Arnhem 1944 Battle Story - Chris Brown

Discussion in 'Books, Films, TV, Radio' started by airborne medic, Mar 26, 2012.

  1. airborne medic

    airborne medic Very Senior Member

    Arnhem 1944 Battle Story by Chris Brown - some observations.

    A small 156 page 'pocket-sized' book on the fighting at Arnhem published by The History Press in 2011 and on the back cover it says 'If you want to understand what happened and why - read Battle Story'. Regretfully I cannot agree with this statement, whilst the book is reasonably priced at £9.99 or less it is in my opinion poorly researched, written and proof read and regretfully does not tell us anything new about the battle. In fact some of the problems spotted are as follows:
    page 36 mention of the 1st Parachute Reconnaissance Squadron, yet on page 127 we have the 1st Airlanding Reconnaissance Squadron and on page 157 the 1st Airborne Reconnaissance Squadron.
    page 38 mention of men being moved 'en masse' from normal infantry battalions to become airlanding ones. This is just not true there are numerous entries in war diaries from those infantry battalions about men being posted away because they were not suitable.
    page 44 mention of a Captain Cain with the South Staffords yet on page 110 he is suddenly Major Cain.
    page 45 mention of the 1st Parachute Regiment.
    page 49 and page 114 mention of drops taking place on 11 and 18 September.
    page 49 mentions two types of glider being used at Arnhem - the Horsa and Hamilcar yet on page 30 shows a picture of a Waco on the ground at Arnhem.
    page 70 mentions Brigadier Eaggers as the chief doctor at Airborne Corps HQ actually Brigadier Eagger.
    page 76 introduces a new unit at Arnhem the 23rd Independent Company who landed as pathfinders for the 1st Airborne Division.
    page 91 and 97 talks about the South Staffords being a spent force by 1130 pm on the 18th September when they were still working their way into western Arnhem.
    page 110 Captain Gronewoed should be Captain Groenewoud.
    page 117 a picture of a house which states it is the Ter Horst when it isn't.
    page 125 the three Army Film and Photographic Unit sergeants who were pictured at Elstree on their return to England identified as 'war correspondents'.
    page 126 states 12 chaplains went to Arnhem, there were 15 who went and also 3 Polish chaplains. Of the 16 (including one Polish who crossed on one of the reinforcement efforts) north of the river, three returned across and so not all stayed behind as this book states.
    page 148 there is no evidence to suggest that Major-General Urquhart chose the location of the cemetery at Oosterbeek. In fact on his first vsit to Oosterbeek after the battle in 1945 the cemetery was already open.
    page 156 the 'Krafft' Battalion was not an NCO training unit but a recruit training one.

    It would appear that whoever proof read this book had no real knowledge of what happened at Arnhem nor the units involved, a final comment would be directed at the recommended reading list as most of the 'general' books suggested have been found to have errors similar to those mentioned above, in fact one of them mentions a Major McCain. There is also a lack of 'unit specific' histories apart from the Recce Squadron which in my humble opinion ought to be included such as B Company Arrived, From Delhi to Arnhem and When Dragons Flew.
     
  2. COMMANDO

    COMMANDO Senior Member

    some other observations....

    Sorry Neil, but I think you are making a very big deal about some miner fact...

    As a matter of fact your expensive book 'Striking Back' about the British airborne and commando raids (european price 34 euro) is not very much more then wast of money and contains nothing more then information that already have been published before by others. Some chapers of your book are not more then large one on one copy's of the reports of the accounts at the PRO instead of doing research yourself. You can ofcours put as much apendix as you like into a book, but when a book is made of 1/4 of just copy's from the PRO then I think you can not say its a book, just a collection of files.. And even asking 34 Euro...o_O

    The title of book does say it it is about the British Airborne and Commando raids 1940-1942... but most of those raids are not even mentioned in any way... Or just in one or tho lines and the largest raids are dealt with in 2 or 3 pages... How many pages are about St Nazaire forinstance ? While about 50 pages on Clousus which was a very small raid...

    There is no balance in your book...

    You book about the RAMC contains also large parts one on one from PRO files... no research done here what so ever... (forinstance large parts about the early days of Airbone RAMC - direct take from On a Wings of Healing)...

    Therefore I think its 'not done' tho make some sharp comment on someone else his book as your own books are not very much better...

    I have seen your comment on other authors books before - almost always in the same line: trying to break others work down. Why ?

