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

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

  1. Drew5233

    Drew5233 #FuturePilot 1940 Obsessive

    So to summarise:

    • I think we can safely dismiss the claims of 400 PoW's murdered. I can't help wonder if this a misunderstanding/mix up between the 400 claimed captured by the 6 DLI and what happened to the far fewer PoWs captured (18-20) by 8 DLI and French tanks. Having now read the comments in Harman's book he doesn't claim that 400 were killed. He only mentions a Dunkirk veteran does in his book, Return via Dunkirk by Gun Buster. The book is part fiction and I haven't found the account yet-Personally I think the contents can be ignored purely on the fact that the book has fiction in it and there is no real way of deciding what is made up and what is fact. I will have another look and see if I can find it though.
    • If there was any mistreatment of German PoW's, going by the accounts in John Sadlers book and some of the previous posts it would appear to be in the area that 8 DLI, 7 RTR and a French Armoured unit were fighting.
    • There is still the comment from Sergeant T Hepple, B Company, 7th Royal Tank Regiment about drawing his pistol to keep the DLI soldiers from his PoW. If he is to be believed and I see no reason why not, at least it proves that the 8 DLI ORs weren't happy.
    • I ordered Angus Calder's The Myth of the Blitz last night to see what is mentioned in this book.
    • It would be good to find Brian Bond published essay 'The British Field Army in France and Belgium 1939-1940' to check its content on the subject.
    • I think the French tank unit needs to be identified and if they have a war diary for this period in the French Archives.
     
    Paul Reed likes this.
  2. Drew5233

    Drew5233 #FuturePilot 1940 Obsessive

    The French unit appears to be French 13eme BCC according to ATB's BITW.
     
  3. Steve Mac

    Steve Mac Very Senior Member

    Hello Andy,

    From various sources, but the better view is it was a mixture of 3e DLM and 13e BCC (a mixture of Somua S35 and Hotchkiss H35 tanks). The French had a total of about 60 tanks committed.

    Best,

    Steve.
     
  4. Steve Mac

    Steve Mac Very Senior Member

    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.
     
  5. Heimbrent

    Heimbrent Well-Known Member

    Good job Andy!

    Steve:
    Thanks for gathering the figures.
    I'd trust Frieser more than Sydnor; his study is more recent and he did a better job concerning sources (given that Frieser only wrote about West 1940 and Sydnor covered about the whole history of the T-Div that's no surprise).
    As for the losses of the T-Div it shouldn't be forgotten that they were an inexperienced unit; unlike DR they didn't even have a CO with proper military training (on a higher level anyway).
     
  6. Verrieres

    Verrieres no longer a member

    Just noticed the title change.. isnt that going to render the `genuine DLI related replies` obsolete and a little confusing for anyone `New` stumbling across it for the first time? Just as a definitive/plausable answer was in sight the goalposts have moved slightly? Just my thoughts:unsure:

    Final input from myself on this one then ;-

    There is still the comment from Sergeant T Hepple, B Company, 7th Royal Tank Regiment about drawing his pistol to keep the DLI soldiers from his PoW. If he is to be believed and I see no reason why not, at least it proves that the 8 DLI ORs weren't happy.


    As George Self described to the IWM a German hiding amongst his(German) own wounded had opened fire hitting an 8th DLI Corporal in the back and killing him and the subsequent return fire which as George admitted probably killed the wounded men around the assailant .
    Feelings would indeed have been hostile towards the German prisoner..and naturally so. Were German Prisoners killed near Arras? Technically as the above testimony implies ..Yes...but not in the context of deliberately taking them out and shooting them like dogs in a field! Which brings us back to the crux of the original question ...how many....certainly no where near the the original number of 400...Personally this can be debated until doomsday and we would never have a definitive answer.


    Happy debating

    Best Wishes

    Jim
     
  7. Steve Mac

    Steve Mac Very Senior Member

    Steve:
    Thanks for gathering the figures.
    I'd trust Frieser more than Sydnor; his study is more recent and he did a better job concerning sources (given that Frieser only wrote about West 1940 and Sydnor covered about the whole history of the T-Div that's no surprise).
    As for the losses of the T-Div it shouldn't be forgotten that they were an inexperienced unit; unlike DR they didn't even have a CO with proper military training (on a higher level anyway).

