Christian Streit, 'Keine Kameraden' for download

[Urmel]

Told you so. :roll:

[thom]

I am surprised to read that Christian Streit receives royalties for a work (his PhD thesis) that was publicly financed. I would rather expect his university to get the money. Anyway, Steve you seem to have a good contact to Mr. Streit, perhaps you can ask him to correct some of his figures in a future edition of "Keine Kameraden".

1) Many of his figures for the total number of captured POWs that are shown in the graph on page 245 cannot be found in archival documents. Instead of using known and available data, Streit made his own mathematical calculations based on partly erroneous figures from different Fremde Heere Ost (FHO) sources, and he made mistakes in the calculations himself. This applies to the figures given for the period from 1/7 to 1/12/43 which are wrong because he added monthly POW figures for June to November 1943 to the figure of 10/5/43 instead of 1/6/43. The figure for 1/1/43 is calculated wrongly as well, using the POW total given by FHO for 1942 (1,653,058) together with the Quartermaster General (GenQu) figure for 20/12/41 as starting point instead of the FHO figure for 1/1/42 (3,355,499). The figure given for 1/2/44 can neither be found in documents nor derived from monthly figures, and the figure given by Streit for 1/7/44 is actually the one of 20/7/44.

2) FHO made a mistake in its 1942 compilations which are also reproduced in Streit's graph on page 245 that inflated the figures by appr. 300,000 POWs. This leads to inflated totals for the entire following period of the war, including the 10/5/43 figure in the graph. Resulting from this, the total number of captured POWs in 1943 as it can be derived from Streit's graph appears to be close to 600,000 which would be twice as high as the actual total for 1943 (according to FHO – 297,899; according to GenQu – 243,449). By the way, already Alexander Dallin ("German Rule in Russia") miscalculated the POW figure for 1943 using the same FHO datasets as Christian Streit.

3) Streit is making incorrect assumptions in other parts of his book due to a misinterpretation of figures. For example, on page 247 he is discussing a high mortality rate among POWs in November 1942 as indicated by a sharp drop in the POW figures for the Reich from 713,325 on 1/11/42 to 636,219 on 1/12/42. However, the first figure actually includes POWs of the Generalgouvernement, and the second not (see BA/MA RW6/534). Without the GG there were just 641,569 POWs in the area of the Reich on 1/11/42 so that the decrease during the month was rather moderate.

Well, more examples could be given. For me, such errors are signs of a rather careless work with documental facts and figures. Correct facts are the least I am expecting from a book that many consider to be a standard on its topic (and the author expects and receives royalties for).

[thom]

The same is with Polyan and others. WW2 books are full of figures that are misinterpreted or simply wrong. Krivosheev is worst, just take his table on Soviet POWs in German hands which is a complete mess. I don't want to know how many of his other figures can be taken serious.

[Urmel]

I am surprised to read that Christian Streit receives royalties for a work (his PhD thesis) that was publicly financed. I would rather expect his university to get the money.

Do you know for a fact that he received public finance for his project, and do you know for a fact that the dissertation and the book are identical?

Correct facts are the least I am expecting from a book that many consider to be a standard on its topic (and the author expects and receives royalties for).

This appears to be strange logic to me. If you don't like to pay for books until you have checked you are happy with them, use a library.

[Moltke d. J.]

Hi,

I am surprised to read that Christian Streit receives royalties for a work (his PhD thesis) that was publicly financed. I would rather expect his university to get the money.

He was a High School teacher until he retired. Besides, in Germany it's every man for himself when it comes to the required publishing of a Ph.D. thesis (no sexism implied ). He was lucky to find a respected publishing house (DVA), but the initial printing run was 3.000, so they didn't expect it to be a bestseller...

From: http://www.vwi.ac.at/aktagung/vortraege ... treit.html

Curriculum Vitae


Christian Streit, Dr., geb. 1942, ist Mitglied der Wissenschaftlichen Kommission zur Überprüfung der Ausstellung „Vernichtungskrieg. Verbrechen der Wehrmacht 1941 bis 1944“; Studium der Geschichte und der Anglistik an der Universität Heidelberg und am Dartmouth College, Hanover, N.H., USA;
1975 – 2005 Gymnasiallehrer; 1977 Promotion an der Universität Heidelberg.

