by Lieutenant P.H. Sharpe in 1906 from a balloon. These images are the first air photos of an archaeological site in Britain (Deuel 1969: 32). They are even more important since the pictures reveal a cropmark of an archaeological feature (Bewley 2005: 16). Also in other parts of Europe aerial archaeology developed in this direction. In Italy, ancient monuments and archaeological sites were photographed in the period 1899-1911 under influence of Giacomo Boni (Musson 2005: 18-19, Gojda 2007: 18-19, Castrianni and Ceraudo this volume). Another step forward in aerial photography is achieved by – again – Wilbur Wright. He is not only credited for partially building the Wright Flyer but also for taking the first air photograph from an aircraft. He took this first picture on 24 April 1909 in Italy (Reeves 1927: 3). From this point on, this new aerial platform for photography would be explored on a couple of pre-war occasions and would be fully exploited during the World War One. Soon after the war started in August 1914, the expected war of movement swiftly changed into a positional warfare in the trenches. The First World War played a key role in the further development of aerial photography and its archaeological application. The significance of the war has been observed in many publications, although few authors look closely at the subject. In one of the standard works on aerial archaeology, Aerial Archaeology in Britain (Riley 1996), Derrick Riley states that: “the beginnings of archaeological air photography were the result of the impetus given to aviation by the First World War and the increase in the number of fliers at that time. Archaeologists were few then, but among them was one who had been an observer in the Royal Flying Corps, O.G.S Crawford, who became the most important pioneer of aerial photography” (Riley 1996: 7).

B. Bewley and W. Raczkowski mention that:

4

Chapter One “apart from the development and aircraft and cameras at the turn of the last century there can be no doubt that the First World War provided a stimulus to the subject of aerial survey generally” (Bewley and Raczkowski 2002: 12).

Leo Deuel considers the First World War as a turning point because: “during those four years the airplane came of age” and “because of the exigencies of war, the construction of planes, flying itself, and the techniques of reconnaissance from the air were perfected at an accelerated pace” (Deuel 1969: 33).

He continues: “the same was true of photographic equipment, such as lenses and plates or films”(Ibid.: 33). However he concludes that “the First World War precipitated relatively few discoveries in aerial archaeology; rather, it sharpened the wits and pointed up the potential”(Ibid.). In our opinion this can be considered the general view on Great War aerial photography on the Western Front. In other theatres of war some important archaeological discoveries were made during French, German and British initiatives. These receive more attention in the available literature, for instance the early work of Leon Rey in Macedonia (Deuel 1969: 34, Bewley 1997: 13). German applications of air photos worth mentioning are the investigations of Carl Schuchhardt of the Roman Limes in the Dobrudja (Romania) in 1918 (Crawford 1954: 206-207, Deuel 1969: 34). Theodor Wiegand is amongst the other famous pioneers. He became well-known for the creation of the Deutsch-Turkischen Denkmalschutzkammando2 as a unit within the Turkish Army (Raczkowski 2002: 32-33). A German photographer, Oberleutnant Falke provided Wiegand with aerial photographs of archaeological sites mostly located in the Negev Desert (Crawford 1954: 206, Deuel 1969: 34-35). As for the English, aerial photographs of Mesopotamian sites (i.e. Samarra) were made by G.A Beazeley (Bewley 1997: 14). This emphasis on the archaeology in the Near East can be easily explained since it mostly concerns upstanding remains and anti-aircraft artillery was not as present as on the Western Front. The attention of many authors swiftly jumps to the inter-war period and the further development of aerial photography by O.G.S Crawford. Even Crawford himself considered the war as an interruption in his

 2

Detachment for the protection of monuments.

Images of Conflict: an Introduction

5

archaeological research (Bewley 1997: 11). Somehow this corresponds with how aerial photography is dealt with in the historiography of the First World War, a process which is described by James Streckfuss. The history of the war in the air focuses only on some small aspects such as the “romantic” battles in the air, the commencement of aerial bombardments and the famous “aces”(see Streckfuss this volume). Only recently have some publications begun to explore the rich history of aerial photography during First World War (see Finnegan 2006 and this volume). The Second World War is on the other hand a better known period in the history of aerial photography. Once more there were major technical advances and another important by-product of the war was that many archaeologists received training as air photo-interpreters (Bewley 2002: 13). Also the aerial photographic collections of the Second World War are more widely known and used (Going 2002, Rączkowski 2004, Musson, Palmer et al. 2005, Hegarty and Newsome 2007, Castrianni and Ceraudo this volume). This large scale use of WW2 air photos contrasts immensely with the almost complete lacking of WW1 air photos in scientific research until the 21st century. The early history of aerial photography can be summarised as a genesis between military observation (“looking at the other side of the hill”), the birth of photography and the invention of the airplane. Retrospectively we notice the strong association of military campaigns and consequent progress in aerial archaeology. This background can still be observed in the aerial photographic jargon, a process distinctively observed by Kenneth Brophy (Brophy 2005). Brophy compiled the following phrases and expressions in the aerial archaeological literature: “sorties, campaigns, reconnaissance, mission, shooting, target”(Brophy 2005: 45), all strongly military tinted.

Start of the programmed archaeological surveys In the short period after the Second World War, the method of aerial photography became established and several initiatives, mainly in the United Kingdom, were started. Among these are for instance the aerial survey of Cambridge University by K. Saint Joseph (Wilson 2000: 20, Bewley 2005: 18), the Royal Commission on the Historical Monuments of England (now English Heritage) and the Royal Commissions in Wales and Scotland (Bewley 2005: 18-19). The development of aerial archaeology in this period is already much debated (Bewley 2005: 16-28, Musson 2005: 23-31) and so will not be dealt with here.

Chapter One

6

Vertical air photos for topographic surveys An important, and often overlooked source, are the large collections of vertical air photos that can be found in many countries (Bewley 1997: 1819). Often these are taken for topographical purposes. Unfortunately these are rarely catalogued or readily accessible. For instance for the small area of Belgium alone, the National Geographic Institute has a collection of some 80,000 post-WW2 air photos. Similar collections of vertical air photos (photographed for non-archaeological purposes) are presumably to be found in many other countries and contain a hidden potential which should not be underestimated.

Why use historical air photos? It is legitimate to ask why we should focus on the use of air photos? The answer is quite straightforward. Historical images contain a wealth of information which can be applied to several disciplines. First of all the pictures are a major source for archaeological prospection. Although they are mostly not intended to be used for archaeological purposes, the pictures can reveal crop or soil marks that can lead to the discovery of many new sites. In addition they can be used to study the nature and the extent of fossilised landscapes (i.e. Celtic fields, ridge and furrow, medieval landscape of moated sites, etc.). Interestingly the earlier part of these kinds of air photos are often taken in the period before major village and city expansions and intensified agriculture took place. As a result it is possible to record archaeological sites which are now already destroyed. These pictures are also an ideal source for the study of the development of both the urban and rural landscape in Europe. Recently, R. Bewley and W. Raczkowski observed the necessity and potential of a quest for large archival collections of air photos: “unlocking these archives is perhaps the most important development which would dramatically improve our understanding and knowledge of Europe’s historical environment” (Bewley and Raczkowski 2002: 5).

One could not agree more.

Why use military historical air photos? The use of historical air photos that were taken for military purposes gives us the same advantages as the previously discussed air photos. But

Images of Conflict: an Introduction

7

the pictures that were taken during the major conflicts of the 20th century have some unique characteristics. These pictures allow us to study the geography of war, a unique development which only took place in a brief period of time (World War One, World War Two, etc.). If we look at the Great War air photos, we can find literally hundreds of thousands air photos in different collections all over Europe and the rest of the world (see also the contributions of P. Haupt and B. Stichelbaut this volume). For the first time in the history of Europe, a war was fought on an industrial scale. At the same level air photographs were taken all along the frontline at the Western Front and other theatres of war, creating an almost complete coverage of air photos. The combination of these two unique facts, allows us to study this landscape in great detail. The air photos are in many instances the only source of information which can be of use for the study of this temporal military landscape. After the Great War, the destroyed cities and fields were reconstructed and most of the military features were erased. In the case of the Great War, the landscape was in many cases even converted to an Allied post war landscape where there is a major dominance of Allied monuments and cemeteries, as it is for instance in the Ypres area. The landscape of the Great War is unique and cannot be compared to any other landscape. Air photos of war zones allow for the detailed identification of aspects of the battle-zones, as for instance they allow the reconstruction of the battlefield on a given timescale, thanks to the fact that many pictures have been preserved. Moreover, it has been observed that a thorough photo interpretation of these images allows the discovery of “types” of monuments, such as trenches, pillboxes, etc., which have not been recorded in other sources in many cases. With the use of modern photogrammetric technologies, it is already possible to “reconstruct” this military landscape in 3D (see Stichelbaut this volume). This will without a doubt allow for a better understanding of some detailed military aspects in the field. Moreover, this reconstruction of the landscape of war offers a huge potential for the wider public.

Why conflict archaeology of the 20th Century? Some authors focus their attention on 20th century military remains (see Haupt 1998, Hegarty, Newsome et al. 2005 and Newsome this volume). Yet it becomes apparent that besides these publications, little

8

Chapter One

attention is paid to this specific kind of heritage in the modern aerial photographic literature. D.R. Wilson for instance, places the remnants of disused military sites in his standard work under the heading of “identification of non-archaeological features”(Wilson 2000: 193-199). Yet he clearly states that: “they could well be regarded as archaeological sites in their own right, but for most archaeologists they still seem like modern intrusions into the “genuine” archaeological record” (Wilson 2000: 193).

This specific kind of archaeology has been condoned rather than embraced in the past and was until recently the domain of amateur archaeologists. Recently, however, 20th century conflict archaeology received more attention by an increasing number of professional archaeologists (Saunders 2002, Saunders 2007, Desfossés, Jacques et al. 2008). The past development of this field in archaeology and its acceptance as a legitimate and scientific field of research can probably be compared to the status of medieval and post-medieval archaeology some decades ago. If we swiftly glance through the aerial photographic collection of the Department of Archaeology (Ghent University), we can notice on a number of oblique air photos traces of trenches and gun emplacements that show up as a still visible earthwork and in some (rare) cases even as a crop mark (see Fig. 1-1). However, in Belgium this does not happen very frequently. For instance on Fig. 1-2 we can observe a very rare example of a preserved breastwork trench in the sand dunes on the Belgian coast. These earthworks can be easily determined as being wartime trenches. Because this trench system is associated with and partly overlain with a German coastal battery (WW2) of the Atlantic Wall, the interpretation of these features as WW1 trenches was not immediately self-evident. The examination of WW1 air photos revealed the true nature of the recorded features, i.e. that they formed part of a Great War trench system. However, the small number of these sites that are recorded in the slide collection of the Department of Archaeology (Ghent University) leads us to suspect that these kinds of features do not show up very often on modern air photos. Especially when we compare them to the hundreds of kilometres of trenches that rest preserved under Flanders’ fields. This view can be biased by the occurrence of breastwork trenches (which were possibly not dug into the ground), the distance of the prospection zone

Images of Conflict: an Introduction

9

from the operated airfield (meaning that the front area was less prospected in the past) and difficult soil conditions. An important characteristic of using historical military air photos is the simultaneity of the air photos with the main subject on the air photos: the Great War landscape and a large diversity of war features. Unlike modern aerial archaeology, most of the visible features are not recorded as crop- or soil marks. Instead they are related to the Great War and were constructed in the period 1914-1918.

Fig. 1-1: Trench system near Lichtervelde, observed as cropmark (Source: Department of Archaeology, Ghent University, Jacques Semey, n° 103823)

Because of the large abundance of air photos taken throughout 19151918, this military landscape had been documented several times during the war. This means that many of the recorded traces are contemporary with the air photos or at least not much older. From an archaeological and anthropological point of view this creates an interesting and perhaps unique situation where the archaeological heritage is being studied with contemporary remote sensing data. On one hand this means that most of the traces such as trenches and gun emplacements were visible for a long time and are clearly noticeable on many of the pictures. This also means that for a study of the military features on historical photos, the “right

10

Chapter One

time” or day for taking aerial photographs is less important than for traditional aerial photography. On the other hand, ground troops were also informed of their visibility from the air. This resulted in an ongoing battle of camouflage between troops on the ground and the aerial photographers.

Fig. 1-2: Breast worked World War One trench in the Belgian dunes (Source: Department of Archaeology, Ghent University, Birger Stichelbaut)

In the United Kingdom, France and Belgium, at least a part of the professional archaeological world considers the material remains of recent conflicts as archaeological heritage. The developments, focus points and future directions of each of these countries in this matter differ slightly. Nicholas J. Saunders’s Killing Time. Archaeology and the First World War (Saunders 2007) provides a useful overview of different initiatives on the Western Front and their history.

References Anon. (1915) Une fusée photographique militaire. In: L'Aérophile, Revue technique et pratique des locomotions aériennes 23, 7/8: 73. Barber M. (forthcoming) Mata Hari’s Glass Eye and Other Stories: A History of Aerial Photography and Archaeology. English Heritage. Bewley R. (1997) From military to civilian: a brief history of the early development of aerial photography for archaeology. In: Oexle J. (Ed.) Aus der Luft. Bilder unserer Geschichte. Lüftbildarchäologie in Zentraleuropa. Landesamt für Archäologie, Dresden: 10-21. —. (2002) Aerial Survey: Learning from a Hundred Years of Experience? In: Bewley R. & Raczkowski W. (Eds.) Aerial Archaeology.

Images of Conflict: an Introduction

11

Developing Future Practice. NATO Science Series vol. 337. IOS Press, Amsterdam: 11-18. —. (2005) Aerial Archaeology. The First Century. In: Bourgeois J. & Meganck M. (Eds.) Aerial Photography & Archaeology 2003. A century of information. Academia Press, Ghent: 15-30. Bewley R. & Raczkowski W. (2002) Future Development of Aerial archaeology. In: Bewley R. & Raczkowski W. (Eds.) Aerial archaeology. Developing Future Practice. NATO Science Series vol. 337. IOS Press, Amsterdam: 1-8. Brophy K. (2005) Subjectivity, bias and perception in aerial archaeology. In: Brophy K. & Cowley D. (Eds.) From the air: understanding aerial archaeology. Tempus, Stroud: 33-49. Chevallier R. (1971) La Photographie Aérienne. Librairie Armand Colin, Paris. Crawford O.G.S. (1954) A Century of Air-photography. In: Antiquity 28: 206-210. Desfossés Y., Jacques A. & Prilaux G. (2008) L'archéologie de la Grande Guerre. DRAC, Villeneuves d’Asq. Deuel L. (1969) Flights into Yesterday. The story of Aerial Archaeology. Penguin Books, Suffolk. Dumarche L. (1988) La photographie aérienne 1914-1918: une nouvelle arme de guerre. In: Humbert J.-P. (Ed.) Vues d’en Haut 14/18. La photographie aérienne pendant la guerre de 1914/1918. Musée de l'Armée, Paris: 8-16. Finnegan T.J. (2006) Shooting the front. National Defence Intelligence College Press, Washington. Going C. (2002) A neglected asset. German aerial photography of the Second World War period. In: Bewley R. & Raczkowski W. (Eds.) Aerial Archaeology. Developing Future Practice (= Nato Science Series I: Vol. 337. IOS Press, Lesno: 23-30. Gojda M. (2007) Flights into the past. Narodni Muzeum, Prague. Haupt P. (1998) Die Mainzer Armierungsstellungen des Ersten Weltkriegs im archäologischen Luftbild. In: Mainzer Archäologische Zeitschrift 1998/99, 5/6: 337-350. Hegarty C. & Newsome S. (2007) Suffolk's Defended shore. English Heritage, Suffolk. Hegarty C., Newsome S. & Winton H. (2005) The Greatest Battlefield that never was - Suffolk Aerial Archaeology. In: Battlefields Annual Review 2005: 63-71. Musson C. (2005) Archeologia Aerea: Storia e approcci diversi. In: Musson C., Palmer R. & Campana S. (Eds.) In volo nel passato.

12

Chapter One

Aerofotografia e cartografia archeologica. All'Insegna del Giglio, Siena: 15-34. Musson C., Palmer R. & Campana S. (Eds.) (2005) In volo nel passato. Aerofotografia e cartografia archeologica. All'Insegna del Giglio, Siena. Nagy P., Unold W. & Vogt S. (2001) Flug in die Vergangenheit. Die Luftbildprospektion im Dienste der Archäeologie. In: Helvetia Archaeologica 32, 125/126: 4-85. Nesbit R.C. (1996) Eyes of the RAF. A history of Photo-Reconnaissance. J.H.Haynes & Co. Ltd, Sparkford. Newhall B. (1982) The history of photography from 1839 to the present. The Museum of Modern Art, New York. Porter H.E. (1921) Aerial Observation. Harper & Brothers Publishers, New York. Raczkowski W. (2002) Archeologia Lotnicza: Methoda Wobec Teorii (Aerial Archaeology: Method in the Face of Theory). Adam Mickiewicz Univeristy Press, Poznan. —. (2004) Dusty treasure: thoughts on a visit to The Aerial Reconnaissance Archives at Keele University (UK). In: AARGnews 29: 9-11. Reeves D. (1927) Aerial photographs: Characteristics and military applications. Ronald Press, New York. Riley D. (1996) Aerial Archaeology in Britain. Shire Publications, Princes Risborough. Saunders N. (2002) Excavating Memories: Archaeology and the Great War, 1914-2001. In: Antiquity 76, 291: 101-108. —. (2007) Killing Time. Archaeology and the First World War. Sutton, Gloucestershire. Von Carl F. (s.d.) Die Entwicklung des militärischen deutschen Luftbildwesens 1911-1918 und seine militärische wie kulturelle Bedeutung. Ferko Collection UTD Box 63. Watkis N. (1999) The Western Front from the Air. Redwood Books, Wiltshire. Wilson D. (2000) Air photo interpretation for archaeologists. Tempus, Stroud.

CHAPTER TWO THE LAST WITNESS. MILITARY AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY USED IN A MODERN MUSEUM CONTEXT PIET CHIELENS Remy Siding 1917 – 1915 – 2008 My first introduction to military aerial photography was through a series of 60 German, Belgian and British aerial photos published in 1987 by Roeselare collector Geert Lepez, under the title Een bijdrage tot “De 3e slag om Ieper”(A contribution to the Third Battle of Ypres) (Lepez 1987). I was a child of the front region, having been raised on stories about the First World War, and had been reading and learning about that war for a number of years. Yet the sight of some of these pictures gave me goose bumps. A British oblique photo (Fig. 2-1) showed the sector of Oosttaveerne Wood near Wijtschate during the Battle of the Messines Ridge, 7 June 1917. Whereas in the foreground next to the wood small black dots suggested advancing British troops, at least ten projectiles were exploding in the background – within the shutter time of one photo. This was undoubtedly the barrage of the British artillery intended to prevent the German reserves from assisting their besieged comrades. This was the war live, in a 70 year deferred relay transmission!

14

Chapter Two

Fig. 2-1: Oosttaveerne Wood 1917 (Source: In Flanders Fields Museum)

Photo 17 of the book (Lepez 1987) (Fig. 2-2) showed the open and still worked land to the South West of Poperinge. The photo was taken by a German observer at 10.30 a.m. on 4 September 1917. Bottom right, on both sides of the Poperinge/Hazebrouck railway and the road to Boeschepe, there was the gigantic complex of tents and wooden huts of four or five Casualty Clearing Stations of the British Second Army, next to a laboratory and other auxiliary installations. Right at the bottom, disappearing in the photo’s identification slip, stood (and still stands today) the Remy Quaghebeur Farm that gave its name to the complex: Remy Siding, with next to it the cemetery, which after the war was called Lijssenthoek Military Cemetery. On the track I could surmise a couple of trains, and some fifty trucks were driving along the Boescheepseweg.

Military Aerial Photography used in a Modern Museum Context

15

Fig. 2-2: German aerial photograph near Poperinge (Source: In Flanders Fields Museum)

Gradually taking in the details and hence the content of this picture with a magnifying glass, that each time led me to the frustration of the print grid, gave me an even greater shock. These trains and trucks carried the wounded to the Casualty Clearing Stations where they received medical care. Some of them could be helped and would continue their trips to the base hospitals and convalescent

16

Chapter Two

homes in Northern France. Others would not make it in spite of all medical efforts, and would be buried on the same day or on the following day. When I visited Lijssenthoek MC, I was able to read their names. In Plot XVIII in rows F and H, I counted 12 casualties of 4 September 1917, and 13 of the following day. An overview showed me that only 12 of the 25 dead belonged to the infantry and originated from six different divisions. The others belonged to the artillery, Army Service Corps, and even included a pilot of the Royal Flying Corps. I had to conclude that these troops were dispersed throughout the Ypres Salient, and so that this was definitely not a large convoy of wounded soldiers. A closer examination showed that the trucks were also driving away from the scene and they were probably double-decker trucks. In the top right corner of the photo the Boescheepseweg intersects with the Singel. In those days that was the Southern ring road, which the troops followed to avoid the centre of Poperinge. What the photo in fact showed was a division arriving from France and driving along Remy Siding en route to the front near Ypres. On the open top decks troops were undoubtedly waving to medical orderlies and nurses who were briefly stretching their legs or smoking a cigarette outside the hutments and tents of their CCS. Maybe just a few days later some of these troops would be returning there, wounded, and some of these injured soldiers would be buried in Lijssenthoek Military Cemetery. Even though I had been mistaken, or rather, even though I was a few days too early to find the names of people “present” on this photo at the cemetery1, the initial shock remained the same. The photo of this motionless landscape in the beautiful morning sun, 5800 metres under the cameraman flying above, was buzzing with life (and death). More than any close-up of the war, it seemed as if this life could start again at any moment and allow the growing tragedy of this place to unfold. If only I could get close enough ... if only I could zoom in beyond the grid... then I would be able to see. 18 years later, while preparing the temporary exhibition “The Last Witness” in the In Flanders Fields Museum, I was able to see it, without



1 The war diary of a division or of the town major of Poperinge could indicate which division passed there on 4/9/1917, after which the cemetery immediately would disclose its secrets. I have not as yet completed this research; indeed, the diary of the town major of Poperinge held in the National Archives ends on 4 January 1917.

Military Aerial Photography used in a Modern Museum Context

17

magnifying glass. Zooming in now occurs through high resolution scanning and on the computer screen. In his contribution Mathieu de Meyer explains how he started georeferencing the collection of aerial photos of the IFFM, at our request, in order to determine the exact front line based on this information. It was, however, the comparison with another undated photo from the collection of Freiherr Dietrich von Kanne that showed me the unfolding tragedy. In reverse sequence, von Kanne’s photo is the oldest (georeferenced here on an orthophoto of GEO Flanders 2005 - Fig. 2-3).

Fig. 2-3: Lyssenthoek Military Cemetery 1915 (Source: In Flanders Fields Museum and GEO Vlaanderen)

It is summer, the hop stands tall and thick in a hop garden along the railway (where it stands bare in the photo dated 4/9/1917), the bushed banks along the Winterbeek and the Vleterbeek are also in full leaf. This must be 1915, the last summer in the Freiher’s life. He died on 24 April 1916, after a dogfight with five British planes. The date can also be

18

Chapter Two

deducted from the field hospital which was already operational at the time. In addition to a small number of huts near the farm, the remainder of the French Hôpital d’évacuation No.15, many tents set up in pairs can be seen on both sides of the railway. These are the first British Casualty Clearing Stations. By 1917, the tents had mostly been replaced with wooden constructions and their number had more than doubled. In the summer of 1917, four and even occasionally five Casualty Clearing Stations were in operation.

Fig. 2-4: Lyssenthoek Military Cemetery 1915 detail (Source: In Flanders Fields Museum and GEO Vlaanderen)

On von Kanne’s photo we can also clearly distinguish the first graves. The latter are situated where today we can still find French and British graves of 1915 in the cemetery. The French first plot, next to the British plots III and I were filled first, as from May 1915. On the photo there are no more than 200 graves, that figure was already reached at the beginning of August (Fig. 2-4). 25 months later, when the photo of the Lepez collection was taken, there were already 5000 more graves. The tragedy of the war is not only highlighted in the number of graves, but also in the extent of the related

Military Aerial Photography used in a Modern Museum Context

19

accommodation, in this instance the expanding field hospital, as can be seen on both photos.

Authentic landscape It is possible to illustrate or demonstrate the succession of events by comparing pictures of the same landscape at a different moment in time. By showing the common points between photos of the war and the present landscape it becomes clear that the identity of this landscape is determined by the events of that war. This becomes quite obvious in a gigantic cemetery like Lijssenthoek Military Cemetery. But this also applies for many far more and far less visible or expected places. For the story of a war in a modern war museum the importance of the visual links between today’s landscape and the war can hardly be underestimated. Now that the First World War generation has disappeared, the importance of the war landscape has grown tremendously. Here the focus is not initially on the typical characteristics of a region, but quite literally on landscape elements: ground, hills, valleys, height differences, watercourses, and on cultural landscape elements: plot boundaries, roads, bushed banks, railway beddings, artificial hills, crops, parks. Drawing attention to this has nothing to do with technical or merely material fascination. Man and his testimony about the war experience remains the central point. The personal, i.e. the emphatic and the human aspects remain at the heart of the discussion on warfare. Man is the only measure of the horrors of war. However, the authenticity value of what is being told will be greatly enhanced in the landscape for the contemporary listener who never had the opportunity of meeting the authenticity of the original protagonists. How can you possibly determine whether all this is “genuine”, if you cannot see it with your own eyes, if you cannot feel it in your own pedal stroke or step, if you are unable to confirm it or strengthen it through your own knowledge and insight? In short, the landscape is the new layer of authenticity to be opened up. It is “this soil” in which the soldiers drowned or became stuck, “this water” that protected them or that they struggled against, “that hill or ridge” they were unable to climb over, “this edge of the road” along which their evacuation ended, and where they thus found their final resting place to the present day.

20

Chapter Two

The landscape as such not only provides an explanation and a context to the war story, but also becomes the symbolic guardian of the story. It is the meeting place between the contemporary visitor and history. Those qualities also give the landscape its identity. The landscape is not only the place in which historical evidence can be found, it is also an anthropological environment in which historic events and interhuman relations and interpretation reach a conclusion, both today and yesterday. As such the spots in the landscape are the anchorage points where the fascination of “returning in history” is maintained and manifested. In this landscape material evidence, historic character, historic events and genuine experience come together. Here the work of the historian, of the archaeologist, of the museum curator and of the anthropologist converge and are enhanced by one another.

Reading landscapes To allow these historic places and landscapes to fulfil this role for a broad public, they must be made legible in many different ways. Although time may have altered their appearance, in many instances it has not changed their identity. The heritage value is still present, but must again be made legible or be made legible in a more concrete manner. This is quite simply the task of a modern war museum like the In Flanders Fields Museum. Presenting human stories with a demonstrable origin, or artefacts with a demonstrable origin and providing a visual reading of these original landscapes, are essential tasks that we must complete in order to make the trench war of 1914-1918 understandable. The inside museum must make the outside museum legible and must charge it with its historic relevance.

Military photography The soldiers of 1914-1918 used all known photographic techniques to make their war visible, i.e. legible. Headquarters required small and large panoramas in order to literally obtain a view of the situation at the front. Artillery observation used oblique and vertical aerial photography to select and define their targets. Cartographers daily updated their trench maps using vertical aerial photos, possibly in stereo pairs. All these types of military photography are again being used to make the war visible 90 years later.

Military Aerial Photography used in a Modern Museum Context

21

This had already been done in the exhibition “The Last Witness”, by means of aerial photos and panorama photos as well as with some remarkably accurate observation drawings. The standpoint of the camera or of the draughtsman was determined in the contemporary landscape and the similar view of that day was now filmed. In the editing suite the current video images and the original panoramas were combined in an animation that allowed eliminating and phasing out the time between the panorama photo and the panorama film. The same occurred with some oblique photos of ruins of buildings that were reconstructed in exactly the same location. The Ypres Cloth Hall is a good example of this. A still from an animation of the snapping shut of the time shutter can only show with great difficulty how revealing this is (Fig. 2-5). It is as if the present day building or today’s landscape is being uploaded with the drama of its historic destruction.

Fig. 2-5: Detail of animation (Source: In Flanders Fields Museum)

In his contribution Mathieu de Meyer extensively explains how he went to work with the vertical aerial photos. Georeferenced aerial photographs leave an imprint of history on the landscape. In historic perspective, however, far more is happening. In the succession of aerial photos taken of the same place at different moments it becomes clear how trench warfare actually worked. More specifically the (relatively) early aerial photos were revealing in this respect.

22

Chapter Two

Trenches, which in the course of the war seemed to have always existed, clearly had an origin in small landscape elements, like a road, a bushed bank, a brook or a slope. It is only with the onset of the major artillery campaigns, for the Ypres Salient as from July 1917, that these landscape elements were destroyed and that their connection with today’s landscape is also lost. In the following example we see how a trench system is elaborated along the hedges and a high row of trees at the boundary of a meadow. In the photo of 19 September 1915 (Fig. 2-6) a communication trench has been built along the Northern hedges of the meadow. In the photo of 14 March 1916 (Fig. 2-7 – both photos belong to the Freiherr Dietrich von Kanne Collection) the trench network has become far busier. A large approach trench to the British front line has been built along the high Southern bushed bank of the meadow. In the British aerial photo of 27 July 1917 (Fig. 2-8 – IWM 9ae623) this meadow can no longer be seen. Even the meadow to its right, which formed the No Man’s Land between the German and Allied front line as from 25 April 1915, can only be distinguished vaguely as a dark spot. Jumping off trenches have been installed in front of the British front line. Four days later, on 31 July 1917, the 38th (Welsh) division would launch the attack on Pilkem from here. Immediately after the successful attack the first dead were buried in the small cemetery Caesar’s Nose (Welsh) Cemetery, which still stands next to the old meadow. In the field to its left you can still distinguish the two communication trenches or the bushed banks of 1915 and 1916 in the discoloration of the soil (Fig. 2-9).

Fig. 2-6: Caesar’s Nose September 1915 (Source: In Flanders Fields Museum)

Military Aerial Photography used in a Modern Museum Context

Fig. 2-7: Caesar’s Nose March 1916 (Source: In Flanders Fields Museum)

Fig. 2-8: Caesar’s Nose July 1917 (Source: Imperial War Museum)

23

24

Chapter Two

Fig. 2-9: Caesar’s Nose modern view (Source: In Flanders Fields Museum)

In the new permanent exhibition that will open in the IFFM in 2012, we aim to continue with such studies. In the first place sites in the Ypres Salient will be selected, but subsequently also from the other fronts in Flanders. The Yser front with its flooded plains offers quite different challenges in respect of the visualization of the front. We also intend to include oblique photos in different new presentations in order to give the contemporary visitor an introduction to both the events of the First World War and its landscape. Where aerial photography in all the applications used to date, were used in a two-dimensional environment, we hope to be able to also include the third dimension in our representation of the war landscape thanks to the animation of oblique photos. In the famous coulisse landscape of Flanders at the beginning of the previous century, the “green screens” formed by trees, bushes, castle parks and hedges, also played an important part in the first half of the trench war. “It was a case of O.Pip versus O.Pip” wrote vortex-artist, author, war artist and artillery observer Percy Wyndham-Lewis in his memoirs (Wyndham-Lewis 1937).2 Seeing and not being seen, that was the essence of trench warfare. This is precisely what the aerial photography of the First World War can show us more vividly than anything else.

 2

O.Pip was the soldier’s jargon for Observation Post.

Military Aerial Photography used in a Modern Museum Context

25

References Lepez G. (1987) Een bijdrage tot “De 3e slag om Ieper”. Drukkerij Atelier, Roeselare. Wyndham-Lewis P. (1937) Blasting and Bombardiering, an autobiography (1914-1926). Eyre & Spottiswoode, London.

CHAPTER THREE ULYSSES’ GAZE: THE PANOPTIC PREMISE IN AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY AND GREAT WAR ARCHAEOLOGY NICHOLAS J. SAUNDERS Introduction The First World War is characterised by a paradox of vision – a paradox created by technology, and which recalibrated human sight, taking its focus away from the middle distance, and towards the contrasted and contested extremes of the ultra-distant, and the ultra-close. Inherent in this paradox was the fact that while aerial photographic technology was increasingly privileging the panoptic bird’s eye view spanning kilometres, weapons technology was contesting with it, by creating conditions that enforced an intimate human engagement with landscape experienced and measured in centimetres. In other words, the cultural sense of distance (the near and the far) (e.g. Helms 1988: 7-9), as well as of scale (the large and the small) (e.g. Molyneaux 2006: 67-71) was being reconfigured not by traditional social discourse and experience, but by the devastating technologies of 20th century industrialised conflict. Lost in the wealth of technological images that aerial photography (and latterly satellite imagery) provides for us, and that shape our understanding of conflict landscapes, are unacknowledged cultural dimensions associated with perception, authority, dominance and control. For aerial photographs, and for maps, these issues play a part in constructing a contested “social life” of the object (Appadurai 1997) which sets the nature of war as experienced by front-line soldiers against that adjudicated by commanders in the rear areas. During the First World War, and at least in part, this paradox was articulated through the social relationships of a class system, which saw the well-educated purveyors of the technology of sanitised “distance” set against the less educated, who experienced and endured the various and often demonic sensualities of proximity.

28

Chapter Three

Ulysses’ Gaze: film as object and alterity The title of this paper has been borrowed and adapted from the 1995 film, Ulysses’ Gaze, by the Greek director Theo Angelopoulos (Angelopoulos 1995). The film’s story concerns a photographer (played by Harvey Keitel) and his quest for the beginnings of the art of filmmaking – specifically his search for three old reels of film from the 1890s that recorded the history and customs of the Balkans with no regard to political boundaries and ethnic strife. These film reels had never been developed, and thus never seen, but were believed to preserve an “innocent” and uncontaminated gaze (Corel 2004: 1017) – a pre-modern visual record of traditional Balkan life. Ulysses’ Gaze is thus a search for an “original moment”, perhaps the “last witness” of an idyllic past of people and places. What adds to this innocence is Angelopoulos’ professional opinion that the first time a film maker looks through a camera’s viewfinder he discovers not a cinematic or photographic image but a whole new world. Angelopoulos creates suspense out of geography and history, because the photographer’s search for the lost reels is a journey in time, and several epochs of the Balkan past appear as inserts throughout the film (Ibid.: 1018). The long lingering shots, the slow pace of the action and the coexistence in the same shot of events from different times creates the impression of a palimpsest of landscape – almost a series of individual photographs. These narrative techniques related to time invite the audience to participate in a genuine act of discovery, to recognise and explore everdeeper layers of meaning, and to reflect on time and memory. The photographer-protagonist in Angelopoulos’ film ignores the siren voices that would make his search easier. When someone offers to fetch the three reels of film from a war-torn Sarajevo in 1994, he refuses – he has to see and experience the places and the objects first hand. And, with his ears and his eyes wide open – like Ulysses/Odysseus tied to the mast – he sees the city for the first time (Ibid.: 1019). His first experience is not visual but aural – the sound of Serbian artillery pounding the city. It seems to the photographer that the innocence of the three reels is once again besieged by the forces of intolerance and hatred. It is worth adding here that in Greek, the name Odysseus means “victim of enmity”.

The Panoptic Premise in Aerial Photography and Great War Archaeology

Fig. 3-1: Poster for Theo Angeloupolos’ 1995 film Ulysses’ Gaze (Courtesy and copyright Theo Angelopoulos)

29

30

Chapter Three

These allusions to classical Greek myth and history work at different levels. A particularly interesting point is that the universal epitome of the “ambiguous and ultimately treacherous gift” is the Trojan Horse – the idea for which, Homer tells us, belonged to Odysseus himself. The three reels of film appear as “a gift from the past to the present” in what they are purported to show, though in fact their true meanings are far more elusive. How true and accurate is their recorded imagery as an example of a primordial gaze? Does one see authenticity, or perhaps a simulacrum? In other words, do cameras capture reality or merely the semblance of it? Angelopoulos’ photographer finally discovers the lost film reels in the keeping of a man who calls himself “a collector of vanished gazes”. Angelopoulos originally planned to materialise an image from the supposed old reels in which Ulysses/Odysseus would look at the camera, hence at us, confronting us with an “innocent gaze” from a time prior to the tragedies of the 20th century. Instead, he presents us with a blank screen (Ibid.: 1020). The fetishism of the reels is dispelled, and the photographer and audience are now aware of the symbolic values of the quest, and have themselves acquired a new gaze – a new way of understanding the world and their place within it.

 Fig. 3-2: Angelopoulos’ photographer (Courtesy and copyright Theo Angelopoulos)

The Panoptic Premise in Aerial Photography and Great War Archaeology

31

The “Western Gaze” and the ambiguity of technology Underlying and intersecting Angelopoulos’ film is the theoretical concept of the “Western Gaze” as explored by the landscape anthropologist Barbara Bender, for whom it is: “a particular, historically constituted, way of perceiving and experiencing the world. It is a gaze that skims the surface; surveys the land from an egocentred viewpoint; and invokes the active viewer (subject) and a passive land (object). This active viewer is equated with “culture” and the land with “nature” (Bender 1999: 31).

Bender draws on the work of Anne Salmond, whose view of the Western Gaze suggests that it is, above all, the assumption of a “detached intelligence working to domesticate and master an objectified world” (Salmond 1992: 85). It is, in effect, a discourse of power and control. While this approach has been used hitherto to explore and theorize the construction and use of maps, it is equally applicable, at least in part, and with some reconfiguration, to aerial photography – not least because aerial photographs were used to produce military maps. Aerial photography “was perhaps the most significant development in cartography before and during the First World War” (Chasseaud 1999: 27-28 and see Chasseaud this volume). It is particularly useful in assessing the mediation of photographic technology so evident in the First World War, and also by virtue of the fact that photographs themselves are objects of “visual and material culture”(Edwards 2001: 13-16) that possess ideological and political components as well as topographic and military ones. In this respect, it is worth emphasizing the difference between wartime aerial photography and its land-based equivalent, inasmuch as while both were inherently risky, the former was enthusiastically encouraged and easily controlled, the latter was not. On the ground – in the landscape – carrying a camera and taking photographs was prohibited by military authorities, especially the British, who sought thereby to control public perceptions by concealing the dreadful scenes of carnage (Ekstein 1990: 233). Even official photographers were constrained. In exchange for being given access to the battlefields, they had to agree in advance not to show British dead. These restrictions – the ideological control of technology – produced a sanitised (and highly unlikely) view of the war – landscapes of terrible destruction peppered with enemy dead but few if any Allied casualties.

32

Chapter Three

For the bereaved, the vast numbers of “the missing” (in battle) were strangely pre-figured by even larger numbers of “the invisible” (in photographs) (Saunders 2001). Civilian knowledge of and ideas about Western Front battlefields consequently bore little resemblance to that of soldiers, a fact which contributed to the (sometimes bitter) alienation felt by many servicemen returning home on leave (Hynes 1990: 116). It is clear that the rapidly advancing technologies of photography produced new and sometimes highly contentious perspectives on battlefield landscapes – images that announced a seemingly objective and pristine authenticity, but that in fact could conceal a serpent’s nest of lies, mistakes, half truths, and misleading interpretations. Variously for aerial and land-based photographs, this was achieved by direct control of what was photographed, deliberate faking of photographic images (Decoodt 2002), or the propagandistic transposition of images from a pre-1914 conflict to “illustrate” German atrocities in Great War Belgium (Ferguson 1998: 232). For reasons of scale and distance, aerial photographs also did not show the dead, though they were there, and an integral part of the landscape. One way or another, objective reality could be elided, and the dead made to disappear or, indeed, to reappear. Aerial photographs (and maps) present a bird’s eye view of the world – a view which registers a palimpsest of past activities, a narrative of action and event. While maps laid a Cartesian grid over a landscape, and are clearly the result of cultural choice as to which features should be highlighted and which should not, aerial photographs appear simply to record what is there. In fact, of course, there is an ironic and complex relationship between these two kinds of images during the Great War which goes beyond the use of aerial photographs to produce military maps. Aerial photographs were not just an adjunct to mapmaking, but also helped to create a physical and psychological iconography of landscape in which logic was affected, and which in turn influenced the decisions of command officers as to what was tactically and strategically achievable. In other words, the existence of aerial photographs gave the impression of knowledge and control, upon which life-saving or life-threatening decisions were made, and therefore changed not only military strategy but also the social relations between soldiers, and between soldiers and landscape in the front line and beyond.

The Panoptic Premise in Aerial Photography and Great War Archaeology

33

Yet, while aerial photographs can induce a sense of all-encompassing vision, their understanding, as with maps, requires a skilled and experienced interpreter – in this case someone who could “read” the telltale signs of war on landscape, and from altitudes and angles that, with some minor exceptions, had never before in human history offered a way of seeing or sensing the environment. These skills had to be learned – and involved, by definition, knowing what to look for, and what to filter out – a process which depended not only on the perhaps “naturally expert eye” of the interpreter, but also on his social and cultural (and educational) background. Learning to interpret aerial photographs – and to draw and communicate salient conclusions up the chain of command – was a process which had embedded itself within the same conceptual framework of the Western Gaze as had the production of maps. The use of aerial photographs to produce what was, initially, a new and very different kind of image of battlefield landscapes, and of their relationship to the Western Gaze, can be assessed also from alternative ways of conceiving and sensing landscape. This is most clearly seen among indigenous non-western peoples, where landscape is more to do with memory, kinship, physical experience, and social process, than with producing drawings or photographs of three dimensional physical space on two dimensional media. Ideas of landscape found, for example, amongst South American Indians, Australian Aborigines, or African tribal peoples include stories concerning the activities of mythical beings, of ancestors, of good or evil spirits, and excerpts from the cultural memory of the group concerned (e.g. Gow 1995, Layton 1999). Places and traces of where people were born, where they died, and where they once lived, all give shape and meaning to a landscape that is invisible to the Western eye (as represented by photography and mapping). It is here, in the interstices of cultural landscapes that indigenous peoples dwell, not at a meeting point of longitude and latitude. This non-western way of sensing the environment has a direct parallel to the First World War and to its various kinds of maps and aerial photographs. In the physical, experiential, and symbolic distance between front line soldiers and the command staff in the rear areas, there is a relationship which is analogous to the differences between indigenous and western ways of perceiving the world.

34

Chapter Three

Indeed, for some, the relationship was more than analogous it was virtually identical, because of the multi-ethnic and multi-faith nature of the Allied armies. African-Americans, African-Caribbean peoples, men from African tribal societies, and Native Americans, Hindus, Sikhs, Maoris, Vietnamese, and Chinese were all involved in some capacity (see Dendooven and Chielens 2008). Each group had its own conceptions of landscape that were forcibly confronted with Western ones during the war, just as their own countries had been subjected to the Western Gaze epitomised by mapping during the previous century (e.g. Lewis 1998). In fact, in many instances, it was the Western Gaze as a tool of European topographic and cartographic imperialism which had brought them to the Somme and Flanders in the first place.

 Fig. 3-3 WW1 air photo, Belgian-German frontline near Dikmuide (Source: Belgian Military Archives SGRS-S/A)

Knowing the earth For Great War soldiers (regardless of race or creed), there were many different ways of “knowing” the landscape – by smell, touch, sound, and sight – although usually, in western sensibilities, it was sight which had predominated hitherto (see Howes 2004, Classen 2005). In times of war,

The Panoptic Premise in Aerial Photography and Great War Archaeology

35

and certainly for the First World War, everyday sight was diminished, and often disappeared almost completely as a way of knowing the battlefield, and sensing one’s enemies. What replaced it at ground level was a universe of tactile sensory perception. What replaced it above ground level was the aerial photograph. At one and the same time, soldiers on or near the front line could see little or nothing (though they might perceive more), while command officers in the rear area could, in one sense, see everything (and arguably perceive less). In the gap between these two perceptions of distance, the fate of thousands of men regularly hung in the balance. For the combat soldier, the physical and psychological intensities of industrialised war produced a different view of the world, if not a new world entirely. In a universe of mud, trenches, dugouts, deafening artillery bombardments, night raids, choking gas, and blind advances across No Man's Land, it was often impossible to see anything. Sight, so central to the Western Gaze, was often replaced by other kinds of sensory experience. As one soldier memorably put it, he had to quickly acquire: “an expert knowledge of all the strange sounds and smells of warfare, ignorance of which may mean death … My hearing was attuned to every kind of explosion … My nostrils were quick to detect a whiff of gas or to diagnose the menace of a corpse disinterred at an interval of months” (Paterson 1997: 239).

The English war poet Wilfred Owen wrote to his mother after just three weeks in the trenches: “I have not seen any dead. I have done worse. In the dank air, I have perceived it, and in the darkness, felt” (quoted in Das 2005: 7). On the battlefields of the Great War, the fragmentation of human bodies and the earth (by artillery barrages and machinegun fire) was on such a vast scale that reality itself was pulverised. The result was a surreal world – a landscape of darkness, sound, touch, and smell. In a universe of trenches, dugouts, bomb craters, and No Man’s Land, where seeing was impossible or lethal, soldiers were often reduced to crawling and slithering, feeling and smelling their way around (Saunders in press). In other words, their knowledge of the world came not from sight, but through tactile sensations – the so-called haptic way of knowing the immediate environment. It is perhaps for this reason that soldiers’ experiences (and writings) were often less concerned with what they could see than with what they could feel. It is hardly surprising that the fear of

36

Chapter Three

mud (with its metal splinters, diseases, effluents, and fragments of other men) sucking the body down to a suffocating death was one of the most common nightmares suffered by soldiers (Das 2005: 37). This ironic and deadly paradox saw “normal vision” – i.e. seeing the landscape to understand it and survive in it – mutate into a crisis of synaesthetic proportions (Howes 2006: 162-164, 169). As the dominant western sense of sight was being denied to front line soldiers, the Western Gaze of panoptical knowledge and total authority over landscape, which had begun with mapping, was now rapidly being emphasized and realized by aerial photography, and seen and used mainly by command staff.

Captured moments and authenticity Military aerial photography has a social life all its own. Quite apart from its technological sophistication, and it’s obvious military advantages, it plugs into social and cultural networks, extends the Western Gaze beyond maps, and provides a new extreme of technological control and authority over the world. For modern conflict archaeology of the First World War, this control and authority has recently been extended to Belgian Flanders in innovative studies that have included the integration of aerial imagery of war landscapes with GIS technology (e.g. see de Meyer 2005 and this volume, Stichelbaut 2006 and this volume). As with Angelopoulos’ Ulysses’ Gaze – the philosophically complex nature of the three lost reels of film, and their supposedly innocent and primordial view of Balkan cultural landscapes – modern digitised and computer-enhanced aerial imagery also raises important conceptual issues. What Angelopoulos’ three reels of film would actually have shown was a snapshot – archaeologically referred to as the “Pompeii premise” (Binford 1981) – of southern Balkan societies and folk traditions ca. 1895. These societies were the result of a long and extraordinarily tangled history in this area – not some fossilization of pristine and somehow ageless cultural reality. Similarly, military aerial photographs of the Great War also captured a complex palimpsest – ancient prehistoric and medieval landscapes that were constantly being destroyed, adapted, or otherwise incorporated into modern battlefield landscapes. Sometimes, these photographs provide the only material trace of pre-1914 landscape features (Stichelbaut 2006: 165, 169-170). Each sequence of photographs, taken on successive hours, days and weeks, was designed to show the effectiveness, or otherwise, of artillery barrages, aerial bombing, and

The Panoptic Premise in Aerial Photography and Great War Archaeology

37

enemy responses in reconfiguring defences and transportation infrastructure. The idea that the three reels of film in Ulysses’ Gaze or Great War military aerial photographs represented an authentic and total view of cultural landscapes owed more to the then un-conceptualised (and unnamed) Western Gaze than to any kind of objective reality. Aerial photographs, like their ground-level equivalent, could mislead – often, and increasingly as time went on – as those on the ground grew to understand the new technology, and began camouflaging and creating dummy features in order to trick not the camera so much as the interpreter (Compère-Morel 1997, Stichelbaut 2006: 165-168). Where mistakes in interpretation were made – i.e. when battlefield features captured by the camera looked authentic and were reported as such – front line soldiers might pay with their lives for the failure of the interpreter to accurately discern what was and what was not real or true. The appearance of authenticity could be an illusion – and the Western Gaze, so successful in subjugating the world of non-European peoples, was turned against its own. Technology seduces the senses, giving the impression that it somehow goes beyond its own specifications to capture something – a feeling, a hunch, a quality – that only exists in the human mind. Such issues lie at the heart of arguments that have raged for decades (if not centuries) over the relationship between humans and the technologies they invent, adopt, and abandon (see Pfaffenberger 1992). Great War aerial photography brought together two of the most sophisticated kinds of technology at the time – aviation and photography – and proceeded to create a distinctive kind of material culture – the aerial photograph, that was astounding in the hitherto unseen perspectives and details of the world that it contained. Nevertheless, despite the overwhelming sense of authority and control that such images could elicit – then, and now – there is no escaping an obvious if somewhat neglected conclusion: aerial photographs are items of material culture with “social lives” of their own, and, in whose apparently authentic and panoptic gaze, lies an unexplored world of connections and alternative conceptions of the relationship between people, landscape, and technology in times of war. The appalling dangers and terrible price of mistaking technology’s ability to record data for the presence of a wished-for authenticity is displayed every night on television news. The world is still living with the legacy of precisely this situation as regards the American-led invasion of

Chapter Three

38

Iraq in 2003. In this instance, the only thing deadlier than the apparent presence of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in aerial and satellite images, was their actual and total absence at ground level on the same spot. The cruel ironies of the mistaken interpretation of these high-altitude photographic images are magnified by the equally disastrous reverse scenario concerning the preceding success of Operation Desert Fox in December 1998. Here, four days of Coalition bombing stopped Saddam Hussein’s production of WMD, and nearly led to his downfall as well. Yet, this success was neither authenticated nor verified by aerial and satellite photography, nor by U.S. intelligence, and so was considered untrue (Ricks 2006: 18-22). This high-altitude failure to verify groundlevel truth was, to bend a phrase, both “shocking and awesome”, and led directly to the invasion and occupation of Iraq and the tens (probably hundreds) of thousands of deaths that followed. Aerial photographs and satellite imagery are material culture – but what we make of them (i.e. the interpretive process) – is influenced and configured not just by pixels and analytical procedures, but by politics, ideology, hubris and wishful thinking. Abstracting uncomfortable truths from our obsession with, and reliance on technology (and the feelings of superiority and control that they give us), allows us perhaps to comprehend the terrible human (and cultural) cost that remote imaging of conflict landscapes can incur. In our perhaps understandable rush to embrace new ways of imaging the landscape we must acknowledge that there is an equal temptation to imagine the landscape that we desire. In developing a multidisciplinary conflict archaeology of the 20th and 21 centuries, the various modern technologies of imaging have an important role to play. Clearly, however, we must be aware of the shortcomings and dangers involved, as errors of interpretational judgement can themselves lead to more conflict. Great War landscapes were created, and their aerial images captured, by technologies accelerated by industrialised conflict. War came first, and aerial photographs came second. In Iraq, aerial photographs came first, and war came second. By 2003, aerial photographs had ceased to be (if they ever were) simply a visual record of conflict, and had become instead a significant material culture “cause” of war. st

The Panoptic Premise in Aerial Photography and Great War Archaeology

39

From the Western Front of 1914-18 to Iraq in 2003, and innumerable conflicts in between, we are confronted with the Western Gaze which all too often has become a calamitous stare into the abyss. Less Ulysses, perhaps, than Medusa.

References Angelopoulos T. (1995) Ulysses’ Gaze. Ltd T.A.C.P. Greek Film Centre and Madman Entertainment Pty Ltd. Appadurai A. (Ed.) (1997) The social life of things. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Binford L.R. (1981) Behavioral Archaeology and the “Pompeii Premise”. In: Journal of Anthropological Research 37, 3: 195-208. Chasseaud P. (1999) Artillery's Astrologers. A History of British Survey and Mapping on the Western Front 1914-1918. Mapbooks, Lewes. Classen C. (2005) The book of touch. Berg, Oxford. Compère-Morel T. (1997) Camouflages. PointBeu and Historial de la Grande Guerre, Amiens. Corel A. (2004) Theo Angelopoulos, a man against frontiers: Ulysses’ Gaze. In: International Journal of Psychoanalysis 85, 4: 1017-1021. Das S. (2005) Touch and Intimacy in First World War Literature. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. de Meyer M. (2005) Houthulst and the A19-Project: Inventory of World War I Heritage Based on Wartime Aerial Photography and Trench Maps. In: Bourgeois J. & Meganck M. (Eds.) Aerial Photography & Archaeology 2003. A Century of Information. Archaeological Reports Ghent University, Academia, Ghent: 87-99. Decoodt H. (2002) Forged photographs during WW1. In Flanders Fields Magazine June: 12-14. Dendooven D. & Chielens P. (Eds.) (2008) World War I: Five Continents in Flanders. Lanoo, Tielt. Edwards E. (2001) Raw Histories: Photographs, Anthropology and Museums. Berg, Oxford. Ekstein M. (1990) The Rites of Spring: The Great War and the Birth of the Modern Age. Houghton Mifflin, Boston. Ferguson N. (1998) The Pity of War. Penguin, London. Gow P. (1995) Land, People, and Paper in Western Amazonia. In: Hirsch E. & M O.H. (Eds.) The Anthropology of Landscape: Perspectives on Place and Space. Oxford University Press, Oxford: 43-62.

40

Chapter Three

Helms M.W. (1988) Ulysses’ Sail: An Ethnographic Odyssey of Power, Knowledge, and Geographical Distance. Princeton University Press, Princeton Howes D. (Ed.) (2004) Empire of the Senses: the Sensual Culture Reader. Berg, Oxford. —. (2006) Scent, sound and synaesthesia: Intersensoriality and Material Culture Theory. In: Tilley C., Keane W., Küchler S., Rowlands M. & Spyer P. (Eds.) Handbook of Material Culture. Sage, London: 161172. Hynes S. (1990) A War Imagined: The First World War and English Culture. The Bodley Head, London. Layton R. (1999) The Alawa totemic landscape: ecology, religion and politics. In: Ucko P.J. & Layton R. (Eds.) The Archaeology and Anthropology of Landscape. Routledge, London: 219-239. Lewis G.M. (1998) Frontier: Encounters in the Field: 1511-1925. In: Lewis G.M. (Ed.) Cartographic Encounters: Perspectives on Native American Mapmaking and Map Use. University of Chicago Press, Chicago: 3-32. Molyneaux B.L. (2006) Topographical Scale as Ideological and Practical Affordance: The Case of Devils Tower. In: Lock G. & Molyneaux B.L. (Eds.) Confronting Scale in Archaeology: Issues of Theory and Practice. Springer, New York: 66-76. Paterson A. (1997) Bravery in the field? In: Lewis J.E. (Ed.) True World War One Stories: Sixty Personal Narratives of the War. Robinson Publishing, London: 239-46. Pfaffenberger B. (1992) Social Anthropology of Technology. In: Annual review of Anthropology 21: 491-516. Ricks T.E. (2006) Fiasco: The American Military Adventure in Iraq. Allen Lane, London. Salmond A. (1992) Theoretical landscapes: on cross-cultural conceptions of knowledge. In: Parkin D. (Ed.) Semantic Anthropology. Academic Press, London: 65-87. Saunders N. (2001) Matter and Memory in the Landscapes of Conflict: The Western Front 1914-1999. In: Bender B. (Ed.) Contested Landscapes. Movement, Exile and Place. Berg, Oxford: 37-54. —. (In press) People in objects: Individuality and the quotidian in the material culture of war. In: White C. (Ed.) The Materiality of Individuality. Springer, New York. Stichelbaut B. (2006) The application of First World War aerial photography to archaeology: the Belgian images. In: Antiquity 80, 307: 161-172.

