3rd Armourd Brigade Destroyed in the Desert

[Brevity]

ClintHardware

I have established Durenborn's assignment and explained his role in the events. You babble something about "wider evidence", "multiple versions of an incident" and "veterans evidence formal and informal". Who figures out the truth and who wants to leave it muddled and confusing?

You seem to be unable to cope with multiple views of a battle being reported.

That's because every event could have happened only one way.

[ClintHardware]

Dear All

When I have had the chance to re-visit the NA at Kew shortly (subject to strikes etc) I will respond to whatever gets posted and directed at me.

Brevity I apologise if I have been babbling - I will re-check the files and be in touch with this forum.

Having read the Crusader topic yesterday and seen doubt placed about the origins of one or more items posted - I am concerned.

Clint

[Urmel]

Curse of the DP

[Urmel]

Here's a little teaser I found for you.

Personally, I am not impressed with the accuracy of the numbers.
Your thoughts....

I doubt the number of 19 cruisers recovered. Unless that includes cruisers left behind in Tobruk for repairs with AOW and still there when the fortress was encircled, which is of course possible.

[Attrition]

ClintHardware

I have established Durenborn's assignment and explained his role in the events. You babble something about "wider evidence", "multiple versions of an incident" and "veterans evidence formal and informal". Who figures out the truth and who wants to leave it muddled and confusing?

You seem to be unable to cope with multiple views of a battle being reported.

That's because every event could have happened only one way.

Rashomon

[ClintHardware]

"That's because every event could have happened only one way." Well....wow..yes...yes it would be nice if history was that simple. And the Police would love that too - imagine the cost savings with investigations and evidence gathering and sifting and then no need for appeals and re-trials etc. It would be nice but would we have anything to enjoy discovering and then re-testing?

The 19 tanks recovered to Tobruk do seem high and the KDG don't refer to such losses in their war diary or regimental history but perhaps after the chaos more accounting was possible. I have panzers damaged between 24th March - 14th May down to 103 or 107 so far - screams of Oh NO from stage left and right.

Rashomon - nice (The film is known for a plot device which involves various characters providing alternative, self-serving and contradictory versions of the same incident).

I do apologise to all of you who have lost it with me. Being a retired Union Rep still fighting corruption and misuse of public finance in government I believe nothing especially the politicians and the personnel departments. I don't even believe my clients - the middle aged female secretary who stole an ambulance was a particularly hard defence case. I don't accept or charge fees.

I was explaining to a homeless Marxist the other day that for something to be interesting it must: a) go bang, b) be lethal in some way, c) be field-able by an armed force, d) change the politics of continent or a country, or e) threaten to change history. He had been trying to interest me in a new lentil soup recipe as a means of social change. Yes OK he could be right.

[Sheldrake]

The late Great Richard Holmes used to give a lecture on the difficulties of certainty in military history based on his experiences researching "Dusty Warriors" the story of the PWRR in Iraq. He stayed with the Unit as their Regimental Colonel visited the unit and interviewed soldiers the day after an action at some spot identified with a colour and a number.

[Attrition]

"That's because every event could have happened only one way." Well....wow..yes...yes it would be nice if history was that simple. And the Police would love that too - imagine the cost savings with investigations and evidence gathering and sifting and then no need for appeals and re-trials etc. It would be nice but would we have anything to enjoy discovering and then re-testing?

The 19 tanks recovered to Tobruk do seem high and the KDG don't refer to such losses in their war diary or regimental history but perhaps after the chaos more accounting was possible. I have panzers damaged between 24th March - 14th May down to 103 or 107 so far - screams of Oh NO from stage left and right.

Rashomon - nice (The film is known for a plot device which involves various characters providing alternative, self-serving and contradictory versions of the same incident).

I do apologise to all of you who have lost it with me. Being a retired Union Rep still fighting corruption and misuse of public finance in government I believe nothing especially the politicians and the personnel departments. I don't even believe my clients - the middle aged female secretary who stole an ambulance was a particularly hard defence case. I don't accept or charge fees.

I was explaining to a homeless Marxist the other day that for something to be interesting it must: a) go bang, b) be lethal in some way, c) be field-able by an armed force, d) change the politics of continent or a country, or e) threaten to change history. He had been trying to interest me in a new lentil soup recipe as a means of social change. Yes OK he could be right.

General and Municipal Boilermakers Unions of the world Unite!
The only people we hate more than the Romans are the UTC. ;O)

I think you're doing all right, the various sources are being presented, analysed, antithesised so a synthesis is emerging.

[MarkN]

I doubt the number of 19 cruisers recovered. Unless that includes cruisers left behind in Tobruk for repairs with AOW and still there when the fortress was encircled, which is of course possible.

How dare you!!!

That report was compiled as the definitive answer to the War Office Dept. of Statistics for future historical record. Are you suggsting that this pre-war professional officer was incapable or incompetent? Are you suggesting he was lax in his efforts to obtain the correct details, or was lacking in intellectual capacity to spot an error? Are you suggesting, perhaps, that he was mislead by other pre-war professional officers as to he correct data? How dare you?

