German Casualty discussion

[bmac]

Bill,

That figure of 166,000 disease deaths in the German army was taken from the research of Boris Urlanis, who wrote an elaborate compendium of mortality rates in warfare, published as Bilanz der Kreige in Berlin in 1965.

Furthermore, the same authority gave figures for deaths from the various diseases that afflicted the German army in the Great War. The biggest killer was lung disease ( 47,000 deaths) , followed by influenza with 14,000 deaths. Here is a huge disparity : a statement that the flu killed fewer than one tenth the number of German soldiers than the figure cited in your post. It does seem rather low, doesn't it ? But it is also born out by the ZN return of May 31 1919.

Phil (PJA)

Phil,

14,000 does seem more in line with the numbers for the BEF, AEF and French. One wonders where McGinnis got his numbers from?

Does anyone have access to this: The Spanish flu 1918/19. course, consequences and interpretations in Germany in the context of the first world war by Michels, E. (2010). Vierteljahrshefte für Zeitgeschichte: Vol. 58, No. 1, pp. 1-33

Might explain a lot.

Also: Andrew Price-Smith, Contagion and Chaos, MIT Press, 2009.

Bill

[Ken S.]

Thank you, Jack. Anecdotally, there are accounts from British soldiers and officers commenting on the increasing youthfulness of captured German soldiers in the final months of the war. Your point, backed up by Mick's comment, is very helpful in putting this into perspective.

Robert

In case it's of interest, the number of deaths by year-of-birth for several units:

I./IR55

1896: 86

1897: 69

1898: 48

1899: 36

1900: 1

RIR46

1896: 275

1897: 216

1898: 97

1899: 55

1900: 1

RIR78

1896: 372

1897: 139

1898: 35

1899: 21

1900: 2

RIR92

1896: 503

1897: 143

1898: 31

1899: 13

1900: 2

RIR204

1896: 466

1897: 158

1898: 30

1899: 3

1900: 0

[Tom W.]

From Two Thousand Questions and Answers about the War (New York: The Review of Reviews Co., 1918), p. 121:

The Germans posted printed local lists in all the town halls, post-offices, and other places where the public could see them and look for the names of friends or kindred... As the country was full of neutrals in the early part of the war, this information went out pretty freely. After some time, however, it was discovered that the German system of army corps, divisions, etc., caused many duplications, the same name being given in different lists in different parts of the country.

Might explain some of those missing Germans. They were incorporeal clones.

[Ken S.]

Deaths for members of RIR46 with birth years 1899 and 1900:

???? – Dec. 4, 1899 – Handtke, Hermann (missing since Jan. 10, 1920)

???? – Feb. 2, 1899 – Goralzyk, Alois (pow Aug. 9, 1918, died in captivity)

???? – June 2, 1899 – Ratayczak, Anton (in an English hospital)

July 21, 1915 – Oct. 31, 1899 – Junge, Willy

Feb. 15, 1918 – July 6, 1899 – Barbknecht, Paul (wnd. Nov. 30, 1917)

May 4, 1918 – Apr. 30, 1899 – Hoffmann, Fritz

June 6, 1918 – Sept. 27, 1899 – Henkel, Josef

June 9, 1918 – Aug. 4, 1899 – Schache, Willy

June 23, 1918 – Jan. 8, 1899 – Maslok, Josef

June 23, 1918 – Sept, 15, 1899 – Reich, Hermann

July 4, 1918 – Jan. 22, 1899 – Rosenbluhe, Wilhelm

July 4, 1918 – Sept. 2, 1899 – Mißler, Hermann

July 11, 1918 – May 3, 1899 – Gosman, Theodor

July 12, 1918 – Feb. 2, 1899 – Glatzel, Franz

July 13, 1918 – Aug. 7, 1899 – Seeger, Helmut

July 14, 1918 – Jan. 22, 1899 – Klossek, Vinzent (dow)