CHAPTER FOUR WHY THE AIR WAR REALLY MATTERED: A GUIDE TO UNDERSTANDING THE SIGNIFICANCE OF AVIATION IN WORLD WAR ONE JAMES STRECKFUSS Introduction In the absence of broad historical acceptance of the idea that aviation actually shaped the nature or determined the outcome of the war, those of us interested in World War One aerial operations have concentrated our research largely on aviation’s romantic mythology, the operational record of specific individuals or aerial units, or its technical aspects. The result of this is a near-century of historiography devoted largely to the careers of fighter pilots, particularly those who achieved the five or more victories necessary to be considered “aces,” the history of highly colourful or successful fighter squadrons, or works detailing the wing span, engine horsepower, armament, speed, climb, and weight-carrying capability of the several hundred different aircraft designs conceived and produced between 1914-1918. A large body of work is devoted to the colour schemes and markings that adorned wartime aircraft. In contrast, only a very small number of books examine the work of aircrew engaged in reconnaissance, and fewer still attempt the task of connecting what was happening in the air to developments in the ground or sea wars. Nicholas Watkis, in The Western Front from the Air (Watkis 1999) begins to hint at the reliance ground commanders placed on aerial observation while concentrating principally on the techniques involved in interpreting aerial photographs. Building on these themes, Terry Finnegan, in Shooting the Front (Finnegan 2006), documented the history of aerial photography during World War One. But these two works are exceptions. For the most part the real value of the World War One air war has been ignored.

42

Chapter Four

Most compelling among the possible explanations behind our neglect of the significance of aerial reconnaissance to the World War One is our failure to properly categorize the status of reconnaissance within the overall concept of air power. Rather than viewing reconnaissance as a “division” of military aviation, we have written about it as a “stage” in the evolution of air power. By so doing, we have dismissed the importance of reconnaissance. Descriptions of the airplane in its 1914 – 1918 intelligence-gathering role are typically found in the first few pages of aviation histories or in the “air war” chapter of World War One’s general histories.

 Fig. 4-1: American aircrew unloading their aerial camera (Source: National Archives and Records Administration)

A Guide to Understanding the Significance of Aviation in World War One

43

Historiography Beginning a brief survey with one of the more recently successful, wide-ranging accounts of World War One, John Keegan’s The First World War (Keegan 1998). Keegan did not write a stand-alone air-war chapter and aggregating the few lines he allotted to aviation approximately two of his 427 pages are devoted to the role aircraft and airmen played in the war. At one point Keegan offered this opinion on the state of air power in the penultimate year of the fighting: “The war in the air, which by 1918 would take a dramatic leap forward into the fields of ground attack and long-range strategic bombing, remained during 1917 largely stuck at the level of artillery observation, “balloon busting”, and dogfighting to gain or retain air superiority” (Keegan 1998: 359).

Similarly, Lyn MacDonald’s Death of Innocence (MacDonald 1993) devotes the equivalent of just a couple of its 601 pages to the Royal Flying Corps’s early photography and artillery registration efforts. MacDonald writes that: “the mapmakers were working overtime and for the first time since the stalemate had set in the Army would have eyes, would be able to see beyond ridges and round corners, and the troops preparing for the coming battle would know precisely where they were going and what they would be up against”(MacDonald 1993: 70).

Flattering though they may be, these few words hardly qualify as a thorough discussion of the revolution addition of the third dimension brought to battle planning. Further, MacDonald’s otherwise lengthy bibliography does not contain a single aviation title; not even a reference to Raleigh and Jones’s The War in the Air despite MacDonald’s mention of several other volumes of the British Official History. Except for one or two passing references to the Royal Flying Corps, Richard Holmes’s biography of Sir John French, The Little Field Marshal (Holmes 2004), reserves discussion of aviation for French’s stint as commander of British home defence efforts, as part of which French also had charge of aerial defence. Attempting to coordinate Army and Navy programs for protection of the homeland made French a believer in, and an advocate for, a unified air command and an independent air force. The British Field Marshal was also an early champion of the idea a modern air force could substitute for a larger, traditional ground army. As Lord

44

Chapter Four

Lieutenant of Ireland, the post he took on following his period as chief home defender, French advocated the liberal use of force against Sinn Fein. Holmes tells us that: “French was well aware that the lack of trained troops in Ireland made the sort of action he envisaged somewhat difficult to achieve. He had his own ideas as to how this shortage could best be offset. On 14 April 1918 he had decided that aircraft could be used with good effect in Ireland” (Holmes 2004: 352).

Making this argument while the war was still in progress arguably puts French somewhat ahead of Trenchard and Mitchell as an air power advocate, as neither of the famous military aviation leaders would take up this cause until after the war. But, by confining aviation to its application to home defence or imperial policing, Holmes implies that French might have thought airplanes were of little if any importance in or over the main battle in France and Belgium. Yet, according to no less an authority than the aerial photography pioneer, Lieutenant-Colonel J.T.C. MooreBrabazon: “at the end of 1914, General French asked General Henderson to start taking photographs from the air” (Letter from Lt.-Col. J.T.C. MooreBrabazon to Capt. Charles Fairbairn, 26 October 1918).

Meirion and Susie Harries account of the United States’ war effort, The Last Days of Innocence: America at War, 1917 – 1918 (Harries and Harries 1997), pays a bit more attention to the possible uses of air power and, in part, offers support for the argument Linda Robertson makes in The Dream of Civilized Warfare (Robertson 2003), namely the American ideas that air power could be effectively substituted for ground troops at a much lesser cost in American lives and that wars could be fought at a distance. Robertson claims these ideas have their intellectual root in the World War One. The Harries begin by writing that: “ aircraft played an important part in the battle, observing, photographing, directing artillery, strafing ground troops, bombing rear areas, bombing civilian targets… dropping propaganda leaflets, and fighting to deny the same opportunities to the enemy” (Harries and Harries 1997: 149).

Going on to describe a general lack of progress in military aviation in the United States prior to the American declaration of war, the Harries document the sudden explosion of interest in the air war following the

A Guide to Understanding the Significance of Aviation in World War One

45

American government’s receipt of the Ribot Telegram. In the Harries’ opinion, the French request that the United States contribute to the war by building an air force made aviation the flavour of the month. Their argument goes in a similar direction to Robertson when they speculate that: “this could be America’s kind of combat with dogfights between aces offering far more scope for rugged individualism than the dirty, bloody, depersonalized struggle on the ground” (Harries and Harries 1997: 149).

From there, the Harries follow development of the United States Air Service on the Western Front through its climax in the Meuse Argonne campaign, during which they maintain “Billy Mitchell’s aircraft at last began to fulfil some of the soaring hopes of the apostles of air power.” At the “very last moment the air forces were putting the “Yankee Punch” into the war and pointing the way to the air combat of the future” (Harries and Harries 1997: 416-417). Along the way, the Harries do acknowledge the importance of reconnaissance – more so, in fact, than many of the other works cited here – but also like many others, they relegate aviation’s “eyes of the army” function to the lesser status of an early development, a stepping stone along the path to the more aggressive, and by implication, the more important work that followed. John Toland’s Pulitzer Prize-winning, No Man’s Land: 1918 – the Last Year of the Great War (Toland 1980) discusses aviation in some chapters and sometimes even refers to aerial reconnaissance and observation. Toland notes, for instance, that in the run-up to the Operation Michael offensive in March 1918, Hindenberg was hoping bad weather would keep enemy reconnaissance flights on the ground (Toland 1980: 10). He also tells us that later in the summer, during the Battle of Chateau Thierry, Billy Mitchell flew over the front “drinking in the details” of the ground fighting (Toland 1980: 318-319). By the time Toland gets to the MeuseArgonne offensive, he’s ready to admit “the safety of thousands of our attacking soldiers” rode on the success of the United States Air Service’s attacks on German observation balloons (Toland 1980: 431). But, like the others mentioned, he does not discuss in any depth the role those balloons, or airplanes engaged in reconnaissance for that matter, played in operational planning, or the value of aerial observation to artillery operations or infantry liaison. Also, he preferred to concentrate on the superstars of World War One aviation, frequently mentioning or quoting

46

Chapter Four

fliers such Eddie Rickenbacker, Manfred von Richthofen, Quentin Roosevelt, and Billy Mitchell.

Analysis The first common feature of these books is their characterization of reconnaissance as the sine qua non of the first year of military aviation. However, the more important thread running through all of these histories is their portrayal of air power as an evolutionary process in which the importance of aerial reconnaissance diminished in direct relation to the growth of an air force’s more combative arms; one in which the mundane duty of gathering intelligence was simply overshadowed by those more aggressive and more glamorous functions. The evolution they describe took place over the course of World War One as the competition for aerial supremacy moved aviation from what we have characterized as its simple, passive beginning towards the more complex, more destructive part aviation eventually came to play in the conduct of armed operations. Suggestions that the limited performance, overall unreliability, lack of impressive weight-carrying capability, and total lack of armament of early military aircraft restricted their usefulness to the performance of reconnaissance carry with them the implication that reconnaissance itself was of little or no military value. A proper argument would hold progress in aviation technology added the seemingly more warlike functions of bombing and pursuit to aviation's firmly established value as an intelligence gatherer. Instead we have implied those more aggressive duties became a substitute for, and a successor to, aerial reconnaissance. In the process the arguably greater value of what the reconnaissance crews contributed to the larger war effort has all but disappeared from the historical record. The military historian, B. H. Liddell Hart takes a slightly different approach. Unlike the others discussed here, Liddell Hart concedes the value of gathering intelligence by air, even going so far as to write that: “to relate the action of aircraft in the military sphere is not possible, for it formed a thread running through and vitally influencing the whole course of operations, rather than a separate strategic feature” (Liddell-Hart 1970: 355).

But then in a twist of logic Liddell Hart condemns the effect aerial reconnaissance had on the war by maintaining that its early maturation

A Guide to Understanding the Significance of Aviation in World War One

47

prevented the war’s senior commanders from adequately developing aviation’s more belligerent aspects in ways that would have brought the war to an early close. Liddell Hart wrote: “the very eagerness with which the armies had eventually embraced aircraft as immediate auxiliaries – for reconnaissance, artillery observation, and the protection of these duties – limited the supply of aircraft for roles of indirect cooperation and curtailed their exploitation of the bombing weapon” (Liddell-Hart 1970: 358).

Liddell Hart’s argument assumes as fact an idea for which no proof has yet been offered, either by himself or by any other historian: namely that the damage he speculates might have been done had the World War One belligerents developed more powerful bombers would have exceeded the damage known to have been done by artillery fire planned with the aid of aerial reconnaissance and regulated by aerial observation. He damned the war's senior commanders for lacking the vision to appreciate what a larger investment in bombers might have done to the enemy's industrial capacity. What Liddell Hart should have appreciated was the tremendous impact commanders did make by developing operational doctrine that properly utilized aviation to the fullest extent then technologically possible. It is important to understand that Liddell Hart’s original book, The Real War (Liddell-Hart 1930), which was first published in 1930 did not include the chapter on the air war he entitled “Panorama”. The aviation section was added when the book was reissued in 1935 and remained in place in the 1970 reissue. As Liddell Hart’s modification should indicate, in the five years that separated the first two editions the British military historian had come to believe that a second world war was on the horizon, a conflict in which aviation would play a prominent part. His enhanced appreciation of the potential of air power was no doubt also influenced by the debate over the future of military aviation that raged throughout the inter-war period as a result of Guilio Douhet’s Command of the Air (Douhet 1942), the Mitchell court martial, Lindbergh’s Atlantic crossing, the rebirth of the Luftwaffe in Germany, and events surrounding the thenupcoming Spanish Civil War. The prominence of bombing in the World War Two seemed to prove what Liddell Hart had said about the World War One commanders’ failure to properly utilize aviation.

48

Chapter Four

Quantifiers The image of the reconnaissance crew has also suffered from the lack of a quantifier. Fighter pilots had the immense advantage of being able to brag about the number of enemy airplanes they shot down. Contemporary press accounts and an overwhelming number of historical works published in the years since World War One loudly applauded the work of the fighter pilot. Counting the number of a pilot’s victories as it increased provided an easy way for readers to follow his career and to assess his contribution. Every plane shot down meant one less aircraft in the enemy’s inventory and one less enemy crew to threaten one’s safety. Bombing results were also quantifiable. Bomber crews could count the number of missions they flew, the tonnage of bombs they dropped on the enemy, and could point with pride to reports in the enemy press about the destruction they caused. Post-war military assessments of bomb damage failed to produce evidence those efforts had been as devastating as propagandized. Yet, the fact any direct damage was caused demonstrated there was some value to the early bombing campaigns. Great future potential simply awaited development of the ability to carry a more powerful bomb load over a longer distance and deliver it with more reliable accuracy; in short, the kind of technological advances we began to see in the World War Two. In contrast, evidence of damage caused by aerial reconnaissance is by its nature indirect, requiring a demonstration the reports brought back, photos taken, or shot corrections called to the artillery had value in helping ground or naval troops succeed in their missions. Further, while there is unquestioned propaganda value in a nation’s ability to boast about the accomplishments of its fighter and bomber forces, the best reconnaissance missions have to be kept secret from the enemy and the public in order to maintain their value. Even after the land or naval combat mission the successful aerial reconnaissance aided is complete, secrecy must be maintained in order not to diminish the ability to perform future missions by announcing the extent of information learned or the exact manner in which it was obtained. All these thoughts can be neatly reduced to a single bottom line. The reconnaissance crew is portrayed by historians as having merely “assisted”, while the bomber or fighter pilot “did”. While not wanting to dwell on a tangent for more than a second, the elements of masculinity inherent in this image should at least be noted. A real man “fights” the

A Guide to Understanding the Significance of Aviation in World War One

49

enemy. He does not simply “observe” or “photograph” him. Consequently it was easy to lionize and heap rewards on the World War One fighter ace or the successful bombing team while ignoring the less colorful, more passive, yet inherently more valuable accomplishments of their contemporaries on reconnaissance duties; work that Mitchell once characterized as “the most important and the most difficult of all Air Service activities”(Mauer 1978: 268).

The effect of World War Two World War Two’s air leaders would have enjoyed proving the DouhetTrenchard-Mitchell argument during their turn at command. They went a long way toward trying. Germany carried out “The Blitz” on London and the UK and the Allies responded with missions against Germany launched by the RAF’s Bomber Command and the United States Eighth Air Force. But, in the end, like their Great War predecessors, the powers that fought World War Two were forced to expend the bulk of their blood fighting on the ground. Nevertheless, military aviation theorists clung to the idea that air forces would prove themselves capable of single-handedly smashing the enemy, eventually forgetting about the proven value of reconnaissance and adopting the bombing design as the preferred model of air power. Mitchell’s recent biographer, Douglas Waller, characterizes development of the idea air power can win wars by itself with no help from the Army or Navy as a gradual evolution, a process that did not reach full maturity in the public’s mind until the First Gulf War, though he concedes Army and Navy leaders still regard the notion as suspect (Waller 2004: 360-361). Yet, even if they did not succeed in convincing the generals and admirals, the air power theorists’ victory over World War One historians seems to have been nearly complete. Their argument that aviation’s real worth lay in its ability to deliver ordnance conflated with accounts of the relatively lack-luster World War One bombing campaigns, resulting in the near disappearance of aircraft from comprehensive historical accounts of World War One. The role played by military aviation in the twentieth century’s second decade years simply no longer conformed to the broad theory of air power that took root in World War One’s wake and ripened during World War Two. As a consequence, flying between 1914 and 1918 was written off as ineffectual, or at best dismissed as a developing embryo lacking the technological maturity to contribute significantly to the outcome of the war.

50

Chapter Four

 Fig. 4-2: French photo mosaic, one of the useful documents provided by aerial photography in World War One (Source: National Archives and Records Administration)

Conclusion The truth is that aviation had a tremendous impact on the First World War. That impact simply lay in an area other than bombing. To discover the value of the airplane in World War One, we need to look to its ability to see what was happening across the river, on the other side of the hill or the other side of the trenches, and on, and slightly under, the surface of the ocean. In the war’s opening weeks, aerial reconnaissance missions flown on both the Western and Eastern fronts firmly established the value of the airplane. In the east, German airmen spotted the advancing Russian armies in time to allow their high command time to plan what became the decisive battle at Tannenberg, prompting Hindenberg to remark: “Without the airmen, no Tannenberg” (Kennett 1991: 31). And in the west, alert British and French aviators saw the German manoeuvre in front of Paris in time for troops to be rushed to the Marne, halting the German advance and setting up the series of flanking manoeuvres known as the “race to the sea”. Over the following four years, the airplane steadily increased in value as an eye in the sky, providing, on land, the basis for map making, battle planning, and artillery spotting, and on the water serving as an

A Guide to Understanding the Significance of Aviation in World War One

51

invaluable auxiliary to the convoy system that ended the German U-boat threat. Documenting Allied commanders’ voracious demand for aerial reconnaissance information is the astronomical number of aerial photos taken during the war. From the humble beginning of a single Royal Flying Corps officer taking a handful of pictures on 15 September 1914, Nicholas Watkis tells us British demand for aerial photos grew to a point where from July to November 1916, during the Somme battle, “the RFC took more than 19,000 air photographs from which 430,000 prints were made” (Watkis 1999: 11). Two years later between July and October 1918, the last complete month for which figures are available, RAF photographers exposed more than 91,000 negatives, from which more than 2,000,000 prints were processed (Laws 1918: 10). This astounding increase more than testifies to the value of what aviation brought to the battlefield. Another important aspect of military aerial photography, one that has only recently become evident, is also worth noting. Aerial photography not only contributed to the war itself, the images shot by World War One’s aerial observers preserved a record of the war unlike any seen in any earlier human conflict; a body of evidence that allows us to study a wide range of issues affecting Europe and the rest of the world from our early twenty-first century vantage point. But, to date, historians have failed to take advantage of that record. World War One aviation has been largely lost in history’s shuffle because we have insisted on looking at it as a black or white – as an all or nothing proposition. Historians should analyze air power in value-added terms that seek to connect it to the ground and naval wars. We should look to construct a true three-dimensional model of the 1914 – 1918 war that considers each component in its proper perspective and assigns each it’s true relative worth. Instead we have continued competing with the army and navy in a way that damages history’s ability to interweave the three elements in which the war was fought. By admitting to mutual dependence historians risk assigning value to the other parts in a way detrimental to the argument which advocates of each component make that their element alone determined the course of the war. But in our failure to take those risks we have written about the ground, naval, and air wars as if they existed in parallel universes when we should have been looking for their connections. Camels and triplanes engage in gripping combats above battlefields barely mentioned except as

52

Chapter Four

places to look for the wreckage of a fighter’s latest victory, and the trench war progresses in all its rat-and-lice infested misery without so much as a glance skyward. Pilots enlist in the air service to escape the ground war, not to contribute to victory there, and the only thought soldiers give airmen is to envy their cushy lifestyle and wonder why they are never seen providing air cover. If we were to concentrate our efforts on the reconnaissance and observation crews, the people Billy Mitchell rightly praised as performing “the most important and the most difficult of all Air Service activities” (Mauer 1978: 268), we might begin to establish those connections. We will not see aviation accorded the respect and attention it deserves in accounts of the First World War until historians realize there was real value in photographs and observation and not just in bombs and bullets.

References Douhet G. (1942) The Command of the Air. Coward-McGann, New York. Finnegan T.J. (2006) Shooting the front. National Defence Intelligence College Press, Washington. Harries M. & Harries S. (1997) The Last Days of Innocence: America at War, 1917-1918. Random House, New York. Holmes R. (2004) The Little Field Marshal: A Life of Sir John French. Cassell Military Books, London. Keegan J. (1998) The First World War. Alfred Kopf, New York. Kennett L. (1991) The First Air War, 1914-1918. The Free Press, New York. Laws F. (1918) Photography: Army Book 135 (Unpublished document). Royal Air Force Museum. Liddell-Hart B. (1930) Real War 1914-1918 Faber, London. —. (1970) Liddell Hart's History of the First World War. Cassell and Co Ltd, London. MacDonald L. (1993) 1915: The Death of Innocence. Headline Book Publishing, London. Mauer M. (1978) The U.S. Air Service in World War I. 2. Office of Air Force History, Government Printing Office, Washington DC. Robertson L. (2003) The Dream of Civilized Warfare: World War I Flying Aces and the American Imagination. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis. Toland J. (1980) No Man’s Land: 1918 – the Last Year of the Great War. Smithmark Publishers, New York.

A Guide to Understanding the Significance of Aviation in World War One

53

Waller D. (2004) A Question of Loyalty: Gen. Billy Mitchell and the Court-Martial that Gripped the Nation. Harper Collins Publishers, New York. Watkis N. (1999) The Western Front from the Air. Redwood Books, Wiltshire.



CHAPTER FIVE SHAPING 20TH CENTURY MILITARY INTELLIGENCE THROUGH A STATIC BATTLEFIELD: AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY’S IMPACT TERRENCE FINNEGAN Introduction German recollections of the horror of battle express the effectiveness of Allied aerial reconnaissance during the Great War. The combatant of this era was trapped in a stationary battle of interminable duration, continuously monitored by new technologies and forced to suffer the effects of a vast inventory of new weapons of destruction designed to achieve annihilation. In keeping with the phenomenon of information access, the Great War marks a distinct milestone in the way intelligence on an enemy combatant was acquired, analyzed and distributed to the commanders of the battle. Aerial reconnaissance and the companion process of interpretation of aerial photographs represented the first major attempt in history to massproduce intelligence on an adversary and resulted in the creation of a new model for warfare. Commanders faced a conundrum when military doctrine failed at the expense of tremendous casualties with no victory in sight. The battlefield commander soon learned that whatever advantage there was to be gained required access to the best and most recent information available. The aerial reconnaissance platform provided by aeroplanes and captive balloons proved to be the most effective means to acquire timely, detailed and readily understood intelligence. Its continued presence alone was a testament to its essential utility in success on the modern day battlefield. Through this means, the war in the air became the first information/intelligence war of modern history.

56

Chapter Five

Positional war made the Western Front the most scrutinized area on earth. It constituted a strategic siege of long duration spanning an entire continent. The phenomenon repeated itself in the latter half of the 20th century when Cold War adversaries locked horns on a new front that spanned from central Europe to the Asian shores of the Pacific Ocean. During the Great War, the host of modern intelligence sources gave meaning to conventional battle planning. Newly arriving Americans learned from the experience of their Allied counterparts that: “under the conditions of modern warfare, no army can long exist without using every possible means of gathering information; and of all these means aerial photographs present probably the best medium” (Hibben 1918).

Allied targeting matured due to that medium. The resultant Plan Directeur and Firing Map conveyed a depth of analysis rarely seen in previous wars. The collection of aerial photographs gave commanders confidence that information was accurate and valid. Clarity and timeliness reinforced their value. As a result, commanders and combatants possessed a better grasp of current battlefield operations and the threats that lay ahead. To reinforce this information stream, command and control was refined through the liaison network. Communication technology, albeit in its infancy, was effective enough to establish networks throughout the trenches and supporting rear echelons. Information flow was not confined to electronic technologies. Every conceivable source of transmitting a message, including carrier pigeons and fireworks, supported the conveyance of knowledge of the battlefield. All converged toward the ultimate objective of positional war – controlling destruction and annihilation of the enemy.

Military intelligence evolves to meet modern challenges Information and intelligence analysis adjusted as campaigns modified to the realities of four years of positional warfare. Approaching combat through in-depth study and analysis proved far more effective than the élan that spurred the first waves of soldiers rushing forward against a wall of lead from machine guns. After the first year, the war clearly demonstrated that information acquired from aeroplanes was credible and contributed effectively to the conduct of battle. Those who were skeptics in the beginning became disciples for the remainder of the war. As

Shaping 20th Century Military Intelligence Through a Static Battlefield

57

campaigns stagnated over the years, military seniors’ exasperation over aerial reconnaissance not resulting in substantial progress portrayed the frustration of modern warfare. Intelligence gave the combatant an advantage. However, it did not ensure victory. Brigadier General Charteris’ comment to General Macdonogh that “airplanes as a battle means of information has failed us” exemplifies the modern day combatant’s dilemma (Charteris 1916). War is fought by military operations employing whatever intelligence information can be acquired and adapted to the objectives of the campaign. In the case of Charteris, subsequent research by David French showed the problem was not just a fixation on aerial photography. It was the pervading reliance by the intelligence staffs on order of battle analysis that determined what constituted the allies’ assessment of the enemy’s depth (French 1996: 7983). Only when the war resumed a mobile battleground in the final weeks did the well-established information infrastructure fail to stand up. It was then that Great War military planning reinforced by aerial reconnaissance and photographic interpretation fell victim to the rapidly evolving front line. Creating a perception of certainty was an underlying theme behind intelligence generated during the war. Aerial photography held sway on what constituted reality in the front line. As its value was acknowledged, so did efforts to confuse interpretation through camouflage and deception. Reliable information became as critical to the war effort as the weapons employed to annihilate the enemy. For this, the combatant came from the intelligentsia of the art world. The results provided a fascinating glimpse into the cognitive processes of modern war. Both sides conducted a psychological war based on the perceived reality of the photograph with the stereoscope serving as the weapon of choice. It transformed the battlefield. Trench activity emphasized deception wherever possible, reinforced by cover of darkness or activities underground. What remained above ground were efforts by master artists to perpetuate illusion through a vast array of camouflage netting. Operations in the forward areas, including construction of dummy trenches and batteries as well as feints of operation from raids and maneuvering artillery, contributed to the war of illusion. Despite the challenges of such deceptions, aerial reconnaissance and photographic interpretation remained the ultimate arbiter on perceiving the enemy. In this light, it is worth noting that not one new photographic principle was discovered and applied. Aerial photography made its difference in

58

Chapter Five

information, not in contributing to the science of photography (Gamble s.d.). Information acquisition came at a price. The demand for more aerial photographs put pressure on industry to produce cameras with optical lenses sufficient to acquire the scale necessary for interpretation and cartographic support. Such demand illustrated a new phenomenon in a nation’s ability to conduct war. The mass production of intelligence introduced to leadership and commanders that their success now hinged on supporting a select group of esoteric industries. The shortage of high quality glass for camera optics created a crisis of unique proportions. The French managed to meet their objectives due to a limited higher quality optics industrial base established prior to the war. The British experience was more profound. The demand for optics to complete a newly established aerial camera inventory alerted them to the precarious situation they faced. Without the optics, they could not acquire critical information. This realisation prompted a plea to the public to turn in whatever lenses were available. It also was matched by a demand to target German aerial reconnaissance to acquire lenses and configure them to the “B” type camera housing. The optics crisis also impacted British war industry involved with aeroplane design. Since the British camera inventory was smaller in configuration to the prevailing French 50 cm and 120 cm cameras, designing reconnaissance aeroplanes prior to 1917 did not require a wider fuselage frame for the internal camera bay. In the last year of the war, negotiations at the ministry level with the French created a limited supply followed by creation of a higher-quality British optics industry that produced lenses for the state-of-the-art “LB” and “BM” type cameras. Aerial photography thus made its impact beyond intelligence gathering. It alerted the nations to vulnerabilities that resulted from a lack of an industrial infrastructure and that created additional dependency on Allied relations.

Shaping 20th Century Military Intelligence Through a Static Battlefield

59

Fig. 5-1: Oblique air photo of Seicheprey (Source: National Archives and Records Administration)

Defining 20th century intelligence applications Beyond the technological impact on modern military operations, Allied aerial reconnaissance and photographic interpretation made major inroads towards defining military operations in the 20th century. Tactical and strategical considerations became the foundation for delineating critical information. Tactical considerations reigned supreme at the front. They were aided by a well-established liaison infrastructure that encompassed all combatant echelons and the entire inventory of aerial platforms. Strategic considerations assumed greater definition due to the combatants advancing the design of aerial platforms. With each sortie generated over the rear echelon, the role of intelligence information was redefined. Aerial bombardment required verification on destruction. Intelligence information from aerial photography accomplished that objective. The ultimate achievement was the vision of Paul Weiller in defining the reconnaissance role in the strategical sector. The French formation of the Weiller Group to acquire strategic coverage of the vitally important rear echelon laid the foundation for ultimate purpose of intelligence in the 20th century. Such

60

Chapter Five

applications of aerial technology became the harbinger of modern-day indications and warning. The Great War also defined how modern states shared intelligence. The relationship between the French and British allies was unique. Both were continually suspicious of the other’s intentions, yet they were mutually forthcoming with support on a major scale as the conflict ensued. The necessity of interdependence in this era of total war dictated the terms of relationships between nations. Since the German adversary was formidable from the first day of the war, the military of the Allied nations found that greater cooperation was essential to not only ultimate victory but survival as well. As aviation entered into the battle, the allies shared lessons that advanced knowledge of the potential of the aeroplane and ballon captif. Access to greater information sparked a revolution in the thinking of the combatants. When the Americans arrived in 1917, not only did they benefit from the experience of the French and British, but they also adopted the entire process for generating critical intelligence on the battlefield. This was especially true with regard to adopting the operational methods of the French, whose techniques in aerial reconnaissance became the standard for American aviation operations. Nonetheless, American intelligence seniors made it clear after staff visits with both Allied headquarters that they would adopt the British method for managing intelligence. Such was the case with the BIO serving at the squadron. However, the nature of the campaign itself in the final months of the war resulted in a preponderance of French aviators and photographic interpreters working alongside American Aero Squadrons and Photo Sections. It is indicative of French influence that the senior advisor to Pershing on aerial photography was General Pétain’s choice, Eugene Pépin. Aerial reconnaissance at St. Mihiel and the Meuse-Argonne had a distinctly French flavor. Aerial reconnaissance and photographic interpretation had a profound influence on the military’s ability to conduct warfare. Despite lessons learned from the final campaigns, the ground commander’s prevailing view of military science in the immediate postwar era was that aviation served as a secondary support to troops on the ground through accomplishing reconnaissance objectives (Christienne and Lissarague 1986: 134). French commanders held the position that success in battle required the infantry to drive back the enemy and conquer the ground

Shaping 20th Century Military Intelligence Through a Static Battlefield

61

(Johnson 1921: xvii). The veteran aerial observer, Harold Porter, echoed this attitude in his comprehensive account quoting Pershing: “utilize all the auxiliary fighting arms in helping the infantry to get forward to the objective of his attack, which is the enemy’s line, and in that aviation plays a very large part that requires a very careful and close training in time of peace with the infantryman who carries a gun. You must protect him from attack by the enemy’s aviation and from observation in order to save him from being the object of the enemy’s artillery destruction” (Porter 1921: 18-19).

The post-war debate The domain of aerial reconnaissance and photographic interpretation became a subject of debate in the postwar era. Senior commanders had to come to terms with how their newest force arm, the air force, would conform to better serve traditional roles. In the United States, senior military leadership committed to a prevailing standard. The subsequent Brigadier General Mitchell controversy during the 1920s concerning the future role of aviation did not alter the established view on aerial reconnaissance. Senior U.S. military officers appeared to resist Mitchell’s vision, when in fact they treasured its potential in the conduct of modern battle. They clearly recognized that superior information gained from aerial reconnaissance created a decisive advantage for the battlefield commander. Such an advantage equated to gaining more control of aviation resources. Army commanders were not tolerant of an aviator’s penchant for roaming about the enemy’s rear areas and beyond “aimlessly” seeking targets. In the inter-war era, army aerial reconnaissance and photographic interpretation remained an essential element for success on the battlefield (pers. comm. David Mets). Whatever role French aerial reconnaissance and photographic interpretation had beyond the conventional view was closely held. It is worth noting that on 11 November 1918, Maréchal Foch took time on that prestigious day to confer the rank of Officer of the Legion of Honor to Capitaine Paul Louis Weiller for his aerial reconnaissance accomplishments during the entire war. At the same time, Foch asked him to keep this methods of reconnaissance secret “to preserve for France the considerable lead it had then attained over the rest of the world in the conduct of the war” (Christienne and Lissarague 1986: 184). This comment suggests France had advanced its command of aerial reconnaissance and photographic interpretation to new levels of capability and potential. The

62

Chapter Five

leadership of Foch, Pétain, and Mangin certified its place in French military doctrine and operational application. Later in the postwar era, their influence declined. By the end of the 1920s, only Pétain was alive, and his influence on the conduct of French army operations was waning. In comparison with the other allies, French postwar doctrine espoused a greater role for aerial reconnaissance. In concert, French technological advances in film cameras continued. French lessons gleaned from Verdun and subsequent campaigns were a testament to favorable consideration of aerial reconnaissance and photographic interpretation. However, such consideration did not translate into effective operational science. Aerialacquired information and associated intelligence analysis was flawed when the Germans marshaled their forces during the Sitzkrieg of 1939, followed by the Blitzkrieg and the rapid capitulation during the Battle of France in 1940. British attention to aerial reconnaissance reached a plateau in the interwar years. The contributions were acknowledged in postwar writings of commanders such as Field-Marshal Haig. However, emphasis on maintaining an intellectual engagement in the subject of aerial reconnaissance and photographic interpretation soon waned. The RAF’s Director of Training, Air Commodore T.C.R. Higgins, expressed his concern in an 8 February 1923 memo to the Director of the RAF Staff College, Air Commodore H.R.M. Brooke-Popham that: “the question has arisen concerning the interpreting or extracting information from aeroplane photographs. It appears to run some risk of becoming a lost art, and one that requires very considerable practice”(Air Commodore Higgins 1923).

Brooke-Popham agreed in his memo a week later, remarking that concern was increasing over the status of the Branch Intelligence Sections. He concluded with an enlightening comment on the state of aerial reconnaissance as it concerned the RAF: “I am very glad that this question is being taken up again and I think it is most important. Otherwise, the Army will quite forget that we can take photographs”(Air Commodore Brooke-Popham 1923).

The issue had evolved over commitment of resources. Training the next generation of aerial photographic interpreters was a shared responsibility between the Army and the RAF. Yet emphasis on the skills had diminished. Two years later Air Commodore Higgins alerted the

Shaping 20th Century Military Intelligence Through a Static Battlefield

63

commander of the Inland Area, Royal Air Force that RAF officers were to discontinue aerial photographic interpreter training at the School of Photography and “that in the future only Army officers will attend this course”(Air Commodore Higgins). Resolution on the issue soon followed. The British War Council approved a proposal that a week of training on aerial photographic interpretation sufficed for the school of intelligence (War Office 1925). A postscript to postwar thinking on aerial reconnaissance and photographic interpretation was eloquently captured by one legend of British photographic interpretation, Constance Babington-Smith, in her memoirs of the accomplishments in the Second World War: “By the time of the Armistice, photographic intelligence had proved itself, and was recognized as the indispensable eye of a modern army. But largely because of the technical limitations of the day – the performance and range of the aircraft and the scope of the cameras – it had become essentially regarded as tactical in value. After the war, the concept became “frozen stiff” in the thinking of the staff colleges of the world” (Babington-Smith 1957: 9-10).

Shaping the future After the Armistice, technology in aerial platforms advanced with state-of-the-art airplane design. Camera and film technology evolved thanks to companies such as Kodak investing in new techniques and designs. Advances in camera technology, culminating in an automatic film camera, became the mainstay of aerial reconnaissance for the remainder of the century. Intelligence analysis continued to employ the analytical strengths of photographic interpretation, namely identifying significant activity in a given space and time in relation to an available record based on history of coverage.

64

Chapter Five

Fig. 5-2: Aerial camera mounted for oblique aerial photography (Source: National Archives and Records Administration)

The ultimate victim of the postwar assessment of aviation’s role was the human in the loop, the aerial observer. With his departure, single-seat aerial reconnaissance platforms capable of flying at higher altitudes and at faster speed became the preferred mode of aerial photographic collection. By the end of World War two, the standing aerial reconnaissance and photographic interpretation architecture refined the clearly defined lessons from the Great War and continued an operational process that remains to this day. Tactical reconnaissance by today’s unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) exhibit the standards employed by Great War aeroplanes. Strategic reconnaissance continues to examine the infrastructure of the industrial and defence sector deep within the borders of adversaries. The initiative of the pioneers exploring the potential of aerial reconnaissance and laying the foundation for aerial photography in the first year of conflict did more than just apply reason to available technologies. They

Shaping 20th Century Military Intelligence Through a Static Battlefield

65

established modern day intelligence and the vast network that exists today. It led eventually to the domain of space as the ultimate environment for reconnaissance. The Great War required accurate information to reinforce the ability of artillery to deliver destruction. The urgency of the early campaigns prompted critical thinking from a cadre of experts trained in artillery to help define how information could be best applied to targeting. The Great War’s military intelligentsia evolved from that need. A pantheon of visionaries such as Grout, De Bissy, Pépin, Weiller, Moore-Brabazon, Campbell, Lewis, Laws and Steichen created a credible and important role for aerial reconnaissance and photographic interpretation in warfare. All made breakthroughs that either advanced information’s role in achieving successful military operations, defining aerial platforms as reconnaissance vehicles, or improved the aerial photograph to become the definitive intelligence source of the War. Their leadership served a multitude of new modern-day warriors that transformed the battlefield. Reconnaissance pilots and aerial observers assumed one of the most demanding and hazardous roles in the war but insured that intelligence was acquired. They combined with the 2e Bureau/BIO and SPAe/Photo Section expertise to create a culture that made an indelible mark on all facets of the front. Public awareness also shaped the image of what aerial reconnaissance and photographic interpretation accomplished in the Great War. The entire landscape of the war was brought directly to the homefront of all combatants through the aerial photographic lens. Aerial photography conveyed the extent of damage to population centers and cultural symbols, such as churches, with vivid clarity. To a limited extent, the public accepted the mystique of photographic interpretation and its role as a secret weapon in winning the war. Postwar public perceptions of ongoing aerial photographic efforts reached the limits of hyperbole based on the potential of the analyst to penetrate the image, see through the camouflage, and detect critical targets for the infantry and artillery response. The label “the deadliest weapon of the war” as applied to the simple stereoscope tool was an imaginative description of an otherwise unknown discipline (Hanson 1928: 15). Public interest in the impact from intelligence continues to the present day.

66

Chapter Five

The enduring legacy The most enduring legacy of the Great War’s aerial reconnaissance and photographic interpretation is how both held command of the combatant. They validated the extent that information and intelligence governed planning decisions before the battle and the management of destruction during battle. Despite the photographic evidence, the body of knowledge associated with the photographic interpreter’s reporting at the escadrille and squadron does not exist in today’s archives. What remains are remnants of intelligence summaries, maps and a scattering of photographic images without accompanying written reports describing significance of the moment and place in time. It is logical to assume that a cache of written reports describing the battle scenes led to the thinking behind the reconnaissance and interpretation. Such reports describe a battle scene of artillery barrages, terrain analysis, camouflage and deception and serve as the ultimate assessment from the “period of destruction”. The legacy of Allied aerial reconnaissance and photographic interpretation that ultimately culminates in the information war of the late 20th century exists in the manuals on aerial photographic interpretation that were written and produced by the Great War experts. This unique series of photographic albums provide the most illuminating portrayal of how the combatants transformed warfare toward a state of verifiable annihilation. Ironically, this legacy also serves to remind us that intelligence and the information that is shared remains a perishable commodity.

References Air Commodore Brooke-Popham R. (1923) Memorandum to Air Commodore Higgins (Unpublished document). The National Archive: Public Record Office. Air Commodore Higgins T. (1923) Instruction Regarding Interpretation of Aerial Photographs. Letter to Air Commodore H.R.M. Brooke-Popham (Unpublished document). The National Archive: Public Record Office. —. (s.d.) Interpretation of Air Photographs. Memorandum to Air Officer Commanding, Inland Area, Royal Air Force (Unpublished document). The National Archive: Public Record Office. Babington-Smith C. (1957) Evidence in Camera, The Story of Photographic Intelligence in World War II. Chatto and Windus, London.

Shaping 20th Century Military Intelligence Through a Static Battlefield

67

Charteris B.G. (1916) (Unpublished document). The National Archive: Public Record Office. Christienne C. & Lissarague P. (1986) A History of French Military Aviation. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C. French D. (Ed.)1996) Failures of Intelligence: The Retreat to the Hindenburg Line and the March 1918 Offensive. Strategy and Intelligence, British Policy during the First World War, The Hambledon Press, London. Gamble C.W. (s.d.) The Technical Aspects of British Aerial Photography During the War 1914-1918 (Unpublished document). The National Archive: Public Record Office. Hanson J.M. (1928) The World War through the Telebinocular: A Visualized, Vitalized History of the Greatest Conflict of All the Ages. Keystone View Company, Meadville. Hibben T. (1918) Interpretation of Aerial Photography. Gorrell Report, series J, Roll 34,2nd A.I.C. Johnson D.W. (1921) Battlefields of the World War, Western and Southern Fronts: A Study in Military Geography. Oxford University Press, New York. Porter H.E. (1921) Aerial Observation: The Airplane Observer, The Balloon Observer, and the Army Corps Pilot. Harper & Brother Publishers, New York. War Office (1925) War Office Memorandum to Secretary Air Ministry, 13 May 1925 (Unpublished document). The National Archive: Public Record Office. .



CHAPTER SIX STRATEGIC AERIAL RESEARCH DURING THE SECOND WORLD WAR: THE CASE OF GERMANY’S NEW WEAPONS YVES LE MANER Introduction This chapter is devoted to strategic aerial reconnaissance during the Second World War. It aims to establish a point of comparison, to determine if the means of aerial photography and military photointerpretation are autonomous techniques or if they are dependent on the nature of the conflicts in which they are being used. It would seem that the history of aerial photography during the Second World War is well known. The Evidence in Camera website, for example, has been online since 2004 and has been a considerable success. In reality, however, there is still a lack of any real in-depth study (Stanley 1981, Nesbit 2000). Essentially, the existing studies are centred on well-known photographs, for an approach that is spectacular and full of anecdotes, e.g. the pictures from Auschwitz-Birkenau, the location of the Tirpitz and the D-Day beaches on 6 June 1944. For this reason, it is useful to first give a very general overview, based on the case of the British, as this is the most fully documented and also the most important case. Next, we will use the research into British efforts to confront the new weapons of Nazi Germany, the V1 and V2, as an example to pose the following questions of comparison: Ͳ

How and to what extent were the methods of military aerial research from the First World War continued in practices used in the Second World War?

Ͳ

What were the new practices that were typical of the Second World War?

Chapter Six

70

Ͳ

Did the knowledge from photographic research and photointerpretation, successfully carried out by the Allies during the Second World War for military information, form the basis for the methods that were used during the Cold War and in the satellite era?

Methods, organisation and uses for British aerial research during the Second World War In 1938, Werner Von Fritsch, the chief of staff for the German army, prophesised: “The nation possessing the best photographic research will win the next war”. The victory of the British in 1944 proved him right. At the onset of the Second World War, however, British aerial reconnaissance was almost non-existent. The armies of the principal opponents only had meagre units of aerial photography, equipped with slow and outdated planes (Blenheim bombers for the British, Bloch-131 and Potez-39 for the French). The French had retained well-structured units, but for the British the situation was disastrous. Therefore, they were forced to start from the beginning, re-employing interpretation specialists from 1914-1918 and recruiting civilians to work in photogrammetry. Above all, the photographic techniques and concepts for their use had remained static since 1918: aerial reconnaissance remained totally under the command of the land forces. Then, in the first months of the war, a handful of pioneers, perfected new techniques for aerial photography and very innovative methods of photo-interpretation. They were largely civilians and were led by an Australian, Sidney Cotton, a former member of the Royal Flying Corps of the First World War. The techniques that these men developed were adopted by the British armed forces after the tragic failure of their own procedures. During the “Phoney War” and during the invasion of France, in May 1940, the Allied high command remained consistently blind to the German war of movement, due to the lack of complete coverage over vast areas. What was new about Cotton’s methods was the use of very fast planes which were un-armed to make them lighter and therefore increase speed and autonomy. Another novelty was that they flew at a very high altitude (between 25,000 and 40,000 feet), to avoid the enemy’s anti-aircraft artillery. As it was essential for them to bring photos back to the base, the RAF Photographic Reconnaissance Unit benefited from the quickest

Strategic Aerial Research During the Second World War

71

fighter planes – Spitfires, Mosquitos and P-51 Mustangs – with the most recent engine models. To obtain quality photographs, flying at high speeds and altitudes required very efficient automatic cameras – as was the case for the Laws F52 – equipped with high-definition lenses and large-size films to enable extensive enlargement. The 36-inch lenses, introduced in 1942, made it possible to distinguish human beings, at a height of 10,000 metres. Thus, Cotton’s method was perfect to cover very large areas of up to 200 km² during each mission. The only direct heritage from the Great War regarding photointerpretation was the fact that negatives were still stereoscopic read and that the successive coverage of one objective was still systematically compared. There was some progress though, especially in the use of machines originating from photogrammetry. The interpretation of photos was entrusted to a single pool of expertise, thus bringing together a very diverse group of specialists under the same roof, including agents from the secret services, cartographers, geographers, geological scientists, and archaeologists. Then, in the summer of 1940, the United Kingdom found itself completely cut off from continental Europe. As a consequence, aerial reconnaissance was the only available source of strategic information for the political and military leaders. From that time on, it was attributed large resources in men and materiel and it acquired the status of a sure and essential source of information at the War Cabinet and with the chiefs of staff. At the beginning of 1941, the Photographic Reconnaissance Unit was installed at the aerodrome in Benson, near Oxford; the Central Interpretation Unit (CIU) was set up in Medmenham 20 km away, where work was carried out without interruption, 24 hours a day. Together, these formed an enormous centre of inter-army interpretation working for the intelligence services. Here the main areas of research were determined according to long-term planning, squadron missions were programmed and photographs were dealt with on arrival. The process of development and printing was the object of very concentrated industrialisation and automation. The CIU was in direct and permanent contact with the general staff.

Chapter Six

72

From 1942 onwards, we can observe a formidable surge in the importance the Allies accorded to aerial reconnaissance and photointerpretation: an entire military group was now devoted to this activity. Thousands of missions were organised over the whole of the theatre of operations, hundreds of thousands, and sometimes millions of photographs were taken, printed and analysed, each month. The Americans adopted the same methods as the British and the CIU in Medmenham was transformed into the Allied Central Interpretation Unit. The British developed methods of interpretation that were both sophisticated and standardised, so that the results of the missions could be exploited very quickly. The multiplicity and diversity of the objectives soon resulted in the creation of specialised sections that were exclusively devoted to the study of specific targets: radar and radio stations, ships, planes, camouflage, factories and underground factories. This study consisted of three phases: an immediate phase to discover the important new facts (a ship’s departure, for example); an analysis, within 24 hours, of all the potential objectives (aerodromes, stations, factories, etc); and finally, a systematic comparison with the previous coverage that had been carried out by each specialised section. Then, and this was one of the keys to the success of the British, the process of transmitting information was very short. The reports of the photointerpreters were analysed by the intelligence services and syntheses were immediately supplied to the decision-making military bodies. The information from aerial reconnaissance was used in many ways by the Allies throughout the Second World War: Ͳ

The essential field of application was, of course, military intelligence. Photographic reconnaissance often made very important contributions during the war, by allowing the British to know and sometimes anticipate enemy attacks. This was for example the case in the summer of 1940 when Hitler’s “Operation Sea Lion” was repelled. Aerial reconnaissance was equally decisive in the Battle of the Atlantic, with the supervision of ship movements in the ports and the production of the U-Boats in the naval shipyards, and during the air offensive against Germany with the control of the aerodromes and aeronautical factories.

Strategic Aerial Research During the Second World War

73

Ͳ

Secondly aerial reconnaissance was crucial for the preparation of bomb attacks and the assessment of bombing damage on towns and economic targets.

Ͳ

Thirdly, it played a very important role in preparing the Allied landings – notably “Overlord” – by providing very accurate mapping of the whole of the coastline that was likely to be selected.

Ͳ

Finally, aerial photographs were also used by the Allies propaganda services in an attempt to demoralise the German population. Numerous leaflets were dropped by plane in their millions, showing large towns owned by the Reich and destroyed by RAF and USAF bombers. This was without any great success, though.

Whether it was to inform people of any bombings or to control them, it was certainly the strategic dimension in the Allied use of aerial reconnaissance that contributed most to their victory. A fundamental development during the Second World War was that the Allies no longer just wanted to supervise the battle ground and the area immediately behind it. Instead, they scrutinised the entire area that was controlled by the enemy, such as their transport networks and consequently, their capacity for industrial production. In theory, and contrary to other information sources, aerial reconnaissance was an active source that did not depend on enemy mistakes or manoeuvres to broadcast false information.

The role of aerial reconnaissance in the fight against Germany’s new weapons For decades, it has been accepted that aerial reconnaissance played a decisive role in the fight of the Allies against the new and secret weapon programmes of Nazi Germany, the V1 and V2s. This is largely due to a book of memoirs written by the Constance Babington-Smith, one of the photo-interpretation specialists at the CIU in Medmenham. The book, entitled Evidence in Camera (Babington-Smith 1957), was quite a success in the United Kingdom and the United States where it was published as Air Spy. In this account, however, the role of the protagonist is exaggerated. It took several decades before a more unbiased account of the

74

Chapter Six

events was published, with the works of R.V. Jones, one of the most brilliant scientists working for the British war effort (Jones 1990). There are a considerable number of documents relating to the British combat against the German secret arms programmes in the National Archive collections in Kew. See in particular the executive summary “Crossbow Report” (September 1945) and the AIR 34/75 file. These facts can be summarised very briefly. It was only in spring 1943 that the British intelligence services became aware of the serious threat that the development of new German weapons posed to London, whereas these were already in the trial phase and programmes for production were being prepared. The research centre in Peenemünde, which was the Gordian knot for the new weapon programmes that were developed by the Army and the Luftwaffe (i.e. the rocket, known as V2 once in service), had in fact been photographed by the Allies’ planes in 1940 and 1942, but the nature of the site had not been identified. It was not until the War Office received reports from agents in Germany, on 9 February 1943, that it was decided to carry out the first specific photographic mission to Peenemünde. This mission took place on 19 March. Around the same time, the Allies conducted research in the French coastal area on the presence of any projectors that werelikely to launch unusual objects. This investigation had been ordered because a previous air sortie from the American Photographic Reconnaissance Unit in Peenemünde, on 19 January 1943, following the mention of the possible development of long-range rockets in this location, came up with no results. From March to April 1943, the task of the photo-interpreters in Medmenham was to determine how much truth there was to the extremely confusing and contradictory information that was obtained from varied sources (e.g. a conversation between two German generals who were captured in Libya on 27 March, or reports obtained from the Polish Resistance in April 1943). The numerous alarm signals incited Churchill to appoint his son-in-law, Duncan Sandys, to lead a massive investigation. This was started in April, under the name of “Bodyline”, and aimed to ascertain the actual existence of the secret weapons that the Germans were believed to be developing (i.e. “rocket-planes”, rockets and long-range canons). On 19 April, the CIU in Medmenham received the order to prepare a high-priority flight programme to photograph the industrial and military sites that could be involved in the production and deployment of new German weapons. In addition, a complete re-examination was requested of all the photos that had been taken between Cotentin and the

Strategic Aerial Research During the Second World War

75

Belgian border, within a radius of 150 miles around London. At this point in time, the British were not yet ready to acknowledge the German technological advance. They believed that the rockets, if they existed, could only be launched by canons, or giant mortars, close to those imagined by Jules Verne. The photographs taken during the second mission to Peenemünde on 22 April 1943 were the subject of an initial report that was filed seven days later by the specialists in Medmenham. As these researchers did not quite know what to look for, nothing abnormal was reported. Later, they would realise that the flight over the installations took place during the trial launch of a V2. The examination of photographs taken on 14 May, during two successive missions led to the same conclusion: in these pictures, there were several rockets on a launching pad, but they simply had not been identified. This flood of new information and the identification of large-scale land terracing in the forest of Watten-Éperlecques, near Saint-Omer in the North of France, on photos taken on 17 May, caused Sandys, to order the complete photographic coverage of north-west France on 4 June. He also decided that Peenemünde and the surrounding islands should be observed regularly. In the middle of June 1943, this investigation yielded some striking results. The key man was R.V. Jones, one of the principal advisors in the British secret services. He had learned of very accurate reports from members of the Luxemburg Resistance who had worked as civil employees in Peenemünde. He identified large-scale rockets in enlargements of good-quality photographs taken on 12 June (Mission N/1853). His assumption was verified after a series of successive missions that all took place within a few days and resulted in a crisis meeting on 29 June, with several ministers from the War Cabinet and chiefs of staff, with Churchill himself presiding. It was decided to initiate a massive bombing raid on Peenemünde and to prepare a new complete coverage of the Channel coastline, within a radius of 150 miles around London. Photos that were taken at the beginning of July, confirmed the extent of the concrete structures that had been prepared in Watten-Éperlecques, verifying several messages from the French Resistance. With the RAF Bomber Command night raid on Peenemünde on 18 August 1943, and the day raid by the 8th USAF on the Watten-Éperlecques bunker, the British were under the impression they had decisively halted the preparations. In fact, the raid on Peenemünde had only slightly delayed the rocket

76

Chapter Six

programme. Still, it had also forced the Germans to disperse the different functions that had until then had been grouped along the Baltic coast (i.e. research, production and trials), throughout the Reich’s territory. In the summer of 1943, British intelligence understood that they faced a double threat. On 22 June, MI6 received information from one of its agents, an officer posted at the War Ministry in Berlin, that “winged rockets” were being developed and were going to be launched on London by means of catapults. On 12 August, the same source confirmed that two new weapons were indeed being developed, and gave their code names. On 31 August, photos taken by the Danish Resistance arrived in England, showing the remains of a device that had gone off course during trials. In a report addressed to Churchill on 14 September, Jones proved there were indeed two different weapons: a “pilotless plane” (the future V1) and a large rocket (the V2). As a result of this, the “Bodyline” investigation was resumed, and a special section of the CIU was installed. On 28 October 1943, Sandys ordered a renewed complete coverage of north-west France, which resulted in approximately one hundred missions in just a few days and the production of thousands of photos. These were compared with those from prior coverage, the order being to locate new rail branch tracks and any trace of large-scale terracing. Through this comparison, five large work sites were identified, corresponding to Sonderbauten, to be identified in the Pas-de-Calais and Cotentin, very large blockhouses destined for the launch of V1s and V2s. But the specialists in Medmenham benefited from very accurate information, they had some very reliable maps, for example, which originated from “Agir”, a network in the French Resistance directed by Michel Hollard. These maps signalled the existence of six suspicious work sites that were close to the Channel coastline. These sites were not linked to the rail network and included identical buildings. All six of them were photographed on 3 November. Each of these pictures shows parallel walls directed exactly towards London, as well as very long buildings (of 120 metres), whose shape resembled that of a ski turned on its side when viewed from the air. The most advanced site in the commune of Yvrench (Somme), in the place known as “Bois-Carré”, served as a reference model to describe the objectives, soon called Ski Sites. These were without any doubt, launch pads for the “pilotless planes”, also named “flying bombs”. On 22 November, 95 similar sites were noticed during photographic coverage between Cherbourg and Hazebrouck.

Strategic Aerial Research During the Second World War

77

On 1 December 1943, a report from the CIU completed the puzzle, with evidence from photos taken on 28 November over Peenemünde-West and the neighbouring Luftwaffe trial centre in Zempin, near Zinnovitz. On these pictures, installations similar to the ski sites were clearly visible. On one of the ramps installed on the shore of Peenemünde Island was a small plane. It was called “Peenemünde 20” by Medmenham, and this was indeed the “flying bomb”. These discoveries set off a high-powered programme of bombings on 5 December 1943, code named “Crossbow”, on all the sites in France which could be linked with the new German weapons, both the Sonderbauten and the “ski sites”. The Germans, who saw the vulnerability of their launch installations, decided to continue most of the Sonderbauten work sites, but abandon the “ski sites”. They prepared ultra-light bases that the Allies had trouble locating (a few concrete blocks for the ramp and a single building to regulate gyroscopes). It was only on 27 April 1944 that the first of these “simplified sites” was identified on a photo that had been taken in the hamlet of Belhamelin in Normandy. New complete coverage of the Channel area, launched on 3 May, then again at the end of May, resulted in the discovery of 66 similar sites. However, the targets were deemed to be too small and thus very difficult to bomb. Just a few days prior to the scheduled landing in Normandy, the threat of the flying bomb suddenly became a immediate problem. On 16 April and 5 May 1944, after some reports from the Polish Resistance, an SS training camp in Blizna had been photographed, but these pictures had not attracted the attention of British photo-interpreters. As a consequence, the rocket had always been relegated to the background until now. From 13 June 1944 onwards, with the beginning of the V1 offensive on London, orders changed dramatically. The emergency was now attributed to preparing and evaluating the “Crossbow” bombings of the flying bomb launch sites and Sonderbauten work sites that were still active. Although the British suffered greatly during the initial weeks of attack, they eventually discovered some efficient counter measures. When the V1 launches ceased on 1 September 1944 as a result of the liberation of northern France by the Allied Armies, there was euphoria among the civilian leaders and British military staff.

