Von Richthofen Funeral

[towisuk]

Looking at some film shot of von Richthofen's funeral, I'm struck by the amount of time, energy and men that went into burying one of the enemy.

Forget the "it was a show of respect for a brave adversary", the younger pilots of both sides also showed great bravery in going into battle with very few hours of

training and experience, and yet when they were shot down they were not accorded the same type funeral with full military honours. In death I'm told all men are

equal, and yet there seemed to be more respect for people/pilots who took a greater number of lives.

Link to the film of von Richthofens funeral

http://aso.gov.au/titles/historical/funeral-baron-von-richthofen/clip1/

regards

Tom

[Simon Birch]

Thanks Tom for posting this - it is an interesting film.

Is anyone aware of any other squadrons that were represented at the funeral – apart from No. 3 and the Australians?

Simon

[SiegeGunner]

Perhaps because MvR was the first major German ace to fall on the Allied side of the lines, Boelke and Immelmann having both come down on their own side.

[WhiteStarLine]

Tom, like you it seems a bit strange. Manfred von Richtofen was killed just 35 metres above my grandfather's Brigade headquarters. The intelligence officer was the first officer to reach the dead airman and he wrote:

Enemy flying circus with red painted triplane about and heavy fights took place in the area at high altitudes. At 11:20 Baron Capt von Richtofen the German champion airman who is reputed & claims to have brought down in combat 80 allied machines was shot down by a 24 Aust MG Company serjeant firing a Vickers MG. The story of the famous airman's death is told in appendices by General Cannan & Lieutenant DP Fraser who witnessed the whole affair.

Capt Richtofen's body was buried by the Australian Flying Corps the following day with full honours. He was recognised as one of the best of sportsmen by all airmen.

Yet just a few weeks before he had cheerfully written about the 'heavy execution' of several thousand German soldiers during a Divisional attack.

About noon our front and defences heavily shelled. Reported enemy massing opposite our front about this line and shortly after noon a determined enemy advance commenced. It was met with excellent rifle & Lewis Gun fire. Machine Guns and Artillery were also splendidly served and heavy execution was done to the attacking forces who retired after several attempts to attack leaving his casualties to be recovered during the darkness. His losses were very heavy ours comparatively light – being only 7officers 153 men of which 1 officer was killed 25 men killed – 6 officers &127 wounded 1 missing while enemy casualties have been estimated at a Brigade & a half.

On April 10 a German who accidentally wandered in lost was shot dead. Yet the day before Richtofen died, a British aircraft apparently piloted bya German operator dropped a message over 41 Battalion's lines asking if they had seen two missing airmen.

It was almost as if there were different rules of engagement . . .

[alex revell]

Yes, contrast von R's funeral with that accorded to James McCudden. All pilots who attended it were disgusted. But I'm afraid that it was always thus.

[Dolphin]

There's an oft-repeated story about the evening of 21 April 1918 in the mess of No 74 Sqn RAF, when one of the unit's pilots proposed a toast to the memory of their late adversary, Manfred von Richthofen, only to have one of the flight commanders, one Capt Edward Mannock, opine that he hoped that the German had burned all the way down.

Clearly, attitudes to the enemy varied from man to man, and from unit to unit.

Gareth

[Dolphin]

Thanks Tom for posting this - it is an interesting film.

Is anyone aware of any other squadrons that were represented at the funeral – apart from No. 3 and the Australians?

Simon

Just to clarify matters, it wasn't No 3 Sqn and the Australians; the pallbearers, firing party, and others at the funeral were from No 3 Sqn, AFC, as the Baron's body had been taken to their aerodrome at Bertangles. Only a couple of years ago, members of the Australian Society of WWI Aero Historians had an account of the funeral from the son of one of the pallbearers, who had photographs of himself in 2007 standing in the exact spot where his dad stood with a wreath in 1918.

Gareth

[towisuk]

Tom, like you it seems a bit strange. Manfred von Richtofen was killed just 35 metres above my grandfather's Brigade headquarters. The intelligence officer was the first officer to reach the dead airman and he wrote:

Enemy flying circus with red painted triplane about and heavy fights took place in the area at high altitudes. At 11:20 Baron Capt von Richtofen the German champion airman who is reputed & claims to have brought down in combat 80 allied machines was shot down by a 24 Aust MG Company serjeant firing a Vickers MG. The story of the famous airman's death is told in appendices by General Cannan & Lieutenant DP Fraser who witnessed the whole affair.

Capt Richtofen's body was buried by the Australian Flying Corps the following day with full honours. He was recognised as one of the best of sportsmen by all airmen.

