The Cost of Tarawa

This unhappy distinction goes to the 2nd Marines, which reported a total of 405 personnel killed, missing, or dead of wounds over the course of the campaign. The lion’s share of the fatalities occurred in Easy Company, Second Battalion, 2nd Marines: 62 total fatalities, including five officers.

Rounding out the top three hardest-hit companies are  K/3/2nd Marines (49 fatal casualties) and F/2/8th Marines (41 fatal casualties).

As of 20 November 2020, there are 365 unresolved Tarawa cases, plus one known mistaken identification awaiting further action.

Of these, 152 cases pertain to members of the 8th Marines. At the company level, K/3/8 has the highest number of unresolved cases (20 individuals), with L/3/2 and M/3/2 close behind (19 cases each).

Proportionally, the highest ratio of missing to resolved is found in C/1/8. Of the company’s reported 19 fatal casualties, one was buried at sea and the rest are uanccounted, for a 95% non-recoverable rate. The ratios in the other companies of 1/8 are similarly high: 4 of 8 in HQ Company (50%); 21 of 36 in Company A (58%); 16 of 31 in Company B (52%); and 14 of 21 in Company D (66%).

A large percentage of these casualties occurred as the battalion tried to wade ashore from the reef on the morning of D+1; many never made it to shore and their bodies sank or drifted out to sea.

The method of recording burials on Tarawa was, put simply, a mess. Not only were there dozens of burial sites, but every Marine unit seemed to have a different naming system in place. Thus, one unit might refer to “Beach  Red One Cemetery,” another might say “Cemetery A,” and a third might say “2nd Marines Cemetery #3.” All of these locations are the same place – which, under the Navy numbering system, became “Cemetery 13.

In “Tarawa’s Gravediggers,” William L. Niven notes that the Navy designated “33 isolated cemeteries…. consisting of one to six graves each” and “eight larger cemeteries of 13 to 153 gravesites.” It should be noted that the Navy’s process of “beautification” meant that memorial markers were placed at several of these locations, which did not necessarily correlate to who was buried where. However, this was the numbering system used by the 604th QMGRC – both as they searched, and as they reported their findings. Thus, it has been used in the map as a means of simplifying the data.

Here is an example of the variety of cemetery names encountered during this project:

This map shows the location of cemeteries by Navy number. (Note that “Cemetery C” does not appear.)

The 604th Quartermaster Graves Registration Company failed to find three large burial sites in 1946.

Cemetery 27
In this instance, the memorial cross was placed too far from the original graves and the 604th was unable to find either of the burial trenches. As they reported:

a. This was a monument cemetery located outside of the large Quonset which was used as the Base theater. The monument was near the dock of the boat basin. The work started on 12 April 1946. There were supposed to be 40 bodies buried somewhere around the monument.


b. Work was begun by removing the monument and digging under it to a depth of seven feet. After digging up the whole area enclosed by the monument and not finding anything, explorative excavations were started throughout the area. At the same time trenches were started in front of the four large Quonsets in the area around the boot basin, but all this work was in vain. Chaplains Kelly and O’Neill went up into the Jap Tower on the boat basin dock with the continue searches [sic]. The area around the barber shop and the area along both sides of the road was dug up but no remains, no remnants of equipment, or any other debris that would have indicated a burial place were located.

c. Work on Grave #27 was finally abandoned on 1 May 1946.. In view of the negative results of the searches, it was felt that this was only a memorial site and there was no value in continuing the search in that area.

Cemetery 27 was located by History Flight in 2015, and nearly all of the Marines buried there have been repatriated.

Cemetery 33, “Row D”
Cemetery 33 was the main burial ground on Betio, and also the site of the large memorial cemetery with over 400 landscaped crosses. This was where the 604th discovered that the markers were all but meaningless:

After two days of excavating no bodies had been re­covered. This created much concern. Father O’Neill, who buried Marine dead on this spot shortly after the invasion. finally made the suggestion that we see if traces of the original rows could be found. Originally. the remains were buried side by side in three rows. These rows were supposed to be diagonal to certain tree stumps. By a series of prospect excavations and narrow trenches. the middle row was found first. Later the other two rows were found. These rows were also diagonal to the way the cemetery was laid out.

