Reliability of Paul Carell

Discussions on books and other reference material on the WW1, Inter-War or WW2 as well as the authors. Hosted by Andy H.
Forum rules
You can support AHF when buying books etc from Amazon, Amazon.co.uk and Amazon.de by using these links.
It costs you nothing extra but it helps keep the forum up and running.
ljadw
Member
Posts: 8091
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 17:50

Re: Reliability of Paul Carell

Postby ljadw » 19 Feb 2015 08:09

Sean Oliver wrote: even journalists have at least some scruples!


Do you believe this ? :P

User avatar
Urmel
Member
Posts: 3728
Joined: 25 Aug 2008 09:34
Location: The late JBond

Re: Reliability of Paul Carell

Postby Urmel » 19 Feb 2015 11:29

Felix C wrote:I recall from reading his various books in English translations conversations among soldiers would frequently start with "Man,.." Do not know if common practice among German young males of the era or not.


It still was a normal way to start a whinge in the blue-collared or farming classes when I was much younger, 30 years ago, so I could imagine it was a normal figure of speech in the 1930s and 40s. So you would say something like 'Mann, bin ich fertig' (I'm exhausted), or 'Mann ist das Scheisse' (What a load of sh*te that is), or 'Mann, kannste Dich mal zusammenreissen' (Can you get a grip!), just to give some examples.
The excellence of [German] forward repair and recovery organisation gives us a salutary lesson in this respect. 7 Armoured Division report, Sept. 1941

The CRUSADER Project - The Winter Battle in the Desert 1941/42

Felix C
Member
Posts: 681
Joined: 04 Jul 2007 16:25
Location: Miami, Fl

Re: Reliability of Paul Carell

Postby Felix C » 19 Feb 2015 12:19

Thanks Urmel. Ironically in my youth 30years ago "Man" as a conversational pivot was used often as well. Just like you referred to above.

User avatar
Urmel
Member
Posts: 3728
Joined: 25 Aug 2008 09:34
Location: The late JBond

Re: Reliability of Paul Carell

Postby Urmel » 19 Feb 2015 16:35

Yes, quite possible it was imported from the US as well after the war, given the amount of US soldiers stationed in Germany.
The excellence of [German] forward repair and recovery organisation gives us a salutary lesson in this respect. 7 Armoured Division report, Sept. 1941

The CRUSADER Project - The Winter Battle in the Desert 1941/42

Sean Oliver
Member
Posts: 33
Joined: 14 Sep 2007 18:18
Location: Wisconsin USA

Re: Reliability of Paul Carell

Postby Sean Oliver » 03 Mar 2015 08:22

Sheldrake; Like many military historians, D'Este is biased against staying silent when there's evidence to suggest past wars might have been fought and won with greater professional skill and with less loss of life than they actually were. Which is a very good bias.

The Americans never once suspected Britain wasn't pulling her weight. They just thought that Churchill ought to keep Montgomery from commanding Allied armies, and that Alanbrooke ought to keep Churchill from formulating Allied strategy. It seems many if not most British commanders agreed with this notion, more or less.

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 4619
Joined: 07 May 2002 19:40
Location: Teesside

Re: Reliability of Paul Carell

Postby Michael Kenny » 03 Mar 2015 09:19

Sean Oliver wrote:
The Americans never once suspected Britain wasn't pulling her weight. They just thought that Churchill ought to keep Montgomery from commanding Allied armies


Where, prior to late 1944 can we find this 'anti-Monty' movement?

And which Montgomery trait made him an unsuitable commander of Allied Armies?

Sean Oliver
Member
Posts: 33
Joined: 14 Sep 2007 18:18
Location: Wisconsin USA

Re: Reliability of Paul Carell

Postby Sean Oliver » 04 Mar 2015 15:34

All of them...

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 4619
Joined: 07 May 2002 19:40
Location: Teesside

Re: Reliability of Paul Carell

Postby Michael Kenny » 04 Mar 2015 15:51

Sean Oliver wrote:All of them...


This one perhaps?

The German commander of the 5th Panzer Army, Hasso von Manteuffel said of Montgomery's leadership:

The operations of the American 1st Army had developed into a series of individual holding actions. Montgomery's contribution to restoring the situation was that he turned a series of isolated actions into a coherent battle fought according to a clear and definite plan. It was his refusal to engage in premature and piecemeal counter-attacks which enabled the Americans to gather their reserves and frustrate the German attempts to extend their breakthrough


'D'Este:
Such resentments, and many seem to be of postwar creation, were not evident to James Gavin, the 82d Airborne commander, when he dined with Hodges and his staff several days later. "The staff spoke of Montgomery with amusement and respect. They obviously liked him and respected his professionalism." For his part, Gavin was impressed with Montgomery as a soldier. "I took a liking to him that has not diminished with the years."

