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

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

  1. idler

    idler GeneralList

    Harman may have been to the PRO but in the old days before digital cameras, I suspect research was primarily looking for information that supported your hypothesis. If he went in looking for 'dirt' on the DLI I'm sure he would find some, even if it wasn't entirely representative.
     
  2. Verrieres

    Verrieres no longer a member

    Harman may have been to the PRO but in the old days before digital cameras, I suspect research was primarily looking for information that supported your hypothesis. If he went in looking for 'dirt' on the DLI I'm sure he would find some, even if it wasn't entirely representative.



    Exactly! Absolutely spot on ! I have done exactly what was asked and provided references regarding the training and supply of 6DLI I have done just that and although it has been brushed aside with various `what if`?`The question on how well the 6DLI were trained,equipped,and supplied has been answered compare this training and supply with the description I provided of the `sister` battalions and see which one matchs Hartons description in the first quote. The fact that men from the North East were only a certain height,came from poor mining backgrounds,when they joined they did`nt expect to fight etc...does that make them candidates for murder?


    Verrieres

    Ps.

    Quote:
    The problem with their feet is also touched on when one of the officers commented on the fact that 6DLI were a fully trained and operational battalion and the fact that their men had been asked to dig fortifications and were technically a motorised unit would not be ideal preparation for forced marches…which blisters or not they completed


    ...not hint that the issue of a lack of transport HAD reared its head in discussion before May 10th???


    No..more of a statement that riding around on lorries and digging fortifications is not ideal preperation for a route march by an Infantry unit:confused:
     
  3. idler

    idler GeneralList

    The biggest problem with these 'myth-busting' histories seems to be that by getting his word in first, the author dumps the burden of [dis-]proof on his detractors; made even more difficult when the statements are generalised and loosely referenced.

    I was intrigued by the reference to Harman's left-wingedness. If he writes this about noble, oppressed northern miners, I hate to think what he'd have to say about soft, southern regiments.
     
  4. phylo_roadking

    phylo_roadking Very Senior Member

    I have done exactly what was asked and provided references regarding the training and supply of 6DLI I have done just that and although it has been brushed aside with various `what if`?`The question on how well the 6DLI were trained,equipped,and supplied has been answered

    Oh? Unless my screen isn't displaying properly? What *I* can see is lots of detail okay - but NO references or sources for it all. You're not getting what I'm asking for at all.

    10 DLI were a sister battalion of the 6th DLI embodiment completed 6DLI had a complement of thirty one officers and 562 other ranks compared to 10DLi `s ten officers and 351 other ranks Conscripts into 6DLi received both initial and specialised training in various places and ranges throughout the North East of England. On the 5th September 1939 intensive training was undertook which included drill, weapons training, route marches and trench digging. Brigadier Churchill demanded that 151 Bde were fit and an intensive physical training programme commenced. The less fit men were weeded out and the 6th DLI were sent on intensive Physical training at Aldershot, specialised weapons courses at Hythe, Gas courses and for senior officers there were TEWTs (Training exercises without troops).On the 18th September the 6DLI were at the ranges at Whitburn following on from their route march and vehicle embus training.On the 22 October the mortar and carrier sections were ordered to chipping Norton and were passed on the way by a large convoy of 8th DLI 8cwt trucks heading in the same direction.2Lt Mike Lockhart battalion motor transport officer was given the use of 20 vehicles in which to learn all the battalion drivers prior to them receiving their 3ton Bedfords to supplement their existing 15cwt trucks.A field was set aside in which motor-cyclists were put through their paces. On the 15th November additional equipment was received and at the beginning of December the number of Bren Guns and Anti-tank guns were made up to War establishment numbers. Further drafts of trained men were sent from The Shropshire Light Infantry to supplement those already received from the ITC at Brancepeth. On the 4th December whilst all men continued their training the 6th DLI received, one humber car, nine 8cwt trucks,one mobile office truck, twelve 30cwt trucks and five carriers to supplement what the battalion already had. On the 11th January the 6th DLI took part in divisional exercises before being inspected by the King on the 17th.
    Once the battalion had moved to France a platoon of ASC together with their 3 ton trucks were attatched to each DLI battalion and all of the men trained in embossing and debussing until they had it off to a fine art Night exercises were carried out in which experimental French methods of moving at night were practised.From 9th March onwards company,battalion or brigade exercises were carried out on a daily basis.defending and consolidating positions as they went. At Emmerin the DLI brigade dug fortifications in parties of 45 men each party been covered by two anti aircraft guns,one gas sentry four stretcher bearers each man wore full service marching order helmets and carried their gas capes together with full arms and personal equipment. A range was prepared at Etaples for anti-tank drills.During the beginning of May the 6th DLI continued their firing on the ranges at Bully Greny and even had a mortar range at Vendin le Vicil that takes the training just up to the Hostilities.The problem with their feet is also touched on when one of the officers commented on the fact that 6DLI were a fully trained and operational battalion and the fact that their men had been asked to dig fortifications and were technically a motorised unit would not be ideal preparation for forced marches…which blisters or not they completed.Oh there was a mention that the Grenades were late arriving