July 26, 1918 – July 1, 1900 – Mandel, Georg

Aug. 9, 1918 – Apr. 23, 1899 – Rheinthal, Georg

Aug. 9, 1918 – Aug. 19, 1899 – Andryzewski, Ludwig

Aug. 9, 1918 – Dec. 17, 1899 – Kaschytza, Viktor

Aug. 9, 1918 – Dec. 28, 1899 – Broschilker, Hermann

Aug. 9, 1918 – Feb. 2, 1899 – Adamek, Albert

Aug. 9, 1918 – July 2, 1899 – Boching, Alfred

Aug. 9, 1918 – June 19, 1899 – Karst, Wilhelm

Aug. 9, 1918 – Mar. 10, 1899 – Sipa, Josef

Aug. 9, 1918 – Mar. 3, 1899 – Szymzak, Josef

Aug. 9, 1918 – Mar. 4, 1899 – Lotter, Eduard

Aug. 9, 1918 – May 3, 1899 – Achtelik, Johann

Aug. 9, 1918 – Oct. 14, 1899 – Lau, Erich

Aug. 9, 1918 – Oct. 21, 1899 – Keller, Friedrich

Aug. 9, 1918 – Oct. 31, 1899 – Axt, Heinrich

Aug. 9, 1918 – Sept. 20, 1899 – Mainka, Stanislaus (missing)

Aug. 9. 1918 – Dec. 29, 1899 – Groll, Paul

Aug. 15, 1918 – Jan. 30, 1899 – Moder, Leo

Aug. 16, 1918 – Feb. 2, 1899 – Kalka, Valentin

Aug. 22, 1918 – Sept. 20, 1899 – Wrobel, Michael

Aug. 31, 1918 – Oct. 30, 1899 – Jankowski, Anton

Sept. 1, 1918 – Dec. 26, 1899 – Braun, Bruno (as pow)

Sept. 3, 1918 – Feb. 24, 1899 – Kmiciak, Kasimir

Sept. 6, 1918 – Sept. 21, 1899 – Lawicki, Emmo

Sept. 13, 1918 – Oct. 11, 1899 – Kuppers, Gerhard

Sept. 16, 1918 – Dec. 16, 1899 – Grygier, Thomas

Sept. 18, 1918 – Apr. 20, 1899 – Hagelsiep, Artur

Sept. 18, 1918 – Feb. 8, 1899 – Bernhard, Albert

Sept. 18, 1918 – June 8, 1899 – Tietz, Johann

Sept. 18, 1918 – May 12, 1899 – Gast, Paul

Sept. 18, 1918 – Nov. 10, 1899 – Jastrzab, Anton

Oct. 3, 1918 – Nov. 27, 1899 – Kotlarski, Andreas

Oct. 6, 1918 – May 30, 1899 – Perluszczak, Anton (dow)

Oct. 8, 1918 – June 9, 1899 – Kolecki, Anton

Oct. 8, 1918 – Sept. 18, 1899 – Niche, Bruno

Oct. 9, 1918 – March 9, 1899 – Forth, Georg

Oct. 22, 1918 – Nov. 26, 1899 – Schulz, Peter (as pow)

Oct. 27, 1918 – Aug. 10, 1899 – Tomczak, Franz

Oct. 30, 1918 – Feb. 16, 1899 – Kiefer, Josef (dow)

Feb. 4, 1919 – Nov. 12, 1899 – Witkowski, Stanislaus (as pow)

[Robert Dunlop]

In case it's of interest, the number of deaths by year-of-birth for several units:

Yes, it is. Thanks Ken. Were the figures for the whole period of the war, or just a particular year of the war?

Robert

[Robert Dunlop]

Jack, the following information is of some interest. It comes from an article entitled 'The Epidemiology of Influenza' by M. Greenwood (Br Med J 1918;2:563-566 - published 23 November 1918):

I will post the graph next, which is associated with Greenwood's concluding remarks about the issue of diet and influenza.

Robert

[Robert Dunlop]

The graph is virually meaningless. I have posted it for the sake of completeness but, in the absence of adequate legends and other supporting information, it is just a graph. The conclusion is of interest but cannot be considered definitive, at least based on the 'graph'

Robert

[Robert Dunlop]

There is another paper in the BMJ that raises some interesting possibilities re influenza deaths and exercise. It is 'A Report on the Influenza Epidemic in the British Armies in France, 1918: The Influenza Committee of the Advisory Board to the D.G.M.S., France. Br Med J 1918;2:505-509. The opening paragraphs provide some interesting figures on the epidemiology of the disease in the British Army:

More interesting is the post mortem data. Almost all soldiers who died had evidence that the heart was affected. Two-thirds had evidence of inflammation in the heart muscle, a condition known as myocarditis which is frequently associated with athletes who die suddenly when suffering flu-like symptoms. In almost all the other autopsies, the heart involvement reflected the severity of the lung disease as well, ie it was mostly the right side of the heart that was dilated and/or affected in some way.

