German Casualty discussion

[bob lembke]

Daniel;

Hi, and many thanks. I got up at 4 AM and am now tired, and will crash, but just noted this and wanted to thank you.

I once wrote a German Army library, their web-site stated that they were swamped with e-mailed requests from school-kids writing school papers, so they only respond to letters; with great pain I wrote a two-page letter (I read German say 3-4 hours a day but rarely write it), and never got a response.

I really have to go to Berlin some time for other research purposes, perhaps that might be a route that works better.

Thanks again.

Bob

PS: got your e-mail. My mailbox is just another full filing cabinet, unresolved issues and requests.

[Ralph J. Whitehead]

Hello Bob,

It seems you have already received an naswer on the medical source and search. It would be great if they eventually were digitalized and placed on the web but I do not see this happening for some time.

I have not been in touch with Frank for some time. I should drop him a line to see how he is.

Ralph

[Ralph J. Whitehead]

The following list was taken from a single Bavarian company that had fought on the Somme. Of the 122 casualties reported on the Verlustlisten, all but 1 occurred on a single day. The initial entry marks what appeared in print, the parts in parenthesis and the more detailed information such as a type of wound and cause or type and cause of death came fromleter reports filed after the action was over. As you can see, the large number of men initially listed as MIA were later found to be prisoners, dead, etc. Some of the slightly wounded men include one who was apparently struck in a finger by a shell splinter, others obviously \much more severe, others not. I just wanted to pass along what can be obvtained when using multiple sources of information and the accuracy of the initial details and the later corrections.

Ralph

W.I.A., shell splinter to right eyelid

M.I.A. (P.O.W. from private letter dated 10 June 1917)

M.I.A. (P.O.W. from private letter)

W.I.A., shell splinter left lower thigh

M.I.A. (P.O.W.)

K.I.A., 10 a.m., shot in head

M.I.A. (P.O.W.)

W.I.A., shell splinter to right upper thigh

W.I.A., shell splinters to upper thigh and right knee

M.I.A. (P.O.W.)

M.I.A. (P.O.W. from private letter)

P.O.W. (From private letter)

M.I.A. (K.I.A. 10 a.m. near Curlu per Red Cross notification)

M.I.A. (P.O.W. from private letter from mother) (died?)

M.I.A. (P.O.W. from private letter)

M.I.A. (P.O.W.)

M.I.A. (P.O.W. from private letter)

K.I.A., struck in neck by bullet

M.I.A. (P.O.W. and W.I.A. from private letter)

M.I.A. (P.O.W. from private letter)

W.I.A., shell splinters to left hip and neck

M.I.A. (P.O.W. from private letter)

M.I.A. (P.O.W. from private letter)

M.I.A. (P.O.W.)

M.I.A. (P.O.W.)

M.I.A. (P.O.W.)

W.I.A., shell splinter to left shoulder

M.I.A. (P.O.W.)

M.I.A. (P.O.W. from private letter dated 7 July 1917)

M.I.A. (P.O.W.)

W.I.A., shell splinter, foot

M.I.A. (P.O.W.)

M.I.A. (P.O.W.)

M.I.A. (P.O.W.)

K.I.A. 10 a.m., buried near Curlu

M.I.A. (P.O.W.)

W.I.A., struck in foot by bullet

W.I.A., shell splinter to upper arm

M.I.A. (P.O.W.)

K.I.A., struck in chest by bullet, buried near Curlu

Slightly wounded by shell splinter on left hip

M.I.A. (P.O.W. from private letter)

M.I.A. (P.O.W.)

M.I.A. (P.O.W. from private letter)

W.I.A., fractured left hand

M.I.A. (P.O.W. from private letter)

Severely wounded, shell splinter to left leg

W.I.A., shell splinters to left hand and right shoulder

W.I.A., shell splinters to arm and back

M.I.A. (P.O.W.)

M.I.A. (P.O.W.)

M.I.A. (P.O.W. from private letter)

Slightly wounded on head by shell splinter

W.I.A., nerve shock

M.I.A. (P.O.W.)

M.I.A. (P.O.W.)

Slightly wounded, shell splinter to right shoulder

Slightly wounded, grazing shot by bullet to left upper arm

M.I.A. (P.O.W. from private letter)

Slightly wounded, shell splinter to head

M.I.A. (P.O.W.)

M.I.A. (P.O.W. from private letter)

M.I.A. (P.O.W.)