    Strange fact is that in some cases you did know that these authors were working on their book, so - if you think you know everything better - why did you not contact them and suggested them to help them out with your knowledge instead in giving comment afterwards on their work....

    Peter Vrolijk
     
    stolpi likes this.
  3. airborne medic

    airborne medic Very Senior Member

    I disagree with your comments....but will accept you have an opinion and will leave the matter there......I am always happy to help people and have proof read many books to hopefully avoid mistakes such as the 23rd Independent Company and that the landings took place on 11 and 18 September or are you happy that such facts are included?
     
  4. horsapassenger

    horsapassenger Senior Member

    I contacted Chris Brown a few weeks ago specifically about the section in his book dealing with the losses sustained by the Staffords on the 18th September.
    He replied explaining that when referring to the Staffords he did, in fact, mean the 1st and 3rd Parachute Battalions. He thanked me for drawing this error to his attention and, as Niall has suggested, put it down to poor proof reading.

    As regards Peter's comments I note that they are about style rather than the accuracy of the content. I recall reading a book recently, written by one of his old running mates, which contained a series of straight transcriptions from the unit's War Diary. Sadly the accuracy of those transcription was poor and the author succeeded in completely changing the context of some of those entries.

    There was a post recently, on another thread, from a person who had worked for a firm of publishers. He was quite specific that if errors in publications were encountered these should be brought to the attention of the author and/or the publisher.

    In the future these books will be used by others as reference material for other publications. If we don't take steps to bring the errors to the author's attention and get them corrected they will simply be promulgated in those future publications.

    John
     
  5. Philip Reinders

    Philip Reinders Very Senior Member

    And how many books did your wrote!! Mr Howes!, its seems that if the Arnhem books aren't published by one certain person, you both have anything better to do comment on it.

    (for example my publications and these from John Sliz (so stop getting them if they are that bad)

    So have some balls check Sigmond publications on mistake hich I can tell you they hold, and put these on the forum, but I bet you lose your free copies!

    But lucky a lot of people in Holland and overseas know how the game is played.
     
  6. COMMANDO

    COMMANDO Senior Member

    if errors in publications were encountered these should be brought to the attention of the author and/or the publisher.




    Correct, so why given comment on this forum instead of contaction the author so he can defend himself
     
  7. horsapassenger

    horsapassenger Senior Member

    Correct, so why given comment on this forum instead of contaction the author so he can defend himself

    Peter

    If you read my thread properly you will see that I did contact the author and he responded thanking me for drawing his attention to the error.

    John
     
  8. COMMANDO

    COMMANDO Senior Member

    Sorry John, I did read your posting and I did read you contacted the author. Well done for taking the time.

    When I wrote 'so why given comment on this forum instead of contaction the author so he can defend himself ' I meant not you but Naill. I was hoping you would understand. I am very sorry if I may have given you the wrong idea.

    What you did, I personaly think, is the only way to help each other interested in the same subject.

    I also think there are no books without mistakes. If I will publish something in the future then I know already it also will contain errors. By letting other people with some knowledge on the battle read a script before publishing will help , but even after that you will always come across errors.

    I think also that it's not done to comment on someone else work as when they are just small errors in my point of view on a public forum.
    I haven't ever read a book about Arnhem without mistakes... maybe because also the authors are humans...
    Let we all eccept that. And I also know that some do know more then others, buts no reason to make a fool about someone else work.

    If you go through this forumyou will see its not the first time Naill tried to make his point about other authors work. I think that Naill must realize that his own books may also contain errors. If he think they are perfect then he is is not very realistic.
    But when he tries (again and agian) to make a fool about someone else work I think its time to put him back on his feet as Naill's books are not that good... But that is ofcourse my personal opinion.

    Its a pitty that there always seems to be some kind of envy between Arnhem researchers as I think that the best book ever to be written on the battle is only possible when all work together (I know its a dream).
    I think this 'arnhem researchers battle' which its now already going on for more then 15 years must come to a stop.
    Thinking on the expertise and knowledge each of us has on the subject it's a pitty we can not all put old pain aside and shake hands and let we all respect eachothers efforts. And yes... somethimes we making mistakes in scripts that no one sees till its published... So what...
     
  9. Paul Pariso

    Paul Pariso Very Senior Member

    Its a pitty that there always seems to be some kind of envy between Arnhem researchers as I think that the best book ever to be written on the battle is only possible when all work together (I know its a dream).
    I think this 'arnhem researchers battle' which its now already going on for more then 15 years must come to a stop.
    Thinking on the expertise and knowledge each of us has on the subject it's a pitty we can not all put old pain aside and shake hands and let we all respect eachothers efforts. And yes... somethimes we making mistakes in scripts that no one sees till its published... So what...