The committee thought that Bacillus influenzae was involved. This was also known as Pfeiffer's bacillus but is now known as Haemophilus influenzae. It is not a virus (despite the 'influenzae' part of the name) and was probably a secondary pathogen, ie caused infection as a result of the damage wrought by the influenza virus. Other authors who published in the BMJ had noted that a filterable virus was involved, based on the infection being transmitted to monkeys.

Other papers report on the outbreaks in various military camps. The conclusion is that whilst pneumonia and other lung complications were relatively uncommon, the fatality rate of these complications was very high. This might reflect the association with heart involvment as well.

Robert

[Robert Dunlop]

Finally, an interesting reference to work in Germany that, hopefully, ties all this back into the current thread

Interestingly, this paper was published in August 1918:

Robert

[Jack Sheldon]

Robert

Thank you for locating all this additional information. Am I right in saying that this had nothing to do with Spaniards but was, in fact, bird flu? It seems to me as a complete layman that, as far as the armies were concerned, the disease was not a decisive factor in 1918, but rather was a further misery piled on misery. I suspect, however, that the robust attitude at unit level to 'going sick' may have meant that some men on either side were given treatment rather too late and with insufficent consideration to the seriousness of their condition, which in turn may have pushed up eiher the death rate, or the numbers of those who had to be invalided out later with weakened hearts.

Jack

[Robert Dunlop]

Jack, your assumption is supported by the CDC paper. This was the first in the line of H1N1 variants. From the descriptions of the disease (which were based on men who were prepared to or had to report sick - a problem known as ascertainment bias), it could have such a devastating general effect that it would be hard for men to push on despite the symptoms. There is always a spectrum of severity, however. No doubt some men did follow the path you outlined above. The delayed myocarditis effect would be something like the problems that occurred with phosgene, where men would be affected immediately by the exposure, begin recovering and then die suddenly.

I suspect that, at some level, the disease was so virulent that it had this epidemic effect. At the population level, this is manifest in the numbers killed, irrespective of their being in the military, serving at the front, or whatever the personal circumstances. At the organ and tissue level, there was something about the virus that is not understood currently. This does not denigrate your thoughts but merely puts things into a broader perspective. While we can see explanations at the 'tactical' level, these may not hold up when taking a 'strategic' overview.

Robert

[MartH]

I can recall an anecdotal conversation with my grandfather about getting out from Riga/Germany to Finland in January/February 1918 with relief , not just because they where needed in Finland for the Independence movement, but because they where always so hungry when part of the Germany Army and had no reserves to fight off minor illness, - they where scared the unit might wither away in Germany with illness. Two things support this the write up in 1919 of his diary I am slowly translating with my mothers help, and she was shocked to read how many references to feeling hungry and searching for food, it reads permanently hungry from 1916 to 1918. The other was how he came across some special macaroons in an Eton restaurant, which triggered a tale about when they took Riga, gorging themselves on marzipan and macaroons then being violently ill, most entertaining but bizarre. In fact around Libau the locals gave them the nickname of "Breadfinns" because they where always trying to buy bread.

Robert, what impact would the blockade and hence lack of food had upon the spread and the ability to fight off the Spanish Influenza?

[Robert Dunlop]

Thanks Mart. Your comments match those from Bob Lembke, whose father also emphasized the constant hunger in the latter part of the war. Significant malnutrition does affect the immune system, making people more susceptible to the effects of infection. I am not sure it would necessarily affect the spread per se, which depends on other factors as well.

Robert

[Ralph J. Whitehead]

Robert, what impact would the blockade and hence lack of food had upon the spread and the ability to fight off the Spanish Influenza?

Probably quite a bit as people who have compromised immune systems from lack of food or a very poor diet would be more vulnerable to the flu and probably a host of other illnesses that would not be fatal to most healthy adults and children.

Ralph

[Ralph J. Whitehead]

From Two Thousand Questions and Answers about the War (New York: The Review of Reviews Co., 1918), p. 121:

The Germans posted printed local lists in all the town halls, post-offices, and other places where the public could see them and look for the names of friends or kindred... As the country was full of neutrals in the early part of the war, this information went out pretty freely. After some time, however, it was discovered that the German system of army corps, divisions, etc., caused many duplications, the same name being given in different lists in different parts of the country.

Tom, I would be interested in seeing any sort of explanations about these different lists. As far as I know there was one list printed that included every German state, colonial and marine loss, the Verlustlisten. Local papers did often print specific portions of these lists for the regiments that were formed in their local areas but I have never seen or heard of 'other' lists. Given the date it was published there is a strong possibility of misinformation or error as we were in the war at that time and the sources for these details would not be readily available to a U.S. paper.