M.I.A. (P.O.W. from private letter)

M.I.A. (P.O.W. from private letter)

K.I.A., struck in chest by shell fragment

M.I.A. (P.O.W. from private letter)

Slightly wounded, cracked left hand from shell splinter

M.I.A. (P.O.W. from private letter)

Slightly wounded, shell splinter to back of head

M.I.A. (P.O.W. from private letter)

K.I.A. 10 a.m. by direct hit from an artillery shell

Slightly wounded, gas poisoning

M.I.A. (P.O.W.)

Slightly wounded, shell splinter to left hand

W.I.A., tear to left hand

W.I.A., bayonet wound, left upper arm, 2 bayonet wounds left upper thigh

M.I.A. (P.O.W. from private letter)

M.I.A. (P.O.W.)

M.I.A. (P.O.W. from private letter)

M.I.A. (P.O.W. from private letter)

W.I.A., bullet wound to thigh

M.I.A. (P.O.W. from private letter) (Died 8 December 1919)

M.I.A. (P.O.W.)

M.I.A. (P.O.W. from private letter)

M.I.A. (P.O.W. from private letter)

W.I.A., gas poisoning

M.I.A. (P.O.W.)

M.I.A. (P.O.W.)

M.I.A. (P.O.W. from private letter from parents)

W.I.A., shell splinters to arm and left hip

M.I.A. (P.O.W. from private letter)

M.I.A. (P.O.W.)

M.I.A. (P.O.W.)

M.I.A. (P.O.W. from private letter)

W.I.A., shell splinter to left arm

K.I.A., struck in head and chest by shell fragments

M.I.A. (P.O.W. from private letter)

M.I.A. (P.O.W. from private letter from mother)

M.I.A. (P.O.W. from private letter)

W.I.A., shell splinter, left upper arm

M.I.A. (P.O.W.)

M.I.A. (P.O.W. from private letter)

M.I.A. (P.O.W. from private letter dated 5 February 1918)

Slightly wounded, shell splinter on left middle finger

M.I.A. (P.O.W. from private letter dated 12 December 1917)

Severely wounded, shell splinters to head and back

M.I.A. (P.O.W.)

M.I.A. (P.O.W. from private letter)

M.I.A. (P.O.W.)

M.I.A. (P.O.W. from private letter)

K.I.A.

M.I.A. (P.O.W.)

Slightly wounded, shell splinters to right arm and chest

M.I.A. (K.I.A. 10 a.m. by hand grenade by Curlu per Red Cross)

M.I.A. (P.O.W.)

Severely wounded, shell splinter to left arm, bruise to left hip

Slightly wounded, shell splinter to left forefinger

M.I.A. (P.O.W. from private letter)

Severely wounded, shell splinters to head and chest

M.I.A. (P.O.W. from private letter)(died?)

M.I.A. (P.O.W. from private letter)

[John Gilinsky]

Thanks Ralph. Can you please list as many (ALL?!) those casualty type or casualty descriptors that relate directly or indirectly to psychological, psychiatric or mental conditions? In your last post of one Bavarian infantry company for 1 day's action you list ONE casualty under "nerve shock." Any others that stick out, that you have found and can you please give us the GERMAN original words / spelling?

DANKE

Hans (aka John)

[Ralph J. Whitehead]

Hello John,

I believe this is the only such entry I came across that I can recall in about 6,000 entries. I was looking for specific groups and names. I will look through the results as best I can and see if any others show up. The actuial listing is Nervenschok Sprech verloren. Nerve shock, speech lost. The man was born in 1880 (34 at time of injury), married with 3 children, a farmer or farm laborer by trade.

It was an unusual entry as most simply dealt with p\hysical injuries as shown onthe list.

Ralph

[Ralph J. Whitehead]

I have continued my searches into the Somme losses and now the Hohenzollern Redoubt for September/October 1915. I found an unusual entry. A man was listed as wounded on the Verlustlisten. His Stammrolle entry indicates that he faked or fabricated his wound. I suspect it was simply to get out of the fighting as it was quite horrible according to many of the accounts. I need to go to the later lists to find his correction that should appear at some point after the initial entry.

Ralph

[ph0ebus]

Hi all,

I was wondering what types of wounds would be classified under the term 'schwer verwundet'?

I have a hot lead, from a fellow Pal, on my great granduncle and the verlustliste this fellow is listed in classifies him as 'schwer verwundet'. My great granduncle, according to family lore, allegedly lost an arm during the war...would the loss of an arm fall under this category? Is there a list of wounds of this type?

Thanks,

Daniel

[phil andrade]

After this rather heated thread began to cool down, I conducted some research into the data of war graves in both Commonwealth and German sources. I received invaluable help from Croonaert ( Sp?) who provided info from the VdK.

