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

I still have the impression that we're talking about a book written by a journalist rather than a historian and I find that unfortunate because I'd like to know the truth.

I think that all units (including the Guards battalions) spent much of the phoney war digging but that could equally mean that Montgomery's 3rd Division "was used for labour duties"

The 2 Pdrs, I assume would have been with 151st Inf Brigade Anti-tank Company rather than with infantry battalions ?

Where do we look next ?

 

Some further details on the incident....

The cemetery action happened in the early evening when the 8 DLI was already retreating from it's furthest point of advance According to Montefiore, they were RESCUED by those French tanks - by inference therefore that they shot up in a panic! - from the 3ieme Division Legere Mechanique....THEMSELVES on the retreat! Looks like the SS-TK in the cemetery were the remains of what 7 RTR had earlier shot up....and thus were sitting across 8 DLI's/3ieme DLM's path of retreat.

4 RNF (and some 6 DLI) were meanwhile covering 6 DLI's retreat from the vicinity of Achicourt and Beaurains when THEY ran into the 7 RTR and they turned THEIR prisoners over to the infantry.

The above extra detail from Montefiore.

There are TWO separate incidents under discussion here; one, the "humiliation" of the few SS-TK prisoners at the cemetery action that involved 8 DLI is obscuring the alledged "massacre" - which was supposedly by 6 DLI.

We do not know WHICH of the two "sites" later spread through the SS-TK rumour service, leading to the later massacres days later.

 

Idler -
Given that he didn;t publish until 1980...I would guess it's the other way round, he's referencing the official histories and war diaries in his book?

Just to clarify: I was suggesting that the DLI's official regimental history (Rissik) drew on the 8 DLI's battalion history (English & Lewis, reprinted a couple of times under different titles).

Are we also fixating on SS formations? Other German units were involved - the Norfolk Yeomanry history identifies 5 & 7 Pz Divs and 5 Pz Regt. At that stage of the war I imagine a Hun was a Hun and it was only later (perhaps only a few days) that some were deemed worse than others.

 

Are we also fixating on SS formations? Other German units were involved - the Norfolk Yeomanry history identifies 5 & 7 Pz Divs and 5 Pz Regt.


This is of course another concern, and variable...

But remember, this fixation is being generated from the OTHER side By the SS-TK who alleged the incident(s) as justification/motive for THEIR outrages...

 

My reading of various sources suggests as well that the only DLI unit to have had custody of large numbers of prisoners would have been 6 DLI.

What happened to them ?

 

By the SS-TK who alleged the incident(s) as justification/motive for THEIR outrages...

Have they? As far as I'm concerned, this wasn't the case. Eicke mentioned some dubious incidents as justification for Le Paradis but none that included massacres on German soldiers. And no doubt he would have mentioned it had he thought it plausible.

 

My reading of various sources suggests as well that the only DLI unit to have had custody of large numbers of prisoners would have been 6 DLI.

What happened to them ?


That's the point....

 

Would the War Diaries for the Intelligence section of 50th Division be the best place to look for reports on prisoners if they made through the system ?

 

The cemetery action happened in the early evening when the 8 DLI was already retreating from it's furthest point of advance According to Montefiore, they were RESCUED by those French tanks - by inference therefore that they shot up in a panic! - from the 3ieme Division Legere Mechanique....THEMSELVES on the retreat! Looks like the SS-TK in the cemetery were the remains of what 7 RTR had earlier shot up....and thus were sitting across 8 DLI's/3ieme DLM's path of retreat.

English & Lewis states that the cemetery action occurred during the advance - 7 R Tks moved off too soon (and, according to the Norfolk Yeo, strayed from their axis), 8 DLI advancd through the carnage they left in their wake. B & C Coys went firm at Duisans, A & D moved on to Warlus. C Coy then sallied out to the cemetery and B Coy was attacked by the French.

A & D Coys had a much harder time getting Stuka'd and attacked in Warlus. There was eventually a Blackhawk Down style rescue with the French playing the part of the Malaysians.
Andy: anything on Sgt A Skorochod DCM in this action?