Frank

[thom]

Urmel, its not about me liking/buying a book or not. Its about forming a public opinion which a standard work usually does. And the facts have to be correct in such a work.

[thom]

The publication of a PhD thesis in Germany is usually an "inhouse" process that does not require a publisher. Your university basically requests you to deliver a number of copies which will then be stored or sent to some libraries. So you normally just go to the next bookbinder. Some PhD students prefer to involve a publisher to let their thesis design look more professionally. The underlying research was done and financed at their universities, though, at least if they are public ones. And the University of Heidelberg (where Christian Streit wrote his thesis) is a public institution.

[Urmel]

Financed? That's news to me. A lot of PhDs are done in people's free time, or they have a 1/2-time contract which requires them to do a full day's work and then they can do the PhD in their spare time. So all the uni does is give them a library pass and a supervisor.

May have been different in the 70s, but unless you have some further info that Streit was actually financed by anyone for his PhD, I'd be happy to assume you made that bit up.

[Urmel]

Urmel, its not about me liking/buying a book or not. Its about forming a public opinion which a standard work usually does. And the facts have to be correct in such a work.

Yes. So does that mean that any book with a factual error in it should be a free download in your view? If not, what has that statement got to do with your complaint about Mr. Streit receiving royalties?

[thom]

Urmel, these are two different things – a) my note about Mr. Streit receiving royalties, and b) my remarks on the wrong figures in his book.

a) I seriously doubt that he paid his trips to the archives or his studies in the US himself. I mean, as a PhD millionaire I would rather lay on the Bahamas beach than working as a teacher later on… But I would have to ask him to know for sure if you insist, or perhaps his former supervisor Mr. Conze, or his university.

b) A scientific work submitted to a publisher with that large number of errors would normally be sent back to the author for major revision.

[bf109 emil]

Still weak. Here's my take. I am working on a book, for which I will struggle to find a publisher because of its very niche character, and bootlegging will not do anything to change that view (for which I have a lot of sympathy). I have considered e-publishing, but if even websites that proclaim to serve our hobby and interest use flimsy excuses to spread what very much looks like bootlegged literature, that's probably not a good idea either. Since I therefore lack any incentive to get on with the work it'll probably never get published, and the information will be lost.

I know, it is a weak excuse for slacking, but I think it fits well into this thread.

Urmel...finish your book...

IMHO and I have to assume yours and from i have gathered you are a fan of literature or reading...
What I am trying to say is IMHO I don't think people will refrain from buying a book because it is published on Google, legal or not...sure someone could save a book, but to be honest if a book is worthy and garners interest most will go out and purchase the book and might I add google helped along this line...If I look over at my book shelf, sure I could have read William L. Shirer "Rise and Fall of the Third Reich" if it had been on a computer, but would I have or for that case whom would read a 2 volume set from a computer terminal when it is readily available for print...

To be totally honest I wish numerous books on say WW2 or history where indeed available more easily on google...one could read a few pages, like the book and permit a sale with the knowledge of what he seeks prior going into a "Chapters" or another book location to purchase...as it stands and because books can't be read or browsed before hand, the majority of people use the library, which opposite of Google prevent the sale 100% as opposed to one being able to read and browse before hand using a web source...

I am not down playing your ability to write, but most best sellers get known by past sellers or word of mouth...this is okay, but what if your book you are writing can generate some interest on the web, which is available to millions and millions as opposed to say IIRC a publisher like the one for 'Keine Kameraden" which originally published 3000 copies and I assume a vast number went to libraries and stunted their sale and only did attention or media review etc. garner interest within a publisher to relaese a new printing in greater numbers...imagine if the publicity of say your work garnered enough pre-printing attention that a publisher upped the number 10 fold over what a publisher does and that is to take low risks, not stick his neck out with a book that might be a dud if he had pre-knowledge of the interest it garnered prior to agreeing to a limited number and a wait and see if it sells type attitude...