78

Chapter Six

 Fig. 6-1: Large scale rocket in a photo taken over Peenemünde, identified by R.V. Jones on 16 June 1943

Strategic Aerial Research During the Second World War

79

 Fig. 6-2: “Yvrench – “Bois Carré”. In November 1943, 95 sites were localised. They showed identical buildings, one of which was directed precisely towards the Tower Bridge. They all included long buildings whose shape resembled that of a ski on its side when viewed from the sky, as a consequence, they became known as “ski sites”

80

Chapter Six

 Fig. 6-3: A “modified site” for the flying bomb at Vincly (Pas-de-Calais)

Only R.V. Jones, who had centralised all the Allied information on the new German weapons since 6 July, sent out warning messages. On 16 July, he received components from a V2 that had fallen in Sweden during failed trials. The next day, he identified rockets in position and ready for a trial launch on aerial shots of Blizna that had been taken on 5 May. On 28

Strategic Aerial Research During the Second World War

81

May, other V2 components arrived in London; they had been recovered by the Polish Resistance and were accompanied by a very detailed report on the activities in Blizna. The British then finally understood that the device could be launched by mobile units from very simple installations (e.g. on concrete plates in the parks of French châteaux, camouflaged in woods, or even on an ordinary road). The V2 offensive against London began on 8 September 1944. It was led by mobile units, operating mostly from Dutch towns, notably The Hague. Despite the thousands of photographs taken by the Allied reconnaissance planes, none of these launch sites had been identified, due to the frequent movements of the German units and the possibilities for camouflage that the urban surroundings provided. Only one photo had been taken over the hippodrome in The Hague on 26 February 1945. Although the Allies were incapable of attacking the V2 launching units, they did manage to record several successful hits on rail convoys transporting the devices. The V2 production site, the underground factory of Mittelwerk near Nordhausen in Thuringia, where the work force was supplied from the adjoining Dora concentration camp, was photographed for the first time on 18 September 1944 to verify information supplied by a MI6 agent. However, it was only on 23 November that an initial interpretation report was drawn up in Medmenham. As a consequence Mittelwerk was never bombed. The special section “Crossbow” at the CIU in Medmenham,which had been devoted to the German secret weapons from spring 1943 onwards, was led by an expert who had already been active in the Great War, Wing Commander Hamshaw Thomas. At the height of its activity in the summer of 1944, there were 15 photo-interpreters working full-time in two teams, 24 hours a day. Vast resources were employed in the fight against the new German weapon programmes. There were approximately 3,000 specific sorties to about a hundred targets (including 50 to Peenemünde), which made up about 40% of the Allied photographic operations between 1 May 1943 and 31 March 1944; 1,250,000 negatives were taken and 4,000,000 photos printed.

82

Chapter Six

Fig. 6-4: Mimoyecques, 3 November 1943. Five sites of giant blockhouses – in German, Sonderbauten – were located from the appearance of new railway branch lines. Here is one, near Calais, in fact a huge underground facility for a new type of gun

The research extended over an immense area: from Cotentin, in France, to Poland, from the Baltic Sea to the Austrian Alps. It covered a wide range of targets: research centres, trial facilities, factories of

Strategic Aerial Research During the Second World War

83

manufacture and assembly (many of which were underground), factories producing fuel and comburents (i.e. alcohol, liquid oxygen and hydrogen peroxide), campaign storages (on the surface or underground), headquarters of operating units and a very diverse range of launch sites. Throughout the investigation, enlargements of the most significant aerial photographs were used by the intelligence services as proof to strengthen the conclusions which were presented to the chiefs of staff and Churchill himself. Contrary to long-believed romanticised historical literature, wishing to personalise history and provide spectacular accounts, photographic research was not the only factor that led to the Allies discovering the different facets of the new German weapon programmes. On the contrary, they resorted to a variety of information sources in order to combat a danger that was perceived as fatal for London a very symbolic target for terrorist attacks. They listened in to conversations and interrogation of German war prisoners, supervised radar station activities and radio transmissions by German units, received reports from agents who had infiltrated in the ministries of the Reich, and from the resistance networks in France, Poland, Luxemburg and Belgium. Paradoxically, the “Ultra” source – which was the deciphering of the “Enigma” messages – supplied very little information about the new weapons, due to the extreme level of secrecy and low broadcast of copies of the messages; the only exception were the activities of the SS trial centre in Blizna. It is important to note that nearly all the launching sites for V-weapons in France were identified after the so-called “Ping-pong Reports” from the Resistance. On most occasions, aerial photography was merely used as a means of verification. On the other hand, it did play a fundamental role in the follow-up of objectives and the decision to launch aerial attacks. Significantly, apart from the identification of several surface factories – Zeppelin in Friedrichshafen, for example – where the examination of aerial photographs with special railway carriages stationed close by, identified in Peenemünde, all site locations relating to programmes for secret German weapons were the result of agent reports.

84

Chapter Six

 Fig. 6-5: “The Mittelwerk, September 1944”. The Allies correctly identified the V2 production site, the underground factory Mittelwerk, near Nordhausen in Thuringe, where deportees from the Dora concentration camp worked. These aerial photos date from September 1944, but the site was never attacked.

Continuity and rupture: the Cold War, the satellite age If aerial photographic information from the Great War left only inconsiderable traces in the practices of belligerents in the Second World War what can be said of the following periods, i.e. those of the Cold War and observation satellites? First of all, there was no break in the photographic research efforts after 1945, as had been the case in 1918. In fact, during the Cold War, the West, with the United States now playing a huge role, continued the methods and practices from the Second World War, but used more and more sophisticated technological means. There is no question of making an in-depth analysis here. We will simply state the principal characteristics of this heritage.

Strategic Aerial Research During the Second World War

85

One of the methods that was adopted in the Cold War was the use of rapid planes flying at very great height (i.e. the U2 and especially the SR71), because they were capable of leading long-distance operations that covered vast areas. In the end, both sides attained the ideal situation, in which the land and sea area that is controlled by the enemy is completely covered. With the observation satellites and their captors evolving beyond the capacity of the human eye1, it was now possible to see through clouds (the quality of coverage during the Second World War was governed by the weather conditions) and to see at night. The picture definition, together with the new possibilities for enlargement, conferred an extreme degree of accuracy to inframetric military images that were obtained by plane and satellite. Still, as can be seen during the Second World War, strategic aerial and space reconnaissance never managed to gain autonomy as a source of military intelligence. Its value remains linked to that of ground sources. In the same way, in the age of UAVs and satellites operating at a height of hundreds of kilometres, 24 hours a day, it is still very difficult to locate a raw-boned, bearded individual wearing a turban in the mountainous areas of Afghanistan and Pakistan, without any precise information of a human origin.

References Babington-Smith C. (1957) Evidence in Camera, The Story of Photographic Intelligence in World War II. Chatto and Windus, London. Jones R.V. (1990) Most Secret War. Hodder, London. Nesbit R.C. (2000) RAF in Action (1939-1945). Public Record Office, Richmond. Stanley R. (1981) World War II Photo-Intelligence. Scribners, New-York.

 1

During the Second World War, there was progress regarding night photography (using stroboscopic cameras) and the first infrared colour films made their appearance in the final months of the conflict.



CHAPTER SEVEN IMAGING GOLGOTHA: PHOTOGRAMMETRY ON THE WESTERN FRONT 1914-1918 PETER CHASSEAUD Introduction The successful dirigible airship and aeroplane gave a major impetus to air survey, while the pre-1914 development of terrestrial and aerial photogrammetry and stereophotogrammetry led to rapid wartime developments. By 1914 map-making from individual air photos fitted onto control points was well established. Without such control, although the data requirements for internal and external camera orientation were understood, there were conceptual difficulties with recording such data, fitting overlapping photographs together (correspondence), and making effective use of stereoscopy.

International developments in photogrammetry before 1914 Air survey was pioneered by Nadar (Gaspar Felix Tournachon), who in 1855 patented equipment for mapping from captive balloon photographs, and Laussedat who in 1858 used these photos for mapping. Experiments were also made using kites, rockets and pigeons, but little progress was made until the internal combustion engine enabled aircraft to fly along specified photographic trajectories. While most photogrammetric plotting before 1914 had been done from terrestrial photographs, aerial survey became the most significant development in military cartography during the war (Chasseaud 1991, 1999, 2004). Important developments in terrestrial photogrammetry instruments were Henry Fourcade’s and Carl Pulfrich’s stereocomparators of 1901, F. Vivian Thompson’s stereo-plotter of 1907-8, and the Zeiss – von Orel stereoautograph (developed from the stereocomparator) of 1908, 1911 and

88

Chapter Seven

1914, the first instrument capable of automatically plotting planimetry and tracing contours from stereograms (Hart 1943). Although restricted to horizontal camera axes, this revolutionised plotting from photographs. It was adapted for high oblique (but not low oblique or vertical) air pairs and, together with the new Hugershoff photogoniometer method, was used for wartime plotting of points and heights (Zeller 1952). In 1909 Zeiss produced its “balloon” survey camera, with which targets could be photographed and plotted by hand, and later with the stereoautograph. The Griesel “photo-plane-table,” incorporating a photogoniometer (an instrument to survey the photograph through the camera lens), was used with this camera (Schumann 1986). By 1914, the Germans and Austrians were significantly ahead in aerial photogrammetry. Although the first multi-lens air camera, made in Austria by Scheimpflug (seven oblique lenses surrounding one vertical) was used experimentally before and during the war, Major James Bagley’s tri-lens camera of 1918 (USA), was the first practical multi-lens camera (Technical Staff of the Fairchild Aerial Camera Corporation 1933). The war impelled research and development, the British and French concentrating on rectification of near-vertical air photographs, while the Germans, besides making greater advances in rectification than the Allies, developed radial triangulation for verticals and sophisticated stereoplotting equipment for obliques (Hart 1943).

French photogrammetry On 1 September 1914, Coulon and Dussert of the Service Géographique de l’Armée switched from Alpine terrestrial photogrammetrical surveys to short-base stereophotogrammetrical survey for the Paris defences artillery, using a Zeiss stereocomparator (SGA 1936). In wartime air survey, the French concentrated on graphic and optical-mechanical restitution rather than developing instrumental plotting of control points like the Germans. This was due partly to Allied air superiority and possession of trigonometrical data and cadastral plans of the operational areas (providing an excellent though outdated detail framework on which to plot air photos) and partly to the enormous pre-war German and Austrian lead in optical plotting instrumentation. French air photography was well documented by Andrieu (Andrieu 1920), Carlier (Carlier 1921), and Dolfus (Dolfus 1922), and air photogrammetry reasonably so in the Service Géographique’s official Rapport de Guerre (SGA 1924, SGA 1936). Of those directly

Imaging Golgotha: Photogrammetry on the Western Front 1914-1918

89

involved in air photogrammetry, Sasportès (Sasportès 1915, Sasportès 1918), M. Rollet de l’Isle (de l'Isle 1916), de Vanssay (de Vanssay 1917), and Roussilhe (Roussilhe 1918, 1920, 1921, 1922a, 1922b, 1922c, 1923, 1926, 1930, 1936) described wartime restitution methods.

French balloon, kite and aeroplane photography Captain Jacques Saconney led pre-war air survey experiments with balloons, kites and aeroplanes. He organised a balloon telephotography section at Chalais-Meudon where he commanded a wartime observation school (Blanchet 1965: 137). Balloon companies were equipped with wooden 50-cm focal-length cameras with excellent lenses, which were first used in aeroplanes between December 1914 (SGA 1924: 26) and May-June 1915. In August 1914 the French army had no aeroplanes equipped for photography (Carlier 1921: 16); however these soon became the primary camera platform. Armies experimented with aeroplane photos despite staff resistance (Carlier 1921: 16), artillery officers from mid-September 1914 using private cameras (mostly Gaumont, 9 x 12 cm plate) to locate German batteries (Dégardin 1988: 17). Colonel d’artillerie Lepelletier used good oblique air photos of German positions in the Champagne for mapping. These were taken on 25 September 1914 by Lieutenant Dollinger (using a Spido-Gaumont 11 x 16 cm hand-held camera with a plate magazine, f/8 lens and a lens shutter) from 1,500-2,000 metres altitude (Roussilhe 1918). A rapid restitution was made using alignments (batteries being particularly visible), the results being overprinted on 1:80,000 map enlargements (SGA 1936: 17, Bacchus 1988: 31). Unfortunately detail on the 1:80,000 was often 300 metres out-of-position. Excellent obliques were also taken by Eugène Pépin near Saint-Souplet (Champagne) by 25 September 1914 (Dumarche 1988: 9), showing German trenches and batteries, and near St.-Mihiel (Humbert and Pierron 1985: 106-107). More good photographs were taken at Verdun from 7 October 1914, to pinpoint and destroy (helped by the accurate 1:20,000 plan directeur of that area) German heavy batteries firing at Fort Douaumont, by capitaine d’artillerie Grout (a balloonist), who took a series along the edge of the Spincourt Forest (Carlier 1921: 16). Army Air Photography Sections were requested in early October (Carlier 1921: 17) and set up by Grout who recruited draftsmen and photographers for the Balloon Establishment at Chalais-Meudon. Sections

90

Chapter Seven

were formed in December 1914 and January 1915, and later enlarged (SGA 1936: 18). On 17 November 1914, Joffre prescribed close collaboration between the Flying Service and the new Groupes de Canevas de Tir of Armies (GCTAs) who used the photos for trench and artillery maps (plans directeurs) (SGA 1936: 72). In September 1915, each Corps was given an Air Photography Section, working with Sections Topographiques des Corps d’Armées (STCAs) to up-date maps (Carlier 1921). Even the poor photos taken with Paul-Louis Weiller’s Vest Pocket Kodak helped to correct 1:80,000 map errors. From November 1914, longer-focus (25/26cm and 50cm) plate cameras were introduced, taking very accurate, detailed, verticals or obliques from 500-4,000 metres altitude. Huge 120cm focal-length cameras were later developed and photographic sorties flown as low as 150 metres to photograph machine guns (Dumarche 1988: 9-10). Various serial and cine film cameras were used by the French, including the Douhet-Zollinger, Thornton-Pickard, Piazza, De Ram, Brock, Duchatelier, and Folmer & Schwing (Karlson 1941). Carlier (Carlier 1921: 42) judged that the German Reihenbildner cameras were at least as good. In early November 1914, Sergeant Paumier photographed the Reims front using a rubber-damped camera, and a level-indicator to ensure verticality. On 23 November an air photo agreement was made between Fifth Army’s Service Aéronautique, and Perrier’s GCTA5: for Paumier’s and the Service Géographique’s short-focus “amateur” cameras they substituted a Lacour-Berthiot 48cm focal-length focal-plane-shutter camera. From 11 January 1915 this gave excellent images which were immediately restituted. Photos were taken by Lieutenants Paumier, Chotard and Pleneau of the Service de la Photographie Aérienne, and by Ingénieur hydrographe Volmat of GCTA5 who air-tested many cameras. The first good restituted photos were taken near Reims, between Pompelle and Berry-au-Bac, in March and April 1915 (SHA 1917-1918). Before writing a GQG artillery survey instruction, Lieutenant-Colonel Maurin obtained Grout’s Verdun photos and conferred with Bellot (GCTA2) and Lepelletier, an aerial photography pioneer who had, on 31 October 1914 for a local operation, produced a plan directeur which clearly showed field boundaries. Lepelletier realised that air photos, despite making straight lines appear curved, showed the nature of the terrain and enabled the plotting of vital reference points for air observers. Bellot prompted General Bourgeois, commanding the Service Géographique, to requisition various types of cameras, notably the Spido-

Imaging Golgotha: Photogrammetry on the Western Front 1914-1918

91

Gaumont plate camera and the “jumelle” Belliéni, for the GCTAs (SGA 1936: 17-18). From January 1915 the Service Géographique ordered general photographic experimentation which resulted in the Aéronautique militaire recognising photography’s superiority over observers’ reports (Roussilhe 1918: 82). Liabeuf, of Fourth Army’s Photography Section, designed and built a prototype tilt indicator, to help to determine external orientation, and a subsequent version was scientifically constructed by Debrie and successfully tested at Plessis-Belleville (Carlier 1921: 46). French tilt indicators and other instruments to determine external orientation did not record on plates or film (SGA 1924: 152), unlike the German equivalents.

Early french restitution methods The formation of GCTAs in November 1914 increased the accuracy of plans directeurs, which showed all German defences, while research concentrated on methods of locating artillery targets (Roussilhe 1918: 82). The first restitutions were rapid improvisations. As few officers were familiar with air photos, prints were annotated to identify machine gun nests, batteries, command posts, etc.; this required new specialist photointerpreters (Dégardin 1988: 19-20).

Graphic methods Plotting enemy batteries from air photos was given the highest priority, an Instruction of 10 November 1914 laying down geometric rules (SGA 1914). As rapid tactical and artillery intelligence requirements were prioritised over planimetric accuracy, cameras were not designed to survey specifications and principal point triangulation (a form of radial triangulation) was initially impossible. Simple graphic methods (alignments, cuttings, intersections, prolongations) were used to plot points and detail: from November 1914 to May 1915 GCTAs used simple geometrical methods: alignments and faisceaux anharmoniques (4-point method), both referred to points of known position. It was almost impossible to use the intersection method (radial triangulation), and the first plans directeurs were compiled from single photos. “Craticulage” (gridding) was widely used to plot detail. High altitude, short-focal-length mapping photography developed later (GQG 1916, GQG 1918, Andrieu 1920).

92

Chapter Seven

Sasportès’ prolongement photographique In mid-December 1914, GCTA3’s Lieutenant Sasportès began airphoto-restitution on the Argonne – Verdun front. He continued into early 1915, plotting control points from photos of the same area, taken from different air stations with different external orientations. This led to GCTA3’s “Note sur la restitution graphique de photographies groupées par deux et supposées prises dans une position quelconque” (February 1915). Later in 1915 he developed a graphic aero-traversing method of photographic extension or cantilevering (prolongement photographique), in August “bridging” between sparse control points by plotting from 4 points identified on the overlaps of a series to fix control points in the Argonne (Sasportès 1915, SHA 1917-1918, Sasportès 1918).

Panstéréoscope Schweisguth 1916 The first French application of stereoscopy to air survey followed Collardeau’s note (27 January 1915), “Sur la Portée de la vision binoculaire”, expounding long-base stereoscopy for viewing relief. No instrumental use (e.g. stereocomparator) was envisaged; although the French recognised the possibility, they were never able to contour instrumentally (De Vanssay 1917). From Dubosque’s stereoscope (modified by Mattey), GCTA7’s Capitaine Schweisguth (Vosges) in 1916 developed the Panstéréoscope Schweisguth utilising random pairs. It was widely used by GCTAs and STCAs (Carlier 1921). Later obliques and high altitude panoramas were used for stereoscopic study of details and ground forms, stereograms being specially mounted for this (SGA 1936).

French mass-production restitution methods Normally only single near-verticals were used for plotting detail onto existing ground control. Increased photographic volume forced the GCTAs to introduce rapid production-line optical-mechanical photographic restitution (Roussilhe 1918: 82-83, Carlier 1921: 53-54, Roussilhe 1930: 20). Four main types of apparatus were evolved: Cot-Marti Apparatus, Chambre claire Vavon, Appareil de projection Demaria-Lapierre (appareil à trois corps) 1915 and the Appareil de redressement.

Imaging Golgotha: Photogrammetry on the Western Front 1914-1918

93

Cot-Marti Apparatus (GCTA5) Captains Vincent (GCTA5) and Volmat studied alignments and correspondence restitution methods, and in March 1915 tested automatic reconstitution using apparatus designed by Ingénieurs hydrographes Cot and Marti which projected the image onto a map trace, on an adjustable frame, which was replaced, once coincidence had been obtained, by bromide paper (Carlier 1921: 52, SGA 1924).

Chambre claire Vavon (GCTA6) In March 1915 Captain Vavon (GCTA6) applied Laussedat’s idea of a prismatic “chambre claire” (camera lucida), also used by Saconney, through which a rectified virtual image of the air photo was viewed and drawn on the plan (SGA 1936: 21). Produced from June, some 330 were constructed during the war for GCTAs and STCAs, who distributed rapid blue-print restitutions, the Service Géographique producing bromides (SHA 1917-1918).

Appareil de projection Demaria-Lapierre (appareil à trois corps) 1915, and the Appareil de redressement Clerc 1916 Various non-optically-rigorous photographic apparatus were designed by Air Photography Sections’ officers for provisional rectifications, e.g. the appareil de projection Demaria-Lapierre (projection, reproduction, restitution, reducing, enlarging) and the appareil de redressement (amplificateur redresseur automatique) Clerc. Construction faults made these almost useless for restitution (Clerc 1920, Carlier 1921: 52-53, SGA 1924).

Roussilhe’s research and apparatus (GCTA2 & GCTA1) 1914-15 In November 1914 Ingénieur hydrographe Roussilhe (GCTA2) made air-photo-compilation of plans directeurs in Picardy, trying to fit the German defences to the inaccurate 1:80,000 planimetry. The accuracy required was 10 metres in relative position, the many identifiable points on the map and photos facilitating working by successive approximations. As a new, large-scale, plan directeur was urgently needed, GCTA2 first tried to improve the existing map from terrestrial observations, and then attempted compilation of a new 1:20,000 plan from air photos, plotting

94

Chapter Seven

German works using rapid methods (Roussilhe 1930). GCTA2 supplied two aeroplanes with Gaumont cameras (plates 13 x 15 cm and 9 x 15 cm) provided by the Service Géographique, and took vertical photos of the Mametz area. Together with the Canevas de Tir (artillery firing chart) prepared by GCTA2, these enabled the German defences to be identified and accurately plotted on a 1:20,000 gridded uncontoured plan, incorporating planimetry, trenches and German batteries, for an attack on 17 December (SHA 1917-1918). In March 1915, Roussilhe was transferred to GCTA1 at Verdun, where restitution suffered from oblique and poor-quality photos. Good, but slow, results were obtained with the 4-point method, but greater photographic volume led to a quicker alignments method being used to update plans directeurs (SHA 1917-1918). Roussilhe and the Vincennes Artillery Topographical Section investigated “industrialised” and improved restitution methods: firstly, optical photo-rectification, using special semiautomatic apparatus or refined descriptive geometry, and secondly, transformation of rectification into plan, applying height corrections. In April – May 1915 he developed an apparatus projecting the photoimage onto the plan by bringing into coincidence four corresponding points. The rectified image was then rephotographed for mapping (Andrieu 1920: 111, SGA 1936: 65-71). First produced between July and December 1915 (note on the underlying theory dated 15 January 1916), this improved GCTA1’s “Canevas de restitution” (SHA 1917-1918). By enabling rapid, moderately precise, restitution it facilitated and speeded up the huge volume of plan directeur compilation and revision and became the main mapping apparatus used by most GCTAs (Roussilhe 1930: 20). In 1918 a new model, incorporating the Scheimpflug condition (eliminating distortion), was under construction (SGA 1924).

Other French photogrammetric experiments GCTAs also used other methods of mapping from air photos. The main developments (Sasportès’ method has already been described), were: Photogrammetry in GCTA4, De Vanssay and Photogrammetry (GCTA10) and the French Second Army on the Argonne front 1917-18.

Imaging Golgotha: Photogrammetry on the Western Front 1914-1918

95

Fig. 7-1: French Roussilhe photo-restitution apparatus, 1916, widely used by Groupes de canevas de tir as a “mass production” process to re-photograph nearvertical photos to the desired plotting scale by obtaining coincidence between four points on the photo and the map, while eliminating photographic distortion

Photogrammetry in GCTA4 (Champagne front) Fourth Army’s Photographic Section was commanded by Pépin, who joined on 15 December 1914 with two photographers, two draughtsmen, and two 26cm focal-length hand-held metal cameras. He took several hundred air photos before March 1915, and in April he was using a handheld camera through a hole in the cockpit floor (Dégardin 1988: 19-20). Fourth Army did pioneering work using a Douhet-Zollinger film camera (6 x 6 cm frames) to map its 60-km front in early 1915. Its automatically overlapping photos, covering up to 6-7 km (and soon 10 km) behind the German lines, were fitted to a crude 1:10,000 planimetric framework created by enlarging the old 1:80,000 map. A rudimentary rapid restitution apparatus was built, pressing the film between glass sheets to prevent distortion. The map was swung until the projected image fitted the map detail, being replaced with light-sensitive paper to provide a rectified image (Carlier 1921: 17-18), and restitutions mosaiced onto the

96

Chapter Seven

map. The relatively flat Champagne terrain implied negligible planimetry errors caused by altitude differences (SGA 1924). Meanwhile Boué, commanding GCTA4, experimented with geometric and photographic rectification (Roussilhe 1930: 23), mainly using graphic restitution methods based on 13 x 18 cm plates taken with the 26cm camera, producing, around April 1915, the first complete 1:10,000 plan directeur of Fourth Army front (Carlier 1921: 18). In 1917, using large numbers of photos of the same terrain to establish control points and lines, GCTA4 produced a definitive planimetric rectification (SGA 1936: 121). GCTA4 also exploited the perspective pyramid’s geometric properties in experiments using obliques to determine the camera’s external orientation (geometrical spatial resection). The first study was made on an oblique panoramic photo of the Ravin de la Goutte, using 1:10,000 sheets Butte de Tahure and Ripont (Andrieu 1920: 52, 106-107). German photogrammeters had been using this technique since the start of the war (Fleck and Jacob 1916). It provided a relatively quick way of determining external orientation, and to that extent assisted plotting.

De Vanssay and photogrammetry (GCTA10) De Vanssay’s GCTA10 in Artois in 1915 used a method suggested by General Arnoux. Cadastral plans were reduced to 1:5,000 and fitted to control points. A fit accurate to about 20 metres was usually obtained from geodetic points in the cadastrals and roads. Photos were used to revise field boundaries, roads, villages, woods, etc. German trenches, batteries, tracks, etc., were easily plotted relative to field boundaries, despite photographic distortion. Vertical relief was a major problem, the old 1:40,000 form-line drawings, enlarged to 1:5,000, being inaccurate. From mid-1915, stereoscopic examination of overlapping photos gave a clear impression of relief and, particularly in the Souchez (Vimy Ridge) area, important intelligence, but no accurate contouring was possible (SHA 1917-1918).

French Second Army on the Argonne front 1917-18 In 1917-18, GCTA2 improved the planimetry and relief of the Argonne forest plans directeurs. Cadastral plans were compiled onto geodetic points, and a form of graphic aero-traverse was then used to bridge areas, where possible closing on geodetic points and precise

Imaging Golgotha: Photogrammetry on the Western Front 1914-1918

97

cadastral planimetric lines, to create a canevas de restitution. This control framework was amplified using the Chambre Claire Vavon for a restitution in which high-altitude photos covering an extensive area were used to establish further control points (points d’appui), identifiable on the sharper lower-altitude photos of the detail restitution. Detail was plotted after tracing the planimetric outlines on the print, creating a canevas d’ensemble de detail. Together with new 1:20,000 plans directeurs of the French rear, this provided a more reliable control for artillery fire and for plotting trenches, enemy batteries, etc. The Panstéréo Schweisguth was used to elucidate ground forms (SHA 1917-18).

French use of stereoplotting instruments The Stereoautograph bought pre-war by the Société française de Stéréotopographie was hardly used for war purposes, and no instrument existed in France in 1914 capable of map-plotting from air photos (Roussilhe 1922b: 3). Ingénieur hydrographe en chef Rollet de l’Isle (1916), who studied the geometry necessary for single-photo restitution, including the Hugershoff pyramid for determining the air station by resection in space, also considered using radial triangulation and the stereocomparator to obtain precise results from two or more photos. De Vanssay’s (de Vanssay 1917) and Roussilhe’s (Roussilhe 1918) papers referred to the stereocomparator. Sasportès (Sasportès 1918) in August 1918 lectured on the theory and perspective geometry of photo-plotting without determination of ground-points. That the French eventually realised that the important component of air photogrammetry was the stereogram, not the individual photo, was made clear by de Vanssay (de Vanssay 1917: 59-60) who noted that the Service Géographique’s stereocomparator only accepted 13x18 cm plates, and was very limited in its ability to orient these. He considered that it was accurate to about one metre for measuring heights on air photos taken from 1,800 metres (5,850 feet).

French photogrammetry at the end of the war In early 1918 Plans directeurs were updated for all French defences. GCTA2 recommended that all photo reconnaissance be done with automatic cameras taking time-interval exposures to provide stereo pairs. This was with intelligence and the simple elucidation of ground forms for cartography in mind (SHA 1917-1918).

98

Chapter Seven

According to Vavon (GCTA6), considering the stereoscope’s 3D image of ground forms: “the complete utilisation of two images can only be made by scientific methods (procédés savants) which have the aim of photogrammométrie (sic)” the method was laborious, and required photographs taken in well-determined and perfectly known positions, which was not yet achieved (Vavon 1918). The French study of air survey theory meant that they were well positioned at the end of the war to develop their own stereoscopic air survey instruments, as Poivilliers (Poivilliers 1922) was to demonstrate in his Stereotopograph plotting instrument utilising goniometers. French photographic restitutions resulted in well-defined points (e.g. gunpits and trench junctions) being plotted on the plans directeurs accurate to about 20 metres, sufficient for artillery work (SGA 1924: 157).

German artillery survey and photogrammetry in 1914 In 1901 the Prussian State Survey adopted terrestrial stereophotogrammetry, using Pulfrich’s photo-theodolite, for artillery mapshooting in fortress and siege operations. In 1903-4 it created sections to execute fortress artillery surveys and produce artillery maps and firing data for home fortresses and attacks on enemy fortresses. A Photogrammetry Section was formed in 1908, enlarged in July 1914 to a Company (Albrecht 1969: 6-7, 48). Army aerial photography started in 1911, enemy battery positions and other targets being plotted from air photographs during the Photogrammetry Section’s survey practice in fortresses. Two Survey Detachments (Vermessungs-Abteilungen), incorporating Photogrammetry Sections, were formed in 1912, practising aerial photogrammetry from airships, balloons and aeroplanes at Wahn and Thorn. In 1912-13 Fortress Survey Detachments (Festungs-Vermessungs-Abteilungen, or FestVAs) were formed by the Prussian Photogrammetry Department for frontierfortress artillery photogrammetry using air photographs, and in March 1914 three existed at Cologne, Metz and Strassburg (BA-MA 1912-14), the Survey’s photogrammeters being transferred to the FestVAs on mobilisation (Albrecht 1969: 7). This advanced the German lead in military photogrammetry, for the FestVAs became the nuclei of the wartime field survey units.

Imaging Golgotha: Photogrammetry on the Western Front 1914-1918

99

Survey units move into the field In 1914 aerial photogrammetry was used at Antwerp to determine, by graphic spatial resection, the air station of the camera and to plot enemy positions (Fleck and Jacob 1916: 23). FestVAs moved into the field, and Field Survey Sections (Vermessungstruppen) and VAs were formed (Landmann 1996: 11). They included Wurtemberg and Bavarian units, the former being equipped with cameras, stereo-comparator, Finsterwalder photocartograph, photo-reduction apparatus, etc.

Maps situation in the first few months The plotting of trenches, gun-pits, trench mortar and machine-gun emplacements, etc., from air photographs, needed detailed, accurate largescale plans as a base. Provisional 1:25,000, 1:10,000 and 1:5,000 artillery and trench maps (often sketch-maps from unrectified mosaics) of Allied defences were soon created in 1915 by 50 air-photo-plotting sections formed by flying squadrons. Lacking a trigonometric framework they were seriously distorted and useless for artillery work (Boelcke 1921: 446449).

War survey organisation (Kriegsvermessungswesen) and field survey detachments (VAs) In July 1915 a War Survey Directorate was therefore created under Major Siegfried Boelcke (Kriegsvermessungschef or KVC), to rationalise ground and air survey (KVC 1918b). Air photography and tactical photointerpretation became Air Force tasks, while air survey and mapping fell to the War Survey Organisation. Photogrammeters and draughtsmen were transferred from the Air Force sections to the VAs, which were the only permitted mapping units. However, competition continued throughout the war, notably in precision aerial photogrammetry for which both created research establishments, because of the impossibility of clearly distinguishing between intelligence and topographical information. This led to duplication and delays, particularly after November 1916 when the Air Force became independent (GHQ 1918b: 107), creating its Photographic Inspectorate and Air Survey Research Unit (Albrecht 1969: 34). Photogrammetric draughtsmen of each army’s VA plotted points and detail from vertical air photos to complete the map, obliques first requiring

100

Chapter Seven

rectification, sophisticated apparatus for which was soon introduced (Boelcke 1916). By the end of 1916, each VA had 1 or more “Ica-Gerät” for such photo-mechanical rectification (BHSA-KA 1916). Janzer of Stuttgart’s Automatic Integrator Transformer was later used for rapid production of trench maps; taking successive narrow strips of oblique airphotos, it produced a map covering 100 square miles (Winchester and Wills 1928). Artillery boards, usually prepared at 1:2,000 from rectified air photographs, were used by trench mortar survey sections (KVC 1918a). From 1915, each Corps Topographical Section (GruppenKartenstelle) plotted enemy trenches, etc., from air and panoramic photographs (Boelcke 1916: 18-19, GHQ 1918a: 123). From 1917, photomaps supplemented line-maps.

German photogrammetry during the war Germany, by its profound connection of science and technology, led the world optical industry (Eckert 1921: 241).

In 1915 many points (6,000 in the Champagne) in the enemy area were rapidly fixed as air survey controls by terrestrial stereophotogrammetry. Planimetry and contours of occupied and enemy territory (and sometimes enemy trenches) were also plotted by Zeiss from terrestrial photographs, using the precision stereoautograph. In 1915 the 1:25,000 terrestrial photogrammetrical survey of Macedonia was plotted with this by Otto von Gruber, of Zeiss’s Geodesy and Photogrammetry Section. Gruber commanded the Mountain Survey Section which did similar work in Serbia (Boelcke 1916, Albrecht 1969). In the same year Werkmeister and Gruber plotted on the Stereoautograph, from terrestrial photographs, a contoured 1:10,000 scale plan (and 1:25,000 map) of the Meuse Valley north of Verdun (Gruber 1932: 382). Gruber later joined Boelcke as GHQ photogrammetry expert. The Stereoautograph was later adapted for high air obliques, but was unsuitable for low obliques and verticals.

Strip photography (Reihenbildner) In 1914 Oskar Messter developed a semi-automatic camera (Reihenbildner) taking 250 exposures in one film strip, by May 1915 testing a fully-automatic one. A cover of 2.4 km by 60 km was photographed from 2,500 metres on one film strip in one flight, a strip overlap of 25% being aimed for. Control points, including points in the enemy area, were fixed by ground and air survey.

Imaging Golgotha: Photogrammetry on the Western Front 1914-1918

101

In 1915 Oskar’s son, E. O. Messter, became an Air Force cinematographer and developed his strip-photo technique, experimenting with the Pulfrich stereocomparator to measure accurately from air photographs. At the end of 1916 he joined the Air Force Photographic Inspectorate, refining his ideas and contacting experts, notably Prof. Dr. Carl Reinhard Hugershoff (who had worked on photogrammetry before the war and, as a field photogrammeter at Posen from 1914 to 1916, invented and developed revolutionary photogrammetric instruments and methods), with whom he discussed the automation of air survey. The stripphotograph technique was extended to stereo-pairs; Boelcke noted that the Messter Doppelreihenbildner (stereo-pair strip camera) providing the stereoscopic imagery to portray ground-forms, and that Hugershoff’s photogoniometer method (surveying the air photo through the camera lens), surveyed accurately at the 1:10,000 scale and had been operationally tested. The Messters built 241 strip-photo air cameras for reconnaissance mapping, which photographed over 7 million km² (Karlson 1941: 125, Baring 1963: 124-138). Air Force Photographic Units worked closely with the VAs (KVC 1918b, Albrecht 1969). Balloons were used as camera-platforms for oblique photogrammetry, a significant element of German survey (GHQ 1918a: 11). Over a million air photographs were used as photogrammetric material during the war (Albrecht 1969: 34).

Methods of plotting from air photographs Graphic and analytical plotting were first used, amplified by stereoscopic examination. The Hugershoff pyramid method, by which a photograph of known focal length could be accurately plotted from only three points, was used widely before and during the war (Eckert 19211925: 1921). This was complicated compared with the plan and elevation analysis for resection in space, invented by Traugott Fischer and modified by Pulfrich. Several other techniques were developed from the pyramid and graphic four-point methods. In 1917 von Rudel (von Rudel 1921) of the Bavarian Survey, with Sixth Army in Flanders and Artois, used graphic radial triangulation (BHSA-KA 1917, Schwidefsky 1958: 132), and the pyramid method was applied to precision air photogrammetry by Hugershoff and Hermann Cranz, building on their earlier work (Hugershoff and Cranz 1919).

102

Chapter Seven

Research and development for automatic photogrammetric plotting apparatus In 1913, Willi Sander of Zeiss partially adapted the stereoautograph for air survey, and in May 1914 patented the air stereoautograph, plotting contours and detail point by point. In early 1914 Gruber’s alternative solution automatically drew contours, plotting planimetry point by point. Sander achieved automatic plotting solutions for planimetry and contours on the air stereoautograph in 1917. All these were useless for low obliques or verticals (Gruber 1932: 173-174). There was duplication of research. The Survey and Air Force airphoto-research establishments at Berlin and Stuttgart, and the Bavarian Survey Office at Munich, carried out experiments similar to those of Zeiss. The Experimental and Survey Photography Departments of the Reserve and Experimental Section formed in Stuttgart in 1916 developed photogrammetric apparatus and methods. Here Cranz in 1917, and later Fischer, worked on “the drawing of contour maps from air photographs, on a control-point network, with investigations into accuracy” (Landmann 1996: 24-27). Similar work was done in the Air Force’s Air Survey Department in Berlin under Hugershoff who, in 1916, went to the Air Force Photographic Inspectorate, and in 1917 commanded its Air Survey Department (Albrecht 1969). Wartime aerial photography’s random camera axes led to the invention of the spatial autograph, reconstructing the intersection of rays in three dimensions (Zeller 1952). Hugershoff and Pulfrich independently revolutionised photogrammetry by making direct angular measurements on obliques, plotting mechanically using the modified Stereoautograph and then Hugershoff’s new photogoniometer method which he later developed into the Autocartograph. Hugershoff and Cranz developed the theory and practice for optical-mechanical automatic plotters (Hugershoff and Cranz 1919: 770-774, Eckert 1921-1925, Krebs 1922: 9). The photogoniometer method was at first used for monocular pointdetermination, thus losing the advantages of stereoscopy (Eckert 1921: 255). Hugershoff and the Heyde firm applied for a photogoniometer patent in May 1917, and for another for combining two photogoniometers with direction lineals in October 1917 (Gruber 1932: 173-174). After two years’ research, in early 1918 Cranz joined Hugershoff, a new air survey organisation being built upon their method. Air Survey Sections were equipped with Hugershoff’s photogoniometer apparatus for accurate pointfixing from obliques (KVC 1918b). Cranz reported in March, after

Imaging Golgotha: Photogrammetry on the Western Front 1914-1918

103

extensive field experiments, an attainable accuracy for point-fixing of ± 0.8 to 1.2 metres by photogrammetry (using photogoniometers), ± 2 to 3 metres by intersection of new points, and ± 3 metres for height-fixing (Albrecht 1969: 36). A patent application was made in October 1918 for an improved photogoniometer, using another lens in the plotting camera to reduce distortion. By the Armistice, Hugershoff was attempting to combine, in one instrument, two photo-plane-table photogoniometers linked to lineals, the first experimental autocartograph appearing towards the end of 1918 (Baring 1963: 125-128), and in October 1919 Hugershoff and Heyde patented an improved plotter and binocular visual system for their autocartograph (Gruber 1932). By the Armistice, Dr. Max Gasser had announced his aeronautical stereocomparator, and Pulfrich (after grasping the idea in 1911) had returned to work on what became his stereoplanigraph for air photographs (Pulfrich 1919), in which he maintained the Porro principle at first neglected by Hugershoff (Gruber 1932: 181). In 1915, Gasser produced a prototype of a revolutionary double projector (forerunner of the Multiplex) and solved the orientation problem, but its enormous potential was neglected (Gasser 1915, Gasser 1923, Gasser 1953). This provided an optical method of plotting planimetry and contours for reconnaissance mapping (Gruber 1932: 159-160, Hart 1943: 22) and “accurate mapping for precise gun-fire“. However a military committee (including his rival Hugershoff), appointed to assess it, reported against it (Gasser 1923, Meier 2000). Stereoscopic air survey for contouring made progress but was not fully developed during the war, only spot heights being determined, and formlines fitted after stereoscopic examination. Relief was usually taken from the poor hachured French 1:80,000 map, occasionally amplified through local tachymetric and air surveys (Albrecht 1969). Soon after the war new high precision plotting apparatus of advanced design were plotting both terrestrial and aerial photographs (Zeller 1952).

104

Chapter Seven

 Fig. 7-2: German Hugershoff-Heyde Autocartograph, 1917-18. Developed for fixing control points for air survey and artillery targeting, it utilised oblique air photos taken with a specially designed and calibrated survey camera, the two photogoniometers (O1 and O2), set to the external orientation of two photos at the moment of their exposure, were fixed to lineals (L1 and L2) whose intersection gave the planimetric position. Double height determination was obtained by transferring the inclination of the photogoniometers through bevel gears to the rod (L1) on the left

British photogrammetry F. V. Thompson’s pioneer work of 1907-8, and an awareness of the German and Austrian lead, the British attitude to photogrammetry was sceptical before, during and even after the war. A British reviewer in 1913 remarked that “photo-surveying is more akin to an amusing game than to a useful art” (Hills 1913: 189). By 1914 little progress had been made in British air survey apart from the experimental wooden Watson air camera of 1913, swinging fore-and-aft on its fixed axis to take overlapping photos (not to a survey specification). Seriously damaged in a crash, it never returned to service (Laws 1959). In 1914 the British, not having developed plotting from air photos, naturally looked to the French.

Imaging Golgotha: Photogrammetry on the Western Front 1914-1918

105

Photography and mapping at the front The RFC took five Pan-Ross cameras (6-inch homocentric lenses) to France (Parry 1977-1982: 8). Air photos were first taken on 15 September 1914, Lieutenant Pretyman photographing German trenches on the Aisne using a hand-held camera. The indistinct results did not impress the staff. The only possible source of accurate information on topographical detail and enemy works was aerial photography, observers’ visual reports and sketches being too imprecise, so in September – October the RFC took more photos from which enemy batteries and trenches were located and roughly plotted on sketch maps (Edmonds 1933). Close contact with the French, who were ahead with air photography, caused British reappraisal. It was recognised that the effectiveness of photography in locating targets depended on accurate large-scale maps, and that photos should contain points recognisable on the map and be free from distortion caused by oblique exposure and movement. Neither maps nor cameras were yet of sufficient quality, but experiments were being pushed forward rapidly (Raleigh 1922). During First Ypres (October – November 1914) sketch maps showing trenches and gun-pits were again produced from air photos. Corps squadrons for photography had been formed. By the end of 1914 reasonably clear photographs were being taken, but French results were better (Jones 1928: 87-88). Major W. G. H. Salmond, on Colonel Sykes staff at RFC HQ, impressed by a French map on which German trenches had been plotted from air photos, investigated French corps organisation, found it highly centralised with many skilled photographers, and advocated concentrating photographers into wing sections. An experimental section (including Lieutenants Moore-Brabazon and Campbell, Flight Sergeant F. C. Victor Laws) was formed in January 1915, sent to Trenchard’s First Wing, and soon recommended an organisation and designed a new camera (Jones 1928, Laws 1959). By the end of January 1915, Lieutenant Darley (No. 3 Squadron), had photographed German defences at La Bassée and produced a crude trench map which demonstrated to the Corps staff the value of air-photo intelligence (Jones 1928: 88-89). Darley claimed to have produced the first trench map from air photos (Darley 1956), but this had been done by various units since the Aisne battle. In February 1915 the first successful British air camera, the hand-held wooden “A” camera with Zeiss-Tessar 9 7/8-inch lens and 8½-inch focal length, taking a 5 x 4-inch plate, was produced by Thornton-Pickard to

106

Chapter Seven

Moore-Brabazon’s and Campbell’s design. Despite the focal-plane shutter, results were excellent. It was first used over German trenches at Fauquissart (Gamble 1927) on 2 March, helping First Army Intelligence to create new 1:5,000 trench maps for the Neuve Chapelle battle (Jones 1928: 89-90). Cameras were soon fixed to ensure vertical exposures, and by the summer the “C” camera, with semi-automatic plate-changing, had appeared (Jones 1928). Laws developed new cameras and efficient training (Laws 1959). Gamble (Gamble 1919) and Parry (Parry 19771982) described the development of cameras, including lenses, shutters, plates and films, stereo and cinematograph. The Williamson “Aerocam” continuous film camera (5 x 4-inch frames), registering altitude and bearing on each picture, was used by the RFC Photographic Section in October 1915, served in France and Egypt, and was used by the RNAS in the Mediterranean. Workman (Cinechrome Company) designed the automatic “Craftsman” whole-plate film camera which was undergoing trials at the Armistice. The American Brock 5 x 4-inch frame film camera was offered to the Allies early in the war. G. A. Barrett’s kite camera (used pre-war in Egyptian exploration) was also tested at an early stage (Gamble 1919: 193-194). Cameras continued to develop, although not to a survey specification. The British failed to recognise the possibilities of radial triangulation (although radial triangulation had been used by Bagley, among others, and Rudel in 1917, there was no clear British understanding of it prior to Hotine’s post-war work). Ernest Dowson and his Survey of Egypt staff devised means of rectifying photographs at Gallipoli for large-scale topographical and trench plans (Dowson 1915, Chasseaud and Doyle 2005: 297-307). Work in Macedonia was described by Mason (Mason 1925). As Collier (Collier 1994) and Collier and Inkpen (Collier and Inkpen 2001) pointed out, Richards and others of 7th FSC (from the Survey of Egypt) carried out successful innovative mapping from air photos in Palestine (Hamshaw 1918, Hamshaw, Thomas et al. 1919, Hamshaw 1920), and in Mesopotamia Beazley did the same (Pirrie 1918, Beazeley 1920). The first British automatic film camera – the “F1” – was designed for cartographic work in Mesopotamia, where a capacity of 250 5 x 4-inch exposures per loading was required. These were confined to the Middle East (Parry 1977-1982).

Imaging Golgotha: Photogrammetry on the Western Front 1914-1918

107

British situation at the end of 1915 Some of the first British attempts at air photo mapping in France were “sad failures” (MacLeod 1923: 244). From April 1915 Army “Maps and Printing Sections” and, from July, when the survey organisation (“Maps”) took over the responsibility for forward mapping from Intelligence (Jack 1920: 39), Topographical Sections made large-scale maps by compiling ground survey and cadastral and other plans onto a trigonometric control, using air photos to correct inaccurate and out of date topography and add enemy defences, works, gun positions, etc. By the end of 1915 the situation had dramatically improved, and a British translation (GHQ 1915) of a French report on photo interpretation and trench mapping from air photos (GQG 1915) had been printed. The British foreword stated that the standard RFC camera, with 8¼-inch focallength lens, was “chosen after a number of experiments as a compromise between a picture showing great detail and one embracing a large area and showing little detail” (GHQ 1915). British cameras were primarily designed to take intelligence photos, not for mapping, and: “no attempt was made to record accurate data such as would be required if each photograph were to be used in its entirety for mapping purposes. Results were, however, satisfactory enough for the purpose of supplying additions to an existing survey. For such purpose the absence of precise knowledge of the camera constants was not of primary importance” (RASC 1923: 7).

British cameras were not calibrated, and no fiducial marks were used to identify the principal point. While a long focal-length might be ideal for tactical intelligence, for mapping it was vital also to have wide-angle, short focal-length cameras to cover a broad terrain area and include several control points on which to hang detail.

British plotting methods On the Western Front little progress was made in British photogrammetry between 1915 and 1917. Simple optical and graphic methods of plotting from individual air photos using camera lucida, proportional dividers, cuttings, alignments, prolongations and intersections were evolved (Winterbotham 1918, MacLeod 1919, 1919a, 1920), and

108

Chapter Seven

there were no attempts to use overlaps. Although it was realised that “ruling points” could be obtained from the mean position of points plotted from different photos of the same area (MacLeod 1919b: 383-384), this was never systematised by creating a fourth order triangulation from crossroads, corners of woods, hedge or ditch junctions or corners, abandoned tanks, etc. (Winterbotham 1918: 92). The Germans however classified them as being as accurate as plane-tabled points (Eckert 19211925). By 1917, plotting from air photos onto a controlled cadastral plan compilation was achieving a 10-metre positional accuracy (GHQ 1918b). Contouring the enemy area to improve the 1:80,000’s form-lines and hachures was most difficult, and air photos were studied to elucidate ground forms, sometimes using a stereoscope (MacLeod 1919a, Winterbotham 1919, Tapp 1920). In back-area surveys, the main triangulation was tested and amplified with further points and heights. A plane-table triangulation was then made from cross-roads and detail (easily pinpointed on air photos) onto which cadastral plans were compiled, detail plotted from air photos and contouring done in the field (Winterbotham 1918: 27). Little research was done in Britain. Lieutenant Carrol Romer, after a year with “Maps, First Army”, left the front in April 1916 and worked with GSGS (MI4) at the War Office until 1918. Familiar with air photos, he researched the problem of elimination of tilt distortion, claiming (Romer s.d.) that a solution was produced by the collaboration of Hinks (drawing) at the RGS, Major A. C. Robinson (mathematics) of the Ordnance Survey and himself (encouragement), but was “of little practical value” and was put aside until J. W. Gordon later rediscovered it and incorporated it into his Perspectograph of 1922 (Gruber 1932: 157-158). In 1918-19, MacLeod was working, with 4th FSB, on a tilt-finder (MacLeod 1919b).

British photo-restitution apparatus The British were aware of French photographic restitution progress, notably the Roussilhe apparatus, and a method based on light-projection was used, apparently in 1916-17, by Wilbraham’s 1st Field Survey Company (the “Projectograph”, an adapted “magic lantern”, designed by Sergeant-Major Wright), projecting the image onto a map to obtain a fit of four points. Intervening detail was then traced. Improved by the Depot FSC in 1917-18, one “Projectograph” was issued to each FSC (though not

Imaging Golgotha: Photogrammetry on the Western Front 1914-1918

109

much used). The ultimate “rebuilt Projectograph” was developed by MacLeod and Cursiter in 4th FSC/B in 1918 (Jack 1920: 36), and used for back-area mapping (MacLeod 1919a). Although not optically rigorous, in that it did not incorporate the Scheimpflug condition, it was adequate. The British continued using their graphic methods of prolongations, alignments and cuttings (Winterbotham 1918: 20) in preference to such optical aids as the Projectograph and the camera-lucida, though the latter persisted throughout the war, despite the severe eye-strain involved. The French, however, regarded them as vital for coping with huge quantities of photos. The British preferred accuracy of plotting, while the French sacrificed accuracy for speed.

British wide angle photography for mapping In the autumn of 1915, Winterbotham (Winterbotham 1918: 23-24) had pointed out to the RFC the value for target fixing and mapping of vertical photos covering a large area containing several fixed points. An important correspondence (February – June 1917) during the German withdrawals on the Ancre and to the Siegfried Stellung, and the Vimy – Arras battle, between Trenchard and others (RFC HQ) and Jack (“Maps GHQ”), with contributions from Winterbotham and Macleod (TNA AIR/1/889/204/4/660: HQ RFC BEF Correspondence regarding wideangle cameras 3/2/17 – 8/11/17), reveals that experiments with wide-angle (WA) cameras were, partly at the request of the survey organisation, being seriously conducted in France, special cameras with appropriate lens systems being constructed. The requirements listed by “Maps” and Intelligence stipulated that each wide angle photo should include several fixed points, to facilitate mapping, save the making of mosaics, and enable plotting of new trenches, other defences, and enemy battery positions. In early 1917, Moore-Brabazon’s RFC’s Photographic Section began to construct wide angle cameras in France and obtain suitable lenses. Few at first, had they been available during the German retreat in March the 1:20,000 maps would have been much more accurate. Where cadastral plans were lacking, such small-scale air photos provided invaluable detail, being compiled directly, after rectification, onto the French geodetic points in 1917-18 (Jack 1920: 41). The new Siegfried Stellung positions were mapped in this way, enabling further controls to be fixed and mosaics of existing verticals to be accurately located. These maps were more accurate than enlargements of the 1:80,000 (MacLeod 1919a), and facilitated the correct compilation of cadastral plans.

110

Chapter Seven

In June 1917 the use of wide angle lenses on whole-plate cameras was growing, wide angle cameras were being constructed in France for longreconnaissance, and fourteen were in use. No problems were experienced with high-altitude photography; photos taken at 21,000 feet from the DH4 each covered 6 square miles (TNA AIR/1/889/204/4/660). In 1918, 6-inch and 8-inch WA cameras provided photos for mapping and intelligence (War Office 1924). This was the high point of British Western Front air survey. The importance of such cameras is clear: apart from widespread use in 1918 for back-area surveys, forward areas, where cadastral plans were lacking, could only be mapped using wide angle, small-scale photos, e.g. First Army front east of La Bassée (Jack 1920: 41). Had the British used radial triangulation, these wide angle photos would have enabled them to achieve more accurate mapping.

British stereo-pairs (stereograms) Major Wilbraham (OC Printing Company RE) experimented early in the war with horizontal stereoscopic views from the trenches (Jack 1920: 185), but not for mapping. Oblique photograms were used in simple stereoscopes to assist tactical intelligence interpretation and to elucidate ground forms for contouring, but were not used for optical-instrumental plotting; in the summer of 1917 MacLeod’s 4th FSC used stereo-pairs of sand dunes at Nieuwpoort to improve the contours (MacLeod 1919a). Generally content with cadastral compilations (apart from the poor relief), and Thompson having been killed in action, the British made no attempt to construct automatic stereo-plotting apparatus for air photos. The stereoscope was constantly used by British surveyors and staff officers, but not necessarily to the best advantage (Hotine 1927: 2). The state of British stereo-photography and mapping is summed up in a November 1917 letter from Moore-Brabazon to Captain Payne RFC, which dismisses the possibilities of mapping (particularly contouring) from air stereograms because of the apparent impossibility of accurately determining the air base from the time separation (to hundredths of a second) and the exact ground speed taking drift into consideration; “the problem becomes far too complicated for actual mapping” (TNA AIR/1/889/204/5/659). Payne and Moore-Brabazon had studied Scheffer’s (1909) article on stereoscopic projection which included a description of D’Almeida’s anaglyph method of 1858 (viewing through red and green glasses) and other forms of viewing, but thought (unlike Gasser in Germany) these had

Imaging Golgotha: Photogrammetry on the Western Front 1914-1918

111

no practical application (TNA AIR/1/889/204/5/659). In early 1919 MacLeod had an officer on his 4th FSB staff at Wahn (Captain Wedderburn, Professor of Physics at Princeton) investigating plotting from air photos without ground control (MacLeod 1919b: 402). As MacLeod admitted, the greatest mistake of the British air survey effort was failing to recognise the significance of stereograms: “one of the reasons why we made such poor progress was that our experience in France actually misled us. In France we were engaged in producing maps from air photographs, but we hardly realised that we were dealing with a special case. We dealt there with the individual photograph, and after the war when we had to solve a more generalised problem we tried to do so by methods which had served us in France . . . It was Captain Hotine who brought home to us that the “unit” as regards air photographic mapping is the overlap – the stereoscopic pair – not the single photo” (Hotine 1930: 160).