Nearly 1,645,000 German soldiers from the Great War are buried in military cemeteries throughout the World. To this figure must be added the hundreds of thousands who have not been recovered for burial. Here I make a tentative extrapolation from CWGC records

About seventy per cent of all the dead from the Empire were buried, although many of them were unknown. Nearly a third were lost altogether. If we apply the same proportion of lost bodies to the VdK total, we would arrive at a total in the order of 2,300,000 German military dead from the Great War. This is about 15% higher than the total officially reported. Then again, an almost identical disparity exists between the 947,000 British Empire dead reported in official statistcs and the 1,109,000 tabulated in the records of the CWGC.

This disparity is attributable principally to the longer period of time covered by the CWGC, whose remit extended well into the 1920s. I believe the same applies for the VdK.

From this I conclude that while the German figure of two million is probably understated, it is no more distorted than the British figure of 947,000, and certainly does not bear the hallmarks of deliberate falsification or supression. Which ever sets of figures we select - a German total of 2,037,000 against a British Empire one of 947,000; or a CWGC total of 1,109,000 against a notionally extrapolated VdK one of c. 2,300,000 to allow for unrecovered bodies - there is harmony in the proportions....Germany lost -roughly - just over twice as many men as the entire British Empire.

This is all a bit rough and ready, and definitely needs fine tuning with more precise statistcs, but I reckon it points to a genuine effort by the German establishment to record and recover the nation's war dead. I have predicated my estimates on the assumption that the proportion of German lost bodies is similar to that of the British, and this is of course questionable.....it might well be that a significantly higher proportiopn of the German dead were not recovered, in which case my suggestion is invalidated.

Phil (PJA)

[Steven Broomfield]

Hi all,

I was wondering what types of wounds would be classified under the term 'schwer verwundet'?

hot lead,

Thanks,

Daniel

Spot on Daniel. I suspect hot lead caused a lot of them.

[phil andrade]

A little more elaboration and precision :

CWGC registers 1,115,597 Geat War dead, This is 17.8% higher than the 947,023 officially reported at the end of 1920. It's hard to account for the huge difference, even allowing for the increased time span of the CWGC remit. More significantly, 588,083 were given identified burial, 188,010 were buried as unknowns, and 339,504 were not recovered for burial at all. This means that the number of lost bodies amounts to 43.75% of those who were buried.

VdK tabulates 1,643,420 German Great War dead buried worldwide. Apply the same increase as that in the CWGC to allow for lost bodies and the total rises to 2,362,416. This is 16% higher than the official estimate of 2,037,000 deaths. There is a kind of harmony in the stats.

Phil (PJA)

[ph0ebus]

Spot on Daniel. I suspect hot lead caused a lot of them.

Well done sir!

-Daniel

[truthergw]

Well done sir!

-Daniel

Pay him no heed, Daniel.

I would guess that a wound which did not allow return to the front line or perhaps service of any nature. As with the other armies, officers would regularly continue to serve with handicaps such as amputation, which would have seen an other rank invalided out.

[Ralph J. Whitehead]

The suggestion that any sampling presented so far used to refute the anecdotal statement of 4,000,000 German war dead is “complete and utter b-------ks!” according to a forum member.

As my earlier review sample was considered too small by some I have increased it in size and scope to cover more areas of Germany. As it was pointed out that many of my earlier reviews were confined to a relatively small section of the overall German army in the field in the war. In regard to this last item, I would like to reiterate that if the German war dead reached a level of 3,000,000 or 4,000,000 as some would believe as opposed to the current number of 2,000,000 then the evidence would have to be spread throughout the entire German army and not confined to a single state or group of regiments.

Here is a list of the regiments I have reviewed since the last time this thread was active:

IR 170, IR 66, RIR 15, RIR 55, RIR 77, RIR 91, 2nd Guard Regiment zu Fuss, IR 20, IR 35, IR 46, IR 53, IR 64, RIR 78, RIR 80, RIR 84, RIR 94, RIR 107, 6th Bavarian RIR, 8th Bavarian RIR, 16th Bavarian RIR, Badische Leib Grenadier Regiment 109, RIR 119, RIR 121, IR 180, RIR 109, RIR 110, RIR 111, RFAR 26, FAR 71, FAR 3, FAR 65. In addition I went through a number of different regiments that were listed in two books on German casualties; Ehrenbuch der Gefallenen Stuttgarts 1914-1918 and the Ehrenbuch der Gefallenen der Stadt Heilbronn 1914-1918. From the latter two books I went through a number of different regiments including RIR 246 and RIR 248, IR 121, Grenadier Regiment 123 and IR 119 as part of a separate research project.

