Although the campaign in Italy lasted almost a year longer than did the one in North-West Europe it is one (as is the Burma campaign) that is virtually forgotten. While this may be understood, why the several one/two day battles so vital to the eventual outcome are rarely mentioned in writings about the war in Italy, is difficult to comprehend - for example, the assault by 2 Commando Brigade in April 1945. Knowing the a Spring offensive was coming, as a part of their network of river defenses the Germans had flooded the Valli di Comacchio to within about six kilometres of the Reno. As this dry area, which became known as the Argenta Gap, offered the only practical way for 8th Army to break through to Ferrara and the River Po, it was decided to give the enemy the impression that the next offensive would be elsewhere. Consequently, much thought was given to how to convince the Germans that the main attack would be up the narrow strip of land between Lake Comacchio and the sea. The plan that evolved was simplicity itself and, as so often happened to plans simple in nature, proved to be highly successful. Although not technically correct, the narrow strip of land was referred to as the "Spit." It is about eight miles long and, except for the southern three miles, is only about two hundred yards or so wide. During the month of March, as the southern section was subjected to heavy attacks by field artillery and from air, substantial German forces were moved from the Argenta Gap to face the expected attack by 8th Army. In two days the Commandos had cleared the Spit of the enemy, during the course of which Corporal Thomas Peck Hunter was posthumously awarded the Victoria Cross. He was the only Royal Marine Commando to be so honoured during World War Two. The Commandos had cleared the way for a Brigade of 56th Division, aboard Fantails, to make a decisive left-hook across the lake - the fate of the German Army in Italy was sealed! Fantails emerging from Lake Comacchio. Not too clear on the picture are several Fantails on the lake to the right of the building.
Hard to find good books on the victory in the Po Valley. Brian Harpur's "The Impossible Victory" is interesting, but a little fluffy. He has good interviews with Clark, Anders, and McCreery, though, and a telling contemporary comment from Alexander. It was actually an amazing victory. The Allies, if I remember my reading, were actually outnumbered by the Germans in spring 1945, because the Canadians were in Holland, the French in France, and much of the British siphoned to Greece. The Allies were also short of artillery and ammunition and had to make up for it with the Desert Air Force and the USAAF. They still had to cope with horrid terrain before breaking into the valley. "the Road to Trieste" by Geoffrey Cox helps, and I have a book by a New Zealander, "One More River," or a similar name, on my shelf, which I can't recall.
Hi KiwiWriter Might I add to your list of reference works "The campaign in Italy" by Eric Linklater. The pity is, that although it is good on dates, it's dry as dust to read. It also fails to include the 4th Queen's Own Hussars in its Index to Formations & Units, does this mean I wasn't there at all Whilst writing, I also have Geoffrey Cox's book although mine is entitled "The Race for Trieste" Best wishes Ron Goldstein
Why are Canadians forgoten in the Italian campaign. Canadains where there and they played a very important role :angry: . I would be greatly pleased if the host would add Canada in being a major player in italy. Thank you. Jewman
Originally posted by jewman Why are Canadians forgotten in the Italian campaign. Canadians where there and they played a very important role? 1 Canadian Infantry Corps and 5 Canadian Armoured Division, who performed magnificently - to mention just a few - at Ortona, Hitler and Gothic Lines, are not among the forgotten. Not by authors of the available literature on the Italian Campaign, and certainly not by those of us who were awarded the honour of wearing a silver Maple Leaf on our uniform sleeves! Cheers, Gerry
I am glad to see that i have the support from other people on this issue. Thank you Garry Long time friend Jewman.