While the British developed effective aerial photography, they failed to use dedicated survey cameras and develop radial triangulation or instrumental plotting methods. Some British participants, particularly in other theatres, realised the implications of film cameras and stereoscopic plotting. In Mesopotamia the British made great strides in developing mapping techniques based on flying straight and level to obtain overlapping strips. Hamshaw (Hamshaw, Thomas et al. 1919: 6, 27) noted that film cameras had many advantages over plate cameras and had been rather neglected by the British, whose Williamson film-camera (invaluable in Palestine when roads and railways were continuously photographed over stretches of 35 – 40 miles) was unsatisfactory in design and mechanism. He noted that the Germans had obtained very good results with their Reihenbildner cameras (Reihenbilder series taken in Palestine, Hamshaw Thomas Collection, Medmenham Collection, Chicksands).

112

Chapter Seven

 Fig. 7-3: British rapid graphic restitution method, 1916. Four points were chosen on the near-vertical photo which could be easily found on the map (here 3 trench junctions and the corner of the small wood), and for which the lines joining them intersected on or close to the feature to be fixed. Lines drawn on the map joined the corresponding points, the intersection of these lines giving the positions of the feature. The remaining detail was quickly drawn in using proportional compasses.

Imaging Golgotha: Photogrammetry on the Western Front 1914-1918

113

Conclusion While the British and French had the advantage of possession of a reasonably good archive of trigonometrcal and topographical data (especially the large scale cadastral plans and index diagrams), and generally enjoyed air superiority, the Germans were at a great disadvantage in both respects. Thus the Germans (aided by their pre-war lead in optics and instrument technology) concentrated on developing sophisticated plotting instruments (including stereoplotters) and radial traingulation techniques for plotting control points from obliques, while the Allies focused on mass-production light-projection restitution of individual near verticals. A recent comparative study of accuracy and fitness-for-purpose of British, French and German trench maps derived from air photos (Chasseaud 2004), concluded that in general the British maps were the best, followed by the French, but that the German optics and plotting instruments were superior and gave Germany a significant post-war lead in aerial photogrammetry.

References Albrecht O. (1969) Das Kriegsvermessungswesen wahrend des Weltkrieges 1914-18. Deutsche Geodätische Kommission, Munich. Andrieu (1920) Les révélations du dessin et de la photographie à la guerre. Principes de métrographie. Gauthier-Villars, Paris. BA-MA (1912-1914) files PH9XX/47, Übungen der Vermessungsabteilungen in Wahn und Thorn 1912, mit photograph, PH9V/98 & 99, Erkundungs- und Vermessungstätigkeit im Festungskrieg. – Entwurf einer Dienstvorschrift in Zusammenarbeit mit dem Kriegsministerium und dem Chef des Generalstabes der Armee. Bd.1, 1913-14, & Bd.2, Jan. 1913 bis Apr. 1914. Bundesarchiv-Militärarchiv, Freiburg-imBreisgau. Bacchus M. (1988) L’utilisation des photographies aériennes pour l’établissement des plans directeurs pendant la guerre de 1914-1918. In: Humbert J.-P. (Ed.). Vues d’en Haut 14/18. La photographie aérienne pendant la guerre de 1914/1918, Musée de l'Armée, Paris: 29-36. Baring R. (1963) E. O. Messter siebzig Jahre. In: Bildmessung und Luftbildwesen 1963: 124-138. Beazeley G.A. (1920) Surveys in Mesopotamia During the War. In: Geographical Journal 55, 2: 109-127.

114

Chapter Seven

BHSA-KA (1916) file AOK6 [Sixth Army Headquarters] Bd. 341, circulars from Kriegsvermessungchef. Bayerische Hauptstaatsarchiv, Kriegsarchiv, Munich. —. (1917) file for Stoverm AOK6 [Survey Staff Officer at Sixth Army Headquarters]. Bayrische Hauptstaatsarchiv, Kriegsarchiv, Munich. Blanchet G. (1965) Les applications militaires de la photographie aérienne. In: Chevallier R. (Ed.) Photographie aérienne – panorama intertechnique. Gauthier-Villars, Paris: 137-144. Boelcke S. (1916) Die Tätigkeit der Vermessungs-Abteilungen, Zusammenfassung der Arbeiten. Verfügung vom 24-3-1916 (Druck). German Field GHQ. —. (1921) Das Kartenwesen. In: Schwarte (Ed.) Die Organisation der Kriegsführung. Der Grosse Krieg 1914-1918, Leipzig: 443-474. Carlier A.H. (1921) La photographie aérienne pendant la guerre. Delagrave, Paris. Chasseaud P. (1991) Topography of Armageddon - A British Trench Map Atlas of the Western Front 1914-18. Mapbooks, Lewes. —. (1999) Artillery's Astrologers. A History of British Survey and Mapping on the Western Front 1914-1918. Mapbooks, Lewes. —. (2004) An Analysis and Evaluation of British, French and German Field Survey and Mapping in the First World War. Which Country Produced the Best Survey and Mapping of the Western Front (Unpublished document). University of Greenwich. Chasseaud P. & Doyle P. (2005) Grasping Gallipoli – Terrain, Maps and Failure in the Dardanelles. Spellmount, Staplehurst. Clerc L.P. (1920) Applications de la photographie aérienne. Encyclopédie Scientifique. Collier P. (1994) Innovative military mapping using aerial photography in the First World War: Sinai, Palestine and Mesopotamia 1914-1919. In: The Cartographic Journal 31: 100-104. Collier P. & Inkpen R. (2001) Mapping Palestine & Mesopotamia in the First World War. In: The Cartographic Journal 38: 143-154. Darley C.C. (1956) Who's Who. Adam & Charles Black, London. Dégardin A. (1988) 14-18, Un observateur de la guerre 1914-1918: Eugène Pépin. In: Humbert J.-P. (Ed.). Vues d’en Haut 14/18. La photographie aérienne pendant la guerre de 1914/1918, Musée de l'Armée, Paris: 17-24. de Vanssay (1917) Note sur l’emploi, pour les travaux cartographiques, des photographies prises en avion. In: Annales hydrographiques 3e Serie, Vol.1, 1917.

Imaging Golgotha: Photogrammetry on the Western Front 1914-1918

115

Dolfus C. (1922) Histoire de la photographie aérienne. In: L’Aéronautique 4, 37: 177-178. Dowson E.M. (1915) Notes on mapping from aeroplane photographs in the Gallipoli Peninsula, Secret, c.22 September 1915. Survey of Egypt, Cairo. Dumarche L. (1988) La photographie aérienne 1914-1918: une nouvelle arme de guerre. In: Humbert J.-P. (Ed.). Vues d’en Haut 14/18. La photographie aérienne pendant la guerre de 1914/1918, Musée de l'Armée, Paris: 8-16. Eckert M. (1921) Luftbildaufnahme und Kartenherstellung. In: Geographische Zeitschrift 27, 1921: 241-260. —. (1921-1925) Die Kartenwissenschaft. 11921, 21925. Mittler, Berlin. Edmonds J. (Ed.) (1933) Mons, the Retreat to the Seine, the Marne and the Aisne, August – October 1914. Military Operations, France and Belgium, 1914, 1, Macmillan, London. Fleck J. & Jacob O. (1916) Kriegsvermessungswesen. Das Lichtbildverfahren und Seine Verwertung. Hermann Brücker, Berlin. Gamble C.W. (1919) On some Photographic Apparatus used in Aerial Photography. In: Transactions of the Optical Society 20, 6: 163-198. —. (1927) The Technical Aspects of British Aerial Photography during the War 1914-1918. Gasser M. (1915) Verfahren, mittels dreier gegebener Punkte durch mechanische Ausmessvorrichtungen mechanische Berechnungsapparate und durch geodätisch orientierte Doppelprojektiosapparate lufttopographische Karten für eine photogeodätisch Landesvermessung herzustellen. Berlin. —. (1923) Über die Unparteilichkeit von Gutachten und Kritiken. Kalkberg. —. (1953) Die Eroberung des Luftraumes für die Kartographie durch die Photogrammetrie. Verlag Mayer, Günzburg/Donau. GHQ (1915) Notes on the Interpretation of Aeroplane Photographs. General Staff, HMSO, London. —. (1918a) Handbook of the German Army In War. the General Staff, London. —. (1918b) Maps And Artillery Boards. The General Staff, HMSO. GQG (1915) Note sur la utilisation des photographies pour l’étude des organisations défensives allemandes. Grand Quartier Général des Armées. État-Major, Paris. —. (1916) Instruction sur les plans directeurs. Grand Quartier Général des Armées, État-Major, Paris.

116

Chapter Seven

—. (1918) Instruction sur les plans directeurs et les cartes et plans spéciaux. Grand Quartier Général des Armées, État-Major (2e et 3e Bureaux), Paris. Gruber O.V. (1932) Photogrammetry – Collected Lectures and Essays. Translated by McCaw G.T. & Cazalet F.A. Chapman & Hall, London. Hamshaw H., Thomas F. & Richards S. (1919) Aeroplane Photography for Map Making, Notes on the Experience gained by the Royal Air Force and the 7th Field Survey Company, R.E., in Sinai and Palestine during 1916, 1917, and 1918. Hamshaw H.T. (1918) Photographic Work of the R.F.C. in Sinai and Palestine during 1917. TNA AIR1/2415/303/28, The National Archives. —. (1920) Geographical Reconnaissance by Aeroplane Photography, with Special Reference to the Work done on the Palestine Front. In: Geographical Journal 55, 5: 349-376. Hart C.A. (1943) Air Photography Applied to Surveying. 2 ed. Longmans, London. Hills E.H. (1913) Review by ‘E.H.H.’ of Weiss, Max, Die Geschichtliche Entwicklung der Photogrammetrie und die Begründung ihre Verwendbarkeit für Mess- und Konstruktionswecke, Strecker & Schröder, Stuttgart, Germany, 1913. In: Geographical Journal 42, 2. Hotine M. (1927) The Stereoscopic Examination of Air Photographs. Professional Papers of the Air Survey Committee No. 4, War Office, HMSO, London. —. (1930) The Application of Stereoscopic Photography to Mapping. In: Geographical Journal 75, 2: 144-166. Hugershoff R. & Cranz H. (1919) Grundlagen der Photogrammetrie aus Luftfahrzeugen. Konrad Wittwer, Stuttgart. Humbert J.-M. & Pierron M. (1985) Photographies anciennes 1848-1918: regard sur le soldat et la société. Sama-Preal, Paris. Jack E.M. (1920) Report on Survey on the Western Front. War Office, London. Jones H.A. (1928) The War in the Air. 2. The Clarendon Press, Oxford. Karlson P. (1941) Oskar Messter zum 75. Geburtstag. In: Bildmessung und Luftbildwesen 16, 4: 125-151. Krebs H. (1922) Der Hugershoff-Heydesche Auto-Kartograph. In: Zeitschrift für Feinmechanik 4, 9: 30, 37, 63, 75, 87, 102. KVC (1918a) Der Punktplan. Chef des Generalstabes des Feldheeres, Brussel. —. (1918b) Sonderbestimmungen fürs Kr. Verm. W., Chef des KVW Nr. 13300, Brussel.

Imaging Golgotha: Photogrammetry on the Western Front 1914-1918

117

de l'Isle M.R. (1916) Utilisation des photographies prises en avion pour compléter une carte: Première Partie – Utilisation d’une Photographie, Paris, février 1916: 1 - 16, Deuxième Partie – Utilisation de Plusieurs Photographies, dated Paris, juin 1916: 1-14, Extrait des Annales hydrographiques. Imprimerie Nationale, Paris. Landmann J. (1996) Das Militärische Karten- und Vermessungswesen in Südwestdeutschland – Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte im 20. Militärgeographischer Dienst Der Bundeswehr, Leiter Militärisches Geowesen, Wehrbereichskommando V/10. Panzerdivision – Abt MilGeo, 70374 Stuttgart. Laws F.C.V. (1959) Looking Back. In: Photogrammetric Record 3, 13: 24-41. MacLeod M.N. (1919a) History of the 4th Field Survey Battalion. DGC, DGIA, London. —. (1919b) Mapping From Air Photographs. In: Geographical Journal 53, 6: 382-403. —. (1920) Mapping From Air Photographs. War Office, HMSO, London. —. (1923) Map-Making from Aeroplane Photographs. In: Royal Engineers Journal 37, 2: 242-256. Mason K. (Ed.) (1925) Records of the Survey of India, Vol. XX: The War Record, 1914-1920. Part 3. Survey of India, Dehra Dun. Parry G. (1977-1982) The History of Aerial Photography. The History of Air Photography in the Royal Air Force. Association of Royal Air Force Photography Officers, London. Pirrie F.W. (1918) War Surveys in Mesopotamia. In: Geographical Journal 52, 6: 351-357. Poivilliers G. (1922) Sur un nouveau ‘Stéréoautographe. In: Comptes Rendues de l’Academie des Sciences 175, 18: 752-755. Pulfrich C. (1919) Über Photogrammetrie aus Luftfahrzeugen und die ihre dienenden Instrumente. Druckshrift Mess 362. Gustav Fischer, Jena. Raleigh W. (1922) The War in the Air. The Clarendon Press, Oxford. Roussilhe H. (1918) Applications de la photographie aérienne aux levés topographiques de précision – Appareil de photorestitution. Annales hydrographiques, 1. Imprimerie Nationale, Paris. —. (1920) La photographie aérienne. In: Revue générale des sciences 30 mai 1920. —. (1921) Rapport sur les études techniques effectuées en 1919 et 1920 sous la direction de Mons. H. Roussilhe. Reconstitution Foncière et Cadastre, Ministère des Régions Liberées, Paris.

118

Chapter Seven

—. (1922a) Application de la photographie aérienne aux levés topographiques. In: La Géographie (Bulletin de la Societé de Géographie) 38, 1: 1-30. —. (1922b) Rapport sur les expériences de levées de plans aux grandes échelles avec emploi de la photographie aérienne. Reconstitution Foncière et Cadastre, Ministère des Régions Liberées, Paris. —. (1922c) Résultats obtenus en 1921 et 1922 par l’application de la photographie aérienne aux levés de précision à grandes échelles. In: Comptes Rendus de l’Academie des Sciences 175, 21. —. (1923) Emploi de la photographie aérienne à la topographie de précision. In: L’Ingenieur-Constructeur 15, 153: 289-354. —. (1926) Etudes sur les instruments géodesiques et sur les résultats de la triangulation cadastrale effectuée dans l’Aisne en 1924 et 1925. Service d’Etudes du Cadastre, Paris. —. (1930) Emploi de la photographie aérienne aux levés topographiques àgGrande échelle. Encyclopédie Industrielle et Commerciale. —. (1936) La Photogrammetrie et ses applications générales. Léon Eyrolles, Paris. Sasportès (1915) Note sur la restitution graphique de photographies groupées par deux et supposées prises dans une position quelconque. SHA: SHAT 3M 561,GCTA3 Historique, Chateau de Vincennes, Paris. —. (1918) La restitution photographique (Unpublished document). IGN Bibliothèque. Schumann R. (1986) Die Entwicklung der photogrammetrischen Geräte in Jena von der Jahrhundertwende bis zum Jahre 1945. In: Kompendium Photogrammetrie 18: 11-217. Schwidefsky K. (1958) Outline of Photogrammetry. Pitman, London. SGA (1914) Détermination de points par restitution de vues photographiques. Service Géographique de l’Armée, Paris. —. (1924) Rapport sur les travaux exécutés du 1er Aout 1914 au 31 Décembre 1919. Historique du Service Géographique de l’Armée pendant la guerre. Service Géographique de l’Armée, Paris. —. (1936) Rapport sur les travaux exécutés du 1er Aout 1914 au 31 Décembre 1919. Historique du Service Géographique de l’Armée pendant la guerre Service Géographique de l’Armée, Paris. SHA (1917-1918) Utilisation de la photographie d’avion pour la correction de la topographie des plans directeurs dans les régions ou n’existaient pas de levés de précision. Tapp W.H. (1920) Survey on the Western Front. In: Transactions of the Surveyors’ Institution 52: 171-230.

Imaging Golgotha: Photogrammetry on the Western Front 1914-1918

119

Technical Staff of the Fairchild Aerial Camera Corporation (1933) Multiple Lens Aerial Cameras in Mapping. New York. Vavon (1918) Conférence No. 30 par le Commandant Vavon, 29-8-18, Chef du GCTA6, Notions sur les cartographies Françaises et étrangères, Cartes du temps de paix, Cartes éditées pendant la guerre, leur valeur. Cours d’Officiers de GCT. Von Rudel E.V (1921) Darstellung eines nahezu ebenen Geländes nach Fliegeraufnahmen bei spärlich vorhandenen Festpunkten. In: Sitzungsbericht der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften 39, 1: 1-8. War Office (1924) Notes on the Interpretation of Air Photographs. War Office, London. Winchester C. & Wills F.L. (1928) Aerial Photography, A Comprehensive Survey of its Practice & Development. Chapman & Hall, London. Winterbotham H. (1918) Survey on the Western Front. Maps GHQ, Geodetic Library, DGC, DGIA, Feltham. —. (1919) British Survey on the Western Front. In: Geographical Journal 53, 4: 253-276. Zeller M. (1952) Text Book of Photogrammetry. H. K. Lewis & Co., London.



CHAPTER EIGHT DÉJÀ VU ALL OVER AGAIN? A BRIEF PRESERVATION HISTORY OF OVERSEAS SERVICE AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY IN THE UK CHRIS GOING The aim of this short paper is to sketch in something of the history of the most significant UK repositories of historical aerial photography for those unfamiliar with them. The reason is that these collections, despite the vicissitudes which have befallen them, remain arguably the largest accessible holdings of historic aerial imagery relating to Europe, if not the world. Until fairly recently even establishing what imagery survived from the enormous mass of imagery taken by the Allied fighting powers during the First and Second World Wars let alone where it now was, presented the researcher with a significant challenge. However, while the British predilection for secrecy at an official level might hinder locating the archives concerned, another British tradition, that of amateur sleuthing, produced one small organisation equally dedicated to pin-pointing them. During its fairly short life the National Association of Air Photo Libraries created the Directory of Aerial Photographic Collections in the United Kingdom (NAPLIB 1999). The much-enlarged second edition of the Directory, published in 1999, listed some 240 UK repositories of aerial photography. Of this total, the overwhelming majority – over two hundred – can be seen to consist of small commercial collections or collections of survey photography taken for local or other Government authorities, and preserved as part of their holdings of administrative text and cartographic records. The logic of the guide’s initially counterintuitive arrangement of collections by UK postcode, with London area collections at the front, is fairly quickly graspable and its useful index of overseas countries depicted, or local areas covered, with taking dates, makes this an easy tool to use. A pan European guide should follow.

122

Chapter Eight

There are eight principal archives in the UK containing imagery taken for reconnaissance, or for cartographic purposes, by various branches of the United Kingdom armed forces. Lodged with two of these collections is other aerial imagery taken by forces Allied to the UK, principally by the then United States Army Air Force (USAAF); the South African Air Force (SAAF), and the Royal Canadian Air Force (RCAF) and preserved in one of them are remnants of seizures of Axis imagery – German, with some Italian. Japanese imagery, called “JX” in the United States, has not so far been found in the UK. The two most significant archives comprise the “Box collection” of First World War photography, now preserved at the Imperial War Museum’s Duxford site, and the Royal Air Force Overseas Print Library, formerly at the University of Keele but now under the stewardship of the Royal Commission on Ancient and Historic Monuments, in Edinburgh, Scotland. Two major post war surveys, flown by the RAF of its then overseas territories, and a European survey flown in 1945-7 by the USAAF are also briefly discussed here although little of the latter survives in European archives. The Directorate of Overseas Survey’s first and second print collections, survey material of the UK Overseas territories, is currently preserved in the Museum of the British Empire in Bristol, and also in Rhodes House, Oxford. Both of these moves have occurred in recent years. These two collections exist only as prints, the original films having been presented to the various territories on their achievement of independent status. When they began to be created in significant numbers during the First World War, aerial photographs presented the military mind with an archival challenge. Operationally speaking, aerial photographs could quickly become out of date; “perished” in quasi-military parlance, but only the least imaginative of Service intellects could insist that aerial photographs should be treated exactly like other classes of superseded military documents, and destroyed. With the rapid realisation that comparative covers – imagery taken of the same place over prolonged periods – could provide intelligence of value there developed the notion that aerial imagery should (in general) be preserved. Thus clash between the two cultures – the destroyers who would only keep only the “latest and best” of covers, and the preservers, began early. Those who favoured maximum preservation tended to be interpreters drawn from the ranks of peacetime academe. These men and women were either already used to interpreting imagery, or rapidly saw that the

Déjà vu all over again?

123

photographs from which they were extracting military intelligence could be of incalculable use within their own fields in peacetime. Strongest advocates were geographers, aided by archaeologists, and to a lesser extent historians: individuals such as J.G.D. Clark, David Linton, Leslie Grinsell, J.K. St Joseph, Glyn Daniel, Terence Powell, Leslie Murray Thriepland, Dorothy Garrod, E. Clive Rouse, J. Kenneth Steer, and Geoffrey Dimbleby. Ranged against them were those who had the unenviable task of juggling storage space with service demands, senior individuals such as, for example, the “father” of RAF Reconnaissance, Wing Commander F.C.V. “Daddy” Laws. For several decades neither the go-aheads nor the laggards carried the day one way or the other. Remarkably frank discussions of the whole Service experience of imagery retention (or otherwise) are preserved in the UK National Archives of which one of the most revealing (at least for captured axis material) is in Piece Air 14/4104. While matters have improved in the past twenty years; ill-thought through clear-outs, both within the services and otherwise, can result in the destruction of historic aerial imagery even today The first major collection to be created by UK forces was that amassed during the First World War by the Royal Flying Corps, which became the Royal Air Force in 1918. From an uncertain start in 1915 the Allies began to produce aerial photographs in their thousands, and by 1918, hundreds of thousands from which prints were made in their millions. Most of the disseminated prints were destroyed following standing orders at the end of hostilities, but the bulk of the glass plate negatives from which they were made were brought to the UK and stored at the RAF School of Photography, Mapping and Reconnaissance at Farnborough, Hampshire. During the 1920’s historically important plates, mainly of the western front, were siphoned off from this to form the Box Collection at the newly-founded Imperial War Museum in Lambeth, London. This archive eventually came to a total of c 85,000 glass negatives. As Watkis notes: “by the end of 1918 approaching six million images had been made on the Western front“ (Watkis 1999: 12). After being stored in a number of unlikely places including a lock-up beneath a railway viaduct, this trove is now at the Imperial War Museum site at Duxford. Finding aids to this material are still (2008) stored in London, comprise a card index linking the glass negatives with the relevant trench map, on which by means of a nested grid, the image could be located.

124

Chapter Eight

As the 1920’s proceeded the demand for space at Farnborough, coupled with the beginnings of deterioration in the often inadequatelyfixed negatives, meant destruction and in 1927 the School of Photography Commandant, Wing Commander F.C.V.”Daddy” Laws, ordered much of the original collection to be taken out of its boxes and buried in a nearby, purpose-dug pit where, to the best of the authors belief, it still remains. When news of this act shocked the former Royal Engineers Panoramic photographer and erstwhile Royal Flying Corps Observer O.G.S. Crawford, who had become the Ordnance Survey’s first archaeology Officer. Following his wartime service, Crawford had become a passionate advocate of the use of aerial photography for archaeological prospection, and the wholesale destruction of this priceless asset, apparently without prior consultation of any cultural organisations such as the British Museum, probably galvanised him to secure for preservation what he could of remaining First World War and post-war service imagery preserved in overseas service holdings. In this he was partially successful and survey material of Egypt, Palestine and Jordan is now preserved as part of the O.G.S Crawford deposit collection in the Institute of Archaeology, London (NAPLIB 1999). Crawford also fought to secure for future use Service training imagery taken of the UK through links with the School of Army Co-Operation at Old Sarum, near Salisbury. He also succeeded in commissioning aerial imagery for training purposes of archaeologically productive areas in the UK such as Wessex. Crawford never forgot, or, one suspects forgave, the 1927 disposal and the loss of photographs it entailed, and with the advent of the Second World War Crawford was determined to ensure that the reconnaissance archive currently being amassed by the RAF would not suffer the fate of its First World War predecessor. Exchanges between him and “Daddy” Laws in 1940, at the height of the Battle of Britain show him badgering RAF High Command to consider a proper system of postwar preservation. Ironically, together with Ordnance Survey Commissioned aerial photography Crawford had concentrated interwar photography covering the UK at the OS headquarters at Southampton, which as a south coast town and the original site of Spitfire manufacture was now dangerously exposed to aerial attack. He made plans for the dispersal of this material, but had been able to make little headway before the Ordnance Survey’s headquarters was severely damaged by fire on the night of Saturday, 30 November 1940, when the Luftwaffe dropped 152 tonnes of High Explosive and 21,528 incendiary bombs on the town. During this attack

Déjà vu all over again?

125

“most large scale air photos taken for revision purposes were (presumed) lost” (Macdonald 1992: 254) Crawford had anticipated than an enormous archive of aerial material would be created during the Second World War and he was right. Between 1940 and 1945 the allies amassed prints of much of this imagery at RAF Medmenham in the UK near Marlow, Buckinghamshire, and as the war progressed substantial overseas collections developed in other theatres of war; in the Far and Middle East, and in southern Europe at San Severo in Italy, and with forces in northern Europe. A cautious estimate indicates the “head” library contained some of 18 million prints postwar, of which the overwhelming bulk was overseas photography. In the immediate aftermath of the Second World War there was a major repatriation of US and Commonwealth forces and with them went substantial records, including several collections of imagery. Much original roll film was shipped back to United States, to be incorporated in Defence Intelligence Agency holdings but as with the First World War, printed material was among the imagery destroyed and much Middle and Far eastern imagery perished. At Medmenham in 1945 many non-imagery records met a fiery end. But the print Library at RAF Medmenham remained intact, as did the Allied Central Interpretation Unit Film Library in the bomb stores of the Oxfordshire base of RAF. Benson. During hostilities other voices than Crawford’s had begun to be heard debating what was to be done about the post-war provision of aerial imagery. Discussion of what to do about the imagery had been raised by others during hostilities. As early as 1943, Professor O. T. Jones, writing in the Geographical Journal (Jones 1943) had noted: “one cannot help a feeling of envy of the facilities for obtaining aerial photographs in the USA…it is to be hoped that energetic efforts will be made after the war to secure comparable facilities in this country”.

Romanists such as Ian Richmond, mindful of what had been photographed abroad, expressed similar sentiments in print. Against a backdrop of a massive flying programme to record the face of postwar Britain, figures such as David Linton, now back in academic life, raised the possibility of a National Film Library, and in 1946, the heads of University of Geography departments conference debated the issue in the session on “Geography and Air Photographs”. Using the time-

126

Chapter Eight

honoured format of the Parliamentary Question the matter was raised in Parliament by Sir Edward Keeling, who drew from Ivor Thomas the statement that the Royal Air Force wartime photos are being preserved while the best arrangements for their future use are under review with all concerned. It was official, the imagery “would not be left to rot”. But it was. In 1945 the British Isles had been a combatant nation two weeks short of seven years. Its economy was exhausted, and the islands facing hard post-war winters, coal shortages, and a looming Cold War. With the creation of a universal Health Service uppermost on people’s minds the disposal of the print Library was rather summarily set aside. It was not until twelve years later that Professor Stanley Beaver, then Professor of Geography at the University College of North Staffordshire, and Alan Walton, a lecturer at the same institution, finally made some headway with a campaign which was largely theirs when they managed to convene a meeting between the RAF and a group of university geographers to discuss the use of the Overseas Print Library. At this meeting, which took place on 29 July 1958, it was agreed that the whole of the collection was of value – scientific, historical, and for teaching purposes; and the aim should be to preserve it in its entirety. Beaver, pressing matters, raised again the 1946 dream of a fellow geographer, David Linton – a dedicated Library – and noted: “perhaps the absolute ideal is for the Government to build and maintain such buildings as would be required to house the Library and its negatives and to provide “reading room accommodation in which prints could be inspected by accredited members of the public. It is strongly felt that we should press for such an ideal, even if the attainment may be a remote possibility. Such a collection is most unlikely ever to be brought together again, and it would be a thousand pities if it were dispersed”.

Holdings over which the Home Office and Air Ministry had full jurisdiction presented little problem: in October 1958 UK cover at Medmenham – the “M” or “Home” Section material – was handed over to the Ministry of Housing and Local Government. It passed through the hands of the department of the Environment, the Royal Commission of Historic and Ancient Monuments (England), and is now curated by English Heritage at its Swindon facility. The Overseas holdings were another matter. The Foreign and Commonwealth Office and the RAF continued to ponder their response to this renewed interest in their inheritance academe stepped up the pressure.

Déjà vu all over again?

127

The results of the Medmenham deliberations were published in the Professional Geographer for March 1959, and when no action had been taken by the succeeding summer an exasperated Alan Walton wrote: “whereas…professional opinion shows remarkable tenacity in the face of political and service indifference, the still stand of action by successive governments in clearing the wartime collection for public access by bona fide persons and/or the setting up of a National Air photo library or centre since the declaration of 1946, is altogether deplorable…For my own part, I consider this print library…an invaluable source of teaching, research, historical and scientific material. It would be nothing less than criminal to destroy it” (Alan Walton 23 June 1960).

This brought a mild riposte from the Under Secretary of State for Air to Sir Hugh Fraser MP, on 15 July – there was “no question of their destruction”. Thereafter, matters finally moved on. First the National Library of Air photographs had to be dealt with. In September 1960 at a formal meeting of the Air Council, the question of whether or not the air Ministry would set up a National Air Photo library was finally considered and “decisively rejected”. This not entirely unexpected conclusion was relayed to Professor S.H. Beaver on 19 January 1961. But Beavers offer of accommodation in the brickworks at Madeley was about to be taken up. In the 1950’s Medmenham had been replaced as the nerve centre of UK Image Intelligence by RAF Brampton near Huntingdon, a town some 20 miles NW of Cambridge. Eventually everything would move here, and the last links with wartime centres such as Nuneham Park, where much GX indexing was done, and Medmenham, would be severed. By July 1961 the decision was made to move the print library from Medmenham. The Medmenham Succession project began life as Project SECMED on 27 July 1961. That August the Officer Commanding OC Libraries went to RAF Medmenham to begin the selection of material to be sent to Keele from the 43,129 sorties kept there, and on 11 September 1961 the project began with the inspection of the base maps concerned. In the same month the RAF Overseas Print Library was formally offered to Keele, and the offer was accepted at a meeting of the University Senate on 23 November 1961. On 1 December 1961 “an important ruling” was given: the imagery which could be transferred to Keele comprised “Unclassified material”; and that “wartime cover of ex-enemy countries can be regarded as unclassified”. That did not mean of course that all cover of ex enemy territories was released unclassified – the best imagery of Warsaw pact territories was not generally transferred to Keele. An explicit statement to this effect has not been seen by the writer, who spent much of 1997

128

Chapter Eight

worrying why the weather had been so uniformly bad over the former DDR – until the penny dropped. Sorties then at Medmenham which could not be released “to university libraries” were any with imagery of neutral countries; any imagery of Commonwealth and Colonial territories; and Brunei. On 18 January Beaver received a letter confirming the conclusion of the “very lengthy negotiations” and the first load of prints started their journey to Staffordshire on 16 May 1962, and by the year’s end JARIC had moved 17,108 sorties. By October 1963, when a Signals Unit moved into RAF Medmenham and the last Intelligence link with it finally severed some 43,129 sorties had been inspected, of which 28,076 sorties, nearly 5.5 million prints in 40,000 boxes had been despatched to Keele. Three thousand and eighty three sorties had been transferred to JARIC. But despite the assurances by the Under secretary of State three years before that there was no question of destruction, roughly one quarter of the holdings, a total of 11,970 sorties, had been destroyed. It must be said, however, that a substantial fraction of this material, would have been rated as of “B” and “BC” quality. Having inspected considerable quantities of such material over the years I can affirm the loss will not have been a complete tragedy. The Library comprised four sections of which the Cover section was responsible for the transfer of essential finding aids to Keele. In the event what was transferred was original cover plots, “banda” papers, and the occasional pilot’s trace. The bulk of these original plots consisted of card sheets onto which had been pasted extracts from GSGS (Geographical section, General Staff) 100,000 and 250,000 maps marked up with outlines of every third or fourth frame, with latitude and longitude information crayoned in from the grids. Each card was endorsed with the Library number of the print boxes. As early as 1944 consolidated plots had begun to be prepared, and copies of these would have been extremely useful to Keele. These would have greatly aided the creation of a rapid indexing system. Unfortunately these were held back and instead instead Keele found itself faced with the task of, getting the archive into a useful state, which it did by setting creating a 10 minute square card index on an enormous Rolodex – an enormous undertaking, largely the work of Sheila Walton (Walton 1975). Sadly, the original wartime cover plots of the sorties not originally despatched to Keele in 1962-3 appear to have been destroyed, but not before they were copied onto acetate and then reduced onto cassettes of microfilm. Only parts of these have been released into the public domain so they are currently difficult to access.

Déjà vu all over again?

129

Meanwhile things were approaching a crisis at Brampton. As the Medmenham Library was being sorted out, the Film Library holdings, which had been steadily built up in the bomb stores at RAF Benson since the war, were moved to RAF Feltwell in Norfolk, arriving between 2 and 12 December 1960. There they were sorted out for dispersal. Three categories were created: film for the “Belle Isle” store at Brampton; film for Military Survey at Feltham, and film “not required”, which in short meant film to be recycled for its silver content. Figures (and thus the extent of dispersal and destruction activities) are not entirely clear. In August 1962 the Belle Isle film repository was stated to hold a staggering 400,000 cans of film (Clarke and Bagley 1968). In March 1964 the Belle Isle repository held 69,000 tins. While at Benson the cans had been stored in sortie order. Now, Brampton Park renumbered them using the numeric (or “BP”) system which is the Key to the computerised concordance in use today. Alan Walton referred to photography being despatched to Keele until 1975. This probably included the DoS 2nd print archive, which spent some time at Keele before it was despatched away to the University of Greenwich. but after this date supply appears to have been episodic until 2003-4, when a second great clear out put into the public domain much of the imagery over 30 years old. Prior to this recent inrush, which included substantial quantities of wartime sorties of Eastern Europe and for the first time some Far Eastern material, the university finally received the GX holdings, which overwhelmed the storage capacity of the university and was silently filed away in spare corners of the campus. The captured German, or “GX”, material was something of a Cold War secret, and during their campaign to see the RAF Overseas Print Library released, it was not referred to by Beaver or by anyone else in a position to know of it. The British and the Americans indexed the incoming collections under conditions of secrecy, producing a first draft of the biggest capture, which was given the code name “Dick Tracy” in September 1945 and a second, revised catalogue in February 1946. With many of the original finding aids destroyed it was a huge effort to locate the German imagery but over time the efforts were crowned with success and cover traces identical to wartime Allied sorties, were created using the German 1:300,000 map series of Europe.

130

Chapter Eight

Fig. 8-1. Temporary Nirvana? The former film store at Archives Two, Maryland, USA in 1998

The various captures produced some over 21,000 “GX” numbers of which the bulk (some 13,000) came from Dick Tracy. Internal gaps and unallocated blocks reduce this total to some 15,644 “Sortie” numbers. Only it is important not to assume that every number represents a separate reconnaissance flight. GX numbers were given to a classifiable run of imagery. Thus a single sortie which carried three cameras, eg GB1040 of 31 August 1940 is now classified by three separate GX numbers distinguished with a suffix; SG, SD, and SK, which indicates the camera focal length. Only when the flight traces are put together is it clear they are exposed on the same sortie. A major duplication programme run by the two powers (Operation Copycat) ensured that the best imagery from each nation’s captures was duplicated and held by the other. Table 8-1 gives a crude breakdown of UK holdings by country using the postwar designations given.

Déjà vu all over again?

131

Table 8-1: Country/region Albania Balkans Belgium Bulgaria Cyprus Czechoslovakia Dodecanese islands Egypt Eire Finland France French Africa Germany & Austria Greece Greece+Crete Gibraltar Hungary Italian Africa (Libya) Netherlands Norway Iceland Iran Iraq Italy Latvia Lebanon Lithuania Malta Poland Romania USSR Spain Syria Turkey UK Yugoslavia

Total GX 029 025 000 065 019 216 008 103 50 NK >50 055 598 189 5919 002 NK 031 557 062

UK Held Origin of UK Version 011 All Copycat 023 All Copycat 000 Unselected 034 Approx half Copycat 000 Unselected 139 All Copycat 001 Copycat 010 All Copycat 000 Unselected 102 Half Copycat 000 Unselected 025 All Copycat 101 Primarily Copycat 053 All Patron 020 Some Copycat 000 Unselected 115 Copycat 004 Copycat 000 Unselected 108 mainly Patron 000 Unselected 002 Unknown 002 Unknown 000 Unselected NK Mostly Copycat NK Unknown NK Mostly Copycat 003 Copycat 407 Mostly Copycat 168 Half Copycat 5000 Mostly Copycat 000 Unknown NK Unknown 22 Mostly Copycat 000 Unselected 026 Mostly Patron

Table 8-1: GX material

The GX material was heavily used during the Cold War for the preparation of target graphics and other data, until the arrival of imagery flown by U-2 aircraft and later, satellites. Like the Allied material, GX sorties were replotted during the later 1950s and early 1960’s onto one

132

Chapter Eight

degree square acetates sheets stored within degree squares. By 1960 the “GX” material has been brought finally into some sort of order. This period is described with hectic gaiety by David Paine, a National Serviceman approaching demobilisation in 1960, in a document preserved in the UK National Archives (AIR 14/4104). But a sad codicil is attached. In March 1971 M. V. Elliott, Captain of Intelligence Corps wrote: “during the winter of 1978-9 I was responsible for the weeding of the Intelligence Library, under Major Bower. A great many GX prints, of which at least 50% were originals, were destroyed as later target material [was] available. Had the contents of this file been known, far many more prints would have been selected for retention as historical documents”.

Anyone wanting to read up on the history of GX is advised to consult Paine’s History. Today, while some of the US held GX imagery has been disposed of (for example to Germany), much of the original Dick Tracy material is preserved in the United States of America, as part of Record Group 373. It is best, therefore, to begin there, and if the inquiry draws a blank, to fall back on UK held material, prefixing the “GX” Number with “10” to locate the relevant “BP” number. Those seeking cover of, for example, Iceland or Cyprus, are only likely to find what they want in Maryland. Currently a major programme is running in the US National Archives to microfilm the degree square acetates, but there is reason to believe that as much as 40 per cent of the existing sorties are no longer represented by acetate cover plots. With the establishment of the Library at Keele, Professor Beaver badly needed funding, and to make it useful, needed urgently to upgrade the finding aids. In May 1962, shortly before the arrival of the first crates, Beaver wrote to R. G. Curtis, head of security at MoD about the need to get it working. By October of the same year it was clear that no further financial assistance would be forthcoming. His gloom must have deepened further when that autumn the University Grants Commission turned down the request for funding to create a building, but relented the succeeding year and financed the construction of the link block at Keele, which was finally opened in 1967 as the official place of deposit for the material. Other universities, though loud in their praise, forbore to offer practical help.

Déjà vu all over again?

133

Fig. 8-2: Luftwaffe Target dossiers – UK airfields, Imperial War Museum

Forty years later the sense of déjà vu are strong. The RAF overseas Library has been taken on by the Royal Commission for Historical and Ancient Monuments of Scotland. The imagery will be temporarily housed in Glasgow until a new facility for it can be created in Edinburgh – an ambitious scheme. The writer remembers vividly being shown in 1992 the shiny architects model of the new archive facility at Maryland in 1992. But it proved to have inadequate cold store facilities and the cans of film one wishes to consult now have to be flown to Washington DC from Lexia, Kansas. 1

 1

This paper is based on my own notes and notes made for a report to Keele University on their archive (Going 1997. The Aerial photographic Archive at Keele. Its history and development, and its future). I have also used the Medmenham Club’s annotated typescript of Clarke and Bagleys invaluable ‘Photographic Reconnaissance by the Royal Air Force, Vols 1-11, by J G D Clark and K E Bagley, for which I thank Wing Commander (Ret.) Michael Mockford. Its additional, postwar section, written I believe to celebrate the RAF’s 50th anniversary, is invaluable. Many friends and contacts have given me information

134

Chapter Eight

References Clark J. & Bagley K. (1945) Photographic Reconnaissance by the Royal Air Force. Air Ministry, London. Jones O. (1943) Review of ‘The origin of the Carolina Bays’ by Douglas Johnson (New York - Columbia Press). In: The Geographical Journal 102: 78-81. Macdonald A. (1992) Air Survey at Ordnance Survey from 1919 to 1991. In: The Photogrammetric Review 14, 80: 249-260. NAPLIB (1999) Directory of Aerial Photographic Collections in the United Kingdom (NABLIB). NAPLIB, Toftwood. Walton A. (1975) Air photographic interpretation and the Keele university Collection. In: Phillips A. & Turton B. (Eds.) Environment, Man, and economic change. Essays presented to S. H. Beaver. Longman, London. Watkis N. (1999) The Western Front from the Air. Redwood Books, Wiltshire.

 about service photography at different times. I thank them all and, for the moment, let them remain anonymous.



CHAPTER NINE MILITARY AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS FROM 1914 TO THE PRESENT: A SURVEY OF THE SOURCES AGNÈS BEYLOT Introduction Boasting a collection of several millions of aerial photographs of France and its former colonies, the History Department of the French Ministry of Defence (Service historique de la défense – SHD) now receives requests for information that span a wide range of interests which illustrate the occasionally unexpected use of aerial photography: sanitising unexploded ordnance, archaeological research, researching landscape history, urbanism or even settling land disputes between neighbours. However large the collection of the SHD, justified by such demands, it is not the only in its kind to collect these images. The aéronautique militaire, the original French air service, later becoming the armée de l’air, the French air force and the aéronavale, the French naval aerial forces, produced for many decades the bulk of aerial photographs, born out of the needs of military intelligence and destined for the production of both military and civilian maps. Circulated by the millions, these images have been shared with organisations which have added the images to their archives. The resulting dispersion of the images now hampers researchers who wish to research them. The concern to reunite the collections of aerial photographs and to durably preserve them had not been formally decided until the 1940s, when the French National Institute of Geography (Institut Géographique National or IGN) was created, for civilian purposes, and the French centre for photograph interpretation of the air force (Centre d’interprétation photographique de l’armée de l’air - CIPAA), for military purposes. In the course of these institutions’ history, this effort aimed at providing a survey of the collections of military aerial photography, which

136

Chapter Nine

are presently preserved by the SHD or elsewhere and which are open to the public.

The First World War: first period of mass production of aerial photographs Organised and developed since 1915, aerial photography undertaken by reconnaissance squadrons of the aéronautique militaire had to fulfil the army’s need for detailed maps and intelligence. The photographs were passed on from the squadrons to the aerial photography sections and were consequently sent in large numbers to, on the one hand, intelligenceexploiting sections (Second bureau), the intelligence service of the aéronautique, common control groups for artillery, topographic sections and to the military in the field, army corps, regiments, brigades, etc.1 This diffusion, which was the result of very precise instructions, illustrates the magnitude of the circulation and of their widespread use within the different sections and units. At that time, the concern of classifying and regrouping all these photographs grew. Since 7 January 1915, at a time when the sections for aerial photography were hardly formed, a memo from the staff of the Eastern army headquarters called for: “centralising the materials gathered by the units stationed at air fields in an archive of photographic documents taken on the terrain or from the air during operations by units stationed at air fields and aviation units.”2

And in addition, the forwarded photographs need to be accompanied with: “a form or notice detailing the necessary indications for further use of the photographs, such as (date, subject, location, altitude, camera type, etc.).”3

It is difficult, however, to appreciate to what extent this memo was put into practice.



1 S.H.A.A., A 278, d. 4: advanced course for sector commanders, squadron leaders, assistant observers, intelligence officers, “Documents de renseignements”, December 1916-January 1917, p. 19. 2 S.H.A.A., A 19. – Document kindly signalled by Marcellin Hodeir. 3 Ibid.

Military Aerial Photographs from 1914 to the Present

137

Regardless of the actual extent of the memo, an archive section was created within the Geography Department of the Army (Service géographique de l’Armée - SGA) on 1 July 1918, even before the end of the conflict. Its aim was to preserve and classify all technical documents coming from the common control groups for artillery. Next to a complete collection of detailed maps, the section included: Ͳ

200,000 different aerial photographs of the Western front (see for instance Fig. 9-1)

Ͳ

20,000 aerial photographs of the Italian front

Ͳ

1,000 aerial photographs taken by the Armée d’Orient (army deployed in the Balkans and Ottoman empire) (see for instance Fig. 9-2)

 Fig. 9-1: Oblique air photos of gas being released in the Aurin sector on 12 July 1916 (Source: Collection Ministère de la Défence, Service historique, Département Air)

138

Chapter Nine

However, in 1923, the SGA collection was split up over the different military regions: here we lose track of their location (Bacchus 1988: 36). Today, no such collection of military aerial photography from the First World War remains; the remaining collections are dispersed, mainly at the SHD – History Department of the Ministry of Defence and at the Army museum. The unit archives, and foremost the division archives and archives of the land army, which are kept by the Land department of the SHD, form the prime site for locating military aerial photographs. These archives include vast numbers of photographs which form an integral part of assault preparations, and are attached to maps, plans and sketches. Yet, looking for pictures of a given region, researchers face a long search without any guarantee of actually finding them. When consulting the common inventory of the Army archives of the 1914-1918 war: Army Corps, Garrisons, Divisions, Regiments. We have only recovered 19 locations for Army Corps where aerial photographs are mentioned: 22N297-298, 22N1105-1106, 22N1443-1444, 22N1653, 22N1676-1677, 22N1788, 22N2050, 22N2138-2139, 22N2338-2339, 22N2444-2445, 22N24592460. The photo library of the Army Museum has a particularly rich collection, featuring over 3,000 aerial photographs in print form, which come from private donations. The main part of the collection comes from the collection of Charles Hallo, who had been an observer-photographer since the autumn of 1915, commander of the photography section of the Second Army from March 1918 until the end of the conflict and one of the harbingers of aerial photography. He donated his collections to the Army Museum in 1951, which include 2,000 test prints of aerial photographs, completed with hundreds of photographs on the life of a photography section in the Second Army. It constitutes a particularly interesting collection because of its coherence and its representative image of such a unit. The documentation centre of the Air and Space Museum equally possesses a private collection of aerial photography that can be dubbed “remarkable”. Courtesy of Commander Eugène Pépin, the collection consists of several hundred documents, including a large number of aerial photographs. Owing to his different functions during and after the First World War, including posts as observer, photograph interpreter, instructor for the American Army and finally expert for the Peace Conference,

Military Aerial Photographs from 1914 to the Present

139

commander Pépin had gathered aerial photographs from the air forces of Germany, the United States, Great Britain and France. Finally, the Air department of the SHD holds a substantial number of 12,000 aerial photographs taken during the First World War, reference numbers A 312-347, whose origin is not completely clear (returned by an air force region?). They cover the departments of the North and East of France that were in the front line, as well as cities in the Ruhr region, Belgium and Luxemburg. Equally worth mentioning, are photographs coming from the French Army of the Orient and showing parts of Macedonia (Fig. 9-2) and Monastir. The collection of the Air department is consequently rather fragmented, much like the remaining aerial photographs of the First World War themselves.

Fig. 9-2: Aerial view of the Macedonian front, the Vardar area 1917 (Source: Collection Ministère de la Défence, Service historique, Département Air)

The Interwar period Starting in 1919, new photography missions were undertaken, first to help cartographers make maps of the devastated regions, later for contributing in drafting the map of France by the Geography Department of the Army (Service Géographique de l’Armée - SGA). Aerial

140

Chapter Nine

photogrammetry, experimentally developed at SGA during the 1920s, resulted in the first map sheet (of Salon-de-Provence) in 1930, followed by a growing number of sheets up until 1939, before completely replacing data gathering from the ground from 1945, with the production of the map of France by the National Geographic Institute (Institut géographique national - IGN). An aerial section was created at the SGA in 1930, but it took up until 1938 before it was outfitted with four aircraft transferred from the air force. These aircraft formed the “marching group of the SGA”, and laid the foundation of the IGN squadron. In other words, during the Interwar period, it was always military aviation (air force, navy and colonial forces) which was responsible for gathering air views to be used for cartography of for intelligence purposes. Heir to the SGA, the national photo library situated at the IGN, maintains a collection which, despite lacking the collections of the First World War, counts no fewer than 3,500 vertical missions carried out by military squadrons for the SGA between 1922 and 1938. This makes it the oldest existing collection. The IGN also holds a number of oblique aerial photo series taken since 1919, especially of Versailles at the time of the signing of the peace agreement or the military parade on 14 July 1919, the French National Holiday. For that same period, the remaining collections of the Air section feature few aerial photographs. The archives of the second bureau of the staff of the air force contain a collection of files featuring original French objectives which are very diverse in nature. The objectives in case are naturally situated outside of France, in Germany (2 B 68-76), in Spain and in the Spanish Sahara (2 B 80) and in Italy and Libya (2 B 89-95): fewer than twenty-odd boxes. A large part of the objectives dossiers and military aerial photographs of the Interwar period have indeed been integrated in the collection of the CIPAA after 1945. The French navy, through its Hydrographic and Oceanographic Service (Service Hydrographique et Océanographique - SHOM), holds several cases of aerial photographs taken between 1920 and 1945 by the Aéronautique maritime (then naval air service, later the navy air force) to draw up plans of coastal details. The Centre for the Overseas Archives (Centre des Archives d’Outre Mer - CAOM) equally holds a certain number of aerial photographs taken in the 1920s by the colonial air force and which cover solely geographical details of the then French territories.

Military Aerial Photographs from 1914 to the Present

141

When considering the total estimated production, only a small number of aerial photographs taken before the Second World War remain, mainly held by the IGN, heir to the SGA.

Since 1945: separation between the military and the civilian domain Since 1945, the military and the civilian domains progressively started to operate independently of one another, resulting in efforts in either domain to collect and preserve the aerial photographs that were taken. As for the civilian domain, it was the National Geography Institute, which was set up in 1940 after the dissolution of the SGA, which was charged in 1946 with managing the “documentation centre for aerial photography”4, whose tasks cover: gathering the original photographs of all aerial photographs taken for metric purposes that were taken by public services or on their behalf of France, of the territory of Algeria, of protectorate countries, mandate territories and overseas France; guaranteeing classification and preservation of these photographs and their duplicate negatives and finally providing access to this documentation to all ministerial departments. All state administrations are required to transfer their photographs to the centre. The Defence ministry is no exception to this rule and regularly transfers are made of selected photographs taken during missions of the air force and naval air force.5 Yet, the relevant decree stipulates that the Defence minister can personally keep “certain documents which are of no other interest than to his/her own department”, particularly aerial photographs that were taken not for metric reasons, but for intelligence reasons.

 4

S.H.D., D.A.A., E 33194: decree n°46-1262 of 29 May 1946 on the organisation of the documentation centre for aerial photography, extract of the Journal Officiel n°128 of 2 June 1946, signed by the president of the GPRA, the Minister of Public Works and the Defence Minister. 5 S.H.D., D.A.A., E 33194 : memo without n° of the head of CIPAA, 11 December 1946 ; instruction n°194 EMG/3 of 10 February 1954 on archiving aerial photographs taken by the naval air force, published in Bulletin officiel Marine, 1954, p. 711.

142

Chapter Nine

 Fig. 9-3: Brest 1945, in the aftermath of the Second World War, aerial photographs were taken to study the effect of military pollution (Source: Collection Ministère de la Défence, Service historique, Département Air)

Concurrently, civil cartography moved away from their dependence on military means. After the dissolution of the SGA in 1940, an aerial photography section consisting of six planes was set up in non-occupied France; in 1944, a new squadron was ordered to photograph the

Military Aerial Photographs from 1914 to the Present

143

destruction caused during the conflict. Nevertheless, the military still contributed to aerial photography for metric purposes: mainly in French colonies or even over Brittany, from 1946 until 1948, action terrain of the reconnaissance group 1/33. Similarly, in the aftermath of the war on 24 July 1945 and by order of the Second bureau, the centre for photograph interpretation of the air force (Centre d’Interprétation Photographique de l’Armée de l’Air - CIPAA) was created. This new unit aimed at being at once a training centre and a centre where aerial photographs of the air force could be collected and exploited. This centre was linked to the photography section of the general staff of the air force – Second bureau6, the likely predecessor to the CIPAA. Subsequently situated in Paris, Neuilly and Versailles, the CIPAA was transferred in 1966 to base 272 “Charles Renard” de Saint Cyr l’Ecole, where it remained until its dissolution. In September 1987 and without changing its status, not its function, the CIPAA became the Training and interpretation centre of the air force (Centre d’Etude et d’Interprétation de l’Armée de l’Air -CEIAA). This in turn, ceased to exist on 31 March 1994: its missions and means were divided over the Image training and interpretation centre of the combined forces (Centre de Formation et d’Interprétation Interarmées de l’Imagerie - CFIII), located at base 110 in Creil, the Military intelligence unit and the military geographical section, while its photo library was transferred to the History service of the air force (Service historique de l’armée de l’air - SHD). The creation of the CIPAA filled the need for centralising the means for interpreting photographs and providing better training for its personnel. Its missions7, defined by the instructions of 10 August 1982 and 6 January 1988, encompass: Ͳ

interpreting aerial images, photographs but equally radar, satellite and infrared images, following the orders of the Second bureau of the General staff of the Air force; identification and analysis of objectives

 6

S.H.D., D.A.A., E 33194: service memo n°2734/EMGA/2/CF of 24 July 1945, signed by the colonel heading the Second bureau. 7 Including other instructions defining CIPAA missions: 1671/DEF/EMAA/3/OP/CD of 20 August 1974; 01159/DEF/EMAA/3/OP/CD of 10 August 1982; 1309/DEF/EMAA/1/ ORG/DR of 15 July 1987.

Chapter Nine

144

Ͳ

exploiting intelligence, resulting in the distribution of catalogues of “air sites”, edited by the Second bureau or the drafting of interpretation reports destined for preparing exterior actions

Ͳ

preparing of and following-up on the yearly programme for taking aerial photographs

Ͳ

providing formation of interpretation personnel: intelligence officers, non-commissioned officers – sketchers and image interpreters

Ͳ

studying the methods and evaluation of materials for interpretation

Ͳ

managing the photo library of the air force

At the time of the dissolution of the CEIAA in 1994, its archives, including the photo library of the Air force as its main point of attraction, were transferred to the SHD, which ensures the preservation of the archives and the ensuing communication. Together with the IGN, it is one of the main public collections of aerial photographs in France open to the public and consists of objectives files and the results of missions undertaken by the air force. The objectives files, held by the Air department under the reference numbers E 33206-33289, consist of 12 meters of archival material. Originating from French, German or Allied forces, these documents were drafted during the war in Indochina (Vietnam), but also during the Interwar period and the Second World War. This proves the retroactive effect of the mission that was given to the CIPAA in 1945. The original Allied files that had been transferred to the intelligence services of the French authorities in Algiers were equally sent to the CIPAA after the war. As for the files of German objectives, the reason of their presence in the collection remains unclear: war spoils? Post war transfers? Later, other objectives files were added to the collection, which were produced by the Centre for Photograph Exploitation (Centre d’Exploitation Photographique), which reported to the Air force headquarters in the Far East, as well as French files on objectives which came from the Second bureau of the general staff.

