Photograph of the Iceberg signed by a known witness

Edward

Member
Jan 21, 2017
5
0
11
49
I have a photo of the iceberg signed by Anthony Wichers.. Along with a very old newspaper article stating that he is known to have witnessed the tragedy and possesses one of the only known photos of the iceberg.

I've tried to upload a image but it keeps saying I don't have enough memory.. Anyway I need to get it appraised and will be putting on the market.. Does anyone have any advice
 

Bob Godfrey

Member
Nov 22, 2002
6,045
51
208
UK
First of all, understand that you have a photo of an iceberg, but it cannot be said to be THE iceberg as no pictures could possibly have been taken until after other ships arrived in daylight to find the Titanic gone and its lifeboats surrounded by a great many bergs. Over the following days and weeks various photos were taken of bergs in the right vicinity, but there's no way of knowing for sure which of these (if any) was THE iceberg. You also need to ask yourself what it was that this 'known witness' actually witnessed. Certainly not the sinking, as nobody who wasn't on the Titanic could make that claim. Perhaps he was on the Carpathia, which rescued the survivors several hours later. You can check that by going through the passenger and crew lists which I think can be found here on this website. But even then he would not of course have been a witness of the sinking so would have no way of knowing which of the mounds of drifting ice was THE iceberg.
 

Edward

Member
Jan 21, 2017
5
0
11
49
Okay let me be more specific.. Does anyone know how I could go about selling this item or having it authincated and then auctioned..

I love this photograph and have considering keeping it in the family.
However, an event of this magnitude belongs to so many more that we have decided to auction it but don't know how to go about it
 

jerry7171

Member
Apr 12, 2016
14
4
13
Sioux Falls
First of all, understand that you have a photo of an iceberg, but it cannot be said to be THE iceberg as no pictures could possibly have been taken until after other ships arrived in daylight to find the Titanic gone and its lifeboats surrounded by a great many bergs. Over the following days and weeks various photos were taken of bergs in the right vicinity, but there's no way of knowing for sure which of these (if any) was THE iceberg. You also need to ask yourself what it was that this 'known witness' actually witnessed. Certainly not the sinking, as nobody who wasn't on the Titanic could make that claim. Perhaps he was on the Carpathia, which rescued the survivors several hours later. You can check that by going through the passenger and crew lists which I think can be found here on this website. But even then he would not of course have been a witness of the sinking so would have no way of knowing which of the mounds of drifting ice was THE iceberg.
This is something that has frequently crossed my mind whenever I hear about a photograph of the infamous iceberg. I haven't kept track but I think I've seen at least three or four photographs of icebergs alleged to have been that iceberg. The caption to each iceberg photo usually noted that there was a telltale smear of red antifouling paint along the waterline of the iceberg.

At first glance, I'd be inclined to take the photo at face value, but with that many photos of visibly different icebergs, I wonder if there was a more natural explanation to explain a supposed paint smear on those icebergs?

The only other thing they seemed to have in common was that they were supposed to have been photographed in the immediate neighborhood of the accident by passengers or sailors on passing ships. We've known since 1985 that the Titanic sank many miles further west than the historic coordinates given out in distress calls. My inclination would be to conclude that any of the icebergs photographed were not likely the one the Titanic sideswiped assuming they were photographed based on the erroneous location of Titanic's foundering.

If anything, the suspect iceberg might well have been some distance to the south and east probably unseen after 15th of April, continuing on its anonymous journey.
 

Rusty_S

Banned
Mar 28, 2012
108
4
48
Well there was one ship the name escapes my mind right now but earlier in the voyage Titanic was in contact via morse lamp with this ship that had its rudder damaged from encountering the ice field. I think its quite possible those bergs with red anti fouling paint on them could have been caused by any number of ships that collided with the bergs and the question is when did the collision happened some could have happened further north and became visible after some ice melted away causing the berg to shift.

That's why I never been able to put much faith in the whole paint smudge statement. Now I do have a photo of an ice berg that looks like the rock of gilbralter that said the iceberg resembled the said rock.
 

Bob Godfrey

Member
Nov 22, 2002
6,045
51
208
UK
This is not an iceberg but rather an ice sheet in Greenland which produces bergs. The picture shows how surface coatings of algae, which are often reddish-brown in colour, commonly form and are then buried under fresh layers of snow. There's far too much in this case to be mistaken for a paint smear, but a lesser amount close to the waterline could easily lead to a wrong conclusion.
algae.jpg
 

Rusty_S

Banned
Mar 28, 2012
108
4
48
Not to mention how do we know that the so called smear is actually red on the photos. The person taking the photo could have saw the darkness and snapped a picture to claim it was red paint. There were people who were trying to get a claim to fame by anything related to Titanic. Its sort of like that guy that is showing pictures of Titanic claiming the darkness is from the coal fire even though the darkness is way too far forward to be from the fire its just a byproduct of the photograph being in black and white.
 

Edward

Member
Jan 21, 2017
5
0
11
49
These were taken by Tony Wichers as he traveled from Germany to America on the ship the Breman. This picture was taken on April 15th 1912. Bremen was the second ship to pass the site of the sinking.
 
A

Aaron_2016

Guest
Enhanced the photo to see what the negative looks like.



iceberg001a.PNG


.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
A

Aaron_2016

Guest
Okay what will that tell me
By showing the negative it allowed me to see the outline and draw the shape of the iceberg. Here it is without the benefit of using the negative. The shape is much more difficult to detect.


icebergpaper.PNG


.
 
A

Aaron_2016

Guest
Survivor Frank Osman believed he saw the iceberg that sank the ship the next morning.


"Yes, sir; you could see it was the one, sir.....At a rough estimate it was 100 feet out of the water....It was round, and then had one big point sticking up on one side of it....It was apparently dark, like dirty ice....We could see it was the biggest berg there, and the other ones would not have done so much damage, I think.....It looked as if there was a piece broken off after she struck, and the ice fell on board. I went and picked up a piece of ice and took it down below in my sleeping room."



.
 

Mlwichers

Member
Jun 27, 2019
1
0
1
Colorado
I know I am responding to an old thread, but Tony Wichers was my grandfather’s uncle. We also have a picture in the family of the iceberg and a copy of the article. This happened when he immigrated to the US from Germany with his brother.