Glantzs' Companion Endgame Stalingrad

Discussions on books and other reference material on the WW1, Inter-War or WW2 as well as the authors. Hosted by Andy H.
Post Reply
woodyab
Member
Posts: 53
Joined: 12 Dec 2008, 09:49

Glantzs' Companion Endgame Stalingrad

#1

Post by woodyab » 18 May 2016, 06:47

A query to you. I have received David Glantzs' Companion: Endgame Stalingrad and have observed that Paulus is named as Von in the "Opposing Orders of Battle 19 November 1942-1 February 1943." German. I can be certain that Glantz never made this mistake. So was this myth perpetuated by the Soviets when they drew up the various ORBATS for the Sixth Army. We are all aware that Paulus came from a family of minor officials. I wonder, therefore, where the Soviets got the idea that he was well connected.
Just out of interest there is also a recent photo that states that " Field Marshall von Paulus..." and the photo on the opposite page just states Field Marshall Paulus. (Again , not Glantz, I am sure) By the way not the same old, same old, photos of Stalingrad.
O, well just one of my pet peeves about books that have Paulus as Von.
I obviously need to get other hobbies ,ha,ha.
Tony :lol:

User avatar
genstab
Member
Posts: 2116
Joined: 15 Jul 2003, 23:50
Location: The Big City on Lake Erie

Re: Glantzs' Companion Endgame Stalingrad

#2

Post by genstab » 20 May 2016, 17:25

I don't blame you- it irks me too. Another thing that irritates me is when an author promotes an officer in advance, during the earlier time in the war been written about- say he is still commanding a lesser command than an Army Group and the author calls him a Field Marshal. (in the case of the Germans it was fairly common for a Field Marshal promoted in 1940 to be commanding an army in the early part of the war.) One of the best examples is Montgomery. He is often referred to earlier in the war (such as in Africa) as a Field Marshal though he wasn't so promoted until 1 September 1944. To me that isn't the mark of a professional historian. Promotion dates aren't that hard to obtain, and a general's actions, authority and influence in a battle or campaign are directly affected by his rank at the time re his contemporaries. He should be written about as holding the rank he actually did at the time described.

The only officer with whom I had a problem in obtaining his promotion was Alexander. His rank as Field Marshal is given as 4 June 1944, the date Rome was captured (by Mark Clark, who disobeyed orders to do it instead of destroying the German 10th Army). However, the promotion wasn't announced until 5 December and backdated.

Best regards,
Bill in Cleveland


Post Reply

Return to “Books & other Reference Material”