"Hitler's First War" by Thomas Weber

[Ken S.]

In my limited collection of German regimental histories I have one (Lehr-Infanterie-Regiment) that actually includes an "incomplete" list of EK1s that were awarded to members of the regiment (up until 1924). There are a total of 144 dated to November 11, 1918. Of these, I count 58 that were awarded to non-officers (excluding Offizier-Stellvertreters). For the non-officers (and Offizier-Stellverterters) the recipient's company is listed the vast majority of the time. (For the officers, however, based on the rolls and the book's substantial text it should be possible to determine the individual's role in the regiment, perhaps even reason for why they earned their EK1.) I'm assuming that the company designation doesn't exclude the possibility that the recipient was not serving in the "frontline" at the time, but it does seem to suggest that many were actually won for their heroic conduct in combat rather than lurking around the regimental HQ.

In fact, I show how rare it was for anyone to get an Iron Cross First Class. However, I also show that it was next to impossible for frontline soldiers to get an Iron Cross 1st Class, while soldiers serving with regimental HQ had at least a chance of getting an Iron Cross 1st Class.

[Sid Guttridge]

Max - You didn't answer an earlier question by the author. Have you read his book?

Indeed, who on this thread HAS read it?

There are now seven pages in two threads on this book on AHF, but I can't detect any evidence that a single contributor has even seen it!

It is one thing sandbagging a book one has read, but quite another to sandbag one that one has not!

Perhaps AHF moderators should keep an eye on the gratuitous trashing of books by posters who haven't even read them. It undermines the very purpose of the site and its credibility.

[Max Williams]

Max - You didn't answer an earlier question by the author. Have you read his book?

Indeed, who on this thread HAS read it?

There are now seven pages in two threads on this book on AHF, but I can't detect any evidence that a single contributor has even seen it!

It is one thing sandbagging a book one has read, but quite another to sandbag one that one has not!

Perhaps AHF moderators should keep an eye on the gratuitous trashing of books by posters who haven't even read them. It undermines the very purpose of the site and its credibility.

That is an assumption on your behalf and one that does not deserve a further response other than saying that you obviously do not know me.

.....Of course you should obtain and read the book. After all, that is the only way you can make up your own mind.
Regards,
Max.

[Ken S.]

Sorry but your conduct isn't exactly making this forum a better place either.

Perhaps AHF moderators should keep an eye on the gratuitous trashing of books by posters who haven't even read them. It undermines the very purpose of the site and its credibility.

[Igor Karpov]

Gentlemen, let's keep this discussion at the border line.

Regards,
Igor

[Sid Guttridge]

Max - You are right. I do not know you. That is why I am asking if you have read the book. Your answer is less than clear. Am I right in thinking that you have read the book? If so, we have common ground for discussion.

If you have read the book, I suggest your representation of it is very selective. Weber's book seems remarkably even handed to me. For example, he is very scathing about the unreliability of sources used in the past to suggest Hitler was homosexual, or lost a testicle when wounded. He also recognizes Hitler's courage and loyalty where merited, such as when he may have saved his commander's life. He is not out to trash Hitler's WWI reputation but to put it on a firmer footing by stripping away some of the Nazi-era embroidery still clinging to it - such as the omission of the fact that his recommendation for the Iron Cross First Class in 1918 came from his Jewish adjutant, Hugo Gutmann.

Weber does seem to have a good case that Hitler's occupation as a regimental runner was relatively comfortable compared with that of line infantrymen and also comparitively safe compared with them. He points out that in the famous 1915 photo of Hitler and seven other regimental despatch runners, all except one survived the war and the single fatality died after being transferred to a different unit on a different front in circumstances unknown. By comparison, the whole of their regiment, which had an establishment of about 3,000 men, suffered 3,754 dead, 8,795 wounded and 678 prisoners!

I haven't finished the book yet, but the Hitler of WWI seems to have been a relatively sympathetic figure. He was apparently not yet overtly or militantly anti-Semitic, whatever he might later say in Mein Kampf. He had no family at home to offer him moral support and was therefore drawn to the company of his fellow regimental HQ staff members. However, he was also something of a loner and not particularly clubable. He was apparently loyal to his officers, but displayed few obvious leadership qualities himself - hence his minimal promotion to gefreiter. He could display courage and paid his dues by being wounded and gassed. I found nothing much to either like or dislike in the character of the WWI Hitler Weber describes. A bit of a loner who is not easy to warm to, but not, apparently, a bad sort over 1914-1918.