This rather haphazard digging not only missed parts of bodies and sometimes entire individuals, but also skipped over an entire row of the cemetery, mostly containing dead from the 6th Marines. (For a detailed analysis of why this might have occurred, see “The Fourth Row.”)

“Row D” was found by History Flight in 2019. Repatriation and identification efforts are ongoing.

Beach Green C
Thirteen Marines are recorded as buried in this cemetery – twelve named, and one unknown. The location was not given a Navy designation or a memorial marker, and the exact location is unclear – although the name implies it is likely on Betio’s western end, near Green Beach. It is also likely in the vicinity of Cemeteries 10 and 11, as these also had letter designations in their history.

In addition to these large sites, two isolated graves were not found. Grave #9 (Captain Thomas B. Royster) and Grave #12 (an unknown Marine) were located close to the water; by 1946, coastal erosion had destroyed the graves and the 604th QMGRC made no attempts to recover remains from these sites.

The 604th had two main methods of identification: material evidence and dental charting.

Lieutenant Eisensmith noted the difficulties inherent in using material evidence:

1. Methods of Identification
a. The permanent identification tags used by the Marine Corps were found to have deteriorated greatly in the coral. The lettering was inadequate, for it could not be brought out by expert criminologists.
b. The temporary tags were of a zinc base, plated with brass, on which the information was etched. These tags were of little value to us as far as identification material.
c. The web equipment buried with the remains was in excellent condition, but no names were found stenciled thereon. The only exceptions were names stenciled on a few ponchos.

The dental officer, Lt. H. H. Robinson, offered a more detailed account of how his team operated.