It is possible that the reference is to lists where corrections were made, updated status information that would show a man's name several times, or it is simply two soldiers with the same name as in 1918 the lists did not indicate units so the question comes to mind as to how would they know there was any mix up or duplication of names from one corps or division area to another? It would be great to see their supporting evidence or source but I suspect that is not possible.

Ralph

[Robert Dunlop]

This journal review here comments that "Malaria and influenza, for example, have mortality rates proportionate to the degree of malnutrition [17]." Reference 17. is to this article here. It studied malaria morbidity and mortality, as well as all-cause mortality, against indices of protein-energy malnutrition. I didn't see any explicit mention of influenza in the full text of the article though.

This review here cited "...the work of Melinda Beck and coworkers, which showed in a mouse model that the pulmonary damage due to an influenza virus is greater in a selenium deficient animal."

Robert

[Jack Sheldon]

That is most interesting, Robert. I think I was aware that much tropical disease can be ascribed to the effect of some parasite on a debilitated host, but I had not realised that it also made individuals more susceptible to virus attack and subsequent complications.

Jack

[MartH]

Robert. thanks for the information, most interesting, and it confirms my view that the blockade had a significant impact on numbers of combat ready German troops.

Mart

[Ken S.]

Along these lines, I'm not sure if you're aware that the Freiburger Zeitung has been digitized; here is an example of some of the information that a given edition could contain:

http://az.ub.uni-freiburg.de/show/fz.cgi?cmd=showpic&ausgabe=03&day=03b1&year=1918&month=04&project=3&anzahl=5

In particular I find the story of the two deserters who murdered Adolf Fuell who was escorting a shipment scrap rubber from Belgium ("Vermischte Nachrichten") interesting.

There are also columns where blurbs of news from nearby towns is printed, sometimes the departure, death, or return of a soldier is reported.

It is possible that the reference is to lists where corrections were made, updated status information that would show a man's name several times, or it is simply two soldiers with the same name as in 1918 the lists did not indicate units so the question comes to mind as to how would they know there was any mix up or duplication of names from one corps or division area to another? It would be great to see their supporting evidence or source but I suspect that is not possible.

Ralph

[Ken S.]

For the entire war.

Yes, it is. Thanks Ken. Were the figures for the whole period of the war, or just a particular year of the war?

Robert

[Ralph J. Whitehead]

Along these lines, I'm not sure if you're aware that the Freiburger Zeitung has been digitized; here is an example of some of the information that a given edition could contain:

http://az.ub.uni-freiburg.de/show/fz.cgi?cmd=showpic&ausgabe=03&day=03b1&year=1918&month=04&project=3&anzahl=5

In particular I find the story of the two deserters who murdered Adolf Fuell who was escorting a shipment scrap rubber from Belgium ("Vermischte Nachrichten") interesting.

There are also columns where blurbs of news from nearby towns is printed, sometimes the departure, death, or return of a soldier is reported.

Thanks Ken, I have seen these copies, it is one of the places where I saw parts of the official VL being printed for local consumption as well as the awards and other stories from the front. It gives a good idea of the level of information that the public had access to during the war.

Ralph

[Tom W.]

Tom, I would be interested in seeing any sort of explanations about these different lists. As far as I know there was one list printed that included every German state, colonial and marine loss, the Verlustlisten. Local papers did often print specific portions of these lists for the regiments that were formed in their local areas but I have never seen or heard of 'other' lists. Given the date it was published there is a strong possibility of misinformation or error as we were in the war at that time and the sources for these details would not be readily available to a U.S. paper.

It is possible that the reference is to lists where corrections were made, updated status information that would show a man's name several times, or it is simply two soldiers with the same name as in 1918 the lists did not indicate units so the question comes to mind as to how would they know there was any mix up or duplication of names from one corps or division area to another? It would be great to see their supporting evidence or source but I suspect that is not possible.

Ralph

Unfortunately there are no sources listed. The book is available on Google Books.

http://books.google.com/books?id=EWxJAAAAMAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=Two+thousand+questions&hl=en&ei=CDdgTbHSAoaosAOKiO26CA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&ved=0CDMQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q&f=false

[Pete1052]

The German army has an old song on this very issue of casualties that dates from before the Great War. Their guys served in the armed forces more or less the same way that our guys did. I realize this message doesn't contribute to the thread other than by adding a bit of thematic mood music. Lest anyone misjudge my motives, a Grandfather of mine fought the Germans during War I and my Dad also did in War II.

