Turkish Stormtroops

Peter H · Post by **Peter H** » 26 Apr 2004 14:08

Inspection by a German officer of Ottoman Assault troops 1918.Note grenade bags copying the German and Austrian example of such troops,and German supplied Ottoman style helmets.
(Source:Helmets of the First World War,Michael Haselgrove & Branislav Radovic)

My question is did such assault detachments serve in Palestine in 1918?My first impression is that these are members of the Ottoman Army Demonstration Battalion,never used in a fighting role in WW1.Kaiser Wilhelm reviewed such helmeted troops in November 1917 when he visited the Ottoman capital.

monk2002uk · Post by **monk2002uk** » 26 Apr 2004 20:28

I too have heard that this was not an operational unit but I have no evidence to support this. I have never been able to get an answer to your question about whether Ottoman Army stormtroopers ever saw action.

Another way to come at the answer is to first consider how stormtroopers were used and then see if any characteristics of stormtrooper tactics appears in the records of British and Dominion. This task might be easier if Turkish stormtroopers wore the helmets, which were very different. I have seen no record of this.

Alternatively, stormtroopers were used for trench raids, counter-attack troops and at the forefront of large scale infantry assaults. Again, I have seen no evidence of their being used in trench raids. Infantry counter-attacks were attempted on a few occasions but from what I have read, they were not characteristic of stormtroops. They tended to comprise large bodies of regular troops.

Large scale infantry assaults were uncommon in the late war. The one example that I have discovered that seemed to include stormtroopers was the combined Turko-German attack on the Australian Light Horse in the Jordan Valley. This was the attack on the Musallabeh salient on 14 July 1918. It was said that two Turkish divisions and two and a half crack German battalions were involved. They were beaten back. My information suggests that the stormtroopers involved were German, the only time that they were used in the Palestine campaign. Almost all the prisoners from this action were German.

Robert

Peter H · Post by **Peter H** » 27 Apr 2004 00:24

Thanks Robert

.

Details on Abu Tellel action of July 1918 can be found in the Australian Official History now online:

http://www.awm.gov.au/histories/ww1/7/index.asp

If anything,it mentions that the Germans regarded the Ottoman contribution to this battle as half-hearted.

The German AsienKorps didn't perform well either,probably a reflection of declining German morale at that stage of the war.More on this unit here:

http://forum.axishistory.com/viewtopic.php?t=29379

Regards,
Moulded

monk2002uk · Post by **monk2002uk** » 27 Apr 2004 08:55

Thank you, Moulded

I think this information also reinforces the notion that I have been toying with, that there were stormtroopers and there were stormtroopers. The archetypal image is portrayed by Ernst Junger. But Renn's description of his training as a stormtrooper illustrates that he learned some of the mechanics but not much of the tactical overview. So there degrees of 'stormtrooper'. The automatic assumption is that units who had received specialist training would be crack units but I am not sure this was always the case. The real answer lies in how they actually performed on the battlefield.

You are right to raise the issue of morale. The numbers of Germans who surrendered may have been consistent with this. But it also raises the question of whether they were as competent in the first instance.

Robert

Abdul Hadi Pasha · Post by **Abdul Hadi Pasha** » 28 Apr 2004 19:14

A couple of points:

By 1918 the best troops had been bled off the Palestine front in favor of the Caucasus campaign.

I would think that if the unit in the picture was intended for review, they would have better-fitting uniforms.

In conclusion, I have no idea. However, I tend to think that the unit pictured is in fact a combat unit. IIRC there were a few thousand of those helmets produced.

gewehrdork · Post by **gewehrdork** » 29 Apr 2004 00:38

monk2002uk wrote:Thank you, Moulded

I think this information also reinforces the notion that I have been toying with, that there were stormtroopers and there were stormtroopers. The archetypal image is portrayed by Ernst Junger. But Renn's description of his training as a stormtrooper illustrates that he learned some of the mechanics but not much of the tactical overview. So there degrees of 'stormtrooper'. The automatic assumption is that units who had received specialist training would be crack units but I am not sure this was always the case. The real answer lies in how they actually performed on the battlefield.

You are right to raise the issue of morale. The numbers of Germans who surrendered may have been consistent with this. But it also raises the question of whether they were as competent in the first instance.