[Sid Guttridge]

Ken - I don't understand why suggesting AHF moderators "keep an eye on the gratuitous trashing of books by posters who haven't read them" isn't exactly making this forum a better place. Surely AHF needs informed, rather than uninformed, critiques?

I now have the book and should be in a position to answer any questions on it you may have, until such time as you are able to acquire a copy yourself.

[Ken S.]

A message forum is a place where people express their opinions. Nobody here has all of the available information to make a truly "informed opinion". So there will always be a certain degree of disagreement and/or misunderstanding. Your coming here and attacking people for having an opinion you disagree with and then repeatedly chirping that they should "buy the book" is simply not contributing anything to the discussion, hence the forum.

I would like to point out that you have changed your criteria for what constitutes an "informed opinion" from reading the book and checking the sources to simply reading the book. I can only assume that you don't understand German nor will you ever find yourself in a position to consult these "new" sources. That being the case, it would seem that no matter how often you read the book, you'll never be in a position to properly critique it anyway.

Keep in mind that in this thread I responded to a specific statement that the author himself apparently posted here. I've read the sections in the book thanks to google where he briefly discusses the issue. Feel free to point out where in my post in this thread I may be wrong, why information that contradicts the author's assertion is not legitmate simply because I haven't read the entire book.

Ken - I don't understand why suggesting AHF moderators "keep an eye on the gratuitous trashing of books by posters who haven't read them" isn't exactly making this forum a better place. Surely AHF needs informed, rather than uninformed, critiques?

I now have the book and should be in a position to answer any questions on it you may have, until such time as you are able to acquire a copy yourself.

[Ken S.]

So he's making this conclusion based on the statistics derived from the regiment alone rather than an assessment based on a wider survey of the survival rates of regimental runners...

Again from the Lehr-Infanterie-Regiment history:

(p.571:) Eine Infanterie-Kompagnie hatte neben Meldern (Gefechtsordonnanzen) auch einen Winker- und Blinkertrupp, beide waren innerhalb des Bataillons ausgebildet. Bataillon und Regiment hatten entsprechende Trupps. Der M e l d e r -- spaeter Laeufer genannt -- trat im Gefecht zum Zug- und Kompagniefuehrer.

Besonders im Stellungskriege war der Laeufer unentbehrlich, man moechte sagen, sogar die ultima ratio, wenn alle anderen Nachrichtenmittel v e r s a g t e n, und das geschah leider sehr oft.

(p. 586:) 1) Der Unterstab des Regiments (RegimentsgeschaEftszimmer)

(p. 587:) Waehrend schwieriger Gefechtslagen war eine Teilung des Personals notwendig. Der ein bearbeitete hinter der Front die laufenden Angelegenheiten, der andere war an der Front auf dem Regiments-Gefechtsstand taetig. So kam es, dass der Regimentsschreiber L i e b i g im Juli 1916 in der Sommeschlacht mit dem ganzen Regimentsstabe nach heldenmuetiger Gegenwehr in englische Gefangenschaft geriet, der Regimentsschreiber Sch w a r z beim Sturm auf den Cornillet im Juli 1918 mit seinem Regiments-Kommandeur, Major H e r o l d, den Heldentod starb.

Weber does seem to have a good case that Hitler's occupation as a regimental runner was relatively comfortable compared with that of line infantrymen and also comparitively safe compared with them. He points out that in the famous 1915 photo of Hitler and seven other regimental despatch runners, all except one survived the war and the single fatality died after being transferred to a different unit on a different front in circumstances unknown. By comparison, the whole of their regiment, which had an establishment of about 3,000 men, suffered 3,754 dead, 8,795 wounded and 678 prisoners!

[Sid Guttridge]

Ken S - Hitler did not serve in the Lehr-infanterie-Regiment. He served in the List Regiment. The book "Hitler's First War", which is the subject of this thread, is specifically about Hitler and his relationships within the List Regiment. So, unsurprisingly, the author concentrates on the List Regiment's experiences, not those of other units undergoing different experiences elsewhere.

If you want to offer a critique of a different book that actually is on your bookshelves, such as the one on the Lehr-infanterie-Regiment, feel free to do so. By virtue of being in possession of that book you would be reasonably qualified to do so.

However, until you have actually read the book this thread is about, you are not in a similarly qualified position.

I have no objection to opinions. per se, just of uninformed opinions forcefully put by posters who haven't actually read what they are criticising.

The are two levels of informed opinion - on the book and its subject. If you want to offer an informed opinion on the book, please at least read it. If you want to offer an informed opinion on its subject, follow up its sources. You have done neither. Worse, you seem you don't seem in the least interested in asking questions of those who really have read the book.