    I don't see a single book/diary/anecdote sourced or referenced in all of that, or the original post.

    As for this

    The problem with their feet is also touched on when one of the officers commented on the fact that 6DLI were a fully trained and operational battalion and the fact that their men had been asked to dig fortifications and were technically a motorised unit would not be ideal preparation for forced marches…which blisters or not they completed


    ...not hint that the issue of a lack of transport HAD reared its head in discussion before May 10th???


    No..more of a statement that riding around on lorries and digging fortifications is not ideal preperation for a route march by an Infantry unit


    read it again....

    commented on the fact that 6DLI were a fully trained and operational battalion and the fact that their men had been asked to dig fortifications and were technically a motorised unit

    Niote the word "and" - When I was at school it was used to connect two SEPERATE things/items....I.E. the issue of being "technically a motorised unit" is IN ADDITION to "the fact that their men had been asked to dig fortifications"

    TWO separate issues. And so-

    "...technically a motorised unit..."

    :mellow: You see?
     
  5. Phaethon

    Phaethon Historian

    The fact that men from the North East were only a certain height,came from poor mining backgrounds,when they joined they did`nt expect to fight etc...does that make them candidates for murder?

    I have nothing really to offer this thread, but the comment on north east people being short does make me laugh considering the north east cities are a traditional recruiting ground for the guards regiments. Of course the fact that my family is from Durham, most of the men in it were all miners, and we're all 6ft+ has nothing to do with it. :D
     
    von Poop likes this.
  6. phylo_roadking

    phylo_roadking Very Senior Member

    It might be worth looking back at Harman's EXACT words on that...

    By tradition the maximum height for a light infantryman was five feet two inches (1.57 metres). County Durham, at the end of twenty years of catastrophic unemployment in the coal-pits and shipyards, had plenty of people small enough and willing to take a job as a soldier.


    Phaeton, Harman didn't day ALL people, he only said "plenty"...;)

    THIS statement...ABOUT what Harman is supposed to have said -

    The fact that men from the North East were only a certain height


    ....is the one that's incorrect. That's NOT what Harman said at all. He ONLY set the height conditional....and THEN noted that in the North-East after years of depression there were plenty of people willing to join up who did happen to meet the height criterion.
     
  7. Verrieres

    Verrieres no longer a member

    Quote By tradition the maximum height for a light infantryman was five feet two inches (1.57 metres). County Durham, at the end of twenty years of catastrophic unemployment in the coal-pits and shipyards, had plenty of people small enough and willing to take a job as a soldier

    Reading this statement above what tradition ? What maximum height ?
    Quote… had plenty of people small enough and willing to take a job as a soldier..
    doesnt this imply they had to be small? This size surely refers to Bantam battalions of WW1 doe`snt it?
    Source http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bantam_(military)

    Look we are going round in circles here!
    You state there are no references quoted for the information supplied well reluctantly I`ll post a list, although we`ve took this thread so far off topic its unbelievable,
    There is only one publication which deals exclusively with 6th DLI during this time and that is `The Faithful Sixth` by Harry Moses drawn from former members of the regiment both officers and other ranks (there`s quite a list but If someone insists I will post them)

    Stephen Shannon Ba at the DLI museum was also forthcoming with access to `The Durham Light Infantry Archives` now housed in the DRO in Durham City, Regimental Trustees at the Regimental Office (Now the Rifles Old Elvet Riverside Durham City) actually requested the book be written. The Imperial War Museum, The DLI Recorded Voice Collection. Most of the same sources consulted by Harman yet both draw completely different conclusions.

