Unrecovered victims

E

Elaine R Barnes

Guest
Annie,
The recovery ships brought coffins only for the first class passangers. The third class and crew recovered were placed in canvas. You must remember that it was a few weeks after the disaster that the Mackay-Bennet( the first recovery ship to reach the area) reached the area. The wind, rain and saltwater badly damaged the bodies during that time. It took several days to reach Nova Scotia after recovering the bodies. Some of the bodies were just not in the best of condition to return them. Also, correct me if I'm wrong all you sailors out there, I believe many crew would have preferred burial at sea.
I also believe the crew only brought enough embalming equipment for the first and second class passangers, as the ships only had so much room.
Hope this helps.
Elaine
 
B

Bill Wormstedt

Member
I don't think the recovery ships brought embalming equipment and coffins specifically for the first and second class passengers. I think they brought what equipment they could - regardless of what class.

However, when they got on site, and SAW that the number of bodies exceeded what they could handle, they had to start making a distiction of who to bury at sea, and who to they had room to keep.
 
Michael H. Standart

Michael H. Standart

Member
As a retired Navy guy, I would have preferred a burial at sea myself.

Cordially,
Michael H. Standart
 
J

James Philip Scribner

Guest
How many bodies were actually found?
How many of the victims remain among the missing?

If the possibility of time travel imagined by Mr. H.G. Wells, the often prophetic and justly celebrated contemporary of the Titanic victims,
ever becomes a technological reality, the lack of vody could be important. I would imagine those victims (such as the Van Impe family, for example) who vanished when the Titanic went down leaving no solid confirmation of their deaths tht way would be easiest to rescue. This would after all cause no paradoxical alteration of known history. How many of the missing crew and passengers can we account for like that?
 
Michael H. Standart

Michael H. Standart

Member
In the list of recovered bodies, it documents 328 bodies that were actually recovered. The numbers of people who actually went down with the ship is still, and will likely remain, a matter of debate. I've seen numbers as low as 1503 and as high as 1528 from a variety of sources, so that makes for between 1175 to 1200 as 'missing'.

Cordially,
Michael H. Standart
 
L

Lester Mitcham

Member
Michael, those figures are too high. Depending on whether or not one accepts that Frederick Miles was onboard then the number of casualties was 1496 or 1497.

Lester
 
Michael H. Standart

Michael H. Standart

Member
Like I said, these numbers are a matter of some debate.(And continue to be such.) I'm sure your numbers are dead on, but do they account for any undocumented passangers, stowaways and the like? I'm not convinced that White Star was quite certain even back then.

But then that's the real problem, isn't it? The numbers are not entirely reliable.

Cordially,
Michael H. Standart
 
L

Lester Mitcham

Member
Which undocumented passengers, stowaways and the like? Did any such individuals exist? I doubt it.

The one name that we have and which everyone ignores is that of Frederick Miles. Both Hermann Soeldner and myself have stated the evidences for Miles perhaps having been onboard.

One other point with the high death figures is that they are often offset by low survivor figures.

Lester
 
Michael H. Standart

Michael H. Standart

Member
Hmmmmmmmm...if there were stowaways, then the information probably went down with the ship, and that graciously assumes they would have been caught. For obvious reasons, these people weren't anxious to advertise their presence. That it could be done was a fact the shipping lines were equally unenthusiastic to advertise.

Cordially,
Michael H. Standart
 
L

Lester Mitcham

Member
Michael, let me see if I can put this another way. When you are looking at any set of Casualty figures whatever number of lost stowaways you may accept must be added to each and every set. All of those Casualty figures come from Statistical Reports of Lost and Saved and those Reports are based on Passenger and Crew Lists; none of which allow for or consider stowaways.

Each List then has to be analized; both for the names themselves and because generally a hand count of the individual names leads to a correction of the end figures. For example: Time and again sets of figures show 11 1st Class W&C were lost. The correct figure is 5. The result is that survivors were counted among the missing. It also goes the other way with some of the missing being listed as having survived. So all Lists of Lost and Saved have to be re-worked. But I re-emphasis that no Casualty figures make any allowances for any lost stowaways who you may accept as having been onboard.

Hope this helps,
Lester
 
Michael H. Standart

Michael H. Standart

Member
Oh points taken. I neither accept nor reject the idea of stowaways. As I said, these people...if any were aboard,(Unlikely but not impossible) had every incentive to avoid advertising the fact. My concern is over some of the varience in figures that I've seen over time. 1497, 1503,1515, 1528...I've seen these numbers kicked about in any number of sources over the years, including the media.

In your opinion, who has the most reliable stats on this?

Curiously,
Michael H. Standart
 
L

Lester Mitcham

Member
Well Michael, the obvious answer is Hermann and myself.

Apart from the question of Frederick Miles we are in total agreement with regard to the number of Passengers who were lost. - 818 or 817. - See my paper in ET Research.

With regard to the Crew; because I have never undertaken a full study I defer to Hermann. - 679

Apart from Hermann's 1497 (or my 1496); all of the other figures you mention (as well as some you do not) suffer from the problems I mentioned in my last message. The only question is 1497 or 1496 and that depends on Frederick Miles. Was he onboard? Perhaps you could try and solve that question?

Hope this also helps,
Lester
 
Michael H. Standart

Michael H. Standart

Member
As to your research and Hermann's,since it represents the latest and greatest, I'll defer to it unless/until somebody comes up with something they can prove is more solid.

What's the story on this Frederick Miles anyway?

Cordially,
Michael H. Standart
 
L

Lester Mitcham

Member
Hi Michael,

Thank you. Re Frederick Miles; the facts are detailed in my paper on this site, under ET Research. To save re-posting it here may I ask you to read it there? See the Special Note.

Regards,
Lester
 
M

Matt Endacott

Guest
Hello,
I was recently scanning over the figures from the Titanic disaster and came across the number of bodies recovered. Off the top of my head i can't remember but i'm sure it was something like 300??
Anyway, next to the death toll it seems over 1,000 bodies wern't recovered??
Shouldn't the majority of the bodies have been together as the current should have kept them relatively together?
I also read that it is thought many bodies became trapped inside the wreck but how is it there have been no traces found of bones inside the wreck?
Thanks,
Matt
 
Top