Were German Prisoners of War killed near Arras, May 1940?

Discussion in '1940' started by Drew5233, Dec 18, 2009.

  1. Rich Payne

    Rich Payne Rivet Counter Patron 1940 Obsessive

    The book arrived today and I think the following caption creates more questions than answers.

    Chapter 5 Standing Alone page 94

    The only question that it raises in my mind is who his KGB handler was when he was at Cambridge...

    Where does that idea that the British were ordered to take no prisoners come from ? Every eye-witness account that I've read suggests that they couldn't wait to get prisoners back for intelligence de-briefing.

    The 2-Div Provost diary that I have a copy of tells that one of their first tasks on reaching the Dyle, before any contact with the enemy, was to establish a POW cage. Hardly what you'd expect if there was no intention to take any.

    ...and an unsubstantiated account of poorly-led and badly informed troops who probably had no A/tk capability running from armour. What does that prove ?

    The repetition of the 'perhaps 400' legitimate prisoners allegation is so bizare as to barely warrant comment.

    I've never read so much unsubstantiated poppycock in a single paragraph.
     
  2. Mr Jinks

    Mr Jinks Bit of a Cad

    Thread about who 'Gunbuster' really was here.
    http://www.ww2talk.com/forum/books-films-tv-radio/11409-%22gun-buster%22-flanders-1940-a.html


    Thank You Owen told you I knew very little:)
    So gunbuster was Royal Artillery and told Harman the DLI murdered 400 prisoners Sorry I havent got the book just feeling my way along:wub:
    So am I right in presuming he was told this from someonelse before recounting to Harman or he witnessed it himself.Sorry in advance.

    Best
    Clifford
     
  3. Drew5233

    Drew5233 #FuturePilot 1940 Obsessive

    Hello again, Kate,

    In Karl-Heinz Frieser' s book 'The Blitzkrieg Legend: the 1940 campaign in the West', the German losses are reported as:

    7.PzD
    89 KIAs
    116 WIAs
    173 MIAs
    From the 173 MIAs, 90 men returned to their units quite quickly.

    SS Totenkopf
    100 KIAs (estimated)
    200 POWs.

    The Sydnor figures at Message #155 agree with the 7.PzD figures above and his figure on the SS Totenkopf appear more robust given the round estimates above, but especially given their source.

    Best,

    Steve.

    Steve, what page are these figures on in the book?

    Rich

    I've never read so much unsubstantiated poppycock in a single paragraph.


    I was thinking slightly along those lines as I typed it up. The book was only a tennor so no real harm to my bank balance but at least thats another stone turned over. Back to Kew in two weeks for the 1 Arm Div GS file and a couple of 50 Div's.
     
  4. Gooseman

    Gooseman Senior Member

    In the German version of 'Blitzkrieglegende' Frieser states the losses of the 7th Panzerdivision on pg 348:

    "Es handelte sich um 89 Tote, 116 Verwundete und 173 Vermisste. Von den letzteren kehrten jedoch 90 Versprengte gleich darauf wieder zu ihren Einheiten zurück" (source: Manteuffel, die 7.Panzer-Division im Zweiten Welt-Krieg, seite 78).

    [translation] "It were 89 KIA, 116 WIA and 173 MIA. Of the latter 90 returned soon after and rejoined their respective outfits."

    The SS-T losses I could not find in Frieser's German version. In the 20 pg section dealing with the Arras affaire it is not mentioned anyway.
     
    Drew5233 likes this.
  5. Drew5233

    Drew5233 #FuturePilot 1940 Obsessive

    Thanks,

    I'm currently reading the English version and I couldn't see any figures either which is why I asked.
     
  6. idler

    idler GeneralList

    Are there any losses for 8 Pz Div? If I recall correctly, the guns knocked out by 12 L might have been associated with them and might help to make up the numbers.

    I started to look for more detail on a few of the prisoner-bearing engagements but then the shitstorm broke...
     
    Roxy likes this.
  7. Steve Mac

    Steve Mac Very Senior Member

    Steve, what page are these figures on in the book?

    Hello Andy,

    The 'perported' figures quote from Frieser's book was in a lengthy article about the French cavalry in May/June 1940. It appears that the part of the quote dealing with 7.PzD - which I cut to the basic figures - is accurate; if not verbatim. The part dealing with SS-Totenkopf appears not to be and I can only assume that this is something that the author of the article has added, without qualifying this fact. :unsure:

    As I mentioned in my note to Kate at Message #167, looking at matters objectively Sydnor's figures are better. They are supported by SS-Totenkopf and 7.PzD's after action reports and casualty returns, using finalised 'missing' figures from roll calls and battlefield investigations. I don't believe you will get more accurate returns than these. Conversely, I didn't commend the casualty figures on SS-T attributed to Frieser as they are estimates. We now know why...

    Is the Frieser book any good?

    Best,

    Steve.
     
  8. Drew5233

    Drew5233 #FuturePilot 1940 Obsessive

    Is the Frieser book any good?


    Not finished it yet but so far its one of the most thorough works on the campaign I've read and refreshingly doesn't make out that only the BEF were fighting the Germans.