This is where and I think the media and search sights such as Google can and would help a tremendous amount in the initial works of a new author...

just my personal opinion regarding this topic of copyright questions...

Jim Snowden (bf109 emil)

[steve248]

It is a serious matter for GERMAN PhD students publishing their work. Unless I have misunderstood what a number of German friends tell me, it is most important to have your thesis published as a book in Germany in order that you may then take up the title "Dr". The German publishing house Schöningh are a well known publisher of PhD cum books but you need to pay them an amount to do so. One friend had to pay them 1000 Euros 3 years ago to have her book published. Other German publishers in this niche market are similar.

Unlike the US and the UK when once you have written a PhD thesis accepted by your university that's it and it can gather dust forever in the university library and you can call yourself "Dr".

[michael mills]

Let's leave aside all this huffing and puffing about who finances the publication of PhD theses.

Thom has raised the issue of serious errors of calculation in Streit's work, which is very important given that his figure of 3.3 million Soviet POWs dying in German captivity seems to have attained canonical status and is often quoted.

Is it possible that the figure of 3.3 million is inflated, due to Streit's errors of calculation? Are all his errors of calculation on the side of inflating the mortality rate of the POWs? The fact that Streit is associated with the Hamburg institution that published the book "Verbrechen der Wehrmacht" suggests that he is ideologically committed and not a dispassionate observer.

If Streit is ideologically committed, and there are errors of calculation in his work which err on the side of inflating the mortality rate of POWs, then maybe his work is less valuable than previously thought. I believe that the alternative work on the treatment of Soviet POWs by the late Alfred Streim (a former judge) posited a lower mortality rate; is his work considered more reliable?

[steve248]

If you look at the timelines involved, Christian Streit published "Keine Kameraden" in 1978 and a couple of papers since.
The Hamburg reference you make, "Verbrechen der Wehrmacht. Dimension des Vernichtungskrieges 1941-1944, was published by Hamburg Institut für Sozialforschung in January 2002. Historical research moved on as new information in new archives became available in those intervening 24 years. Streit is no longer an active historian and there will not be a revised edition of "Keine Kameraden". Looks like you guys out there have a clear field to research and publish a completely new history of Soviet prisoners in German captivity.

[thom]

Michael you wrote

Is it possible that the figure of 3.3 million is inflated, due to Streit's errors of calculation? Are all his errors of calculation on the side of inflating the mortality rate of the POWs?

Actually not. There is another error he made that compensated for his inflated numbers.

He arrived at his 3.3 million figure, as we know, by starting from FHO's total of 5.7 million POWs (which is too high by at least 300,000 as shown above) minus 900,000 remaining in captivity minus 1 million that were released minus 500,000 that escaped or fell into Soviet hands again: 5.7 – 0.9 – 1.0 – 0.5 = 3.3. For the number of 500,000 escapees/in Soviet hands he refers to an FHO document from 20/2/45. However, the document actually tells us the following (see BA-MA RH2/2588 or NARA T78/493): "Die Gesamtzahl der Gefangenen wird um 500000 gekürzt, für die aus der Gefangenschaft Entlassenen, die den Sowjets wieder in die Hände fielen." which means translated that OF (emphasis mine) the 1 million released, 500,000 fell into Soviet hands again. Consequently, Streit would even end up with 3.8 million deaths! Perhaps this even looked to high for him, and he just re-interpreted the above-mentioned document.

Anyway, FHO's total which is the basis for Streit's calculation is incorrect, which is apparantly unknown also to Streits successors, such as most recently Dieter Pohl ("Die Herrschaft der Wehrmacht") who wants us to believe, without any proof, that FHO's 5.7 million is plausible while the 5.2 million total of GenQu is the result of errors in calculation (appraised by Streit as "extremely thorough research"). Pohl's estimate, however, is 2.8-3.0 million deaths among Soviet POWs.