    Hello Kate,

    What a stange conclusion to draw. First, Frieser used estimates for SS Totenkopf. Second, Frieser's figures for 7.PzD are analogous with Sydnor's. Third, Sydnor's figures 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. Looking at matters objectively, I would trust Sydnor's figures.

    Quotes for Sydnor and Frieser are attached below.

    For the record the T-Div - SS Totenkopf - may have been an inexperienced unit, but so was the TT-Div - 50th (Northumbrian) Division - of which the 8th Bn Durham Light Infantry was part; the were Territorials (civilians and part-time soldiers before WWII commenced for us Brits).


    To my knowledge Rommel, Eicke and Sydnor have all commented on the Arras counter-attack/action.

    From the Axis forum:

    "Charles Sydnor's Soldiers of Destruction, a history of the Totenkopf, 1990, gives the following details of German casualties at Arras:

    SSTK Div
    39 Killed
    66 Wounded
    2 Missing

    7th Pz Div
    89 Killed
    116 Wounded
    83 Missing

    395 Total

    This locks up with other works that quote total German losses at Arras as around 400 men. Sydnor's figures are supported by SSTK and 7th PZ Div after action reports and casualty returns. Finalised 'missing' were determined after roll calls and battlefield investigations."

    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.
     
  8. Steve Mac

    Steve Mac Very Senior Member

    Just noticed the title change.. isnt that going to render the `genuine DLI related replies` obsolete and a little confusing for anyone `New` stumbling across it for the first time? Just as a definitive/plausable answer was in sight the goalposts have moved slightly? Just my thoughts:unsure:

    I couldn't agree more, Jim. After 2 years and 2 months... why? :unsure::unsure::unsure:
     
  9. Owen

    Owen -- --- -.. MOD

    Just noticed the title change.. isnt that going to render the `genuine DLI related replies` obsolete and a little confusing for anyone `New` stumbling across it for the first time? Just as a definitive/plausable answer was in sight the goalposts have moved slightly? Just my thoughts


    I couldn't agree more, Jim. After 2 years and 2 months... why?


    Cos people where moaning & whinging that the original thread title was disrespectful to the DLI & so after a chat with a couple of us Drew thought it best to change it.
    Now he has we've still got more moaning & whinging about the new title.
     
  10. Drew5233

    Drew5233 #FuturePilot 1940 Obsessive

    I changed the title because you lot kept moaning about 400 dead and kept going on about it !

    Anyone reading the thread properly will see the reason for the title change in the first post and when they get to post 161 (assuming they haven't lost the will to live with all the moaning and bitching) they will then see a summary.

    I for one have a massive facsination with what happened in 1940 and like to research all the avenues to any incidents that intrigue me-This happens to be one of them. I don't get 'case theory' as seems to be in this thread by some members and if I can I leave no stone unturned.

    If you have nothing constructive to add to this thread please go and post on another section as there is more than enough posts already that are just clouding the issue rather than helping it and more importantly understanding what actually happened.
     
  11. Heimbrent

    Heimbrent Well-Known Member

    Hello Kate,

    What a stange conclusion to draw. First, Frieser used estimates for SS Totenkopf. Second, Frieser's figures for 7.PzD are analogous with Sydnor's. Third, Sydnor's figures 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. Looking at matters objectively, I would trust Sydnor's figures.

    Quotes for Sydnor and Frieser are attached below.

    For the record the T-Div - SS Totenkopf - may have been an inexperienced unit, but so was the TT-Div - 50th (Northumbrian) Division - of which the 8th Bn Durham Light Infantry was part; the were Territorials (civilians and part-time soldiers before WWII commenced for us Brits).



    Best,

    Steve.

    Steve,
    sorry, I didn't really make myself clear above. I didn't mean I didn't trust Sydnor, not at all. What I meant is that Frieser's study is more recent and that he probably had easier access to archive material at least for the German side (being MGFA and all).
    Also, you can obviously put much more details in a study which only covers the campaign in the West than you can when dealing with the history of a unit throughout its time of existence. Sydnor's study is of course reliable even though some of his statements and conclusions are no up to the latest research.
    Since both authors give the same numbers (and I doubt Frieser copied them from Sydnor) then there's not even a problem, is there.

    My remark about them being an inexperienced unit was simply to point out that this was one reason for high(er) casualty rates. And I do suppose that inexperience leads to tactical mistakes which will certainly increase frustration and anger among the troops - which was one reason why they were more likely to overreact.
    Same happened with Heer units, btw. I wouldn't know nearly enough about the British Army to say anything about the units you mention above.