    Ooo and the Maps in the book are first class.
     
  9. Steve Mac

    Steve Mac Very Senior Member

    Not finished it yet but so far its one of the most thorough works on the campaign I've read and refreshingly doesn't make out that only the BEF were fighting the Germans.

    Ooo and the Maps in the book are first class.


    Thanks, Andy. That's another added to my wish list!

    Best,

    Steve.
     
  10. Gooseman

    Gooseman Senior Member

    Is the Frieser book any good?


    The Frieser book is the best of its kind.

    Frieser manages to pin-point the emphasis of the German strategy and the Allied failures. Notwithstanding downplaying Germany's supremacy on some parts and overplaying the quality of French armour, the book takes care of the beloney that was written in the first 50 years after the events.

    All quality work on the Westfeldzug in 1940 that was published over the last five years or so, makes prominent use of Frieser's study. The thouroughness of the man's analysis of things was not only refreshing (as in 'dealing with the old myths'), but it also shows a stunning picture of the facts and figures in May 1940. That there was no German superiority in numbers or quantity (and quality) of material, but that there was a huge difference in the quality of doctrine, quality of officers and NCO of the first line troops and basically that alliances are disadvantages in comparison to single nation belligerents.

    It also demonstrates the complete and utter blindness of the French and the absurdism in Gamelin's plans. On the other hand it deals with the myths as if the Germans had produced a super army with mere super soldiers and commanders. Frieser takes his readers to the (many) controversies amongst German commanders, proves that many of the prominent successes on the battlefield were gained by NCO's or Lieutenants, rather than Generals and Frieser manages to discuss the huge risks some prominent players took. How it all works out in one giant slam victory, but that at many stages the German GHQ had more than massive doubts.

    Frieser is a must have and must read for anyone interested in the May/June 1940 affaires. It contains many eye-openers.
     
    Jonathan Ball likes this.
  11. Steve Mac

    Steve Mac Very Senior Member

    The Frieser book is the best of its kind.

    Frieser manages to pin-point the emphasis of the German strategy and the Allied failures. Notwithstanding downplaying Germany's supremacy on some parts and overplaying the quality of French armour, the book takes care of the beloney that was written in the first 50 years after the events.

    All quality work on the Westfeldzug in 1940 that was published over the last five years or so, makes prominent use of Frieser's study. The thouroughness of the man's analysis of things was not only refreshing (as in 'dealing with the old myths'), but it also shows a stunning picture of the facts and figures in May 1940. That there was no German superiority in numbers or quantity (and quality) of material, but that there was a huge difference in the quality of doctrine, quality of officers and NCO of the first line troops and basically that alliances are disadvantages in comparison to single nation belligerents.

    It also demonstrates the complete and utter blindness of the French and the absurdism in Gamelin's plans. On the other hand it deals with the myths as if the Germans had produced a super army with mere super soldiers and commanders. Frieser takes his readers to the (many) controversies amongst German commanders, proves that many of the prominent successes on the battlefield were gained by NCO's or Lieutenants, rather than Generals and Frieser manages to discuss the huge risks some prominent players took. How it all works out in one giant slam victory, but that at many stages the German GHQ had more than massive doubts.

    Frieser is a must have and must read for anyone interested in the May/June 1940 affaires. It contains many eye-openers.

    Thanks for that, Gooseman. Kate also mentioned that Frieser as a source of information is to be trusted...

    I look forward to reading his book; one for a holiday me thinks, so I can read it right through without much interruption.

    Best,

    Steve.
     
  12. Gooseman

    Gooseman Senior Member

    You won't be disappointed, Steve.

    Don't get bothered by the analysis of the French armour quality. That, I find, an extremely weak aspect of the book that should have been tackled by editors who mastered that specific topic. Frieser exaggerates the quality of the French tanks, whereas at the same time he righteously criticizes the same vehicles when he evaluates the operational and tactical (non)capacity of the French armour.

    Frieser however manages to analyse the operation fabiously, there where it matters even on a 'hair-splitting-level'. I very much like that. When one also reads his tour-guide ("Sedan"), where he compares 'then-and-now' and tells the story that goes along with the landmarks that are still there today, one is fully informed.
     
  13. LondonNik

    LondonNik Senior Member

    Deleted
     
    Last edited: Sep 16, 2017
  14. Drew5233

    Drew5233 #FuturePilot 1940 Obsessive

    There are over a 1,000 pages in this and the 1 Armd Div Provost file for me to go through but this jumped out at me when I was copying the files yesterday. Reading between the lines it appears (understandably by this date) officer's were not following the correct procedures when handling PoW's.

    Perhaps the fate of these 15-20 PoW's that were striped off lays with the French?

    "After preliminary examination at Div, prisoners are to be despatched at once to French Army HQ."

    [​IMG]
     
  15. Drew5233

    Drew5233 #FuturePilot 1940 Obsessive

    I wonder what happened to these 200 to 300 prisoners captured by 50 Division units?

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
     
  16. LondonNik

    LondonNik Senior Member

    Deleted
     
    Last edited: Sep 16, 2017

Share This Page