Yet just a few weeks before he had cheerfully written about the 'heavy execution' of several thousand German soldiers during a Divisional attack.

About noon our front and defences heavily shelled. Reported enemy massing opposite our front about this line and shortly after noon a determined enemy advance commenced. It was met with excellent rifle & Lewis Gun fire. Machine Guns and Artillery were also splendidly served and heavy execution was done to the attacking forces who retired after several attempts to attack leaving his casualties to be recovered during the darkness. His losses were very heavy ours comparatively light – being only 7officers 153 men of which 1 officer was killed 25 men killed – 6 officers &127 wounded 1 missing while enemy casualties have been estimated at a Brigade & a half.

On April 10 a German who accidentally wandered in lost was shot dead. Yet the day before Richtofen died, a British aircraft apparently piloted bya German operator dropped a message over 41 Battalion's lines asking if they had seen two missing airmen.

It was almost as if there were different rules of engagement . . .

An excellent contribution many thanks....

Interesting that they considered him one of the best of all sportsmen, after all he was not killing pheasants at a country house shoot..!!!

Strikes me that that may reflect the attitude of some of the higher rank allied officers may have held towards their own men,...those not of the "right class" were not accorded the same respect...even in death.

regards

Tom

[towisuk]

Yes, contrast von R's funeral with that accorded to James McCudden. All pilots who attended it were disgusted. But I'm afraid that it was always thus.

Yes a clear case of lions led by donkeys

regards

Tom

[joad]

Hi all

We have a family story from a relative who said he was there when the Red Baron crashed. He and his mates ran over to look at the novelty of a newly crashed aeroplane and he later said, so it goes, that it was interesting but they had no idea who the pilot was. No one in his battalion had ever heard of the Red Baron until after the crash.

Thats how the story goes.

He was a captain.

Adam

[Michael Molkentin]

It is a good question- and one that has troubled me for a while.

AFC airmen typically received very basic funeral, so as not to - in my view - undermine squadron morale.

With Richthofen there is evidence that No. 3 Squadron's CO, Major David Blake was a driving force behind the funeral arrangements. Also, when the French citizens of Bertangles vandalised his grave following the funeral, Monash was furious and condemned the act. This suggests to me, that simply, it was a 'top down' initiative.

That said, some of the squadron members clearly thought it was worth showing Richthofen that kind of honour. 2AM James Barnes wrote in a letter home, a week later that he thought it was good that the squadron had shown Richthofen respect, 'as he was a good soldier for his country and never went to London or Paris killing women and children'. Mechanics from the squadron fashioned him an ornate cross from a propeller, with a brass plate. This, it should be noted though was the standard cross design No. 3 Squadron buried its own airmen under.

On the other hand, the squadron which on 22 April showed Richthofen such respect had, on 21 April looted his body and aircraft- so one wonders how widespread views like Barnes' in fact were. Another mechanic felt the other way- John Alexander wrote in his diary that they should have 'pass[ed] him by' like the Germans treated Allied airmen.

The best I can come up with from the evidence is that chivalry was an idealised conception of combat intended to make violence more culturally palatable (as it was in its original form in Medieval Europe) and not an all pervasive 'law'. Hence, it was incredibly elastic in the way that individuals, groups, units etc. perceived and imposed it. The Richthofen funeral happened because - for varied and complex reasons - some figures of authority deemed that it should. Perhaps Blake (who hasn't left personal papers, so we'll never know) perceived the funeral as good press for his unit. Perhaps Monash likewise perceived it for the Australian Corps. Then again, perhaps they had less pragmatic motivations- perhaps they had deeply held convictions that this is how one treated an enemy airman of significant standing.

In any case- I am still pondering this- so these are just some 'work in progress' thoughts.

[towisuk]

An interesting and thought provoking post Michael.

I agree that the organization of the funeral appears to be a "top down" initiative. On a wider scale, if this was an example of the "Top Brass's" priorities and mentality, it's no wonder that so many mistakes were made in decisions leading to thousands of allied soldiers losing their lives.

Tom

[SiegeGunner]

The Germans had buried Albert Ball with considerable ceremony at Annoeullin the year before, presumably with the involvement of Lothar von Richtofen. I wonder whether the respects accorded to MvR were a reciprocal gesture.

[towisuk]

I wonder why these ceremonial burials of each others "Aces" began, as mentioned earlier in the topic, our own side (it appears), did not afford James McCudden the same respect when he died after his plane crashed.

regards

Tom

[david lee]

An interesting and thought provoking post Michael.