If you have any genuine curiosity about the book, please ask.

[Ken S.]

Could you even understand the quotations that I provided from the Lehr-Infanterie-Regiment's history?

Ken S - Hitler did not serve in the Lehr-infanterie-Regiment. He served in the List Regiment. The book "Hitler's First War", which is the subject of this thread, is specifically about Hitler and his relationships within the List Regiment. So, unsurprisingly, the author concentrates on the List Regiment's experiences, not those of other units undergoing different experiences elsewhere.

[J. Duncan]

Review by the Wall Street Journal written by reknowned historian Norman Stone.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... #printMode

I'm interested in whether the book sheds some light on Hitler's army "job" as "political officer" which Captain Karl Mayr trained him in order to observe some of the early radical groups in Munich such as the German Worker's Party. I've heard that Hitler even wore the red armband of the political left for a short period, possibly may have flirted with Socialist Communism? Too bad Mayr has not gotten a biography as he was a catalyst / "missing link" into getting Hitler involved in politics in the first place.

[Kar43]

I purchased the book today. I look forward to reading it.

[dmike]

Review by the Wall Street Journal written by reknowned historian Norman Stone.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... #printMode

I'm interested in whether the book sheds some light on Hitler's army "job" as "political officer" which Captain Karl Mayr trained him in order to observe some of the early radical groups in Munich such as the German Worker's Party. I've heard that Hitler even wore the red armband of the political left for a short period, possibly may have flirted with Socialist Communism? Too bad Mayr has not gotten a biography as he was a catalyst / "missing link" into getting Hitler involved in politics in the first place.

i've just been reading the book, and i've found it very interesting. I've also read the williams book which is also
very good. the big difference between the 2 is that williams seems to have read the official regimenatl history
of the unit (pub 1932) and the usual sources but gone no further. hes very good on the battles the RIR 16 or list regiment were in and what the British were doing, but says less about the people who were in Hitlers regiment. Weber has gone through the archives and brought to life the many different people who served in that regiment by quoting their own letters and recollections. Some may disagree with his conclusions but he has done a very valuable job in making available
these German sources known to an english reading audience.

One of the many issues Weber addresses is Hitlers claim that the war politicised him and was the birthplace of his political thinking. Its very difficult to answer this as Hitler hardly wrote anything (thats survived) it seems between
1916-19. It seems highly unlikely that he was spouting anti semitic rants during the war since it was a Jewish officer in the regiment (Hugo Gutmann) who recommanded him for the Iron Cross 1st class in August 1918.

In October 1919 Hitler did write a very anti semitic response to a letter that had been sent to Mayr (weber p255). However in February he was filmed walking behind the coffin of the murdered socialist leader Kurt Eisner wearing both black and red armbands (p251). I saw a clip of this recently on TV about the SS, and i believe it has been uploaded to youtube. I'm sure some will say its not conclusively Hitler. At that time he was on the soldiers council of the 2nd infantry regiment in Munich, and remained so under the Soviet republic of Eugen Levine in April 1919 who was both Jewish and a former Russian revolutionary. It seems likely that Hitler's political awakening took place after the war as a result of the turbelent events of 1919. Even so it was another year March 1920 before he finally left the army, which had been for nearly 6 years both his home and family, and embarked on a political career.

I've written this becos I've long found this forum very informative on many obscure matters about both WW1 & WW2.

Mike

[MichaelWittmann]

Having read the preview of the book in google books, some reviews and the comments of Weber i have come to the conclusion that the conclusions of the Writer are unsubstantial, and it is certain that the main objective of this writer when he began to write the book (judging by his typical anti nazism and lack of objectivity) was to FIND AS MUCH AS I CAN , AND TWIST TRUTH AS MUCH AS I CAN TO PROVE MY POINT. NOTHING GOOD COULD HAVE BEEN PRODUCED BY ADOLF HITLER , HE WASNT BRAVE.
Just the way that he dismisses the 5 medals of valor that hitler was awarded is enough to make a forward thinking person not to trouble much with webers book.
The same facts could have been used to draw completely different conclusions, he diminishes his comrades even his commander that he saved, by sayin (he only knew him for 7 days) that is just outrageous.

And before someone says (you havent read the whole book) i have to say that, i have read the preview and the comments of the writer and that is what iam judging, if i had the whole book i would have made a review about the whole thing.
For eg there is an incident when adolf Hitler attacks one of the officers for saying that the war must stop cause it is lost, one of his comrades records that incident and he says that the veterans liked him more after that , that is certainly not a cowards trait.