4 RNF (and some 6 DLI) were meanwhile covering 6 DLI's retreat from the vicinity of Achicourt and Beaurains when THEY ran into the 7 RTR and they turned THEIR prisoners over to the infantry.

6 DLI's 'hundreds of prisoners' were mopped up behind 4 R Tks west of Dainville (Rissik) - a battle that was fought before the British units reached their start line on the Arras-Doullens road. It seems unlikely that they would have taken their PWs forward to Beaurains, so they either got sent back, or were skilfully disposed of amongst the battle casualties so as not to arouse suspicion.

The above extra detail from Montefiore.

There are TWO separate incidents under discussion here; one, the "humiliation" of the few SS-TK prisoners at the cemetery action that involved 8 DLI is obscuring the alledged "massacre" - which was supposedly by 6 DLI.

We do not know WHICH of the two "sites" later spread through the SS-TK rumour service, leading to the later massacres days later.

Interestingly, the Norfolk Yeomanry claim the bulk (20) of the German tank kills in the Warlus area traversed by 25 Pz Regt and near Totenkopf; perhaps the SS just had a dislike of people from Norfolk?

 

One thing I would like to add to the debate is that Knochlein's defence did bring this incident up as one of the reasons for the massacre at Paradis along with the well debated 'dum-dum' bullets theory and the lesser debated white flag or Nazi flag as a rouse to bring the SS out in the open and when subsequently shot by The Norfolks-I think this happened at Le Cornet Malo which was defended by 'C' Company I believe.
Last Stand At Paradis-Richard Lane.



From the book:

No such allegations were made in the aftermath of Le Paradis (Referring to 400 prisoners)....

....When XV1 Army Corps HQ asked for an explanation from Totenkopf, the only excuse given was the alleged irregular fighting methods employed by the British in that sector: Dumdum bullets and the Swaztika flag. These accusations also formed part of during Fritz Knoechlein's trial....

The book goes on to explain each incident including a 'white flag' incident.

Sorry for the error.

Andy

 

Originally Posted by Verrieres
Rich its not the author but your quote which is out of context!Verrieres
...erm not my quotes. I haven't quoted since my reference to Blaxland on page 1

"Rich, that wasn't an answer to YOU! "

Phylo, I know it wasn't intended for me but I can only read your rendering of Harman as implying that 6th and 8th DLI were labour battalions which as far as I can ascertain, they weren't.

I really do think that the book we're discussing is based on journalistic levels of proof rather than historical accuracy.


Sorry Rich I`m getting you mixed up with Phylo there.Please accept my apologies.

The point I was trying to make was that the description offered up by Phylo from the book was best suited to 10th/11th/12th DLI and the fact it was attributed to 6th & 8th DLI is wrong.

Verrieres

 

The point I was trying to make was that the description offered up by Phylo from the book was best suited to 10th/11th/12th DLI and the fact it was attributed to 6th & 8th DLI is wrong.


The above quote ...does it refer to 6th and 8th DLI why not 9th DLI who made up the trio of 151bgde and followed in reserve during the attack? 50th Div were one of the few fully equipped motorised Divisions in the BEF and trained as such right up until the main counter attack the lack of marching fitness would have had an adverse effect because it was never envisaged that these motorised divisions would have to march long distances.The comments the author has made regarding radios ,bren guns and no supporting artillery seem to best describe the 10th DLI 11th DLI and the 12th DLI (Tyneside Scottish) who were raised as sister battalions to those of the 6th 8th 9th DLI .Forming a duplicate brigade 70bde(on paper)battalions had only reached platoon training there were no 3" mortars all transport was hired from civilian sources in fact they were only sent for an initial period of five months after which they were to be brought home,no artillery was sent to accompany them they had no radio equipment,only 14 bren guns per battalion (Enough really because most men had not completed the war course on the rifle!)
This description seems to fit perfectly with that given by the author...but these battalions were not part of Frankforce..five weeks later they were fighting for their lives using their rifles against German panzers.