Military Aerial Photographs from 1914 to the Present

145

The zones that are covered correspond to the nature of these files, namely preparing bombardments. The sites concerned cover aerial installations, military sites, radar sites, warehouses, army barracks, ports and industrial installations, all high priority targets. German targets figure prominently, both in French and Allied objectives files, followed by Austria, France, both Western and Eastern Europe, including German objectives files of sites in the former Soviet Union and finally, Indochina and the Chinese-Vietnam border. What makes these files most interesting is their diversity: aerial photographs, both vertical and oblique, tagged or not, maps, interpretation reports, intelligence bulletins, all gathered before or after the bombardment. The objectives files, however, are limited when compared to the vast collection of the photo library of the air force. This collection, transferred to the SHD and currently situated at the fort of Romainville, on its own holds 2.5 km of aerial film and paper printing. The number of images, estimated at 3,500,000 in 1970, is difficult to quantify.8 The bulk of the collection is made up of yearly missions carried out by units of the air force, following a pre-established programme drafted by the CIPAA itself. Starting in 1939 through to the 1970s, these missions covered to France, then French colonies: Indochina, French Northern Africa, Madagascar and to a lesser extent French Western Africa and French Equatorial Africa. To give an idea of the magnitude of the collection, the photographic printings of Indochina on their own constitute about 150 meters of archival material, even after the losses due to the retrieval of the collection mentioned in the archives of the CIPAA. The collection mainly includes vertical photographs, corresponding to regular missions to precise objectives: industrial zones, cities, strategic sites. However, it also includes in these missions, a series labelled “base coverage”, which is a systematic coverage of the French territory carried out in the 1960s. In the same vein, a coverage of air force bases in France equally exists. A number of these missions can be situated in a war context: mainly for the missions flown during the Second World War9, over Indochina or Algeria, including missions over Dien Bien Phu or Royan and other pockets of German resistance along the French Atlantic

 8

S.H.D., D.A.A., E 33194: record pertaining to the archiving mission of the CIPAA, 29 July 1970. 9 The Centre Camille Jullian (associated laboratory n°284 of the CNRS) holds aerial photographs of different scales taken by Allied forces in 1944, before and after bombardments, which are copies of the CIPAA collection.

146

Chapter Nine

coast. Finally, an exceptional collection of 150 to 200 “artistic” panoramic photographs is included, taken around Algiers and Oran, and over French mountain ranges. These are of an exceptionally fine quality and mainly cover archaeological sites in Algeria.

 Fig. 9-4: Aerial photo of the archaeological site of Djemila in Algeria (10 February 1948) (Source: Collection Ministère de la Défence, Service historique, Département Air)

Military Aerial Photographs from 1914 to the Present

147

 Fig. 9-5: Examples of the extremely rich photo collection of Indochine. The vertical air photo shows one of the Angkor temples taken on 24 February 1956. The quality of the 24 x 24 cm negatives provides possibilities for enlargements (Source: Collection Ministère de la Défence, Service historique, Département Air)

If formally accessible to the public in keeping with the law of 1979, these extremely valuable collections remain hard to consult and exploit due to the nature of the classification system and the state that the images are in. To locate a photograph of a given point, the following steps have to be taken: locating the point on a map, finding the corresponding tracking points of missions carried out in the region (recorded through tracing or plotting), determining whether the mission actually covered the exact point, extracting the corresponding images. Due to the variety of documents needed for a search and their fragility, researchers are currently unable to carry out the search on their own. They are assisted by staff of the “aerial photography” cell of the Air department, which provides the boxes containing the photographs. However, it is being considered to create a data base providing direct access to a geographic point on the basis of the photograph reference number. Furthermore, next to the specific preservation conditions that photographs require, the nature of the films used to make the aerial shots causes problems. A third of the photographs of aerial photographs in the collection were taken before 1955, which is to say in a period when cellulose nitrate film was used, which is highly flammable and dangerous. In addition, processes of selection, duplication and subsequently elimination of films are currently undertaken. Under these conditions, the Air department tries its utmost to answer the requests but is unable to answer large volumes of requests.

Chapter Nine

148

A number of collections with easier access held by the Air department deserve special attention. Illustrating the development of aerial photography within the air force, aerial photographs can be found scattered over the archives of reconnaissance and bombing groups, as well as in a more coherent form as individual dossiers per country in the archives of the Second Bureau. Of particular interest are: Ͳ

in the archives of the Free French forces and Allied forces in sub series 4D : a series (4D81-85) of records of objectives and aerial photographs of pockets of German resistance along the French Atlantic coast, and objectives files on European countries (4D30-36)

Ͳ

in the collection of the Second bureau: aerial photographs of Northern Africa (E11362-11383) and objectives files (E30197-30235).

Finally, in the private collections, the Air department holds coverage of the Paris region and its surroundings, taken by a military unit for training purposes on the eve of the Second World War ; the quality of this document allows for researching the urban fabric of the capital before the occupation of the “zone” of old fortifications.

Towards interforces cooperation Since 1945, the CIPAA has not been the only military organisation charged with the interpretation and preservation of aerial photographs: the army and navy have equally set up similar organisations. The Land department of the SHD today holds a collection stemming from the centre for photograph interpretation of the land army (Centre d’Interprétation Photographique de l’Armée de Terre - CIPAT), founded in 1974 within the Centre for intelligence instruction and interpretation of photographs (Centre d’Instruction du Renseignement et d’Interprétation Photographique - CIRIP), which became the EIREL in 1995. It covers about 600 metres of photographic film, partly dating back to the Second World War and dealing equally with Algeria, which are still not available to the public due to a lack of research instruments. The hydrological and oceanographic service of the navy (Etablissement Principal du Service Hydrologique et Océanographique de la Marine EPSHOM) located in Brest since 1971 holds 90,000 photographs whose

Military Aerial Photographs from 1914 to the Present

149

dates of origin are mainly situated between 1950 and the present time and which mainly deal with a sea environment. The dissolution of the Research and interpretation centre of the Air Force (Centre d’Etude et d’Interprétation de l’Armée de l’Air - CEIAA) in 1994 came as a response to the increasing willingness to centralise in the domain of military intelligence, which led to the founding of the military intelligence section. Ever since, the exploitation of aerial photography is managed jointly by the various departments, as is its preservation. Since 1994, these tasks are jointly taken up by the CFIII, which holds the missions flown outside of the French territories, and the aerial photography cell of the army in Strasbourg. Stemming from the military geography section, the latter archives aerial missions over the national territory, complementing IGN coverage.

References Bacchus M. (1988) L’utilisation des photographies aériennes pour l’établissement des plans directeurs pendant la guerre de 1914-1918. In: Humbert J. (Ed.) Vues d’en haut. La photographie aérienne pendant la guerre de 1914-1918. Musée d’Histoire Contemporaine, Paris: 29-36.



CHAPTER TEN GREAT WAR AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS IN GERMAN ARCHIVES: A GUIDE TO THE SOURCES PETER HAUPT Introduction After the end of the war, aerial photographs made their way into public archives in various ways. In general, article 202 of the Versailles Treaty declared, that all military and naval aeronautical material, except the machines mentioned in the second and third paragraphs of Article 198, must be delivered to the Governments of the Principal Allied and Associated Powers (photographic apparatus is especially mentioned). While this undoubtedly included aerial photographs, large numbers of such images were not released. Their military value was probably deemed high in the eyes of the Germans, whereas the allies primarily focused on weaponry. Moreover, in the chaotic months after the end of the war, many military aerial photographs were taken home as memorabilia by the veterans. Especially the latter may be obtained nowadays at antique dealers or over the internet, for example approximately two dozen First World War aerial photographs appear weekly on eBay Germany (Haupt 2001). Military documents in public civil archives mostly originated from dissolved military archives. Due to Germany’s modern federal structure, which allows each state its own cultural policy, each of the 16 states has its own state archive. In addition there is a federal archive (Bundesarchiv), which received many documents of the German military institutions. Other military aerial photographs are kept in state, county or communal museums. A considerable part of the collection of aerial photographs are inheritances or purchases from important private collections, in particular

152

Chapter Ten

these might have found their way into small collections. As a result, a few hundred aerial photographs from a veteran’s inheritances may have been left to a communal museum or the city archives. Such collections are almost impossible to trace. Furthermore there are several hundreds of published aerial photographs. While some of these were biographical-historical descriptions by veterans, others were general works on the history of the First World War, military handbooks or postcards. Even though, First World War documents are at present no longer kept secret, the main problem in working with them is the difficult access. While many of the aerial photographs bear annotations (at least observer, date and time), no documents list the collection details. However, the personnel are often very well informed about their archives, so that inquiries are often successful. With larger archives, it is often recommended to visit the institution in person (with appointment), especially if one needs to choose and reproduce certain photographs. In exceptional cases, it might be possible to start a search in online-databases, sometimes even with a picture preview. In database research with keyword searches, one should bear in mind that the German terms “Luftbild” and “Luftaufnahme” are both synonymous for the word “aerial photograph”, with “Luftbild” being the more common term. Many Luftwaffe photographs from the Second World War appear to have gone into the archives of the Allied forces. Apart from those aerial photographs which found their way into private memorabilia collections, the German archives contain many aerial photographs from World War Two made by Allied soldiers, which were then reproduced after the war and often show a range of locations throughout Germany.

A guide to German archives Bundesarchiv in Koblenz The collection Bild 162 (Sammlung Rolf Penselin, acquired in late 1984), consists of 110 glass negatives and 140 slides, with additional paper prints. These photographs are important sources for the history of aviation. However, it contains aerial photographs of Lille (France), Breslau (Poland), Mihain Bravul (Romania) and a few other localities.

Great War Aerial Photographs in German Archives

153

 Fig. 10-1: Typical German air photo near Lizerne (Source: Belgian Military Archives SGRS-S/A)

The collection Bild 103 includes pictures made between 1914 and 1935 by the Wehrkreiskommando V. These are the former collection of the Heeresbildarchiv in Stuttgart. Of the 23,706 objects existing in 1944, approximately 13,300 still exist today; they predominantly include approximately 500 slide rows for instruction purposes (“Der Weltkrieg in Luftbildern”), containing a total of nearly 13,200 slides (glass, usually 8.5 x 10 cm). Negatives and paper prints, as well as a detailed inventory list were produced. Amongst others, the following places are mentioned: Ͳ

Reihe 215: Lessinghen and Moerei in Flanders, 42 towns in the Alsace and south-Western Germany.

Ͳ

Reihe 216: 33 aerial photographs of a Bavarian Fliegerabeilung in the southern Vosges (1916-1917).

Ͳ

Reihe 234: Destroyed fortresses (Dun, Vaux, Montmédy, Longy and others).

Chapter Ten

154

Ͳ

Reihe 238: 135 aerial photographs of the Western front amongst them: Aisne-Kanal, Aisne, Armentières, Baccarat, Beaucourt, Bellewarde-Teich bei Ypres, Beu, Hof Biez bei Wecflaquart, Bizet: Pont Ballot bei Armentières, Bois-Boul, Boiselle, Buchenkopf, Bully-Grenay, Carnoy, Cassel, Certeaux-Ferme, Chassemy-Brenelle, Chavonne-Brage, Contalmaison, Crivillerhöhe, Curtines, Dammerkirsch, Deville-Wald, Domlevin, Dormans, Dugny, Eaucourt, Erquinchen, Fricourt, Fungeraux-Croix du Bois, Flers, Ginchy, Fismes, Gabril, Gavrell, Gerlaux Ferme, Grande Ferme, Grand Sec Bois, Grand Voivre, Harbonnières, Hilsenfirst, Hooge, Jagsfelder Wald, La Bècque, La Champreuille, Le Paradis, L’Èpinette, Longueval, Laon, Langres, Matrelle, Maurespas, Merrey, Moravillers, Mont de Merris, Mourmelon le Grand, Moyen, Morbeque, Mühlbach, Neux les Mines, Neufchateau, Outtersteene, Pargny, Perenchies, Pojane, Pocières, Prosnes, Pompey, Potyce, Pozières, Rambervillers, Remomont, Rinxent, Rouvres, Sailly, Steenbeque, St. Omer, Serre, St. Jean, Ferme Rochefort, Thaon les Vosges, Tourneaux-Wald, Tournèes, Vasseny, Vailly, Vainy-Aisne-Kanal, Verlinghem, Wasserburg, Wohltätigkeitsschlucht, Wurmsatal, Wyschaete.

Ͳ

Reihe 240: 63 aerial photographs of the Western front amongst them: Aisne-Kanal, Altmattkopf, Barrenkopf, Breitfirst, Basse-Marse, La Becque, Beu, Chaume-Miclo, Col-du-Bonhomme, Combehäuser, Engelberg Faing, Gazondu-Faing, Hartmannsweilerkopf, Hölzlen, Jeunes-Champs, Kaysingswald, Latschenköpfle, Lingekopf, Lingesattel, Lomberg, Longueval, Markircher Höhe, Metzeral, Moleghem, Mühlbach, Noirmonthäuser, Pairis, Le Paradis, Le Pre-des-Raves, Renaudroche, Rocherswald, Schnepfenried, Schwarzberg, Sinfronce, Starkenbach, Stendebach, Storchenrunz, Tournèes, Verse, Verse-Ceresier, Violette.

Ͳ

Reihe 255: amongst others an aerial photograph of Hooge (Flanders).

Ͳ

Reihe 256: various aerial photographs (amongst others a bridge in England, Minsk, Valona, Etaples, Hooge (Flanders), Combles-Höhe).

Great War Aerial Photographs in German Archives

155

Ͳ

Reihe 312-314: 89 aerial photographs of the Western front (without further description).

Ͳ

Reihe 319: 42 aerial photographs of positions (without further description).

Ͳ

Reihe 399: 27 aerial photographs: Übungstarnen gegen Fliegersicht.

According to a description of the above collections from the year 1980, approximately 600 Word War One terrestrial and aerial photographs, as yet not accessible, exist in the State archive in the Bild- und Filmamt (BUFA), partly in the Bildstelle der 4. Division. Aerial photographs may also be found in the Sammlung Carl Wöltje, the Hauptgruppe Erster Weltkrieg der Sachthematischen Bildersammlung as well as in the Kleine Erwerbungen Bild. According to information from January 2006, there are World War One aerial photographs (except the above described collections Bild 103 and Bild 162) in: Ͳ

Sachthematische Bildsammlung des Bundesarchivs (aerial photographs out of donations from individuals and institutions, also from military authorities, amongst which the Sammlung Oscar Tellgmann (Bild 136))

Ͳ

Allgemeiner Deutscher Nachrichtendienst der DDR (Bild 183; approximately 10 aerial photographs from the Bildagentur Scherl)

Ͳ

Bildsammlung des Militärarchivs (contains a large amount of aerial photographs, at present being evaluated).

Aerial photographs of the German Luftwaffe (thus taken after World War One) may be found in Bild 168.

Landeshauptarchiv Koblenz (Rheinland-Pfalz) This archive includes 15 aerial photographs from the inheritance Hermann-Josef Klein (Bestand 700,226). These photographs were taken in 1915-1916, probably on the Western Front.

Chapter Ten

156

Bayerisches Hauptstaatsarchiv, Abt. IV: Kriegsarchiv (Central State Archives, Bavaria) Approximately 300,000 aerial photographs of the Western front (sorted by divisions) are included in this archive. It also contains 14,500 aerial photoraphs of the Übungsfliegerabteilungen (mostly southern Bavaria). As well as a collection of 2,500 aerial photographs of the Palestine theatre of war. Finally, it comprises various photo albums and photographs from private ownership, which also contain aerial photographs.

Hauptstaatsarchiv Stuttgart (Baden-Württemberg) Ͳ

GU 117 Nr. 855 and 1295: aerial photographs (1914-1918), inheritance from Wilhelm Herzog von Urach and Graf von Württemberg.

Ͳ

M 33/2 Nr. 36: orders (1916-1918) by the Generalkommando XIII. A.K.: aerial map 1:5,000 of Sailly and view-all-round of the area between Banteux and Marcoing.

Ͳ

M 33/2 Nr. 62: battle of Flanders (Apr.-May 1916) by the Generalkommando XIII. A.K.: maps and reports, one aerial photograph taken near Zillebeke.

Ͳ

M 33/2 Nr 96: Generalkommando XIII. A.K.: 14 aerial photographs of Northern Poland.

Ͳ

M 33/2 Nr. 235: Generalkommando XIII. A.K.: aerial photographs of train stations, airfields and depots in the area Albert-Peronne (spring 1917).

Ͳ

M 33/2 Nr. 257: Generalkommando XIII. A.K.: aerial photographs of offensive near Gillemont-Ferme (Aug./Sept. 1917)

Ͳ

M 33/2 Nr. 367: Generalkommando XIII. A.K.: offensive “Winter” between Gonnelieu and Marcoing (Dec. 1917/Jan. 1918) one aerial photograph.

Ͳ

M 33/2 Nr. 404: gas as weapon (1917-1918) by the Generalkommando XIII. A.K.: four aerial photographs of gas-minefields east of Villeret (Dec. 1917).

Great War Aerial Photographs in German Archives

157

Ͳ

M 33/2 Nr. 548: orders (1916-1918) by the Generalkommando XIII. A.K.: no aerial photographs, but a lot of things belonging to this subject.

Ͳ

M 33/2 Nr. 569: aerial photographs and maps taken near Cambrai (June 1917).

Ͳ

M 33/2 Nr. 604-608: aerial photographs of Kemmel, Ypres, Le Catelet, Honnécourt, maps, orders and descriptions.

Ͳ

M 33/2 Nr. 854: the Generalkommando XIII. A.K.: aerial photograph-maps of Gueudecourt, Becourt, Albert, Cambrai and the area of the 2nd army south of Valenciennes.

Ͳ

M 190 Bü 3: many aerial photographs, taken by the Fußartillerie-Regiment Nr. 13 in 1918 (sizes: 17.5 x 12.5 cm and 30 x 24 cm).

Ͳ

M 190 Bü 48: plans of the 1918 offensive in Flanders and near the Chemin des Dames (1918).

Ͳ

M 190 Bü 155 (and 136, 149): aerial photographs of Romania (1917, Württembergisches Fußartillerie-Regiment Nr. 13).

Ͳ

M 190 Bü 189: diary of the Württembergisches FußartillerieRegiment Nr. 13 (1918): five aerial photographs of the Western front.

Ͳ

M 206 Nr. 55: 6 aerial photographs, taken after minethroweraction between Oosthoek and Zillebeke.

Ͳ

M 206 Nr. 68: 3 aerial photographs, taken after minethroweraction near Honnécourt.

Ͳ

M 660/020 Nr. 1: aerial photographs taken by the Fernflieger-Abt. 39 (Alsace).

Ͳ

M 660/036 Nr. 2-5: a few aerial photographs in the albums of Max Georg Rösch (Alsace).

Chapter Ten

158

Ͳ

M 660/041 Nr. 9 and 19: aerial photograph of the forestry near Thiepval (1916, in the diary of Adolf Spemann). Nr. 19: aerial photographs of the Somme 1916.

Ͳ

M 700/1: collection of about 1,000 positives, mostly taken between 1917 and 1918: villages of Northern Württemberg.

Ͳ

M 700/2 and 3: approximately 177 aerial photographs of landscapes in Württemberg.

Ͳ

M 701/1: aerial photographs of towns and villages of BadenWürttemberg.

Ͳ

M 706: collection of view-all-round-photographs. Taken in France, Belgium, Poland, Russia, Romania, Serbia, Bulgaria and Italy between 1914 and 1918.

Staatsarchiv Sigmaringen (Baden-Württemberg) In collection N 1/68 there are nine aerial photographs of the Western Front (glass plate negatives of the Fotoatelier Kugler in Sigmaringen), which can be found on the internet1.

Landesarchiv Saarbrücken In the picture collection of the state archive there are four WWI aerial photographs showing war damages and the airport St. Arnual (taken in autumn1917; B 1465/2-4 C and B 1465/10 C). An aerial photograph shows the railway-station (taken before WWI; B 2439 C).

Landesarchiv Schleswig-Holstein The archive contains only one postcard showing an aerial photograph of the Lockstedt camp, taken before World War One (Signature: Abt. 2003.1 No. 732).

 1

http://www.landesarchiv-bw.de/ofs21/olf/struktur.php?bestand=2350&klassi =011.001.028&anzeigeKlassi=011.001.028

Great War Aerial Photographs in German Archives

159

LandesarchivNordrhein-Westfalen, Hauptstaatsarchiv Düsseldorf The Abteilung 4 contains a few Zeppelin-photographs of cities on the lower Rhine. Large collections of aerial photographs taken by the HansaLuftbild-GmbH are important for the period between the wars. These photographs (taken 1934-1941) are also found in the Landeshauptarchiv Schwerin (Mecklenburg-Vorpommern).2

Österreichisches Staatsarchiv – Kriegsarchiv WWI aerial photographs are sorted by companies and cannot be accessed at present, due to their being glass negatives of which safety copies must be made first. These aerial photographs are part of archive group 12 (picture collection).

Kriegsgeschichtliches Luftbildarchiv des Tiroler Verlages Steiger This publisher owns several hundred aerial photographs of the alpine region, which probably come from the inheritance of Raimund Pichler.

Firmenarchiv der Luftschiffbau Zeppelin GmbH (LZ-Archiv) The museum owns a few aerial photographs.

Agfa Foto-Historama im Museum Ludwig At present, approximately 2,000 World War One aerial photographs exist here, left to the museum by Joseph Aumann. Amongst them are valuable documentations of the development of aerial photography as well as maps and sketches of the Western front. The collection (Bestand Aumann) was analysed and described by G. Voigtlaender-Tetzner in 1990, during which certain discrepancies and losses were noted. According to these descriptions, the following photographs are included: Ͳ

Anlage 18: Album of a Beobachterkurs Fliegerersatzabteilung No. 7 near Köln 1915:

 2

see http://www.landeshauptarchiv-schwerin.de/pages/tektonik.htm

der

Chapter Ten

160

Amongst the 35 photographs in the album are 12 aerial photographs (Longerich, airport Butzweiler Hof, Rhine near Wesel, other places near Cologne; but also photographs of the Western front: Vaux 1918, Havrincourt 1915, St. Leger/Ornes 1915). A second album contains 72 aerial photographs of the positions in the north of the fortress Cologne (Towns: Bessenich, Birkesdorf, Bonn, Brühl, Buschdorf, Düren, Efferen, Geichs by Zülpich, Hersel, Hitdorf, Kalscheuren, Krefeld, Lachem, Leverkusen, Longerich, Merheim, Neuss, Niehl, Nonnenwerth, Rodenkirchen, Roisdorf, Sechtem, Wahn, Wesseling, Wevelingshofen, Worringen, Rhein by Zündorf). The same album apparently contains mislaid maps amongst maps of Arras, Blanchy and Ransart (1:5,000 to 1:10,000). Ͳ

Anlage 22/1: 253 aerial photographs of the front near Arras (1915)

Ͳ

Anlage 22/2: 129 aerial photographs of the front near Arras (oblique photographs 1915)

Ͳ

Anlage 22/3: 187 aerial photographs of the town Arras (oblique photographs 1915)

Ͳ

Anlage 22/4: 146 aerial photographs of the area surrounding Arras

Ͳ

Anlage 22/5: 295 aerial photographs of the front near Arras (Dec. 1914/Jan. 1915)

Ͳ

Anlage 22/6: 183 aerial photographs of the area surrounding Arras

Ͳ

Anlage 22/7: 254 aerial photographs of the area surrounding Arras

Ͳ

Anlage 22/8: 115 aerial photographs of the area surrounding Arras

Ͳ

Anlage 23: 83 enlargements of aerial photographs of the area surrounding Arras (1914/1915)

Great War Aerial Photographs in German Archives

161

Ͳ

Anlage 24: 45 map drawings, blueprints and sketches of positions around Arras

Ͳ

Anlage 25: map of Arras

Ͳ

Anlage 28: various documents concerning the organisation of the Luftbildabteilung 1916

Ͳ

Anlage 29: bericht der Beschaffungsstelle für Lichtbildgerät

Ͳ

Anlage 30: 81 aerial photographs of areas around Hannover (1916/17)

Ͳ

Anlage 32: 26 aerial photographs of the Piave-Isonzo-front 1917/18 (mostly Italian airfields)

Ͳ

Anlage 33: map drawings of the Piave-Isonzo-front 1917/18

Ͳ

Anlage 34: 39 serial verticals of the Piave-front (mostly airfields and trainstations)

Ͳ

Anlage 35: weekly reports and other documents of the Piavefront 1917/18, amongst which an aerial photograph of the Adriatic Sea dated 10.4.1917

Ͳ

Anlage 36: 6 serial verticals of the area surrounding Arras Oct. 1917

Ͳ

Anlage 38: 17 surround photographs of Verdun und the Vosges frontier

Ͳ

Anlage 39: 6 instruction booklets for aerial photography 1916/1917

Ͳ

Anlage 41: aerial photograph of Verdun 1915

Ͳ

Anlage 45: maps and map drawings 1:1,000 to 1:100,000 with positions (amongst others Burnhaupt, Sommepy to Metz, Arras and surrounding area, Beaumont to Ornes, Cambrai, Saulty-Beaumont, Verdun, Longuyon, St. Mihiel)

Ͳ

Anlage 47: journal and manuscript from 1930

Chapter Ten

162

Ͳ

Anlage 48: 27 aerial photographs 18x24 cm around 1930 (near Magdeburg)

A large collection of photographic apparatus (approx. 18,000 objects) contained several aerial cameras, amongst which one for attachment to a homing pigeon. The objects are now owned by the Agfa company. 3

Deutsches Historisches Museum, Berlin This relatively young establishment owns at least one photo postcard from the first war months (airport Les Rosiers, F; GOS-No. D2G00090). It is to be expected that this museum will extend its existing collections within the next years.

Militärgeschichtliches Forschungsamt To this institution of the Federal Republic / Bundeswehr belongs the Luftwaffenmuseum in Berlin-Gatow and the Militärhistorisches Museum in Dresden. Although both probably received aerial photographs of WW1 and WW2, but unfortunately did not answer our request.

Leibniz-Institut für Länderkunde (IfL), Archiv für Geographie This archive contains 548 aerial photographs from the Sammlung Ernst Wandersleb (Balloon and aeroplane photographs from 1909 up to the beginning of World War I). The photographs are scanned and may be examined through the OPAC of the Geographic Central Library (GZB). The collection mainly covers the German states Thuringia and Saxony, but also further areas in southern and south-Western Germany (additionally: Innsbruck, Alsace).

Ullstein Bild This publisher owns a small but particularly impressive collection of WWI aerial photographs, which can be found at http://www.ullsteinbild.de with the search words “Luftbild Weltkrieg“, a fee may be necessary for use.

 3

http://www.cologneweb.com/agfa.htm

Great War Aerial Photographs in German Archives

163

References Crawshaw, A. (2001) Some history of the captured German WWII photography. In: AARGnews, 22: 45-49. Haupt, P. (2001) How to get German First World War AP's from the internet. In: AARGnews, 23: 29-32. McLaren, K. (1997) Luftwaffe material in the National Monuments Record of Scotland. In: AARGnews, 15: 15-16. Rączkowski, W. (2004) Dusty treasure: thoughts on a visit to The Aerial Reconnaissance Archives at Keele University (UK). In: AARGnews, 29: 9-11.



CHAPTER ELEVEN HISTORY OF MILITARY AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS IN ITALY AND ADDRESSED ARCHIVES LAURA CASTRIANNI, GIUSEPPE CERAUDO The pioneering period: Giacomo Boni & Dante Vaglieri An in-depth analysis of the period between the end of 1800 and the explosion of the First World War, the so-called pioneering period of the Italian Air Force (Lodi 1976, Zicavo 1928), allows us to fully understand the real contribution of the aerial photographs of war to historical and archaeological research – specifically those concerning the two great World Wars of the 20th century. In fact, during this period the indispensable technical and scientific bases have been provided for the successive development of the military aerial photography and for its subsequent application to various disciplinary fields, from the military one to the archaeological. The unquestioned protagonists of this fundamental historical moment are both the aerostieri and the exceptional archaeologists such as Giacomo Boni (1859-1925) and Dante Vaglieri (1865-1913). During their own excavation activities, these protagonists could benefit from an eclectic scientific training within the field of archaeology that, by nature, allowed them to experiment with all the possibilities offered by the new technologies in that part of the 20th century.11

 1

To improve the understanding of Boni and Vaglieri’s innovative work in respect of the period in which they were working, it suffices to read R. Bianchi Bandinelli’s words, describing the Roman archaeological atmosphere of that period: “il tono aulico fu anche conforme al carattere tutto particolare di una cultura locale che per la sua particolarissima situazione storica divenne incline, nei suoi ultimi due secoli nella maggioranza dei suoi rappresentanti, anche insigni, meglio all’esaltazione che all’indagine critica, più alla elegante

166

Chapter Eleven

Giacomo Boni’s excavation activities (Iacopi 2003) represent the first application of aerial photography to archaeological research in Italy. In 1898 the Minister of Education, Guido Bocelli, entrusted the Venetian architect with the management of a new excavation campaign in the Roman Forum. For the first time, Boni availed himself of the contribution that this auxiliary science could offer to the field of archaeology. From 1899 to 1906, Boni carried out a series of ascents with a Brigata Specialisti’s captive balloon, which had kindly been offered by the Corps of Engineers. His aim was two-fold: to realize a planealtimetry relief concerning the valley of the Forum and to document advancements of the excavations, which also concerned the area of Palatinum Hill from 1907 onwards. The relief of the Roman Forum (Boni 1900: 220-229), dated May-June 1900 and following less than three years after that of the Palatinum Hill (Reina and Barbieri 1904: 43-46), was executed by the Royal Technical college of Engineers in Rome. This project was directed by Prof. Reina and defined by Dante Vaglieri’s guide, called “la miglior guida per i monumenti del Foro, sino allora rimessi in luce” (Vaglieri 1903: 14-16). Up till now, the aerial photographs, taken at heights from 300 to 500 metres above sea level have been exceptional documents showing the progressive advancement of excavations. So far, they have remained largely unpublished, despite being indispensable instruments of study to improve the knowledge of the central archaeological area of Rome (see Fig. 11-1) 2. Moreover, they are the first examples of auxiliary instruments

 accademia erudita e formale che alla concreta ricerca scientific” Bandinelli R.B. (1965) Boni Giacomo. Enciclopedia dell’Arte Antica, 6, 764-767. (For a general setting of this crucial period in the Roman archaeology, see also: Ramieri A.M. (1983) L’archeologia in Roma capitale: le scoperte, i metodi e gli studi. In: Sartorio G.P. & Quilici L. (Eds.) Roma capitale 1870-1911. L’archeologia in Roma tra sterro e scavo Venezia: 18-29 and Sartorio G.P. (1983) Tra antiquaria e archeologia. In: Sartorio G.P. & Quilici L. (Eds.) Roma capitale 1870-1911. L’archeologia in Roma tra sterro e scavo. Venezia: 13-17. 2 The pictures mentioned are preserved in photographic archives of several private and public institutes and research centres in Rome, both Italian and foreign. At the moment, these pictures are the object of a study realized through a collaboration between the “Laboratorio di Topografia Antica e Fotogrammetria” (LabTAF) at the University of Salento and the “Soprintendenza Archeologica di Roma (SAR)” in the person of Dr. Patrizia Fortini. The study aims at compiling a completely photographic corpus and at finding a punctual dating of the single rises. To this

History of Military Aerial Photographs in Italy and Addressed Archives

167

used in archaeology, so they gain, in our opinion, an important documentary value concerning the experimental techniques and the methodologies used at the end of the century. These techniques and methodologies were available to the “newborn” archaeological science because of the experimentations and the theorizations that were realized in those same years by the Italian military environment, even if initially exclusively used for tactical and defensive purposes (Chiusano and Saporiti 1998: 11-16, 171-173, Volpe 1980: 5572). The first Photographic section of the Italian army was established on 1 April 1896, when it was included into the Brigata Specialisti, at the Aerostatic section of Castel S. Angelo in Rome, only three years after Boni’s first aerial photo of the Roman Forum (Lodi 1976: 29-44). Because archaeological research established the first field of civil application of the new aerial photographic technique, we do not have to be amazed at the contemporary nature of the military and archaeological applications of the aerial photograph. From the start, the two disciplines have been inextricably linked, which is also demonstrated by the presence of archaeological aerial photos – of the Roman Forum and the Palatinum – in two of the most important aerial topographic manuals at the beginning of the 20th century: Ranza’s (Ranza 1907)3 photographic manual of the year 1907 and, a few years later, Tardivo’s manual (Tardivo 1911)4; both works have a scientific character, because they were written by a lieutenant and a corporal of the Italian army, respectively. To understand this strong relationship better, we can remember the subjects that are represented in the frescos decorating the walls of the first-floor hall of the villa Mellini. In this period, the villa was the headquarters of the photographic section of the Brigata Specialisti (Lodi 1981: 254-256).

 end, materials used range from Boni’s notes and designs through newspapers and bans of that period to documentation found in the archives. 3 The following archaeological aerial photos are included: right and left picture of table XIV, believed to represent the “Comizio”; right and left picture of table XV, “Roma, Palatino”; right picture of table XVO, “Foro Romano e Palatino”. 4 This photo, marked as “Pianta Topofotografica della Zona Archeologica di Roma. Esempio di unione di tre levate consecutive” shows a general view of the archaeological central area of Rome, which includes the Colosseum, the Palatinum and the Roman Forum.

168

Chapter Eleven

Fig. 11-1: Aerial image of the archaeological central area of Rome shot from the balloon during Boni's excavations (Panoramic of the Colosseum, Roman Forum and Palatinum)

Two activities of the survey presented here, consisting of fourteen scenes of military or topographical character, are of archaeological character – with the shooting of the Roman Forum – and the aerial photographs a little later, of the zone of the excavations in Pompei. The aerial photographs of the Roman Forum are not isolated examples in the general atmosphere of great technical and scientific fervour of those years; in fact they were soon followed by the flight on Pompei (1910) and Ostia (1911). It is still thanks to the initiative of the Ministero della Pubblica Istruzione (MPI) and to the technical support of the 3rd Brigata Specialisti of the Genio Militare, under the leadership of the Captain Maurizio Moris

History of Military Aerial Photographs in Italy and Addressed Archives

169

(Pesce 1994), that we have the aerial shots of the Pompeian archaeological area. These shots were taken in August 1910 with the aim of obtaining a map with a detailed scale, which proved to be useful for studying and documenting the finished and planned excavations in the area of the old city (Stefani 2008). Dante Vaglieri (Olivanti 2002) has also proven to be an unquestioned protagonist of the beginnings of archaeological aerial photography in Italy; thanks to his far-seeing work, a balloon survey was executed in the archaeological area of Ostia, just one year after the Pompeian episode, (see Fig. 11-2). In that period the area was little more than a desolate a field of ruins (Shepherd 2007). Vaglieri was elected director of the excavation in 1907. He had the support of the advanced techniques and the qualified staff of the Genio Militare. In May 1911 he could use the new means of topofotografia dal pallone (as it was theorized in the same year by Cesare Tardivo) to document the excavations in Ostia and to place the old and the new discoveries realized in this area. In conclusion, the contribution from the Italian military environment to the development of the aerial photograph and to its successive employment in non-military disciplines appears obvious to anyone who follows, also briefly, the vicissitudes associated with the birth and the development of the archaeological aerial photograph in Italy (Ceraudo 2004: 47-68).

The period between the two wars: Giuseppe Lugli No outstanding figures can be mentioned in the Italian scientific panorama between the First and Second World War, with the exception of Giuseppe Lugli (Colini 1968: 161-164, Romanelli 1968: 57-59). He was a convinced supporter of the usefulness of the aerial shooting in the archaeological field, and already in the autumn of 1920 he used the “osservazioni dirette” from the airship, during studies in Domiziano’s villa on the Albani Hill, in an attempt to define the position of the docks on the sides of the Albano Lake.

170

Chapter Eleven

Fig. 11-2: Aerial view of the Ostia excavations shot from the balloon in 1911

Lugli (1890-1968) performed a flight with the Roman airship (the twin of the “Italia” airship) to 800 metres above the river basin of the lake, after having contacted the Ministry of War and after receiving the support of his master Rodolfo Lanciani (senator in those days), Unfortunately, this experiment, which was among other things anomalous for the absence of photographic shootings, remained an isolated experience.

History of Military Aerial Photographs in Italy and Addressed Archives

171

The year 1938 officially marked the resumption of the studies on the archaeological air photograph in Italy when Lugli held a presentation on L’importanza della fotografia aerea negli studi di topografia archeologica (Lugli 1940: 143), on the occasion of the Fifth National Congress of Roman Studies. During this conference, there was a voting to start regular aerial explorations, including those in Italy, similar to other votings which had been held or were still being held in other European countries5. The principal program could be formulated thanks to the collaboration of the Air Ministry. The main results of these programmed studies were presented on the occasion of the First International Conference of Photogrammetry, held in Rome in September 1938 (Lugli 1939). However, these activities were abruptly interrupted by the explosion of the Second World War. Between the two world-wide conflicts, the role of the Italian studies appears to be rather marginal, at least until the Fifties, in spite of the pioneering experimentations of Boni and Vaglieri, made exception for Lugli’s applications. They did not succeed in outlining plans regarding aerotopographyical research of any type in a continous and methodical manner; this can certainly be attributed to the explosion of the Second World War, but probably also to several existing difficulties of communication between the military organs and the academic world of that time. Even though the Second World War interrupted the ongoing research, it also produced an enormous amount of photographic material taken for the military recognitions. As a result, this type of studies was greatly stimulated without any pioneering residual.

 5

In this regard, we have to remember that 1939 - the following year - marks the first emanation of the “Regio Decreto” 22nd July -XVII 1939, n. 1732. This decree, which concerns the aerial shootings, remained in use until December 2000, when it was replaced by DPR 29 September 2000, n. 367. As a result, the restrictive and anachronistic norm in this decree was completely changed. Furthermore, the frontiers of the aimed flights at a low altitude in Italy were opened, and the shootings of oblique images were allowed.

172

Chapter Eleven

Main archives and collections of Italian aerial photography The existing corpus of images from that period is guarded in the two most important aerial photographic archives in Italy: the “Istituto Geografico Militare” in Florence and the “Aerofototeca Nazionale” in Rome (Piccarreta and Ceraudo 2000: 189-192).

Istituto Geografico Militare (IGM) The Istituto Geografico Militare of Florence, which was officially constituted in 1882, contains the greatest collection of aerial photos of our country. The IGM has three main institutional tasks: (1) to perform a systematic survey of aerial photos of the aerial photogrammetric type, (2) to conduct topographical surveys and (3) to supply to the production of the official cartography, on an average scale and on a small scale. The aerial photogrammetric survey of the national territory is performed every five years – although not always this regularly – and it is used to the writing and the modernization of the map of Italy on several scales. Thanks to these institutional tasks, the IGM has been able to constitute, in the course of time, the greatest existing aerial photographic archive in Italy: the cover of the entire national territory is formed in a particular manner, namely on the basis of black and white vertical aerial pictures of traditional format 23x23 cm, taken from the years between the World Wars until today. In the archaeological field, photos taken before or during the Second World War are sometimes of the utmost importance. They consist of glass plates of unusual format 13x18 or 20x20 cm as well as of films of large format 30x30 cm; these cover a chronological arc that goes from 1942 to 1953. The so-called ‘flight basic’ of biennium 1954-55 turns out to be an indispensable instrument for all the topographical studies on the territory. These aerial images, realized for the greater part with machinery (aircrafts and photogrammetric cameras) and the American operator, considering the post-war situation in Italy, can be considered as irreplaceable documents.

History of Military Aerial Photographs in Italy and Addressed Archives

173

The photos revealed the Italian territory as it appeared before or during the great agrarian transformations carried out from the beginning of the Fifties onwards. This period witnessed the introduction of powerful mechanical means which were useful when working in the fields. In subsequent years especially the coasts and the city periphery were modified and distorted by the devastating process of cementation. Comparing the so-called “historic” flights with successive ones allows us to establish in detail the transformations of the landscape throughout time, which has proven to be of great documentary value.

Aerofototeca Nazionale (ICCD) During a Convention in Paestum in 1954, the archaeologists present at the meeting proposed to set up a centre of collection and study of the aerial photographic material. At the end of 1958, the “Aerofototeca Nazionale” in Rome was born, thanks to the agreement between the Aeronautical Defence Ministry and the Ministry of Education. The ICCD was a detached section of the National Photographic Cabinet (Boemi 2003: 17-42). Dinu Adamesteanu (1913-2004), one of the archaeologists who promoted the initiative, was asked to direct the new office (Giardino 2004: 15-36). That more did the best for the birth of the enterprise. He strongly advocated the use of air photographs in the field of archaeological research. The discoveries in those years made the aerial photograph widely known as the irreplaceable means for archaeological research. Moreover, some competent organs of the Aeronautical Defence Ministry had become widely available. Both events enabled the creation of the Aerofototeca Nazionale, whose aim was to collect and produce photographic material of fundamental importance for the study and the safeguard of the territory and of the architectonic remains that can be found in this territory. From 1964 to 1990 the Direction of the Aerofototeca Nazionale has been entrusted uninterruptedly to the archaeologist Giovanna Alvisi, who not only monitored the general progress of the Office, but also perfected the traditional system of cataloguing the aerial photographic material, on whose basis a first statement of the computerized cataloguing has been given (Alvisi 1987).

174

Chapter Eleven

Under her direction, the interest has broadened from the archaeological field to the study of the territory in a global context, paying attention to the protection of the environment, the historical centres and the architectonic assets. As from 1973, as a result of the creation of the Ministry for the Cultural Assets and Environments, the National aerial photographic library became part of the Central Institute for the Catalogue and the Documentation, which was officially renamed as “Laboratory for Photo interpretation and Photogrammetry”. During nearly forty years, the Aerofototeca Nazionale could acquire numerous collections of aerial photographs with material of varied origin and with covers ranging from the first years of the 20th century until the present. However, the most interesting collection of the Aerofototeca Nazionale can be especially attributed to the collections of aerial photographs taken during the last world-wide conflict by the United State Air Force, during their permanence in Livorno, and by the English Royal Air Force, during their permanence in San Severo (Foggia). During the Second World War, the English flights of the RAF and the American flights of the USAAF were determining for the advance and the victory of the Allies. However, especially in southern Italy there were flights of the “Regia Aeronautica” (Regia Italian Air Force) (see Fig. 11-3) and of the German Luftwaffe, immediately after the disembarkation of the Allies in Sicily in July 1943. Today these same flights are historical witnesses to the condition/the state of the territory before the great infrastructural works and to the urbanization that, from the beginning of the Fifties, has often deeply altered the Italian agrarian landscape; images nearest, for absurdity, to which that had to be the ancient situation of the places that not to the modern truth.

Regia Aeronautica (Air Force) Since the independent constitution in Armed Forces (1923), it was decided to give every Italian army corps a group of aerial observation.

History of Military Aerial Photographs in Italy and Addressed Archives

175

The flight material was constituted of airplanes already used in the First World War; subsequently, they oriented on the formula of the aircraft for aimed employment. In 1943, the 310th Photographic Recognition squadron with photo panoramic machines was based in the new Macchi MC 205, in Guidona.

Fig. 11-3: The port of Brindisi in 1943; the upper part of the image shows the moored seaplane in ‘Seno di Levant’ (Regia Aeronautica aerial photograph)

Luftwaffe Some of the photographic recognitions, carried out by German aviation in Italy, were executed with German aircrafts of varied types, and were supplied to the German Aeronautical Direction still before the beginning

176

Chapter Eleven

of the conflict. At the end of the supplies, the Luftwaffe of the Italian Air Force counted 700 aircrafts of varied type, which had been yielded in a four-year period. The reconnaissances were therefore carried out on the national territory by German and Italian staff in the respective Armed Forces. The archives of the aerial photographic library contain a considerable number of images of the format 30 x 30 cm, generally taken after the disembarkation in Sicily. These images cover various strategic zones, such as ports and airports, in the south of Italy. Aerial photographs of the same format have been executed by the Aeronautical Direction with the same equipments and have been acquired from the office.

Royal Air Force (RAF) The photographic reconnaissance executed by English aviation on the Italian territory began on December 1942 and continued until the beginning of the hostilities. The fighting in North Africa was still on when high altitude reconnaissance flights from Malta started systematically, in order to prepare Italian actions on ports and cities. Already during the “night of Taranto”, when the English bombed and torpedoed the Italian fleet, the English reconnaissance was very active and precise. The RAF collection, transported from Puglia to Rome at the end of the world-wide conflict, was almost completely donated to the British School in Rome. Only in 1974 did they begin the practical for the cession in warehouse to the aero photographic library. One year later, a convention was held between the British Academy and the Central Institute for the Catalogue and the Documentation, on behalf of the Ministry of the Cultural Assets. All the material was transferred to the headquarters of the Aerofototeca Nazionale, thereby reconstituting the collection unit that had been divided in the first post-war period.

History of Military Aerial Photographs in Italy and Addressed Archives

177

Aerial photos, taken during several military missions carried out between 1943 and 1945, today constitute a unique and irreplaceable document for the study of a historical situation of the Italian territory. More specifically, these photos provide valuable information for particular moments in evolution of this territory, i.e. before the great city and agrarian transformations6. Aerial photographs of the RAF come from the Allied Air Force Base of San Severo (see Fig. 11-4) and, above all, concern the region of the central band of the Italian peninsula (see Fig. 11-5).

Fig. 11-4: Anglo-American Aerophotographic Centre near San Severo (Foggia) (RAF airphoto)

 6

The importance of this photographic material for the studies of ancient topography in Italy is highlighted by the exhibition, with the relative catalogue, which was organized in Rome in 1980 thanks to the Central Institute for the Catalogue and the Documentation of the Ministry for the Cultural Assets. This exhibition was entitled: “L’aerofotografia da materiale di guerra a bene culturale, le fotografie aeree della RAF” Alvisi G. (1987) La conservazione della memoria storica del territorio: gli archivi fotografici, cartografici e la catalogazione. Atti della II Conferenza nazionale di cartografia e informazione territoriale169-179..

178

Chapter Eleven

 Fig. 11-5. Bombardment effects of Cassino and Montecassino, 15/03/1944; at the top the ruins of the Abbey, on the left the rests of the theatre and the amphitheatre of the ancient Roman city of Casinum (RAF air photo)

The flight missions of the RAF maintained high quotas to approximately 27,000 feet, in order to avoid the anti-aircraft. Furthermore, these missions used 24-inch focals for the larger scales of approximately 1:10.000 as well as 6-inch focals for scales of approximately 1:50.000, with the aim of placing the territory. The airplanes used were generally Spitfires and Mosquitos; they ascended from the makeshift airports of the Tavoliere delle Puglie to photograph the effects of the previous attacks.

History of Military Aerial Photographs in Italy and Addressed Archives

179

These images document those zones in which the English military missions were directed. These missions took off from the numerous makeshift airports which were dislocated in the Tavoliere. The aerial photographs taken during the conflict by the English aeronautic, which had a second operating Air Force Base in North Africa, are practically disowned and no longer used in Italy; missions left from here for the southern regions and the larger islands belonging to Italy. At the end of the war, all this material ended up in England: five million frames that focused mainly on the territories of Western Europe, the Mediterranean basin and the northern coasts of Africa.

United States Army Air Force (USAAF) The war events that regard the operativeness of the USAAF in Italy began with the preparation of the Allied Forces for the invasion of Sicily. In the spring of 1943, the strategic reconnaissance unit of the USAAF begins a remarkable activity, necessary to the preparation of the established disembarkation to Washington in the ‘Conference of the Tridente’, as compromise between Roosevelt’s and Churchill’s desiderata in forecast of the disembarkation in Normandy. The aerial photographic material of the USAAF is of the greatest historical and documentary value because it represents part of the Italian territory, especially the central-northern regions, before the great transformations during the post-war period. In March 1964, aerial images were received on deposit from the American Academy of Rome. Because they are still kept in packing cases at present, they are not available for consultation. These images generally refer to the year 1945 and especially cover zones in North Italy, on more important purposes, even if there are also American shootings on cities in central Italy (see Fig. 11-6).

180

Chapter Eleven

 Fig. 11-6. The town of Alife in two USAAF vertical photos dated October 1943, before and during an aerial bombing of the Allied Forces. Below the pictures: the reports with the objectives and outcomes of the mission, written on the back of the photos

In the Sixties and Seventies a series of flights purposely executed by the Air Force guaranteed aerial shootings of archaeological zones to destruction risk and enriched the patrimony guarded by the aerial photographic library, which currently is the greatest existing civil aerial photographic archive in Italy. From the beginning of 1990, the Aerofototeca Nazionale was directed by the architect Mariella Boemi7; one of the numerous initiatives launched in these years that is definitely worth mentioning is the inauguration of a great exhibition titled “Icaro’s glance: the collections of the National aerophotographic library for the knowledge of the territory” (Guaitoli 2003). This Exhibition was held in Rome in May 2003. The Exhibition and the contemporary publication of the catalogue were realized thanks to the collaboration between the ICCD, the Istituto di Beni

 7

We offer our sincere thanks to Mariella Boemi, director of the Aerofototeca Nazionale, for her availability and her enormous liberality in allowing us to examine the aerial images in the Institute.

History of Military Aerial Photographs in Italy and Addressed Archives

181

Archeologici e Monumentali (IBAM – CNR) of Lecce and the Faculty of Beni Culturali at the University of Salento. They constituted an important moment for the archaeological air photograph in Italy. The research and study of LabTAF at the University of Salento have borne fruit in recent years in a variety of initiatives, including publishing reports that are important for the birth of the first Italian scientific review. This review, entitled "Aerial Archaeology”, is entirely dedicated to archaeological aerial photography. Studies of Archaeological Aerotopography exited the first two numbers, respectively in 2004 (Ceraudo and Piccarreta 2004) and 2007 (Ceraudo and Piccarreta 2007). This review, unique in its kind in Italy, fills the gap of the specific sector of Italian archaeological research. It will deal with various subjects: from the history of the studies conducted by the pioneers, through contributions of methodology and applications of archaeological photo-interpretation and works of oriented photogrammetry, to the latest specialistic applications linked to the new remote sensing technologies.

References Alvisi G. (1987) La conservazione della memoria storica del territorio: gli archivi fotografici, cartografici e la catalogazione. Atti della II Conferenza nazionale di cartografia e informazione territoriale169-179. Bandinelli R.B. (1965) Boni Giacomo. Enciclopedia dell’Arte Antica, 6, 764-767. Boemi M.F. (2003) L’Aerofototeca Nazionale. In: Guaitoli M. (Ed.) Lo sguardo di Icaro: le collezioni dell’Aerofototeca Nazionale per la conoscenza del territorio. Campisano Editore, Rome: 17-42. Boni G. (1900) Rilievo eseguito dalla R. Scuola d’applicazione degli ingegneri di Roma, nell’area compresa fra il Colosseo e il Tabulario, Notizie degli Scavi di Antichità. 220-229. Ceraudo G. (2004) Un secolo e un lustro di fotografia aerea archeologica in Italia (1899-2004). Archeologia Aerea. Studi di aerotopografia archeologica. 1. Ist. Poligrafico dello Stato, Rome: 47-68. Ceraudo G. & Piccarreta F. (Eds.) (2004) Archeologia Aerea. Studi di Aerotopografia Archeologica. 1. Ist. Poligrafico dello Stato, Rome. Ceraudo G. & Piccarreta F. (Eds.) (2007) Archeologia Aerea. Studi di Aerotopografia Archeologica. 2, Ist. Poligrafico dello Stato, Rome. Chiusano N. & Saporiti M. (1998) Palloni, dirigibili ed aerei del Regio Esercito, 1884-1923. Ufficio Storico SME, Rome.

182

Chapter Eleven

Colini A.M. (1968) Giuseppe Lugli. In: Rivista Italiana di Archeologia 15: 161-164. Giardino L. (2004) Omaggio a Dinu Adamesteanu, Archeologia Aerea. Studi di Aerotopografia Archeologica. 1. Ist. Poligrafico dello Stato, Rome: 15-36. Guaitoli M. (Ed.) (2003) Lo sguardo di Icaro: le collezioni dell’Aerofototeca Nazionale per la conoscenza del territorio. Campisano Editore, Rome. Iacopi I. (2003) Giacomo Boni. In: Capodiferro P. & Fortini P. (Eds.) Gli scavi di Giacomo Boni al Foro Romano. Documenti dall’Archivio Disegni della Soprintendenza Archeologica di Roma. 1, Rome: 9-29. Lodi A. (1976) Storia delle origini dell’aeronautica militare 1884-1915. Ateneo & Bizzarri, Rome. —. (1981) Il volo a Roma. s.n., Rome. Lugli G. (1939) Saggi di esplorazione archeologica a mezzo della fotografia aerea. Rome. —. (1940) L’importanza del rilievo aereo negli studi di topografia archeologica. Atti del V Congresso Nazionale di Studi Romani. 2, Rome: 143. Olivanti P. (2002) Dante Vaglieri alla direzione degli scavi di Ostia Antica (1908-1913). In: Bruun C. & Zevi A.G. (Eds.) Ostia e Portus nelle loro relazioni con Roma. Institutum Romanum Finlandiae, Rome: 270289. Pesce G. (1994) Maurizio Mario Moris: padre dell'aeronautica italiana. Gaeta. Piccarreta F. & Ceraudo G. (2000) Manuale di aerofotografia archeologica. Metodologia, tecniche e applicazioni. Edipuglia, Bari. Ramieri A.M. (1983) L’archeologia in Roma capitale: le scoperte, i metodi e gli studi. In: Sartorio G.P. & Quilici L. (Eds.) Roma capitale 18701911. L’archeologia in Roma tra sterro e scavo. Giuseppina Pisani, Venezia: 18-29. Ranza A. (1907) Fototopografia e fotogrammetria aerea. Nuovo metodo per il rilevamento topografico di estese zone di terreno dall’alto. S.n., Rome. Reina V. & Barbieri U. (1904) Rilievo planimetrico e altimetrico del Palatino eseguito dagli allievi della Scuola d’applicazione per gli Ingegneri in Roma, Notizie degli Scavi di Antichità. s.n., s.l. Romanelli P. (1968) Giuseppe Lugli. In: Studi Romani 12: 57-59. Sartorio G.P. (1983) Tra antiquaria e archeologia. In: Sartorio G.P. & Quilici L. (Eds.) Roma capitale 1870-1911. L’archeologia in Roma tra sterro e scavo. Giuseppina Pisani, Venezia: 13-17.

History of Military Aerial Photographs in Italy and Addressed Archives

183

Shepherd E.J. (2007) Il “Rilievo topofotografico di Ostia dal pallone” (1911). Archeologia Aerea. Studi di aerotopografia archeologica. 2: 15-38. Stefani G. (2008) Il Rilievo topofotografico di Pompei del 1910. Archeologia Aerea. Studi di aerotopografia archeologica. 3. Tardivo C. (1911) Manuale di fotografia, telefotografia, topofotografia dal pallone. s.n., Torino. Vaglieri D. (1903) Gli scavi recenti al Foro Romano. In: Bullettino della Commissione Archeologica Comunale di Roma 31: 3-239. Volpe N.D. (1980) Fotografie Militari. Stato Maggiore Esercito Ufficio Storico, Rome. Zicavo E. (1928) Notizie storiche sulla specialità aerostieri e fotografi del genio del R. Esercito italiano. s.n., Rome.



CHAPTER TWELVE THE INTERPRETATION OF GREAT WAR AIR PHOTOGRAPHS FOR CONFLICT ARCHAEOLOGY & OVERVIEW OF THE BELGIAN ROYAL ARMY MUSEUM’S COLLECTION BIRGER STICHELBAUT Introduction After the first Battle of the Marne (5-11 September 1914), the character of the First World War changed from a war of movement into a stalemate in the trenches. The strength and possibilities of the new air weapon were soon recognised. Pilots and observers became the eyes of the army, a role up until then only filled by the cavalry and espionage. The almost industrial outputs of aerial photographs, gathered over four years time, survived in large quantities and archival collections are spread out all over Europe, the United States and even Australia. In this paper we offer detailed insight into the largest collection of air photos in Belgium, which can be found at the Belgian Royal Army Museum in Brussels (KLM-MRA). In our opinion gaining accurate and thorough insights into the composition and content of archives is of the utmost importance for any kind of study depending on these images. The historical air photos of World War One have a variety of possible applications. First of all they can be of use to detect previously undetected archaeological sites as crop-, shadow- or watermarks. We can only benefit from the age of the pictures. This allows us to detect sites that may already have been destroyed. Their second use is to research past landscapes that are visible on the air photos. The possibilities are almost endless: for instance the study of woodlands, land-use, sand dunes, grassland and field boundaries at the beginning of the previous century and subsequent changes.

