Obersalzberg Relics

[ObKrieger]

There is an interesting line that one must draw, in my opinion, between the tamperment of an archaeological site and the rescue of deteriorating artifacts. It seems to me that there isn't much of a difference between digging up shrapnel in Karelia and taking bits of brick from Obersalzberg. The only practical argument I can think of is the fact that relics in Karelia are likely to rot away otherwise, while the ruins of the structures in Obersalzberg have been discovered, and should remain as entirely intact as possible, so that future generations can enjoy them. With too many people doing things like what you did, the site will soon be lost.

In any case, when one removes an artifact from its site and therefore its context, it becomes irrelevant. In one photo I see the ruins of a structure in Obersalzberg. In another, I see rocks. Same material, different context.

My advice to you would be to leave things be from now on, for both legal and ethical reasons.

[sandgroper]

I've been after a piece of marble tile from the Reich Chancellery for a long time now but cannot track down any. I have no problem with that because the building was demolished, I would not chip a piece off if the building had been retained at all, no matter what the condition. I would also not break a piece off from the Soviet war memorial in Berlin or the train station wall. I also wouldn't be on selling anything like that. I did have a piece of tile from the kitchen in the Eagles Nest, it was given to me and I have since given it to someone else.

[Frundsberg]

Well, in Germany most people want to forget the nazi past and they are not happy when tourists come to Germany only because they want to visit places where Hitler lived. So from that point of view there is nothing bad when Berghof will be completly destroyed or even better - something new will be built instead of the nazi ruins. You can not compare ruins of the Berghof with Stonehenge for example. Germany has a long and interesting history, not only years 1933-1945.

[slados28]

There is an interesting line that one must draw, in my opinion, between the tamperment of an archaeological site and the rescue of deteriorating artifacts. It seems to me that there isn't much of a difference between digging up shrapnel in Karelia and taking bits of brick from Obersalzberg.

That's exactly what I was trying to get at --- I don't really see why some people in this thread felt it necessary to come down as hard on this guy that they saw the need to compare his pieces of brick and a twig from a bombed out/demolished building with defacing gravemarkers and souvenir hunting in gas chambers.

With regards to you argument that the battlefield relics would be lost if not dug up vs. the ruins of a deteriorating foundation not rapidly meeting this same fate by natural means/processes I tend to disagree. By digging up and selling off these battlefield relics one could also just as easily argue that these also lose their historical meaning and become "irrelevant". Once they are dug up and scattered all over the world, usually for profit, they are no longer where they were dropped and used in their actual historical context and as a result the sites where they were dug up gradually become depleted of physical evidence of the events that once took place there.... just as bad in my book.
One could also argue in the same vein that every museum around the world has nothing but artifacts devoid of their historical significance/meaning just because said items have been removed from their actual place of discovery/origin.... something which I, and hopefully most others on here, would of course strongly disagree with.

That's my devil's advocate bit --- sort of, I guess. I have no real problem with battlefield archaeology or picking up some rubble on the ground just as long as common sense is utilized and aforementioned objects and areas are left alone and respected.

Also, I was referring to picking up a small memento up off of the ground --- not chipping away at existing buildings/structures = vandalism

[herrzark]

one piece of history is history itself.Of course i would like to have one.If the building is after so many years falling down and in the near future will be destroyed i dont see why not to save some piecies

[reichstall]

Not only does this go on in europe but here in the states it too is going on.Is there anything wrong with it no I don't think so I pick up rocks from all over the world.It says to me i been here plus since i work with rocks and sooil in my job it is a added bounus.Now would i chip a grave marker no but i did pick up a stone from my grand parnets grave plot in holland when i was there .As for the bunker if you go to where the bunker was in berlin and look in the lot you will see lots of concrete chunks mixed in the gravel of the lot so in theroy if you choose to believe you have the bunker there.So if anyone wants a rock from my plot of land just come and take all you want want a chunk of tree from my trees ok you can have that too. As for the house don't take too much it will fall down.

[Scout]

Nothing can substitute visiting sites yourself - be it the Soviet War memorial in Berlin or a battlefield.

[Paul D]

This is a genuine question , who actually owns the Obersalzberg , Berghof , Hitlers WW1 Bunker etc etc ??

Does anyone who takes items from these sites stop to ask ??

[Scout]

The Speer House for example seems to be privately owned, from what I read recently.

[harryamb2]

nazi relics i.e buildings bunkers etc,are being destroyed by the goverment of and councils germany and ground into dust ,so I do not see any thing wrong in people picking up loose bits to preserve them.there's talk of them destroying the stadium that Speer designed.