ShareThis Page
Nation

Iwo Jima flag raiser misidentified, Marines say

| Thursday, June 23, 2016, 6:33 p.m.
The Marine Corps announced Thursday, June 23, 2016, after conducting an investigation prompted by the claims of two amateur historians, that Pfc. Harold Schultz of Detroit was one of the six men in the iconic World War II photograph showing the raising of the American flag at Iwo Jima.
The Marine Corps announced Thursday, June 23, 2016, after conducting an investigation prompted by the claims of two amateur historians, that Pfc. Harold Schultz of Detroit was one of the six men in the iconic World War II photograph showing the raising of the American flag at Iwo Jima.

WASHINGTON — The Marine Corps acknowledged Thursday it had misidentified one of the six men in the iconic 1945 World War II photo of the flag-raising on Iwo Jima.

The investigation solved one mystery but presented another: Why didn't the serviceman — identified as Pfc. Harold Schultz of Detroit, who died in 1995 — reveal his role?

“Why doesn't he say anything to anyone?” said Charles Neimeyer, a Marine Corps historian who was on the panel that investigated the identities of the flag raisers. “That's the mystery.

“I think he took his secret to the grave.”

The Marine Corps investigation concluded with near certainty that Schultz was one of the Marines raising the flag in the photo.

The investigation also determined that John Bradley, a Navy corpsman, was not in the photograph taken on Mt. Suribachi by Joe Rosenthal, an Associated Press photographer. The Feb. 23, 1945, photograph depicts the second flag-raising of the day.

Three men identified in the photo — Bradley, Ira Hayes and Rene Gagnon — went on a tour selling war bonds in the United States and were hailed as heroes.

Bradley's son, James, and co-author Ron Powers wrote a best-selling book about the flag raisers, “Flags of our Fathers,” which was made into a movie. John Bradley had been in the first flag-raising photo on Iwo Jima and might have confused the two, Neimeyer said.

James Bradley declined to comment Thursday. However, he said in May that the Marines' decision to investigate the matter led him to believe his father confused the first and second raisings of the flag.

“My father raised a flag on Iwo Jima,” Bradley said. “The Marines told him way after the fact, ‘Here's a picture of you raising the flag.' He had a memory of him raising a flag, and the two events came together.”

Michael Strank also was a participant in the flag raising. Born in Czechoslovakia and raised in Conemaugh, Cambria County, he joined the Civilian Conservation Corps, where he remained for 18 months, then became a highway laborer for the state. Strank enlisted in the regular Marine Corps for four years in 1939.

Schultz, who enlisted in the Marine Corps at 17, was seriously wounded during fighting on the Japanese island and went on to a 30-year career with the Postal Service in Los Angeles. He was engaged to a woman after the war, but she died of a brain tumor before they could wed, according to his stepdaughter, Dezreen MacDowell. Schultz married MacDowell's mother when he was 63.

Analysts believe Schultz, who received a Purple Heart, knew he was in the iconic image but chose not to talk about it.

“I have a really hard time believing how it wouldn't have been known to him,” said Matthew Morgan, a retired Marine officer who worked on a Smithsonian Channel documentary on the investigation. The filmmakers turned over their evidence for the Marine Corps to examine.

Schultz might have mentioned his role at least once. MacDowell recalled him saying he was one of the flag raisers during dinner in the early 1990s when they were discussing the war in the Pacific.

“Harold, you are a hero,” she said she told him.

“Not really. I was a Marine,” she recalled him saying.

She described him as quiet and self-effacing.

It's difficult to fathom Schultz's desire to keep his role quiet — particularly in an era when many servicemen are rushing books into print about their exploits — but during World War II, many veterans were reluctant to speak about their experiences.

The photo appeared in thousands of newspapers and raised the morale of a nation that had grown weary of the bloody slog in the Pacific.

“We were winning the war, but it was the hardest part of the war,” historian Eric Hammel said of the Pacific island-hopping campaign.

“It went viral, in the 1945 equivalent of the word,” Neimeyer said.

The new investigation was prompted by growing doubts about the identity of Bradley in the photo.

Two amateur historians, Eric Krelle and Stephen Foley, were able to identify Schultz as a possible flag raiser. They examined the Rosenthal photo and compared it with others taken that day, including a film that was shot at the same time Rosenthal took his photo. Their research was highlighted in a lengthy 2014 Omaha World-Herald article.

More than a year later, the Marine Corps agreed to investigate the claim, appointing a nine-person panel headed by Jan Huly, a retired Marine Corps three-star general.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me