These regiments represent a cross section of the German army from numerous states, primarily Prussia but also including Württemberg, Baden, Bavaria and I believe at least one Saxon unit. Despite the lack of primary source documents for some of these units, the existing records and multiple sources still available to researchers can be used for cross reference purposes and verification or repudiation of the existing information. In the case of the Bavarian units I used the original Stammrolle records currently available on-line.

If the alleged number of dead was to exceed current beliefs (mine) by 50%-100% then some evidence of this would be expected to be found in at least one of these units. If not then the numbers of dead for the ‘unknown’ source of these dead would be enormous and far exceed anything reported in the past. This large number of unaccounted for dead could not be found in the Bavarian, Württemberg or Saxon units as if this was the case more men would have died than actually served in the war in some cases. Allied soldiers might be good shots but no country or individual section of any country lost over 100% of their men, it is simply not possible.

I should note that the larger books containing the names of war dead that belonged to a particular city or region do have corrections in them. In the Heilbronn book one entry had the wrong location of death and this was changed. One other had the date printed as 1819 and was changed back to 1918. Corrections on the Stuttgart book as well as one other similar source on Jewish war dead also contain corrections. These involve changing the spelling of a name, the location of their birth, etc. and do not run into the thousands, they number only a handful as in the Heilbronn book.

Each of the regimental lists were prepared primarily for the surviving members of the regiment and the families of those lost. This was their target audience as these families had a direct interest in the events that affected their family members. The larger collections were also aimed at the local populace and the families of those who served and the theme of these books is one of remembrance of those who fell and to honor the service provided by the citizens of that particular region or city.

Whenever possible, I cross referenced each loss against all available data bases including the printed Verlustlisten and other printed sources of casualty lists.

Before proceeding further just a few personal comments. First, my interest in this subject stems from my overall interest in the German army that served in the war and the experiences of the men. I have studied a number of different countries from time to time and my own personal connection to the Great War that includes several men lost fighting in the Württemberg regiments as well as several who survived. Four Whiteheads that served in different British regiments including two who were wounded. One of these men was wounded on 21 March 1918 on the opening day of the Michael Offensive. I also have researched 9 Whitehead/Mutter related relatives in the U.S. Army and my wife’s great uncle Otto Egmondt, Jakob Ernst who died in July 1918 fighting in Coy I, 165th U.S. Infantry, possibly against relatives of mine for all I know.

Certain words have been used to describe the contents of the original posts from last year. Castigate: a reproof or criticism. Vilifying; to utter slanderous and abusive statements against. Pillorying; means of exposing one to public scorn and ridicule. I accept castigate as I am criticizing Edmonds in regard to his claims of German losses, both on the Somme and the total number of German war dead. It is my opinion that he is incorrect on both subjects. As to vilifying or pillorying Edmonds I simply do not accept that what was put forth in the earlier postings comes close to anything of the sort.

What his possible reasons might have been (if my position is found to be more credible than his) is not known to me. Who else might be involved in creating the opinions expressed by Edmonds is also not known to me and which I cannot comment upon. Suffice it to say I am looking at the allegations to see if they are correct or not and from what I have found in my research is that neither claim holds up to scrutiny.

In my review I looked at losses between the years 1914 and 1916, the years where the Verlustlisten still identified the individual regiments and units for each man. Before anyone decides to pounce on this shortcoming, let me explain how I used the remainder of the regimental Ehrentafel and Verlustlisten. I double checked the total count of dead for each year and in some cases this was provided by the original author of the regimental history. In others it was taken by simple formulas used on the Excel spreadsheets where the casualties were listed.

The reported number and identity of the men killed in the 1914-1916 period corresponded exactly with the regimental lists and in turn many of these were cross referenced to one or more other sources. If this is the case in all samples, as it was, then the men that would make up for the 1,000,000-2,000,000 missing dead must all have come from the period 1917-1918.

If this was the case, where 50-100% more dead existed, then the numbers of dead in the 1917-1918 period would have to be extremely large yet in many cases the fatal losses of some regiments fell in this period. Others that were heavily involved in the fighting in Flanders or in the 1918 Offensives showed a spike in fatal losses for these events but still within normal ranges found in earlier fighting. In other words, no sign of any additional men killed that could account for the 1-2,000,000 additional dead. I was also able to locate the names of these men in the alphabetical VL lists for 1917 and 1918 and make a notation for future use of which regiment they belonged to.

I reiterate my opinion that if such a huge additional number existed there would be some hint of it in some of the regiments reviewed yet nothing was found. In my opinion the statement that regimental accounts support the theory of an additional 1-2,000,000 German war dead is completely unfounded. It would be a statistical impossibility if my sampling did not run across a single example of this error.