1. Identification and verification of bodies by dental chart comparison was extensively used in this project, and was found to be a satisfactory method. The Navy H-4 Forms (dental charts) of all Marine and Navy personnel who were supposedly buried on Tarawa and Apemama. and also the forms of those buried at sea, missing, and dying of wounds as a result of the action at Tarawa. were obtained from the Bureau of Medicine and Surgery, Washington, D. C., and were carried there to be used as an aid in the identification of the aforementioned personnel.
2. The undersigned Dental Officer received orders from the Fourteenth Naval District which placed him on temporary additional duty with the Memorial Branch, Oahu Quartermaster Service, AFMIDPAC, for the accomplishment of this project. Similar orders were issued for a Dental corpsman with the rate of Pharmacist’s Mate 1c. Before leaving Oahu, this corpsman assisted the officer in training twelve enlisted men in dental charting. These men were intensively trained for eight weeks, and proved to be quite efficient in their duties of examining and recording dental conditions. These men were selected from the 604th GRS Company on the basis of AGCT test..
3. The duties of the personnel in the dental organization were as follows: The Dental Officer was in charge, the greater part of his work being to compare field dental charts with government dental charts. The Navy Dental corpsman was placed in direct supervision of all field dental corpsmen, and in addition was responsible for the collection of all Form H-4’s and Form 1042’s at the end of each working day. The duties of the field dental corpsmen were those of cleaning, examining, and charting teeth of the exhumed bodies.
4. Materials which were used in this project besides the government H-4 Forms already mentioned included 2,000 blank H-4 Forms obtained from the Naval Medical Supply Depot, Aiea Hospital, T. H. and usual office equipment. Also burial maps and rosters of the dead, which were obtained from Washington, were referred to constantly.
5. The procedure used for the identification and/or verification of each recovered body was as follows: The 604th GRS Company was divided into groups for the purpose of disinterment and preliminary identification work. In each of these groups were two dental corpsmen, one to make examinations of teeth, and the other to record on a blank H-4 Form the dental conditions found. In the field, when one of the exhumation groups uncovered a body, the dental corpsmen would immediately obtain the skull, thoroughly clean the teeth of all dirt, and proceed to make the dental examination and record of condition found an one of the· blank H-4 Forms. At the same time, other men in the group would fill out a WD QMC Form 1042 (Report of Burial) right at the grave site. The Form 1042 contained general information peculiar to the grave in question, and the Form H-4 contained specific dental information peculiar to the body in question. Therefore, so that nothing would be overlooked which may have led to positive identification, both forms were sent to the Dental Officer who correlated the information. The Dental Officer then proceeded to look for the Government H-4 Form which had the same name on it as the field record had. When this form was found, it was compared with the field record, and identification was thereby verified or disproved. In the event that there was no clue as to identification, and there was present even the slightest unusual dental condition, a search was made through each record of the bodies buried in the particular cemetery or location, comparing each record with the field dental record in question. If no identification was effected in this manner, this field record was temporarily laid aside. At the end of the project, all remaining government dental records were divided among the eight most proficient dental corpsmen, and each was examined for a possible match with the remaining field dental records in question. Nineteen bodies were identified in this manner.
6. The government H-4 Forms were separated into individual cemeteries and locations, each of Which was alphabetized and appropriately labeled. This index system was accomplished by using the maps of each cemetery obtained from Washington, as a guide. In locations where no markers were present or no map had been made, names of the deceased were taken from memorial plaques in some instances, if there was one erected in the general area. A slight modification of the process just described was necessary when initials were found on the personal effects of the man; for example, on his billfold, ring, et cetera. In this case, the roster of the dead previously obtained from Washington was referred to, and when a man with the same initials was found on the roster, his government dental chart would be compared to the field chart in question. When identification tags were found with a body, the same procedure was used. In a few instances, it was definitely proven by dental chart comparison that the tag found with or near the remains was not the correct tag for the remains in question. As will be noted. it was necessary for the Dental Officer to have had access to this information which was placed on the Form 1042, and this is the reason that all such forms were required to pass through his office.
7. An important fact that was considered in the identification process was the similarity of many dental records. This is due to the fact that same teeth in the mouth are found to be decayed, missing, or filled in a far greater number than others. In the process of identification. unless there was some dental peculiarity, no matter how slight, it followed that positive identification was impossible. For this reason, many remains were declared Unknown. There was also to be considered the fact of error in reading of both the field chart and the government chart in some instances. However, as far as is known, this factor was negligible. In the field, various conditions of the teeth and jaws were present. There were remains found with one or more teeth missing from the jaws. In many instances the teeth were found adjacent to the skull. In other instances the teeth were not recovered. Another common condition found was that parts of one or both jaws were missing. Several skulls were found with one jaw missing, and a few remains were exhumed for which no skull was found, even after exhaustive searching in and around the area in which the remains was located. In cases where any teeth at all were recovered, H-4 Forms were made out and all the details noted. In order to keep records in order, H-4 Forms were made out for those remains for which no skull could be recovered, and the details so noted.
8. The result of using this method of’ dental chart comparison was that 117 bodies were positively identified by dental charts alone, and 137 bodies were identified by correlation of other information with dental charts. The identity of 40 remains was definitely disproven after other information had led to a tentative identification.
9. The result of the entire operation was that only 49% of the bodies said to be interred in Tarawa Atoll was actually located. The reasons for this were:
(a) In the large cemeteries, it was found that remains were buried in rows diagonally to the rows of markers, and names on the markers therefore could not be depended upon for identification of the remains;

(b) In other large cemeteries, there were many markers present in a given area. but no remains could be found in the area.. This was also true of many individual grave;

(c) There were said to be more remains present on Tarawa. but they were impossible to locate because the burial places were not marked in any way.

At least nine Marines killed at Tarawa had a wife in New Zealand mentioned on their casualty card:

Truitt Anderson (Molly, in Wellington)
James Atkins (name unknown, in Wellington)
Thomas Cooper (Ray, in Wellington)
William Cowart (Lesley, in Wellington)
Reuben Hedger (name unknown, in Wellington)
William Jay (Margaret, in Wellington)
Willam McKibben (name unknown, in Mount Victoria)
Arnold Millick (Hazel, in Wellington)
Mark Tomlinson (Lillian, in Wellington)

There are likely many more. In these cases, the home address shown is the last known residence in the United States.