    The T-Div wasn't just inexperienced because they had no previous fighting experience. Like I said, their CO wasn't really a military man as far as I can tell. Plus they had the pressure of performing exceptionally well, since they were "elite" (from the racial point of view). Which is what they thought anyway. And they had no military tradition so they had to build that first, along with reputation.
     
    Drew5233 likes this.
  12. Verrieres

    Verrieres no longer a member

    Cos people where moaning & whinging that the original thread title was disrespectful to the DLI & so after a chat with a couple of us Drew thought it best to change it.
    Now he has we've still got more moaning & whinging about the new title.

    Sorry I said I had nothing else to add ,but your answer is just emphasising Steves question
    After 2 years and 2 months... why?

    The `moaning & whinging`could perhaps be the disbelief that the figure of 400 was ever considered believable in the first place consider Malmedy how many perished 84 (ish)? That was a major atrocity .The simple wording of your reply unfortunately draws the wrong type of off topic reply that is so often criticised ...a little like the one I have added really.

    I changed the title because you lot kept moaning about 400 dead and kept going on about it !

    Anyone reading the thread properly will see the reason for the title change in the first post and when they get to post 161 (assuming they haven't lost the will to live with all the moaning and bitching) they will then see a summary.

    I for one have a massive facsination with what happened in 1940 and like to research all the avenues to any incidents that intrigue me-This happens to be one of them. I don't get 'case theory' as seems to be in this thread by some members and if I can I leave no stone unturned.

    If you have nothing constructive to add to this thread please go and post on another section as there is more than enough posts already that are just clouding the issue rather than helping it and more importantly understanding what actually happened.

    Andy,
    With the uttmost respect mate the title change came after an offer to copy the relevant enquiry details,which I was to be honest reluctant to do,(as can be testified by other members here) but I was privately encouraged to do so but the expense and the effort would now be meaningless as it would not address the new parameters of the title.
    Another reference to `case theory` again with respect the original title and thread dealt with a single case `The DLI and the murder of 400 PoW`s in May 1940`not a general heading like the thread has now but `case` specific for over two years now?
    Hindsight is a marvellous thing and with it comes this thought ..Why re-open a closed thread? If it was getting so out of hand why not leave it closed and begin afresh with the `New` title and a new beginning?
    I know the last comment you have made is a `General` comment hopefully not aimed at any individual but as Steve and myself were the two who posted a reference to the title change I do tend to take it a little personally;)

    Time and again we are advised to take arguments and disagreements to PM`s etc yet I checked my messages before I replied here and there was nothing hence this in open forum.
    Thinking about things I do`nt really think I want to post anything `constructive`or otherwise in any other section or this Forum to be honest little sections are fast growing into `Private`mini web sites and no longer is it a `open` WW2 Talk Forum.

    Sorry but its the truth

    Best Wishes for the future and I hope you get back on track soon


    Jim
     
  13. Drew5233

    Drew5233 #FuturePilot 1940 Obsessive

    6 Million Jews were murdered in WW2 and people still disbelieve that.

    In 2009 I knew significantly less than I do now about the BEF and the regulars to the 1940 section of the forum are continually breaking new ground and discovering new facts that were lost in time.

    Only last night after looking in Harmans book, as I have said, he doesn't claim that 400 prisoners were killed. He says a Dunkirk veteran does in his book Return via Dunkirk. Even the auther of the DLI book that was quoted by yourself and Me hasn't even bothered to look in Harmans book by the look of it, as even he says its Harman's claim that 400 German soldiers. Again just incase anyone missed it, a veteran of the Dunkirk evacuation claims it and I know how some on here take what veterans say as gospel-Maybe Harman is of the same thought of some members on here and veterans are to be believed at all times?

    Anyway in short-Harman doesn't claim there was 400 killed at Arras. He just says the Dunkirk Vet does who goes by the name of Gun Buster.

    I fail to see why changing the title would stop you from obtaining copies of documents that disprove any involement of the DLI killing German PoWs. If it bothers you that much I am more than happy to pay for them or copy DLI war diaries at Kew to the value of the documents you have access to.

    The original thread title was a question and not an accussation, if you read the first post you will see I was actually asking a question if it really did happen and I fail to see why people have got so upset over this question. Surely this is what WW2 Forums are all about? Asking questions and seeking answers? That is all I was doing. The reason why I changed it was I felt the figure of 400 was a distraction to the real underlying question if any German PoWs were killed.