Even if I missed each and every one of the units that Edmonds alludes to, this would make the remaining regimental lists account for all of the missing men and the lists of war dead would be enormous and easily discovered long before the year 2012.

I am not an Edmonds researcher nor do I have any animosity toward his efforts and accomplishments. However, in this particular matter I feel he was in error and for whatever reason he provided statements that were unsupported by facts. This is not slander, scorn, ridicule or abusive in any way, it is a look at a claim that was made and that in my research does not stand up to the light of day.

If there are any Edmonds researchers or anyone who has access to any information that could support the higher numbers of fatal losses please let me know. I would like to check on them to see if they do support his views in any way. Does anyone know of any source that could provide details on his sources used for his allegation?

One other point came up that if the Verlustlisten were the be all and end all of German lists then why were they not used to account for the German losses, etc. They can be to a great extent but in others it would be very difficult. The lists did not follow a fixed publication pattern. Lists were printed as they were received and in some cases the time between the loss date and the printing date fluctuated. This could be a result of the higher losses at any given time and the need to set the type down to a reduction in staff at the printers and taking more time to print the names. There is also the size of the lists. While some are larger than others they generally did not run beyond a certain size. In some cases a list printed one day would end in the middle and be picked up over the next issue or two.

In order to utilize the data provided you would need to create a data base that counts each and every man and then follow them through the lists until they either stopped being a casualty or were killed. Even when killed the name could reappear for a particular correction as in the case of Albert Thielecke, killed near Serre in 1915. He was correctly listed as being killed but his name was misspelled. He reappeared in a later list in order to make a correction.

If you did follow the names it might very well be possible to trace the men into the 1917-1918 period where the lists were alphabetical or in the subsequent lists into 1919 when losses continued to be printed as they became available in the post war period. There would be the unavoidable issue of the exact date and location where they were wounded or killed. Some clues are provided in the earlier lists that quickly disappear and the location and dates are no longer provided.

Another criticism of my results alluded to the fact that if all lists count the same people then all should show the same numbers. This might be true if all counted the information in the same manner. While the ZN issued reports on overall loss figures for a period of several months, a single month, etc. the Verlustlisten was not providing an overall accounting of numbers, it was reporting the names of the men who made up the numbers used on the larger lists excluding those who reported sick. The Verlustlisten were used to publish casualties as a result of death or injury from wounds, accidents, suicides and men who were either missing or captured.

Yes, the same source of information used in other reports but it was used in a completely different manner than the others. It is not a simple matter of the same information of losses being presented the same way over and over. ZN reports by month or longer, VL reports daily with the exception of Sunday. Larger, overall loss reports were used to review manpower issues, need for replacements, etc. VL provided families with details on the fate of their loved ones. Same people populated the lists but for completely different purposes.

Now consider this aspect of the mystery of the missing 2,000,000 dead. The names I found in the Verlustlisten corresponded to the names found in the Ehrentafel and verified through other sources. If there was a conspiracy to hide 2,000,000 dead then how did they know which names to omit as early as 1914 when the war would ideally be over by December? Then, take the same information and make sure that the names on the Verlustlisten matched the post war regimental accounts and similar Ehrentafel records, village memorials and the like. In other words, the conspiracy would have to be in place when the war started and never waiver for an instant in order to have everything match up.

Now, for something completely different. I also noted that it has been suggested that the German loss numbers do not add up accurately and that there are some 4-5 million missing men and that these probably made up the additional dead and wounded. If I recall correctly the numbers started somewhere with 13,250,000 men called to the colors, some 7,000,000 dead, wounded and missing leaving us with 6,250,000 men. Of the 4,000,000 wounded approximately 3,000,000 returned to duty leaving us 9, 250,000 men as a net figure.

Of this number the German army consisted of 4,000,000 men at the end of the war so if we subtract this final number from the result of our earlier math we come up with the mystery of what became of 5,250,000 men.

I for one have no idea where these numbers were taken from. Also, these numbers used do not represent all of the categories used to account for losses and they are cumulative numbers and do not show the losses, gains etc. from month to month or year to year.

I am going through a number of different charts and sources to see if this issue can be presented in a manner in which it was utilized during the war by all countries involved. In the case of mobilization strength or numbers called to the colors the German army had a strength of 7,114,904 men at the start of August 1917, the fourth war year according to the German sources. They counted the years from August through July as a year and did not use a calendar year for their computations.

Of the 5,028,160 men in the field army there were 3,528,178 men on the Western Front, 1,341,736 on the Eastern Front and the remainder, the balance, being located on the other fronts not listed, some 158,246 men. The influx of replacements, loss of men killed or discharged for wounds, illness or other reasons each year made up the total army strength.