186

Chapter Twelve

The third, and perhaps even the most innovative aspect, is the application of the photos to gain a better understanding of the diversity, density and distribution of remains of World War One. The ensuing digital maps and inventories are an indisputably useful working document for the cultural management of this specific type of military heritage. But before it is possible to rely on such maps it is important to learn how to interpret these air photos in a modern context. Especially this (methodological) approach is the subject of a large part of this paper. But first of all the content of the KLM-MRA collection is explored to illustrate that it is possible to make large archives accessible using GIS.

Belgian Royal Army Museum (KLM-MRA) The collection of Great War aerial photographs, the Collection Photos Aériennes ’14-’18, at the KLM-MRA is the largest in Belgium. The majority of the air photos are taken by the Aviation Militaire Belge (AvMB), or the Belgian military aviation during the First World War. The history of how these pictures found their way to the museum is unclear. The vast amount of air photos and the organisation of the collection makes us believe it was bequeathed to the Photographic Service of the Belgian Army during the inter-war period. It is assumed that the pictures were donated (Moerenhout 2007) to the KLM-MRA shortly after its official foundation in 1923 (Koninklijk Legermuseum Brussel 2007). However, no written records exist at the museum to support this assumption.

Organisation and structure of the collection This KLM-MRA collection consists of 365 boxes of aerial photographs, containing 48,511 individual photographic prints. Despite its being the largest collection of historical aerial photographs in Belgium, its existence and huge potential is not widely known. Locating air photos is performed by means of a sizeable geographic card index, containing numerous place names along the Belgian front. In some cases this corresponds with an actual archival record which can be retrieved from the stack. The sum total of archived pictures for a place name is noted on the cards, accompanied by the nearest toponyms presented in the quarters of the compass. For the most part however these cards are only cross-references to other cards in the index. This complicated system has a bearing on the systematic research of the whole collection. Thanks to the consideration of the archival staff it was possible

The Interpretation of Great War Air Photographs

187

to examine the filing cabinets, enabling us to gain a clear understanding of the collection’s structure. The pictures are stored in 365 boxes, alphabetically classified under the heading of 1,935 place-names, which are reproduced from the captions of the air photos (for instance: Dixmude, Ferme de la Nouvelle Batterie, Carrefour Wagner, etc.). However this classification is ambiguous since the place-names can be divided in two separate classes. A first group, “the placenames only in use during 1914-1918” contains the names of cabarets, trenches, trench map references (for instance: Yser B 16.500, 47 N, Point 49 J) and war toponyms (mostly names of farms, crossroads and woods). These names were only in use during the conflict and do not exist anymore on modern maps. The second set we can name “modern names”, meaning they are not connected to the Great War and are often still in use. This group contains the names of villages, roads, canals, railroads and local place names such as brooks, hamlets, mills, bridges and hills. Most of the pictures are (near) vertical air photos. Panoramic and oblique pictures are also found but in lesser quantities. Unfortunately they are not stored in a separate way and are stored in the same boxes.

Problem with the KLM-MRA collection The collection of the KLM/MRA holds primarily aerial photographs made by the reconnaissance units of the Belgian Military Aviation during the Great War. As a consequence, the distribution of the pictures is broadly limited to the area between Nieuwpoort and Steenstrate. This is the frontline occupied by the Belgian armed forces and was divided into six front sectors (Nieuwpoort, Ramskapelle, Pervijse, Diksmuide, Lo and Steenstrate) (Debaeke 1998: 12). Sporadically British, French and some captured German pictures are to be found in the collection, but in small quantities only. The majority of the place names (58%) belong in the first group (19141918 place names). This creates a specific problem since these place names cannot be found on modern topographic maps. Therefore it is almost impossible to know the coverage of these aerial photographs. To solve this, a specific research project was set up to relocate all these place names on present cartographic records. While using contemporary trench maps of different scales, many of the historical names can still be traced. Because of the specifications of the research area, we directed our attention to Belgian trench maps or Plans Directeurs.

188

Chapter Twelve

Geographic content Methodology The final goal of the archival aspect is to create a quantitative and geographic distribution map of the entire air photo collection. To accomplish this goal, a GIS project is set up to integrate different cartographic sources; not only existing digital topographic maps but also a selection of scanned Belgian trench maps. To combine these informational layers in their proper position with correct scales, the paper maps need to be scanned and georeferenced. In order to accomplish this: “a number of locations with known coordinates must be identifiable on the map or image, referred to as ground control points”(Conolly and Lake 2006: 86). In our case study four to six ground control points (GCPs) such as crossroads and churches were selected on both the scanned historical trench maps and present-day topographic maps. Through a first-order polynomial transformation the trench map was integrated in the GIS. This process involved three operations: translation, scaling and rotation (Conolly and Lake 2006: 87); resulting in a georeferenced map in the same coordinate system as the existing scanned topographic maps. The trench maps used are: Plan Directeur Armée Belge, Nieuwpoort 1:20,000 (1 July 1918); Plan Directeur Armée Belge, Dixmude 1:20,000 (01 March 1918) and Armée Belge Plan Directeur, Merkem 1: 10,000 (1 October 1916). These data were supplemented by a number of photographed trench maps originating from the considerable cartographic collection at the KLM-MRA. The next phase consisted of meticulously exploring the cartographic data in search of the 1,935 place names with photographic coverage. Several difficulties were encountered. First of all, many of both the “modern” and “1914-1918” record names were not found on any of the historical and current topographic maps. Secondly there were multiple possibilities for the location of some individual toponyms (for instance: Hoekstraat, Kaphoek, etc.) and finally some only referred to common names of mills, brooks and roads (for example: Molentje (mill), Kruiststraat (cross road), etc.) for which there were multiple options. On the one hand we had a database with place names, the sum of aerial photos per place name, a box number and a unique ID number for each record. On the other we had an integrated GIS in which we had to plot

The Interpretation of Great War Air Photographs

189

these locations as point locations. Through a simple “Join” command in ArcView we were able to link both types of data and hade a graphic idea of the distribution of all the toponyms for which air photos are available. An additional challenge was the occurrence of French and Dutch villages, of which 36 could be located. With an eye to consistency, we wanted all information on a single map in the same coordinate system (projected Belgian Lambert 1972). The foreign villages were looked up using Google Earth and afterwards projected and converted to fit the Belgian coordinate system. This method allows to combining cartographic data originating from different software and/or formats to be integrated in GIS. Our research allowed locating 1,371 (= 71%) of the 1,935 place names that were indexed. When we look at the ratio between located toponyms and the absolute number of aerial photographs, this figure looks even more successful. The 1,371 located place names correspond to 42,841 prints of air photos, which is 88% of the whole collection.

Geographic distribution of the air photos As expected, the majority of the KLM-MRA air photos is pinpointed in Belgium. Hardly 311 aerial photographs are located in France (0.73%) and only 18 in the Netherlands (0.04%). Most of the air photos are situated in the front area between Nieuwpoort and Middelkerke in the north and Langemark-Poelkappelle in the south. The municipalities with most aerial photos within their boundaries are: Diksmuide (9,271), Houthulst (6,600), Middelkerke (5,178), Langemark-Poelkapelle (4,285), Nieuwpoort (2,460), Ieper (1,510), Staden (1,233) and Kortemark. This overview might however give a simplified idea because the surface area has not been taken into account. A better approach is dividing the amount of air photos in each village by its surface area. This way we obtained a balanced overview of the density of aerial coverage at the Belgian-German front expressed in air photos per km². The most densely covered community then becomes Houthulst (117.78 air photos per km²), followed by LangemarkPoelkapelle (80.68/km²), Nieuwpoort (79.42 km²) and Middelkerke (68.13 km²). It has to be clear however that these numbers are only indications and give an approximation of reality, for the real coverage of an aerial photo is not delimited by community borders. It is naturally conceivable that aerial photographs cover parts of different municipalities. Strategic reconnaissance missions were carried out frequently, mostly by special squadrons and escadrilles (Finnegan 2006: 119). It is however

190

Chapter Twelve

interesting to see the range of this specific type of photoreconnaissance missions. There is almost an abundance of sources available, even for areas up to 40 kilometres away from the static front zone in WestFlanders. Fig. 12-1 shows both the density of aerial photos in the front zone communities as well as the distribution well behind German lines. Equally remarkable is the coverage in the borderzone between the Netherlands and Belgium, probably taken to monitor the German Hollandstellung. This was an almost continuous line of field defences and concealed bunkers in case the Netherlands would violate neutrality (Van Eyndhoven 2008).

Fig. 12-1: Distribution of air photos of the KLM-MRA collection in Belgium and France

48,511 unique air photos? Our counts indicate a collection of approximately 48,500 aerial photographic prints at the KLM-MRA (Collection Photos Aériennes ’14’18). By applying GIS techniques it becomes possible to come to conclusions about the distribution and density of the air photo coverage.

The Interpretation of Great War Air Photographs

191

There is however a major limitation we have to bear in mind: the presence of multiple photographic prints of the same negative. Glass negatives of air photos were printed in large numbers and the demand for air photos in different army units was high (Vrancken 1999: 166). Probably a large quantity of prints of these negatives survived and is now know as the Collection Photos Aériennes ’14-’18. As a consequence, some prints are duplicates and will be found in several boxes with different place names. Without collecting information on every printed air photo it is impossible to know with certainty the number of unique prints. On the other hand we can make a reasonable assumption about the quantity of Belgian Great War APs, using different sources: autobiographical documents of World War One aerial photographers and some historical sources. The commander of the Belgian aerial photographic service at the Moeren aerodrome, Capitaine Jaumotte, mentiones expressly more than 15,000 perfectly exposed negatives on his airfield, which were printed several times (Jaumotte 1919: 163). At a later stage a second photo department was operational, led by Commandant d’Hendecourt (d'Hendecourt 1935), for which no absolute numbers of printed air photos are available. By combining the output of both photographic services, we come to a sum of circa 20,000-25,000 different negatives. When we examine the research of the Belgian Fardes Journalières at the KLM-MRA, research carried out by author Walter Pieters, we see these numbers substantiated. Pieters has evidence of at least 1,467 different photographic reconnaissance flights, carried out between 6 August 1914 and November 1918 by the AvMB (Pieters 2007). For 34% of these photo-reconnaissance flights the minimum amount of pictures taken was mentioned, leading towards an average of at least 12.7 per mission. It seems not unreasonable to extrapolate this number to a minimum of 19,000 different negatives. This number corresponds well to the data of Capitaine Jaumotte. A final remark concerns the comprehensiveness of the collection. The question has to be asked whether the Collection Photos Aériennes ’14-’18 can be considered as the inheritance of an unreported collection of air photos which could have been compiled during the war. The compilation of the collection (along the total Belgian-German front) makes us believe it has to originate from a central department before being handed over to a photographic service. All the more because the geographic distribution

192

Chapter Twelve

exceeds divisional boundaries and any different sections in zones along the front.

Conclusion The Collection Photos Aériennes ’14-’18 at the KLM-MRA is a unique collection of historical aerial photos in Belgium. 48,511 APs are arranged in 1,931 record numbers linked to place names. At first sight the arrangement of the card index is difficult to fathom and does not stimulate accessibility. However, thanks to our GIS approach of the archival information it was possible to come to conclusions about the density and distribution of most (88%) of the air photos. In some municipalities there is a density up to 117 air photos per square kilometre, illustrating the size and importance of the collection.

The interpretation of Great War air photographs for conflict archaeology The second part of this paper focuses on an entirely different aspect of these aerial photographs: the interpretation of these images. In the following sections we aim to offer insight into different levels of interpretation which are possible when using Great War aerial photographs. We consider this aspect important because the level of experience in air photo-interpretation will have its effect on the results and accuracy of a study using these sources.

Comparative study of air photos A basic rule is to examine the pictures in relation to each other. Although a lot of information can be retrieved from a single air photo, much more can be retrieved by comparing multiple images. It is only when we compare different pictures that we see minor changes that provide us with detailed information on the nature, organisation and meaning of certain traces. The older the air photos are, the more traces can be seen that originate from the first months of war and document the beginning of WW1 trench warfare. When we take a look at more recent pictures, we can often document that these traces become less visible after a while and sometimes even completely disappear. This can have several causes, first of all overgrowth by vegetation, which makes traces blend in with the

The Interpretation of Great War Air Photographs

193

natural environment. Secondly, because of the destructive effect of artillery fire many features were destroyed. For this reason we should always start with the oldest pictures of 1915. Although these air photos are often very oblique or panoramic, the early war traces are clearly visible. These features can always be mapped using pictures which are more vertical (and easier to georectify). Following this logic, one should not be afraid to attach a provisional interpretation to certain traces. By looking at younger pictures the evolution of their visibility may change and a different interpretation might be added. This becomes even more complicated when for instance not only the visibility of a war features changes through time but also the functionality. This can be illustrated using Fig. 12-2 as an example.

Fig. 12-2: Comparative study of air photos (Source of the aerial photographs: KLM-MRA)

The above figure (Fig. 12-2) represents two different extracts from air photos of the same location, photographed on two distinct dates. The left image was taken on 30 September 1916, while the right image was photographed more than one and a half year later on 2 April 1918. This complex is situated near Langemark (Belgium). Up to the start of the Third Battle of Ypres the site is located almost 4 kilometres behind the first lines. As a result many gun positions of this period are spread in the immediate vicinity because it is located in the artillery zone. On (A) we can observe a German exercise trench system with fake shell holes. An

194

Chapter Twelve

exact date for the construction of the exercise trenches is not available, but 30 September can be considered as terminus ante quem. The distance from the frontline provided some security but it was definitely not out of reach of Allied artillery. This might have been intentional, to let newly arrived soldiers become accustomed to the continuous and awful battlefield noise. After the start of the Passendale Offensive the frontline came closer until at the end of October 1917 the area was occupied by Belgian troops (B). By this time the landscape was totally transformed and many of the early features became invisible. Only the most pronounced features such as the breastwork trench and parts of the road network can still be recognised. The function of this place on the battlefield changed drastically. From a relatively calm place behind the lines where German troops practised infantry tactics, it became the frontline area. The former practice trenches became the theatre of real fighting and they were occupied by Belgian troops. Some typical Belgian advanced posts (P.P.) can be observed on (B). The new frontline, indicated by a white dotted line, was deliberately abandoned by the Allies in April 1918 because of the German Spring Offensive. The area becomes again a part of the German hinterland and its function changes again for a couple of months until the final liberation offensive in September 1918. This example clearly shows the need of a comparative study of air photos to gain full understanding of the context and meaning of this small site on the battlefield. For instance, at the time of the first construction of the German training trenches somewhere in 1916, these were intended to practise trench warfare. At the time this system was incorporated into the Belgian line of defence on the right picture, the principles of trench warfare had changed. Instead of focusing on a continuous line of field defences, the new frontline consisted of a defence in depth where the main points of resistance were groups of strategically positioned bunkers in the landscape of mud and craters. In this aspect, it is paradoxical that the old entrenchment became incorporated into a new military doctrine. What the example also shows, is that some of the early traces from 1916 (such as the fake shell holes and some smaller trenches) are not any longer visible on the 1918 aerial photograph. This case study points to the importance of the interpretation of a variety of features in a comparative way with pictures of distinct dates. The trenches on (A) need to be correctly identified as a practise system, the same counts for the advanced listening posts. But what this examples teaches us most of all is that it is very difficult to interpret Great War aerial photographs without looking at their context. An interpretation of a

The Interpretation of Great War Air Photographs

195

back area will differ much from a front sector. Therefore this contextualisation should not be overlooked or forgotten.

Stereoscopy The interpretation methods and practices described in the above headings can be considered as the standard method for the interpretation of these historical air photos. Most pictures were analysed in this way. For an additional group of pictures, a second level of interpretation is possible. In many of the archives containing, stereopairs are available. This technique was an answer to the ongoing war between camouflaged artillery positions and air photo interpreters. Even now, these sources can give us additional information about the elevation of the terrain and war features. What we need is a stereo couple. These are two pictures taken successively at the same flight direction and altitude, ideally with a 60% overlap. Specialized software allows to create digital stereo views or anaglyphs (see Fig. 12-3). When we look at these with stereo glasses we can have a 3D-visualistaion of the terrain and the war features. This is a very useful aid for the interpretation and identification of breast worked trenches, bunkers and gun emplacements. This second level of interpretation (stereoscopy) is carried out using the PC-based GIS and Remote Sensing software package ILWIS 3.4. The result of the image processing is an anaglyph. Basically, the anaglyph superimposed the two images. The left image of the stereopair is displayed in red, the right image in green. The height differences on the overlapping part can be viewed using red-green glasses. Each of our eyes is only able to see the part of the perspective it is supposed to see. This occurs because these glasses, red for the left eye and green for the right eye, act as a filter. Our brain then combines these separate images and gives us a virtual view of the field elevation of both the terrain and of all features on the overlapping section of the aerial photos. This uncomplicated technique was applied where possible. As mentioned earlier, the majority of the studied air photos originate from KLM-MRA. Because of the classification system in use at the museum, many successive air photos are arranged in different boxes. This interferes with the retrieval of stereopairs. In spite of this, a considerable number of stereo pairs were obtained and used to create anaglyphs.

196

Chapter Twelve

It is interesting to mention that an elementary version of this technique was already used by the ground crews during the Great War. As such the method is nothing new. Finnegan describes that aerial interpreters used green and red lantern slides for adding additional stereoscopic effect. This slide projection was viewed with red and green spectacles (Chasseaud this volume and Finnegan 2006: 144).

Fig. 12-3: Example of an anaglyph

Digital photogrammetry We already described the two most current levels of modern interpretation of air photos. First, there is a comparative study of all air photos. A second level of interpretation applies to overlapping parts of successive air photos. The combination of these uncomplicated techniques is applied where possible. We can go even a step further with the interpretation and analysis of the Great War APs when a multidisciplinary approach is adapted. Using photogrammetric techniques, it becomes possible to reconstruct a historical landscape that now has already

The Interpretation of Great War Air Photographs

197

disappeared. Again, the availability of high quality stereopairs is an absolute necessity. This research focuses on the overlapping part of two successively taken air photos (see also Stichelbaut, Devriendt et al. 2005). In the framework of the European Culture 2000 project “European Landscapes: Past, Present and Future” and in cooperation with the Department of Geography (Ghent University- Prof. dr. Rudi Goossens and Dennis Devriendt) a digital surface model (DSM) created out of a hisotircal stereo pair. The technology and methodology of this project is not new and can be considered as a known photogrammetric technique. However, the innovative aspect of this case-study is that this technique is only rarely applied to substantially aged pictures whose camera parameters are unknown. The stereoprocessing of the old photographs was performed through a digital photogrammetric workstation (VirtuoZo). A DSM and corresponding orthophoto were generated from the stereomodel. This was calculated from the relative and absolute orientation of the historical photographs. The absolute orientation was based on ground control points (GCP) measured with a Pentax 9500 GPS (Global Positioning System) with an accuracy of 5 cm (without conversion of WGS84 to Lambert72). Finding good quality points from the old pictures in the field, 90 years later, proved to be a difficult task because of the destruction of the landscape by artillery fire, village expansion and re-allotments. Therefore, large redundancy was applied, to ensure that a minimum of six GCP’s could be identified and pointed accurately in the stereomodel. In general, the only suitable candidate points were corners of parcels. The orthophoto provided accurate geopositioning of the aerial photograph in GIS. This is also a true orthorectification and photogrammetric restitution of the overlapping part of the stereopair. The image can be considered as a map since all geometric transformations were adjusted. Just as important is the derived DSM. This allowed to reconstruct and visualise the past landscape in three dimensions. The example studied clearly shows the difference between the (1.50 m above ground) breast worked trenches and more concave features. The DSM also allowed measuring the z-value of every single point, therefore adding new valuable information on the construction of these war features. The research area is the location of a German third line breastworked trench system. The construction was finished in the first months of 1915 and it remained in use until the final offensive at the end of 1918. On the

198

Chapter Twelve

orthophoto (See Fig. 12-4) we can see a clear trace of the breastworked trench. It runs from north to south with a significant curve in its direction. This specific trench had both semicircular and square traverses, something which is not current in the research area. At regular intervals, four smaller zigzag communication trenches are noticed, leading towards a second fighting trenches, which is significantly less well visible on the AP. Westwards of the main trench, we can observe two more or less parallel and darkly coloured strips. These area barbed wire entanglements, even the individual poles can be noticed at some spots. Also interesting to notice are a couple of diagonally oriented features in the centre of the picture. These can be identified as abandoned gun emplacements, an inexperienced photo-interpreter might easily identify this as another trench. Possibly these were constructed this way as a form of early camouflage. This orthophoto is an excellent example of the high quality and usefulness of pictures of a snow-covered landscape. The snow reveals much more detail than would otherwise be possible.

Fig. 12-4: Generated orthophoto

The orthophoto enables us to measure the length and width of features. This revealed that the breastwork of the main trench has a diameter of

The Interpretation of Great War Air Photographs

199

more than 19 metres! The barbed wire entanglements are on the other hand only 5 to 8 metres wide. The DSM (See Fig. 12-5) also provides some interesting results. A first important observation is that we can clearly follow the trace of this trench on the height model. This means the breastwork of this trench had a significant elevation in the landscape of approximately 1.5 metres high. Additionally, we can notice small depressions along the end of the breastwork. These are interpreted as the borrow pits which were needed for the construction of the large earthen breastwork. These are mostly present on the backside of the main trench. Remarkably, we can also identify the locations of some individual gun pits, which would be hard to detect with purely visual interpretation. In the upper part of the picture, we can also see the outlines of a medieval moated site.

Fig. 12-5: DSM of the studied area

Equally interesting is the trace of this trench, which exactly followed the contour lines of the micro topography. The natural landscape component on this site clearly dictated the outline. The trench was located in such a manner that it had a clear view of the slope towards the Belgian

200

Chapter Twelve

lines in the west. However, it was not constructed at the top of the hill because here its silhouette would stand out too much. The ditches of the moated site are also recorded on the DSM. Interpretations using both the orthophoto and derived DSM are even more accurate. For instance the linear feature in the top right of the DSM might easily be misinterpreted. In fact this is a line of trees. Because this is a digital surface model, also the elevation of the vegetation is calculated (opposite to for instance LIDAR data). This kind of information can only be recorded from the air photo and not on the DSM.

Mapping the conflict landscape This military war landscape can be optimally researched by combining early aerial imagery and modern cartographic techniques. Because of the large abundance of these resources, we are able to study multiple front sectors at a time, rather than use a site oriented approach. Using GIS, it becomes possible to re-map all the relevant war features to modern maps. These images provide us an unparalleled view of the density, distribution and diversity of all kinds of war features, many of which are not described in historical sources. Once air photos are correctly interpreted using different layers of interpretation, all visible features can be mapped or listed in the GIS. We will not give a technical overview of this method but we would like to point to some important thoughts on the subject. First of all, we believe it is scientifically necessary to record the utmost of information. Therefore all features need to be recorded as polygons instead of linear and point features. The reason for this is quite straightforward: the typology of trenches and other features can differ strongly and needs a detailed mapping. For instance only an inventory that records both the excavated part of a trench and the (perhaps) above ground parapet and parados can provide information on the typology of a particular trench. If an inventory only contains line features, literally a whole layer of information is neglected. A second capital blunder that could be made is to only record trenches. Although this type of features might be considered as inherent to the Great War and its archaeology, the air photos document a whole landscape thickly strewn with a variety of other features: for instance gun emplacements, huts, shooting ranges, training camps, trench railways, canvas screens, airfields and bunkers.

The Interpretation of Great War Air Photographs

201

Since we can consult many air photos (preferably of different dates) we can record the evolution of the trench system by adding termini post and ante quem to an inventory of war features. This adds an extra dimension to the GIS. The entire inventory contains an accumulation of all visible war features during the four years of the war. The time aspect, however, allows us to research when a certain type of features came in use or when the layout of a trench system was changed.

Conclusion Great War air photos are an often overlooked source for both the study of conventional and conflict archaeology. For many areas these pictures are the first air photos available and often they are covering large surfaces. Approximately half a million air photos are available for the Western front alone and can be found in a variety of archives and museums. These air photos are an underestimated source for a variety of applications. We believe that making them accessible for a broader scientific public should be a major objective in the next decades. A major application of the images lies in the research area of conflict archaeology. Using Great War aerial photographs, it becomes possible to digitally recreate or reconstruct the military landscape during WW1. No other source gives this amount of information. Even more important is the possible scale of aerial photographic research. Instead of a site-by-site approach, we can now study Great War landscapes and examine how it was organised.

References Anon. (1916) Photographic notes. London. Conolly J. & Lake M. (2006) Geographical Information Systems in Archaeology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. d'Hendecourt R. (1935) Heures inoubliables. Privately published. Debaeke S. (1998) Het Drama van de Dodengang. De Hel van het IJzerfront. De Klaproos, Koksijde. Finnegan T. (2006) Shooting the front. National Defence Intelligence College Press, Washington. Jaumotte J. (1919) Conférence du Commandant J. Jaumotte, du Genie. In: La Conquête de l’air. Bulletin Officiel de l’Aéroclub de Belgique 1919, 14: 163-166.

202

Chapter Twelve

Koninklijk Legermuseum Brussel (2007) Historiek van het museum. http://www.klm-mra.be/klmnew/nederlands/main01.php?id=amuseum/geschiedenis (07-01-2008). Moerenhout M. (2007) Personal communication concerning the origin of the KLM-MRA aerial photographic collection. Pieters W. (2007) Personal communication and unpublished research notes on the “Aviation Militaire Belge”. Stichelbaut B., Devriendt D., Goossens R. & Bourgeois J. (2005) Reconstructing the past: the use of digital photogrammetry and GPS measurement for the study of the 1914-1918 wartime landscapes. In: Lodewijckx M. (Ed.) Abstracts of the AARG Annual Conference 19-21 September 2005: 89. Van Eyndhoven H. (2008) Holland Stellung - AntwerpenTurnhoutstellung, het rechtersluitstuk voor de Hollandstellung. http://www.forten.info/catalogus/hollandstellung/hoofd.htm (11-012008). Vrancken L. (1999) De Geschiedenis van de Belgische militaire vliegerij, 1910-1918. Koninklijk Legermuseum, Brussel.



CHAPTER THIRTEEN WORLD WAR 1 BATTLEFIELDS OF THE YPRES SALIENT MAPPED AND ANALYSED WITH AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS. A CONFRONTATION WITH THE CURRENT LANDSCAPE AND ARCHAEOLOGY MATHIEU DE MEYER Introduction The Ypres Salient is one of the most notorious battlefields along the Western Front, in which German and Allied forces faced each other in a stalemate of trench warfare. Formed between the Second and the start of the Third Battle of Ypres, it soon became infamous. In 2001, some archaeological World War remains of this region were inventoried within the framework of a project that was undertaken by the Flemish Heritage Institute (V.I.O.E. – Vlaams Instituut voor het Onroerend Erfgoed). In 2004, this project was continued by the In Flanders Fields Museum (Ypres, Belgium). The initial project, led by the Flemish Heritage Institute, focused on archaeological sites that had come under threat. The northern half of the Ypres Salient, for example, was studied because there were plans to extend a motorway through this area. From 2004 onwards, the In Flanders Fields Museum concentrated on the inventory of its aerial photographs in the Ypres Salient: its mission was to reconstruct the First World War landscape of the complete salient by means of aerial photographs. The results were used in a major temporary exhibition in the museum called “The Last Witness”(de Meyer 2006c). The Second Battle of Ypres (22 April – 25 May 1915) was the second attempt by the Germans to conquer Ypres and is remembered because it was the first time poisonous chlorine gas was used on a large scale. In the

204

Chapter Thirteen

first couple of hours, the Germans advanced quite far. Within the gained territory they built an extensive and heavily fortified system of trenches, as did the Allied forces. After this heavy combat, the position of the front line stabilized and remained very much the same for the next two years to come. From that position, both sides continuously attempted to win ground but failed to consolidate the gained territory, thus leaving the situation more or less unchanged for the next two years. However, these small offensives and clashes still left their marks in the landscape. On 31 July 1917, the first day of the Third Battle of Ypres (31 July – 10 November 1917), the British broke through the enemy lines and advanced towards Paschendaele.

Projects of the Flemish Heritage Institute and the In Flanders Fields Museum The Flemish Heritage Institute and the In Flanders Fields Museum initiated several inventory projects, in which contemporary aerial photographs were used as an important source to assemble archaeological and historical information about the First World War. Every project needed a different approach, but basically four kinds of inventories can be distinguished: normal inventories, inventories of areas under threat, urgent inventories and thematic inventories. In 2001, a new project was started, which was called the Central Archaeological Inventory (CAI - Centrale Archeologische Inventaris). It aimed to map all known archaeological sites in Flanders. As First World War archaeology received more recognition, it became obvious that this war heritage should not be forgotten. The first battlefield inventory project was already carried out in 2001, when all known sites in the municipality of Houthulst were put in a database and in a Geographic Information System (GIS). The sites were divided into four categories: Prehistoric, Roman, Medieval and World War. The result was a map with over 1,000 different sites; deep dugouts, trenches, meter gauge railways and bunkers are some examples of the mapped infrastructure. Initially, trench maps were the main sources, but it soon became apparent that they did not render any satisfactory data. Although they were useful to obtain some basic information, there were too many mistakes and inaccuracies on the original wartime maps (de Meyer and Demeyere 2004: 131-132, Stichelbaut 2005, de Meyer 2006b: 49-51).

WW 1 Battlefields of Ypres Salient Mapped and Analyzed with Aerial Photographs

205

Aerial photographs, on the other hand, offered more reliable images than trench maps. Whereas the same trench is sometimes depicted in a totally different manner on different trench maps of the same period, the aerial photographs show a clear evolution in the appearance of the trenches. As a consequence, georeferenced aerial photographs soon became the major resource for World War inventory projects. This does not mean that trench maps were not used anymore, though; they are still an important source for particular cases. When an area is under serious threat on short notice, for example, there is no time to search for aerial photographs if the area has not been inventoried yet. In most of such cases, trench maps are used to get an idea of the situation. When an area is under threat, reserachers use as many different sources as possible. In that case, not only trench maps and aerial photographs are used; literature, regiment books, diaries, sketches from soldiers and several other types of archival documents also play an important role. This is necessary in order to paint a complete picture of what can be found in the threatened area. Such an approach was used in the A19 project and a project in Boezinge, for example. Finally, there are thematic inventories, in which specific sites are listed. An example are the deep dugouts, located with the use of “secret” army documents. Below we will focus on two major projects in which aerial photographs played a major role: the A19 project and the inventory of the Ypres Salient. But first we will examine the collection of the In Flanders Fields Documentation Centre, and the technique used to study the aerial photographs.

The collection of the In Flanders Fields Documentation Centre Besides a vast collection of German, British and Belgian photographs, the Documentation Centre possesses a marvellous collection of photographs, which were taken by lieutenant von Kanne, a German officer who died in 1916 when his plane was brought down during an reconnaissance flight. It is a rather small collection, but it is easily accessible, as all the photographs were put in a database which visitors of the centre can consult. In the future, the georeferenced images will also be available (de Meyer 2006a: 3-4).

206

Chapter Thirteen

The collection does not only contain images of the area around Ypres, but also of other regions in Belgium and France (Yser front, Bruges, Ghent, etc.). New material and additional information are constantly being added. The database offers about a thousand photographs for consultation. It is possible to search the images by a variety of codes attributed to them over the years, which include both the original references and any archival references that might have been added later. In addition, many other searches are possible: by pilot, observer, nationality, country, province, town, municipality, place name, trench map sheet reference, date, hour, altitude, etc. A number then enables you to quickly retrace the picture in one of the albums and, whenever available, in the GIS software (de Meyer 2006). In order to complete the research mentioned below, images from the Box Collection of aerial photographs in the Imperial war museum (London, UK) were also used.

Working with aerial photographs Using GIS computer software, the old aerial photographs were overlaid very carefully onto modern aerial pictures using the image warping technique. It is important to use the modern images as a reference layer (Fig. 13-1); cadastral and topographic maps are not particularly detailed or reliable. The Ypres Salient has been imaged as completely as possible – even minor frontline shifts have been properly documented. The comparisons between the old and new images is interesting, not only to study the battle, but also to study the evolution of the war landscape (de Meyer 2006a: 3-4, Stichelbaut 2006). Polygons, lines or dots can be drawn on top of the old photographs, and by removing the old images in the computer program, one gets a modern map with all the World War information on it (Fig. 13-2). Trenches, barbed wire, old field boundaries, battery positions and other structures can easily be located using this method (de Meyer and Pype 2006: 376-378)

WW 1 Battlefields of Ypres Salient Mapped and Analyzed with Aerial Photographs

207

Fig. 13-1: Historical air photograph projected on top of a modern orthophoto (20 July 1915). During the war this area was known as Bellewaerde Ridge and Menin Road. Now there is an amusement park with the same name on site (Source: In Flanders Fields Museum / Geo-Vlaanderen)

Although the technique may be modern, similar methods were already in use during the war to produce trench maps, discuss tactics and observe the frontline on both sides. Obviously, the newly obtained information is far more accurate and contains fewer errors. Nevertheless, the results obtained during the war were extremely impressive. A new medium was being developed and fine-tuned there and then, paving the way for modern aerial photography and its processing into geographically correct cartographic material (de Meyer 2006a: 3-4).

208

Chapter Thirteen

 Fig. 13-2: The trenches of the aerial photograph can be overlaid on top of the modern image (Source: In Flanders Fields Museum / Geo-Vlaanderen)

The A19 project Preliminary research In 2002, plans were revealed to extend the A19 motorway through the northern half of the Ypres Salient, between Sint-Juliaan and Bikschote. That same year, the Flemish Heritage Institute received a special commission from the Flemish Community to undertake a detailed archaeological evaluation of the area, also known as Pilkem Ridge. This project aimed to locate any remains from the War, determine whether or not they were human and evaluate the condition that they were in. Furthermore, it was supposed to assess the damage that the highway could inflict on the archaeological heritage. The Institute decided to proceed as they would for an excavation on a medieval site and use all available techniques. On the one hand, the minister wished to have a number of carefully selected areas excavated. On the other hand, he wanted a report about the significance of the region during the First World War (Dewilde, de Meyer et al. 2004, de Meyer and Pype 2006).

WW 1 Battlefields of Ypres Salient Mapped and Analyzed with Aerial Photographs

209

The projected path of the A19 would cross several important frontlines; not only the most famous Ypres Salient, established during the Second Battle of Ypres, but also the frontline which was created after the First battle of Ypres between 19 October and 22 November 1914. In April 1915, the Second Battle of Ypres commenced in the area; yet another new frontline was built. On 31 July, during the Third Battle of Ypres (Third Ypres / 31 July – 10 November 1917), British soldiers broke through the enemy lines. From then on, the area stayed in Allied hands. Aerial photographs were much used within the project, in order to make an inventory of the area. They were combined with fieldwalking campaigns, geophysical surveys, and a wide range of other sources. The oral history sources consisted of testimonies of people who were directly involved, their children, or the contemporary inhabitants of the region. Besides these, there were also many written sources (e.g. literature, archival documents, regimental books) as well as trench maps. First, the important trench line systems and infrastructures were mapped in a GIS using British and German trench maps and aerial images. These were used as a guide for the field walking campaign of the entire highway route (length: 7km/width: 100m). Several concentrations of material were mapped. Depressions in the fields were also registered in the GIS, because they could be the result of a collapsed deep dugout. In later projects, the field walking campaign was discontinued, as the study of the aerial photographs produced better and faster results. Aerial photography was common practice during conflicts from 1915 onwards, so for trenches dating from before 1915, maps and archival documents were more important (de Meyer 2004, de Meyer 2006b: 53-55, de Meyer and Pype 2006: 366). Based on this information, nine zones were selected in the autumn of 2002, on which extensive archaeological fieldwork would take place. Of each of these nine zones, a more detailed inventory was to be made based upon aerial photography and other sources (de Meyer 2006b: 55-60, de Meyer and Pype 2006: 366).

210

Chapter Thirteen

 Fig. 13-3: The projection of the A19 motorway on top of the British frontline near Sint-Juliaan, which was established during the Second Battle of Ypres. These photographs were taken four days before the start of the Third Battle of Ypres (Source: In Flanders Fields Museum, Flemish Heritage Institute and GeoVlaanderen)

Excavations Finally, six zones were excavated: Cross Roads, Forward Cottage, Turco Farm, Canadian dugouts, High Command Redoubt (Mauser Ridge) and the frontline near Bikschote. These excavations were carried out by the Flemish Heritage Institute, in some cases in co-operation with the No Man’s Land Team and the Association for World War Archaeology. A great deal of new information about the living conditions in the trenches and material culture was collected; any human remains were recovered and re-buried in one of the many war cemeteries in the area (Pype and De Gryse 2004).

WW 1 Battlefields of Ypres Salient Mapped and Analyzed with Aerial Photographs

211

The largest excavation site was Cross Roads. It was named after the nearby farm, which used to be called “Cross Roads Farm” by the Commonwealth soldiers. The place became important during the Second battle of Ypres when the Allied troops conducted counter-attacks against the Germans. The first trenches were dug at the end of April 1915. After the Second Battle of Ypres, the British frontline was dug in another direction and stayed there for two years until the Third battle of Ypres began (de Meyer and Pype 2004, Pype and De Gryse 2004, de Meyer and Pype 2006: 371-375). On site, the evolution of British trench construction could be mapped and analyzed. The oldest trenches (April - May 1915 in this case) did not contain any remains of systems to support the walls or the bottom. In one trench, some duckboards had been used cover the bottom. As that was not the best solution either, after a while soldiers started to pile up these duckboards to keep their feet and legs dry. At Cross Roads, three layers of duckboards were found on top of each other. Finally, the so-called inverted A-frame was introduced: a wooden structure with an inverted Ashape was put on the bottom of the trench. On top of the structure the duckboards were placed, so that the water and mud could run underneath them. At some places, where shellfire had destroyed the trenches, the duckboards had been repaired using bricks, stones and even stable-doors. Another evolution which was noticeable on site was the development from unconnected straight, shallow trenches to the typical deeper zigzag pattern trenches, with second and third battle lines and communication trenches. The walls of the trenches were sometimes covered with sandbags, chicken wire or corrugated iron. On some occasions, the sandbags could only be recognized through the textile impressions in the earth (de Meyer and Pype 2004: 19-43, Pype and De Gryse 2004, de Meyer and Pype 2006: 371-375). Trenches were of course not the only feature on the site; other excavated structures were ammunition depots, artillery platforms, food depots, a dugout frame, shelters and shell holes. Numerous artefacts were collected, mostly parts of standard combat equipment. These included uniform buttons, several copper buckles, fragments of the leather webbing, remains of peaked caps, regimental insignia and standard-issue spoons.1

 1

Other artefacts gathered on the site were the following: empty glass bottles, unused mortar bombs, mica eye lenses from gas respirators, blue water bottles, pocket-knives, razors, tooth-brushes, the handle of a shaving brush, entrenching

212

Chapter Thirteen

 Fig. 13-4: The Cross roads site during the excavations (Source: Flemish Heritage Institute)

The remains of five soldiers were also recovered from the Cross Roads site. Three of them were piled up on top of each other and had probably died during an attack. The equipment of two of these soldiers was very well-preserved. The remains of a fourth soldier were found completely scattered in a shell hole. The fifth individual was also found in a shell hole, but only two parts of his legs and a part of his skull were recovered (de Meyer and Pype 2004: 19-43, de Meyer and Pype 2006: 371-375).

 tools, standard Lee-Enfield rifles, standard 0.303-inch cartridges (and boxes filled with them), brass oil containers (one still filled), shovels, aniline pencils, medicine bottles, a complete French “Vermorel” sprinkler, rum jars, copper screw caps of petrol tins, small ceramic medicine jars, remains of candles, a iron hammer, pincers, nails, several pick-axes, cartridges from flare pistols, several dumps and loose examples of hand grenades, rifle grenades, shells, fragments of ceramic pipes, wellpreserved matches, parts of mouth organs and copper coins (de Meyer and Pype 2004: 19-43, de Meyer and Pype 2006: 371-375).

WW 1 Battlefields of Ypres Salient Mapped and Analyzed with Aerial Photographs

213

Dating the trenches Aerial photographs played a major role in the interpretation and study of the excavated structures. When the fieldwork was finished, the excavation plans and geophysical research were georeferenced in the GIS and compared with the inventory and aerial photographs. That way, the excavated trenches could be dated very precisely, as the different phases in trench building could be determined more accurately (see Fig. 13-5, for example). By means of the aerial photographs and some maps we could determine six different phases of trenches built in just a two-year period. Partly due to the results of this extensive archaeological research, the decision was made not to extend the A19. The new proposed route avoided the battlefields and frontlines almost completely.

The Last Witness project: the inventory of the Ypres Salient In 2004, the In Flanders Fields Museum took over the inventory project from the Flemish Heritage Institute. They did not regard it as an archaeological project, but incorporated it into a large temporary exhibition (“The Last Witness”) which was held in the museum in 2006. In this exhibition, the inventory was used to re-create the landscape as the last witness of the Great War. As most veterans and most people born during the war have passed away now, anyone who is interested in this period has lost all direct personal contact with these events. Those born during the war are now elderly, and only a minority of the visitors (less than 45% in the case of the In Flanders Fields Museum) have ever had the chance of personally meeting someone who was in the war. They are in search of another way to remember the war, and establishing some kind of relationship with the landscape is one way to achieve that (Chielens 2006, Chielens, Dendooven et al. 2006).

214

Chapter Thirteen

 Fig. 13-5: Plan of the excavation at Cross Roads, with the six different phases that were identified with by means of aerial photographs and some maps found in diaries and regimental books (Source: Flemish Heritage Institute)

A modern museum that uses a lot of personal witness accounts has the task of finding new ways to involve its audience in the way the former generations of visitors were involved. Thus, the IFFM has set out to put into context all objects it shows and all witness accounts it uses, in such a way that the visitors can relate to it in a direct and personal way. Hence, providing the visual context of this war landscape in the museum is a very important means to try and attain that level of personal involvement (Chielens 2006, Chielens, Dendooven et al. 2006). In order to compare the new landscape with the war landscape, the entire Ypres Salient was re-created using the aerial photographs and panoramic photographs. Film and photography from the period in general give us an idea of what the war was like, in which conditions it was fought, by whom and how. They give us an inside view into the historical

WW 1 Battlefields of Ypres Salient Mapped and Analyzed with Aerial Photographs

215

world, but they hardly provide any sense of relationship with today’s world. Military panorama photography and aerial photography, on the other hand, can visualize the historical context in relation to the presentday landscape that we can still visit (Chielens 2006, Chielens, Dendooven et al. 2006). In between the major battles, the area also provided the backdrop to many more minor actions and skirmishes, which all left their traces in the landscape and which were accurately registered by the “flying cameras”(de Meyer 2006). We examined the different phases of the war (between the second and third battle of Ypres) and illustrated them with aerial photographs and trench maps. The different battles (large and small) were reconstructed, along with their different trench systems. Historical research was carried out in order to map as many actions as possible. All the information about available photographs was first put in the database, before selecting the most qualitative and representative images of the different phases of the war in the area. Thousands of aerial photographs were taken of the area during the war, which now enables us to thoroughly study the Salient, and all the smaller movements on the frontline. As it was impossible and unnecessary to use every single picture that exists, about 300 images were finally selected to reflect all the different phases (Chielens, Dendooven et al. 2006: 143-146). Some places in the aerial photographs were difficult to identify, as they had almost completely been destroyed. Therefore, we first processed the oldest images, those from 1915. On those pictures, the landscape is still quite intact. Then, more recent images were processed and georeferenced based on the older aerial photographs. On the images from 1917, the landscape has changed drastically: field boundaries, roads, trees and even trenches have disappeared. By 1918 most of the Ypres Salient looks like a lunar landscape and is packed with shell holes and mine craters. The trenches of the old images can be copied in the GIS, and projected on top of the modern aerial photographs.

216

Chapter Thirteen

 Fig. 13-6: Overview of the georeferenced images in the Ypres Salient (Source: In Flanders Fields Museum, Flemish Heritage Institute and Geo-Vlaanderen)

From a historical point of view, the images revealed a lot: new information and insights could be gathered, known actions could be better understood. Some mine craters and frontline movements which were unknown until now, and which could be located and linked to other

WW 1 Battlefields of Ypres Salient Mapped and Analyzed with Aerial Photographs

217

specific actions, were discovered due to the research. With GIS we could overlay images of different eras, and show to the metre where and when which events took place. These layers of georeferenced aerial photographs allowed us to create a reanimation of today’s landscape with the tragic events of the war (Chielens 2006) (Fig. 13-1 & 13-2). Although the aerial photographs have now been used for a temporary exhibition, the goal of the In Flanders Fields Museum is to continue this work for a larger area and to use this material for the new permanent collection, which will be opened in 2012.

Conclusion The archaeology of the First World War poses unique challenges and utilizes resources that are not usually encountered in conventional archaeology. The availability of archival documentation, aerial photographs, trench maps, witness testimonies and innumerable contemporary accounts and war literature offer valuable information in locating and identifying any features that are found in excavations (Meyer and Pype 2006: 378380). The possibilities of aerial photographs are manifold: they are used nowadays to help with the reconstruction of the war landscape and with other types of historical research, but they are also useful for the study of archaeological heritage. When the Flemish Heritage Institute (VIOE) made a study of the Pilkem Ridge area – the possible shortcut for the A19 motorway – the archaeological inventory of the region relied heavily on aerial photographs processed by GIS software. The system is now put to further use in offering archaeological advice for future industrial or residential expansion projects. The information could even be integrated in the urban planning process. The emphasis will have to be on conservation and protection, but also on maintenance, information and sensitization. Finally, the inventory will be used in a more integrated manner for the management and protection of World War archaeological remains. The international importance of these remains was recognized when it was decided not to extend the A19 motorway. In addition, there are other, less obvious domains in which the pictures have proven to be useful. Ancient and forgotten medieval moats, for example, show up clearly on the pictures. Furthermore, there have been benefits for natural history and landscape interpretation. The photographs help explain the origin of specific ponds, or shed light on forestation and

218

Chapter Thirteen

parcelling. In many cases, these are the oldest known photographic records of villages, cities, houses and streets. In some cases, they are even the only known records. Trench maps were used during the several studies as an additional source of information. Although most of the information on these maps was originally based on aerial photography, we cannot say exactly how accurate they are. Nevertheless, they are good guides to study the battlefields and, more specifically, aerial photographs. Still, the photographs offer us a much more reliable image than the maps. In an ideal situation, the different types of sources should be combined in order to comprehend the whole story. However, there are some situations in which aerials are not helpful at all: time-pressure can be a problem, but also history. Older trenches can sometimes be found on the 1915 - 1918 imagery. However, in the Ypres Salient, many traces have disappeared on the pictures due to the fighting and the alteration of the landscape by incessant artillery shelling. In such cases, trench maps can be very useful. In the modern world, it is essential to show the results of the inventories and excavations to a broader audience. Thus, the approach used in “The Last Witness” was revolutionary. For the first time, the results of archaeological excavations were shown to the public in combination with modern displays about the evolution of the war landscape.

References Chielens P. (2006) Making use of military photographs (aerial and panorama) in a modern museum context. Oral paper at Military Aerial Photography and Archaeology 2006 Conference, Ypres. Chielens P., Dendooven D., Decoodt H. (Eds.) (2006) De Laatste Getuige. Het oorlogslandschap van de Westhoek. Terra - Lannoo, Tielt. de Meyer M. (2004) Deel 2: Historisch Onderzoek en inventarisatie (Unpublished document). —. (2006a) A Bird’s Eye View of the Ypres Salient. In: Flanders Fields Magazine 16: 3-4. —. (2006b) Inventarisatie van archeologische resten uit de Eerste Wereldoorlog en de mogelijkheden voor onderzoek naar sporen van andere conflicten: Battlefield Archaeology in West-Vlaanderen. De opbouw van een archeologisch beleidsinstrument, CAI 2, VIOE, Brussel: 43 - 74.

WW 1 Battlefields of Ypres Salient Mapped and Analyzed with Aerial Photographs

219

—. (2006c) Luchtfoto's uit de Eerste Wereldoorlog: vroeger en nu. In: Chielens P., Dendooven D. & Decoodt H. (Eds.) De Laatste Getuige. Het oorlogslandschap van de Westhoek. Terra - Lannoo, Tielt: 143146. de Meyer M. & Demeyere F. (2004) De inventarisatie van de gemeente Houthulst (prov. West-Vlaanderen). CAI I - De opbouw van een archeologisch beleidsinstrument CAI, IAP, Brussel. de Meyer M. & Pype P. (2004) The A19 Project. Archaeological Research at Cross Roads. Zarren. de Meyer M. & Pype P. (2006) Scars of the Great War (Western Flanders, Belgium). In: Scott D., Babits L. & Haecker C. (Eds.) Fields of Conflict, Battlefield Archaeology from the Roman Empire to the Korean War. Praeger Security International, Westport: 359-382. Dewilde M., de Meyer M., Pype P. & Demeyere F. (2004) A19 Deel 1: Synthese en evaluatie (Unpublished document). Pype P. & De Gryse J. (2004) A19 Deel 3: De opgravingen (Unpublished document). Stichelbaut B. (2005) Great War Aerial Photography, a contribution to the Flemish Battlefield Archaeology. In: Bourgeois J. & Meganck M. (Eds.) Aerial Photography & Archaeology 2003. A Century of Information. Academia Press, Ghent: 137-150. —. (2006) The application of First World War aerial photography to archaeology: the Belgian images. In: Antiquity 80, 307: 161-172.



CHAPTER FOURTEEN AIR PHOTOGRAPHS, MILITARY ARCHAEOLOGY AND HUMAN MEMORY: A CASE STUDY FROM SOUTH EAST LONDON ANDY BROCKMAN, KEVIN BARTON “Living just below ‘The We Anchor in Hope’, I can remember the large metal tubes being built along Shooters Hill Road just inside the golf course. One night at the beginning of a night air raid, my mother father and myself were just leaving our kitchen door facing up Shooters Hill when there was a blinding flash and roar which caused my father to fall back on my mother and she onto me all ending up on the floor. We thought it was a bomb at first then realising it must have been the tubes sending up a box barrage. I was about 14/15 at the time. I do not remember how many times they were fired but I do not think it was many ”(Page 2005)

Introduction The aim of this paper is to describe how a small, but vivid, element of our military heritage was explored, through the course of a Community Archaeology research programme, “The Lie of the Land Project” (initially unrelated to the Military Archaeology of World War Two). This case study is situated near Shooters Hill, South East London. In detail, the paper discusses the results of a programme of archaeological fieldwork, archival research and research in the community, which were inspired by an air photograph progression. The community work involved tracing, interviewing and corresponding with a range of witnesses, who were asked to recount their perceptions and memories, relating to the site of a former World War Two “Z Battery” (i.e. anti-aircraft rocket installation). This site was situated on the southern half of what is now Shooters Hill Golf Course (Fig. 14-1).

222

Chapter Fourteen

 Fig. 14-1: 7 August 1944, showing the Shooters Hill area with west at top of frame and the Shooters Hill site centre left (RAF Air Photograph RAF/UK/106G/LA/30 frame 3145) (Source: English Heritage RAF Photography)

Finally, this archaeological and historiographical research is related to the questions, meanings and perceptions of service on the site in the context of World War Two on Shooters Hill in general. We also examine as to how this site-specific study relates to the study of other Z Battery Units, as these are a little-known part of Anti-Aircraft Command, itself sometimes regarded as one of the forgotten forces of World War Two. We

Air Photographs, Military Archaeology and Human Memory

223

also explore the nature of preservation, by recording landscape features related to military archaeology, when physical evidence is all but absent.

The air photograph sequence In the course of writing a desktop assessment of archaeological potential for The Woodlands Farm Trust, a charitable educational trust based at Woodlands Farm, Shooters Hill, Andy Brockman obtained a sequence of air photographs from the English Heritage, National Monument Record in Swindon. On inspection it quickly became apparent that, although the study was primarily related to the area of the Woodlands Farm, an area immediately to the west of the Farm – on what is now Shooters Hill Golf Course – showed a series of unusual features and buildings, none of which appeared on pre-WW2 mapping or on post-WW2 mapping and air photography. Most pertinent to the history of Woodlands Farm itself, a series of six, apparently rectangular buildings in a compound – situated on the Farm’s western margin – appeared to be connected by active paths to the facility on the golf course (Fig. 14-2). Significantly, as of Autumn 2005 when the assessment was written, there were no clearly visible standing remains on either the Shooters Hill Golf Course or Woodlands Farm. The English Heritage Greater London Sites and Monuments Record showed that the site was characterised as a “Battery”, identified from documentary sources as a ZAA (Rocket AA Artillery) site, listed as present from 30 July 1942 and last recorded on 9 December 1943. The source of the information was listed as C. S. Dobinson’s unpublished document Twentieth Century Fortifications in England (Dobinson 1996a, 1996b, 1996c). An inspection of the CBA/English Heritage, Defence of Britain Database listed the site as a now destroyed Anti-Aircraft Emplacement. It was further discovered that the English Heritage Survey had noted just 51 Z Battery sites in the whole of the UK, of which only one, namely Roan Head on the Golta Peninsula in island of Flotta in the Orkney Islands, had survived in recognisable form. This discovery suggested that such sites were rare and any information which could be collected about the nature and operation of Shooters Hill might be of wider regional and national interest to military historians and archaeologists.

224

Chapter Fourteen

Following the air photograph sequence through 1945 and 1946, it was clear that the nature of the occupation of the site changed. The grid of features disappeared leaving soil marks, but the buildings appeared to remain in use, with active paths and other facilities visible. In October 1945, what appeared to be military type Bell Tents were present on site, yet these were gone by the Autumn of 1946. It was also noted that the six rectangular buildings in a compound to the east of the site were reduced to three sometime between 7 August 1944 and 11 October 1945.

Fig. 14-2: 7 August 1944 A detail showing the still operational Z Battery. A detail from RAF Air Photograph RAF/UK/106G/LA/30 frame 3145 7 August 1944. Corrected to place north at top of frame (Source: English Heritage RAF Photography)

Further research was carried out for three reasons: the stratigraphy within the air photographic sequence, the clear military nature of the site and the accessibility of the compound and six buildings on the Woodlands Farm Land Take as targets for fieldwork. Therefore, a project design for a site-specific Community Archaeology Project (CAP) was drawn up on behalf of the Woodlands Farm Trust and this was the subject of a successful funding bid to the United Kingdom National Lottery, Home Front Recall Programme, under the title: “The 05.45 Project”. Because this

Air Photographs, Military Archaeology and Human Memory

225

was a time-limited funding stream, designed to fund projects tied to the sixtieth anniversary of the end of World War Two in 2005, the fieldwork had to be completed by 31 December 2005.

Fig. 14-3: POW Camp 1020. Note the six huts, three apparently damaged, to the east of the farm boundary, top left of frame. A detail taken from RAF/106G/UK/916 Frame 6007 11 October 1945. Corrected to place north at top of frame (Source: English Heritage RAF Photography)

In its completed form, The 05.45 Project ran from September to December 2005 and employed the efforts of professional archaeologists, archaeology students from the Birkbeck College Centre for Continuing Education and local sixth form centres, Plumcroft Primary School, a local school studying aspects of World War Two as part of the United Kingdom National Curriculum and a number of witnesses to World War Two from the Shooters Hill area, representing a range of experience from child evacuees, through the civilian services to Home Guard Gunners. The project culminated in a community celebration at Plumcroft Primary School, the 05.45 Tea Party, prepared by a team of children working with professional chef, Ken Hawksworth. The team used both wartime and contemporary recipes and entertainment, to mark the completion of the formal stage of the work and to share the project results with the community.