Robert

Monk ; In the german army when "sturmkompagnies" were created it was on a local level at first and for the most part thereafter.The germans set forth basic principals of what sturmtruppen were and what was expeceted of them. Being the local commanders were given the task to subordinate the task of assembling and training these "abtielung" to a junior officer in their unit...the quality of these 'specialized' troops did vary.Wurttemberg regiments were noted for having some very high espree de corps sturmkompagnies that were very effective.
There is an excellent book out there by Bruce Gudmundsson "Stormtroop Tactics". An excellent read for sure.

monk2002uk · Post by **monk2002uk** » 29 Apr 2004 19:43

gewehrdork wrote:There is an excellent book out there by Bruce Gudmundsson "Stormtroop Tactics". An excellent read for sure.

Yes, I enjoyed reading his book. But as I read further into the Spring 1918 offensives, particularly in regimental and divisional/brigade histories, I began to appreciate that the tactical innovation of Rohr et al did not necessarily spread as widely as might be expected. There were many divisions who had units or had training in sturmtaktiks but this did not square with performance on the battlefield. Renn's book ('War') was very illuminating in explaining why a some units performed less well.

Robert

Peter H · Post by **Peter H** » 30 Apr 2004 01:53

Ed Erickson's penultimate work on the Ottoman Army of WW1 mentions no Assault Detachments.

Abdul is correct about the Caucasus campaign draining the best of the Ottoman Army;a little known fact is that the bulk of the valiant Gallipoli veteran divisions ended up moving onto this theatre in 1916.

gewehrdork · Post by **gewehrdork** » 30 Apr 2004 03:56

M ; where can a copy of this tome be acquired ?.

Peter H · Post by **Peter H** » 30 Apr 2004 06:59

G,
Try Amazon or here:

http://www.greenwood.com/books/bookdeta ... sku=GM1516

Not a cheap buy but that's specialised military history I guess.

Regards,
Moulded

monk2002uk · Post by **monk2002uk** » 30 Apr 2004 09:46

It is a good book but there are some limitations in detail. There are some inaccuracies in it as well. I think these are inevitable, given that the book takes a high-level look at the Ottoman Army throughout the entire war. I tried to get hold of Eriksson but have failed to do so. He clearly had access to a wide range of Turkish source material in Ankara. Personally, I have not attached great significance to the lack of mention of Turkish stormtroopers.

Robert

Cristiano de S.O Campos · Post by **Cristiano de S.O Campos** » 10 May 2004 21:05

:?

Hello friends

In m y book Ottoman Army 1914-1918 by Osprey Publishing London have a plate with stormtrooper soldier using these two badges.

One is a square badge with two red triangles in each side

Other is a green triangle with two yellow chevrons.

it will be that it is some type of rank insignia?

Kaan goes to make a research for me about turkish army rank insignia army in 1914-1918,because it is Turkish and can find with more information about the turkish army rank insignia.

But these badges is used in Turkish Stormtrooper uniforms,look the first photo with turkish soldiers using a Steelhelmet.

I wait much replies.

Best Regards

Cristiano Campos
Rio de Janeiro
Brazil.

Abdul Hadi Pasha · Post by **Abdul Hadi Pasha** » 10 May 2004 21:54

monk2002uk wrote:It is a good book but there are some limitations in detail. There are some inaccuracies in it as well. I think these are inevitable, given that the book takes a high-level look at the Ottoman Army throughout the entire war. I tried to get hold of Eriksson but have failed to do so. He clearly had access to a wide range of Turkish source material in Ankara. Personally, I have not attached great significance to the lack of mention of Turkish stormtroopers.

Robert

What are the inaccuracies to which you are referring? I did not spot any that had to deal with military issues, but a few minor ones about historical and political issues.

monk2002uk · Post by **monk2002uk** » 11 May 2004 19:52

Abdul Hadi Pasha wrote:What are the inaccuracies to which you are referring?

I have researched several battles for wargames scenarios. While Eriksson's book is excellent for obtaining an overview of the Turkish forces that might have been involved in a particular incident, there are many minor discrepancies in some of the details. This has been true for the operations in the Caucasus, Gallipoli and Egypt/Palestine. They do not invalidate the book but readers should be cautious. This book is not a definitive and detailed account of battles - it was not written as such. Any book that takes a high level view must perforce sacrifice a degree of accuracy of detail in favour of summary statements.

Robert

Peter H · Post by **Peter H** » 01 May 2006 11:08

A revisit on this topic.

Can any of our Turkish members provide any information on Turkish stormtroops?

Regards,
Peter

Axis History Forum