At the start of the war the army was 4,442,212 men split between the two fronts as well as in the garrison army. The field army, east and west, was 2,578,646 men. So you can see it is not as simple as a + b – c = d. I wonder if anyone would look at the overall British numbers and using the same criteria, the total mobilized minus losses, plus returning men and compare the number you come up with against the strength of the army at the end of the war. I wonder if the numbers would match up without leaving any remainder? If there are any men left over, were they all killed and their identities have been hidden all these years?

The numbers I have found so far for army strength, losses, etc. only covers the period between August 1917 and July 1918.

Field Army:----------- 5,028,160

Garrison Army:------- 2,086,744

Western Front:---------3,528,178

Eastern Front:----------1,341,736

All numbers shown below are a total of the losses reported in the west, east and at home.

Killed:-------------------192,466

Wounded:---------------1,277,708

Died from wounds:--------65,706

MIA or POW:-------------178,782

Reported sick:-----------5,923,247

Died of illness:--------------46,746

Unfit for service:----------154,804

Fit for duty:--------------3,250,039

Sent to the field

From the base

Hospitals in

Germany:------------------753,561

Total short term

losses:--------------------5,172,587 (Men treated at or near the front areas and returned to duty in a short time period)

Dead (Killed, died,

Missing):-------------------483,700 (Killed + died of wounds + died of illness + MIA & POW)

Total longer term

losses:-----------------------638,504 (men requiring longer hospital stays, generally at facilities in Germany)

New replacements:--------762,536

The replacement numbers fluctuated from year to year as could be expected. The monthly

averages given for men being returned to duty and new replacements were 67,320 and 64,889

respectively.

This is a snapshot of the losses that occurred throughout the 12 months from August 1917 through July 1918. Can you use these to prove a point one way or another? Possibly, but like all numbers from all countries it is a cumulative issue and further breakdowns are required as to when these losses occurred, when the replacement and returning troops came to the front, etc. I will be continuing to translate and review a wide variety of charts and comparisons for additional information.

Ralph

[phil andrade]

Hi Ralph,

The only convncing challenge I can offer to the completeness of the two million death figure is the recorded number of German military dead in the war cemeteries of the Greart War : just under 1.65 million. this, it must be recalled, does not allow for the huge number of unrecovered bodies, which in the case of the British Empire amounted to more than forty per cent of the number that were buried, whether as Known or Unknown, in the CWGC cemeteries. I cannot believe that the proportion of unrecovered German dead was lower than that of the British, and would suggest that, if extrapolation was applied, we might allow for 2.3+ million German dead : a fifteen per cent increase on the officially registered 2 million.

Earleir in this huge thread there were allusions to war memorials in Wurtemberg and Saxony, commemorating the dead from those states. IIRC, they too allowed for per capita death ratios which, if applied to Germany as a whole, would conform to figures in the region of two and a quarter to two and a half million.

That said, I am in heated agreement with you.

Phil (PJA)

[Ralph J. Whitehead]

Phil,

This may be true but without further research into the actual numbers and reports filed by each army during and after the war there is no way to know if these can be compared side by side. The biggest ‘what if’ is any assumption that one side could not have less unrecovered bodies than another without further research.

We are faced with a push for Hydro Fracturing the ground shale in order to recover natural gas, called hydrofracking for short. The ads all tout how many jobs it creates, how the companies are concerned over the environment, etc. Then the biggest piece of cr-p yet. ‘If done correctly the process is perfectly safe’.

No process is ‘perfectly’ safe if mankind has any say. We always heard oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico was safe ‘if done correctly’. Then there was the big blow out last year that pumped billions of gallons of oil into the water. I guess it was not done correctly, was it?

As I am involved in four different projects at present I will leave this portion of the investigation to you. Perhaps a good place to start would be the CWGC and the VDK sites that might have some further details in regard to the question of known graves as opposed to the number still to be accounted for.

I would have a healthy concern about extrapolating numbers for Saxon or Württemberg units to the whole of Germany. Just because one group has a certain percentage of dead does not mean it will follow throughout the rest of them. Also, keep in mind that the lower the overall population number when compared to the reported war dead could give you a larger percentage that does not apply to the other states or if it is could give you false numbers, higher or lower, than you actually have.

The extrapolation can give you a specific number but you will need to check this number against the actual details for each region of Germany and then Germany as a whole in order to see if it matches or not.