    Why re-open the thread? Because I don't think threads should be closed forever and I can-This thread was only closed because certain members were rambling and genralising and not debating the actual topic in the heading.

    Wherever you choose to post is entirely upto you and other forum members, all I want to do is discuss the subject in hand-We know there wasn't 400 prisoners killed and the 'veteran', whoever he is, was obviosly wrong for saying so. All these sort of posts do is detract from finding the facts and make the thread confusing and time consuming to find the relevant information. It took me over an hour last night to read back through this again because of all the posts that are not specific.

    So now I feel I have adequetly explained myself and my actions (if not PM or VM me) can we please get back to the subject at hand and not cloud this thread any further with unrelated 'bunk' like this.

    Cheers
     
  14. Steve Mac

    Steve Mac Very Senior Member

    Harman could not even produce evidence that there were any witnesses, the quote below is from Message #124:

    From "Myths and Legends of the Second World War", by James Hayward, Sutton Press, 2003. [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 officer 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."

    And some of the so called facts he uses to justify the 'phantom' soldiers claims are clearly incorrect; quote below from Message 152:

    I would only like to comment on the last sentence of the first quote in Message #141 where Harman claims:

    "By the evening of the 21st most of the DLI officers were dead, and every single one of the eight companies present was commanded by a second lieutenant."

    This refers to the 8th Bn Durham Light Infantry which lost between 23 (definite) and 25 (possibly) men KIA on 21 and 22 May 1940 - the pertinent dates. Not one of these soldiers was an Officer. The Battalion history discusses one Company Commander wounded, with he an another Company Commander taken POW on the 21 May 1940. Where did Harman get his facts - or is it fantasy?

    The foregoing deal with your comments below about Harman's book (below) and the rationale for this whole thread.

    Only last night after looking in Harmans book, as I have said, he doesn't claim that 400 prisoners were killed. He says a Dunkirk veteran does in his book Return via Dunkirk. Even the auther of the DLI book that was quoted by yourself and Me hasn't even bothered to look in Harmans book by the look of it, as even he says its Harman's claim that 400 German soldiers. Again just incase anyone missed it, a veteran of the Dunkirk evacuation claims it and I know how some on here take what veterans say as gospel-Maybe Harman is of the same thought of some members on here and veterans are to be believed at all times?

    Anyway in short-Harman doesn't claim there was 400 killed at Arras. He just says the Dunkirk Vet does who goes by the name of Gun Buster...

    ...The reason why I changed it was I felt the figure of 400 was a distraction to the real underlying question if any German PoWs were killed...

    ...So now I feel I have adequetly explained myself and my actions (if not PM or VM me) can we please get back to the subject at hand and not cloud this thread any further with unrelated 'bunk' like this.Cheers

    Given the facts in the first two quotes it is clear that:

    1) Regardless of what Harman or a soldier(s) he supposedly interviewed allegedly said, no evidence or soldier witness - or even the soldier(s) name - has been produced.
    2) Harman and his 'phantom' witness are entirely discredited.
    3) Further evidence has been posted that all prisoners of the 6 and 8DLI were handed over, either, to MP's at 151st Infantry Brigade HQ or to the French.
    4) ANY claim the the 8DLI executed German prisoners has no basis in truth, in fact there are no grounds on which to consider the matter further.

    I accept that you posted a question not an accustaion. However, following comments from members, at times it appeared like an allegation that the 6 and/or 8DLI executed German prisoners. It was there like a stain on the reputation of a very fine battalion, regiment, division, for over two years, with the title clearly referring to the Durhams. Then just when we appeared to be kicking the accusuation of wrong doing into touch the 'Durhams' title is removed. So, no closure...

    You may think it is 'bunk' Andy, but clearly Jim doesn't and neither do I, and there are other forum members that feel the same way. I know Jim is severely hacked off, and given the content and tone of his message he may not be back. I really do hope I am wrong.

    In conclusion what is there left to explore vis a vis the Durhams? What are we going to do to get Jim back on this forum - we can't afford to lose someone of his stature, it is not good for the forum?!?

    Best,

    Steve.
     
    canuck likes this.
  15. canuck

    canuck Closed Account

    Thanks for that summary Steve. Well said. I arrived late to this thread and was struggling to grasp the point of the exercise.
     