Hi Jewman, In my last I mentioned the award of the Maple Leaf of which the North Irish Horse is indeed proud - as my copy of the original is tattered it has been reproduced. Best wishes, Gerry Special Order of the Day by BRIGADIER J.N. TETLEY, Commander 25 Tank Brigade 24 May 44 1. The following messages have been received and replies sent: From Commander 1 Cdn Corps To Commander 25 Army Tank Brigade. rptd Commander 1 Cdn Inf Div Canadians owe a debt of gratitude to the 25 Tank Bde which has fought so magnificently with us today. The courage and determination of all ranks has been beyond praise. From Commander 25 Tank Brigade To Commander 1 Cdn Corps. rptd Commander 1 Cdn Inf Bde All ranks 25 Tank Brigade thank you for your most generous message. This day has been a great one for all of us and we shall never ask for better comrades than 1 Cdn Inf Div From 1 Cdn Inf Div To 25 Tank Bde Message from Comd 1 Cdn Corps to Comd 1 Cdn Div. CANADA will be proud for ever of a battle which its 1 Cdn Div has today won. Through the courage and determination of all ranks of the Div and their British Comrades of the 25 Tank Bde, HITLER LINE has been broken in the face of bitter opposition and the enemy has been dealt a blow from which he will NOT soon recover. The final victory is nearer. Let us press on and complete our task. From G.O.C.1 Cdn Inf Div. To 25 Tank Bde. Well done. We have won a resounding victory. This victory is the fruits of your magnificent courage, endurance and the will to win. Now we have the bastards on the run we must keep cracking. Good luck. I am the proudest man in the world. From 25 Tank Bde To G.O.C. 1 Cdn Inf Div All ranks 25 Tk Bde thank you for your kind message. We ask for nothing better than to fight with 1 Cdn Inf Div under your command and will help to make Kesselring run faster and farther yet. 2. The Bde Commander wishes these messages and the following to be read to all ranks. By the great courage and determination which you have shown today and by the magnificent manner in which you faced the most difficult task you have ever met, you have made a great page in history. Many experienced soldiers might have thought your task impossible in such country and with such skilled and determined defence. I thank you all for the great job you have done. 3. General G.C.Vokes, DSO, Commanding 1 Cdn Inf Bde, has intimated that he would be pleased if all ranks of 25 Tk Bde would wear a Maple Leaf emblem in token of the part played by the Bde assisting 1 Cdn Inf Div to breach the ADOLF HITLER LINE. Commander, 25 Tank Brigade, has accepted the offer with thanks. Further instructions will be issued at a later date. (Sgd) J.N.Tetley Brigadier Commander, 25 Tank Brigade
I agree with my friend Gerry. The part played by the Canadians in the Italian campaign is not forgotten, but it is overshadowed by the Normandy landings. Over the past two and a half years I have done all in my power to raise the profile of WW2 in Sicily and Italy. I have made two visits to the Canadian War Cemetery at Agira, Sicily and paid my respects and those of relatives who have been in contact with me. The 490 Canadians buried there came so far to die so soon and we will not let their memory fade. Colin.
The Canadian sacrifices at the battle of Ortona are beginning to come out of the shadows. CBC did a documentary on it, and Mark Zuehlke wrote a fine book titled "Ortona." He followed up with a book on the 1st Canadian Corps' drive to Rome called "The Liri Valley." John Springer's new "The Black Devil Brigade" is a fine oral history of the legendary US-Canadian 1st Special Service Brigade. Zuehlke has a new book out on the Canadian drive to the Gothic Line. The problem Canada has had in the Anglo-American public perception is that historically it has been overshadowed by giants: France, Britain, and the United States. Having visited Canada and collected her stamps for 30 years, I know enough about Canada to be dangerous. I can well understand Canadian frustration with American attitudes...US Marines holding the Canadian flag upside down at the 1992 World Series...Yankee fans booing the Canadian national anthem before a 1985 game with the Toronto Blue Jays...and seeing American tourists yell at a Canadian postal clerk in Montreal for refusing to accept US stamps. I also know that despite the superficial similarities, the US and Canada are different places. The US is founded on "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Canada's founding document, the British North America Act, calls for "peace, order, and good government." These are two diametrically different philosophies of nationhood. My advice to people who are this angry is this: do something about it. Don't yell at me. I don't control Hollywood, the TV industry, or the morons who hired Mary O'Dowd to sing a song that she had never learned.