226

Chapter Fourteen

The physical context: Shooters Hill and its role in the defence of south east London Shooters Hill, in the London Borough of Greenwich, is a hill of London Clay of the Thames Group, topped by a cap of Stanmore Gravels. Rising to 129m, it is one of the highest points in South East London, commanding prospects to the north across the Thames, east into Kent and west towards the City of London and Westminster. Given this commanding situation, approximately eight miles from the City of London, the east facing slope of Shooters Hill was well placed to form part of the anti-aircraft defences of the capital. Any aircraft approaching London from the south east, particularly from airfields in North West France would, inevitably, pass in the vicinity of Shooters Hill and pass in turn over the strategically vital Woolwich Arsenal, London Dockland, the City of London Whitehall and Westminster: the military, commercial, economic and governmental heartlands of London and therefore of the British war effort. Not surprisingly, the War Department took an interest in Shooters Hill when planning the London Gun Defended Area (LGDA) in the late 1930’s. On the outbreak of war in September 1939, various locations on Shooters Hill assumed a military character, and the military facilities on Shooters Hill were developed throughout the period 1939-1944. In particular, the two principlal open spaces on the Hill, Shrewsbury Park and Shooters Hill Golf Club, became the home for military units. The western side of Shrewsbury Park was designated as a location for flying barrage balloons under Field Scheme Nose Cap in the Spring of 1939 (Air 16/323 250838), and by the Battle of Britain in the Autumn of 1940 it had become the location for a flight of balloons operated by 901 (County of London) Barrage Balloon Squadron RAF (Bush 2005). Meanwhile Shooters Hill Golf Course had also been requisitioned. The Club House, with its extensive views to the east, became a Home Guard Battalion Headquarters, while the southern nine holes of the golf course itself became an anti-aircraft artillery (AAA) site. As the anti-invasion defences developed from May 1940 onwards, Shooters Hill played a further role in the land defences of London, with its control of the land routes into London from the south east and locally, the route into Woolwich Arsenal. In the most developed scheme, in place by 1942, the Hill was defended in depth as part of London Stop Line Central with installations including a Pill Box on the summit of the Hill, now lost,

Air Photographs, Military Archaeology and Human Memory

227

concrete dragons teeth anti-tank blocks and steel anti-tank rails controlling the roads off of the hill to the north and north east as well as a spigot mortar emplacement controlling the cross roads on the western side of the hill. The local Home Guard were also trained to operate a “Flame Fougasse”, sited on a choke point on the A 207 (Shooters Hill Road) close to the summit of the hill and immediately south of what would become the Shooters Hill Anti-Aircraft site (Peters 2005: 27).

The technical context: development and deployment of Z Batteries The ancestry of British military rocketry lies in work, in part based on Indian rockets captured from the rocket brigade of Tipu Sultan of Mysore (1750-1799). The work was carried out at Woolwich in the late 18th and early 19th centuries, most famously by Major William Congreve, Royal Artillery. However, Z Batteries or ZAA Batteries, as they are sometimes recorded, have their immediate origins in development work carried out by a team from Woolwich Arsenal, where work on developing an unguided, fin-stabilised 2 inch (50mm) rocket began in 1934. In 1937 the SubCommittee on Air Defence Research requested that the development effort should concentrate on an electrically fired, 3 inch (76mm) rocket which would carry the same warhead as the standard 3.7 inch AA shell. Designated the 3” UP (Unrotated Projectile), design work for the new weapon was carried out at Fort Halstead in Kent, with test firings by a trial battery based at Aberporth in South Wales. An extended trial was held in 1939, on the island of Jamaica in the West Indies. The 3” rockets were initially fitted with a No 700 Mark 1 timed fuse which had to be set by hand, and were mounted on a simple “Rocket Projector”, which consisted of a pair of guide rails, basic traverse and elevation controls, and a protective blast shield for the crew of two. The rockets were fired electrically and the No 1 Operator was relayed instructions from the site control room via a headset ,which were then passed to the Number 2 verbally. Early production units were made by Messrs G A Harvey of Greenwich and the initial production run of the Mark 1 Unit, launching a single rocket, was 2,500. Each projectile weighed 24.5 kilos of which 1.94 kilos was High Explosive and 5.76 kilos cordite propellant. Called into action, a Z Projector was capable of engaging targets up to an altitude of 6,770m and at a horizontal range of some 3,720m.

228

Chapter Fourteen

Although most of the initial production run of Z Projectors went to the Merchant Navy for shipboard defence, the equipment was mainly developed for use in a land-based, anti-aircraft role, because of the simplicity of the construction and operation of the units, coupled with the potential destructive power of the rockets launched en masse at an airborne target. The first operational trial battery was formed at Aberporth in October 1940. This site was later granted the distinction of the first Z Battery kill. The first operational Z Battery was placed to defend Cardiff Docks. General Sir Frederick Pile, the General Officer Commanding AntiAircraft Command, noted that by October 1941 the naval demand for Z Rocket Projectors had been largely met and that the units were now becoming available for use in Home Defence (Pile 1947: 5982-5983). In his Post-War report, Pile stated that it had been his intention to use rocket batteries in conjunction with the regular AAA. Coincidentally, the equipment became available at the same time as Anti-Aircraft Command was ordered to reduce the number of personall by 50,000 to free regular servicemen for service overseas in the Field Forc. This concurrence of circumstances led to the introduction of the Home Guard to the crewing of Z Battery sites to bring the Command back up to strength (Ibid.). Development work continued through the early years of the war and the titles of War Office files give an indication of the direction of the effort. During 1942 the Ballistics Committee examined “The accuracy of 3” Rockets for high level AA Fire” (PRO: WO 195/1657), “...predicted concentrations of 3” rockets against high level and unseen targets.” (WO 195/1792), “…flash from 64 projector rocket battery.” (PRO: WO195/2038) and “…accuracy of 3” rockets for high AA fire” (PRO: WO/2326). With the Z Battery being essentially a single-shot weapon, effective target prediction and fire control were the principal issue sto be addressed, with the new equipment also needing to be integrated into the existing command and control system. Hence the study “Systems of fire control for 3”Rocket in HAA role controlled by SA plotter and GL” (AVIA 41/148) was conducted. In this new role, Z Batteries were employed in an area defence mode, on the approaches to major targets such as the above-mentioned Cardiff Docks, the Naval Base at Chatham, and of course London. On the immediate eastern approach to the City of London, Z Batteries were sited at Victoria Park Hackney, Blackheath and Shooters Hill.

Air Photographs, Military Archaeology and Human Memory

229

The Home Guard and Z Battery sites It is impossible to separate a discussion of the operation of Z Batteries from discussion of the Home Guard. The Home Guard had begun life in May 1940 as the Local Defence Volunteers (LDV), an all-volunteer force designed to augment the regular field force with men who were either too old or too young to serve, or who were in reserved occupations, deemed too important to the war effort to serve with the colours. On 23 July 1940, the LDV were officially renamed the Home Guard. By 1942, after a period of rapid expansion, and equipment shortages typified by the issue of the infamous Home Guard Pike (a bayonet from a Lee Enfield rifle welded onto a steel tube), the Home Guard had established themselves as a uniformly equipped cadre of local battalions, companies and platoons, with their own shoulder title and affiliation to local county regiments, shown by the cap badge worn on the field service cap. By mid 1941 the war effort in general, and Anti-Aircraft Command in particular, was facing acute problems of personnel shortage. It was in an attempt to counteract this that two major innovations were implemented in crewing Anti Aircraft Command’s assets: (1) the introduction of mixed crews of men and women on fixed sites where separate accommodation deemed appropriate to the female crews could be provided and (2) the recruitment of members of the Home Guard into the Command, in particular to crew the new, personnel-intensive, Z Batteries. Home Guard Recruitment into Anti-Aircraft Command began in late 1941 with most Home Guard crewed Z Batteries becoming operational during 1942. They remained operational until the decision to stand down and disband the Home Guard in November 1944.

The form and history of the Shooters Hill Z Battery site At the time of writing, documentary sources about the Shooters Hill Z Battery and POW Camp are sparse. The Battery War Diary did little more than confirm unit designations and provide hints at operating protocols, battery routine and key events. The general reference to the Shooters Hill site is included in a 1st AntiAircraft Division Location statement dated 30 July 1942, where the site is listed as No 7 Z Shooters Hill, occupied by 145 Battery, 1Z Regiment 48 Brigade Royal Artillery (PRO: WO166 7313). On 12 December 1943 a similar unit location statement records the unit as 1(M) Z Regiment (PRO:

230

Chapter Fourteen

WO166 11154) (Dobinson 1996c). However, the Unit War Diary of 145 AA “Z” Regt Royal Artillery shows that the unit was formed in Bristol in January 1941 and the Shooters Hill site was approved on 21 July 1941. Site preparation began on 4 August 1941 (145 AA Z Regt RA War Diary) and former Home Guard Gunner John Simpson recalled that the battery began life as a group of four projectors in the south east corner of the site, with other equipment added as it became available (Simpson 2006). The War Diary records that the Battery became fully operational on 12 February 1942. The site then saw various equipment upgrades and sporadic action for the remainder of its active life. The Home Guard began training for deployment on the Battery in late April 1942 and by 31 July 1943 the Home Guard had taken over all 64 projectors as well as plotting duties in the control room (145 AA Z Regt RA War Diary). As a standard Z Battery of 64 twin rocket No2 Mk 1 Projectors, Shooters Hill required 178 men per relief to keep it in action and, with each Home Guard Soldier required to serve one night in eight; this meant a fully crewed Z Battery required a force of 1,424 (Pile 1947: 5982-5983). A proportion of the Battery staff would be regulars from the Royal Artillery and other specialised units, charged with maintenance and ammunition handling; other support staff included members of the Auxiliary Territorial Service (ATS), signallers and electronics experts and, importantly for morale, the NAAFI (Navy, Army and Air Force Institute) providing food and entertainment. This brief description demonstrates that a fully deployed Z Battery represented a considerable investment in material and personnel, both for the War Office and the local community. After the Home Guard were officially disbanded in November 1944, the site was taken over as a Prisoner of War Camp. A prisoner record supplied by a former prisoner of war at Shooters Hill, Gunther Verclas, and held by The Woodlands Farm History Group, confirms the camp as 1020 (G) POW Working Coy (Verclas 2005). A designation confirmed by a remarkable set of sketches drawn by another of the prisoners, Wolfram Dörge, and published privately at Christmas 1946 (Dunmow 2005) (Fig. 14-4). It is as Camp 1020 that the Shooters Hill Camp is listed in the English Heritage report on POW Camps in Britain 1939-1945 (Thomas 2003). It is clear from RAF Air Photograph RAF/UK/106G/LA/30 frame 3145, taken on 7 August 1944, that Shooters Hill conformed to the standard configuration for a Z Battery equipped with No 2 Mark 1 Projectors, that is 64 Twin Projectors placed on a regular grid with eight

Air Photographs, Military Archaeology and Human Memory

231

files of eight projectors on approximately 15 yard (13.7m) centres. Each projector sat on a metal base plate levelled with adjustable feet, which are in turn mounted on a simple concrete ring or temporary firing platform. Once removed all that would have been left was a bare patch of ground. A magazine shelter of corrugated iron was situated adjacent to the projectors. On Flotta the ends of these were in filled with water dipped bags of concrete, but it is not known if this was the case at Shooters Hill. The battery accommodation, control room, guard house, NAAFI and other ancillary buildings, such as ablutions blocks, were arranged on the east, south and west sides of the site, with road access from Shooters Hill Road. Most buildings appear to be of the 24ft/30ft (7.2m/9m) Nissan Hut type. There appear to be some twenty six major buildings in total, roughly the same as on Flotta where there were at least twenty four.

Fig. 14-4: Illustrations of POW Camp 1020 in 1946 by Wolfram Dörge. (Source: the Dunmow Family)

These buildings were retained as the function of the site changed into its Prisoner of War Camp guise. However, it is clear that the three northernmost huts in the compound in the western paddocks of Woodlands Farm were removed between 7 August 1944 and 11 October 1945. What appears to be debris can be seen around what appear to be three rectangular

232

Chapter Fourteen

hut bases. Although a subsequent photograph (RAF 106/G UK 1356 Frame 5147 taken on 2 April 1946) shows the same rectangular features, the area appears to have been tidied up and debris removed. The causes for this removal have not been fully elucidated or entirely determined. However, the London Bomb Damage Assessment Map show two V1 strikes on the western quadrant of Woodlands Farm in the Summer and Autumn of 1944, while former Home Guard Gunner Geoff Pendergast recalls an order to sleep under the rocket racks adjacent to the Projectors because some of the Nissan Huts which had been used for sleeping accommodation, had been destroyed, possibly causing some casualties (Pendergast 2006). This is corroborated to a degree from the War Diary of 1 M “Z” Regiment Royal Artillery, the parent unit of the Shooters Hill Battery. This War Diary records: “24 August 1944. Flying bomb crashed 80 yards due east of perimeter of site. Damage to six huts. No damage or casualties” (War Diary of No 1 M “Z” Regiment Royal Artillery). Although the War Diary records no casualties due to this event, it is known that a second V1 impacted on or near the site; however, the entry relating to this is missing.

A small-scale geophysical survey of the Eastern compound and area of Nissan Huts at the Shooters Hill ZAA Battery site In the Autumn of 2005 funding became available to research the Shooters Hill Z Battery site through a combination of money from the United Kingdom National Lottery (Big Lottery Fund, Home Front Recall Programme) and a contribution in kind from the Centre for Continuing Education, Birkbeck College, University of London. It was decided to attempt to use non-invasive survey techniques to see if it was possible to identify elements of the Z Battery site, as well as any other buried archaeological features. As part of its MA Archaeology Programme, Birkbeck College employed Kevin Barton of Landscape and Geophysical Services assisted by Chris Randolph, to teach a week-long practical module at Woodlands Farm. They were tasked to use the presumed site of the Z Battery Huts, as a target, to demonstrate various survey and geophysical techniques. The

Air Photographs, Military Archaeology and Human Memory

233

work is reported as a standard professional orientation survey, thus giving the students the taste and satisfaction of taking part in real-world research. For two reasons, it was decided to target the effort on the area of six rectangular buildings: (1) the difficulty of arranging access to Shooters Hill Golf Course for a full geophysical survey, and (2) the questionable efficacy of this type of survey due to the sheer amount of post-World War Two landscaping on the golf course. These buildings were provisionally identified as Nissan Huts relating to the Z Battery site and the surrounding compound, situated in the two westernmost paddocks of Woodlands Farm in the vicinity. The real extent of the geophysical survey was determined by the teaching and demonstration requirements of the Birkbeck course. A topsoil magnetic susceptibility survey, using a Bartington MS2 susceptibility meter with MS2B 18cm field loop, was carried out on a 5 x 5m grid over the field containing the four most southerly huts. The purpose of the survey was to investigate if there were any significant areas of soil disturbance or debris associated with the military use of the field, which could be identified using this geophysical technique. The results revealed a number of areas of higher susceptibility which did not directly relate to the immediate area of the hut sites. The source of these anomalies with higher susceptibility could be associated with military activities such as dugouts and burning/disposal of waste or more recent agricultural activity involving land improvement. These areas will be tested as part of a follow-up excavation and sampling programme. A small area of the site was surveyed using the electrical resistance method on a 0.5m x 0.5m grid by means of a TRS/CIA electrical resistance meter with a 0.5m twin probe array. The depth of investigation of this method is approximately 0.5m. The objective of this survey was to examine a rectangular boundary with north-south and east-west elements that surrounded the hut sites and which could be seen in the aerial photographs. Within the limited survey area, no evidence for the boundaries was found. However, a number of linear features of low electrical resistance were found, which could be interpreted as ditches. There was one significant diagonal southwest – northeast trending ditch with a number of possible east-west splays. These features could be related to drainage of the site. A test excavation will be needed to investigate the age of these possible drains. Within the constraints of the teaching programme, it was not possible to carry out a systematic magnetic gradiometer survey of the site. In

234

Chapter Fourteen

February 2006 the opportunity was taken to do this survey and it was carried out on a 1 x 0.25m grid using a Geoscan FM256 gradiometer. The effective depth of investigation of this method largely depends on the gradiometer specification and the magnetic intensity of any sub-surface features encountered. A typical depth of investigation would be up to 1m. The survey concentrated on the area immediately to the east of the southern line of huts and in the northern field containing two huts. The data collected was heavily influenced up to 5m from a metal fence which formed the western boundary of both south and north fields and by the fence which divided north and south fields. In addition, there were a number of highly magnetic single point anomalies which occurred throughout the survey area. These anomalies could be due to military and/or agricultural activity. The final processed data revealed a number of coherent anomalies or zones which may relate to military and/or ancient archaeological activity. To the east of the huts there is a series of weak anomalies which appear to trend in a north – south direction. It is not clear whether these anomalies are related to the military occupation of the site or to a much earlier occupation. Further geophysical follow-up is required to investigate these features prior to possible excavation. In the northern field there is a welldefined, circular area of randomly spaced, single-point anomalies. The zone measures some 40m in extent. There is anecdotal and bomb damage map evidence of V1 strikes on the site of Woodlands Farm; this might explain the disappearance of three of the most northern huts when the 1945 aerial photography is compared with that from 1944 (LCC Bomb Damage Map 107). The location and extent of the overall magnetic anomaly may indicate the site of such a V1 impact. The geophysical surveys, despite being limited in nature and extent, have indicated that the area of the huts and the northern field are likely to be prospective for evidence of military and other activities. More systematic geophysical survey with follow-up by excavation is needed to comprehensively investigate and classify these areas.

Military and civilian memory: perceptions of the operation and effectiveness of the Shooters Hill Z Battery As can be seen from the above discussion of the Archaeological Geophysics at Shooters Hill, thus far, the study of the Shooters Hill Z Battery has been sparsely documented. Moreover, the archaeology is

Air Photographs, Military Archaeology and Human Memory

235

ephemeral and therefore hard to interpret; the air photograph sequence has been used in much the same way as our wartime colleagues speciliasing in photo interpretation tracked changes in military features over days, weeks and months rather than the standard archaeological time span of, in the case of the UK, potentially 8,000 years. What has made the study so rewarding is the opportunity to begin to test whether it is possible to relate the available archaeology, such as the search for the eastern compound and Nissan Huts, to the memories of former Gunners and to Wolfram Dörge’s sketches which named specific parts of the site under their POW Camp guise. Although this process is still in train at the time of writing, it is possible to make some preliminary observations. The witnesses have given us a clearer view of the military culture of the battery, than the physical nature of the battery itself. One gunner took us through the loading and firing routine for both the Number 1 and Number 2 operator, but could not recall where on the site he had normally worked. Events recalled ranged from a politically interesting, short-lived food strike (on account of a steamed fish breakfast which some of the unit took exception to and which led to a reading of Kings Regulations regarding refusal to obey orders on active service) to the sense of dread as the control room telephone rang to put the battery on alert. Generally, the former Gunners recall a strong sense of – to use the contemporary phrase – “doing one’s bit” for the war effort. During a telephone interview and a subsequent interview on camera, Geoff Pendergast provided/offered some vivid insights into the operation of the Battery, including an echo of Geoff Page’s account of a full battery salvo which prefaced this paper. Pendergast’s brother was involved in the work on the 3” rockets used on the battery; when he saw the Projectors installed on Shooters Hill he told their sister, who lived about a kilometre north east of the battery, to make sure she got into the shelter or at least dived under the table if she heard the battery fire, on account of the danger of fall out from the rockets exploding, misfires launching on the wrong trajectory or rockets failing to explode. It is a comment on the effectiveness of the Official Secrets Act that neither of the two siblings knew that Geoff was serving on the battery until well after the war ended (Pendergast 2006). It is certainly true that everyone who saw a Z Battery in action remembers the light of the rocket trails but most of all the noise generated. A further comment opened up the whole subject of the effectiveness of Anti Aircraft Command in general and Z Batteries in particular. Geoff

236

Chapter Fourteen

Pendergast recalls that the Mayor of Bexleyheath sent a message to the Battery stand down dinner, held at the Shakespeare Hotel in Woolwich in November 1944. Although somewhat tongue in cheek, it reveals an underlying friction between the civilian authorities and AA Command who were responsible for putting so much unguided explosive hardware into the sky above populated areas. Pendergast’s recollection is that the message contained the following comment: “thank God you are standing down because you have caused more damage to property in Bexleyheath than the enemy has” (Pendergast 2006). This in turn ties in with the perception of a number of former Gunners that, within their circle at least, the efforts of AA Command were as much connected to the morale of the public as they were responsible for causing actual damage to the enemy. Indeed as one put it: “I have long felt that the Royal Artillery would prefer to forget that they (Z Batteries) ever happened.” (Dennis 2006). This insight is clearly linked to comments from both Geoff Pendergast (Pendergast 2006) and John Peters that after initial attempts to engage incoming V1 Flying Bombs, Z Batteries were forbidden to fire on these weapons. Peters attributes this decision to one attempted shoot down resulting in civilian casualties caused by incorrect fuse settings (Peters 2005: 31). However General Pile noted in his Post-War report that: “for three nights the guns in London fired at those targets which had penetrated the primary defences, but after that they were restricted since it was clear it was better to allow the flying bombs a chance of passing the more densely populated parts of the capital rather than shoot them down into it” (Pile 1947: 5989).

Given this statement, although there were clearly issues connected to the use of rockets, such as the fall out from the body and tail fins of the rocket as well as shrapnel from the exploding warhead, not to mention misfires; in respect of “Diver,” operations against the V1, the Z Battery units around London were treated in the same way as the conventional AAA and forbidden to engage. However, this is not to say that the question of fall out was entirely destructive. Alan Tizzard, a local resident in his early teens in 1944, recalls collecting the burnt out fuselage sections from the rockets to make model submarines (Tizzard 2005). Bill Bindloss, who trained on Rocket Projectors but joined the RAF in October 1942 before he could serve at Shooters Hill, saw the battery in action and commented: “I only saw it in action on one night. It was an

Air Photographs, Military Archaeology and Human Memory

237

impressive sight but it was obvious it did not have the altitude to worry the bomber crew” (Bindloss 2005). Bill Bindloss may already have been influenced in his view of the effectiveness of Anti Aircraft Artillery as he recalled the regular Royal Artillery Gunners on Woolwich Common telling their Home Guard sentries that their 3.7 inch guns were “…useless and they were for the bangs to lift the morale of the local residents” (Bindloss 2005). However Mr Bindloss is referring to a period before the development of effective gun laying radar and proximity fusing, which increased the chances of a successful engagement. It has also been possible to detect a slight undercurrent of cap badge politics in the Shooters Hill Z Battery Crews. Members of The Chatham Home Guard Living History Unit have observed that some members of the Home Guard with whom they had contact resented having to surrender their Royal West Kent Regiment cap badge, on transfer to the Royal Artillery Home Guard (Schild 2005). In the course of the 05.45 Project interviews, another case of cap badge friction was observed. Geoff Pendergast is rightly proud of his service with Anti Aircraft Command and of the nickname they awarded themselves, The Bow and Arrow Mob, after the Red Shoulder Flash of a drawn bow pointing skyward worn by members of Anti Aircraft Command. When this was mentioned to John Simpson, who served on the battery from 1942 until the end of its active life, he said that veterans of the Battery had rather resented the change in badge in 1943 from the aircraft impaled on a sword, which had been the original shoulder flash of 1st Anti-Aircraft Division. This is not to say that these members feel (that) their time was wasted. Certainly many of those who volunteered for the Anti Aircraft Home Guard did so as way of “hitting back at the enemy” (Pendergast 2006). By 1942 the fear of invasion had diminished considerably, and for men in reserved occupations, or otherwise unable to serve, this was a way of sharing the discomfort and risks of front line soldiers, possibly particularly if other members of the family were serving in front line units, as in Geoff Pendergast’s case. His brother had been at Dunkirk with the Royal Army Medical Corps. Even those who were called up into the Anti Aircraft Home Guard, as occurred later in the war, felt they were in the front line; this was not without danger, as shown by Pendergast’s recollection of a training accident on the Shoebury Ness Range, which killed a Projector crew (Pendergast 2006).

238

Chapter Fourteen

Relic, reminiscence and meaning, presenting and preserving the military archaeology of Shooters Hill in the 21st Century In the sole paragraph devoted to Z Batteries in his Defending Britain20th Century Military Structures in the Landscape, Mike Osborne observes correctly that: “Since there was never very much to be seen, and sites tended to be in built up areas, such sites have totally disappeared and only their former locations may be remembered” (Osborne 2004: 176).

However, this comment raises the question of how we, as archaeologists and historians can record such ephemeral sites, if we regard the recording of the military archaeology of the 20th Century as significant. This question is especially relevant if, as on Shooters Hill, the scientific survey results are ambiguous and the only clearly visible relic is a ramp in the pavement on Shooters Hill Road which once led to the Main Gate. This issue needs to be addressed as Z Batteries represent a major investment in wartime material and community effort, operated as they largely were by over a thousand citizen soldiers recruited from the community they were defending. Certainly Z Batteries are also worth recording as a pioneering, if technologically crude, application, of what would become the dominant military technology of the second half of the twentieth century: military rocketry. This brief account shows that it is possible to reconstruct something of the atmosphere and operational routine of a Z Battery, while it is still possible to trace and interview eye witnesses to the operation of such sites. Moreover, these interviews also illuminate, if not always evenly or exactly, the dry recording of unit location, duty rostas and official reports, not to mention the overview of an air photograph, which is apparently all seeing andfrozen in time. These written and recorded memories are the Paston Letters of World War Two: partial, personal and incomplete but adding immensely to our understanding. Therefore, it is intended that a more comprehensive account of the memories and perceptions of the people who served on Shooters Hill, or who saw it in action, will be published in due course.

Air Photographs, Military Archaeology and Human Memory

239

In conclusion, it is a well-known tenet in British archaeological practice, that any element of the national archaeological resource, which cannot be physically preserved in situ, should be preserved by record. The air photographs, which provided the spur to this study, are one priceless record, in terms of the information they contain and the memories and meanings they can help uncover. However, if the contribution of Z Batteries and similarly ephemeral aspects of the military archaeology of World War Two, to the development of the landscape in the mid to late twentieth century is to be understood, let alone their contribution to the culture of the communities they operated in, then they can only be preserved by record. In that case, those historical and archaeological records, need to be made and placed in the public domain, preferably while first hand testimony from former crews and their contemporaries is still available, to inform the investigation. In doing so we can also, as the 05.45 Project has shown, engage and empower the wider community across generations to take ownership of their landscape and history and provide their own views and meanings.

References Bindloss B. (2005) Personal communication of the author with Bill Bindloss. Bush A. (2005) Personal communication of the author with Arthur Bush. Clive H. & Nigel A. (1989) London at War. The Hulton Deutsch Collection. Quoin Publications. Dennis L.T. (2006) Personal Communication of the author with the late L.T. Dennis. Dobinson C. (1996a) Anti Aircraft Artillery 1914-1946, Site Gazetteers WW1/HAA/ZAA and LAA. Twentieth Century Fortifications in England, 2-4. CBA, York. —. (1996b) Anti Aircraft Artillery 1914-1946, Sources. Twentieth Century Fortifications in England, 5. CBA, York. —. (1996c) Anti Aircraft Artillery 1914-1946, Text. Twentieth Century Fortifications in England, 1. CBA, York. Dunmow L. (2005) Personal communication of the author with Laurie Dunmow. Jefferson E. (1970) The Woolwich Story. Woolwich and District Antiquarian Society. Lowry B. (1996) 20th Century Defences in Britain - an introductory guide. CBA.

240

Chapter Fourteen

Ogley B. (1992) Doodlebugs and Rockets The battle of the flying bombs. Froglets Publications, Westerham. Osborne M. (2004) Defending Britain. Twentieth-Century Military Structures in the Landscape. Tempus, Stroud. Page G. (2005) Personal communication of the author with Geoff Page. Pendergast G. (2006) Interview with Geoffrey Pendergast. Peters J. (2005) Wartime Woolwich. Elgar Press, London. Pile F. (1947) The Anti Aircraft Defence of the United Kingdom from 28 July 1939 to 15 April 1945: Supplement to the London Gazette. HMSO, London. RCAHMS (2007) National Monument Record Scotland. Canmore Database. Schild T. (2005) Personal communication of the author with Tim Schild. Simpson J. (2006) Personal communication of the author with John Simpson. Thomas R.J.C. (2003) Prisoner of War Camps 1939-1948 Project Reports. English Heritage. Tizzard A. (2005) Personal communication of the author with Alan Tizzard. Verclas G. (2005) Personal communication of the author with Gunther Verclas.



CHAPTER FIFTEEN SUFFOLK’S DEFENDED SHORE AND BEYOND: THE USE OF MILITARY AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS IN SYSTEMATIC ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY IN ENGLAND SARAH NEWSOME Introduction to military aerial photography and archaeology in Britain The development of military aerial reconnaissance photography and aerial archaeology in Britain has always been inextricably linked, perhaps since 1906 when Lieutenant Sharpe, a member of the British Army regiment the Royal Engineers, took the first intentional aerial photographs of a British archaeological monument when he photographed Stonehenge from a hot air balloon, producing near vertical and oblique views (Barber forthcoming). In more recent years the use of aerial photographs for archaeological research has become synonymous with specialist oblique photography. This type of photography is often taken in specific conditions with the definite intention of capturing particular archaeological or historic remains, in particular the buried elements of the historic landscape visible from the air as fleeting differences in vegetation growth know as “cropmarks”. However the use of vertical aerial photographs taken for non-archaeological purposes, and specifically those of military origin for aerial archaeology, in Britain at least, really has its roots in discoveries made in the 1920s. In 1923 O.G.S Crawford, a pioneer of British landscape archaeology, and particularly of the mapping of archaeological landscapes from aerial photographs (Bowden 2001), examined a batch of negatives taken two years earlier by the School of Army Cooperation based in Wiltshire. This

242

Chapter Fifteen

led to a remarkable discovery. Whilst developing their aerial reconnaissance skills the school had fortuitously photographed a cropmark which reflected the position of a previously unknown extension to the Stonehenge Avenue, a processional route which extends as an earthwork from the northern side of the famous stone circle. The negatives from these military photographs revealed that this avenue extended towards to the River Avon, which, previous to Crawford’s discovery, had only been suspected (Barber 2005). Crawford’s later excavations of these cropmarks proved the existence of the ditches that had created the changes in the vegetation visible from the air and at this early date military aerial photographs had been instrumental in highlighting the potential of the aerial view in archaeological research. Throughout the first half of the 20th century the military careers of many future aerial archaeologists were significant in sustaining the link between aerial archaeology and military reconnaissance highlighted by Crawford’s discovery of the Stonehenge Avenue extension described above. This is because Crawford and a number of the pioneers of aerial archaeology realised the potential of aerial photographs for archaeological research whilst working in photo reconnaissance units in the First and Second World Wars (Deuel 1971, Hegarty and Newsome 2007: 5, see also Bourgeois and Stichelbaut this volume). Continuing developments in cameras and reconnaissance technology by the British military were also of great parallel benefit to the recording of archaeological monuments and the development of aerial archaeology. Even before the Second World War when, as Conyers Nesbit (Nesbit 2003: 58) notes the Archaeological Office of the Ordnance Survey used the F24 camera developed for military reconnaissance by the Royal Aircraft Establishment for recording sites from the air, though it usefulness in a conflict was limited.

The collections of historic RAF photographs The aerial photographs taken by the Royal Air Force during and after the Second World War now constitute an important source of historical and archaeological information for many countries in Europe and further afield, particularly in those countries where civilian aerial photography has been prohibited until recently. The RAF photographic collections of England are now housed in the National Monuments Record in Swindon where they are available for consultation by all with prior notice. The Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Scotland and the Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments Wales hold similar collections of these photographs for their portions of

Suffolk’s Defended Shore and Beyond

243

the United Kingdom and the 6.5 million reconnaissance photographs of Europe and beyond are now held in The Aerial Reconnaissance Archive, Keele. Many smaller collections also hold copies of parts of these national collections in their archives. There are over two million vertical aerial photographs in the NMR collection in Swindon. These include later vertical photographs from Ordnance Survey and commercial companies but the historic RAF photographs make up the largest portion. The collection also includes some photographs taken by the United States Army Air Force (USAAF). For the purposes of this paper the RAF collections can be divided into three main groups of photographs: the vertical photographs taken during the Second World War, the vertical photographs taken after the Second World War and the military oblique collection. The military oblique collection consists of 79,000 oblique photographs taken by the RAF during and after the Second World War up to the early 1960s. The purpose of taking these photographs was probably to train air crew and check the aerial visibility and camouflage of British military installations and defences. Some of these oblique military photographs as were also taken by the USAAF (Hall, Groves et al. 2003). Unlike oblique aerial photographs taken for specialist archaeological purposes today, the military oblique photographs were taken mainly by using a fixed rather than hand-held camera. During the Second World War the information gained from low level oblique photographs, similar to those now held in the National Monuments Record, was particularly instrumental in the planning of the D-Day landings on the Normandy beaches in June 1944 (Nesbit 2003: 188). The RAF also undertook vertical photography of many parts of Britain during the Second World War, the vast majority of which can be used to produce a stereo image. The development of military photo reconnaissance in Britain has been well documented elsewhere (Babington-Smith 1957, Nesbit 2003) and it is not necessary to recount it here. What is not well understood is why the particular sorties and targets were photographed in Britain during the war. Training of photo-reconnaissance pilots was certainly undertaken in the United Kingdom, the clearest commitment to this being the establishment of an Operational Training Unit for this purpose in 1942 (Nesbit 2003: 146). The air crew who undertook aerial reconnaissance behind enemy lines needed to be able to “fly very steady compass courses and to be capable of pilot-navigation without any aids other than map-reading” (Nesbit 2003: 90). However it seems that the

244

Chapter Fifteen

ways in which pilots of reconnaissance aircraft were training and the method of the training is a topic that had been little studied (see for instance Nesbit 2003). It is an opinion commonly held that, as with the military oblique photographs described above, the vertical photo reconnaissance over Britain during the war was undertaken either for the purposes of training air crew (Hall, Groves et al. 2003) or for checking the effectiveness of camouflage and defences around key installations and along key defensive lines. The frequency of the flights in certain areas in the early part of the Second World War may also be related to the assessment of progress in the construction of coastal defences. Another reason for the capturing of British coastal defences and other installations may also have been the testing of cameras. The majority of the RAF aerial photographs for the UK are of a much larger scale than the actual reconnaissance taken over Europe. Without the restrictions created by anti-aircraft fire protecting enemy targets the reconnaissance planes could fly at a much lower level. After the war ended the RAF continued to take aerial photographs for a variety of military and civilian purposes. Much of the photography was undertaken for mapping-making or updating, up to the point when the Ordnance Survey took on this role themselves in later years. One of the key phases of photography undertaken in the post-war period was that of the National Survey. The National Survey was one of a number of flying tasks undertaken by the photo reconnaissance units after the end of the Second World War (Nesbit 2003: 241). The survey was carried out by 540 Squadron which was later re-named 58 Squadron and was undertaken between 1946 and 1948, providing almost complete stereo vertical photographic coverage for most of the British Isles for the immediate postwar period at 1:10,000 scale. It was undertaken on behalf of the Ordnance Survey for the purposes of town planning and reconstruction in the postwar period. After the National Survey was disbanded the RAF continued to taken aerial photographic coverage of Britain though much of this tended to be at a much smaller scale and is less relevant to archaeological survey. The Swindon collection of RAF photographs is a hugely valuable resource for research into the archaeological landscapes of England, particularly for systematic archaeological surveys based on aerial photographs, such as the many projects completed under the auspices of the National Mapping Programme (NMP) which have repeatedly demonstrated this value. The National Mapping Programme has been

Suffolk’s Defended Shore and Beyond

245

comprehensively described elsewhere (Bewley 2001) so only a brief summary will be given here. The programme, managed by English Heritage, involves the systematic interpretation, mapping and recording of all archaeological features, dating from the Neolithic to the end of the Second World War, visible on all aerial photographs easily available for consultation in both national and regional photographic collections. The programme aims to undertake systematic survey based on aerial photographs for the whole of England and over a third of the country has already been completed. One of the great strengths of the National Mapping Programme lies in its systematic examination of the historic RAF photography for a given project area as well as more modern specialist oblique and vertical photography. Systematic survey of the vertical aerial photographic collections for a large geographical area is often beyond the resources of other projects.

The benefits of the historic RAF photographs for systematic survey The RAF aerial photographic collections, particularly the vertical collections, are extremely useful when undertaking systematic archaeological landscape survey using aerial photographs, such as the National Mapping Programme, for a number of different reasons which will be summarised below. The RAF vertical photographs are particularly useful for systematic survey as they constitute England’s largest collection of historical air photographs providing an element of time depth by capturing England’s landscapes of anything up to 60 years ago, prior to the post-war agricultural intensification and urban expansion that has in some areas caused dramatic change. This means that the RAF aerial photographs of the 1940s and 1950s record elements of archaeological landscapes which in some areas have subsequently been destroyed and are no longer visible on later photographs. Many of the useful properties of these photographs for archaeological survey come from the way they were purposefully taken by the RAF as reconnaissance photographs that would be used to glean detailed information from a distant view. For example, the vast majority of the RAF vertical photographs were taken so that the adjacent frames overlapped and the resulting images could therefore be viewed in 3D using a stereoscope. The 3D view was particularly important to the military

246

Chapter Fifteen

photo reconnaissance interpreters trying to identify potential military installations in combat zones but now the availability of stereo coverage means that the RAF prints also can be used effectively to examine upstanding, earthwork archaeology recorded on these photographs and to get a broader understanding of the local topography and landscape situations of monuments. The near blanket coverage of the National Survey also means that most areas of landscape in England have some level of vertical photographic coverage for the immediate post-Second World War period, therefore providing the benefits underlined above, providing a historic baseline for systematic survey using aerial photographs for almost the whole of England. This means that virtually all parts of the country have at least one run of historical vertical photographs that can be examined as part of systematic surveys such as NMP. However it should be noted that there are some gaps in this coverage as the National Survey project was terminated before fully complete (Hall, Groves et al. 2003). Additionally the RAF vertical photographs available for England vary significantly in quality and scale but much of the photography, such as the National Survey, was flown at low level because none of the country was within a conflict zone and so provides the necessary detail needed for systematic archaeological survey such as the National Mapping Programme. A scale of 1:10,000 or smaller is ideal for archaeological survey and the National Survey photographs of 1946-48 were flown at this scale providing a superb amount of detailed information on archaeological and historic landscapes.

The use of historic RAF photographs in archaeological survey Most of the following examples of the important contribution that RAF vertical photographs have made to systematic archaeological survey are taken from a three year National Mapping Programme project which examined the Suffolk coastal zone. Suffolk is a county in the east of England with a long stretch of coastline which to the southern end is interrupted by three major river estuaries, the Stour, Orwell and Deben. Lowestoft, a large port town to the north of the county, is the most easterly point in Britain. This part of the English coast has a legacy of plentiful low level military photography taken during the Second World War presumably taken in order to assess anti-invasion defences and train air

Suffolk’s Defended Shore and Beyond

247

crew in coastal aerial reconnaissance, a task particularly important when planning the D-Day landings in Europe. For some stretches of the Suffolk coast photographs are available at intervals of just a few months, perhaps reflecting the strategic significance of this stretch of England’s coastline which was particularly vulnerable due to the proximity of the county to mainland Europe and its low cliffs and wide open beaches. Whilst attempting to account for the proliferation of wartime aerial photographic runs in Suffolk’s coastal areas, it is also worth noting that the responsibility for photographic reconnaissance was given to Coastal Command’s No 16 group in summer 1940 (Nesbit 2003: 104) and it is possible that the subsequent location of airfields near the coast from which conflict zone reconnaissance was being undertaken may also have had some impact on the amount of reconnaissance photography available for the British coastline. Also of relevance may be the creation in March 1941 of a new unit tasked with the reconnaissance of British beaches in the event of an invasion and also the photography of enemy coastline (Ibid.: 118). Detailed examination of which squadrons were taking photographs of the Suffolk coast in this period could help to clarify the links between the squadrons’ geographical location and roles and the amount and nature of aerial photography they undertook along the English coast. A few of the examples have also been taken from another NMP pilot project focusing on a transect through the South Downs. The South Downs is a chalk escarpment that stretches for 170 km along the south coast of England through the counties of West Sussex, East Sussex and Hampshire. It provides a good contrast to the Suffolk coastal project as there is a strong tradition of archaeological research in the South Downs area, including a strong tradition of the use of aerial photography for archaeological purposes, but the examples demonstrate the extra dimension that the RAF aerial photographic collections can add even in what is perceived to be a relatively well understood and heavily studied landscape.

Benefits of using historic RAF photographs to study archaeological landscapes During the Suffolk Coastal NMP project military photographs proved particularly important when undertaking systematic archaeological survey as the area does not have a legacy of historic oblique or, in fact, in some parts of the coast even more recent oblique photography so the RAF

248

Chapter Fifteen

collections were vital, filling in gaps and providing some coverage for the whole coastal zone and for collecting baseline data even though they were not originally taken for archaeological purposes. This lack of historic specialist oblique photographs reflects the very different nature of the archaeological record in Suffolk compared to, for example, that in Wiltshire, where the spectacular preservation as earthworks of, particularly prehistoric, archaeological monuments and field systems on the chalk downland attracted the early pioneers of aerial photography for archaeology (Crawford and Keiller 1928). In areas where the only historic aerial photographs available are the vertical RAF collections these photographs also play a vital role in recording archaeological landscapes that have been lost or damaged through development and agriculture in the 20th century. Particularly in coastal zones such as the Suffolk coast, these photographs also can provide a snapshot of the dynamic coastal environment sixty years ago and can reveal archaeological features in the estuarine inter-tidal zones which have now been covered by silts or eroded by the tide. An example of this benefit from the Suffolk coast was the discovery of a series of fish traps in the River Deben which are only visible on one run of RAF aerial photographs taken in September 1945. A testament also to the benefits of NMP systematic survey, the fishtraps were visible as a series of V-shaped arrangements of wooden posts between which nets could be strung. The military aerial photos currently appear to provide the only visual record of this type of fishing activity in the estuary and the wooden remains have either been destroyed or are now covered by river silts. The RAF military oblique collections can sometimes illustrate the dynamic nature of the coastal zone in more detail, as loss and damage can be seen at specific historic coastal sites by comparing the historic RAF oblique photographs with more recent photographs. The Martello Tower at Slaughden near Aldeburgh in Suffolk was built at the start of the 19th century as part of a chain of coastal artillery towers built along the south and east coast of England to guard against Napoleonic invasion. The RAF oblique photographs from 1944 shows the tower with its outer moat intact and also a stretch of Second World War beach defences (reminding us of the original reason for taking these photographs); the photograph taken in 2004 shows how, over 60 years, half of that outer moat has been lost to coastal erosion (Fig. 15-1), a pattern repeated for other sites along the coast, particular historic anti-invasion defences.

Suffolk’s Defended Shore and Beyond

249

In Suffolk much of the coastal zone has been ploughed for many centuries but the historic military photographs have highlighted where earthwork field systems on the coastal heathlands have been taken into arable cultivation since the Second World War. An example of this is the ploughing up of an earthwork field system on Sutton Common just to the south of the famous Anglo-Saxon cemetery at Sutton Hoo. Today the field system has been destroyed but it was clearly visible as earthworks on historic military photographs taken in the 1940s. The systematic survey of the historic military aerial photographs for the NMP project on the South Downs has also demonstrated the dramatic impact of 20th century agriculture on the upstanding archaeology of the chalk downlands in that area and the extent of damage that even short spells of deep ploughing can cause to upstanding archaeological landscapes (Fig. 15-2). What the RAF photographic collections also often provide is historical landscape context and an understanding of landscape change, whether this is in the form of direct impacts on the archaeological resource such as the ploughing on the South Downs described above or simply providing a better understanding of the environment in which you are undertaking archaeological research and giving context to any oblique photographs. Development has also had a major impact in the Suffolk coast zone in the last 60 years, whether for housing, the tourism industry or port expansion. At Felixstowe comparisons between modern vertical photographs and those taken in 1944 show where the expansion of the container port has all but obliterated the military landscape to the north of Landguard Fort clearly visible during the Second World War on RAF vertical photography

250

Chapter Fifteen

Fig. 15-1: The Napoleonic period Martello Tower at Slaughden, near Aldeburgh, Suffolk visible on an RAF military oblique photograph taken in 1941 and a more recent photograph taken in 2004. By comparing two photographs the erosion of the most of the seaward side of the moat can clearly be seen (Source: English Heritage RAF Photography, NMR)

Suffolk’s Defended Shore and Beyond

251

Fig. 15-2: These two images demonstrate how the historic RAF vertical collections can highlight the dramatic impact of agriculture on archaeological landscapes. The image on the left was taken in 1946 and the image on the right in 1950. The damage that has been so quickly caused to the prehistoric field system at Park Brow in the South Downs is clearly evident (Source: English Heritage RAF Photography, NMR)

Of course it goes without saying that the RAF military photographs will always provide the additional potential for recording cropmarks of archaeological features that have been captured by coincidence when the photographs were taken, in much the same way that the Stonehenge avenue cropmarks were discovered by Crawford on the photographs taken by the School of Army Cooperation in the 1920s. Though many specialist oblique photographs have been taken of Suffolk coast’s buried prehistoric landscapes visible as cropmarks, in many areas the accidental capturing of cropmarks on the historic RAF vertical photography added important detail to the picture that has already been gained from the oblique photographs, again highlighting the importance of a systematic examination of all the available photography for an area.

252

Chapter Fifteen

Benefits for using historic RAF aerial photographs to study military landscapes In the case of the Suffolk coast, the most important benefit of including the RAF photographic collections in the systematic archaeological survey was for the structures relating to the reason why the photographs were originally taken, the Second World War. The wartime and immediately post-war RAF photographs capture Suffolk’s coastal anti-invasion defences in superb detail with very clear low level coverage that would not have been possible in a war-zone (Fig. 15-3). Other stretches of coastal defence systems have now been recorded by NMP projects in other parts of the country such as Norfolk, Cornwall and Yorkshire to name but a few and these projects have shown that the historic RAF photographs have provided a similar wealth of detail about the coastal defence systems in these areas as well. Arguably more important than recording detail on individual sites, the inclusion of the RAF photographs in a systematic survey such as NMP provides a fantastic opportunity to interpret, map and record the system of anti-invasion defences for the Suffolk coast as it was originally constructed; a coherent linear defence system many kilometres in length. Studies and surveys undertaken in the field today often record isolated pillboxes and other parts of the “hard” defences which can make little sense outside the context of the whole system of defence. The photographs importantly record the “soft” parts of the linear system such as the barbed wire entanglements, so important in creating the coastal crust defences but which were removed very quickly for a variety of practical and health and safety reasons after the end of the war. The information from the photographs helps us to make sense of the isolated concrete remains of these systems that survive today.

Suffolk’s Defended Shore and Beyond

253

 Fig. 15-3: This photograph of a barrage balloon mooring position at Lowestoft, Suffolk in 1946 highlights the superb level of detailed information relating to Second World War defence features that the contemporary historic RAF verticals can record (Source: English Heritage RAF Photography, NMR)

In addition to the rapid removal of the “soft” parts of the coastal defence after the war, many of Suffolk’s more substantial coastal antiinvasion defences have been removed over the years sometimes in a deliberate attempt to remove these concrete structures that are perceived to

254

Chapter Fifteen

be ugly and are associated with “bad memories” of the war. Again their cliff-top positions mean they have been vulnerable to coastal erosion and in many places the sea has taken its toll. As with the remains from earlier periods, this again means that the time-depth provided by the RAF collections is vital in understanding the location and relevance of the structures which remain. Though reasonable detailed plans were made when constructing coastal defences, anti-invasion structures are the least well recorded of defence structures in official archives (Dobinson 1996: 4) and local conditions can mean that plans were not followed exactly. The photographs can provide a true picture of what was actually built and where. The frequency with which the Suffolk coast was photographed throughout the Second World War has allowed the possibility of understanding how the coastal crust defences developed in parallel with changes in central defence policy and personnel. In some years and for some stretches of the coast, only months separate the date at which one run of photographs was taken from the next. One area where this development of defences can be seen in great detail is around the area of Sizewell in Suffolk which saw changes in its defences in relation to the changing threats from the enemy throughout the Second World War. Most significantly, by November 1944, after the D-Day invasions and the waning of the invasion threat, coastal anti-invasion defences were reduced around Sizewell and a DIVER gun battery was installed to counter the new threat, the V1 long-range flying bomb (Fig. 15-4). An additional benefit of systematically examining all aerial photographs in a particular landscape zone, including those of historic military origin, is the discovery of images that capture a moment in time. Though these images are sometimes not of direct use in the interpretation, mapping and recording of archaeological features, they are unlikely to be discovered by means other than systematic survey and can provide important illustrations of historic events. An example of this could be the barges seen lined up in the River Orwell and River Deben in the summer of 1944. These vessels are thought to be dummy boats installed on the river to make the D-Day preparations look more advanced and more significant than in reality and to draw attention away from sites where the true preparations were being made (Fig. 15-5). D-Day preparations are also visible on photographs of Wherstead Hall and Orwell Park in the Orwell estuary where the mustering of troops prior to the D-Day invasions can be seen in the expansion of temporary camps around these requisitioned country houses. These types of photographs play an important role in placing people

Suffolk’s Defended Shore and Beyond

255

within these modern military landscapes avoiding a remote view which lacks understanding at a human scale and can also be linked to recorded events.

 Fig. 15-4: These images demonstrate how the historic RAF photographs allow us to track changes in coastal anti-invasion defences at a particular location as the nature of the threat changed throughout the Second World War. The photograph on the left shows Sizewell, Suffolk in December 1941 when the barbed wire, pillboxes and lines of anti-tank cubes reflect the measures taken against the threat of invasion. By the time the next photograph was taken in 1946 many of these linear defences have been removed and but the position of a DIVER anti-aircraft battery can be seen, one of a series installed along the Suffolk coast towards the end of the Second World War to counteract a new threat, that of the V1 flying bomb (Source: English Heritage RAF Photography, NMR)

On the South Downs other fleeting moments in Britain’s Second World War military activities are captured on the military RAF aerial photographs such as at Highden Hill, Sussex where RAF photographs taken in April 1945 appear to show areas of scorched earth from some sort of petroleum warfare experiments, just to the west of a series of Bronze Age cross-ridge dyke earthworks.

256

Chapter Fifteen

 Fig. 15-5: The RAF photographs capture “moments in time” which are unlikely to be found by anything other than a systematic examination of the photographs. The image shows rows of barges lined up in the River Orwell in Suffolk in July 1944. The barges are thought to be dummy vessels installed to make the D-Day preparations look more significant and advanced to German reconnaissance than they were in reality (Source: English Heritage RAF Photography, NMR)

Finally, ensuring the future survival of these remaining anti-invasion defences on the Suffolk coast, and of other types of archaeological remains in general, in part relies on the perception of these remains by the local communities who live with them on a daily basis. The RAF collections are

Suffolk’s Defended Shore and Beyond

257

an important way of increasing the understanding and valuing of these types of historical remains as they can demonstrate the small part the defences played in much wider defence schemes and events of national and international importance therefore raising their significance in peoples’ minds. Often Second World War structures are incorporated into everyday existence on the coast, such as the beach-front shelter at Aldeburgh which was converted from the gunhouse of an emergency coastal gun battery erected in 1940. It is important that local awareness of these types of structures is raised and the aerial view can be so much more evocative than a dry description of these types of modern military remains.

Conclusion The benefits of using the RAF aerial photographic collections for systematic archaeological survey in England (and the rest of the UK) have been repeatedly demonstrated, particularly through the work of English Heritage’s National Mapping Programme. It is clear that the RAF collections are one of the key resources for archaeological landscape survey in England and should be used routinely in research along with other archaeological investigative techniques as there omission is of great detriment to any systematic survey of this type. It will be interesting to see if, in the years ahead, the potential of the Luftwaffe photographs of the United Kingdom held in the Library of Congress in Washington will be realised and the information available on these photographs incorporated into systematic aerial photographic surveys as has been recently suggested (Standring 2007). However, without doubt the RAF collections will remain the primary sources of historic vertical aerial photography for the United Kingdom. An extended version of this paper has recently been published as Suffolk’s Defended Shore: Coastal fortifications from the Air (Hegarty and Newsome 2007).

References Babington-Smith C. (1957) Evidence in Camera, The Story of Photographic Intelligence in World War II. Chatto and Windus, London. Barber M. (2005) Personal communication of the author with Martyn Barber.

258

Chapter Fifteen

—. (In press) Mata Hari’s Glass Eye and Other Stories: A History of Aerial Photography and Archaeology. English Heritage. Bewley R. (2001) Understanding England’s historic landscapes: an aerial perspective. In: Landscapes 2, 1: 74-84. Bowden M. (2001) Mapping the Past: OGS Crawford and the development of landscape studies. In: Landscapes 2, 2: 29-45. Crawford O.G.S. & Keiller A. (1928) Wessex from the Air. Clarendon Press, Oxford. Deuel L. (1971) Flights into Yesterday. MacDonald, London. Dobinson C. (1996) Anti Aircraft Artillery 1914-1946, Text. Twentieth Century Fortifications in England, 1. CBA, York. Hall G., Groves K., Ogle R., Spiers D. & Runciman C. (2003) An Overview of the Aerial Photographic Collections of the NMR 2003 (Unpublished document). English Heritage, Swindon. Hegarty C. & Newsome S. (2007) Suffolk's Defended Shore: Coastal fortifications from the Air. English Heritage, Swindon. Nesbit C.R. (2003) Eyes of the RAF: A History of Photo Reconnaissance. 2 ed. Sutton, Stroud. Standring R. (2007) Personal communication of the author with Robin Standring.



CHAPTER SIXTEEN THE SCOTTISH HOME FRONT 1939-45: GATHERING INFORMATION ON MILITARY AND CIVILIAN STRUCTURES FROM RAF AND LUFTWAFFE AERIAL COVERAGE OF SCOTLAND DAVID EASTON Introduction There are several sources of WW II air photographs in Britain, not least at the Imperial War Museum, English Heritage and Keele University in England. Perhaps not as well known is a smaller collection held in the Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Scotland (RCAHMS) alongside the large post-war Royal Air Force (RAF) coverage of Britain. The RCAHMS holds c. 8,000 images taken of Scotland (Fig. 16-1) by the RAF, mainly dating from 1940 to 1944 in addition to a small collection of Luftwaffe target photographs acquired from the National Archives and Records Administration in the USA (Fig. 16-2). The Luftwaffe target photographs were taken for strategic use by the German military. Although RCAHMS holds over 130 of these mounted prints with accompanying maps, others can be found in the Imperial War Museum, whilst many also seem to remain in private hands elsewhere in Britain.

The RCAHMS Collection- Royal Air Force imagery This collection comprises just over 8,000 images covering most areas of Scotland, and is probably only a small part of the total that must have been photographed during the Second World War. Though the geographical coverage is mainly concentrated around the central industrialised belt between Edinburgh and Glasgow, there is also good coverage of Fife and the eastern seaboard from the Shetland Islands to Angus. The western seaboard was flown much less often with only parts of Islay, Tiree, the

260

Chapter Sixteen

Western Isles, Mallaig/Morar area and the southern part of the Kintyre Peninsula being covered.

Fig. 16-1: The cities of Scotland, based on Ordnance Survey “Strategic” data (Source: RCAHMS)

The Scottish Home Front 1939-45

261

Of greater use to wartime research are the “M” series oblique images taken by No.1 CAM squadron, taken to assess camouflage on industrial and military buildings. The low altitude photographs are of immense use to the interpretation of those sites photographed. Perhaps as a reflection on the way this collection has been created, there are at least four sizes of prints. The smallest 5” (12.5cm) x 5” up to 10”(20.4cm) x 10”, indicating the different cameras used. The peak years for the output of photographs held in this collection would appear to have been 1941-1942 with 1943 the next most productive with only 79 photographs taken in 1940 and eight in 1944. However, it should be noted that there are several sorties for which we have no date, but which were are almost certain are from 1941. The somewhat eclectic nature of the collection is shown by the subject matter, particularly a sortie running across Glasgow. In this case the pilot must have switched off the cameras after reaching the Greenock area beyond Glasgow and then started photography over Northern Ireland, the resulting last four frames from this sortie providing superb coverage of the Harland Wolff shipbuilding yards in Belfast.