Verrieres, in the last few pages your opinion has gone from "seems to best" describe the OTHER DLI battalions to now that Harman's description of 6 and 8 DLI "is wrong".

In that time, however, while you've SAID several times that the descriptions best fit the other battalions, AND cited a description of THEM....you haven't shown anything proving that Harman's description of the 6th and 8th battalions is actually wrong; ONLY that the others seem to have been in an EQUALLY parlous state to what he describes :mellow:

Might it be a better idea to actually cite something that shows the 6th and 8th battalions were in a BETTER shape than the others, or better than Harman says - rather than simply stating it and "making it so"?

War crimes and alleged war crimes discussions generally benefit from as much sourced material as possible; better an abundance as it helps avoid polemics.

 

Lets try and see what happened to the prisoners 6th DLI took.I`ve used the last hour to take the advice and re-read a few things and this is what is reported to have happened to the prisoners 6th DLI took.

First as already stated 100 or so under escort ran into a German Recce Unit presumably they would have been freed..
.heres a quote from `the Faithful Sixth` and I`m sure its inclusion was in direct response to the massacre allegations
....In material terms the Germans lost about four hundred prisoners to both of the attacking battalions.These were sent back to Brigade Headquarters and thence,under Military Police escort,on to division and ultimately,prisoner of war camp in England.The dead and wounded suffered by the enemy are not recorded but must have been heavy as the British tanks got amongst them when they were most vulnerable.The enemy suffered equally heavily in destroyed and damaged vehicles,guns and tanks... end Quote

The 6th DLI Lost over two hundred killed,wounded and taken prisoner the battalion in retreat was accidentally split into two with a further two hundred officers and men under Lieut Colonel Miller heading for Boulogne,leaving just under two hundred all ranks under the command of Major Jeffreys to fall back on the Dunkirk perimiter.


Verrieres

 

Verrieres, in the last few pages your opinion has gone from "seems to best" describe the OTHER DLI battalions to now that Harman's description of 6 and 8 DLI "is wrong".

In that time, however, while you've SAID several times that the descriptions best fit the other battalions, AND cited a description of THEM....you haven't shown anything proving that Harman's description of the 6th and 8th battalions is actually wrong; ONLY that the others seem to have been in an EQUALLY parlous state to what he describes :mellow:

Might it be a better idea to actually cite something that shows the 6th and 8th battalions were in a BETTER shape than the others, or better than Harman says - rather than simply stating it and "making it so"?

War crimes and alleged war crimes discussions generally benefit from as much sourced material as possible; better an abundance as it helps avoid polemics.

Sorry this is confusing now.I thought I said in post 23 that 6th 8th & 9th were a fully equipped motorised Division? surely this rules them out of the quoted description of having
..... had half the official supply of Bren light-machine guns, no radios and no supporting artillery. These deficiencies ...
fully equipped is fully equipped (1940`s style)sorry but what else can I say ? Look at my description of 10th/11th/12th draw your own comparisons have I in anyway drawn any similarity to a Fully Equipped battalion/brigade?
No!



Verrieres

 

I thought I said in post 23 that 6th 8th & 9th were a fully equipped motorised Division? surely this rules them out of the quoted description of having ..... had half the official supply of Bren light-machine guns, no radios and no supporting artillery.


In THAT context "fully equipped motorised" appeared to refer to the "motorised"....not the "fully equiped"

But then again,
50th Div were one of the few fully equipped motorised Divisions in the BEF and trained as such right up until the main counter attack

...I could post up LOTS of pics of fully motorised units exercising in the UK AFTER Dunkirk....if you count Beaverettes!

the lack of marching fitness would have had an adverse effect because it was never envisaged that these motorised divisions would have to march long distances


But that doesn't excuse the reported failure to "foot check", it's still in platoon officers' regs.

