A Morale dilema

Yet another essay, this time on the morale of troops in Italy. The first objective, to define morale and the factors that either contribute to or detract from it. Sun Zsu, Clausewitz and many others all state that high morale is important to win battles and a prime objective is to destroy the enemies morale. For example for the period prior to Alamein the British morale was low and they were loosing battles whilst the Afrika Corps morale was high. So why in Italy was this turned on its head? In their well sighted and built defended positions, the Germans exhibited high morale right until their defeat in 1945. The Allies on the other hand, exhibited signs of low morale such as high numbers of deserters, yet they won (all be it, on some occasions after a number of attempts) all their battles!
And then the factors that influences morale - as yet I have been unable to find a definitive list. But the more I research the more I have come to the conclusion that there is not one because each man is different and something that will affect one will not affect another. I have been talking to a respected subaltern of late (who had gained a medal for leading a bayonet charge), and when we discussed the effect of news of the Normandy landings on his men, he says they were pleased that the troops in the UK were getting stuck in. He did however talk about the low morale in tank crews and on more than one occasion found himself lacking armoured support because of a '88 phobia that had developed. In one instance a troop even getting themselves deliberately bogged down in a marsh rather than travel up a road that possibly had an '88 round a bend. Something that is little discussed!

British Artillery in WW2

Sometimes you think the subject for an essay is going to be comparatively easy! I have just finished my latest on the 'Development of Field Artillery Tactics in World War Two' (hence no postings for a while). The first problem was the distinct lack of secondary material, there are only really three authors on the subject, Pemberton, Bailey and Bidwell. The later writing three different books on the subject. The second problem, the sheer enormity of the subject, keeping it below 4,000 words - a challenge on its own. The final problem was, as I found whilst researching it, that the tactics were mostly developed during WW1 and only refined through better C3, consequently half the essay is about WW1 tactics.

I am now starting my next essay on the Soldiers Experience on the Gustav Line (in preparation for my dissertation on the Garigliano Crossing), again a huge subject, so I am looking to tighten it up to one aspect.

The Dodgers Name Part 3

Its back to essays and planning for disertations again so I am now very busy. However I still continue to research the Dodgers name. It now appears that the expression was in use a long while before the Normandy landings took place. The earliest example I have so far is Feb/March 1944 and one veteran recalls hearing Lord Haw Haw talk about it. It appears that the expression D-Day was being openly used for the forthcoming assault on Europe, the only thing that was not known was exactly when and where. This also means that when I examined the Lady Astor archive I may have been looking at the wrong year (who would have thought that D-Day Dodgers originated in 1943?)

New Book

I always await new books on the Mediterranean Campaign with interest. When Pulitzer Prize winner Rick Atkinson published his new book The Day of Battle, The War in Sicily and Italy 1943-1944 (Little Brown Books) I was at the front of the queue like a child waiting for a Harry Potter book.

Yes the book is very well researched with an impressive 588 end notes covering a massive 100 pages alone, the sources another 30 pages, however I was somewhat disappointed with the remainder of the book. If you are looking for a balanced narritive of the first part of the campaign, you will still need to look at some of the earlier works as this is a book of the American involvement of the campaign. The British are relegated to little more than a sideshow with their failures given more coverage than their successes, the American hierarchy's anglophobia more prominent than the British Generals experience etc. It also fails to adequatly address the British philosophy of conservation of men and it was this that dictated their strategy and tactics. The role of the French Expeditionary Corps in the early part of the assault on the Gustav line is not included nor, despite their success, the fact that Clarke ordered them to break off their attack to support the American suicidal frontal assault on Cassino.

Even the American failures are not covered in detail. For example, whilst there is a blow by blow account of the crossing of the Rapido River, there is no analysis of why it failed, no mention that they did not practice the assault in advance, of the poor co-ordination between infantry, artillery and engineers nor the lack of recconaisance.

Any study of the Italian campaigns should include all the forces involved in equal detail because they all impacted on each other. They were also on a steep learning curve as the conditions were quite unlike anything encountered before and it was not until much later e.g. the Po Valley that the leasons learned were put into practice.

We await James Holland's new book on the campaign now...

Source of the expression D-Day Dodgers

I have been trying to find the origins of the D-Day Dodgers name. As yet I have not found anything conclusive all appears to be rumors and stories. This is what we have so far!
May or may not have been as a result of a letter signed D-Day Dodger.
He may have come from the Hampshire Regiment (56 Div?).
Lady Astor may have replied in a speech possibly to Parliament?
She may have replied in a letter.
It may have been someone else.
Lady Astor may have published a denial in the 8th Army News
I have spent a day going through Lady Astors personal papers and there was not one mention of the Dodgers.
We do know that the song was the end result.

If anybody has copies of the 8th Army News with the denial or can add more options etc. I would be pleased to hear from them.

Update on training questionaire

I have now started to receive replies on the training questionaire. So far answers all tally. No training at any level, no access to training manuals once a soldier left the UK not only for the Private but also the NCO. It also shows that there was no extra training for newly promoted men at NCO level.

Training for the war in Tunisia and Italy

When reading through training manuals for the army, it struck me that they are written around Northern Europe with its fields and woods. There is no mention of how to fight in the terrain encountered in either the desert, Tunisia or Italy.

We are therefore sending out a survey to veterans to find out what training they did and how tactics differed in these campaigns. So far they have been sent to members of the 1st Army and 8th Army Associations.

If anybody knows of a veteran that would like to take part, please drop me an e-mail and I will send the questionnaire to them.

We will publish our results on the website in due course.

Important Documents get lost for ever

I began researching the British X Corps crossing of the Garigliano River some time ago. Keeping an eye on E-Bay for anything interesting I spotted a full set of documents from the RAOC Officer in charge with detailed plans, overlay's etc. (including his Diary). It was eventually sold to a private collector for a huge sum. I was also talking to a man who does house clearances who said that very often he, and others like him often pick up this sort of thing. Some throw them away, others who realise what they are, sell them to collectors usually through e-bay.

Why cannot there be a register of these sorts of documents that are now in private hands, so historians like myself can look at when conducting research and enable us to access them.