  16. Drew5233

    Drew5233 #FuturePilot 1940 Obsessive

    So to summarise:

    • I think we can safely dismiss the claims of 400 PoW's murdered. I can't help wonder if this a misunderstanding/mix up between the 400 claimed captured by the 6 DLI and what happened to the far fewer PoWs captured (18-20) by 8 DLI and French tanks. Having now read the comments in Harman's book he doesn't claim that 400 were killed. He only mentions a Dunkirk veteran does in his book, Return via Dunkirk by Gun Buster. The book is part fiction and I haven't found the account yet-Personally I think the contents can be ignored purely on the fact that the book has fiction in it and there is no real way of deciding what is made up and what is fact. I will have another look and see if I can find it though.
    • If there was any mistreatment of German PoW's, going by the accounts in John Sadlers book and some of the previous posts it would appear to be in the area that 8 DLI, 7 RTR and a French Armoured unit were fighting.
    • There is still the comment from Sergeant T Hepple, B Company, 7th Royal Tank Regiment about drawing his pistol to keep the DLI soldiers from his PoW. If he is to be believed and I see no reason why not, at least it proves that the 8 DLI ORs weren't happy.
    • I ordered Angus Calder's The Myth of the Blitz last night to see what is mentioned in this book.
    • It would be good to find Brian Bond published essay 'The British Field Army in France and Belgium 1939-1940' to check its content on the subject.
    • I think the French tank unit needs to be identified and if they have a war diary for this period in the French Archives.
    Having now found the account in Gun Busters book he only mentions 400 PoWs and thats it. To be fair the book is rather random with units like the 2007th Regt and randomly named Infantry Battalions like North and South Shires Regt. Probably something to do with wartime censorship.

    Anyway moving on here is the war diary entry from 1 Army Tank Brigade HQ WO 167/414
    [​IMG]
     
  17. JCB

    JCB Senior Member

    I'd say absolute fantasy , 400 men dissapearing on a crowded battlefield with nobody noticing anyone was missing or any evidence of their demise either at the time or in the intervening 72 years !
     
  18. Mr Jinks

    Mr Jinks Bit of a Cad

    Hello
    I have not contributed much to this forum but I am familiar with the documents mentioned in Post 145 the letter reproduced in Post 158 is the summary page of eleven I saw them in the Record office in Durham last summer.
    I agree with Verrries about the title change a much more sensible option would have been the closure of a now meaningless 100+ posts move away from the specific Durham Regiment theme? This would open a new discussion on a more general topic without any figures or specifics.
    I hesitate to post incase this too is deemed `Bunk`(absurd, ridiculous, nonsense) but it is in my opinion relevent to a fair and open discussion on what is an interesting subject.Verrries was right to question the title change and its timing ,his suggestions to me were not `bunk`but relevent and I thought they were put quite well.Some of the answers were not I don`t know how others feel about it but thats my input.
    `Gun Buster` I`m told by my grandson is a `comic character` japanese I believe.Oh and by the way the reason for closing the thread Andy please go back and edit your post and remove `and I can!` it sounds very childish (which I`m sure you are not) and does not portray you very well.
    Best
    Clifford

    PS Verrries if your look in You`ll be missed and thank you for the help you have given on and off this forum.Best.
     
  19. Drew5233

    Drew5233 #FuturePilot 1940 Obsessive

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

    Chapter 5 Standing Alone page 94

    Bewildered and bad tempered, British troops behaved on occasion very poorly. It was an accident that the Grenadier Guards, on 15 May, shot up elements of the Belgian Army retreating towards them, and inflicted quite heavy casualties. But belief that the British had been 'betrayed' thereafter provided an excuse for looting food and drink from the local population, and for summary executions of supposed fifth columnists. As Harman comments, 'It's a small wonder if local civilians were eager to see the back of them-even if the replacement was to be the German Army, whose propaganda had plenty of material to work with.' While some soldiers figured bravely in rear guard actions, 'too often' the British collapsed. One frank account published during the war described a 'disorderly mob' of British soldiers running away because a false report that German tanks were at hand and 'looking (if truth be told) very much like the popular conception of the Italian Army. One thing which frightened the British soldiers was the fear of capture. They assumed that, like themselves, the Germans had been ordered to take no prisoners. While SS Troops did cold-bloodedly murder 170 British prisoners in two seperate incidents, this was after men of the Durham Light Infantry had killed a great many (perhaps 400) SS men who were legitimate prisoners of war.
     
  20. Owen

    Owen -- --- -.. MOD

Share This Page