Ralph

[Jack Sheldon]

A great piece of forensic work Ralph. Very well done. I note that you have the Ehrenbuch der Gefallenen Stuttgarts. The article by Gen der Inf von Soden concerning Wuerttemberg casualties is worth quoting (p XLIV) '82,000 killed! - two corps up to full war strength - [this] speaks volumes. It represents in dead 3.2% of the population, 15% of all Wuerttembergers who took up arms ... The losses are great, greater than [those of] all the other contingents ... '

This suggests strongly that it is risky to extrapolate from the well known figures for W'berg for the other contingents. Soden was an honourable man and a good witness. He would not have made up a story like that, though it is impossible to say by how much the W.berg fatal percentile exceeded that of the other contingents. However, I should like to mention that 15% of the 13,250,000 Germans who served comes out at 1,987,500 - a strangely familiar figure, nicht wahr?

Jack

[phil andrade]

There is a thundering silence from VDK about unrecovered dead.

Too much to do in the aftermath of 1945, I suppose.

One figure which crops up, rather like a can being kicked around, is the reckoning for Belgium : 130000+ Geman dead from 1914-18 in the several big cemeteries, another 90000 supposedly unrecovered.

I have tried, but have failed, to gain authentication for that.

I must admit that the official figure of two million bears a very close proportionate relationship with the 1.3 million for Metropolitan France. If there was any attempt to cook the books, why admit to such a huge figure ?

But I remain troubled by such a large number of recovered dead for burial.

See post 313 about Saxon dead....4.25% of population.

Phil (PJA)

[phil andrade]

The biggest 'what if' is any assumption that one side could not have less unrecovered bodies than another without further research.

Ralph

It is my assumption, I admit.

In Belgium - and, I suppose, in France too - many German cemeteries were destroyed or built over. There was not much incentive to cherish the war graves of an aggressive and defeated foe that had been evicted from home soil.

What - as far as I know - the German VDK lacks is a system of commemoration for the hundreds of thousands who have no known grave. This facility is available in the CWGC, and enables research into how many died on particular sectors of the fronts during various time periods. Martin Middlebrook makes good use of these registers in his book on The Somme Battlefields. This is not to say that his findings are absolutely accurate, but they certainly enable us to corroborate - or challenge - the official British casualty statistics. Franky Bosteyn provides similar data in his book Passchendaele 1917. A comparable source of info. from the German VDK would throw so much light on - for example - the losses on the Somme.

Talking of the Somme, Ralph, when might we expect your Volume II to arrive ? I ordered it last year, clicking on Amazon, and was susequently advised that it won't be out until spring. Can't wait !

Phil (PJA)

[roel22]

What - as far as I know - the German VDK lacks is a system of commemoration for the hundreds of thousands who have no known grave. This facility is available in the CWGC, and enables research into how many died on particular sectors of the fronts during various time periods. (...) A comparable source of info. from the German VDK would throw so much light on - for example - the losses on the Somme.

As far as I know the VDK- archives, together with all Prussian military records, were destroyed during WWII. So after 1945 all they had about 1914-1918 were the names of the identified casualties, written on the gravestones in the German cemeteries.

Roel

[Ralph J. Whitehead]

Talking of the Somme, Ralph, when might we expect your Volume II to arrive ? I ordered it last year, clicking on Amazon, and was subsequently advised that it won't be out until spring. Can't wait !

Phil (PJA)

Patience Phil, I had hoped to get it in print earlier as well but the overall size and content caused the unfortunate delay. It is in the hands of the publisher and in the process of being prepared. It will contain over 22,000 names of men who became casualties on the Somme from each unit that was identified as being present on 1 July. Saying this, not each one came from 1 July. Whenever possible I identified 1 July losses and came up with over 6,600 I believe. These consist of almost every infantry regiment, many artillery units and smaller support units as well. The other names are of men who became casualties in the period shortly before 1 July and in the days following it. In the case of the 6th Bavarian RIR I was able to locate a Stammrolle record for every man in the regiment and the VL lists for this period show 99%+ are from 1 July. I did the same for all other Bavarian units as well with very few exceptions.

The final book size for 1 July was some 1,200 pages and this needed to be reconfigured to allow it to make it to print.

Just think of what we could do if each day was completed in the same manner. If I hear anything on the book I will pass it along.

Ralph

[phil andrade]

There was some diffidence on my part, Ralph, when I submitted that VDK figure : I was anxious not to appear contentious, especially in view of what I regard as such phenomenal research on your part. I know that you are a professional when it comes to the deployment of statistics. For me to raise the spectre of any doubt regarding the completeness of the two million official death figure seems almost like a form of insolence. And, for the record, I find it amazing that anyone familiar with the statistical controversies of the Great War can give credence to the assertion of Edmonds in respect of four million being the true number.

Regarding the VDK figure, there is an anomaly which invites comment.