"That's because every event could have happened only one way." Well....wow..yes...yes it would be nice if history was that simple. And the Police would love that too - imagine the cost savings with investigations and evidence gathering and sifting and then no need for appeals and re-trials etc. It would be nice but would we have anything to enjoy discovering and then re-testing?
...
I do apologise to all of you who have lost it with me. Being a retired Union Rep still fighting corruption and misuse of public finance in government I believe nothing especially the politicians and the personnel departments. I don't even believe my clients - the middle aged female secretary who stole an ambulance was a particularly hard defence case. I don't accept or charge fees.

How interesting!!!

Are you really confessing to being a professional twister of evidence, to create doubt where doubt previously didn't (or shouldn't) exist, in order to pursue an agenda that requires others to accept an alternative narrative to the 'truth'? Most enlightning if true.

Events only have one 'truth'. History only ever happend in one way. Witness, storytellers and authors create, recreate and invent multiple versions of historical events. The police only have a difficult time because the the public is generally very poor at recounting what really happened and far too many deliberately lie.

And, in response to your request regarding Kew, specifically it would help if you reviewed the 5RTR and 3ArmdBde WDs to confirm the existence or non-existence of quotes by Lt.Col Drew regarding tanks seen approaching/engaging their position. Can you find any specific quote by him? Maybe then you can decide for yourself whether Wilson's words represent the evidence or a wee twist of the narrative. More specifically, recopying and not missing out Maj Lister's signature on page 4 of the report of the engagment would be helpful in clearing up the earlier charade paraded in this thread.

[Tom from Cornwall]

Hi,

I've been following the debate over sources, etc, with great interest - please don't stop, the more that you debate the more likely it is that the available range of sources is at least widened, even if the search for historical certainty is elusive. That there is plenty of room for healthy debate and differing perspectives is clear.

For those seeking certainty, could I humbly suggest either Rory Muir's brilliant book on the battle of Salamanca - he points out even sources written almost immediately after the battle were contrary and clearly befuddled by the fog of war and the limited perspective of an individual on the battlefield. Also interesting, and more recent, is the fascinating analysis of the historiography of the NZ Official History series contained in a thesis entitled 'Memory, History, Nation, War' by Rachel Bell and which can be found on internet.

Both suggest the danger for the historian, as for the general, of grasping information that appears certain and confirming of one's thesis/plan and the importance of keeping an open mind - despite the horrible lack of clarity that this presents.

Regards

Tom

[Attrition]

Quite agree, not that I've ever had an idée fixe....

[Brevity]

So, just how many were lost? Was it ...
45 (AFV ME note),
46 (CO 5RTR report),
49 (Jentz, source unconfirmed),
53 (Jentz from 5RTR WDiarist) or
other? Australian OH mentions 38 l think from memory.

Here's a little teaser I found for you.

Personally, I am not impressed with the accuracy of the numbers.
Your thoughts....

I doubt the number of 19 cruisers recovered. Unless that includes cruisers left behind in Tobruk for repairs with AOW and still there when the fortress was encircled, which is of course possible.

According to Jentz

A composite squadron of 3 Hussars and 5 RTR was formed on 8 April and issued:
- 3/Mk.IVA Cruisers on 10 April
- 1/Mk.IVA Cruisers on 11 April
- 2/Mk.IVA Cruisers on 12 April
- 1/Mk.IVA Cruisers on 13 April
Total (13 April) - 7 Mk.IV Cruisers and 15 light tanks

14 April - the composite squadron of 3 H / 5 RTR now has 7 Cruiser tanks and 18 light tanks.

ca. 20 April - 1 RTR takes over 9 Mk.IV Cruisers from 5 RTR.

1 May - C Squadron of 1 RTR has 9 Cruisers Mk.IV.

This group was hadly used in combat, and no casualties were recorded.


In addition, 11 other Cruisers ( 10 Mk.I and 1 Mk.IIA) were shipped to Tobruk on 8 April with 1 RTR. This bunch had several battle losses (2 destroyed on 11 Apr, 2 on 14 Apr, 1-2 on 1 May with a few more heavy damaged).

Nevertheless, on 15 May, 1 RTR had 23 Cruisers in Tobruk...

[Brevity]

continuing from previous post.
It does appear like some Cruisers were evacuated from Tobruk for repairs in Egypt.

13 April, Cyrenaica Command Operation Instruction No. 9 is issued and reads in part - Cruiser Tanks that cannot be effectively repaired locally by 27 April, are to be evacuated.


17 April - "Cruiser tanks to be loaded comprise six now in AOW and not proposed for local repair"




25 April - " (...) vehicles to be (harbour) loaded in following priority (...) 2nd - six cruiser tanks for repair in Alex"







So, we don't know the initial number of Cruisers in Tobruk, delivery info by Jentz seems incomplete, and some Cruisers were shipped out.

This will be a hard one to solve. Anyone has more info?

[Urmel]

I think whichever why you slice it, you don't get to 19.

[Brevity]

That comes with no doubt. But it would be great to establish hard facts - something even the tanks' owners couldn't figure out right.