I agree that the organization of the funeral appears to be a "top down" initiative. On a wider scale, if this was an example of the "Top Brass's" priorities and mentality, it's no wonder that so many mistakes were made in decisions leading to thousands of allied soldiers losing their lives.

Tom

Hi Tom,

It almost sounds like you believe every dead soldier on the Western Front wore Khaki (wirh a 'sprinkling' of Horizon blue). Your "lions led by Donkeys" is not well thought through, and you are almost in a minority for still believing such a palpably unlikely 'truth'.

Many mistakes were made, of course they were. On ALL sides. This is not being 'donkey like', and yes, 'thousands of allied soldiers' did die, as did thousands of German, Austrian, Turkish, Russian and all the rest. Was every General, right across the board, a 'donkey'.

Your feeling that "those not of the right class" were not accorded the same respect in death is certainly indefensible. Could all those, as you admit, thousands (tens of thousands, even hundreds of thousands), ALL be given 'ceremonial interrments. vR (will we never tire of talking about him) was an individual, of some worth as a rallying figure for the Germans (air as well as ground) and thus his death, his being 'brought down' in aerial combat, as was first thought (and no truly conclusive proof that I am aware of proves beyond any doubt that he was not hit by Browns machine guns, though, of course, I admit it is unlikely---but that is not the same as talking absolutes----real, hard, indisputable, carved in stone facts are heady things indeed) was worth making an especial case out of for the R.A.F.----more for public consumption at home, than for anything else.

The doctors that performed , well, let's call them 'autopsies' ---for want of a better word, but shoving a metal rod through the wound to attempt to confirm the cause of death is hardly, even then, state of the art, must have wondered, as we do, why all the fuss---was he not just 'another' dead body, in a sea of dead bodies. We know differently, he was iconic, then as now. When icons fall, some demonstration is required that , victor of 80 combats, or a few less, or not, icons are due some special treatment to demonstrate that no-one in that war is immune to death.

We, then as now, seem to find it hard to believe that 'famous' (or even infamous) people 'die' ----look no further than princess Diana---and all the media hype and 'conspiracy' mythology surrounding her death. Perhaps the 'ceremony' was as much to do with 'proving' somehow that the demon had been exorcised, as any notion of 'chivalry'

Chivalry rarely showed its face in war (rarely, but sometimes)--even medieval battle--remember Henry V order to execute the French prisoners (all nobles who had been spared for ransom) after AGINCOURT was really already won! We know the men-at-arms refused to carry out the order, and Henry had to detail 200 archers (outside the chivalric code) to do it, and few enough were killed in the event, but it proves just how tenuous 'chivalry' is on any battlefield.

Cheers,

Dave

[centurion]

"The obvious point to make about the unusual honours and attention given to Richthofen’s funeral is that these provided a propaganda opportunity – a chance to demonstrate how civilised and decent the Allies were in their willingness to treat a defeated opponent well. Clearly the death of Richthofen would be of interest not just in the Allied countries, but also to the German people, and so treating him in accordance with the principles of chivalry would send a subtle but positive message to them."

Ian Jackson, Australian War Memorial

There is some evidence that Monash may have been involved in some way. Hardly a General to whom the tired old 'donkey' epithet could be applied.

[WhiteStarLine]

Hi all

We have a family story from a relative who said he was there when the Red Baron crashed. He and his mates ran over to look at the novelty of a newly crashed aeroplane and he later said, so it goes, that it was interesting but they had no idea who the pilot was. No one in his battalion had ever heard of the Red Baron until after the crash.

Thats how the story goes.

He was a captain.

Adam

Hi Adam, interesting story, very plausible that he was there and very easy to check if you tell us his name.

Captain Adams (44th Bn AIF) placed the guard and Captain Hilliary (11th Infantry Brigade staff officer) was given the effects by Lt Fraser (IO) to check the identity papers with Corporal Peters, their German speaker. All the other officers mentioned were Lieutenants (Fraser, Mayman, Travers). Not sure of the padre's rank, but the 8th Field Artillery Brigade padre was the one who made many of the looters give back what they had taken. Most of the looting was done by Gunner Ridgway, then by the men of 3 Div Sigs. There is no mention of their Signal Officer Lt Groves being about and I suspect he was back in Bonnay that day. Captain Forsyth was in Vaux and actually reached for his revolver when Richtofen was 10 metres above him. However, he did not attend the crash site.