Mark Zuehlke's otherwise fine work is marred by too many errors. For example, on page 286 he writes: "At 0800 hours, 'B' Squadron of the North Irish Horse was right at the wire. Squadron commander Major G.P. Russell's leading tank was only thirty yards from a concealed Panzerturm when it opened fire. In seconds, Russell's tank and four others were ablaze. Russell seriously wounded. The dust and smoke were so thick that the commanders were unable to see the gun firing at them. One after another, the tanks were picked off by the Panzerturm or by other tank guns. The Panzerturm knocked out thirteen tanks before a North Irish Horse Churchill managed to destroy it with an armour-piercing round that penetrated the concrete base and detonated the gun's ammunition. 31 In all, the regiment lost forty-one of fifty-eight tanks."32 The concealed Panzerturm did not fire on Ballyrashane (which I was aboard) - it was not even manned - she was hit on her starboard side four times by a dug-in Panther located some 200 yards distant. After knocking out Ballyrashane and Bushmills just behind her, seven more were put out of action later in the day by the same Panzerturm (bravely its crew had stayed put) as they returned to take on more ammunition, for a total of nine not thirteen. Three tanks were put out of action soon after Major Russell's, however, not from fire from the Panzerturm. The Regiment did not lose forty-one tanks - the actual total was twenty-five of which fifteen were recovered being not too badly damaged and made battle-worthy. The actual losses are available in the Battle Report referenced as 31, here is an extract: "Thus ended the battle of the Adolf Hitler Line, a battle in which both Canadian Infantry and our tanks faced very stubborn and fierce resistance. Heavy casualties had been inflicted on the enemy and we sustained, in our turn, serious casualties. It is now known that 1st Canadian Division suffered one thousand casualties in killed, wounded and missing and the N.I.H. lost twenty-five tanks, thirty-four officers and men being killed and thirty-six wounded. The greatest gallantry and devotion to duty was displayed by all ranks throughout the battle and their determination to support the infantry at all costs has caused the highest praise from all sources. The regiment is known to have destroyed two Panther Mark V tanks, two Mark IV Specials, one self-propelled 75 mm. gun, one Panther turret emplacement, one 88 mm. anti-tank gun, one 75 mm. anti-tank gun, one 20 mm. dual purpose gun, two armoured machine-gun posts and several snipers. Casualties on enemy infantry could not be computed." Of particular interest, the twoi Panthers destroyed were the first by tanks of the Western Allies. Mr. Zuehlke, in response to my letter bringing the above and other inaccuracies to his attention, indicated in his reply that corrections would be made in the event of a second printing.
Well, that's an interesting error, and a good catch, and I'm glad Mark Zuehlke will make the correction in future editions. Don't pound him too harshly for errors like that. It's easy to criticize. From experience, I can tell you that writing is very, very, very hard work, and the reaction is usually endless complaints that I didn't use my psychic powers to read my reader's mind and write the book he wanted to see. Also, if you have Mark's address, I'd like to get my books autographed by him.
Originally posted by Kiwiwriter Well, that's an interesting error, and a good catch, and I'm glad Mark Zuehlke will make the correction in future editions. Don't pound him too harshly for errors like that. It's easy to criticize. Pounding authors is not my intention at any time, only to make constructive comments to be of help, and if accepted, so that they may be incorporated in subsequent printings. One caveat, the find of an obvious error makes one suspect there may be others, perhaps known to someone else. Zuehlke's e-mail address: markz@pinc.com His footnoot 32, reminds me of a most moving moment at the joint burial service, to honour the dead of the North Irish Horse and the Seaforth Highlanders of Canada, came at the conclusion when Pipe-Major Edmond Esson MBE appeared out of the mist playing the "Scottish Lament" - there were few dry eyes that Thursday evening of 25th May, 1944. Cheers, Gerry
I wouldn’t be too concerned with bashing history authors Gerry, if they’re wrong they’re wrong. A novel is someone telling a story they’ve made up, no? - let’s be kind and say it’s their own idea. The story and/or the writing style appeals to you or it doesn’t. History is telling the facts and/or the writers opinion. Where author’s opinion is being expressed it should be made clear it is their opinion and the reasoning behind it. As Joe Friday used to say; ”just the facts pleases”. No shame in not ‘knowing’ everything, but at least say when there is doubt, flimsy evidence or several versions. If the author wishes to assume deity status of knowledge, and they are wrong, they deserve an intellectual kickin’ - no? Fully accepted however, that with the best will in the world errors occur as a result of ‘genuine mistakes’ for which there are very plausible and reasonable explanations. These are probably most likely to occur when the writer goes into detail where there is a wish to state as much information as possible. However, however, in many cases it is also fair to say that the information is wrong because the writer made assumptions (i.e. the often single source is correct) and did not take the time and trouble to thoroughly investigate. Also, another consideration concerns who