Photographs of War & picture honesty

[xayraa33]

looking at the BBC news site this morning , and it showed a photo and drawing montage of the Indian Mutiny, as India is celebrating the 150 years since the Rebellion of 1857.
the opening photo was a crop of a photo that I had seen some 20 years ago in the book by Frances Fralin called " The Indelible Image😛hotographs of War 1846 to the present"
the photo was the interior of Secundra Bagh some months after the fighting by Felice Beato, it was gruesome and it stayed etched in my memory, but even 20 years ago I had a feeling that the corpses and bones and skulls were exhumed and placed in the courtyard for the benefit of the photographer , Felice Beato, to make a shocking & very memorable photo, which I think, he succeeded to do very well.
the BBC article today mentions this a bit, and it confirms my 20 year old gut feeling.
so this photo is similar to the dead rebel sniper of the American Civil War by Mathew Brady and Company.
there was accusation of the photograper placing the body near a rifle and calling the photo " dead rebel sniper ".

 

[RML]

Does the BBC confirm this hunch or is it mere speculation?

Even, or perhaps particularly, in those days I can't imagine the Raj allowing corpses being exhumed months after the fact to have a photo taken that would undoubtedly stir emotions back in England, emotions that were already very much stirred when the news of the bloody massacre broke. Such photos could easily be withheld by the censors in times of trouble, so why allow recreating the scene months after?

It's still my opinion that Beato took the shot as it was, though I'm wondering why the corpses would still be around months later, especially in India. The stench must have been horrible, and isn't there a religious aspect to consider here too? Is it certain that the shot was taken months after the fact, or is there doubt about that piece of information too?

In all, dubious circumstances or dubious information.

 

[xayraa33]

the" exhumation of human remains story" started at that time with a report by Sir George Campbell.
http://www.brown.edu/Facilities/University_Library/collections/askb/beato/beato.html

 

[RML]

the" exhumation of human remains story" started at that time with a report by Sir George Campbell.
http://www.brown.edu/Facilities/University_Library/collections/askb/beato/beato.html

But there are also reports contrary to that:

Located on the outskirts of Lucknow, it was the scene of intense fighting in November, 1857. Following the action, the British dead were buried in a deep trench but the Indian corpses were left to rot. Later, the city had to be evacuated and was not recaptured until March 1858 and it was shortly afterwards that Beato probably took this photograph. As one contemporary commentator described it: "A few of their [rebel] bones and skulls are to be seen in front of the picture, but when I saw them every one was being regularly buried, so I presume the dogs dug them up." A British officer, Sir George Campbell, noted in his memoirs Beato's presence in Lucknow and stated that he probably had the bones uncovered to be photographed. However, William Howard Russell of The Times recorded seeing many skeletons still lying around in April 1858

So, it's still speculation.

 

[xayraa33]

speculation , yes maybe, my gut feeling says the corpses were dug up for the photograph, probably from seeing real exhumations .
I do not think this story can be proven either way after a century and a half.
but along with the Beeb , other news sites repeat the macabre story.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...lds_End_of_Nawabi_era/articleshow/1973978.cms

 

[RML]

Grizzly? Yes. And probably that's why people keep repeating this version of the tale. 🙂

But it's good to realise that in Beato's time it was nigh impossible to shoot actual battle. The shutter times necessary, and the time needed just to set up the camera would negate such shots from the beginning. It's with that in mind that most war photos of the mid 19th C are either portraits, posed scenes or landscapes (either with or without battle damages shown). Because it was impossible to shoot actual battle in progress, very often scenes were staged, and this was considered perfectly acceptable in them days. Just as retouching was perfectly acceptable, even in journalism. Heck, news papers didn't even print photos but lithographs and engravings after photographs.

 

[xayraa33]

Roger Fenton did not photograph such scenes in the Crimean War just 3 years before the Beato image, athough he had witnessed such vistas.
it was not until the american civil war that the war dead were photographed more often , like what is in in Gardener's Sketch Book.

 

[RML]

Fenton missed the infamous Charge of the Light Brigade by months and his famous image of the Valley of Death is taken months after the armies left, showing only the valley strewn with cannonballs. At first I thought those were skulls, really. 🙂

Fenton was even more "unlucky" that he arrived at the battle scene of the Crimean war after the worst suffering (during the winter of 1854-55). The public was aware of that suffering but IIRC no or hardly any photos at all exist to "prove" it.