Shortly afterwards, the shelling started and it became too dangerous. In fact, just a few weeks ago, I was looking at a box section of the wing and it had 3 Div Sigs clearly written on it. When I turned it over, the narrative told how they literally dodged shells and one almost got them. In the end they got their piece (obviously).

It is a bit unlikely that no one had heard of von Richtofen (the term 'Red Baron' was not used back then). The Flying Circus was a very common sight during April and Bean cites how during the souvenir rush "eagerness increased tenfold when the intelligence officer, Lieutenant Fraser . . . found his name". (Appendix 4, The Death of Richtofen, page 6)

For your relative to be there, he would most likely be 44th Bn AIF, or 52nd Bn (located at Vaux). The FAB and 41, 42 and 43 Bns were slightly further away and more involved inwhat was a very dangerous time for 11th Brigade. The next day a mustard and phosgene gas attack occurred near the crash site and German prisoners told of a pending Divisonal attack, so they had other things on their mind.

Cheers,

Bill

[towisuk]

Hi Tom,

It almost sounds like you believe every dead soldier on the Western Front wore Khaki (wirh a 'sprinkling' of Horizon blue). Your "lions led by Donkeys" is not well thought through, and you are almost in a minority for still believing such a palpably unlikely 'truth'.

Many mistakes were made, of course they were. On ALL sides. This is not being 'donkey like', and yes, 'thousands of allied soldiers' did die, as did thousands of German, Austrian, Turkish, Russian and all the rest. Was every General, right across the board, a 'donkey'.

Your feeling that "those not of the right class" were not accorded the same respect in death is certainly indefensible. Could all those, as you admit, thousands (tens of thousands, even hundreds of thousands), ALL be given 'ceremonial interrments. vR (will we never tire of talking about him) was an individual, of some worth as a rallying figure for the Germans (air as well as ground) and thus his death, his being 'brought down' in aerial combat, as was first thought (and no truly conclusive proof that I am aware of proves beyond any doubt that he was not hit by Browns machine guns, though, of course, I admit it is unlikely---but that is not the same as talking absolutes----real, hard, indisputable, carved in stone facts are heady things indeed) was worth making an especial case out of for the R.A.F.----more for public consumption at home, than for anything else.

The doctors that performed , well, let's call them 'autopsies' ---for want of a better word, but shoving a metal rod through the wound to attempt to confirm the cause of death is hardly, even then, state of the art, must have wondered, as we do, why all the fuss---was he not just 'another' dead body, in a sea of dead bodies. We know differently, he was iconic, then as now. When icons fall, some demonstration is required that , victor of 80 combats, or a few less, or not, icons are due some special treatment to demonstrate that no-one in that war is immune to death.

We, then as now, seem to find it hard to believe that 'famous' (or even infamous) people 'die' ----look no further than princess Diana---and all the media hype and 'conspiracy' mythology surrounding her death. Perhaps the 'ceremony' was as much to do with 'proving' somehow that the demon had been exorcised, as any notion of 'chivalry'

Chivalry rarely showed its face in war (rarely, but sometimes)--even medieval battle--remember Henry V order to execute the French prisoners (all nobles who had been spared for ransom) after AGINCOURT was really already won! We know the men-at-arms refused to carry out the order, and Henry had to detail 200 archers (outside the chivalric code) to do it, and few enough were killed in the event, but it proves just how tenuous 'chivalry' is on any battlefield.

Cheers,

Dave

I dont know where you got your first sentence from in the above post, taken from one of my earlier posts in this topic....

"the younger pilots of both sides also showed great bravery in going into battle "

the accent in my quote shown is on "both sides". I believe that means I was refering to more than the allied forces and giving credit to the bravery of the combatants

of the other side as well.

I may be in a minority with my Lions led by Donkeys mentality, but who is to say that the minority is always wrong...History is not a democracy...!!

regards

Tom

[david lee]

I dont know where you got your first sentence from in the above post, taken from one of my earlier posts in this topic....

"the younger pilots of both sides also showed great bravery in going into battle "

the accent in my quote shown is on "both sides". I believe that means I was refering to more than the allied forces and giving credit to the bravery of the combatants

of the other side as well.

I may be in a minority with my Lions led by Donkeys mentality, but who is to say that the minority is always wrong...History is not a democracy...!!

regards

Tom

Hi Tom,

Well, I took a distillation of your posts numbered 8---9 and 12. And your quote about "younger pilots" etc. I never even addressed ---at all!

8) talks about "class distinction" in death.......

9) tells of "lions led by donkeys"

12) tells of "top brass mentality" leading to "thousands of ALLIED soldiers losing their lives.."