the writer is and whether or not they had a personal involvement, and if so, how well they were positioned to ‘know’ everything that went on, how old the memory is and how competent are they in the matters of observation, recollection and expression? A yardstick I keep in mind; Let’s say the writer is on trial accused of making everything up with the purpose of achieving a best seller to make money - relax, this is just to illustrate a point. The writer’s defence would be to establish that either what was written was fact, (or at least one side of an acknowledged arbitrary point), or the writer had taken reasonable steps to reach a conclusion which subsequently turned out to be wrong. Warning - saying that something was taken from an earlier publication is no defence except in exceptional circumstances. If the original author gets a point wrong, just because subsequent authors site the same point will NOT make it correct! If a writer can’t defend their statements and conclusions............... After all, they’re not giving you or I a free book are they - and I for one object to wasting my time and my money. No.9
That's a very good and clever answer, but I can tell you that my experience as a writer is that most of the "constructive criticism" I receive are people basically angry with me that I didn't write the book they wanted to see written, or people who are enraged that I didn't share their political views (usually from neo-Nazis), or would-be or practicing schoolmasters, who think that my use of AP style in an article instead of military style is a hanging offense. I also get a lot of people who complain that my web page on World War II doesn't start on September 1, 1939, and end on September 2, 1945, and then berate me for failing to have done so. I have to patiently explain to them for the 57,000th time that this is a work-in-progress and I do it all myself, research, writing, everything. I also get the people who hammer me hard over unbelievably trivial points, pretty much so that they can taunt and tease me. I have got more than my share of e-mails complaining that I say that the USS Washington never lost a man in combat, when five of its sailors were killed in a collision and an admiral fell or jumped overboard. Quite true, but those were not combat deaths, and my interlocutor proudly announces that I am wrong, he is right, tee hee hee. The attacks on my web page especially infuriate me, because I have yet to receive a penny in pay for this work, yet to receive a single piece of assistance for it, and yet I am accused of plagiarism and many other offenses. Another reader was enraged that I did not describe how his cruiser was gravely damaged in a naval battle. I wrote back to tell him that my article was about a completely different battle on a completely different date. No answer back. A Dutch guy blasted my web page because I didn't give a Dutchman enough credit for organizing an escape from Colditz. I told him that the escape from Colditz was a trivial schoolboy prank compared to the bloodshed in Auschwitz and Stalingrad. Another writer snarled at me that my page should start on September 1, 1939, and "While the Americans were weaseling out of the war, a few thousand Britons and Canadians...were fighting, how can you call this page history?" I told him that between the period of September 1, 1939, and December 7, 1941, the Germans killed about 2 million Poles and Jews while the Japanese killed about 3 million Chinese...did they count in his calculations, or was World War II solely suffered by a few thousand Britons? He apologized sheepishly. I printed that corresopndence on my FAQ page. My favorite was the enraged Italian gentleman -- his letter is reprinted on my page -- who wrapped up his denunciation of my work by saying, "May God put you face to face with those you have dishonored." Writers are expected to have the psychic ability to write the books that total strangers want written. We are also expected to be perfect in every way. I take comfort in the positive e-mails I get and in remembering something that one of my MFA Creative Writing instructors pointed out..."All books are failures." They never achieve what the writer intended. No matter how well they are done, the critics will find something to flay. As for folks who are really angry at my published works: I often send them a check for the cost of the magazine, plus their postage, plus 10 percent interest, which comes to about six or seven dollars. I have done that several times. Never saw a check come back cashed. It's very easy to ridicule and condemn writers after the fact, and it's good fun to taunt and berate them for minor errors. I was publicly flayed in my Navy days when I did 60-page newsletters singlehandedly for grammatical errors. It was a humiliating experience. Now I am being flogged alive on The History Channel forum as "worse than a mere plagiarist" after some other jerk there reprinted my stuff without permission. That guy, after reprinting my stuff -- then called me a plagiarist. Pot and kettle, I guess. You spend vast amounts of time working on your research, doing your research, writing and rewriting, trying to get the information done, you finally put the damn thing out...and as my teacher Frank McCourt discovered when he went home to Limerick to promote "Angela's Ashes," people just scream at you for doing a lousy job. One man threw the book in Frank's face. I can't tell you how many times I've challenged my detractors to do my web page themselves. They always back off. I don't know why. They seem to know everything better than I do.