    So many books have been published on the BEF campaign each of the DLI books
    The DLI at War by David Rissik
    `Faithful` The Story of the Durham Light Infantry SGP Ward
    The Gateshead Gurkhas The Story of the 9thDLi by H Moses
    The Faithful Six again by Harry Moses
    8th DLI by English and Lewis

    All make no secret of the fact that the sister battalions were poorly trained and equipped if the battalions of 151Bde were also in such bad shape would`nt they have mentioned it ,even in passing? Older publications on the campaign such as as It Happened 1954 by C R Attlee, Old Men Forget 1953 Duff Cooper, The Fateful Years 1957.The Reckoning 1965 Anthony Eden, R MacLeod The Ironside Diaries 1962, Memoirs by B L Montgomery never (If memory serves me correct)mention the battalions of 151bde been short of Brens, Artillery and such but I would bet that on any references to 70 bde of which 10/11/12 DLI were part that some mention would be made to their lack of training and resources.

    The lack of artillery mentioned by Harman would I suppose be based on what was available for the attack but the 50th division did have RA and RE personnel at their disposal if it was used at the time I don`t honestly know.
    Source;-http://www.niehorster.orbat.com/017_britain/40_org/_inf-div.html

    What was set as a posing question by Drew regarding the murder of 400 Pows has become a discussion/Argument on whether Nicholas Harmans descriptive account matches the mentioned 6th & 8th DLI my opinion was it was best suited to 10th/11th/12th DLI and not used as a blanket for all the DLI territorial battalions involved. I stick by my opinion ,and others no doubt will stick to theirs I have no copies of store returns etc for that particular period, but who has? Its for the individual to decide ,and not for me to try and influence further. My argument is at an end. I apologize to Drew for my part in taking this thread totally off topic with the question still unanswered after over 65 postings.:indexCAXI2NHN:


    Verrieres
     
  8. Gary Kennedy

    Gary Kennedy Member

    Just two technical points that will niggle if I don't mention them, even though they aren't likely to contribute.

    The quote referring to all the Platoon commanders being fresh-faced or mid-life 2nd Lieutenants is a little odd. In 1940 only one Platoon per Company was commanded by an officer, the others (two for infantry normally) being lead by Warrant officers class III (Platoon serjeant-majors). I understand this rank was only abolished after the Dunkirk campaign, though will accept correction if I'm wrong.

    Likewise, the DLI probably had Bns on two different establishments. 50th Div was a first line Territorial formation, trimmed down to two Bdes and correspondingly fewer support and service units. It was termed a Motor Div, but relied on the RASC attaching one Troop Carrying Company per Bde, this Coy having three Sections (Platoon size actually) that had a theoretical 25 x 3-ton lorries each to lift a Bn. 23rd Div was a duplicate second line Territorial formation, that was sent over to France for labour duties. Infantry (Pioneer) Battalions had a different establishment, which did allow for only 14 Bren guns as someone mentioned, and no 2 or 3-inch mortars. Possibly the description of DLI units as under-equipped might have confused the Pioneer units, on a lighter scale, with the Motor Div units.

    Beyond that, the mechanics of the massacre of such a large group of prisoners, with apparently no survivors (?), during the midst of a confused and rolling battle, with seemingly no physical trace of the event found by the advancing Germans, and perpetrated by suggestedly ill-equipped, non-regular personnel, causes me to raise an eyebrow. It is not a campaign I have studied in great detail, nor do I have access to the sources some have quoted, such as war diaries (though I doubt it would get a specific mention), so I'll remain sceptical on the issue.
     