I struggle to see where you "don't know where I got my first sentance from" Tom!

As for "history not being a democracy"-----no, it is not, but their is good history and bad history----as with historians. IF we postulate (as you are saying) that the British army constituted Lion like soldiers, led by Donkey like Generals----then, presumably, Britains dead would have far eclipsed the dead of Germany and France, Russia and Austria-Hungary---et al!

Did it?

If we imagine the British generals were stupid and stubborn, and callous to the extreme, then we might imagine the British army rising up in mutiny.

It, of course, did no such thing----- but the Russian army did. The French army did. The German army did. The British army is the only one in it from the very beginning, to the very end, that did not mutiny or surrender! A strange dichotomy for an army led by Donkeys.

It was, was it not, the delegates of the German army that crossed no-mans land with a white flag...

Cheers,

Dave.

[towisuk]

"If we imagine the British generals were stupid and stubborn,"

Haig was convinced throughout the war the cavalry would win it......I think that constitutes stupid and stubborn

regards

Tom

[centurion]

We seem to have gone from Richthofen's funeral to the troll's delight - Haig AND Lions and Donkeys - either one of which inevitably leads to vituperation etc etc and absolutely nothing to do with the original OP

[david lee]

"If we imagine the British generals were stupid and stubborn,"

Haig was convinced throughout the war the cavalry would win it......I think that constitutes stupid and stubborn

regards

Tom

Haig championed every modern weapon on the battlefield! Machine guns, aeroplanes, tanks----Haig used them all and begged for more, and better one's. But most tellingly, Haig won! What constitutes a successful Commander if not victory on the battlefield?

Is that not his job. Is that not, in the final analysis, what he is paid for---what he gets salutes from everyone for? This obsession with 'butchers and bunglers', Lions led by donkeys, cavalry generals with nothing between their ears ------ boots a-shine and spurs a-jingle morons who 'sacrificed' a whole generation on the altar of their self esteem, is seriously flawed, and accepted as flawed by just about every serious historian nowadays.

Perhaps you need to move away from just reading Laffinesque type historians.

As for cavalry, the ONLY arm of exploitation in those days, well, let Sidney Rogerson, who was there during those deadly dangerous days in March, April May 1918 tell the truth about cavalry....

"It was a crowning mercy that they had no cavalry. How many times during the retreat did we thank heaven for this! The sight of a few mounted men in the distance would at once start a ripple of anxiety, the word, 'CAVALRY!' being whispered and passed from mouth to mouth down the firing line. Men looked apprehensively over their shoulders, fearful lest horsemen might already be behind them. Cavalry was the ONE FACTOR that would have smashed the morale of the defence in a twinkling"

But no cavalry were available for the Germans, who had left it all in Russia! So the British retreat was pursued by the Germans at exactly the same pace----walking pace. No exploitation of a demoralised and retreating (fighting withdrawal) foe there.

Cavalry in those days DID that job, and, until a different war, were the ONLY means to exploit any kind of breakthrough. Not quite so 'contemptible' the British cavalry, who, let it be remembered, were also fully trained riflemen also, used as dismounted infantry often enough.

Remember also that in 1914 the German army fielded 10 cavalry divisions in the west.

Cheers,

Dave.

[alex revell]

I agree. Let's get back to the original post. It's pointless trying to score points off one another. I've never yet known people having their minds and opinions changed by other people putting forward an opposite view. It's better to agree to disagree and leave it at that.

[david lee]

Yes a clear case of lions led by donkeys

regards

Tom

I merely responded to the above---in post 9. though, Alex. I will always question "lions led by donkeys' type statements. This is eminently reasonable and laudable, surely.

cheers,

Dave.

[Simon Birch]

Just to clarify matters, it wasn't No 3 Sqn and the Australians; the pallbearers, firing party, and others at the funeral were from No 3 Sqn, AFC, as the Baron's body had been taken to their aerodrome at Bertangles. Only a couple of years ago, members of the Australian Society of WWI Aero Historians had an account of the funeral from the son of one of the pallbearers, who had photographs of himself in 2007 standing in the exact spot where his dad stood with a wreath in 1918.

Gareth

Hello Gareth,

I am slightly reluctant to disagree with you but I know of at least 2 officers from 65 Squadron who attened the funeral. What got me thinking of this was a written account by an armourer in 65 Squadron, who says the several of this squadrons officers attended the funeral. I was therefore wondering if I could identify and of them from either the film or the available still pictures - however I did realise that this was always a long shot.

Simon