    Brilliantly put Peter, I couldn't agree more.

    As a bit of a "Johnny come lately" to the Arnhem scene I don't know the full history behind the various disagreements within the crowd nor is it any of my business. I can only speak from personal experience and that has always been very good, regardless of whom I have been speaking to or corresponding with.

    I have had nothing but help and cooperation from ALL sides and I like to think that I have made some good friends along the way. I know I've said this before, both publicly and in private when I've met some of the guys, but at the end of the day, all any of us want to do is to learn as much as possible about the subject and it is sad that personal disagreements are getting in the way and causing bad feelings.

    Surely there must be some way that past events can be "put to bed" as it were? Or am I just being hopelessly naive?

    All the best (to ALL sides!)................. :)
     
  10. kingarthur

    kingarthur Well-Known Member

    Brilliantly put Peter, I couldn't agree more.

    As a bit of a "Johnny come lately" to the Arnhem scene I don't know the full history behind the various disagreements within the crowd nor is it any of my business. I can only speak from personal experience and that has always been very good, regardless of whom I have been speaking to or corresponding with.

    I have had nothing but help and cooperation from ALL sides and I like to think that I have made some good friends along the way. I know I've said this before, both publicly and in private when I've met some of the guys, but at the end of the day, all any of us want to do is to learn as much as possible about the subject and it is sad that personal disagreements are getting in the way and causing bad feelings.

    Surely there must be some way that past events can be "put to bed" as it were? Or am I just being hopelessly naive?

    All the best (to ALL sides!)................. :)


    I couldn't of put that any better myself Mr P :)
     
  11. horsapassenger

    horsapassenger Senior Member

    Peter

    Thank you for your reply. Firstly I would say that I have an excellent working relationship with a very large number of Arnhem researchers, both in the UK and Netherlands, and that cooperation, discussion and sharing of information is the order of the day.

    As I stated above my primary concern is that errors in books that go uncorrected will end up being promulgated by others that use them as source of reference in the future.

    A couple of years ago I spent many months at the archives searching for information on a person named in a book written back in 1946. This name had been repeated in a later book by a well respected person that had served with and worked alongside the original author and then used by others in subsequent books covering the subject. In the end, after much searching, I finally identified this person and obtained copies of contemporaneous reports which confirmed this. The name was nothing like that given in the original book - the original error had simply been repeated over and over for 60+ years.

    I normally attempt to contact authors privately to make them aware of any errors that I spot. Most, I am glad to say, are very receptive, however there are, sadly, a few individuals that do not appear to be willing to accept any such comment, no matter how well intended it may be, and you will witness the reaction of one such person above.

    It is strange that after I contacted Mr Sliz, privately, to point out errors in his book "A Long Tradition" (errors that he accepted) Mr Reinders posted the comment (Arnhem book thread post 3926) "I don't care about the idiots who comment on it, or those who don't have the balls to show themselves on the forum" suggesting that he would apparently have preferred me to have raised the question of such errors on the public forum - exactly what Niall has done and is being chastised for.

    It would appear that you just can't win - damned if you do and damned if you don't.

    John
     
  12. Philip Reinders

    Philip Reinders Very Senior Member

    Yes Peter indeed!
     
  13. Philip Reinders

    Philip Reinders Very Senior Member

    One of the books I first purchased was 'Off at last' and I had originally written to Robert to tell him he had named my grand father in a photo which wasn't him and also that in his first print it stated that he was killed in a glyder accident and this was also incorrect after this we kept in contact and everything I found out subsequenly I sent him copies off to keep him informed.


    It seems that other people also make mistakes, suprise, suprise
     
  14. Pegasus_2406

    Pegasus_2406 Theirs is the glory...

    Its a pitty that there always seems to be some kind of envy between Arnhem researchers as I think that the best book ever to be written on the battle is only possible when all work together (I know its a dream).
    I think this 'arnhem researchers battle' which its now already going on for more then 15 years must come to a stop.
    Thinking on the expertise and knowledge each of us has on the subject it's a pitty we can not all put old pain aside and shake hands and let we all respect eachothers efforts. And yes... somethimes we making mistakes in scripts that no one sees till its published... So what...
    Hear, hear!!!
     
