The attacks on Cristot (10th to 17th June 1944)

Discussion in 'NW Europe' started by Ramiles, Mar 27, 2015.

  1. TTH

    TTH Senior Member

    I have Hastings' autobiography. I am going to bed shortly, but I can check it tomorrow.
     
  2. TTH

    TTH Senior Member

    Juts a note on the 6th DWR and the Parc de Boislonde fight. Despite the fact that his report angered Montgomery, Lt Col Turner of the 6th was given a second chance as CO of the 1st Hampshires in 50th Division. The 1st Hamps had been having a very rough time ever since D-Day, but Turner led the unit well and morale and performance improved markedly under him.
     
  3. m kenny

    m kenny Senior Member

    Last light numbers for 2 CAB on 11/6/44 show 13 Shermans required repairs under 24 hours (not lost and still with the unit) and 36 tanks as lost or needing major repairs. This means the absolute max of lost tanks is 36 and then only if all of the 36 were behind German lines and if 1st Hussars were the only part of 2 CAB in action that day and no other unit suffered any losses. .
     
  4. Ramiles

    Ramiles Researching 9th Lancers, 24th L and SRY

    Thanks Canuck,

    I've "mocked" up this map with your info on there to give its context for the Battle of Cristot on the 11th June 1944.

    [sharedmedia=gallery:images:28204]

    Nb. please there's a "red" starting line and I've dotted in an entirely assumed (on my part) "line-of-control" the whole area was I'm sure more fluid that than and I've had to guess at the mo. who actually held huge chunks of the map.

    I think I have seen maps of the entire Normandy campaign made as snapshots for different dates, so there might be one of those for the 11th to give an even broarder understanding of the entire NWE Normandy campaign.
    & this is one I have found "useful" at the mo. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Martlet#/media/File:Caumont_Gap.svg

    There might be a thread for "11th June 1944 Normandy" either to be made or extant where
    here snippets of interesting info for this particular date can be dropped.

    For now I think I've has answered a lot of my first questions about Cristot and so I might start some further lines of inquiry or encourage others to do such, such as:

    "The Attack on Cristot 10-11th June 1944"

    "Cristot between 12-16th June 1944"

    "The Attack on Cristot 16th June 1944"

    "Around Cristot June 1944"

    etc. and even the "24th Lancers & Cristot" - might be good!

    (Plus even a German perspective on Cristot :rolleyes: - looks like it might be on the way B) )

    I'll try to post links in this thread to further lines of inquiry around this fascinating topic and again it would be great if others could also?

    I might re-title this one though to "Inquiries about the allied attacks on Cristot" (10th to 11th June and 16th June 1944) - but the current title; seems to just about fit for now :)

    Thanks for all the great info, and all the best,

    Rm

    Ps. I've also mocked up a map of the tanks' shots on the Cristot Church steeple on the 16th June 1944. Were any fire to have "overshot" I assume it might be be worked out from something like that? My best guess at the mo. though would be that any fire would have landed amidst German lines to the North East? East ? South East ? or South?

    [sharedmedia=gallery:images:28178]
     
    Last edited: Oct 20, 2016
    canuck likes this.
  5. Sheldrake

    Sheldrake All over the place....

    View attachment 134886
    Here is a map showing the dispositions from the "Other Side of the Hill" It is from the history of 12 SS Division by Hubert Mayer the Ia (COS) of the division. He has obviously drawn some of his material from the same allied sources already quoted.

    Note that from his point of view the 12 SS faced three not two related battles. The battle around Pt 103/ St Pierre should be included.
     

