If you're a healthy, sane, normal person (particularly interested researchers excepted of course), your head will start swimming at the latest half-way down this paragraph, accompanied by strong pangs of nausea. Hopefully this gives some inkling of what it is to work with Tagesmeldungen, and how realistically we can expect them to reliably break down the losses on single days.5 March
II a contain a total of: 81 KIA, 219 WIA, 6 MIA=306. Of these, 3/11/0-14 are Nachmeldungen from I AK for 25-28 February, 11/43/0-54 are NM from XXXVIII AK for 2 and 4 March. There’s a –2 Berichtigung for 2 March. Reports from 291 ID and 285.Sich.D. are missing. Hence, without the Nachmeldungen and Berichtigungen, the total for the day is 236.
IV b gives a total of 46/122/1=169 for the day, plus 278 sick and a Krankenbestand of 3739. It also lists 22 Frostbites (these NCL will not be referred for following days). In addition to these, he reports a Nachmeldung for 4.3. of 48/99/5=152.
In the end, with the Nachmeldungen, the differences are not great – 306 and 321. But of course, the NM refers to different dates. Hence, there is another way to compare, namely to check if there are similar NM for the same date in the other channel, but included in another day’s report.
Can we find 152 NM casualties for 4 March in the II a reports? There is just 1 on 5 March. Then a further 2 on the 6th, but on the 7th there’s a large NM From Gr. V. Basse, covering 1-6 March – 73/154/0-227. On the 8th, there is a similarly sized NM covering various stretches of 4-7 March. Several more turn up on 12 March. Then it trickles down to minor additions from Heerestruppen, f.e. on 16 March, when Strassenbau-Btl. 510 is listed with 2 wounded NM for 4 March, also on 18 March.
See 6th for IV b nachmeldungen for the 5th.
The conclusion seems obvious; While the two reports do not necessarily contradict each other it is very clear that it is futille to seek to reconcile them. The reason for this is that they recorded their Nachmeldungen in such different ways. With the II a reports, they trickled in gradually and are not always recorded for a specific day but rather for a group of days, but they are unit-specific. In the Heeresarzt reports, Nachmeldungen are always given for a specific day, but is not broken down on unit. This is not surprising, as the former relied on reports from units, and the latter on reports from medical installations.
II a gives a daily total of 70/180/0=250. Of these, 19/30/0=39 are Nachmeldungen for I AK early March and XXVIII AK between 17 January and 7 February, leaving a daily total of 211.
IV b gives just 108 combat losses for the day. They also however report a NM of 159 combat losses for 5 March. If we add these to those reported for that day, it comes to 328, now considerably more than the total in the 5 March II a report. There is also a further Nachmeldung of 143 for 4 March.
For this day the II a report gives 159/431/5=599. Of this, 94/214/0=308 are Nachmeldungen from Gr.v.Basse in early March and 126.ID on 16 February (just 1 wounded). Hence, the total for the day is 291. Reports from 93. and 212.ID are missing.
Heeresarzt reports 129 combat losses. He also gives a NM for 6 march of 154, which brings his total for that date to 262 – again higher than the 211 reported by the II a.
II a gives 172/514/34=720. 98/287/15=400 are NM, for various days in early March, hence the total for the day is 320.
Heeresarzt gives just 62. There is also a NM for 7 March stating 270 losses, bringing that day’s total to 399. A further 39 NM for 6 March brings that day’s total to 301.
II a gives 86/288/7=381. Only 11 of these are NM, pertaining to the previous day. 291. and 217.ID are missing.
Heeresarzt gives 155. A NM for 8 March adds 383, bringing the total for this day to 345.
II a gives 55/186/7=248. 9/33/1=43 are NM, -1/2/-1 berichtigungen, so the total for the day is 205.
IV b gives 95, with a NM for 9 March of 363, bringing the 9 March total to 518.