 

:indexCAXI2NHN:




Verrieres

 

Look at my description of 10th/11th/12th draw your own comparisons have I in anyway drawn any similarity to a Fully Equipped battalion/brigade?

My point is that whatever you say about 10th/11th/12th Batts., you haven't sourced anything that proves the 6th/8th were better equiped.

You're making the threeway comparison with what Harman says with what the position is in 10th/11th/12th Batts with what therefore the position wasn't in the other two. That doesn't automatically follow.

You can't just say that BECAUSE Harman's description reads LIKE the state of the 10th/11th/12th Batts.....that he's therefore wrong about the 6th/8th. That's a non-sequitor. What you've said really ONLY indicates the state of the 10th/11th/12th Batts.

What you need to do is source material showing the REAL state of the 6th/8th batts. compared to Harman's description....

You need to draw in the third side of that three-way comparison.

The problem is - I don't think this is something that can be done here; it's the sort of detail - shortage of equipment etc. - that can really only be picked up from Daily Reports etc.where deficiencies would be reported up the unit command tree by the normal admin process. We're working from secondary if not tertiary sources....I really doubt that there's any written primary sources commonly available to us on THAT for the DLI, unless we're sitting in Kew or the IWM....

Harman IS the sort of secondary source that gets used normally...

 

Ok cannot sleep so heres some facts even though its totally off Topic.
Comparisons

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

Final observation;-Quote ...I really doubt that there's any written primary sources commonly available to us on THAT for the DLI, unless we're sitting in Kew or the IWM ...if thats true then how can Harman give his initial description of 6th & 8th DLI???

Verrieres

 

...if thats true then how can Harman give his initial description of 6th & 8th DLI???

Simple...

I really doubt that there's any written primary sources commonly available to us on THAT for the DLI, unless we're sitting in Kew or the IWM

"The Arras adventure has been described often, and many writers have followed Rommel's exciting account of what it was like on the receiving end, at which he got the impression that larger british forces were involved than the four battalions actually engaged. I was generously helped at the Durham Light Infantry Museum and the Light Infantry Office in Durham city. The war diaries of the units concerned are fascinating. Those who consult them in the PRO must promise not to reveal information about individuals named. I have treated some personal interviews about the fighting on the same basis; notably, those concerning the murder by British soldiers of their German prisoners."

He was! :mellow:

In his "notes on sources" as well as ALL the books he mentions specifically, he also lists being helped by several dozen then-members of the 1940 Dunkirk Veterans Asociation; and seems to have spent time in and around the salient interviewing locals. He mentions consulting the IWN Collections for material in Chp.1, the Musee de L'armee and Centre de Documentation de la Deuxieme Guerre Mondiale in Brussels for Chp.2, The many and various British regimental histories for Chp. 4, war diaries and other papers in the PRO for Chp.5, the aforementioned PRO records for the war diaries invovled at Arras for Chp.6, Cabinet Papers, War Office papers and Admiralty Papers in the PRO for Chp.7, verbal interviews and the Admiralty records under ADM199 in the PRO for Chps 8-17 on the actual evacuation...

He does seem to have done the dusty detail work...rather than pester his local branch library with interlibrary loan requests!

 

First of all -

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.

We don't know how much of that actually went to France with them. It's entirely possible that some part of all of that remained in the UK for training the NEXT DLI battalion raised. That seems to have been quite a common way for the British Army to do things; divisional arty dug in on the south and south-east coast seems to have pased from unit to unit several times during the later summer and autumn as various units went abroad and others took their place in the invasion defences...while later in the war I know the North Irish Horse were VERY disappointed to leave their Valentines behind in the UK and pick up new tanks in North Africa, while the Vals were used for the NEXT unit in training; this they had not expected....

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

We don't know how much of THAT remained with them after that training period ended. It's always said the BEF had enough transport to move ALL it's troops "motorised" in the Spring of 1940....but only if it was used to ferry them forward Certainly after THAT -

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.

....it looks as if they were a lot more static between then and May 10th?

Would 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??? :mellow: