When did those POWs became POWs?
I guess we are not talking about the same group.
The picture is further complicated by the forced labor prisoners and those who became POWs from regions which were lost to Hungary after WW2.
When did those POWs became POWs?
Okay, I see your point.Richard Anderson wrote: ↑16 Feb 2021 18:19I understand, but when we have reasonably well documented estimates of c. 178,000 postwar PW deaths becoming 750,000, then I have a problem. The only way that Overmann can make it work is by forcing a further 575,000 deaths into the wartime years, after already shoehorning in hundreds of thousands into those years with little explanation of how they occurred other than "German reporting was bad", which simply wasn't the case.Peter89 wrote: ↑16 Feb 2021 10:22In the case of Hungary, the POWs and other rounded-up males were very badly treated in slave labor camps in the SU. Even if it was not a systematic plan, thousands perished of infections, malnutrition and cold.
To be fair, I personally met and talked to some people who were taken away to do forced labor in Kiev, and the guy was so talented (he was a plumber) that the Soviets wanted to keep him there, offered him a flat, a decent salary and multiple wives.
About 30% of the Hungarian POWs and malenkij robot prisoners died.
Why are there so many German deaths in 1944 and 1945 compared to earlier years? The highest month of the war prior to 1944 is January 1943, with 180 thousand deaths on the Eastern Front. Then in June 1944 the death toll on the Eastern Front surges to 142 thousand then 277 thousand in August, and the first 4 months of 1945 are an absolute bloodbath. Were the Allies just mowing down Germans as they tried to surrender?
Because he had already distributed more excess deaths into earlier years than the actual records supported? For example, he "estimates" Eastern Front deaths of 25,000 for June 1941, when the well-documented figures maximum is 8,886 Heer, 92 Luftwaffe, and 42 Kriegsmarine. If we assume that all the 3,167 MIA reported were in fact dead, we are still only halfway to his estimate. That means either the Germans failed to notice and never accounted for an additional 12,813 dead or they somehow were hidden somewhere in the wounded count. That would mean that 43% of the 29,639 wounded died. Yes, German medical care in some ways was problematic, but not that problematic.historygeek2021 wrote: ↑02 Mar 2021 05:20Why are there so many German deaths in 1944 and 1945 compared to earlier years? The highest month of the war prior to 1944 is January 1943, with 180 thousand deaths on the Eastern Front. Then in June 1944 the death toll on the Eastern Front surges to 142 thousand then 277 thousand in August, and the first 4 months of 1945 are an absolute bloodbath. Were the Allies just mowing down Germans as they tried to surrender?
Well, if Overmans estimate for the period 1939-1943 when the Germans were able to keep good records seems inaccurate, then I would suppose that Overmans estimate for the period 1944-1945 when the Germans were not able to keep as good records is inaccurate too. The problem is, it is easy to demonstrate that the German records were unlikely at any time to have been off by the orders of magnitude that Overmans infers. That would imply that it is not the German record keeping that is inaccurate, but rather that it is Overmans methodology that is flawed.
Indeed, that could be so. The most comprehensive Wehrmacht accounting of irrecoverable losses included killed through enemy action, dead through accident, sickness and suicide, dead to unknown causes, executed, missing in action and interned, prisoner of war, discharged from the service, and deserter (still at large). It totaled 4,215,165, of whom 2,153,158 were the last four categories, where there could be considerable uncertainty as to whether or not they were still alive as of the reporting date. Some, such as the 732 at large deserters, were almost certainly dead if they ever got caught. The 438,352 discharged from service must also be considered as a significant source of additional morbidity, given they likely either suffered physical wounds more crippling than say a Stauffenberg, since they could not even serve in a desk job, or had mental wounds, which the Reich would likely have frowned upon (I suspect if they were euthanized after discharge they would not be counted as military losses). The last category, 1,435,853 MIA also likely included significant numbers of KIA and dead...23,217 were in the Kriegsmarine, mostly in the U-Boot service and are almost all certainly dead, since it looks like most of the 5,004 crew who were PW were included in the 8,988 known KM PW.Art wrote: ↑02 Mar 2021 21:14You see, according to official reporting German military losses on the Eastern Front (all three branches included) were circa 620,000 men killed and missing in 1943 and circa 1,100,000 killed and missing in 1944. That actually confirms that irrevocable casualties in 1944 were larger than in the previous years in about the same proportion as estimated by Overmans. Then, if you add losses of wounded in hospitals (not included in the numbers above) and non-battle deaths that would make totals quite close to Overmans. That's, of course, odd because not all of these casualties were military deaths in a strict sense. Overmans maintains that official reporting was incomplete and missed some part of casualties. Which has a valid point but still doesn't answer the question why "complete" estimate of military deaths is almost the same as "incomplete" official numbers of dead and missing - too much for a simple coincidence.