  9. phylo_roadking

    phylo_roadking Very Senior Member

    Gary - actually THIS is interesting -

    Likewise, the DLI probably had Bns on two different establishments. 50th Div was a first line Territorial formation, trimmed down to two Bdes and correspondingly fewer support and service units. It was termed a Motor Div, but relied on the RASC attaching one Troop Carrying Company per Bde, this Coy having three Sections (Platoon size actually) that had a theoretical 25 x 3-ton lorries each to lift a Bn.


    As we know from Verrieres this IS what happened...IN FRANCE, and before May 10th...

    Once the battalion had moved to France a platoon of ASC together with their 3 ton trucks were attatched to each DLI battalion and all of the men trained in embossing and debussing until they had it off to a fine art Night exercises were carried out in which experimental French methods of moving at night were practised.


    The role of the RASC in transporting the DLI in the field is ALSO entirely congruent with their having left their earlier-assigned EXTRA transport as detailed by Verrieres in England...especially if the infantry companies weren't ever INTENDED to have organic transport :mellow:

    The war diaries of the 6th and 8th battalions might therefore confirm if the earlier RASC-provided transport was still available to them after the chaos of May 10th-19th ;).....or if it had been withdrawn and assigned elsewhere in the panic of the retreat.

    After all, Harman didn't say there were NO trucks...

    There were not enough trucks to transport the Durham Light Infantry.


    Note my emphasis.
     
  10. idler

    idler GeneralList

    From Lewis & English: 8 DLI embussed on troop carriers at Annay on the morning of 21 May and were taken to Vimy Ridge. It seems that the troop carrying vehicles (TCVs) were not used to get the battalion to its start line. As it was 10 miles away and supposedly clear, I'd have thought TCVs would have been used, but they are not mentioned. Indeed, Rissik says both battalions were to march to the start line. The bottom line is that TCVs were available.

    I don't have The Faithful Sixth but reading between the lines of Rissik, 6 DLI may also have been bussed to the Vimy area, then set off on foot.

    Just noticed a reference in English and Lewis to 8 DLI undertaking a 27-mile march on 18 May with the comment that cobbled roads weren't kind to feet that had been softened while digging an anti-tank ditch near Gondecourt. 19 May was also a long march before the TCVs reappeared on 20 May.
     
  11. phylo_roadking

    phylo_roadking Very Senior Member

    From Lewis & English: 8 DLI embussed on troop carriers at Annay on the morning of 21 May and were taken to Vimy Ridge.


    Idler, from Harman -

    The infantry, who had spent the night beside the great Canadian war memorial at Vimy Ridge, near Arras, were supposed to march 15 kilometers in two and a half hours, in order to take up position behind the tanks. They were late.


    Seems to be a considerable divergence there. Might reconcile on the specific term "morning" I.E. any time after Midnight! ;)....but see below...

    The OTHER factor is...

    From Lewis & English: 8 DLI embussed on troop carriers at Annay on the morning of 21 May and were taken to Vimy Ridge. It seems that the troop carrying vehicles (TCVs) were not used to get the battalion to its start line. As it was 10 miles away and supposedly clear, I'd have thought TCVs would have been used, but they are not mentioned. Indeed, Rissik says both battalions were to march to the start line. The bottom line is that TCVs were available.

    ...how many??? I.E. might the trucks have required several trips to position them at Vimy Ridge??? This wouldn't necessarily be regarded as practical the next day...convoys motoring to the start line might be a bit obvious in daylight with the attack starting as late as 11am ;)

    This might be another explanation of the "overnight" vs. "morning of the 21st divergence"; a process of ferrying them in might have taken that long, motoring back and forth and embussing/debussing - that the leading elements may indeed have arrived and had to bivouac at the War Memorial...

    If they started at "Annay"...Annay is three miles outside Lens, which means a trip of around ten miles as the crow flies to Vimy Ridge - or at least 40, maybe 45mins, at convoy speed. That's a 1hr 20-30min round trip, maybe five mins each end to embus/debus with kit (is that being optimistic? After all, they HAD been practising!) Therefore - purely as an illustration - four round trips to lift what is after all TWO full battalions (we don't hear about them being understrength) takes six hours!

    Wish we knew how many trucks they had made available to them, or how many trips it took to assemble at Vimy Ridge...
     