    Attached Files:

    Ramiles likes this.
  6. canuck

    canuck Closed Account

    and on the same day, not far away:

    Also on 11 June the 46th Royal Marine Commando assaulted Rots. The official historian of Le Régiment de la Chaudière, described the scene the following day:
    They fought like lions on both sides, so that the dead lay corpse by corpse. We searched every house, every courtyard to avoid ambush. And here is the confirmation of how ferocious last night's battle must have been. The Commandos lie dead in rows beside the dead SS. Grenades are scattered all over the road and in the porches of houses. Here we see a Commando and an SS man, literally dead in each others arms, having slaughtered each other. There, a German and a Canadian tank have engaged each other to destruction, and are still smoldering, and from each blackened turret hangs the charred corpse of a machine gunner. Over here are a group who ran towards a wall for shelter and were shot down before they got there. And then near the church, as the advance guard of C Company and the carriers turn the corner, there are three Germans. Only three. But one of them instantly draws his pistol and hits one of our men. A Bren gunner kills two of the three SS men, but the survivor gets away. Now we understand with what kind of fanatic we have to deal.

    46th Casualties

    Killed – 20
    Wounded – 9
    Missing – 31

    When Rots and Le Hamel were re-occupied by the Canadians two days later they found 122 dead Germans.
     
    Owen likes this.
  7. Dubman

    Dubman Well-Known Member

    the Chateau is now a very expensive hotel and restaurant. Shame really it should be a museum
     
  8. canuck

    canuck Closed Account

    It was once freely accessible to tourists, veterans and families but as of my last visit they were denying access.
     
  9. Sheldrake

    Sheldrake All over the place....

    It was once freely accessible to tourists, veterans and families but as of my last visit they were denying access.



    The Chateau at Andrieu is a smart hotel and restaurant which serves a segment of visitors to the region, who presumably pay for some privacy.. I would be surprised and disappointed if the hotel turned away a visit by relatives of the Canadians executed there If someone wanted it as a museum they would need to buy it.

    it is worth remembering that the Battles were fought in someone's back garden. It is their battlefield not ours or our fathers or grandfathers. Liberation meant a restoration of freedom. It did not give the liberators children any right to roam. By and large i find the local Norman population extremely hospitable, especially where veterans are concerned.Of course some people get fed up when people taker their property for granted; wouldn't you? Some places are owned by cranky individuals and others by the very old. Some places are someone's business which is affected if tourists turn up every hour or leave gates open, startle animals or damage fences. If you want to visit someone's house or property write first and be prepared for someone to say "non." .
     
    Tricky Dicky likes this.
  10. Ramiles

    Ramiles Researching 9th Lancers, 24th L and SRY

    This might straighten things out (or make them more complex but anyhow): a Normandy guide recently told me when helping me out when I was looking into Putot-en-Bessin:

    "the majority of the prisoners captured at Putot en Bessin and then murdered were killed several kilometres from the Chateau d'Audrieu, near the crossroads of the small track leading south from le Mesnil-Patry to Cheux and the road from Fontenay-le-Pesnel to St. Manvieu-Norrey.

    There is a fairly lengthy discussion around various aspects of this occurence on the Axis History Forum here.
    The book "Conduct Unbecoming" by Howard Margolian is probably one of the better researched books on the subject, covering the Abbaye d'Ardenne and other incidents too."

    I think I have mentioned it elsewhere in a thread on here, but not sure, but since it wasn't really about Cristot - a new thread on this might be in order - ? And a link to that discussion can be placed here to lead to it?

    I think Sheldrake is right though, and to add on my own, things like "eternal flames" and "eternal shrines" worry me a little bit, because with all of our best intentions we can't necessarily bind all future generations to this, though of course it is nice for current generations to think that such memories will always be there. On the other hand the Greeks still "celebrate" their fallen at "Marathon" and "Thermopylae" but Turkish victories against Byzantium (on current Greek soil) not so much. (Still as I said, a whole other thread and not really Cristot!)

    All the best,

    Rm.
     
  11. canuck

    canuck Closed Account

    It was once freely accessible to tourists, veterans and families but as of my last visit they were denying access.