The published German statistics that I have scrutinised are consistent in so far as they indicate a great preponderance of effort on the Western Front.

More than three quarters of all German casualties were incurred in France and Belgium, Even in 1915 - the year when the Germans made their principal effort against the Russians - their casualties were heavier on the Western Front.

The sanitatsbericht is the most detailed source I possess. Up until the end of July 1918, it records more than four and three quarter million battle casualties on the Western Front, compared with fewer than one and a half million on the Eastern, a ratio of well over three to one. And that, it must be recalled, does not include the huge German casualties in the the August - November fighting in France and Belgium, which would greatly increase the disparity between West and East.

Churchill, it should be noted, estimated a total of 5,383,000 German casualties for the Western Front and 1,697,000 for the other fronts.

The consensus is there, in general terms.

And yet the statistcs of the VDK show that, of all German military dead buried in cemeteries from the Great War, just under 55% are in France and Belgium.

How can we account for this ?

Phil (PJA)

[Ralph J. Whitehead]

Hi Phil, The levels of losses are quite different in the east and the west but I cannot see a correlation between the numbers lost and the numbers as known burials. Numerous factors could be involved here including that in the east much of the fighting was in stationary positions or during German/Austrian attacks. While the Russians did attack a number of times and did take ground I believe much of this was opposed to Austrian infantry. I cannot say for sure as I have not spent much time studying the eastern front. I would suspect that given the type of warfare it may have been easier to establish formal burial areas that survived the subsequent fighting.

In the west, many losses occurred in the fighting by Verdun, the Somme, Flanders and such and in many cases formal burials did not take place other than if a man was brought back to a casualty clearing station or a medical dugout. Many were simply buried where they fell and many of the cemeteries established before heavy fighting in a given area were destroyed in the subsequent fighting. These are just assumptions and ideas at present, I would have to look at more details and the VDK statistics currently available. I will try to delve deeper into this aspect as quickly as possible. I am sure other members who have studied this aspect in more detail could provide more information on this subject and I hope they chime in. Speak to you soon.

Ralph

[phil andrade]

Another aspect of the West-East Front split of the VDK data forces itself on my attention, Ralph. The figure for German burials in Poland is very high : "approx" 400,000. This is nearly three times the number for Belgium (136,314), and is exceeded only by France (766,748). There were some particularly intense battles fought against the Russians, expecially in 1914-15, but I felt the number was astonishingly high. I was then advised to remember that present day Poland includes significant areas that were, pre 1919, part of Germany. It might well be that many of those 400,000 were men who died from wounds in hospital in Prussia, and that they might have been mortally wounded on the Western Front. It's a bit of a stretch to imagine that a man wounded on the Somme might have been transported all the way back to Posen where he died in a hospital....but I wonder how often this might have happened. Present day Germany contains the graves of 124,655 soldiers from the Great War. Many of these, surely, died from influenza, but perhaps there is information about wounded men who died after evacuation from the battle fronts. By the same token, I would be interested in finding out what proportion of the 150,000+ British Empire soldiers who died from wounds received in France and Flanders made it back to Blighty before they expired. Quite a number, I should think.

Edit : another thing....weren't significant numbers of German dead repatriated to the Fatherland during the war itself ?

Phil (PJA)

[Jack Sheldon]

Phil

You need to be careful when quoting GE burial figures in Germany. The Volksbund is solely responsible for graves outside Germany. They do publish information concerning burials within the Federal Republic, but only if the information is supplied to them by local authorities (who are under no obligation to do so). You must assume, therefere, that repatriations are covered only patchily and those of deaths in the homeland following wounding and hospitalisation even more so.

Jack

[Ralph J. Whitehead]

It's a bit of a stretch to imagine that a man wounded on the Somme might have been transported all the way back to Posen where he died in a hospital....but I wonder how often this might have happened. Present day Germany contains the graves of 124,655 soldiers from the Great War. Many of these, surely, died from influenza, but perhaps there is information about wounded men who died after evacuation from the battle fronts.

Edit : another thing....weren't significant numbers of German dead repatriated to the Fatherland during the war itself ?

Phil (PJA)

Phil, In addition to what Jack has provided it would not be unusual for men wounded at the front later dying in German hospitals. Numerous severely wounded men were sent to hospitals across Germany where many eventually died from their wounds. In some case many months after the actual wound. These often come up when looking at casualty details and the final resolution of the injury if it ended in death. As to the exact number? I am not sure if there are records of the totals. I have only come across these as I look at particular actions or units.

In regard to repatriation of German dead during the war I have not heard of any cases other than a handful of higher ranking officers. From what I have seen the vast majority, 99%+ were buried near where they were killed or died.

Ralph