"Montgomery saved the (U.S.) 7th Armored Division," said Robert Hasbrouck
.




Hey you think he would at least get a thank you!
Last edited by Michael Kenny on 04 Mar 2015 16:51, edited 6 times in total.

Sean Oliver
Member
Posts: 33
Joined: 14 Sep 2007 18:18
Location: Wisconsin USA

Re: Reliability of Paul Carell

Postby Sean Oliver » 04 Mar 2015 15:55

Where, prior to late 1944 can we find this 'anti-Monty' movement?

N. Africa, the Mediterranean, S. England, and N. France
And which Montgomery trait made him an unsuitable commander of Allied Armies?

All of them

Michael Kenny
Member
Posts: 4619
Joined: 07 May 2002 19:40
Location: Teesside

Re: Reliability of Paul Carell

Postby Michael Kenny » 04 Mar 2015 16:07

Sean Oliver wrote:
Where, prior to late 1944 can we find this 'anti-Monty' movement?

N. Africa, the Mediterranean, S. England, and N. France




Why do otherwise normal people lose focus when their visceral anti-Montgomery paranoi rears its ugly head?

User avatar
Sheldrake
Member
Posts: 1664
Joined: 28 Apr 2013 17:14
Location: London

Re: Reliability of Paul Carell

Postby Sheldrake » 04 Mar 2015 17:10

Michael Kenny wrote:
Sean Oliver wrote:
The Americans never once suspected Britain wasn't pulling her weight. They just thought that Churchill ought to keep Montgomery from commanding Allied armies


1. Where, prior to late 1944 can we find this 'anti-Monty' movement?

And which Montgomery trait made him an unsuitable commander of Allied Armies?




1. In the minds of Generals Bradley, Clarke and Patton on whose toes Montgomery had at times trodden. Carlo D'Este does a good job of dissecting the relationships in "Bitter Victory."

2. Lack of dimplomacy. Lack of an American passport. It was obvious that as the proportion of US forces rose, they would expect to their generals to command them.

User avatar
Marcus Wendel
Forum Staff
Posts: 30743
Joined: 08 Mar 2002 22:35
Location: Sweden

Re: Reliability of Paul Carell

Postby Marcus Wendel » 04 Mar 2015 18:58

Please get back on topic, i.e. the reliability of Paul Carell.

/Marcus

Feldwebel_Steiner
Member
Posts: 3
Joined: 13 Feb 2018 22:08
Location: UK

Re: Reliability of Paul Carell

Postby Feldwebel_Steiner » 13 Feb 2018 22:13

maarten swarts wrote:What a complete useless discussion. Of course was Carell everything for what you blame him. But who wasn t in 1960 in Germany? Everybody was in some way connected with the nazi regime, with or against their will. If not, you were not a part of the German society. Germany had lost the war, POWs were just returning from russian camps. The only experience they had in life were war and camps. Nobody wanted to hear their stories, so the Landser Hefte and Carell s books fell on fertile ground. But what s more there wasn t anything else. Yes some division stories but those were not for the average soldier unless they were part of that unit. And Carell could surely write. In 1960 I was in Köln on holiday (bike&tent) and there I bought the magazine "Kristall"
They put every fortnight a piece of his (then) new book "Barbarossa") in it. It was completely new to me. On the first four pages were nothing but letters from readers who said "at last, somebody noted there was a war fifteen years ago". It was then the only book you could read about the war in the east.
So you never thought about the credibility or from where he got his information. You were lucky you had something. Later I recognized how he didnt write of a lot of episodes, especially in Sorched earth. And years later when came up what the Germans did in Russia- killing jews and other people on an enormous scale and the Russian behaviour the books of Carell lost their attraction and credibility.
That Carell s books were dangerous is nonsense, They filled a gap when there was nothing else. They were a good read and didnt turn me in a die hard Nazi. Nowadays there is not a serious historian that uses his books as a reference.

Maarten Swarts


Vol 1 ...Stalingrad, David Glantz

Uses Carell in his bibliography. Funnily enough it’s his Stalingrad book...

uhu
Member
Posts: 385
Joined: 05 Jan 2004 13:00
Location: US

Re: Reliability of Paul Carell

Postby uhu » 14 Feb 2018 01:55

Yes, books were published in Germany prior to the 60's. Here's a nice two volume set of pictorials published in 1952. Most of the photos have not been published since. I suspect the photos were from Signal magazine and the reproduction is not that clear as would be today, but still interesting.
https://www.amazon.com/ZWEITE-WELTKRIEG ... eg+im+bild


Return to “Books & other Reference Material”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ahrefs [Bot], CommonCrawl [Bot], Pz III