    The Chateau at Andrieu is a smart hotel and restaurant which serves a segment of visitors to the region, who presumably pay for some privacy.. I would be surprised and disappointed if the hotel turned away a visit by relatives of the Canadians executed there If someone wanted it as a museum they would need to buy it.

    it is worth remembering that the Battles were fought in someone's back garden. It is their battlefield not ours or our fathers or grandfathers. Liberation meant a restoration of freedom. It did not give the liberators children any right to roam. By and large i find the local Norman population extremely hospitable, especially where veterans are concerned.Of course some people get fed up when people taker their property for granted; wouldn't you? Some places are owned by cranky individuals and others by the very old. Some places are someone's business which is affected if tourists turn up every hour or leave gates open, startle animals or damage fences. If you want to visit someone's house or property write first and be prepared for someone to say "non." .


    I wasn't questioning their right to deny access. I was simply noting the change from the previous policy. For the record, that applied to organized groups who respectfully sought permission. Ignorant louts who trespass on private property really aren't welcome anywhere.
     
  12. Ramiles

    Ramiles Researching 9th Lancers, 24th L and SRY

    Quite right, I think everyone agrees on that :)

    Now back to Cristot ;) enough said.
     
  13. Ramiles

    Ramiles Researching 9th Lancers, 24th L and SRY

    Following on from Cristot on the 16th... it was during the afternoon of the 17th June 1944, that a ‘B’ Sqn 24th Lancer supported attack by the DWR (Duke of Wellington's Regiment) on Parc de Bois Londe, a wood on their front (i.e. to the south (though only if they were facing that way (I'd have guessed from where they'd come that 'forward/front' was actually "east" ;) ) which harboured infantry and tanks and was causing the troops in the area "considerable trouble". (were there a few Parc de Bois Londe's I'm sure I heard that name mentioned elsewhere but in a different place? i.e. other than south of Cristot? As I'm sure I've seen some "accounts" suggest that a Parc de Bois Londe was also in the woods to Cristot's south east? Or perhaps it was just a very big park that went from south of Cristot to the east? :Hydrogen: )
    A wargame "scenario" for the "events at Parc de Bois Londe"
    http://www.fireandfury.com/scenarios/bloodhonourparcdeboislande.pdf

    An account of this attack on the 17th June on Parc de Bois Londe is given in the war diary of the 24th L in appendix "E" and the 24th L war diary goes on to note: "A’ Sqn after some eventful forward patrolling from Pt 103, returned to Hervieu in the evening.

    Another "understated" account that might "do" with a "bit" of filling out and filling in? :)

    Another thread might do for events at "Parc de Bois Londe" and the Pt.103 incident(s) on the 17th might fit into something on the lines of a wider overview of the events around Point 103?

    Threads started here: http://ww2talk.com/forums/topic/57272-the-battle-for-point-103-and-st-pierre-9th–-18th-june-1944/
    & http://ww2talk.com/forums/topic/57273-the-battle-for-the-parc-de-bois-londe-17th-june-1944/

    [sharedmedia=gallery:images:28204]

    [sharedmedia=gallery:images:28205]



    Rm
     
    Last edited: Jun 17, 2021
  14. SDP

    SDP Incurable Cometoholic

    The Parc de Bois Londe is the very large characteristic wooded area with central Chateau visible at the top right hand corner of the aerial photo shown in post #24 in your 24th Lancers Tessel Wood thread.

    The Parc still exists by name but most of the trees have been felled and the land turned over to agriculture (the reason I say this is that, if you try to look for the Parc on a modern maps app, you won't find it if you are looking for woodland!).
     
  15. Ramiles

    Ramiles Researching 9th Lancers, 24th L and SRY

    Thanks SDP,

    That makes more sense, the Parc de Bois Londe on the maps these days - I guess - is basically just the Chateau, there are a few other "small" parc areas dotted around there now - some residential cul-de-sacs so I'm guessing these extend into the old "Parc de Bois Londe" area.

    http://www.fireandfury.com/scenarios/bloodhonourparcdeboislande.pdf

    Has a 'little map' that I suppose outlines, in basis, the "fought-over" area?