  12. idler

    idler GeneralList

    We are arguing increasingly detailed (albeit interesting) aspects of the battle in order to gauge the credibility of Harman and - in turn - his claim of a massacre. However, I don't really want to be retyping vast chunks of Lewis & English, especially as it's readily available here. Nothing I've seen supports the disappearance of 400 or so Germans so I'm inclined to write off Harman as a sensationalist hack. That may be horribly unfair as the rest of his book might be fantastic. Can I add that it doesn't mean that I don't believe British troops could kill German POWs.

    Going back to my burden of proof comment, Harman is the one who is diverging from earlier sources. All the points you raise are valid and ought to be studied and resolved but shouldn't Harman have done that already? He should have picked apart the war diaries and the works of Lewis, English and Rissik and told us where, how and why they are wrong, effectively dismissing or 're-interpreting' primary and secondary sources that don't support his theory.

    Happy Christmas, by the way!
     
  13. phylo_roadking

    phylo_roadking Very Senior Member

    And to you!

    so I'm inclined to write off Harman as a sensationalist hack

    The odd thing is - he's regarded nowadays as amiong the basic reading on Dunkirk! :mellow: One of the reasons WHY any claims need to be critically assessed and proved/disproved, not just chucked out out of hand.

    I don't automatically regard him as foolproof for the reputation he has; quite the reverse, that's perhaps WHY he should be knocked down if warranted - BUT PROPERLY. When looking into something like this it has to be done properly, in detail, no "peekaboo" sourcing as has appeared in this thread...and certainly no polemics and jingoism colouring the issue.

    As noted before, the epithet "sensationalist hack" COULD therefore also be applied to the likes of Max Hastings :lol:

    All the points you raise are valid and ought to be studied and resolved but shouldn't Harman have done that already?

    Maybe he had...WE just don't know. At the very least, being Ye Goode Olde Days, he would have been working with a proper editor at Hodder and Stoughton.

    He should have picked apart the war diaries and the works of Lewis, English and Rissik and told us where, how and why they are wrong, effectively dismissing or 're-interpreting' primary and secondary sources that don't support his theory.


    That wasn't what he was writing, he was writing "popular entry-level" history, not a regimental history or a refutation of EARLIER allegations - after all! HE was making this in print for the first time.

    Again - WE don't know what level of work/research ihe performed in the available sources to come up with what he did; he certainly refers to most of the primary sources. Might be best to have a look at his "Notes on Sources" chapter for yourself to see the level of what he SAYS he did...
     
  14. phylo_roadking

    phylo_roadking Very Senior Member

    Meanwhile - to get back on track slightly -

    Here's the Lewis&English account of the cemetery action again...
    `C` Company was soon in action.Supported by a few French tanks they attacked a cemetery about half a mile to the west of Duisans where over a hundred Germans had taken refuge when the British armour had passed through the village.The French tanks raked the cemetery area with machine gun fire and when the infantry advanced they found only eighteen Germans alive.The remainder had been mown down by the French gunners.The survivours were handed over to the French who stripped them to the skin and forced them to lie face downwards in the road until it was time to take them away...


    I found this anecdotal account on the BBC People's War site...
    After much training and maneuvers in France and advances and retreats up and down the French-Belgium border the battalion saw its first major action near the village of Warlus and Duisans On the 21st May 1940 the battalion Split into 2 units, supported by a few French tanks they attacked a cemetery where over a hundred Germans had taken refuge. The French tanks raked the cemetery with machine gun fire and when the infantry advanced only 18 of the hundred were left alive and taken prisoner

    BBC - WW2 People's War - Private 4455304 Joseph Summerbell Wilkinson 7th and 8th Battalion Durham Light Infantry and the 7th Battalion Green Howards

    Okay, can ANYONE tell me WHY if it was the infantry who advanced into the cemetery after the French tanks raked the area with MG fire....and thus it was the DLI who rounded up the surviving 18 SS-TK as POWS in THEIR custody....they should THEN have handed them over to the French TANK crews??? :mellow: That's one I don't understand.
     
  15. phylo_roadking

    phylo_roadking Very Senior Member

    I'd have thought TCVs would have been used, but they are not mentioned. Indeed, Rissik says both battalions were to march to the start line. The bottom line is that TCVs were available.