Luftwaffe air photos The available material held in the RCAHMS consists of some 126 panchromatic aerial photographs and 28 distribution maps (RCAHMS 1999). In addition 32 photocopied images from the Imperial War Museum were added to allow more complete coverage of Scotland. A number of the images almost certainly pre-date the outbreak of the Second World War. The photographs held in RCAHMS are centred on specific targets and in all cases have been linked to a site in the RCAHMS CANMORE online database. Many have now been scanned and can be found as images on-line in the database. The Luftwaffe material in RCAHMS archives is not comprehensive; there are 189 Scottish sites in the Imperial War Museum collection and further images held by Nigel Clarke at Lyme Regis, Dorset, England. More interestingly, in the course of a winter lecture series provided by the author to local history societies, it was revealed that in at least one or two instances someone in the audience possessed a copy of a Luftwaffe aerial

262

Chapter Sixteen

photograph that they had either “collected” themselves or their father or grandfather had “recovered” from the European theatre of war.

 Fig. 16-2: 1940 Luftwaffe target photograph of Errol Airfield, Perthsire (Source: National Archives and Records Administration)

The Scottish Home Front 1939-45

263

Fig. 16-3: The RAF equivalent of Fig. 16-2 flown 27 August 1943 (Source: National Archives and Records Administration)

Recording military sites from 1939-45 air photographs RCAHMS was involved in the collation of information and archive storage of material as part of the Defence of Britain Project. This Project had its origins in various interested groups around the United Kingdom.

264

Chapter Sixteen

The Council for British Archaeology (CBA) initiated the Project with a grant from the then Department of the Environment to encourage the participation of people who had actually served through twentieth century wars, creating a network of interested persons and volunteers to record sites nationwide. The author was personally involved on the Steering Group Board and from this Project information on over 17,000 sites was forwarded to the CBA office in York. The archive and database was housed at the Imperial War Museum, Duxford in England. The Project ended in 2000 and the resultant database is now available on-line.1 Oblique and vertical photographs from 1940-44 period which were of assistance to the Project can be found in the location of many structures relating to military activity throughout Scotland. Some of the specific site types for which data was enhanced are discussed below. The Project was assisted in one notable area by the coverage of heavy anti-aircraft batteries. The RCAHMS collection includes photographs from one sortie showing most of the batteries built for the Glasgow Gun Defended Area (GDA’s) whilst under construction. The images were specifically taken to record building progress of these sites and the information that can be gleaned from them is very valuable. When examined in conjunction with official documents they can often confirm or refute some of the information provided by recollections of volunteers, not all of which is entirely reliable. One frame from this sortie also reveals a plethora of bomb craters surrounding an anti-aircraft battery. The images from the sortie were also able to provide evidence as to whether these sites had been provided with gun-laying radar sets.

RCAHMS survey recording The initial recording of military sites by RCAHMS had, up to 1995 been spasmodic, and had usually occurred only when a site was under threat of destruction. It was the impetus provided by the Defence of Britain Project that spurred the organization to give it higher priority. The topic therefore became a major part of the RCAHMS recording programme. Specifically, the Orkney Islands were selected for an intensive programme of both photographic and measured drawn survey, mainly due to the survival of a large number of structures from both world wars.

 1

See http://www.britarch.ac.uk/projects/ bdob/index.html

The Scottish Home Front 1939-45

265

The historic wartime air photographic collection along with the postwar material has provided the survey programme with invaluable support material. Particular use was made of the sortie covering the Orkney Islands where RCAHMS undertook a major survey of 20th century remains. Several accommodation camps were identified and a number of frames of the early war period Chain Home radar station at Netherbutton provided superb information about the remains that survive at present. During the 1990 survey RCAHMS investigators were able to relate the surviving remains on the ground providing the survey team with much needed information. The arrangement of what we realised were two “Z” batteries on the east and west sides of the main elements of the station appears on the 1942 images. Coverage of another Radar Station at Noss Hill, Shetland again provided useful information for survey purposes. The layout of the buildings and position of the masts shown on the image allowed investigators to lead the survey photographers to providing better coverage of this site.

Site classifications Many elements of World War II defences in Scotland have been extracted from the photographs, but below are seven main classes of site which are included as examples.

Airfields Over 54% of the wartime airfields of Scotland are visible on wartime air photography held in RCAHMS. They appear on either Luftwaffe verticals or, as more often as RAF oblique or verticals. In some cases the same airfield has been photographed more than once, allowing for comparisons to be made over the war years. In one particular case, Wick Airfield, we can follow the changes that occurred between 1941 and 1943, including the evidence for the destruction by German bombing of one of the aircraft hangars. Recent fieldwork and survey by RCAHMS has again photographed the airfield from the air allowing further comparison to be made. The three surviving active airfields, Lossiemouth, Kinloss and Leuchars are well covered, particularly the latter as it was from this base that many of the RAF’s air reconnaissance flights originated. The wartime

266

Chapter Sixteen

images held by RCAHMS proved extremely useful in another recent photographic survey undertaken at Leuchars. Scanned copies of the photographs were utilised in a report undertaken on the pre-1945 buildings on the airfield as it can be shown as one of the best example of a modern palimpsest of airfield buildings in Scotland. In two instances, Drem and East Fortune to the east of Edinburgh, RCAHMS has scanned all the individual photographs and then merged the scans to produce an overall image (Fig. 16-4).

Fig. 16-4: Scanned image of fifteen 12.7cm x 12.7cm prints, digitally enhanced showing the whole of Drem Airfield in 1943 (Source: RCAHMS)

Drem Airfield in effect began the air war and ended it, being one the first in action in October 1939 and receiving the German Delegation to Britain for the surrender of Norway (Tully-Jackson and Brown 1996: 14). The air station was also utilized for the testing of radio counter-measures mounted in night fighters (Ibid.: 80). A most interesting aspect of the photographic coverage is the images showing some of the minor grass emergency landing grounds (ELG) such as those at Campbeltown, Kintyre in western Scotland and Whitefield, north-east of Perth. In both cases all that is visible are a few huts, usually

The Scottish Home Front 1939-45

267

of the Nissen type and some aircraft parked close by. Today, in nearly all cases nothing can be seen because the land has reverted to cultivation. Some airfields were flown more than once during the war and these sequences allow the researcher to compare and contrast changes wrought over this period. Amongst many alterations, these include the addition of aircraft hangars (or in the case of Wick one destroyed by enemy action), the lengthening of runways and the addition of dispersed accommodation. There is also one sortie, showing airfields under construction in the northeast of Scotland. Camouflage schemes on hangars and buildings can be noted from this collection probably reflecting the changes in strategic thinking in the war. Other photographed airfields have revealed surprising elements. For instance, the Leuchars Airfield images of 1942 show Lockheed Lodestar aircraft by the First World War Coupled General Service sheds, these being used on the diplomatic flights to neutral Sweden.

Coast batteries and heavy anti-aircraft batteries Coast Batteries built to defend important harbours and estuaries are surprisingly absent from the RCAHMS collection, and those that were photographed are mainly from high altitude or long distance. One reason for the lack of coverage may be that many of the oblique aerial photographs taken of these sites were attached to the gun record books kept by the commanding officer of the battery and are now housed in the National Archives, Kew, London.

268

Chapter Sixteen

 Fig. 16-5: Vertical air photograph, Torry and Girdle Ness Batteries, Aberdeen (Source: RCAHMS)

However, the RCAHMS collection does hold some images of the large batteries and two examples, Fort George, Highland Council area and Charles Hill, Fife Council Area probably provide the researcher a representative idea of what to expect. The battery at Fort George has been demolished whilst that at Charles Hill survives, though most of the

The Scottish Home Front 1939-45

269

ancillary buildings have been removed, a common problem with sites such as this. The wartime oblique images of Fort George, shows the installation with heavy camouflage netting, whilst that at Charles Hill has none. Another single frame from a sortie of vertical photographs taken near the end of the war has captured both Torry and Girdle Ness batteries (Fig. 165) in Aberdeen shows detail up to the surrounding barbed-wire fences in a single frame. Unlike coast batteries, the sorties flown over heavy anti-aircraft batteries are more comprehensive. As noted above, the anti-aircraft batteries around Glasgow are well covered with one sortie concentrating entirely on producing oblique and vertical formats. The Glasgow flight also shows whether, at the date of the flight, guns were already mounted, another useful feature for anyone researching this aspect of wartime activity. Even the “M” Series or CAM obliques noted below have recorded one or two anti-aircraft sites including the eponymous “Z” batteries used earlier in the war. The Z battery was usually comprised a group of 64 (or less) fixed rocket mounts firing unrotating projectiles set to explode at a pre-set height. The main problem was that it had a “limitation as a ‘one shot’ weapon” (Dobinson 2001: 298) and that it required a relatively large area, for its layout (Ibid.). Quanterness in Orkney is a classic example. The National Archives (formerly Public Record Office), has documents referring to a battery near this place, but the location given sited it over half a kilometre away from where it actually was. The sortie covering Orkney from 1941, yielded the true location and the image has also revealed the very temporary nature of the installation, showing it to be made up mainly of tents rather than permanent buildings. A visit to the site in 1998 found only four small mounds and a row of concrete hut bases. Another few frames from the 1941 sortie show a permanent anti-aircraft battery, again in Orkney, just south of the Netherbutton Radar Station at Midhouse. Visible here are fixed gun emplacements and an early gun-laying radar unit with Gl-mat and an accommodation camp of huts. The coverage of these batteries has confirmed or refuted in some cases the use of gun direction radar, specifically by the presence of a hexagonal Gl-mat adjacent to the gun-emplacements. In one case, the site at Strone near Gare Loch protecting the war built Naval Base, it is very apparent on the photograph that the guns have not been mounted, which, given the date

270

Chapter Sixteen

of the photograph would suggest that the armament may never have been installed (Fig. 16-6). The Gl-mat that can be seen in the Strone example was also found on many of the heavy anti-aircraft batteries. The mat became necessary after it was found that the gun-lying radar was particularly “sensitive to siting” (Hogg 2002: 114-136) when it was discovered problems could be solved by laying a large area around the radar set with a mat of chicken wire. The Gl – mat was octagonal in plan and several have been found in Orkney, with short lengths of wire still attached to the posts. There was also an octagonal pathway around the mat (Dobinson 2001: 276). Supplying over 300 gun batteries was to involve the whole of the country’s stock of chicken wire (Price 2000: 124).

 Fig. 16-6: M series (CAM oblique) 1943 image of heavy anti-aircraft battery with Gl-mat for radar set in foreground, Strone, Argyll and Bute (Source: RCAHMS)

Anti-invasion defences, coastal and inland The RAF photographed long stretches of the coast during the war. As a consequence many of the emergency defences thrown up after Dunkirk

The Scottish Home Front 1939-45

271

have been recorded. Pillboxes, anti-tank blocks, anti-tank ditches, antilanding obstacles and roadblocks all appear in the collection. They have proved most invaluable in locating long-lost structures including some now buried by drifting sand dunes. However, some mysteries remain. Sections of ditch between Peterhead and Fraserburgh in Northeast Scotland are analogous to Iron Age defences with a wooden paling running along the outer lip of a linear trench or ditch. Though this was part of an anti-tank system with large pillboxes or strongpoints placed at the changes in angle of the ditch, it would seem that the use of wooden palings lacked the strength to resist a tank attack. The World War Two period photographs have provided much information on what was built. In some cases this is at odds with the documentary evidence in the National Archives, confirming the fact that many defence installations were planned but never built. Parts of the major Stop Line in Scotland, the Command Line have been photographed, particularly the area around Ladybank, Fife. In this case the zigzag course of a major anti-tank ditch is visible along with some of the associated pillboxes. As can be seen on Fig. 16-7, this major stop line was much more complicated than had been originally thought. In some places there were two lines of anti-tank ditch with pillboxes for both machine guns and antitank weapons built into the system. The fact that the main Edinburgh to Aberdeen railway ran through the line provided the designers with some problems because this inevitably created gaps in the defences. Interestingly, this major Command Line is cited in Defending Britain (Osborne 2004), which notes the anti-tank blocks, pillboxes and loopholed walls that its formed parts, but omits to mention the large and obvious anti-tank ditch that is visible in Fig. 16-7. There is also almost complete oblique air coverage of the coast between Inverness and Fraserburgh, incorporating mile upon mile of antitank blocks, pillboxes, strong points and observation posts along this shore. As many lengths of this still survive, some of it buried within the rapidly shifting dunes, the photographs have helped in the identification of many elements of the coastal defence system. These sorties have therefore provided the recorders in RCAHMS with a large amount of information about where and in some cases when these defences were built. Although many of the long lines of beach anti-tank blocks survived to be photographed by the National Survey from 1946

272

Chapter Sixteen

onwards, there were some areas where these had been removed almost immediately after the cessation of hostilities, showing the value of the contemporary aerial photography.

Fig. 16-7: RAF 1941 showing part of the Command Line, 24 February 1942 showing the anti-tank ditch north of Ladybank, Fife (Source: RCAHMS)

Radar sites Several of Scotland’s radar stations have been photographed and of these the best are Netherbutton in the Orkney Islands and Noss Hill, Shetland Islands. The images of the early Chain Home Radar station at Netherbutton have confirmed several banks of “Z” batteries defended the

The Scottish Home Front 1939-45

273

station. As this installation was covered during the survey of 20th century military remains these vertical air photographs were able to assist RCAHMS in deciphering what survives on site today. The other valuable sequence of photographs covers another Chain Home station at Noss Hill in the Shetland Islands. RCAHMS has also photographed the remains of this large radar site. Many of the structures survive, mainly due to the fact that it is very remote. A lot of use has been made of work undertaken by Ian Brown of the National Museums of Scotland who has accumulated a large archive of material relating to radar stations in Scotland and publications showing the locations of most of the permanent stations in Scotland (Latham and Stobbs 1996: 223).

Decoys Very few of the large number of decoys constructed in Scotland during the Second World War appear on the contemporary air photographs. Two exceptions are the Q/QF type Decoy Airfield at Sarclet south of Wick in Caithness and the Starfish decoy at Gleniffer Braes near Paisley, to the west of Glasgow (Fig. 16-8). The Starfish type decoy was designed to lure enemy bombers away from the urban area and the image of the Gleniffer Braes site clearly shows the metal “baskets” to create small oil fires, the control bunker and other groups of fire baskets (Dobinson 2000: 76-131). Though many of the decoy sites relating to Starfish are known from the postwar air photographs, this is the only one recorded during the war found in the RCAHMS collection. One other, the Q/QF type airfield decoy airfield at Sarclet, south of Wick has been photographed. At this location the runway and perimeter track has been “created” in the vegetation and is clearly seen on the vertical photograph of February 1941. Interestingly, these dummy runways at the decoy airfield at Sarclet are still visible today in heather vegetation along with the brick and concrete remains of the control bunker. Of all the types of sites the decoys are the most difficult to identify on air photographs, especially the postwar series.

“M” series camouflage and industrial Scotland Known as the “M” Series these are mainly oblique aerial photographs and were taken by No.1 CAM Squadron, a little known unit formed at Baginton in 1939 using an odd assortment of aircraft. The unit must have

274

Chapter Sixteen

utilised Leuchars Airfield, Fife along with several other airfields throughout Scotland. The coverage is mainly urban and oblique though there are one or two examples of vertical photography and it would appear they were used for assessing the effectiveness of camouflage schemes on industrial plant in Scotland. During the course of the war the RAF photographed a large part of the industrial infrastructure in Scotland’s, much of which has now disappeared. Though the subject matter is mainly industrial, a few military sites appear in the 600 images of this part of the collection. Good evidence for camouflage schemes can be found from both the wartime and postwar air photographs and it is suggested that it may be useful if a separate study is undertaken of this much forgotten art including oral evidence and the recording of surviving examples. Certainly, examination of the photographs shows a wide range of camouflage schemes, some simple, but many of complicated designs. Bizarrely, some of the most prominent of those observed are found on military buildings, and the example of the Type C hangars at Wick Airfield surely must count as the most visible (Fig. 16-9). Other examples are found at most of the airfields recorded during this period and if those found on some of the industrial plant are included, a wide variation of schemes can be seen. In some instances camouflage has been taken to almost ridiculous lengths, almost making the buildings more visible rather than less. However, this is surpassed by Edinburgh Corporation who during the early part of the war, “even went so far as to camouflage the roofs of their buses” (Jeffrey 1992: 133). This would have been of little practical value especially as they did not repeat this on the large fleet of electric trams that formed a major part of the public transport system.

The Scottish Home Front 1939-45

275

 Fig. 16-8: Starfish Decoy at Gleniffer Braes, West Renfrewshire, 1941 (Source: RCAHMS)

What is missing? Despite the seminal work of experts such as John Guy (Guy 19972001, Dobinson 2000, Dobinson 2001), many wartime sites have yet to be discovered. The most obvious omissions from the aerial photography is evidence of First World War structures in Scotland. This is partly due to the fact that Scotland was not the front line and reconnaissance photographs of home-based sites were unnecessary. Additionally, many of the First World

276

Chapter Sixteen

War period sites were re-used in the later conflict and were recorded when the official aerial photographic training schemes were instituted. Secondary to this is that many of those built during this period have been demolished or remained out of use by 1939.

 Fig. 16-9: Wick Airfield, Highland showing the camouflage scheme on the Type C hangars, 1941 (Source: RCAHMS)

A second reason is that First World War aerial photography was in its infancy, though by 1918 its uses had become vital to the war effort. The documentary evidence found in the National Archives supplements the lack of aerial information about the 1914-18 period military structures in Scotland to a certain extent, but the lack of coverage is notable.

The Scottish Home Front 1939-45

277

From the Second World War, there are also some notable omissions. These include Loch Ewe, radar stations of the Western Isles and part of Loch Ryan, near Stranraer. Finally and not previously mentioned, invisible on air photographs are internal details of buildings such as war art, painted wall signs and other structures too small to be captured by air photography.

Further work and conclusions The first 4,000 RAF wartime air photographs have been carefully examined and a great deal of information has been extracted from this source. However, the remaining 4,000 prints, which were released from Government security restrictions, more recently, are now in the process of being plotted and catalogued. Further work on this material is underway with discoveries of military activity regularly being noted. RCAHMS are also trying to find further Luftwaffe material. Although most of the recent discoveries have been in private hands copies are being requested to permit public access to these images. Though the material held by RCAHMS is of less International importance it cannot be stressed how valuable the air photographs from 1939-45 war are to research on military activity within Scotland. A large amount of information has been gleaned from the examination of the images and coupled with several documentation sources held in the National Archive, Imperial War Museum and elsewhere has painted a much fuller picture of the Home Front in Scotland that might have been expected. The visual image will always have the advantage over the written word and in creating a forum for public access to the photographs via the website (www.rcahms.gov.uk), RCAHMS has gained much more than just additional archive lists.

References Babington-Smith C. (1958) Evidence in Camera, The Story of Photographic Intelligence in World War II. Chatto and Windus, London. Barclay G.J. (2005) The Cowie Line: A Second World War “stop line” west of Stonehaven, Aberdeenshire. Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland. Edinburgh: 119-161. Dobinson C. (2000) Fields of Deception, Britain’s bombing decoys of World War II. English Heritage, London.

278

Chapter Sixteen

Dobinson C. (2001) AA Command, Britain’s Anti-Aircraft defences of the Second World War. English Heritage, London. Guy J. (1997-2001) A survey of 20th Century Defences in Scotland. 1-21, Edinburgh. Her Majesty’s Stationary Office (1942) Front Line 1940-41, the official story of the Civil Defence of Britain. Her Majesty’s Stationary Office, London. —. (1945) Roof over Britain, the official story of Britain’s anti-aircraft defences 1939-1942. Her Majesty’s Stationary Office, London. Hogg I.V. (2002) Anti-Aircraft Artillery. The Crowood Press Ltd, Marlborough. Holmes R. (2004) The Little Field Marshal: A Life of Sir John French. Cassell Military Books, London. Hughes J. (1991) A Steep Turn to the stars, a history of aviation in the Moray Firth. Benevenagh Books, Peterborough. Hughes M. (1998) Hebrides at War. Canongate Books, Edinburgh. Jeffrey A. (1992) This Present Emergency, Edinburgh, The River Forth and South-East Scotland and the Second World War. Trafalgar Square, Edinburgh. Latham C. & Stobbs A. (1996) Radar: A wartime miracle. Alan Sutton, Stroud. Leaf E. (1996) Above All Unseen, the Royal Air Force’s photographic reconnaissance units 1939-1945. Haynes Publications, Yeovil. Lowry B. (2004) British Home Defences 1940-45. Osprey Publications, Oxford. Nesbit C.R. (2003) Eyes of the RAF: A History of Photo Reconnaissance. 2 ed. Sutton, Stroud. Osborne M. (2004) Defending Britain. Twentieth-Century Military Structures in the Landscape. Tempus, Stroud. Price A. (2000) Blitz on Britain 1939-45. Sutton Publishing, Stroud. —. (2003) Targeting the Reich, allied photographic reconnaissance over Europe, 1939-45. Greenhill Books, London. RCAHMS (1999) Catalogue of the Luftwaffe Photographs in the National Monuments Record of Scotland. Scotland from the Air 1939-49. 1, RCAHMS, Edinburgh. —. (2000) Catalogue of the RAF World War II Photographs in the National Monuments Record of Scotland. Scotland from the Air 193949. 2, RCAHMS, Edinburgh. —. (2004) Catalogue of the RAF Oblique Aerial Photographs 1945-9 held in the National Monuments Record of Scotland. Scotland from the Air 1939-49. 3, RCAHMS, Edinburgh.

The Scottish Home Front 1939-45

279

Simpson G.J.F. (2004) Story of Drem Airfield. Gullane & Dirleton HS, Edinburgh. Staerck C. (1998) Allied Photo-reconnaissance of World War II. Thunder Bay Press, London. Stanley R. (1982) World War II Photo Intelligence. Charles Schribner's sons, London. —. (1998) To Fool a Glass Eye, camouflage versus photo reconnaissance in World War II. Smithsonian, London. Thompson J.B. (1989) The Charterhall Story: a tribute to the wartime work of a Borders airfield. Air Research, New Malden. Tully-Jackson J. & Brown I. (1996) East Lothian at War 1. East Lothian District Library, Haddington. Tully-Jackson J. & Brown I. (2001) East Lothian at War 2. East Lothian Council Library Service, Haddington.



CHAPTER SEVENTEEN A PROPOSAL FOR AN ENCYCLOPAEDIC INTERNET DATABASE OF AIR PHOTO AND LAND PHOTO IMAGES OF EARTH SURFACE MARKS AND SIGNATURES WACLAW GODZIEMBA-MALISZEWSKI “Ineluctable modality of the visible: At least that, if no more, thought through my eyes.Signatures of all things I am here to read, seaspawn and seawrack, the nearing tide” James Joyce, Ulysses

Introduction: the trend towards digitalisation of historical aerial and land imagery archives for the Internet Several Internet search engines provide images and photographs. These offerings are overwhelmingly horizontal, but include, in rare instances, vertical and oblique aerial photographs. But such are often presented with marginal resolution and without scale. The poor Internet inventory of aerial imagery is a detriment to several disciplines, among them archaeology, the earth sciences, military history, forensic criminology, architecture, and several social sciences. Some specialist Internet sites offer GIS views of the earth, the best of which are by subscription, aimed at particular sciences, and require advanced software. Google Earth is a user-friendly site particularly welcomed by archaeologists and others who anticipate its future development towards advanced GIS tools. However, Google and other search engines do not provide a historical record of changes in the earth’s surface. The author learned recently that Google and other commercial companies have sent representatives to the Cartographic Branch of the United States National Archives in College Park Maryland, USA, to assess their imagery holdings. Details of such and the response of the National

282

Chapter Seventeen

Archives have not been made public. But what is certain is current commercial interest in digitalizing the enormous photographic archives of aerial images. Future digitalization may also include identification guides, as well as vintage WWII era American military photo interpretation manuals, and similar materials captured from the German army – which itself had captured Soviet army photo interpretation manuals (GodziembaMaliszewski 1995a: 84-87). The aerial photography collections at the Cartographic Branch of The National Archives consist of reconnaissance photos taken from balloons during the American Civil War, WWI and WWII Allied military air photos, captured German Luftwaffe air photos, post WWII Moby Dick, Black Bird and Corona images up to the 1970’s, as well as domestic American aerial imagery, contemporary and vintage. At present there are approximately 800,000 flight sortie overlays, including National, Allied, and captured GX German imagery and JX Japanese imagery, of which 250,000 are accessible while the remaining 550,000 are unavailable because of physical or NATO restrictions. Where some flight transparent overlays may record only several air photos, others may have multiple sortie plans recording dozens of air photos. Digitalization of this vast holding is a formidable but not impossible task. The Cartographic Branch of the National Archives has already digitalized some of its research tools, in one particular case because of the degeneration of transparent acetate sortie overlays. The overlays are now in a cold storage repository in Lenexa (Kansas) to prevent further deterioration due to vinegar syndrome and distortion. Several hundred thousand of them have already been digitalized. In the past a researcher had to hold a particular transparent overlay that contained several sortie flight plans, over an AMS map to locate a point of interest. Now it is possible to sit in front of a film-viewing machine, place an erasable mark on a screen over a particular AMS map, then scroll down a continuous roll of overlays showing flight sorties devoted to the particular geographic coordinates of the map. This new efficient research method will be readily adaptable to the Internet in the future. Digitalisation of historical aerial and land imagery for presentation on the Internet will eventually encompass most global archives. Parenthetically, one must observe that the original images remain of utmost importance. There is no contemporary scanning technology that can capture every nuance of the original photograph. Where a researcher finds data of questionable interpretation within an image digitalised from

A Proposal for an Encyclopaedic Internet Database

283

an original panchromatic photograph, examination of the original will prove essential, particularly in forensic applications.

An encyclopaedic interdisciplinary Internet database of aerial photography and corresponding land images, with collateral data As much as the future commercial development of Internet access to state archives of vintage aerial imagery would be a boon to several disciplines, the author proposes that another Internet site, academically driven, should be developed that would greatly assist photo interpretation specialists. Based on multi-sourced information, and incorporating collateral textual materials, the site would be a visual encyclopaedia comprising aerial and horizontal ground photography, schematic illustrations, and references to published data. Universities and private sources concerned with interpretable data in several scientific and historical disciplines would contribute to the proposed database. The proposed main site would need a platform of 400 dpi, with links to original imagery sources of 1,600 and 24,000 dpi. Other than stating that such a site should also include a “bulletin board” where a researcher could post an ambiguous photograph for the purview of interested colleagues; and that searchable terms used by different disciplines to describe visual forms should be cross referenced in searches for similar images, the complexities of how such an interactive database should be constructed is outside of the scope of this paper. Though many databases already exist, most are not accessible by the Internet, nor is there a common platform of image size and resolution. In cases of problematic interpretation, a researcher may spend hours trying to find a visual authority. This is especially true of ground that is difficult to access, as in the case of the author’s interest in some areas of the Russian Federation and other East European nations where there is an increasing tendency on the part of current authorities to restrict investigation of crime scenes associated with the communist era. Other areas of interest to archaeologists in search of “ground truth” may also be difficult to access, such as in closed societies like China, or in areas of conflict like the Middle East. In situations like the above, a visual encyclopaedia on the Internet of various earth marks and signatures would be of great comparative value.

284

Chapter Seventeen

A search of Google Images resulted in very few images “earth marks” and “crop mark” of which the great majority were graphic illustrations, with few being actual aerial photos. A search for “Kurgan” produced thousands of images, few of which were relative to archaeological interest, excepting, among several others, the massive fields of the Russian barrow fields at Gnezdovo. ”Snow mark” and other terms denoting the visual interests of archaeologists ended with similar poor results. Relating to small death pits or trenches, often disguised, attributable to the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany (and apparent in some WWII reconnaissance imagery), the search term “mass graves” resulted in astonishingly few images, most of which originated from a Holocaustdenial site, and a few from Bosnia. Most successful was the term “tumuli”, which resulted in hundreds of images, about 30% of which were of archaeological interest. These included some fine oblique photographs of the 8th – 11th centuries B.C Macedonian burial field near Aigai containing 300 small earthen tumuli, but that look similar to earth marks of hummocky terrain associated with some forms of karst geomorphology. This is a perfect example of why a visual data base is needed; the differentiation between similar-shaped objects, as in certain forms of tumuli and karst marks, would be more easily distinguished by comparative imagery. In a general text search for data in the fields of archaeology or earth science one is most likely to be directed to a PDF file rather than to a HTML and in consequence find reference to photographic or similar data in the original publication but not inclusive on the Internet. This explains why Google Images is so poorly represented with archaeology and earth science vertical imagery. A search of Google for air photos of “camouflage” produced far more interesting results, as is true for many military signatures, rather than for terms associated with archaeology and earth science. A general search for “aerial photos” resulted in approximately 100,000 images, and for “aerial photographs” with just under 40,000 results, few of which had a scale attached. “Photo interpretation” resulted in over 100,000 images, many of curious interest, but even with specific commands search results are limited because few results contain scale or adequate resolution. Regarding the physical sciences, a search for “karst, aerial” resulted in only 5 aerial photos. A search for “mogote” – a steep-sided hill of limestone usually surrounded by flat alleviated plains, produced 589

A Proposal for an Encyclopaedic Internet Database

285

results, including many of a town named Mogote in Colorado, and plants of the cow-parsley family. Of actual mogotes, most images were horizontal; few were vertical air photos. “Sinkhole” results were in the thousands, but mostly horizontal views or graphic illustrations. Related to sinkholes, “pepino”, a smaller conical shaped hillock similar to a mogote, and similar in shape to some examples of tumuli and kurgans, resulted in a few thousand images, mostly of South American pepper varieties. “Hummock”, or “hummocky terrain”, low mounds on the earth’s surface, often multiple, and also close in appearance to the earth marks of Etruscan tumuli fields in Italy, produced many images, but none were aerial. So too with “tussock”, which denotes clumps of grass or vegetation in multiple groups. Basically this was the case with other search engines offering images. Access to aerial imagery, some of which remains restricted, as in the case of WWII Russian Federation holdings, and in formerly closed archives of some nations of Central and Eastern Europe, has largely been possible in only recent years (Goida 1997: 10-11). The development of professional practice by European aerial archaeologists has been the most significant theoretical advance of modern archaeology. This eclipses the contemporary development of forensic archaeology and forensic taphonomy1 (Haglund and Sorg 2002). The quantum leap forward by pioneering aerial archaeologists was propelled, in part, by the availability of vintage air photos, chiefly since 1979 in the United States, and in Europe the lifting of restrictions of where small aircraft could survey following the collapse of communist regimes since 1990. Parallel to this time period the development of the Internet and associated technologies has been extraordinary. Though historiography is well represented on the Internet in textual format, the earth sciences and archaeology, though also well presented textually, must develop a stronger authoritative visual presence. This is the challenge facing archaeologists today.

 1

A recent taphonomy text book (Haglund and Sorg 2002) contained nothing on air photo evidence, nor reference to how the various interdisciplinary scientists found the sites under discussion. In the early 1990’s, Polish forensic legal-medical doctors concerned with Katyn, were made subordinate to archaeologists who had no criminal or forensic training. This resulted in much discussion in medico-legal journals, and, unfortunately, errors in practice and omission by those archaeologists assigned to the case. See also Madro 1995 and relative papers appearing in Archiwum Medycyny Sadowej i Kriminologii, Krakow, 1992-1998.

286

Chapter Seventeen

The author believes a symposium on the proposal above, to create an Internet encyclopaedia of visual marks and signatures, would be a giant step forward. All disciplines with an interest in aerial imagery and photointerpretation could contribute, including those who would benefit in a secondary role from such a centralization of visual knowledge.

Examples of aerial photographs showing similar marks of archaeological and earth science interests The author’s field of research for the past eighteen years has been detection of earth signatures and marks of concealed mass graves and burial pits on former Soviet territory evident in WWII aerial photography. The study of mass-homicide, or genocide, on former Soviet territory is a consideration, in parallel, of the occupation of such by the two bloodiest regimes of Europe in the past century, Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union. The materials presented below are for the purpose of demonstrating alike or ambiguous marks and signatures. The author will not present fully annotated photographs and collateral materials as in his other studies (Godziemba-Maliszewski 1993, Godziemba-Maliszewski 1995b). The object here is to show a few examples of the hundreds that the author could post to the proposed encyclopaedic Internet visual database, and to draw the interest of others with a view to doing likewise.

Ozero Sukhoye, Russia Novgorod Oblast' (58°46 N- 34°28 E) The region’s geographic relief is characterized by a dominant depression containing many swamps and marshlands partially drained by ancient peat diggings. Elevated sections are forested, and with villages on high grounds. Beneath the fertile surface soil layer, and the dominant peat and humus, is a layer of clay beneath which is a lower strata of limestone. Due to karst formations, underground water channels and an aquifer are present. The name “Sukhoye”, meaning, “dry” in Russian, is therefore inappropriate, and perhaps the lake was so named ironically. Before the Russian Revolution a nobleman’s estate was present near Lake Sukhoye. The author has not located any archaeological papers concerning the immediate area of interest on the Internet or in western libraries. As

A Proposal for an Encyclopaedic Internet Database

287

Sukhoye is located approximately 40 kilometers southwest of Borovichi, it is supposed that the prehistory of that region of Novgorod Oblast applies. In 1990 the author received a letter and map from Jerzy Szwede of Palo Alto California containing information positing that, in 1940, Polish prisoners of war were present at a forced-labour camp in the immediate region. The crude hand-drawn map indicated Lake Sukhoye (also known as Divinets) and lines indicative of anti-tank defence trenches. Anecdotal evidence suggested that some prisoners were executed and buried in a portion of the anti-tank trench. Other information from villagers in the region revealed uncertainty as to the prisoner’s nationality, and that the uniformed prisoners might also have been from Finland. The author later gathered other information from the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Poland in an interview with procurator Zbigniew Mielecki (Mielecki 1991). References to Sukhoye and other potential sites appeared in other publications (Bozena 1992). When the author’s research was sent to St. Petersburg Russia section of the Research & Information Centre of Memorial, Dr. Veniamin Ioffe arranged a scientific expedition to Sukhoye that took place between 5 and10 July 19932. The researchers, who were not accompanied by an archaeologist, inexplicitly did not excavate sites of concealment identified by the author, and thus did not establish the existence of concealed mass graves, or other explanation of the earth marks present in Luftwaffe WWII air photos. There may have been a reason for their reluctance to dig: the materials, originally sent to Dr. Ioffe by the author, were confiscated by the KGB (now FSB) and a complaint against the author was sent to the American FBI. Upon being advised by the FBI that the materials, containing WWII German aerial photographs, were declassified and available to any researcher at The National Archives, the materials were released to the St. Petersberg section of Memorial by Russian authorities. Though the research group did not excavate, they did verify the presence of remnants of anti-tank defences, and took useful depositions from villagers in the

 2

The group sent from the Research & Information Center of Memorial, St. Petersburg consisted of six persons: Kruk, Natalya Semenovna, hydrologist; Butkevich, Mariya Stanislavovna, hydrotechnologist, Khromenkov, Vitor Sazonovich, geologist; Chuykina, Sofya Aleksandrovna, student sociologist; Resnikova, Aleksandra, student; Mirkin, Boris Savyelevich, laborer.

288

Chapter Seventeen

area. Thus, research on the area is still on-going by the author, whose interest is chiefly in ground disturbances evident in 19413. The above attempts to encapsulate a complex historiography of the author’s interest in Sukhoye. This will suffice as the object at present is to present the enigma of two anomalies present in German WWII photoreconnaissance imagery taken on 10 September 1941.

Fig. 17-1 Ozero Sukhoye Russia (Source: National Archives and Records Administration)4

The first of which, (Fig. 17-1) presents a general view of Ozero Sukhoye showing signatures and marks of interest. The second (Fig. 17-2)

 3

In December 1994, the author received a letter from Dr. Veniamin Ioffe with additional information on the post WWII use of the area: A new NKVD camp administration, camp no. 270, existed in1944-1952. It included Hungarian, German, and Romanian prisoners of war, as well as internees from several other countries, including insurgent Poles from the underground army (Armia Krajowa) who were distributed in 15 individual gulag camps, “lagpunkty”. According to Dr. Ioffe no documents surfaced in the Novgorod UBD archives indicating whom the prisoners were in 1940-41. 4 Coordinates: 58°46’N- 34°28’E, Sortie: GX 518A F271 SG, Frame: 039, Original Scale: 1:15,000, Date & Time: Sept 19, 1941 9:43 a.m.

A Proposal for an Encyclopaedic Internet Database

289

presents a photo enlargement of an anti-tank defence trench in which ground vegetation has obscured the parapet earthworks. It is known that calcified soil promotes rapid growth of legumes and other types of vegetation, particularly lupins on loamy soils containing clay (Kurlovich 2002: 111). Anecdotal testimony indicates that prisoners were buried in part of the anti-tank defence trench (Swede 1990). Bone matter in damp conditions would quickly leach into the water system. Of the immense network of anti-tank defence trenches that surround Sukhoye and neighbouring villages, this is the only anomaly within an anti-tank trench that seems to correlate with the anecdotal account. At the southernmost point of Ozero Sukhoye a wide hillock with a mesa-like flat crown suddenly rises in elevation by approximately 6-8m from the flat land that lays westerly, and the sloped forest abutting easterly (Fig. 17-3). On top are three separate groups of at least fifty, and possibly more, crater-like shapes evident as white circles with dark centres, some of which appear in a clearing within the descending slope of forest. The inner dark marks suggest sunken centres holding, again by photo-tone, water in the soil, whilst the raised white circular shapes suggest elevation from ground level and hence less water in the soil. The group sent there in 1993 by Dr. Ioffe did not observe their presence on the surface nor, lacking an archaeologist, or for some other unexplained imperative, did they attempt an exploratory excavation. It is known that peat diggings have been common the surrounding area since ancient times; but these circular shapes seem incongruous to peat diggings that are generally present as trenches or terraced escarpments. Two dirt roads (off camera), lead to the site, one immediately southerly, and the other south-westerly. Other small trails are also evident. The soil separating two larger areas of circular clusters is widely scarred, apparently by vehicular traffic. Such heavy ground disturbance by vehicles suggests that this is not an ancient barrow or tumuli site, but something undefined that was frequently accessed. Yet in the following section on the Gnezdovo funereal barrows (Fig. 17-4) similarities of shapes will be observed though they are with certainty barrows. Nearby the Ozero Sukhoye site, approximately 165m southwest, is a machine-gun position (identified to the author by military photo-interpretation analyst Robert Poirier in 1991).

290

Chapter Seventeen

Fig. 17-2: Ozero Sukhoye Russia (Source: National Archives and Records Administration)5

Fig. 17-3: Ozero Sukhoye Russia (Source: National Archives and Records Administration)6

 5

Coordinates: 58° 46’N- 34°28’E, Sortie: GX 518A F271 SG, Frame 040, Original Scale: 1:15,000, Date & Time: Sept 19, 1941, 9:43 a.m.

A Proposal for an Encyclopaedic Internet Database

291

A similar group of white circular shapes, yet without the dark centres, appears in a clearing approximately 2 kilometers north of Ozero Sukhoye. Also several kilometres north of the lake are strip mines with fenced barracks and guard towers present.

Gnezdovo, Russia Smolenskskaya Oblast’ (54°78 N - 31°83 E) Gnezdovo is situated on the banks of a meander of the Dniepr River, immediately west of Smolensk, in the centre of the East European plain that contains 50 or more glacially formed lakes and many engraved river valleys. AMS maps identify Karst in the immediate region, and at least one sinkhole is present near the former NKVD dacha on the Katyn Forest bend of the river nearby. Clay, dolomite, chalk, marl, and limestone are found in the region, as well as loam and black topsoil. Gnezdovo was the most important Iron Age portage (Westerdahl 1992, Westerdahl 2004) between the Lower Dvina and the Dniepr, and contains the largest grave field in Russia. Of an approximate estimate of 5,000 barrows traces some 3,000 remain, a large portion attributed to Scandinavians and earlier ones to Slavonic tribes from the 9th century AD (Pushkina and Zhukovsky 2005). The meanders and flood plain of the at times raging Dniepr River obliterated many hundreds over the centuries. Commenting on the great flood of 1655, Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich wrote to his sisters from Smolensk that a bridge spanning the Dniepr, normally about 15m above the river, was submerged. Gnezdovo is within 2 kilometres of the “Goat’s Hill” of Katyn Forest where, in 1940, the Soviet Security Police, the NKVD, buried approximately 4,400 Polish officers in concealed graves and blamed the crime on the Germans (Zawodny 1962, Godziemba-Maliszewski 1995b). 7

 6

Coordinates: 58° 46’N- 34°28’E, Sortie: GX 518A F271 SG, Frame 040; Original Scale: 1:15,000, Date & Time: Sept 19, 1941, 9:43 a.m. 7 Following the collapse of the Soviet Union many East and Central European nations immediately put academic papers on the Internet and built a strong presence. Russian science was late in doing so, chiefly establishing an impressive Internet presence only after 1996. Papers related to kurgans also only appeared on the Internet in the later 1990’s, unknown to the author’s 1995 study of the mass graves of Polish prisoners at Katyn, nearby to which are the Gnezdovo kurgan fields. The New York Public Library and other American sources lacked sufficient visual data. In consequence the author identified only a few kurgans, the editors

292

Chapter Seventeen

The author presents the above historical abbreviation to introduce Fig. 17-4, the photograph of the central field of Gnezdovo barrows taken by the Luftwaffe on 8 January 1944, as a close comparative to that of Ozero Sukhoye (Fig. 17-3) 8. Whereas the elevated white circles of Ozero Sukhoye present lower damp earth within their shapes, the central group of mounds of Gnezdovo, revealed here covered with snow, present like the shapes of beehive-like domes, higher in elevation, and with smaller central collapsed tops. The tops indent in only a few instances by natural compaction of the contents within, but in far greater measure by intrusion of fortune hunters who have robbed them. Fig. 17-4 has several marks of interest, including an above ground pipe that skirts the barrow fields.

Fig. 17-4: Gnezdovo Russia (Source: National Archives and Records Administration)9

 insisted on attributing the rest to “bee-hive like domes”, a feature of karst landscape (according to AMS strategic maps, Gnezdovo is within a karst sector). 8 Contemporary literature refers to barrows at Gnezdovo; now the accepted term. Earlier Russian, Polish, and English literature used the term “kurgans”. 9 Coordinates: 54°46’15”N 30°47’17”E, Sortie: GX 4682 F 24 44 SD, Frame: 95, Original Scale: 1: 9,000, Date & Time: January 1, 1944

A Proposal for an Encyclopaedic Internet Database

293

What is most striking in similarity to the Sukhoye and Gnezdovo images is that roads, evinced by footpaths and scars of vehicular traffic, have been created among the shapes. In the case of Gnezdovo it is observed that destruction of many kurgans in front of the ingress railway road is evident by a lower earth strata, indicating massive mechanical excavation. It is known that local peasants used earth for brick making and other purposes, and that many excavation pits are present on the terrain (Fig. 17-5) But it is difficult to ascertain if the excavation of the central group of mounds was officially sanctioned (note the precise curving arc of the road leading to it), or if these are traces of 19th century archaeological investigation, or perhaps both.

Fig. 17-5: Gnezdovo Russia (Source: National Archives and Records Administration)10

There are many groups of barrows on both sides of the Dniepr. The author found one area beneath Gluschenki where probable NKVD burial pits were commingled within a barrow field (Godziemba-Maliszewski 1995b).



10 Coordinates: 54°46’15”N 30°47’17”E, Sortie: GX 4682 F 24 44 SD, Frame: 96, Original Scale: 1:9,000, Date & Time: January 1, 1944

294

Chapter Seventeen

Fig. 17-6, located westerly of Gnezdovo and above the Polish graves at Goat’s Hill, Katyn, presents a snow covered rectangular shape of three rows of 42 square shapes with one open side each, above this are eight more similar shapes, and above these an open pit. A specialist in the audience, Arnold Pronk, solved the “signature” of the shapes: The image is of a snow covered German ammunition dump constructed of sandbags 11 . Each sand bag square is independent of adjacent structures, so if an explosion occurs in one it will not transfer to another. That the mystery of the image was solved quickly, the author posits as validation of the need for an encyclopaedic Internet database of visual signatures and marks, particularly the proposed “bulletin board” that would invite commentary.

Fig. 17-6: Gnezdovo-Katyn Russia (Source: National Archives and Records Administration)12

 11

The identification was made by Arnold Pronk of Radboud University, Netherlands. 12 Coordinates: 54°46’15”N- 30°47’17”E, Sortie: GX 4682 F24 44 SD, Frame: 99, Original Scale: 1:9,000, Date & Time: January 1, 1944

A Proposal for an Encyclopaedic Internet Database

295

Relating to the circular barrow shapes evident in snow at Gnezdovo, and to those similar, yet unknown, from Ozero Sukhoye, the author will now present an image of circular shapes found in Kharkiv Ukraine.

Kharkiv Kharkiv Oblast’ Ukraine (49°58 N- 36°8 E) Kharkiv is situated at the confluence of the Kharkiv, Lopan, and Udy Rivers that flow into the Seversky Donets watershed. Despite this, its location is within a zone of generally low humidity, situated between two zones: grassland and woodland. In some years high air temperatures and draught conditions result in dust storms from mid to late summer. The dominant types of soil are rich Ukrainian black earth (chernozem) and gray podzolic loess. Large masses of gray podzolic soils are found exposed by drained washes, ravines, and riverbanks. Hundreds of years ago the majority of Ukraine was covered with forests. In the WWII era, surrounding Kharkiv, only remnants remained. Cultural artefacts date to the Bronze Age, as well as those of later Scythian and Sarmatian settlers. The Chernyakhov culture flourished in the area from the 2nd to the 6th century AD. It was also an important 17thcentury frontier headquarters of Ukrainian Cossacks who were loyal to the Russian tsars. The northern expanse of forest between Kharkiv City and Pyatakhatki is known as the Forest Park. From the time of the Revolution until well after WWII this Forest Park was fenced, first by the Cheka, and then by the NKVD and its successor acronyms, and was off-limits to the general population. Upon entry into Kharkiv in late September 1941 the Germans referred to Kharkiv as “Little Paris”. During WWII there were 4 major battles between German and Soviet forces that impacted the surrounding forests and fields as well as leaving significant parts of the city destroyed. But it may be the hub of the largest killing grounds so far encountered on Soviet terrain by the author, containing mass-graves created during the Revolution and the Civil War, the Red Terror initiated by Lenin, Stalin’s Great Terror and the Purges through 1941, the period of German occupation, and Soviet retributions upon re-occupying the city. Fig. 17-7 presents two forest clearings in the Kharkiv Forest Park just west of the Belgorod-Kharkic Highway. Opposite to them on the easterly side of the road, are the known graves of Polish prisoner of war officers

296

Chapter Seventeen

from Starobelsk who were transported to Kharkiv prison, killed, and buried in the Forest Park near the village of Piatachatki. These clearings evident in Fig. 17-7 are in the forest that was controlled by the Cheka and the later NKVD from 1920 through the date of the photograph, 24 September 1941, taken before the German entry into Kharkiv. The lower trapezoid-shaped clearing contains 21 white spots that appear as tops to mounds, rather like hummocky terrain, yet there is no other terrain of this character around. It is likely that they are burial pits created by the NKVD after 1937. The tops, at the end of a dry summer, would hold less water than the ground sloping downwards from them, accounting for the white halation.

Fig. 17-7: Luftwaffe aerial photograph of Kharkiv Ukraine (Source: National Archives and Records Administration)13

Just above the trapezoid shape is another, irregularly shaped clearing containing approximately 11 to 14 white halation marks elevated from the soil surface, yet somewhat older that those in the clearing below it.



13 Coordinates: 49°58’ N. 36°8’ E, Sortie TUGX 1282 460 SK, Frame: 054, Original Scale: 1:38,000, Date & Time: Sept. 24,1941 8:47 a.m.

A Proposal for an Encyclopaedic Internet Database

297

Fig. 17-8 presents another Luftwaffe photograph, taken on 20 September 1941 of a forest clearing approximately 1.5 kilometres to the south of Fig. 17-7. Two large covered trenches are visible, around which are 5-6 pits. A forest path crosses the clearing bisecting these shapes. The shapes are visible because of the brown-off, the dying of new grass cover that did not survive the hot Ukrainian summer, surrounded by older mature grass still alive. The author believes the earth marks were created in 1940, and may possibly be associated with civilian Polish prisoners, concentrated in Kiev and sent to Kharkiv for execution at the same time as Polish prisoners of war in the spring of 1940. South of the photo-plane the forest ends on the outskirts of the city of Kharkiv. Nearby is a compound with high fencing and guard towers. Easterly to this is a military barracks. The clearing is no longer present, it is now the seat of a radio tower. Large trenches like the above in Fig. 17-8 are evident in many areas of the former Soviet Union. They are also evident near Nazi concentration camps in German-occupied Poland and other nations. There have been several significant ground studies of such, but a comparative aerial imagery analysis is lacking. Research is needed to determine approximate estimates, in differing earth conditions, of the actual size of a concealment trench within a larger earth disturbance. When such trenches are created, earth is disturbed well beyond the perimeters by an initial parapet of soil. Upon filling-in, a larger earth mark is left than the actual size of the digging. In the author’s estimate such a mark as that in Fig. 17-8 indicates a trench about 15% smaller in size than the area disturbed on the photograph. An Internet database of marks and signatures would greatly assist this area of research.

298

Chapter Seventeen

Fig. 17-8: Luftwaffe aerial photograph of Kharkiv Ukraine (Source: National Archives and Records Administration)14

Mednoe, Russia Tverskaya Oblast’ (56°93 N- 35°47 E) Tverskaya Oblast, characterized by very flat terrain, contains many mineral springs, hundreds of lakes created upon the end of the glacial age, and three main rivers, Volga, Mologa, and Tvertsa. Forests now cover 50% of the territory though this was greater in the WWII era. The region has large deposits of coal, glass-making sand, limestone, dolomite, and is covered with fertile soil and many peat beds and significant muskeg bogs. Mednoe is situated westerly of Tver (Kalinin in the communist era) on the banks of the Tvertsa River. Polish prisoners of war detained at Ostashkov were found near Mednoe in 1991 in damp mass graves that still preserved remnants of flesh after 50 years. The graves had been covered by a post Cheka NKVD (Soviet security forces) latrine.

 14

Coordinates: 48°58’ N. 36°8’. E, Target Material: Dick Tracy “City 1”, Sortie: DT/TM 5 Box 13, Frame: 1731, Original Scale: 1:38,000, Date & Time: Sept. 20, 1941

A Proposal for an Encyclopaedic Internet Database

299

The author’s study of the terrain of Mednoe identified 12 possible areas of mass graves, two of which have been confirmed. Clearly it was chosen as the secret burial grounds of the Kalinin (now Tver) NKVD, and most of the sites probably date from the 1930’s, excepting the Polish sites created in the spring of 1940. The site presented here Fig. 17-9, approximately 2 kilometres south of Mednoe on the Tvertsa River, relates to the flat rectangular trenches presented in Kharkiv Fig. 17-8 above, though differing in shape. In the top right quadrant of the photo plane seven large dog-bone shaped trenches appear. Such shapes result from the entry and exit of a bulldozer whose blade pushes soil left and right upon exiting, and then, on re-entering the trench does the same to the other end. This is a signature mark, just as the signature of a backhoe, a bucket excavator, creates either the symmetrical shapes evident in Kharkiv, above, or the shapes evident here in Mednoe that are below the dog-bone shapes and also westerly of them. The author showed this image and others in 1991 to the Bronze Age archaeologist Prof. Kazimierz Godlowski of Jagiellonian University, who discounted the shapes as of no ancient archaeological interest, and thought them approximate but somewhat earlier to the date of the photographs taken on 22 August 1942. Later the author sent them to the Odessa section of the Research & Information Center of Memorial, who in turn sent them to the Tver section. Tver Memorial presented them and other collateral research of the author’s to Russian security authorities in Tver. The materials were seized, the area in Mednoe cordoned off, and all access forbidden (letter to the author by Nikolai Danilov of the Odessa section of Memorial, 1996). The author presents the above examples of known and ambiguous images, some of archaeological interest and remarkably similar and easily confused with earth science marks and signatures, in support of the proposal for an Internet database of ground marks and signatures. Answers to what lies beneath the earth in certain of the above examples, detected by aerial observation, may only be answered by archaeological exploration and collateral research in various state archives.

300

Chapter Seventeen

Fig. 17-9: Luftwaffe aerial photograph of Mednoe Russia (Source: National Archives and Records Administration)15

Appendix: some terms and caveats “Air-truth” is a term used by military and strategic intelligence photo interpreters to posit what seems likely, probable, in an aerial imagery observation. “Ground-truth” is solid corroborative archival data, confirmed anecdotal testimony, or the ineluctable authority of on-site inspection that confirms air-truth. Other than military and intelligence photo-interpreters, aerial archaeologists and earth scientists enjoy the advantage of on-site inspection within permissive territories. Regarding the terms “marks” and “signatures”, the author appreciates that archaeologists and earth scientists use the former generally, where especially military and strategic photo interpreters use the latter. Of several examples of a signature, that is, a shape that is certain, or caused by a known impact, are individual earth scars left by tracked or wheeled military vehicles. Another example, the dirt roads often seen in air photos



15 Coordinates: 56°93’ N. 35°47’ E, Sortie: GX 1594 F 1855, Frame 053, Original Scale: 1:22,000, Date & Time: August 22, 1942 7:46 a.m.

A Proposal for an Encyclopaedic Internet Database

301

of Eastern Europe displaying three worn paths, the centre created by a horse and the outer by wheels of a wagon. Military signatures are well documented in photo interpretation and recognition manuals, and are constantly updated following advances in technology. Col. Roy Stanley, recalling his role in the Vietnam War, clarified why some US military photo interpreters in their reports used caveats: “A statement by a photo interpreter without caveats means he is sure of the interpretation. The most common bet-hedgers in photo intelligence are “probable” and “possible” (Stanley 1981, Stanley 1998). In mind of the above, one recalls the words of American politicians who deliberately obfuscated the phrase “possible weapons of mass destruction” (language used in US photo intelligence reports on Iraq) – to “weapons of mass destruction”; now debunked. (George Bush, October 2002 – a phrase repeated seven times in a speech in Cincinnati Ohio)

References Bozena L. (1992) Wybaczcie nam, jesli mozecie. Federacja Rodzin KatyĔskich, Katyn. Godziemba-Maliszewski W. (1993) Babi Yar: An Interpretation of Land and Air Photos. The United States Holocaust Reseach Institute, Washington D.C. —. (1995a) Katyn: An Interpretation of Aerial Photographs Considered with Facts and Documents. Polskie Towarzystwo Geograficzne, Warsaw. —. (1995b) Katyn: An Interpretation of Aerial Photographs Considered with Facts and Documents. In: Fotointerpretacja w Geografii Problemy Telegeoinformacji 25: 84-87. Goida M. (1997) Aerial Archaeology in Bohemia. Prague. Haglund W.d. & Sorg M.H. (2002) Advances in Forensic Taphonomy: Method, Theory and Archaeological Perspectives. CRC, New York, London. Kurlovich B. (2002) Eco-Geographic Classification of Lupins. Vavalov Institute of Plant Industry, St Petersburg. Mielecki Z. (1991) Interview with Zbigniew Mielecki. Pushkina T. & Zhukovsky M. (2005) Digital archive of the materials from the Gnezdovo archaeological complex. In: Rossijskaâ arheologiâ 2005, 1: 50-63. Stanley R. (1981) World War II Photo-Intelligence. Scribners, New-York.

302

Chapter Seventeen

—. (1998) To Fool a Glass Eye, camouflage versus photo reconnaissance in World War II. Smithsonian, London. Swede J. (1990) letter to the Polish newspaper Nowy Dziennik [New Daily] (Unpublished document). Westerdahl C. (1992) Vikingatidens transportteknik i Ryssland. In: Fellows-Jensen G. & Lund N. (Eds.) Ellevte tværfaglige vikingesymposium, Københavns Universitet. Århus, Københavns 7-26. —. (2004) On The Significance of Portages: A Survey of New Research Area. http://www.abc.se/~m10354/publ/portages.htm Zawodny J. (1962) Death in the Forest. The Story of the Katyn Forest Massacre. University of Notre Dame Press, South Bend.