[Guest]

This book Histories of two hundred and fifty-one divisions of the German army which participated in the war has many examples of casualty statistics for German units, that might be of value to some of you. Here are a few examples.

Input 'casualties' in search box

Page 18

1st Guards Division

Belgium.

1. Detrained on the 11th and 12th of August in "Prussian Wallonia," at Weismes

and neighboring stations. Entered Belgium August 13, via Stavelot; crossed the

Meuse at Huy on the 18th. The 23d it fought at Fosse and St. Gerard, after having

crossed the Sambre at Jemmapes. Fought at Fournaux on the 24th. Was engaged,

August 29, between Guise and Vervins (le Sourd, Leme).

Marne.

2. It fought next on the Marne (St. Gond marsh).

3. It was in Artois near Hebuteme the end of September.

Flanders.

4. In November the 1st Bde. was in Flanders (Gheluvelt) ; the 2d Bde. remained at

Hebuterne. From the beginning of the campaign until January 19, 1915, the 3d Ft.

Gd. Regt. suffered casualties of 49 officers and 2,707 men.

1915.

Champagne.

1. The beginning of January the 1st Bde. went from Gheluvelt to Champagne.

2. The beginning of February the 2d Bde. rejoined the 1st.

3. In March tJtie division went to Alsace, where the whole Guard Corps was brought

together again.

Russia.

4. In April the division went to Russia (GaLicia), detraining at Bochnia the 22d.

5. It fought at Tamow and Krasnoslaw, skirted Brest-Litowsk, and pushed on to

Krobin. The losses of the 3d Ft. Gd. Regt. in Russia (May 15-Aug. 31) were 17 officers

and 2,116 men. The 1st Ft. Gd. Regt. lost 53 officers and 3,005 men.

France.

6. Brought back by stages to Warsaw; entrained about the 15th of September for

the western front. Itinerary: Thorn, Posen, Frankfort-on-the-Oder, Berlin, Cassel,

Giessen, Coblentz, Treves, Luxemburg, Namur, Charleroi.

Artois.

7. Reassembled at Charleroi, the division was alerted September 25, and engaged

on the Artois front (Folic). Losses of the 1st Ft. Gd. Regt. in the fighting of the end

of September amounted to 1,522.

8. Relieved October 20, it took over the Lassigny-Beuvraignes sector.

1916.

1. The division remained in the calm Lassigny sector until July 20, 1916.

2. After some days rest in the neighborhood of Nesles, the division went by stages

to the Peronne region, where it was put in reserve.

SoMME.

3. August 15 it relieved, in the course of the battle of the Somme, what was left of

the 1st Bavarian Reserve Division.

4. The division lost heavily (5,000 men, only 300 of whom were prisoners) during

the attacks of the 19th and 20th of August and at the time of the costly defense of

Clery (Sept. 3), and therefore it was relieved.

5. Reassembled in the Catelet region, and having received reenforcements, it went

back into line south of the Somme, in the Biaches-Barleux sector. Its losses there

were considerably less.

Page 40

1st Bavarian Regiment

SOMME.

2. In the last days of September, 1914, at the time of the "race to the sea," the two

divisions of the 1st Bavarian Corps were in the 2d Army (Von Buelow), which operated

on the Somme in the Peronne region. They became heavily engaged notably

at Combles (Oct. 24) and at Maricourt (Dec. 17). By November 4 the 1st Bavarian

Regiment had had casualties of 63 officers and 2,090 men since the beginning of the

war.

Page 42

1st Bavarian Reserve Division

Neuville-St. Vaast.

1. In May, 1915, the 1st Bavarian Reserve Division was engaged at Neuville-St.

Vaast, when it was reinforced by two battalions of the 99th Reserve Infantry Regiment.

The 2d Bavarian Reserve Regiment suffered casualties of 14 officers and 1,413

men

9th Bavarian Division?

At the beginning of February the division was sent back to the region of Laon-

La Malmaison. It returned to the sector of Ville au Bois, where it opposed the French

offensive of April 16 and lost 2,300 captured and many casualties; the 2d and 3d

Battalions of the 14th Reserve Infantry were almost all taken prisoners.

Mike

[Steven Broomfield]

I have a copy of that book, Mike (reprinted a few years ago), and I often wondered how those figures were obtaied, given that it was not a German publication, and produced in wartime anyway, when figures would, presumably be difficult to obtain. (Gosh. What a long sentence).