    Rm.
     
  16. SDP

    SDP Incurable Cometoholic

    Lots of artistic licence as you would expect in a war game but nevertheless shows the characteristic wooded area with the wide treeless avenues visible on the contemporary aerial view. The Parc was bitterly contested and the Chateau completely destroyed. Not searched lately but I think there are a number of images available via Google but spell it as Chateau de Boislonde.
     
  17. Ramiles

    Ramiles Researching 9th Lancers, 24th L and SRY

    It's odd to look back at the events on the 16th June 1944, as the numbers of Germans actually "involved" still seems to be pretty opaque.

    In addition to the snipers and mortar fire (from who know's where?), which the 24th L and KOYLI faced on their approach to Cristot, the war diary of the 24th says: "The wrecks of 2 SP guns, one armoured car and 2 ½-tracked TCVS were found in the village, also about 12 German dead." and mark the six enemy tanks seen entering a wood (parc de bois londe?) due south of the position.

    Their objective seeming to secure the village and prevent it's use as an OP point from which observance of Point 103 could presumably be made. I assume it's loss would have been an annoyance to the Germans, and one which they would have wanted to get back, albeit with its utility being somewhat curtailed, their having lost the excellent vantage point offered by the Church steeple there?

    By this point though the Germans might have been loosing hope of holding out everywhere and have been cutting their losses and forsaking anyhow that which they could no longer hold? Pulling out and seeking shelter south in the woods seems a strategic option best made, lest a rout or utter defeat be forced? If nothing else the German's probably didn't have the fuel to waste in running their tanks about.

    Rm.
     
  18. Ramiles

    Ramiles Researching 9th Lancers, 24th L and SRY

    Something to add to this thread that I have managed to pick out from the IWM audios:

    Ronald William Mole : For an account of Cristot on 11/6/1944: http://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/80013136

    Detail from REEL 2: memories of loss of second commander at Tessel Wood; feeling of security in tank; duties at end of day. Recollections of operations as trooper with 4/7th Royal Dragoon Guards in Normandy, 1944: B Squadron's attack on Cristo, near Tilly, 11/6/1944; German tank counter attack at Point 103; opinion of unit medical officer, Captain Hood and his fate; capture of German POWs at Tessel Wood; character of spotter plane pilot; nickname given to Sherman tanks; rest period at Jerusalem Crossroads and Bayeux; opinion of General Brian Horrocks; unit morale; method of largering at night; bombing by German Air Force near Caumont; infantry's preference for operating with diesel tanks rather than petrol tanks.
     
    canuck likes this.
  19. Ramiles

    Ramiles Researching 9th Lancers, 24th L and SRY

    This is one of my "latest" finds: 50 DIV IN NORMANDY: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF THE BRITISH 50th (NORTHUMBRIAN) DIVISION ON D-DAY AND IN THE BATTLE OF NORMANDY By ETHAN RAWLS WILLIAMS, LCDR, USN B.S., United States Naval Academy, Annapolis, Maryland, 1997
    http://www.dtic.mil/...df?AD=ADA475698

    An interesting PDF (124 pages though!) with some detail all about the attacks on Cristot on both the 11th and 16th.

    It's a nicely searchable pdf (Ctrl-F)

    I guess that: "The advancing German armor, without its supporting infantry, was soon stopped at the firm base held by the 1st Dorsets and elements of the 8th Armored Brigade. The German attackers withdrew to the east at about 10:30 P.M." on 11th June 1944 (on page 81) - with according to the war diary of the 24th L what could be 24th L "A" squad support???

    And in reference to the events thereafter on the 16th June 1944:

    "authors such as David French, Timothy Harrison Place, Max Hastings, and John Buckley have all used the 49th Division’s operation to seize Cristot as an example of effective infantry-armor cooperation. Ultimately, on June 16, British forces captured Cristot with an infantry battalion, a squadron of tanks (according to the war diary of the 24th L "C" squad 24th L? - Rm note), and artillery fire from four field regiments and seven medium regiments. The British suffered only three killed and 24 wounded, all in less than two hours. While the 49th Division found 17 dead Germans in the village, it noted that there was no counter-attack. This attack was a success as the infantry and armor alternated leading the assault as dictated by the terrain. Like the 7th Armored Division, the 49th released a message to 21st Army Group detailing their successful combined arms tactics with an “Immediate Report from Normandy.”

    And it continues:

    "There is no doubt that the 49th Division demonstrated sound tactics, but what is omitted by the above authors is the fact that German forces had withdrawn from Cristot the night prior. The 49th Division did not know this fact, as it stated in its “Immediate Report” that the “strength of the enemy was not known…Late on June 15, the new commander of the 12th SS Division, Standartenführer (Colonel) Kurt Meyer visited the 12th SS Reconnaissance Battalion in Cristot and ordered his unit to withdraw. That night, the reconnaissance battalion mined the roads and withdrew its forces, leaving only a few soldiers in the village to maintain contact with the attacking British—a significantly smaller force than the one faced by the 69th Brigade."

    This suggests to me that at least the 16th advance was contested by the Germans (most definitely not by the c400 Germans that have been "mentioned" in some "accounts" of the attack on the 16th though :) ), and that there were at least a "few Germans" still there. I doubt that they would have left their dead just lying about (though I may be wrong to think this) but this few might have been the 15 or 17 dead found when the British took the place. - either way the British advance was not an uncontested walk in but they faced, mines, mortars and infantry fire and risked presumaby panzerfausts.

    I think at this stage though the reporters on the British side wanted this to be a victory to be proud of, after the "failure" of all the effort on the 11th. And at the end of the day they got the place and the Germans were by whatever means denied it and "pushed" out.

    http://ww2talk.com/forums/index.php?app=core&module=attach&section=attach&attach_rel_module=post&attach_id=134887

    When you look at the position maps for mid June 1944 it's clear why Cristot was a thing to have and to hold, and I bet the Germans were a bit miffed not to have had it after fighting for it there. Perhaps they thought that they had been "lucky" on the 11th and didn't want to "risk" trying to "repeat" this on the 16th - in case this time it didn't go "all their own way"?

    By the way, intriguing point... why "United States Naval Academy, Annapolis, Maryland" would want to cover all of this so nicely out there?! Perhaps there are similar British studies of all this out there, but they are just as yet not so easy to find on google etc? Either way it's great that there are "sources" to discuss in depth out there!

    All the best,

    Rm.
     
  20. Ramiles

    Ramiles Researching 9th Lancers, 24th L and SRY

    On the path to getting some detail on the Advanced landing ground (ALG) B18 at Cristot which was completed on 25th July 1944 (1200m long, 40m wide, compacted earth. Runway 110).

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Landing_Ground#Northern_France_Campaign

    • B-18 Cristot, France
    [​IMG]49°11′41″N 000°34′48″W (approximately) - I'm guessing not actually "approximately" here i.e. in the "Cristot High Street" though ;) Sadly this CRAF recon is only from the sortie on the 24th of June - the tracks there being thought to be from tanks (?) - but this should give a good general idea of the area where the work on B18 was carried out:
    [sharedmedia=gallery:images:28237]

    Nb. There are some nice images of other Forgotten airfields here : http://www.forgottenairfields.com/calvados/
    (This link goes to the section on Calvados, Normandy but there are more than these there)
    Cristot (B-18) though is a bit more "forgotten" it seems - than these ;)

    And see also: Advanced Landing Grounds (ALGs) in Normandy (for some descriptions & a Normandy ALGs context map) : http://www3.sympatic..._eight/alg.html
     

Share This Page