    Just had a thought....

    From Ellis -
    Only the 50th Division was to be used in the opening phase. Of this division one brigade (the 150th) was sent to strengthen the Arras garrison and to hold the Scarpe immediately to the east of the town. Thus at the beginning of the operation only the 50th Division's second brigade (the 151st) was employed in the clearing-up action, and of this brigade's three infantry battalions one was kept back in support of the attacking troops. The attacking infantry on May the 21st were thus not two divisions but two battalions.


    I wonder - were the available trucks used to motor the 150th Bde. into Arras???
     
  16. Owen

    Owen -- --- -.. MOD

  17. idler

    idler GeneralList

  18. phylo_roadking

    phylo_roadking Very Senior Member

    The thread is interesting - but a lot of what on first glance seems useful has already been refuted here, For instance - Syndor's casualty figures for SS-TK have been shown to be wrong in THIS thread by one poster...

    One thing it DOES do, however - at the very end - is bring the rumour of a massacre back VERY specifically on onto the 18 soldiers stripped and...? after the cemetery action.
     
  19. idler

    idler GeneralList

    Sydnor's figures are only relevant if one makes the assumption that all of the 400 (or the 18) were SS. I don't - there were plenty of Heer units around.

    One thing it DOES do, however - at the very end - is bring the rumour of a massacre back VERY specifically on onto the 18 soldiers stripped and...? after the cemetery action.
    That's not quite how I read it. The thread fizzles out with the 18 being the only documented case of mistreatment of POWs. The rest of the thread echoes a lot of what's here with the added bonus of Hayward establishing that Harman can't evidence his argument:

    Comsat Angel 11 Oct 2004, 17:31
    Found the book - "Myths and Legends of the Second World War", by James Hayward, Sutton Press, 2003. Further to the above, it appears that @ 18 Germans survived the attack by French tanks, and it was one of these survivors who shot a British soldier.

    Hayward dissects Harman's allegations, viz: "Harman's allegations concerning the massacre of an unknown - but apparently "large" - number of German prisoners by both 6 and 8 DLI were based in part on "personal interviews" with 2 former DLI men, one an office and the other a warrant officer. Neither has ever been identified, and in February 2002 Harman told this author that he had mislaid all relevant papers and forgotten their names." Quite! No German reports of murdered prisoners were ever made, no bodies of murdered Germans were ever found, nor did Kochlein ever use this "massacre" in his defence in 1949.

    I wonder where Hayward got the information that one of the 18 shot one of ours? That would pretty much justify one execution and the stripping of the rest to ensure there were no more concealed weapons.

    The pegasus-one link looked interesting but turned out to be dead. It's now here (6 DLI prisoners being sent back to Bde). One thing in there that would have got up my nose, had I been a landser, is the reference to an escort being overpowered and, presumably, killed. Why take POWs if they show no gratitude for having been spared and will kill you at the first opportunity?

    So, to summarise: plenty of evidence that large numbers of prisoners were taken, no evidence of where they went (bar L/Cpl Parker's account), one unsupported accusation that they were murdered.

    I have noticed that 50 Div's Pro[vost?] Coy's war diary for May 1940 is missing from the PRO but I'm still not inclined to think it's a conspiracy.
     
  20. phylo_roadking

    phylo_roadking Very Senior Member

    Neither has ever been identified, and in February 2002 Harman told this author that he had mislaid all relevant papers and forgotten their names." Quite!


    Well, we don't know the circumstances of this comment; did the two gentlemen sit down together and have a long detailed discussion...or did "someone" phone Harman out of the blue and ask for the names of his sources? :lol: Nor do we know what guarantees of anonymity Harman gave his sources in the DLI....but I'm quite sure he wasn't about to give their names to someone who would likely hot-foot it straight up the M1! :mellow: If we accept is career as a journalist....even nowadays it takes VERY severe court action by the police to force a journalist to reveal his sources if he doesn't want to!

    The other thing to remember is...February 2002 is AT LEAST 22 years after Harman would have worked his last on the book, given no revisions and X-amount of time for proofing and pre-production in Ye Goode Olde Days....
     

Share This Page