  15. Pegasus_2406

    Pegasus_2406 Theirs is the glory...

    I couldn't of put that any better myself Mr P :)
    I completely agree. Best to all of you, Paul
     
  16. horsapassenger

    horsapassenger Senior Member

    One of the books I first purchased was 'Off at last' and I had originally written to Robert to tell him he had named my grand father in a photo which wasn't him and also that in his first print it stated that he was killed in a glyder accident and this was also incorrect after this we kept in contact and everything I found out subsequenly I sent him copies off to keep him informed.


    It seems that other people also make mistakes, suprise, suprise

    Philip

    I fear that you're going off at a tangent. I don't think that anybody has ever claimed that books are published without errors. The question appears to be how to deal with these inevitable errors when they are encountered. If you look at the preface to Niall's book "Red Berets and Red Crosses" he states "I therefore hope to have presented as accurate a picture as possible and I must take responsibility for any errors that have crept in". He goes on to include his home address so that people could contact him.

    I am glad to see, from your post above about your Grandfather and contacting Robert Sigmond concerning errors that you had identified, that you subscribe to the viewpoint that these errors should be brought to the author's attention in order that they can be corrected.

    The only question remaining therefore is how this should be done. Should it be by private communication with the author - something that you chose to publicly criticise me for doing. Or, as Niall, has done by posting the errors on a public forum.

    John
     
  17. Lofty1

    Lofty1 Senior Member

    One of the books I first purchased was 'Off at last' and I had originally written to Robert to tell him he had named my grand father in a photo which wasn't him and also that in his first print it stated that he was killed in a glyder accident and this was also incorrect after this we kept in contact and everything I found out subsequenly I sent him copies off to keep him informed.


    It seems that other people also make mistakes, suprise, suprise

    I would like to point out that the above words were taken from the Samuel Cassidy KOSB Arnhem thread, they were posted on that thread by a member of his family who kindly related their story of research, and finding more on the demise of Samuel. they were never written to imply criticism of any sort. just sharing information which is what WWtalk is about.
    The above few lines are a small part of an interesting and informative post, adding insight from a different stance, ie the family,
    I think as a new member to the forum they may find it disappointing to find those few lines from their first post used here, as some sort of ammunition, in some sort of argy bargy that is beyond the understanding of most readers of this thread.
    Should the new member read their words in this thread they may wonder what the have got involved in, so lets steady down chaps and stick to our aims of learning and sharing and all getting along, for the benefit of everyone.
    regards lofty
     
  18. Philip Reinders

    Philip Reinders Very Senior Member

    Didn't started this, and those who know me (who spoken to me personally instead of listening to other people) know how this started and whom started it, ABRG, and later Peter and myself have given help to a lot of people and publications, but when asking for information and documentation, some people have a lot of comment and a big mouth, but never offered their help. There are at least 2 posts on this forum which have the same questions but no replies.

    I can tell you one thing, some people, and not saying these are on this forum, will never stop doing their thing against peter, myself, and even against other people, you should known what slack Geert Maassen received when making the Roll of honour and even now when it's published. We will carry on, but if being attacked defend ourselves, even one time with a sollicitor, and doing again when needed, we like to keep in nice and keep working with the people we do, and if any other send us information or documentation for a publication, needly mention them as source, as nobody came write a book without any other help, also the other way around, as can be seen on a number of publication, but expect the same as being mentioned as source, but as Bill Joell said: "We didn't start the fire".
     
  19. horsapassenger

    horsapassenger Senior Member

    I would like to point out that the above words were taken from the Samuel Cassidy KOSB Arnhem thread, they were posted on that thread by a member of his family who kindly related their story of research, and finding more on the demise of Samuel. they were never written to imply criticism of any sort. just sharing information which is what WWtalk is about.
    The above few lines are a small part of an interesting and informative post, adding insight from a different stance, ie the family,
    I think as a new member to the forum they may find it disappointing to find those few lines from their first post used here, as some sort of ammunition, in some sort of argy bargy that is beyond the understanding of most readers of this thread.
    Should the new member read their words in this thread they may wonder what the have got involved in, so lets steady down chaps and stick to our aims of learning and sharing and all getting along, for the benefit of everyone.
    regards lofty

    Lofty

    Please accept my sincere apologies for not realising that Philip had quoted from that post.

    John
     
  20. Philip Reinders

    Philip Reinders Very Senior Member

    Another case proved, I write something and here it goes. :)

    Cased closed from our site
     

Share This Page