I hope my last post does not suggest I may have been having a pop at you in any way Kiwi - I don’t think it’s been taken that way. I don’t know your work so am in no position to make any pointed statements. I have looked at your web site and see it ‘s quite an opus. I would say whatever one is to read there, including the summary of W.W.II, can be assumed to be from an American Naval perspective? Therefore depth and accuracy is probably highest in that area? Sorry to learn strangers launch into heavy first strike comments and, in this day and age, surprised (though to your credit) you entertain them and reply. If one wants to enter into "N'th" degree pickiness then you can spend every waking hour on the net. In respect of a book though, as you say I also expect few if any authors are completely happy with the end result. From a history reader’s viewpoint, I at least like to think I am reading the product of intelligent research and/or considered opinion. In the case of the latter, I welcome a sensible opinion contrary to that I hold or have considered, provided that, the writer puts up a good case. With a first person account, I welcome passion in the narrative and a writer who wants to render an account rather than pretend they may be considered for a literary prize. Naturally, all this is personal opinion which may or may not match that of another reader? You mention ‘Impossible Victory’ which you find a bit “fluffy”. Myself, I rate the book highly for accomplishing what Brian Harpur sets out to do - tell his story as was and as he saw it. What he gives me are invaluable pieces for my jigsaw of the Italian theatre. Your jigsaw is no doubt different to mine and Harpur probably doesn’t provided the pieces you’re looking for? His endorsement of Fred Majdalany’s work, ‘The Battle of Cassino’, I also concur with. Oh, and as Ron says, Linklater’s book is quite useful, but hard pushed to beat watching jello set. I’m not sure what is meant but people accusing you of not writing a book as they would have wanted it written? A general observation is that if someone has a connection with a particular unit, or ship, then only wonderful things must be written about it. If it turns out to be more wonderful than can be substantiated, so much the better. I’d say the current generation of grandchildren usually employ this sentiment. It’s not a case of setting out to run down anyone in particular, rather trying to state a case as accurately as possible. If for them the war wasn’t as tough as for others, or they had more than their share of idiots - then that’s the way it was. Hollywood and the Playstation may have done their bit to introduce children to history in some way, but without an obligatory notice that the viewer or gamer should consult real history sources to find out more, they have done equal or more harm by implication they preach fact. I hope you keep on with your writing and treating the nazis - neo or otherwise - to both barrels, (been known to unsheath the Wilkinson on a few myself from time to time) No.9
Thank you for your note. I'll have to give the detailed answer later today. I'm at my work computer, which is overrun by malware and viruses, and one of them won't let me hit the "return" key in a forum without it locking up. Your note requires an in-depth answer, and I can't do it from here. I do feel that you were delivering a direct punch to my nose and I am grateful for your warmer words in this note. The short point: readers often go into a book expecting it to a book expecting it to match their pre-existing views. When the book fails to do so, the reader blames the writer. As for "Impossible Victory," I blame the publisher for billing it as a definitive account of the Po victory when it's more of a personal story of the Italian campaign. My pre-existing expectation was that it would cover things like the Fantails, Impact Plain, Impact Royal, and suchlike. It didn't. What it did do was give an excellent picture of what it was like to serve in the British 8th Army in Italy, and of its generals, and of that it is outstanding.
Wow, please don't lay duplicity on me, I wasn't throwing any punches? I may have flayed my arms about a bit, expressing general views, and perhaps inadvertently made contact, but nothing was aimed. I totally agree "Impossible Victory" is not a complete study of the Po victory, but provides an invaluable insight from one perspective. For instance, Harpur doesn't begin to deal with the role of Special Forces, but in his position I would be surprised if he tried to. There again, the copy I have says "A personal account of the battle for the River Po", being what it is. Harpur's post war interviews, particularly with Clark, I find priceless. I appreciate your observations as an author, of some reader reactions, which seem to support my idea of 'hero worship' over straight forward history. There again, as has been illustrated with Linklater's book, fact can be presented in the most boring fashion. For five years I endured a history teacher who was a master at this. Sorry to hear of your computer situation. I tend to assume most people have an anti-virus and firewall installed, either purchased or free. Some of the freebies appear to work quite well. No.9
For those interested in the Canadians in Italy I'd like to recommend a couple of other books. One is Colin McDougall's EXECUTION (1958) a vastly underrated and mostly ignored novel by a man who was there. The novel follows the Canadians from Sicily to Ortona and up to the Hitler Line. McDougall also fictionalizes the account of the execution of a Canadian private by his own army--something that actually happened. Despite its obscurity the novel is one of the very best to have come out of WWII (and I've read tons). It has been out-of-print for some time, but it is imminently due for reissue in Canada by McClelland and Stewart. It'll be orderable online once it's out (I'm proud to say I had something to do with the reissue by bringing it to the M&S editor's attention). Another way to get it is to order one of the many second-hand copies available at www.abebooks.com The execution itself has been given a non-fictional treatment in Andrew Clark's book A KEEN SOLDIER: THE EXECUTION OF PRIVATE JOSEPH PRINGLE (www.chapters.indigo.ca, ISBN 0676973558). Cheers
If you're interested in others, I'd recommend Farley Mowat's And No Bird Sang, which has just come out in Canada in a new edition (the old one should also be easy enough to find: www.abebooks.com). The book is a memoir of Mowat's CEF experiences in Italy. For those interested in Canadian books, I posted a list of recommendations under the "Books..." discussion category.
